Welcome to PatsFans.com

Patriots getting more vulnerable in playoffs past 3 years

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by PATRIOTSFANINPA, Feb 4, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. PATRIOTSFANINPA

    PATRIOTSFANINPA Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    15,726
    Likes Received:
    20
    Ratings:
    +31 / 0 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    Its apparent that no team is truly worried or scared to play the Patriots in the playoffs anymore - BB and Tom and Co.'s record,While still very good is starting to show a bit of wearing down

    2005 - Losing Divisional game to Denver
    progressing to
    2006 - Losing AFCCG to Indianapolis
    progressing to
    2007 - Losing Super Bowl to Giants

    While the Patriots have progressed thru the past 3 years to get further in the playoffs it is the same result for NE - A loss

    Somehow this team is becoming very vulnerable in the playoffs - Big change when we looked at things back in 2004 as if we just had to get to the playoffs to win it all....No more is that the case
     
  2. the Patriot

    the Patriot On the Game Day Roster

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    447
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Well if being vulnerable translates to not winning Superbowls then yes. But honestly, winning SBs is against the norm. Our postseason record following 2004 is 5-3 which is good but nothing special.
     
  3. patsfaninpa

    patsfaninpa In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,990
    Likes Received:
    122
    Ratings:
    +306 / 11 / -3

    It's hard to win playoff games. We got a little spoiled. Your premise is right. We are a little more vulnerable. But, some of those games we won. We were extremely close to losing. Raider game, Tennessee game in 03(their wr drops ball..Giants wr catches it), 04 run was pretty impressive. Nothing flukey that year. Ironically, this was the easiest past to a championship we ever had.

    01 AFCCG in Pittsburgh, 14-2 Rams.
    03 Titans and Colts 12-4, white-hot manning come into AFCCG.
    04 12-4 Colts, 15-1 Steelers and Eagles 13-3(rested starters and lost 2 reg. season game.)
    05 We were just too beat up.
    06 At 14-2 SD, at 12-4 Indy
    07 Wild-card Jags 11-5 at home, SD 11-5 at home with depleted offense
    and Wild-Card Giants 10-6 in Super Bowl.

    Need to get to the qb in the 4th quarter. We need some speed off of the edge. Hard to find. But, not many great teams get the 7th pick either. I want a pass-rusher first, then a couple of cb's. I'll be satisifed with a veteran ilb and moving A.Thomas back inside.
     
  4. MrTibbs

    MrTibbs Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,486
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Whats been the key in all of those losses? Critical offensive playcalling at crucial times and an aging defense that wears down by games end.
     
  5. patsacolachick

    patsacolachick Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Or you can look at it as we have gotten further along in each of the past three years-meaning next year is ours, baby! :rocker:
     
  6. Ernestine

    Ernestine Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I don't think you can say that. 2006, Denver was the better team IMHO. Last year, the Chargers were the best team and we were lucky to steal that game. However, they should have beaten the Colts. It really was no excuses. The pats simply should not have lose that game.

    Although the giants D controlled the Pats all game, it was still the Pats to lose in the end. I think that is the most frustrating thing about the game. The Pats were basically 1 play away from winning like they were last year. It sucks, but i can't blame the defense. They played FAR better than the offense did until the 4th quarter.

    The Pats were the most talented and best team all year. In the superbowl, you only have to be the best that day. The giants just were better this given Sunday!!!It sucks, but you can not win it ever year. Did you expect the Pats to win 10 SB in a row?
     
  7. Carpentier

    Carpentier On the Roster

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Look at the positive
    Next years superbowl is ours for sure now.:rocker:
     
  8. Jimke

    Jimke In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,810
    Likes Received:
    23
    Ratings:
    +79 / 13 / -6

    The Pats haven't had a good trio of cornerbacks since they had

    Ty Law, Tyrone Poole, and Asante Samuel in the 2003 season.

    This year Randall Gay looked lost out there, Ellis Hobbs gave up key

    touchdowns, and Asante did not take a step up during the

    playoffs. The only way a defense can cover for average to below

    average cornerbacks is to have a real good pass rush like the Giants.
     
  9. richpats

    richpats Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    3,499
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    If someone looked at the 2005-2007 Patriots in a vacuum (i.e. no recognition of the 2001-2004 teams), they would see a team that had a SERIOUS problem finishing the deal in the playoffs. There comes a point where Belichick and the players aren't immune to their mistakes anymore, and this is it. Maybe the problem is the Pats always THINK they are champions but they don't PLAY like champions.
     
  10. patsacolachick

    patsacolachick Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Oh for heaven's sake, they are not going to win the Super Bowl every year, okay? They play extremely well MOST of the time, but there has never been a team that plays like a champion EVERY SINGLE PLAYOFF GAME.
     
  11. richpats

    richpats Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    3,499
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I feel my point is still valid though. In Denver, we could use the "not winning every year" excuse. In Indy we could do the same and cite that many key players were out. Last night? The defense wasn't gassed, the offense had receivers, it had weapons (except for a banged-up Faulk). No excuse for blowing that lead.
     
  12. NEPatriot

    NEPatriot Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    7,836
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    they are simply out of gas in the end.
     
  13. SoonerPatriot

    SoonerPatriot In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2004
    Messages:
    3,318
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    It also hurts when you meet good teams in the playoffs. Last year the Colts get to the SB and a crappy Bears team with a punchless offense quarterbacked by Rex Grossman was waiting.

    THis year, we go and it's a team peaking at the right time that found a huge match up to exploit (our OL) waiting on the other end.
     
  14. Snake

    Snake Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2007
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    You've got that right.

    Going 18-0 in the NFL requires a team to exhaust most of everything it could possibly have by the time it gets to the SB.

    I think the second half of this season revealed an aging team simply getting more and more exhausted with each passing week. They won some close ones, and some were simply lucky wins. The Chargers were beat up, but the Giants rookies stepped up. Our O line couldn't do the job. The defense didn't play a bad game, all things considered, but the offense got some serious roadblocks thrown up in front of it, and it simply had no way to get around the roadblocks....the Pats just didn't play with the necessary intensity to win that game the way they had won many games...going away and scoring lots of points.

    The last three playoffs have not treated us well. The Patriots will still be the team to beat next year. It should be fun, but I don't want to have to go through another season like this one.

    I've been watching these guys since the 60's, and last night topped the 85 Super Bowl as my most miserable Patriots experience.

    We need another Super Bowl, and next year will be a great time to get another Super Bowl.
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2008
  15. track dog

    track dog Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Wasn't that the point of pushing the 60 minute mantra all year? I think the team did a good job of addressing that issue this year. The team knew what they had to do; yesterday they just couldn't do it.
     
  16. Ernestine

    Ernestine Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I don't think it had anything about the team aging. The main core of the Pats are pretty much in their prime, same with the Colts. I think the pressure and the fact that every week it got more difficult because they were taking EVERYONE best shot and they were not even champions. Everyone starting with the Eagles wanted to be the ones who shut down the Pats prolific offense. Every week that went by there was more film for defensive coordinators to look at and build upon the other team success. This never happened to the Pats before. In the season in which the Pats went back to back, they did not get the efforts from teams as they this season. I think that is what wore on them. They had to be perfect. They did not want to lose because everyone put them on a pedestal and they had to meet expectations.The game stopped being fun. The beginning of the season you can tell they had fun. In the playoffs, they didn't seem like a 16-0. They seemed like a team who was exhausted not because they are old, which they are not, but because they could not lose that week because it meant the repercussions of being labeled chokers and a disappointment.


     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>