PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

This team isnt that bad


OK...Jets...agree... @Chargers...I MAY be at that game...the Chargers won't have home field for [email protected]'s still Darnold...remember the "I'm seeing Ghosts" comment? Robby Anderson is leading the league in drops...no CMC. Great D though...and maybe Gilmore too....Cleveland...they are banged up right now, but tough D..just a bit weak in the [email protected] like our chances if we lock down Ridley and Pitts...Titans...they don't have a secondary...just match scoring with Derek Henry and we have a shot...@Bills on MNF...we ALMOST WON in Buffalo last year with Cam!!!

I expect playoffs, baby!!! Let's gooooooo!!!!!!!
You should expect playoffs at this point.
It’s not unreasonable to expect 9-8 or 10-7 gets the last wild card spot. Until you have that many losses you should expect playoffs.
We are 2 games behind the bills and play them twice.
It’s funny how the people latching on to the you are what your record says you are cliche also want to credit the team for losses in games they have yet to play.
 
You should expect playoffs at this point.
It’s not unreasonable to expect 9-8 or 10-7 gets the last wild card spot. Until you have that many losses you should expect playoffs.
We are 2 games behind the bills and play them twice.
It’s funny how the people latching on to the you are what your record says you are cliche also want to credit the team for losses in games they have yet to play.
I don't think 10-7 gets it done. I feel like 11-6 is the new 10-6 in this new format. And man...it's a crowded field in the middle right now. We sort of know who the top teams appear to be right now, everyone else could change by the time we reach the end of December and it's going to be interesting to see how it shakes out.
 
The problem with that is we don't know what we don't know, which would fill the Grand Canyon and beyond.
And no one second guesses the second guessers. It’s always easy to say anything but what was done would be better, but that’s not really judging a decision.
 
The problem with that is we don't know what we don't know, which would fill the Grand Canyon and beyond.

I agree we don't have all the information that BB has on the sidelines, but I do think Bill overthinks things a lot. FOr example, in SB 42, he decided not to kick a 50 yard FG because Ghost had never kicked one from that far during the 2007 season. But he is clearly capable of doing so as we saw for many years.
 
I don't think 10-7 gets it done. I feel like 11-6 is the new 10-6 in this new format. And man...it's a crowded field in the middle right now. We sort of know who the top teams appear to be right now, everyone else could change by the time we reach the end of December and it's going to be interesting to see how it shakes out.
Remember there are 3 wild cards now. So 7 of 16 make the playoffs. As of now 3-3 would get the 3rd WC.
2019 8-8 gets in. 2018 9-6-1 gets in 2017 and 2016 9-7 gets in.

At 2-4 we are only a game in the hole.
 
I didn't love the call, but I get why he did it. As I posted earlier, punt it deep and hope for one more stop with a chance to get the ball back with good field position and hopefully send in Folk to win it if they had stopped them. If they came up short, Dallas didn't have far to go to get in field goal range.

The Pats defense was gassed. Dallas had run 70+ plays up to that point. Surely Bill noticed that, right?
 
I agree we don't have all the information that BB has on the sidelines, but I do think Bill overthinks things a lot. FOr example, in SB 42, he decided not to kick a 50 yard FG because Ghost had never kicked one from that far during the 2007 season. But he is clearly capable of doing so as we saw for many years.
How do you “overthink” things?
How is thinking your kicker is shaky from a distance, based upon coaching him all season and asking him before each game what he thinks his range is while the st coach watches him in pregame, OVERTHINKING?
 
The Pats defense was gassed. Dallas had run 70+ plays up to that point. Surely Bill noticed that, right?
Probably why he felt he had a better chance to stop them going 50 yards than stop them going 10.
 
Remember there are 3 wild cards now. So 7 of 16 make the playoffs. As of now 3-3 would get the 3rd WC.
2019 8-8 gets in. 2018 9-6-1 gets in 2017 and 2016 9-7 gets in.

At 2-4 we are only a game in the hole.
Forgot about that...although I still feel like it might take 11 wins now to get in. Definitely curious to see who does/doesn't make it this year and the records...but I feel like it's definitely going to be more challenging than past years.
 
Last edited:
Forgot about that...although I still feel like it might take 11 wins now to get in. Definitely curious to see who does/doesn't make it this year and the records...but I feel like it's definitely going to be more challenging than past years.

I was in the same boat going into the season, because every AFC team has an extra home game this year, so I figured 11-6 would be this year's 10-6 (which would get you in most years). If it were a year where every AFC team had an extra road game, I might think 10-7 is the new 10-6.

Through the first six weeks though, things feel really muddied, like there's a lot of teams just kind of hovering around the .500 mark and we're not sure who's going to break out and go on a run. It still might take 11 wins, but here's one thing we've got going for us that I would wager most 2-4 teams in history don't: three of our losses are against the NFC. We still have games left against Tennessee, Cleveland, LA, and Indy, who all could be in that wildcard mix too, not to mention four more games in the division. They have to win them, of course, but their fate is very much in their hands with the opportunity to win against direct playoff competition.

It's an interesting side note to remember about 2008, the Matt Cassel year. They went 11-5 that year, which gets you 99 times out of a 100. But 4 of their 5 losses were to AFC playoff teams, including a loss to Miami that would have given them the division in the end. Losing games is never good, but if you have to pick games to lose, the out of conference ones are the least impactful.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Ian
The Pats defense was gassed. Dallas had run 70+ plays up to that point. Surely Bill noticed that, right?
He did, he admitted it yesterday morning when they asked him that. Again, they were hosed either way. Although, I think people probably would be killing Josh and not him if they went for it and the play call stunk and they hadn't gotten it...so there's that ;)
 
Forgot about that...although I still feel like it might take 11 wins now to get in. Definitely curious to see who does/doesn't make it this year and the records...but I feel like it's definitely going to be more challenging than past years.
I think the competition is:
Buffalo
Baltimore
Kc
Sd
Tennessee

are 5 you expect will get in

denver
Indy
Pitt
Jets
Phins
Jax

are 6 that I don’t see having much if a shot

That leaves us, Cleveland and the raiders.
I don’t see 2 of those 3 winning 11.

But you are right, it’s early and teams could drastically change their fortunes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He did, he admitted it yesterday morning when they asked him that. Again, they were hosed either way. Although, I think people probably would be killing Josh and not him if they went for it and the play call stunk and they hadn't gotten it...so there's that ;)
Aren’t some killing Josh for the play he would have called it they did go for it?
:rolleyes:
 
Forgot about that...although I still feel like it might take 11 wins now to get in. Definitely curious to see who does/doesn't make it this year and the records...but I feel like it's definitely going to be more challenging than past years.
It's an interesting side note to remember about 2008, the Matt Cassel year. They went 11-5 that year, which gets you 99 times out of a 100. But 4 of their 5 losses were to AFC playoff teams, including a loss to Miami that would have given them the division in the end. Losing games is never good, but if you have to pick games to lose, the out of conference ones are the least impactful.

I think what @Ring 6 is saying, although I do not see it directly stated so he can correct me, is that there is a lot of parity in the league this year, so the # of wins required to be a wild card team this year is looking to be lower. If you look at the records in the AFC there are no undefeated teams and only one team with a single loss. So with the future wild card teams presently at 4-2 or 3-3 (and maybe 2-4 :)), it is not 2008, and definitely does not look to be more challenging than past years. Maybe I misunderstood what @Ian is saying, but if we go on "I feel" this message board would be crazy ;) .
 
I think what @Ring 6 is saying, although I do not see it directly stated so he can correct me, is that there is a lot of parity in the league this year, so the # of wins required to be a wild card team this year is looking to be lower. If you look at the records in the AFC there are no undefeated teams and only one team with a single loss. So with the future wild card teams presently at 4-2 or 3-3 (and maybe 2-4 :)), it is not 2008, and definitely does not look to be more challenging than past years. Maybe I misunderstood what @Ian is saying, but if we go on "I feel" this message board would be crazy ;) .
As you pointed out, I agree, I think there's going to be a lot of teams potentially knotted together at the end and I wonder if any potential tie-breakers, head-to-head match-ups, etc. might end up being the difference.

Again, I've never seen things play out in a 17-game scenario but there are enough bad teams where I'm not sure if the Patriots can somehow emerge as the best of the worst by then. After all, they'd need to finish 8-3 the rest of the way as it is to even get to 10-7. That in itself feels like a long shot barring a major turnaround or a significant (or impactful) addition at the trade deadline. Not saying it won't happen, but it definitely won't be easy given that they've already gone 0-4 at home and have a lot of road games ahead of them.

At the same time, they're 2-0 on the road...so what do I know :)
 
I think what @Ring 6 is saying, although I do not see it directly stated so he can correct me, is that there is a lot of parity in the league this year, so the # of wins required to be a wild card team this year is looking to be lower. If you look at the records in the AFC there are no undefeated teams and only one team with a single loss. So with the future wild card teams presently at 4-2 or 3-3 (and maybe 2-4 :)), it is not 2008, and definitely does not look to be more challenging than past years. Maybe I misunderstood what @Ian is saying, but if we go on "I feel" this message board would be crazy ;) .

Oh I agree, and what's more is that since the first tiebreakers are head to head followed by conference record, we have opportunity to be in good shape with those since most of our remaining games are in conference. Still have to get there, but if we do finish 10-7, it means we went at worst 8-4 versus the AFC, which is a decent tiebreaking record. For reference, none of the wild card teams last year in the AFC (despite being 11-5 overall) had a conference record better than 7-5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ian
I was in the same boat going into the season, because every AFC team has an extra home game this year, so I figured 11-6 would be this year's 10-6 (which would get you in most years). If it were a year where every AFC team had an extra road game, I might think 10-7 is the new 10-6.

Through the first six weeks though, things feel really muddied, like there's a lot of teams just kind of hovering around the .500 mark and we're not sure who's going to break out and go on a run. It still might take 11 wins, but here's one thing we've got going for us that I would wager most 2-4 teams in history don't: three of our losses are against the NFC. We still have games left against Tennessee, Cleveland, LA, and Indy, who all could be in that wildcard mix too, not to mention four more games in the division. They have to win them, of course, but their fate is very much in their hands with the opportunity to win against direct playoff competition.

It's an interesting side note to remember about 2008, the Matt Cassel year. They went 11-5 that year, which gets you 99 times out of a 100. But 4 of their 5 losses were to AFC playoff teams, including a loss to Miami that would have given them the division in the end. Losing games is never good, but if you have to pick games to lose, the out of conference ones are the least impactful.
Taking the optimistic point of view yes the Pats AFC record of 2-1 is helpful. 3 NFC losses is much better than 3 AFC losses.

Pats right now are one of 6 teams in contention for one playoff spot (currently held by Pitt at 3-3). Pats are ranked 5th out of those 6 teams at the moment, but their AFC record of 2-1 is best in that group today. So if they had beaten the Cowboys then they would be in a playoff spot right now as the 7 seed.

They're not out of it by any means but a loss to the Jets would be a big step toward it.
 
Taking the optimistic point of view yes the Pats AFC record of 2-1 is helpful. 3 NFC losses is much better than 3 AFC losses.

Pats right now are one of 6 teams in contention for one playoff spot (currently held by Pitt at 3-3). Pats are ranked 5th out of those 6 teams at the moment, but their AFC record of 2-1 is best in that group at the moment.

They're not out of it by any means but a loss to the Jets would be a big step toward it.

Oh for sure, not just mathematically but conceptually as well, a loss to the Jets would be like a Tonya Harding to the knee of our playoff hopes.
 
Taking the optimistic point of view yes the Pats AFC record of 2-1 is helpful. 3 NFC losses is much better than 3 AFC losses.

Pats right now are one of 6 teams in contention for one playoff spot (currently held by Pitt at 3-3). Pats are ranked 5th out of those 6 teams at the moment, but their AFC record of 2-1 is best in that group today. So if they had beaten the Cowboys then they would be in a playoff spot right now as the 7 seed.

They're not out of it by any means but a loss to the Jets would be a big step toward it.
True, and if they didnt have to play the Bills twice, it would be looking a lot better.
 
You should expect playoffs at this point.
It’s not unreasonable to expect 9-8 or 10-7 gets the last wild card spot. Until you have that many losses you should expect playoffs.
We are 2 games behind the bills and play them twice.
It’s funny how the people latching on to the you are what your record says you are cliche also want to credit the team for losses in games they have yet to play.
What have you seen, that would make you predict the pats will beat the bills? Other than the pats have played 1 defense in the top 10, and got rolled in that one. I dont usually make predictions, but if I did and based it on what I see. The pats have won 2 games that were played by two of the worst teams in the NFL, 4 others they lost.
 


Monday Patriots Notebook 5/6: News and Notes
Tom Brady Sustains, Dishes Some Big Hits on Netflix Roast Special
TRANSCRIPT: Jerod Mayo on the Rich Eisen Show From 5/2/24
Patriots News And Notes 5-5, Early 53-Man Roster Projection
New Patriots WR Javon Baker: ‘You ain’t gonna outwork me’
Friday Patriots Notebook 5/3: News and Notes
Thursday Patriots Notebook 5/2: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 5/1: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Jerod Mayo’s Appearance on WEEI On Monday
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/30: News and Notes
Back
Top