Re: Another too early crack at the 53 Man Roster
posted at 7/11/2013 11:06 AM EDT
In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
In response to IrishMob7's comment:
They scored 37, 24, and 34 points, respectively, in their 3 playoff games. If our offense could do that this year I would be estatic. I don't really care what their ranking was in the regular season; I want to see how they perform when it matters in January and February. The Pats are a given to make the playoffs every single year so I'm not too concerned about regular season stats.
That 2006 team would have EASILY won the Super Bowl that year if our defense didn't suck donkey d*ck in the 2nd half against the Colts in the AFC Championship game. They couldn't stop a freaking nosebleed. That 2006 team would have manhandled that pathetic Bears team. The 2006 Bears team might have been the worst team to participate in a Super Bowl in the past 15 years.
Lastly, we will see how the defense stacks up this year. I'm excited to watch that young core progress like they have for the past couple of seasons. Add in Wilson, Kelly, Armstead, and a few rookies and I think we have a unit that will surprise a lot of people and end up winning games for us this year. We can hope.
You need to look at those games more closely. Asante Samuel had interception returns for TDs in both the Jets and Colts games (the two where the cracked 30 points). The also took advantage of a lot of short fields (thanks to the defense). Against the Chargers, three of their five scoring drives where 33 yards or less. If San Diego does not turn the ball over four times (and miss a FG at the end of regulation) the Patriots never even see the Colts.
In the AFC Championship game that year, the Patriots were dominated in the second half on both sides of the ball. The were outscored 32-13. The longest drive is was 34 yards and that was the last one and it ended in a pick. The only second half TD was set up by an 80-yard kickoff return.
I totally agree on playoffs being more important than the regular season. That team was not good enough to win in the playoffs. They were lucky to get past the Chargers, and it took the Colts a half to wake up and realize that they were the better team.
I think the young defense for the Patriots this year can be good, but if the offense is what it was in 2006, I doubt it can be good enough to carry the Patriots very far.
All very good points. I'm not one to take sides and blame one side of the ball over the other (like 90% of the board) but I have been one to say that the two sides need to work more cohesively. There will be spurts in the game where the O is continuously scoring and the D comes out, doesn't get ANY pressure and then gives away all momentum. Then there will be times when the D is continuing to get 3 & outs giving the offense short fields, and the O ends up punting after a 3 & out.
I think 2006 was a perfect example of both sides doing their job more often than not which leads to a more cohesive and efficient team. You don't need to have the most talented players or the best overall team. What you do need is for the D to get turnovers and play consistently, and the offense to lead sustaining drives that lead to some kind of points. That has been lacking over the past few seasons. I really do think this year will be the year that we revert back to the 2006 type team.
But all of this stemmed from Jints being his usual d00sh self. The offense still has many more weapons this upcoming season than they did in 2006; I was just using 2006 as a reference to the "nobodys" at WR. Gronk will eventually be back. Vereen will be unleashed more, whether it be in a scatback role or put out in the slot where he can use his athleticism. Our RB core is much better than it was in 2006. Overall, I'm not worried about the offense. Brady will make it work with the weapons he has. You can take that to the bank.