- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 72,772
- Reaction score
- 22,604
Thats what I was thinking. Almost asked who said itMy God that sounds like it should have come from the mouth of either Squeaky or the Douche...
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Thats what I was thinking. Almost asked who said itMy God that sounds like it should have come from the mouth of either Squeaky or the Douche...
3. WendellThree Up
1. Jamie Collins - Very good, not spectacular. Did well in run game. Generated a little pressure. Got the INT created by Chandler Jones
2. Chandler Jones - 2 1/2 QB pressures, biggest play of the game
No, just no.
Who did they sit in order to suck?
Are you implying that stupid decisions with respect to his team winning is a Belichick standard?Honestly It's not smart but this is Bill we are talking about. He isn't always conventional. I could see him testing the team with a little adversity.
I agree it's stupid, but it is bb after all.
1. Kline/Fleming (rotated same position) says Kline wasn't all that bad and wasn't sure why he was pulled but Fleming was atrociousChung was Bedard's third down. Missed the first two.
No, just no.
Who did they sit in order to suck?
Chung was Bedard's third down. Missed the first two.
I wholeheartedly 100% disagree. BB has never sat players based upon looking past a weak opponent. He would not do it with a team he spent all week saying always plays us tough.I never said they sat anyone to suck, but I think they decided to site Arrington, Blount, Connolly, and Edelman (although Edelman may not have been cleared to play) because of the competition. And if they were facing a better team or needed to win the game more, one or more might have played.
It absolutely would be the first time. This team is and has always been about one game at a time and NEVER taking any opponent lightly. Your 'insight' suggests you know nothing about BB and the way he runs the team.The Pats didn't do anything in order to suck, but they may have decided not to put their best effort there by opening up the play book or play players less than 100% for thinking about the playoffs over winning this particular game. It wouldn't be the first time they have done stuff like this. You are making a bigger deal than it is.
Chung was Bedard's third down. Missed the first two.
Chung was terrible. The Jets put a bullseye between the 2 and 3 on his jersey and targeted him early and often.
Are you implying that stupid decisions with respect to his team winning is a Belichick standard?
Because there was another team trying to win the game that made plays.Negative, but I can see bb not putting all effort to win this game decisively. The Patriots could of won by a lot more, but they didn't. Why, that's what we are talkin about.
Are you implying that stupid decisions with respect to his team winning is a Belichick standard?
I wholeheartedly 100% disagree. BB has never sat players based upon looking past a weak opponent. He would not do it with a team he spent all week saying always plays us tough.
Those players were injured. There is no conspiracy theory here.
It absolutely would be the first time. This team is and has always been about one game at a time and NEVER taking any opponent lightly. Your 'insight' suggests you know nothing about BB and the way he runs the team.
Because there was another team trying to win the game that made plays.
Lets not be like Jets fans and say we could have blown them out but they suck so bad we decided we didn't even need to try.
From our archive - this week all-time:
May 25 - June 9 (Through 26yrs)











