Interesting timing of Gronk critiques

[RayClay]

That was funny as hell. Playing a game like that in public pretty much guarantees offensive quotes. At least Gronk is funny and gives it all on the field, as opposed to being not funny and a complete failure.

Besides, Tebow's now on the Jets, a virtual fallen angel.:halo:

 

[BradyManny]

loool that's perfectly timed comedy considering the post that preceded yours.

Whatever, man - I said I had no problem with Gronk's antics, and history will show that.

It's not about him hanging with porn stars or saying goofy things. Heck, I like the guy for his personality. Again, he's one of my favorite players.

I have a problem with the fact that he didn't seem to skip a beat after losing that game. Wes Welker probably had to be talked out of slitting his wrists that night; Tom Brady bailed on the Pebble Beach pro-am and has been in a cave since; Brandon Spikes won't even talk about it.

I'd love to see some of that same anger from Gronk. There's no doubt it will turn to motivation for these guys. It's the "oh, we'll probably be there again next year" mentality that leads to the SB hangover.

 

[eom]

superbowl hangover is a crock

 

[BradyManny]

superbowl hangover is a crock

History says otherwise.

Weren't the perfect season Dolphins the last team to win the SB after losing it? And one of only two?

When something doesn't happen in 40 years, we tend to call it a pattern.

 

[eom]

History says otherwise.

Weren't the perfect season Dolphins the last team to win the SB after losing it? And one of only two?

When something doesn't happen in 40 years, we tend to call it a pattern.

no -- your interpretation of history says otherwise.
people see ufo's and bigfoot fairly often, but that doesn't mean they exist.

I remember when people said the same thing about the nba.
there are 32 teams in the league -- you make it sound like one of them is owed a superbowl.

here's something else to learn from history:

http://www.essortment.com/16th-century-beliefs-witch-craft-63129.html

 

[BradyManny]

no -- your interpretation of history says otherwise.
people see ufo's and bigfoot fairly often, but that doesn't mean they exist.

I remember when people said the same thing about the nba.
there are 32 teams in the league -- you make it sound like one of them is owed a superbowl.

here's something else to learn from history:

16Th Century Beliefs About Witch Craft

There are 32 teams in the league, but naturally, the two that have most recently been to it are of higher talent - and therefore more likely to make it back.

Do we need to go through how SB losers have fared of late?

11 - Steelers lose in wild card
10 - Colts lose in wild card
09 - Cards lose in divisional
08 - Pats miss playoffs
07 - Bears miss playoffs, go 7-9
06 - Seahawks lose in divisional
05 - Eagles miss playoffs, go 6-10
04 - Panthers miss playoffs, go 7-9
03 - Raiders miss playoffs, go 4-12
02 - Rams miss playoffs, go 7-9
01 - Giants miss playoffs, go 7-9

So, of the last 11, 7 teams have missed the playoffs, 2 more lost in the Wild Card round, and the final 2 lost in the Divisional round.

All of them failed to repeat the success they had the preceding year.

I'm not sure how this clear and overwhelming statistical evidence is comparable to witchcraft to you.

We even see the winners of the Super Bowl dropoff in certain cases.

Either way, success is hard to follow-up, and making it to the Super Bowl is a success.

Now, barring an injury to Tom Brady - which is the thing that derailed their last post-SB attempt, the Patriots are poised to put an end to this pattern.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

no -- your interpretation of history says otherwise.
people see ufo's and bigfoot fairly often, but that doesn't mean they exist.

I remember when people said the same thing about the nba.
there are 32 teams in the league -- you make it sound like one of them is owed a superbowl.

here's something else to learn from history:

16Th Century Beliefs About Witch Craft

While all trends someday have to come to an end,what separates the 2011 Patriots from the other 39 teams that failed to win the SB the next season?

Are the 2012 Pats going to be good enough to do something that no other team has done before you were even a thought in your parents minds remains to be seen.

Winning the Super Bowl the next season after losing it makes that losing team a longshot..
whether or not your closed mind believes it or not,it's a fact.

It's so hard that even getting back to the SB and lose it again goes all the way back to the early 90s Bills.

 

[eom]

listing results doesn't demonstrate causality.

in 1986 it had been 15 years with no repeat winner in the nba --- then what happened?

the point is that while there might be some kind of psychological letdown or complacency after a superbowl win, that's entirely in your imagination until you can show otherwise, and you haven't.
clouds shaped like stuff are still just clouds.

 

[eom]

Now, barring an injury to Tom Brady - which is the thing that derailed their last post-SB attempt, the Patriots are poised to put an end to this pattern.

I think it's interesting that you happened to bring up this example, because it's a great illustration of what I'm talking about -- how often do teams win 11 games and miss the playoffs?
if you like making lists.

getting to the superbowl is not an easy thing -- there's a lot more luck and circumstance involved than most people would like to believe.
2007 - pats make superbowl
2008 - pats suffer 'superbowl hangover' by not making playoffs....?

you attribute this 'failure' to brady's absence, yet in 2001, 2005, and 2009 the pats made the playoffs with 11 or fewer wins and brady onthe team.

 

[eom]

I'll give you another illustration of what I'm talking about --- you sound like the kind of person that believes red cars are more dangerous to drive than other colors because it's been shown that red cars are involved in more accidents.

 

[BradyManny]

I think it's interesting that you happened to bring up this example, because it's a great illustration of what I'm talking about -- how often do teams win 11 games and miss the playoffs?
if you like making lists.

getting to the superbowl is not an easy thing -- there's a lot more luck and circumstance involved than most people would like to believe.
2007 - pats make superbowl
2008 - pats suffer 'superbowl hangover' by not making playoffs....?

you attribute this 'failure' to brady's absence, yet in 2001, 2005, and 2009 the pats made the playoffs with 11 or fewer wins and brady onthe team.

The Patriots missed the playoffs in 2008 b/c - relative to the competition that they all faced that year - they were not one of the best teams in the AFC. It's pretty simple.

That 2008 team could not beat a good team, it had historically one of the easiest schedules in NFL history, and it's 11 wins were inflated.

Had Tom Brady been on that squad, it honestly might've gone 16-0 again.

11 wins or not - the goal is to make the playoffs, the Patriots did not do it, nor did they deserve to considering they lost nearly every game they played against decent competition. It was an achievement for Belichick to do what they did that year - and a tribute to Cassel, but that was not a playoff caliber team, and it bore itself out over 16 games.

 

[BradyManny]

I'll give you another illustration of what I'm talking about --- you sound like the kind of person that believes red cars are more dangerous to drive than other colors because it's been shown that red cars are involved in more accidents.

I am perfectly aware of causation and correlation.

But the Super Bowl hangover could very well be an instance of causation.

A team that was successful one year suddenly becomes unsuccessful the next year, in some cases without much change in personnel. Obviously there are other factors involved.

But when you see teams with largely the same players, similar schedules, and facing similar level of competition across the league, suddenly go from the SB to sub-500, you have to look to other factors.

Fatigue from having played more games than anyone else the year before; increased motivation from playing opponents facing a league champion; and yes, complacency from its players.

Those are some things that would help explain why SB losers - and even winners - have an abnormal dropoff in success.

And, so again - I'd rather see the players take the loss extremely personally, and get back to work with a renewed motivation, then brush it off and hit the media circuit. But that's just me.

 

[eom]

The Patriots missed the playoffs in 2008 b/c - relative to the competition that they all faced that year - they were not one of the best teams in the AFC. It's pretty simple.

That 2008 team could not beat a good team, it had historically one of the easiest schedules in NFL history, and it's 11 wins were inflated.

Had Tom Brady been on that squad, it honestly might've gone 16-0 again.

and yet this team is part of your list of "clear and overwhelming statistical evidence" that superbowl teams can't have success the following year because of some voodoo curse

Fatigue from having played more games than anyone else the year before;

omfg -- this is what I'm talking about when I say you have a vivid imagination.

 

[BradyManny]

and yet this team is part of your list of "clear and overwhelming statistical evidence" that superbowl teams can't have success the following year because of some voodoo curse



omfg -- this is what I'm talking about when I say you have a vivid imagination.

Re: the 2008 Patriots - I think I made it rather clear that the Patriots would be the exception to this trend in either 2008 (had Brady been healthy) or this upcoming season (assuming the team has health). I listed them b/c I listed the last several teams, they were on the list. You can make whatever conclusions you want from it.

The simple post-SB factors that I have been talking about are obviously negated by many of the things the Patriots do that have helped them maintain the unprecedented level of success they have had for so long. Belichick's teams are used to long seasons & short offseasons; are used to being a target for opponents every week; and are as mentally tough as they come.

Where have I ever said it was "some voodoo curse?"

I gave you tangible examples of things that happen to teams that play in the Super Bowl.

I'm not sure why it would be hard to accept that a team that has to play longer into the season, scout, study & practice longer into the season - and eat time into their draft prep, offseason, etc. would be at a disadvantage relatives to the other teams...Belichick has said as much.

 

[DaBruinz]

While all trends someday have to come to an end,what separates the 2011 Patriots from the other 39 teams that failed to win the SB the next season?

Are the 2012 Pats going to be good enough to do something that no other team has done before you were even a thought in your parents minds remains to be seen.

Winning the Super Bowl the next season after losing it makes that losing team a longshot..
whether or not your closed mind believes it or not,it's a fact.

It's so hard that even getting back to the SB and lose it again goes all the way back to the early 90s Bills.

What is the difference between this year's Pats and other teams who have lsot the SB previously? Well, for one, Tom Brady. For another, this team is getting back a ton of Talent that was injured. Guys like Dowling, Gronk, Mankins. Yes, I know that Gronk and Mankins played in the SB, but they were injured and it was clear that it affected them.

In the past, most SB losing teams have been decimated by losing free agents. The Free agents the Pats have lost have been inconsequential, other than Mark Anderson and BJGE. And the Pats have 2 young RBs who should be able to replace BJGE. Anderson will be another story, though I believe that Trevor Scott can do so..

 

[eom]

The simple post-SB factors that I have been talking about are obviously negated by many of the things the Patriots do that have helped them maintain the unprecedented level of success they have had for so long. Belichick's teams are used to long seasons & short offseasons; are used to being a target for opponents every week; and are as mentally tough as they come.

you are absolutely killing me with this nonsense, so this has gotta be it for me.
what you're determined to believe is that all the other teams that make the superbowl are fatigued by these couple extra games and so won't have subsequent success, but all these players on belichick's teams are helped by making the superbowl because it makes them resistant to the fatigue of playing a couple extra games.
(and all this despite the player turnover on all these teams each year.....)

you win!!!

 

[BradyManny]

And I should make clear, I'm not trying to argue this is a hard and fast thing.

It's just that generally, success - such as reaching Super Bowls - is hard to repeat, for various reasons, some of which I have stated here (and none of which you have accepted).

And generally, those reasons have to do with somewhat intangible aspects of the process, including mental strength, work ethic and approach to preparation - three things which are key to the Patriots continued success.

And generally, elite athletes have a similar mental make-up where winning & losing is intrinsically tied to their well-being and self-view, and a huge part of their motivation going forward. Gronkowski might be the exception to this rule, but I'd rather see him show more remorse over the crushing defeat than he has thus far.

 

[jczxohn1]

While Gronk's publicity seems fairly innocuous on the one hand, one wonders how well it sits with his tight end partner. There is a symbiotic relationship to their success, Welker included. You just cant double all three. Hopefully, Hernandez enjoys Gronk's off-field antics as much as we do, but I'd be surprised. Aaron has some very special talents that few in the league can match, it would be a shame for him to lose appreciation from the fan base. With a new blocking tight end in the fold, Aaron may be able to blossom even more.

 

[BradyManny]

you are absolutely killing me with this nonsense, so this has gotta be it for me.
what you're determined to believe is that all the other teams that make the superbowl are fatigued by these couple extra games and so won't have subsequent success, but all these players on belichick's teams are helped by making the superbowl because it makes them resistant to the fatigue of playing a couple extra games.
(and all this despite the player turnover on all these teams each year.....)

you win!!!

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. You nailed it. You have clearly been reading and comprehending my argument this entire thread. Oh well, I lost this one. :bricks:

 

[DaBruinz]

The Patriots missed the playoffs in 2008 b/c - relative to the competition that they all faced that year - they were not one of the best teams in the AFC. It's pretty simple.

WRONG. They missed the 2008 play-offs because the winner of each division is guaranteed a spot in the play-offs.. San Diego had an 8-8 record that year. That can't be considered better than the Pats 11-5 record in any way, shape or form.

That 2008 team could not beat a good team, it had historically one of the easiest schedules in NFL history, and it's 11 wins were inflated.

Had Tom Brady been on that squad, it honestly might've gone 16-0 again.

This is BS. The team plays who they play.. They don't pick the schedule.

11 wins or not - the goal is to make the playoffs, the Patriots did not do it, nor did they deserve to considering they lost nearly every game they played against decent competition. It was an achievement for Belichick to do what they did that year - and a tribute to Cassel, but that was not a playoff caliber team, and it bore itself out over 16 games.

Yet they beat Miami the 2nd time around. You know, a play-off team. Same with Arizona..

To claim that an 11-5 record is not a play-off caliber team when it is better than 5 of the teams in the play-offs is just silly. And it truly holds no water..