Winning 14+ Games

[Clonamery]

...Well, it's arguably more pathetic....

It's waaaaaaaaaay better than (just) being an argument waiting happen.

 

[townes]

The Patriots haven't won since 2004, and it's the same silly song and dance from the Patriots homer crowd that it was in Indiana. So let's not pretend that it's any different. It's not. Well, it's arguably more pathetic, because the Patriots homers should know better, having seen the Colts homers doing it.

I'll take a "silly song and dance" over the abject misery the glass is only 95% full crowd spews every day of the week. Unlike the other major sports football is a one and done system and one bad game ends even a great team's year, and that is why excellent franchises like the Patriots, Colts, Packers, and Steelers can go for a decade or more without a World Championship despite a consistently high level of performance. Those demanding a World Championship every year and calling the season a failure if that isn't achieved are beyond unreasonable, it can't and won't happen, and the best any football fan can expect is that their team is run well enough to contend on a regular basis, which the Patriots clearly do.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The Patriots haven't won since 2004, and it's the same silly song and dance from the Patriots homer crowd that it was in Indiana. So let's not pretend that it's any different. It's not. Well, it's arguably more pathetic, because the Patriots homers should know better, having seen the Colts homers doing it.

LOL the old same but different retort...and the clever homer taunt. I happen to think what is arguably more pathetic is the inability of some fans to appreciate the journey any more. Apparently being contrarian is the sole remaining source of your fan enjoyment. I know you think that's a mark of your superior intellect. But it's just insufferable ego blowing smoke up your skirt...

 

[Off The Grid]

LOL the old same but different retort...and the clever homer taunt. I happen to think what is arguably more pathetic is the inability of some fans to appreciate the journey any more. Apparently being contrarian is the sole remaining source of your fan enjoyment. I know you think that's a mark of your superior intellect. But it's just insufferable ego blowing smoke up your skirt...

For The Win!!! :rocker:

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

The Patriots haven't won since 2004, and it's the same silly song and dance from the Patriots homer crowd that it was in Indiana. So let's not pretend that it's any different. It's not. Well, it's arguably more pathetic, because the Patriots homers should know better, having seen the Colts homers doing it.

So basically it's Superbowl or bust? I know players may feel that way, but we fans get to enjoy the moments.

What you're saying sounds similar to fans who look at a 6-3 ball game and say the entire game was terrible (not enough points scored). Some people might appreciate the defensive dominance performed by each team.

Likewise, we fans live the game 1 week at a time and there's usually ritual and commitment in watching the games. We invest in the moments, all the moments. Does it feel like a kick in the gut when we lose (in the post-season), sure does...doesn't mean we can't appreciate the entire season after the fact. And no, I still don't feel good about having an 18-1 season (in case you were wondering), but having reached 14-2 wit hthe team we had felt good and makes the future look promising.

 

[Deus Irae]

LOL the old same but different retort...and the clever homer taunt. I happen to think what is arguably more pathetic is the inability of some fans to appreciate the journey any more. Apparently being contrarian is the sole remaining source of your fan enjoyment. I know you think that's a mark of your superior intellect. But it's just insufferable ego blowing smoke up your skirt...

Ehhh, as has become your wont, you mistake unthinking obeisance and loyalty for fandom and enjoyment. Just for an example, since you decided to make this personal again, I've been one of those who've defended the 2007 season as a success despite the Super Bowl loss. I was among the few defending Cassel when people were calling for his head. However, because you find my fandom to be not 'pure' enough for your standards, you've spent years making stupid comments about my supposed "contrarianism", and not seeming to understand that sometimes my "contrarianism" was in defense of the team and/or its players and decisions.

Most people understand that you can actually question a team and still be a fan, just as most people understand that goals and expectations change over time. Coaches understand that. Players understand that. Red Sox fans spent the better part of 100 years living it while waiting for a championship. It's just a few people like yourself who can't seem to wrap their minds around that basic notion.

 

[Deus Irae]

So basically it's Superbowl or bust? I know players may feel that way, but we fans get to enjoy the moments.

What you're saying sounds similar to fans who look at a 6-3 ball game and say the entire game was terrible (not enough points scored). Some people might appreciate the defensive dominance performed by each team.

Likewise, we fans live the game 1 week at a time and there's usually ritual and commitment in watching the games. We invest in the moments, all the moments. Does it feel like a kick in the gut when we lose (in the post-season), sure does...doesn't mean we can't appreciate the entire season after the fact. And no, I still don't feel good about having an 18-1 season (in case you were wondering), but having reached 14-2 wit hthe team we had felt good and makes the future look promising.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/756111-winning-14-games.html#post2550474

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

It's all about perspective and having a sound, rational one. Somewhere between Colt fans and Pats fans lies the truth...

As an example, a fan over on Coltfreaks just knocked himself out doing an analysis of the greatest QB's in the league, past and present. What he decided to base his formula on was subjectively selected stats. He decided among other things to not use rookie stats because Peyton's sucked and would have knocked him off of a couple of his all important comparative listings... He decided to use QB's with less than 50 starts because that (along with a mathmatical error here and there) bumped Brady off of a couple of the lists. He relied heavily on total yards because those are Manning's forte. He used sacks as a criteria because between OL talent and official aversion to calling holding against the Colts OL Manning was untouchable for a while...

He also claims he left off seasons he felt were outliers for players like Favre and Marino and Montana just because he felt like it...

And of course he ignored post season statistics altogether...inclusion of which would have knocked most of the non Manning competition not named Brady off his lists altogether...

Mo is correct.

There simply has to be a consist approach to football.

At the beginning of the season, most "experts" and many here had the Patriots at 8-8 or at most 10-6. The team goes 14-2 and it's a failure.

This equivalent to initially expecting 10, then thinking you are going to get 20 but wind up with 17 but 17 is a huge failure.

The foremost point is this is a very young team that lost in the playoffs to a veteran team. What this proves is experience matters and there is only one way to get experience.
This has been true since a pigskin was first tossed and even the Patriots cannot escape the inevitable laws of reality.

Based on where we sit, the Patriots are the only "powerhouse" that has huge upside from 2010 in terms of young players, draft choices, and cap space.

Why anyone would be depressed at 14-2 "trough" season is beyond me.

If one and done happens 2013-4, I would support the depression. No way 2010 deserves that type of mindset.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Ehhh, as has become your wont, you mistake unthinking obeisance and loyalty for fandom and enjoyment. Just for an example, since you decided to make this personal again, I've been one of those who've defended the 2007 season as a success despite the Super Bowl loss. I was among the few defending Cassel when people were calling for his head. However, because you find my fandom to be not 'pure' enough for your standards, you've spent years making stupid comments about my supposed "contrarianism", and not seeming to understand that sometimes my "contrarianism" was in defense of the team and/or its players and decisions.

Most people understand that you can actually question a team and still be a fan, just as most people understand that goals and expectations change over time. Coaches understand that. Players understand that. Red Sox fans spent the better part of 100 years living it while waiting for a championship. It's just a few people like yourself who can't seem to wrap their minds around that basic notion.

When did patsfans.com become the platform for self adulation?

Most of the problems that are associated with your posts revolve around the fact that your "contrarianism" is quite shallow and stupid.

A serious elevation in posting quality in needed before you can be legitimately called a "contrarian".

 

[Shelterdog]

Not to be a hippie but following football is a form of recreation so if you just enjoying rooting for a competitive team, that's fine, and if you're not happy unless they win the superbowl, that's also fine. It's a completely subjective thing.

Now if you're only happy without a ring you're not going to be happy that often because it's a very competitive business, but bully for you.

 

[Oswlek]

The foremost point is this is a very young team that lost in the playoffs to a veteran team. What this proves is experience matters and there is only one way to get experience. This has been true since a pigskin was first tossed and even the Patriots cannot escape the inevitable laws of reality.

Very true. I was going to post something like this, but didn't bother because it won't change anyone's opinion.

People look at NE's one and done in 2009 and then the one and done in 2010 and equate the two, but they really aren't that similar. Same thing with the defensive woes. The Pats were a fading, again team and it showed in their inability to make big stops and step up in the playoffs. The big stops and playoff exit persisted, but the cause was the exact opposite. Instead of being old, NE was plagued by too much inexperience.

2010 wasn't a contiunation of 2009 (or 2007 if you want to go further back), it is a complete reversal that happened to end in a similar manner. But there isn't a team in the league that is better equipped for the next 4 years than the Pats.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Ehhh, as has become your wont, you mistake unthinking obeisance and loyalty for fandom and enjoyment. Just for an example, since you decided to make this personal again, I've been one of those who've defended the 2007 season as a success despite the Super Bowl loss. I was among the few defending Cassel when people were calling for his head. However, because you find my fandom to be not 'pure' enough for your standards, you've spent years making stupid comments about my supposed "contrarianism", and not seeming to understand that sometimes my "contrarianism" was in defense of the team and/or its players and decisions.

Most people understand that you can actually question a team and still be a fan, just as most people understand that goals and expectations change over time. Coaches understand that. Players understand that. Red Sox fans spent the better part of 100 years living it while waiting for a championship. It's just a few people like yourself who can't seem to wrap their minds around that basic notion.

You used to be what you now accuse me of being. Then the Seymour trade happened and Maroney was traded and you lost your mind because you had spent so much capital in defending those players against any criticism that I guess you felt Bill stabbed you in the...ego. Since then you've become almost Felgeresque in your contrarianism where all things Belichick are concerned (and in that case it was losing the bestseller to a former critic). Bill can't do anything "right" anymore. See the difference between us is, while I have and will continue to question Bill's decisions from time to time, I also came over time to accept that knows more about this team and these players and he's forgotten more about the NFL game than you or I will ever know. That fact coupled with his record spanning more than a decade here now leads me to pause and ponder long and hard before I muster the audacity to lambaste him for making stupid or foolish mistakes...so I at least have going for me - that I am able to wrap my mind around the fact that as a fan I have insufficient data to make kneejerk pronouncements about how a HOF HC conducts football business. Mostly I observe and even admire and try to figure out how and why he does what he does and why on occasion it doesn't work.

See, much to your chagrin, you and I are really a lot alike, just different...

Truth be told, as time goes by you and NEM are becoming increasingly alike, the only differences being his posts until he entirely lost his marbles had some random comedic value and he wasn't obcessed with semantics, just measurables and scoring.

 

[rabthepat]

More "LOSER" talk...be happy that your team goes 14-2 and then chokes come play off time...why not research how many teams go 14-2 and do not win a single play off game...add to it you blow it to a team you beat earlier 45-3...


Last year's Patriots were paper tigers and nothing more...they were as tough as a Dunkin Donuts jelly donut...

 

[townes]

Most people understand that you can actually question a team and still be a fan, just as most people understand that goals and expectations change over time. Coaches understand that. Players understand that. Red Sox fans spent the better part of 100 years living it while waiting for a championship. It's just a few people like yourself who can't seem to wrap their minds around that basic notion.

Most people do question they just don't maintain a constant level of misery and negativity towards the most successful franchise in the sport. Despite their run of success the Patriots have had plenty of misses in the draft, free agency, prick moments, and some truly painful losses, and most people can recognize these and put them in some sort of realistic context. On the other hand there is the Steve From Fall River crowd who no matter how much success they have or good a job they do drafting or in personel always find ways to crap all over them and run them down. They cloak this as their version of "critical thinking" when in truth it is simply ego run amok as they insist over and over that day is night simply because they say so. They excel in revisionist history and focus all their attention on the supposed deficits the team has created for itself and somehow manage to turn anything that isn't a championship into failure.

The Patriots are far from perfect but still are the best franchise in the game and are poised for years of success to come, and I actually feel sorry for those who can't see their success for what it is and manage to always see them as failing. Critical thinking and an always open sore of negativity are two different things, and people shouldn't confuse the two no matter how much the miserable try to conflate them.

 

[Patspsycho]

Very true. I was going to post something like this, but didn't bother because it won't change anyone's opinion.

People look at NE's one and done in 2009 and then the one and done in 2010 and equate the two, but they really aren't that similar. Same thing with the defensive woes. The Pats were a fading, again team and it showed in their inability to make big stops and step up in the playoffs. The big stops and playoff exit persisted, but the cause was the exact opposite. Instead of being old, NE was plagued by too much inexperience.

2010 wasn't a continuation of 2009 (or 2007 if you want to go further back), it is a complete reversal that happened to end in a similar manner. But there isn't a team in the league that is better equipped for the next 4 years than the Pats.

To this, I would like to add that it's not just inexperience on the part of those youngsters- it's also not having the realization of how hard it is to get to the superbowl like the veteran players do. Brady went to the superbowl, 3 of his first 4 years in the league, and since then, has only been there once, so he takes losses much harder than a player who's been in the NFL only one or two seasons, so to speak.

 

[RayClay]

How many of those teams won the championship? What's the % of winning the SB if you achieve a 14 win season?

My calculator says here it's 100% better than if you don't make the playoffs.

 

[Sfpat]

Hey, you can always root for the Texans, or the Browns, or Chargers or Vikings, or Bills, or ......Jets, or.......(insert name of team here).