I am so Stoked

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

    Re: I am so Stoked

    TJ is right.  On paper this is a much improved team, but we have to see what these guys do on the field.  Just as one example, Dennard certainly has potential, but he may turn out to be a meathead who can't learn the plays too. We won't know until the preseason starts at the earliest and maybe not for a year or two after that.  

    I'm not too worried about Brady in the postseason as long as the defense is improved and Brady has a more diverse group of receivers and better backs than he did last year.  If a postseason game comes down soley to how Brady plays, the team has significant flaws elsewhere because, while QB play is very important, it shouldn't be the only factor that matters.  The Pats have struggled in the postseason as much because of defensive lapses and lack of diversity in offensive weapons as because of Brady's very occasional lapses of judgment. The team has had talent issues on defense and, to some extent, on offense.  The biggest reason for optimism is that most of those talent issues seem to have been addressed--on paper at least.  Now we just have to see how the new talent performs on the field.    

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

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked : agree on the running game and wonder why bb doesnt see that and act on it in fa and drafting (no all purpose backs) and in our game plans
    Posted by bredbru


    BB drafted two RBs last year and let BJGE walk this year (probably because BJGE wasn't really the all-purpose back this offense needs).  BB is clearly trying to upgrade the position, but he's got a lot of other positions to deal with too, so he can't fix everythnig all at once. I suspect he feels Ridley and Vereen will contribute more this year after a season of learning, and Addai actually is that all-purpose type back who can provide some veteran support as long as he still has anything in his tank. 


     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ender587. Show Ender587's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    Id be careful about counting these chickens before they hatch.  Just look at Greenbay and Philidelphia last year.  GB won the SB with half their team on IR, they came back the next year saying.. well now we are healthy, this should be easy.  We know we will be in the playoffs, but once your there its really anyones game.  Just look at the Giants... 9-7... barely make the flipping playoffs, and then they start pulling games out of their backsides..

    Philadelphia had the "dream team" that was embarrassing..  I think we are going to be awesome, but Im trying not to get to excited.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    I agree on the paper v.s. field aspect, but you can't compare GB and Philly to NEs 2012 team.

    Warnings were out on both GB and Philly's situation:

    1. GB lost literally 5-7 key players.  Some were starters, some were absolute key contributors. 

    2. We had a Philly troll in here all arrogant and preachy after their whirlwind shopping spree last year and he was bitchslapped right out the door.  You cannot take that many key bodies at once (like the Jets have done) and expect it to be great immediately. It does't matter how many great names on the jersey come out of that locker room, it's how the pieces fit.

    This is why BB buulding via the draft, taking some lumps to get to where he wanted to go, was so important. The base is built here. The infusion moves have now been added to increase depth, quality and competition. Some here wanted BB to make knee jerk moves and had no patience. Not me.

    The comparisons to a GB or Philly last year are not remotely close, IMO.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked : BB drafted two RBs last year and let BJGE walk this year (probably because BJGE wasn't really the all-purpose back this offense needs).  BB is clearly trying to upgrade the position, but he's got a lot of other positions to deal with too, so he can't fix everythnig all at once. I suspect he feels Ridley and Vereen will contribute more this year after a season of learning, and Addai actually is that all-purpose type back who can provide some veteran support as long as he still has anything in his tank. 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid


    Except you throw away a known commodity in BJGE which is durability (yes, I know he had turf toe), no fumbling, running solidly in between the tackles, and consistency.

    Addai is injury prone and Ridley and Vereen have never played 16 games in an NFL season before.

    The skill sets are good, but you're rolling the dice by ditching a known thing and hoping the other pieces are there.

    The main concerns for me are Tom Brady's consistency in a pass first offense and the durability/experience of RBs we simply need to use in order to win a SB.

    Ridley is my choice. I feel his fumbling issue was nothing more than not knowing when to ball up and concede the yards he was going for at the end of a play.  Fixable issue.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    TJ is right.  On paper this is a much improved team, but we have to see what these guys do on the field.  Just as one example, Dennard certainly has potential, but he may turn out to be a meathead who can't learn the plays too. We won't know until the preseason starts at the earliest and maybe not for a year or two after that.   I'm not too worried about Brady in the postseason as long as the defense is improved and Brady has a more diverse group of receivers and better backs than he did last year.  If a postseason game comes down soley to how Brady plays, the team has significant flaws elsewhere because, while QB play is very important, it shouldn't be the only factor that matters.  The Pats have struggled in the preseason as much because of defensive lapses and lack of diversity in offensive weapons as because of Brady's very occasional lapses of judgment. The team has had talent issues on defense and, to some extent, on offense.  The biggest reason for optimism is that most of those talent issues seem to have been addressed--on paper at least.  Now we just have to see how the new talent performs on the field.    
    Posted by prolate0spheroid


    Struggled in the preseason? WHo cares?

    Also, I guess we shouldn't be surprised that you just said you aren't worried about the most important player on the field, on the heels of some downright abysmal or mediocre playoff games in years past.

    If Brady simply played a tad better in the SB, to just a good level, we are sitting here as SB champs, regardless of a younger D with some warts on the back end of a rebuild.   That's a Tony Dungy style excuse.  Brady has too much pressure. Let's help Brady by throwing 40+ times per game and pretend it's the elixir, and then use the excuse that him throwing 40+ times a game is too much pressure for him, a guy who was as cool as any QB who ever lived. lol

    We won't be playing a mangled/weak Denver type D in the postseason for 3 games every year. Tom Brady needs to wake up when the chips are on the table. In case he hasn'r realized, people want to kill him in the pocket.

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

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked : Struggled in the preseason? WHo cares?


    That was a typo.  I meant postseason. 

    Also, I guess we shouldn't be surprised that you just said you aren't worried about the most important player on the field, on the heels of some downright abysmal or mediocre playoff games in years past. If Brady simply played a tad better in the SB, to just a good level, we are sitting here as SB champs, regardless of a younger D with some warts on the back end of a rebuild.   That's a Tony Dungy style excuse.  Brady has too much pressure. Let's help Brady by throwing 40+ times per game and pretend it's the elixir, and then use the excuse that him throwing 40+ times a game is too much pressure for him, a guy who was as cool as any QB who ever lived. lol We won't be playing a mangled/weak Denver type D in the postseason for 3 games every year. Tom Brady needs to wake up when the chips are on the table. In case he hasn'r realized, people want to kill him in the pocket.
    Posted by BassFishing


    Brady has made a few bad decisions on a handful of plays, but overall his performance has been strong.  I agree there is too much pressure on him and he may try to force things at times because of that, but the reason the pressure has been so high on him is that (1) the defense isn't reliable enough to protect a lead and (2) the offensive weapons are limited in their diversity.  I know you disagree and think that the WRs and RBs have been more than adequate, but I think BB's actions in the offseason tell a pretty good story about his opinion of the talent level at those positions. 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    They protected multiple leads in the SB. mostly by holding NY to FGs. Normally when I see a team settling for FGs playing an offense like ours, that's a sign they're going to lose.   But, not with our feeble postseason offenses in recent years, apparently.  I don't applaud 3 and outs over and over by our offense like you do, either. 3 and outs by our offense, not killing any clock of any kid, is a bad thing from where I come from.

    The D protected a lead in the AFC title game, replete with a huge Spikes INT!
    How can deny what actually happened here? If the offense is supremely better than our own D, where was it when it counted? Where was it?  That's 2 SBs blown due to the same issue.

    Even in 2010, the D was a top flight D in creating turnovers, as they were this year (averaging 2 turnovers per game at one point), which gives our offense more chances to at least move the ball and kill some clock. BUt, our offense chooses to make mistakes or not kill the clock.

    This is flat out ridiculous for you to absolve, what is some horrendous play by the offense at times, and then come down so irrationally hard stating that the D "can't be trusted to hold a lead". How many leads does the D need to hold? HOw many forts does the D need to hold in 1st halves while Brady fiddles around with his deep balls or wild passes?

    And this after the D is pressed to the wall early in games because our own offense looked inept for entire halves during the season. At least 6 games featured our D holding the fort until the offense did something. As bad as the D was in Pitt, they actually held the fort for anything to happen in the second half by the offense.

    How many times can you sit here and lie? Can you please just stop it and admit you lost and move on here? The board doesn't want to see this anymore.  The season is over, the offense blew multiple chances to ice the game in the 4th qtr. End of story. No NFL team should be asking their D to be a lock down for every series on every drive in this era. It's impossible.



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

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked : Except you throw away a known commodity in BJGE which is durability (yes, I know he had turf toe), no fumbling, running solidly in between the tackles, and consistency. Addai is injury prone and Ridley and Vereen have never played 16 games in an NFL season before. The skill sets are good, but you're rolling the dice by ditching a known thing and hoping the other pieces are there. The main concerns for me are Tom Brady's consistency in a pass first offense and the durability/experience of RBs we simply need to use in order to win a SB. Ridley is my choice. I feel his fumbling issue was nothing more than not knowing when to ball up and concede the yards he was going for at the end of a play.  Fixable issue.
    Posted by BassFishing



    The problem with BJGE is he wasn't very much help in the passing game, which meant he needed to come off the field a lot.  (He also was a fairly limited runner, who did not have the speed to run outside the tackles.)  For a runner to succeed in this offense he has to either be versatile and able to run and also contribute at a high level in the passing game (like Kevin Faulk) or be so dominant a runner that we can rely on the run instead of the pass for a large percentage of the offense (like Corey Dillon).  A guy like BJGE who was not versatile and not dominant wasn't a long term answer at RB, which I'm sure is why BB didn't make an effort to re-sign him.  I think BB would like to see a better running game, but having a limited player like BJGE as lead back was actually holding the running game back.  There's some risk to moving on, but I think BB came to the conclusion that keeping BJGE (particularly at his likely cost) would only keep the running game from developing in the way it needs to develop to work better with this offense. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    I'll be the pessimist for the moment. Anderson and Carter grabbed ten sacks apiece last year. In the long run, they needed young defensive players, but in the short term- well, do we really expect a couple of rookies to be 10 sack guys? Cause that almost never happens. IMO, continuity is a big factor on defense, and it screwed this team up last year because every weak it was a different group of DBs. Look at the Eagles, they bring in a ton of talent, but they can't play together until the very end of the year. This defense will look almost completely different from last year, and while that's probably a good thing in the long term, I don't expect them to gel from the beginning.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    They protected multiple leads in the SB. mostly by holding NY to FGs. Normally when I see a team settling for FGs playing an offense like ours, that's a sign they're going to lose.   But, not with our feeble postseason offenses in recent years, apparently.  I don't applaud 3 and outs over and over by our offense like you do, either. 3 and outs by our offense, not killing any clock of any kid, is a bad thing from where I come from. The D protected a lead in the AFC title game, replete with a huge Spikes INT! How can deny what actually happened here? If the offense is supremely better than our own D, where was it when it counted? Where was it?  That's 2 SBs blown due to the same issue. Even in 2010, the D was a top flight D in creating turnovers, as they were this year (averaging 2 turnovers per game at one point), which gives our offense more chances to at least move the ball and kill some clock. BUt, our offense chooses to make mistakes or not kill the clock. This is flat out ridiculous for you to absolve, what is some horrendous play by the offense at times, and then come down so irrationally hard stating that the D "can't be trusted to hold a lead". How many leads does the D need to hold? HOw many forts does the D need to hold in 1st halves while Brady fiddles around with his deep balls or wild passes? And this after the D is pressed to the wall early in games because our own offense looked inept for entire halves during the season. At least 6 games featured our D holding the fort until the offense did something. As bad as the D was in Pitt, they actually held the fort for anything to happen in the second half by the offense. How many times can you sit here and lie? Can you please just stop it and admit you lost and move on here? The board doesn't want to see this anymore.  The season is over, the offense blew multiple chances to ice the game in the 4th qtr. End of story. No NFL team should be asking their D to be a lock down for every series on every drive in this era. It's impossible.
    Posted by BassFishing


    Rusty, you're a bad listener.  I'm not applauding the offense's performance, all I'm saying is the reason for its ineffectiveness in the postseason goes beyond Brady's mistakes.  It has a lot to do with the weapons around Brady as well.
    As far as the D, the stats don't lie. I was in the stands for the Ravens playoff game and believe me the D made some good plays, but also a number of bad ones.  Flacco's passing yards were way above his average . . . and the D nearly gave up the game in the end, but were saved by the Raven's FG kicker.

    This is not to say the offense is flawless, it's just simply to recognize what's obvious to any unbiased observer--that the Pats have areas on both D and O that need to improve. Hopefully, this offseason addresses all those areas. 

    And as far as what the board is tired of . . . I think it's your constant whining about Brady . . . yeah, he's not perfect, but no one in his right mind thinks QB is anything but a strength for the Pats.  The key is giving him the right weapons on offense and building a worthy defense to complement him. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked : The problem with BJGE is he wasn't very much help in the passing game, which meant he needed to come off the field a lot.  (He also was a fairly limited runner, who did not have the spead to run outside the tackles.)  For a runner to succeed in this offense he has to either be versatile and able to run and also contribute at a high level in the passing game (like Kevin Faulk) or be so dominant a runner that we can rely on the run instead of the pass for a large percentage of the offense (like Corey Dillon).  A guy like BJGE who was not versatile and not dominant wasn't a long term answer at RB, which I'm sure is why BB didn't make an effort to re-sign him.  I think BB would like to see a better running game, but having a limited player like BJGE as lead back was actually holding the running game back.  There's some risk to moving on, but I think BB came to the conclusion that keeping BJGE (particularly at his likely cost) would only keep the running game from developing in the way it needs to develop to work better with this offense. 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid


    False. Go look at the stat lines where BJGE was targeted as a set receiver on set checkdowns and how that confused defenses. The problem is, O'Brien didn't use him enough in that area due to his subbing for the RB addiction problem, which in turn diffused this weapon.

    NE was never going to use Woodhead as a lead back, so the concept would work fine with Woodhead IF he only was more of a true, lead back. This is the thing you don't get.

    Go look at BJGE's stat line in the 2010 Pitt game. He had like 50 yards receiving in that game and Pitt didn't know how to handle it.

    Something not used doesn't not mean something isn't any good.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked : Rusty, you're a bad listener.  I'm not applauding the offense's performance, all I'm saying is the reason for its ineffectiveness in the postseason goes beyond Brady's mistakes.  It has a lot to do with the weapons around Brady as well. As far as the D, the stats don't lie. I was in the stands for the Ravens playoff game and believe me the D made some good plays, but also a number of bad ones.  Flacco's passing yards were way above his average . . . and the D nearly gave up the game in the end, but were saved by the Raven's FG kicker. This is not to say the offense is flawless, it's just simply to recognize what's obvious to any unbiased observer--that the Pats have areas on both D and O that need to improve. Hopefully, this offseason addresses all those areas.  And as far as what the board is tired of . . . I think it's your constant whining about Brady . . . yeah, he's not perfect, but no one in his right mind thinks QB is anything but a strength for the Pats.  The key is giving him the right weapons on offense and building a worthy defense to complement him. 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid


    I am pretty sure the board is tired of you pissing in the wind and making excuses for our future HOF QBs subpar postseasons lately. That's what  I am sure of. ou just simply refuse to put any accountability into the lap of Brady.

    If it's not BJGE not being good enough, it's asking for blood from stone from, admittedly, not a top notch D.   

    Frankly, I don't care if you're paying $50 to park, drink $11 beers and watch Brady make 20 million to throw INTs into triple coverage late in the 4th qtr or not.

    Thank god for Sterling Moore.  And the key is to have an OC who gets it, reining Brady in, putting him back under Center, using more playaction and a run game so the good and great weapons he's always had here, since 2010, can be used as a well oiled machine. He was complemented just fine in 2010 when Moss, his binky was traded. Now, we see Brady at the Kenutuck Derby with another binky. I don't want Brady using binkies. I want Brady finding the open guy, which has been a problem for him since the JEts flooded where his binkies like to go in Janaury of 2011.

    Basically, if Brady blows the SB this year, you're going to look awfully dumb.  No offense is now more loaded than this one.  This group of TEs/WRs makes GB's personnel look like a college team's.


     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: I am so Stoked

    Yes. The Rams didn't respect the Pats D and they should have run the ball more in the second half.

    It was a bit of each. Ingenius gameplan, overachieving D outplaying a finessse offense.

    We are now that here in NE and it's just pathetic.  Why we would want to be something we know fails on offense, I have no idea.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked : False. Go look at the stat lines where BJGE was targeted as a set receiver on set checkdowns and how that confused defenses. The problem is, O'Brien didn't use him enough in that area due to his subbing for the RB addiction problem, which in turn diffused this weapon. NE was never going to use Woodhead as a lead back, so the concept would work fine with Woodhead IF he only was more of a true, lead back. This is the thing you don't get. Go look at BJGE's stat line in the 2010 Pitt game. He had like 50 yards receiving in that game and Pitt didn't know how to handle it. Something not used doesn't not mean something isn't any good.
    Posted by BassFishing


    BJGE had 4 receptions for 36 yards against Pitt in 2010.  It just seemed like a lot because it was so unusual for him to have any receptions at all.  His total for the entire 2010 season was just 12 receptions for 85 yards. 

    I don't think coaching was the primary problem.  I think it was BJGE's inability to get open.  He was smothered by the LBs far too often as an outlet receiver. 
     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked : BJGE had 4 receptions for 36 yards against Pitt in 2010.  It just seemed like a lot because it was so unusual for him to have any receptions at all.  His total for the entire 2010 season was just 12 receptions for 85 yards.  I don't think coaching was the primary problem.  I think it was BJGE's inability to get open.  He was smothered by the LBs far too often as an outlet receiver. 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid


    9 yards per reception for a lead RB, opening up lanes for Gronk, Hernandez, etc, is a bad thing?

    So, why would you scoff at something that is successful and actually helps the TEs, WRs and flow the offense?

    It's like saying BJGE's 50 yards on 8 carries at halftime vs. Baltimore were meaningless and who cares if he never saw the field again as Brady wildly threw his second INT of the game.

    You sure you're a Pats fan? Brady won 3 SBs with weaker RBs, TEs and WRs as a group.



     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ytsejamer1. Show Ytsejamer1's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    Weis' offensive philosphy was a big part of our success.  Sure, the offense didn't have the "star" players, but Weis would be sure to keep defenses honest.  He wouldn't show his hand so brazenly as O'Brien had...even McD to an extent.  He'd continue running the ball even if they didn't have much to show for it.  Brady's play action passes were so effective in part because the defenses knew the Pats would try and run the ball.

    Long story short, everyone opened up the game for everyone.  Brady (and the team more specifically) were so dangerous and ahead of other teams because they literally would adjust what they were doing to each team...on both sides of the ball.  It made them so very dangerous.  They wouldn't be so obtuse when something wasn't working.

    Regarding the Giants as an opponent...why would you expect a different outcome when you largely attack their defense the same exact way, each and every game?  Until they start "thinking" differently for their offense, you can't really expect a different result.  Sure, we've been close to beating them by a play or two, but I think the gameplan (or lacktherof) has been the greater difference for winning and losing.  I'm sure that point is debatable, but that is my opinion on it.
     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked : 9 yards per reception for a lead RB, opening up lanes for Gronk, Hernandez, etc, is a bad thing? So, why would you scoff at something that is successful and actually helps the TEs, WRs and flow the offense? It's like saying BJGE's 50 yards on 8 carries at halftime vs. Baltimore were meaningless and who cares if he never saw the field again as Brady wildly threw his second INT of the game. You sure you're a Pats fan? Brady won 3 SBs with weaker RBs, TEs and WRs as a group.
    Posted by BassFishing


    Sorry Rusty, there's a reason BJGE's production in the passing game is so low (26 receptions total in four years)--and it's not because the Pats' coaches are too dumb to throw to him, despite what you apparently think.  I know, you'll say it's all O'Brien's fault or maybe all Brady's fault, but the idea that O'Brien and/or Brady were doing the wrong thing for four years in a row and Belichick tolerated it is patently absurd, unless you also think Belichick has less backbone than a half-digested jellyfish. 
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked : Sorry Rusty, there's a reason BJGE's production in the passing game is so low (26 receptions total in four years)--and it's not because the Pats' coaches are too dumb to throw to him, despite what you apparently think.  I know, you'll say it's all O'Brien's fault or maybe all Brady's fault, but the idea that O'Brien and/or Brady were doing the wrong thing for four years in a row and Belichick tolerated it is patently absurd, unless you also think Belichick has less backbone than a half-digested jellyfish. 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid



    Yeah it's not like we haven't won a SB in 8 years or anything. BB is the best coach/GM in football, but that does not mean that he is omniscient.

    Prolate is there even a small chance from your view point that we perhaps, maybe, just a little bit have fallen in love with the pass after 07? Do you dispute the 90 plus pass to 30 plus run ratio of the 07,11 Superbowl's was a factor in our offense scoring 15.5 ppg?

    I stick up for BB to all the trolls and supposed misguided Pats fans who say BB can't draft/can't GM/can't manage this franchise more then most here. For me to find fault with our offense does not mean I think BB is "inept" it means I think our offense could be more diverse and make things easier for Brady.

    That's all.

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

    Re: I am so Stoked

    Another thread bites the dust.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: I am so Stoked

    In Response to Re: I am so Stoked:
    In Response to I am so Stoked : oh no doubt about it, the rest of the league is in panic mode...i certainly know the giants are, unbelievably so...as a matter of fact the other 31 teams are petitioning the commissioner to cancel next season they are so frightened of the pats...
    Posted by JintsFan

    Ah... Jints.... you tell the truth!!   (-;
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share