Why didn't anyone pick us in 2001?

godef · Jan 29, 2008

The Rams had only one Super Bowl win a few years before, so not a lot of people hated them yet. Of course, the hate never did develop because we grounded their budding dynasty.

PatsFanSince74 · Jan 29, 2008

i think a lot of the media were just going along with the conventional wisdom.

one of my neighbors on our floor here in manhattan, a very well-known NFL play by play guy in the broadcast booth, was standing by the elevator on his way to New Orleans a few days before the 2001 game. we had talked about the pats a couple of times since the Snow Bowl and he knew I was a big fan.

so, I asked him, "Well, do my pats have any chance at all? Am I the only one who thinks they're gonna win on Sunday"

His answer: "If the Patriots come out and hit them on the nose from the beginning of the game, I think they'll win. St. Louis isn't used to getting knocked around. The secret is to bloody them up a bit." With that, he got on the elevator and I thought about what he said when our D came out hitting everything in sight that day.

True story.

TruthSeeker · Jan 29, 2008

captain stone said:
Wow. That's strange; I thought that I had read in USA Today after the SB that, of all the writers polled by the paper, Borges was the only one to predict a Pats win. Maybe I'm confusing the SB with the AFCC played the week before?

A lot of people believed that the Patriots had a decent chance of beating the Steelers. I certainly did.

However, I had practically no hope against the Rams - which is one of the things that made it so special.

NEPatriot · Jan 29, 2008

patsfaninpa said:
I remember Joe Theisman picked us in 01. I believe M.Hoge. OK pick yourself up off of the floor did too. And, from the media I believe Sal Paolantonio(sp?) did too.

I believe you're correct in that Theisman picked us. I really don't care who picks who.

ivanvamp · Jan 29, 2008

PatsFaninAZ said:
When I read Theisman, it kind of makes me think you could say some of the same things about the Giants this year.

In the article, Theisman talked about how the Rams were susceptible to turnovers, having led the league by turning the ball over 44 times that year. He thought the Pats could exploit that. That year, the Pats were 9th in the league in turnover differential, while the Rams were 26th. In other words, the Rams were awesome, but they had a major achilles heel, and if you could expolit it you had a shot. The Pats did exploit it, winning the turnover battle 3-0.

But this year, the Pats are 1st while the Giants are 26th. So if you go by Theisman's logic, look for the team with the good turnover margin to exploit the weakness of the team with the bad turnover margin.

It just so happens to be the case that the team with the good turnover margin is the heavy favorite (New England), and the team with the bad turnover margin is the underdog (NYG).

So I don't see the comparison from 2001 to 2007 as being valid.

Giants6timeworldchamps · Jan 29, 2008

I thought the Patriots could win.

Johnny Mac · Jan 29, 2008

John Kruk picked the Patriots and got the score exactly right.

Amnorix · Jan 29, 2008

SF reporter Ira Miller picked the Pats to win the SB before the playoffs even began. :-O

A San Francisco Chronicle colleague, Ira Miller, correctly picked nine of the 11 postseason games, including the Super Bowl, by picking winners on the basis of their coaches, not the players.

http://archive.profootballweekly.com/content/archives2001/features_2001/****ey_022502.asp

Fencer · Jan 29, 2008

theflinger said:
I think people are forgetting just how big of an upset 2001 was. 2001 is the very reason some of the mediots are mulling over if the Giants could win.

We have bingo. Upsets or even close games in Super Bowls were pretty rare until the Patriots started winning them.

nepatz11 · Jan 29, 2008

I think the main reason that people are picking the giantsa is because they played us tough 4 weeks ago

FootballFan85 · Jan 30, 2008

The Giants held the Pats to within a touchdown in the last game of the season. How people can say that isnt playing them tight, I don't know.

It can easily be argued that the Giants are playing significantly better now than they were leading into that first meeting.

At the same time it can easily be argued that the pats of the last 8 games are not the same invincible looking Pats we saw in the first 10.

What I dont understand is why anyone thinks it's such a travesty for someone to pick the Giants. The matchup is probably a lot closer than a lot of people would LIKE to admit.

However in the end, the Pats will win because the fact of the matter is this is the New England Patriots and its Tom Brady, and regardless of anything else, winning pressure games is what they do. Over and over and over again.

Despite that though, I'm not sure why so many people get offended by a Giants pick as if people were picking the Dolphins to beat them.

Rawky77 · Jan 30, 2008

FootballFan85 said:
The Giants held the Pats to within a touchdown in the last game of the season. How people can say that isnt playing them tight, I don't know.

It can easily be argued that the Giants are playing significantly better now than they were leading into that first meeting.

At the same time it can easily be argued that the pats of the last 8 games are not the same invincible looking Pats we saw in the first 10.

First the last 8 games of the regular season had some wrinkles you are conveniently overlooking like the weather which affects the passing game and the fact we were the last undefeated team standing which met every team we played was playing beyond themselves for we were their SB. Those two factors alone made a huge difference in the total score separation at the end of the games.

As too the Gints they had a fluke kick return TD off the Moss penalty which radically altered our STs pursuit angles, that is not happening again.

Also after the Gints game tell me how our defense played in the last two Play Off games.

We held Jax's too 20 pts and SD to 12 pts gee seems to be a huge difference in how the Pats play in the playoffs does anyone really think that the Pats will not have their best game in the SB.......one more thing we settled for 3 FGs in the Gints first game partly due to our offensive approach. Convert 2 of those to TD's in the SB and this contest will not even be close.

Rawky77 · Jan 30, 2008

brdmaverick said:
To answer the original question in the title of the thread.....

"no one picked us in 2001 because no one SHOULD HAVE picked us in 2001."

Let's be real, you would have to be crazy to truely think the Pats were going to win.

l.

I picked the Pats to win and yes everyone said i was crazy but i even believed i knew how they would win....the same way the Celtics beat the Super Talented Lakers for the world championship in basketball.....the Celtics had no chance to match them in athletic talent but they had one strategy that would work.....play physical, beat them up and not allow their talent to beat you.....it worked for the Celtic's and to this day i remember the Head Line in the LA Times, CELTICS WIN UGLY.....My fav of all time.

I thought the Pats could do the same thing and they did.

PatsFaninAZ · Jan 30, 2008

After watching super bowl 36 and the america's game film for the 2001 Patriots, I have to admit that I can totally see where some of the comparison between the 2001 Patriots and the 2007 Giants is coming from.

One of the things Lawyer Milloy talks about is the joy in the locker room after losing to the Rams by 7 at home. It's the same thing people are saying about the Giants after week 17, and people here are scoffing at.

All the stuff about Belichick telling the team that it's not important what you've done in the season or whether you've been the best team in the season -- all you need to be is the best team at the end of the season, etc. Both teams starting the year with 2 bad losses, etc.

Just seems pretty similar to me. Not saying it means we'll lose. We have Bill Belichick not Mike Martz. I am saying, though, I think the comparison is legit in some ways.

Lansdowne · Jan 30, 2008

Two words: Tuck Rule

A lot of people saw that and thought to themselves, "Those lucky f*ckin' bastards..." and since then have been drinking the Hatorade whether the Patriots have won with a "boring" team or with the high-octane offense we have now. It will never stop. The Patriots are loved or hated, but never ignored.

tuckeverlasting · Jan 30, 2008

Slagathor said:
So let me get this straight....

The Giants played the Pats close....(IMHO it wasn't that close).

So since they played it close, they will correct the mistakes that kept them from winning and win the game.

The logic is......the Pats....comfortable with the fact that they won.....will make no changes.

That folks is what I call lazy analysis generated by bias.

As has been said before, but never acknowledged by the media intelligencia, was how much external and psychological pressure the Pats had on them that game. An unbeaten season and TD reecords on the line.

The Giants had NOTHING to play for, other than the opportunity to play spoiler. Their playoff position was set. ZERO PRESSURE.

Now the dynamic has changed.

They have pressure now.

In Tampa, people thought they could win but weren't holding their breath. In Dallas and Green Bay, the pressure was all on the home teams.

All three of those teams had to live up to playoff expectations as well as the fact they were all very flawed overrated teams.

Now they are expected to perform similarly to their last 4 games.

Some are expecting them to upset the Pats. They will have that thrown in their face everyday.

Guys like Burress and Pierce will soak it up and let it blind them. That's just how those type of players are.

Gents.....we will win this game handily.

Our team is as loose as I've ever seen them.

They are giddy about where they are.

They are excited at the prospect of solidifying the greatest legacy in pro football.

They have much more to play for than the Giants. WAY MORE.

media... intelligencia ? talk about an oxymoron. is there a more exclusive club than media intelligencia. members; 1:bricks:

LiveShot · Jan 30, 2008

Sebastian who's a radio personality from the Hartford area, picked the Pats to win outright. He is an expert on sports odds and very successful. www.sebastiansports.com is his website.

FootballFan85 · Jan 30, 2008

Rawky77 said:
First the last 8 games of the regular season had some wrinkles you are conveniently overlooking like the weather which affects the passing game and the fact we were the last undefeated team standing which met every team we played was playing beyond themselves for we were their SB. Those two factors alone made a huge difference in the total score separation at the end of the games.

As too the Gints they had a fluke kick return TD off the Moss penalty which radically altered our STs pursuit angles, that is not happening again.

Also after the Gints game tell me how our defense played in the last two Play Off games.

We held Jax's too 20 pts and SD to 12 pts gee seems to be a huge difference in how the Pats play in the playoffs does anyone really think that the Pats will not have their best game in the SB.......one more thing we settled for 3 FGs in the Gints first game partly due to our offensive approach. Convert 2 of those to TD's in the SB and this contest will not even be close.

It's funny how people remember things like a fluke kick against them, but don't remember things like a fluke time out or a fluke ball passing perfectly through the arms of a dback for a TD instead of what would be an easy pick 99% of the time.

The Pats had their share of luck this year too. More than once in Baltimore. Does that mean they're not as good as they are.

It's amazing how insecure some Pats fans are.

The Pats will win this game because they simply overwhelm the Giants in one category, cool headedness (word?).

The Pats aren't invincible. In fact they needed downright luck multiple times to win at least one game this year. So what? Theyre still 18-0.

People need to get over this whole attitute of no one can score on the Patriots and everytime someone puts up a good game it was because of this factor or that factor. Every week people said "that wont happen again!", and week after week the Pats found themselves in tough games.

Whether or not you agree with comparing the Gints to the 01 Pats, one thing is for sure, by writing of the Giants, youre acting exactly like everyone else in 01 who didnt give the Pats a chance in hell.
Whether you like the Giants-Pats comparison, real Pats fans should understand that upsets can and DO happen. Your own team proved it.

Armen Da Pats Fan · Jan 30, 2008

blackglass3 said:
Condi Rice kind of, sort of, not really, ok didn't actually pick us. But she did tell Larry King that if the game was close in the 4th quarter against the Rams, she thought we had a great chance of winning.

But I understand your point.

Who the he l l is Condi Rice? Is she on ESPN?

For my money, I'll take Suzi Kolber.

libalu53 · Jan 30, 2008

By chance I watched the Pats/Rams 2001 replay (every down) last night on NFL Network.

Gotta tell ya, I watched the original game with 15-20 folks over my house and drinking. Last night was by myself, sober watching each play. NO WAY Pats should have won that game!!!!

Defense played GREAT with mostly journey men players. Brady threw every long pass way over receivers heads. But made the plays when they counted.

Brady has really improved since that game. Wouldn't mind having young Law and Malloy on the team Sunday. Light/Seymour were rookies that Superbowl. Faulk looked great along with Troy Brown.

Why didn't anyone pick us in 2001?

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Banned

In the Starting Line-Up

Banned

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

On the Game Day Roster

Pro Bowl Player

On the Game Day Roster

Banned

On the Game Day Roster

On the Game Day Roster

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Banned

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

Rookie

Similar threads