Call me crazy but I feel the Patriots game will be very competive.

[modo]

Yo', peeps be trippin' if they think the Pats or even the Dolphins are just going to roll over.

 

[Outlaw Josey Cutler]

With TB, it was partially because we were scoring quickly. It's not about the big plays in the 2nd 1/2 against GB. We couldn't sustain drives or score against GB and didn't run enough. We scored a TD in 37 sec from 30 out and only had one 3 and out against TB in the 2nd 1/2. TOP was affected for different reasons against those 2 teams.

I love CCS. The bolded is very true and never did I say otherwise. I even hinted at it by saying "when Bears go up big, the TOP switches like in GB and TB (to utter disaster in GB)."

The bolded implied the lack of drive sustainablity in the second half, thanks. What is similar is the big lead the Bears had in each game, and the difference BETWEEN the two games is fairly obvious (with the lack of 2-3 redzone TDs open but missed in GB 2nd half) leading to my conclusion:

" if the Redzone TDs can still happen even if 20+ yard plays don't happen then our offense will be a two-dimensional monster: take away the big play and the Bears will WCO time of possession you to death with back breaking little redzone TDs OR run up on the bubble screens (eg Bellamy TD) and the Bears will kill you over the top for a non-redzone TD.

Potentially very exciting times ahead of us."

 

[Bearly]

The other thing of note is that we're getting ahead of ourselves here. Miami has a VG pass D and is willing to pressure the passer so this will not be that cake walk Mitch had against TB. We should be favored due to our D but Miami is 4-2 and have a better record than us if we don't win. This a big game for both teams in that a win put's Miami back in the race and a loss could have us 3-3 after NE. A very different situation then most are projecting. Not what I'm expecting but any given Sunday...

 

[Bearly]

I love CCS. The bolded is very true and never did I say otherwise. I even hinted at it by saying "when Bears go up big, the TOP switches like in GB and TB (to utter disaster in GB)."

The bolded implied the lack of drive sustainablity in the second half, thanks. What is similar is the big lead the Bears had in each game, and the difference BETWEEN the two games is fairly obvious (with the lack of 2-3 redzone TDs open but missed in GB 2nd half) leading to my conclusion:

" if the Redzone TDs can still happen even if 20+ yard plays don't happen then our offense will be a two-dimensional monster: take away the big play and the Bears will WCO time of possession you to death with back breaking little redzone TDs OR run up on the bubble screens (eg Bellamy TD) and the Bears will kill you over the top for a non-redzone TD.

Potentially very exciting times ahead of us."

Not really what I said regarding the TB game. Who wouldn't take points over TOP?

 

[bamainatlanta]

Doubtful that Miami shits the bed 3 games in a row.

 

[playthrough2001]

The Patriots won't be an easy game. They've added a lot of pieces since they got beat down by the Jags in week 1.

They actually beat the Texans week 1.

 

[modo]

They actually beat the Texans week 1.

a few teams have beat the Texans....not exactly a major award.

 

[DC]

Coach VS Coach-NE
Bears front 7 VS Brady-Bears

Pats 24
Bears 31

 

[Hawkeye OG]

Doubtful that Miami shits the bed 3 games in a row.

As long as our offense can muster 20 points, we have a good shot at winning. That OL is in shambles and our D will be the best they have faced so far. Their 3 wins came against pretty bad teams. Then again, I suppose you could say that about the Bears too.

 

[WestCoastBearsFan]

anybody who thinks the Patriots won’t be a tough match up is about as dumb as they get. Bellichek is going to try and confuse the hell out of Mitch. He lives to confuse young and inexperienced QBs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Warrior Spirit]

NE usually starts off slow. In 2014, KC destroyed them on MNF and everyone talked about how they were finished as was Brady. Then went on to win the SB. That's why I wasn't surprised or impressed with DET's victory over them--NE just didn't show up.

All true but they seem to be far less likely to show up when on the road.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Bellicheck is 23-0 against QB's under the age of 25, and if KC beats them, they will almost be in must win mode.

 

[nc0gnet0]

NE usually starts off slow. In 2014, KC destroyed them on MNF and everyone talked about how they were finished as was Brady. Then went on to win the SB. That's why I wasn't surprised or impressed with DET's victory over them--NE just didn't show up.

This is very true, to Bellicheck, September is almost pre-season.

 

[Warrior Spirit]

Bellicheck is 23-0 against QB's under the age of 25, and if KC beats them, they will almost be in must win mode.

Interesting stat indeed but seems like whenever these stats are given attention, that first time comes.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Interesting stat indeed but seems like whenever these stats are given attention, that first time comes.

I thought the same thing when I heard it on Golic and Wingo on my way to work. Just threw it out there. Was actually a reference to their upcoming game against the Chiefs and Mahomes, Not MT.

 

[dennehy]

This is very true, to Bellicheck, September is almost pre-season.

From 2013-17, New England was 14-3 in September, 82%. Over those five seasons they were 63-17, 79%.

Over their first six games in each of those years they were 23-7, 77%. 10 of their 17 losses came in the second half of the season.

 

[nc0gnet0]

From 2013-17, New England was 14-3 in September, 82%. Over those five seasons they were 63-17, 79%.

Over their first six games in each of those years they were 23-7, 77%. 10 of their 17 losses came in the second half of the season.

2014 2 of their 4 losses came in the first 4 games
2015 0 of 4 came in the first 4 games
2016 1 of two losses came in the first 4 games
2017 2 of three losses came in the first 4 games

so, in the last four years, 3 out of 4 times, the Pats lost 50% or more of their total season losses in the first 4 games.

 

[nc0gnet0]

So you think that equates to 'September is like preseason?'

Yes, and overall they lost more games in the second half of the season and had a worse overall wining percentage than they did in September.

So yes, if you cut it off at the exact right time for your argument and if you use some weird stats about percentage of losses in very small sample sizes, you can make the stats say whatever you want them to.

Except it wasn't me that said it, this came out of a Matt Patricia news conference/interview. And again your splitting hairs about winning percentage in September, as two of the losses came in the first two days of October, but still within the first 4 games, so your stats are a big skewed, but thanks for taking things so literally.

 

[dennehy]

Except it wasn't me that said it, this came out of a Matt Patricia news conference/interview. And again your splitting hairs about winning percentage in September, as two of the losses came in the first two days of October, but still within the first 4 games, so your stats are a big skewed, but thanks for taking things so literally.

Sorry, I should have worded that better - it was kinda petty. I just did the breakdown over the last 10 years for fun. They've won 73% of their first four games, and 78% of their last 12. So a little better, but to me that's not really a slow start or really even a big enough difference to say it matters.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Sorry, I should have worded that better - it was kinda petty. I just did the breakdown over the last 10 years for fun. They've won 73% of their first four games, and 78% of their last 12. So a little better, but to me that's not really a slow start or really even a big enough difference to say it matters.

I didn't go back ten years, just the last 4, and it holds true. And it is not me cherry picking stats either, but repeating something a former patriot coach said.