Let's say BB stays on until he retires. What does that mean for the franchise?

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,322
When I was saying N'keal Harry was a bust around this time of the season in 2019 many people said, "We need to see more."

The thing is, we didn't need to see more. Harry sucks. And Thornton doesn't have it. He drops too many passes if he runs a good route and gets open, which is rare as it is. I guess we'll see but he doesn't have it. He cannot create. And his hands are just bleh.

And those WRs you listed were almost all 10 years ago or more. (Issac Bruce, Chris Carter, and Reggie Wayne, seriously?) Wide receivers weren't as polished back then. I think that is obvious after what we've seen from Chase, St. Brown, and Jefferson. And Dotson, Olave, Pickins, Wilson, and Watson literally this year. All those guys have had break out games, despite Olave and Watson and Dotson having injuries, just like Thrornton. So I don't want to hear that injuries caused Thornton to regress. And Olave is catching passes from a statue and Wilson is catching passes from the worst QB in the NFL and Pickins is catching passes from bums.

Recently the NFL has seen rookie WRs break out en masse, usually in the 2nd half of their rookie season. The true studs are studs from the jump. Thornton has 18 catches and a couple of huge drops. He's had 0 great games in 2022.
I picked older guys because we’ve seen what their entire careers looked like, not just a year or two. Like I said, I gave it about three minutes of thought. I didn’t do a deep dive.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,550
I don't quite get the pushback on the examples @BaseballJones presented. They were intended to show it's not a given that Thornton will be a bust.

I thought Thornton had a terrible game against Cincy. Inexcusable for him to not make that catch on a perfectly thrown ball by Mac. And, he is, unfortunately, trending towards bust territory. At the same time, he suffered a random injury, one that is 100% not predictive of future injury luck, at a bad time after looking impressive early in his first training camp. Bringing up the injury is not the same as making excuses for his performance. But, as much as some do not want to hear it, the injury could offer an explanation for his performance to date.

There is definitely amusement value to go back to Thornton's draft thread where the pick was widely praised as a Belichick genius move.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,213
There was hardly consensus on the Thornton pick in his draft thread. Hell the first post points out FO's Adam Schwartz had a Udfa grade on him and some others had a 5th rd grade. This wasn't a Christian Barmore type slam dunk by any means it was a high risk zero floor pick.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,550
There was hardly consensus on the Thornton pick in his draft thread. Hell the first post points out FO's Adam Schwartz had a Udfa grade on him and some others had a 5th rd grade. This wasn't a Christian Barmore type slam dunk by any means it was a high risk zero floor pick.
The first post said "discuss". 2nd post mentioned his 40 time. 3rd post was a video recap of his highlights. Then some posters hoping he could catch. Subsequent posts quoting from scouts, etc.:

New #Patriots WR Tyquan Thornton was highest drafted @ShrineBowl player since 2012.

And from multiple sources, it sounds like trading up for Thornton was necessary for NE. At least one team had him as their top WR on the board today. Notable that two WRs went immediately after.
Now we have a post quoting Schwartz:

When we wrote up Playmaker Score, Tyquan Thornton had an estimated draft position of "UDFA."
Same poster also linked the following:

In @BobMcGinn's draft scout series, this is what a scout said about Tyquan Thornton: “He’s a big-play threat waiting to happen. He’s a better version of Darius Slayton or Will Fuller. What (Henry) Ruggs was. He’s got that caliber impact. But this guy can actually run routes.”
Later:

Thornton is also not as agile as most highly-drafted Patriots wideouts. Clocked a 7.25-second three-cone drill and a 4.39-second shuttle. Explosive though. Hit a 10-11 broad jump and a 38.5-inch vertical.
One poster's reaction:

If the pick had been Skyy Moore or Pickens, people would be thrilled and praising the Pats. I feel like it's pretty useless to complain - they could have had one of them and valued Thornton the most. The track record isn't spotless, but it's not horrible either and it feels foolish to me to think they don't know what they're doing.
Tyquan Thornton's rare speed can definitely put fear in defenses who wanna load the box on early downs Eats cushion and pulls away quickly vs off, beats press using pace and deception off the line Like the ball tracking and finish on under throws
"Rooting for Thornton, but dang getting mini-Harry over Brown/Deebo vibes.

@McKennAnalysis
· 1h
So the Patriots set off a run of WRs.

50th overall: Tyquan Thornton (Patriots)
52: George Pickens (Steelers)
53: Alex Pierce (Colts)
54: Skyy Moore (Chiefs)

You can bet that will make for regular comparisons for years to come."
The tweet below was linked by Cellar-Door:

View: https://twitter.com/ScottBarrettDFB/status/1517692003504562181?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1517692003504562181%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=


And Evan Lazar's reaction:

Evan Lazar: Tyquan Thornton's release game is a thing of beauty. Been a minute since the #Patriots had a WR with his kind of speed and quickness at the line. As Matt Groh said, this is not a linear athlete. Thornton can avoid press coverage with his lateral quickness.
Then a post noting how Mel Kiper panned the pick, which is usually a positive.

And reaction from @SMU_Sox, which I'll link directly as his posts are always insightful:

http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/patriots-select-wr-tyquan-thornton.36436/post-4969823
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,213
Great I should have said, first few posts, regardless I think you did a good job validating my point that it was far from a celebrated draft pick or that the consensus was it was a great pick.

I also always hear that we "stole" him from PIT but I don't think that is the case. If memory serves me correctly PIT had their draft card in moments after NE had picked Thornton to announce Pickens. If you lose out on your binky I don't think you make the selection as quickly as PIT did. If anything I think PIT might have created some smoke around Thornton to give them a better shot at Pickens.

Either way I'm done beating this horse, hope Thornton figures something out in the offseason and a real OC unlocks his potential. I won't be buying any 11 jersey's in the meantime but will be rooting for him. I'm also looking forward to being wrong about panning a NE wr pick one of these years.
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
The GM shit is a problem, but BB has earned the right to coach here as long as he wants to as far as I'm concerned.

A lot of entitled fans in these parts that forget what rebuilding year after year, finishing seasons with 1-5 wins feels like, etc. I'll take .500 seasons during a rebuilding process all day long rather that the games I sat through on metal bleachers for most of the Foxboro Stadium seasons. Jets, Broncos, Texans, Raiders, Colts, Falcons, Panthers, Saints, Bears, Lions, Cardinals, etc. Their fans would beg to have had the rebuilding seasons we've been having, instead of the seasons they've had for most of the last 2 decades.
This is pretty much how I feel, with the most important agreement being your first sentence: if you win 6 Super Bowls and set just about every record for winning in the history of the NFL over 20 years while being recognized as the greatest coach in the history of the league, you can coach my team as long as you want.

As for the rebuilding seasons, last year felt markedly different than this one. A rookie QB got us to the playoffs backed by a stout running game and a good young defense. That felt like… well… putting the “building” in rebuilding. Now I’m not sure what to think.

But ultimately 1) I’m still basking in the glow of the recent past and 2) there’s still no coach I would rather have than Belichick.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,723
02130
Today is precisely why Bill is still a great head coach. The Pats had no business being in that game. The Bengals should have steamrolled us. And yet there we were, headed to a win with 40 seconds left.

Sadly, the horrific first half, the mistakes and the general brain dead play is a reflection of the organizational rot that has set in. Bill can’t
overcome on Sunday what he has allowed to transpire Monday through Saturday.
Yes, Bill is so good that he made one of the best QB/WR duos in the league run the wrong route when our best returner happened to be guarding him, and then he used telekenesis to make the tipped prayer on 3rd and 29 go directly to Meyers.

The defense played much better in the second half but a "fair" score would have been like a 14+ point blowout if either of those plays go differently.

I'm not trying to pick on you nor do I think Bill is bad now, but I don't think Bill gets much credit for the second half. You saw it from the players saying they showed "fight" too. I guess they didn't quit, and if it gets them hyped them sure, but they got super lucky that they even had a chance at the end.
 

Curtis Pride

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
1,410
Watertown, MA
Thornton is a bust but only because he was grossly over drafted. No one had a 2nd rd grade on him, he is fast, or at least runs a fast 40 and that is it. The sobering reality is that WR's drafted in the first 3 rds that didn't have a reasonably productive rookie season, say 500 yards, are considered "face planters" in the Dynasty community. The hit rate among face planters is incredibly small. The thinking is that if someone is drafted in the first 3 rounds they should be expected to contribute early on barring injury and if they don't it is not because they don't get the opportunity a later draft pick might not get but simply they aren't that good.

So what is a “face plant” rookie? That was the key to his analysis.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DynastyFF/comments/l5f3ro/buying_rookie_faceplant_wrs_is_a_bad_idea/

The odds of Thornton being the next Chad Jackson are extremely high. To be fair the 2022 WR class was very weak after the first handful of WR went off the board. No one besides Pickens looks to be a good bet for future success and even Pickens has his warts, basically a better N'Keal Harry. Zero separation but incredible contested catch ability. Probably not someone Mac would be targeting.
To clarify this analysis, the original Reddit article was written 5 years ago and used WRs drafted from 2002 to 2016.

In BJ's cited examples above, only Demaryius Thomas (drafted in 2010) would count in the dataset. Reggie Wayne was drafted in 2001, Mike Williams in 2017, Wes Welker was a UDFA in 2004, and Adam Thielen was a UDFA in 2014.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,721
Unreal America
It’s remarkable how well things have broken for the Pats the past couple weeks, and they haven’t been able to take any advantage of it.

They could be 9-6 right now, looking at a game against a Tua-less Dolphins.

And no, losing so our draft position is marginally higher is not a worthy trade off for missing the playoffs.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,748
It’s remarkable how well things have broken for the Pats the past couple weeks, and they haven’t been able to take any advantage of it.

They could be 9-6 right now, looking at a game against a Tua-less Dolphins.

And no, losing so our draft position is marginally higher is not a worthy trade off for missing the playoffs.
Yup. 1 more win is all they needed to have a home game against Teddy Bridgewater for a playoff spot. Now, they need this game and some help because there’s no way they’re winning in Buffalo last week of the season. Too bad. Missed opportunities will define this season.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,322
Yup. 1 more win is all they needed to have a home game against Teddy Bridgewater for a playoff spot. Now, they need this game and some help because there’s no way they’re winning in Buffalo last week of the season. Too bad. Missed opportunities will define this season.
Here are their losses....

20-7 at Miami - They were kind of overrun this game. Miami had the better of them all game long.
37-26 vs Baltimore - They had every chance to win this game. Even with Mac's multiple INTs, the STILL had a chance until Agholor fumbled as they were driving for the potential winning score. UGH.
27-24 at Green Bay (OT) - They HAD THIS GAME BY THE BALLS and lost. In overtime, 2nd and 5 from the GB 46, only needing a FG to win the game, they blew it badly.
33-14 vs Chicago - Utterly impossible time defending Justin Fields, who really broke out as a pro in this game. Discouraging loss as they were just mauled in this one.
33-26 at Minnesota - Another game they easily could have won. Up 26-23 going into the fourth quarter. Down 33-26 late, the Pats still had a chance and Mac *JUST* missed Agholor deep at the end.
24-10 vs Buffalo - The Bills had total control of this game from the start.
30-24 at Las Vegas - Pats played poorly until a defensive score lit the spark. They had a 24-17 lead with 2 minutes left and let the Raiders convert a 4th and 10. Then the Raiders scored on a long pass that should not have counted (receiver barely stepped out of bounds, but it was ruled a TD). Then the Pats were basically running out the clock for overtime until the utterly inexplicable lateral play led to the victory in the most bizarre fashion possible for the Raiders.
22-18 vs Cincinnati - Down 22-0, the Pats staged a huge comeback and had the game IN THE PALM OF THEIR HANDS with just over a minute to go. 1st and goal from the 5 yard line, looking for the go-ahead touchdown, Stevenson fumbled the game away.

I know this is what bad teams do - find ways to lose. But the Pats EASILY could have won the Baltimore game, the Green Bay game, the Minnesota game, the Las Vegas game, and the Cincinnati game. That's 5 games the Pats could have - and in most cases, SHOULD have - won.

BUT...they didn't, which is why they're now struggling to make the playoffs. This team easily could be 12-3 right now, no joke. Of their wins, even though the Pittsburgh score was close, the Pats dominated them in the stats, they blew out Detroit and Cleveland, they handled the Jets at home, blew out Indy, beat the Jets on the punt return but they dominated the Jets in that game, and finally beat Arizona by 14. There were really no games the Pats won that they *should* have lost. But there are a bunch of games they lost that they *should* have won.

Of course this isn't truly a 12-3 team. They are what their record says they are. They've found ways to lose these games. But damn, they're very, very, very close to having one of the better records in the AFC, for real.
 

ShaneTrot

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2002
6,504
Overland Park, KS
If they had a functioning offense that made fewer mistakes and was well designed this team would be in the playoffs. That’s on Bill, he chose what happened here.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
13,019
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
They could also have easily lost both Jets games and the Steelers game and I disagree they were ever anywhere close to beating Baltimore. Also took them an extreme amount of luck to be in any position to come back against the Bengals. Not to mention how many backup QBs they've played throughout the year (a trend that will continue next week). I think on the whole their record reflects how they've played and I actually tend to think they've been fortunate on that front.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,642
I agree on the Jets games. I felt like they were practically gifted those games. I do agree they've also had some amazing losses this year, clutching defeat from the jaws of victory.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,322
They could also have easily lost both Jets games and the Steelers game and I disagree they were ever anywhere close to beating Baltimore. Also took them an extreme amount of luck to be in any position to come back against the Bengals. Not to mention how many backup QBs they've played throughout the year (a trend that will continue next week). I think on the whole their record reflects how they've played and I actually tend to think they've been fortunate on that front.
Yes when you play close games they could go either way. But the Pats dominated the Jets statistically in both games. In the second, the Jets never came close to even threatening to take the lead. That’s the thing. In the Ravens game, the Pats were marching down the field and has just hit a huge play to get in position to score when Agholor fumbled.

In the second Jets game, the Jets couldn’t move the ball… AT ALL, and never even came close to giving any indication that they could do anything against the Pats’ D.

So I think the Pats were much closer to winning the close games they lost than to losing the close games they won. I think it’s pretty clearly the case.

But all that doesn’t matter because they’re 7-8 and deservedly so. I said all that to make the point that they’ve had their chances to really put up a good record and they’ve blown those chances, so it’s super frustrating, and the blame falls on them for not taking care of business.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,723
02130
They were gifted the Jets games because the Jets were still starting their awful QB who they drafted 2nd instead of the better QB on their bench with no draft pedigree. They dominated the Jets statistically because Wilson sucks.

But yes the record is about what they deserve.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,322
Yes they were fortunate the Jets started Wilson. But the Jets were never close to winning either of those games. That’s what I’m talking about.

It’s like the Pats got killed by the Bears while playing an injured Mac Jones and then bringing a rookie off the bench. Yeah that was good fortune for the Bears. But the Pats never were close to winning that game. And at GB the Pats started Brian freaking Hoyer who got hurt in the game and they had to put in Zappe, a rookie with, at the time, absolutely ZERO experience.

That stuff happens.

Conversely, the Pats actually had a real chance late to beat GB, Cincy, LV, Bal, and Min. That’s what I’m talking about.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
13,019
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Yes they were fortunate the Jets started Wilson. But the Jets were never close to winning either of those games. That’s what I’m talking about.

It’s like the Pats got killed by the Bears while playing an injured Mac Jones and then bringing a rookie off the bench. Yeah that was good fortune for the Bears. But the Pats never were close to winning that game. And at GB the Pats started Brian freaking Hoyer who got hurt in the game and they had to put in Zappe, a rookie with, at the time, absolutely ZERO experience.

That stuff happens.

Conversely, the Pats actually had a real chance late to beat GB, Cincy, LV, Bal, and Min. That’s what I’m talking about.
The second game was tied with 10 seconds left in regulation and in the first game a pick 6 was taken off the board on a tricky tacky call that could very well have buried the Patriots. There are a lot of scenarios in which even a single play going the other way means the Patriots lose those games.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
33,402
Yes they were fortunate the Jets started Wilson. But the Jets were never close to winning either of those games. That’s what I’m talking about.
if JFM doesn’t get called for roughing on the pick 6 that’s a totally different game.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,322
The second game was tied with 10 seconds left in regulation and in the first game a pick 6 was taken off the board on a tricky tacky call that could very well have buried the Patriots. There are a lot of scenarios in which even a single play going the other way means the Patriots lose those games.
In any close game any crazy thing can happen at any time. Like a punt return TD with five seconds left in the game.

That doesn’t mean the Jets were actually close to winning that game. The Pats dominated the stat sheet, and the Jets did NOTHING.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,721
Unreal America
Yep, the Pats could have easily lost both Jets games. This team could be anywhere from 4-11 to 10-5 right now. So 7-8 is probably what they are.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
33,402
Agreed. But it was.
you could have given the same reply to your very own post

Could have beaten the Ravens: But they didnt
Could have beaten the Packers: But they didn’t
Could have beaten the Raiders, Bengals, Vikes: But… you get the idea
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,322
you could have given the same reply to your very own post

Could have beaten the Ravens: But they didnt
Could have beaten the Packers: But they didn’t
Could have beaten the Raiders, Bengals, Vikes: But… you get the idea
I did, if you see my post on it. I said they have nobody to blame but themselves because they were *thisclose* to winning those games but they didn’t. They easily could have 11-12 wins this year BUT THEY DON’T, because they always made the critical error or what have you.

That was my whole point.


EDIT: Just to quote myself in that first post:

I know this is what bad teams do - find ways to lose. But the Pats EASILY could have won the Baltimore game, the Green Bay game, the Minnesota game, the Las Vegas game, and the Cincinnati game. That's 5 games the Pats could have - and in most cases, SHOULD have - won.

BUT...they didn't, which is why they're now struggling to make the playoffs. This team easily could be 12-3 right now, no joke. Of their wins, even though the Pittsburgh score was close, the Pats dominated them in the stats, they blew out Detroit and Cleveland, they handled the Jets at home, blew out Indy, beat the Jets on the punt return but they dominated the Jets in that game, and finally beat Arizona by 14. There were really no games the Pats won that they *should* have lost. But there are a bunch of games they lost that they *should* have won.

Of course this isn't truly a 12-3 team. They are what their record says they are. They've found ways to lose these games. But damn, they're very, very, very close to having one of the better records in the AFC, for real.
 
Last edited:

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,820
I did, if you see my post on it. I said they have nobody to blame but themselves because they were *thisclose* to winning those games but they didn’t. They easily could have 11-12 wins this year BUT THEY DON’T, because they always made the critical error or what have you.

That was my whole point.


EDIT: Just to quote myself in that first post:
They usually squeeze the most out of their season (kind of like the Ravens this year, despite some early season gaffes). The fact that they haven’t this year has been disheartening and honestly feeds the Mac criticism as much as anything. He hasn’t shown he can win games they aren’t supposed to or aren’t controlling in the other phases.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,060
Mansfield MA
BUT...they didn't, which is why they're now struggling to make the playoffs. This team easily could be 12-3 right now, no joke. Of their wins, even though the Pittsburgh score was close, the Pats dominated them in the stats, they blew out Detroit and Cleveland, they handled the Jets at home, blew out Indy, beat the Jets on the punt return but they dominated the Jets in that game, and finally beat Arizona by 14. There were really no games the Pats won that they *should* have lost. But there are a bunch of games they lost that they *should* have won.
You're using the domination in non-score stats as justification that those wins weren't really close, but you're not factoring that in in the above analysis of close losses. Green Bay and the Bengals outgained them considerably in those two games. I don't know you'd classify those as "should have won" without making the inverse allowance for the Steelers and Jets games. (And in the first Jets game, they were outgained by ~100 yards and Mac threw a pick six that got called back for an away-from-the-ball penalty).

They're 7-8. Their point differential suggests they should be 8-7. That feels about right. Most teams play a lot of close games and find themselves on either side of several close contests.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,322
You're using the domination in non-score stats as justification that those wins weren't really close, but you're not factoring that in in the above analysis of close losses. Green Bay and the Bengals outgained them considerably in those two games. I don't know you'd classify those as "should have won" without making the inverse allowance for the Steelers and Jets games. (And in the first Jets game, they were outgained by ~100 yards and Mac threw a pick six that got called back for an away-from-the-ball penalty).

They're 7-8. Their point differential suggests they should be 8-7. That feels about right. Most teams play a lot of close games and find themselves on either side of several close contests.
I have said several times now in this conversation that they deserve to be 7-8. They made key mistakes in those games and are what their record says they are. The point I’m making is that they easily could have a MUCH better record, they could easily have already clinched a playoff spot.

But they didn’t. And the blame falls squarely on themselves for being in the position they’re in.

I mean… Minnesota has won gobs of one score games that could have gone either way. But they’ve gotten the job done and are sitting pretty. The Pats haven’t. C’est la vie.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,290
New York City
I have said several times now in this conversation that they deserve to be 7-8. They made key mistakes in those games and are what their record says they are. The point I’m making is that they easily could have a MUCH better record, they could easily have already clinched a playoff spot.

But they didn’t. And the blame falls squarely on themselves for being in the position they’re in.

I mean… Minnesota has won gobs of one score games that could have gone either way. But they’ve gotten the job done and are sitting pretty. The Pats haven’t. C’est la vie.
Minnesota has a great record because they have won every game they could have lost. They haven't lost any games they could have won.

The Patriots have won games they could have lost and lost games they could have won almost equally. You're talking like a golfer who puts one in the trees, flubs a chip, and misses 3 four footers and is like, "I shot an 82 and it should have been a 76 except for those bad shots."

But the bad shots happened.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
9,073
Philly
To be honest I find the “well if this and this and this happened they have a shot of being 10-5 not 7-8” analysis frustrating and not productive. You aren’t measuring where this team is. And I don’t think you can say easily. The Vikings are historical outliers this year outperforming their Pythag. They are an exception of exceptions. Teams that easily are 12-3 tend to have a much greater point differential than the Patriots. Patriots have about 7.8 expected wins. Teams with 7.8 expected wins are going to live within +/- 2 of that. A lucky team might be 10-5. An unlucky team might be 6-9. Patriots are right around where they should be at 7-8. This team consistently makes mistakes. They are what their record is for good reason.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,185
Westwood MA
If they had a functioning offense that made fewer mistakes and was well designed this team would be in the playoffs. That’s on Bill, he chose what happened here.
This.

Their offense has been a shitshow since the first day of training camp and that is 100% on Belichick, this half assed experiment of his torpedoed their season before it started.

Hire a real OC and a real OLine coach and see what happens in 2023.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,322
Minnesota has a great record because they have won every game they could have lost. They haven't lost any games they could have won.

The Patriots have won games they could have lost and lost games they could have won almost equally. You're talking like a golfer who puts one in the trees, flubs a chip, and misses 3 four footers and is like, "I shot an 82 and it should have been a 76 except for those bad shots."

But the bad shots happened.
They lost more games that they could/should have won than won games that they could/should have lost.

That’s the point. They’ve had plenty of great opportunities and blown them.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,521
They lost more games that they could/should have won than won games that they could/should have lost.

That’s the point. They’ve had plenty of great opportunities and blown them.
Meh, they're 3-4 in 1 score games, you just prioritize the losses by 1 score over the wins because you're a fan and so you see blown opportunities when they lose (and remember all of them because you have a much more emotional response to them than to the opponent screwing up), but not the opponent's blow opportunities when they win. Every 1 score game is loaded with plays that could have made a major difference for both sides.

This team is average in 1 score games, they're right around where the underlying numbers say they should be. They haven't been particularly unlucky or incompetent in "blowing opportunities" compared to the rest of the league.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,322
And?

As others have said, they are exactly where they should be. Why should we care about the 'ifs'?
My point, for like the third time in this conversation, is that the Pats could have clinched a playoff spot already (pretty easily actually) but they’ve bungled this season. They’ve made this season WAY harder than it’s needed to be.

This really doesn’t seem like a very controversial take nor one that should be getting this much push back.
 

ShaneTrot

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2002
6,504
Overland Park, KS
I was listening to Doug Kyed and Mike Hurly’s podcast and they spent a good 10 minutes on how awful the punting has been this season, basically the Pats are last in the NFL in most punting metrics. Why is BB not replacing Palardy? The offense is terrible and he is not flipping field position. Just seems another detail that used to be sweated and BB is just accepting the situation. At least try another punter.
 

Cotillion

New Member
Jun 11, 2019
5,405
I was listening to Doug Kyed and Mike Hurly’s podcast and they spent a good 10 minutes on how awful the punting has been this season, basically the Pats are last in the NFL in most punting metrics. Why is BB not replacing Palardy? The offense is terrible and he is not flipping field position. Just seems another detail that used to be sweated and BB is just accepting the situation. At least try another punter.
Maybe this is what Bill considers tanking? Lol
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,863
Needham, MA
Palardy has been awful but the most likely reason why he’s still on the team is that there’s nobody out there who is going to be guaranteed to be a better punter, and Palardy has a lot of practice and game reps on the FG operation as the holder.

If we are going to skewer the special teams (and we probably should), the mental mistakes, penalties and missed assignments to me are a lot more worrisome than a street FA punter who sucks performing at his expected level of suckitude.
 

Bertha

Member
SoSH Member
May 3, 2016
208
I would guess that no punter who also kicks off was out there. With Folk‘s nagging injury issues, I wonder if him being forced to kick off is the cause for some of his atypical accuracy issues of late.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
49,892
Its absolutely possible that a better punter than Palardy is just sitting at home chilling, not trying to get a job with any NFL teams and its possible that the Patriots would not upgrade even if they knew that there was a good punter just sitting around waiting for them to call. But it doesn't seem plausible.

Ernie Adams Razor suggests they are sticking with Palardy because he's the best of their current options.
 

patinorange

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 27, 2006
31,718
6 miles from Angel Stadium
As Bill Parcells said (paraphrasing) you are what your record says you are. Middle of or just below the pack.
Are we spoiled? Of course. We expect more from Bill. Beat Buffalo and win a playoff game without Tom.
The cure.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,290
New York City
As Bill Parcells said (paraphrasing) you are what your record says you are. Middle of or just below the pack.
Are we spoiled? Of course. We expect more from Bill. Beat Buffalo and win a playoff game without Tom.
The cure.
Of course, "you are what your record says you are" is pablum hogwash. It never meant anything and it doesn't mean anything.

Is Minnesota really a quality and dominant 12-4 team because that is their record? No, of course not. The Jets, Cleveland, and Vegas all have better point differentials.

That adage is worth as much as Matt Patricia's coaching skills.
 

patinorange

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 27, 2006
31,718
6 miles from Angel Stadium
Of course, "you are what your record says you are" is pablum hogwash. It never meant anything and it doesn't mean anything.

Is Minnesota really a quality and dominant 12-4 team because that is their record? No, of course not. The Jets, Cleveland, and Vegas all have better point differentials.

That adage is worth as much as Matt Patricia's coaching skills.
The record gets you in the playoffs (or not). The only thing that matters is playoff wins. And the Patriots record is pretty much what the Patriots are. Mediocre.
I'm just responding to all the "what could have been" talk in this thread.
You win some you shouldn't have, (Jets) and you lose some you shouldn't have (Raiders) but, in the end, it usually evens out.
In Minnesota's case, you have a point. They probably won a few more than they should have. But if they win a couple in the playoffs, it's forgotten and it's a great season.
If they get beat in round one, the record means nothing.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,642
Its absolutely possible that a better punter than Palardy is just sitting at home chilling, not trying to get a job with any NFL teams and its possible that the Patriots would not upgrade even if they knew that there was a good punter just sitting around waiting for them to call. But it doesn't seem plausible.

Ernie Adams Razor suggests they are sticking with Palardy because he's the best of their current options.
Palardy is clearly not good, but I feel like they have had issues on ST that aren't just the fault of the punter.