The Pats basically won division titles the last season based on horrible schedules. I will give them credit that they beat the teams they should beat. Not turning the ball over and being a very disciplined team basically won them the division but have they beat any good teams? If Sanchez didn't implode for 5 games would they have won the division? 2008 Wins Chiefs Jets Niners Broncos Rams Bills Dolphins Seahawks Raiders Cardinals Bills 2008 Loses Dolphins (original wildcat game) Chargers Colts Jets Steelers 2009 Wins Bills Falcons Ravens Titans Bucs Dolphins Jets Panthers Bills Jaguars 2009 Loses Jets Broncos Colts Saints Dolphins Texans I'm not looking to compare the Jets and Pats all I'm saying is other then the Ravens in 2009 when was the last time the Pats beat a good team? I'm discounting the division games since they always seem like anything can happen. I'll be very curious to see how they do against the Chargers, Colts, Ravens, Steelers, Bengals, Vikings, Packers and Bears.
Since we're going with the, "If Sanchez didn't implode for 5 games would they have won the division?" logic, I'm gonna say, yes, because if Brady or the D didn't implode for 5 games as well, they would've still finished 15-1.
My point was more were they really a 10 or 11 win team the last two seasons? If they played harder schedules would they have won 7 or 8 games?
There really is no need to question the quality of opponents. They are simply not as strong as they once were. This division is completely up for grabs where as in years past it had always been the Patriots' to lose. The "dynasty" so to speak is over but they will still be a tough out.
I know I'm talking about the last two years. Their fans act like they are still the 2007 team. They haven't done much of anything since the superbowl.
If they haven't done much since their SB then we've done a shit of a lot less. I hate to stick up for them, but any of this talk that they're no longer good or they're on a decline is garbage. Unless the Jets begin to win the Division consistently and make numerous PO appearances, they're still the team to beat. Does it really matter if they go 8-8 and still win the Division and we go 7-9 or 6-10? They're still better than us. I think we stand a good chance to make that Division run next year tho, so let's see how it plays out.
They are on the decline... maybe they will successfully re-fill all the gaping holes in that defense, or get the Offense back to firing on all eight cylinders again... but based on last year they are going backward. Have we done enough to surpass them? We'll have to wait and see. I agree though that they will always be a tough team.
I agree and I never said we are the superior team. Until Brady retires or declines it will be difficult to win the division. My point was that the Pats team is very different then the superbowl teams and really struggled against actual good teams. Does't mean that Brady can't get them 10 wins against crappy teams.
True, if Sanchez played better we could have won.... but as the great Charles Barkley also said: “If I didn’t eat so much I wouldn’t be fat.”
LOL exactly, hard to match 16-0. Alot of weapons are gone, Welker is out, Moss is slowing, Brady is not quite the same. Nothing lasts forever.
They are still a good team. They are not as good as they once were, and I think this is largely due to their coaching staff and front office being gutted by every other team in the league. You can't be good in the NFL for long without other teams taking talent cogs from your machine (via promotion). They have lost talented coordinators and, more importantly, great personnel people. I think an interesting sub point of this discussion is if the coaching has declined or if the roster talent has declined. I think that Belichick, while not as good as he was with Weis and Crenel, is still one of the best at putting players in the best position to win. If you look at the players he has to work with, however, they are not NEARLY as good as they were before. Teams build through the draft. The Pats have not drafted well recently and they aren't as good. The Jets had a few rough years in the middle of the decade, but are now looking to be in good position for a while due to a series of strong drafts by Tannenbaum. Hell, the Giants had one of the best drafts I've seen live in 2007 and that directly lead to them winning the Super Bowl. As the draft goes, so do the fortunes of the team; the Patriots are no exception to this.
Good post, I agree with almost all of this. It's hard to tell what's going to happen with the Patriots this year. I'm not a rah-rah, Koolaid-chugging fan of any sports team... I'm more of a realist. The Patriots are more of a wildcard than ever before. If you consider that Brady was lost for the entire 2008 season, then last year has to be looked at by itself. There were really alarming trends in '09 for Pats fans - blown first half leads, they couldn't win on the road, and most disturbingly they didn't play good situational football (getting that big first down or a third down stop, etc... basically making a big play at a big moment). Whether it's coaching, or a lack of talent, or a little of both... I think it kind of remains to be seen. To be 100% honest, 8-8 would be no more surprising to me than say 14-2. I'd also say that the "Dynasty" has been over for a while now... it's been six seasons this fall since the Patriots won a title. There's only a handful of guys left with Super Bowl rings. If they do win another one at some point in the Belichick/Brady years, I personally won't view it as part of the great run of the early 2000s.
the jets have won, what 24 games in the three seasons under discussion? How many have those assholes won?
I still think it's mostly talent, especially on the defensive front 7. The DL is still great, but the LBs are nowhere near as good as they once were. This is especially evident in their inability to rush the passer. Mayo is great against the run, but ILBs don't generate pressure in a 3-4 and Mayo isn't a great pass-rusher anyway. The only threat to get to the QB is Banta-Cain, he's a far cry away from the days of Vrabel and Colvin coming off the edges. The only sense in which I think the Patriots are enigmatic/unpredictable is that we don't know what we Brady will be taking the field. People make a big deal about the WR injuries, but in his prime Brady made his hay with an average group of WR. I think we know what we have in the defense and, to be frank, it's not a defensive unit that plays great with a lead due to the subpar secondary and inability to pressure the QB. And yeah, the Dynasty is over. Had they won it all in 2007 you could make an argument that they Dynasty simply had a few down years. The Giants won, I came, and the last vestiges of that argument died.
LOL, awesome closing line. :up: You're dead-on... you usually are! The LB crew on the championship teams wasn't necessarily comprised of pro-bowlers, but guys who made the already-mentioned big plays at big times. They never really replaced guys like McGinest, Vrabel, Bruschi, and - to a lesser extent - guys like Ted Johnson and Roman Phifer, who were quiet contributors. The key to all of it will be how they drafted in '09 (kind of remains to be seen... I usually give it two seasons before being too critical of new guys) and this year. Unless they have some big plans to get an impact guy on defense, but I can't see that happening.
