they are all high variance plays that you can't depend on happening again. they are not "lucky" but at the same time they are so unlikely to be reproduced the next time the teams meet that you really shouldn't be putting too much weight into them as good plays or bad plays. if that guy on the Jets makes that INT 9/10 times, and this game was the 1 time he didn't, that's basically luck. or great fortune for the Pats. you might call it a "bad play" and it was, but you basically just got a lucky result

you probably think David Patten getting knocked unconscious and falling out of bounds was a solid play b/c he caught it!

By your logic, pretty much everything that doesn't happen exactly 50% of the time is luck. The INT not happening was certainly good fortune and the most high variance of the plays you mentioned. The INT by Ninkovich was absolutely a good play by him and a bad play by Sanchez and could certainly be an indication of future results. That was the most "unlucky" of the plays you mentioned. The other two were in between.

I suppose my point is that if both teams play at the same level as they did on Sunday night then the Pats will likely win 100% of the time even without what you deem as some lucky plays.

Point of comparison is the Pats-Bills game this year. If they both play at the same level the next time, I think it's much more likely the Pats win the game. That was not the case on Sunday.

Goodie, yes, there is a **** ton of luck in every NFL game. it's not everything that doesn't happen 50% of the time, but when a guy drops a ball that he catches 9/10 times, that's a lot, lot closer to "luck" than "bad play!"

no play is ever going to be 100%, ergo sometimes weird **** just happens

Agreed. My main point was that it wasn't a game where it was a the weird plays or lucky bounces that caused the Pats to win. They simply outplayed the Jets, in all three phases.

I don't think the Pats *won* b/c of bounces, but they certainly helped, and was a big reason why this was a 21 point win instead of a 7 or 10 point win.

which is kind of the original point made upthread

i cant believe they couldnt recover that muffed punt, 3 jets touched the ball before a patriot could, so sick

Fair enough. Not sure why you said *won* but I understand your point.

Pretty much exactly what kb4z said. Again, I'm thrilled with how the played, and with the outcome, but they got pretty much every bounce.

And in other games they didn't. What does it really matter? Win is a win.

I mean, sure, they got some bounces but it wasn't like they didn't completely outplay the Jets as well. In the Bills game, the Bills got some very favorable bounces and without those bounces, they were very likely not going to beat the Pats. That wasn't the case here.

See, I don't think they "completely outplayed" the jets. Yardage was similar. Pats won the turnover battle which is huge, but at least one of Brady's throws should have been picked off, and one of Sanchez' fell right into our hands. Did we outplay them? Sure, but not by 21 points, not even close.

In the grand scheme? It doesn't matter. But we and the media are looking at this game and treating the pats as head and shoulders better than the jets, when in reality, I think the two teams are super close.

Much less posting in here this week by Jets fans compared to last week IMO.

Well, the Pats have beat the Jets 3 out of 4 now with all three of the victories relatively decisive. The only Jets victory was by a touchdown and everything pretty much had to go wrong for the Pats in that game.

Not only that but the Pats defense, with two of their best players hurt, held the Jets to 16 points on Sunday. It wasn't even the best squad that the Pats have and they still beat them handily.

Yeah, I think it's about time to call it. The Pats are a better team than the Jets. It is absolutely NOT super close. That just doesn't make much sense looking at the last four games the two teams have played.

Goodie you may have a better argument if you say over the past 2 years, the score is

Pats 147
Jets 96

of course at this point, last years results should be discounted at this point, both teams are different than they were

Fair enough. If last years results are discounted then I think the gap becomes wider and makes my point.

Goodie, your argument pretty much implies you don't think the pats have a shot against the steelers if they meet in the playoffs.

No it doesn't. I'm not saying the Jets can't beat the Pats, I'm saying the Pats are clearly the better team. As it stands now, the Steelers are clearly a better team than the Pats, based on the evidence we have. That doesn't mean the Pats can't beat the Steelers in the playoffs.

Dude, you do realize there are no absolutes in sports right? I sure hope so.

I think they'd handle them at home. On the road though, refs will be wearing that black and yellow so gl.

who is better than Seahawks or Ravens?

Saints or Rams?

I wasn't basing my opinion of the Steelers being better right now only on the game they played against each other. That would be foolish. There's a lot more factors that go into that assessment than just head to head. I'm quite sure you understand that.

Not really sure those were huge rivalry, must win games (to win the division, that is) for the saints and ravens. Are you suggesting that just as much info can be gained by watching those games as the Pats/Jets game? I don't think that's a credible argument. For all intents and purposes, the pats/jets game WAS a playoff game.

ok, sorry, i shouldn't have said "no chance" and if you think the steelers are clearly better than the patriots, then at least you're consistent so I have no issue with your opinion except for one thing.

You're putting too much stock in one game. Do I really need to list all the games where a clearly inferior team outplays its opponent? I don't deny that the Pats clearly outplayed the Jets in game 1, and they at the very least made a ton fewer mistakes IN new york in game 2, but we have 7 other games for each team to help determine each team's strength.

I think the Pats are a better team, but just not heads and shoulders better.

maybe you weren't, but you were certainly basing pats > jets on the two games.

pats beat jets by like 80 points last year in a very important divisional race game. then the jets totally outplayed them in the playoffs. sooooooo, i'm confused?