Patriots have only won/reached the SB with a bye Narrative

[everlong]

Bye: 13 (14 if they beat Miami)
Played WC weekend: 3
Missed playoffs: 2

It's comical what the media tries to hang their hats on without giving context. Sure it's true but when you have a bye nearly every year.....

Also for context as we all know the two years they missed the playoffs they missed on tie breakers and one without Brady (granted an epically easy schedule that year).

Of the three times they had to play WC weekend. The 2009 team just wasn't good. The 2005 team had a ton of injuries to land them in the WC round and then they ran into a Denver team that they simply didn't matchup well with. The 2006 team if not for the flu, Bobby Wade taking out Rodney Harrison and the refs they could quite easily have won the title that year.

The other narrative is being 4-4 on the road in the playoffs. Three losses to Denver and one in Indy. Two of the losses to Denver they were simply outmatched and lucky to make it that far in a lot of ways. The other two games there were a lot of suspect calls that went against them and they still had chances to win. Ghost missing an XP, etc.

 

[RobertWeathers]

....and for the 2000th time I will crap on this narrative.

They still beat the best to get to the SB at home and on the road and beat the best to win it.

That means bye or no bye they are a top 4 NFL team which is why they earned the bye in the first place.

 

[maust]

(yawn)
In the 50 years the wildcard has been around it has produced all of 10 Super Bowl teams, 6 of them were winners. Yet somehow it diminishes the Pats of this century that they have played well enough not to be among them?

GTFO with that lame azz sh!t, you gonna come at the King you gotta bring something better than that.

 

[pheenix11]

I’m mystified how being 4-4 on the road in the playoffs is somehow bad.

Do these nitwits have any idea how hard it is to win on the road in the playoffs?

Its called home field advantage for a reason.

These are probably the same people who still think Montana is better because he was 4-0 in Superbowls. Because somehow not making the playoffs or getting bounced in the first round is better than losing in the SB.

 

[TB_Helmet]

I’ve heard the “can’t win on the road” narrative (especially last year, blew that one up against KC) but haven’t heard anyone try to diminish the Pats accomplishments due to earning byes. Do people actually say that?

 

[farn]

While it’s not impossible to win w/o the bye, I think that teams greatly benefit from it... limits wear n tear, injuries, the possibility of a fluke play eliminating you...

Love the bye. Want it. Let’s beat Miami (or watch KC blow it vs CHI today).

 

[Poker]

Yeah the whole narrative is dumb. It would be one thing if the sample size was a lot bigger of times they played wild card weekend and didn't get to the super bowl. But you shouldn't penalize them for the 9 times they HAVE gotten to the SB just because they had a bye all those times.

 

[Hyped]

I’m mystified how being 4-4 on the road in the playoffs is somehow bad.

Do these nitwits have any idea how hard it is to win on the road in the playoffs?

Its called home field advantage for a reason.

These are probably the same people who still think Montana is better because he was 4-0 in Superbowls. Because somehow not making the playoffs or getting bounced in the first round is better than losing in the SB.

My go to comeback vs. the "Montana is 4-0 in SBs" narrative is that he was 4-3 in conference title games in an era where the NFC title game was the real SB.

 

[Hyped]

I’ve heard the “can’t win on the road” narrative (especially last year, blew that one up against KC) but haven’t heard anyone try to diminish the Pats accomplishments due to earning byes. Do people actually say that?

They say the AFCE is a cakewalk....so if they say that, they will say anything....

 

[jboston19]

The best teams are going to get the bye, which stands to reason they’d have the best shot to beat the teams that 1) weren’t good enough to earn a bye and 2) played a game rather than get a week of rest and preparation.

 

[Patjew]

I’m confused about the premise... when the (BB/Brady) Pats have not had the bye they’ve never made it to the SB.

So what is in dispute?

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

The odds of winning 3 games in a row against the league’s elite are considerably higher than winning 4 in a row. Its a big advantage in a do or die format, especially with one of those games being at home instead of away.

 

[TB_Helmet]

They say the AFCE is a cakewalk....so if they say that, they will say anything....

Yeah but I still haven’t heard anyone say it. Smells a little like a straw man.

 

[fightingirish595]

This narrative in nonsense because they’ve not had a bye only 3 times in this era?
05,06, and 2009.

not winning any of those years had nothing to do with the bye

 

[captain stone]

No bye = No SB appearance. Period.

Best chance they had to break that Fact was during 2006, and we all know how that ended.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

No bye = No SB appearance. Period.

1985 says Hi.

 

[Antdawg]

Yes, a bye makes the road easier. I thought that was the entire point.

 

[Uncle Rico]

I wonder if — and bear with me because this is a generalization. — but I wonder if teams that are good enough to earn a bye are — and remember I’m speaking generally here — but I wonder if teams that earn a bye are ... generally better than those that don’t. Just to introduce a random factor into the analysis.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

the toughest thing is win multiple playoff games in the same year. It requires 3 or 4 to win a
Super Bowl.
Drew Brees has won multiple playoff games in a single year ONCE in his career, the year he won a Super Bowl.
Aaron Rodgers has won multiple playoff games in a single year TWICE in his career.
Brady has done it 10 times!!!!!!

 

[bresna]

Let's face it, "3 Games To Glory" sounds much better than "4 Games To Glory" and it saves us the expense of that extra disc.