MainePatsFan26
Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2011
- Messages
- 1,385
- Reaction score
- 1,532
You point out that the Patriots did not score enough points due to multiple factors, citing their poor possessions and awful officiating for the loss. My whole point in earlier posts was that we should not blame the officiating as the primary reason for the loss, with me stating, "The officiating was terrible but I don't think that's what cost the game compared to not playing well." As noted in this earlier quote, I believe poor play was more responsible COMPARED to the officiating. I never said or alluded to poor play being the "only reason" for the loss as you claimed about my post. Either you ignored my post's wording or are attempting to misrepresent what I said.It's not excuse bingo, it's pointing out the obvious. The Patriots had 14 points taken off the scoreboard due to bad officiating. That's a fact. The ensuing drives to get 10 points out of the 14 took game clock that would otherwise been available for potential additional possession. That's not in dispute, that's a fact. Correcting the bad officiating caused us to lose a timeout. This timeout could have provided a final possession to win the game. That's not in dispute, that's a fact.
You seem to be stuck on 'look at this quarter, look at that quarter, look at that play' and are adamantly stating that's the only reason. No. But yes, a very notable contributing factor for the Patriots inability to score more points than the Chiefs was due to a number of poor possessions by the O and the D. Another reason for their inability to score sufficient points for victory was (see above). In a shocking! bit of analysis, it ends up multiple factors can go into a team's inability to score enough points to win
With all your sarcasm and self-importance in the above quote with things like "shocking!", I would have hoped you would have read my post more carefully and engaged with it in a respectful manner.
Lastly, you dismiss the butterfly effect with "that's a fact." If the Patriots score one of those touchdowns, you suggest everything after that changes for the better. But the Chiefs might get more aggressive on offense, thus meaning longer drives and no additional possession for the Patriots. Maybe the Chiefs score an additional field goal or touchdown in the process. The Patriots might use a timeout in another situation. The point is that there is no "fact" about what would have transpired after one of those bad calls suddenly going our way. More points give the Patriots more of a chance, but claiming that hypothetical likely scenarios are facts is really just smoke and mirrors when it comes to debate.
Last edited:
