We hoped Gronk was near his norm but he obviously was a shadow of his normal self.
You just can't take away Brady's #1 weapon and expect to win the SB.
In a close game like this you have to believe him being 100% would have made all the difference in the world.
In hindsight it was a valiant effort considering the handicap. We almost pulled off beating a red hot Giants' team with one hand tied behind our back.
Dirty baahstahd Pollard strikes again.
Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
-
Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 4:48 AM EST
- BabeParilli
- Posts: 12277
- First: 5/29/2008
- Last: 5/19/2013
-
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 4:56 AM EST
- yakv
- Posts: 352
- First: 10/23/2008
- Last: 12/3/2012
It Hurts But What will hurt morewill be all the talk about tarnished legacynext season will have to be a cross road for BB and TBtime to reload cuase the window will be closing ,no more underwoods , ocho ,we to open the wallets get some free agentsmario williams and others -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 5:52 AM EST
- NoMorePensionLooting
- Posts: 1028
- First: 2/2/2010
- Last: 5/21/2013
It would have helped for sure but Gronk doesn't play Defense nor does he play O line. We were beat by a better overall balanced team.
On to next year. -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 5:59 AM EST
- FrogLegs
- Posts: 171
- First: 5/30/2008
- Last: 4/25/2013
How could the coaches NOT draw a game plan not involving Gronk??? They knew he was not able to play. Using him has a decoy just doesn't cut it for a SB!!! I guess the Giants realized pretty quickly that Gronk would not be a threat. The coaches had 2 weeks to be inventive but no, they even released Underwood removing one of the few WR options they had. Bitter... -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 6:01 AM EST
- donrd4
- Posts: 1458
- First: 1/22/2006
- Last: 5/16/2013
In Response to Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:We hoped Gronk was near his norm but he obviously was a shadow of his normal self. You just can't take away Brady's #1 weapon and expect to win the SB. In a close game like this you have to believe him being 100% would have made all the difference in the world. In hindsight it was a valiant effort considering the handicap. We almost pulled off beating a red hot Giants' team with one hand tied behind our back. Dirty baahstahd Pollard strikes again.
Posted by BabeParilli
Their other hand was up their AZZ.... -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 6:19 AM EST
- palookaski
- Posts: 640
- First: 10/28/2011
- Last: 4/12/2013
In Response to Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:We hoped Gronk was near his norm but he obviously was a shadow of his normal self. You just can't take away Brady's #1 weapon and expect to win the SB. In a close game like this you have to believe him being 100% would have made all the difference in the world. In hindsight it was a valiant effort considering the handicap. We almost pulled off beating a red hot Giants' team with one hand tied behind our back. Dirty baahstahd Pollard strikes again.
Posted by BabeParilli
Agree! Gronk is a difference maker and it's clear when one player was not effective it cost the Pats. The Pats need difference makers like a True RB, WR and 3 on defence.
I do not hold any future hope for Ridley, Vereen, McCourty, Cunningham and a few other top picks were wasted. Manningham being so open and McCourty playing him so loose trying to catch up with him and no time to lQQk up and defend a pass. Disgusting!
People say Spikes had a good game, not me, reaction time too slow.
Have a good day! -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 6:36 AM EST
- Brad34
- Posts: 746
- First: 7/23/2008
- Last: 5/5/2013
In Response to Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:It Hurts But What will hurt more will be all the talk about tarnished legacy next season will have to be a cross road for BB and TB time to reload cuase the window will be closing , no more underwoods , ocho , we to open the wallets get some free agents mario williams and others
Posted by yakv
I agree. I believe this team maybe over achieved particularly with the defense they had even though they appeared to play better at the end of the year. The team is very close to a dominant multi superbowl winning team with the addition of a couple of pieces. Open the purse strings whilst Brady is still capable. -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 7:10 AM EST
- GadisRKO
- Posts: 1908
- First: 4/8/2010
- Last: 5/19/2013
In Response to Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:In Response to Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi : Agree! Gronk is a difference maker and it's clear when one player was not effective it cost the Pats. The Pats need difference makers like a True RB, WR and 3 on defence. I do not hold any future hope for Ridley, Vereen, McCourty, Cunningham and a few other top picks were wasted. Manningham being so open and McCourty playing him so loose trying to catch up with him and no time to lQQk up and defend a pass. Disgusting! People say Spikes had a good game, not me, reaction time too slow. Have a good day!
Posted by palookaski
Wow, you are clueless aren't you? Spikes was one of the bright spots on D and that WASN'T McCourty getting beat by Mario Manningham, that was Sterling Moore...
How clueless can you be?
No future for Ridley? He was a stud out there when BB allowed him to be, what Pats team were you watching all season? I know he wasn't on the field during the Super Bowl but that's on BB being stubborn and not wanting a rookie to fumble the game away.
Only thing I agree with is that we need an outside the numbers guy like Vincent Jackson to help this offense desperately. A safety from FA and some front seven players from the draft.
With that said, I think we would have won had Gronk been 100%. F*** Bernard Pollard... -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 8:15 AM EST
- BubbaInHawaii
- Posts: 3226
- First: 6/13/2008
- Last: 1/1/2013
I'm not convinced that a 100% healthy gronk would have guaranteed a sb win.
Although Brady had a 91 QB rating, the passing game was pretty much shut down and OBIE had no plan B. Plus, the D failed when we needed them to win the game for the Patriots. -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 12:09 PM EST
- BabeParilli
- Posts: 12277
- First: 5/29/2008
- Last: 5/19/2013
In Response to Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:It Hurts But What will hurt more will be all the talk about tarnished legacy next season will have to be a cross road for BB and TB time to reload cuase the window will be closing , no more underwoods , ocho , we to open the wallets get some free agents mario williams and others
Posted by yakv
As always the draft is crucial and the failures we have seen lead directly to some of these street scrubs being depended upon in a SB. Better drafting would certainly have meant another championship. -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 12:12 PM EST
- TheExaminer
- Posts: 12057
- First: 12/30/2010
- Last: 5/20/2013
Agreed. Gronk was nowhere close to game ready, and that might have made the difference. -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 12:14 PM EST
- TheExaminer
- Posts: 12057
- First: 12/30/2010
- Last: 5/20/2013
In Response to Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:It Hurts But What will hurt more will be all the talk about tarnished legacy next season will have to be a cross road for BB and TB time to reload cuase the window will be closing , no more underwoods , ocho , we to open the wallets get some free agents mario williams and others
Posted by yakv
How about Reggie Wayne? Or is he too old now? Of course, if we win with him, they'd all say "you couldn't do it without an ex-Colt." -
This post has been removed.
-
This post has been removed.
-
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 12:30 PM EST
- BabeParilli
- Posts: 12277
- First: 5/29/2008
- Last: 5/19/2013
In Response to Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:This is a very disturbing theread. I stopped reading about 4 or 5 posts down. We have mental midgets all scoruing for the same kinds of excuses as they sit there and type with Brady underoos on their heads. Unbelievable. It was 17-15 at the start of the 4th! After NE's opening drive inn the 3rd, the offense did absolutely nothing! Gronk or no Gronk, get to the line, run your plays, and more important run the ball with the lead! BJGE had 10 efffing carries total! If you liked the opening drive out of halftime, you should want to see more of BJGE and some Ridley. SOme Pats fans are morons.
Posted by RustyGriswold
Rusty, if you think having the guy who just had the greatest season in history for a TE being negated by injury is not a HUGE factor in this game I can't help you with that. It's no-brainer 101.
AGAIN - in three of our 4 losses this year the D failed to get the stop in the last minute. -
This post has been removed.
-
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 12:43 PM EST
- ccsjl
- Posts: 1724
- First: 1/18/2007
- Last: 2/11/2013
Welker catches ball with 4 mins to go...GAME OVER -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 12:46 PM EST
- jbolted
- Posts: 1680
- First: 4/16/2008
- Last: 3/15/2013
It 's a biitch when your HOF TE can barely move in the biggest game of the year, ain't it? I truly wish he was healthy and you would've won, just as I wish Gates/Rivers/LT were healthy a few years back. -
This post has been removed.
-
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 12:48 PM EST
- jbolted
- Posts: 1680
- First: 4/16/2008
- Last: 3/15/2013
In Response to Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:Actually, they moved it fine, they just didn't mix in the run enough. And at least our HOF QB isn't an immature moron like Philip Rivers is. Enjoy the long way down, Boltspank.
Posted by RustyGriswold
Ok spilt milk, have some more sour grapes. -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 1:04 PM EST
- MoreRings
- Posts: 2719
- First: 9/2/2011
- Last: 5/19/2013
In Response to Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:We hoped Gronk was near his norm but he obviously was a shadow of his normal self. You just can't take away Brady's #1 weapon and expect to win the SB. In a close game like this you have to believe him being 100% would have made all the difference in the world. In hindsight it was a valiant effort considering the handicap. We almost pulled off beating a red hot Giants' team with one hand tied behind our back. Dirty baahstahd Pollard strikes again.
Posted by BabeParilli
I hope B Pollard dies of aids -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 1:06 PM EST
- upstart
- Posts: 5
- First: 2/6/2012
- Last: 2/7/2012
In Response to Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:We hoped Gronk was near his norm but he obviously was a shadow of his normal self. You just can't take away Brady's #1 weapon and expect to win the SB. In a close game like this you have to believe him being 100% would have made all the difference in the world. In hindsight it was a valiant effort considering the handicap. We almost pulled off beating a red hot Giants' team with one hand tied behind our back. Dirty baahstahd Pollard strikes again.
Posted by BabeParilli
Not at all. The league needs to reinstate illegal videotaping, then we go all the way next year!
21-17. -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 1:19 PM EST
- FrnkBnhm
- Posts: 1112
- First: 4/6/2011
- Last: 2/8/2013
The problem was not that Gronk was hurt. The problem was this team was built in such a way that only three players mattered to their success. Without Gronk, Welker and Brady all at 100% the Patriots were not the same team. The offense was not only predicated way too much on throwing the ball. It was predicated too much on throwing the ball to the same three guys over and over. Branch or Ocho needed to step up an become a weapon and neither could do it.The coaching staff had to know on the day after the Ravens game that there was a chance Gronk would not be 100%. With two weeks to prepare they could not come up with an offense that could consistently move the ball (they basically had two effective drives in that entire game).This team was flawed all season. They showed how to beat them in the Pittsburg game and the regular season Giants game. The played bad teams for 9 weeks after that got lucky against the Ravens (Lee Evans' drop and Billy Cundiff's miss). The Patriots luck just ran out on the biggest stage. -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 2:11 PM EST
- BabeParilli
- Posts: 12277
- First: 5/29/2008
- Last: 5/19/2013
In Response to Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:The problem was not that Gronk was hurt. The problem was this team was built in such a way that only three players mattered to their success. Without Gronk, Welker and Brady all at 100% the Patriots were not the same team. The offense was not only predicated way too much on throwing the ball. It was predicated too much on throwing the ball to the same three guys over and over. Branch or Ocho needed to step up an become a weapon and neither could do it. The coaching staff had to know on the day after the Ravens game that there was a chance Gronk would not be 100%. With two weeks to prepare they could not come up with an offense that could consistently move the ball (they basically had two effective drives in that entire game). This team was flawed all season. They showed how to beat them in the Pittsburg game and the regular season Giants game. The played bad teams for 9 weeks after that got lucky against the Ravens (Lee Evans' drop and Billy Cundiff's miss). The Patriots luck just ran out on the biggest stage.
Posted by FrnkBnhm
If you think missing a HOF caliber TE wasn't the problem then you're missing just about everything.
Other than Brady, Gronk is by far the most important component of this O. This is because talent is very thin at most skill positions.
Beyond Wes, the WR situation is poor. Our backfield is populated by guys taken off the scrap heap. -
Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi
posted at 2/6/2012 2:12 PM EST
- BabeParilli
- Posts: 12277
- First: 5/29/2008
- Last: 5/19/2013
In Response to Re: Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi:In Response to Bottom line: No Gronk = No Lombardi : Not at all. The league needs to reinstate illegal videotaping, then we go all the way next year! 21-17.
Posted by upstart
Here's your new assignment. Try not to be a moron.