Pats 10-0 playoff run, Did U know?

[KansasBronco]

I was listening to Dave Logan on KOA for a little bit tonight and found this interesting. During this current Pats run of 10 in a row, here's what's happened.

3 games were the superbowl which is played on a neutral field.
5 games where played at home
2 games were played in Pittsburgh where the steelers turned it over 10 times.
Basically, Pittsburgh gave them those games.

What was Dave trying to say, well Denver is a tough place to play, and if we don't give the game away with turnovers, we should stand a very good chance of advancing in the playoffs.


I found this to be very interesting. At least it made me feel a little better. I'm already getting tense about this weekend. This is from a writer at ESPN.

. I know New England is a trendy pick to reach its fourth Super Bowl in five years, but here's what could stop the Patriots from getting there: 1) Tom Brady is a different quarterback on the road, and New England must play its next two away from Gillette Stadium to reach Detroit, assuming a Colts victory over the Steelers. OK, OK, so Brady is a perfect 10 in the playoffs and beat Pittsburgh in two AFC Championship games at Pittsburgh (once, with help from Drew Bledsoe), but look what happened this year. Including this weekend's playoff game, Brady has 17 touchdowns and two interceptions at home; on the road he has 12 touchdowns and 12 interceptions. Yeah, I'd call that a trend.

[Bronco Rob]

All that goes out the window at game time.

[terry251973]

I was listening to Dave Logan on KOA for a little bit tonight and found this interesting. During this current Pats run of 10 in a row, here's what's happened.

3 games were the superbowl which is played on a neutral field.
5 games where played at home
2 games were played in Pittsburgh where the steelers turned it over 10 times.
Basically, Pittsburgh gave them those games.

What was Dave trying to say, well Denver is a tough place to play, and if we don't give the game away with turnovers, we should stand a very good chance of advancing in the playoffs.


I found this to be very interesting. At least it made me feel a little better. I'm already getting tense about this weekend. This is from a writer at ESPN.

. I know New England is a trendy pick to reach its fourth Super Bowl in five years, but here's what could stop the Patriots from getting there: 1) Tom Brady is a different quarterback on the road, and New England must play its next two away from Gillette Stadium to reach Detroit, assuming a Colts victory over the Steelers. OK, OK, so Brady is a perfect 10 in the playoffs and beat Pittsburgh in two AFC Championship games at Pittsburgh (once, with help from Drew Bledsoe), but look what happened this year. Including this weekend's playoff game, Brady has 17 touchdowns and two interceptions at home; on the road he has 12 touchdowns and 12 interceptions. Yeah, I'd call that a trend.
I think i have already discussed this about the pats never playing in a place like denver to go to the superbowl.The pats basically went to the superbowls with the same setup that the colts have this year.When you get home field thruout and you are a good team then getting to the superbowl its not as difficult.Unless your home fans suck and dont supporet your team then most likely the home team will win.During wildcard weekend you are going to have teams win on the road because being a wildcard is just that.You are a playoff team but not in the same category as the 2 teams with the byes.

[NYBronc]

For what it's worth:

Costas/Collinsworth - Denver
Marino/Carter - NE

[trench]

The pats basically went to the superbowls with the same setup that the colts have this year.When you get home field thruout and you are a good team then getting to the superbowl its not as difficultThey've only had the HFA throughout the playoffs once during their SB wins. Only half of those 10 wins were at home.

[terry251973]

They've only had the HFA throughout the playoffs once during their SB wins. Only half of those 10 wins were at home.
YES AND 2 WERE AT THE PITIFUL STEELERS AND 3 WERE THE SUPERBOWL ITSELF.so out of 10 games basically 2 were road games at the same place.Ill restate what i said.DENVER ISNT PITTSBURGH.hell we even beat them in afc title game.pitt sucks in the playoffs unless of course you count them wiping out palmer to win but i dont consider that a clean win.

[Casper Bronco]

Shanahan is 8-0 at home in the playoffs against teams previously played in the regular season.

[trench]

Shanahan is 8-0 in the playoffs against teams previously played in the regular season.He also has a 3 consecutive one-and-out streak going...

[saleen s28one]

Shanahan is 8-0 in the playoffs against teams previously played in the regular season.


how is that possible we lost to the colts the past two years when we played them in the regular season?

[epicSocialism4tw]

He also has a 3 consecutive one-and-out streak going...

That streak is for road games.

[terry251973]

He also has a 3 consecutive one-and-out streak going...
yes but as we all know everything must come to an end just like the pats bandwagon and so called dynasty.

[BigPlayShay]

Shanahan is 8-0 at home in the playoffs against teams previously played in the regular season.

Do you mean at home? Just wondering because in 03 and 04 the Broncos played the Colts in the regular season and then lost to them in the playoffs.

Edit: Nevermind, I see that you edited your post to say at home.

[trench]

yes but as we all know everything must come to an end just like the pats bandwagon and so called dynasty.So-called dynasty huh? Well we didn't need salary cap infractions to get our Lombardi trophies...

[terry251973]

So-called dynasty huh? Well we didn't need salary cap infractions to get our Lombardi trophies...
no you just needed the jags to upset us and that new rule called the tuck rule to send you to the superbowl other than that your team is awesome.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Interesting corelations between the 2002 Pats that finished 9-7 and missed the playoffs and the 2005 version at 10-6 that's being annointed the next champion already...despite only one games difference in their record.

The 2002 team had a crappy running game that finished near the bottom of the league.......with Antoine Smith gettng under 1000 yards and 3.9 a pop...while the 2005 Pats also had a crappy running game that was one of the leagues worst...with Corey Dillon getting 3.5 ypc

The 2002 Pats couldn't stop anyone on the ground...finishing near the bottom of the league in rushing defense. The 2005 Pats can't stop anyone through the air...with their pass defense finishing at the bottom or near the bottom in almost every major statistial caregory.

The 2002 Pats got beat by Denver in the regular season...by 8 points. The 2005 Pats got beat by Denver in the regular season...by 8 points.

Coincidence?

[RMT]

Shanahan is 8-0 at home in the playoffs against teams previously played in the regular season.

I like your video in this post. It's a vivid reminder of just how physical the Broncos played against the Pats earlier in the season. Saturday will be more of the same.

[trench]

no you just needed the jags to upset us and that new rule called the tuck rule to send you to the superbowl other than that your team is awesome.That Jags game was a Shanahan home loss to a team the Pats beat soon afterwards. As for the tuck rule, the Raiders deserved it. They got the ball back and did nothing with it anyway.

[JCMElway]

For what it's worth:

Costas/Collinsworth - Denver
Marino/Carter - NE

Of course, Marino and Carter are dumb asses.

[RMT]

So-called dynasty huh? Well we didn't need salary cap infractions to get our Lombardi trophies...

The circumvented cap issue was blown WAY out of proportion. The Broncos NEVER gained one iota of leverage from that. One player agreed to defer a portion of his contract with the understanding that he would be released. How does that carry the Broncos to a Super Bowl win?

[Old Dude]

For what it's worth:

Costas/Collinsworth - Denver
Marino/Carter - NE

Collinsworth must be a dumbass too, because in his column, he picked the Pats.

Maybe he's playing the spread.

[Jason in LA]

I was thinking about this the other day. The only place the Pats have had to go to, and be the road team, was at Pitt. Off the top of my head, the Steelers have lost four AFC Championship games at Pittsburg under Cowher. Twice to the Pats, once to the Broncos, and once to the Chargers. Their only win at home in the title game was against the Colts, which they got lucky to win. The Colts damn near completed a Hail Mary pass at the end of the game. The guy had it in his hands, but it barely hit the ground when he landed. It was so close that it was called a TD at first. Playing at Pittsburg doesn't seem like a hard thing to do in the playoffs. Playing in Denver is a very hard thing to do come playoffs.

[NYBronc]

And they had Harbaugh at QB.

[errand]

Shanahan is 8-0 at home in the playoffs against teams previously played in the regular season.

Actually, the Broncos as a franchise are 8-0 @ home....Mike hasn't won 8 playoff games....................yet.

[errand]

So-called dynasty huh? Well we didn't need salary cap infractions to get our Lombardi trophies...

Knock it off clown...you know that was a fumble.

[errand]

That Jags game was a Shanahan home loss to a team the Pats beat soon afterwards. As for the tuck rule, the Raiders deserved it. They got the ball back and did nothing with it anyway.

Doesn't matter what they did when they got the ball back...the point is if not for that non-fumble call...your boys wouldn't have won the game. Period.

[Paladin]

Yeah. Somebody needs to remind Tom Terrific that when he sees Pryce coming, just tuck that ball in there and fall down.

[yavoon]

if the patriots go on to win the superbowl this weekend in denver will have been the least likely game for them to win.

[footstepsfrom#27]

The Broncos are 14-5 against the New England Patriots, 10-2 at home...before that they were called the Boston Patriots, before many of you were born.

As for the Patsies Superbowls...I'll give them props for beating a 14-2 Rams team by a field goal...even though our 12 point win over 14-2 Atlanta is more impressive...but lets be honest here...that 4 point win over a so-so Carolina team and the 3 point win over the Eagles don't come close to matching the difficulty of beating the Packers.

[Sgt Sauce]

I heard Marino lent Plummer his Budweiser shirt.. it's on!!!


BRONCOS 31
PATSIES 14

[trench]

Knock it off clown...you know that was a fumble.It was replayed and overturned. Would you like to play the conspiracy card next?

[trench]

The circumvented cap issue was blown WAY out of proportion. The Broncos NEVER gained one iota of leverage from that. One player agreed to defer a portion of his contract with the understanding that he would be released. How does that carry the Broncos to a Super Bowl win?It seems like more than just one player was involved: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7687802

[epicSocialism4tw]

It seems like more than just one player was involved: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7687802

Yes...and it also seems as though you are making much more out of it than what it is worth.

[trench]

As for the Patsies Superbowls...I'll give them props for beating a 14-2 Rams team by a field goal...even though our 12 point win over 14-2 Atlanta is more impressive...but lets be honest here...that 4 point win over a so-so Carolina team and the 3 point win over the Eagles don't come close to matching the difficulty of beating the Packers.Let me get this straight... you're trying to downplay the Pats' last two Super Bowl wins when the Broncos coughed up 90 points to the Colts over the same stretch of playoffs? They didn't seem that tough to beat.

[trench]

Yes...and it also seems as though you are making much more out of it than what it is worth.touchy subject?

[epicSocialism4tw]

touchy subject?

Misread the post?

[listopencil]

It seems like more than just one player was involved: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7687802

"The undisclosed agreements that formed the basis of the Management Council's disciplinary initiative, and ultimately the settlement between the Management Council and the Broncos, included

1) agreements with several Broncos players to defer salary payments with interest, and

2) an agreement with a former Broncos player not to waive the player prior to a certain date.

Both types of agreements raised salary cap accounting issue. "


Ooooooh! How horrible. That's the best you can come up with? Pretty damn lame.

[listopencil]

Let me get this straight... you're trying to downplay the Pats' last two Super Bowl wins when the Broncos coughed up 90 points to the Colts over the same stretch of playoffs? They didn't seem that tough to beat.


So how did your Pats do while we were winning SuperBowls? That would be the more accurate comparison.

[Rock Chalk]

For what it's worth:

Costas/Collinsworth - Denver
Marino/Carter - NE
Collinsworth picked NE in his column on NFL.com.

Michael Smith the day aftre the Wildcard round, bagged on NE and picked Denver but the next day after the major guys picked NE, he changed his pick.

I dont mind so much. I mean, they are just guessing same as us and they dont want to guess against Brady.

[BroncoBuff]

Shanahan is 8-0 at home in the playoffs against teams previously played in the regular season.
Shizzle ya zizzle, C Fizzle!

[BroncoBuff]

Collinsworth picked NE in his column on NFL.com.

Michael Smith the day aftre the Wildcard round, bagged on NE and picked Denver but the next day after the major guys picked NE, he changed his pick.
Collinsworth always seems the most objective of the four.

[Minuteman]

Interesting corelations between the 2002 Pats that finished 9-7 and missed the playoffs and the 2005 version at 10-6 that's being annointed the next champion already...despite only one games difference in their record.

The 2002 team had a crappy running game that finished near the bottom of the league.......with Antoine Smith gettng under 1000 yards and 3.9 a pop...while the 2005 Pats also had a crappy running game that was one of the leagues worst...with Corey Dillon getting 3.5 ypc

The 2002 Pats couldn't stop anyone on the ground...finishing near the bottom of the league in rushing defense. The 2005 Pats can't stop anyone through the air...with their pass defense finishing at the bottom or near the bottom in almost every major statistial caregory.

The 2002 Pats got beat by Denver in the regular season...by 8 points. The 2005 Pats got beat by Denver in the regular season...by 8 points.

Coincidence?

Gee, did the Patriots WIN the following year with Antowain Smith getting only about 650 yards on the ground, too? and about 3.5 yards per carry?

And didn't he 2003 Patriots team have a statisically subpar year defending the pass?...and were strong versus the run?

hmmmm.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Let me get this straight... you're trying to downplay the Pats' last two Super Bowl wins when the Broncos coughed up 90 points to the Colts over the same stretch of playoffs? They didn't seem that tough to beat.
No...I'm making the point that your Superbowl teams came against teams not that strong. What's our secondary meltdown have to do with it? Answer: nothing.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Gee, did the Patriots WIN the following year with Antowain Smith getting only about 650 yards on the ground, too? and about 3.5 yards per carry?
Faulk also had over 600 on the ground.
And didn't he 2003 Patriots team have a statisically subpar year defending the pass?...and were strong versus the run?

hmmmm.
Uh...no. The 2003 Patsies ranked #1 in the NFL in yards per passing attempt on defense. This current mess is LAST IN THE NFL in that critical defensive catagory. The 2003 team also ranked #1 in TD's surrendered, #1 in INT's and were #32 in number of pass attempts. This team is 31st in yardage surrendered via the pass, and 28th in TD's and INT's. You are missing Ty Law and Rodney Harrison and your current secondary is crap compared to what that team had. It seems you don't even know your own team, yet your telling us about ours?

Also...you didn't have to play on the road in the playoffs, and you beat Denver in the regular season. Now you have to play IN DENVER, and you lost to us already...so no...sorry, but this season is markedly different.

You will discover just how different very soon.

[Tailgater]

The circumvented cap issue was blown WAY out of proportion. The Broncos NEVER gained one iota of leverage from that. One player agreed to defer a portion of his contract with the understanding that he would be released. How does that carry the Broncos to a Super Bowl win?

The 'one player' happened to be the HOF QB, wasn't it? The guy that signed an illegal cap-friendly deal that gave the team cap room to build the roster needed to win?

I'm sure it didn't contribute to the overall team at all. Nah.

[max7]

Interesting corelations between the 2002 Pats that finished 9-7 and missed the playoffs and the 2005 version at 10-6 that's being annointed the next champion already...despite only one games difference in their record.

The 2002 team had a crappy running game that finished near the bottom of the league.......with Antoine Smith gettng under 1000 yards and 3.9 a pop...while the 2005 Pats also had a crappy running game that was one of the leagues worst...with Corey Dillon getting 3.5 ypc

The 2002 Pats couldn't stop anyone on the ground...finishing near the bottom of the league in rushing defense. The 2005 Pats can't stop anyone through the air...with their pass defense finishing at the bottom or near the bottom in almost every major statistial caregory.

The 2002 Pats got beat by Denver in the regular season...by 8 points. The 2005 Pats got beat by Denver in the regular season...by 8 points.

Coincidence?

you do realize that by making this argument you are building up the pats accomplishments?

it is a very fair comparison.
holding a SB team together for more than 2 seasons is not easy, broncos fans know all about it.
most of the time a team makes 1 SB, win or lose it falls apart the next year.
this a huge part of why the 3-peat has never been done.

there are 3 differences between the 2 seasons.

1. this team is much better than the '03 team
the over all talent and team experience has improved
2. the jets had no QB all year '05
way easier div. this time, the div was locked up when the pats won at
buff wk 14 and they were 8-5
3. '03, 9-7 and '05, 10-6(5 if they needed that miami game they could of
had it)

[BostonIrish]

So how did your Pats do while we were winning SuperBowls? That would be the more accurate comparison.

They were following the league rules regarding the salary cap.

[Jason in LA]

The NFL said that the Broncos did not receive any competitive advantage when the violated the cap. If they had followed the rules exactly they would have still been able to get the same exact roster those two years. People just don't understand that.

[trench]

"The undisclosed agreements that formed the basis of the Management Council's disciplinary initiative, and ultimately the settlement between the Management Council and the Broncos, included

1) agreements with several Broncos players to defer salary payments with interest, and

2) an agreement with a former Broncos player not to waive the player prior to a certain date.

Both types of agreements raised salary cap accounting issue. "


Ooooooh! How horrible. That's the best you can come up with? Pretty damn lame.What did you come up with? "Ooooooh! How horrible", that's what. They cheated and got caught. Paid a big fine, lost a draft pick. That's an pretty much an embarrassment.

[Tailgater]

Faulk also had over 600 on the ground.

Uh...no. The 2003 Patsies ranked #1 in the NFL in yards per passing attempt on defense. This current mess is LAST IN THE NFL in that critical defensive catagory. The 2003 team also ranked #1 in TD's surrendered, #1 in INT's and were #32 in number of pass attempts. This team is 31st in yardage surrendered via the pass, and 28th in TD's and INT's. You are missing Ty Law and Rodney Harrison and your current secondary is crap compared to what that team had. It seems you don't even know your own team, yet your telling us about ours?

Also...you didn't have to play on the road in the playoffs, and you beat Denver in the regular season. Now you have to play IN DENVER, and you lost to us already...so no...sorry, but this season is markedly different.

You will discover just how different very soon.

OMG! WE'RE DOOMED! :( :( :(

So if the Pats do somehow pull off a miracle and beat the the unbeatable broncos, you'll have to admit they lost to a bad team, right?

Thanks for the update on our team. Nevr would have known any of that kool info!

[trench]

So how did your Pats do while we were winning SuperBowls? That would be the more accurate comparison.They were in the playoffs.

[Jason in LA]

What did you come up with? "Ooooooh! How horrible", that's what. They cheated and got caught. Paid a big fine, lost a draft pick. That's an pretty much an embarrassment.

Sure, that's true, but they still did not receive a competitive advantage for the rule that they broke. So what's there to complain about? The results would have been the same if they had followed the rules correctly.

[shaftedelic]

OMG! WE'RE DOOMED! :( :( :(

So if the Pats do somehow pull off a miracle and beat the the unbeatable broncos, you'll have to admit they lost to a bad team, right?

Thanks for the update on our team. Nevr would have known any of that kool info!

Nope.. When the Pats beat the Broncos, they will still be considered an unprooven team.. Just like after they destroyed Tampa and Jacksonville.. Those were suppose to be the last two tests to see if the Patriots were back on track..

[azbroncfan]

Tuck rule, At the time I was glad of the BS call because I hate the faders but I always maintained it was a crap call as when you watch the replay it's clearly a fumble not a pump fake where the ball comes out as woodson strips it. Another point is that whatever was called on the field needed to stand as it was undisputable evidence to overturn. Typical NE area breaks, these fans sold their soul to the devil with all the Pats breaks and red sox winning.

[sonsofkraftybob]

11-0 in the playoffs is a record that will never ever be broken.

[Jason in LA]

What record is that?

[Jason in LA]

Tuck rule, At the time I was glad of the BS call because I hate the faders but I always maintained it was a crap call as when you watch the replay it's clearly a fumble not a pump fake where the ball comes out as woodson strips it. Another point is that whatever was called on the field needed to stand as it was undisputable evidence to overturn. Typical NE area breaks, these fans sold their soul to the devil with all the Pats breaks and red sox winning.

Same way I felt. It was a BS call, but I loved it. I loved seeing the Raiders get the shaft.

If that call went against the Pats, they'd be crying for years, just like the Raiders.

[sonsofkraftybob]

What record is that?

The Pats playoffs record streak.

[azbroncfan]

11-0 in the playoffs is a record that will never ever be broken.
So is 10-1.

[shaftedelic]

Tuck rule, At the time I was glad of the BS call because I hate the faders but I always maintained it was a crap call as when you watch the replay it's clearly a fumble not a pump fake where the ball comes out as woodson strips it. Another point is that whatever was called on the field needed to stand as it was undisputable evidence to overturn. Typical NE area breaks, these fans sold their soul to the devil with all the Pats breaks and red sox winning.


Of course everyone seems to forget that the Raiders benifited from the Tuck rule first, which was also a play off game back in the day. They also seem to not pay attention to Brady getting hit on the helmet.. Last I checked that was suppose to be a 15 yard penalty. Also the Raiders were winning at that point and did get the ball back..

[shaftedelic]

The Pats playoffs record streak.


Of course it doesn't need to end at 11-0.

[Jason in LA]

The Pats have won 10 in a row, not 11. And it wouldn't be 10-0 in the playoffs, because the Pats have lost 10 playoff games. I guess you guys don't want to count anything from the 1900s.

[azbroncfan]

Of course everyone seems to forget that the Raiders benifited from the Tuck rule first, which was also a play off game back in the day. They also seem to not pay attention to Brady getting hit on the helmet.. Last I checked that was suppose to be a 15 yard penalty. Also the Raiders were winning at that point and did get the ball back..
How did they benfit, they called it a fumble and the game would of been over as they could of ran the clock out, instead NE got ball back and ended up kicking a long FG to tie and won in OT.

[Jason in LA]

Of course everyone seems to forget that the Raiders benifited from the Tuck rule first, which was also a play off game back in the day. They also seem to not pay attention to Brady getting hit on the helmet.. Last I checked that was suppose to be a 15 yard penalty. Also the Raiders were winning at that point and did get the ball back..

Are you talking about the holy roller play? If you are, that wasn't a tuck rule, that was just a blown call by the refs. It should have been an incomplete pass, but it was ruled a fumble. Stabler threw the ball forward, he didn't fumble it.

If that's not the play you are talking about, I can't think of any other play like it that helped the Raiders win a game.

Even if it did, doesn't make the tuck rule right. We all know it was a BS call. Hell, most of us loved the call because it screwed the Raiders. But everybody outside of Pats fans realizes it was a BS call. I don't see why you guys even bother to defend it.

[Paladin]

LOL!!!

None of the BS flying around here means a thing when the game starts tomorrow night. I couldn't care less about any of the past history of either team when the whistle blows. Why? Because it is going to be the on-field execution that matters, not what (whoever) did last week, last year, or when ever. History and stats are interesting for the past, but do not predict all that well for this game.

The pats had a good four year run. This is now. There is no comparison to what will happen on the field.

Frankly, I don't even know if it will be a good game or not. It could deteriorate to a boring game, or it could be exciting. The fans in the stands can make it exciting, and any player on either team can blow one play that affects the outcome. Either team. And that cannot be predicted from any stats or history.

[VileTom]

They were following the league rules regarding the salary cap.


The Niners really cheated on the cap but the Broncos were just in an accounting dispute.

There are lies, damned lies and statisticics - the you have Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

[Spider]

Are you talking about the holy roller play? If you are, that wasn't a tuck rule, that was just a blown call by the refs. It should have been an incomplete pass, but it was ruled a fumble. Stabler threw the ball forward, he didn't fumble it.

If that's not the play you are talking about, I can't think of any other play like it that helped the Raiders win a game.

Even if it did, doesn't make the tuck rule right. We all know it was a BS call. Hell, most of us loved the call because it screwed the Raiders. But everybody outside of Pats fans realizes it was a BS call. I don't see why you guys even bother to defend it.
I saw that play .... back when Sandy Eggo had a chicken for a mascot :~ohyah!: .....

[Jason in LA]

The chicken looked like somebody shot him.