Help for #12

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't know where people get the idea that our receivers were that good.  In the two playoff games here are the receiving totals:

    • Edelman--16 receptions for 173 yards
    • Vereen--7 receptions for 75 yards
    • Collie--5 receptions for 72 yards
    • Amendola--3 receptions for 77 yards
    • Hoomanawanui--3 receptions for 39 yards
    • Dobson--2 receptions for 33 yards
    • Mulligan--1 reception for 6 yards

    When I look at that list, I simply don't see an impressive list of talent, nor do I see strong results.  You can blame it on Brady or the play calling, but really how does anyone delude themselves into thinking the Pats had "elite" NFL talent at the receiving positions in the playoffs last year?  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Well against the colts we had 218 yards rushing and 6 td by our backs.  That will effect the receivers stats. Don't cha think?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from glenr. Show glenr's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't know where people get the idea that our receivers were that good.  In the two playoff games here are the receiving totals:

    • Edelman--16 receptions for 173 yards
    • Vereen--7 receptions for 75 yards
    • Collie--5 receptions for 72 yards
    • Amendola--3 receptions for 77 yards
    • Hoomanawanui--3 receptions for 39 yards
    • Dobson--2 receptions for 33 yards
    • Mulligan--1 reception for 6 yards

    When I look at that list, I simply don't see an impressive list of talent, nor do I see strong results.  You can blame it on Brady or the play calling, but really how does anyone delude themselves into thinking the Pats had "elite" NFL talent at the receiving positions in the playoffs last year?  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Well against the colts we had 218 yards rushing and 6 td by our backs.  That will effect the receivers stats. Don't cha think?

    [/QUOTE]


    Don't argue with the armchair GMs

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to glenr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't know where people get the idea that our receivers were that good.  In the two playoff games here are the receiving totals:

    • Edelman--16 receptions for 173 yards
    • Vereen--7 receptions for 75 yards
    • Collie--5 receptions for 72 yards
    • Amendola--3 receptions for 77 yards
    • Hoomanawanui--3 receptions for 39 yards
    • Dobson--2 receptions for 33 yards
    • Mulligan--1 reception for 6 yards

    When I look at that list, I simply don't see an impressive list of talent, nor do I see strong results.  You can blame it on Brady or the play calling, but really how does anyone delude themselves into thinking the Pats had "elite" NFL talent at the receiving positions in the playoffs last year?  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Well against the colts we had 218 yards rushing and 6 td by our backs.  That will effect the receivers stats. Don't cha think?

    [/QUOTE]


    Don't argue with the armchair GMs

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm not arguing but if you divide those out , other then mulligan ,it's over 10 yards a reception. 

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't know where people get the idea that our receivers were that good.  In the two playoff games here are the receiving totals:

    • Edelman--16 receptions for 173 yards
    • Vereen--7 receptions for 75 yards
    • Collie--5 receptions for 72 yards
    • Amendola--3 receptions for 77 yards
    • Hoomanawanui--3 receptions for 39 yards
    • Dobson--2 receptions for 33 yards
    • Mulligan--1 reception for 6 yards

    When I look at that list, I simply don't see an impressive list of talent, nor do I see strong results.  You can blame it on Brady or the play calling, but really how does anyone delude themselves into thinking the Pats had "elite" NFL talent at the receiving positions in the playoffs last year?  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Well against the colts we had 218 yards rushing and 6 td by our backs.  That will effect the receivers stats. Don't cha think?

    [/QUOTE]

    Against the Colts there were 13 receptions on 27 pass plays (2 sacks, 12 incompletions). Against the Broncos, there were 24 receptions on 40 pass plays (2 sacks, 14 incompletions). I'm not seeing anything that makes me think they passed well in either game. They didn't need to pass as much against the Colts because of the success of the run, but when they did pass, the results were actually even worse than against the Broncos. 

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

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to glenr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't know where people get the idea that our receivers were that good.  In the two playoff games here are the receiving totals:

    • Edelman--16 receptions for 173 yards
    • Vereen--7 receptions for 75 yards
    • Collie--5 receptions for 72 yards
    • Amendola--3 receptions for 77 yards
    • Hoomanawanui--3 receptions for 39 yards
    • Dobson--2 receptions for 33 yards
    • Mulligan--1 reception for 6 yards

    When I look at that list, I simply don't see an impressive list of talent, nor do I see strong results.  You can blame it on Brady or the play calling, but really how does anyone delude themselves into thinking the Pats had "elite" NFL talent at the receiving positions in the playoffs last year?  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Well against the colts we had 218 yards rushing and 6 td by our backs.  That will effect the receivers stats. Don't cha think?

    [/QUOTE]


    Don't argue with the armchair GMs

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm not arguing but if you divide those out , other then mulligan ,it's over 10 yards a reception. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Their net gain per pass play was 5.8 yards.  That's poor.  Their opponents (Colts and Broncos) had a net gain per pass play of 8.2. 

    Good ( i.e., high scoring) offenses tend to get about 7.0 net yards per pass play--5.8 is bottom feeder level; 8.2 exceeds the Broncos' season average of 7.8. 

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Help for #12

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to glenr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't know where people get the idea that our receivers were that good.  In the two playoff games here are the receiving totals:

    • Edelman--16 receptions for 173 yards
    • Vereen--7 receptions for 75 yards
    • Collie--5 receptions for 72 yards
    • Amendola--3 receptions for 77 yards
    • Hoomanawanui--3 receptions for 39 yards
    • Dobson--2 receptions for 33 yards
    • Mulligan--1 reception for 6 yards

    When I look at that list, I simply don't see an impressive list of talent, nor do I see strong results.  You can blame it on Brady or the play calling, but really how does anyone delude themselves into thinking the Pats had "elite" NFL talent at the receiving positions in the playoffs last year?  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Well against the colts we had 218 yards rushing and 6 td by our backs.  That will effect the receivers stats. Don't cha think?

    [/QUOTE]


    Don't argue with the armchair GMs

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm not arguing but if you divide those out , other then mulligan ,it's over 10 yards a reception. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Their net gain per pass play was 5.8 yards.  That's poor.  Their opponents (Colts and Broncos) had a net gain per pass play of 8.2. 

    Good ( i.e., high scoring) offenses tend to get about 7.0 net yards per pass play--5.8 is bottom feeder level; 8.2 exceeds the Broncos' season average of 7.8. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady got sacked twice he had no time to throw thanks to mankins and the center. How many of the balls were over thrown, under thrown and thrown away. Manning had all day to throw. When he didnt " the Super Bowl" how did that work out. Pretty much parallel. 

    I as you would like better receivers but these guys arnt thr trash of the league. The Denver game was a bad game all around and IMO isn't an accurate reflection of the whole season. When Vince went down and Kelly got hurt it effected the whole team. 

     

Share