In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
I think it's hard to blame the offense for this loss, though I'll throw Rusty just a little bone in saying he's right that the offense was helped by the Bills ineptitude on defense (penalties, poor plays, etc.), and the mistakes the offense did make were ofen hidden by the Bills defense being so bad.
That said, the offense did do more than what should have been needed to win the game. Good defensive teams hold most opponents to scores in the teens and low twenties, with occasional single digit performances. The Pats' defense is so far from that it's sad. Yes, they are opportunistic and get a number of turnovers. But they very predictably give up point totals in the 20s and 30s, week after week, and they have a tendency to struggle in the fourth against hurry up drives. This simply is not a defense you can expect to ever have a week where they give up just 9 or 12 points and shut an offense out in the fourth quarter. Because of that, this is a team that can't win without scoring a lot on offense. And because of that, the offense will always have to rely much more on Brady and the spread passing game than some fans would like. Every game is a potential shootout--even against bad offenses--which means we have to play offense every week as if we're ten points behind with five minutes left. It's a sad state of affairs, but it is what it is.
Fortunately, the coaches continue to show their skill by winning. We're still in the top part of the league and are likely headed for the playoffs again. Will we go far with this defense? Probably not, but BB got us to the big dance last year with a similar disaster of a defense. Fans whine and complain about the offense's performance in the Super Bowl, but as I said last year, it was a miracle we even got there--and a tribute to Belichick's genius.
Defense still wins championships (or at least plays a big role in doing so). We still don't have a championship defense. But at least we have Belichick . . .
Gee, thanks for being 1/4 honest for once, Prolate. You're really a mature, swell person.
Again, go look at the boxscores of yesterday's games. ALL Ds give up scores in the 20s! Wake up. It's not 2004 anymore.
Why are you so arrogant with these facts? Go compares the average "yards allowed per game" in 2004 to 2012.
Case closed. The sticks will be moved in this league. Most scores yesterday were in the high 20s/mid 30s. It's the way it is. Holding our OWN D's feet to the fire with yards allowed in the air is assinine because it's moot in today's game.
I repeat, the issue yesterday was the run game working for Buffalo on our front 7. THAT was the root cause of why Buffalo did a nice job on offense.
SF just allowed 24 points at home, mostly because Alex Smith was knocked out which meant their own offense sputtered giving the Rams more drives than they would have had if Smith wasn't knocked out. Same deal in the Dallas game. Vick blows, but Foles is a worse option.
Dallas then pulled away.
SF's D looking WORSE than they usually do at home is not a coincidence with their back up Qb on the field and their own offense sputtering. Complementary football. Look it up.
It's a concept you have no idea about, apparently.
BB's genius in knowing this is an offensive league, knows the Ds are at a disadvantage, so he ups the odds by investing in the offense and then teaching the D to get takeaways. That's the formula.
I don't like it either, but it's the right formula for this era. The last 4 SB winning teams had nice offenses, with balance, and opportunistic Ds.
They didn't have '85 Bears kind of Ds. Get over it. Tagliabue is long, long gone and the owners want points and revenue. Fantasy football, video games and teams are wanted in LA and London.
Yeah, the Bills running game was giving our defense trouble. But that didn't make our pass defense any better. Usually it's just the pass defense that looks bad. Yesterday both pass and run defense looked bad. Hopefully that's not a trend. But it reminds me of the Baltimore game when all of a sudden the run defense which has generally been great seemed to disappear. Can't wait to watch film of this later today if I have time to see what really went wrong . . .
Whether you think the points we scored were the result of our offense executing well or the Bills' defense failing makes no difference in the outcome. We still scored 37 points, mounted long drives, ate up clock, etc. Whether it was our offense that earned it or the Bills defense that gave it up to us makes no difference to our defense. The length of the drives was the same and the outcomes of the drives the same, regardless of whether it was our offense or the Bills defense that was responsible for the outcome. So even if the offense's performance was bad and all those points and long drives were fully the responsibility of the Bills' defense, it would have made no difference to our defense. "Complementary" football isn't an issue here because the offense was on the field a long time and scored points, regardless of whether you think they earned it or not. The defense needed to step up. They had plenty of rest. They weren't in bad field position. They were working with a lead. The offense didn't hurt the defense in any way. If the defense failed, it was all their own fault. Offense had nothing to do with it.