Patriots, what's so impressive? (1 Viewer)

I don't get what is so impressive about the Pats this year. Don't give me the superbowl talk cause I'm factoring that in and again, I'm talking about THIS YEAR. Specifically the past 6 weeks where everybody has been drinking the Patriot koolaid again. Their current resurgence has more to do with their schedule. Look who they played.Jets, Bills, Bucs, Jets, Dolphins to finish off the season. Take the Dolphins game out since they rested starters. That's not so overly impressive other than the Bucs but Belichek should be able to beat a QB like Simms without blinking. And playing Jax in the first round, as impressive as that was, did you see Jax's schedule after their bye week:Rams-6, Texans-2, Ravens-6, Titans-4, Cards-5, Browns-6, Indy-14, 49ers-4, Texans-2, Titans-4That's a combined 53-107, take out Indy and that's 39-105 for 8/9 wins. Jax was the biggest fraud this year, add to that Leftwich coming back early off injury..........doesn't make the Pats look as tough as they are.The only thing that I find scary about the Pats is that they may have gained back the swaggar of a champion, which I still think talent trumps.

Well, for THIS year, say what you will, but they DID win the division. And, they are playing well at the right time of year.Also, you have to consider the past with this team, or any team. Anytime a Champion is in the playoffs, they will garner significant attention. Nevermind that they have won three of them.

Brady has NEVER lost a playoff game. Nuff said

Yep, they stunk pretty good in the first half of the year. Oh btw, did you look at that schedule? Toughest in the NFL. They ended up 3-3. Not great, not horrible. Yes, they had the benefit of a softer second half.You could play the 'what's so impressive' card on a number of teams this year. How tough was Seattle's schedule? Chicago's?

I don't get what is so impressive about the Pats this year. Don't give me the superbowl talk cause I'm factoring that in and again, I'm talking about THIS YEAR. Specifically the past 6 weeks where everybody has been drinking the Patriot koolaid again. Their current resurgence has more to do with their schedule. Look who they played.

Jets, Bills, Bucs, Jets, Dolphins to finish off the season. Take the Dolphins game out since they rested starters. That's not so overly impressive other than the Bucs but Belichek should be able to beat a QB like Simms without blinking.

And playing Jax in the first round, as impressive as that was, did you see Jax's schedule after their bye week:

Rams-6, Texans-2, Ravens-6, Titans-4, Cards-5, Browns-6, Indy-14, 49ers-4, Texans-2, Titans-4

That's a combined 53-107, take out Indy and that's 39-105 for 8/9 wins. Jax was the biggest fraud this year, add to that Leftwich coming back early off injury..........doesn't make the Pats look as tough as they are.

The only thing that I find scary about the Pats is that they may have gained back the swaggar of a champion, which I still think talent trumps.

Click to expand...

Now break down Indy and Seattle and tell me why anyone should be drinking that fruit punch.

I don't get what is so impressive about the Pats this year. Don't give me the superbowl talk cause I'm factoring that in and again, I'm talking about THIS YEAR. Specifically the past 6 weeks where everybody has been drinking the Patriot koolaid again. Their current resurgence has more to do with their schedule. Look who they played.

Jets, Bills, Bucs, Jets, Dolphins to finish off the season. Take the Dolphins game out since they rested starters. That's not so overly impressive other than the Bucs but Belichek should be able to beat a QB like Simms without blinking.

And playing Jax in the first round, as impressive as that was, did you see Jax's schedule after their bye week:

Rams-6, Texans-2, Ravens-6, Titans-4, Cards-5, Browns-6, Indy-14, 49ers-4, Texans-2, Titans-4

That's a combined 53-107, take out Indy and that's 39-105 for 8/9 wins. Jax was the biggest fraud this year, add to that Leftwich coming back early off injury..........doesn't make the Pats look as tough as they are.

The only thing that I find scary about the Pats is that they may have gained back the swaggar of a champion, which I still think talent trumps.

Click to expand...

If talent trumps, they would have ZERO Championships.

I don't get what is so impressive about the Pats this year.  Don't give me the superbowl talk cause I'm factoring that in and again, I'm talking about THIS YEAR.  Specifically the past 6 weeks where everybody has been drinking the Patriot koolaid again.  Their current resurgence has more to do with their schedule.  Look who they played.

Jets, Bills, Bucs, Jets, Dolphins to finish off the season.  Take the Dolphins game out since they rested starters.  That's not so overly impressive other than the Bucs but Belichek should be able to beat a QB like Simms without blinking.

And playing Jax in the first round, as impressive as that was, did you see Jax's schedule after their bye week:

Rams-6, Texans-2, Ravens-6, Titans-4, Cards-5, Browns-6, Indy-14, 49ers-4, Texans-2, Titans-4

That's a combined 53-107, take out Indy and that's 39-105 for 8/9 wins.  Jax was the biggest fraud this year, add to that Leftwich coming back early off injury..........doesn't make the  Pats look as tough as they are.

The only thing that I find scary about the Pats is that they may have gained back the swaggar of a champion, which I still think talent trumps.

Click to expand...

If talent trumps, they would have ZERO Championships.

Click to expand...

The Patriots team that beat Jacksonville by 25 points and destroyed the rest of the AFC East at the end of the year SHOULD NOT be compared to the team that looked like a wounded dog early in the season. If you've watched the difference in the way the team has played, then you'll know what I mean. It's not even close.

I don't get what is so impressive about the Pats this year. Don't give me the superbowl talk cause I'm factoring that in and again, I'm talking about THIS YEAR. Specifically the past 6 weeks where everybody has been drinking the Patriot koolaid again. Their current resurgence has more to do with their schedule. Look who they played.

Jets, Bills, Bucs, Jets, Dolphins to finish off the season. Take the Dolphins game out since they rested starters. That's not so overly impressive other than the Bucs but Belichek should be able to beat a QB like Simms without blinking.

And playing Jax in the first round, as impressive as that was, did you see Jax's schedule after their bye week:

Rams-6, Texans-2, Ravens-6, Titans-4, Cards-5, Browns-6, Indy-14, 49ers-4, Texans-2, Titans-4

That's a combined 53-107, take out Indy and that's 39-105 for 8/9 wins. Jax was the biggest fraud this year, add to that Leftwich coming back early off injury..........doesn't make the Pats look as tough as they are.

The only thing that I find scary about the Pats is that they may have gained back the swaggar of a champion, which I still think talent trumps.

Click to expand...

Don't we go through this every year? The Patriots are never a scary team, they just get the job done in most aspects of the game. They have the best coach in the league and the best playoff QB. They play together as a team, take away the one thing their opponent does best, and exploit whatever their opponent leaves open.

I'm sure regardless of who wins (I think NE will win) that someone will bump this up. I know NE looks very scary to me right now - and I will not argue with anyone that says that NE will win the Super Bowl (even if they play the Colts next week - I'd just say that I'll root for my team and hope for the best).

The Patriots team that beat Jacksonville by 25 points and destroyed the rest of the AFC East at the end of the year SHOULD NOT be compared to the team that looked like a wounded dog early in the season. If you've watched the difference in the way the team has played, then you'll know what I mean. It's not even close.

Click to expand...

How did NE do before they caught that murders row of QBs - Bollinger twice, Simms, Losman, & Frerotte (whom they lost to)? Oh, that's right, they caught a capable NFL team in KC & got a mudhole stomped into their backs by Larry Johnson & the Chiefs.Tell me why their excursion into DEN should be any different than their excursion into KC.

I don't get what is so impressive about the Pats this year.  Don't give me the superbowl talk cause I'm factoring that in and again, I'm talking about THIS YEAR.  Specifically the past 6 weeks where everybody has been drinking the Patriot koolaid again.  Their current resurgence has more to do with their schedule.  Look who they played.

Jets, Bills, Bucs, Jets, Dolphins to finish off the season.  Take the Dolphins game out since they rested starters.  That's not so overly impressive other than the Bucs but Belichek should be able to beat a QB like Simms without blinking.

And playing Jax in the first round, as impressive as that was, did you see Jax's schedule after their bye week:

Rams-6, Texans-2, Ravens-6, Titans-4, Cards-5, Browns-6, Indy-14, 49ers-4, Texans-2, Titans-4

That's a combined 53-107, take out Indy and that's 39-105 for 8/9 wins.   Jax was the biggest fraud this year, add to that Leftwich coming back early off injury..........doesn't make the  Pats look as tough as they are.

The only thing that I find scary about the Pats is that they may have gained back the swaggar of a champion, which I still think talent trumps.

Click to expand...

If talent trumps, they would have ZERO Championships.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more. The Patriots have had more overall talent, top to bottom, than any other team in the league. They may have lacked big name talent in the 2001 title run, but you can't play that card the last few years with the best QB in the game and several of the best defenders.

Here's a post from the Shanahan-Belichick thread that I think makes my point:

For some reason, I keep thinking of the 1993 Oilers when I think of the 2005 Broncos.

The 1993 Oilers had limited success in the playoffs in the previous 6 years. Unlike Denver, they had made the playoffs in all 6 previous years, but they were a Wild Card team every single time and never made it past the Divisional round of the playoffs.

Finally, in 1993, everything came together and after a slow start (1-4), they ran off 11 straight wins and took the 2nd seed in the AFC playoffs.

Their reward for all of this? Joe Montana, Marcus Allen, and the Kansas City Chiefs. The Chiefs ended up beating the Oilers in Houston (their last playoff victory, believe it or not) and Houston lost the Oilers just a few years later.

Click to expand...

When you think about how analysts were breaking down the Chiefs-Oilers game in 1993, did they look at 1993 in a vacuum and say the Oilers have had a better season, Moon had a better, healthier season than Montana, so the Oilers win? Of course not. They factored in that Joe freaking Montana was the QB of the Chiefs, and while I can't be sure, I have a strong feeling that most analysts would have picked the Chiefs anyway.This Patriots team feels sort of like those Chiefs ... big-name talent (whether Patriots fans want to admit it or not), a sub-par season (yes, we know it's injuries), but a very dangerous playoff contender.

I don't get what is so impressive about the Pats this year.  Don't give me the superbowl talk cause I'm factoring that in and again, I'm talking about THIS YEAR.  Specifically the past 6 weeks where everybody has been drinking the Patriot koolaid again.  Their current resurgence has more to do with their schedule.  Look who they played.

Jets, Bills, Bucs, Jets, Dolphins to finish off the season.  Take the Dolphins game out since they rested starters.  That's not so overly impressive other than the Bucs but Belichek should be able to beat a QB like Simms without blinking.

And playing Jax in the first round, as impressive as that was, did you see Jax's schedule after their bye week:

Rams-6, Texans-2, Ravens-6, Titans-4, Cards-5, Browns-6, Indy-14, 49ers-4, Texans-2, Titans-4

That's a combined 53-107, take out Indy and that's 39-105 for 8/9 wins.   Jax was the biggest fraud this year, add to that Leftwich coming back early off injury..........doesn't make the  Pats look as tough as they are.

The only thing that I find scary about the Pats is that they may have gained back the swaggar of a champion, which I still think talent trumps.

Click to expand...

If talent trumps, they would have ZERO Championships.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more. The Patriots have had more overall talent, top to bottom, than any other team in the league. They may have lacked big name talent in the 2001 title run, but you can't play that card the last few years with the best QB in the game and several of the best defenders.

Click to expand...

I believe talent will rise to the very top over the long haul of a regular season. That being said, only once did N.E. have home-field throughout the playoffs.

I believe talent will rise to the very top over the long haul of a regular season. That being said, only once did N.E. have home-field throughout the playoffs.

Click to expand...

Okay, in their 3 titles they were #1 in the conference once and #2 in the conference twice. In 2004, they were #2 exclusively because of the head-to-head loss against Pittsburgh, and that loss wasn't a talent problem.

I believe talent will rise to the very top over the long haul of a regular season. That being said, only once did N.E. have home-field throughout the playoffs.

Click to expand...

Okay, in their 3 titles they were #1 in the conference once and #2 in the conference twice. In 2004, they were #2 exclusively because of the head-to-head loss against Pittsburgh, and that loss wasn't a talent problem.

Click to expand...

A 1st round bye is really the top consideration in terms of Super Bowl chances - not getting a #1 seed. The drop-off from the number of Super Bowl contestants having a #1 seed vs. a #2 is fairly small. The drop-off of the number of Super Bowl contestant having a first-round bye and not having a first-round bye is very large.

I believe talent will rise to the very top over the long haul of a regular season. That being said, only once did N.E. have home-field throughout the playoffs.

Click to expand...

Okay, in their 3 titles they were #1 in the conference once and #2 in the conference twice. In 2004, they were #2 exclusively because of the head-to-head loss against Pittsburgh, and that loss wasn't a talent problem.

Click to expand...

A 1st round bye is really the top consideration in terms of Super Bowl chances - not getting a #1 seed. The drop-off from the number of Super Bowl contestants having a #1 seed vs. a #2 is fairly small. The drop-off of the number of Super Bowl contestant having a first-round bye and not having a first-round bye is very large.

Click to expand...

The Patriots team that beat Jacksonville by 25 points and destroyed the rest of the AFC East at the end of the year SHOULD NOT be compared to the team that looked like a wounded dog early in the season. If you've watched the difference in the way the team has played, then you'll know what I mean. It's not even close.

Click to expand...

How did NE do before they caught that murders row of QBs - Bollinger twice, Simms, Losman, & Frerotte (whom they lost to)? Oh, that's right, they caught a capable NFL team in KC & got a mudhole stomped into their backs by Larry Johnson & the Chiefs.Tell me why their excursion into DEN should be any different than their excursion into KC.

Click to expand...

They can only play who is on their schedule. While losing 6 of the 8 opening day defensive backfield players, and coaching up new ones, they did go 6-5. Nothing to be proud of. But, those Same Buffalo Bills went into Cincinatti and stomped Cincinnati, with Carson Palmer, and those same Bills lost to the Jets. Oh yeah, Miami also beat the Broncos this year, handilly. Why should the excursion be any different? Was the Bronco excursion into KC any different than the Pats? Nope. The big difference is the pats were playing the KC game with new and hurt players. Anybody in their right mind recognizes that they are playing better, on both sides of the ball.

Put it this way. Why should Denvers most recent excursion into the world of playoff football turn out any different than the last 3?

Two weeks to plan? Both of the last 2 seasons, the Broncos knew their playoff opponent in the wild card round in week 16. Two weeks to play. Heck, two years ago, they even got to scrimmage the Colts in week 17, to no avail.

Should it be the feared Bronco pass rush, and their feared 28 sacks this season, playing with a healthy lineup. The Pats played without Richard Seymour for 1/3 of the season, and still had 33.

To wrap it up, there is simply no way I see the Pats losing to the Broncos. NO scenario I can put together has Jake 'the fake' Plummer pulling it out against Brady. NONE!!!

They can only play who is on their schedule. While losing 6 of the 8 opening day defensive backfield players, and coaching up new ones, they did go 6-5. Nothing to be proud of. But, those Same Buffalo Bills went into Cincinatti and stomped Cincinnati, with Carson Palmer, and those same Bills lost to the Jets. Oh yeah, Miami also beat the Broncos this year, handilly.

Click to expand...

This is patently a terrible argument. DEN beat a tough SD team twice, and SD went into NE's backyard & kicked their respective arses, amongst other common foes of NE & DEN such as NE travelling to KC. You can't play this kind of game, or you'll eventually have Houston winning this year's Super Bowl.NE travelling to KC with essentially Dillon being the only missing significant component is pretty comparable to travelling to DEN this year - KC doesn't lose at home late in the season, and DEN is ruling their turf this year. Actually, DEN is a significantly better team than KC. It stands to reason that someone who is pimping NE ought to be able to explain away that KC loss rationally as a preamble to winning in DEN on Saturday.

Put it this way. Why should Denvers most recent excursion into the world of playoff football turn out any different than the last 3? Two weeks to plan? Both of the last 2 seasons, the Broncos knew their playoff opponent in the wild card round in week 16. Two weeks to play. Heck, two years ago, they even got to scrimmage the Colts in week 17, to no avail. Should it be the feared Bronco pass rush, and their feared 28 sacks this season, playing with a healthy lineup. The Pats played without Richard Seymour for 1/3 of the season, and still had 33. To wrap it up, there is simply no way I see the Pats losing to the Broncos. NO scenario I can put together has Jake 'the fake' Plummer pulling it out against Brady. NONE!!!

Click to expand...

So your argument for NE winning is that teams don't change talent level & critical components from year to year. Pardon me while I laugh at the implausability of that argument.DEN's pass rush is solid, but you wouldn't know that as a NE fan. They bring a lot of pressure while not accumulating a lot of sacks. 5 more sacks over 16 games is really not much to brag about, especially when you consider that Plummer was only sacked 23 times, 3rd least in the league. Don't expect your Pats to come in & dump Plummer 4 times or more.And making cute little rhymes about Plummer's name while completely dismissing the giant step he took this year in regard to maturity and quaterbacking play is also implausible. Plummer was exactly 1 notch below Brady in NFL QB ratings this year, throwing 8 less TDs but also 7 less INTs than Tom Terrific.

What's so impressive about the Pats this year? They were dessimated by injuries, faced an incredibly tough schedule to begin the year, stumbled a bit and were questioned by many to even make the playoffs. After winning 3 Super Bowls in 4 years they could've packed it in and called it a letdown year.Instead of taking the easy way out, they worked harder, turned their season around, won their division, regained the confidence and swagger of a champion and just trampled over the vaunted Jacksonville defense in week one of the playoffs as the attempt to win 3 Super Bowls in a row, a feat which has never been accomplished in the NFL.I find that pretty impressive.

One word - Belicheck. I think he's the #1 coach of all time for coming up with a one-off game plan to beat a team in the playoffs. I forget who said it, but the quote goes something like: "he can beat your'n with his'n and he can beat his'n with your'n" - thats belicheck to a T. Whatever the gameplan is to stop Denver's zone blocking scheme, my guess is that it'll be something that Denver hasn't seen before. Just like with Ben and Manning last year, Im sure Belicheck will have some disguised coverages and blitzes to induce Plummer into bad decisions. Im sure the Pats will have picked up on some of the telltale signs of whether Denver is faking the blitz or coming with 6 or 7 when they crowd the line.Perhaps most importantly, Belicheck seems to have the complete attention of his team - they trust the game plan always execute it flawlessly in the playoffs. As long as Belicheck and co are right about the game plan, the players will make it work.

I believe talent will rise to the very top over the long haul of a regular season. That being said, only once did N.E. have home-field throughout the playoffs.

Click to expand...

Okay, in their 3 titles they were #1 in the conference once and #2 in the conference twice. In 2004, they were #2 exclusively because of the head-to-head loss against Pittsburgh, and that loss wasn't a talent problem.

Click to expand...

A 1st round bye is really the top consideration in terms of Super Bowl chances - not getting a #1 seed. The drop-off from the number of Super Bowl contestants having a #1 seed vs. a #2 is fairly small. The drop-off of the number of Super Bowl contestant having a first-round bye and not having a first-round bye is very large.

Click to expand...

I would also say that during the majority of this run Indy has actually been more talented than N.E. The only problem being that Indy's quarterback has yet to prove he is capable of performing at a high level in the playoffs on a consistent basis. As mentioned in another thread, the guy just doesn't have "it" when the regular season ends.

I believe talent will rise to the very top over the long haul of a regular season. That being said, only once did N.E. have home-field throughout the playoffs.

Click to expand...

Okay, in their 3 titles they were #1 in the conference once and #2 in the conference twice. In 2004, they were #2 exclusively because of the head-to-head loss against Pittsburgh, and that loss wasn't a talent problem.

Click to expand...

A 1st round bye is really the top consideration in terms of Super Bowl chances - not getting a #1 seed. The drop-off from the number of Super Bowl contestants having a #1 seed vs. a #2 is fairly small. The drop-off of the number of Super Bowl contestant having a first-round bye and not having a first-round bye is very large.

Click to expand...

I would also say that during the majority of this run Indy has actually been more talented than N.E. The only problem being that Indy's quarterback has yet to prove he is capable of performing at a high level in the playoffs on a consistent basis. As mentioned in another thread, the guy just doesn't have "it" when the regular season ends.

Click to expand...

I don't know about that. The Patriots have had a lot more talent on defense than the Colts, particularly in 2003. In 2004, the defense wasn't as dominant, but the offense picked up the slack with Dillon being one of the best runners in the game.I realize that there's a lot more appeal to a plucky bunch of overachievers winning the titles (as in 2001) than a stacked, talented team winning (IMO 2003 and 2004). Perhaps, regionally, it's because 2001 felt like the Red Sox (although the Marlins is a better example) while 2003 and 2004 felt like the Yankees.

I believe talent will rise to the very top over the long haul of a regular season. That being said, only once did N.E. have home-field throughout the playoffs.

Click to expand...

Okay, in their 3 titles they were #1 in the conference once and #2 in the conference twice. In 2004, they were #2 exclusively because of the head-to-head loss against Pittsburgh, and that loss wasn't a talent problem.

Click to expand...

A 1st round bye is really the top consideration in terms of Super Bowl chances - not getting a #1 seed. The drop-off from the number of Super Bowl contestants having a #1 seed vs. a #2 is fairly small. The drop-off of the number of Super Bowl contestant having a first-round bye and not having a first-round bye is very large.

Click to expand...

I would also say that during the majority of this run Indy has actually been more talented than N.E. The only problem being that Indy's quarterback has yet to prove he is capable of performing at a high level in the playoffs on a consistent basis. As mentioned in another thread, the guy just doesn't have "it" when the regular season ends.

Click to expand...

Before this season - only on offense - and last season NE had tons of talent on offense because Dillon was such a threat. Not even close on defense, and not on special teams, either (the 38-34 win in 2003 had a NE special teams TD at the end of the half, for example). Before this season - NE had a more successful regular season both years than the Colts - it wasn't just a playoff problem. The other problem is schemes - NE's defensive schemes is exactly what gives Manning problems (3-4 Ds with active linebackers who can both rush the passer and drop into coverage), and Indy's defensive schemes is exactly what Brady exploits best (soft Cover-2 zones). This problem would still be there in a potential AFC title game for the Colts, which is why I as a fan would be very nervous.

I think Brady is better than Manning - but when the two play against each other there are other factors as to why it is the series is so lopsided besides just the QBs.

same old tired arguements..........nothing even remotely worth while posted that would convince me otherwise, if they beat the Broncos, sure that's impressive.but for most of you guys that are already handing the win to NE in mile high, give your head a shake.if nothing else, this triggered a good discussion.

Put it this way.  Why should Denvers most recent excursion into the world of playoff football turn out any different than the last 3? 

Two weeks to plan?  Both of the last 2 seasons, the Broncos knew their playoff opponent in the wild card round in week 16.  Two weeks to play.  Heck, two years ago, they even got to scrimmage the Colts in week 17, to no avail.

Should it be the feared Bronco pass rush, and their feared 28 sacks this season, playing with a healthy lineup.  The Pats played without Richard Seymour for 1/3 of the season, and still had 33. 

To wrap it up, there is simply no way I see the Pats losing to the Broncos.  NO scenario I can put together has Jake 'the fake' Plummer pulling it out against Brady.  NONE!!!

Click to expand...

So your argument for NE winning is that teams don't change talent level & critical components from year to year. Pardon me while I laugh at the implausability of that argument.DEN's pass rush is solid, but you wouldn't know that as a NE fan. They bring a lot of pressure while not accumulating a lot of sacks. 5 more sacks over 16 games is really not much to brag about, especially when you consider that Plummer was only sacked 23 times, 3rd least in the league. Don't expect your Pats to come in & dump Plummer 4 times or more.

And making cute little rhymes about Plummer's name while completely dismissing the giant step he took this year in regard to maturity and quaterbacking play is also implausible. Plummer was exactly 1 notch below Brady in NFL QB ratings this year, throwing 8 less TDs but also 7 less INTs than Tom Terrific.

Click to expand...

Not sure Denver's going to be able to get the same kind of pressure against NE that they did on many teams throughout the year. NE spreads the ball around well, and Den primarily generates pressure with delayed blitzes--with Lynch especially. Brady is a calm enough QB not to forget that. Ne may try to limit the effectiveness of the blitz either with very long counts or by going no-huddle. And with so many targets to choose from, there will be someone open for Brady to find.Den's real advatage over NE is the run game. NE will gear everything toward stopping that; if they succeed, I think NE has a good shot, even on the road against a very very good Denver team. If Anderson / Bell get going in the first half, NE is in some trouble.

How about we let the teams play.

What's so impressive about the Pats this year? They were dessimated by injuries, faced an incredibly tough schedule to begin the year, stumbled a bit and were questioned by many to even make the playoffs. After winning 3 Super Bowls in 4 years they could've packed it in and called it a letdown year.

Instead of taking the easy way out, they worked harder, turned their season around, won their division, regained the confidence and swagger of a champion and just trampled over the vaunted Jacksonville defense in week one of the playoffs as the attempt to win 3 Super Bowls in a row, a feat which has never been accomplished in the NFL.

I find that pretty impressive.

Click to expand...

This was the only post in this thread worth reading, thank you.

What's so impressive about the Pats this year? They were dessimated by injuries, faced an incredibly tough schedule to begin the year, stumbled a bit and were questioned by many to even make the playoffs. After winning 3 Super Bowls in 4 years they could've packed it in and called it a letdown year.

Instead of taking the easy way out, they worked harder, turned their season around, won their division, regained the confidence and swagger of a champion and just trampled over the vaunted Jacksonville defense in week one of the playoffs as the attempt to win 3 Super Bowls in a row, a feat which has never been accomplished in the NFL.

I find that pretty impressive.

Click to expand...

You forgot they lost both coordinators.I think that you also have to consider, that as a defending champion, every team gets up to play you. There are no let downs.

Satch, jurb and DropKick: great posts.Hey, let the haters hate. Everyone will try and knock the Pats down, cite useless stats and meaningless trends when we all know the game will be decided on the field.These past 3 SuperBowl wins came the same way; full of doubters. Nothing has changed this year. I have faith in Belichick and I have faith in Tom, Tedy, Adam, Willie, Sey, Deion etc. This is a team loaded with champions, and you can't discredit that with stats, no matter how hard you try.All I see is nervous Broncos fans trying to make themselves feel better about the game, when we all know that the Pats are back. A few idiot FBG's can't shake me.

These past 3 SuperBowl wins came the same way; full of doubters.

Click to expand...

Do you really believe this? Because in 2003 and 2004, this doesn't really apply.No team, not even the 1985 Bears, is going to be universally selected to win the title.

The Patriots were the consensus favorite in both 2003 (once the playoffs began) and 2004 (the whole season long) to win the Super Bowl.

EDIT: Because I have to in order to legitimize my viewpoint, I'm adding that I'm a Broncos fan who picked the Patriots to win this weekend.

Satch, jurb and DropKick: great posts.Hey, let the haters hate. Everyone will try and knock the Pats down, cite useless stats and meaningless trends when we all know the game will be decided on the field.

Click to expand...

It's got nothing to do with hating. It's about realistic exploration of potential game events vs some kind of preconceived notion that NE now has some kind of divine right to obtain every Super Bowl title from now until Belicheck/Brady retire. NE can be beaten, my friend. They are playing under much different circumstances this year than in previous years, with some signifcant question marks on the O-line & the secondary being especially glaring, as well as different coaches and not having a bye week to aid their SB chase.DEN & IND/PIT are not just going to roll over & die just because Brady is coming into town. DEN and IND are better teams right now than NE is. It would be nice to see some of the people worshipping at the Pats' altar - including a significant portion of national media - acknowledge the fact that the games do indeed have to be played and that NE has a reasonable possibility of losing either this week or next week.

Is Pinda disrespecting Brady and the Pats??? HOW DARE YOU?

There's something about the Patriots that reminds me of what Bill James once said about Bernie Williams (whom he thought at the time was wildly under-rated).They do everything very well, but no one thing so extraordinarily well that it demands your attention and makes you think "that is an AWESOME football team."

Since 2001, the Patriots are 18-3 when playing a team for the second time in a season and are 6-0 when facing an opponent against whom they had suffered a loss earlier in the same season. In the 21 rematches since 2001, the Patriots also have outscored their opponents 516-315.

Since 2001, the Patriots are 18-3 when playing a team for the second time in a season and are 6-0 when facing an opponent against whom they had suffered a loss earlier in the same season. In the 21 rematches since 2001, the Patriots also have outscored their opponents 516-315.

Click to expand...

Den fans better cry for and

There's something about the Patriots that reminds me of what Bill James once said about Bernie Williams (whom he thought at the time was wildly under-rated).They do everything very well, but no one thing so extraordinarily well that it demands your attention and makes you think "that is an AWESOME football team."EDIT: Whoa. Double-post. Sorry.

I don't get what is so impressive about the Pats this year.  Don't give me the superbowl talk cause I'm factoring that in and again, I'm talking about THIS YEAR.  Specifically the past 6 weeks where everybody has been drinking the Patriot koolaid again.  Their current resurgence has more to do with their schedule.  Look who they played.

Jets, Bills, Bucs, Jets, Dolphins to finish off the season.  Take the Dolphins game out since they rested starters.  That's not so overly impressive other than the Bucs but Belichek should be able to beat a QB like Simms without blinking.

And playing Jax in the first round, as impressive as that was, did you see Jax's schedule after their bye week:

Rams-6, Texans-2, Ravens-6, Titans-4, Cards-5, Browns-6, Indy-14, 49ers-4, Texans-2, Titans-4

That's a combined 53-107, take out Indy and that's 39-105 for 8/9 wins.   Jax was the biggest fraud this year, add to that Leftwich coming back early off injury..........doesn't make the  Pats look as tough as they are.

The only thing that I find scary about the Pats is that they may have gained back the swaggar of a champion, which I still think talent trumps.

Click to expand...

If talent trumps, they would have ZERO Championships.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more. The Patriots have had more overall talent, top to bottom, than any other team in the league. They may have lacked big name talent in the 2001 title run, but you can't play that card the last few years with the best QB in the game and several of the best defenders.

Click to expand...

Talent like Dion Branch and David Givens at WR? How about those 3rd string CBs they used for last years run. Believe me, this team is a lot less talented than 1/4 of the league. It's their ability to play as a team and believe in their system that makes them what they are.

NE Got rolled by the AFC West (1-3, beat only the Raiders at home). Luckily for the Pats they played in the easiest division in the AFC, otherwise there would be no playoffs at all. Heck they were 4 bad goal line play calls in Miami from losing that bad division.As for people saying they had a tough schedule to start, but kept their heads in it and finished strong. That's exactly right, they had a tough schedule to start, and they struggled, then had an easy second half and won. Seems pretty straight forward to me, beat the easy teams, lose to the tough teams. Unfortunatly for them, this is a tough team on the road comming off a bye. I won't be surprised to see Denver win by +10.

NE Got rolled by the AFC West (1-3, beat only the Raiders at home). Luckily for the Pats they played in the easiest division in the AFC, otherwise there would be no playoffs at all. Heck they were 4 bad goal line play calls in Miami from losing that bad division.

As for people saying they had a tough schedule to start, but kept their heads in it and finished strong. That's exactly right, they had a tough schedule to start, and they struggled, then had an easy second half and won. Seems pretty straight forward to me, beat the easy teams, lose to the tough teams. Unfortunatly for them, this is a tough team on the road comming off a bye.

I won't be surprised to see Denver win by +10.

Click to expand...

Is it not also straight forward that half the roster was down during the "tough" portion of the schedule?

Well, for THIS year, say what you will, but they DID win the division. And, they are playing well at the right time of year.

Also, you have to consider the past with this team, or any team. Anytime a Champion is in the playoffs, they will garner significant attention. Nevermind that they have won three of them.

Click to expand...

A champion is always deserving of the attention. NE is playing better than they were earlier in the year and are healthier. Don't forget, the Broncos also won their division and the AFC West is considered by most to be the toughest division in the league. AFC East just didn't look too tough this year.

Yep, they stunk pretty good in the first half of the year. Oh btw, did you look at that schedule? Toughest in the NFL. They ended up 3-3. Not great, not horrible. Yes, they had the benefit of a softer second half.

You could play the 'what's so impressive' card on a number of teams this year. How tough was Seattle's schedule? Chicago's?

Click to expand...

As I said above, the AFC West was probably the toughest division in football. I don't think Denver had an easy schedule either. I'll give the Pats their due though. They look much better than they did early on. Their season ending schedule didn't strike fear into anyone either.I think there is a legit argument that none of the teams in the NFC look too unstoppable and that several teams in both divisions did have light schedules in the first or last half of the season. Jags, Colts, Seahawks and Bears could all be argued into that category.

How did NE do before they caught that murders row of QBs - Bollinger twice, Simms, Losman, & Frerotte (whom they lost to)? Oh, that's right, they caught a capable NFL team in KC & got a mudhole stomped into their backs by Larry Johnson & the Chiefs.

Tell me why their excursion into DEN should be any different than their excursion into KC.

Click to expand...

If I was a Pats fan, the posting by Pony Boy above would be one of my main worries. The home field advantage in Invesco is significant. Also, the Chiefs game planning towards the end of the season wasn't much different from the Broncos game plan. Basically, we're gonna run it at you and you know it. Now stop it. Not too deceptive but very effective.

They can only play who is on their schedule. While losing 6 of the 8 opening day defensive backfield players, and coaching up new ones, they did go 6-5. Nothing to be proud of. But, those Same Buffalo Bills went into Cincinatti and stomped Cincinnati, with Carson Palmer, and those same Bills lost to the Jets. Oh yeah, Miami also beat the Broncos this year, handilly.

Why should the excursion be any different? Was the Bronco excursion into KC any different than the Pats? Nope. The big difference is the pats were playing the KC game with new and hurt players. Anybody in their right mind recognizes that they are playing better, on both sides of the ball.

Put it this way. Why should Denvers most recent excursion into the world of playoff football turn out any different than the last 3?

Two weeks to plan? Both of the last 2 seasons, the Broncos knew their playoff opponent in the wild card round in week 16. Two weeks to play. Heck, two years ago, they even got to scrimmage the Colts in week 17, to no avail.

Should it be the feared Bronco pass rush, and their feared 28 sacks this season, playing with a healthy lineup. The Pats played without Richard Seymour for 1/3 of the season, and still had 33.

To wrap it up, there is simply no way I see the Pats losing to the Broncos. NO scenario I can put together has Jake 'the fake' Plummer pulling it out against Brady. NONE!!!

Click to expand...

Miami beating Denver in Week 1 is significant? What are we debating here? Denver losing in KC did have a different outcome if you look at how narrowly the Chiefs won that game. No mudhole was stomped.

It was last year that Denver scrimmaged the Colts B-team in Week 17. Aside from that, you don't think the Denver team has changed dramatically over the last two years? Seems most Denver fans are giving Pats credit and say they'll be a hard team to beat. I think Belicheck and Brady will give the Broncos credit and say the same about them. Man up and admit it will be a good game.

As for the sack numbers, etc. that you quote, you really haven't watched the Denver D much. It was created a huge number of hurried throws and opposing QBs have been picking themselves up off the ground all year long. It is better than you think.

Anyone that can't see the difference in Plummer's game this year is just looking for something to pick on and drinking some hater kool-aid. Like I said before, man up and give credit where it is due. I have no problem doing the same.

Satch, jurb and DropKick: great posts.

Hey, let the haters hate. Everyone will try and knock the Pats down, cite useless stats and meaningless trends when we all know the game will be decided on the field.

These past 3 SuperBowl wins came the same way; full of doubters. Nothing has changed this year. I have faith in Belichick and I have faith in Tom, Tedy, Adam, Willie, Sey, Deion etc. This is a team loaded with champions, and you can't discredit that with stats, no matter how hard you try.

All I see is nervous Broncos fans trying to make themselves feel better about the game, when we all know that the Pats are back. A few idiot FBG's can't shake me.

Click to expand...

If you have already started calling other fans names like "idiot", you are showing signs of nervousness yourself. All of the "useless stats" I've heard from the media so far this week have been in the Pats favor. As a Pats fan, you should sit back and enjoy the virtual knob polishing that the media is giving the Pats all week long. The Pats can win this game and are a good team. However, ignoring that they are going into Denver as 3pt underdogs and calling anyone with a different opinion an "idiot" takes away one of your man cards. Time to man up. Your boy Brady would tell you the same thing.As a side note to all of the discussion above, the media gave San Diego a virtual knob polishing all season long, too. It didn't get them too far. The analysts also berated Plummer always picking the next week to be the week "he shows the true Jake". This is the only guaranteed outcome of this Pats/Broncos game: No matter the winner, the analysts will be there to say "I knew it all along and said this would happen all season". After all, they're brilliant! A loss for the Pats would be more devastating for their fans because after years of bandwagon analysts, it would be amazing to see how quickly those same guys will turn on the Pats/Brady/Belicheck. For Denver fans, I've never seen so many "experts" repeatedly pick against a team throughout the season that finished 13-3. Why should this week be any different?

These past 3 SuperBowl wins came the same way; full of doubters.

Click to expand...

Do you really believe this? Because in 2003 and 2004, this doesn't really apply.No team, not even the 1985 Bears, is going to be universally selected to win the title.

The Patriots were the consensus favorite in both 2003 (once the playoffs began) and 2004 (the whole season long) to win the Super Bowl.

EDIT: Because I have to in order to legitimize my viewpoint, I'm adding that I'm a Broncos fan who picked the Patriots to win this weekend.

Click to expand...

Surf, you and I have been down this road before, and I respect your opinions, so I won't go trying to change your mind... but 2004 was all about the 15-1 Steelers, not the Pats.

2003 was all about Indy.

2001 was a "fluke".

Now I'm not crying "disrespect" here. I don't care as long as the end result is the one I'm looking for... a Lombardi for the trophy case. Doubters and haters be damned. We definately have different perceptions on the way the Pats are treated by the national media, agreed?

Yes, there will always be doubters, and yes fans of other teams will have optimism for their squad. But it's the guys who think Week 6 stats (or regular season for that matter) mean something in Round 2 of the playoffs that make me laugh. You'd think recent history would have showed them something.

Everyone knows the playoffs are a totally different animal. Anyone who can't acknowledge that a.) hasn't been watching enough football lately, or b.) has blind optimism for their team.

Satch, jurb and DropKick: great posts.

Hey, let the haters hate. Everyone will try and knock the Pats down, cite useless stats and meaningless trends when we all know the game will be decided on the field.

Click to expand...

It's got nothing to do with hating. It's about realistic exploration of potential game events vs some kind of preconceived notion that NE now has some kind of divine right to obtain every Super Bowl title from now until Belicheck/Brady retire. NE can be beaten, my friend. They are playing under much different circumstances this year than in previous years, with some signifcant question marks on the O-line & the secondary being especially glaring, as well as different coaches and not having a bye week to aid their SB chase.

DEN & IND/PIT are not just going to roll over & die just because Brady is coming into town. DEN and IND are better teams right now than NE is. It would be nice to see some of the people worshipping at the Pats' altar - including a significant portion of national media - acknowledge the fact that the games do indeed have to be played and that NE has a reasonable possibility of losing either this week or next week.

Click to expand...

Pony - I wholeheartedly agree that New England can lose this game; Denver is very, very talented. I am being realistic. No one expects Denver to roll over and die, and the NFL to hand the Lombardi to NE.Denver and Indy might be better teams right now, sure, I'll agree just to make my point... that alone doesn't always win you the game, you know what I'm saying? Ask the '04 Steelers or the '01 Rams... sometimes the best team on paper doesn't always win the game. Intangibles do come into play.

NE Got rolled by the AFC West (1-3, beat only the Raiders at home). Luckily for the Pats they played in the easiest division in the AFC, otherwise there would be no playoffs at all. Heck they were 4 bad goal line play calls in Miami from losing that bad division.

As for people saying they had a tough schedule to start, but kept their heads in it and finished strong. That's exactly right, they had a tough schedule to start, and they struggled, then had an easy second half and won. Seems pretty straight forward to me, beat the easy teams, lose to the tough teams. Unfortunatly for them, this is a tough team on the road comming off a bye.

I won't be surprised to see Denver win by +10.

Click to expand...

N.E.'s third string almost beat the Dolphins this year (in fact, it's common knowledge they lost on purpose). They were never even CLOSE to losing the division.As for Denver, no one is saying that they are not a good team or won't play a good game. But they barely beat SD, BAL, and WAS at home--it's not like suddenly teams go to Denver and get crushed. (To their credit, they won all their home games.)

They also got crushed by Miami, blew the game against the Giants, and like the Pats lost in KC.

As I see it, N.E. was effectively 11-5 this year (they easily could have beaten Miami again). Denver was 3 fiedls goals away from being 10-6. Had that been the case, would N.E. have been a better team based on record.

As many have said, the stats are not going to make any difference. They will decide it on the field of play.

Talent like Dion Branch and David Givens at WR? How about those 3rd string CBs they used for last years run. Believe me, this team is a lot less talented than 1/4 of the league. It's their ability to play as a team and believe in their system that makes them what they are.

Click to expand...

Are you really going to play this game?Deion Branch may not be a top-10 NFL WR, but he's the reigning Super Bowl MVP.

And while you talk about 3rd-string CBs, what about some of the title-winning players like Brady, Dillon, Law, Harrison, Bruschi, Vrabel, McGinest, Seymour, and Vinatieri?

The Patriots don't have less talent than other top-caliber teams. In fact, the reason they win is because they have more talent at the lower rungs and therefore can exploit matchups and be more versatile.

Surf, you and I have been down this road before, and I respect your opinions, so I won't go trying to change your mind... but

2004 was all about the 15-1 Steelers, not the Pats.

2003 was all about Indy.

2001 was a "fluke".

Now I'm not crying "disrespect" here. I don't care as long as the end result is the one I'm looking for... a Lombardi for the trophy case. Doubters and haters be damned. We definately have different perceptions on the way the Pats are treated by the national media, agreed?

Yes, there will always be doubters, and yes fans of other teams will have optimism for their squad. But it's the guys who think Week 6 stats (or regular season for that matter) mean something in Round 2 of the playoffs that make me laugh. You'd think recent history would have showed them something.

Everyone knows the playoffs are a totally different animal. Anyone who can't acknowledge that a.) hasn't been watching enough football lately, or b.) has blind optimism for their team.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, if our roles had reversed and the Broncos had achieved what the Patriots had, I might have your view on this situation so I agree, it's all about perspective.I'm surprised no one has commented on my post about the 1993 Oilers. I think that shows pretty clearly that there's a precedent for a proven playoff QB to have a poor season and come back in the playoffs as good as ever. I think that is just as telling evidence as anything the Patriots did early in 2005 as to what could happen this Saturday.

As a Patriot's season ticket holder, I guess you would call me a homer. In actuality, New England is my second favorite team. That may be hard to swallow, but this is where I live and I've been a long time fan of the NFL in general and enjoy attending the games in person.The original posting asked what was impressive about the Patriots. In summation, it's sustained excellence in the face of adversity. Very few teams are able to accomplish this. Consider the fortunes of recent Super Bowl winners/contenders Tampa Bay, Oakland, Baltimore...Obviously, Pat's fans will defend the team and mention the good things about the team. This is not to discredit other teams. We are not saying the Patriots are unbeatable or that they have a divine right to a win this week or even a championship. Do we need to twist people's responses into "all Pat's fans are cocky" reactions. Sorry, but we've been down that road and it's just not worthwhile.Everyone left deserves to be where they are and it will be decided on the field.

Just for ha-has, I took a look at the fates of other back-to-back Super Bowl winners (of which there are 7).Three did not even make the playoffs the following season (68 Packers, 80 Steelers, and 99 Broncos). The 74 Dolphins lost to the #1 seed in the AFC in their first playoff game.That leaves 3 others that made it to the conference championship game.- The 76 Steelers got thumped by the Raiders 24-7.- The 90 49ers came the closest to getting back the Super Bowl but lost to the Giants 15-13 in what I believe was the game where LT1 stole a handoff when SF was trying to run out the clock.- And the 94 Cowboys gave up 3 quick TDs to the 49ers and could not recover, losing 38-28.Obviously the odss are against the Patriots winning out, and they can't go undefeated in the post-season forever. The other playoff teams that were gunning for a 3-peat all lost to the #1 seed (or #2 seed if they were the #1 seed).

Talent like Dion Branch and David Givens at WR?  How about those 3rd string CBs they used for last years run.  Believe me, this team is a lot less talented than 1/4 of the league.  It's their ability to play as a team and believe in their system that makes them what they are.

Click to expand...

Are you really going to play this game?Deion Branch may not be a top-10 NFL WR, but he's the reigning Super Bowl MVP.

And while you talk about 3rd-string CBs, what about some of the title-winning players like Brady, Dillon, Law, Harrison, Bruschi, Vrabel, McGinest, Seymour, and Vinatieri?

The Patriots don't have less talent than other top-caliber teams. In fact, the reason they win is because they have more talent at the lower rungs and therefore can exploit matchups and be more versatile.

Click to expand...

But I think everyone compares quality talent to how many pro-bowlers you have. They do have an extremely talented team but most are "second teir" for lack of a better term. And I'd rather have it that way than any way else.