Who Was A Fan During The Dark Years

[Actual Pats Fan]

If it's true as you say that there are a lot of unstable bandwagon fans, you should be able to come up with a few examples.

Well, for one, there's that 1960Pats guy! Yeah, he's...

...um, he's, uh...

...I'm...I'm going to eat my dinner now...

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

I was full on Patriot fan by the time that probably the worst team song ever in the history of NFL teams was made in response to the Bears' Super Bowl Shuffle. Can't remember it exactly but something like 'The Patriots, Barry and we'. (I still contend if Morgan, I believe it was Morgan, catches that TD and/or Grogan starts the game then we could have made it competitive. Once that TD pass was dropped, then the team leader Eason and I think it was Craig James showed they clearly were intimidated by the Bears D, the game was basically DOA.......pre-SB, ahem, partying not withstanding).

Most people consider the theory silly and stupid; however, it was as clear at the time as it is today:

Steve Grogan was: Experienced in pressure situations, including as an underdog. Also, experienced and effective in managing a game (called his own plays). Was the single main reason the team was competitive and in the race in 1985. Was tough enough to handle pressure from Bears' defense and still make enough plays to succeed in keeping the ball - and keeping it out of the Bears' hands. Time of possession was crucial-our defense could not be on the field all day. A slowed down, methodical game was our only chance for an upset. This kind of "tempo" does in fact, rub off on a defense; specifically in this case, there were at least three separate dropped pick-sixes in the first quarter, of which we really needed to convert at least two I think, to have a chance at a win.

Tony Eason was: A good guy as far as I know, but nowhere near physically equipped to deal with a punishing defense. Not nearly mentally equipped to handle the inevitable pressure the Bears' D was going to bring. A good passer, not a great one, and not in Grogan's league in experience or maturity or leadership
or ability to manage a game. Plus, he had the flu.

A competitive championship game requires that both teams bring their best to the table, and only one did that day. Berry's idea that Eason could morph out of nowhere into Dan Marino was insane.

 

[patman52]

Became a fan in 1960...held season tickets in old Schaefer Stadium in the 70's and 80's. Lived the life of a diehard, hard core Patriot fan with 50 or so other people...Lot 17...Section 206. Saw a lot of horrible football games. Never ever had a bad day tailgating with the group. We made every Sunday a gustatory event.And the beer? Ice cold kegs and kegs of just about every damn brew that was around.

Kraft ruined everything by buying the lots ,paving them over, slotting parking spots and essentially doing away with the tribal atmosphere. Life is change and yes, all this winning has been a lot of fun. I still miss the old underdog days though.

yeah, i used to park all the way in the back probably where the field house is now., then the long walk to the stadium thru the area with the old travel trailers- remember and the sausage and pepper guy. The best one was when a guy had a Ryder truck and had a stripper in the back and kegs all over the place, once in a great while the cop would come down on horseback, but they never bothered us.

But then the team got good and the tailgates got bad. No fires, no kegs, one year they even banned regular footballs, they wanted you to toss nerf balls because the BMW crowd was complaining about the cars getting hit. I was an alum bench guy 335

 

[BobDigital]

I was too young to be... which goes to show how spoiled we are cause i am not that young The only bad year we had that i saw was 2000 you could argue 1995, 93 but that was a team that had hope which made it barable.

 

[patfanken]

Most people consider the theory silly and stupid; however, it was as clear at the time as it is today:

Steve Grogan was: Experienced in pressure situations, including as an underdog. Also, experienced and effective in managing a game (called his own plays). Was the single main reason the team was competitive and in the race in 1985. Was tough enough to handle pressure from Bears' defense and still make enough plays to succeed in keeping the ball - and keeping it out of the Bears' hands. Time of possession was crucial-our defense could not be on the field all day. A slowed down, methodical game was our only chance for an upset. This kind of "tempo" does in fact, rub off on a defense; specifically in this case, there were at least three separate dropped pick-sixes in the first quarter, of which we really needed to convert at least two I think, to have a chance at a win.

Tony Eason was: A good guy as far as I know, but nowhere near physically equipped to deal with a punishing defense. Not nearly mentally equipped to handle the inevitable pressure the Bears' D was going to bring. A good passer, not a great one, and not in Grogan's league in experience or maturity or leadership
or ability to manage a game. Plus, he had the flu.

A competitive championship game requires that both teams bring their best to the table, and only one did that day. Berry's idea that Eason could morph out of nowhere into Dan Marino was insane.

You have a very selective memory of Tony Eason, but you are not alone lots of Pats fans have similar memories. Most of them caused by John Hanna's remark about his toughness after Hanna retired at the end of the 85 season. Of course John failed to mention that he was a partial cause of Eason's "lack of toughness, because in the 85 season, John had 2 bad shoulders as well as a chronic bad knee and was far from the HOFer he'd been most of his career.

Eason in fact was a pretty good NFL QB for a couple of years, but had a fatal flaw. He was 6'4 and 210 and looked like he'd never seen a weight room. He had a slight build He just wasn't physically strong enough to absorb the punishment that NFL QB's have to deal with. After a rookie year where he rode the bench, he had 2 really good seasons with the Pats, 84 and 86. He was hurt on an offf in 85 where he split the QB duties with Grogan. But in those 2 seasons when he was the Pats full time QB, Eason had very respectable numbers: around 3,300 yds and good TD/int numbers (23-8/19-10). In fact IIRC he led the league in QB rating in the 86 season.

Don't forget that these were very good numbers for that time. This was WELL before NFL flag football came into fashion BTW- that team had an 11-5 record and lost in Denver (again) 22-17.....and the ST's coach that year was one, Dante Scarnecchia.

Eason had the misfortune of following Steve Grogan, who was the toughest QB in the NFL when he was in his prime, and having the last 25 years having the team QB'ed by Brady and Bledsoe, 2 guys who are both among the tougher QB's in the league when they played.

Eason paled in comparison to these 3 guys, but that doesn't mean he wasn't tough, just not AS tough. Eason had neither the physical build, nor the obsessive drive and competitiveness that creates guys like Brady, Bledsoe, and Grogan. But that doesn't make him a wimp or a bad person. 99 out of a hundred of us couldn't take the beating an NFL QB takes in a single game, let alone a full season. ESPECIALLY back in 85, when they still played the game as it was intended. Maybe we might want to think about that before we call someone else "not tough".

As you probably have already noted, I have always felt that Eason got a bit of a bad rap from most Pats fans over the years. He certainly wasn't a great NFL QB, but he wasn't a horrible one either. He had a good 3 year run where he was a good NFL starter. The rest of his career he was either injured or a back up. It happens. But the bottom line is that we've had a LOT of QB's play for the Pats over the years who weren't nearly as good or effective as Tony Eason....at leas tor those 3 years.

BTW- you complained about Grogan not getting the start in the SuperBowl that year. But you failed to notice that the QB who was on the field for all 3 ROAD playoff wins that year. was Tony Eason, and in those 3 games threw 5 TD's against zero picks.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

You have a very selective memory of Tony Eason, but you are not alone lots of Pats fans have similar memories. Most of them caused by John Hanna's remark about his toughness after Hanna retired at the end of the 85 season. Of course John failed to mention that he was a partial cause of Eason's "lack of toughness, because in the 85 season, John had 2 bad shoulders as well as a chronic bad knee and was far from the HOFer he'd been most of his career.

Eason in fact was a pretty good NFL QB for a couple of years, but had a fatal flaw. He was 6'4 and 210 and looked like he'd never seen a weight room. He had a slight build He just wasn't physically strong enough to absorb the punishment that NFL QB's have to deal with. After a rookie year where he rode the bench, he had 2 really good seasons with the Pats, 84 and 86. He was hurt on an offf in 85 where he split the QB duties with Grogan. But in those 2 seasons when he was the Pats full time QB, Eason had very respectable numbers: around 3,300 yds and good TD/int numbers (23-8/19-10). In fact IIRC he led the league in QB rating in the 86 season.

Don't forget that these were very good numbers for that time. This was WELL before NFL flag football came into fashion BTW- that team had an 11-5 record and lost in Denver (again) 22-17.....and the ST's coach that year was one, Dante Scarnecchia.

Eason had the misfortune of following Steve Grogan, who was the toughest QB in the NFL when he was in his prime, and having the last 25 years having the team QB'ed by Brady and Bledsoe, 2 guys who are both among the tougher QB's in the league when they played.

Eason paled in comparison to these 3 guys, but that doesn't mean he wasn't tough, just not AS tough. Eason had neither the physical build, nor the obsessive drive and competitiveness that creates guys like Brady, Bledsoe, and Grogan. But that doesn't make him a wimp or a bad person. 99 out of a hundred of us couldn't take the beating an NFL QB takes in a single game, let alone a full season. ESPECIALLY back in 85, when they still played the game as it was intended. Maybe we might want to think about that before we call someone else "not tough".

As you probably have already noted, I have always felt that Eason got a bit of a bad rap from most Pats fans over the years. He certainly wasn't a great NFL QB, but he wasn't a horrible one either. He had a good 3 year run where he was a good NFL starter. The rest of his career he was either injured or a back up. It happens. But the bottom line is that we've had a LOT of QB's play for the Pats over the years who weren't nearly as good or effective as Tony Eason....at leas tor those 3 years.

BTW- you complained about Grogan not getting the start in the SuperBowl that year. But you failed to notice that the QB who was on the field for all 3 ROAD playoff wins that year. was Tony Eason, and in those 3 games threw 5 TD's against zero picks.

Just to clarify, I wasn't an Eason hater. Tony had his moments. The wildcard path to the SB -- putting to rest the unwritten curse of Miami -- was definitely something Eason was a part of. However, if I recall correctly, a major factor in the victories was about generating an excellent +/- on turnovers. And we had a very good D of our own (I have an excellent memory of so many NFL pundits trashing the Patriots, calling us pretenders who made the SB because they didn't like that we knifed through the old guard of the AFC).

So to the last game, the SB, of the long road trip. Here come the Bears' defense. I think it was the 49ers and Giants who got mauled by the Bears' D leading up the SB.....pretty much opponents weren't even getting a whiff of the endzone against the Bears. The only whiff the opposing offenses were getting is the whiff of smelling salts especially for the QBs. The Bears' D was like Mike Tyson in his prime (around the same time era) -- the intimidation factor was so high he all but had the fight won before it even started.

I agree it would have been a tough call to not start Eason after the 3 road wins to the SB, but Berry should have recognized the opponent he was facing was very different than the AFC opponents, and everyone in the football universe knew Grogan was one of the toughest SOBs to ever throw a football. The Bears' D maybe would kill Grogan but they were not going to shake him. OTOH Eason was quickly and visibly shaken by their D. Never mind Hannah's comments, it was visually obvious to everyone in the room full of Patriot fans I was in that Eason was s#!tting bricks from the assault the Bears' defense was throwing at him (I include Craig on that list too - he looked like he was going to turn around and run the other direction the moment he received the handoff).

I still don't think we win that game but to keep it close the upstart Patriots going against that D couldn't afford to start the game the way they did. The Patriots' team seeing their QB/their leader get pummeled while he ducks and covers rapidly and repeatedly, the Patriots' offense literally going backward on every possession, it just played right into everyone's belief (including the Patriots themselves) that the Patriots didn't belong on the field with the Bears. IMHO the team seeing Grogan from the get go would have been a boost to their confidence, seeing Grogan's deathwish of standing tall long enough to actually complete some passes and actually move the ball forward would have made a tangible difference in the otherwise complete drubbing the Patriots received.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

doesn't make him a wimp or a bad person

Never said he was either. Not fair to compare anyone's toughness with Grogan; simply in the context of who should start.

You point out some important facts, which undoubtedly led to Berry's decisions. Yes, I'm referrring to '88 specifically also, which was arguably more egregious, since Flutie was fine and in '85 Grogan was just coming off an injury.

Tony's decent numbers do not reflect the critically inopportune mistakes and interceptions he made throughout his time here. I am completely aware of his effectiveness as I saw all the games. I also saw enough highlights of Steve Young to appreciate his ability, and again numbers supported Seifert's decision; however if SF was interested in winning the Jan. '93 NFCCG they very simply had to start Montana. It was clear from the previous playoff game, that although they survived, the Niners were not going to be able to deal with Dallas with Young in there. Yes, this would have required stones on Seifert, as well as some salving of Young's ego, but the bottom line is do you want to win the game. Imagine Tom Brady being healthy and active for a huge playoff game, and Belichick telling him, "Sorry, Tom, but Jacoby's been doing a great job for us and we've been winning so we'll just leave things as they are."

I was there when we clinched vs. the Bengals in '85, and in each of the 3 road playoff wins the team controlled the game, and Eason was called upon to make some plays (most impressively vs. the Raiders) and not screw it up. The Bears obviously presented a completely superior opponent in a completely different environment.

So, my memory's not selective, I failed to notice nothing, and I never called Tony those things. Today, his ego is unquestionably intact, but I would prefer having another Super Bowl ring, or two.

As for Hannah, John is not known for his cozy, warm, fuzzy, complimentary personality; and I will point out that after he retired our running game immediately plummeted from the top to the rock bottom of the league.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

IMHO the team seeing Grogan from the get go would have been a boost to their confidence, seeing Grogan's deathwish of standing tall long enough to actually complete some passes and actually move the ball forward would have made a tangible difference

I've said it before; I like JJ but the Cowboys would have pooped their pants if they'd seen Montana out there for the Jan. '93 NFCCG. I mean, what exactly did Joe have to do to gain some cred over there?

...not that I'm complaining, it means we're catching up with the Steelers in SB wins, not the Niners.

And finally, if I'm calling Berry and Seifert dummies then I have to include Flores. Starting Marc Wilson against us over a healthy and active Jim Plunkett??

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

I was too young to be... which goes to show how spoiled we are cause i am not that young The only bad year we had that i saw was 2000 you could argue 1995, 93 but that was a team that had hope which made it barable.

There was, in fact, TONS of hope in '73-'75, and '82-'84, and even '91-'92, until we got erased, at which time they should have renamed the team to, the Americans, or the Elvises, or whatever.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

*raises hand* from 08-10 we didnt make a single afc championship game. Dunno how i made it through that stretch

 

[jimnance]

You have a very selective memory of Tony Eason, but you are not alone lots of Pats fans have similar memories. Most of them caused by John Hanna's remark about his toughness after Hanna retired at the end of the 85 season. Of course John failed to mention that he was a partial cause of Eason's "lack of toughness, because in the 85 season, John had 2 bad shoulders as well as a chronic bad knee and was far from the HOFer he'd been most of his career.

Eason in fact was a pretty good NFL QB for a couple of years, but had a fatal flaw. He was 6'4 and 210 and looked like he'd never seen a weight room. He had a slight build He just wasn't physically strong enough to absorb the punishment that NFL QB's have to deal with. After a rookie year where he rode the bench, he had 2 really good seasons with the Pats, 84 and 86. He was hurt on an offf in 85 where he split the QB duties with Grogan. But in those 2 seasons when he was the Pats full time QB, Eason had very respectable numbers: around 3,300 yds and good TD/int numbers (23-8/19-10). In fact IIRC he led the league in QB rating in the 86 season.

Don't forget that these were very good numbers for that time. This was WELL before NFL flag football came into fashion BTW- that team had an 11-5 record and lost in Denver (again) 22-17.....and the ST's coach that year was one, Dante Scarnecchia.

Eason had the misfortune of following Steve Grogan, who was the toughest QB in the NFL when he was in his prime, and having the last 25 years having the team QB'ed by Brady and Bledsoe, 2 guys who are both among the tougher QB's in the league when they played.

Eason paled in comparison to these 3 guys, but that doesn't mean he wasn't tough, just not AS tough. Eason had neither the physical build, nor the obsessive drive and competitiveness that creates guys like Brady, Bledsoe, and Grogan. But that doesn't make him a wimp or a bad person. 99 out of a hundred of us couldn't take the beating an NFL QB takes in a single game, let alone a full season. ESPECIALLY back in 85, when they still played the game as it was intended. Maybe we might want to think about that before we call someone else "not tough".

As you probably have already noted, I have always felt that Eason got a bit of a bad rap from most Pats fans over the years. He certainly wasn't a great NFL QB, but he wasn't a horrible one either. He had a good 3 year run where he was a good NFL starter. The rest of his career he was either injured or a back up. It happens. But the bottom line is that we've had a LOT of QB's play for the Pats over the years who weren't nearly as good or effective as Tony Eason....at leas tor those 3 years.

BTW- you complained about Grogan not getting the start in the SuperBowl that year. But you failed to notice that the QB who was on the field for all 3 ROAD playoff wins that year. was Tony Eason, and in those 3 games threw 5 TD's against zero picks.

The expected SB blowout shouldn't diminish how magical that postseason was. 3 road playoff wins- and eason was a big part of that.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

Compared to the our recent run, every team in the NFL had "dark years." The Pats were never sad sacks like the Browns or Lions, they were an underfunded team without a stadium [then a joke of one] who usually played with a lot of heart, had some fine teams that couldn't get over the hump and bottomed out on occasion.

I guess our advantage is, we were raised in sports reality as far as learning how hard it is to win big. I feel sorry for fans who see excellence that's not perfect as a disaster.

Sorry, Clay, but some of those Patriot teams in the early 70s were as bad as anything ever - until the '76 Tampa Bay Bucs came along. Some times were so bad, if they won, they seemed more surprised than anyone.

The Boston papers played right along with the caricature, spending the first 3 days after a game knocking them down, then spending the next 3 days building them back up. For the longest time, of course, the Herald refused to send it's top reporters to cover Pats' games, instead preferring to give coverage to the Giants.

Me? I heard a radio blurb in the late summer of '59 saying Boston was going to get an AFL franchise, and I determined I was going to be a fan!

I still remember staying at my sister's apartment, listening to Friday night games against LA (Chargers). Boy, them's were the days!

I was furious when they traded Bouniconti to Miami for Kim Hammond! All in an apparent effort to sign first round pick Ron Sellers (who turned out to be not-so-hot).

But in the end, it all worked out. And then some.

 

[denverpatsfan]

I was. I even attended games. I fondly remember those underachieving teams and solid players that were stuck here. Tim Goad. Jon Stephens. 1-15 season. Visitors' side PACKED with Bills fans in the 90's. Sullivan Stadium. I have our bench from that place. Loved that stadium. I was nearly trampled to death in the mad rush to get Steelers playoff tickets in 1997. Good times

 

[italian pat patriot]

You have a very selective memory of Tony Eason, but you are not alone lots of Pats fans have similar memories. Most of them caused by John Hanna's remark about his toughness after Hanna retired at the end of the 85 season. Of course John failed to mention that he was a partial cause of Eason's "lack of toughness, because in the 85 season, John had 2 bad shoulders as well as a chronic bad knee and was far from the HOFer he'd been most of his career.

Eason in fact was a pretty good NFL QB for a couple of years, but had a fatal flaw. He was 6'4 and 210 and looked like he'd never seen a weight room. He had a slight build He just wasn't physically strong enough to absorb the punishment that NFL QB's have to deal with. After a rookie year where he rode the bench, he had 2 really good seasons with the Pats, 84 and 86. He was hurt on an offf in 85 where he split the QB duties with Grogan. But in those 2 seasons when he was the Pats full time QB, Eason had very respectable numbers: around 3,300 yds and good TD/int numbers (23-8/19-10). In fact IIRC he led the league in QB rating in the 86 season.

Don't forget that these were very good numbers for that time. This was WELL before NFL flag football came into fashion BTW- that team had an 11-5 record and lost in Denver (again) 22-17.....and the ST's coach that year was one, Dante Scarnecchia.

Eason had the misfortune of following Steve Grogan, who was the toughest QB in the NFL when he was in his prime, and having the last 25 years having the team QB'ed by Brady and Bledsoe, 2 guys who are both among the tougher QB's in the league when they played.

Eason paled in comparison to these 3 guys, but that doesn't mean he wasn't tough, just not AS tough. Eason had neither the physical build, nor the obsessive drive and competitiveness that creates guys like Brady, Bledsoe, and Grogan. But that doesn't make him a wimp or a bad person. 99 out of a hundred of us couldn't take the beating an NFL QB takes in a single game, let alone a full season. ESPECIALLY back in 85, when they still played the game as it was intended. Maybe we might want to think about that before we call someone else "not tough".

As you probably have already noted, I have always felt that Eason got a bit of a bad rap from most Pats fans over the years. He certainly wasn't a great NFL QB, but he wasn't a horrible one either. He had a good 3 year run where he was a good NFL starter. The rest of his career he was either injured or a back up. It happens. But the bottom line is that we've had a LOT of QB's play for the Pats over the years who weren't nearly as good or effective as Tony Eason....at leas tor those 3 years.

BTW- you complained about Grogan not getting the start in the SuperBowl that year. But you failed to notice that the QB who was on the field for all 3 ROAD playoff wins that year. was Tony Eason, and in those 3 games threw 5 TD's against zero picks.

simply great ! i agree 100% with you

ps = personally i rank Eason at our 4th place in history after Brady Bledsoe and Grogan

 

[PittPatriot]

As a 9yo, I got to be interested in football right as we were about the SB run in 1985.
Then I moved to Pittsburgh to the next town over from Aliquippa - Ditka country where everyone cheered for the Bears to beat us.
That solidified my love for the Pats.

 

[patman52]

You have a very selective memory of Tony Eason, but you are not alone lots of Pats fans have similar memories. Most of them caused by John Hanna's remark about his toughness after Hanna retired at the end of the 85 season. Of course John failed to mention that he was a partial cause of Eason's "lack of toughness, because in the 85 season, John had 2 bad shoulders as well as a chronic bad knee and was far from the HOFer he'd been most of his career.

Eason in fact was a pretty good NFL QB for a couple of years, but had a fatal flaw. He was 6'4 and 210 and looked like he'd never seen a weight room. He had a slight build He just wasn't physically strong enough to absorb the punishment that NFL QB's have to deal with. After a rookie year where he rode the bench, he had 2 really good seasons with the Pats, 84 and 86. He was hurt on an offf in 85 where he split the QB duties with Grogan. But in those 2 seasons when he was the Pats full time QB, Eason had very respectable numbers: around 3,300 yds and good TD/int numbers (23-8/19-10). In fact IIRC he led the league in QB rating in the 86 season.

Don't forget that these were very good numbers for that time. This was WELL before NFL flag football came into fashion BTW- that team had an 11-5 record and lost in Denver (again) 22-17.....and the ST's coach that year was one, Dante Scarnecchia.

Eason had the misfortune of following Steve Grogan, who was the toughest QB in the NFL when he was in his prime, and having the last 25 years having the team QB'ed by Brady and Bledsoe, 2 guys who are both among the tougher QB's in the league when they played.

Eason paled in comparison to these 3 guys, but that doesn't mean he wasn't tough, just not AS tough. Eason had neither the physical build, nor the obsessive drive and competitiveness that creates guys like Brady, Bledsoe, and Grogan. But that doesn't make him a wimp or a bad person. 99 out of a hundred of us couldn't take the beating an NFL QB takes in a single game, let alone a full season. ESPECIALLY back in 85, when they still played the game as it was intended. Maybe we might want to think about that before we call someone else "not tough".

As you probably have already noted, I have always felt that Eason got a bit of a bad rap from most Pats fans over the years. He certainly wasn't a great NFL QB, but he wasn't a horrible one either. He had a good 3 year run where he was a good NFL starter. The rest of his career he was either injured or a back up. It happens. But the bottom line is that we've had a LOT of QB's play for the Pats over the years who weren't nearly as good or effective as Tony Eason....at leas tor those 3 years.

BTW- you complained about Grogan not getting the start in the SuperBowl that year. But you failed to notice that the QB who was on the field for all 3 ROAD playoff wins that year. was Tony Eason, and in those 3 games threw 5 TD's against zero picks.

Ken, I agree with your recollection of him as a qb throwing the ball, but not his toughness. The guy would not fight thru a sack, A defender laid a hand on him and too often he would just crumble to the turf. If he played the game today he would be an all star. But back then the defense used to punish qbs and he just could not deal with it.

 

[mosslost]

Same here. I was 12.

first season I really remember was 76, though I faintly remember Plunkett which would mean 74 or so. I was 7 in 74, but went to Schaeffer with my dad. The NFL was extremely competitive for the Pats (Dolphins, Steelers, the old Baltimore Colts were nasty, the Oilers, the Raiders..) but I distinctly remember from 76-80 most national pundits considered us to be a powerhouse, especially 76. So when I first remember being a sports fan, I did not consider anything dark at all about the Patriots. And then it lasted for a while too. When I was a young sports fan I had high expectations of the Patriots every single season. So the dark year thing is overstated without question. Yes we absolutely stunk some years. However, just saying we did not make the playoffs or whatever did not mean as much back then. Example 77, we went 9-5, Baltimore I believe won the division, someone else got the only wild card in the AFC. It was like that alot in the 70s and even 80s. It was hard to make the playoffs. The Pats were ahead of their time offensively too back then. To this day the 78 team is the all time rushing leader. The 76 team when Grogan was a 2nd year QB the teams offense was considered revolutionary. I actually watched one of their Monday night games when the beat the Jets 41-7 the other night cause I was bored, and I have to admit I was sort of stunned by the passing game and the running game. That same offensive scheme that they used, is the beginning of what the Pats still use today.

 

[Boston Boxer]

I've been a Patriots fan since 2004. I've risen with the many ups and few ( Brady injury, playoff defeats) downs. Who on here was a fan before Kraft arrived? A time when blackouts, fan apathy were a common sight. How has that made you appreciate, and furthermore deal with heart wrenching losses like tonight? Just curious.

have been a fan since birth (1967). I remember sitting in the metal bleachers at Schaefer Stadium...we have come a long way since then that is for sure. Make the best of these time folks...as soon as Bradt retires, we are a middle of the pack team. (but i do love Jimmy G)

 

[patsfan13]

Became a fan around 62, HAd Season Tickets when Schaeffer stadium opened when Graduated from HS, $45/ticket endzone seats, 7 reg season, 2 preseason games.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

Ken, I agree with your recollection of him as a qb throwing the ball, but not his toughness. The guy would not fight thru a sack, A defender laid a hand on him and too often he would just crumble to the turf. If he played the game today he would be an all star. But back then the defense used to punish qbs and he just could not deal with it.

Sure Tony was a tough player. He was not an elite QB. Set the league record for sacks in '84.

Top Pats QB's, in terms of greatness, including their time before/after their stints here:

1. Brady
2. Plunkett
3. Grogan
4. Parilli
5. Kapp
6. Flutie
7. Dowling

Eason and Bledsoe were not even close to elite. Neither were Kerry Collins, Vinny Testaverde, Jeff George, Neil Lomax etc. Nothing personal.