Running the table? I wouldn't bet on it. Lower your expectations.

[supafly]

Am I missing something here? None of you have actually listed a sound reason for why we aren't going to run the table, strategy-wise or personnel-wise, or even psychologically.

I agree with you that they can run the table, but if you're looking for someone to play devil's advocate and list a couple/few reasons why they couldn't here are some:

--the law of averages would state that going 24-0 in the second half of the year for the 3rd straight year would be quite an amazing feat. That alone has some bearing, whether we like it or not. Winning 24 straight in the second half would be quite an unlikely feat in my opinion, not that I am wishing against it of course.

--they've lost to the first 3 teams they've played this year who had top 10 defenses, going 0-3. Yet we are supposed to suddenly assume that they will now go 3-0 against tht next 3 teams (some who also have much better offenses, coaching, and well-rounded teams). They lost to the likes of Seattle and Arizona, and had last second game saving victories in both of the Jets and Bills games, yet we are supposed to assume that they are going to steamroll over both the Texans and 49'ers within a 6 day stretch? And that isn't even taking the fact into account that they will be coming off of 2 divisional road games heading into those games.

--They play arguably the 2 toughest teams in the NFL, one from each conference on a shorter 6 day stretch. That cannot necessarily be considered beneficial.

--The team will have to adapt to playing without their best blocker, and arguably their best downfield threat. That alone warrants enough reasoning to think that they will lose one of the last 6 games as they deal with not only the loss of talent, but also the potential learning curve that it may bring.

--The divisional games, although often overlooked by many of the average fans often prove to be tougher than we may have expected at times. Going to play both the Jets and Dolphins on the road should not be overlooked.

--Belichick may choose to rest some starters in the final game vs MIA after halftime if there is nothing to gain in the seeding. That alone is another possible good reason as to why there may be a loss.

--If they did run the table that would mean that they'd have won another 10 games in a row to close out a season. While we have seen that before, it may not be the odds on favorite of happening. It would also mean that they'd have to win either 13 or 14 in a row to end the year if they are to win the SB again, and the odds of that happening are not all that great.

I agree with you that it can definitely happen and I'm not really trying to be negative, I am just listing some reasons why it would be very hard to do so...which is what others failed to do in their reasoning.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

I don't think we'll run the table, either. One of the Houston/San Fran games is going to be a loss. If I had to put money on it, I'd say it would be the game against the 49ers.

EDIT: I think that will be our last loss of the season, though.

The biggest matchup that game will be Solder up against the fastest pass rusher off the edge in Alden Smith....if Smith is controlled I like our chances.

I think we lose to Houston.....Andre Johnson will devour this secondary and the front 7 may struggle with Foster and Tate

 

[supafly]

The biggest matchup that game will be Solder up against the fastest pass rusher off the edge in Alden Smith....if Smith is controlled I like our chances.

I think we lose to Houston.....Andre Johnson will devour this secondary and the front 7 may struggle with Foster and Tate

I don't know, but I'd have felt much better with Gronk in there blocking against both of those teams.

Hopefully someone else can step up or the scheme can help to dictate more success vs those kinds of physical teams, as we've seen before.

There's just something about those 2 teams that seem to demand more attn than many teams we've seen in the past, although there may be no truth to that thought.

 

[PatriotSeven]

I don't know, but I'd have felt much better with Gronk in there blocking against both of those teams.

Hopefully someone else can step up or the scheme can help to dictate more success vs those kinds of physical teams, as we've seen before.

There's just something about those 2 teams that seem to demand more attn than many teams we've seen in the past, although there may be no truth to that thought.

I think there is a lot of truth to that. That something is that they deserve that attention because they have arguably looked like they are better than we are as an all around team(they have less perceived weaknesses), have better records than we do, have beaten better teams than we did, and they could very well be better than we are until we prove we can beat them. I can easily believe we have the better offense, and the better quarterback, and quite likely the better coaching, but do we have the better team?

We've gotten the benefit of the doubt from the NFL when it came to who is better without having to face some of these teams, and have also confidently given it to ourselves as well, but after countless times of failing against top defenses, I just can't sit there and believe it until we face those two teams. I think some of us are simply coming to the realization we can no longer come to that foregone conclusion. We need to see it. It's something that perhaps our fan base hasn't been used to in awhile.

That's why I look forward to it. Last year we lost to both Pittsburgh and the Giants, the only 2 legitimate teams we faced in the regular season and in the last half of the year and leading up to the Superbowl we got tested by Baltimore in the playoffs(which we looked sloppy against) and.....Tebow. So I can only see positives from facing these two teams. I welcome this type of competition before we get to the playoffs. It allows us to measure ourselves. I truly believe it will help prepare us and give us a better chance to win in the playoffs and the Superbowl by facing these two teams now, irrelevant of whether we win or lose.

 

[DaBruinz]

I'm just being realistic.

No, you're not being realistic. That's the problem.

- We have yet to face the 2 toughest teams we had on our schedule this year, 49ers and Texans. Who says they are the two toughest? You?
- We lost to teams worse than those 2. Again, says who?
- We've had bad teams take us to the wire, Bills and Jets. So, clearly you discount divisional games and think that the rivalries don't mean anything.
- We are out 2 of our best offensive weapons. Last I looked, It was Mankins and Gronkowski who were out. Not Brady and Welker.
- We only beat 1 strong team. Again, you think this only because you discount division rivals.

You may not think those are sound reasons, but I do.

You think they are sound reasons, but they aren't. They are significantly flawed.

Houston - Lost to Green Bay. Barely beat Jacksonville. By your standards, they've only beat "two" tough teams.

San Fran - Lost to Minnesota. Lost to the Giants. Barely beat Seattle. Yes, they've beat Green Bay and they beat Chicago. Couldn't beat St. Louis despite OT. But what about the rest of their schedule.

What you absolutely, totally discount is that, to this point, the Pats defense has played like the young and inexperienced defense they are. But, that seems to be changing. One of the big reasons is that they are FORCING turnovers. They lead the league in forced fumbles and fumbles recovered. Not to mention they also have 13 interceptions.

There are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about the Pats chances instead of being pessimistic.

 

[Sciz]

The 49ers and Texans separately pale in comparison to the Ravens and the refs together, and the Pats still almost pulled that one out.

 

[Patriot Missile]

I keep getting more and more confident the Pats will run the table. Especially if the defense continues to improve. To be honest I don't think there is a defense that can hold this team under 25 points and that includes Houston and SF. I think Houston will be tough and SF will be a blowout.

 

[supafly]

I welcome this type of competition before we get to the playoffs. It allows us to measure ourselves. I truly believe it will help prepare us and give us a better chance to win in the playoffs and the Superbowl by facing these two teams now, irrelevant of whether we win or lose.

I think that is a good point. The other line of thinking is that it would be better to get the bye against lower level competition and increase the odds of getting to, and winning the SB--much like last year.

Arguments can be made for both sides of course, but you play who's on the schedule and try to make the best of it. As a whole, I think the schedule has been competitive with many other teams around the league this year, where it really wasn't last season.

Either way, I think that they certainly can win the rest of their games, but it's probably a lot more likely that they'll go 5-1 or even 4-2 the rest of the way out. We should still have a shot at the bye in a month or so, which speaks volumes to the way that this team turned it around in some ways.

 

[supafly]

There are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about the Pats chances instead of being pessimistic.

I think that is a very good statement too. I don't necessarily think that too many are meaning to be pessimistic, just more on the realistic side, and of course we won't all be able to agree on what those standards are measured by.

You do make a great point that if you are a fan of the team heading into late November, there are plenty of reasons to believe that we can compete with any team in the league for 60 minutes.

 

[mayoclinic]

I keep getting more and more confident the Pats will run the table. Especially if the defense continues to improve. To be honest I don't think there is a defense that can hold this team under 25 points and that includes Houston and SF. I think Houston will be tough and SF will be a blowout.

First we have to beat the Jets. Do that and we're 8-3, and I like our chances against Miami. Beat Miami and we're 9-3 with a Monday night home game against Houston. Let's see how the defense looks awt that point, and how we're doing without Gronk. If we're firing on all cylinders, I like our chances against Houston, which would make us 10-3 with a win over the Texans going into the SF game.

Take it week by week.

 

[1960Pats]

Here we are in Patriot year 12AB and this is easily the winning-est NFL team in this century as well as NFL history. I couldn't possible argue against them running the table. I wouldn't even try.

 

[jah]

I agree with you that they can run the table, but if you're looking for someone to play devil's advocate and list a couple/few reasons why they couldn't here are some:

--the law of averages would state that going 24-0 in the second half of the year for the 3rd straight year would be quite an amazing feat. That alone has some bearing, whether we like it or not. Winning 24 straight in the second half would be quite an unlikely feat in my opinion, not that I am wishing against it of course.

There is no such thing as the law of averages.

 

[fnordcircle]

Houston is not as good as advertised and I think San Fran will struggle to score against us if our defense plays like last week.

I'm telling you guys if we maintain the increased aggressiveness of last week we're gonna be unstoppable.

And why not maintain last week's aggressiveness? It's hardly like bend-don't-break was stopping the big plays.

 

[Froob]

Why do 49ers and Texans get a pass around here when they play like crap but the pats don't?

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

Yes...saying we're not a lock to run the table and to tame our expectations while suggesting we end up 11-5 is insanely pessimistic.

Which one of us has lost track of the center?

PS: My post isn't based on any given Sunday logic. It's based on the fact that we are going to face 2 teams that have proven to be better than us so far in the regular season, and most people outside this fan base see it the same way, we have struggled to beat teams we should have and only looked the part against weak teams with the exception of Denver. In fact I'm pretty sure you only took the time to read half my post because the other half of the message was the fact that I believe it's great to be able to test our team against playoff contenders, which I believe will serve us better in the long run. There's nothing pessimistic about that.

What you think you're communicating to the forum vs what you're actually communicating seem out of alignment. Most here will concede that 11-5 is a very real possibility, but the reasoning you're using to support that stance is what's pessimistic.

I understand that my posts are off center; they're written exactly that way to make a point. The shocking thing is you don't seem to understand that your posts are the exact same garbage just in the opposite direction. This whole thread feels like some kind of response to a single post and makes no sense all on its own.

You're saying that the Jags, Jets, and Phins all have a chance to beat the Pats. Unless you back that up with some very detailed analysis/breakdowns it's the definition of "any given Sunday" logic. Those are teams that are clearly inferior to the Pats.

The 49ers and Texans are clearly going to be hard games; I don't think I've seen a single person arguing this. Is that really the whole point of this thread? To argue a point that absolutely no one is arguing?

Oh I took the time to read and re-read and re-read your post. I completely agree that having those tough games down the stretch will be good for the Pats, but that certainly doesn't erase all the inane rambling prior to that point.

 

[MassPats38]

Why do 49ers and Texans get a pass around here when they play like crap but the pats don't?

Because they have 1 and 2 fewer losses, respectively. That means they rock. It does not mean that they got lucky in a few games to avoid some losses. When it is convenient, "you are your record." When not, "escaped with a win" or "almost lost."

The fact is the Pats are capable of beating every team on the remaining schedule. They are also capable of losing to those teams, with a lesser margin of error against these two given the talent level. Given the Pats' recent history, I don't bet against them when it comes to winning. It will be tough to win out, but is far from impossible.

 

[Bhelmet]

There is no such thing as the law of averages.

Not sure if you are being sarcastic - but there IS such a thing as the law of averages. Bernoulli formulated the principle.

 

[Rob0729]

Right now, there is no team the Pats can't beat.

Houston has looked shaky the last month or so and benefited from poor competition and luck (facing the Bears without Cutler) of their schedule. They really haven't looked impressive in their wins. Their only impressive win since September was vs. the Ravens who look shaky themselves.

San Fran is beatable too.

I am not guaranteeing the Pats will run the table or even say they will, but they have arguably been playing better football than either Houston or San Fran over the last month or month and a half. I wouldn't be surprised if they did not lose another game this season.

 

[PatriotSeven]

No, you're not being realistic. That's the problem.

- We have yet to face the 2 toughest teams we had on our schedule this year, 49ers and Texans. Who says they are the two toughest? You?
- We lost to teams worse than those 2. Again, says who?
- We've had bad teams take us to the wire, Bills and Jets. So, clearly you discount divisional games and think that the rivalries don't mean anything.
- We are out 2 of our best offensive weapons. Last I looked, It was Mankins and Gronkowski who were out. Not Brady and Welker.
- We only beat 1 strong team. Again, you think this only because you discount division rivals.

You may not think those are sound reasons, but I do.

You think they are sound reasons, but they aren't. They are significantly flawed.

Houston - Lost to Green Bay. Barely beat Jacksonville. By your standards, they've only beat "two" tough teams.

San Fran - Lost to Minnesota. Lost to the Giants. Barely beat Seattle. Yes, they've beat Green Bay and they beat Chicago. Couldn't beat St. Louis despite OT. But what about the rest of their schedule.

What you absolutely, totally discount is that, to this point, the Pats defense has played like the young and inexperienced defense they are. But, that seems to be changing. One of the big reasons is that they are FORCING turnovers. They lead the league in forced fumbles and fumbles recovered. Not to mention they also have 13 interceptions.

There are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about the Pats chances instead of being pessimistic.

I will just answer your points in red.

1. Their record. Statistics. Strength of schedule.

Texans: 9-1. Scoring defense #3, Scoring defense: #4
49ers: 7-2-1. Scoring defense: #1, Scoring offense: #13
Patriots: 7-3. Scoring defense: #16, Scoring offense: #1

2. That applies to every NFL team, so it's kind of a moot point. However we're not even in one of the toughest divisions in the NFL.

3. I was speaking about Gronk and Hernandez, before I heard he was confirmed to play thursday. We'll still have to wait and see if he's really back this time but do keep in mind our offense is centered around our tight ends and their ability to block.

4. Again, are you really using division rivals as an argument for strength of schedule? Not only are we not one of the toughest divisions, but doesn't the "divisional rivalry" apply to every single NFL team? When I'm talking about Houston beating better teams, I don't count the Jaguars and Titans among those.

Obviously you wouldn't give Houston any credit for beating their divisional rivals and I assure you nobody outside of this fan base would consider beating this year's Jets or Bills a meaningful test of our strength either.

Fact is we are 0-3 against the top 10 defenses we faced:

Arizona #7
Seattle #2
Baltimore #9

Arizona's offense is ranked 30th and Seattle's 24th and they still beat us.

I'm not being pessimistic. I'm being realistic. I just can't overlook the fact we are 0-3 against top 10 defenses. There's even less to feel good about when were are getting ready to face even better teams than those 3 and we are missing Gronk. We have yet to prove we are capable of beating a team with a top 10 scoring defense, even when they have inept offenses. That's a fact. Not an opinion nor a "feeling".

 

[PatsFan2]

I keep getting more and more confident the Pats will run the table. Especially if the defense continues to improve. To be honest I don't think there is a defense that can hold this team under 25 points and that includes Houston and SF. I think Houston will be tough and SF will be a blowout.

Minus Gronk...i wouldn't be that confident...its going to be interesting playing without him. The few times we played without Gronk ie...AFC-CG vs Ravens after his injury and the SB our Offense was not as smooth. And Teams will be able to key on Welker. If somebody steps up it might be different...i hope Edelperson continues his improvement in our Offense.