Idle thoughts – The confessions of a fair-weather Pats fan

[Brady'sButtBoy]

Good post to open the thread, I almost tuned out too but hung in there though I admit feeling disgusted.

Hey, we've played 3 of the top 4 teams in the league: Denver, Houston, and San Fran. Considering we walloped Houston and Denver, and turned over the ball 4X against SF and still almost beat them...well, I'd say we're looking pretty good. The NFL is tough, and it's difficult to bring perfection every game - just ask the teams we've whipped. Ask Baltimore, Pitt, Green Bay, even Atlanta and SF how hard it is.

Only one team has gone 16-0 in the regular season (ah, that's your NE Pats btw). All teams lose, and all good teams lose a big game or two, that's just the way it goes.

The bye would have been big, I agree. And those minutes of indifferent play in the AZ loom ever bigger now. BB not having Brady push the ball closer despite having 42 seconds and a TO. Our extremely dependable kicker shanking an 'easy' kick. Those minutes failing to execute are the ones that may doom our season. Not the SF game. You can't beat every good team you play. The Pats beat most of the best, more than nearly anyone else does (Divison leaders Hou, NE, Balt, Denver have all played each other and The Pats are 2-1 in their 3 games, Den 1-2, Balt 1-2, Hou 2-1). I'm focusing on that.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

In all honesty, how many of you would be happier today if the patriots ended up beating the niners in an epic come back, knowing well that the niners would have a sour taste in their mouths for any rematch game?

Definitely not me. That loss made it a lot harder to even get to the rematch.

I don't like big winning streaks heading into the post season. At all.

You must've been quaking in your boots in 2001 and 2003, then.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

In all honesty, how many of you would be happier today if the patriots ended up beating the niners in an epic come back, knowing well that the niners would have a sour taste in their mouths for any rematch game?

we would have been the #2 seed and denver would be coming here....really? :bricks:


And don't like winning streaks heading into the playoffs? huh?

 

[SHOWTIME15]

we would have been the #2 seed and denver would be coming here....really? :bricks:


And don't like winning streaks heading into the playoffs? huh?

I said BIG winning streaks - im talking like 8-10 games. I realize we did in 2003, but that was the only time a team in the past 10 years with a big winning streak ended up with the Lombardi. 2001 patriots had a 5 game winning streak, which is not a big streak in my opinion. Momentum in football is overrated - all you need is one or two games to get back on track.

As far as Denver getting a bye is concerned, almost every super bowl champion from 2004 on has played in the wild card round. Getting a playoff bye has not worked for the patriots since 2004. Maybe there is something to NOT getting a bye that seems to work.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Getting a playoff bye has not worked for the patriots since 2004.

Umm they had a bye in 07 and 11 and made the SB and were 1 play away..what do you mean has not worked?..... That's the only way they have been able to make the SB....:bricks:

They have NEVER made a SB when not given a bye. So it has worked

 

[Off The Grid]

Great Argument!! :rocker:

Great Points...and CounterPoints!!

Damn, she was Hot.

 

[Off The Grid]

Seriously.

 

[Off The Grid]

A smidgeon Chauvinistic and disgusting, but still...CLASSIC:

Saturday Night Live _ Point Counterpoint: Lee Marvin and Michelle Triola - Video Dailymotion

 

[supafly]

Umm they had a bye in 07 and 11 and made the SB and were 1 play away..what do you mean has not worked?..... That's the only way they have been able to make the SB....:bricks:

They have NEVER made a SB when not given a bye. So it has worked

On top of that the teams who have had byes (#1 and #2 seeds) have represented the Super Bowl teams 2/3rds of the time historically speaking.

The top seed has an almost 1/2 rate of going to the SB.

As you've stated, the 5x we've gone to the SB under Belichick we've had the bye.

The 4x that we didn't go to the SB we've had seeds #3 or lower.

Getting a playoff bye has not worked for the patriots since 2004.

As noted, it seemed to work out pretty well in the 2007 and 2011 seasons, as they represented the AFC in the SB with the #1 seed.

While the byes don't necessarily guarantee anything, they certainly raise the odds dramatically. Any time that you get to host a home game after a week long bye of rest and 2 weeks of preparation to then propel yourself to the AFCCG (which you will likely host too in many cases), it is obviously a very good thing.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Umm they had a bye in 07 and 11 and made the SB and were 1 play away..what do you mean has not worked?..... That's the only way they have been able to make the SB....:bricks:

They have NEVER made a SB when not given a bye. So it has worked

You're not addressing my main point, which is against having a big winning streak going into the playoffs.

In all honesty with regard to 2007 and 2011 the team sidn't look good in the playoffs outside of the division round where they played a crummy jacksonville and broncos teams. Maybe an extra game wouldn't hurt and can help build some more momentum. It can be a confidence builder especially for a young team.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

You're not addressing my main point, which is against having a big winning streak going into the playoffs.

It can be a confidence builder especially for a young team.

I still don't get why your against a big winning streak...so a 2 game streak is fine..but a 7 isn't?

And they don't really need the confidence...most of them on the team now have been to the big show...last year

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I rarely ever take positives out from a loss, but the Brady-Lloyd connection is a huge plus if that indicates the 2 are really starting to click. That outside threat is what we've always needed in those games where defenses clog up the middle and don't respect the outside. Also Ahern having another great outing is a great sign, though the ankle worries were pretty much gone for me after Houston.

If only this team could run the ball better against teams that are strong up front, the offense would truly be unstoppable.

 

[DocHoliday]

I rarely ever take positives out from a loss, but the Brady-Lloyd connection is a huge plus if that indicates the 2 are really starting to click. That outside threat is what we've always needed in those games where defenses clog up the middle and don't respect the outside. Also Ahern having another great outing is a great sign, though the ankle worries were pretty much gone for me after Houston.

If only this team could run the ball better against teams that are strong up front, the offense would truly be unstoppable.

Gronk this year and Ballard next year should definitely help. If Ballard is half as strong as Gronkowski our run packages will be monstrous.

 

[Chopblock CB]

Ahhhhh yes...the "Fair Weather fan"....at the games..when we see one of the regular fans leaving early..everyone else would stand and chant "Fair weather fan...fair weather fan"..while pointing at them!!!!
The only thing I found out of the initial "Long winded" post was that this person ..once they walk away from the game (yee of little faith) that for superstitious reasons....should STAY AWAY!!! lol...
Never once...even down by 28..did anyone sitting around me, and judging from how many people were still at the stadium after halftime, never once did we doubt that this game was over.....even after the 62 yard KO return and the subsequent play that beat Arrington for the TD putting us down again...did we not feel this team would comeback and win...even on the onsides kick we all felt that we'd get the ball back. I guess it's bothersome that folks only stick with their team when they are up bigtime or when it's close and are "Sometimes" quick to walk away from the team if they are down.
Even when Bledsoe was down against the Vikings 31-3 at the half back in 96 we all stayed to witness his biggest comeback in his career beating the Vikings 34-31...same went for this game along with every other game I've been to...We stay to the end...we support the team through thick and thin...take the good with the bad and live and die with this team....just like we have for 40 years....I guess I have mixed feelings when someone admits that they skipped out on the team...then makes light of it with a long winded post like that.....just sayin' ya know?

 

[Gumby]

Ken, thanks for good stuff as usual.
I don't like to put in the effort you do at this; but I do love to feed off your comments.

.....
.

1. The loss was painful of course. But given the level of the comeback AND the defense we did it against., I'm sure we can find a lot of positives to fall back on. What we can't get back is the fact that we will playing on “wildcard weekend”, and will probably have to win playoff games in Denver and Houston .....

Still 2 games to play.... Thought you learned NOT to do the fair weather thing here. Don't despair (yet). Anyway even if the Pats only get the 3 seed and have to play in WC round; I would not bet against the winner of Colts-Cincy (?other?) going into Houston and winning (unlikely but possible). So Pats as a 3 seed could theoretically still host an AFCCG if they do what they need to at home and in Denver.

.....

6. Dennard made 3 rookie mistakes in that first half alone that I saw and was going to comment on in detail had I not bailed on the team. Parcells (may he rot in hell), wisely said that if you have to start rookies, they are eventually going to cost you a game. By half time it looked like this was going to be the game for Dennard That being said, it really hurt the Pats when he got hurt. It weakened us in 2 spots, because Arrington keeps proving he doesn't belong on the outside, and conversely, not having him in the slot, weakened that area. I'm happy to hear that his injury doesn't look to be long term. It did when it happened.

Agreed, not sure why they dont try to sub in Cole or one of extra Ss over the outside and leave arrignton in the slot in these situations. Can't be worse than what we've seen, CAN IT??

.......

8. I don't think that the Niner would want to play us again in the Superbowl, especially with Gronk on board. That 2nd half had to have been a rude awakening for them, ,and what looked to be a dominant defense

9. Can't say enough about our coaching staff. Not only did they keep those guys playing hard, they managed to make enough effective adjustments to allow the Pats to score 28 unanswered points on that great defense

Amen, brother. The whole league took a lesson and there should NEVER EVER EVER be another announcer who skewers BB for "running up the score".

I was saying Tue morning at work that it was such a contrast the 2 weeks one after another.
-----Houston - down by 28 pts: They pack it in and start playing subs.
-----NE- down by 28 they kick your azz and tie it up.

MENTAL TOUGHNESS will pay dividends ON THE ROAD and IN THE PO.

12. I will remind people that contrary to common wisdom,. Steven Ridley only fumbled ONE time last night. That's not a good thing by any means, but by what you hear in the media he fumbled twice. Here is a clue. RB's fumble the ball. Don't forget that Ridley and BJGE now have the same number of fumbles this season. This team turns the ball over SO infrequently, we've become spoiled to this reality. If Ridley has a fumbling problem, then ALL RB's have fumbling problems. It happens folks. Do what you can to minimize it, but you can't stop it. It would be wrong to limit his snaps going forward.

Don't want to limit his snaps; but it seems it has been there since beginning of the year; he doesnt cover the ball when running in traffic (double up his arms or move it to side away from defenders). So i just wonder what coach IF is doing to get through to him on this. It is been almost 2 full seasons now.

Granted on the fumble; if he had covered up, he would probably be on IR with a broken forearm right now the way that SF helmet came in right dead on the ball.

13. SF has a very good team, and its easier to see why Harbaugh has gone to Kaepernick. He did a very good job on Sunday, but the Pats gave him a lot of help. It seemed like every nightmare scenario a fan could conger up, happened in the first 35 minutes of that ballgame. Fumbles, interceptions, bad penalties we did it all. Think about it. SF punted 5 times, and the Pats got at LEAST 3 holding calls on those punts, maybe 4. When has that ever happened. How many time did the Pats have to start drives inside their 10. So many self inflicted wounds
.

very uncharacteristic of NE; you have to hope was an anomoly.

There is no way Smith could do what CK did; so was the right call vs a NE giving up that many opportunities (or even just playing neck-neck). But remember (IMHO) if coin was reversed - NE got up early - CK might have been like a rookie pressing the ball in and it likely would have dominoed in the other direction very badly.

 

[patfanken]

Ken, thanks for good stuff as usual.
I don't like to put in the effort you do at this; but I do love to feed off your comments.



Still 2 games to play.... Thought you learned NOT to do the fair weather thing here. Don't despair (yet). Anyway even if the Pats only get the 3 seed and have to play in WC round; I would not bet against the winner of Colts-Cincy (?other?) going into Houston and winning (unlikely but possible). So Pats as a 3 seed could theoretically still host an AFCCG if they do what they need to at home and in Denver.

Yeah, there are a lot of things that still CAN happen. But the likelihood is that 12-4 is not going to get us a bye. It could be worse. Weren't the Saints something like 13-3 and were forced to go on the road to play Seattle the year they lost their opening game? Now THAT is was a kick in the nuts. . I'm still hoping for a Denver let down and great game by the Brown.

Agreed, not sure why they dont try to sub in Cole or one of extra Ss over the outside and leave arrignton in the slot in these situations. Can't be worse than what we've seen, CAN IT??

Maybe the better move would have been to move McCourty back to CB and run with a Gregory/Chung safety tandem and keep Arrington inside

Don't want to limit his snaps; but it seems it has been there since beginning of the year; he doesnt cover the ball when running in traffic (double up his arms or move it to side away from defenders). So i just wonder what coach IF is doing to get through to him on this. It is been almost 2 full seasons now.

Granted on the fumble; if he had covered up, he would probably be on IR with a broken forearm right now the way that SF helmet came in right dead on the ball.

Look according to NFL.com he's fumbled 4 times and we've lost 2 of them. That ISN'T a lot. Certainly not to the degree that the media has made it out to be. All I hear on the media this week is "how are we going to deal with Ridley's fumbling problem". Like its an issue of epic proportions as oppose to what reality is.

What pisses me off is you don't get that anywhere else. The kid from Washington, has the same number of fumbles and its not a main topic of conversation. At this stage of his career Adrian Peterson was fumbling 8 or 9 times a season, and there was no speculation about sitting him down or going to someone else.

 

[robbomango]

Checking out of a game once every decade is more like a rare and mild case of Fair-weather-fannitus, I'm sure the football gods have forgiven you Ken...

 

[goheels22002]

While it was pretty ugly in the first half, it wasn't like we were playing the Jets on the day when it all went wrong. I kept watching both because I will always watch the Patriots on the rare times it's televised over here, and because I wanted to see what the character of the team was. Would they lay down (like Houston did) or would they fight to the end? The answer was exactly what I was looking for. I think this is one of those losses that makes the team stronger, and I'm more confident we'll win in the playoffs this year than I have been for a long time.

I agree. The 49ers loss had a huge upside as it created the opportunity to show mental toughness and determination, plus it was a tremendous wakeup call to a team that had been cruising against lesser opponents.

It was not the Cardinals loss which was just awful - turnovers, penalties, blocked punt, etc. That was the key loss of the year.

 

[Patsfan_22]

Checking out of a game once every decade is more like a rare and mild case of Fair-weather-fannitus, I'm sure the football gods have forgiven you Ken...

A bunch of people in the row ahead of me left about 5 minutes into the 3rd quarter when we were down 31-3, I thought that was absolutely ridiculous. I could understand people leaving once Akers made the field goal to make it 41-31 with a minute left but who leaves at essentially half time? Thankfully everyone around made sure they knew how pathetic it was.

 

[NYCPatsFan]

A bunch of people in the row ahead of me left about 5 minutes into the 3rd quarter when we were down 31-3, I thought that was absolutely ridiculous. I could understand people leaving once Akers made the field goal to make it 41-31 with a minute left but who leaves at essentially half time? Thankfully everyone around made sure they knew how pathetic it was.

Maybe they thought they brought ill-luck and wanted to do the team a favor by leaving. Nearly worked eh?

I try doing all such stunts - like switching off the TV for some time or coming after the quarter or changing to another Pats gear etc - because I am so convinced that my actions have some effect on us.

And during this game, I chased my girlfriend away from the room because I was convinced she brought ill-luck. True - she was with me for the first half and we all know the score; I switched the TV off and came back to watch alone during the 4th, we tied! she then walked in and bang - the kick-return and they scored.

Dang...