Rodney: Pats might benefit from losing one

[1960Pats]

Bill Polian thought the same thing and had his Colts intentionally lose to the Jets in 2009, which allowed the Jets to get into the playoffs. #integrity, but I digress...

Colts did no better than the Pats.

The Saints that same year actually tried to win all their games but couldn't. But they were the ones who wound up winning the Super Bowl. I'm glad karma won out in that one; I wouldn't have felt good about the Colts winning thst year because of their actions (well, and other reasons....), and therefore I wouldn't want the Pats not to give their all in a game this year either.

Tanking against the Jests actually worked for Indy. They wanted nothing to do with Pittsburgh and ended up beating the Jests in the AFCC.

There are examples of times when it does work and when it doesn't. The Pats rested their players in the Buffalo game last year and went on to have one of their best SB runs.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I think the Pats went for it on 4th and 13 because they felt like they had something. Brady has admitted that, had he made the right read, it would have been a touchdown. I also think Belichick himself was a big part of *why* the team was so tight; it wasn't just the record. I'd also postulate that the youth on this team gives them a better chance of maintaining higher energy throughout the playoffs even with that extra weight.

BB absolutely contributed to the stress with his obsessiveness in keeping the team focused on the smallest of details.

I'm sure TB12 had a good look but deciding to go for it pre-emps the look.

 

[Froob]

Probably should change the title, Rodney didn't suggest Patriots intentionally lose a game.

 

[1960Pats]

I may be wrong but wasn't Rodney one of the DB that dropped a sure interception on the final drive of that Super Bowl. I will never watch that game again but i think I remember that.
Personally I don't care as long as we win the SB. The 72 Dolphins have never been considered one of the greatest teams ever. the Pats being compared to the 70's Steelers or the 80's 49ers make much more proud of this team.

Rodney was the guy who was trying to reach the ball on the helmet catch. Too bad he didn't just pull down Tyree's arm instead. That would have worked.

 

[h0c2000]

If the Pats are to lose one of the next 3, the best scenario would be a loss to the Eagles.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

It was stressful and most likely on their minds in that SB...which is why he is saying it

 

[sb1]

2007 team had a lot of veterans and long time Patriots who had been there and done that several times. I think those guys were pretty mentally tough themselves.

I'm not saying they were soft but... I think last year's champs and this year's team respond to adversity much better. Would the 2007 team come back from two 14 point deficits in the playoffs and 10 down late in a Super Bowl? Honestly I don't know if they would have. We already saw unlike the champs last year the 2007 Pats played their worst game of the year under a cloud of off field nonsense.

As the season went into the home stretch and the playoffs and SB game it was clear the 2007 Pats were buckling under the pressure of the undefeated season plus all the other nonsense going on.

I think the 2014-15 Pats are a mentally tougher team, or at least at the top they are.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I'm not saying they were soft but... I think last year's champs and this year's team respond to adversity much better. Would the 2007 team come back from two 14 point deficits in the playoffs and 10 down late in a Super Bowl? Honestly I don't know if they would have.

As the season went into the home stretch and the playoffs and SB game it was clear the 2007 Pats were buckling under the pressure of the undefeated season plus all the other nonsense going on. The modern Pats won the Super Bowl under almost the same cloud. I think they are a tougher team, or at least at the top they are.

What you dont know is how the 2014 Pats would play if they were 16-0 vs BAL or 18-0 vs SEA.

To even broach saying that the 07 team was even in the same zip code as soft is absurd.

 

[sb1]

What you dont know is how the 2014 Pats would play if they were 16-0 vs BAL or 18-0 vs SEA.

To even broach saying that the 07 team was even in the same zip code as soft is absurd.

No I don't know that but judging by how they dealt with adversity and pressure I can guess that they would do very well.

If it is true that 07 was softer than the 2014-15 Pats... again just my opinion... then it's not really 07's fault. Happens to any team that isn't tested very much and doesn't go through a lot of adversity.

My point is I'm confident the 2014-15 Pats can handle the "pressure" of 18-0... not that I think we'll get a chance to find out.

 

[scott99]

The stress of winning every single game is enormous. I understand Rodney's point. If it's easier to win the SB with losing a meaningless regular season game...then I am onboard with that. I want the Super Bowl.

I agree. Though I suspect this will possibly happen AFTER the Pats clinch the division/home field.

 

[scott99]

Rodney was the guy who was trying to reach the ball on the helmet catch. Too bad he didn't just pull down Tyree's arm instead. That would have worked.

How about he hits the guy instead of ripping at his arm. He hits him, no way he holds onto the ball.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

I don't think Rodney is saying this out of sour grapes (in the classic sense: the grapes are sour, so I don't want them anyway...that is the true sense, not the way the phrase is misused often, but I am way off topic here.)

I think many players believe they would have won the SB in 2007 without the added pressure of going undefeated, and Rodney is certainly in that boat.

That being said, sometimes it's kind of ridiculous when teams purposefully try to avoid going 16-0, like the Colts in 2009 when they pulled their starters in a game they were initially trying to win. You know that, whether they are 16-0 or not, they hadn't truly lost with Manning in there, so in some ways the psychological pressure is the same thing...that is, no opportunity to learn/re-focus after a loss.

 

[oldrover]

Probably should change the title, Rodney didn't suggest Patriots intentionally lose a game.

Done. Mea culpa. Please forgive me.

 

[glm]

No I don't know that but judging by how they dealt with adversity and pressure I can guess that they would do very well.

If it is true that 07 was softer than the 2014-15 Pats... again just my opinion... then it's not really 07's fault. Happens to any team that isn't tested very much and doesn't go through a lot of adversity.

My point is I'm confident the 2014-15 Pats can handle the "pressure" of 18-0... not that I think we'll get a chance to find out.

You don't go 18-0 without facing adversity or pressure. Hell, a lot of players on that team faced pressure and adversity for years.

Honestly if you're trying to say a team with Brady, Vince, Bruschi, Rodney, Seymour, Vrabel, Light, Neal etc. that was 18-0 at one point is soft at all, then you just might have gone crazy.

 

[sb1]

You don't go 18-0 without facing adversity or pressure. Hell, a lot of players on that team faced pressure and adversity for years.

Honestly if you're trying to say a team with Brady, Vince, Bruschi, Rodney, Seymour, Vrabel, Light, Neal etc. that was 18-0 at one point is soft at all, then you just might have gone crazy.

Not saying they're soft... just perhaps a little softer than the 2014-15 Pats.

Just because the 2007 Pats couldnt handle 18-0 doesnt mean the 2014-15 Pats cant.

 

[oldrover]

No one would now say the 2007 team was soft if Tyree doesn't make that catch.

 

[glm]

Not saying they're soft... just perhaps a little softer than the 2014-15 Pats.

Just because the 2007 Pats couldnt handle 18-0 doesnt mean the 2014-15 Pats cant.

No way to really measure that. Yeah the 2015 team had a lot of players face pressure and adversity on the way to the SB last year. But, the 2007 team also had a lot of players faced pressure and adversity when they won the SB multiple times.

Don't really see how anybody can say which team is tougher after 9 games into the season.

 

[glm]

No one would now say the 2007 team was soft if Tyree doesn't make that catch.

People would say it was a defensive battle where the Pats really showed their toughness.

 

[zydecochris]

I don’t think we're going undefeated so it's probably moot. In fact I expect to lose this week to Buffalo.

That said, if we do, I don’t think it's the same as 2007 when 16-0 in the regular season had never been done before. 19-0 (sorry Shula, you were only 17-0) hadn't been done. Maybe I'm wrong but I think the pressure is way less;until the SB "all" that we'd do would have been done before.

I agree that the Pats probably aren't going undefeated, that is just being realistic. There is some win probability for each game. Because of the different ways the ball bounces, each game is essentially a weighted throw of the dice, with the "weight" depending on what that win probability is. Throwing the dice 10 more games does not have a high probability of arriving at 10 more victories, if that wasn't the case then why hasn't there ever been a 19-0 season?

I dream of a 5th Pats Super Bowl win this year, and although others may not agree, that is all I care about (the Super Bowl win), I frankly couldn't care less if the Pats go undefeated. I thought Rodney (who did NOT say the Pats should try to lose) made an excellent point that perhaps a loss might have a silver lining in some ways so that everyone isn't obsessing about a perfect season, only winning the final game of the season.

 

[Bruins29]

As the season went into the home stretch and the playoffs and SB game it was clear the 2007 Pats were buckling under the pressure of the undefeated season plus all the other nonsense going on.

I will say that the 2007 team handled their 2 playoff games probably smoother than the 14 team did. JAX and SD were really no match while the 14 team nearly lost to the Ravens who this year are a 3-7 team. If TB does not have a legendary game and they pull some trickery, they lose.

I think the problem with 07 is that they were so good that they diddnt face enough adversity. The Giants game was just a lot of bad things all happening in the same game.

Also, is this even a conversation or comparison if Butler does not make the greatest defensive play in the history of the Superbowl.

I mean we are talking about a whiskers difference between the 07 team winning the SB and the 14 team losing it.