- Joined
- Oct 8, 2012
- Messages
- 5,215
- Reaction score
- 4,267
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.Hell, if Pierre Woods doesn't let Ahmad Bradshaw take away the recovered fumble from him;
He was completely on top of it and it should have been blown dead. Bradshaw was digging at it . Bull **** play.Yeah, that one was so odd to me. Wasn't Pierre Woods completely on top of it covering it and Ahmad Bradshaw came in after the fact and took it?
I don't blame the refs, for Pierre Woods to lose that ball when he appeared to be on top of it on the ground, he didn't deserve it based on principal.
But still, I remembered that play when they changed the replay rule regarding fumble recoveries. If the replay rule was in effect back then that is now, we would have gotten that ball (atleast how I remember it. I have not seen a video since then. Perhaps my bias has colored my memory of it). Now replay can be used to see who recovered a fumble, back then it could not.
He was completely on top of it and it should have been blown dead. Bradshaw was digging at it . Bull **** play.
Found a video of it.
If the Patriots achieved perfect, where is the hunger moving forward? Part of what fueled their continued reign has been a quest for perfection one game at a time.Yup, they were THAT close to a storybook ending.......if Tyree doesn't make a play then Moss has the game winning touchdown.
It was a tough one, but having the extreme fortune of a turnover at the 1 yard line and a 25 point comeback I've learned to cope.
If the Patriots achieved perfect, where is the hunger moving forward? Part of what fueled their continued reign has been a quest for perfection one game at a time.
I would have loved 19-0, but I think I'd rather have a dynasty like we are witnessing than a Dolphins scenario where the players get together and reminisce about that one season. Screw that.
It is still incredible that we went 11-5 in 2008, were on fire that last month, and still managed to miss the postseason.Interesting question.
I think 19-0 would have added to the 01-17 dynasty legacy.
Fish won it again in 73 so the weren't complacent
I have no doubt the hunger would have been there b/c BB would drive them.
But Tom got hurt so....
IMO the fact they went 11-5 after such a physically and mentally exhausting season and losing Tom was BBs greatest coaching job.It is still incredible that we went 11-5 in 2008, were on fire that last month, and still managed to miss the postseason.
Good point about the Dolphins, so I guess complacency doesn't automatically set in. I'm just worried that we would have lacked that drive for more if we went 19-0.
07 rules
I will never understand this revisionist view of the 2011 Pats. They were 13-3, and the year before they were 14-2 and lost to the Jets in the Divisional.To me, they were playing with house money,
If the Patriots achieved perfect, where is the hunger moving forward? Part of what fueled their continued reign has been a quest for perfection one game at a time.
I would have loved 19-0, but I think I'd rather have a dynasty like we are witnessing than a Dolphins scenario where the players get together and reminisce about that one season. Screw that.
Woods should've been stronger on the ball...same as Moss on 3rd/20.Yep! Exactly how I remembered. Maybe the ball was squirming underneath him but that should have been ruled a new England recovery
Hard to argue that...Woods should've been stronger on the ball...same as Moss on 3rd/20.
The D played quite bad in that game. The Giants had the ball for 37 minutes because they couldn't get off the field. Eli completed 75% of his passes. They gave up an 88 yard drive to end the game. The defense wasn't good all year so it wasn't a surprise though.I will never understand this revisionist view of the 2011 Pats. They were 13-3, and the year before they were 14-2 and lost to the Jets in the Divisional.
Winning it that year was expected. 13-3 against the 9-7 Giants. The D did not play bad in that game. They should have won, and no, the Pats at 13-3, in the SUper Bowl, are NEVER "playing with house money"
The ONLY Brady lead Pats team "playing with house money" would have been SB 36.
wrongThe D played quite bad in that game