In response to wozzy's comment:
[QUOTE]

The offense, special teams and the defense weren't executing early in the season, this happens, especially with young teams.  I swear it's like you guys have never watched young players make mistakes, there was a time Ty Law and Lawyer Milloy were getting burned; they improved.

You all ask what is the effect of a run game compared to last year?  How about Tom Brady working at peak efficiency.  A run game is a QB's best friend, especailly the best play action QB in football. 

How about last year defensively we averaged 15 ppg allowed, currently we're at 12 ppg, getting better, plus lead the league in turnovers, a sign of a well rested attacking defense.

Stubborn doesn't describe those in denial, we're substantially better off and to simply attribute it to Ridley (4.6 forty time?) being so talented and completely dismiss that the architect of the last record setting offense we had in 2007 being back has nothing to do with it, is plain silly. 

Either meet us halfway or prepare to look more silly when this offense is held up for historical comparison at season's end?

 

Where do you get 12 and 15 ppg defensively?  Try 21.4 and 23.o ppg, not much change despite being on the field  4 minutes less per game.  They are also much worse in completions over 20 and have gotten worse in each of the past 4 years.   Worse in sacks and allowing a higher QB rating per game. Read & weep!

The Patriots pass defense is among the worst in the league on throws deeper than 20 yards downfield. This is the fourth consecutive year that the completion percentage New England has allowed on those throws has risen. The Patriots allowed an NFL-worst 48.4 completion percentage on throws longer than 20 yards downfield last season, and have been even worse through eight weeks this year. Not surprisingly, the injury status of Patrick Chung has had a major impact on the team’s performance. When Chung is on the field, the Patriots have allowed 7.6 yards per pass attempt, which would still rank 25th in the league. Bad becomes worse with Chung on the sidelines -- he has been out the last two weeks -- as the Patriots have allowed 9.7 yards per pass attempt. That average would rank dead last in the league by over a half-yard.

Is this the well rested D you speak of? 

What did you think of TB being in shotgun 52% of the time last week with only 3 runs? (which is higher than their current 49% average)

What are the backs averaging in the 3 losses?   You know the ones against the teams with the better D's?  Looks like they didn't do so good.  That will have to change come play-off time.

Over-all the O's stats have not changed from last year with the addition of the run at a higher %. being the only difference.  The pass attempts thru week 8 are identical.  The passing yards per game are almost identical. The 2011 points p/g are almost identical to this years 32.8.

Still trying to figure out what's gotten your chest puffed up so much.  Do you know the O still reverts to the pass when they aren't running well?   What's really changed besides the backs ypc due to having more talent in certain games?

 Do you know teams still care more about stopping TB over Steven Ridley and probably will until TB's arm falls off?    Truth, TB still passing as much as last year and would be more if they didn't pull him in the 4th last week.

 

Yeah BB doesn't start rookies; except for Ty Law and Lawyer Milloy when he was defensive coordinator, Richard Seymour, Logan Mankins, Eugene Wilson, Asante Samuel at nickel, Devin McCourty, Chung, Ras Dowling who started before he got hurt, our current Wilson, Dennard along with a laundry list of others.

BB starts and plays rookies who earn it, that's a popular myth though... 

For the record, their pass-run ratios have been as follows:

2010 (16 games): 54%-46% 

2011 (16 games): 59%-41%

2012 (8 games): 55%-45%

Points per game have been remarkably consistent across all three seasons (32.4, 32.1, and 32.8).  We were told repeatedly during the offseason by Wozzy that points are all that matter . . . if that's the criteria for measuring success, the offense has been very good--and pretty much equally good--over the past three years. The facts are the facts. 

Pezz I didn't mean to say they were giving up 12 ppg, I meant they're ranked 12th in the NFL as opposed to where we finished last year at 15, you shouldn't get so worked up.

Prolate I agree that 2010 was Obie's best season and he still got bounced in the first round of the playoffs because he decided to start Woody for the Jets game and barely ran.  So the key to Brady's most efficient season under Obie and he wasn't smart enough to stick with what was working. Facts are the facts.

This year's offense is better than anything Obie ever pumped out because it's balanced and statistically better in every way.  This is the best Patriot offense since 2007 and if it wins a Super Bowl will be better than that one as well.

Honestly to even have an offense that has averaged 32, 32 and 32 points over the last three seasons is pretty amazing. Why are we still talking about the offense like it is a problem? Yeah it will stall against a good defense in the playoffs, but if we had a defense that could stop someone we wouldn't have to worry about it. In the end that is what keeps killing us...a defense that can get off the field and get us the ball back.

Our defense plays better when the offense compliments it's style of play... what this whole arguement is about; complimentary football.  A concept that escapes many here.

In response to wozzy's comment:

I agree, We are better this year on both sides of the ball. The defense is better than last year statistically and should improve even more like they do every year. The offense has added one of the leagues best running games to the top passing game. These improvements bode well for the Patriots. IMO they are the best team in the NFL and barring injury will win it all. I know that I'm a homer but really do believe this.

In response to wozzy's comment:

Yup, without a doubt.

In response to wozzy's comment:

The defense rests your honor.

I have actually come around to the argument that talent had a lot to do with the limited effectiveness of the running game at times last year.  Ridley was a rookie, Vereen was hurt and the rest of the RB stable (BJGE, Faulk, Woodhead) were average to slightly above.  Ridley has taken a big step, Vereen is beginning to emerge a bit and Bolden looks like a find.  So yes, the talent level is better.  

Brady was this team's best chance to win last year.  However, just because last year's offense is as statistically good as this year's offense doesn't mean it wasn't flawed -- or at least it was easier for good defensive teams to prepare against.  Yes, the Pats should rely on their best player in gut check situations, but we unfairly expect Brady to deliver 100% of the time.  Having a more effective run game makes Brady's job easier and may help them win another superbowl.  We all can argue statistics, run vs. pass ratio and whatever numbers exist, but I see a 5-3 team that can be a dominant running team and who can make teams pay for trying to key on Brady and the passing game.  I feel much better about this team going forward into the playoffs (offensively anyway) than I did about last year's team.

In response to TrueChamp's comment:

You guys are funny.

If the O's stats are virtually the same as last year in points/pg. , throwing attempts are dead even at 337 thru 8 games (despite the increase in run plays), yardage is similar and the amount of wins is identical, where is the significant advantage with a higher run percentage?

Also if the D's stats are virtually the same as last years with them being statistacally worse in some areas, mainly completions over 20, where is the dramatic improvement?

The one difference I can see is that they ( the D) are on the field less in TOP, but is that a reflection of the increase in the run game or merely that teams are scoring on them more quickly and thus getting them off the field quicker.  The amount of TD's they are giving up outside the red zone would suggest the latter. Teams are scoring against them in 2 minutes as apposed to the 5 minutes in the past and the points given up p/g are the same.  Think about it!

In response to wozzy's comment:

I Agree, but I still believe its the defense for the most part that doesnt play complimentary. Perfect example was against the Jets I believe when Brady orchestrated a 90 yard drive that ended with a TD and we took the lead. THESE are situation in the past when the D would seize the moment and build off the offense' momentum and go get a three and out. What happens was the defense proceeded to give up a similar 90 yard drive that ended in a TD led  by the great Mark Sanchez.

 

So the only thing here is that we expect Tom to come thru in those situation and he does for the most part save for a few games in the past few YEARS. With Mark Sanchez we EXPECT him to fail in the end and HE DOES for the most part until he plays our secondary and looks like Montana twice a year. Same thing in 2010. You can talk about Woody starting(which Tom doesnt control) but its more about Sanzhez sustaining long drives on us and he was  a rookie then who S*cked and he s*cks even worse now but looks great when he plays us. Explaint that one Wozzy because to me, anytime the offense doesnt play complimentary its mainly because the coaches forget the fundamentals of playcalling and so forth . With our D, they can call ANY play and they will likely be toasted...

 

No one gives props to Brady when he is just well Brady. I thought Brady has his best game in years last week. Pinpointing guys with just sick passes through tight windows. Was great in his progressions and read and not enough credit is given to his accuracy. Sure he had that game where he threw balls in the dirt. McNabb did it EVERY week!  Brady is the most consistent reliable player on the team and has to sit and wactch his defense get carved up by Cheap Qbs that keeps the game close when in reality if we has just a decent secondary most games would never be close...

In response to pezz4pats' comment:

Yeah. Still not understanding what people are crowing about. 

The defense isn't improved. 

The offense isn't improved materially, though it is more versatile with Ridley as opposed to BJGE.

It isn't about running. They handed the ball off 34 times and still lost to the Ravens. 

They handed it off 28 times and still lost to the Cardinals. 

Suprise. It's the same exact team from last season. 

They win when the offense plays really well ... they lost when it doesn't. 

The defense is suspect. 

Running more has had 0 effect on that. 

In response to TripleOG's comment:

+1 

This defense is suspect. Nothing will change that except for more/better talent. Specifically in the back four and at DE. 

In response to pezz4pats' comment:

My entire position on this subject was not that BJGE was an all star, but that since 2009 we have been a one dimensional offense. Over reliant on the pass. It was our offensive philosophy and it didn't work against any kind of above average defense. We haven't beat a team with a winning record since the Packers in 2010. This means how we built the team and the schemes we used each Sunday was an issue, so in that respect I agree that talent was an issue. Having 2 undrafted starting RB's for 2 years is a problem with the philosophy imo.

Yes our defense is not what it used to be, but our offense talent wise is as good as any team in history. Now that BB has turned his attention to being balanced by drafting RB's (like in the draft) and bringing back an O.C (who absolutely excelled here in 07 and 08) we are will be capable of doing what the Giants did to us twice. Keep the ball away from other teams offense's. Keep our defense off the field.

The Packers,Saints,and Giants all have the same problems in the secondary that we have. Scheme for a defense and using minimal use of extra rushers(rush 4 drop 7) might just have something to do with the secondary problems for all these teams. It isn't a coincidence that they are annually in the bottom 10 in passing defense. Granted after losing our starting safeties for the 2nd year in a row our rookies in the secondary are still getting burned in prevent coverage and that is unacceptable, but they will learn. They look like good athletes and most of our defense is made up of high draft picks, talent will win out!

The defense could have complemented the offense quite nicely in the last 2 SBs by getting an actual stop at the end instead of falling apart, making Eli a legend and losing the game.

Truth hurts.

In response to TrueChamp's comment:

No. 

Assume that allowing a substantially lesser amount of points and scoring a substantially greater amount of points the sum of which adds up to a greater number of victories is the threshhold for what we can agree on is the standard of the "D" being better and the "O" being better. 

Both teams allow about 21 ppg.

Both teams score about 32 ppg.

Both teams were 4-3 at the halfway point. 

How is that better?

Please don't bring up stats that are meaningless to the discussion. Just because you ran more doesn't mean it was better if the outcome was the same. 

Bottom line for me, and you all can disagree if you feel otherwise.  Going into the playoffs (assuming they get there), do you feel better if the opposing defense has to worry about Ridley, Vereen, Bolden and Woodhead?  I do.  When the playoffs come and the level of D you're facing isn't like the tomato can D's you ran roughshod over during the regular season, your chances for a deep playoff run are decreased if the other team plays you primarily for the pass.  And it requires Brady to be...well, superstar, clutch Brady all the time.     

It's a testament to Brady that this team got to the superbowl last year.  They also had some luck, like any superbowl team does.  But the Giants were able to stifle this offense enough eke out two wins.  Granted, the defense let up the lead, and the defense needs to be better, but the offense was not flawless despite the fact that they did enough to put the team in position to win.  

I don't think this is solely a statistical argument, and this offense will have to win the day convincingly to get another championship. 

In response to CablesWyndBairn's comment:

I'm not concerned going into the playoffs what the other defense is worried about.

 

I'm concerned about what the opposing offense is worried about. Unfortunately they will be pretty much worried about nothing.

In response to zbellino's comment:

So being #1 in the league with ypc allowed at 3.5 is meaningless?

Forcing the most fumbles on the league are meaningless.

Being top 7 in INT's is meaningless?

So top ranked run defense and being 12th in lg in pts allowed and tops in turnovers doesn't mean a thing. Got it.

By your logic of the record being the only thing that counts we can safely say that the 2006 team with Reche Caldwell was 10x better then this years or last years team because shoot they were 6-1 at the half way point. Good try Z-Bo. Why don't you sit the next couple of plays out champ.

In response to TrueChamp's comment:
[QUOTE]

Answer: The advantage is portrayed in your response below. The passing plays are the same but we are on pace to rush 150 more att's then last year. Do you really not understandI understand  how this benefits the "TEAM" both offense AND defense

 

I understand perfectly that they are running more plays per game to achieve the same results.  So if you are running more plays per game and have exactly the same results, wouldn't that actually mean they are LESS effecient than last year?

Shouldn't MORE plays yield BETTER results, not equal results????

On the converse, shouldn't the D be BETTER if they are on the field LESS??? 

They are not.

How do you resident geniouses explain that? 

I'll give ya a hint.  The increase in running plays has not attributed to a better yield, nor has it helped the D, so far.

Moral of the story is, there has to be a better balance between offensive play and DEFENSIVE play to make a difference.  They HAVE to stop giving up last minute drives to lose the lead in the final minute and relying on TB to bring them back with seconds left.  They did it in the jest game, hopefully that's a start.

Also, BTW, the O scoring 32points p/g is an average.  That means some weeks they will score  17-20 and some weeks 45-52.  You need a D on the games they score on the lower end of that.  Something we have not seen in years.

In response to TrueChamp's comment:

The D was tops in ints last year too.  They also had a good run D half way thru last year but it dropped some in the second half. Their points pg are the same.  They have slightly less sacks and a ridiculous amount of passes over 20 and are set to blast the record for them.

They are not better!

http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/football/patriots/christopher-price/2012/11/01/stevan-ridley-leads-renaissance-patriot

 

Stevan Ridley leads Patriots running game's renaissance

 

Here you go Babe, Z-bo and Pro.

"When you take a look at the splits between the first eight games of the 2011 season and the first half of this season, the difference is astounding: through the first eight games last year, New England had 199 rushes on 893 rushing yards for an average of 4.5 yards per carry and six touchdowns. This year, in that same stretch, the Patriots have 276 rushes on 1,197 rushing yards for 4.3 yards per carry and 12 touchdowns."

 

UH OH. The YPC this year are below last years output but the rushing attempts have gone up almost 10 per game. Sounds like somebody is committing to a running game.

Ahh heck you guys are right. Running more means nothing. The 1 dimesnional down field passing attack was fine and did great on the biggest stages(jets playoff loss,Ravens afc squeaker,and Gints Sb loss) and giving your defense rest by running the ball 77 more times in 8 games means nothing becuase we allow the same ppg as we did last year, despite being 3rd in the league in defensive turnovers,and allowing a league low 3.5 ypc on the ground.....GOOD ONE.

Oh btw Tom Brady has 3 int's compared to 10 last year at the halfway point. Probably a coincidence and has nothing to do with balance McD and BB are committed to.

Notice the 2 seasons the Pats ran the ball most are Brady's fewest picks in the last 3.5 years. 2010 when he had 4 for the year, and this year he has 3. Amazing what keeping a defense guessing does for a great QB.

Oh but hey turning the ball over to the other team probably has no adverse effects on your defense right?