95 replies to this topic

[Stitch01]

If only Brady could be more like Mark Sanchez under pressure!

[dbn]

10-6.

This offense can't seem to put up the points needed against the top defenses. Especially defenses with stout front 7's. They lose to both San Fran and to Houston. Then they lose another random game (1 to the Jets, Rams, or Dolphins).

This rings of "the Red Sox can't hit good pitching". They lead the NFL in offense, both in yds/game and pts/game. The 18 point showing against AZ when they couldn't find the end zone and settled for too many field goals was indeed disappointing, but no team has scored more points against either Baltimore or Seattle this year than the Patriots.

[SMU_Sox]

And boy did they ever leave points on the board against Seattle.

[Ed Hillel]

And boy did they ever leave points on the board against Seattle.

Because Brady is now a world class choke-artist, of course, and we can reasonably expect that from here on out.

I'm torn between 10 and 11, but I will pick 11 because talented BB teams in New England have almost always finished the season at a torrid pace. Of all the games left, I actually think @Miami scares me the most.

Edited by Ed Hillel, 17 October 2012 - 01:43 PM.

[Super Nomario]

And boy did they ever leave points on the board against Seattle.

I almost started a "Offensive Red Zone Struggles" thread, but then I looked at the numbers and it's pretty much a one-week blip; they were in line with last season's numbers (and near the top of the league) until this past week's debacle. I have been surprised at how few looks they've gotten Lloyd in the red zone, and Gronk doesn't seem 100%, but at this point I don't have any reason to believe this will be a season-long issue.

[drleather2001]

I'd like to hear Axx's thoughts on his 3-13 prediction.

[Shelterdog]

10-6. Going 8-2 the rest of the road would be really hard. They normally have only one or two stinkers a season, but the fact that they've had two already doesn't mean that they won't have another one in the next ten games, and you add in Houston and the 49ers and Miami and it could be a tough year.

[mpx42]

11-5, which is what I thought they'd do before the season. I expect them to drop one of the Houston/SF games and probably lose another game on the road somewhere else (Miami maybe?) The St. Louis game looks a lot harder now then it two months ago.

[axx]

I'd like to hear Axx's thoughts on his 3-13 prediction.

It seemed too tempting. Plus I can't change it.

[dbn]

Damn you if you wind up being right.

[JohnnyK]

For those of you who say they finish 10-6 I will bet $50 to the jimmy fund they finish better.

Still up for grabs? If so, I'll take you up on this.

[SMU_Sox]

Still up for grabs? If so, I'll take you up on this.

w0000000t done!

[JMDurron]

10-6. Despite only losing 3 games by a combined 4 points, the Patriots have somehow managed to lose 3 games where it can be reasonably argued in each instance that they outplayed the other team that day. I don't think it's reasonable to expect the Patriots to outplay their remaining 10 consecutive opponents, which I think would be required for the various flags/bounces/dropped passes/INTs or what have you to lead to a 11-5 record. I think the Patriots will lose two more "blew it at the end" games, and actually get outplayed by at least one of their upcoming opponents. Losing 3 out of 6 games while playing well and being generally healthy does not bode well for making a dominant run through the remaining schedule. This team won't stay this healthy all season, the health of the useful TEs in particular scares me half to death.

10-6 will still win the division, because I think at most 1 of the losses will be against a divisional opponent.

[loshjott]

Exactly the same here. In the last set, I figure a split of the Hou and SF games, and a split with Miami. Funny, I posted in the half glass full thread as one of the more optimistic voices here, but doesn't mean they sweep the table. 10-6 should be good for the division and maybe a #2 seed the way the season is shaking out, which will put the Pats in good shape.

There's no way 10-6 will earn a #2 seed, especially if one of the losses is to Houston. Baltimore may be in trouble but I don't see them going 4-6 from here out, which is what's needed for a 10-6 Pats team to overtake them for the #2 seed.

[DegenerateSoxFan]

I'm going to go with my gut feeling following the Seattle loss and say 12-4. Why do I say that? I think the toughest part of their schedule is behind them, and they could just as easily be 5-1 (whereas they could not just as easily be 1-5). Houston and SF are mortal, and will have to come to Foxboro in December. Yes, the secondary is still an issue, along with some occasional bad late-game play-calling on offense. But the team got better over the season last year, and I think they will this year too. I don't expect them to run the table, but do they have any really tough road games left? A strong run other than the odd game that turns on a random bounce by the oblong projectile in use isn't farfetched.

[JohnnyK]

w0000000t done!

http://sonsofsamhorn...ost__p__4387307

[Tony C]

There's no way 10-6 will earn a #2 seed, especially if one of the losses is to Houston. Baltimore may be in trouble but I don't see them going 4-6 from here out, which is what's needed for a 10-6 Pats team to overtake them for the #2 seed.

yep, you're right. #3 seed it'd be.

[JokersWildJIMED]

12-4...they should win the next two and finish 5-3 in the first half, even with the (at least) two games they lost that they should have won...that hopefully will even out in the second half

[Shelterdog]

yep, you're right. #3 seed it'd be.

If that's the case it looks like we picked the right year to be a #3/4 seed--usually you get a pretty strong team seeded five, and sometimes also at six (the loser of Pitt/Baltimore, maybe the Titans), but it's not lining up that way this year.

[dbn]

yep, you're right. #3 seed it'd be.

Except the entire AFC is going to finish 8-8, and it will take that computer that beat Kasparov to figure out the tie-breakers.

[bakahump]

Whats the rational about Brady suddenly losing his mental edge?

Granted he made 2 dumb plays at the end of the half....1 that could have been his WR fault. (Gronk turns left instead of right and its a high pass).

Does the majority of the board really think that a cerebral 35 yo QB suddenly loses his mental abilities? Physical? No doubt. I would not hesitate to think that Bradys arm is not as strong as it once was or that he is not as "fast" as he one "was".

But not as mentally sharp? I dont buy it.

If you pointing to the intentional grounding as evidence then Previous to that game he should never have done such a bone headed move. Yet in the SB that shall not be named he did the same thing.

I buy he got his bell rung in the Seattle game. And it affected him IN THAT GAME. I dont believe some decline in the mental abilities of TB overall however due to age.

Do we have any anecdotal evidence that Veteran QBs lose something MENTALLY?

[axx]

I think the toughest part of their schedule is behind them, and they could just as easily be 5-1

I got a chance to review the season and came to the conclusion that they should be at least 5-1 at this point, and could have been 6-0. I don't think it's a fluke they lose close games though because of the terrible secondary.

It's gotten to the point where BB needs to take the agressive approach when closing out games, even if it means replaying 4th and 2.

[RedOctober3829]

I got a chance to review the season and came to the conclusion that they should be at least 5-1 at this point, and could have been 6-0. I don't think it's a fluke they lose close games though because of the terrible secondary.

It's gotten to the point where BB needs to take the agressive approach when closing out games, even if it means replaying 4th and 2.

It's not necessarily the aggressive approach that needs to be taken rather just the smart approach. The short passing game is great, but when they are up late in the 4th quarter they need to run the ball as much as possible to bleed the clock more. The risk of incompletions is too great to throw the ball as much as they do in late-game situations while leading. Run the ball more late and even if you don't pick up a first down you use more clock.

On defense, the safeties need to be as far off the ball as you can allow. Nothing should be going over their heads.

[Super Nomario]

It's not necessarily the aggressive approach that needs to be taken rather just the smart approach. The short passing game is great, but when they are up late in the 4th quarter they need to run the ball as much as possible to bleed the clock more. The risk of incompletions is too great to throw the ball as much as they do in late-game situations while leading. Run the ball more late and even if you don't pick up a first down you use more clock.

You don't bleed very much clock by running the ball three times and then punting, especially if the other team has time outs left. A team with a good defense can get away with this approach (SF did last night); I don't think the Patriots can.

[RedOctober3829]

You don't bleed very much clock by running the ball three times and then punting, especially if the other team has time outs left. A team with a good defense can get away with this approach (SF did last night); I don't think the Patriots can.

In the situation last week with about 5 minutes to go, Seattle wouldn't have been using their timeouts yet. They had 3 incompletions which only used about a minute to 1:30 of the clock. Running the ball uses much more clock even if you don't pick up a 1st.

[Super Nomario]

In the situation last week with about 5 minutes to go, Seattle wouldn't have been using their timeouts yet. They had 3 incompletions which only used about a minute to 1:30 of the clock. Running the ball uses much more clock even if you don't pick up a 1st.

They were also at midfield with a six point lead. They get a first down or two and they've got a shot at a FG that makes it a two-score game. Given what ultimately happened, that was a surer path to victory than trying to eat clock.

Edited by Super Nomario, 19 October 2012 - 11:23 PM.

[Turrable]

In the situation last week with about 5 minutes to go, Seattle wouldn't have been using their timeouts yet. They had 3 incompletions which only used about a minute to 1:30 of the clock. Running the ball uses much more clock even if you don't pick up a 1st.

But then they had a drive with around 3 minutes left where a few first downs would have iced the game, and they ran it twice into a brick wall and missed on the 3rd and long.

[RedOctober3829]

But then they had a drive with around 3 minutes left where a few first downs would have iced the game, and they ran it twice into a brick wall and missed on the 3rd and long.

I'll say it until I'm blue in the face: Running the ball in that situation is still the right thing to do. This has been their problem for a few years from now. They need to be able to run the ball more effectively when trying to bleed the clock out.

[Turrable]

I'll say it until I'm blue in the face: Running the ball in that situation is still the right thing to do. This has been their problem for a few years from now. They need to be able to run the ball more effectively when trying to bleed the clock out.

I generally agree, but the thought process has to be different against a run D like the one Seattle has. In that situation the priority has to be getting a first down or two, and running on the defense wasn't going to get it done.

Probably a moot point since they'll only face a defense that tough a couple of times before the season is out.

[Super Nomario]

I'll say it until I'm blue in the face: Running the ball in that situation is still the right thing to do. This has been their problem for a few years from now. They need to be able to run the ball more effectively when trying to bleed the clock out.

If a team could pick up first downs running three downs in a row, they'd do it all the time. When NFL defenses are keyed up to stop the run in obvious running situations, it's very hard to make any yardage that way.

By far the best clock-killing job this past weekend was the Dolphins, who ate 6:49 and two of the Rams' timeouts. They used QB runs, HB runs, short passes, and even a fake punt. But the worst plays were the HB runs, which gained 4, 0 (on 2nd-and-1), 0 (on 3rd-and-1), 2, and -1 (on 3rd-and-1). And the Dolphins still ended up giving the ball to St. Louis with 1:41 left and a timeout, plenty of time to tie the game if the Rams actually had an offense.

[RedOctober3829]

If a team could pick up first downs running three downs in a row, they'd do it all the time. When NFL defenses are keyed up to stop the run in obvious running situations, it's very hard to make any yardage that way.

By far the best clock-killing job this past weekend was the Dolphins, who ate 6:49 and two of the Rams' timeouts. They used QB runs, HB runs, short passes, and even a fake punt. But the worst plays were the HB runs, which gained 4, 0 (on 2nd-and-1), 0 (on 3rd-and-1), 2, and -1 (on 3rd-and-1). And the Dolphins still ended up giving the ball to St. Louis with 1:41 left and a timeout, plenty of time to tie the game if the Rams actually had an offense.

I agree with you that NFL defenses will be keyed up to stop it, but what separates the good teams from the mediocre in situational football is being able to run it when they know you are going to. Your Dolphins point stands, but if you are going to eat that much time off the clock you need to mix in play action and a few passing plays in the middle of the field.

[Super Nomario]

I agree with you that NFL defenses will be keyed up to stop it, but what separates the good teams from the mediocre in situational football is being able to run it when they know you are going to. Your Dolphins point stands, but if you are going to eat that much time off the clock you need to mix in play action and a few passing plays in the middle of the field.

The 49ers were running the ball well all night against Seattle on Thursday, and in a clock-killing situation they couldn't make a first down running 3 times. I'm not sure there are teams that can do what you're saying, at least consistently against good defenses.

[epraz]

I agree with you that NFL defenses will be keyed up to stop it, but what separates the good teams from the mediocre in situational football is being able to run it when they know you are going to. Your Dolphins point stands, but if you are going to eat that much time off the clock you need to mix in play action and a few passing plays in the middle of the field.

Or recognizing when the defense is keyed to stop the run and calling or audibling to a pass play (play action?) that takes advantage of the LB and S inching up.

[SWHB]

Whats the rational about Brady suddenly losing his mental edge?

Granted he made 2 dumb plays at the end of the half....1 that could have been his WR fault. (Gronk turns left instead of right and its a high pass).

Does the majority of the board really think that a cerebral 35 yo QB suddenly loses his mental abilities? Physical? No doubt. I would not hesitate to think that Bradys arm is not as strong as it once was or that he is not as "fast" as he one "was".

But not as mentally sharp? I dont buy it.

If you pointing to the intentional grounding as evidence then Previous to that game he should never have done such a bone headed move. Yet in the SB that shall not be named he did the same thing.

I buy he got his bell rung in the Seattle game. And it affected him IN THAT GAME. I dont believe some decline in the mental abilities of TB overall however due to age.

Do we have any anecdotal evidence that Veteran QBs lose something MENTALLY?

Not to beat a dead horse, but the grounding wasn't a "bone headed move" - it was a bad call. You're allowed to throw the ball away (even if there are no players there) to stop the clock, just not to prevent a sack and loss of yardage. And it's not like this is a situation where the rule is written one way and routinely interpreted the other way by the refs, either. Would you question Brady's mental state if during the two-minute drill he ran up to the line and spiked the ball to kill the clock, but was called for grounding? That's another situation where the ball is intentionally thrown where there isn't an eligible receiver.to stop the clock, and obviously that's never flagged.

[amarshal2]

I agree with you that NFL defenses will be keyed up to stop it, but what separates the good teams from the mediocre in situational football is being able to run it when they know you are going to. Your Dolphins point stands, but if you are going to eat that much time off the clock you need to mix in play action and a few passing plays in the middle of the field.

I really think you're wrong. Brady and BB for years were the absolute kings of closing out football games and it definitely wasn't the running game.

[JMDurron]

10-6. Despite only losing 3 games by a combined 4 points, the Patriots have somehow managed to lose 3 games where it can be reasonably argued in each instance that they outplayed the other team that day. I don't think it's reasonable to expect the Patriots to outplay their remaining 10 consecutive opponents, which I think would be required for the various flags/bounces/dropped passes/INTs or what have you to lead to a 11-5 record. I think the Patriots will lose two more "blew it at the end" games, and actually get outplayed by at least one of their upcoming opponents. Losing 3 out of 6 games while playing well and being generally healthy does not bode well for making a dominant run through the remaining schedule. This team won't stay this healthy all season, the health of the useful TEs in particular scares me half to death.

10-6 will still win the division, because I think at most 1 of the losses will be against a divisional opponent.

Well, they got outplayed tonight, IMO, and won anyway. So I suppose there's really no meaningful difference between winning ugly and losing while generally executing well (particularly on offense) from a predictive standpoint.

[phragle]

'sup

[ragnarok725]

Yeah - I'm not sure we learn each year. They're better or the same in all the areas we thought would cause their downfall last season. Maybe they'll continue throwing games away, but I have a hard time believing it.

I'm one of the few 13-3 votes on here. The losses have been frustrating, and there are definitely some deficiencies. But they're better or on par with every team remaining on their schedule, and I just get the sense they'll go on a run.

Still feeling optimistic about this projection, although the hardest two games are yet to come.

It's sad to remember just how frustrating this team was earlier in the season. They could be in the driver's seat right there with Houston but for a field goal, a 50+ yard bomb, or some horrendous replacement officiating.

[mpx42]

12-4 looking a bit more likely...two very tough games coming up in a six-day stretch though, missing Gronkowski/Jones/Mankins/Edelman and with Connolly and Vollmer not playing close to the healthy versions of themselves. Should learn a lot about this team.

[CaptainLaddie]

Still feeling optimistic about this projection, although the hardest two games are yet to come.

It's sad to remember just how frustrating this team was earlier in the season. They could be in the driver's seat right there with Houston but for a field goal, a 50+ yard bomb, or some horrendous replacement officiating.

They've lost 3 games by a total of 4 points. They've won 9 games by a total of 166 points. Two wins were close (3 and 6, I don't count today). They could very easily be undefeated or a one-loss team.

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

'sup

Careful. They lose back to back games against Houston and San Fran, there's going to be a whole lot of hand-wringing, and they'll be 9-5 to boot.

[phragle]

'sup

[phragle]

Seriously what the hell SeoulSox?

[Ralphwiggum]

I voted 12-4 but this team is winning out.

[SeoulSoxFan]

Seriously what the hell SeoulSox?

Fuck, most embarrassing pick indeed. I'll claim it as a reverse-reverse-jinx and call it a day.

[JohnnyK]

http://sonsofsamhorn...ost__p__4387307

I'll go and break my kids' piggybanks now...