Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    There's a point there.  But all the guys mentioned from the past are too old to play. We're still rebuilding.  Some of the young guys on this team will be very good two or three years down the road.  And there are also some holes that still need to be filled with additional players.  But we have a lot of draft picks . . . . so look for this team to get better.  And remember, we were 14-2 this year, so getting better means getting very, very good.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaveNorthShore. Show DaveNorthShore's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    Don't fully agree.

    I agree that the Pats need more talent, especially on D

    But the talent on this team was good enough to go 14-2 with one of the toughest league schedules (i.e. not KC's schedule).  In the process this talent won decisively over Pitt (at Pitt), NYJ, Chicago (at Chicago), and beat Indy and GB. 

    This talent was good enough to be NYJ by 7-10 pts on Sun.  Poor preparation (the lack of fire, the dropped passes, the mistakes) and game planning (the fake punt, the drive to nowhere) lost this game
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    Talent and execution are different. I do not feel this team had as much talent as many other teams, but they executed flawlessly, a game plan each week by the best coach in football.
    Sunday, they did not execute, and in addition made numerous mistakes including fumbles, int's and missed tackles. They also did not cause any turnovers.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rerun85. Show Rerun85's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    Rkarp has it right. This game was a matter of decision making and execution by the players. One f--k up after another. This coaching staff was stellar this year with all the young talent they needed to bring along.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Brad34. Show Brad34's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    Bruschi and Harrison and Willie Mac were all young and experienced once just like a lot of the players the Pats have now. They all improved and became great players it remains to be seen if the current guys can be anywhere near those guys especially their toughness and intelligence at being able to maste BB's defensive schemes. They went 14-2 in a rebuilding year. The Jets have bought everybody under the sun to get that team and I don't see them getting past Pitt. Pats will contend again next year and hopefully add some mixing pieces to the D.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from j24m1. Show j24m1's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    There is a point made that has some substance, but like Brad34 said, all the guys he mentioned on the SB teams, they had to grow up. Remember, those players were on losing teams as well. McCourty will be as good as Law. Chung could be very close to Harrison. Mayo is better then Bruschi (although not clutch yet like Bruschi had an instinct for ). Sorry Bruschi, love you brotha, but Mayo has more talent. As far as the other 3 LBs, heck yes there not as talented. Rob N is an over achiever, slow as molasses..  Arrington is actually pretty good. 

    For yesterday, Brady was not Brady, don't know why. Defense did well, the killer was that 50 yard slant to cotchery. Cant have a defensive breakdown like that in a game your losing. Botttom line. Many things could have changed the outcome, it didn't happen. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Dessalines. Show Dessalines's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    I agree with rkarp on the matter of execution vs, talent. The PATS have talent.  A team does not go 14 -2 without that component.  However, do we not have to give credit where credit is due, if you are really analyzing the situation honestly?  The JETS, (YETS no longer), also have a talented squad.  They beat us twice this year and once we beat the hell out of them.  On a different day we WILL beat them again, count on it.  However, they came to play on Sunday and our team did not.  I credit the JETS secondary.  It was obvious that only the last option on any pass play was open.  The JETS coverage was sensational and that won the game for them.  You can talk fake put error, criticize the defense but this was an offensive failure IMO, we went away from the run and Brady could not find anybody open.  The game was lost this way.  It was very much like the second game of the season against the JETS. I thought the idea here was for the PATS to get up early shut down the JETS running game and force them to beat us with Mark Sanchez passing. Well obviously that didn't happen and it was due more to the JETS play than anything else. Oh, and Mark Sanchez? Well, he had a primary hand in beating us, he played pretty well. Sorry fellow PATS fans those are the facts.



    However, our team is young and the PATS own the next draft, so I expect the PATS to be competitive for years to come. Can we really ask for more? After all it is only entertainment. 


    Lastly, Ron Borges is a nasty, vindictive TOOL.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    If by talent Borges means "young talent", then I'd agree somewhat.  Having such roster turnover was one of the reasons why I had this team pegged for 10 wins.  You never know how young talent will perform, and I'm amazed it took this long to be an issue. 

    I think this team needs an infusion of more young talent, and they are set up to get it with their draft picks.  But more than anything, lack of execution at times hurt the Pats in the Jets game, and young guys had something to do with it.  How many times did Brady audible at the LOS the other night only to have a receiver run a wrong route or not ready for the throw?  You know it wasn't Brady making the mistake.  On defense, that group of guys needs to gel, and it will happen, but that defense needs a few more pieces, and let's hope this offseason is about supplementing the existing roster, which has a good core.     

      
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from HOFFBURGER. Show HOFFBURGER's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    in fairness, and by no means is this a shot at BB, but many of the key defensive guys in the early days were drafted by parcells and BB inherited them. not all of them, but many. sure he drafted seymour, signed vrable & harrison, etc...but parcells drafted mcginest, bruschi, law, milloy and many other defensive players that played crucial roles in the 2001 super bowl then went on to be the core of the defense after that (milloy excluded).

    BB still did most of the developing these players and took them to a level parcells didnt, so again it's not a slight on BB.

    IMO BB is the best in the game at coaching guys up and getting the most out of them, he does a fabulous job developing these guys i think that goes without saying. what i would love to see once, just once, is to really cash in on draft day and take a shot at some top shelf college talent for a change instead of the usual trading back for value. BB has does an unbelievable job turning late rounders and practice squad guys into viable nfl players...i would love to see what he could do when developing a few guys among the yop 100 or so college players. Be nice to have a draft that yeilds a few stars and not just projects that turn into solid role players.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from threejak. Show threejak's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    Ah the good 'ole days....Give it a rest....
    We play with what we have TODAY not yesterday or seven years ago.
    Oh and he forgot one of my favorites, Andre Tippett too....

    A good young club with a mix of stalwart veterans, some promising youngish  players coupled with  enviable draft positions to move FORWARD in the coming season.

    And exactly how many teams in the NFL can claim this?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    Borges is an idiot, when they were winning in the regular season "the hoodie" was still a genius and our young talent was great.  Now that they lost he is grasping for a reason to hold on to and push to the masses...

    I'd take any and all of our units over the Jets (although their WR corps is probably better) we didn't lose because we weren't talented enough.  We lost because of poor offensive play calling, you come strong or not at all, we brought our "finesse" game to a dogfight.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    Yep, it has to do with experience.  The youth of this football team.  It's not less talented, just unproven.  It isn't the coaching, Bill's the best.  It usually takes a player a couple of years to come into his own.  McCourty and Gronkowski were rookies and had a great year.

    The difference between this years loss and last years is that I feel more optimistic about the future.  There's not too many parts missing from this thing.

    Ron Borges is the anit-Christ of sports writing.  He's a perfect example of what's wrong with sport writers today, especially on the Globe.   
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from futbal. Show futbal's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    The offense has the talent and was poorly coached as the game progressed particularly, while the defense was thin and the Jets exploited it. This team needs some strength in the offensive game planning (maybe a new OC)
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from HOFFBURGER. Show HOFFBURGER's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    "the anti christ of sports writing"...LOL
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    O'Brien got slaughtered 2 years in a row.  Time to hire a real Offensive Coordinator.....even though I know it will never happen.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

         The Patriots have become too much of a finesse team over the years. They need to get back to being physical, tough, and mean! I'm tired of what I've seen the past two years in the play-offs. This team has become SOFT.

         To get back to being physical means that the Pats should draft primarily for their OL, and defensive front seven. I want to see the Pats be able to pound and ground teams on offense, and intimidate and force turnovers on defense.

         If I sound angry, I am. Aren't you?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    You can't possibly think talent had nothing to do with it.

    The huge mismatches in that game were OLB, WR, and CB. It was apparent all game long.

    Enough of getting on the O-line, or Brady, or even the special teams. The Patriots need WRs who get open and catch the ball. Period. 

    They will continue to lose to the Jets half the time (and teams like the Jets) until they can get someone that can beat Cro-Revis man to man, without any "scheme" drawn up for that week.

    Scheme's work once. Then they are figured out. Just like they got their men free 45-3 ... then it didn't work the second time around because the Jets were prepared for it. 

    At the end of the day, it is about players and execution. Pats need someone to make a rookie QB get uncomfortable, they need someone to lock down the other side of the field, and the desperately need someone who can beat pro-bowl cornerbacks without relying on gimmick plans. 

    Forget Welker. He is a slot guy, with obviously diminished skills. 

    Branch is a nice complementary guy. Going out on the field with Tate as your #3 is a giant black hole against a team that has corners built to cover WRs like Calvin Johnson and Reggie Wayne. 

    NE needs one of those, or at least someone credible. 

    Forget Ninkovich. Borges, who is usually ret@rded, is actually right here. Great stories do not equal great talent. NE needs someone to do what Calvin Pace did. And moreover, forget Warren coming back, because he isn't the answer either. NE desperately needs an interior lineman who can do what Shawn Ellis did that game, which was dominate with pressure inside
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots:
    [QUOTE]Tate could be a really good WR in the NFL if he gets a chance to develop, dont quit on that guy too soon Z.
    Posted by MVPkilla4life[/QUOTE]


    Tate may very well be an ok #3, it would take a lot of work, and seasoning and time and a huge amount of development. Right now, this season, he was terrible. Simply terrible. A no show. That said, this much is clear.

    He will never, ever, ever, be the kind of guy who wins matchups against people like Cromartie and Revis. 

    Period. 

    And that is what NE needs. A credible home run threat on offense. Just one. Someone who can, in the excellent words of Gasper, take the pressure off of Brady to be perfect all the time. 

    Name one player on the Patriots that makes that end zone corner catch the Holmes made. One. Name one. Or even the sideline grab that Edwards made. Or the ridiculous RAC down the filed that Cotchery made. 

    Meanwhile, we get to watch backups on other teams make nasty catches in the end zone ... mmm, thinking of Blair White's fingertip grab of a pass wide of him by four yards. 

    Then thinking of all the drops by Welker (yes Welker) Tate and Branch this season, and how all season I can think of one really good catch that any of them pulled in that made me say, wow, you just helped the team. 

    OK, now think if that guy could actually RAC it to the house without a defense making a profound blunder (like the year long REC for Branch against a sleeping Oakland "D"). 

    Add those together, you get a guy like Holmes who is better than anyone NE fields. 

    There is no question about it ... it is about talent. And no, Tate is not the answer, and Branch and Welker will be even older than they are now next season.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    The Patriots' 14-2 record this year was not a fluke and nobody is arguing that this defense is better than the ones that brought trophies home.

    They have the talent to win. They have beaten all of the remaining teams in the playoffs.

    But 1-2 vs the hated Jets this season is unconscionable, especially when one of those losses was in the playoffs.

    The Patriots earned home field. If these two teams played at Foxboro ten times how many would the Pats win? I would bet 8 or 9.

    The Jets played a great game Sunday. The Patriots didn't.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    To compare the Jets to any team and I think you end up in a talent debate.  The Jets are in it to win now.  Next year not so much as these high dollar players hit the door.  You'll see a lot of talent leave and the Jets along with Ryan will crash and burn.  So I find it hard to debate the talent thing with the Jets.  Especailly when you have Bodden and Warren out for the year.  To take this player and that player and compare them to the Pats players I think it's a no brainer that the Jets win out.  The Jets players are established while the Pats are not.  The one drawback I see is when you have so many undrafted FAs on the field.  

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    Nope.  Not buying it.  I understand when he compares our players to past greats, but picking Jet units over Pat units...  no.  And their play in the regular season shows that.  Our running game is better, we didn't use it.  Our receivers?  Well, throw in tight ends, and its WAY better.  Watching Gronk turning away from where the pass was thrown was painful.  I suspect he had some brain farts, and I think if he had gotten rolling, it would have been different as the Jets rolled coverage to him.  We gave them the perfect scenario, underperforming to their strengths, letting them lead, then giving them easy points on stupid plays when they needed them.  They won, but just as much, WE LOST.  
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    Every single play you mentioned was a total defensive failure, not the Holmes catch which was tight coverage and a great catch. I write them all off. Period. 
    Welker is not a home run RAC guy, he can get lost in traffic for five to ten yards but isn't fast enough to run away from most 43 ILBs. If you can't see that watching him, then you are imagining things. Branch is a gillion years old, and does not get open against elite corners. The Jets kept Revis on him this time, and he was a ghost. 

    Tate made one catch, one catch. It was not the same play. Holmes was literally occluded and still tracked the ball through a CB and still kept his feet in. And Holmes makes catches like that every other week. Tate could not track the ball when he was wide open, and had one juggling catch because he was atrociously late for a catchable ball that a credible deep threat would have taken to the house.  Seriously, compare that to the amazing amount of plays where he isn't open because he can't make cuts right and has trouble tracking the ball, then add in his five drops on easy catches, and it is evident that he just doesn't have the natural talent to be an NFL big play WR. Sorry. That is my evaluation.  

    I could go to the Panthers roster and do what you just did. Name a play for each loser against the worst players in the league that were broken plays, or find a guy who played terrible all season long and had one good play. Doug Gabriel had a 45 yard catch for NE. Maybe they should get him? Yeah, check, he is every bit as good as Santonio Holmes. Right. Now I've figured it out. 

    Here is what it is:

    Branch -- aged guy who is almost a JAG, but can make a savvy play
    Welker -- very good (no longer elite or even great) slot guy with zero home run ability
    Tate -- very disappointing second year player with little promise outside of speed
    Pryor -- absolutely unknown commodity who they wouldn't let on the field until a game that was 100% garbage time

    Hernandez -- promising rookie TE with ups and downs
    Gronk -- promising rookie TE, who is more a possession guy

    The last two, who do NOT match up on the perimeter, and are not home run threats. They are TEs. TE's don't take it to the house. And neither of them are the kind of player other teams have to game plan around. And no, neither of them (especially Hern's bunch of drops this season) is as talented before the catch as Holmes is, and neither is as talented after the catch.

    You need to watch other teams play man and see what it looks like when you have WRs that go out and get balls that are not perfect throws. NE doesn't have a guy who can do that consistently. That is fact. If you think NE has one WR that matches up with Holmes or Edwards you are not really watching dude. Sorry. If Brady were QBing that game for the Jets, Holmes and Edwards would have had unreal sick numbers, but Sanchez is so terrible it takes him three tries at a wide open WR to get one down. If Cotchery were NE's slot he would be every bit as good as Welker, and would provide a bit more top end speed that would scare defenses. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Ron Borges?:Talent, not coaching, doomed Patriots

    Usually, when things go so badly - it's not one cause.

    I gotta say it was a mixture of poor coaching (game plan, preperation, and play calling),poor play, inexperience, plus good solid play by the Jets.

    Gotta give kudos to the Jets for taking it to us.
     

Share