10-6 for 2010?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1021us. Show m1021us's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010? : That is a pretty stupid post
    Posted by underdogggg


    See Doggg, even your alter ego thinks that your post is stupid.....I didn't need to say anything....
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1021us. Show m1021us's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    i'll reserve judgement until after the draft and the remainder of the offseason, but i'm feeling 10-6 or 9-7 at this point...
    Posted by Going-the-Distance


    Yeah, I feeling a 16-0 season with a SB victory myself.....LOL!
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1021us. Show m1021us's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to 10-6 for 2010?:
    W   Sunday, Sept. 12 — vs. Bengals, 1 p.m. (CBS) L    Sunday, Sept. 19 — at Jets, 4:15 p.m. (CBS) W   Sunday, Sept. 26 — vs. Bills, 1 p.m. (CBS) L    Monday, Oct. 4 — at Dolphins, 8:30 p.m. (ESPN) Who is the Pass rush coming from?      Sunday, Oct. 10 — BYE L    Sunday, Oct. 17 — vs. Ravens, 1 p.m. (CBS) W   Sunday, Oct. 24 — at Chargers, 4:15 p.m. (CBS) L    Sunday, Oct. 31 — vs. Vikings Who is the QB?, 4:15 p.m. (FOX) W   Sunday, Nov. 7 — at Browns, 1 p.m. (CBS) L    Sunday, Nov. 14 — at Pittsburgh Who is their #2 WR?  Is Ben playing?, 8:20 p.m. (NBC) L    Sunday, Nov. 21 — vs. Colts A late November game in NE results in a loss?, 4:15 p.m. (CBS) W   Thursday, Nov. 25 — at Detroit, 12:30 p.m. (Thanksgiving, CBS) W   Monday, Dec. 6 — vs. Jets, 8:30 p.m. (ESPN) W   Sunday, Dec. 12 — at Bears, 1 p.m. (CBS) W   Sunday, Dec. 19 — vs. Packers, 8:20 p.m. (NBC) W   Sunday, Dec. 26 — at Bills, 1 p.m. (CBS) W   Sunday, Jan. 2 — vs. Dolphins, 1 p.m. (CBS) 10-6 for 2010? Maybe I'll feel better after draft....lol
    Posted by BubbaInHawaii


    Just a few questions.....
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Anarchy99. Show Anarchy99's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    Chargers get 4th easiest schedule... how does that happen the schedule needs to be better ballanced then that.
    Posted by DaBlade

    The schedule is predetermined and there is no decision making involved at all.  Each team will play it's division rivals twice (total of 6 games), all the teams in a division in their own conference (4 games), all the teams from a division in the other conference (4 games), and the two teams in the other two divisions in their conference that finished in the same spot in their division (2 games).

    So in NE's case, they get the AFC North and NFC North as their other complete divisions to face this year.  They finished in first in their division, so they get the teams that finished first in the other 2 AFC divisions (South and West), which were the Colts and Chargers.

    The schedule rotates as to which divisions face each other and it's been like that ever since they expanded to 32 teams.  Since scheduling is a piece of cake doing it that way, they likely won't change it unless they change the number of teams in the league again.

    As for strength of schedule, one year varies so much from the year before that it usually is pretty meaningless.  One year the Dolphins had 1 win and the next year they had 11.  But heading into the season, most thought the Dolphins would be crushed each week.  Things change quickly in the NFL . . .
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010? : Again, It is illogical to make iny predictions based on who is currently on the team....Any predictions have no merit what so ever.....You can't contest that I am wrong..... What good is it if I tell you that I predict that the Pats will beat the Colts in New England in the dead of winter?  It won't do any good at all because the teams are incomplete....
    Posted by m1021us


    Then why even post?  Why come to the board? 

    Its the offseason when much of time nothing (at least known to the general public) is going on in the NFL.  This is the very time that people speculate and enjoy discussing what may or may not be for the future. 

    Are you actually a colts fan?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010? : That is a pretty stupid post
    Posted by underdogggg

    LOL - have you jumped on the pats bandwagon yet?  Its coming through your town soon?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1021us. Show m1021us's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010? : Then why even post?  Why come to the board?  Its the offseason when much of time nothing (at least known to the general public) is going on in the NFL.  This is the very time that people speculate and enjoy discussing what may or may not be for the future.  Are you actually a colts fan?
    Posted by underdoggg


    16-0 Baby!  16-0!  How do you like them APPLES?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    I like the effort - but now you sound like the people you identify as idiots.  How does that make you feel?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1021us. Show m1021us's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    I like the effort - but now you sound like the people you identify as idiots.  How does that make you feel?
    Posted by underdoggg


    Duh!  Why do you think I did it?  My 16-0 prediction has as much merit as the 9-7 or 10-6 predictions.....
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1021us. Show m1021us's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    10-6 would be a really good record with their schedule. I can't front. It is a brutal one. If they can get through that they should be well prepared for postseason play if they make it. Nothing would shock me. Not even 8-8.
    Posted by tompenny


    I was actually thinking the opposite.....all of the teams that they are playing have lost many players and still have many holes.....I would not be shocked with 16-0....
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010? : Duh!  Why do you think I did it?  My 16-0 prediction has as much merit as the 9-7 or 10-6 predictions.....
    Posted by m1021us

    I completely disagree.  Those that believe the pats may be a 9-7 or 10-6 team at this time have a basis for believing it.  Your 16-0 statement (fabricated or not) could not be as convincingly defended as those that predict a 10-6 or 9-7 season. 

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

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010? : I was actually thinking the opposite.....all of the teams that they are playing have lost many players and still have many holes.....I would not be shocked with 16-0....
    Posted by m1021us


    So to not be shocked by the pats having a 16-0 season since other teams have many holes, are you suggesting that the pats do not have many holes?  If not, what is your basis for you not being shocked if the pats go 16-0?  
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1021us. Show m1021us's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010? : I completely disagree.  Those that believe the pats may be a 9-7 or 10-6 team at this time have a basis for believing it.  Your 16-0 statement (fabricated or not) could not be as convincingly defended as those that predict a 10-6 or 9-7 season. 
    Posted by underdoggg


    Actually, no.....both have the same basis....none can be convincingly defended....none of the teams have a full roster.....
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1021us. Show m1021us's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010? : So to not be shocked by the pats having a 16-0 season since other teams have many holes, are you suggesting that the pats do not have many holes?  If not, what is your basis for you not being shocked if the pats go 16-0?  
    Posted by underdoggg


    All teams have many holes....and the Pats have been there before....therefore I would not be shocked.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010? : Actually, no.....both have the same basis....none can be convincingly defended....none of the teams have a full roster.....
    Posted by m1021us

    Here come a m1021us-ism - That's your opinion and your opinion is wrong.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010? : All teams have many holes....and the Pats have been there before....therefore I would not be shocked.
    Posted by m1021us


    So your only reasoning for not being shocked is that the pats have been there before?  If not, then what else?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from akius. Show akius's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    Not if we get Dez Bryant. All bets are off
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from croc. Show croc's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    The statement of the Rosters not being filled is correct. I'd wait until Sept before making much of a prediction vs the schedules...even so they are invariably wrong.  

    Dez Bryant might be there at 22.  He's not an idiot in the league of Marshall, let alone Holmes, but if he does slip we'll know why. Unless they made a move for a solid vet DL like Umenyoira, it would be hard to see them taking Bryant at 22 - I think he'll be gone before then.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    a lot of pundits seem to think the Pats may get Bryant.  He'd be a great pick but does he solve real problems for the pats?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from croc. Show croc's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    Ya! He'd solve the 3rd WR issue and heir apparent to Moss.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    W   Sunday, Sept. 12 — vs. Bengals, 1 p.m. (CBS)
    L    Sunday, Sept. 19 — at Jets, 4:15 p.m. (CBS)
    W   Sunday, Sept. 26 — vs. Bills, 1 p.m. (CBS)
    W   Monday, Oct. 4 — at Dolphins, 8:30 p.m. (ESPN)
         Sunday, Oct. 10 — BYE
    W    Sunday, Oct. 17 — vs. Ravens, 1 p.m. (CBS)
    L    Sunday, Oct. 24 — at Chargers, 4:15 p.m. (CBS)
    W    Sunday, Oct. 31 — vs. Vikings, 4:15 p.m. (FOX)
    W   Sunday, Nov. 7 — at Browns, 1 p.m. (CBS)
    W    Sunday, Nov. 14 — at Pittsburgh, 8:20 p.m. (NBC)
    W    Sunday, Nov. 21 — vs. Colts, 4:15 p.m. (CBS)
    W   Thursday, Nov. 25 — at Detroit, 12:30 p.m. (Thanksgiving, CBS)
    W   Monday, Dec. 6 — vs. Jets, 8:30 p.m. (ESPN)
    W   Sunday, Dec. 12 — at Bears, 1 p.m. (CBS)
    W   Sunday, Dec. 19 — vs. Packers, 8:20 p.m. (NBC)
    W   Sunday, Dec. 26 — at Bills, 1 p.m. (CBS)
    W   Sunday, Jan. 2 — vs. Dolphins, 1 p.m. (CBS)


    14-2. Gonna be a great year
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Gulo. Show Gulo's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    13-3 or 12-4

    anything less than that is a disappointment and mediocre 
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from akius. Show akius's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    13-3 or 12-4 anything less than that is a disappointment and mediocre 
    Posted by Gulo


    SH*t up, we are in the rebuilding phase, this isn't the pats team from the last decade.. 10-6 or 11-5 seems very likely but I'm goona wait to say anything with confidence.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    I would wait on this before we start predicting records.  The Pats have a lot of serious questions going into the draft.  If we don't fix the pass rush and the right side of the defense we'll be in trouble against good offensive teams, even average offensive teams.  This means a possibility of dropping 8 games. Offensively I think the Pats can fix this easily enough.  This draft seems a little bit more friendly on the offensive side of the ball. 
    Posted by garytx



    I agree that it's too early; especially since we haven't gone thru draft and finished off-season acquisitions. But, as of today.....
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: 10-6 for 2010?

    In Response to Re: 10-6 for 2010?:
    We're not losing to Miami IN Miami. How do I know this? Becasue I'm going to the game and I have been to A LOT of Pats games and I have NEVER EVER seen them lose. So there. I'm also going to the Viking, Jets (@ Gillette) and Indy games so you can put those in the win column as well. Also let's remember that the schedule never turns out the way we think it will and teams that we think we can/can't beat in April end up being totally different in October. We will sweep the Jets this year and I can't wait to bump this thread when we do!
    Posted by KellieMB


    Well, if you're going to be there.....lol  :)
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share