idhawkman wrote:Here's our scheduled opponents next year. We know the Raiders are week 6 in London but don't know the rest of the schedule yet. What I want to know is, what is the best and worst things you notice about the schedule next year?
Home: Los Angeles Rams, Arizona Cardinals, San Francisco 49ers, Green Bay Packers, Minnesota Vikings, Kansas City Chiefs, Los Angeles Chargers, Dallas Cowboys.
Away: Los Angeles Rams, Arizona Cardinals, San Francisco 49ers, Chicago Bears, Detroit Lions, Denver Broncos, Oakland Raiders, Carolina Panthers.
What I like the most is that other than the London game, we have pretty much a regionalized AWAY schedule (freakin' Panthers put a hole in that but hey, not bad overall).
What I don't like: Not sure that the NFC NOrth will be that easy next year...
Seahawkgal wrote:I will be going to the Detroit game. We had a blast when we went in 2012.
Hawktawk wrote:Id as to playing in a weak division I agree the pats have had incredibly smooth sailing. Other than a few jets team I don’t remember anyone else making much noise for almost 2 decades. I must point out as when Holmy was dominating the “ NFC worst” it was because he was hanging 1-2 losses on division teams hence making them “worse”
Dominance is dominance. You got to be good to be lucky and they have been the luckiest dynasty in the history of pro sports
Rambo2014 wrote:You boys can thank your lucky stars that Walsh missed all those kicks costing you 2-3 games!
First you would have been embarrassed by the Rams in the Playoffs so you avoided that
If and a huge IF you would have made it to the SB as a pretender it would be a national embarrassment with a huge loss
Hawktawk wrote:Ramblo! You flamed out in the first round AT HOME to a 9-7 team that was a missed Walsh field goal from possibly losing in our house. That's after missing the playoffs for what ? 13-14 years?
Seattle meanwhile hasn't had a home playoff loss in 14 years in spite of winning the division 4 times under Holmgren including a SB appearance and 6 playoff teams in Carrolls 8 seasons none of whom failed to reach the divisional round and one lombardi in 2 appearances with the worst goal line call in NFL history or there may well have been 2. Thats with a complete rebuild in the middle of this crazy run.
STFU little boy. We can bask in our laurels but your team hasn't won jack of a post game appearance since 2004.
Stow it. CU next year pal.Lets see if you can repeat or is it a flash in the pan....
idhawkman wrote:I think the pats have benefitted from playing in one of the worst divisions in the history of the NFL for as long as they've been bad. Its not hard to go deep in the playoffs every year when you are almost 100% healthy from not playing tough competition all year and you have a bye the first game of the playoffs.
So I do believe that schedules matter. That said, it is then up to the TEAM to make the rest of the magic happen and that includes the coaches, trainers, even the laundry guys. Its a mentality of winning. What this team needs next year is a strong START to the season to get that mentality back before it sinks back to 1990's level.
I think our schedule is setup to give us every opportunity to get that mentality back next year, thus the post...
ESPN had an article discussing the easiest paths to the SB since 1990 (really only looking at post-season schedules). The Pats had 4 of the easiest 10 roads to the SB. Pretty crazy to think about. A big part of their 'easy' roads has been the fact that they have been a #1 seed so many times. Their easy divisional schedule has certainly had a hand in this.
mykc14 wrote:ESPN had an article discussing the easiest paths to the SB since 1990 (really only looking at post-season schedules). The Pats had 4 of the easiest 10 roads to the SB. Pretty crazy to think about. A big part of their 'easy' roads has been the fact that they have been a #1 seed so many times. Their easy divisional schedule has certainly had a hand in this.
NorthHawk wrote:Meh. He's being given too much credit.
He's very good, but I think others might have been better but didn't get the chance.
RiverDog wrote:
You could say that about a lot of players in a lot of sports. How many HOF baseball players would have done as well as they did had blacks been allowed to participate in the MLB prior to 1947? Would Babe Ruth been the home run champ or would it have been Josh Gibson?
The fact is that Brady got his chance and took full advantage of it. You can't discount his career based on what if's or lucky stars.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests