Sports : The Patriots were lucky.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
horrible coaching by atlanta for not running the clock in the second half.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
Patriots just keep getting lucky. Lucky their players make more plays and their coaches are smarter. So I guess it's luck that wins every football game, ever.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
No, the Patriots are a good team. Maybe the best over the last ten years. But they were lucky Atlanta didn't know how to finish the game.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
Yes, they were lucky they have a superior staff and players who can execute better.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
Post ignored
This message has been hidden because the poster is in your ignore list: HairyButtCheeks
I'll never read another post about farts by you again.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
And pretty girls doing number #2
'Go get an education, learn to talk you first language, lerarn to spell countries names' nidii-76417
'Go get an education, learn to talk you first language, lerarn to spell countries names' nidii-76417
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
Lucky?
What if they had been spot on from the first minute and giving Allanta a hard time?!
Atlanta was lucky that Brady and his team mates were totally off track for more than the half of the game. How many balls had been dropped that could have been caught.
Allanta was lucky, but not clever.
Willkommen im Zeitalter des Trump!
What if they had been spot on from the first minute and giving Allanta a hard time?!
Atlanta was lucky that Brady and his team mates were totally off track for more than the half of the game. How many balls had been dropped that could have been caught.
Allanta was lucky, but not clever.
Willkommen im Zeitalter des Trump!
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
All I am saying is if in the third quarter when the Falcons were winning 28-3, if Atlanta had known how to finish a game, New England would not have had a chance.
One could say, Atlanta made New England look bad in the first half.
One could say, Atlanta made New England look bad in the first half.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
One could say, Atlanta made New England look bad in the first half.
And one could just as easily say New England made Atlanta look bad in the 2nd half
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
So in the first half, Atlanta made the Patriots look bad with the Patriots dropped passes and executed better, but in the second half, New England didn't execute better and Atlanta did it to themselves. The Patriots knew what they had to overcome, came up with a game plan to get it done, and did it. Regardless of what the Falcons did, the Patriots still had to do it. Not to menton score 2 2 pint conversions.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
Right.
In the first half, Atlanta made New England look bad. And in the second half, Atlanta made Atlanta look bad and the Patriots took advantage of it.
In the first half, Atlanta made New England look bad. And in the second half, Atlanta made Atlanta look bad and the Patriots took advantage of it.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
So in the first half, Atlanta made the Patriots look bad with the Patriots dropped passes and executed better, but in the second half, New England didn't execute better and Atlanta did it to themselves. The Patriots knew what they had to overcome, came up with a game plan to get it done, and did it. Regardless of what the Falcons did, the Patriots still had to do it. Not to menton score 2 2 pint conversions.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
No other team would have been able to take advantage of those mistakes by Atlanta, so it is like Schlacko said, the Falcons provided an opportunity and the Patriots' preparation allowed them to take advantage of it. Call that luck if you want.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
I thought I said that already;
Atlanta had that game won. Anytime you have a 25 point lead (28-3) halfway through the third quarter, the game is yours to win or lose. And the Falcons lost that game. Yes, the Patriots were good enough to take advantage of Atlanta's terrible second half game plan. But they never should have had the chance.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
I don't think you'll really get an argument from anyone saying that what happened was entirely because the Patriots played better, and had nothing to do with Atlanta playing worse.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
First of all, I disagree. There are many sports fans out there who believe the Patriots did it all on the own.
Secondly, all I wanted was "I agree" or "I disagree". If posters are going to split hairs and defend the Patriots based on all their accomplishments, they are not really getting the point of my initial post.
I gave New England their deserved props in my opening post. But still, we have replies defending the Patriots and disagreeing that Atlanta gave that game away with terrible play calling in the second half.
Secondly, all I wanted was "I agree" or "I disagree". If posters are going to split hairs and defend the Patriots based on all their accomplishments, they are not really getting the point of my initial post.
I gave New England their deserved props in my opening post. But still, we have replies defending the Patriots and disagreeing that Atlanta gave that game away with terrible play calling in the second half.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
I see replies that include Patriots' fans taking offense at the notion that what happened was predominantly the result of luck, but I don't see anyone saying that this would have happened regardless of what Atlanta did in the second half.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
Well then they are jumping to simplistic "black and white" conclusions. I never said "what happened was predominantly the result of luck". I even said New England was a good team that was good enough to take advantage of Atlanta's terrible second half game plan.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
Secondly, all I wanted was "I agree" or "I disagree".
You don't understand how message boards work. Next time set up a poll with "I agree" or "I disagree" as options.
There are many sports fans out there who believe the Patriots did it all on the own.
And you insist that Atlanta alone 'gave the game away.' Yes, the Patriots capitalized on poor play calling, but the Patriots' players still had to outplay their opponents. The Patriots staff still had to call plays to capitalize on Atlanta's error.
"Giving the game away" completely takes away the credit from the Patriots for making the winning plays that Atlanta could not. Atlanta shot themselves in the foot, sure. But the Patriots still had to outwork and outperform their opponents to win. So stop bitching about one team 'giving away the game,' as if a 25 point comeback happened on a fluke play or a bad call.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
The Amendola catch was a fluke play.
It was Edelman. But you are correct. It was a fluke play.
All the dumb Patriots fans here try to claim that the Patriots played better, but they didn't. Just look at all the lucky plays the Patriots got:
1. Brady throws a bad pass into traffic and the ball is tipped straight into the air. Should've been intercepted, but lucky for the Patriots, I think Bennett was the one who just happened to be in the area and caught the tipped ball when it came back down.
2. Brady throws another bad pass into traffic that should've also been intercepted, but Edelman makes a lucky catch.
3. The Patriots commit an obvious facemask that would've given the Falcons a chance to kick a game-clinching FG and put the game away late in the 4th quarter, but the refs not only miss the obvious facemask against the Patriots but instead call holding against the Falcons and move the Falcons back 10 yards out of FG range to let the Patriots stay in the game.
If all 3 of those plays didn't happen in the Patriots favor, then the Patriots don't win. And every intelligent person would agree that all 3 of those plays weren't the result of the Patriots playing better. All 3 of those plays were simply the Patriots being lucky.
In fact, the Patriots are the luckiest team in NFL history. The Patriots don't win the Super Bowl because they're good; it's because they cheat and they have the most incredible luck:
2001 - The Patriots lose their 1st playoff game when Brady fumbled the ball away in the snow, but lucky for the Patriots referee Walt Coleman makes the biggest blown call in NFL history and reverses the Patriots playoff loss and effectively gives the Patriots a double-elimination in the postseason.
2003 - Carolina scores a TD to tie the game late in the 4th quarter and then the kicker kicks the kickoff out of bounds, giving the Patriots the ball at the 40-yard line for a short drive to kick a FG.
2014 - Brady gets caught cheating in the AFC Championship Game and should've been suspended for the Super Bowl, but the NFL allows the cheater to play in a Super Bowl that he cheated to advance to. Then Seattle is 1 yard from winning the Super Bowl, but the #1 rushing offense in the NFL decides not to run the ball from the 1-yard line and instead throw the ball into the middle of the field where there are a lot of bodies that could get a hand on the ball.
2016 - Brady throws 2 bad passes into traffic that should've been intercepted, but lucky for the Patriots they catch both passes. Then the refs miss an obvious facemask call against the Patriots that would've given the Falcons a chance to kick a game-clinching FG to put the game away. So once again, the refs blow a call on a key play and help the Patriots win.
It's often better to be lucky than good. And the Patriots have had the most incredible luck in NFL history.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
*bunch of mumbo jumbo designed to make AH feel better*
Yeah, wasn't all of that awesome?!
I hope something similar happens next year, too.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com:443/data.filmboards/images/upload/x02oEeo.png
All the dumb Patriots fans here try to claim that the Patriots played better, but they didn't.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
You don't understand how message boards work. Next time set up a poll with "I agree" or "I disagree" as options.
No, they can explain why they agree or disagree. And we can talk about it.
And you insist that Atlanta alone 'gave the game away.' Yes, the Patriots capitalized on poor play calling, but the Patriots' players still had to outplay their opponents. The Patriots staff still had to call plays to capitalize on Atlanta's error.
"Giving the game away" completely takes away the credit from the Patriots for making the winning plays that Atlanta could not. Atlanta shot themselves in the foot, sure. But the Patriots still had to outwork and outperform their opponents to win. So stop bitching about one team 'giving away the game,' as if a 25 point comeback happened on a fluke play or a bad call.
No, I never said it was all Atlanta. I even said the Patriots were a good team and they were good enough to take advantage of Atlanta's terrible second half game plan. You and other posters are being too simplistic and too "black and white".
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
You and other posters are being too simplistic and too "black and white".
You're the one being simplistic and you know it. Atlanta played poorly down the stretch while the Patriots played nearly flawless football. Scoring 31 unanswered points isn't luck, bud. Yes the Falcons made poor decisions and made mistakes, but the Patriots still had to score two TDs and two 2 pt conversions late in the game just to tie it up. It's beyond luck at that point.
What you're arguing is true of any football game ever played. The winning team is 'lucky' the losing team made poor decisions or mistakes at some point in the game where the winning team was able to gain an advantage. Talk about overgeneralizing things.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
What you're arguing is true of any football game ever played. The winning team is 'lucky' the losing team made poor decisions or mistakes at some point in the game where the winning team was able to gain an advantage. Talk about overgeneralizing things.
That is wrong. Especially when you are talking about the Super Bowl. Many Super Bowls were lopsided because the winner was clearly better than the loser. There was no luck involved with those games.
And even in some close games, both teams do their best. No luck involved.
I never said New England was a bad team. Or even that they didn't deserve to win. So, don't be so defensive.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
I'm not being defensive, I'm using common sense. 31 unanswered points isn't luck. Stop making ridiculous arguments to defend your false premise.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
The Patriots were lucky Atlanta didn't try to work the clock with their good running game. Then the Patriots would not have had the time to make 31 unanswered points. That would have been the smart thing to do. But, Atlanta was stupid. Lucky for the Patriots.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
31 unanswered points isn't luck, it's that simple. 20/20 hindsight is the most generic, shortsighted form of analysis.
If Atlanta was successful in their passing game down the stretch, we aren't having this conversation. But they weren't because the Patriots made plays on defense. The Patriots didn't recover 4 Falcons fumbles in the end zone. That would be lucky. The Patriots executed better in every facet of the game down the stretch.
This is as dumb as calling the last Patriots Super Bowl win 'lucky.' "They're just lucky Pete Carroll made the dumbest play call ever." This completely disregards the Patriots coming back from 10 down in the 4th qtr against the league's #1 defense, the fact that the Seahawks got down to the goal line on a fluke deflection, and the fact that the Patriots scouted that very play in practice. If Malcolm Butler hadn't been burned for a TD in practice, if he hadn't been the one who gave up the fluke play to get the ball down there, if the Patriots hadn't scouted that play, it's a very different outcome.
They were more prepared and made one more play than the other team. Just like this game. I'm just going to keep repeating myself. It isn't luck when you're the more prepared team who executes better. Luck would be a Hail Mary. 31 unanswered points cannot be luck.
So as I've said from the beginning, yes it's a good thing there were Falcons miscues on the field and on the sidelines. But that is true regardless of the situation. Every football game comes down to who makes more plays and who makes less mistakes.
How about this: The Falcons are lucky the Patriots waited until late in the game to score 31 unanswered points. If that sounds ridiculous, now you know how ridiculous you sound to everyone else.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
If Atlanta was successful in their passing game down the stretch, we aren't having this conversation. But they weren't because the Patriots made plays on defense. The Patriots didn't recover 4 Falcons fumbles in the end zone. That would be lucky. The Patriots executed better in every facet of the game down the stretch.
This is as dumb as calling the last Patriots Super Bowl win 'lucky.' "They're just lucky Pete Carroll made the dumbest play call ever." This completely disregards the Patriots coming back from 10 down in the 4th qtr against the league's #1 defense, the fact that the Seahawks got down to the goal line on a fluke deflection, and the fact that the Patriots scouted that very play in practice. If Malcolm Butler hadn't been burned for a TD in practice, if he hadn't been the one who gave up the fluke play to get the ball down there, if the Patriots hadn't scouted that play, it's a very different outcome.
They were more prepared and made one more play than the other team. Just like this game. I'm just going to keep repeating myself. It isn't luck when you're the more prepared team who executes better. Luck would be a Hail Mary. 31 unanswered points cannot be luck.
So as I've said from the beginning, yes it's a good thing there were Falcons miscues on the field and on the sidelines. But that is true regardless of the situation. Every football game comes down to who makes more plays and who makes less mistakes.
How about this: The Falcons are lucky the Patriots waited until late in the game to score 31 unanswered points. If that sounds ridiculous, now you know how ridiculous you sound to everyone else.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
I disagree. If the Falcons had played a smart game and the Patriots still beat them, That would not be luck, that would be superiority.
But the fact that the Falcons literally blew out the Patriots in the first two and a half quarters, and then bad play calling allowed a good New England team to come back and win, that was luck. Luck gave New England a chance, when they shouldn't have had one.
New England didn't win as much as Atlanta lost.
But the fact that the Falcons literally blew out the Patriots in the first two and a half quarters, and then bad play calling allowed a good New England team to come back and win, that was luck. Luck gave New England a chance, when they shouldn't have had one.
New England didn't win as much as Atlanta lost.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
New England didn't win as much as Atlanta lost.
I disagree, and I've already explained why. 31 unanswered points is not luck. You have to execute, no matter what the game plan (your or theirs) is.
It's clear you know nothing about football and you'll say anything to discredit the Patriots. It's kind of sad, honestly.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
I disagree, and I've already explained why. 31 unanswered points is not luck. You have to execute, no matter what the game plan (your or theirs) is.
It is absolutely luck. The fact that the Patriots couldn't score more than 3 points in the first three and a half quarters. And then all of a sudden they can score 31 unanswered, is total luck. Lucky Atlanta didn't know how to close out an apparent easy victory.
It's clear you know nothing about football and you'll say anything to discredit the Patriots. It's kind of sad, honestly.
It is clear you worship the Patriots as if they are a collection of undefeatable super heros. And you will say anything to defend them. It is really pathetic.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
It is absolutely luck. The fact that the Patriots couldn't score more than 3 points in the first three and a half quarters. And then all of a sudden they can score 31 unanswered, is total luck.
Don't look now but your argument has changed.
Earlier you said:
Yes, the Patriots were good enough to take advantage of Atlanta's terrible second half game plan.
Which is what I've been saying from the beginning. It isn't luck, you have to make plays. Outplaying and outcoaching isn't luck, genius.
And you will say anything to defend them.
I don't have to defend them, they won. And that's what's killing you, isn't it?
It is absolutely luck. The fact that the Patriots couldn't score more than 3 points in the first three and a half quarters. And then all of a sudden they can score 31 unanswered, is total luck.
Had to post this again because it's hilarious. This has to be top ten dumbest/sour grapes commentary in the history of this board, and that's saying something.
It's been a blast, but you'll have to find someone else to convince that 31 unanswered points is 'luck.' Plenty of dullards on this board, just keep at it. Maybe your life will turn around soon, but you'll have to work for it. You won't get there with luck.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
I don't have to defend them, they won. And that's what's killing you, isn't it?
Then, why are you defending them? I count no less than eight posts on this thread alone where you desperately defend them against all logic.
It's been a blast, but you'll have to find someone else to convince that 31 unanswered points is 'luck.' Plenty of dullards on this board, just keep at it. Maybe your life will turn around soon, but you'll have to work for it. You won't get there with luck.
I will have to look long and hard to find anyone as pathetically desperate as you.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
Who started this thread? I'm just a guy taking part in several conversations right now. The team I root for won, and you can't accept it. You insist 31 unanswered points is 'luck' as if there was no element of skill involved. You have now called it 'total luck,' shifting to a more extreme stance because my argument has you emotionally agitated. It's a hoot.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
I thought you weren't going to talk with me about this anymore?
Face it, you can't help yourself . . . ha ha ha . . .
It's been a blast, but you'll have to find someone else to convince that 31 unanswered points is 'luck.' Plenty of dullards on this board, just keep at it. Maybe your life will turn around soon, but you'll have to work for it. You won't get there with luck.
Face it, you can't help yourself . . . ha ha ha . . .
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
Yea, free will and all that. You'd have a point if I weren't also involved in other conversations right now. Now we've reached the point where you shift the conversation to the argument itself instead of the topic, in the hopes of getting the 'last word,' which of course proves you were correct all along.
31 unanswered points is 'total luck.' I mean, what else is there to say about your understanding of football?
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
31 unanswered points is 'total luck.' I mean, what else is there to say about your understanding of football?
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
Luck would be a Hail Mary.
Luck would be all 3 of the following plays going in favor of the Patriots:
1. Brady throws a bad pass into traffic and the ball is tipped straight into the air. Should've been intercepted, but lucky for the Patriots, I think Bennett was the one who just happened to be in the area and caught the tipped ball when it came back down.
2. Brady throws another bad pass into traffic that should've also been intercepted, but Edelman makes a lucky catch.
3. The Patriots commit an obvious facemask that would've given the Falcons a chance to kick a game-clinching FG and put the game away late in the 4th quarter, but the refs not only miss the obvious facemask against the Patriots but instead call holding against the Falcons and move the Falcons back 10 yards out of FG range to let the Patriots stay in the game.
If all 3 of those plays didn't happen in the Patriots favor, then the Patriots don't win. And every intelligent person would agree that all 3 of those plays weren't the result of the Patriots playing better. All 3 of those plays were simply the Patriots being lucky.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
It was actually a double facemask, but you knew that already.
Tell me more about Warriors fans not holding up 'Free Draymond' signs. Tell me more about one movie studio paying critics to write poor reviews of other studios' films. Tell me more about The Broncos repeating as AFC champions. Tell me more about Dak Prescott being the first rookie QB to win the Super Bowl.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Tell me more about Warriors fans not holding up 'Free Draymond' signs. Tell me more about one movie studio paying critics to write poor reviews of other studios' films. Tell me more about The Broncos repeating as AFC champions. Tell me more about Dak Prescott being the first rookie QB to win the Super Bowl.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
It was actually a double facemask
And a double facemask would've still favored the Falcons and given the Falcons a chance to kick a game-clinching FG to put the game out of reach. Because a double facemask would've been an offsetting penalty, which means no yards lost for the Falcons. Instead, the refs not only don't call any facemask penalty but call a holding against the Falcons, moving the Falcons back 10 yards and out of FG range. So once again, the refs helped the Patriots win.
Let's look at the possibilities on that play:
1. Refs call facemask penalty against Patriots only. Falcons get 15 yards and automatic 1st down.
2. Refs call double facemask penalty against both teams. Offsetting penalties, down is replayed, no yards are gained or lost, Falcons remain in FG range.
3. Refs call double facemask penalty against both teams and call holding against Falcons. Same as #2. Offsetting penalties, down is replayed, no yards are gained or lost, Falcons remain in FG range.
4. Refs miss facemask penalty and call holding penalty against Falcons only. Falcons lose 10 yards and are out of FG range.
5. Refs don't call facemask penalty or any penalty. Completion stands. Falcons have 4th down but are in FG range.
So every other possibility would've given the Falcons a chance to kick a game-clinching FG to put the game away. But the refs miss the obvious facemask and call the only possibility that takes the Falcons out of FG range.
Like I said in my previous post, that wasn't the result of the Patriots playing better. That was simply the result of the Patriots being lucky. Once again, the refs helped the Patriots win.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
5. Refs don't call offsetting facemask penalties which would not have made a difference, but do call the obvious hold on Atlanta. Hey, that's what happened!
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
What are you talking about? They call the facemasks that's offsetting penalties and replay of the down. The ball would of stayed at the original line of scrimmage.
Re: The Patriots were lucky.
Reply |
They called the holding penalty as well.
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
The future is in the hands of a man who has none.(As in no future, as opposed to no hands.)
The Patriots were lucky.
Atlanta had that game won. Anytime you have a 25 point lead (28-3) halfway through the third quarter, the game is yours to win or lose. And the Falcons lost that game. Yes, the Patriots were good enough to take advantage of Atlanta's terrible second half game plan. But they never should have had the chance.
Atlanta should have been working on the clock. They only ran the ball four times in the second half. And when Julio Jones made that great sideline catch to put the Falcons in field goal position, Atlanta tried to throw the ball, got sacked out of field goal range, and stopped the clock with incompletions.
If they had just run the ball, even if they made no yards, they would have taken time off the clock and made it a three score lead with little time left. They had good running backs and a good field goal kicker.
Atlanta had that game won. And they blew it.