Tom Brady reaffirms plan to play beyond 2019

[Kontradiction]

You will be wrong. Pats over Saints in SB53.

So who are they signing at DT to down Kamara and Ingram this late in the season?

 

[RobertWeathers]

some of our starters couldn’t crack some NFL teams. what about if you modify Wolf’s criteria to 2 quality starters?

No way there would ever be universal agreement on what "quality" is so I'm not going to bother.

We can agree Elandon Roberts is a average/below average starter but he has produced at an NFL level. For BB to find that kind of production in the 6th round is pretty good in my book. Seeing how hes a 50% snap player maybe he should be in the "Reserve" category?

 

[PatsFan92]

So who are they signing at DT to down Kamara and Ingram this late in the season?

Listen, the playoffs are like a whole new season altogether. I mean look at what the 2012 Ravens did, they lost 4 of their last 5 games in the regular season and then went on to win the SB from a wildcard position. You are making a big mistake by writing off the Patriots. The Pats are going to be playing better on offence and defence come playoff time, just watch.

 

[gitgronked82]

Drafts take time to evaluate and the evaluation can be modified depending on which point in time you select.

If you apply Ron Wolff's 2 starters/2 reserves rule is a successful draft.

2018- Starters: Sony, Jackson, Bentley. Wynn TBD
2017- Starters: Wise in the 4th round. #1 was Cooks which got the team Wynn and cap space. They only had 4 picks total.
2016- Starters: Thuney and Roberts, Reserves: Brissett and Karras. VV and Mitchell contributed well but didn't last.
2015- Starters: Brown, Flowers, Mason. Reserves: Cardona, Richards -good STers
2014- Starters: Jimmy, White, Stork , Malcolm (didn't last but started) Reserves: Fleming

To say a lot was to be desired isn't accurate.

Based on where they pick, they are at a disadvantage in getting blue chip talent.

Only thing with that rule is that it doesn’t take into account that some players may be starting that shouldn’t be starters on a strong unit. If you’ve had trouble drafting, the bar for starting will be lower

Malcolm brown and elandon come to mind as players that may not be starting on a great unit


Also.. stork. Jeez. Pretty much forgot about him

 

[gitgronked82]

Listen, the playoffs are like a whole new season altogether. I mean look at what the 2012 Ravens did, they lost 4 of their last 5 games in the regular season and then went on to win the SB from a wildcard position. You are making a big mistake by writing off the Patriots. The Pats are going to be playing better on offence and defence come playoff time, just watch.

That’s true... but wouldn’t the same apply to other teams? I’m sure saints fans are looking at their cooled-down offense claiming that it will kick it up a gear in January as well

 

[PatsFan92]

That’s true... but wouldn’t the same apply to other teams? I’m sure saints fans are looking at their cooled-down offense claiming that it will kick it up a gear in January as well

Those other teams haven't got Brady and Belichick.

 

[signbabybrady]

Yeah, I'm not bothering anymore. Complete waste of time. For the record, I hope I'm wrong on this and end up looking like an idiot.

You will be.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yeah, I'm not bothering anymore. Complete waste of time. For the record, I hope I'm wrong on this and end up looking like an idiot.

What's funny is that, for at least most sane people, "Season's over" about a playoff team doesn't actually mean a 0% chance, and that's understood. And, as Patriots fans, 2007 serves as a constant reminder of that. It's the flip side of "No way they lose", which 2007 also reminds us doesn't actually guarantee a 100% success rate. When we talk about winning championships and playoff runs, we pretty much break teams down, unconsciously or not, into one of 7 types:

Mortal lock
Heavy favorite
Favorite
Meh
Not likely
Puncher's chance
Not a chance in hell


And we understand that history has repeatedly proven that "always" and "never" aren't actually absolutes, in context.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Only thing with that rule is that it doesn’t take into account that some players may be starting that shouldn’t be starters on a strong unit. If you’ve had trouble drafting, the bar for starting will be lower

Malcolm brown and elandon come to mind as players that may not be starting on a great unit


Also.. stork. Jeez. Pretty much forgot about him

Thats an arbitrary assessment.

Malcolm Brown wouldn't start ahead of Vince Wilfork. We all know that.

 

[signbabybrady]

You're getting the ever loving **** kicked out of you. Again

Not even in the least. I think we have an excellent chance at a title this year he thinks the seasons over.

 

[Kontradiction]

Listen, the playoffs are like a whole new season altogether. I mean look at what the 2012 Ravens did, they lost 4 of their last 5 games in the regular season and then went on to win the SB from a wildcard position. You are making a big mistake by writing off the Patriots. The Pats are going to be playing better on offence and defence come playoff time, just watch.

One of those losses was to a playoff team in which the Ravens took their starters out in the first quarter and two of the other three were also against playoff teams that season. The other - the Steelers - were knocking on the door of the playoffs until they lost Big Ben. I'm also not writing off Belichick and Brady by themselves, but history has shown that both need complete teams around them to win it all. This isn't a complete team.

 

[signbabybrady]

What's funny is that, for at least most sane people, "Season's over" about a playoff team doesn't actually mean a 0% chance, and that's understood. And, as Patriots fans, 2007 serves as a constant reminder of that. It's the flip side of "No way they lose", which 2007 also reminds us doesn't actually guarantee a 100% success rate. When we talk about winning championships and playoff runs, we pretty much break teams down, unconsciously or not, into one of 7 types:

Mortal lock
Heavy favorite
Favorite
Meh
Not likely
Puncher's chance
Not a chance in hell


And we understand that history has repeatedly proven that "always" and "never" aren't actually absolutes, in context.

If you've been paying attention at all it's Kontra that hasn't recognized this. He's stated his position as not a chance in hell but is trying to act like its not likely or they have a punchers chance. Which is fine. But the real problem is I have stated that basically I think they are heavy favorites and he's tried to say that if I don't think they are mortal locks then we are saying same thing.
And as a kicker he also thinks if you're a Homer you might think they still have a chance this year but you won't even be a fan of the team anymore when TB and BB are gone.

 

[PatsFan92]

One of those losses was to a playoff team in which the Ravens took their starters out in the first quarter and two of the other three were also against playoff teams that season. The other - the Steelers - were knocking on the door of the playoffs until they lost Big Ben. I'm also not writing off Belichick and Brady by themselves, but history has shown that both need complete teams around them to win it all. This isn't a complete team.

I could say the same about the 2011 Giants. That wasn't a complete team yet they still went on to win the SB. I have a lot of confidence in this Patriots team, they could easily be 12-4 with the first seed if it wasnt for the Miami game. This team isn't as bad as people make them out to be.

 

[Brewskies]

He is talking too much about playing longer, so I expect him to play next season and then retire. Also this week the Pats theme is just do enough to win. Also, they speak about taking the focus off of Brady, Gronk, McDaniels, and BB it other teammates that help the team win. Sounds like they are preparing the fans for less than top quality performances, just enough to win.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

So who are they signing at DT to down Kamara and Ingram this late in the season?

We couldn’t stop the run in last year’s super bowl either and yet almost won. We’re going to need a few breaks along the way (i.e, no turnovers) if we end up playing them but other teams have done well against the Saints this year. Really the only way to beat them is in a shootout.

 

[Kontradiction]

What's funny is that, for at least most sane people, "Season's over" about a playoff team doesn't actually mean a 0% chance, and that's understood. And, as Patriots fans, 2007 serves as a constant reminder of that. It's the flip side of "No way they lose", which 2007 also reminds us doesn't actually guarantee a 100% success rate. When we talk about winning championships and playoff runs, we pretty much break teams down, unconsciously or not, into one of 7 types:

Mortal lock
Heavy favorite
Favorite
Meh
Not likely
Puncher's chance
Not a chance in hell


And we understand that history has repeatedly proven that "always" and "never" aren't actually absolutes, in context.

I'd put them somewhere between meh and puncher's chance. They would have been elevated had Gordon kept it together and the offense hit an October-like stride. Without him, you bottle up Edelman and they're basically dead in the water. It's just a tick better than the offense from the beginning of the season. Compound that with the pass-pro issues on the right side of the OL, Brown's inconsistency on the other side, and a defense that's been the worst against the run as any Belichick has coached since he's been here, and I'm not sure why people are clinging to high hopes with this team short of the possibility that they're only rooting for them because they win and to admit their shortcomings is to admit that there's a strong possibility that this just isn't the year. That's basically how we got here. SBB isn't mad that I said "season's over." He's mad because I theorized that the majority of homers are only homers because they're also front runners/bandwagon fans.

 

[Kontradiction]

I could say the same about the 2011 Giants. That wasn't a complete team yet they still went on to win the SB. I have a lot of confidence in this Patriots team, they could easily be 12-4 with the first seed if it wasnt for the Miami game. This team isn't as bad as people make them out to be.

And they're nowhere near as good as people make them out to be either. The Giants had the task of going up against a team with the second worst pass defense of all time (to that point) in the Super Bowl. The Patriots, if they even get there, will be playing a much more complete team.

We couldn’t stop the run in last year’s super bowl either and yet almost won. We’re going to need a few breaks along the way (i.e, no turnovers) if we end up playing them but other teams have done well against the Saints this year. Really the only way to beat them is in a shootout.

That was with an offense that was firing on all cylinders. This year's offense, without Gordon, is a pop gun.

 

[Deus Irae]

If you've been paying attention at all it's Kontra that hasn't recognized this. He's stated his position as not a chance in hell but is trying to act like its not likely or they have a punchers chance. Which is fine. But the real problem is I have stated that basically I think they are heavy favorites and he's tried to say that if I don't think they are mortal locks then we are saying same thing.
And as a kicker he also thinks if you're a Homer you might think they still have a chance this year but you won't even be a fan of the team anymore when TB and BB are gone.

I have been paying attention. You're being made to look like an ass yet again, because you can't get past "PATRIOTS = AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!", and you get stuck viewing everything through that lens.

It's not as if this hasn't been pointed out to you time and again. Until you learn to use a more balanced viewpoint when doing analysis, you're always going to have the same problems.

And there's not a mortal lock or heavy favorite anywhere in the AFC this year. Anyone with a lick of reasonableness in their evaluating can see that.

 

[mosslost]

I know it is Super Bowl or bust.

But I personally, having been a fan of the team over 40 years, do personally make a distinction between going 11-5, winning the AFCE, and making the AFCCG and losing a tough game; from going 5-11 and sucking.

In other words the fact that in both cases neither team holds up the trophy, does not make them equal.

EDIT: and btw I am not making an argument with any poster. I am just saying what I believe about some of the topics in the thread.

 

[signbabybrady]

I have been paying attention. You're being made to look like an ass yet again, because you can't get past "PATRIOTS = AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!", and you get stuck viewing everything through that lens.

It's not as if this hasn't been pointed out to you time and again. Until you learn to use a more balanced viewpoint when doing analysis, you're always going to have the same problems.

And there's not a mortal lock or heavy favorite anywhere in the AFC this year. Anyone with a lick of reasonableness in their evaluating can see that.

If you don't view this team through that lens then you haven't been paying attention for the last 20 years.

You can disagree with my opinion of heavy favorite if you want but based on the bolded why in the world would you think TB and BB have little or no shot as Kontra does?

We have a bye and get to face what you defined as a field with no heavy favorites seems to me like even you think we have a way better shot than Kontra thinks we do.