That's insane.
12 byes in 17 years... (or 18, either way)
I know a version of this has been posted in the past, but it's still a crazy stat.
12 byes in 17 years... (or 18, either way)
I know a version of this has been posted in the past, but it's still a crazy stat.
Haha that's an awesome way to look at it - the Patriots have played fewer Wild Card games than the Texans or Redskins or Jaguars or Dolphins. Makes it seem like they're an even worse franchise than those teams.
Hahaha
Expanding to all first round byes in the SB Era (which I think is all ever):
14: Patriots, 49ers
12: Broncos
11: Steelers
9: Cowboys
8: Bears
6: Falcons
5: Eagles, Giants, Dolphins, Chargers, Raiders, Rams, Packers
4: Browns, Titans, Colts, Vikings, Chiefs, Bills, Panthers
3: Seahawks, Bucs, Redskins
2: Saints, Ravens, Bengals
1: Cardinals, Jaguars, Jets, Lions
0: Texans
(unaudited)
14: Patriots, 49ers
12: Broncos
11: Steelers
9: Cowboys
8: Bears
6: Falcons
5: Eagles, Giants, Dolphins, Chargers, Raiders, Rams, Packers
4: Browns, Titans, Colts, Vikings, Chiefs, Bills, Panthers
3: Seahawks, Bucs, Redskins
2: Saints, Ravens, Bengals
1: Cardinals, Jaguars, Jets, Lions
0: Texans
(unaudited)
Celebrating that Hudson Solder gets to see another post-season.
https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/01/04/nate-solder-cancer
https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/01/04/nate-solder-cancer
There are few mountains left to climb for the Pats, but winning the Super Bowl vs. a team playing in its home stadium would be one. Bring on the Vikings.
Mike ReissVerified account @MikeReiss 3m3 minutes ago
In addition to Rob Gronkowski, quarterback Tom Brady was named first-team AP All-Pro. It is Brady's third career All-Pro honor.
In addition to Rob Gronkowski, quarterback Tom Brady was named first-team AP All-Pro. It is Brady's third career All-Pro honor.
Tom Brady has 25 career playoff wins.
The 6 NFC playoffs starting QB's have a combined 26 career playoff starts.
The 6 NFC playoffs starting QB's have a combined 26 career playoff starts.
Gunning for a sixth Lombardi. Three periods of time:
Period 1 (2001-2004) - The first dynasty
Period 2 (2005-2013) - Unfulfilled greatness
Period 3 (2014-present) - The second dynasty
In the first dynasty, they:
- Beat a team (StL Rams) that had recently won the SB (1999) and was looking to establish a dynasty of its own. Won in dramatic fashion.
- Beat a young, emerging NFC power (Carolina) that had not had this kind of success before. Won in dramatic fashion.
- Beat a consistently excellent NFC power (Philadelphia) that was looking to get over the hump. Was pretty much in control much of the game but the score was still tight at the end.
In the unfulfilled greatness period they:
- Won the division constantly.
- Went to 2 Super Bowls and lost both in excruciating fashion.
- Set multiple NFL records along the way.
In this second dynasty, they:
- Beat a team (Seattle) that had recently won a SB (2013) and was looking to establish a dynasty of its own. Won in dramatic fashion.
- Beat a young, emerging NFC power (Atlanta) that had not had this kind of success before. Won in dramatic fashion.
- This year????
It's kind of eerie how this second dynasty they're mirroring the first one.
Period 1 (2001-2004) - The first dynasty
Period 2 (2005-2013) - Unfulfilled greatness
Period 3 (2014-present) - The second dynasty
In the first dynasty, they:
- Beat a team (StL Rams) that had recently won the SB (1999) and was looking to establish a dynasty of its own. Won in dramatic fashion.
- Beat a young, emerging NFC power (Carolina) that had not had this kind of success before. Won in dramatic fashion.
- Beat a consistently excellent NFC power (Philadelphia) that was looking to get over the hump. Was pretty much in control much of the game but the score was still tight at the end.
In the unfulfilled greatness period they:
- Won the division constantly.
- Went to 2 Super Bowls and lost both in excruciating fashion.
- Set multiple NFL records along the way.
In this second dynasty, they:
- Beat a team (Seattle) that had recently won a SB (2013) and was looking to establish a dynasty of its own. Won in dramatic fashion.
- Beat a young, emerging NFC power (Atlanta) that had not had this kind of success before. Won in dramatic fashion.
- This year????
It's kind of eerie how this second dynasty they're mirroring the first one.
So who would be the NFC equivalent of the Eagles this year? The Saints are the only team that kind of works there.
I for one would appreciate the symmetry of beating the Rams in the first and last Super Bowls of the Patriots dynasty (certainly not saying I hope this is the last year the Patriots make the Super Bowl, but if it is that symmetry would be kind of neat as a "time is a circle" kind of thing).
I for one would appreciate the symmetry of beating the Rams in the first and last Super Bowls of the Patriots dynasty (certainly not saying I hope this is the last year the Patriots make the Super Bowl, but if it is that symmetry would be kind of neat as a "time is a circle" kind of thing).
If Brady hadn't won those last two games he'd be destroyed forever by the media. Can't lose 4 straight friggin' Super Bowls. And because he did, he's been treated completely differently by the media and tons of outside fans for all eternity. It's put Peyton in the rear view in terms of legacy. A 6th looks boring to the rest of the NFL but Steelers and Cowboys fans will sure hate it. Brady gets GOAT treatment because of those last two games and I will die happy because of it. Those two Giant Super Bowls crushed us all, we all knew Brady needed justice for his greatness and needed at least another ring. We got it as fans. And more. Just stopping by to Celebrate What Is.
Here's are question to throw out to everyone. If the Patriots go on to win their 6th Super Bowl this year which era will be better?
2001-2007 Patriots
6 AFC East Titles
4 First Round Byes
5 AFC Championship games
4 AFC Championships
3 Super Bowl Titles in 4 year stretch (only Cowboys other team to do it)
16-0 Regular Season in 2007
21 straight wins between the 2003 and 2004 seasons
Undefeated in two straight seasons at home (2003 and 2004)
12.2 wins a season average
versus
2010-current Patriots
8 AFC East Titles
8 First Round Byes
They would have been in 7 Straight AFC Championship games
They would have won 4 AFC Championships
And they would be the 3rd team to win 3 in 4 years behind Cowboys and Patriots era from above
Undefeated at home in 2010, 2013
12.75 wins per season average
2001-2007 Patriots
6 AFC East Titles
4 First Round Byes
5 AFC Championship games
4 AFC Championships
3 Super Bowl Titles in 4 year stretch (only Cowboys other team to do it)
16-0 Regular Season in 2007
21 straight wins between the 2003 and 2004 seasons
Undefeated in two straight seasons at home (2003 and 2004)
12.2 wins a season average
versus
2010-current Patriots
8 AFC East Titles
8 First Round Byes
They would have been in 7 Straight AFC Championship games
They would have won 4 AFC Championships
And they would be the 3rd team to win 3 in 4 years behind Cowboys and Patriots era from above
Undefeated at home in 2010, 2013
12.75 wins per season average
If you take the best team from each era - 2004/2007 in the first, 2010/2014 in the second - I think the former would be better teams overall. I had far more confidence that the team would get it done in an era where they were known for a stellar defense and adequate offense (2004), or mind-numbingly overwhelming offense and damned-good defense (2007), than in the current era of great offense but bend-but-don't-break defense. I felt we were a more balanced team in that earlier era, at least up until Brady and Moss set the league on fire (and even then still had a great defense, 4th in PA).
It's also a team of individuals, ultimately, and I feel like the earlier era had more great players whereas the current one has two legendary players and is generally pretty top-heavy. Of course, by comparison to the rest of the league, the Patriots' roster is much more well-distributed; but by comparison to the first half of the dynasty, I think they had a greater number of difference-makers.
Consider:
Brady - Troy Brown - Branch - (Moss) - Light - McGinest - Seymour - Bruschi - Vrabel - Wilfork - Law - Harrison - Vinatieri
vs
Brady - Gronk - Edelman - (Welker) - Mankins - Solder - Wilfork - Mayo - Hightower - McCourty - Gostkowski
It's certainly not a slam dunk either way.
It's also a team of individuals, ultimately, and I feel like the earlier era had more great players whereas the current one has two legendary players and is generally pretty top-heavy. Of course, by comparison to the rest of the league, the Patriots' roster is much more well-distributed; but by comparison to the first half of the dynasty, I think they had a greater number of difference-makers.
Consider:
Brady - Troy Brown - Branch - (Moss) - Light - McGinest - Seymour - Bruschi - Vrabel - Wilfork - Law - Harrison - Vinatieri
vs
Brady - Gronk - Edelman - (Welker) - Mankins - Solder - Wilfork - Mayo - Hightower - McCourty - Gostkowski
It's certainly not a slam dunk either way.
I would split the two eras by decade, 2001 - 2009 and then 2010 to present. 2010 is when Gronk arrived and, IMO, when they fully transitioned to a team that relied on their offense to win games, rather than a defensive team or a more balanced team (with 2007 being the possible exception there).
The 2010 - present teams really haven't had a "down" year, playoffs every year, AFCCG every year since 2011 and 3 Super Bowl appearances.
The 2001 - 2009 teams had 2002 (missed playoffs and the last time the franchise didn't win at least 10 games), 2005 and 2009 teams which are the three worst teams of the Brady era (leaving out 2008 for obvious reasons). But, they also had the 2003, 2004 and 2007 teams which I think are the three best teams of the Brady era.
I think it is a classic consistently great vs. higher peak argument, but man what a fucking ride it has been.
The 2010 - present teams really haven't had a "down" year, playoffs every year, AFCCG every year since 2011 and 3 Super Bowl appearances.
The 2001 - 2009 teams had 2002 (missed playoffs and the last time the franchise didn't win at least 10 games), 2005 and 2009 teams which are the three worst teams of the Brady era (leaving out 2008 for obvious reasons). But, they also had the 2003, 2004 and 2007 teams which I think are the three best teams of the Brady era.
I think it is a classic consistently great vs. higher peak argument, but man what a fucking ride it has been.
Tom vs Time documentary coming out.
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2018/01/09/tom-brady-shares-peek-into-personal-life-in-new-documentary-tom-vs-time/
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2018/01/09/tom-brady-shares-peek-into-personal-life-in-new-documentary-tom-vs-time/
What’s crazy is for all the success, how many Pats from the Belichick era will heading to the HOF? Brady, Gronk, and...who? Moss, though he was here and gone in a flash, and of course never won a SB. Vinatieri? McGinnest? Law?
Vinatieri, certainly. He's either the #1 or #2 kicker of all time. Moss is probably in this year, depending (as you say) on whether you count him.
Ty Law made the final cut (top 10) last year, is in the semis this year, and may well make it. He's not a slam dunk but probably >50% to eventually get in.
Wilfork may get strong consideration, but I think the list stops there. The NFL HOF is too small and restricted, and the voters too bitter and catty, to give one of those precious spots to the likes of Harrison, Light, Troy Brown, Bruschi or (to my eyes) anyone on the current roster. They'll have to content themselves with their rings, and being Patriots HOFers.
Ty Law made the final cut (top 10) last year, is in the semis this year, and may well make it. He's not a slam dunk but probably >50% to eventually get in.
Wilfork may get strong consideration, but I think the list stops there. The NFL HOF is too small and restricted, and the voters too bitter and catty, to give one of those precious spots to the likes of Harrison, Light, Troy Brown, Bruschi or (to my eyes) anyone on the current roster. They'll have to content themselves with their rings, and being Patriots HOFers.
Seymour is the only name I'd add as a possibility, although he's hurt by the position he played.
I think Harrison had a HOF career but his reputation as a dirty player is going to hurt his chances. I've said it many times on this board, but he was the best defensive player from the 2003 - 2004 teams if you ask me.
I think Harrison had a HOF career but his reputation as a dirty player is going to hurt his chances. I've said it many times on this board, but he was the best defensive player from the 2003 - 2004 teams if you ask me.
He certainly made some huge plays in both those playoffs.
2003 Divisional - INT in 17-14 win over Titans
2003 AFC Championship - INT in endzone vs Colts
2003 Super Bowl - Sack of Delhomme
2004 Divisional - INT to end game vs Colts
2004 AFC Championship - 87 yard pick 6 against Steelers making score 24-3 at the time.
2004 Super Bowl - 2 INT's against the Eagles and a sack
You're thinking they are going to leave Bill out? :0)
Edit: Serious answer, Seau was probably a hall of famer before he was a Patriot but I'd say he counts. Same with Curtis Martin. Kraft, of course, is a shoe-in. I would also think Rodney may get in, because of his media presence, which I think helps. I think McGinnest has a chance. Slater would be a pretty bold pick, and could start a whole debate that could derail this thread, but it will never happen so probably not worth talking about.
Last edited:
Not taking away from your list, but the game was 20-3 with 4 seconds left after he picked it. He almost had another pick in SB39 on the play right before his first one (batted it to Samuel, negated by a Phifer penalty).
Especially when you contrast that with the number of HOFers from
- Green Bay in the 60s (11 -- Adderley, Davis, Gregg, Hornung, Jordan, Nitschke, Ringo, Robinson, Starr, Taylor, Wood)
- Miami in the 70s (6 -- Buoniconti, Csonka, Griese, Langer, Little, Warfield)
- Pitt in the 70s (9 -- Blount, Bradshaw, Greene, Ham, Harris, Lambert, Stallworth, Swann, Webster)
- SF in the 80's (6 -- Dean, Haley, Lott, Montana, Rice, Young)
- Buffalo in the 80s (5 -- Kelly, Lofton, Reed, Smith, Thomas)
- Dallas in the 90s (6 -- Aikman, Allen, Haley, Irvin, Sanders, Smith)
Curtis Martin was gone from the Pats before BB or TB even arrived.
Strongly disagree on Seau. His HOF resume was complete just based on his years with the Chargers, before he ever even got to the Dolphins. He was clearly on the back 9 by the time he got to the Pats.
I agree with that assessment. I'd wish that Light would get a little more love...if Boselli and Jacoby can be semi-finalists, I don't see why Matt Light couldn't at least make it that far. I almost forgot that he missed much of that 2005 season as well (knocked out in that same game against Pittsburgh as Harrison did, I think...talk about a Pyrrhic victory)...I guess since he came back as steady as ever after that, while Harrison had a knee injury against the Titans in 2006, and the HGH issue because of it as well.
I will always wonder what Seymour's career numbers would have been in a conventional 4-3 "Go and wreak havoc" kind of defense. He was big enough to play inside, and quick enough to play outside. He ran a fumble recovery back against the Bills during their Bledsoe years that always sticks in my mind. I have never seen a 300 pound man run as fast as he did.
I loved Matt Light. In no world is he a HoFer. 3 Pro Bowls and 1 All Pro. Let’s be a bit realistic.
I gotta think that if anyone wises up and gives a special teams player other than a kicker some consideration for a Hall of Fame slot then Slater (with 7 Pro Bowls and counting to his name) has to be top of the list. I also think that if assistant coaches were to be given some love then Scar should be in. I think both areas should be represented in the Hall but the way the selection process is structured probably means that neither one has a chance in hell.
I think the salary cap came in in 1994. Before that, I think more players stayed with one team, and thus benefitted from those dynasties in ways that Seymour & Law, for example, didn't.
Mel Blount played all 13 years with Pit.
Bradshaw 14.
Greene 13
Ham 12
Harris 12 (then 8 games with seattle)
Lambert 11
Stallworth 14
Swann 9
Webster 15 (before 1.5 in KC)
I'm not suggesting that any of them (maybe Bradshaw) are not HoFers. And in and of themselves, that's extraordinary longevity. But, to the point of relatively few Patriot HoFers, would a team have been able to keep them all with a cap? Would they become less HoF-likely if they hadn't been associated with a dynasty for their whole career?
You wanted BB fired before the Super Bowl because of deflategate and said it made you embarassed to be a Pats fan. People forget that.
If that lineup doesn’t suffice to give you a woodie ...
Championships help everyone who was a champion. Of that list, insofar as Canton is concerned, most notably Bradshaw and the two receivers (which, again, is not to say any of them is not Hall worthy). Greene and the two linebackers would have been admitted if they had worn clown costumes.
There is no chance that group stays together in the modern era. Zero. Beyond playing ability, even in the Neanderthal 1970s, two of them were celebrities. Greene, of course, and Lambert, who adorned a cover of SI and was crazy.
Slater has a decent shot of getting in. His Pro Bowl/All-Pro selections are solid and he has a pretty stellar reputation in NFL circles.
Eventually we'll see the selection restrictions loosened a bit (8 selections a year in a 32 team league is way too low), which should open up specialists and even non-HC candidates like Scarnecchia.
On Seymour, he was first team NFL All-Decade Defense DT along with Sapp for the 2000's (which is chosen by the HOF voters). Looking it up for reference nine of the eleven 1990's defense first -teamers were elected to the HOF (all but the safeties, Steve Atwater and LeRoy Butler). ALL of the All-Decade defensive players for the 1980's made it. Ten of the 1970's team made it (all but safety Cliff Harris).
On that first team defense for the 2000's, Strahan, Sapp and Brooks are already in. Freeney, Lewis, Urlacher,
Bailey, Woodson, Reed and Dawkins all have excellent to lock chances of making it.
Seymour's probably the most likely of that group to get left out, but it wouldn't be surprising if he eventually got in.
I would like to see them shift to category elections. Something like
- Offensive line
- Skill positions
- QBs
- Defensive line
- LBs
- DBs
- Special Teams
- Executives
- Coaches
- None of the above (e.g. union folks, agents, broadcasters, referees)
I mean, Steve Tasker still isn't in the HOF. It'll be a long wait for Slater if he ever gets in and those odds aren't very good. It took Ray Guy forever and he's thought of as the best in his position by a long way. Specialty players have a hard time getting in.
If Steve Tasker, who not only had all the credentials that Slater has had but also had national recognition as a HoF possibility, can't even make it to the final round of candidates, there's little chance Slater gets in
2 Super Bowl wins can go a long way to jumping him over Tasker. They both have 7 pro bowls. Tasker has 5 1st team All Pro's while Slater has 4 1st team All Pro's and 1 second team All Pro's.
If sportsbooks haven't caught up on it yet, simplest prop bet you can win is a heads call by Slater. He supposedly calls heads all the time.
I think you were on the right track. Dillon was a more proficient scorer, had better yards per carry, was a better receiver and held onto the ball better than Bettis. Bettis enjoyed a longer career and played most of his career with the Steelers whereas most of Dillon's career was with the lower profile Bengals. Dillon's per game rushing stats in the postseason are also generally better than Bettis's although Bettis has advantages in terms of TDs while also playing in 8 more post season games than Dillon. I would argue that Dillon was a better back than Bettis.
Citing Slater’s 2nd team All Pro this year is kinda like citing Rafael Palmeiro’s Golf Glove. He played in 9 games.
Tasker actually contributed offensively. As a kick and punt returner, as a receiver and basically made the position even a Pro Bowl roster spot. Much like Light, I love Slater but he’s got a fraction of the touches, three* career touches on offense and has never stepped foot in an end zone other than to knell for a touchback. No, he’s not a HoFer and certainly not before Tasker.
Isn't the whole point of acknowledging Slater's greatness that he contributes a huge amount without touching the ball? Just look at the Jets game - the Patriots gained about 80 yards of field position because they had a guy on special teams who consistently gets down field and makes plays. To say that only a returner or kicker "actually" contributes because they touch the ball ignores the other 21 guys on the field and the fact that Slater's proficiency has probably resulted in both more points for his team and less points for the opposition than the vast majority of participants in the games in which he appears.
This is smart but lost on most people. Skill positions--terrible term--is where it's at.
If the OL is amazing this weekend, then Brady and Gronk (or Cooks/White/etc.) were dominant. If the OL is terrible, then Brady is "cooked".
Folks who don't touch the ball are mostly disregarded. Certainly the hype machine ignores them. Remember the David Terrell debate?
I'm not qualified to weigh in on Slater vs. Tasker, but the idea that the former could possibly be better will be impossible for some people to fathom.
Yes, but Tasker did all that AND contributed by touching the ball on top of it. Both on offense and forcing more turnovers. I 100% agree that it's not all about touches and that the guys in the trenches, the gunners, the long snapper, etc, all make huge contributions. But if you're comparing two players directly and one has more contributions on top of it by helping in other aspects, I find it hard to argue the latter player has a better HoF case. If one were able to actually quantify a gunner's value, I'd be willing to bet Tasker still ranks higher and then has more contributions on top of it, contributing to offense more than just running a straight go route when the outside receiver was hurt and they needed to get a DB out of the area they wanted to make a play in. If a special teamer is getting in on a 5 player class, I find it kind of crazy to think it would be Slater over Tasker.