The Truth about the Patriots

[MoLewisrocks]

The only way you see those posters more is if you have AndyJohnson, Eagle Eye, MoLewisRocks and several other over-the-top homers on ignore. That group is ubiquitous with its unthinking backing of all things and moves Patriots.

LOL Coming from the omnipresent champion of contrarianism and criticism for enlightenment sake, I take your attempt at an insult as a compliment. Not surprising who showed up in this thread first, is it...

 

[mgcolby]

I believe most fans hope for the best, but are realistic going into the season with the questions the pats have.

Please name one team that doesn't have question marks somewhere on their team?

Just one!

 

[signbabybrady]

The only way you see those posters more is if you have AndyJohnson, Eagle Eye, MoLewisRocks and several other over-the-top homers on ignore. That group is ubiquitous with its unthinking backing of all things and moves Patriots.

I would like to be added to that list .

 

[Deus Irae]

LOL Coming from the omnipresent champion of contrarianism and criticism for enlightenment sake, I take your attempt at an insult as a compliment. Not surprising who showed up in this thread first, is it...

Thanks for demonstrating my point. You could almost have been my sock puppet.

 

[Deus Irae]

I would like to be added to that list .

You do like the Kool Aid. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[PatsBoy12]

I thought the Patriots have only gone to four SB's under Kraft and Belichick?

 

[Synovia]

Thanks for demonstrating my point. You could almost have been my sock puppet.

Wow, its amazing that someone who pretty much is a sock puppet has a sock puppet.

 

[Sicilian]

I'm ok with either side so long as they have thought out arguments. I don't have to agree with said argument to consider it a valid thought process, but something more than "In BB we trust!" for the homers or a blanket generality about "You can't win without X all the time!" from the chicken littles.

Also, when one side presents a fact that I dispute (perhaps a statistic that I feel doesn't accurately portray what happens on the field), and I dispute that fact and thus the argument, rebuttals of "Keep drinking that Kool-Aid " etc, are frustrating.

Apparently you can't argue against a naysayer without being a homer, and you can't argue against a homer without being a chicken little. Honestly, it's the attitude of most of these extremists that sucks, not their opinions.

 

[PATSNUTme]

The only way you see those posters more is if you have AndyJohnson, Eagle Eye, MoLewisRocks and several other over-the-top homers on ignore. That group is ubiquitous with its unthinking backing of all things and moves Patriots.

We have rules about insulting other members.












As Mayor of Homerville, I'm insulted that I was excluded from that list of names.

 

[Deus Irae]

We have rules about insulting other members.












As Mayor of Homerville, I'm insulted that I was excluded from that list of names.

Fair enough, sir, although your homer "style" tends to be less along the "stifling dissent" approach.

 

[reflexblue]

i thought the patriots have only gone to four sb's under kraft and belichick?

'96 '01 03 '04 '07 = 5

 

[The Brandon Five]

We have rules about insulting other members.

That's right, if you don't repeatedly insult others, your thread rankings will suffer and you are in danger of being "ignored" or outright banned.

 

[LuthierJr]

 

[PatsBoy12]

'96 '01 03 '04 '07 = 5

Um, Belichick wasn't the head coach in '96, but I guess I see what you're saying.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I don't see that to be the case, especially on this forum. You have to admit that pass rush, from whatever position have been a problem for this team for a few seasons now.

I DEFINITLY see that to be the case, in the last couple, but not necessarily going forward.

As I have posted about the missing "quotas" of pressures and sacks from the interior DL, sans Seymour, ILBs, sans Bruschi, and blitzing Safeties, sans Rodney.

The OLB position actually exceeded the expected "annual quota" of sacks from there last year, amid the wailing and knashing of teeth about poor OLBs; and insufficient pass rush blamed on the OLBs, exclusively.

In the Rams game the interior DL got two sacks, the ILBs blitzed for two pressures, and the Safeties came effectively, too, along with the called back sacks from the OLBs for roughing.

 

[reflexblue]

Um, Belichick wasn't the head coach in '96, but I guess I see what you're saying.

UM, Nothing gets past you, i said under Kraft and Belichick

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

The only way you see those posters more is if you have AndyJohnson, Eagle Eye, MoLewisRocks and several other over-the-top homers on ignore. That group is ubiquitous with its unthinking backing of all things and moves Patriots.

Hey....did you forget someone?

 

[AzPatsFan]

You young whipper snappers have no collective memory.

Our beloved Patriots have been to 6, six, S-I-X, Superbowls, and & 7, seven, S-E-V-E-N League Championship games in their 50 year existence. Kraft and Belichick, FHOF, were involved in 5. Raymond Berry HOF, was involved in one; as was Parcells, FHOF?

1963 AFL Championship Lost 10-51 San Diego Chargers

1985 Superbowl Lost 10-46 Chicago Bears

1996 Superbowl Lost 25-31 Green Bay Packers

2001 Superbowl Won 17-14 St Louis Rams

2004 Superbowl Won 24-21 Philadelphia Eagles

2005 Superbowl Won 32-29 Carolina Panthers

2007 Superbowl Lost 14-17 New York Giants

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

Um, Belichick wasn't the head coach in '96, but I guess I see what you're saying.

He was the DC.

 

[Ring 6]

Here is the thing. A rational person with no agenda considers things in context.

It is easy to find things to gripe about. Tom Brady is the best QB in the NFL but I can find instances of poor play. Why? Because everyone has instances of poor play. I can find instances of poor play in every other QB as well. If I limit my discussion to those instances without recognizing their frequency or severity, I can argue my way into Tom Brady being a bad QB.

It works the same way with decision making. BB has made a tremendous amount of bad decisions. But in context he has made a much lower percentage of bad decisions than anyone else out there. I can argue my way into BB is a bad decision maker. Its as silly as the Brady example.

Most of the posting on this board revolves around judging decisions and discussing expectations, including discussing the expectation of whehter decisions were good or poor.

Rational, fair and balanced thinking would give the doubt to BB until proven otherwise because of his track record. Its foolish to suggest that we have the information available that he does in making a decision. This brings us to the agenda based poster.

Many posters just come here to vent. If they don't like the way things are going they vent, and their agenda tends to be that they would rather aim low and have the team exceed expectations than be set up for a fall. The success of the franchise has exacerbated that.

Then you have posters such as Deus Irae, crippled by narcicism and using their posts to make them feel like they are smart. When the argument fails, it is very simply, you call the other poster a homer, because in one felt swoop you dismiss their point of view as biased.

Of course it is reasonable to question BBs decisions in the proper context because many of them will be wrong. But when it is done to expand an agenda, or done by ignoring context and facts, it ruins the board.

Go ahead and question everything as long as it is backed up with facts and a reasonable argument, and not the ridiculous assumption that a poster can make better football decisions than BB.

If you like to call me a homer, fire away. Because in the BB era I have been more supportive of the decisions, more in agreement with the philosophy and more ready to give benefit of the doubt than most. And that makes me more right than most. If I were a 'homer' in the Rod Rust era, then I would be worried.