What's the worst Pats team since 2004?

[Satchboogie3]

PatsDeb, did you seriously vote for the 2007 team? This isn't a poll of "which team had the most disappointing season", it's "What's the WORST Pats team". 2007 was the best (yes, better than 01, 03 or 04) Pats team in their history.

 

[PatsDeb]

PatsDeb, did you seriously vote for the 2007 team? This isn't a poll of "which team had the most disappointing season", it's "What's the WORST Pats team". 2007 was the best (yes, better than 01, 03 or 04) Pats team in their history.

Yes, I really did, although I guess I was voting my own feelings rather than how good the team was. I just remember being on the edge of my seat every game towards the end of the year, thinking the other shoe had to drop at some point, and then dreading that it would happen in the playoffs. I went to the SB and the whole game I just sat there feeling dread. When the Pats finally went ahead late in the game, I remember thinking, "Finally, I can relax," only to watch it blow up a few minutes later. I bought a shirt at half-time with the Superbowl logos on it and I ended up giving it to charity a few days after I got home never having worn it.

Can't agree that the 2007 team was better than the 01, 03 or 04 teams because those teams were able to pull out all the stops and win it all, and the 07 team couldn't do that in the end.

 

[IcyPatriot]

A few spoiled fans here lately
... The Patriots have been great ... even in their injury plagued season they played like champions.

 

[Deus Irae]

A few spoiled fans here lately
... The Patriots have been great ... even in their injury plagued season they played like champions.

How is anyone here "spoiled", regarding this particular thread? The poll is about Patriots teams post-2004. I assume we'd all have put every one of those teams ahead of the 2008 Lions, but that was not the question being posed.

 

[Afterlifemobile-86]

2005 was soo bad, but they were also slammed with a crazy amount of injuries the whole year. This year's team reminds me a lot of the 2006 team (one of my all time favorite Pats teams). They aren't wowing anyone but come playoff time they could get real scary. 2006 was a superbowl championship team had they held on in INDY. Imagine that, a superbowl championship with Caldwell and Gaffney as your top 2 WR's. That's another reason I loved the 06 team, it really showed everyone how much of an amazing QB Brady is. Brady was like MacGyver that year with the lack of big name talent he started with.

 

[RayClay]

The 2005 team battled back from more adversity than I've ever seen to make the playoffs.

The 2007 team was the worst. Neither of these teams won it all, obviously, but the 2007 team distorted our offense into a front running stats machine and we haven't recovered the style of play which made us great since.

I still have faith we can integrate a great player like Moss into an overall scheme that takes advantage of what the defense gives/is forced into, but it's yet to be proven.

The 2008 team had the most balanced offense, that should tell you something.

 

[HarkDawg]

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

Yeah, but our division is improving...... and we still beat them for the MAJORITY of the games in 2009 .

 

[Patjew]

The 2008 team had the most balanced offense, that should tell you something.

Cassell > Brady?

 

[HarkDawg]

Cassell > Brady?

NEVAH Not even close.



Brady is the KING of the Cassel

 

[RobertWeathers]

The 2007 team was the worst. Neither of these teams won it all, obviously, but the 2007 team distorted our offense into a front running stats machine and we haven't recovered the style of play which made us great since.

That is completely irrational and bleeds bitterness.

One last stop in SB42 and that team is considered the greatest of all-time.

 

[DarrylS]

thank god there were no message boards in the early 90's, you all would be commiting suicide, beating the dog or committing acts of self emoliation.. we are luck to be where we are, despite some bumps in the road... despite some "issues" it is all good.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Add me to the list of those who did not enjoy the 2007 season. It had the forboding aura of incipient disaster throughout the 2nd half of the regular season. That said, it was the best team of the time period. This 2009 squad has the potential of being anywhere from the best to just better than the worst. To be better than 2007 would require a ring, which requires a consistent offense where key players don't go MIA and a defense that matures into cohesiveness. A bit of a long shot given the lack of performance against quality opponents but still yet possible in the weeks to come.

 

[aluminum seats]

thank god there were no message boards in the early 90's, you all would be commiting suicide, beating the dog or committing acts of self emoliation.. we are luck to be where we are, despite some bumps in the road... despite some "issues" it is all good.

Your comment isn't relevent to this thread......

 

[aluminum seats]

I have to say, I'm surprised at all the votes for 2005, which was the driver for me to set up the poll.

I view the 2005 team as really two teams, which is why the team in the playoffs is the one to consider. That year, the Pats started off 4-4, and it was a 4-4 that EASILY could have been 2-6. They had lost both coordinators from the year before, and it was really a team in transition.

But after that, the Pats won 6 of their last 7 entering the playoffs. (They threw the game against Miami to get Jax in the playoffs.) Denver was the universe's way of reversing all the Pats' good fortune the previous 4 years......5 turnovers, missed field goals, just an absolute fiasco of a game. They outgained the Broncos 420-286. Just a horrible game--but it happens. Point is, if that team simply played without unprecedented mistakes in that game, they win the Super Bowl.

To me, it's about the TEAM, and what you see watching the games. I think that Pats TEAM beats 2006, 2008, and 2009....and maybe 2007.

 

[Ring 6]

1.) Cassel come playoff time (which was the parameter given by the OP) was playing better than Brady is now.

2.) The O-line was much better at the end of last season than it has been this year.

3.) WR1 and WR3 were both stronger last year.

4.) Last year's D-line was much better than what's been out there this year.

5.) Last year's linebacking was better than this years, and that's a sad commentary on what we've seen to date this season.

6.) The O.C. position was being handled much more skillfully last season.

2009 has better safety play, better play at the #2 and #3 CB spots, and Taylor is better than Jordan as the #2/#3 RB. Other than that, when I break it down, it's pretty much even or 2008 over 2009 to me so far.

#1 is foolish. I stopped there.

 

[RobertWeathers]

....and maybe 2007.

You had me until you said this....

Why isn't the 2007 team a TEAM? All due respect but that line of thinking makes no sense. The most dominant team in regular season history, with two touh playoff wins vs a hot JAX team and a galvinized SD squad and comes within 30 seconds of cementing itself as THE greatest team of all-time potentially loses to a secondary of rookie Hobbs, a not yet good Asante, Artrell Hawkins and lost Eugene Wilson? That schedule at the end of the year for 2005 team was full of cupcakes.

If Rodney doesnt get hurt....its a closer contest. That I may agree with.

 

[mgteich]

For many this poll is about living up to expectations.

By that logic a bad team that goes 8-8 (or 11-5 with a truly weak schedule) is all of a sudden a good team if it exceeds expectations. Also, a team that loses its coordinators starts 4-4, has weak WR's and non-existent ILB's are not a bad team if they make the playoffs.
==================

Others simply look at results. The 2005 team was not a bad team since they made the playoffs. The 2008 was a bad team because they failed to make the playoffs.
===================================

For example, was the 2001 team one of the best patriots teams of all time because it won the Super Bowl, exceeded expectations, and pulled off many miracles? Or was it one of the weakest teams ever to win a Super Bowl? And was the poor 2005 team not a weak team because they made the playoffs?
===================================
Since the 2000 transition year, Belichick has had been in the playoff hunt until the last weekend every year.

 

[RayClay]

Cassell > Brady?

Team > individual.

Balance > star system.

Game plan > play designs

 

[RobertWeathers]

For many this poll is about living up to expectations.

By that logic a bad team that goes 8-8 (or 11-5 with a truly weak schedule) is all of a sudden a good team if it exceeds expectations. Also, a team that loses its coordinators starts 4-4, has weak WR's and non-existent ILB's are not a bad team if they make the playoffs.
==================

Others simply look at results. The 2005 team was not a bad team since they made the playoffs. The 2008 was a bad team because they failed to make the playoffs.
===================================

For example, was the 2001 team one of the best patriots teams of all time because it won the Super Bowl, exceeded expectations, and pulled off many miracles? Or was it one of the weakest teams ever to win a Super Bowl? And was the poor 2005 team not a weak team because they made the playoffs?
===================================
Since the 2000 transition year, Belichick has had been in the playoff hunt until the last weekend every year.

Nice post mgtiech, you've made me take pause and try and add some clarity for my own sake. I'll throw it out there for discussion. Great thread!

There is "worst" team- talent, record, etc. My team is 2008

There is "least successful" team-IMO based on playoff failure: My team is 2008

There is "most disappointing" team- Based on expectations. My team is 2007.

There is "most successful" team-Tie, 2001, 2003, 2004. Although the 01 run was the most gratifying.

There is "the best" team- Mine is 2004.

My .02$

 

[DarrylS]

Your comment isn't relevent to this thread......

Oh no?? I have no real complaints and think all of the teams were good.. could they have done some things better yes, but all these polls about the gloom and doom need to be put into perspective.. we have fielded a top team in this decade..

despite some "issues" it is all good