When the Patriot Way goes wrong

[Ghost_002!]

7 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

No, you’re not understanding how numbers work. 
 

I didn’t state how I felt, I asked for objective data in order to properly assess the situation. You provided that data, I analyzed that data and figured out your point was just wrong. 
 

You’ve been stating how you’ve felt this whole time and have been trumpeting your opinion as facts. That’s why I asked for objective data, which proved that. 

 

if there is a 50% chance of winning the game from the 20 yard line aka point of attack. How exactly am I wrong  about "feeling" or stating "the Patriots could" of won? 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 27, 2020 by Ghost_002!

[JGMcD2]

5 minutes ago, Ghost_002! said:

 

if there is a 50% chance of winning the game from the 20 yard line aka point of attack. How exactly am I wrong  about "feeling" or stating the Patriots could of won? 

 

Because that hasn’t been your argument the entire time lol. Your argument has changed as I’ve continued to push back on it. 

 

But as it relates to your point, you were behaving as if Newton turning the ball over was so egregious and that teams automatically convert in the red zone (with no facts to support that) then the facts didn’t bear that. The Patriots not scoring there wasn’t as egregious as you said it was. 

Edited November 27, 2020 by JGMcD2

[Don Otreply]

3 hours ago, Ghost_002! said:

 

 

Cause i am free to be here....and there's this thing..where not everyone has to share the same point of view as you. And it fascinates me how off base people's sports takes are. 

 

 

Proof?

Google is your friend, 

[Ghost_002!]

10 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

Because that hasn’t been your argument the entire time lol

 

Your argument has changed as I’ve continued to push back on it. 

Interesting...Show me where i changed my argument.? 

 

you want to debate that I have no scientific backup to post what I have posted...i have proven i do. Explain to me what my argument was..show me where I am changing things up?

 

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

Because that hasn’t been your argument the entire time lol. Your argument has changed as I’ve continued to push back on it. 

 

But as it relates to your point, you were behaving as if Newton turning the ball over was so egregious and that teams automatically convert in the red zone (with no facts to support that) then the facts didn’t bear that. The Patriots not scoring there wasn’t as egregious as you said it was. 

 

 

my quote" That game didnt have anything to do McDermott or even Brady. Because you can insert any other QB in that situation and the pats could of won. That wasn't a situation were only elite QBs take control of. They were at the 20. Most NFL QBs could handle that moment. Tyrod Taylor could of won that game given how it was setting up."

 

 

 

nothing there..putting it, the way you are trying to paint my words. I guess, Tyrod Taylor has never won any games for a team before...i guess he is not capable of scoring from the 20 yard line...wait wait..i have to get technical..i should of said Tyrod Taylor had a 50% chance to win that game.....

 

Edited November 27, 2020 by Ghost_002!

[Putin]

10 minutes ago, Ghost_002! said:

 

if there is a 50% chance of winning the game from the 20 yard line aka point of attack. How exactly am I wrong  about "feeling" or stating "the Patriots could" of won? 

 

 

 

 

That  % would also depend on if the balls were deflated or not 

[JGMcD2]

7 minutes ago, Ghost_002! said:

Interesting...Show me where i changed my argument.? 

 

you want to debate that I have no scientific backup to post what I have posted...i have proven i do. Explain to me what my argument was..show me where I am changing things up?

 

 

 

 

 

 

my quote" That game didnt have anything to do McDermott or even Brady. Because you can insert any other QB in that situation and the pats could of won. That wasn't a situation were only elite QBs take control of. They were at the 20. Most NFL QBs could handle that moment. Tyrod Taylor could of won that game given how it was setting up."

 

 

 

nothing there..putting it, the way you are trying to paint my words. 

 

Sure, let’s go back through all of your posts... I have them right here!!! They’re all in order too, which is fun. 

 

1) You start off saying that Newton was careless with the football. You maintain this point the whole time. 

 

 

i think you should look at that game a little bit more...had nothing to do with not having brady and more to do with Newton being very careless with the football...because if you watched that game, the patriots where in seconds of winning that game....the bills with the pats JV squad were on their heels...
 

2) Here is where you tell me that you only want facts and not opinion... which is great! 

 

and no i am not contradicting myself at all because I truly do not care if you do not like what i like...just have facts not your opinions

3) Here you insert an opinion... you say you can insert any other QB and the Pats could have won. Well that’s an opinion, this is where I asked for you to provide DATA showing me any other QB would convert in that situation. 

 

Because you can insert any other QB in that situation and the pats could of won. That wasn't a situation were only elite QBs take control of. They were at the 20. Most NFL QBs could handle that moment. Tyrod Taylor could of won that game given how it was setting up.

4) Now you tell me (without data) that percentages are very high for the offense to score at any moment, with the implication that scoring in the red zone is very high for an NFL team. I obviously went through the numbers and that wasn’t the case at all, even though you presented me the numbers and said teams score a lot in the red zone... but I looked quick, did some rough math and found out it was 55% of the time... essentially a coin flip. 

 

and you want to act like the percentages aren't high for a offense marching down the field,  ball on the 20 to score? OF course a lot can happen, but the percentages are high an NFL offense could score in that moment and no my post did not say the Pats would win...i said they "could" of won. 
 

5) Now you just disregard all of that and say you  FELT like they had a great chance even though the numbers still show it was a 50/50 shot. Again, you provide no facts, just your opinion. Which you told me in section 3 of this post was something you didn’t care about, you only care about facts. 

 

What i seen was, the patriots had the bills on their heels. Had Newton not fumbled .....i felt great about the patriots chances. 
 

Ultimately you changed from telling me that Newton was careless and any other QB would execute. You used the fact offenses score a lot in the red zone to support your argument. The data didn’t bear that out at all, it showed that it was a coin toss. Then you acted as if that supported your argument when it actually contradicted what you had asserted to me earlier on. Eventually you just give me your feelings on the situation saying that if Newton doesn’t fumble you feel good, even though the numbers suggest it’s almost as likely for the Patriots to not score there as it is for them to score. 
 

You gave me opinions the whole time, even though you said all you want is facts, and then when you presented facts they blew up your argument. 

[Mikie2times]

Part of the Patriot way requires players to buy in unquestioning, blind, with 100% confidence. That will be a hell of an advantage for any leader to just get blindly. As new players come in, TB, BB, and older players indoctrinated new ones into the culture. All of this was only possible based on what BB and TB created. You had two people at probaly the most important roles/positions in football, perceived as the best ever. Players didn't question it, they bought in without questioning things, by gosh, millionaires playing as one with the perhaps the GOAT QB and a fantastic HC worked rather well.

 

By no means is that type of culture something you can just bring with you. It was built on a history of winning over a long period of time. With how private he is, I doubt BB has done much to share the secrets of X's and O's with assitants. Little Stevie probably gets sent to his room when he steals his notebooks.  All this is likely a far cry from the consideration Parcells showed BB when he was learning the job.  

 

I think Flores and possibby Crennel can be successfull. Flores, because he seems to be creating his own culture and not trying to replicate one. Crennel because he is a disciple of Parcells and seems to connect well with players (although he has some stains in his past, but then again who doesn't?).        

[Ghost_002!]

19 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

Sure, let’s go back through all of your posts... I have them right here!!! They’re all in order too, which is fun. 

 

1) You start off saying that Newton was careless with the football. You maintain this point the whole time. 

 

 

i think you should look at that game a little bit more...had nothing to do with not having brady and more to do with Newton being very careless with the football...because if you watched that game, the patriots where in seconds of winning that game....the bills with the pats JV squad were on their heels...
 

2) Here is where you tell me that you only want facts and not opinion... which is great! 

 

and no i am not contradicting myself at all because I truly do not care if you do not like what i like...just have facts not your opinions

3) Here you insert an opinion... you say you can insert any other QB and the Pats could have won. Well that’s an opinion, this is where I asked for you to provide DATA showing me any other QB would convert in that situation. 

 

Because you can insert any other QB in that situation and the pats could of won. That wasn't a situation were only elite QBs take control of. They were at the 20. Most NFL QBs could handle that moment. Tyrod Taylor could of won that game given how it was setting up.

4) Now you tell me (without data) that percentages are very high for the offense to score at any moment, with the implication that scoring in the red zone is very high for an NFL team. I obviously went through the numbers and that wasn’t the case at all, even though you presented me the numbers and said teams score a lot in the red zone... but I looked quick, did some rough math and found out it was 55% of the time... essentially a coin flip. 

 

and you want to act like the percentages aren't high for a offense marching down the field,  ball on the 20 to score? OF course a lot can happen, but the percentages are high an NFL offense could score in that moment and no my post did not say the Pats would win...i said they "could" of won. 
 

5) Now you just disregard all of that and say you  FELT like they had a great chance even though the numbers still show it was a 50/50 shot. Again, you provide no facts, just your opinion. Which you told me in section 3 of this post was something you didn’t care about, you only care about facts. 

 

What i seen was, the patriots had the bills on their heels. Had Newton not fumbled .....i felt great about the patriots chances. 
 

Ultimately you changed from telling me that Newton was careless and any other QB would execute. You used the fact offenses score a lot in the red zone to support your argument. The data didn’t bear that out at all, it showed that it was a coin toss. Then you acted as if that supported your argument when it actually contradicted what you had asserted to me earlier on. Eventually you just give me your feelings on the situation saying that if Newton doesn’t fumble you feel good, even though the numbers suggest it’s almost as likely for the Patriots to not score there as it is for them to score. 
 

You gave me opinions the whole time, even though you said all you want is facts, and then when you presented facts they blew up your argument. 

 

 

 

Thank you for taken the time to research my post. I am sorry if you take what i am saying as contradiction (being lighthearted and sarcastic ). Newton was careless with the football, in terms of needing Brady in that situation...you do not need brady, you just need any QB to be careful with the football. That is not an indictment on Newton. (I have said it wasn't an indictment on Newton) Yes i believe the patriots would of won. If that makes me in the wrong for saying that or you feel i am contradicting myself...cool. I am going to disagree. 

 

the percentages i see, tells me-they are pretty high for a team to score there....you have about 17 teams ranging from 70 to 60% . That is how i am going to look at it....if that speaks of me being incorrect to you cool at this point it seems you want to be right and prove me to be very wrong...so ok have at it... i will disagree and still post here. 

 

 

Edited November 27, 2020 by Ghost_002!

[JGMcD2]

6 minutes ago, Ghost_002! said:

 

 

 

Thank you for taken the time to research my post. I am sorry if you take what i am saying at contradictory (being lighthearted). Newton was careless with the football, in terms of needing Brady in that situation...you do not need brady you just need to be careful with the football. That is not an indictment on Newton. (I have said it wasn't an indictment on Newton) Yes i believe the patriots would of won. If that makes me in the wrong for saying that, or you feeling i am contradicting myself...cool. I am going to disagree. 

 

the percentages i see, tells me-they are pretty high for a team to score there....you have about 17 teams ranging from 70 to 60% change to score. That is how i am going to look at it....if that speaks of me being incorrect to you cool at this point it seems you want to be right and prove me to be very wrong...so ok i will disagree but cool. Look at it however you want. 

 

 

You can’t just take 17/32 teams and use that to support your argument. That’s not how numbers work. That’s not being objective, that’s being extremely subjective. 
 

You’re cherry picking numbers to fit your argument. You take the entire sample or it’s worthless. 
 

You keep saying look at it however you want, but that’s what you’re doing. You’re categorically neglecting objective data, you’re implying that I’m applying my opinion to things when I am just looking at the facts...not one iota of your argument has been anything other than opinion. 
 

You want facts, yet you don’t use them.

Edited November 27, 2020 by JGMcD2

[Ghost_002!]

4 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

You can’t just take 17/32 teams and use that to support your argument. That’s not how numbers work. That’s not being objective, that’s being extremely subjective. 
 

You’re cherry picking numbers to fit your argument. You take the entire sample or it’s worthless. 
 

You keep saying look at it however you want, but that’s what you’re doing. You’re categorically neglecting objective data, you’re implying that I’m applying my opinion to things when I am just looking at the facts...not one iota of your argument has been anything other than opinion. 
 

You want facts, yet you don’t use them.

 

 

honestly...i am not... at this point, i am just summarizing where I am standing now....honestly. It really doesn't matter to me anymore  about what you think about my posts. 

Edited November 27, 2020 by Ghost_002!

[mbs]

I think the Patriot way really means have a very smart head coach and have competent assistants. Apart from Ernie and Scarneccia, I doubt BB regards anyone else in the recent history of the organization as a peer. Maybe McDaniels is worth something given Bill's efforts to retain him but the rest are trained bicycle riding bears.

 

Well, I think Flores does seem to be an another exception. I don't know if he's great but he pretty clearly isn't terrible. 

[GunnerBill]

12 hours ago, FeelingOnYouboty said:

The only NE coach who’s had some success is Flores but it’s still too early to judge him.

 

Thank God for Beane and McDermott. I’m so grateful!

 

Bill O'Brien had some success. 4 division titles and two playoff wins in 6 years. His GM ship sunk his coaching.

[Warcodered]

48 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Bill O'Brien had some success. 4 division titles and two playoff wins in 6 years. His GM ship sunk his coaching.

To be fair when you make as dumb trade as he did this year it's going to overshadow a lot.

[YoloinOhio]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Bill O'Brien had some success. 4 division titles and two playoff wins in 6 years. His GM ship sunk his coaching.

His downfall was that he was too power hungry and it cost him the only thing he was good at, HC. At one point he was the HC, OC and GM because he couldn’t work with anyone well enough to have anyone else in those roles than himself. That’s how you end up with a 4 win team with no HC or GM or 1st or 2nd rd pick and a crumbling roster around a great young QB. 

Edited November 28, 2020 by YoloinOhio

[Big Turk]

When has is ever gone right except in New England?

[Ponch]

14 hours ago, Inigo Montoya said:

I think the lack of success from the Belichick coaching tree, especially when compared to the Parcells and Andy Reid trees, is because when you are an assistant coach in New England, Bill micro-manages everything. Belichick doesn't develop coaches, he simply instructs them on how to do things his way.  When his coaches finally get a head coaching gig and leave New England they suffer from that lack of personal growth and development.  Most of these guys go off to another team and try to be Bill Belichick, like Matt Patricia is doing, and it just doesn't work.  

 

The other thing these fledgling coaches don't have is the incredible good fortune to find a unicorn like Brady, a generational talent at QB who is also beta-male enough to tolerate the constant abuse of his head coach even after numerous championships and MVPs.  What Belichick did in New England is not reproducible elsewhere and I think the rest of the League is finally starting to figure that out.

 

 

I have felt similarly for many years, and this explains all the flameouts 🔥 from his “tree”. I just never had the ability to express it as eloquently as you Inigo. I admit it. You are better than I am.

[GoBills808]

5 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

When has is ever gone right except in New England?

-and w/Brady

[Inigo Montoya]

1 minute ago, Ponch said:

I have felt similarly for many years, and this explains all the flameouts 🔥 from his “tree”. I just never had the ability to express it as eloquently as you Inigo. I admit it. You are better than I am.

 

   LOL!   But I know something that you don't know...  I am not left handed!

[Ponch]

1 minute ago, Inigo Montoya said:

 

   LOL!   But I know something that you don't know...  I am not left handed!

😳 you are amazing! ...Oh, there is something I ought to tell you.......I’m not left-handed either! 🤪

[stuvian]

Patricia is clearly dead man walking and has lost the locker room. He didn't inherit a losing franchise either. Caldwell had that team contending. Caldwell is a leader of men. Patricia is a copy cat trying to cut and paste with no success.