Belichick says win over Jets was '"A big positive!"

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from jozee76. Show jozee76's posts

    Belichick says win over Jets was '"A big positive!"

     

    Positive? Really, really? Ok, they won, and yes that is VERY positive. But, HOW they won is entirely another story.  For 8 years, Bill (The GM) has made such poor personnel decisions it's not close to being funny. Now they've honestly left TB with 1 option to throw too.  Just 1!!!!!!!!!!  I'm sure it get's better from here. (It has too!) But last week was anything but "A big positive!" Positive? Really, really?

     

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from JoeFoyFan. Show JoeFoyFan's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    "A small positive" is a better description.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from NoMorePensionLooting. Show NoMorePensionLooting's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    Lot of young guys on the team. BB is just trying to keep things upbeat. Brady was contrite as well. Spin seldom equates to reality.......

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to jozee76's comment:

     

     

     

    Positive? Really, really? Ok, they won, and yes that is VERY positive. But, HOW they won is entirely another story.  For 8 years, Bill (The GM) has made such poor personnel decisions it's not close to being funny. Now they've honestly left TB with 1 option to throw too.  Just 1!!!!!!!!!!  I'm sure it get's better from here. (It has too!) But last week was anything but "A big positive!" Positive? Really, really?

     

     

     




    I guess you are smarter than Bill.  Brady has lots of options to throw to.  They currently are not catching very well, or running routes well.  SETTLE DOWN.  They will  get better, and then we will have a corps of young, fast, big wide receivers.  You should all remember it was receiver/te drops in the last SB that cost us that championship.  So the rebuild was needed. It will be ugly early, but the schedule and luck have gotten us through the first bit with 2 wins.  Whatever happens next, we got two games worth of experience and are going to have guys returning soon.  Keine Panic.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    Any time you  can escape the idiotic (Thanksgiving excepted) Thursday game with a win -- particularly a division win -- it's a very, very big positive.

    Does anyone besides me find it amusing that a league which wants so desperately for you and I to believe it has deep concerns about "player safety" keeps spreading its product thinner and thinner?

     

    Look . . .  it's true enough that the Pats have looked fairly pedestrian against what can only be described as two pretty bad teams, but last time I checked they don't award style points in the NFL . . .  unless, of course, you end up way, way down the list of playoff tie-breakers.

    We should all hope it won't come to that.

     

     

    Now you listen here! He's not the Messiah . . .   he's a very naughty boy!



     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jallen1952-formelyJallen3531. Show jallen1952-formelyJallen3531's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    Kudos to the coach for trying to keep things positive, but we saw what we saw on Thursday, and I refuse to believe that was to his standards.

     

    And what's up with the kick-off return game?  Is Blount seriously the best they can do?  If he ever makes it to the 40 I'd be shocked......

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rtuinila. Show rtuinila's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to Davedsone's comment:


    I guess you are smarter than Bill.  Brady has lots of options to throw to.  They currently are not catching very well, or running routes well.  SETTLE DOWN.  They will  get better, and then we will have a corps of young, fast, big wide receivers.  You should all remember it was receiver/te drops in the last SB that cost us that championship.  So the rebuild was needed. It will be ugly early, but the schedule and luck have gotten us through the first bit with 2 wins.  Whatever happens next, we got two games worth of experience and are going to have guys returning soon.  Keine Panic.

     




    I'm not sure the receivers are running the wrong routes, They just may not be making the proper "route adjustment" on particular plays. I know that is nitpicking but, to me, there is a big difference. Other than that I agree!

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from rtuinila. Show rtuinila's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to jozee76's comment:

     

     

     

    Positive? Really, really? Ok, they won, and yes that is VERY positive. But, HOW they won is entirely another story.  For 8 years, Bill (The GM) has made such poor personnel decisions it's not close to being funny. Now they've honestly left TB with 1 option to throw too.  Just 1!!!!!!!!!!  I'm sure it get's better from here. (It has too!) But last week was anything but "A big positive!" Positive? Really, really?

     

     

     



    They won, they didn't turn the ball over, none of the skill guys got injured, the rookies got more experience, the defense got four turnovers, only allowed 10 points. Aside from low fantasy football numbers it was an almost perfect game! I think almost perfect IS a positive.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from jozee76. Show jozee76's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    And? I would say winning 2 division games with your offense slow out of the gate, each showing character from the way they won the games, the latter being on a short week completely undermanned, is a positive.

     




    Yes winning the 2 games is a positive. But it is not a BIG POSITIVE. They looked horrible!  Against the Bills, The Jets and the Buccaneers this may fly. But against an other stronger team they will be, and are in trouble. Don't get me wrong, they will get better. Week 4, week 5, who knows, but they will get better. And in the end, Bill may make us all eat humble pie and these guys will turn out to be all pros. But week 2 a "A Big Positive" ah, NO!

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from jozee76. Show jozee76's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to rtuinila's comment:

     

    In response to jozee76's comment:

    Positive? Really, really? Ok, they won, and yes that is VERY positive. But, HOW they won is entirely another story.  For 8 years, Bill (The GM) has made such poor personnel decisions it's not close to being funny. Now they've honestly left TB with 1 option to throw too.  Just 1!!!!!!!!!!  I'm sure it get's better from here. (It has too!) But last week was anything but "A big positive!" Positive? Really, really?

     

     

     There were positives from the game no doubt. But "A Big Positive?" NO!

     

     



    They won, they didn't turn the ball over, none of the skill guys got injured, the rookies got more experience, the defense got four turnovers, only allowed 10 points. Aside from low fantasy football numbers it was an almost perfect game! I think almost perfect IS a positive.

     

     

    There were positives from the game no doubt. But "A Big Positive?" NO!




     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    Well . . .  if we're going to be buttressing our arguments by simply repeating ourselves, I'll join in:

    Three days rest.

    Almost no practice.

    limited roster.

    Horrible game conditions.

    Division win.

     

     

    Very, very big positive.

     

    Yes.

     

    Now you listen here! He's not the Messiah . . .   he's a very naughty boy!



     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    Good stuff p-mike. I can't wait to see this place when the Pats actually lose a game.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Getzo. Show Getzo's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to jozee76's comment:

     

     

     

    Positive? Really, really? Ok, they won, and yes that is VERY positive. But, HOW they won is entirely another story.  For 8 years, Bill (The GM) has made such poor personnel decisions it's not close to being funny. Now they've honestly left TB with 1 option to throw too.  Just 1!!!!!!!!!!  I'm sure it get's better from here. (It has too!) But last week was anything but "A big positive!" Positive? Really, really?

     

     

     



    Really.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from tankboytaylor. Show tankboytaylor's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '


    guess alot of you werent watching or forget'this is how alot of the Pats championship teams won games.  I could care less how many points this team scores as long as its one more the opponent come end of game

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to FrankDooley's comment:

    And? I would say winning 2 division games with your offense slow out of the gate, each showing character from the way they won the games, the latter being on a short week completely undermanned, is a positive.

     




    I expect them to go undefeated in the division every season.  Looking at the division this season there is no reason why they shouldn't.  But I admit, I felt better about it before week 1 then I do now.  To need 3 turnovers to escape with a 13-10 win over a rookie qb who isn't that good and the rest of the bad jets team, that's not good.  We can't afford to go 4-2 or worse in the division.  I see 5 losses in the schedule as it is, can't have 2 more from within the division..  9-7 isn't going to cut it this year.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from teegee. Show teegee's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    Pat's have got what, 7 drafties and 4 udfa? Alledgedly are the 2nd youngest team. What'd ya expect?  Blowouts?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to p-mike's comment:

    Well . . .  if we're going to be buttressing our arguments by simply repeating ourselves, I'll join in:

    Three days rest.

    Almost no practice.

    limited roster.

    Horrible game conditions.

    Division win.

     

     

    Very, very big positive.

     

    Yes.

     

    Now you listen here! He's not the Messiah . . .   he's a very naughty boy!






    Jets could use all the same excuses, plus they traveled before the game, plus they were starting a rookie QB that probably really shouldn't be starting, plus they have RR as a coach, lol!

    Still the Pats needed 3 turnovers to eek out a 13-10 win.

    It's awesome to be positive but we also need to be realistic.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Getzo. Show Getzo's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to TFB12's comment:

    In response to p-mike's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Well . . .  if we're going to be buttressing our arguments by simply repeating ourselves, I'll join in:

    Three days rest.

    Almost no practice.

    limited roster.

    Horrible game conditions.

    Division win.

     

     

    Very, very big positive.

     

    Yes.

     

    Now you listen here! He's not the Messiah . . .   he's a very naughty boy!



     




    Jets could use all the same excuses, plus they traveled before the game, plus they were starting a rookie QB that probably really shouldn't be starting, plus they have RR as a coach, lol!

     

    Still the Pats needed 3 turnovers to eek out a 13-10 win.

    It's awesome to be positive but we also need to be realistic.

    [/QUOTE]

    Excuses........... are excuses.........  Pats have 2 wins.  These are the only facts we can draw from 2 weeks.   2 wins.  

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from jozee76. Show jozee76's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to Getzo's comment:

    In response to TFB12's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to p-mike's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Well . . .  if we're going to be buttressing our arguments by simply repeating ourselves, I'll join in:

    Three days rest.

    Almost no practice.

    limited roster.

    Horrible game conditions.

    Division win.

     

     

    Very, very big positive.

     

    Yes.

     

    Now you listen here! He's not the Messiah . . .   he's a very naughty boy!



     

     




    Jets could use all the same excuses, plus they traveled before the game, plus they were starting a rookie QB that probably really shouldn't be starting, plus they have RR as a coach, lol!

     

     

    Still the Pats needed 3 turnovers to eek out a 13-10 win.

    It's awesome to be positive but we also need to be realistic.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Excuses........... are excuses.........  Pats have 2 wins.  These are the only facts we can draw from 2 weeks.   2 wins.  

     

    [/QUOTE]


    They do have 2 wins, for that it's great! 2 Division wins, GREAT! It's just looking ahead (Looking past Tamp Bay) is a bit worrisome! That's all!

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to Getzo's comment:

    In response to TFB12's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to p-mike's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Well . . .  if we're going to be buttressing our arguments by simply repeating ourselves, I'll join in:

    Three days rest.

    Almost no practice.

    limited roster.

    Horrible game conditions.

    Division win.

     

     

    Very, very big positive.

     

    Yes.

     

    Now you listen here! He's not the Messiah . . .   he's a very naughty boy!



     

     




    Jets could use all the same excuses, plus they traveled before the game, plus they were starting a rookie QB that probably really shouldn't be starting, plus they have RR as a coach, lol!

     

     

    Still the Pats needed 3 turnovers to eek out a 13-10 win.

    It's awesome to be positive but we also need to be realistic.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Excuses........... are excuses.........  Pats have 2 wins.  These are the only facts we can draw from 2 weeks.   2 wins.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    NO! NO! NO!

    You diddn't get the memo... if you don't win in a blowout it doesn't count.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from bostatewarrior. Show bostatewarrior's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    I thought I was the only one who thought Thursday games just didn't seem right.  Talk about your unbalanced schedule.

    Here's an idea for the NFL to increase revenue; include the Vegas point spread in the actual score. Whoa parity!  

     

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from bostatewarrior. Show bostatewarrior's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to jozee76's comment:

    In response to Getzo's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to TFB12's comment:

     

     

     




    They do have 2 wins, for that it's great! 2 Division wins, GREAT! It's just looking ahead (Looking past Tamp Bay) is a bit worrisome! That's all!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I looked on the Tampa Bay forum and they have a thread about the Pats.  I couldn't help but think, "they still need to play the Saints"

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Belichick says win over Jets was '

    In response to Getzo's comment:


    Excuses........... are excuses.........  Pats have 2 wins.  These are the only facts we can draw from 2 weeks.   2 wins.  

     



    I agree, but 2 wins that were already counted on, not a surprise, we expected this.  What wasn't counted on, what wasn't expected was how bad the Pats would look just barely getting those two wins.  Reason for concern is justified, imo.

     

Share