The "as mild as it was" qualifier was used to convey that it is well understood that the Bell comment was not jarring. And true, he did add that last sentence.
BB knows what the platforms are called I'm sure. The big twist will be when Belichick reveals that he was Brady's social media guy all along.
Thanks!
I don't know, just would have been a funny side thing while Brown had to live-feed his coach's private talk.
I'd say 8 out of 10.
If you are making book and getting a decent amount of action on Pittsburgh, you're probably happy to write these tickets all day long. The line will adjust, and reportedly has done so.
I think this is due in part to the tendency by some to be overly influenced by the success of non-bye teams. By definition, anyone the Pats could face at this point would be on a postseason winning streak. The Steelers have now won two playoff games, including a road game against a fashionable favorite, while the Pats were off the radar before turning in a supposedly unconvincing (18-point!) victory over a historic underdog. In short, there's more of a postseason narrative for Pittsburgh -- and it feeds into the whole myth of the tough-guy Steelers and their warrior QB.
I hear what you're saying, but I don't quite understand how it works. The Patriots beat their opponent by 18 points. The Steelers didn't score a touchdown and beat their opponent by 2 when their opponent was called for a holding penalty after a successful 2-point conversion that had just tied the game in the waning moments.
That's not really the full story though. The Patriots were nip and tuck with a 16 point road underdog through 3+ quarters. The Steelers moved the ball at will and pretty much dominated a KC team playing at home. (Between the 20's, at least.) At the end of the day that needs to be balanced out by the fact that the Patriots did, in fact, win by 18 and the Steelers did, in fact, not score a touchdown. But the narrative is more complex than the final score.
See Stich and others for gaming expertise, but this is the way I think it works.
The narrative of the Patriots game isn't exactly the way that you have made it sound. The Texans offense was not really able to move the ball effectively against the Patriots defense. Nearly all of the Texans points were a result of Patriots unforced errors (penalties or turnovers). Once the Patriots stopped making those errors, they won the game going away.
VegasInsider.com still has spreads at 5.5 or 6 points at all the casinos they cover -- same as yesterday. Not sure if there's a lot of fan money in the early action (most of the country will be rooting against the Pats), or if the gambling community sees this matchup differently than you and I do.
This is correct. I remember saying when the Pats got to 24 pts the game was over as long as we STOP TURNING THE BALL OVER! Texans weren't scoring over 24 pts.
It's the Pittsburgh way. Talk about how tough you are, then complain about little things that are "unfair".
That's my take as well. Is putting an excuse out front like that really what he thought would be effective motivation? "Everyone thinks we suck" is not the same as "the deck has been stacked against us."
Not the only place he's not welcome. New Orleans, St. Louis, San Diego and likely Oakland soon.
I'd love to see the ITP guys take a look at this. We all saw the success that Houston had with Clowney and Mercilus shooting the A gaps, using their quickness to overwhelm Andrews. But what did the Pats do to counter it as it seemed like it worked gangbusters for a couple of series and then disappeared? Was it, as Simms suggested, a change in the blocking assignments to work from center out? Or was it something else, perhaps in the play-calling? Or did Houston simply change tactics which would make no sense, but stranger things have happened (cf. "Malcolm, GO!")
They lose, however, Brady's game was a direct result of Houston's defense, which is the best in the league and played like it. Pittsburgh's D is good, but nowhere near Houston's.
For the most part, I agree. My only issue is that he said all that about Brown and then mentioned that he hadn't spoken to him yet. Seems like he probably should have talked to Brown before calling him immature and selfish in a press conference.
He also had a real poor game in the 2007 AFCCG against SD that nobody really remembers. And against SD in the Div Round the year before. This team can survive a bad game from Brady if the defense shows up. The good news is that it's VERY difficult to beat the Pats if Brady brings his A game, which could easily happen if the OL protects him.
I'm not.
