Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Pats and 2nd Half Collapses


  • Please log in to reply
377 replies to this topic

#101 shawnrbu


  • SoSH Member


  • 10,120 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:01 PM

The big failure today that scares me is the long completions allowed. They have consistently made other teams earn points by long drives. Today that gave up huge chunks of yardage in single plays.


It's been a reoccurring theme the past 4 games. Baltimore, Buffalo, Denver and Seattle gained huge chunks in the passing game. Seemingly at will, which makes you wonder why Manning even bothered to run McGahee last week.

#102 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25,691 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:16 PM

I think people are underappreciating how difficult it is to defend the deep pass in the league these days. The Patriots are bad at it, but I don't get the sense their struggles are somehow otherworldly. The Giants just last year won the Super Bowl with a pretty incompetent pass defense, in particular vulnerable to the long completion.

That's modern football.


But against the Pats, nearly every long throw is either completed or flagged for PI. Throwing deep against the Pats' awful secondary is a legitimate game-long strategy because their DBs are so fundamentally poor that it's almost guaranteed to get 20+ yards at a pop. That's an enormous indictment of both the personnel and the coaching of those players.

I don't get the sense that's true with other teams.

#103 Ed Hillel


  • Wants to be startin somethin


  • 43,679 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:17 PM

I think people are underappreciating how difficult it is to defend the deep pass in the league these days. The Patriots are bad at it, but I don't get the sense their struggles are somehow otherworldly. The Giants just last year won the Super Bowl with a pretty incompetent pass defense, in particular vulnerable to the long completion.

That's modern football.


It doesn't matter, since they're still relatively terrible at it. It may be difficult, but it certainly shouldn't be this easy.

#104 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,373 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:23 PM

I think bowiac is on to something. Every close game I watch seems to end in 80 yard, 2 minute drives that are almost all accomplished in the air and include a PI or two. The Pats are certainly vulnerable the pass but not sure it's really unique. I'm more concerned with why they can't have these drives of their own anymore because that's something they could at least do fairly recently.

#105 jtn46


  • SoSH Member


  • 6,867 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:27 PM

It's been a reoccurring theme the past 4 games. Baltimore, Buffalo, Denver and Seattle gained huge chunks in the passing game. Seemingly at will, which makes you wonder why Manning even bothered to run McGahee last week.

I wouldn't say Buffalo did. Fitzpatrick was basically 50/50 to throw a pick in the second half of that game on deep passes. Late in the Denver game Manning tried but the coverage was pretty good. It's definitely the way to get yards against the Patriots defense, though, and as the rules change it becomes tough to run into any QB that can hit those.

#106 Salva135


  • Cassandra


  • 1,143 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:34 PM

But against the Pats, nearly every long throw is either completed or flagged for PI. Throwing deep against the Pats' awful secondary is a legitimate game-long strategy because their DBs are so fundamentally poor that it's almost guaranteed to get 20+ yards at a pop. That's an enormous indictment of both the personnel and the coaching of those players.

I don't get the sense that's true with other teams.


Was there anyone who didn't hold their breath every time Russell Wilson rainbowed a pass downfield? The Pats have to be near the top of the league in 20+ pass plays given up.


I'm worried that Luck and (gulp) Sanchez will be watching this game tape and grinning.

Re: the bold, it absolutely is, and calls the coaching staff and front office very much into question regarding this aspect of the team.

We don't expect a great secondary. We expect less than a horrible one after several years of coaches, scouts, and others evaluating this unit for years and still producing the exact same bottom of the league results.

Edited by Salva135, 14 October 2012 - 09:39 PM.


#107 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25,691 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:38 PM

Was there anyone who didn't hold their breath every time Russell Wilson rainbowed a pass downfield? The Pats have to be near the top of the league in 20+ pass plays given up.


It's been said a thousand times, but if the DBs looked for the ball every once in a while they wouldn't get flagged for PI all the time. They have all the ball awareness coached out of them, seemingly. They drafted some talented guy: McCourty was really good his first year in the league, Chung too. Dowling showed some promise. The longer they stayed in the Pats' coaching staff hands, the worse they got.

#108 MarcSullivaFan

  • 1,961 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:50 PM

-Secondary sucks, and while they finally seem to have a talented pass rushers, they're not good enough to make up for the secondary. They're going to have to get improvement from the young DBs, and they're going to have to go after quarterbaccks more aggressively, or we're in for another year of a bottom quarter pass defense.
-Pass blocking ranges from adequate to lousy
-Brady is human, and he's 35. This is the wrong point in his career for the pass blocking to be in decline
-Unless Brady's protection improves significantly, they're going to have a tough time with any team that can shut down their running game.

#109 Ed Hillel


  • Wants to be startin somethin


  • 43,679 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:56 PM

-Unless Brady's protection improves significantly, they're going to have a tough time with any team that can shut down their running game.


I thought the protection was pretty stellar today. Brady threw the ball almost 60 times, got sacked once, and didn't really seem to face all that much pressure, really. This against one of the best pass rushes in football in a hostile environment.

Edited by Ed Hillel, 14 October 2012 - 09:56 PM.


#110 Mystic Merlin


  • SoSH Member


  • 21,959 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:57 PM

They moved the ball like gangbusters most of the time - but red zone play is pretty important, and they were miserable there (1/6 TD).

#111 Jack Sox

  • 3,317 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 09:59 PM

-Secondary sucks, and while they finally seem to have a talented pass rushers, they're not good enough to make up for the secondary. They're going to have to get improvement from the young DBs, and they're going to have to go after quarterbaccks more aggressively, or we're in for another year of a bottom quarter pass defense.
-Pass blocking ranges from adequate to lousy
-Brady is human, and he's 35. This is the wrong point in his career for the pass blocking to be in decline
-Unless Brady's protection improves significantly, they're going to have a tough time with any team that can shut down their running game.


Hard time blaming the O-line when Brady throws for nearly 400 yards against the leagues top defense.

I'm hoping the secondary can somehow improve on defending the deep ball, and can only really assume they have to at this point. This level of suck is not sustainable in this league, I don't think.

Also, they need to bring more than 4 way more often just to avoid the long developing play. Disguise some blitz packages too. The front 7 is a talented and IMO, an above average unit but the approach thus far has been too vanilla. Need to change it up.

#112 Ed Hillel


  • Wants to be startin somethin


  • 43,679 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:18 PM

Here is one thing I will say I find distressing:

When Brady took the ball back with 80 seconds left and no timeouts, how much confidence did you have that they were going to drive down into FG range? Be honest. That game was still well within reach.

#113 Captaincoop


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,218 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:24 PM

I am not advocating benching Brady - repeat, I am NOT advocating that.

And there is no way to prove this, but it's a feeling I've had going back at least a year - if Brady got Mo Lewis'ed next week, I am not at all sure this team wouldn't look better moving forward.

And...commence fire now.

#114 MarcSullivaFan

  • 1,961 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:26 PM

I thought the protection was pretty stellar today. Brady threw the ball almost 60 times, got sacked once, and didn't really seem to face all that much pressure, really. This against one of the best pass rushes in football in a hostile environment.


I only saw portions of the second half, in which he seemed to be under pressure frequently, but I'll have to go back and watch the whole game. But I was speaking about the season as a whole. He's on pace to be sacked 36 times. Certainly he's partly to blame--he does not avoid pressure as well as he used to. But that's sort of my point. He's 35, and mediocre pass protection isn't getting it done. I'd agree that he had a bad game today, and the offensive execution was lousy. As bad as the secondary was, this team should be winning games in which the D gives up 23 points.

But in a season like this, where there seem to be no dominant teams, getting in to the playoffs is the main thing. At that point, in today's NFL, it's a crapshoot.

#115 BigSoxFan


  • SoSH Member


  • 12,255 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:30 PM

I am not advocating benching Brady - repeat, I am NOT advocating that.

And there is no way to prove this, but it's a feeling I've had going back at least a year - if Brady got Mo Lewis'ed next week, I am not at all sure this team wouldn't look better moving forward.

And...commence fire now.


What do you mean by this? Going forward in 2012? Beyond? Brady has scored 12 TDs this year and has only thrown 3 INTs. He wasn't sharp today in the red zone but he's been pretty good overall, especially when you consider that Hernandez was out for 3 weeks.

#116 Ed Hillel


  • Wants to be startin somethin


  • 43,679 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:31 PM

And...commence fire now.


Sure, if you think Mallet could up better than 5,000 yards, 24 TD, 8 INT, 8.5 YPA, a 67% completion percentage, and a QB rating of 100, I suppose you've got a point.

Edited by Ed Hillel, 14 October 2012 - 10:33 PM.


#117 Soxy Brown

  • 2,523 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:31 PM

I am not advocating benching Brady - repeat, I am NOT advocating that.

And there is no way to prove this, but it's a feeling I've had going back at least a year - if Brady got Mo Lewis'ed next week, I am not at all sure this team wouldn't look better moving forward.

And...commence fire now.


Ok. I'll bite. How, exactly, would this team "look better" with Mallett running the show instead of Brady? My mind is prepared to be blown.

#118 smokin joe wood

  • 583 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:33 PM

With all of the PI calls that seemingly go against the Pats, they don't really get a ton of downfield PI calls in their favor. The Patriots haven't had a big, physical wide receiver on the outside in many moons. Those seem to be the guys that get the jump balls thrown their way that result in a lot of PI calls.

#119 Salva135


  • Cassandra


  • 1,143 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:33 PM

Here is one thing I will say I find distressing:

When Brady took the ball back with 80 seconds left and no timeouts, how much confidence did you have that they were going to drive down into FG range? Be honest. That game was still well within reach.


When is the last time Brady won a game for the team when all of the chips were down, the game was in question, and he led the team down for a game-winner? Can't remember.

When is the last time the SOSH game ball went to Brady for the big win?

Edited by Salva135, 14 October 2012 - 10:34 PM.


#120 Ed Hillel


  • Wants to be startin somethin


  • 43,679 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:34 PM

When is the last time Brady won a game for the team when all of the chips were down, the game was in question, and he led the team down for a game-winner? Can't remember.


Last year against Dallas.

To be fair to Brady, he hasn't been in many such situations, it's just more of a general fourth quarter offense disappears thing that's shaking my confidence a bit.

Still, 80 seconds, you'd like to see Brady be able to get 50 yards in the modern NFL, especially when they seem to be able to get it done at the end of the first half.

Edited by Ed Hillel, 14 October 2012 - 10:36 PM.


#121 Mystic Merlin


  • SoSH Member


  • 21,959 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:35 PM

When is the last time the SOSH game ball went to Brady for the big win?


I don't think means what you want it to.

#122 Captaincoop


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,218 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:37 PM

Sure, if you think Mallet could up better than 5,000 yards, 24 TD, 8 INT, 8.5 YPA, a 67% completion percentage, and a QB rating of 100, I suppose you've got a point.


Brady has put up huge stats the last few years...and then he has screwed the pooch in the postseason. I just think the Brady era has run its course. Not saying Belichick should throw Mallet in to start, not saying there is really anything he can do about it...but I just don't see this team winning another title behind Brady.

I'm not going to further defend this point, because I'm aware that I'm gamethreading and there isn't much statistical support for the argument.

Edited by Captaincoop, 14 October 2012 - 10:38 PM.


#123 Fishercat


  • Svelte and sexy!


  • 4,492 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:37 PM

With all of the PI calls that seemingly go against the Pats, they don't really get a ton of downfield PI calls in their favor. The Patriots haven't had a big, physical wide receiver on the outside in many moons. Those seem to be the guys that get the jump balls thrown their way that result in a lot of PI calls.


A lot of this seems to be because, and this is a symptom of WR size admittedly, Brady prefers to overthrow his targets than underthrow them. It's hard to get a PI on an overthrown ball because the WR and DB are going the same direction and unless the DB tackles the WR from behind, it's unlikely they'll make meaningful contact. If the ball was underthrown, and the WR is coming back to the ball, it introduces different kinds of contact (WR returning for the ball, DB running into a slowed down WR, etc.) that are likely to draw pass interferences. It's a lot like how their DB strategy is to play the WR and not the ball. It really limits big yardage passes actually being caught, but since the DB isn't looking for the ball, underthrown balls are a lot more likely to turn into DPI and INTs will drop like a rock.

#124 Salva135


  • Cassandra


  • 1,143 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:38 PM

I don't think means what you want it to.


I meant in the "Sanchez" style of "big wins." Sometimes a team needs its QB to just drive and win the damn game. Brady failed today.

But that's only in reference to the level of confidence Ed feels with Brady and the game on the line. That confidence level, among most Pats fans, has unquestionably dropped over the years.

Edited by Salva135, 14 October 2012 - 10:40 PM.


#125 Ed Hillel


  • Wants to be startin somethin


  • 43,679 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:40 PM

Brady has put up huge stats the last few years...and he then he has screwed the pooch in the postseason. I just think the Brady era has run its course. Not saying Belichick should throw Mallet in to start, not saying there is really anything he can do about it...but I just don't see this team winning another title behind Brady.


Wes Welker catches a pass and Brady is the super bowl MVP and, let's be honest, you are saying Belichick should put in Mallett to start.

#126 amarshal2

  • 2,718 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:41 PM

Brady has put up huge stats the last few years...and then he has screwed the pooch in the postseason. I just think the Brady era has run its course. Not saying Belichick should throw Mallet in to start, not saying there is really anything he can do about it...but I just don't see this team winning another title behind Brady.

I'm not going to further defend this point, because I'm aware that I'm gamethreading and there isn't much statistical support for the argument.

Yeah, it's just not a defensible position to take. At least not yet. It seems like you know this.

#127 Captaincoop


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,218 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:42 PM

Wes Welker catches a pass and Brady is the super bowl MVP and, let's be honest, you are saying Belichick should put in Mallett to start.


No, I'm certainly not. I'm not even high on Mallett, regardless of Brady's status. I thought Hoyer was better and actually had a chance to be a good QB in this system.

And, P.S., you mean "Welker bails out Brady by catching a poorly thrown ball and..."

Edited by Captaincoop, 14 October 2012 - 10:43 PM.


#128 bosox188

  • 1,139 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:45 PM

I meant in the "Sanchez" style of "big wins." Sometimes a team needs its QB to just drive and win the damn game. Brady failed today.

But that's only in reference to the level of confidence Ed feels with Brady and the game on the line. That confidence level, among most Pats fans, has unquestionably dropped over the years.


You're really going to use Mark Sanchez as your example of what you want to see from Brady?

#129 Ed Hillel


  • Wants to be startin somethin


  • 43,679 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:47 PM

No, I'm certainly not. I'm not even high on Mallett, regardless of Brady's status. I thought Hoyer was better and actually had a chance to be a good QB in this system.


It seems that you certainly are:

And there is no way to prove this, but it's a feeling I've had going back at least a year - if Brady got Mo Lewis'ed next week, I am not at all sure this team wouldn't look better moving forward.


You're saying the team would be better if they benched Brady, or he nearly died, or whatever. If you're not high on Mallett, maybe you think the Pats should go wildcat with Edelman? Please enlighten us.

#130 CoffeeNerdness

  • 429 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 10:56 PM

Between the spaghetti arm flailing with their back to the ball and the fact that they can't draft or develop defensive backs you have to wonder if the coaches and front office have a firm grasp on what makes a quality DB in the NFL. The difference between a hard hitting, smothering unit like Earl Thomas and Co. and the soft batch chumps in the Pats secondary is stark.

#131 Captaincoop


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,218 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 11:02 PM

It seems that you certainly are:



You're saying the team would be better if they benched Brady, or he nearly died, or whatever. If you're not high on Mallett, maybe you think the Pats should go wildcat with Edelman? Please enlighten us.


No...if you actually read the words you're citing, you'd notice that I said that I'm not sure. In other words, I don't have 100% confidence that Brady putting up huge stats and also making some critical mistakes is what this team needs at QB right now.

#132 BigSoxFan


  • SoSH Member


  • 12,255 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 11:17 PM

No...if you actually read the words you're citing, you'd notice that I said that I'm not sure. In other words, I don't have 100% confidence that Brady putting up huge stats and also making some critical mistakes is what this team needs at QB right now.


Given the putrid play of the defense, I think it's exactly what this team needs right now. Last year, Brady took a team that had no business winning a SB to a play or two away from doing just that. I think I agree with the underlying premise of your point being that it'd be nice if we could get to the point where 350/3 TD from Brady isn't needed against good teams. Unfortunately, the oline is worse and the secondary is as bad as it's ever been so there's really no other option. The Patriots still need Brady to sling it. The running game has gotten better with Ridley/Bolden so hopefully we'll be able to rely on this later in the year but the defense doesn't give us any choice. Until Belichick the "defense genius" proves that he actually has what it takes to put together a good defense again, we need 27-34 to win most games.

#133 SeoulSoxFan


  • SoSH Member


  • 11,651 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 11:37 PM

We're 3/8 through the season and all tied up. We don't even lead the division. We still have Houston and San Fran sitting out there. Newsflash: we are already competitive in the division, by definition. If you think the Pats are going to suddenly take off while the other 3 teams start dropping games left and right, you're in for a rude awakening. Well, maybe the Bills will drop off. But 4 teams tied at 3-3 guarantees a competitive division until the end. Accept the new reality.


So, what would be the Pats records come week 17? I triple dare you to put it on record to back up this comment.

#134 C4CRVT

  • 2,438 posts

Posted 14 October 2012 - 11:46 PM

A lot of this seems to be because, and this is a symptom of WR size admittedly, Brady prefers to overthrow his targets than underthrow them. It's hard to get a PI on an overthrown ball because the WR and DB are going the same direction and unless the DB tackles the WR from behind, it's unlikely they'll make meaningful contact. If the ball was underthrown, and the WR is coming back to the ball, it introduces different kinds of contact (WR returning for the ball, DB running into a slowed down WR, etc.) that are likely to draw pass interferences. It's a lot like how their DB strategy is to play the WR and not the ball. It really limits big yardage passes actually being caught, but since the DB isn't looking for the ball, underthrown balls are a lot more likely to turn into DPI and INTs will drop like a rock.


My pops and I were watching the game and spent a fair bit of the game going bananas about the secondary seemingly never turning around to look for the ball. My memory is usually suspect on these types of matters but it seemed like there were several pass plays where if the DB had looked for the ball, there would have been at minimum a 50/50 chance for an INT. The DBs seem to be coached to let the guy catch the ball, then tackle him. Can someone with some deeper understanding explain what the DBs and coaches are thinking?

On the second to last drive, I thought that the empty backfield was retarded. The draw play and the play fake should always be an option. I don't (yet??) grasp the rationale behind an empty backfield in that situation.

#135 Jettisoned

  • 480 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 12:03 AM

Most of the time the DB's can't turn their heads because they're several steps behind their receiver, be it because they bit on play action (Wilson on the last TD, Chung on literally every play action pass) or because they simply can't keep up (Arrington). When they get behind like that the best they can hope for is a drop, and barring that just tackle the guy and limit his YAC.

Edited by Jettisoned, 15 October 2012 - 12:04 AM.


#136 ZP1

  • 186 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 12:15 AM

I can't help but roll my eyes into the back of my head any time I hear phrases along the lines of,

"WHY ISN'T HE JUST DRIVING DOWN FIELD AND WINNING THE GAME?!?!!11"

It's great when that happens, but the reality is that most forms of "clutch" factor are more or less chance - like every other drive a QB makes. The better the QB, the better the overall chances that he's able to go down the field and score on any given drive. Brady is statistically one of the best QBs in the league at giving you a great chance to go down the field and score on every play. Sometimes it happens in a deemed "MUST WIN" situation, but most of the time it happens throughout the game, steadily racking up points and putting the team into a scenario in where they aren't in the stereotypical do or die situation.

What am I getting at? Solid all around play means that you usually don't need a "clutch" play. And "clutch" plays as they are are more or less subject to the same god damn statistics that any other drive down the field is. Do people honestly get upset when Brady fails your average drive at 8:51 in the 2nd Quarter? No? Then stop with the utterly braindead rants when shit hits the fan and Brady doesn't convert a late game drive that would win a game. Contrary to popular belief, there's really no magical power Brady is going to pull out of his ass to suddenly make him (a top of the league elite QB), even more elite.

It's just mind boggling to me how people have such a terrible grasp of basic statistical analysis. Even remarkable drives like the one's in Brady's first super bowl was a combination of Brady playing well AND having a bit of a horseshoe crammed up his ass. Sometimes on some drives, the horseshoe for QBs can be crammed up there a bit more (or in the case of Eli Manning, 7 horseshoes and the horse itself). Good QBs are more likely to have "clutch" game winning drives because they're more likely to have solid drives PERIOD. And on the flip side, even QBs that suck and have terrible overall success rates (ie: Tebow) can happen to hit their (significantly) lower percentage chance of a successful drive late in the game and appear clutch.

All of the above SHOULD be common sense. Yet, instead you have some people (or perhaps just one person) in this thread insinuating that Brady is actually terrible and Mallet would be better at "just winning games" than Brady. What the fuck? Think. Please.

#137 SeoulSoxFan


  • SoSH Member


  • 11,651 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 12:24 AM

I meant in the "Sanchez" style of "big wins." Sometimes a team needs its QB to just drive and win the damn game. Brady failed today.


Define "Sanchez" style of "big wins". I quadruple dare you.

#138 JimBoSox9


  • will you be my friend?


  • 12,756 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 12:28 AM

There are definite secondary woes, but its awful hard to escape the notion that a younger Brady would have forced the team to 5-1 himself in these close games. That's the inevitability of age, but equally worrisome is the thought that that's the kind of uber-elite they need from Brady to be a serious contender.

To put off these thoughts I recite catechisms about close games, luck, and reversion to the mean.

#139 ZP1

  • 186 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 12:29 AM

Brady has put up huge stats the last few years...and then he has screwed the pooch in the postseason. I just think the Brady era has run its course. Not saying Belichick should throw Mallet in to start, not saying there is really anything he can do about it...but I just don't see this team winning another title behind Brady.

I'm not going to further defend this point, because I'm aware that I'm gamethreading and there isn't much statistical support for the argument.


I made my general point in my above post, but to respond to this directly:

Seriously? Like... seriously? If you actually feel like Brady has "screwed the pooch," then your sense of entitlement during these years of plenty is really going to take a pounding when the years of famine come in (Brady and BB retiring). Brady in addition to being one of the leagues topmost elite QBs, is also a QB that has remarkable consistency from game to game. Most of Brady's "bad" games come from when the team overall has failures and Brady simply plays "good" instead of out of his mind fantastic.

SPOILER ALERT: No QB in the league can remotely stand up to the standard you're trying to hold Brady to.

Honestly, I think one of the only cases you can ever make for an elite QB being anathema to winning a championship is Brett Favre. And that's only because his playstyle was one that lended itself to wild inconsistency within any given game. Even though Favre ended up on the good side far more than not (and put up winning records in the regular season often), that sort of inconsistency is really bad in a 1 game playoff format the NFL operates under. If the NFL were a league in where the playoffs were even best 2 out of 3, you probably would have seen Favre win far more championships than he did.

Brady is not Favre. Brady is remarkably consistent. You cannot ask for anything better than a remarkably consistent elite QB in this league, and you are kidding yourself if you think that any other QB could meet the standard you are attempting to set for Brady. Years of the Patriots being awesome and Brady being elite have spoiled you beyond belief.

Edited by ZP1, 15 October 2012 - 12:32 AM.


#140 Salva135


  • Cassandra


  • 1,143 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 02:10 AM

Define "Sanchez" style of "big wins". I quadruple dare you.


A "Sanchez win" is hereby defined as a game whereby his team struggles with ups and downs due to turnovers and miscues on offense, gets big stops, and in the end, results in a TD from the QB who gets all of the credit for pulling out the win. That is a "Sanchez" style win. I wish Brady could have Sanchez'd today.

#141 twibnotes


  • SoSH Member


  • 8,949 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 05:19 AM

I made my general point in my above post, but to respond to this directly:

Seriously? Like... seriously? If you actually feel like Brady has "screwed the pooch," then your sense of entitlement during these years of plenty is really going to take a pounding when the years of famine come in (Brady and BB retiring). Brady in addition to being one of the leagues topmost elite QBs, is also a QB that has remarkable consistency from game to game. Most of Brady's "bad" games come from when the team overall has failures and Brady simply plays "good" instead of out of his mind fantastic.

SPOILER ALERT: No QB in the league can remotely stand up to the standard you're trying to hold Brady to.

Honestly, I think one of the only cases you can ever make for an elite QB being anathema to winning a championship is Brett Favre. And that's only because his playstyle was one that lended itself to wild inconsistency within any given game. Even though Favre ended up on the good side far more than not (and put up winning records in the regular season often), that sort of inconsistency is really bad in a 1 game playoff format the NFL operates under. If the NFL were a league in where the playoffs were even best 2 out of 3, you probably would have seen Favre win far more championships than he did.

Brady is not Favre. Brady is remarkably consistent. You cannot ask for anything better than a remarkably consistent elite QB in this league, and you are kidding yourself if you think that any other QB could meet the standard you are attempting to set for Brady. Years of the Patriots being awesome and Brady being elite have spoiled you beyond belief.


This x 1000.

Discussion about the Patriots not being who we want them to be should be 100 pct focused on BB's inability to build an avg defense. The defense has been remade over the last few years, and while there are some nice young players, it's still a bad defense, especially against the pass which is what really matters in the nfl today.

#142 MarcSullivaFan

  • 1,961 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 06:05 AM

Can't argue with the criticism of the D rebuilding process, but I have a lot more hope in the long run for this unit than I have in several years. The front seven is pretty good, and has the upside d being very good. In Jones, Mayo, Love, Wilfork and potentially Hightower, they have 4-5 very good to elite players in the front seven. On the other hand, the secondary is obviously a shit show. Wilson and Dennard show some promise, but who the hell knows. Spikes is a great run stopper, and actually a good blitzer when they use him in that role, but is obviously very limited.

Overall, I'm still optimistic about this team the rest of the way. Yeah, there have been some tough losses in the last few years, but name me a team that hasn't. GB and the Steelers had brutal playoff losses last season. The "clutch" Giants collapsed in 2008 and missed the playoffs in 2011. The Ravens blew a big lead to the Steelers in the 2010 playoffs. Houston and San Fran just got steamrolled at home. There are no dominant teams, just teams that make the playoffs. At that point, all bets are off.

#143 dcmissle


  • SoSH Member


  • 12,775 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 06:53 AM

I think people are underappreciating how difficult it is to defend the deep pass in the league these days. The Patriots are bad at it, but I don't get the sense their struggles are somehow otherworldly. The Giants just last year won the Super Bowl with a pretty incompetent pass defense, in particular vulnerable to the long completion.

That's modern football.


I agree with the general point, but remember this about the Giants. Because of injury, their d-line did not round into form until very late, and that line distinguishes them from everybody else. Their front 4 are incredibly disruptive and cover for a multitude of weaknesses at the back end. We are not there, cannot get there this season at least, and the d-backs are for crap.

There is room and time for improvement on the back end. The bad news is the good news too.

I cannot say that about the Ravens, for example, who lost Webb for the season yesterday and are not likely to get better until Suggs returns. So that is another team that most weeks will have to score 30+ to have a decent chance to win any given game.

#144 Stitch01


  • SoSH Member


  • 9,062 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 07:10 AM

A "Sanchez win" is hereby defined as a game whereby his team struggles with ups and downs due to turnovers and miscues on offense, gets big stops, and in the end, results in a TD from the QB who gets all of the credit for pulling out the win. That is a "Sanchez" style win. I wish Brady could have Sanchez'd today.


When was the last time Sanchez had a Sanchez win? Why do we want Brady to suck most of the game? Why doesn't the AFC title games fourth quarter comeback count?

You are a wierd dude. Did Jets assault your wife or something or do you just like to be miserable? The 2012 Jets are nothing better than mediocre, why do you feel they are lurking in every shadow?


Edited by Stitch01, 15 October 2012 - 07:10 AM.


#145 tims4wins


  • PN23's replacement


  • 7,027 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 07:31 AM

The Giants lost at home to Washington and Seattle last year, right? And Houston gave up 42 points last night at home. This league is wacky. The Pats do need to figure out how to play better situationally, but the fact is that they are competitive in every game. Hard to say that about many other teams. Atlanta almost lost at home to Oakland yesterday. Just have to hope the Pats can win the division, then take it from there.

#146 Shelterdog


  • SoSH Member


  • 8,860 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 07:48 AM

When was the last time Sanchez had a Sanchez win? Why do we want Brady to suck most of the game? Why doesn't the AFC title games fourth quarter comeback count?

You are a wierd dude. Did Jets assault your wife or something or do you just like to be miserable? The 2012 Jets are nothing better than mediocre, why do you feel they are lurking in every shadow?


Back off. I too would prefer Brady to play more like Sanchez.

It's pretty straight forward. Our defense kind of plays, particularly when Gregory and Chung are out. The record looks worse than it is because of the 2 home/4 road split and because we're 0-3 in tight games (and those are .500 affairs over the long run for all coaches and teams). If they don't pull it together and tighten up red zone execution/sloppy offensive play/defening the deep ball better then sure, it's going to be a 2009 kind of year with a short playoff run at best but between the easier schedule and BB's track record of having his defenses improve Iam reasonably confident they will pull things together.

I think you do so a lot more Dennard and Dowling over the next couple of weeks because the current crew ain't getting it done.

#147 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25,691 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 07:56 AM

There are definite secondary woes, but its awful hard to escape the notion that a younger Brady would have forced the team to 5-1 himself in these close games. That's the inevitability of age, but equally worrisome is the thought that that's the kind of uber-elite they need from Brady to be a serious contender.

To put off these thoughts I recite catechisms about close games, luck, and reversion to the mean.


It would help if Brady didn't have series where he played like he was suffering from a head wound. The intentional grounding at the end of the half was amazingly stupid. The INT in the end zone was because Brady threw the ball a billion miles an hour despite the fact that Welker was only about 6 yards away from him. It's baffling.

Yes, a younger Brady would be 5-1 this year, because a younger Brady didn't make those elementary mistakes. Perhaps a younger Brady gets the team an extra first down on the last drive of the game and Seattle never gets a chance at the win.

That being said, Brady's still great, but he's making more Bledsoe-esque mistakes than ever before, which is expected due to age and the football punishment he's taken.

#148 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25,691 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 07:58 AM

This x 1000.

Discussion about the Patriots not being who we want them to be should be 100 pct focused on BB's inability to build an avg defense. The defense has been remade over the last few years, and while there are some nice young players, it's still a bad defense, especially against the pass which is what really matters in the nfl today.


It's a bad defense against the pass. Against the run they're quite stout. The trouble is, of course, that this is a passing league now. And the Pats can't defend the pass at all. They either have guys who lack a lot of talent (Arrington and Moore) or they have talented guys that have all the instincts coached out of them by year 2 (McCourty, Chung).

The DL is good and the LB corps is promising. The secondary is a compete shitshow. It's beyond time to replace those positional coaches with someone else, because they're turning every player they have into Ricky Reynolds clones. It's awful.

I would give my left kidney for a in-his-prime Rodney Harrison right now.

#149 bakahump

  • 4,803 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 08:00 AM

Couple thoughts...

Dennard looked pretty good. I hope its not "Arrington good" which means he is the freshest seafood and has not yet begun to stink or that the other secondarys stink makes him seem decent in comparison.

Could a Dennard/ Dowling CB duo be something....anything better then what we have seen? Especially if we use Mccourty 2.0 at safety (and ...Chung I guess),,,,where he showed some actual talent last year?

An Ebner/Wilson safety duo with 2 mins to play is absolutely inexcusable....and what the hell was Mccourty defending on that TD throw? "Lalalalala....ok WR out of my zone here go Tavon.....huh....no one left for me to cover....oh crap..."

#150 Scriblerus

  • 392 posts

Posted 15 October 2012 - 08:03 AM

It drives me crazy when this team has a lead, is moving the ball well on offense, and doesn't bury the hatchet. I want BB to run the damn score up every chance they get. I know we can say that they are always trying to score, but when the Patriots gives a team any sense of momentum, that's when it all falls to shit.

When Seattle scored to bring it to six, I knew that the Patriots would lose that game. I turned to the guys I was watching the game with and said "They'll run it twice, throw a bad third down pass and cough this game up." This is on McDaniels and Brady. The Patriots do this way too often for other teams not to notice. I was begging them to play with urgency in the last three minutes. Go hurry-up, if for no other reason than to get in the head of the defense. The Pats are killing teams in that offense. If I'm Seattle and I see them playing conservative at the end of the game, I'm pumped because I know I have a better chance to stop them.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users