What's the worst Pats team since 2004?

[aluminum seats]

Another unrelated thread was turning into this conversation, which I think was interesting, partly because I disagreed with the opinions there. So, interested what the board thinks. Could have asked about the best team, or rank them all, but doing it this way is the most effective to me. So, since the last Super Bowl season, which Pats team is the worst? To keep things consistent, let's use the "version" of the team that entered the playoffs (or in the case of last year, at the end of the year.) That's when championships are won, after all.

 

[wilfork is beastin']

either the 08 or the 05 team

 

[Tunescribe]

WHY accentuate the negative? I don't get it.

 

[jmt57]

Despite the 11-5 record, the 2008 team. Playing the two weakest divisions in the NFL made that team look much better on paper than they actually were.

 

[pats1]

2008 is the obvious choice.

 

[cincipatsfan]

WHY accentuate the negative? I don't get it.

This needs to be a choice on the poll

 

[JSn]

2008 is the obvious choice.

Despite a few of the issues there, I really enjoyed watching that season play out, however.

 

[Deus Irae]

As I opined in that other thread, it's 2005, and there's not a close second. From worst to best:

2005
2009
2008
2006
2007


There's still time for 2009 to improve, obviously.

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

I think 2008. No Brady at QB even though Cassel played well. Defense was pretty terrible last year with O'Neal and Hobbs starting at CB. We ended up 11-5 but we played a ton of bad teams. Raiders, 49ers, Rams, Chiefs, Seahawks, Bills, were all garbage and even Denver was bad they had absolutely no defense.

 

[pats1]

As I opined in that other thread, it's 2005, and there's not a close second. From worst to best:

2005
2009
2008
2006
2007


There's still time for 2009 to improve, obviously.

Really? At least in 2005 they could beat their division to make the playoffs.

 

[Kontradiction]

I'd put the 2009 team over the 2008 team with Brady being the reason. But mine would be 2008 followed by 2005.

 

[aluminum seats]

WHY accentuate the negative? I don't get it.

It's not accentuating the negative. Saying what's the best Pats team would likely lead to a round of hosannas for the 2007 squad, which I don't find interesting. Ranking the teams is too varied for a poll (although posters can rank 'em of course, and probably will.) Thinking about the "worst" team leads to the best kind of analysis. And the "worst" team since 2004 will still be a pretty darn good team, so it's not really negative at all. I guess I could change to "least best" but let's not be babies.

 

[wilfork is beastin']

2009 is better than 08. Last year our defense let guys like Bulger and Seneca Wallace air it out and the team was god awful on 3rd down. Our defense looked terrible on Monday night but it's been more than reliable most of the year and much improved from 08. We also haven't had a starter go down with a season ending injury each week

 

[RobertWeathers]

As I opined in that other thread, it's 2005, and there's not a close second. From worst to best:

2005
2009
2008
2006
2007


There's still time for 2009 to improve, obviously.

Interesting, Deus....I view 09 better than 08. What is your reasoning?

 

[pats1]

2009 is better than 08. Last year our defense let guys like Bulger and Seneca Wallace air it out and the team was god awful on 3rd down. Our defense looked terrible on Monday night but it's been more than reliable most of the year and much improved from 08. We also haven't had a starter go down with a season ending injury each week

Agreed, 2008 was a sub-standard season overall. The Pats' wins generally did not come against good teams.

 

[borg]

Cassel would run all over this current D....a bowling ball with a butchers knife

 

[PatsDeb]

I voted for 2007 because even though that wasn't the worst team statistically, after the-game-that-shall-not-be-mentioned, I have NEVER felt as bad as that after a sporting event and doubt I ever will again. The way I felt after that game has actually given me perspective last year and this year to remember it's only a game and there are more important things in life than football (though few are as enjoyable when your team is winning).

 

[farn]

I think the 05 team is much worse than the others. Last year's team, I would trust a bit more...

There were so many weird happenings following that 04 SB season... Brown & his KC friend, Beisel at LB... yikes.

 

[Rob0729]

I would say 2008. They really weren't that good especially without Brady. A weak arsed schedule. Take that team and give them this year's schedule and they might be 5-6 right now or worse.

If you want to break down the seasons in half, the first half of the 2005 season was the worst half of year that the Pats have had since 2001. The team switch a switch in the second half of the Chiefs game and become a good team, but before that the team was mediocre especially on the defensive side.

 

[mcgraw_wv]

Worst, Best, Improving, Declining, are all words to describe how a performance meets expectations. The 08 team will probably be rated the worst since it did not make the playoffs.

However, not only did they meet the expectations placed on them after Brady went down, they Exceeded them. Therefore in my book they can't me rated as the worst.

This years, to me has performed the worst, well below expectations.