MattM Posted July 7, 2008 Author Share Posted July 7, 2008 I am not counting them out either, and I figure they will win the division again. If I were betting, I would go that way. But, there is a part of me that could see them just collapsing this season too. The Super Bowl loser collapse trend is pretty strong, and that team certainly has had a lot of distractions this off-season. I know, it is only the off-season, but this whole thing will likely heat up again once training camp breaks. In the little he has talked about it, Brady already seems a little uptight and defensive, he almost looks a little "burned out" IMO...Bellichek seems to be getting more defiant...people are whispering...just saying, I am not sure that their recon operation didn't help them (especially 6th round draft pick Tom Brady) just a little bit over the years. You hear guys like Dan Marino, Phil Simms, Boomer Esiason and Jim Kelly explain that knowing defensive play calls would be a "huge" advantage for a QB, you just can't help but wonder... Actually, on HBO's Inside Sports interview with Matt Walsh HBO quoted "a former offensive star" on those Pats teams as saying that they knew what was coming most of the time due to the signal stealing and that yes indeed it was a very large advantage. To this day, I wonder why no major news outlet latched onto that quote--it really does make one wonder sometime..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 The cheating aspect aside, they have won 3 superbowls this decade & have appeared in another super bowl. WHAT? Say, let's all create comments based on this thought process, shall we? I'll go first with a few. The killing-his-wife aspect aside, OJ was a good husband. The Ishtar aspect aside, Elaine May is an outstanding movie director. The taste-likes-pisswater aspect aside, Coors Lite is quite the hearty lager. The P*ts are proven cheaters right through their Super Bowl years. They won nothing this decade. They cheated. That's all they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 WHAT? Say, let's all create comments based on this thought process, shall we? I'll go first with a few. The killing-his-wife aspect aside, OJ was a good husband. The Ishtar aspect aside, Elaine May is an outstanding movie director. The taste-likes-pisswater aspect aside, Coors Lite is quite the hearty lager. The P*ts are proven cheaters right through their Super Bowl years. They won nothing this decade. They cheated. That's all they did. Absolutely. To overlook it is to condone it. You can't cheat and be called a dynasty. Not sure why people can't wrap that round they're brains. Also not sure how 18 months of good football can be considered a dynasty, either. Seems like people are setting the bar pretty low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Absolutely. To overlook it is to condone it. You can't cheat and be called a dynasty. Not sure why people can't wrap that round they're brains. Also not sure how 18 months of good football can be considered a dynasty, either. Seems like people are setting the bar pretty low. Look who you're talking too. Bills fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Look who you're talking too. Bills fans. Scary, right? As time goes on, it is going to be much worse if we don't at least make the playoffs. You see, the young posters/fans aren't used to losing as much as we are. Sad, but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 I understand what you are saying, and agree. The record books are never going to change. But, I don't think you can ever think about these Patriots (2001- present) without being mindful of the cheating scandal. I didn't take it very seriously at first, but the more that comes out, I just have to wonder about how great these Patriot teams would have been, on a level playing field. I think the cheating they succeeded at is much more signifcant than some are seeing it as. I am by no means a Pats fan, but have stuck up for them for years, on this board. I am more than willing to give teams/athletes, no matter what team, their proper credit when they achieve something. But this cheating scandal really alters my view of them (Brady, Bellechk, etc etc) and their legacy. Sure, they won 3 Super Bowls in 7 years, but the final score doesn't tell the whole story. They will be considered "great" in the same way that Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, and Mark McGwire are in MLB. You can't deny that they did something great, but you can have major doubts about how they got there. For me, as much as it pains me to say it, the last true dynasty in the NFL was the Cowboys of the 1990's. Totally agree. The cheating has tainted everything & your baseball analogy is perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 WHAT? Say, let's all create comments based on this thought process, shall we? I'll go first with a few. The killing-his-wife aspect aside, OJ was a good husband. The Ishtar aspect aside, Elaine May is an outstanding movie director. The taste-likes-pisswater aspect aside, Coors Lite is quite the hearty lager. The P*ts are proven cheaters right through their Super Bowl years. They won nothing this decade. They cheated. That's all they did. Way to take one line out of my comments. I am not overlooking anything. All I was contesting was that the poster said their accomplishments on the field did not merrit them being considered a dynasty. Winning 3 super bowls in 7 years & appearing in another super bowl should be more then enough to be considered a dynasty. Now if want to discredit their dynasty for cheating, as I tend to do that is fine. I think that is the right way to view it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Absolutely. To overlook it is to condone it. You can't cheat and be called a dynasty. Not sure why people can't wrap that round they're brains. Also not sure how 18 months of good football can be considered a dynasty, either. Seems like people are setting the bar pretty low. This is what I disagree with on your outlook. It is not just 18 months. It was winning 3 out of 4 super bowls. If that is not considered a dynasty, what do you consider a dynasty? Please note, it is fine to dismiss their accomplishments due to the cheating aspect, which I am leaning towards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Winning 3 super bowls in 7 years & appearing in another super bowl should be more then enough to be considered a dynasty. Jesus, why is this so hard to comprehend? They cheated during that entire 7-year stint. THAT is how the got to the Super Bowl. THEY CHEATED. If you eliminate the cheating, you eliminate the SBs. If you elminate the SBs, there are no 3 SBs in 7 years. There's bumpkis. Zero. Nothing. They're the league poster child for fraud. They're the Milli Vanilli of the NFL. But I suspect you believe Milli Vanilli should have been able to keep their Grammy, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 ... I refuse to read this post since the author did not include the proper use of an asterisk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Jesus, why is this so hard to comprehend? They cheated during that entire 7-year stint. THAT is how the got to the Super Bowl. THEY CHEATED. If you eliminate the cheating, you eliminate the SBs. If you elminate the SBs, there are no 3 SBs in 7 years. There's bumpkis. Zero. Nothing. They're the league poster child for fraud. They're the Milli Vanilli of the NFL. But I suspect you believe Milli Vanilli should have been able to keep their Grammy, huh? Why do you get upset when people have a different opinion then you? & BTW, I agree with you, what I was contending was that he said was that winning 3 super bowls in 7yrs should not on it's own merit(cheating aside) was not enough to consider them a dynasty. I think that is incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 The cheating aspect aside, they have won 3 superbowls this decade & have appeared in another super bowl. The only other teams that I could think of having as good of a run as them over the course of a decade our the 70's Steelers, the 80's 49ers & the 90's Cowboys. I mean say they are not a dynasty because they were caught cheating, but do not say the reason they should not be considered a dynasty since 2000 because they have not accomplished enough. You just sound like a sore loser. The only argument is that they won those super bowls by a margin of 3 points or less. If they were cheating, then that margin is awfully close that the cheating might have had an impact on them. They had a good run, but they will forever be tainted by the spygate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Jesus, why is this so hard to comprehend? They cheated during that entire 7-year stint. THAT is how the got to the Super Bowl. THEY CHEATED. If you eliminate the cheating, you eliminate the SBs. If you elminate the SBs, there are no 3 SBs in 7 years. There's bumpkis. Zero. Nothing. They're the league poster child for fraud. They're the Milli Vanilli of the NFL. But I suspect you believe Milli Vanilli should have been able to keep their Grammy, huh? As much as I hate to say it... They still had the talent to do so. What's their excuse for going 16-0? Well, besides meltdowns from the Ravens and Philly who had them against the ropes.. The real question we need to know is ......... Were then still cheating after they got busted @ the Jets game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 The only argument is that they won those super bowls by a margin of 3 points or less. If they were cheating, then that margin is awfully close that the cheating might have had an impact on them. They had a good run, but they will forever be tainted by the spygate. I remember, specifically, Donovan McNabb, as well as players from the Colts, Steelers and Bills, over the last few years, commenting after a loss to the Pats, "It was almost like they knew everything we were going to do..." Back when I heard those comments, I took them in a more figurative sense. Like the ulktimate compliment to a well coached, prepared team. But, were those players trying to tell us something else? I know it will never happen, but I would love to hear Drew Bledsoe questioned about this whole matter. He would have been in a key position, in 2001, to be in on whatever schemes Bellechik had designed. If you recall, Bledsoe had more than a little disdain for Bellechik, and there always seemed to be more to the story than was ever said in public. Despite the way people hate Bledsoe on this board, he was a team leader, and is not one who would likely "spill the beans" on his own coach, or his former coach. But there was always inferred "other issues" that Bledsoe had with Bellichik. You have to wonder... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts