Re: A Cold, Hard Look at Brady's Last 7 Postseasons
posted at 10/13/2013 1:24 AM EDT
In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:
"I go by facts"
You go by selective facts that support your beliefs. You can line up facts to support almost any argument - even those contradicted by science (evolution, global warming, etc).
That's why arguing you have "facts" on your side is weak. Anyone can assemble facts.
Truly persuasive argumentation is the result of taking other points of view into account, reckoning with them, and then address them in your argument.
But you don't do that because you take the view that anyone who disagrees with you is a loser or not a true fan and so forth and has no valid positions. Therefore you convince no one, and that "facts" you present are contradicted by other facts that you don't reckon with easily (example: our defense's inabllity to force turnovers in recent postseasons, or stop opponents from driving down the field with two minutes or less left in the game, which many of us feel is just as impactful as Brady's play or any other factor.
The offenses in the recent years have been power houses and the "Strength" of the Patriots team. That is exactly how the team had been built. It is almost impossible to have a complete and evenly balanced team when your avg draft position is 26.2 for the past 10 years. The league is set up to force parity.
I do not know for any fact as I have no time or interest in going to look it up but I will venture a very educated guess that the TO's that the Patriots D have created over or during those years in the regular season came predominantly in games during which times they were leading and probably many times leading comfortably by more than one possession.
This goes back to the original point of how the team was constructed during that time. The defense is MUCH more capable to dictating to the offense the tempo and what they want it to do when they are playing from in front with a solid lead or comfortable lead. (Brady himself spoke of this after this recent Bengals game and how the Bengals D did that to him and the Pats offense)
In 2010 loss to Jets the Pats only led once in that game by 3 points. Played from behind the rest of the game. Much more difficult to generate sacks and or TO's when playing from behind.
In 2011 Pats played from behind until :15 left in 1st half then led by 1 point at half. Both teams come out for the 2nd half and each have drives. Pats 1st and get a TD. So you can make an argument that they have an opportunity to maybe try and dictate something but its a one possession game in the SB so I am not sure how much. They do manage to keep the Giants to ONLY a FG. Pats go out with the "strength" of their team and lay an egg, 3 and out and put their "weakness" back out on the field. Don't even get me started on this game because it is probably the one single game I take issue with Brady in for his career. Lots of mental mistakes that were very costly to the outcome of the game by him.
In 2012 same thing again. Pats only led briefly by 3 and 6 points in the game. Only short stretches and or even a single possession. All three games the same, playing even or from behind making it much more difficult to generate sacks and or TO's.
In simplest form, you are not going to have success asking the weakness of your team to bail out the strength of your team when the strength of your team falls on its face and under-performs for a particular game. It will rarely if ever happen. The weakness needs to play from an advantageous position. This is the very fundamental basics of the nuances of the game of sports in general. Those that do not understand it clearly might know the rules of a particular sport but obviously do not truly understand the sport or sports in general.
By the way, all the stuff you stated before the piece I highlighted I thought was very well said and true. Few on these boards ever do that, unfortunately.