Official Playoff Thread of the New England Patriots

[Wandering Athol]

Indy at home brings no fear to Pats fans who have been around for a few years. In fact, I would bet the Pats are itchin' to play the team that drubbed them in Foxboro, and see Peyton make his baby-face again. Denver at home is an entirely different story. Hence, I think the #4 seed is what the Pats would be better off with, hoping someone else takes out Denver before the Pats would have to play them (for reference, see Jacksonville circa 1996). Unfortunately, the #4 seed leaves out all-but-the-most-remote possibility of another home playoff game for the Pats. Looks like no win-wins this year. Hence, this will be a tougher run to the Super Bowl than the three previous.

That said, what exactly is different from a player-coach standpoint this year than last. One thing - Rodney Harrison. You can write all you want about Crennel and Weis being gone, but Belichick is the glue, and the players play, not the coaches. So, the secondary's worse. The linebackers are better with the T Johnson/Colvin tradeoff, now that Vrabel's been moved, and Bruschi's returned. The young D-line is a year older and wiser, maybe a push here. The offense is better now that it is finally healthy: with Brady having his best year yet, Dillon starting to return to form, Watson's emergence, and the O-line inexplicably playing better than I would've ever thought. Special teams are similar to last year. It's taken the whole year for this team to get healthy and gel and I expect BIG things from them in the playoffs.

Where does that leave the Pats? The whole team IMO opinion is on par AT THIS TIME with last year's - the offense is little better, and the defense is little worse. The Tampa game was not a fluke. Last year's team destroyed Pitt and Indy at home, and solidly defeated Phi in the SB. This year they've got one home game (most likely a win against any of Pit/KC/Jac), probably two away games (crossing my fingers they don't get Denver), and I'd take my chances on the money-line against anyone in the NFC. Anyway, with the momentum they've got, the veteran presence, and Belichick's wisdom, I think any team would be a fool not to consider the Pats (the Champs) the #1 contender for this year's SB. I do not know if they will win it all, but I do know they can, and it'll take a near-perfect game to knock them out.

 

[The New Guy]

Indy at home brings no fear to Pats fans who have been around for a few years.

It should. I believe that the Colts are the best team in the league right now. The only reason the Pats have beaten the Colts the last few years is because of home field advantage. Few teams have a more favorable home (frozen) field advantage than NE. If the Pats would have had to play @ Indy the last couple of years, I don’t think that they would have even made it to the Super Bowl.

That said, what exactly is different from a player-coach standpoint this year than last.

You already mention most of the differences in the team yourself. Why do things have to be different for a team not to be as good as they have been in the past? What happened to the Pats in 2002 when they didn’t even make the playoffs?

I think any team would be a fool not to consider the Pats (the Champs) the #1 contender for this year's SB.

I am not a team, but you can consider me a fool. :D NE just does not have as good a team as they have had in the past. I think that you will see, (not only in the playoffs, but into next year) that the losses of Crennel and Weis are a bigger blow than you think. Just look at the 10-5 record they have now. Yes, 10-5 is pretty good, but they have only beaten two teams that are going to make the playoffs. They will be facing much better teams in the Playoffs this year. It will be interesting to watch.

 

[Wandering Athol]

It should. I believe that the Colts are the best team in the league right now. The only reason the Pats have beaten the Colts the last few years is because of home field advantage. Few teams have a more favorable home (frozen) field advantage than NE. If the Pats would have had to play @ Indy the last couple of years, I don’t think that they would have even made it to the Super Bowl.

Based upon what :confused:: Peyton's 2-3 record against the Pats at Indy, or the fact that he's dropped the last 2 to the Pats on his home turf, or is it Indy's 3-10 record against the Pats in the "Peyton era"? You are making the classic Indy Fan (which I don't think you are) mistake, which is to believe that the best regular-season team will be the best post-season team. The Pats are playing their best football of the season RIGHT NOW, while the Colts are dropping (albeit meaningless) games and the organization is distracted by the Dungy mess. Maybe the Colts feel they can just turn it on for the playoffs - good luck on that one.

BTW: the if this, if that hypotheticals don't hold too much water with reality :shakeno:. The FACT is the Pats earned home field in 2001, 2003, 2004 - deal with it, just like the Pats will have to this year.

You already mention most of the differences in the team yourself. Why do things have to be different for a team not to be as good as they have been in the past? What happened to the Pats in 2002 when they didn’t even make the playoffs?

That's actually a very good question :clap: . And is one I would like to delve into on a Pats message board after I've had a good amount of time to research it. Here are my quick thoughts on that one:

The 2001 Pats weren't as great as the 2003 and 2004 Pats. The 2001 Pats WAAAY overachieved and beat better teams in the playoffs and the Super Bowl. But the great thing is, they're still the 2001 Champs :1st: ; liken it to someone traveling to Vega$ with $100 in their pocket and leaving with $5,000. On average, should this happen? No, but the averages don't always work out in the short run. Go back and look at the drafts and FAs they've picked up since 2001: they are just a much better team now, simply stated :refuse: .

The 2002 Pats were brought back down to reality by a much tougher schedule, the inability to stop the run (due to extremely spotty DL and S play by guys who were jettisoned the next year), Brady suffering through a little bit of a sophomore slump, and perhaps a few guys resting on their laurels. Oh, and they were still 9-7 that year, knocked out of the playoffs on the last week, losing a tie-breaker to the Jets . Now just exactly who did the Pats themselves knock out out the playoffs that very same Week 17? :o You'll have to check that one out for yourself..

I am not a team, but you can consider me a fool. :D NE just does not have as good a team as they have had in the past. I think that you will see, (not only in the playoffs, but into next year) that the losses of Crennel and Weis are a bigger blow than you think.

Just look at the 10-5 record they have now. Yes, 10-5 is pretty good, but they have only beaten two teams that are going to make the playoffs. They will be facing much better teams in the Playoffs this year. It will be interesting to watch.

Yup, the Pats are lucky there were no serious contenders in the AFC East this year, I'll give you that. That said, it's very unfortunate for the rest of the league, because it has given the Champs time to heal and gel heading into the playoffs. It's not how you start, it's how you finish. This will be their longest and perhaps toughest road to the SB yet, but I'm not sure they're at any worse odds entering the playoffs than they were in 2001, or 2003 for that matter. I think I'll stick around and see how it all plays out :bugeye: .

 

[The New Guy]

Now just exactly who did the Pats themselves knock out out the playoffs that very same Week 17? :o You'll have to check that one out for yourself.

I remember that game very clear. It was a game that NE never should have won. If I remember right the Phins had the ball late in the game and were up by three. Some horrible play calling aloud the Pats to get the ball back and kick a field goal to take that game into overtime. Once NE won the toss Mare kicked the ball out of bounds to give the Pats the ball on the 40. It was a horrible game…..thanks for the memories.:)

I'm not sure they're at any worse odds entering the playoffs than they were in 2001, or 2003 for that matter.

Just the fact that NE does not have a bye makes their odds worse. We could probably go back and forth all day on why I think they won’t make it to the Super Bowl, and why you think they will, but I am just going to enjoy watching how it plays out.

 

[Wandering Athol]

[/size][/font]
I remember that game very clear. It was a game that NE never should have won. If I remember right the Phins had the ball late in the game and were up by three. Some horrible play calling aloud the Pats to get the ball back and kick a field goal to take that game into overtime. Once NE won the toss Mare kicked the ball out of bounds to give the Pats the ball on the 40. It was a horrible game…..thanks for the memories.:)

"It was a game NE never should have won." :tsk: Like the Oakland "tuck rule" game, like the 2 times in the playoffs they've beaten the Steelers in Pitt, like the 14 pt underdog SB game against St. Louis, like the 2 times they've torched in the Colts in the playoffs, like this year's earlier Mia v. NE game, like etc, etc, etc, etc. There seems to be a well-developed pattern here. The Pats simply out-execute other teams, on the field and on the sidelines.

I believe the 2002 game you mention was the one where Wannstedt (God bless him; boy, do I miss him in the division) stopped running the ball mid-way through the 3rd quarter and put the game in the hands of the ever-reliable Jay Fiedler :bravo: , even though the Pats could not stop Ricky (185 yard, 6 ypc, and 2 TDs), even with 8 in the box. I would have called the gaming commission in Vega$ after that game and demanded an investigation if I had bet the money-line on the Fins. Wanny should've been canned after that game, if the Fins had an owner with the foresight and gumption to do it. Top 5 worst-coached games I've ever seen.

Just the fact that NE does not have a bye makes their odds worse. We could probably go back and forth all day on why I think they won’t make it to the Super Bowl, and why you think they will, but I am just going to enjoy watching how it plays out.

Nope. I'll make a good wager with your money that their odds in Vega$ going into the 2001 playoffs to win the SB were worse than they are right now.

 

[Zeke0123]

[/size][/font]

"It was a game NE never should have won." :tsk: Like the Oakland "tuck rule" game, like the 2 times in the playoffs they've beaten the Steelers in Pitt, like the 14 pt underdog SB game against St. Louis, like the 2 times they've torched in the Colts in the playoffs, like this year's earlier Mia v. NE game, like etc, etc, etc, etc. There seems to be a well-developed pattern here. The Pats simply out-execute other teams, on the field and on the sidelines.

I believe the 2002 game you mention was the one where Wannstedt (God bless him; boy, do I miss him in the division) stopped running the ball mid-way through the 3rd quarter and put the game in the hands of the ever-reliable Jay Fiedler :bravo: , even though the Pats could not stop Ricky (185 yard, 6 ypc, and 2 TDs), even with 8 in the box. I would have called the gaming commission in Vega$ after that game and demanded an investigation if I had bet the money-line on the Fins. Wanny should've been canned after that game, if the Fins had an owner with the foresight and gumption to do it. Top 5 worst-coached games I've ever seen.



Nope. I'll make a good wager with your money that their odds in Vega$ going into the 2001 playoffs to win the SB were worse than they are right now.

I think I like you.

 

[The New Guy]

[/size][/font]

"It was a game NE never should have won." :tsk: Like the Oakland "tuck rule" game, like the 2 times in the playoffs they've beaten the Steelers in Pitt, like the 14 pt underdog SB game against St. Louis, like the 2 times they've torched in the Colts in the playoffs, like this year's earlier Mia v. NE game, like etc, etc, etc, etc. There seems to be a well-developed pattern here. The Pats simply out-execute other teams, on the field and on the sidelines.

You keep replying with things things that I never said. I never mentioned the 2 times in the playoffs they've beaten the Steelers in Pitt, or beating the Colts in the playoffs., or the Rams or Raiders. I just mentioned the Dolphin game in 2002. You know and I know that if that game was coached correctly NE never would have won it.

Top 5 worst-coached games I've ever seen.

Something that we can both agree on. :)

Nope. I'll make a good wager with your money that their odds in Vega$ going into the 2001 playoffs to win the SB were worse than they are right now.

I was not talking about the 2001 team, I was talking about last years team. This year vegas could give the Pats 2 to 1 odds for all I care. The Pats are not going to the Super Bowl. Once you accept it, you will feel much better. Your mom should have told you to aim low and avoid disapointment? Just be happy the Pats made it to the playoffs. I know you don't beleive me, but just wait a couple weeks, and then get back to me.

 

[Wandering Athol]

You keep replying with things things that I never said. I never mentioned the 2 times in the playoffs they've beaten the Steelers in Pitt, or beating the Colts in the playoffs., or the Rams or Raiders. I just mentioned the Dolphin game in 2002. You know and I know that if that game was coached correctly NE never would have won it.

I quoted you, then offered events the Pats have dealt with in the recent-past that have drawn similar comments :m359: . When things become overly repetitive there is generally a logical reason behind the pattern that may not be completely obvious at first. It is not luck or conspiracy: those are the refuge of dimwits and buffoons :adfin: . Why do the Patriots win so many close games/upset so many favorites? The reason is that the Pats players and coaches execute better in the clutch (aka turn their game up a notch) than their opponent, time and time again. The Pats are simply mentally tougher than most of their foes :idea: . While they may have players who are not limelights whores, they do not shrink from it like violets when the stage curtains open neither. They have drank the Kool-Aid and subjugate to the greater good of the team. They are not invincible (obviously), but they will be VERY hard to beat come playoff time for the just-mentioned reasons, BECAUSE the playoffs are where, in a league of parity, mistakes are amplified, and the Pats consistently punish opponents who make them :chair: . I doubt very much that Indy and its fans want any part of the Patriots. The Pats are their bogeyman, and I'm not sure the Colts have the gumption to climb out of bed and open the closet doors to see what lies therein..

Now, your statement, "You know and I know that if that game was coached correctly NE never would have won it," leads me to my next question: If football simpletons :stooges: such as you and I know more about game-time decisions than Nick Saban, what does that say about your coach? That is, essentially what you said, correct? Or are you over-simplifying things and perhaps the Patriots just out-played the Dolphins when it mattered? :tongue:

Something that we can both agree on.

:)

As a Fins fan, that game must equate with watching a train crash. You can see it coming (Ricky stop running; Fiedler starts throwing) a mile away, you keep telling yourself that there's still time for the outcome to change (Wannstedt to realize the game is slipping away), but in the end it climaxes in a bloody wreck (Pats win, Fins out of playoffs when they controlled their own destiny) :egads: . You know what? The Jets were a better team that year anyhow - crushed the Colts (what else is new), but didn't show up in Oakland for some reason.

If it makes you feel any better, a similar "Top 5 Worst Coach Games I've Ever Witnessed" that year was Pats v. Bears, which the Pats won 33-30. A-Train was running wild, Marty Booker was throwing TD passes, I actually thought I saw Buddy Ryan :smoker: walking the sidelines for a second the D was playing so well. Then inexplicably, Jauron had a Wicked-Witch-of-the-West-like meltdown towards the end of the 3rd quarter, Pats scored 17 in the 4th, and....exactly..."It was a game NE never should have won." (I'm not misquoting you am I?) He was eventually fired after the 2003 season, about a season too late IMO.

I was not talking about the 2001 team, I was talking about last years team. This year vegas could give the Pats 2 to 1 odds for all I care. The Pats are not going to the Super Bowl. Once you accept it, you will feel much better. Your mom should have told you to aim low and avoid disapointment? Just be happy the Pats made it to the playoffs. I know you don't beleive me, but just wait a couple weeks, and then get back to me.

If you say so....I don't expect them to win, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

 

[0000001]

We have never really had much of a home field advantage besides when theres a snowstorm going on and we've beaten indy at least 2-4 times in their dome over the past 5 years. The difference between this years pats and last years is defense. All those injuries are killing the team. Our top guy in the backfield is all of a sudden Eugene Wilson. Don't be fooled by all this media hype about how "great and wonderful" the colts are. They better pull things together from these last two losses. Our 2002 playoff games were not luck at all. The only game I can think of that was a real miracle was the pats dolphin game already mentioned. Our odds are this, either we win it all again, or we dont, simple as that.

 

[The New Guy]

I quoted you, then offered events the Pats have dealt with in the recent-past that have drawn similar comments :m359: .

I know, but was specifically talking about the Phins - Pats 2002 game. The Pats did not execute Wanny’s decision to stop running the ball. The Pats did not execute Olindo Mare kicking the ball out of bounds in overtime to give the Pats the ball on the 40 yard line. If the Phins would have ran the ball 3 times for no gain and punted, that would have taken enough time off the clock, and the game would have never gone into overtime. So, if you call other teams making stupid mistakes executing, then yes, the Pats execute very well.

I doubt very much that Indy and its fans want any part of the Patriots. The Pats are their bogeyman, and I'm not sure the Colts have the gumption to climb out of bed and open the closet doors to see what lies therein.

I Completely disagree. I think that Indy fans would love to play the team that has embarrassed them in the playoffs the last few years. To be the best you have to beat the best. Even if the best is just a shadow of what it once was.

If football simpletons :stooges: such as you and I know more about game-time decisions than Nick Saban, what does that say about your coach?

Nick Saban? Again, I was refering to the 2002 game coached by Wanny.

If you say so....I don't expect them to win, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

In you last few post you have been telling me how “The whole Pats team in your opinion is on par AT THIS TIME with last year'sâ€Â, and how “Any team would be a fool not to consider the Pats (the Champs) the #1 contender for this year's SB. You even said that you would take your chances on the money-line against anyone in the NFC vs. the Pats. Now you a saying that you don't expect them to win? This is a good thing. You are taking the first steps to facing reality. The next step is to say that the Pats are probably not going anywhere in the playoffs. Seriously though, if the Pats do make it to the Super Bowl, besides Seattle who do you think can beat them?

 

[Wandering Athol]

I know, but was specifically talking about the Phins - Pats 2002 game. The Pats did not execute Wanny’s decision to stop running the ball. The Pats did not execute Olindo Mare kicking the ball out of bounds in overtime to give the Pats the ball on the 40 yard line. If the Phins would have ran the ball 3 times for no gain and punted, that would have taken enough time off the clock, and the game would have never gone into overtime. So, if you call other teams making stupid mistakes executing, then yes, the Pats execute very well.

"The reason is that the Pats players and coaches execute better in the clutch (aka turn their game up a notch) than their opponent, time and time again."

"Better" is a word used often to compare things. I think I can unequivocally state that the Pats executed better in the clutch than the Fins did that day. :tongue: Wannstedt, Mare, and Fielder shrank from the limelight :escape: more than the Pats stepped up.

Nick Saban? Again, I was refering to the 2002 game coached by Wanny.

Oops, this multi-post tete-a-tete (sic) has caused me to mix threads. My faux pas. :dunce: Too much drinking in preparation for New Years.

It does make me wonder what you thoughts are about this year's coaching job by Saban against the Pats at Miami, especially the final drive playcalling.

In you last few post you have been telling me how “The whole Pats team in your opinion is on par AT THIS TIME with last year'sâ€Â, and how “Any team would be a fool not to consider the Pats (the Champs) the #1 contender for this year's SB. You even said that you would take your chances on the money-line against anyone in the NFC vs. the Pats. Now you a saying that you don't expect them to win? This is a good thing. You are taking the first steps to facing reality. The next step is to say that the Pats are probably not going anywhere in the playoffs. Seriously though, if the Pats do make it to the Super Bowl, besides Seattle who do you think can beat them?

Umm, I haven't seen the SB futures yet, but I seriously doubt anyone is better than even money to win outright. I'm a homer fan, but I'm not such an idiot yet that I don't understand probabilities. For example, even if I thought the Pats were 75% likely to win every game on their way to the SB (if these games were considered independent, mutually exclusive events), there would still be less than a 50% chance to get to the SB based upon pure mathematics, much less win it. I like the Pats chances better than the competitions', especially if they can make it through the Miami and WC game injury-free.

The AFC is already favored over the NFC by 9 points last time I checked. The 'Hawks' are the MOST OVER-RATED team in the NFL right now. I will be salivating :hi5: at the opportunity to place money (giving points) on the AFC in the SB should they make it. I like the 'Skins: the way they're playing right now, they are my darkhorse contender: veteran QB (if healthy), good running game, D's playing better, good coach; if some team figures out how to stop Moss, they might be in trouble though. And that doesn't speak well for the NFC.

 

[The New Guy]

It does make me wonder what you thoughts are about this year's coaching job by Saban against the Pats at Miami, especially the final drive playcalling.

In whole, I am really pleased with what Saban has accomplished with this team. The NE game specifically, I did not like the play calling on the last 4 plays. Being behind it was a very different situation than the 2002 game, but I really did not like the fades into the sunny side of the field. Both games had bad play calling, but Saban's, (I should really say Linehans) bad calls do not even compare with Wanny’s in the 2002 game IMO. I have enjoyed our “Multi-Post†conversation we have had the past few days. Have a Happy New Year!





P.S You shouldn't drink, it can give you an overweight liver.

 

[aboome]

We Pats fans are proud of the entire team. Who wouldn't be? Adam has been clutch with his field goals and Brady has kept the team close enough to make those field goals winners. Thats what a team does, everybody does their job. All you guys that say someone else should get credit for the win are fooling yourselves. Do you think Montana did it all by himself or aikmen or young? Brady has done as much for the Patriots as those other QB's did for their teams. If your happy with Gus and you think he's going to get your team there then be happy. Me I wouldn't want anybody else but Brady under the center especially in a big game.

c'mon on u pats fan r all the same i live in patsland and when bledsoe got hurt in 2000 all i saw was brady sucks jersey and tees so u guys are sayin ur so loyal let brady prove himself this year if he can pull it off he should be named with all the others u listed but if he cant dont make excuses that people were hurt because if u do that just means that brady isnt as good as u say he is, so till then u have to remeber brady has had alot of help to win those three championships, and as i remember the cliche is defenses wins championship not bradys wins championships

 

[Metal Panda]

This playoff thread can be closed about January 8th.

 

[MR NFLFAN]

Brady has already proved himself as a clutch player. If you can't see that then you know zero about the game. New Flash of course he hasn't won all by himself neither did any of those QB's I mentioned but like them he has the ability to lift his team mates to another level.
Nothing he does will convince someone like you because you simply don't like the guy. History will remember brady and he's already a lock on the HOF no matter weather you like him or not. Time to pull your head out of the sand.