I just requested a copy from my town library. Two five year old boys and the running mantra of our household is "work hard and try your best."
Huh funny I loved it. Made me realize how much the guys in the locker room like Jules and will miss him (even Dante rooting for him to get into the end zone) when I worried his "act" might be getting old. Also that I and the team might miss Blount Force Trauma more than I had thought. I also enjoyed the way they had the three guys playing off of each other. I've seen the highlights before but it was the three guys and the framing around the book that I really enjoyed.
All the talk about passing being the right choice perhaps in 49 and 51, so I decided to look at the turnover percentages on average for passing vs. running plays.
In 2016 there were 18,295 passes thrown, and 415 were intercepted, for an overall rate of 2.27%
In 2016 there were 13,320 rushes taken, 228 were fumbled but only 95 of those were loss, for a turnover rate of .71%
I was surprised that fumble were actually less than 1/3 as likely to happen on the average rush than an interception was. I assumed interceptions were more likely, but not 3 times more likely
In 2016 there were 18,295 passes thrown, and 415 were intercepted, for an overall rate of 2.27%
In 2016 there were 13,320 rushes taken, 228 were fumbled but only 95 of those were loss, for a turnover rate of .71%
I was surprised that fumble were actually less than 1/3 as likely to happen on the average rush than an interception was. I assumed interceptions were more likely, but not 3 times more likely
Don't get me wrong, I love Edelman and loved him in the America's Game from 49. Just thought it was a little bit over the top this time.
What about fumbles on passing plays, either due to strip sack or post-catch? The former being especially problematic due to the field position gain.
There's a bit of Dwight Howard going on there. Hey look I'm just like Shaq you guys!
My review: I enjoyed it. Doesn't get your heart pumping like NFL Turning Point or inspire admiration like DYJ, but it's not a bad way to kill 41 minutes.
Pro:
- Lots of new content, footage, interviews, detail on regular season, etc that we haven't gotten much of before.
- Hightower is a great interview, I'd like to see more of him. Blount isn't bad either; the entire team seems to deeply respect him.
- Chris Evans' voiceover >> whatever Edward Norton was doing
- The bit about Gronk on the final play of the Seattle game was excellent (~17'30")
- Some honesty from the 3 main interviewees about playing with #12
- Jackie Slater cameo quote in the post-SB on-field celebration
Con:
- Poorly-chosen subject matter that doesn't fit into a real narrative. Has the editorial flow of my 4th-grade book reports.
- Lots of focus on Edelman, who will talk and talk as long as there's a camera pointed at him, rather than people who have interesting things to say. Virtually no coaches talking.
- Only 4 replays of the Floyd block (but the appropriate ~10 of the hightower strip sack)
- Way too schmaltzy with the everyone-hugging-their-mom stuff at the end
Looking at all the replays of the Blount pile-carry in the AFCCG, my one thought was: Hogan was lollygagging, just idly walking towards the scrum. I bet he caught absolute hell for that on Monday.
Pro:
- Lots of new content, footage, interviews, detail on regular season, etc that we haven't gotten much of before.
- Hightower is a great interview, I'd like to see more of him. Blount isn't bad either; the entire team seems to deeply respect him.
- Chris Evans' voiceover >> whatever Edward Norton was doing
- The bit about Gronk on the final play of the Seattle game was excellent (~17'30")
- Some honesty from the 3 main interviewees about playing with #12
- Jackie Slater cameo quote in the post-SB on-field celebration
Con:
- Poorly-chosen subject matter that doesn't fit into a real narrative. Has the editorial flow of my 4th-grade book reports.
- Lots of focus on Edelman, who will talk and talk as long as there's a camera pointed at him, rather than people who have interesting things to say. Virtually no coaches talking.
- Only 4 replays of the Floyd block (but the appropriate ~10 of the hightower strip sack)
- Way too schmaltzy with the everyone-hugging-their-mom stuff at the end
Looking at all the replays of the Blount pile-carry in the AFCCG, my one thought was: Hogan was lollygagging, just idly walking towards the scrum. I bet he caught absolute hell for that on Monday.
I couldn't find anything that granular, but I'm sure those would have to be counted in the
Edit: Fixed my blunder calling those plays fumbles when they should be counted with passing turnovers
Last edited:
I actually have an article coming out on fumbles tomorrow on ITP! Rate of fumble post-catch is similar but slightly lower than running plays (probably because of more out-of-bounds runs). But fumble on strip-sack is a real concern - about 14% of sacks result in a fumble. So turnover on a pass play is higher. It should be noted, however, that Matt Ryan is excellent at avoiding fumbles; he only fumbled four times last year and fumbles less than once per 100 dropbacks for his career. Weirdly, we've seen key fumbles in the last two Super Bowls from three of the best QBs in recent vintage at avoiding fumbles (Ryan, Cam Newton, and Peyton Manning, who was probably the best ever at this).
Agreed. I am pretty Edelman'ed out right now after this offseason and now all these videos.
We get it. Nobody has worked harder than you at trying to be Tom Brady's friend and work ethic spirit animal.
Scary to think of the things JE will say acting like a "coach" on the sidelines this year as he is being allowed to hang around rather than sent home as most IR guys are.
That's what my wife said to me this morning when I told her I was disappointed in the latest America's Game.
Actually, I would argue the opposite. If a fumble on a pass play is counted in the fumbles category, which I understood you to be attributing to running plays, then those fumbles should be shifted over from running plays (thereby reducing the turnover rate there) and added to passing plays, which then, in conjunction with INT's, would increase the turnover rate there.
That's what I was getting at.
Basically, you would need to add up fumbles on strip sacks, fumbles on YAC, and INT's to get a true sense of the danger of a turnover on a passing play. And then compare it to fumbles on true running plays (after subtracting for the above).
I roll my eyes at JE11 occasionally, but I fucking love him, and if he finds his way to the sideline and practice and anywhere else - film sessions - I have no doubt he will do what he can to mentor and tutor a guy like Phillip Dorsett, and I hope he does. All hands on deck.
Tonight's banner ceremony @GilletteStadium will be streamed live on http://Patriots.com starting at 8:15pm ET.
It's probably unseemly that, sitting alone in my basement while 'cooking', I laughed as hard as I did when I saw this. Thanks!
FS1 had NFL Films Presents (Katie Nolan) with great coverage of the ring ceremony and more in depth looks at some of the players who were new to the team last year like Hogan and Van Noy.
Reairing Sat morning
Reairing Sat morning
Just checked to see what the NFL record was for most consecutive road victories since they went 8-0 last year and then won again yesterday, and found out that the 49ers won 18 road games in a row from 1988-1990, which is fucking amazing.
Brady has never - NOT EVER - lost on the road the week following a home loss. NEVER.
Also, he has never lost on a Thursday or Saturday game on short rest.
Also, he has never lost on a Thursday or Saturday game on short rest.
James White wrote an article about the Super Bowl for The Players' Tribune last week, and it was really good.
Agreed. Brady clearly loves the guy – and I loved all the footage of him tearing shit up in high school (in all three phases of the game" as it were). Not hard to see what BB liked about him.
Also, how great is Wes saying something to the effect of "My Football Life is going to be about all the Super Bowls I lost."
How quickly Andrew Luck's stock has fallen. Two yrs ago or even a year ago he would have been on this list with Brady and Rodgers in the top 3.
This is an interesting question. Maybe one of the top college guys will end up #1, who knows. I don't think it'll be Brady.
Looking at all the SB championships, there's never been a 10 year stretch with 10 different QBs winning. And the 10 yr record is 4 wins for Bradshaw and Montana. Brady's clusters of 3 and 2 wins are too spread out, which is amazing in itself.
This is an interesting question. Maybe one of the top college guys will end up #1, who knows. I don't think it'll be Brady.
Looking at all the SB championships, there's never been a 10 year stretch with 10 different QBs winning. And the 10 yr record is 4 wins for Bradshaw and Montana. Brady's clusters of 3 and 2 wins are too spread out, which is amazing in itself.
They're not trying to predict an election or what a larger sample would do. Sample size doesn't really matter.
Disagree. Or would you say the same if they had just asked five people and one had said Brady?
The original image also didn't state that it was a question to active NFL players, which does change the equation a bit of course.
And yes, it is hilarious.
Odds of patriots winning the super bowl as the game goes on.
https://g.redditmedia.com/_5LhNzfAEk1jDgyuwVTpKyp6tkVBQSgtzHFBRj_oPI0.gif?fm=mp4&mp4-fragmented=false&s=c1792fa07d5afc51a366c6cbd5a8e938
https://g.redditmedia.com/_5LhNzfAEk1jDgyuwVTpKyp6tkVBQSgtzHFBRj_oPI0.gif?fm=mp4&mp4-fragmented=false&s=c1792fa07d5afc51a366c6cbd5a8e938
Let’s not forget two nauseatingly close calls in between the two runs.
And on topic, despite all the difficulties they’ve had, if they get and stay reasonably healthy, and get their act together on defense, he could pull it off again. I’m just enjoying watching the greatest do his thing while it happens.
I think we can (somewhat artificially) divide the Patriots under BB/TB into three eras.
Era 1 - the first dynasty - 2001-2004
Three division titles. Three trips to the Super Bowl. Three Lombardi trophies. The emergence of Tom Brady as an elite quarterback.
Era 2 - the great regular season team - 2005-2013
Eight division titles. The best record in football over that time. Five trips to the AFCCG. A perfect regular season. But two heartbreaking SB losses where they couldn't get over the hump. Video game level offenses. The emergence of Tom Brady as an all-time great quarterback, with a statistical profile to back that claim up.
Era 3 - the second dynasty - 2014-2017??
Three division titles (and in first place this year). The best record in football over that time. Two trips to the Super Bowl. Two of the greatest Super Bowl victories of all time. Brady, in his older years, almost redefining greatness.
Over Brady's 15 years as a starter (throwing out 2000 when he was a rookie, and 2008 when he was injured all year, and this year because it's not even halfway done), the Pats have been to 7 Super Bowls (winning 5). That's 47% of the seasons, he's been to the Super Bowl. Winning 5 (33%). Going to 10 AFCCGs (67%). That's INSANE. In his time as a starter, he's been to the conference championship game 2 out of every 3 seasons. And to the Super Bowl nearly HALF the time. If they go this year, he will have been to 8 SBs out of 16 seasons as a starter. Half the time. It's beyond incredible.
Era 1 - the first dynasty - 2001-2004
Three division titles. Three trips to the Super Bowl. Three Lombardi trophies. The emergence of Tom Brady as an elite quarterback.
Era 2 - the great regular season team - 2005-2013
Eight division titles. The best record in football over that time. Five trips to the AFCCG. A perfect regular season. But two heartbreaking SB losses where they couldn't get over the hump. Video game level offenses. The emergence of Tom Brady as an all-time great quarterback, with a statistical profile to back that claim up.
Era 3 - the second dynasty - 2014-2017??
Three division titles (and in first place this year). The best record in football over that time. Two trips to the Super Bowl. Two of the greatest Super Bowl victories of all time. Brady, in his older years, almost redefining greatness.
Over Brady's 15 years as a starter (throwing out 2000 when he was a rookie, and 2008 when he was injured all year, and this year because it's not even halfway done), the Pats have been to 7 Super Bowls (winning 5). That's 47% of the seasons, he's been to the Super Bowl. Winning 5 (33%). Going to 10 AFCCGs (67%). That's INSANE. In his time as a starter, he's been to the conference championship game 2 out of every 3 seasons. And to the Super Bowl nearly HALF the time. If they go this year, he will have been to 8 SBs out of 16 seasons as a starter. Half the time. It's beyond incredible.
I don't know if it's anything but one great run. Others may make a different and more persuasive case, but the years when I think the team was absolutely unequivocally good enough to win the Super Bowl were: 2001, 2003, 2004, 2006*, 2007*, 2010, 2011*, 2014, 2015*, 2016. That's ten (10) and I think this is a conservative list as I've left off 2012 and 2013 and of course they were in the AFCCG each of those years. The years with the asterisk, which are four of the five seasons on that list they didn't win the Super Bowl, were years they were a single play from either winning the SB or going to a SB they likely would have won.
I think there's a reasonable argument to be made that in 2003, 2004, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2014, 2015, and 2016 the Pats were the best team in the NFL.
I think there's a reasonable argument to be made that in 2003, 2004, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2014, 2015, and 2016 the Pats were the best team in the NFL.
Green Bay was the best team in the league that year and it wasn't particularly close. The Pats were terrible on defense in 2011.
2011 team DVOA:
1. GB 27.0%
2. NO 23.8%
3. NE 22.8%
I'll give you that they were the best team, but I'd say it was at least fairly close. Here's what a not-close year looks like, 2007:
1. NE 52.9%
2. IND 28.3%
3. JAC 24.1%
...
14. NYG 1.9%
Green Bay was probably the better team in 2010 by year end, too -- the Pats were lucky to face them in the one game not started by Aaron Rogers, and just barely won. When Rogers and Clay Mathews were healthy, they were damn near unstoppable.
Went to turn on the Bruins game and had the NFL network on my tv when it turned on. Good timing...
By year end? Nah, the Patriots ended the 2010 season on a ferocious hot streak. They beat the Lions 42-24 on the road on Thanksgiving, then whupped the Jets 45-3, stomped the Bears 36-7, then the narrow escape versus the Matt-Flynn-led Packers (31-27), then demolished the Bills 34-3 before closing out the season with a 38-7 win over the Dolphins. It was one of the most dominant stretches in the entire Patriots dynasty.
The Packers, when healthy, were probably more complete (the 2011 Patriots D gets kind of singled out when really the unit wasn't great from about '09 through '13), but the offense was up-and-down even with Rodgers and they lost four times in games Flynn had nothing to do with.
*2006 was a tough one to swallow. Everybody knew the AFC rep would be stronger than the bears. Arguably similar situation in 2015, but rarely does anything good happen for the Pats in Denver.
Yeah the Pats may not have been the “best” team in 2006 but clearly would have thrashed the Bears.
2015 I view differently - first off, the Pats were crazy banged up - RB, Gronk had gone down, Edelman’s first game back was KC and he got re-injured. Secondly, while hindsight is 20-20, the Panthers were 15-1 and the best team in football. They wasted Arizona in the NFCCG. They laid an egg in the Super Bowl but I didn’t really see that coming. I think the Pats would have been underdogs.
I think they'd have lost to Carolina, they didn't have that kind of pass rush to smoke Newton the way Denver did.
But they absolutely would have beaten Rex Grossman's bears.
And you can also argue that Atlanta was better last year, or Seattle two years before that, or even Philly way back.
But they absolutely would have beaten Rex Grossman's bears.
And you can also argue that Atlanta was better last year, or Seattle two years before that, or even Philly way back.
