Something was proven to me about the Pats via Super Bowl

[Doc]

Play bottom of the barrel defense all season, say 27th or 31st......... then get hot in the playoffs. That's the blueprint. That's the lesson you've learned.

I learned that lesson awhile ago. It's not necessarily the best team during the season that wins it all. And regular season offensive and defensive rankings mean bunk. The Giants' defense held their 4 post-season opponents to an average of 11 PPG.

[dave mcbride]

Play bottom of the barrel defense all season, say 27th or 31st......... then get hot in the playoffs. That's the blueprint. That's the lesson you've learned.

Your case is hopeless. Mention that like ten of the last ten SB winners have featured elite QBs, and you'll get "Trent Dilfer! Brad Johnson! Earl Morrall! In your face!"

[BADOLBILZ]

The points scored/allowed are the more important stats.

 

In the three rounds of the playoffs that the Pats and Giants both participated in, the Pats gave up fewer points per game.

 

Did I mention that the all the QB's that played in the last 5 Super Bowls will probably end up in the HOF? What a strange coincidence in a sport that is so dominated by defense.

[dave mcbride]

I learned that lesson awhile ago. It's not necessarily the best team during the season that wins it all. And regular season offensive and defensive rankings mean bunk. The Giants' defense held their 4 post-season opponents to an average of 11 PPG.

The best D (SF) was on the cusp but couldn't get to the big game because their QB played terribly against the Giants when the chips were down.

[Best Player Available]

The best D (SF) was on the cusp but couldn't get to the big game because their QB played terribly against the Giants when the chips were down.

Truth

[Doc]

In the three rounds of the playoffs that the Pats and Giants both participated in, the Pats gave up fewer points per game.

 

Did I mention that the all the QB's that played in the last 5 Super Bowls will probably end up in the HOF? What a strange coincidence in a sport that is so dominated by defense.

Might want to check your stats on the Pats defense. Yes, it is a strange coincidence.

 

The best D (SF) was on the cusp but couldn't get to the big game because their QB played terribly against the Giants when the chips were down.

SF, the defense that gave up 27 points to the Rams and 32 to the Saints?

[dave mcbride]

Might want to check your stats on the Pats defense. Yes, it is a strange coincidence.

 

 

SF, the defense that gave up 27 points to the Rams and 32 to the Saints?

Are you suggesting that the Saints were actually stoppable? Or that the Niners defense wasn't one of the two or three best in the league?

[NoSaint]

The bottom line is that they ranked 27th in total defense and last in rushing. I keep getting told how those things win championships.

 

However, the constant in the past 5 SB's has been a franchise QB versus another franchise QB.

 

Funny how people HERE gloss over the fact that Eli Manning had a season of 4th quarter dominance as has never been seen before, yet the same Giants defense that gave up 16 straight completions and a 14 play 96 yard TD drive was the dominant force in their mind.

 

Eli competed 75% of his passes for near 300 yards.

 

Obviously a qb is number 1 but the defense typically is the tiebreaker between those two elite qbs facing off. The defense that matches up in that game better typically wins.

[BADOLBILZ]

Might want to check your stats on the Pats defense. Yes, it is a strange coincidence.

 

The Pats gave up 10 points in the divisional round, 17 in the championship game and 21 in the SB. 48 points total.

 

That's 16 points per game.

 

The Giants gave up 20 in the divisional round, 17 in the championship and 17 in the SB. 54 points total.

 

That's 18 points per game.

 

What kind of doctor are you again?

[Doc]

Are you suggesting that the Saints were actually stoppable? Or that the Niners defense wasn't one of the two or three best in the league?

Well, the 49'ers' offense scored 34 points against the Saints. Yet they struggled against the Giants.

 

The Pats gave up 10 points in the divisional round, 17 in the championship game and 21 in the SB. 48 points total.

 

That's 16 points per game.

 

The Giants gave up 20 in the divisional round, 17 in the championship and 17 in the SB. 54 points total.

 

That's 18 points per game.

 

What kind of doctor are you again?

What kind of Dick are you again?

 

I said "playoffs." That's your first hint. There will be no others.

[dave mcbride]

Well, the 49'ers' offense scored 34 points against the Saints. Yet they struggled against the Giants.

 

 

What kind of Dick are you again?

 

I said "playoffs." That's your first hint. There will be no others.

I suspect this won't convince you, but Smith missed a ton of open receivers against NY. He killed his own team outside of a couple of good throws to Davis. That said, yes, the Giants had a better defense -- and a better DC, in my opinion -- than the Saints. I think the bottom line is that teams have to have an elite QB and a defensive unit that can get after the QB. The Steelers, for instance, have both, and they've been to the SB twice in the past five years. The Colts D could get after the QB as well. As can the Ravens, who in a world that wasn't upside down would have represented the AFC this year. They're an interesting case because they never make it, but Flacco has in fact become a very good QB. They should have gone this year, but thanks to Evans and Cundiff, they failed.

 

The Pats gave up 10 points in the divisional round, 17 in the championship game and 21 in the SB. 48 points total.

 

That's 16 points per game.

 

The Giants gave up 20 in the divisional round, 17 in the championship and 17 in the SB. 54 points total.

 

That's 18 points per game.

 

What kind of doctor are you again?

Badol, you're forgetting the Falcons game, when the Giants gave up precisely zero points on defense.

[Doc]

I suspect this won't convince you, but Smith missed a ton of open receivers against NY. He killed his own team outside of a couple of good throws to Davis. That said, yes, the Giants had a better defense -- and a better DC, in my opinion -- than the Saints. I think the bottom line is that teams have to have an elite QB and a defensive unit that can get after the QB. The Steelers, for instance, have both, and they've been to the SB twice in the past five years. The Colts D could get after the QB as well. As can the Ravens, who in a world that wasn't upside down would have represented the AFC this year. They're an interesting case because they never make it, but Flacco has in fact become a very good QB. They should have gone this year, but thanks to Evans and Cundiff, they failed.

I'm not saying ALL you need is a great defense. You need a good offense as well. Ideally the better of both, the better you'll be.

 

Badol, you're forgetting the Falcons game, when the Giants gave up precisely zero points on defense.

Obviously based on his absence, he realized his error, tucked tail and ran.

 

And that's badolbilz? WTF happened to him?

[BADOLBILZ]

Obviously a qb is number 1 but the defense typically is the tiebreaker between those two elite qbs facing off. The defense that matches up in that game better typically wins.

 

All other things being equal the team with the better defense has the advantage........but was that the case in this SB? I think the Pats and Giants defenses played about equally well......in the end, the Giants completed an incredible long pass play when backed up at their 12 yard line, which literally tipped the scales in their favor.

 

But I will buy the idea of matching up to win. The Giants are a bad match-up for the Patriots. The Pats offense relies very little on running the ball and their QB is very sensitive to pass rush. The strength of the Giants defense is pass rush. Not pass defense necessarily, but pass rush.

 

I mean, the truth is that the Giants didn't have a historically significant SB defense. Not even close. They were starting a LB that was teaching school in November. Their LB's are nobodies. Secondary is just OK considering the assets applied to the unit......should be better. Their DL is very deep.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Dick Drawn

[NoSaint]

I'm not saying ALL you need is a great defense. You need a good offense as well. Ideally the better of both, the better you'll be.

 

 

Obviously based on his absence, he realized his error, tucked tail and ran.

 

And that's badolbilz? WTF happened to him?

 

Even looking at those elite offenses like the greatest show on turf - they had good defenses.

 

Superbowl winners tend not to have weaknesses just about anywhere but especially qb. Good qb, good pass rush and suddenly even average players around thme look good. Get some good players mixed in and you look great. Very few superbowl winners have any guys that are just horrible.

[BADOLBILZ]

I'm not saying ALL you need is a great defense. You need a good offense as well. Ideally the better of both, the better you'll be.

 

 

Obviously based on his absence, he realized his error, tucked tail and ran.

 

And that's badolbilz? WTF happened to him?

 

Error? I said the 3 rounds that the Pats and Giants both played in. You can't read OR add. Doctor of doucheology?

Edited February 8, 2012 by Dick Drawn

[NoSaint]

All things being equal the team with the better defense has the advantage........but was that the case in this SB? I think the Pats and Giants defenses played about equally well......in the end, the Giants completed an incredible long pass play when backed up at their 12 yard line, which literally tipped the scales in their favor.

 

But I will buy the idea of matching up to win. The Giants are a bad match-up for the Patriots. The Pats offense relies very little on running the ball and their QB is very sensitive to pass rush. The strength of the Giants defense is pass rush. Not pass defense necessarily, but pass rush.

 

I mean, the truth is that the Giants didn't have a historically significant SB defense. Not even close. They were starting a LB that was teaching school in November. Their LB's are nobodies. Secondary is just OK considering the assets applied to the unit......should be better. Their DL is very deep.

 

Matchups are huge.

[BADOLBILZ]

I suspect this won't convince you, but Smith missed a ton of open receivers against NY. He killed his own team outside of a couple of good throws to Davis. That said, yes, the Giants had a better defense -- and a better DC, in my opinion -- than the Saints. I think the bottom line is that teams have to have an elite QB and a defensive unit that can get after the QB. The Steelers, for instance, have both, and they've been to the SB twice in the past five years. The Colts D could get after the QB as well. As can the Ravens, who in a world that wasn't upside down would have represented the AFC this year. They're an interesting case because they never make it, but Flacco has in fact become a very good QB. They should have gone this year, but thanks to Evans and Cundiff, they failed.

 

 

Badol, you're forgetting the Falcons game, when the Giants gave up precisely zero points on defense.

 

I forgot to figure in the points that the Pats allowed in the wildcard.

 

So.....48...plus......zero......

 

Seriously guys, READ the post.

 

What's next? A link request?

[Doc]

Error? I said the 3 rounds that the Pats and Giants both played in. You can't read OR add. Doctor of doucheology?

I said PLAYOFFS, moron. Because you see, the first playoff game the Giants played matters. And it wasn't against some joke like the Broncos.

 

And you could say I'm a doctor of doucheology. I can prescribe some meds to help you with your affliction, if you'd like. The first step is admitting you have a problem.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Doc

[Scraps]

On a parallel train of thought, I was blown away by the factoid that during this past regular season, the Pats did not beat a single team with a record greater than .500. - (cited by SportsCenter)

 

I found this to be remarkable.....

 

While this does sound remarkable, there were only 2 teams they played in the regular season that had winning records and there were 6 teams that would have had winning records if they had not lost to the Patriots*.

[BADOLBILZ]

I said PLAYOFFS, moron. Because you see, the first playoff game the Giants played matters. And it wasn't against some joke like the Broncos.

 

And you could say I'm a doctor of doucheology. I can prescribe some meds to help you with your affliction, if you'd like. The first step is admitting you have a problem.

 

The Giants first playoff game mattered just like the regular season mattered for the Pats. Those two thing got those teams to the divisional round. From there, they each played 3 games. Were they against equal opponents? No, but who is to say that the Pats wouldn't have put a 48-0 whipping on the Falcons? That's why it's irrelevant to the argument.

[Doc]

The Giants first playoff game mattered just like the regular season mattered for the Pats. Those two thing got those teams to the divisional round. From there, they each played 3 games. Were they against equal opponents? No, but who is to say that the Pats wouldn't have put a 48-0 whipping on the Falcons? That's why it's irrelevant to the argument.

This is patently ridiculous. No playoff game is "irrelevant." You can't just ignore a game because it doesn't fit your argument.

[benderbender]

I mean, take off the blinders and give 'em their due.

 

I think Chris Colinsworth, Colin Cowherd, and the media have moisturized Brady and Bellicheat's rear end enough to last a lifetime.

 

Go on to a Patriots forum and give them whatever man love you feel is due them. Personally I feel he owes us for a decade of two easy wins per season.

[dave mcbride]

The Giants first playoff game mattered just like the regular season mattered for the Pats. Those two thing got those teams to the divisional round. From there, they each played 3 games. Were they against equal opponents? No, but who is to say that the Pats wouldn't have put a 48-0 whipping on the Falcons? That's why it's irrelevant to the argument.

??

To quote the Downing Street Memo, "the intelligence and facts were fixed around the policy."

[Ramius]

The Giants first playoff game mattered just like the regular season mattered for the Pats. Those two thing got those teams to the divisional round. From there, they each played 3 games. Were they against equal opponents? No, but who is to say that the Pats wouldn't have put a 48-0 whipping on the Falcons? That's why it's irrelevant to the argument.

 

Ok then. Someone please inform the NFL that the Wildcard round is irrelevant in the grand scheme of the NFL playoffs.

[section122]

The Giants first playoff game mattered just like the regular season mattered for the Pats. Those two thing got those teams to the divisional round. From there, they each played 3 games. Were they against equal opponents? No, but who is to say that the Pats wouldn't have put a 48-0 whipping on the Falcons? That's why it's irrelevant to the argument.

 

I say they wouldn't have because the Falcons had a winning record.

 

On that note I don't think the Pats* could have made it out of the NFC. Say you do discount the Falcon's game for whatever inane reason. The Giants beat the 15-1 Packers (handily I might add) and the 13-3 49ers. (Both on the road!) The Pats* beat the 8-8 Broncos and the 12-4 Ravens (barely). In the NFC the Pats* would have also been on the road for at least the Packers game.

 

Comparing the defensive efforts of these two teams is a joke!

[PDaDdy]

When a season is made or broken on a few plays, how valuable does a little extra info become?

 

PTR

 

Oh spygate was a huge deal. People have blown it off and forgotten it now but their spying made a big difference in my opinion. When New England was winning super bowls though they had a better defense to go along with what was always a steady high scoring offense. You need both sides of the ball in abundance.

[Billshank Redemption]

I used to think spy gate isn't really a big deal but this isn't the first time its been brought up and james harrison did tweet about it. I think a lot of the players on other teams still remember it and our well aware of it. They certainly didn't appreciate it and maybe it did have more of an impact on the patriots dynasty then we realize. Football is a game of inches and whatever you can do to gain even just a slight advantage is huge.

[Mr. WEO]

Johnson made some off-hand comment about "everyone" doing it, without even the slighest bit of evidence (save for that damning expose on Howard Mudd some 20 years ago!). Beyond that, he admitted to doing whatever he could to cheat, and he and Belichick go fishing together. Hardly evidence or a character witness that would be credible even in the court of public opinion.

 

 

The points scored/allowed are the more important stats.

I was hoping my post would smoke out your "fishing buddies" argument. Always a laugh--as though someone would willingly cast into doubt his (and his owner's and players') SB victories in order to bail out his "fishing buddy".

 

The interview is what it is--one of the most well known SB winning coaches of the past 25 years is telling us he illegally video taped opposing defenses. He tells us he first heard about it from an assistant coach of the Chiefs many years before. He tells us other teams were doing it. He tells us who is considered the best in the league (a guy who never refuted this claim).

 

In 2003 and 2004, NE hadn't even played their SB opponents that year, so it's not clear how they stole their signals those year in order to win the SB. Against Carolina, they hadn't seen the Panthers in 2 years.

 

Other than you, I haven't seen any published report to casting doubt on JJ's claims--not even Jerry Jones. What bothers you is that the court of public opinion reacted to the fallout from the spygate saga with a big yawn--as did what appears to be nearly every player and opposing coach.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Mr. WEO

[Mr. WEO]

I'm sure JJ was real scared the NFL would strip him of draft picks and fine him after revealing he cheated. Considering he hadn't been an employee of the NFL since '99. As for discounting what he said, no one supported it either. It was a throwaway comment for those looking to excuse their cheating as something "everyone did," again without a single shred of evidence. But have at it, doc. You've been their biggest defender for years. Like the pig at breakfast, you're commited.

 

No other HC (current or former) came forth and said they cheated too? Shocking. That's your argument? What "evidence" were you looking for JJ to provide in that interview (other than his spontaneous admission)? Actual tapes? Lie detector results?

 

 

A throwaway comment, you say? From those "looking to excuse their cheating"?

 

So the guy from WEEI sat and thought, "Hmmmm, I wonder which former NFL head coach will reveal that he cheated in this way when I ask him on the radio...I know--I bet Jimmy Johnson will!".

 

It was a detailed answer to a specific question. Anyway, pointing this out to you equates with "defending" (defending what?) "them", when I clealry never did that and said, as you know, that BB was crazy for breaking the rule after the league warned him (and all teams) in writing not to do so. Now, if all teams are being warned, don't you think they all knew it ws going on, at least at some level? Ans don't you think they already changed their signal calling habits as a result of this hardly a secret practice of taping signals? And how did the pats cheeat their way to SB wins in '03 and '04 without any tape to view?

 

You're upset that hardly anyone in the league (players, owners) registered any of the outrage that you still harbor. I'm for "defending" the obvious and for prosecuting BS. You enjoy conspiracy and blaming others for the problems of the Bills.

[NoSaint]

Oh spygate was a huge deal. People have blown it off and forgotten it now but their spying made a big difference in my opinion. When New England was winning super bowls though they had a better defense to go along with what was always a steady high scoring offense. You need both sides of the ball in abundance.

 

So you think that better team loses those early rings without the tape? Just a curiosity I've wondered some reading the thread.

 

What kind of scoreboard swing do you expect?

 

Any odds on if other teams bent rules as well?

[Doc]

No other HC (current or former) came forth and said they cheated too? Shocking. That's your argument? What "evidence" were you looking for JJ to provide in that interview (other than his spontaneous admission)? Actual tapes? Lie detector results?

 

 

A throwaway comment, you say? From those "looking to excuse their cheating"?

 

So the guy from WEEI sat and thought, "Hmmmm, I wonder which former NFL head coach will reveal that he cheated in this way when I ask him on the radio...I know--I bet Jimmy Johnson will!".

 

It was a detailed answer to a specific question. Anyway, pointing this out to you equates with "defending" (defending what?) "them", when I clealry never did that and said, as you know, that BB was crazy for breaking the rule after the league warned him (and all teams) in writing not to do so. Now, if all teams are being warned, don't you think they all knew it ws going on, at least at some level? Ans don't you think they already changed their signal calling habits as a result of this hardly a secret practice of taping signals? And how did the pats cheeat their way to SB wins in '03 and '04 without any tape to view?

 

You're upset that hardly anyone in the league (players, owners) registered any of the outrage that you still harbor. I'm for "defending" the obvious and for prosecuting BS. You enjoy conspiracy and blaming others for the problems of the Bills.

Sorry doc, I need more than "everyone did it" from a known cheat and bud of Belichick, whose only examples of cheating were some OL coach some 20 years ago and himself, over a decade ago. I need even some hint of other teams, you know, actually doing it.

 

So the person who is cheated is at fault, not the cheater? Interesting. Is that just for football, or does it apply everywhere in your world? And the Pats didn't face any teams in the playoffs that they met during the regular season in 2003 and 2004?

 

I'm not outraged at the lack of outrage, not that there was no outrage and still isn't (witness James Harrison). They haven't won a SB since getting caught. It's kind of like you and Merriman's problems after getting caught using steroids ("everyone uses them").

Edited February 9, 2012 by Doc

[ThurmasThoman]

Do you have link to winning 3 superbowls was "obviously" obtained by cheating? I am no patriot fan at all. But that as a serious charge that should be backed by verifiable fact, or not mentioned. Again, there to my knowledge wasn't even a congressional hearing (LOL like that would bring out the truth). But I think my point is clear.

 

This stuff is more a Urban legend than anything. As much as many would like to believe its the truth. As for the burning of the tapes. Well, the NFL is a private corporation, not the white house. Maybe they burned them because they over stepped and there was nothing damming on them. They slapped the Hoodys hand with a fine. They did not ban him, which you think would happen if he cheated his way to 3 superbowl wins. its just my opinion of a extremely muddy, rumor filled tabloid like scandal.

 

 

i used to be in this camp. i really did.

 

look - i have been watching football for 20 years. there are people here that have been watching it longer than that. there are people that post here that have played ball on the college level. hell, there are people here that play a lot of madden on their playstation that understand the game better than me. but let me say this:

 

i live in new england. i grow up in new england. im a bills fan. ive seen 99% of their games since turning 21 (old enough to go to bars with direct tv) and before that, about 50% of their games. but new england? man, i've probably seen more patriots games than any 3 of their most bandwagon, fair-weather, wes welkah should be cut patriot fans COMBINED.

 

my only point is... OBJECTIVELY... i have never... EVER EVER EVER... seen football played like the patriots played it between 2001/2002, and 2003/2004. there's winning good, theres winning ugly, theres winning lucky, and then theres just winning when you have absolutely no business winning because you know what play is coming next. if it was black jack, they were hitting on 17 and getting a 3 every time. if it was poker, they were going all in on a pair of 7s after the 1st card, and then getting their 4th 7 on the river - EVERY GAME. they were beating peyton in his prime... in ways that were just... magical. after they beat the steelers for the second time in the conference championship, steelers wideouts after the game said PATRIOT PLAYERS WERE CALLING OUT THEIR PLAYS AT THE LINE OF SCRIMMAGE!

 

is brady the best qb in the league, and the best qb of the last decade? yes.

is belly the best coach in the league, and the best coach of the last decade? without question.

did the patriots cheat, and did that help them win superbowls? yes.

 

these facts are not mutually exclusive from one another. and i used to say "i wish the bills could cheat like that." but no. no i dont. because the more ive read about it, the more ive learned about it, the less i want that stigma for my organization. because maybe some people will forgive and forget - but there is a LARGE segment of the football world, including current and former players, who feel that the patriots violated the very spirit of the game. a game that we are clearly quite passionate about.

 

its truly unforgivable, and they deserve all of the bad fate that befalls them.

[BillsfaninFl]

If we must talk about the hated Patriots, then even though it hurts me to say it, Robert Kraft is the type of owner we wish Ralph was. In the latest (Feb. 6th) issue of Sports Illustrated, They have an article entitled How Robert Kraft Turned the Patriots into the NFL's Model Franchise. In the article it covers things like his obsession with wanting to own the local football team (as opposed to wanting to make a business investment). He wanted top coaching, so after Parcells left, he hired Belichick even though he had to pay a penalty to the Jets to get him. By comparison, Ralph never paid top dollar for a coach. He just told us he would, but didn't. Kraft made comments in the article regarding Bledsoe vs. Brady. Even though Bledsoe was one of the most prolific QBs in the league and Kraft said "I love the guy," Belichick wanted to go with Brady. So Kraft approved the trade with Buffalo, and said "That was a tough one. But you've got to back your key managers when they make a decision." We all know what has happened when Bills management did not agree with Wilson.

 

I hate the Patriots and nothing would make me happier than to see them go into decline (as has been wrongly prophesized the last few years), but I wish our team's owner was driven by the desire to have a perrenial competitor, was willing to pay more to make it happen and after hiring football experts would support their attempts to make the team better, rather than creating constraints like "Cash to the Cap."

Edited February 9, 2012 by BillsfaninFl

[Bill from NYC]

But I will buy the idea of matching up to win. The Giants are a bad match-up for the Patriots. The Pats offense relies very little on running the ball and their QB is very sensitive to pass rush. The strength of the Giants defense is pass rush. Not pass defense necessarily, but pass rush.

 

I mean, the truth is that the Giants didn't have a historically significant SB defense. Not even close. They were starting a LB that was teaching school in November. Their LB's are nobodies. Secondary is just OK considering the assets applied to the unit......should be better. Their DL is very deep.

 

The Giants have a defensive line that is absolutely stacked and very deep. It's not only the best in the NFL, it is the best one I have seen in a long time. So good, that it makes me reconsider my long time preference of the 3/4 defense, which is a foot injury away from a nose tackle to being ineffective. This in a pass driven league.

The rest of the Giant defense really isn't that great. In fact, imo our secondary would make more plays than theirs with that DL in front of the. Our lbs however are as bad as one can really imagine.

 

Call me crazy, but imo the Bills receivers aren't the worst either, and seem to be getting open more often than in recent years. The bottom line wrt the Bills (imo) is that with more talent and depth on both lines, they can be a playoff team (assuming they bring in 1 or 2 professional linebackers). I think the Giants helped make my case.

[ThurmasThoman]

 

 

I hate the Patriots and nothing would make me happier than to see them go into decline (as has been wrongly prophesized the last few years), but I wish our team's owner was driven by the desire to have a perrenial competitor, was willing to pay more to make it happen and after hiring football experts would support their attempts to make the team better, rather than creating constraints like "Cash to the Cap."

 

we win more games than the pats next year, take it to the bank.

 

to clarify: we beat them once, and had a 21-0 lead before we benched the best player on our team.

 

we are better than the pats, and injuries to our

qb

league leading rb

de

lb

wideouts

kicker

and anyone else you want to name kept us out of the playoffs.

 

we will have a strong draft.

we will have offseason conditioning.

we will have a training camp.

we will have an easy schedule.

we will win the east.

we will play in the conference championship.

 

the afc is WEAK. i absolutely can not wait for this season. I CANT WAIT.

 

i have not been this optimistic about a football season since doug fluties second year as a starter, aka the music city miracle year.

 

is it september yet??

Edited February 9, 2012 by JohnnyGold

[Jim in Anchorage]

we win more games than the pats next year, take it to the bank.

 

to clarify: we beat them once, and had a 21-0 lead before we benched the best player on our team.

 

we are better than the pats, and injuries to our

qb

league leading rb

de

lb

wideouts

kicker

and anyone else you want to name kept us out of the playoffs.

 

we will have a strong draft.

we will have offseason conditioning.

we will have a training camp.

we will have an easy schedule.

we will win the east.

we will play in the conference championship.

 

the afc is WEAK. i absolutely can not wait for this season. I CANT WAIT.

 

i have not been this optimistic about a football season since doug fluties second year as a starter, aka the music city miracle year.

 

is it september yet??

You do remember the Jets and Miami games?

[Alphadawg7]

Before the Spygate events of 2007, the Pats were 12 - 2 in the playoffs, including three wins off the foot of Vinateri (no, Brady did not win them any of their Super Bowls, their kicker did).

 

Since Spygate, they are 4 - 4 and 0 - 2 in the Super Bowl.

 

Maybe the taping controversy has more teeth than expected, since, if anyone remember SB 39, the Pats were very cavalier in their approach to the game and seemed to know what the Eagles would do even before the Eagles did it.

 

I sincerely believe Spygate helped them in their early success during this run. Now that they can't do it and were exposed, their post season record is much more pedestrian and their Super Bowl record is down right abysmal.

 

Any thoughts?

 

The advantages of spygate are so over exaggerated that its not even funny. Truth is, every team has a endless amount of film of schemes of their opponents. The likelihood that they found something that the other film doesn't already show is minimal at best, and even then it would be maybe a play or two that they may not even run in a game. If you talk to any person with any knowledge of game planning for a football game at a high level they will tell you more was made of it than it really is and lots of teams have done things like this.

 

The reason they won those games is very very simple...more talent in the FO and on the field in the SB years than in the more recent years. For one, the D was substantially better back then and has been a sore spot for sometime now.

 

Lets also be REALISTIC here...Literally TWO PLAYS cost NE the both SB victories. In the first one, it was the dropped INT just before the Tyree miracle catch (or you can even say the fluke catch by a WR who couldnt even make the squad the following season despite being the SB hero) cost them a victory in that one. In this last one, the Welker drop would have been a NE win if he had held onto that ball. And thats a catch he makes 8 out of 10 times. So, outside of two plays, NE would be 5-0 in the SB's including an undefeated season where they TROUNCED just about every opponent they played outside the SB against a devastating front 7.

 

I am no Pats fan, but it gets soooooo old listenting to people whine over something so insignificant in terms of the actual games being played. On one hand I understand that most people have never played football, at least at a higher level, and dont realize the minimal impact it really had (if any at all)...but get over it. They beat us just about every time we play them because we have sucked for the last decade after terrible personnel and front office decisions, and they havent because they are literally one of the best run organizations in football and have one of the best QB's to play the game and one of the best coaches of our generation.

 

I mean these guys AGAIN have a ton of early picks, including 2 firsts and 2 seconds...this is a team coming off a 13-3 season and a SB birth, yet they are going to have a ton of ammo going into the draft to fill the few holes they have (WR, Front 7 and Secondary) either through drafting or trading. I would kill to have a front office that could pull that off year end and year out. That is why they are SB contender every year for the last decade, and even before that, while we have been rebuilding mostly since the 90's. There success is not because of some stupid tapes that had little significance.

[Alphadawg7]

we win more games than the pats next year, take it to the bank.

 

to clarify: we beat them once, and had a 21-0 lead before we benched the best player on our team.

 

we are better than the pats, and injuries to our

qb

league leading rb

de

lb

wideouts

kicker

and anyone else you want to name kept us out of the playoffs.

 

we will have a strong draft.

we will have offseason conditioning.

we will have a training camp.

we will have an easy schedule.

we will win the east.

we will play in the conference championship.

 

the afc is WEAK. i absolutely can not wait for this season. I CANT WAIT.

 

i have not been this optimistic about a football season since doug fluties second year as a starter, aka the music city miracle year.

 

is it september yet??

 

Love the optimism...but the unfortunate reality is that the AFC East could be the toughest its been in a very long time if Miami gets a real QB like Manning or even Flynn. Both have question marks, but if Manning goes there and is healthy, then they are going to be a real threat to the division crown and a dangerous team. If Flynn goes and can be the guy his potential suggests (and IMO he is the real deal, been following him for a while), then they can still be a very dangerous team. NE will still likely win at least 11 games, and the Jets will still be tough, especially if they end up pulling in Manning or Flynn in their own QB upgrade. Hell, Manning could go to the Jets and Flynn to the Fins (or vice versa) and that could make things really tough.

 

That being said, I am optimistic on the direction this team is going, and anything is possible in the NFL with a new season. However, our division could be scary good next year if the Fins and or Jets get a real QB. And it's tough to fill the number of holes we have in one off season unless the FO gets uncharacteristically aggressive in FA and hits on the majority of our draft picks being impact players year one. Thats a tall order for any team let alone one that has been rebuilding for a decade.

[angryfan62]

i used to be in this camp. i really did.

 

look - i have been watching football for 20 years. there are people here that have been watching it longer than that. there are people that post here that have played ball on the college level. hell, there are people here that play a lot of madden on their playstation that understand the game better than me. but let me say this:

 

i live in new england. i grow up in new england. im a bills fan. ive seen 99% of their games since turning 21 (old enough to go to bars with direct tv) and before that, about 50% of their games. but new england? man, i've probably seen more patriots games than any 3 of their most bandwagon, fair-weather, wes welkah should be cut patriot fans COMBINED.

 

my only point is... OBJECTIVELY... i have never... EVER EVER EVER... seen football played like the patriots played it between 2001/2002, and 2003/2004. there's winning good, theres winning ugly, theres winning lucky, and then theres just winning when you have absolutely no business winning because you know what play is coming next. if it was black jack, they were hitting on 17 and getting a 3 every time. if it was poker, they were going all in on a pair of 7s after the 1st card, and then getting their 4th 7 on the river - EVERY GAME. they were beating peyton in his prime... in ways that were just... magical. after they beat the steelers for the second time in the conference championship, steelers wideouts after the game said PATRIOT PLAYERS WERE CALLING OUT THEIR PLAYS AT THE LINE OF SCRIMMAGE!

 

is brady the best qb in the league, and the best qb of the last decade? yes.

is belly the best coach in the league, and the best coach of the last decade? without question.

did the patriots cheat, and did that help them win superbowls? yes.

 

these facts are not mutually exclusive from one another. and i used to say "i wish the bills could cheat like that." but no. no i dont. because the more ive read about it, the more ive learned about it, the less i want that stigma for my organization. because maybe some people will forgive and forget - but there is a LARGE segment of the football world, including current and former players, who feel that the patriots violated the very spirit of the game. a game that we are clearly quite passionate about.

 

its truly unforgivable, and they deserve all of the bad fate that befalls them.

Man am I glad someone besides me said this, especially someone from that area. Football is in one way kind of like chess due to the fact that the opposing players and coaches must try to predict what their opponent is up to on any given down. This is the beauty of the game, any offense can be stopped, and any defense can be exploited....as long as you guess right. Get it wrong and you'll be scored on, or your play will be stuffed. Some teams and coaches are better at this than others obviously, and sometimes those rules just don't apply(Our season opener against the Pats a few days after they cut their defensive captain Milloy, and that SB between TB and the Raiders where 1 coach got to play his old team half a season after being fired by them). I'm not a kid and I have been watching my Bills and other teams play football regularly since the late 70's. Normally it's just impossible to guess right all the time, and even a crappy team will hang a few scores on you when they catch you looking the wrong way, but I watched those games too and it just wasn't normal. I mean almost never being caught in the wrong defensive alignment vs a run or a pass, I watched teams run play action so good it fooled the camera, but as the pass came down you'd see 3 Pats defenders bracketing the would be receiver. I watched them either pick up or burn every blitz no matter how cleverly disguised or how many guys were sent. Too many times I would see Pats pass defenders seemingly waiting on the ball to get to them while it was in the air. I mean I guess it could all be my imagination and all of that that I watched was simply the result of razor sharp discipline and superb game planning/coaching, but in my own very personal opinion....they had to be cheating.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

JohnnyGold speaks for me… both in terms of his view on the Cheating Bastards*** and on his optimism for the 2012 Season.