|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Oct 22, 2019 13:07:42 GMT
New England Patriots next 3 games vs. teams each coming off their bye week.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 22, 2019 13:14:38 GMT
New England Patriots next 3 games vs. teams each coming off their bye week. The Ravens game should be interesting. For a Super Bowl champion, the Patriots seem to have a remarkably easy schedule. The Saints got screwed by the NFL referees last year. And apparently the NFL schedule makers have screwed them this year. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 22, 2019 13:29:11 GMT
New England Patriots next 3 games vs. teams each coming off their bye week. The Ravens game should be interesting. For a Super Bowl champion, the Patriots seem to have a remarkably easy schedule. The Saints got screwed by the NFL referees last year. And apparently the NFL schedule makers have screwed them this year. Shut the fuck up already. The Saints have one quality win, at Seattle. The Patriots have one quality win, at Buffalo.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 22, 2019 13:41:35 GMT
The Ravens game should be interesting. For a Super Bowl champion, the Patriots seem to have a remarkably easy schedule. The Saints got screwed by the NFL referees last year. And apparently the NFL schedule makers have screwed them this year. Shut the fuck up already. The Saints have one quality win, at Seattle. The Patriots have one quality win, at Buffalo. Compare the win/loss totals of the opponents of the New England Patriots and the New Orleans Saints --- this year and last year. And then compare the win/loss totals of the entire schedules. I think it will be crystal clear what I am talking about. I am not saying the Pat's are not good. But quality of opponents is important. As I said before, it's easier to play cupcakes all year (Alabama), and then play post season opponents. Then to play a challenging regular season schedule (LSU) and then play post season opponents. |
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 22, 2019 14:04:06 GMT
The Ravens game should be interesting. For a Super Bowl champion, the Patriots seem to have a remarkably easy schedule. The Saints got screwed by the NFL referees last year. And apparently the NFL schedule makers have screwed them this year. Shut the fuck up already. The Saints have one quality win, at Seattle. The Patriots have one quality win, at Buffalo. REPY #2 Also look at all the teams that were in the playoffs last year --- or won their divisions --- on both teams' schedules. And compare. |
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Oct 22, 2019 14:17:43 GMT
How the schedules are made. Shut the fuck up already. The Saints have one quality win, at Seattle. The Patriots have one quality win, at Buffalo. REPY #2 Also look at all the teams that were in the playoffs last year --- or won their divisions --- on both teams' schedules. And compare. As previously stated, teams play their division rivals twice each and two preset other divisions. It’s probably known ALREADY who the teams will play next season. The only question is timing. So the Saints are not screwed by who their opponents are any more or less than any other team. It’s also not the Patriots’ fault that the Dolphins, Jets, and until recently the Bills are poorly run franchises. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 22, 2019 14:23:33 GMT
How the schedules are made. Shut the fuck up already. The Saints have one quality win, at Seattle. The Patriots have one quality win, at Buffalo. Compare the win/loss totals of the opponents of the New England Patriots and the New Orleans Saints --- this year and last year. And then compare the win/loss totals of the entire schedules. I think it will be crystal clear what I am talking about. I am not saying the Pat's are not good. But quality of opponents is important. As I said before, it's easier to play cupcakes all year (Alabama), and then play post season opponents. Then to play a challenging regular season schedule (LSU) and then play post season opponents. This isn't college football, there are no style points. You don't compare resumes by looking at who you beat, who they beat, who they beat, etc. You barely beat the Cowboys, who lost to the Jets, who the Patriots blew the doors off of last night. What does any of that mean? Nothing. You play who's in front of you. The Patriots lost to 5 non-playoff teams last year, and yet they beat the Bears, Colts, Texans and Chiefs. Were those easy games? All three of the teams the Patriots played in the post-season last year had better records than the Patriots. The Patriots went on the road to Arrowhead and won the AFC championship game. They shut down the Rams who beat you in your own building. How was any of that easy? The Patriots are 4-1 against the Saints in the Brady era. Which one of those were you good, or have you always been bad when the Patriots played you? The 2013 game was a classic, that's for sure. It's tedious listening to crybabies try to explain away the Patriots success year after year. You don't go to 9 Super Bowls and win 6 of them by not playing anybody. Yes, they've played a soft schedule so far, but they gave Buffalo their only loss of the season-- at home. Who have the 49ers played? Who are the good teams the Saints have played? Hell, they lost to a Rams team that's mediocre this year if we're going by record alone. Compare the win/loss totals of the Patriots and the Saints over the last 20 years, the number of championships and the head-to-head matchups and it will be crystal clear who the better team is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 22, 2019 14:25:55 GMT
How the schedules are made. Shut the fuck up already. The Saints have one quality win, at Seattle. The Patriots have one quality win, at Buffalo. REPY #2 Also look at all the teams that were in the playoffs last year --- or won their divisions --- on both teams' schedules. And compare. Were the Chiefs not a good team last year? Because the Patriots beat them twice. Too bad your team shit the bed-- at home-- against the team the Patriots manhandled in the Super Bowl.
|
|
|
|
Post by klawrencio79 on Oct 22, 2019 14:28:51 GMT
Compare the win/loss totals of the opponents of the New England Patriots and the New Orleans Saints --- this year and last year. And then compare the win/loss totals of the entire schedules. I think it will be crystal clear what I am talking about. I am not saying the Pat's are not good. But quality of opponents is important. As I said before, it's easier to play cupcakes all year (Alabama), and then play post season opponents. Then to play a challenging regular season schedule (LSU) and then play post season opponents. This isn't college football, there are no style points. You don't compare resumes by looking at who you beat, who they beat, who they beat, etc. You barely beat the Cowboys, who lost to the Jets, who the Patriots blew the doors off of last night. What does any of that mean? Nothing. You play who's in front of you. The Patriots lost to 5 non-playoff teams last year, and yet they beat the Bears, Colts, Texans and Chiefs. Were those easy games? All three of the teams the Patriots played in the post-season last year had better records than the Patriots. The Patriots went on the road to Arrowhead and won the AFC championship game. They shut down the Rams who beat you in your own building. How was any of that easy? The Patriots are 4-1 against the Saints in the Brady era. Which one of those were you good, or have you always been bad when the Patriots played you? The 2013 game was a classic, that's for sure. It's tedious listening to crybabies try to explain away the Patriots success year after year. You don't go to 9 Super Bowls and win 6 of them by not playing anybody. Yes, they've played a soft schedule so far, but they gave Buffalo their only loss of the season-- at home. Who have the 49ers played? Who are the good teams the Saints have played? Hell, they lost to a Rams team that's mediocre this year if we're going by record alone. Compare the win/loss totals of the Patriots and the Saints over the last 20 years, the number of championships and the head-to-head matchups and it will be crystal clear who the better team is. Thank god movieliker can sit down again, now that you've handed his ass to him.
|
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Oct 22, 2019 14:35:04 GMT
The Ravens game should be interesting. For a Super Bowl champion, the Patriots seem to have a remarkably easy schedule. The Saints got screwed by the NFL referees last year. And apparently the NFL schedule makers have screwed them this year. Shut the fuck up already. The Saints have one quality win, at Seattle. The Patriots have one quality win, at Buffalo. I was actually hedging against ppl whining about the Patriots 2019 cakewalk schedule.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 22, 2019 14:41:17 GMT
Compare the win/loss totals of the opponents of the New England Patriots and the New Orleans Saints --- this year and last year. And then compare the win/loss totals of the entire schedules. I think it will be crystal clear what I am talking about. I am not saying the Pat's are not good. But quality of opponents is important. As I said before, it's easier to play cupcakes all year (Alabama), and then play post season opponents. Then to play a challenging regular season schedule (LSU) and then play post season opponents. This isn't college football, there are no style points. You don't compare resumes by looking at who you beat, who they beat, who they beat, etc. You barely beat the Cowboys, who lost to the Jets, who the Patriots blew the doors off of last night. What does any of that mean? Nothing. You play who's in front of you. The Patriots lost to 5 non-playoff teams last year, and yet they beat the Bears, Colts, Texans and Chiefs. Were those easy games? All three of the teams the Patriots played in the post-season last year had better records than the Patriots. The Patriots went on the road to Arrowhead and won the AFC championship game. They shut down the Rams who beat you in your own building. How was any of that easy? The Patriots are 4-1 against the Saints in the Brady era. Which one of those were you good, or have you always been bad when the Patriots played you? The 2013 game was a classic, that's for sure. It's tedious listening to crybabies try to explain away the Patriots success year after year. You don't go to 9 Super Bowls and win 6 of them by not playing anybody. Yes, they've played a soft schedule so far, but they gave Buffalo their only loss of the season-- at home. Who have the 49ers played? Who are the good teams the Saints have played? Hell, they lost to a Rams team that's mediocre this year if we're going by record alone. Compare the win/loss totals of the Patriots and the Saints over the last 20 years, the number of championships and the head-to-head matchups and it will be crystal clear who the better team is. We can do whatever we want. Objective football fans know the Patriots reside in a traditionally weak division. Objective football fans know the Patriots have an easy schedule this year. Nobody is saying the Patriots are not good, or they didn't win the Super Bowl fair and square last year. I am just pointing out the obvious --- the Pats reside in a traditionally weak division. And they have a relatively easy schedule. And one more observation --- it's no secret the AFC is the weaker of the two conferences this year. Just look at any top 5 or 10 in any power rankings. |
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 22, 2019 14:44:16 GMT
REPY #2 Also look at all the teams that were in the playoffs last year --- or won their divisions --- on both teams' schedules. And compare. As previously stated, teams play their division rivals twice each and two preset other divisions. It’s probably known ALREADY who the teams will play next season. The only question is timing. So the Saints are not screwed by who their opponents are any more or less than any other team. It’s also not the Patriots’ fault that the Dolphins, Jets, and until recently the Bills are poorly run franchises. I never said it was anybody's fault. I am just making an observation. The Pats reside in a traditionally weak division. The Pats have a relatively easy schedule this year. |
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Oct 22, 2019 14:54:28 GMT
As previously stated, teams play their division rivals twice each and two preset other divisions. It’s probably known ALREADY who the teams will play next season. The only question is timing. So the Saints are not screwed by who their opponents are any more or less than any other team. It’s also not the Patriots’ fault that the Dolphins, Jets, and until recently the Bills are poorly run franchises. I never said it was anybody's fault. I am just making an observation. The Pats reside in a traditionally weak division. The Pats have a relatively easy schedule this year. No one is denying that. No one other than you is also saying the Saints got screwed. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 22, 2019 15:01:11 GMT
This isn't college football, there are no style points. You don't compare resumes by looking at who you beat, who they beat, who they beat, etc. You barely beat the Cowboys, who lost to the Jets, who the Patriots blew the doors off of last night. What does any of that mean? Nothing. You play who's in front of you. The Patriots lost to 5 non-playoff teams last year, and yet they beat the Bears, Colts, Texans and Chiefs. Were those easy games? All three of the teams the Patriots played in the post-season last year had better records than the Patriots. The Patriots went on the road to Arrowhead and won the AFC championship game. They shut down the Rams who beat you in your own building. How was any of that easy? The Patriots are 4-1 against the Saints in the Brady era. Which one of those were you good, or have you always been bad when the Patriots played you? The 2013 game was a classic, that's for sure. It's tedious listening to crybabies try to explain away the Patriots success year after year. You don't go to 9 Super Bowls and win 6 of them by not playing anybody. Yes, they've played a soft schedule so far, but they gave Buffalo their only loss of the season-- at home. Who have the 49ers played? Who are the good teams the Saints have played? Hell, they lost to a Rams team that's mediocre this year if we're going by record alone. Compare the win/loss totals of the Patriots and the Saints over the last 20 years, the number of championships and the head-to-head matchups and it will be crystal clear who the better team is. We can do whatever we want. Objective football fans know the Patriots reside in a traditionally weak division. Objective football fans know the Patriots have an easy schedule this year. Nobody is saying the Patriots are not good, or they didn't win the Super Bowl fair and square last year. I am just pointing out the obvious --- the Pats reside in a traditionally weak division. And they have a relatively easy schedule. And one more observation --- it's no secret the AFC is the weaker of the two conferences this year. Just look at any top 5 or 10 in any power rankings. I'm going to post this one more time. The Patriots win at the same clip against the rest of the NFL as they do against their own division, so your 'weak division' argument is completely invalid. I've never worried about who has the stronger conference because to be the best you have to play the best eventually. Back in the day the Pats shut down the high powered Manning Colts over and over again in the playoffs. They beat co-MVPs' Peyton Manning and Steve McNair twice each during the 2003 season. But I guess that was easy. They beat the 15-1 Steelers in Pittsburgh in the 04 AFC championship game, and the 13-3 Eagles in the Super Bowl, but I guess that was easy. In 2014 they beat the defending Super Bowl champion Seahawks and the league's #1 defense in the Super Bowl; easy. They came back from down 25 points in the second half of the Super Bowl and won, but anyone can do that. They've been to 9 Super Bowls and won 6 of them playing nothing but soft teams the whole time, including playoffs. Look man, I apologize for swearing at you earlier, that was uncalled for. But sooner or later you're going to have to accept the Patriots are a superior organization. You don't have to like them, you can mock their losses and bitch about their wins all you want; I'm a sports fan so I get being tired of a particular team winning. But you look like a schmuck when you constantly make excuses for your team's failures and other teams' success.
|
|
|
|
Post by tristramshandy on Oct 22, 2019 15:06:27 GMT
The prevailing thought is that Frank Reich was the true genius of the Super Bowl Season. Everyone is calling for the head of Al Groh’s son. Reich is truly a godsend after the toiling years under Chuck Pagano. It really tells you about context - - in San Diego, he was considered a bum when he was offensive coordinator here. One man's trash is another's treasure.
|
|
|
|
Post by tristramshandy on Oct 22, 2019 15:14:45 GMT
The Ravens game should be interesting. For a Super Bowl champion, the Patriots seem to have a remarkably easy schedule. The Saints got screwed by the NFL referees last year. And apparently the NFL schedule makers have screwed them this year. Shut the fuck up already. The Saints have one quality win, at Seattle. The Patriots have one quality win, at Buffalo. At the end of the day, you really have to go by record - - you play who you play. Buffalo's 5 wins: Jets, Giants, Bengals, Titans, Dolphins. Combined record: 6-27. Pittsburgh's 4 losses: Patriots, Seahawks, 49ers, Ravens. Combined record: 23-4 (and one of the four was when the Ravens beat the Seahawks). Buffalo is going to go to the playoffs and Pittsburgh won't. At the end of the day, how close are they to one another? A lot closer than a 5-1 and 2-4 record would lead you to believe. Seven weeks into an NFL season, it's hard to tell much of anything about anybody except that New England's defense is insanely good.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 22, 2019 15:14:53 GMT
We can do whatever we want. Objective football fans know the Patriots reside in a traditionally weak division. Objective football fans know the Patriots have an easy schedule this year. Nobody is saying the Patriots are not good, or they didn't win the Super Bowl fair and square last year. I am just pointing out the obvious --- the Pats reside in a traditionally weak division. And they have a relatively easy schedule. And one more observation --- it's no secret the AFC is the weaker of the two conferences this year. Just look at any top 5 or 10 in any power rankings. I'm going to post this one more time. The Patriots win at the same clip against the rest of the NFL as they do against their own division, so your 'weak division' argument is completely invalid. I've never worried about who has the stronger conference because to be the best you have to play the best eventually. Back in the day the Pats shut down the high powered Manning Colts over and over again in the playoffs. They beat co-MVPs' Peyton Manning and Steve McNair twice each during the 2003 season. But I guess that was easy. They beat the 15-1 Steelers in Pittsburgh in the 04 AFC championship game, and the 13-3 Eagles in the Super Bowl, but I guess that was easy. In 2014 they beat the defending Super Bowl champion Seahawks and the league's #1 defense in the Super Bowl; easy. They came back from down 25 points in the second half of the Super Bowl and won, but anyone can do that. They've been to 9 Super Bowls and won 6 of them playing nothing but soft teams the whole time, including playoffs. Look man, I apologize for swearing at you earlier, that was uncalled for. But sooner or later you're going to have to accept the Patriots are a superior organization. You don't have to like them, you can mock their losses and bitch about their wins all you want; I'm a sports fan so I get being tired of a particular team winning. But you look like a schmuck when you constantly make excuses for your team's failures and other teams' success. A) None of that changes these two facts 1) The Patriots reside in a traditionally weak division. And 2) They have a relatively easy schedule. B) I am only talking about this year. C) Apology accepted. Thank you for being a classy poster trying to remain civil. I wasn't offended. That happens a lot on these types of social media. And yes, the Patriots are the best NFL organization over the last 10-20 years. If not ever. Regardless. |
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Oct 22, 2019 15:16:32 GMT
I'm going to post this one more time. The Patriots win at the same clip against the rest of the NFL as they do against their own division, so your 'weak division' argument is completely invalid. I've never worried about who has the stronger conference because to be the best you have to play the best eventually. Back in the day the Pats shut down the high powered Manning Colts over and over again in the playoffs. They beat co-MVPs' Peyton Manning and Steve McNair twice each during the 2003 season. But I guess that was easy. They beat the 15-1 Steelers in Pittsburgh in the 04 AFC championship game, and the 13-3 Eagles in the Super Bowl, but I guess that was easy. In 2014 they beat the defending Super Bowl champion Seahawks and the league's #1 defense in the Super Bowl; easy. They came back from down 25 points in the second half of the Super Bowl and won, but anyone can do that. They've been to 9 Super Bowls and won 6 of them playing nothing but soft teams the whole time, including playoffs. Look man, I apologize for swearing at you earlier, that was uncalled for. But sooner or later you're going to have to accept the Patriots are a superior organization. You don't have to like them, you can mock their losses and bitch about their wins all you want; I'm a sports fan so I get being tired of a particular team winning. But you look like a schmuck when you constantly make excuses for your team's failures and other teams' success. A) None of that changes these two facts 1) The Patriots reside in a traditionally weak division. And 2) They have a relatively easy schedule. B) I am only talking about this year. C) Apology accepted. Thank you for being a classy poster trying to remain civil. I wasn't offended. That happens a lot on these types of socia media. And yes, the Patriots are the best NFL organization over the last 10-20 years. If not ever. Regardless. What is your point about A? |
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Oct 22, 2019 15:18:11 GMT
A) None of that changes these two facts 1) The Patriots reside in a traditionally weak division. And 2) They have a relatively easy schedule. B) I am only talking about this year. C) Apology accepted. Thank you for being a classy poster trying to remain civil. I wasn't offended. That happens a lot on these types of social media. And yes, the Patriots are the best NFL organization over the last 10-20 years. If not ever. Regardless. What is your point about A? I think it is an undeniably important consideration in trying to determine who are the better teams --- quality of opponents. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 22, 2019 15:36:59 GMT
How the schedules are made. Shut the fuck up already. The Saints have one quality win, at Seattle. The Patriots have one quality win, at Buffalo. At the end of the day, you really have to go by record - - you play who you play. Buffalo's 5 wins: Jets, Giants, Bengals, Titans, Dolphins. Combined record: 6-27. Pittsburgh's 4 losses: Patriots, Seahawks, 49ers, Ravens. Combined record: 23-4 (and one of the four was when the Ravens beat the Seahawks). Buffalo is going to go to the playoffs and Pittsburgh won't. At the end of the day, how close are they to one another? A lot closer than a 5-1 and 2-4 record would lead you to believe. Seven weeks into an NFL season, it's hard to tell much of anything about anybody except that New England's defense is insanely good. Agreed, we haven't even played half a season yet so nobody has proven anything. And I know people in the Monday Night thread probably roll their eyes when they see me complaining about the Pats' in-game shortcomings, but it's true. You don't get a trophy for winning 7 games. I just think the "you're only successful because you've played a weak schedule" argument doesn't apply to the defending Super Bowl champs.
|
|
