Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

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

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss:
    [QUOTE]I just don't know how much longer we are going to call our defense young, at least we don't call them young and exciting anymore. The "rebuilding" of this defense took place after 07, next week it will be 2012....that's an eternity in the NFL. We have spent roughly 6 second round picks on defense in that time and almost as many 3rd's. We gave Bodden a 30 million dollar contract. It's ok to recognize it didn't work, it's even ok to NOT admit it didn't work, but when you place the blame on a hall of fame QB and high scoring offense...that's not right.
    Posted by mthurl[/QUOTE]

    We have been top 10 in ppg allowed for nearly the past 5 years. How did "it" not work?
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Patsman3. Show Patsman3's posts

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss : Considering BB just signed a blocking FB finally and hasn't won a SB in the McDaniels base spread, I'd say you're pretty dumb with this topic. Do you stand up and cheer when Brady is sacked on the first play of the  game or when we see a rifled ball from 3 yards away on 3rd and 1 in the shotgun? I don't. I shake my head and get ready to turn the tv off. Have you read the drive chart, or are you still afraid to?  LMAO I can't tell if you're more arrogant or phony. Neither are good traits.   So, you and your boyfriend Mt. Hurl makes excuses for injured OL in this game at home, but when Eli Manning lobs two wounded ducks in the air for borderline or incorrect calls after Chung and Spikes go down, you give no leeway to the defense? Or Mayo out in Pitt, Bodden released, etc, in Pitt when our own offense wasted 1:30 at the goal line in the shotgun? Could you be any more of a hypocrite?  It's so awkward watching such phony behavior from Pats fans who do it because they are so in love with Brady. The defense has been down to B and C Squads for 6 weeks and it doesn;t matter if it was KC or INdy at home, or the Skins on the road, the defense shows up.  Or they at least adjust to keep the offense in the game after pathetic displays. The offense didn't necessarily show up for first halves the MAJORITY of this season. This also happened v.s. the Cowboys, Giants and Steelers. Translation and NEWSFLASH:  This has been going on all year, most of 2009, in January last year and obviously right now.  This is not debatable. If you want fantasy stats for Brady, that's great. Enjoy your fantasy leagues, the rest of us will know how we won SBs and what we enjoyed as long time Pats fans. Stick to hockey or the CFL, Prolate.  You and your Brady Bandits are the only ones I know of who cannot admit this finesse, one dimensional offense, can be contained or shut down enough for us lose games.  How much more evidence do you need? Look at the end of 2007 when our D was allowing 25+ points per game.  Did you blame a veteran, allstar D then? Run the ball. End of EFFFING story.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    Interesting the Pass happy Pats have given up 321 points and the NO balanced attack, eating the clock and keeping their D off the field have given up 322.   Hmmm, guess Rusty doesn't like to let the facts get in the way of his rant.

    Maybe one day, but unlikely, you will realize the defense problems the Pats have rest with the Defensive players, coaches, and schemes and not the offensive they run. 
     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Patsman3. Show Patsman3's posts

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss:
    [QUOTE]What? You're making my point for me. Right now, the Saints D is no better than NE's D. Nor is GB's. The difference is both Brees and Rodgers are playing better than Brady every week over 4 qtrs. Absolute fact. Our D has flaws and so does NOs and GBs.  GB just gave up 126 yards at the half, at home, to a non Cutler led Bears squad with two practice squad RBs. I warned of GB's AWFUL run D 2 months ago pointing to how teams could beat them, yet all the media has done is bash Belichick's supposed "worst D in the NFL" all year, so rubes like yourself just take the bait. You;re a complete fool for taking the bait.   GB cannot stop the run and is WORSE than our D. NOs D is nothing special and also has run D issues, but holds in the red zone like ours does. They gave up 470 yards to Atlanta last night.   Remember how the pinkies here all get dramatic when our D does that?  LMAO If Brady can up his play and just somewhat consistent, that helps our D. Absolute fact. Read the drive chart from the first half and explain how that is a good thing for this team. We'll await your explanation.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    Comical.  There is no need to argue who is playing better Brees, Rodgers or Brady.  All 3 teams are averaging over 30 points a game.  Your an absolute joke to be out here arguing Brady needs to play better because somehow 31 points a game is not enough. 

    I know see that you wear a fool's crown Mr. Burger King.
     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss:
    [QUOTE]To nobody in particular, Nobody here can seem to explain the multiple personality disorder of our defense, all many can say is that it "stinks" and that the offense has saved it so often. Yet when the offense is converting first downs, not touchdowns mind you, but first downs the defense has been very solid.  Too many here dismiss or don't even acknowledge how all three phases work together , instead they look to blame one side or the other for sloppy play. The defense took some rebuilding after our last Super Bowl appearance, we've asked our offense to shoulder the burden of keeping us afloat while these young guys on defense learn how to win. A first half that reads; punt, punt, punt, punt etc... isn't exactly doing it's job. The offense should be converting first downs, we don't have to score on every play.  I'm not asking for an inordinate amount of running plays to be called, I'm simply hoping that the offense will be less predictable and we will move the football and eat up some clock, maybe even put ourselves in good field position.  You can blame injuries on the offensive line for that first half, but then what happened in the 2nd half?  This offense with Tom Brady running the no huddle would score points regardless of who has the title of offensive coordinator, under those circumstances Tom is calling his own plays.   But if your own two eyes can't see the lack of inventiveness with our play calling from the sideline then prepare to be bounced from the playoffs yet again and prepare your "the defense stinks" argument.   We used to grind it out on offense the way the 49ers do, we used to protect our offense from itself, we used to run whether we got 5 yards or not, I can't remember Charlie Weis ever sending in a pass play on 3rd and one, probably because if he did we converted it.  In my opinion we are too greedy, looking way down field when instead we should be concentrating on getting ten yards for a first down. Move the ball methodically down the field, keep our young defense off the field, the defense played almost the entire first half on the field while our O watched from the sideline. That is a failure.
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

    Wozzy . . . I agree that all three phases work together and what your offense does affects your defense and vice versa.  Right now, we've got an offense that can score lots of points and control the ball with its passing game.  It hasn't proven it can do the same with its running game.  Maybe it could, but it doesn't run enough for us to really know.  Now a whole bunch of fans (you, Rusty, TrueChamp) are trying to tell us running more would work, but apparently Bill O'Brien is too stupid to try it and Bill Belichick is too stupid to fire him! If you're Rusty, you're also trying to tell us that Brady is running the whole show and insisting on passing all the time to pad his stats or something.  I guess I'm skeptical about all that.  I don't think BB and BO'B are idiots or that Brady is a spoiled, petulant little brat. I think BB and BO'B have concluded that they have a much better chance of sustaining drives and scoring if they pass a lot and so that's what they tell Brady to do. This seems far more plausible to me than an epidemic of idiocy among the coaching staff.  

    If you look at this offense realistically, what you see is a dearth of weapons.  Yeah, there are few guys with real talent: Brady, Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez.  That's four.  Beyond that they're nothing special.  BJGE is merely serviceable, Woodhead is a passing-down specialist, Ridley is still unproven.  Branch is an nice third receiver, Ocho has talent but apparently can't remember his routes.  If you watched the Saints last night, you saw a team with seven receivers who have 300 yards or more and three different backs all of whom have close to 500 yards each, and a fourth back pushing 300 yards.  GB is similar . . . a team with multiple options on offense--not as much of a running threat as NO, but with a deep, diverse set of talented receivers.  Given the dearth of talent on the Pats offense, it is absolutely amazing that BB and Brady are getting 20 points a game from the Pats offense, never mind 30.  Yeah, the offense stalls out sometimes.  What's amazing, though, is that with just four receiving threats (if you include Branch) it doesn't stall out every single drive.  Running a mediocre back like BJGE (or even a possibly good back like Ridley) 10 times a game more is simply not going to help.  BB and BO'B have devised an offense that relies primarily on an up-tempo no huddle passing game to prevent defensive substitutions and force the defense to play the same set of defenders against Gronk, Hernandez, and Welker until the LBs and DBs tire out.  Yeah, it's not that diverse.  It is one dimensional.  But it's that way not because BB and BO'B have brain farts every game or lack creativity, it's that way because they have only four decent offensive weapons to work with. There isn't much they can do with that talent.  So what they try to do is put those four guys in situations where they're most likely to succeed.  Personally, I think it's a brilliant coaching effort (and a brilliant job by the QB), because this offense really doesn't have the horses to be in the top three offenses in the league.  Yet that's where it's at. 

    Despite this, there's a bunch of fans here whining about the offense. Sorry, I just don't get it. Watch NO and see the kind of talent a typical 30-point offense is made with. Then watch the Pats.  The only possible conclusion is that our coaching staff are geniuses, because they're doing so well with so little. 

    The same thing is true on defense, as well, where the talent is even worse. Rodney Harrison wasn't kidding when he called this the worst secondary in NFL history.  It's bad.  The LBs are bad too (except for Mayo).  And the DL is mediocre except for Wilfork.  It shouldn't surprise anyone that this defense is 32nd in the league in yardage.  What's amazing is that it manages to stay in the middle of the pack when it comes to points.  Again, it's brilliant coaching.  

    What the Pats need now more than anything is talent.  If they win the Super Bowl this year (and they very well might) it's purely because BB, his coaching staff, and his QB have figured out a way to do it with duct tape and safety pins. And if they don't win, it won't because they coached bad, but because with the talent they have they didn't really even deserve to be in the playoffs.  
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from gmbill. Show gmbill's posts

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss": I don't understand how you keep repeating this sh it sometimes. You do realize the game was actually taped. There is video evidence of what happened, there is written evidence of what happened, pundits and reporters have written about what happened. Here is a fact " the Patriots did not get into this game by establishing the run". That is simply a fact, it is undisputed, you can spin this anyway you want but the video and the written evidence is clear. They came out in the second half and threw the ball with empty backfields to score 20 in a row. It was after that point that the run was established. I know the pass heavy offense was the problem in the first half but you must face the reality that it was an even more pass heavy offense in the second half that got the team going.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]

    Go easy on the "King", he is too busy trying to tell us all how smart he is, to pay attention to facts.
     
  12. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss": This has to be one of the dumber questions ever posted on this board ...
    Posted by coolade2[/QUOTE]

    No Cool, you clearly underestimate 66 and the King, they have much deeper and dumber points made here. The dumbness exists on too many levels to explain.

    But that of course comes from being the smartest two on the board and always feeling the proper response top any post is to argue, act like you are talking to a child and when that fails, call names.
     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss : Right, so Wozzy, True Champ and myself ignore facts? Really?  It appears like we provide them, which is what trolls and irrationals don't like. Or do we bring facts to the table to literally embarrass the arrogant ones who can't apparently admit they're wrong? I don't need to tell you I have fine football acumen, Mr. INsecure.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    You may be brilliant, I don't care. You are an a--. You do not know how to communicate with people. If you were secure in your knowledge you would be open to someone not understanding and take the time to explain your position.

    Instead anyone who does not agree is a ball licker, Brady lover on and on. This is not even debating, it is 2nd grade foolishness.

    What ever you have to say I lose in the shi--y translation

    You comment on the fact that I do not comment much. I don't, I like to see what is going on and LEARN from others. Rarely when I see a point I want to support I add my short two cents.

    The only other time I comment is when I see a bully (You and 66) who just sound like sad little men, jumping on every post to tell anyone posting why they are so stupid for not getting your brilliance.

    so keep spouting dip shi-

    Have you ever gone back to a thread and read your posts? Do it on this one and tell me you are proud
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from CaptainZdeno33. Show CaptainZdeno33's posts

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    Did you just call Tedy Bruschi Terdy? W.t.f.?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss:

    Prolate my response is in italic.

    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss : Wozzy . . . I agree that all three phases work together and what your offense does affects your defense and vice versa. You agree but then defend the current strategy? How does that work, because right now all 3 phases are certainly not working together.


     Right now, we've got an offense that can score lots of points and control the ball with its passing game.  It hasn't proven it can do the same with its running game.  Maybe it could, but it doesn't run enough for us to really know.(And there you go, we are saying WHY don't we run enough to know? Why don't we run to set up open receivers?)

      Now a whole bunch of fans (you, Rusty, TrueChamp) are trying to tell us running more would work, but apparently Bill O'Brien is too stupid to try it and Bill Belichick is too stupid to fire him!(Now your taking things to the extreme. Do you think it is outrageous that we are so enamored with the passing game that we use it as a crutch and become a one trick pony?))

     If you're Rusty, you're also trying to tell us that Brady is running the whole show and insisting on passing all the time to pad his stats or something.  I guess I'm skeptical about all that.  I don't think BB and BO'B are idiots or that Brady is a spoiled, petulant little brat.   (I can't speak for the others but I don't think we have said these guys are idiots, I guess what you are saying is that you think Obrien is a genuis for thinking up an offensive strategy that involves Brady throwing the ball a sht load?)

     I think BB and BO'B have concluded that they have a much better chance of sustaining drives and scoring if they pass a lot and so that's what they tell Brady to do. This seems far more plausible to me than an epidemic of idiocy among the coaching staff.   If you look at this offense realistically, what you see is a dearth of weapons.  Yeah, there are few guys with real talent: Brady, Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez.  That's four.(We can't possibly know if we have talent like the Saints without the players on the roster getting an opportunity, example, how can Chad exceed by getting 6-10 snaps per game? Is this Obriens genuis at work?)

      Beyond that they're nothing special.  BJGE is merely serviceable, Woodhead is a passing-down specialist, Ridley is still unproven.  Branch is an nice third receiver, Ocho has talent but apparently can't remember his routes.  If you watched the Saints last night, you saw a team with seven receivers who have 300 yards or more and three different backs all of whom have close to 500 yards each, and a fourth back pushing 300 yards.  GB is similar . . . a team with multiple options on offense--not as much of a running threat as NO, but with a deep, diverse set of talented receivers.  Given the dearth of talent on the Pats offense, it is absolutely amazing that BB and Brady are getting 20 points a game from the Pats offense, never mind 30. ( The DEARTH OF TALENT WHAT?? You can't be srious Prolate) Yeah, the offense stalls out sometimes.  What's amazing, though, is that with just four receiving threats (if you include Branch) it doesn't stall out every single drive.  Running a mediocre back like BJGE (or even a possibly good back like Ridley) 10 times a game more is simply not going to help.  BB and BO'B have devised an offense that relies primarily on an up-tempo no huddle passing game to prevent defensive substitutions and force the defense to play the same set of defenders against Gronk, Hernandez, and Welker until the LBs and DBs tire out.  Yeah, it's not that diverse.  It is one dimensional.  But it's that way not because BB and BO'B have brain farts every game or lack creativity, it's that way because they have only four decent offensive weapons to work with

    .(So I can surmise by what your saying that BB and his coaching staff are a bunch of idiots because they ONLY have 4 talented players on offense, see what I did there?) There isn't much they can do with that talent.  So what they try to do is put those four guys in situations where they're most likely to succeed.  Personally, I think it's a brilliant coaching effort (and a brilliant job by the QB),

    ( Now I agree 100% it is a brilliant job by the Qb to do what he is doing with the most predictable offense in NFL history, I am just glad that the EXTREMELY HORRIFIC hits he has taken in this open book offense has not injured him) because this offense really doesn't have the horses to be in the top three offenses in the league.  Yet that's where it's at.  Despite this, there's a bunch of fans here whining about the offense. Sorry, I just don't get it. Watch NO and see the kind of talent a typical 30-point offense is made with. Then watch the Pats.  The only possible conclusion is that our coaching staff are geniuses, because they're doing so well with so little

    .(Wow you have a VERY low opinion of the offensive roster)  The same thing is true on defense, as well, where the talent is even worse. Rodney Harrison wasn't kidding when he called this the worst secondary in NFL history.  It's bad.  The LBs are bad too (except for Mayo).  And the DL is mediocre except for Wilfork.  It shouldn't surprise anyone that this defense is 32nd in the league in yardage.  What's amazing is that it manages to stay in the middle of the pack when it comes to points.  Again, it's brilliant coaching.   What the Pats need now more than anything is talent.  If they win the Super Bowl this year (and they very well might) it's purely because BB, his coaching staff, and his QB have figured out a way to do it with duct tape and safety pins. And if they don't win, it won't because they coached bad, but because with the talent they have they didn't really even deserve to be in the playoffs.

     (It sounds as though you have covered your a$$ in either case, if they win its because coaching and if they lose they were supposed to. Way to go out on a limb here Kemosabe)
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    Yeah Rusty, New Orleans does have more weapons.  Here are the facts: 


    New Orleans Receivers with at least 20 receptions and 200 yards:
    Jimmy Graham911,21313.35910
    Darren Sproles816818.4396
    Marques Colston7399813.7506
    Lance Moore5262712.1478
    Pierre Thomas473898.3571
    Robert Meachem3859015.5676
    Devery Henderson3045515.2792

    New Orleans Runners with at least 50 carries and 200 yards
    Mark Ingram1224743.9355
    Pierre Thomas1055325.1335
    Darren Sproles815637.0362
    Chris Ivory602474.1250
          
    Pats receivers with at least 20 receptions and 200 yards
    Wes Welker1161,51813.1999
    Rob Gronkowski821,21914.95215
    Aaron Hernandez7277210.7466
    Deion Branch5170213.8635

    Pats runners with at least 50 carries and 200 yards
    BenJarvus Green-Ellis1746453.7189
    Danny Woodhead763464.6121
    Stevan Ridley723605.0331
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss : P rolate my response is in italic.
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    Hey TrueChamp . . . you got it right:  I have a low opinion of the depth of talent on this team.  I think we have a few top-calibre players and a lot of guys who are at best mediocre.  I'd love to see more diversity on offense too--I don't disagree with you or Rusty or Wozzy on that.  I just don't think we're one-dimensional because our coaches are too dumb or too stubborn or too uncreative or too enamored of passing to try anything else.  I think our coaches know we've got limited talent and therefore have to play a more limited offensive style than is ideal.  Still, they've managed to make the most of what they have mostly by going up-tempo and keeping the defense on its heels.  Maybe if Ridley continues to look good we'll see more diversity as we'll have another decent option to play with, but so far, this offense just hasn't had the weapons to do much more than what they do do. (And I don't think the coaches are not playing guys out of stubbornness--I think if Ocho were ready to take the field more, he'd be playing more--BB has never been the kind of coach not to play guys if they can contribute.) 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Patsman3. Show Patsman3's posts

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    In Response to Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss:
    [QUOTE]NE "averages" 3o points per game? Care to source that?   NE's D either sets up half of those 30 points every week they actually score 30 or our D is literally scoring the TDs themselves like Wilfork in Washington or Nink in NY. You clearly don't watch the games. After you source your comments with the appropriate documentation, please read that drive chart from the 1st half and explain why we should be celebrating our own offense at home not crossing the 50 for an entire half. Thanks, Corky.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    LOL please source the defense setting up 15 points per game. Please source that.  Oh and since your taking this stance with the Pats please do that with ever other team and tell me what they average as well.  Give it a rest already.
     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from mighty2012. Show mighty2012's posts

    Re: Interesting Stat from Mike Reiss

    gmbill is my new hero

    Laughing
     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share