I found it interesting

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

    I found it interesting

    that the first 3-4 plays last night the Texans looked like they were going to have their way with it...BB called a time out, adjusted, and the Pats never looked back defensively...

    I didnt get what the adjustment was? Did Lovie come out?

    Lets face it, the offense and defense both played well, but Houston has more talent than they showed last night. The score last night was more reflective on BB vs Kubiak...even more so than Pats vs Texans

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    that the first 3-4 plays last night the Texans looked like they were going to have their way with it...BB called a time out, adjusted, and the Pats never looked back defensively...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    yeah, that was a smart move by BB, that was a shock and awe game for sure

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    I think the early timeout was because they had 12 men on the field

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    In response to dapats1281's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think the early timeout was because they had 12 men on the field

    [/QUOTE]


    still, it changed after that

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from soups. Show soups's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    Defensive tone did change, but for once the balls went the Pats' way.  Two fumbles recovered and a ghost PI call on their 3rd TD.

    Still, Pats owned this team.  Line was 4.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    I think they brought some more beef on the field, Deaderick maybe?

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think they brought some more beef on the field, Deaderick maybe?

    [/QUOTE]

    Deaderick has played more snaps the past couple weeks and even more so last night.  Not sure when he came in though.  Definitely a possibility.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from palookaski. Show palookaski's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I love how even after that blistering by NE with the entire world raving about NE undressed Houston, RKarp is still claiming that somehow Houston is better.

    I WARNED over and over that Houston does not match up well with NE. Houston had problems with Detroit and Jax for crying out loud.

    It was a mystery why this was ignored by the media heading into this game other than the idea that the media just couldn't wait to crown anyone else other than BB's Pats, simply to not have to praise BB again.

    It's quite comical to watch, actually.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes rkarp, interesting. Texans opening series was an eye opener in that their run game took 3 runs  for good gains and then the TO. Could have been 12 men on and if so that would be twice in the game as they had another later on as well.  No doubt preparation in Practice all week was a contributing factor for that beatdown. BB and coaches had them prepared.

    This comment by Rusty - although seemingly negative- to you, is perfectly acceptable because it's true what he says, although your OP intent was not meant as a spin for the Texans, IMO.

    Good comment Rusty and yes, comical :-)))) Thanks for the laugh.

    Have a good evening

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    that the first 3-4 plays last night the Texans looked like they were going to have their way with it...BB called a time out, adjusted, and the Pats never looked back defensively...

    I didnt get what the adjustment was? Did Lovie come out?

    Lets face it, the offense and defense both played well, but Houston has more talent than they showed last night. The score last night was more reflective on BB vs Kubiak...even more so than Pats vs Texans

    [/QUOTE]


    1st play was Scott VW and deadrick with Hightower and Nink standing at the ends.(only VW and Deadrick with hands in dirt) 2nd play was the same and Foster ran left toward Deadrick and Nink with great down field blocking by Andre and the FB who was off set to the left. We called the T.O because our D was confused on the formation. Then VW shot the gap and shoe laced Foster(great play). Only VW and Deadrick had their hands on the ground the entire series. Personnel didn't change.

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

    Re: I found it interesting

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I love how even after that blistering by NE with the entire world raving about NE undressed Houston, RKarp is still claiming that somehow Houston is better.

    I WARNED over and over that Houston does not match up well with NE. Houston had problems with Detroit and Jax for crying out loud.

    It was a mystery why this was ignored by the media heading into this game other than the idea that the media just couldn't wait to crown anyone else other than BB's Pats, simply to not have to praise BB again.

    It's quite comical to watch, actually.

    [/QUOTE]

    but Houston has more talent than they showed last night."

    am I claiming that Houston is better? Or am I claiming that Houston has more talent than they showed against the Pats?

    I thought that Houston was ill prepared, intimidated and did not make any adjustments. The game was over at half time, even though the deficit was only 21 points.

    I have seen Schaub play a lot better, and the Texans Oline and Dline are capapble of better games.

    I stand by my comment, talent wise, the 2 teams are more evenly matched than the score of the game.(although I giove the edge to the Pats because of Brady) I stand by my comment that BB outcoached, out prepared and adjusted in game more than Kubiak...

    You are also VERY well aware that any time you "warn" or "warnings were out", that I stop reading anything you have to say, so I must have missed that one

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I love how even after that blistering by NE with the entire world raving about NE undressed Houston, RKarp is still claiming that somehow Houston is better.

    I WARNED over and over that Houston does not match up well with NE. Houston had problems with Detroit and Jax for crying out loud.

    It was a mystery why this was ignored by the media heading into this game other than the idea that the media just couldn't wait to crown anyone else other than BB's Pats, simply to not have to praise BB again.

    It's quite comical to watch, actually.

    [/QUOTE]

    I was at the game, so did not see the pregame show, but every "on air talent" and writer I spoke with at the game, picked the Pats....

    I didnt see the pregame, but;

    I wouldnt listen to what Berman has to say anyways (self promoter), and I know that Keyshawn and Ditka picked the Pats. They both love the Pats, BB and Brady. Wouldnt surprise me if Jackson sat on the fence as usual, and Carter picked the Texans...

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    An 11-1 team that is no longer new to the idea of playoffs; a team touted as best in AFC; a team with a trio of first class RB, WR and QB; a team that is supposed to have a solid D and the league's defensive MVP... and they did not come to play? THey were not prepared?

    They said it was the boggest game in franchise history. And they were not prepared? THey didnt play well?....

    Here is the fact of the matter (and I saw the game): the Patriots D was pretty good much of the time and very good at key points. They made Houston make mistakes. The limited the Houston running game to about 40 yards less than they average (in spite of that first run). They made Johnson look very human. THey made Schaub look like an average QB (remember this was the D that early in the year was making weak QBs look good). They made it tough for Houston to run in short yardage. They pressured Schaub.

    On the other side of the ball the Pats ran for 130 yards: about 40 yards more than the average by the Houston D. And of course the passing game was just too much for Houston in spite of Brady having an unusual number of bad throws.

    The fact of the matter is the Pats made them look bad. And while you don't want to hear it it was due to really good play by the Pats.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    An 11-1 team that is no longer new to the idea of playoffs; a team touted as best in AFC; a team with a trio of first class RB, WR and QB; a team that is supposed to have a solid D and the league's defensive MVP... and they did not come to play? THey were not prepared?

    They said it was the boggest game in franchise history. And they were not prepared? THey didnt play well?....

    Here is the fact of the matter (and I saw the game): the Patriots D was pretty good much of the time and very good at key points. They made Houston make mistakes. The limited the Houston running game to about 40 yards less than they average (in spite of that first run). They made Johnson look very human. THey made Schaub look like an average QB (remember this was the D that early in the year was making weak QBs look good). They made it tough for Houston to run in short yardage. They pressured Schaub.

    On the other side of the ball the Pats ran for 130 yards: about 40 yards more than the average by the Houston D. And of course the passing game was just too much for Houston in spite of Brady having an unusual number of bad throws.

    The fact of the matter is the Pats made them look bad. And while you don't want to hear it it was due to really good play by the Pats.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    yes, they did not come to play and that is on the coach. And yes, they have better talent than they showed, although not as much talent as the Pats.

    I dont want to play them in Houston in the playoffs if it comes to that. I like the Pats chances against Denver, Indy and Pitts/Cincy much more than the Texans...

     

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    An 11-1 team that is no longer new to the idea of playoffs; a team touted as best in AFC; a team with a trio of first class RB, WR and QB; a team that is supposed to have a solid D and the league's defensive MVP... and they did not come to play? THey were not prepared?

    They said it was the boggest game in franchise history. And they were not prepared? THey didnt play well?....

    Here is the fact of the matter (and I saw the game): the Patriots D was pretty good much of the time and very good at key points. They made Houston make mistakes. The limited the Houston running game to about 40 yards less than they average (in spite of that first run). They made Johnson look very human. THey made Schaub look like an average QB (remember this was the D that early in the year was making weak QBs look good). They made it tough for Houston to run in short yardage. They pressured Schaub.

    On the other side of the ball the Pats ran for 130 yards: about 40 yards more than the average by the Houston D. And of course the passing game was just too much for Houston in spite of Brady having an unusual number of bad throws.

    The fact of the matter is the Pats made them look bad. And while you don't want to hear it it was due to really good play by the Pats.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    yes, they did not come to play and that is on the coach. And yes, they have better talent than they showed, although not as much talent as the Pats.

    I dont want to play them in Houston in the playoffs if it comes to that. I like the Pats chances against Denver, Indy and Pitts/Cincy much more than the Texans...

     

    [/QUOTE]


    PLEASE!  They came to play.  That's a lie.   They talked that game up as the biggest in regular season history.  They had letterman's jackets made, were all gacked up and called this a statement game.

    You're a terrible liar. The fact is, NE beat the snot out of them and had a great gameplan, out-executing them, etc.  You know why?   Because NE is actually the better built team. They have better depth, balance and from 1-53 are stronger.

    You're constant inability to give NE's D in particualr any credit as you absolutely rave about every other AFC team, is embarrassing.

    You were at the game and you still don't get what happened.

    [/QUOTE]

    I 100% get what happened. The Texans were ill prepared, and didnt want the game as much as the Pats. I still say that is on the coach. The Texans didnt not adjust to anything the PAts ran, the Pats came up with every loose ball, the Texans were caught flat footed on 2 of the Pats TD's. Standing on the sidelines, their was no vibe from the Texans bench, and they knew they lost at halftime. Again, that is on the coach.

    I dont recall raving about any other AFC teams? I have liked the 49'ers all year. I also can see the Jints coming together. I am not sold on Seatle, Wash, Dallas or Atl.

    Assuming playoff teams are; Denver, Pitts, Cincy, Texans, Ravens....the team I least wish to play is the Texans. Esp in Texas. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: I found it interesting

    Rusty I don't always agree with rkarp, but you need to chill the f out here.  He already said the Pats are more talented than the Texans.  He just thinks the Texans will play better than they did on Monday.  If we do play them again I expect to win.  I don't expect to blow them out by 30+.  Do you?

     

Share