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

  1. 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:

     

    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.




    And their own ability in the RS was 2:20 minutes per drive and 38-40% scoring rate which they equaled or bettered in the play-offs.  They incidently averaged better than the league.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. 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 seattlepat70's comment:

     

    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.

     




    Exactly.  He doesn't realize most knowledgeable Pats fans realize the D played closer its ceiling the last two postseasons than the offense.

     

     




    Wrong again.

    I just showed you were the O played to their average and the D played  twice as bad as their average in Top which was the main reason for the loss.  Simpleton!

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from isurfvb24. Show isurfvb24's posts

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

    .... pats offense vs playoff teams ppg 34  pats defense vs playoff teams ppg 26.......(2012)

     

     

     
  5. 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 RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    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.

     




    Exactly.  He doesn't realize most knowledgeable Pats fans realize the D played closer its ceiling the last two postseasons than the offense.

     

     

     




    Wrong again.

     

    I just showed you were the O played to their average and the D played  twice as bad as their average in Top which was the main reason for the loss.  Simpleton!

     

     



    Pezz, the next time you look up at the scoreboard and see a Top column replacing a points column at Gillete or any other stadium and it signifies the winner at the end of every game let me know.

    Until then we will have to respectfully agree to disagree.

    (one 2011 example of Top: Indy 35:39, Pats 24:21 - Pats won 31-24)

     

    ...but as a lil fyi I have no idea where you get your stats but I went through the pain in the rear-end process tonight of looking them up and calculating them myself.

    for one example:

    In 2011 The Pats scored points at a rate of 48% of the time they had possesison of the ball for the regular season.

    They only scored 33% of time time they had the ball in the SB. That's is 15 % less. That is underperforming.

    Those regular season stats are including all the numerious times the Pats offense had a 1 play kneel down at the end of the half and or game making the % lower than it would be if excluded. So including them is to the benefit of your argument and yet the final results still does not show the results to make me think differently.

    Those stats ALSO do NOT include scoring chances that should had been but Gostkowski missed a chip shot FG which would had made the % even higher(they were left as scoreless possessions). Again this supports your argument and not mine and still does not help your argument work out.

    Nor do the stats take into account all the next to final or final possesions of the games in the regular season where the Pats are NOT even trying to score and are just running out the clock because they have the lead and don't need more points. This is also lowering their % number which again benefits your argument but still does not give you the outcome you want to show. 

    So even when the Pats are NOT trying to score on every single possession they avg a higher percentage of scoring possessions than they did in the Superbowl when they were trying to score on every single possession in the tight game.

    Sorry Pezz I really was trying to see what you were getting at but the numbers don't show it.

    You admitted all the various problems the offense had in one of your post. Mental mistakes/turnovers by Brady that gave away Top, possessions, and points, the drops, missed blocks, etc. Not to mention the 15% decrease in scoring points per possessions held.

    ...and yet somehow magically all the offensive woes are the fault of the defense??? Just can not wrap my head around your logic.

     

     

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

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

    You bring up a good point, surf. We should measure their SB46 performance versus reg season performance against playoff teams, using Pezz's criteria/metrics.

     

     

    In 2011, the playoff teams they played in the reg season were PIT, NYG and DEN. Pats scored an average of 26 over 11 possessions (the avg # of possessions they played across those three games.

     

    Scaled down for the 9 possessions they got in the SB game, they should have scored 22 (20 if you believe they only got 8 possessions). 22 or 20, Pats scored about a FG fewer points than their reg season avg against playoff teams. Add in the 2 pts the O gave up on that safety and you could say that their output deficit was more than a FG worth of points.

     

    The D on the other hand gave an average of 24 points to the three playoff teams during reg season. Scale it down to for 8 possessions, it would be fair to expect that the D gave up 18. The D gave up 19. 

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

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

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    You bring up a good point, surf. We should measure their SB46 performance versus reg season performance against playoff teams, using Pezz's criteria/metrics.

     

     

    In 2011, the playoff teams they played in the reg season were PIT, NYG and DEN. Pats scored an average of 26 over 11 possessions (the avg # of possessions they played across those three games.

     

    Scaled down for the 9 possessions they got in the SB game, they should have scored 22 (20 if you believe they only got 8 possessions). 22 or 20, Pats scored about a FG fewer points than their reg season avg against playoff teams. Add in the 2 pts the O gave up on that safety and you could say that their output deficit was more than a FG worth of points.

     

    The D on the other hand gave an average of 24 points to the three playoff teams during reg season. Scale it down to for 8 possessions, it would be fair to expect that the D gave up 18. The D gave up 19. 

     




    when all this numbers babble is done only two real facts remain:

    1. tom brady left both sb's with a lead

    2. rusty blames EVERYTHING on tom brady

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

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

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    You bring up a good point, surf. We should measure their SB46 performance versus reg season performance against playoff teams, using Pezz's criteria/metrics.

     

     

    In 2011, the playoff teams they played in the reg season were PIT, NYG and DEN. Pats scored an average of 26 over 11 possessions (the avg # of possessions they played across those three games.

     

    Scaled down for the 9 possessions they got in the SB game, they should have scored 22 (20 if you believe they only got 8 possessions). 22 or 20, Pats scored about a FG fewer points than their reg season avg against playoff teams. Add in the 2 pts the O gave up on that safety and you could say that their output deficit was more than a FG worth of points.

     

    The D on the other hand gave an average of 24 points to the three playoff teams during reg season. Scale it down to for 8 possessions, it would be fair to expect that the D gave up 18. The D gave up 19. 

     




    when all this numbers babble is done only two real facts remain:

     

    1. tom brady left both sb's with a lead

    2. rusty blames EVERYTHING on tom brady



     

    I just ran the numbers. Pezz defined the metrics. BTW...those numbers are facts too. 

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

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

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    You bring up a good point, surf. We should measure their SB46 performance versus reg season performance against playoff teams, using Pezz's criteria/metrics.

     

     

    In 2011, the playoff teams they played in the reg season were PIT, NYG and DEN. Pats scored an average of 26 over 11 possessions (the avg # of possessions they played across those three games.

     

    Scaled down for the 9 possessions they got in the SB game, they should have scored 22 (20 if you believe they only got 8 possessions). 22 or 20, Pats scored about a FG fewer points than their reg season avg against playoff teams. Add in the 2 pts the O gave up on that safety and you could say that their output deficit was more than a FG worth of points.

     

    The D on the other hand gave an average of 24 points to the three playoff teams during reg season. Scale it down to for 8 possessions, it would be fair to expect that the D gave up 18. The D gave up 19. 

     




    when all this numbers babble is done only two real facts remain:

     

    1. tom brady left both sb's with a lead

    2. rusty blames EVERYTHING on tom brady

     



     

     

    I just ran the numbers. Pezz defined the metrics. BTW...those numbers are facts too. 




    to me it's nice techno babble sabre metrics geek stuff which is fine for discussion on a computer forum but when a defense needs 4 stops to win the sb and the opponent has 80 and 92 yards to go and they fail and give up a td both times....

    i really don't need computers statistics to tell me any more

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

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

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    You bring up a good point, surf. We should measure their SB46 performance versus reg season performance against playoff teams, using Pezz's criteria/metrics.

     

     

    In 2011, the playoff teams they played in the reg season were PIT, NYG and DEN. Pats scored an average of 26 over 11 possessions (the avg # of possessions they played across those three games.

     

    Scaled down for the 9 possessions they got in the SB game, they should have scored 22 (20 if you believe they only got 8 possessions). 22 or 20, Pats scored about a FG fewer points than their reg season avg against playoff teams. Add in the 2 pts the O gave up on that safety and you could say that their output deficit was more than a FG worth of points.

     

    The D on the other hand gave an average of 24 points to the three playoff teams during reg season. Scale it down to for 8 possessions, it would be fair to expect that the D gave up 18. The D gave up 19. 

     




    when all this numbers babble is done only two real facts remain:

     

    1. tom brady left both sb's with a lead

    2. rusty blames EVERYTHING on tom brady

     



     

     

    I just ran the numbers. Pezz defined the metrics. BTW...those numbers are facts too. 

     




    to me it's nice techno babble sabre metrics geek stuff which is fine for discussion on a computer forum but when a defense needs 4 stops to win the sb and the opponent has 80 and 92 yards to go and they fail and give up a td both times....

     

    i really don't need computers statistics to tell me any more




    To me, I like looking at the entire game and understand how they got in that situation in the first place. 

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

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

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    You bring up a good point, surf. We should measure their SB46 performance versus reg season performance against playoff teams, using Pezz's criteria/metrics.

     

     

    In 2011, the playoff teams they played in the reg season were PIT, NYG and DEN. Pats scored an average of 26 over 11 possessions (the avg # of possessions they played across those three games.

     

    Scaled down for the 9 possessions they got in the SB game, they should have scored 22 (20 if you believe they only got 8 possessions). 22 or 20, Pats scored about a FG fewer points than their reg season avg against playoff teams. Add in the 2 pts the O gave up on that safety and you could say that their output deficit was more than a FG worth of points.

     

    The D on the other hand gave an average of 24 points to the three playoff teams during reg season. Scale it down to for 8 possessions, it would be fair to expect that the D gave up 18. The D gave up 19. 

     




    when all this numbers babble is done only two real facts remain:

     

    1. tom brady left both sb's with a lead

    2. rusty blames EVERYTHING on tom brady

     



     

     

    I just ran the numbers. Pezz defined the metrics. BTW...those numbers are facts too. 

     




    to me it's nice techno babble sabre metrics geek stuff which is fine for discussion on a computer forum but when a defense needs 4 stops to win the sb and the opponent has 80 and 92 yards to go and they fail and give up a td both times....

     

    i really don't need computers statistics to tell me any more

     




     

    To me, I like looking at the entire game and understand how they got in that situation in the first place. 

     



    oh i didnt say ur wrong there-i agree

     

    my point is really a response to rusty and his mental dwarfs

    still u have to admit twice brady left with a lead and the opponent had limited time and a long field-regardless of how they got there a good D,  a clutch D would have done better

    not that i am complaining mind you!  :  )

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp'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 RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    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.

     




    Exactly.  He doesn't realize most knowledgeable Pats fans realize the D played closer its ceiling the last two postseasons than the offense.

     

     

     




    Wrong again.

     

    I just showed you were the O played to their average and the D played  twice as bad as their average in Top which was the main reason for the loss.  Simpleton!

     

     



    Pezz, the next time you look up at the scoreboard and see a Top column replacing a points column at Gillete or any other stadium and it signifies the winner at the end of every game let me know.

    Until then we will have to respectfully agree to disagree.

    (one 2011 example of Top: Indy 35:39, Pats 24:21 - Pats won 31-24)

     

    ...but as a lil fyi I have no idea where you get your stats but I went through the pain in the rear-end process tonight of looking them up and calculating them myself.

    for one example:

    In 2011 The Pats scored points at a rate of 48% of the time they had possesison of the ball for the regular season.

    They only scored 33% of time time they had the ball in the SB. That's is 15 % less. That is underperforming.

    Those regular season stats are including all the numerious times the Pats offense had a 1 play kneel down at the end of the half and or game making the % lower than it would be if excluded. So including them is to the benefit of your argument and yet the final results still does not show the results to make me think differently.

    Those stats ALSO do NOT include scoring chances that should had been but Gostkowski missed a chip shot FG which would had made the % even higher(they were left as scoreless possessions). Again this supports your argument and not mine and still does not help your argument work out.

    Nor do the stats take into account all the next to final or final possesions of the games in the regular season where the Pats are NOT even trying to score and are just running out the clock because they have the lead and don't need more points. This is also lowering their % number which again benefits your argument but still does not give you the outcome you want to show. 

    So even when the Pats are NOT trying to score on every single possession they avg a higher percentage of scoring possessions than they did in the Superbowl when they were trying to score on every single possession in the tight game.

    Sorry Pezz I really was trying to see what you were getting at but the numbers don't show it.

    You admitted all the various problems the offense had in one of your post. Mental mistakes/turnovers by Brady that gave away Top, possessions, and points, the drops, missed blocks, etc. Not to mention the 15% decrease in scoring points per possessions held.

    ...and yet somehow magically all the offensive woes are the fault of the defense??? Just can not wrap my head around your logic.

     

     



    Really enjoyed this thread, and id like to thank IQ and Seattle for finishing what a few of us have tried to explain to pezz for years. unfortunately it will not matter how clearly you state it. Anyway, im hoping we can coach this "team" up to where they start plyin their best football on thebiggest stage! Both offensively and defensively!

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

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

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    You bring up a good point, surf. We should measure their SB46 performance versus reg season performance against playoff teams, using Pezz's criteria/metrics.

     

     

    In 2011, the playoff teams they played in the reg season were PIT, NYG and DEN. Pats scored an average of 26 over 11 possessions (the avg # of possessions they played across those three games.

     

    Scaled down for the 9 possessions they got in the SB game, they should have scored 22 (20 if you believe they only got 8 possessions). 22 or 20, Pats scored about a FG fewer points than their reg season avg against playoff teams. Add in the 2 pts the O gave up on that safety and you could say that their output deficit was more than a FG worth of points.

     

    The D on the other hand gave an average of 24 points to the three playoff teams during reg season. Scale it down to for 8 possessions, it would be fair to expect that the D gave up 18. The D gave up 19. 

     




    when all this numbers babble is done only two real facts remain:

     

    1. tom brady left both sb's with a lead

    2. rusty blames EVERYTHING on tom brady

     



     

     

    I just ran the numbers. Pezz defined the metrics. BTW...those numbers are facts too. 

     




    to me it's nice techno babble sabre metrics geek stuff which is fine for discussion on a computer forum but when a defense needs 4 stops to win the sb and the opponent has 80 and 92 yards to go and they fail and give up a td both times....

     

    i really don't need computers statistics to tell me any more

     




     

    To me, I like looking at the entire game and understand how they got in that situation in the first place. 

     



    oh i didnt say ur wrong there-i agree

     

    my point is really a response to rusty and his mental dwarfs

    still u have to admit twice brady left with a lead and the opponent had limited time and a long field-regardless of how they got there a good D,  a clutch D would have done better

    not that i am complaining mind you!  :  )




    In retrospect, it looks like the D could have been more clutch. However, did you see how they played the whole season? When you consider how that D was that season, particularly, how much they gave up to your NYG during reg season (24), giving up 19 was a big improvement.

    Think of it this way, had everyone on this board got together in a bar just before the SB46 and someone guaranteed that the Pats would give up no more than 19 pts on that game, what % of the the Pats fans do you think would have said Pats were sure to win?

     

     

     

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

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

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

     

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    You bring up a good point, surf. We should measure their SB46 performance versus reg season performance against playoff teams, using Pezz's criteria/metrics.

     

     

    In 2011, the playoff teams they played in the reg season were PIT, NYG and DEN. Pats scored an average of 26 over 11 possessions (the avg # of possessions they played across those three games.

     

    Scaled down for the 9 possessions they got in the SB game, they should have scored 22 (20 if you believe they only got 8 possessions). 22 or 20, Pats scored about a FG fewer points than their reg season avg against playoff teams. Add in the 2 pts the O gave up on that safety and you could say that their output deficit was more than a FG worth of points.

     

    The D on the other hand gave an average of 24 points to the three playoff teams during reg season. Scale it down to for 8 possessions, it would be fair to expect that the D gave up 18. The D gave up 19. 

     




    when all this numbers babble is done only two real facts remain:

     

    1. tom brady left both sb's with a lead

    2. rusty blames EVERYTHING on tom brady

     



     

     

    I just ran the numbers. Pezz defined the metrics. BTW...those numbers are facts too. 

     




    to me it's nice techno babble sabre metrics geek stuff which is fine for discussion on a computer forum but when a defense needs 4 stops to win the sb and the opponent has 80 and 92 yards to go and they fail and give up a td both times....

     

    i really don't need computers statistics to tell me any more

     




     

    To me, I like looking at the entire game and understand how they got in that situation in the first place. 

     



    oh i didnt say ur wrong there-i agree

     

    my point is really a response to rusty and his mental dwarfs

    still u have to admit twice brady left with a lead and the opponent had limited time and a long field-regardless of how they got there a good D,  a clutch D would have done better

    not that i am complaining mind you!  :  )

     




     

    In retrospect, it looks like the D could have been more clutch. However, did you see how they played the whole season? When you consider how that D was that season, particularly, how much they gave up to your NYG during reg season (24), giving up 19 was a big improvement.

    Think of it this way, had everyone on this board got together in a bar just before the SB46 and someone guaranteed that the Pats would give up no more than 19 pts on that game, what % of the the Pats fans do you think would have said Pats were sure to win?

     

     

     



    conversely however if they were told that D needed to make a big stop to win that game how confident would they have been?

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

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

    Definitely not. It was pretty much a given that they would give up points. It was a matter of how many.

    To me, ultimately, when in the game they gave up the points does not matter as much as the number of points they gave up in total - particularly, if the Pats even scored the points they scored against the Giants during the reg season. 

    The way I looked at it, through sixty minutes, there would be high and low points in the game. I did not care when those highs and lows happened so long as in the end the aggregate performances of the O and the D, as measured by the final scores, matched or bettered their ability.

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

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

    I can't believe that posters who are supposedly football coaches can't understand that the number of possessions in a game matters!  Traditional ball control strategies are all about reducing possessions for the other team.  But because possessions generally alternate, reducing possessions for the other team also means reducing them for your team.  Ball control games result in lower possessions for both teams, which generally is a disadvantage to the offense with the greatest scoring ability.

    A lot of people who argue with Pezz praise the Giants for a ball control strategy in the Super Bowl.  Really, though, the Giants got away with ball control in large part because they were able to exploit our defense's poor pass coverage.  They didn't run their way to victory despite what some claim.  Sure, they ran a bit more than the Pats did (situations were different).  But they also threw 40 passes and completed 75% of them!  This isn't traditional run-based ball control.  It was a strategy designed to exploit the Pats' defense's problems in pass coverage.  It worked: it allowed the Giants to limit Brady's time on the field while scoring on half their own drives. It also probably made Brady and the Pats have to throw even more than they wanted to, in order to try to score on their limited drives.  It was a good strategy that worked because (1) the Giants executed and (2) our defense didn't stop them. 

    This isn't an argument that our offense was particularly good.  The fact is, without Gronk and with an injured Mankins and Vollmer, it wasn't very good that day.  It underperformed.  But please, the defense didn't perform well either.  I think Manning's 75% completion percentage was the highest he had all year--if I remember right, one of the highest he's had in his career!  There's no way a defense that allows completions on 75% of 40 passes, that allows scores on 50% of the other team's drives, and that allows the other team to mount drives that average about 4 minutes in length is playing well.  

    And don't even get me going on the Giants' last drive, when they had to score in 2.5 minutes and did it easily . . . 

     

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

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

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    I can't believe that posters who are supposedly football coaches can't understand that the number of possessions in a game matters!  Traditional ball control strategies are all about reducing possessions for the other team.  But because possessions generally alternate, reducing possessions for the other team also means reducing them for your team.  Ball control games result in lower possessions for both teams, which generally is a disadvantage to the offense with the greatest scoring ability.

    A lot of people who argue with Pezz praise the Giants for a ball control strategy in the Super Bowl.  Really, though, the Giants got away with ball control in large part because they were able to exploit our defense's poor pass coverage.  They didn't run their way to victory despite what some claim.  Sure, they ran a bit more than the Pats did (situations were different).  But they also threw 40 passes and completed 75% of them!  This isn't traditional run-based ball control.  It was a strategy designed to exploit the Pats' defense's problems in pass coverage.  It worked: it allowed the Giants to limit Brady's time on the field while scoring on half their own drives. It also probably made Brady and the Pats have to throw even more than they wanted to, in order to try to score on their limited drives.  It was a good strategy that worked because (1) the Giants executed and (2) our defense didn't stop them. 

    This isn't an argument that our offense was particularly good.  The fact is, without Gronk and with an injured Mankins and Vollmer, it wasn't very good that day.  It underperformed.  But please, the defense didn't perform well either.  I think Manning's 75% completion percentage was the highest he had all year--if I remember right, one of the highest he's had in his career!  There's no way a defense that allows completions on 75% of 40 passes, that allows scores on 50% of the other team's drives, and that allows the other team to mount drives that average about 4 minutes in length is playing well.  

    And don't even get me going on the Giants' last drive, when they had to score in 2.5 minutes and did it easily . . . 

     




    Actually they both passed the same amount, but the gints ran the ball 10x more times...which in a game of less possessions(yep the all important amount of possessions argument) is a world of a difference in terms of "ball control" "clock control" and keeping a defense guessing. And Brady completed just less then Eli, the only difference was Brady turned it over twice due to our offense's own poor decisions.

    But I won't expect that to stand in your way.

    It was all the defense's fault for allowing 19 points.

    Now write us a long report on how it is the defense's fault that the 34 ppg offense has scored 14

    17

    13

    points in the last AFC home championship, and 2 Super Bowls.

    I'd love to hear it.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

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

    Building on True's point.

    The ToP difference has several components to it.

    1) Difference in the number of plays

    2) NYG trying to shorten the game so they milked the clock more on each play and they probably refused to go OB

    3) NWE wanted to extend the game so they were taking less time to snap the ball

    NYG and NWE had equal number of possessions, but NYG had only 9 more plays than NWE. Actually, of the 9, three of those were a gift from Nink, which ultimately yielded no points for NYG.

    Without #2 and #3, a difference of nine plays would not explain the difference in TOP. 

    Now think about this. Underperformance angle aside:

    NYG won by 4 points. 2 of those points were off the safety. Without that safety, they would have been within a FG of winning. Then you place on top of that the INT, which happened on a 1st and 10 at the NWE 43. That's just a few plays away from a sure FG. 

    I should not say sure because we would be talking about Ghost.

    Everyone loves TB (I bet even Rusty), and I believe no Pats fan would want anyone else to be calling the plays, but those two mistakes were beyond costly.

    There is another angle to this actually. I truly believe the Pats deliberately gave up the last TD to try and give TB more time for his last drive. NYG got into the red zone which pretty much was a sure FG that would result in a 18-17 score. Without the safety, a FG would not even tie the game. I think it really impacted how they called the D on NYG's last drive.

     

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

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

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    Building on True's point.

    The ToP difference has several components to it.

    1) Difference in the number of plays

    2) NYG trying to shorten the game so they milked the clock more on each play and they probably refused to go OB

    3) NWE wanted to extend the game so they were taking less time to snap the ball

    NYG and NWE had equal number of possessions, but NYG had only 9 more plays than NWE. Actually, of the 9, three of those were a gift from Nink, which ultimately yielded no points for NYG.

    Without #2 and #3, a difference of nine plays would not explain the difference in TOP. 

    Now think about this. Underperformance angle aside:

    NYG won by 4 points. 2 of those points were off the safety. Without that safety, they would have been within a FG of winning. Then you place on top of that the INT, which happened on a 1st and 10 at the NWE 43. That's just a few plays away from a sure FG. 

    I should not say sure because we would be talking about Ghost.

    Everyone loves TB (I bet even Rusty), and I believe no Pats fan would want anyone else to be calling the plays, but those two mistakes were beyond costly.

    There is another angle to this actually. I truly believe the Pats deliberately gave up the last TD to try and give TB more time for his last drive. NYG got into the red zone which pretty much was a sure FG that would result in a 18-17 score. Without the safety, a FG would not even tie the game. I think it really impacted how they called the D on NYG's last drive.

     




    it is not even debatable Seattle. Without the safety the game was soooo different in the end. i beat this point to death after the game was played but the circular logic was nauseating. You are correct, if a FG didn't win the game(due to our safety) the Gints has so much more pressure on them, and equally as important, if Brady didn't force the long int to Gronk and just extended the drive another 2 minutes the Gints may not even of had time to get a FG....let alone a TD. BJGE came off a 7yd run and a 5 yd run, then we went 40 yards in the air on 1st down to a TE on 1 foot which resulted in a DE staying with him and picking it off. Keep running, we were winning, use the clock, put pressure on the gints, maximize ball control, keep our own young defense off the field etc.etc.etc..

    Anyways....

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

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

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

    Building on True's point.

    The ToP difference has several components to it.

    1) Difference in the number of plays

    2) NYG trying to shorten the game so they milked the clock more on each play and they probably refused to go OB

    3) NWE wanted to extend the game so they were taking less time to snap the ball

    NYG and NWE had equal number of possessions, but NYG had only 9 more plays than NWE. Actually, of the 9, three of those were a gift from Nink, which ultimately yielded no points for NYG.

    Without #2 and #3, a difference of nine plays would not explain the difference in TOP. 

    Now think about this. Underperformance angle aside:

    NYG won by 4 points. 2 of those points were off the safety. Without that safety, they would have been within a FG of winning. Then you place on top of that the INT, which happened on a 1st and 10 at the NWE 43. That's just a few plays away from a sure FG. 

    I should not say sure because we would be talking about Ghost.

    Everyone loves TB (I bet even Rusty), and I believe no Pats fan would want anyone else to be calling the plays, but those two mistakes were beyond costly.

    There is another angle to this actually. I truly believe the Pats deliberately gave up the last TD to try and give TB more time for his last drive. NYG got into the red zone which pretty much was a sure FG that would result in a 18-17 score. Without the safety, a FG would not even tie the game. I think it really impacted how they called the D on NYG's last drive.

     

     




    Exactly. Thank you for a very intelligent and rational post. 

    ....

     



    Thank you. 

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

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

    In all the above babble, not one of you addressed Eli's 75% completion rate on 40 passes. Guess what?  Passes completed in bounds run off more time than running plays. Think about that a bit, then get back to me.

     

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

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

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    But I won't expect that to stand in your way.

    It was all the defense's fault for allowing 19 points.

    Now write us a long report on how it is the defense's fault that the 34 ppg offense has scored 14

    17

    13

    points in the last AFC home championship, and 2 Super Bowls.

    I'd love to hear it.



    Why don't you explain how the almost perfectly balanced offense in last season's AFC championship game (they ran the ball almost exactly as many times as they passed it before Ridley's fumble) put up 13 points in 3.5 quarters.  The "run the ball = win" crowd got completely owned by that game.  It isn't debatable.  Yeah Brady ended up with 54 passes, but almost 50% of them came in the last 8 minutes of the game when we were down by 2 TDs and had no choice.

     

Share