The Patriots

[Bolts223]

Facts...in the entire Brady career, the Bills made the playoffs once (barely, on a miracle, 2 yrs ago - one and done).

Facts...the Dolphins have one division title (when Brady missed the entire 2008 season) and the Jets have one in the entire Brady era. Do you think that the Patriots would have 17 or 18 division titles if they were in any other division the past 20 yrs?

Facts...the Dolphins, Jets, and Bills have had consistently the worst quarterbacking of any division the last 20 years. If not who is worse? You mention Cousins, Schaub, Collins, etc...ALL of those are better than anything those three teams have had since Marino retired in 1999. You say Titans, Jags, etc...how about Steve McNair? Brunell? Even Leftwich was better than anyone Miami has had since 2000. Almost every franchise in the NFL has had better quarterbacks.

The Patriots have been able to capitalize on winning the weakest division nearly every year and receiving home games and/or byes in the playoffs.

You must be a young Patriots fan.

I think they win almost any other division 95% of the time from 2003-present, yes. The Pats have a slightly higher win % vs teams outside their division than they do vs the teams in that division. I'm not a Patriots fan, you're just lost in your irrational hatred of them to where you are set in believing it regardless of what actual facts I throw at you.

[powderblueboy]

I think they win almost any other division 95% of the time from 2003-present, yes. The Pats have a slightly higher win % vs teams outside their division than they do vs the teams in that division. I'm not a Patriots fan, you're just lost in your irrational hatred of them to where you are set in believing it regardless of what actual facts I throw at you.

Not last year. They don't win any division outside of the AFC Least. Having an easy division and automatic wins against crap teams means they can rest people for the playoffs.

They didn't have any starters missing entering the playoffs. Imagine if the Chargers enter the playoffs in that state.

[chargers1316]

I think they win almost any other division 95% of the time from 2003-present, yes. The Pats have a slightly higher win % vs teams outside their division than they do vs the teams in that division. I'm not a Patriots fan, you're just lost in your irrational hatred of them to where you are set in believing it regardless of what actual facts I throw at you.

It isn't irrational hatred. It is a very rational explanation for one of the major factors/advantages that they have had since 2001. 95% since 2003? That would be what the Patriots have done in the AFC East (Miami in 2008). That would mean the Patriots win their division every year but once...you don't think Favre/Rodgers could have won 2+? You don't think Brees/Ryan/Newton could have won 2+? You don't think the Steelers/Ravens combined could have won 2+? You don't think the Giants/Cowboys/Eagles combined could have won 2+?

Since realignment in 2002, those 3 AFC East opponents have a combined total of 15 winning seasons...out of the past 17 years. Combined...less than one winning season per year produced by the three of them combined. Stop telling me their win rate vs. the Patriots.

And yes, you are obviously a Patriots lover.

[powderblueboy]

It all began with the tuck rule call against the Raiders.

And even then the refs got it wrong with that rule: Brady appeared to pat the damn ball with his other hand when the ball was brought back. Refs interpretation was that Brady had to tuck the ball under his armpit and make like Red Grange, before a fumble could occur.

If that was Rich Gannon & Oakland, the call on the field would never/ever have changed.

[powderblueboy]

How much of that is because of the Pats? I'm not going to lie and say the AFC East is a powerhouse division, but people exaggerate how bad it is.

The Jets have actually had some good teams - they even went to back to back AFC Championship games at one point. It's not unrealistic to say that the 2010 Jets could've gotten better seeding which could've resulted in a SB birth if they didn't play in the same division as the Patriots who went 14-2 that year and beat them 45-3 in the regular season. Maybe they beat the Steelers in the AFC Championship if that game is at home.

The Patriots have gone 6-0 in the AFC East exactly 1 time in 18 seasons. To say that they get 6 easy wins every year is just not true.

Also: Look at every season which actually resulted in the Patriots winning the Super Bowl. Only 2018 could you actually say the AFC East was bad.

In 2001: The Dolphins and Jets both made the playoffs as wild cards with 11-5 and 10-6 records respectively.

In 2003: The Dolphins went 10-6 and just missed the playoffs.

In 2004: The Jets went 10-6 and beat us in the playoffs that year. The Bills went 9-7 and just missed the playoffs.

In 2014: The Bills went 9-7 and had one of the best defenses in the league that year. They were in playoff contention until week 17. Dolphins were also 8-8.

In 2016: The Dolphins went 10-6 and made the playoffs.


Also: I find the "Every division but the AFC East has had two different representatives in the last 20 years."

Yeah. Unless an AFC South team that isn't the Colts makes the playoffs this year, that is no longer true.

It's been 17 years since a non-Broncos AFC West team has made the SB.

The fact is that the AFC in general hasn't had a whole lot of parity in the 21st century. It's mainly been dominated by the Patriots/Steelers/Ravens/Peyton Manning led teams.

The only AFC Division that has had two teams that have actually been in recent SB's is the AFC North with the Steelers and Ravens. And the Ravens have only had 2 seasons in their entire franchise history in which they finished with a better regular season record than the Patriots. (2000 and 2006)

This discussion doesn't happen in 2010 (the first decade). However, this decade, while watching last years Patriot team win, with perhaps the weakest defensive front 7 to ever win a Super Bowl, pedestrian offensive tackles, complementary weapons & a bad-backed Gronk, one has to ask oneself how much does it help a team to coast and still get in with a first round bye.
That's been the Patriot's advantage since LT's last year with the Jets.



And please don't tell us Charger fans how good the Bills are.

[chargers1316]

This discussion doesn't happen in 2010 (the first decade). However, this decade, while watching last years Patriot team win, with perhaps the weakest defensive front 7 to ever win a Super Bowl, pedestrian offensive tackles, complementary weapons & a bad-backed Gronk, one has to ask oneself how much does it help a team to coast and still get in with a first round bye.
That's been the Patriot's advantage since LT's last year with the Jets.



And please don't tell us Charger fans how good the Bills are.

Lol...those glorious Bills are 5-33 vs New England since Brady began playing for the Patriots.

[Boltjolt]

Not last year. They don't win any division outside of the AFC Least. Having an easy division and automatic wins against crap teams means they can rest people for the playoffs.

They didn't have any starters missing entering the playoffs. Imagine if the Chargers enter the playoffs in that state.

Yeah imagine.

They have 6 SB wins, we have Zero.
They balled in the playoffs......again,...beating the top teams and have 3 SB wins after winning in the playoffs on the road.
Why this is a discussion, I've no idea. Say anything you want, it don't matter. They have 6 SB wins and aren't playing the Bills,Jets or Miami in the playoffs.

[blueman]

Why this is a discussion, I've no idea.

Offseason.

Hey, we look great on paper!

[Guest]

I think they win almost any other division 95% of the time from 2003-present, yes. The Pats have a slightly higher win % vs teams outside their division than they do vs the teams in that division. I'm not a Patriots fan, you're just lost in your irrational hatred of them to where you are set in believing it regardless of what actual facts I throw at you.

The Patriots did not even have the best record in the AFC much less in the NFL in a number of the seasons from 2003 to the present (2004-2006, 2008-2009, 2012-2013, 2015, 2018) despite playing in a division that has often been fairly weak. There were multiple seasons in which the only AFC division they would have won was their own crappy division (2005-2006, 2009). So there is no way they would have won every other division 95% of time. That notion seems kind of over the top to me.

They have had an impressive run in terms of length in years, but they are overrated both historically and at present. They really have only had one team that was clearly better than the rest of the league and that team, the 2007 team, lost, just as our clearly better than the rest of the league team did the year before. I think their getting to 9 Super Bowls in the Brady/Belichick era is a great accomplishment, but what they did in those games was nothing special, not even once.

What I saw was three close games that could have gone either way followed by two losses, then a pass interference non-call that featured more contact than what got called against us in last year's final game on NE's first series, then a miserable choke by the Falcons to give them another win, then another loss followed by a game where their opponent never showed up and they still could not produce a convincing win.

I compare that to some of the truly great teams and to me there is no comparison. The great 49ers teams absolutely dominated Miami (+22), Denver (+32) and us (+23). The 1985 Bears throttled every team they saw in the playoffs. It was total annihilation (21-0, 24-0, 46-10). There was no question about which team was the best team. The Patriots have never had a Super Bowl winning team that was great like that in the entire Brady/Belichick era.

I also do not think that it was a big deal that they beat KC in KC last season (just as we did) or that they beat a Rams team that was clearly not at its best that had been gifted its entry into the Super Bowl by way of a horrendous call. For the rest of my life I will believe that if Rivers takes the sack against Denver at the StubHub Center, we would have won the Super Bowl (playing KC's playoff schedule without road field disadvantage) as the Colts were incredibly overrated and got exposed by a Chiefs team that we had the much better of statistically twice; the Patriots were not a good road team; and the Rams had nothing in the Super Bowl.

I will even take my thinking one step further and note that I believe that Brady was already in soft decline last year and that I would expect his rate of decline to increase a little bit this year even though his offensive system hides his weaknesses pretty well most of the time.

[Bolts223]

The Patriots did not even have the best record in the AFC much less in the NFL in a number of the seasons from 2003 to the present (2004-2006, 2008-2009, 2012-2013, 2015, 2018) despite playing in a division that has often been fairly weak. There were multiple seasons in which the only AFC division they would have won was their own crappy division (2005-2006, 2009). So there is no way they would have won every other division 95% of time. That notion seems kind of over the top to me.

They have had an impressive run in terms of length in years, but they are overrated both historically and at present. They really have only had one team that was clearly better than the rest of the league and that team, the 2007 team, lost, just as our clearly better than the rest of the league team did the year before. I think their getting to 9 Super Bowls in the Brady/Belichick era is a great accomplishment, but what they did in those games was nothing special, not even once.

What I saw was three close games that could have gone either way followed by two losses, then a pass interference non-call that featured more contact than what got called against us in last year's final game on NE's first series, then a miserable choke by the Falcons to give them another win, then another loss followed by a game where their opponent never showed up and they still could not produce a convincing win.

I compare that to some of the truly great teams and to me there is no comparison. The great 49ers teams absolutely dominated Miami (+22), Denver (+32) and us (+23). The 1985 Bears throttled every team they saw in the playoffs. It was total annihilation (21-0, 24-0, 46-10). There was no question about which team was the best team. The Patriots have never had a Super Bowl winning team that was great like that in the entire Brady/Belichick era.

I also do not think that it was a big deal that they beat KC in KC last season (just as we did) or that they beat a Rams team that was clearly not at its best that had been gifted its entry into the Super Bowl by way of a horrendous call. For the rest of my life I will believe that if Rivers takes the sack against Denver at the StubHub Center, we would have won the Super Bowl (playing KC's playoff schedule without road field disadvantage) as the Colts were incredibly overrated and got exposed by a Chiefs team that we had the much better of statistically twice; the Patriots were not a good road team; and the Rams had nothing in the Super Bowl.

I will even take my thinking one step further and note that I believe that Brady was already in soft decline last year and that I would expect his rate of decline to increase a little bit this year even though his offensive system hides his weaknesses pretty well most of the time.

The Patriots have been 1st in the NFL in SRS (A metric that combines both point differential and strength of schedule) 8 times in the Brady/Belichick era. Comparing their record in individual seasons to teams in different divisions is not a good indicator of how they would have done in that division playing an almost entirely different schedule. You also have to figure out who you would swap them with. Are we doing a 5 team division in this scenario? Are they taking the spot of the worst or best team in that division? I also don't really see the point in what the 49ers or Bears did 30+ years ago. The league was completely different back then and disparities in talent levels between teams were much larger than now. A lot of SB's were blowouts in the 70's, 80's and early 90's. Besides the Seahawks/Broncos SB, every SB from 2003-present has been at least decently competitive. I hope Brady does decline this year, for the sake of our chances at winning the Super Bowl. I'll believe it when I see it though.

[Bolts223]

The Patriots did not even have the best record in the AFC much less in the NFL in a number of the seasons from 2003 to the present (2004-2006, 2008-2009, 2012-2013, 2015, 2018) despite playing in a division that has often been fairly weak. There were multiple seasons in which the only AFC division they would have won was their own crappy division (2005-2006, 2009). So there is no way they would have won every other division 95% of time. That notion seems kind of over the top to me.

They have had an impressive run in terms of length in years, but they are overrated both historically and at present. They really have only had one team that was clearly better than the rest of the league and that team, the 2007 team, lost, just as our clearly better than the rest of the league team did the year before. I think their getting to 9 Super Bowls in the Brady/Belichick era is a great accomplishment, but what they did in those games was nothing special, not even once.

What I saw was three close games that could have gone either way followed by two losses, then a pass interference non-call that featured more contact than what got called against us in last year's final game on NE's first series, then a miserable choke by the Falcons to give them another win, then another loss followed by a game where their opponent never showed up and they still could not produce a convincing win.

I compare that to some of the truly great teams and to me there is no comparison. The great 49ers teams absolutely dominated Miami (+22), Denver (+32) and us (+23). The 1985 Bears throttled every team they saw in the playoffs. It was total annihilation (21-0, 24-0, 46-10). There was no question about which team was the best team. The Patriots have never had a Super Bowl winning team that was great like that in the entire Brady/Belichick era.

I also do not think that it was a big deal that they beat KC in KC last season (just as we did) or that they beat a Rams team that was clearly not at its best that had been gifted its entry into the Super Bowl by way of a horrendous call. For the rest of my life I will believe that if Rivers takes the sack against Denver at the StubHub Center, we would have won the Super Bowl (playing KC's playoff schedule without road field disadvantage) as the Colts were incredibly overrated and got exposed by a Chiefs team that we had the much better of statistically twice; the Patriots were not a good road team; and the Rams had nothing in the Super Bowl.

I will even take my thinking one step further and note that I believe that Brady was already in soft decline last year and that I would expect his rate of decline to increase a little bit this year even though his offensive system hides his weaknesses pretty well most of the time.

I would also expand and say when is the last time we had a team that won the SB and was clearly the best team in the league the entire season? People will argue the 2013 Seahawks, but that's revisionist history. They barely beat the 49ers and even the Saints game was interesting at the end. Last team I can really think of that pretty much dominated its way through the entire season was the 96 Packers. The league is just different now, it's designed for parity.

[Guest]

The Patriots have been 1st in the NFL in SRS (A metric that combines both point differential and strength of schedule) 8 times in the Brady/Belichick era. Comparing their record in individual seasons to teams in different divisions is not a good indicator of how they would have done in that division playing an almost entirely different schedule. You also have to figure out who you would swap them with. Are we doing a 5 team division in this scenario? Are they taking the spot of the worst or best team in that division? I also don't really see the point in what the 49ers or Bears did 30+ years ago. The league was completely different back then and disparities in talent levels between teams were much larger than now. A lot of SB's were blowouts in the 70's, 80's and early 90's. Besides the Seahawks/Broncos SB, every SB from 2003-present has been at least decently competitive. I hope Brady does decline this year, for the sake of our chances at winning the Super Bowl. I'll believe it when I see it though.

It seems as if you were the one that stated that the Patriots would have won 95% of the divisions from 2003 to the present as if the Patriots were this historically great world beating monolith. You then cited the SRS metric for seemingly the same proposition. If they were truly so great, why would it matter which team got substituted out of the division? It seems that in discussing which team would be swapped for the Patriots, you are hedging on your statements about the greatness of the Patriots. I did not see any such qualifying remarks in your previous posts.

Also, the reason why the Patriots being in a weak division for so many of the seasons of the Brady/Belichick era matters so much has very little to do with whether or not the Patriots would have won other divisions had they been swapped for the divison winner of the other divisions, but rather to do with the fact that in every one of the 9 instances in which the Patriots reached the Super Bowl in the Brady/Belichick era, the Patriots had a first round bye. Being in a division that has been weak for many seasons has been a huge factor in putting the Patriots in a position to reach Super Bowls. During the entire time from 2003-2018, the Patriots have had a winning record in their division (8 times 5-1, 6 times 4-2 and 2 times 6-0).

Of course, the reason why the truly great 1980s and 1990s teams are relevant to the discussion is because they represent examples of what truly dominant teams looks like. I 100% agree that the league was different then. Truly dominant and historically great teams did exist then and pretty much do not exist now. That is exactly my point. No truly dominant great teams exist and that includes the Patriots who have never produced a historically great Super Bowl winning team.