Hollywood Donahoe Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 The average margin of score for the Patriot's Super Bowls is MINUS 8 points- the 2nd worst among all NFL champions since the first Super Bowl. This supports the conclusion that the Pats are among the least convincing championship teams in the history of the sport, and no respectable student of the game would ever accept those anemic numbers as an indication of a "dynasty" when they in fact indicate just the opposite. The Pats have eked out these timid victories at a time when their NFC opponents are at their weakest in over 25 years. The fact is there is a tremendous chasm between being "barely good enough by your kicker's foot" and the huge leap from there to being an actual "Dynasty". As I mentioned when this tripe was in your signature, those figures include Super Bowls XX and XXXI, which are most certainly not included in the dynasty years (XXXVI, XXXVIII, and XXXIX). Therefore, your entire premise is based entirely on faulty logic. It's akin to me saying that since the Colts went 3-13 in 1997, they suck now. But intellectual honesty was never you're thing, was it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKC Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 As I mentioned when this tripe was in your signature, those figures include Super Bowls XX and XXXI, which are most certainly not included in the dynasty years (XXXVI, XXXVIII, and XXXIX). Therefore, your entire premise is based entirely on faulty logic. It's akin to me saying that since the Colts went 3-13 in 1997, they suck now. But intellectual honesty was never you're thing, was it? 570217[/snapback] What, you like +9 instead- the total that shows how in the most recent three trips it took three field goals to eke out victories? Oh, excuse me, that was what I said in the first place! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 What, you like +9 instead... I like it a lot when those 9 points mean 3 wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKC Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I like it a lot when those 9 points mean 3 wins. 570229[/snapback] While at the same moment precluding any honest or accurate mention of the label "Dynasty". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 While at the same moment precluding any honest or accurate mention of the label "Dynasty". Three Super Bowl wins in four years = Dynasty. At least to all but a small sect of irrationals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKC Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Three Super Bowl wins in four years = Dynasty. At least to all but a small sect of irrationals. 570240[/snapback] Here in America we consider a Football Dynasty to be a team who has dominated their opponents for some extended period of time, not merely eke out a couple of 3 point squeakers and then declare themselves "A Dynasty". One thing no one will ever argue (rationally) is that the Pat's "dominated" their Super Bowl opponents. Not after your FG kicker had to bail you out in each game. But do try to press your losing argument forward since you clearly believe that little run of squeakers has come to an end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Here in America we consider a Football Dynasty to be a team who has dominated their opponents for some extended period of time... "We?" You and who else? Do "we" also consider three to be more than twenty-five, as you once stated? Do "we" also consider a deep ball passer to throw five to six such passes per game, as you once stated? I don't know if other human beings would appreciate you lumping them in with your inane and frequently wildly inaccurate beliefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Man, nobody respects the Patriots [genuflect]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I read the comments of one Patriette fan some weeks ago who hoped the Patriettes would not make the playoffs, because tarnishing Brady's zero playoff losses would be too difficult to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 7 straight seasons of calls going their way- "Just Give it to Him" Game. Unconscious guy recovering a fumble while laying 3/4 out of bounds, "Tuck Rule", and countless others. It's about time it went the other way for once. Maybe if the players wouldn't cry, scream, B word and moan for a penalty on every single play, they would have gotten yet another call. How about those FIVE turnovers? That didn't matter did it? Crybaby sissies. New England/Boston CANNOT LOSE ENOUGH for me. If they lost every game they ever played from now on, it wouldn't satisfy me. Almost dynasty over. Good bye and shut the hell up. 570198[/snapback] This warrants a BUMP. This is all that needs to be said to the ingrate Patsy fans! And now they whine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Playing by the "rules" has always been a big part of the Pats' run, and indeed, has been a staple of all NFL dynasties. I can imagine that teams that don't adhere to the NFL rulebook do not experience much success. 570202[/snapback] They (The NFL) will never admit (like they did in the Steelers-Indy game) that they MISINTERPRETED the "tuck rule." They can still fool people that it was the correct interpretation... Why would they fess up? Now, the interception (TP) during the Indy game was a little harder to cover-up... They had to apologize for that boo-boo interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 This warrants a BUMP. This is all that needs to be said to the ingrate Patsy fans! And now they whine. 570533[/snapback] The Celtics and Bruins should provide some Good Times over the winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Just stating fact. I notice you conveniently ignored the portion of my post which stated that the Patriots' poor play, not the bad call(s), is what ultimately cost them the game. 570215[/snapback] They played poor in games they won... What is your point? I think AKC's post stated that. Dynasty's dominate... That is a big qualifier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 7 straight seasons of calls going their way- "Just Give it to Him" Game. Unconscious guy recovering a fumble while laying 3/4 out of bounds, "Tuck Rule", and countless others. It's about time it went the other way for once. Maybe if the players wouldn't cry, scream, B word and moan for a penalty on every single play, they would have gotten yet another call. How about those FIVE turnovers? That didn't matter did it? Crybaby sissies. New England/Boston CANNOT LOSE ENOUGH for me. If they lost every game they ever played from now on, it wouldn't satisfy me. Almost dynasty over. Good bye and shut the hell up. 570198[/snapback] I mean this in all honesty, I really believe the Pats just came to believe every call should go their way. Now, I am not one who thinks their was some grand conspiracy, as I think most of the calls were correct by definition(excepting the just give it to em game). But calls like the Offensive interference on Moulds this year, while correct, are seldom called, especially in the 4th quarter of a tight game. But you get those kind of calls over a 5 year span, you start to expect them. And yes, I do consider the Pats a dynasty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Three Super Bowl wins in four years = Dynasty. At least to all but a small sect of irrationals. 570240[/snapback] No. Why do you think the Pats feel disrespected?... Why the struggle to not be satisfied with what they did in the past? I would bet they are "driven" to prove they are worthy. I am not saying their wins are bad... They are quite good but, wins like that have to be repeated more to gain respect. I would say that is true if you dominate your opponents... If you don't, then the dynasty tag takes a little longer to stick. The way NE was pulling things out of the hat during their SB years... I would say the dynasty tag has to go beyond just the "years test" in these squeaker victories. Now if they would have won 2 more the same way (3 points or less) in consecutive years, they would be a "dynasty." Just a Buffalo was a dynasty for futility... 2 losses would have not been enough... Now 4 in a row makes the "years test" moot. Same applies to NE and squeaker victories. It just seems people really want to push a label nowadays because it is in vogue and makes interesting spin. Again, the Pats are the WORST multiple SB victors... Just as the Bills were the the BEST multiple SB losers. Some how, I don't know what gains more respect?... Buffalo doing it 4 years in a row gains some sort of respect. The Pats get respect... But, really that much? They would have gained more respect if they would have repeated more only because the way they were winning. I think Dallas shellacking the Bills 2 years in a row gets more repsect than the Pats. You make the call... I have faith you will make the wrong call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I mean this in all honesty, I really believe the Pats just came to believe every call should go their way. Now, I am not one who thinks their was some grand conspiracy, as I think most of the calls were correct by definition(excepting the just give it to em game). But calls like the Offensive interference on Moulds this year, while correct, are seldom called, especially in the 4th quarter of a tight game. But you get those kind of calls over a 5 year span, you start to expect them. And yes, I do consider the Pats a dynasty 570547[/snapback] I really think the Pats and Kraft would be up Sh*t's creek if it weren't for these calls they have been receiving the past 6-7 years. Finacially, the Pats and the NFL would be in deep doo-doo if the fans disappeared (which can happen very easily in NE... If they get disillusioned... Not to say they aren't now. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I'm glad they are gone. It's getting boring watching the same team over and over and over and over and over and over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Three Super Bowl wins in four years = Dynasty. At least to all but a small sect of irrationals. 570240[/snapback] Thank you David Patten's unconscious head. Sure, its a dynasty, but it was a combination of a great team, a great coach, and more than a little luck. JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Thank you David Patten's unconscious head. Sure, its a dynasty, but it was a combination of a great team, a great coach, and more than a little luck. JDG 570653[/snapback] I agree it's a dynasty. But, I take the 85 Bears in a heartbeat over any of those three team NE put on the field. As far as "best teams ever" I wouldn't even put any of those Pats squads in the top five. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I would consider the pats like a pimple on the Lombardi trophy's ass, nothing more significant than that. History will prove me correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts