In response to dapats1281's comment:
In response to RidingWithTheKing's comment:
In response to dapats1281's comment:
How many ppg in the playoffs did they score this way? Then, how many of those scores were defensive and how many were assisted by the fact that they were a turnover machine in the playoffs?
Everyone who says going back to this style remembers everything incorrectly.
2001: Offensive points scored: 16, 17, 13
2003: Offensive points scored: 17, 24, 32
2004: Offensive points scored: 20, 34, 24
2005: Offensive points scored: 28, 13
2006: Offensive points scored, 31, 24, 27
Here's a couple of things for some of you to remember. Maybe outside of 2004, those offenses were not great at all. Stick those offenses on this team, and they will lose in the first round.
For everyone who says that Wes has handicapped the offense, realize that they actually used to win playoff games where the offense scored under 20 points. And in some of the games where they scored over 20, it was because the defense put the offense in great field position OR gave them extra possessions.
This isn't a case of addition by subtraction. The Patriots aren't going to become an offense where everybody gets 50 balls or whatever, this just means Gronk and Hern will get slightly more looks each...and if Gronk gets hurt again, it means Hern will just get a bunch of the targets that Wes used to get.
It still comes down to the defense. If Ty Law doesn't make the plays he made in the playoffs, or if McGinest doesn't get those sacks, people would remember that in those championship years, that offensive system was not better than what we have had lately.
I'm still holding out hope, because there are still some domino's to drop. But I do believe the offense will be slightly worse next season. But it's not about what the offense does, never has been for me during this offseason. It's about what BB is going to do about the defense.
First of all, toss out 2001. We all know he was a game manager in his "rookie" year that year.
Second, note how 2003 and 2004 show higher scores, but they're also games where he didn't throw picks.
Third, the blowout in 2005 was vs Jax at home. Jax is a warm weather team. The 13 points in DEnver featured 5 NE turnovers and a Brady pick 6 in the shotgun spread base with Dillon on one foot and too much Faulk, which proves my premise even more.
So, you can't use a 5 turnover game in Denver as a barometer.
IMO, NE's offense ran the best in 2003, 2004 2010 and 2012. If I had to rank them, I would go like this:
2004
2010
2003
2012
I leave out 2007 because it's an aberration season. Give me 2010 and 2004 with a pinch of 2007 and we win the SB.
Not a coincidence that two toys Brady got in 2007 (Moss and Welker) were overused after 2007 ti the point one guy got traded and we saw two more non SB ending seasons in 2011 and 2012 because Welker was used too much already with no real perimeter balance.
Get Brady back under center more for playaction on the flanks, because NE is loaded down the middle with Gronk, Hern or Amendola.
2004...do you think it helped that the Pats had a defense that was able to hold that Colts offense to 3 points? If the 2012 Pats defense held the Ravens to 3 points, I doubt Brady throws it 54 times and I would imagine they run it a bit more.
AFC Championship game, they got up on the Steelers 24-3 (7 coming from the defense). Most importantly, they shut down the Steelers offense.
Easier to have Brady only throw it 25ish times and have Dillon grind it out when you have a defense that prevents you from falling behind or allows you more opportunities to get on the field.
2010 is just as much of an abberation season as 2007. I doubt Brady is going to have another season where he goes 300+ straight passes without a pick again.
Defensive play has a large impact on offensive balance.
Your last statment is one of the dumbest things I've ever read here. No offense.
The only way that is true is if the D allows a bunch of points in the first half. That's not what has been going on here, dude.
3 points in SB 42, 7 in SB 46, 7 in this last year's AFC title game. NE had LEADS in all of these games. LEADS. They weren't trailing. We ended up CHOOSING to throw 45 times in these games. CHOOSING.
FAIL
Christ, even in the 2010 divisonal loss to the Jets, it was 7 before the CHung fake punt fumble in short field for the Jets to get their second TD before half. It was 14-11 at the end of the 3rd qtr for chrissakes and Brady is staring over at O'Brien looking for more shotgun spread calls to go 3 and out on.
IN an offensive era like this EVERY SINGLE Pats fan should be expecting more from our QB and offense and a bit less from the D. Are you seriously expecting holding an offense today to under 10 point in a playoff game?
Are your freaking kidding me? What league are you watching?
BB just forced the second divorce for Brady in 3 seasons because Brady was proving the weapons he was given werent' working well enough for him.
When did I ever make mention of the points allowed? It's about the defense making plays.
You made mention of how the defense in the early days was better rested...howabout the fact they they did not force a single 3 and out in the Super Bowl? Howabout the Giants defense forcing a crucial safety and an interception.
2007? Why did the Giants win? Cause the defense gave Manning time to perform his goofy game winning drives. Much the way the old Pats defense gave the Brady an opportunity for the game winning drive.
I'm not saying you're going to go back to the old days where you run it 30+times, but defense does play a role in how you play offensively.
Playing with a stout defense as opposed to a leaky one can play a difference when it comes to choosing to throw the ball away or trying to force it.
It's an offensive era, and offense matters more, but don't disregard defense. I can name you mutiple defensive plays made by every Super Bowl team that made the difference between them winning a championship.
