http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

    As if just because football outsiders says it that it now makes sense to some folks.

    I already posted long ago the summary of what FO capitalized in its own article. As well as the same basic little table showing the difference in offense and defense performance of regular season avg vs big time post season losses.

    It's not rocket science. It's fundamental. 

    It is not a coincidence that from 1970 to present that only ONE team has won the AFCCG scoring 13 points or fewer. In 1991 the Bills beat the Broncos 10-7.

    It is also not a coincidence that you have to go all the way back to 1975 to find a single team who has won a superbowl by scoring 17 points or fewer. (That excludes the Giants who beat the Patriots 17-14, since we are talking about the Pats.)

     



    I remember. Actually, upon reading the FO article (before this post of yours), it crossed my mind that the author might be LowFBIQ himself. 

    I do share the perspective. In fact I did the same research you did after the 2007 SB... but was too lazy to write anything as nice as you did, anticipating what comes after. That's why I was glad someone did it here.

     

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    As if just because football outsiders says it that it now makes sense to some folks.

    I already posted long ago the summary of what FO capitalized in its own article. As well as the same basic little table showing the difference in offense and defense performance of regular season avg vs big time post season losses.

    It's not rocket science. It's fundamental. 

    It is not a coincidence that from 1970 to present that only ONE team has won the AFCCG scoring 13 points or fewer. In 1991 the Bills beat the Broncos 10-7.

    It is also not a coincidence that you have to go all the way back to 1975 to find a single team who has won a superbowl by scoring 17 points or fewer. (That excludes the Giants who beat the Patriots 17-14, since we are talking about the Pats.)

     

     



     

    I remember. Actually, upon reading the FO article (before this post of yours), it crossed my mind that the author might be LowFBIQ himself. 

    I do share the perspective. In fact I did the same research you did after the 2007 SB... but was too lazy to write anything as nice as you did, anticipating what comes after. That's why I was glad someone did it here.

     




    Well, all you people are ignoring the most rudimentary of concepts.

    Possessions!

    Take into account that most of their regular season points per game were scored in 12 possessions, it is illogical to hold them to that standard when both SB's consisted of 2/3rds their normal possessions.  Most teams score on only about 1/3rd of their possessions.(32%)

    The Pat's O maintained a higher than the average, 38 + % throughout the RS and also in the SB's.

    They would have to score in a whopping 67-100 % of their possessions to maintain their season average, depending on if thet were 3's or 7's or combination of.

    You have the D to thank for that.

    You can also thank them for allowing the gints to score on 50% of theirs, which FAR exceded what  an elite offense like the Pats  or GB or the Saints would do.  Fail!

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

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    It's obvious the offense has "problems". Too often when it is all on the line, they can't run, they can't block and they can't catch.

    What you have is a MEDIOCRE team surrounding a HOF QB. That's it. Since the defensive stalwarts BB inherited got old that is the bottom line of what this team is.

    This is not rocket science, nor does it need deep analysis. It is OBVIOUS. Of course if your team is one big fat yawn but you have a Brady, a Peyton Manning or a Rodgers you will be in the mix. So, our mediocre team surrounding the HOF QB is always in the mix, until Brady becomes mediocre, or his replacement is; then we won't be in the mix. Simple shyte.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    As if just because football outsiders says it that it now makes sense to some folks.

    I already posted long ago the summary of what FO capitalized in its own article. As well as the same basic little table showing the difference in offense and defense performance of regular season avg vs big time post season losses.

    It's not rocket science. It's fundamental. 

    It is not a coincidence that from 1970 to present that only ONE team has won the AFCCG scoring 13 points or fewer. In 1991 the Bills beat the Broncos 10-7.

    It is also not a coincidence that you have to go all the way back to 1975 to find a single team who has won a superbowl by scoring 17 points or fewer. (That excludes the Giants who beat the Patriots 17-14, since we are talking about the Pats.)

     

     



     

    I remember. Actually, upon reading the FO article (before this post of yours), it crossed my mind that the author might be LowFBIQ himself. 

    I do share the perspective. In fact I did the same research you did after the 2007 SB... but was too lazy to write anything as nice as you did, anticipating what comes after. That's why I was glad someone did it here.

     

     




    Well, all you people are ignoring the most rudimentary of concepts.

     

    Possessions!

    Take into account that most of their regular season points per game were scored in 12 possessions, it is illogical to hold them to that standard when both SB's consisted of 2/3rds their normal possessions.  Most teams score on only about 1/3rd of their possessions.(32%)

    The Pat's O maintained a higher than the average, 38 + % throughout the RS and also in the SB's.

    They would have to score in a whopping 67-100 % of their possessions to maintain their season average, depending on if thet were 3's or 7's or combination of.

    You have the D to thank for that.

    You can also thank them for allowing the gints to score on 50% of theirs, which FAR exceded what  an elite offense like the Pats  or GB or the Saints would do.  Fail!

     




    Brady threw away his first possession in SB 46 with that Safety.  Also, what good is it if we're not scoring on possesions they do have?

     

    Also, you try to sneak in "scoring" which are actually two FGs for a total of SIX POINTS in one half in SB 46 to make it seem like it was offensive.

    So, when you say "50%", it's very misleading, Mr. Sneaky.  The last TD shouldn't have happened if Brady doesn't take the Safety, toss the worst INT of his entire career or Welker doesn't drop it.

    So, your premise is a FAIL becuase it's very sneaky with how you positioned it.

    13 points allowed with our own QB throwing away 3 possessions due to lack of execution and bad decisions, isn't about the D letting Tom Brady down.

    You lose.

     

     




    They scored on 38% of their possessions which is high.  They also did not score on 62 % of their possessions which is the opposite of 38% and better than average.

    That's the way it works.   Score on 38%, don't score on 62%.  Take away 4 possessions because the D can't get off the field and the O is screwed.  SCREWED!

    Look what TB did to the San Fran D in 4 possessions and less than 8 minutes.  28 points!

    You take them away with an  D that can't get off the field  and you have ZERO chance of doing that.  ZERO!

    Teams don't score on most of their possessions unless they play the Pat's D.  Then it's pretty common place.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    As if just because football outsiders says it that it now makes sense to some folks.

    I already posted long ago the summary of what FO capitalized in its own article. As well as the same basic little table showing the difference in offense and defense performance of regular season avg vs big time post season losses.

    It's not rocket science. It's fundamental. 

    It is not a coincidence that from 1970 to present that only ONE team has won the AFCCG scoring 13 points or fewer. In 1991 the Bills beat the Broncos 10-7.

    It is also not a coincidence that you have to go all the way back to 1975 to find a single team who has won a superbowl by scoring 17 points or fewer. (That excludes the Giants who beat the Patriots 17-14, since we are talking about the Pats.)

     

     



     

    I remember. Actually, upon reading the FO article (before this post of yours), it crossed my mind that the author might be LowFBIQ himself. 

    I do share the perspective. In fact I did the same research you did after the 2007 SB... but was too lazy to write anything as nice as you did, anticipating what comes after. That's why I was glad someone did it here.

     

     




    Well, all you people are ignoring the most rudimentary of concepts.

     

    Possessions!

    Take into account that most of their regular season points per game were scored in 12 possessions, it is illogical to hold them to that standard when both SB's consisted of 2/3rds their normal possessions.  Most teams score on only about 1/3rd of their possessions.(32%)

    The Pat's O maintained a higher than the average, 38 + % throughout the RS and also in the SB's.

    They would have to score in a whopping 67-100 % of their possessions to maintain their season average, depending on if thet were 3's or 7's or combination of.

    You have the D to thank for that.

    You can also thank them for allowing the gints to score on 50% of theirs, which FAR exceded what  an elite offense like the Pats  or GB or the Saints would do.  Fail!



    You are one of the only people trying to hold on to this absurdity that the D failed and is the sole reason. (mind you I am not saying the D played great, just to expected levels, which was well enough in the two SB losses)

    How often is it that a team has a differential of 2 or more in the posession battle? I don't know but it has to be rare. It's almost impossible I think and only happens with a final kneel down or something.

    The very nature of the game is you have it and either score or give it back. Then the other teams gets it, scores or gives it back.

    When you look at most games, the possessions are typically equal or a differential of ONE most of the time I am guessing. Part of it is because you can't start and end both halfs with the ball because you get to start the game OR half with it but not both. How do you not get this?

    Although the offense and defense may have more than one responsibility what is the PRIMARY responsiblity of each unit?

    The offense is to score "points". The defense is to prevent "points". That is the primary function.

    I will bet you that you can go back through NFL history and find TONS of games where a team still won a game while losing the possession battle, the time of possession battle, turnover battle, etc. Not talking all together but possibly even so.

    However you can not find ONE SINGLE GAME where the team that scored fewer points won the game.

    When you go into the post season of games you have a realistic expectation of what your two units can do as far as scoring and preventing points, if playing mistake free football. You have that realistic expectation based on what they accomplished all season long.

    When one unit goes out in the post season and bascially stays the course and the other can not then how can you not see which unit truely underperformed? You are not required to make some leap to saying the defense is great to see which unit fell on its face.

    Whether both teams get 14 possessions each or 8 possessions each they "both" have the same opportunity to be just as efficient as each other or more specifically to their own season averages.

    Can you point to reasons for the offensive struggles in those two SB losses, absolutely, but it does not remove the fact that they grossly underperformed(..and no i am not talking about anything having to do with the defense as a reason).

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to jri37's comment:

     

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

     

    In response to jri37's comment:

     

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    As if just because football outsiders says it that it now makes sense to some folks.

    I already posted long ago the summary of what FO capitalized in its own article. As well as the same basic little table showing the difference in offense and defense performance of regular season avg vs big time post season losses.

    It's not rocket science. It's fundamental. 

    It is not a coincidence that from 1970 to present that only ONE team has won the AFCCG scoring 13 points or fewer. In 1991 the Bills beat the Broncos 10-7.

    It is also not a coincidence that you have to go all the way back to 1975 to find a single team who has won a superbowl by scoring 17 points or fewer. (That excludes the Giants who beat the Patriots 17-14, since we are talking about the Pats.)

     

     



     

    I remember. Actually, upon reading the FO article (before this post of yours), it crossed my mind that the author might be LowFBIQ himself. 

    I do share the perspective. In fact I did the same research you did after the 2007 SB... but was too lazy to write anything as nice as you did, anticipating what comes after. That's why I was glad someone did it here.

     

     




    Well, all you people are ignoring the most rudimentary of concepts.

     

    Possessions!

    Take into account that most of their regular season points per game were scored in 12 possessions, it is illogical to hold them to that standard when both SB's consisted of 2/3rds their normal possessions.  Most teams score on only about 1/3rd of their possessions.(32%)

    The Pat's O maintained a higher than the average, 38 + % throughout the RS and also in the SB's.

    They would have to score in a whopping 67-100 % of their possessions to maintain their season average, depending on if thet were 3's or 7's or combination of.

    You have the D to thank for that.

    You can also thank them for allowing the gints to score on 50% of theirs, which FAR exceded what  an elite offense like the Pats  or GB or the Saints would do.  Fail!

     




    Brady threw away his first possession in SB 46 with that Safety.  Also, what good is it if we're not scoring on possesions they do have?

     

    Also, you try to sneak in "scoring" which are actually two FGs for a total of SIX POINTS in one half in SB 46 to make it seem like it was offensive.

    So, when you say "50%", it's very misleading, Mr. Sneaky.  The last TD shouldn't have happened if Brady doesn't take the Safety, toss the worst INT of his entire career or Welker doesn't drop it.

    So, your premise is a FAIL becuase it's very sneaky with how you positioned it.

    13 points allowed with our own QB throwing away 3 possessions due to lack of execution and bad decisions, isn't about the D letting Tom Brady down.

    You lose.

     

     

     




    They scored on 38% of their possessions which is high.  They also did not score on 62 % of their possessions which is the opposite of 38% and better than average.

     

    That's the way it works.   Score on 38%, don't score on 62%.  Take away 4 possessions because the D can't get off the field and the O is screwed.  SCREWED!

    Look what TB did to the San Fran D in 4 possessions and less than 8 minutes.  28 points!

    You take them away with an  D that can't get off the field  and you have ZERO chance of doing that.  ZERO!

    Teams don't score on most of their possessions unless they play the Pat's D.  Then it's pretty common place.

     




    The Giants put up 13 points through 57 minutes. That's all that needs to be said. No one cares about the dopey data you're over-analyzing when the game is about points.

     

    They had 2 drives (before the last one) in the 4th qtr with a 17-12 or 17-15 lead.

    Result?

    INT on 1st down.  Welker drop.

    Fail and fail.

    Any time you hand momentum over to another team like that in a close game, it's a huge boost to the opponent. Anyone who has played sports know this, but since you were playing Dungeons and Dragons through high school, you don't know this.

     

     



    On the flip side the Pats D allowed the Giants to average 9 plays per drive never coming up with any 3 and outs for the entire game. The D was responsible for the Offenses average starting position of their own 16 yard line.

     

    Bottom line.... there is enough blame to go around for both sides of the ball.

     




    That's fine, but I've never ever, ever gone into a game as a fan more concerned about how many 3 and outs my D gets. I look at the scoreboard, as do most humans.

     

    Again, this is what I mean.  The Irrationals stomp their feet because King Brady isn't handed his usual 2 turnovers per game, which is pathetic. 

    God forbid the D not be lights out for Brady to be able to score more than 14 or 17 points. That's essentially what it means. An offense that puts up 30 points on average all year, now can't score more than 14 or 17, unless they're handed 3 or 4 more drives?  I could see if your offense sucked and they HAD to have those drives to compete. Think Sanchez and the Jets.

    I could also see  if our D was bad giving up 21 points inthe first half of a SB or something.  Oh wait, SF's supposed juggernaut D just did that!  lol

    Do you realize each TD drive in and out of halftime was in the 2 minute base hurry up, essentially?

    That's the ONLY offense our passing offense could run well in 2011 against good Ds. That's a problem.

     

     



     In SB 46 the D couldn't get off the field. The offense couldn't make a big play. It was a TEAM effort.

     

    Every game is unique in its reason for an outcome. For SB 46 the effort was there on both sides of the ball the executionon on big plays and crunch time on both sides was the issue.

     




    It's always a team effort, but the root cause of these last minute losses is seen in our offensive approach earlier in games, squandering points.

     

    If you had told me we'd score only 14 points in SB 42 or our D would allow less than 14 in 57 minutes in SB 46, I wouldn't have believed either BEFORE the game.

    Pretty simple. Our offense has been underperforming a lot more than our D underperforming.

     




    Don't give the O, 2/3rds of their possessions if you don't want them to score 2/3rds of their points.  Doesn't get more simple than that unless you are a simpleton like yourself.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    As if just because football outsiders says it that it now makes sense to some folks.

    I already posted long ago the summary of what FO capitalized in its own article. As well as the same basic little table showing the difference in offense and defense performance of regular season avg vs big time post season losses.

    It's not rocket science. It's fundamental. 

    It is not a coincidence that from 1970 to present that only ONE team has won the AFCCG scoring 13 points or fewer. In 1991 the Bills beat the Broncos 10-7.

    It is also not a coincidence that you have to go all the way back to 1975 to find a single team who has won a superbowl by scoring 17 points or fewer. (That excludes the Giants who beat the Patriots 17-14, since we are talking about the Pats.)

     

     



     

    I remember. Actually, upon reading the FO article (before this post of yours), it crossed my mind that the author might be LowFBIQ himself. 

    I do share the perspective. In fact I did the same research you did after the 2007 SB... but was too lazy to write anything as nice as you did, anticipating what comes after. That's why I was glad someone did it here.

     

     




    Well, all you people are ignoring the most rudimentary of concepts.

     

    Possessions!

    Take into account that most of their regular season points per game were scored in 12 possessions, it is illogical to hold them to that standard when both SB's consisted of 2/3rds their normal possessions.  Most teams score on only about 1/3rd of their possessions.(32%)

    The Pat's O maintained a higher than the average, 38 + % throughout the RS and also in the SB's.

    They would have to score in a whopping 67-100 % of their possessions to maintain their season average, depending on if thet were 3's or 7's or combination of.

    You have the D to thank for that.

    You can also thank them for allowing the gints to score on 50% of theirs, which FAR exceded what  an elite offense like the Pats  or GB or the Saints would do.  Fail!

     



    You are one of the only people trying to hold on to this absurdity that the D failed and is the sole reason. (mind you I am not saying the D played great, just to expected levels, which was well enough in the two SB losses)

     

    How often is it that a team has a differential of 2 or more in the posession battle? I don't know but it has to be rare. It's almost impossible I think and only happens with a final kneel down or something.

    The very nature of the game is you have it and either score or give it back. Then the other teams gets it, scores or gives it back.

    When you look at most games, the possessions are typically equal or a differential of ONE most of the time I am guessing. Part of it is because you can't start and end both halfs with the ball because you get to start the game OR half with it but not both. How do you not get this?

    Although the offense and defense may have more than one responsibility what is the PRIMARY responsiblity of each unit?

    The offense is to score "points". The defense is to prevent "points". That is the primary function.

    I will bet you that you can go back through NFL history and find TONS of games where a team still won a game while losing the possession battle, the time of possession battle, turnover battle, etc. Not talking all together but possibly even so.

    However you can not find ONE SINGLE GAME where the team that scored fewer points won the game.

    When you go into the post season of games you have a realistic expectation of what your two units can do as far as scoring and preventing points, if playing mistake free football. You have that realistic expectation based on what they accomplished all season long.

    When one unit goes out in the post season and bascially stays the course and the other can not then how can you not see which unit truely underperformed? You are not required to make some leap to saying the defense is great to see which unit fell on its face.

    Whether both teams get 14 possessions each or 8 possessions each they "both" have the same opportunity to be just as efficient as each other or more specifically to their own season averages.

    Can you point to reasons for the offensive struggles in those two SB losses, absolutely, but it does not remove the fact that they grossly underperformed(..and no i am not talking about anything having to do with the defense as a reason).




    Your explanation has nothing to do with what I am talking about.  I am talking about the lack of possessions on both sides for both teams.  I never said there was a 2 possession differential.  Not even close!

    Most games are 12, not 8.  Pats score their points in 12 possession games not 8 possession games.  Get it?

    Both teams scores were low due to lack of possessions.  This is not rocket science.

    The gints score was higher because the D allowed them to score on 50% of them.

    Scoring on 50% of your possessions is rare.  Not as rare as an 8 possession game due to the D never leaving the field but rare none the less.

    Double screwed!

    Throw in the extremely poor field position due to the D never stopping the gints on their own side of the field and they are triple screwd.

    But, Ya, Blame brady for not scoring 4.25 points on every possession to reach his rs average when he only has to score 2.75 during the rs to maintain his average.

      That makes perfect sense!

    Oh, and there was an almost 16 minute ToP differential due to the D's inability to get off the field.   That's a whole freaken quarter.  It was not due to short drives by the O.  Their average Top pp was normal.  It was the D taking almost twice the time it should take to get off the field that was NOT normal.

    Quadruple screwd!

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

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:
    In response to digger0862's comment:

     The Patriots win more often than not, because of Tom Brady and the offense. When Tom and the offense sputter, the defense hasn't been able to overcome and win the big games.

    The problem is the whole team underperforms in the clutch, that includes the offense, defense, special teams and coaches.

     70% ur first point 30% ur second

     Your team has been the beneficiary of two SB wins due to Tom Brady and the offense, professor.

    Pipe down. Stay out of this thread.

    Brady thinks he can throw to victory and it's been proven in the regular season and postseasons, he cannot almost exclusively do that.

    Real Pats fans get this problem. Pink hats, keep their head in the sand.




    Rusty, you do have the greatest tendancy to belittle Brady and give little credit to the other team.  There are two sides to the coin, recognize them both!

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     


    Well, all you people are ignoring the most rudimentary of concepts.

     

    Possessions!

    Take into account that most of their regular season points per game were scored in 12 possessions, it is illogical to hold them to that standard when both SB's consisted of 2/3rds their normal possessions.  Most teams score on only about 1/3rd of their possessions.(32%)

    The Pat's O maintained a higher than the average, 38 + % throughout the RS and also in the SB's.

    They would have to score in a whopping 67-100 % of their possessions to maintain their season average, depending on if thet were 3's or 7's or combination of.

    You have the D to thank for that.

    You can also thank them for allowing the gints to score on 50% of theirs, which FAR exceded what  an elite offense like the Pats  or GB or the Saints would do.  Fail!




    The article is simply looking at the Pats' performance in playoff losses to assess whether either side performed to THEIR norm - not the league norm

    Even taking possessions into account, you can't say the O was not at fault on both SB 42 and 46.  Your argument may hold water for SB 46, but not SB 42. Moreover, it certainly does not hold water when evaluating their AFCCG against the Ravens.

    SB42

    NWE had nine possessions and they scored on two - i.e., they scored on 22% of their possessions. I don't have to look at what they did during the reg season to know that was below their RS avg. 

    The D gave the O every chance to take the game. They gave up a FG on NYG's first possession, then followed up with four straight stops. The O did not capitalize. 

    AFCCG

    Your argument falls apart even more in the AFCCG. On this game, they scored on 3/12 possessions (25%) - way below their RS average of 48%. 

    OBTW, despite the BAL O heating up during this postseason, the D gave up scores only on 36% of BAL possessions (if you count that BAL only had 11; they actually had 12).

     

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    LOL

    Pezzy absolutley exposed by FB IQ.  Bludgeoned.

    FB IQ, he doesn't get that it's TOP not the amount of possessions. Quality is always better than quantity.

    The TOP itself would have been dead even if not for the Safety, INT or the Welker drop.

     God you're insane!

    The drop and the safety had absolutely nothing to do with the D spending amost 5 minutes on the field for every single possession.  The D is responsible for their own time on the field.

    Wrong again, mr. simpleton

    ToP and possessions were screwed because of D's inability to get off the field. Period!

    The O's time per possession was slightly better than the league average for possessions.

    The D's Top was almost twice as bad as the leagues average of 2:38 per possession.

    If you have a D that is using twice the time it takes to complete a normal possession, it doesn't leave much time for the O to operate.   The game is timed.   Simple math.

    The freaken D was taking the total time it should take for both the O and D to complete one freaken possession.  An offensive and defensive possession should take 5 minutes.

    60 minutes/ 5 minutes='s 12 possessions.  Are you really that dense?  Apparently, so!




     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

     


    Well, all you people are ignoring the most rudimentary of concepts.

     

    Possessions!

    Take into account that most of their regular season points per game were scored in 12 possessions, it is illogical to hold them to that standard when both SB's consisted of 2/3rds their normal possessions.  Most teams score on only about 1/3rd of their possessions.(32%)

    The Pat's O maintained a higher than the average, 38 + % throughout the RS and also in the SB's.

    They would have to score in a whopping 67-100 % of their possessions to maintain their season average, depending on if thet were 3's or 7's or combination of.

    You have the D to thank for that.

    You can also thank them for allowing the gints to score on 50% of theirs, which FAR exceded what  an elite offense like the Pats  or GB or the Saints would do.  Fail!

     




     

    The article is simply looking at the Pats' performance in playoff losses to assess whether either side performed to THEIR norm - not the league norm

    Even taking possessions into account, you can't say the O was not at fault on both SB 42 and 46.  Your argument may hold water for SB 46, but not SB 42. Moreover, it certainly does not hold water when evaluating their AFCCG against the Ravens.

    SB42

    NWE had nine possessions and they scored on two - i.e., they scored on 22% of their possessions. I don't have to look at what they did during the reg season to know that was below their RS avg. 

    The D gave the O every chance to take the game. They gave up a FG on NYG's first possession, then followed up with four straight stops. The O did not capitalize. 

    AFCCG

    Your argument falls apart even more in the AFCCG. On this game, they scored on 3/12 possessions (25%) - way below their RS average of 48%. 

    OBTW, despite the BAL O heating up during this postseason, the D gave up scores only on 36% of BAL possessions (if you count that BAL only had 11; they actually had 12).

     

     




    I'm just telling you what happened in the 2 SB's.  Both, 8 possession and low scoring games.

    The AFCCG game does not fall into that catagory and was more an anomonly as you are correct, they only scored in 25 % of their possessions.

    Those things tend to happen when receivers drop balls and rb's can't punch it in from the 1 yard line and fumble when the O is driving, 2 ints at the end, and an O line that couldn't get to the line in under 16 seconds didn't help either.  Just a bad game all around.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to agcsbill's comment:

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:
    In response to digger0862's comment:

     The Patriots win more often than not, because of Tom Brady and the offense. When Tom and the offense sputter, the defense hasn't been able to overcome and win the big games.

    The problem is the whole team underperforms in the clutch, that includes the offense, defense, special teams and coaches.

     70% ur first point 30% ur second

     Your team has been the beneficiary of two SB wins due to Tom Brady and the offense, professor.

    Pipe down. Stay out of this thread.

    Brady thinks he can throw to victory and it's been proven in the regular season and postseasons, he cannot almost exclusively do that.

    Real Pats fans get this problem. Pink hats, keep their head in the sand.

     




    Rusty, you do have the greatest tendancy to belittle Brady and give little credit to the other team.  There are two sides to the coin, recognize them both!

     




    this above is rusty's agenda in a nutshell re: brady

    his other agenda is bill bellichick invented football

    thank God he only has two agendas!

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

     


    Well, all you people are ignoring the most rudimentary of concepts.

     

    Possessions!

    Take into account that most of their regular season points per game were scored in 12 possessions, it is illogical to hold them to that standard when both SB's consisted of 2/3rds their normal possessions.  Most teams score on only about 1/3rd of their possessions.(32%)

    The Pat's O maintained a higher than the average, 38 + % throughout the RS and also in the SB's.

    They would have to score in a whopping 67-100 % of their possessions to maintain their season average, depending on if thet were 3's or 7's or combination of.

    You have the D to thank for that.

    You can also thank them for allowing the gints to score on 50% of theirs, which FAR exceded what  an elite offense like the Pats  or GB or the Saints would do.  Fail!

     




     

    The article is simply looking at the Pats' performance in playoff losses to assess whether either side performed to THEIR norm - not the league norm

    Even taking possessions into account, you can't say the O was not at fault on both SB 42 and 46.  Your argument may hold water for SB 46, but not SB 42. Moreover, it certainly does not hold water when evaluating their AFCCG against the Ravens.

    SB42

    NWE had nine possessions and they scored on two - i.e., they scored on 22% of their possessions. I don't have to look at what they did during the reg season to know that was below their RS avg. 

    The D gave the O every chance to take the game. They gave up a FG on NYG's first possession, then followed up with four straight stops. The O did not capitalize. 

    AFCCG

    Your argument falls apart even more in the AFCCG. On this game, they scored on 3/12 possessions (25%) - way below their RS average of 48%. 

    OBTW, despite the BAL O heating up during this postseason, the D gave up scores only on 36% of BAL possessions (if you count that BAL only had 11; they actually had 12).

     

     

     




    I'm just telling you what happened in the 2 SB's.  Both, 8 possession and low scoring games.

     

    The AFCCG game does not fall into that catagory and was more an anomonly as you are correct, they only scored in 25 % of their possessions.

    Those things tend to happen when receivers drop balls and rb's can't punch it in from the 1 yard line and fumble when the O is driving, 2 ints at the end, and an O line that couldn't get to the line in under 16 seconds didn't help either.  Just a bad game all around.



    Pats had 9 possessions in 2011 not 8. They GAVE two of those away AND spotted the other team 2 points to start the game.

    Somehow that does not contribute though to them underperforming in your mind.

    Personally I think you have been fighting with King too long and simply have dug your heels and and put the blinders on.

    How can you actually write that stuff and then NOT think the offense underperformed?

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

     


    Well, all you people are ignoring the most rudimentary of concepts.

     

    Possessions!

    Take into account that most of their regular season points per game were scored in 12 possessions, it is illogical to hold them to that standard when both SB's consisted of 2/3rds their normal possessions.  Most teams score on only about 1/3rd of their possessions.(32%)

    The Pat's O maintained a higher than the average, 38 + % throughout the RS and also in the SB's.

    They would have to score in a whopping 67-100 % of their possessions to maintain their season average, depending on if thet were 3's or 7's or combination of.

    You have the D to thank for that.

    You can also thank them for allowing the gints to score on 50% of theirs, which FAR exceded what  an elite offense like the Pats  or GB or the Saints would do.  Fail!

     




     

    The article is simply looking at the Pats' performance in playoff losses to assess whether either side performed to THEIR norm - not the league norm

    Even taking possessions into account, you can't say the O was not at fault on both SB 42 and 46.  Your argument may hold water for SB 46, but not SB 42. Moreover, it certainly does not hold water when evaluating their AFCCG against the Ravens.

    SB42

    NWE had nine possessions and they scored on two - i.e., they scored on 22% of their possessions. I don't have to look at what they did during the reg season to know that was below their RS avg. 

    The D gave the O every chance to take the game. They gave up a FG on NYG's first possession, then followed up with four straight stops. The O did not capitalize. 

    AFCCG

    Your argument falls apart even more in the AFCCG. On this game, they scored on 3/12 possessions (25%) - way below their RS average of 48%. 

    OBTW, despite the BAL O heating up during this postseason, the D gave up scores only on 36% of BAL possessions (if you count that BAL only had 11; they actually had 12).

     

     

     




    I'm just telling you what happened in the 2 SB's.  Both, 8 possession and low scoring games.

     

    The AFCCG game does not fall into that catagory and was more an anomonly as you are correct, they only scored in 25 % of their possessions.

    Those things tend to happen when receivers drop balls and rb's can't punch it in from the 1 yard line and fumble when the O is driving, 2 ints at the end, and an O line that couldn't get to the line in under 16 seconds didn't help either.  Just a bad game all around.

     



    Pats had 9 possessions in 2011 not 8. They GAVE two of those away AND spotted the other team 2 points to start the game.

     

    Somehow that does not contribute though to them underperforming in your mind.

    Personally I think you have been fighting with King too long and simply have dug your heels and and put the blinders on.

    How can you actually write that stuff and then NOT think the offense underperformed?




    Never, ever, said the O couldn't have performed better, just realized there were contributing factors.

    Those 2 things you mentioned are part of the game.  They failed on 2 (5) possessions but they were possessions, none the less. Remember a 38% scoring rate will be a 62% failure rate.  The missing 4 possessions were never had and the opportunity to score on the 38% of those, never happened.

    There is a difference.  Like I said, teams only score on 32% of their possessions as a rule, according to league averages.  Scoring on 32% (or 38, as it were) would have resulted in a higher score if it were a 12 possession game, instead of an 8 possession game.

    Even with that, if the D, didn't allow a 50% scoring rate, they would have won.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

     


    Well, all you people are ignoring the most rudimentary of concepts.

     

    Possessions!

    Take into account that most of their regular season points per game were scored in 12 possessions, it is illogical to hold them to that standard when both SB's consisted of 2/3rds their normal possessions.  Most teams score on only about 1/3rd of their possessions.(32%)

    The Pat's O maintained a higher than the average, 38 + % throughout the RS and also in the SB's.

    They would have to score in a whopping 67-100 % of their possessions to maintain their season average, depending on if thet were 3's or 7's or combination of.

    You have the D to thank for that.

    You can also thank them for allowing the gints to score on 50% of theirs, which FAR exceded what  an elite offense like the Pats  or GB or the Saints would do.  Fail!

     




     

    The article is simply looking at the Pats' performance in playoff losses to assess whether either side performed to THEIR norm - not the league norm

    Even taking possessions into account, you can't say the O was not at fault on both SB 42 and 46.  Your argument may hold water for SB 46, but not SB 42. Moreover, it certainly does not hold water when evaluating their AFCCG against the Ravens.

    SB42

    NWE had nine possessions and they scored on two - i.e., they scored on 22% of their possessions. I don't have to look at what they did during the reg season to know that was below their RS avg. 

    The D gave the O every chance to take the game. They gave up a FG on NYG's first possession, then followed up with four straight stops. The O did not capitalize. 

    AFCCG

    Your argument falls apart even more in the AFCCG. On this game, they scored on 3/12 possessions (25%) - way below their RS average of 48%. 

    OBTW, despite the BAL O heating up during this postseason, the D gave up scores only on 36% of BAL possessions (if you count that BAL only had 11; they actually had 12).

     

     

     




    I'm just telling you what happened in the 2 SB's.  Both, 8 possession and low scoring games.

     

    The AFCCG game does not fall into that catagory and was more an anomonly as you are correct, they only scored in 25 % of their possessions.

    Those things tend to happen when receivers drop balls and rb's can't punch it in from the 1 yard line and fumble when the O is driving, 2 ints at the end, and an O line that couldn't get to the line in under 16 seconds didn't help either.  Just a bad game all around.

     



    Pats had 9 possessions in 2011 not 8. They GAVE two of those away AND spotted the other team 2 points to start the game.

     

    Somehow that does not contribute though to them underperforming in your mind.

    Personally I think you have been fighting with King too long and simply have dug your heels and and put the blinders on.

    How can you actually write that stuff and then NOT think the offense underperformed?

     




    Never, ever, said the O couldn't have performed better, just realized there were contributing factors.

     

    Those 2 things you mentioned are part of the game.  They failed on 2 (5) possessions but they were possessions, none the less. Remember a 38% scoring rate will be a 62% failure rate.  The missing 4 possessions were never had and the opportunity to score on the 38% of those, never happened.

    There is a difference.  Like I said, teams only score on 32% of their possessions as a rule, according to league averages.  Scoring on 32% (or 38, as it were) would have resulted in a higher score if it were a 12 possession game, instead of an 8 possession game.

    Even with that, if the D, didn't allow a 50% scoring rate, they would have won.



     

    Why do you keep comparing their performance to league averages? It's not a comparison to the league average. It is a comparison of performance to their own ability.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/ - The Patriots Real Problem

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    It could be that Brady is a choker and a spoiled brat who won't give up shotgun formations and Belichick isn't a good enough coach to realize the problem or control the player . . . 

    Or it could be that the offensive weapons around Brady are not quite as deep or diverse as needed to challenge the best defenses all over the field or to overcome an injury to a key player (like Gronk or, on the line, Mankins or Vollmer). That, and the defense simply doesn't have the talent to be relied upon not to give up a big pass play at an inopportune moment. 

    I pick the latter (gaps in talent), but we've got a whole contingent of "fans" who think the former (bad coaching and a choker QB) . . . 

    We can argue until the cow's come home, but no one is going to change their opinion, so why bother?

     

     



    +1,  for to long we've have a 1 dimensional O and I blame that on player personal more then I do on Brady or coaching. With Vereen and Ridley emerging I'm hoping they have more faith in them this next year. I'm hoping that they also diversify the WR core better but so far this offseason I'm not to happy with the results. I don't like the walking wounded as #1 and #2 guys right now and I don't like molasses and Slater as #3 and #4 guys. That's a scary WR to give to Brady. With some luck they can trade Mallett for a 2nd or 3rd and sign Sanders who should be some durability to that #2 WR spot. Then draft a high upside kid like Bailey, Rogers, or Wheaton. It would go a long way to diversitfy the WR's and add some real talent to the core. Of course I still want them to bring in Nelson or Ramses to compete against molasses for the RZ WR position

     



    +1 and give me the bigger rogers

     

Share