General Boston Sports Thread

[BillTheGOAT]

Read on Twitter

Hogan, Gilmore, Alan Branch, Gillislee...former Bills...hope we claim him we got capspace after Gilmores restructure.

[K For Three]

Chiefs releasing Hunt will make things interesting for the top seed of the AFC. They just lost a combined 1200 yd player, their run game will suffer.

Patriots need to beat the rest of the teams and Chiefs only losing one more for the Pats to get HFA. They just cant win against quality teams on the road this year, HFA would be huge.

More worried about Philip Rivers then the Chiefs TBH. Rivers is a real one.

Pats struggled on the road a few times in past postseasons when they played Peyton Manning led teams, but not as much with others.

I have had Pats/Rams all year in my head though and not changing it now.

[threrf23]

WTF man

[truth18]

My god.

[K For Three]

That seriously just happened.

Like it actually did.

[threrf23]

I wasn't even watching, figured the game was over...I had the Ravens/Chiefs on and it was interrupted by a highlight of that final play

[truth18]

What the ****.

[K For Three]

I wasn't even watching, figured the game was over...I had the Ravens/Chiefs on and it was interrupted by a highlight of that final play

I left the room and came back in and then saw the Dolphins celebrating like they just won the Super Bowl.

I know we struggle with Miami once a year but WOW, what kind of luck is that crap? Thats pretty un-Patriot like to lose this way.


Maybe I have to rethink things lol. Luckily the Celtics can win by 50 a game?

My only fear still deep down is that the Pats make the big game again and lose the big game again.


Okay I will get over this, *deep breath*.

[K For Three]

Yeah I mean I think it's like time to pretend that never happened and move on for the rest of the day or something......

It didn't happen.

At all.

[31to6]

Gollllllldarn
What a play
I was like come on flag come on flag come on ah hell

[BillTheGOAT]

2 missed kicks by SucksKowski, no points on the final drive of the 1st half and that **** that happened there in the end.

And this is with 2 blocks from special teams, we dont deserve to win. We have to get it done on the road at arrowhead stadium. This is not our year.

[truth18]

2 missed kicks by SucksKowski, no points on the final drive of the 1st half and that **** that happened there in the end.

And this is with 2 blocks from special teams, we dont deserve to win. We have to get it done on the road at arrowhead stadium. This is not our year.

Are you seriously going to insult Gostkowski? Dude is incredible, we can forgive the occasional mistake.

We should have gone for the **** TD as well. **** hell what a horrible loss.

[BillTheGOAT]

2 missed kicks by SucksKowski, no points on the final drive of the 1st half and that **** that happened there in the end.

And this is with 2 blocks from special teams, we dont deserve to win. We have to get it done on the road at arrowhead stadium. This is not our year.

Are you seriously going to insult Gostkowski? Dude is incredible, we can forgive the occasional mistake.

We should have gone for the **** TD as well. **** hell what a horrible loss.

yeah he totally didnt cost us this game, as bad as that **** in the end was you cant leave 4 pts on the field by your kicker.

[mbsnmisc]

I am a lifelong Phin fan. This team is probably the worst 7-6 team in NFL history. We are -55 (scoring margin), for the year. I have no idea how they do it, but the horseshoe has to fall out of their ass eventually.

With all that being said, if Tannehill has a modicum of protection he is at least an average NFL QB. He lacks pocket awareness, (that will always be his fatal flaw), but he can make every throw and is a good athlete. He is also one tough SOB. He was hurt in their 3rd game but played against NE and Cincy. He then missed 5 games, he couldn't even throw for almost a month. His QB rating for this year is 105.

This would be the most unlikely playoff squad of all time.

[colaroaster]

not worried when we got 358 yards of tommy terrific throwing darts to his eggs: edelman, gronk, and gordon

[Homerclease]

Those Giant teams were a whole lot more inferior to the those Pats teams than this year's Pats team is to any other team out there. The point is that if the Pats lost to a team like the Giants, than anything is possible. Home Field would be nice, but it really shouldn't matter.

In 2007 week 17, the giants held a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter and the patriots came back to win a close game.

In 2011 the giants defeated the patriots in the regular season.

To say those giants teams were much much inferior is saltyness and pure homerism

1 and done nature of football allows inferior teams to win more often than most fans admit. And a few plays can turn a chance at a huge upset win into a blowout loss.

2011 Giants were a 9-7 regular season team. "The 2011 Giants were the first team in NFL history to reach the Super Bowl with a negative point differential (minus-6, 394 points scored, 400 points allowed)." I suspect they had some regular season injuries like every other team so to be fair entering post season they may have been better than those dismal stats would indicate. Just like the 2007 team, they did match up well against the Patriots in Super Bowl.

But healthy Patriots squad in a must win game like Super Bowl, I think takes them 85 out of 100 times. Given credit to Giants for rising to occasion but Patriots with Gronk severely hobbled were basically playing without arguably the best 2 way tight end in NFL history having his best season. Yes, Gronk was young then but he had 1300+ yards that regular season and 17 touchdowns and forced teams to double him.

Frankly I remember saying before that game..... Healthy Gronk --> Patriots win.
Injured Gronk that can't move well -- Patriots could easily lose without it being upset at all.

Very early in the game, it was obvious that his ankle injury made in impossible for him to cut well. Complete shell of himself that game as a wide out on pass plays. It didn't take a football coaching genius to realize it so Giants knew it early on and it impacts everything else. Gronk has declined since back then and if he actually had similar injury in this post season, I suspect BB might bench him for the entire game and have him inactive.

2007 Patriots were significantly superior to Giants but Giants matched up well. And more importantly in Super Bowl, Brady really was playing with a bad ankle. I am not saying it impacted his throws that much since I don't think it did but I do think it impacted Patriots game planning..... Brady obviously not a mobile qb and never was but healthy he scrambles 3 or 4 times in a game like that if Giants don't change tactics. And it just changes complexion of game. Bum ankle from my vantage point had Patriots going into the game with too much of a home run game plan which played into Giants hands and gave an inferior team a chance to stay in it. BB pretty much said he was out coached in that one and I think he meant it.

This all being said, I am a Patriots fan and not a homer.... If Seattle had been fully healthy....they probably beat Patriots in the Super Bowl more often than not without having to get lucky for it to happen. Seattle if healthy probably better team than fully healthy Patriots squad but Pats with quick receivers matched up well against Seattle's style of play of defense. And then helped by injuries.

The 2011 Giants beat the Patriots not once, but twice.

The 2007 Giants held a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter against the Patriots week 17 and beat them in the title game.

You can try to rationalize it any way you want but calling either years team ‘significantly better’ than the Giants is blind homerism.

[Valid]

Those Giant teams were a whole lot more inferior to the those Pats teams than this year's Pats team is to any other team out there. The point is that if the Pats lost to a team like the Giants, than anything is possible. Home Field would be nice, but it really shouldn't matter.

In 2007 week 17, the giants held a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter and the patriots came back to win a close game.

In 2011 the giants defeated the patriots in the regular season.

To say those giants teams were much much inferior is saltyness and pure homerism

1 and done nature of football allows inferior teams to win more often than most fans admit. And a few plays can turn a chance at a huge upset win into a blowout loss.

2011 Giants were a 9-7 regular season team. "The 2011 Giants were the first team in NFL history to reach the Super Bowl with a negative point differential (minus-6, 394 points scored, 400 points allowed)." I suspect they had some regular season injuries like every other team so to be fair entering post season they may have been better than those dismal stats would indicate. Just like the 2007 team, they did match up well against the Patriots in Super Bowl.

But healthy Patriots squad in a must win game like Super Bowl, I think takes them 85 out of 100 times. Given credit to Giants for rising to occasion but Patriots with Gronk severely hobbled were basically playing without arguably the best 2 way tight end in NFL history having his best season. Yes, Gronk was young then but he had 1300+ yards that regular season and 17 touchdowns and forced teams to double him.

Frankly I remember saying before that game..... Healthy Gronk --> Patriots win.
Injured Gronk that can't move well -- Patriots could easily lose without it being upset at all.

Very early in the game, it was obvious that his ankle injury made in impossible for him to cut well. Complete shell of himself that game as a wide out on pass plays. It didn't take a football coaching genius to realize it so Giants knew it early on and it impacts everything else. Gronk has declined since back then and if he actually had similar injury in this post season, I suspect BB might bench him for the entire game and have him inactive.

2007 Patriots were significantly superior to Giants but Giants matched up well. And more importantly in Super Bowl, Brady really was playing with a bad ankle. I am not saying it impacted his throws that much since I don't think it did but I do think it impacted Patriots game planning..... Brady obviously not a mobile qb and never was but healthy he scrambles 3 or 4 times in a game like that if Giants don't change tactics. And it just changes complexion of game. Bum ankle from my vantage point had Patriots going into the game with too much of a home run game plan which played into Giants hands and gave an inferior team a chance to stay in it. BB pretty much said he was out coached in that one and I think he meant it.

This all being said, I am a Patriots fan and not a homer.... If Seattle had been fully healthy....they probably beat Patriots in the Super Bowl more often than not without having to get lucky for it to happen. Seattle if healthy probably better team than fully healthy Patriots squad but Pats with quick receivers matched up well against Seattle's style of play of defense. And then helped by injuries.

Saying that the 2011-12 Patriots would have beaten the 2011-12 Giants "85 out of 100 times" is absolutely asinine. That Giants team had a prime Eli, fantastic receivers, a terrific offensive line and a ferocious defensive line. They got healthy late in the year and it showed. They were significantly better than their 9-7 record and probably win 11 games with good health.

I could absolutely see your argument for 2007-08, but that 2011-12 Giants team was more loaded than people like to believe. The fact that Eli was the one QB in the league who didn't crap his pants at the mere sight of Brady was just the cherry on top.

[Cornbread]

In 2007 week 17, the giants held a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter and the patriots came back to win a close game.

In 2011 the giants defeated the patriots in the regular season.

To say those giants teams were much much inferior is saltyness and pure homerism

1 and done nature of football allows inferior teams to win more often than most fans admit. And a few plays can turn a chance at a huge upset win into a blowout loss.

2011 Giants were a 9-7 regular season team. "The 2011 Giants were the first team in NFL history to reach the Super Bowl with a negative point differential (minus-6, 394 points scored, 400 points allowed)." I suspect they had some regular season injuries like every other team so to be fair entering post season they may have been better than those dismal stats would indicate. Just like the 2007 team, they did match up well against the Patriots in Super Bowl.

But healthy Patriots squad in a must win game like Super Bowl, I think takes them 85 out of 100 times. Given credit to Giants for rising to occasion but Patriots with Gronk severely hobbled were basically playing without arguably the best 2 way tight end in NFL history having his best season. Yes, Gronk was young then but he had 1300+ yards that regular season and 17 touchdowns and forced teams to double him.

Frankly I remember saying before that game..... Healthy Gronk --> Patriots win.
Injured Gronk that can't move well -- Patriots could easily lose without it being upset at all.

Very early in the game, it was obvious that his ankle injury made in impossible for him to cut well. Complete shell of himself that game as a wide out on pass plays. It didn't take a football coaching genius to realize it so Giants knew it early on and it impacts everything else. Gronk has declined since back then and if he actually had similar injury in this post season, I suspect BB might bench him for the entire game and have him inactive.

2007 Patriots were significantly superior to Giants but Giants matched up well. And more importantly in Super Bowl, Brady really was playing with a bad ankle. I am not saying it impacted his throws that much since I don't think it did but I do think it impacted Patriots game planning..... Brady obviously not a mobile qb and never was but healthy he scrambles 3 or 4 times in a game like that if Giants don't change tactics. And it just changes complexion of game. Bum ankle from my vantage point had Patriots going into the game with too much of a home run game plan which played into Giants hands and gave an inferior team a chance to stay in it. BB pretty much said he was out coached in that one and I think he meant it.

This all being said, I am a Patriots fan and not a homer.... If Seattle had been fully healthy....they probably beat Patriots in the Super Bowl more often than not without having to get lucky for it to happen. Seattle if healthy probably better team than fully healthy Patriots squad but Pats with quick receivers matched up well against Seattle's style of play of defense. And then helped by injuries.

Saying that the 2011-12 Patriots would have beaten the 2011-12 Giants "85 out of 100 times" is absolutely asinine. That Giants team had a prime Eli, fantastic receivers, a terrific offensive line and a ferocious defensive line. They got healthy late in the year and it showed. They were significantly better than their 9-7 record and probably win 11 games with good health.

I could absolutely see your argument for 2007-08, but that 2011-12 Giants team was more loaded than people like to believe. The fact that Eli was the one QB in the league who didn't crap his pants at the mere sight of Brady was just the cherry on top.

“Prime Eli”


...lol

[Homerclease]

1 and done nature of football allows inferior teams to win more often than most fans admit. And a few plays can turn a chance at a huge upset win into a blowout loss.

2011 Giants were a 9-7 regular season team. "The 2011 Giants were the first team in NFL history to reach the Super Bowl with a negative point differential (minus-6, 394 points scored, 400 points allowed)." I suspect they had some regular season injuries like every other team so to be fair entering post season they may have been better than those dismal stats would indicate. Just like the 2007 team, they did match up well against the Patriots in Super Bowl.

But healthy Patriots squad in a must win game like Super Bowl, I think takes them 85 out of 100 times. Given credit to Giants for rising to occasion but Patriots with Gronk severely hobbled were basically playing without arguably the best 2 way tight end in NFL history having his best season. Yes, Gronk was young then but he had 1300+ yards that regular season and 17 touchdowns and forced teams to double him.

Frankly I remember saying before that game..... Healthy Gronk --> Patriots win.
Injured Gronk that can't move well -- Patriots could easily lose without it being upset at all.

Very early in the game, it was obvious that his ankle injury made in impossible for him to cut well. Complete shell of himself that game as a wide out on pass plays. It didn't take a football coaching genius to realize it so Giants knew it early on and it impacts everything else. Gronk has declined since back then and if he actually had similar injury in this post season, I suspect BB might bench him for the entire game and have him inactive.

2007 Patriots were significantly superior to Giants but Giants matched up well. And more importantly in Super Bowl, Brady really was playing with a bad ankle. I am not saying it impacted his throws that much since I don't think it did but I do think it impacted Patriots game planning..... Brady obviously not a mobile qb and never was but healthy he scrambles 3 or 4 times in a game like that if Giants don't change tactics. And it just changes complexion of game. Bum ankle from my vantage point had Patriots going into the game with too much of a home run game plan which played into Giants hands and gave an inferior team a chance to stay in it. BB pretty much said he was out coached in that one and I think he meant it.

This all being said, I am a Patriots fan and not a homer.... If Seattle had been fully healthy....they probably beat Patriots in the Super Bowl more often than not without having to get lucky for it to happen. Seattle if healthy probably better team than fully healthy Patriots squad but Pats with quick receivers matched up well against Seattle's style of play of defense. And then helped by injuries.

Saying that the 2011-12 Patriots would have beaten the 2011-12 Giants "85 out of 100 times" is absolutely asinine. That Giants team had a prime Eli, fantastic receivers, a terrific offensive line and a ferocious defensive line. They got healthy late in the year and it showed. They were significantly better than their 9-7 record and probably win 11 games with good health.

I could absolutely see your argument for 2007-08, but that 2011-12 Giants team was more loaded than people like to believe. The fact that Eli was the one QB in the league who didn't crap his pants at the mere sight of Brady was just the cherry on top.

“Prime Eli”


...lol

Eli was phenomenal in 2011. Carried an injured bad defense and an offense with virtually no running game at all through a murderers row of opponents in the NFC playoffs. The 2011 NFC title game broke him mentally I think but that was absolutely his prime and probably his peak season

[PierceFan4ever]

Pats would currently have home field throughout the afc if it wasn’t for that 70 yard lateral win for the dolphins in the end