Lot's of nonsense

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

    Lot's of nonsense

    First of all, Brady was mostly excellent in this game. Yes, he made a few mistakes, but fortunately none resulted in points for the Seahawks. The number of absolutely brilliant plays by Brady far outweighed the mistakes. 

    I don't know why anyone thinks putting Brady under center would have worked.  The Seahawks have a great run defense.  We couldn't run effectively against them.  The spread was our only hope in this game. And for the most part, Brady executed it extremely well.

    The score was 23-10 with 9:21 left.  The defense played very well against the run, but (as has been a problem for years) gave up multiple big pass plays at inopportune times near the end of the game.  

    This pass defense is a huge liability.  When the game is on the line, you can almost bet they'll give up not just one bad play, but two or three.  It's the second and third plays that we can't recover from. 

    The run game looked really good the last two weeks against nickel defenses.  Unfortunately, it's not looking nearly as good against big fronts.  

    Once again, it seems to be the case that the Pats cannot win a game if the offense scores an average (or slightly below average) amount of points.  This defense just isn't a defense that can win games on it's own.  That's too bad, because the offense won't be able to win every game.  Sometimes the defense has to be the hero.  I'm afraid this defense will never pitch a shut out or anything close.  You have to assume they will give up 24 points and have to design your offense to score at least that much.  If we had a better defense, we could run a more conservative, run-heavy offense.  Without that defense, though, I'm afraid we're still stuck living and dying by the pass. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    I think PATS have a balanced attack. Against some defenses the mix just needs to be different.

    Brady had a bad game, INT in the Red Zone being the biggest.

    The secondary is awful. I hold my breath everytime a pass is thrown.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    In response to Bunker Spreckels' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PATSthebest's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think PATS have a balanced attack. Against some defenses the mix just needs to be different.

    Brady had a bad game, INT in the Red Zone being the biggest.

    The secondary is awful. I hold my breath everytime a pass is thrown.

     

     Eli just did.

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]


    I hold my breath when Brady throws from the shotgun 40+ times. No team wins a SB throwing 40+ times.

    Remember that.

    [/QUOTE]

    Eli just did, and Rogers and Brees and  Ben.  Diffrence is they had a D that didn't give up 2 score leads in the final 9 minutes or 57 seconds or 38 seconds.  Pathetic!

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    There were 59 pass plays in this game.  Brady had a 62% completion percentage.  An awful lot of those plays were very good plays.  There were maybe five bad plays.  

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    First of all, Brady was mostly excellent in this game. Yes, he made a few mistakes, but fortunately none resulted in points for the Seahawks. The number of absolutely brilliant plays by Brady far outweighed the mistakes. 

    I don't know why anyone thinks putting Brady under center would have worked.  The Seahawks have a great run defense.  We couldn't run effectively against them.  The spread was our only hope in this game. And for the most part, Brady executed it extremely well.

    The score was 23-10 with 9:21 left.  The defense played very well against the run, but (as has been a problem for years) gave up multiple big pass plays at inopportune times near the end of the game.  

    This pass defense is a huge liability.  When the game is on the line, you can almost bet they'll give up not just one bad play, but two or three.  It's the second and third plays that we can't recover from. 

    The run game looked really good the last two weeks against nickel defenses.  Unfortunately, it's not looking nearly as good against big fronts.  

    Once again, it seems to be the case that the Pats cannot win a game if the offense scores an average (or slightly below average) amount of points.  This defense just isn't a defense that can win games on it's own.  That's too bad, because the offense won't be able to win every game.  Sometimes the defense has to be the hero.  I'm afraid this defense will never pitch a shut out or anything close.  You have to assume they will give up 24 points and have to design your offense to score at least that much.  If we had a better defense, we could run a more conservative, run-heavy offense.  Without that defense, though, I'm afraid we're still stuck living and dying by the pass. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    The Pats aren't going to score their average against the best defenses. That's something that somehow just doesn't sink in for some. They are going to score below their average against the good defenses. Seattle had the second rated defense allowing 14 ppg and we got 23 on them inb a downpour.

     

    Conversely, they were scoring only 17 a game but our secondary gave up 24. There is your loss in a nutshell.

    Brady is not going to be able to bail this crappy D out of every spot they get themselves in. You let a 70 QB put up a 133 on you and even a Hall of Famer might not be able to overcome that when He's struggling with a running game that is a joke and a tough defense across the line.

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    In response to Bunker Spreckels' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    First of all, Brady was mostly excellent in this game. Yes, he made a few mistakes, but fortunately none resulted in points for the Seahawks. The number of absolutely brilliant plays by Brady far outweighed the mistakes. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Folks, we have a crazy person on our hands who also thinks he smarter than everyone who doesn't understand basic grammar.

    I have to chuckle at Mr. Wine and Cheese season ticket holder from out of town that tries to tell everyone how smart he is to claim 2 INTs, a myriad of wild and bad throws for more possible INTS, two groundings (one that cost them 3 points) is somehow as "mostly excellent".

    Funny how even Brady disagrees with his own obsessive pink panty fanbase.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, but that's not as funny as a guy who tries to claim a secondary  that lets a 70 passer hand a 133 on them played fairly well. Now THAT is funny.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bunker Spreckels' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    First of all, Brady was mostly excellent in this game. Yes, he made a few mistakes, but fortunately none resulted in points for the Seahawks. The number of absolutely brilliant plays by Brady far outweighed the mistakes. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Folks, we have a crazy person on our hands who also thinks he smarter than everyone who doesn't understand basic grammar.

    I have to chuckle at Mr. Wine and Cheese season ticket holder from out of town that tries to tell everyone how smart he is to claim 2 INTs, a myriad of wild and bad throws for more possible INTS, two groundings (one that cost them 3 points) is somehow as "mostly excellent".

    Funny how even Brady disagrees with his own obsessive pink panty fanbase.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, but that's not as funny as a guy who tries to claim a secondary  that lets a 70 passer hand a 133 on them played fairly well. Now THAT is funny.

    [/QUOTE]

    The secondary played horrible again. Other than Dennard nobody can cover even average receivers.

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    First of all, Brady was mostly excellent in this game. Yes, he made a few mistakes, but fortunately none resulted in points for the Seahawks. The number of absolutely brilliant plays by Brady far outweighed the mistakes. 

    I don't know why anyone thinks putting Brady under center would have worked.  The Seahawks have a great run defense.  We couldn't run effectively against them.  The spread was our only hope in this game. And for the most part, Brady executed it extremely well.

    The score was 23-10 with 9:21 left.  The defense played very well against the run, but (as has been a problem for years) gave up multiple big pass plays at inopportune times near the end of the game.  

    This pass defense is a huge liability.  When the game is on the line, you can almost bet they'll give up not just one bad play, but two or three.  It's the second and third plays that we can't recover from. 

    The run game looked really good the last two weeks against nickel defenses.  Unfortunately, it's not looking nearly as good against big fronts.  

    Once again, it seems to be the case that the Pats cannot win a game if the offense scores an average (or slightly below average) amount of points.  This defense just isn't a defense that can win games on it's own.  That's too bad, because the offense won't be able to win every game.  Sometimes the defense has to be the hero.  I'm afraid this defense will never pitch a shut out or anything close.  You have to assume they will give up 24 points and have to design your offense to score at least that much.  If we had a better defense, we could run a more conservative, run-heavy offense.  Without that defense, though, I'm afraid we're still stuck living and dying by the pass. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    The Pats aren't going to score their average against the best defenses. That's something that somehow just doesn't sink in for some. They are going to score below their average against the good defenses. Seattle had the second rated defense allowing 14 ppg and we got 23 on them inb a downpour.

     

    Conversely, they were scoring only 17 a game but our secondary gave up 24. There is your loss in a nutshell.

    Brady is not going to be able to bail this crappy D out of every spot they get themselves in. You let a 70 QB put up a 133 on you and even a Hall of Famer might not be able to overcome that when He's struggling with a running game that is a joke and a tough defense across the line.

    [/QUOTE]

    This is absolutely right, Babe.  The one good thing I'll say about the defense is they've improved against the run this year.  They controlled Lynch very well.  But as long as they're prone to giving up big plays in the passing game, we can only reliably win if our offense can score 30 or 40 points.  But we simply can't expect to do that against good defenses--in the regular season or in the playoffs. 

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    In response to sporter81's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bunker Spreckels' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    First of all, Brady was mostly excellent in this game. Yes, he made a few mistakes, but fortunately none resulted in points for the Seahawks. The number of absolutely brilliant plays by Brady far outweighed the mistakes. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Folks, we have a crazy person on our hands who also thinks he smarter than everyone who doesn't understand basic grammar.

    I have to chuckle at Mr. Wine and Cheese season ticket holder from out of town that tries to tell everyone how smart he is to claim 2 INTs, a myriad of wild and bad throws for more possible INTS, two groundings (one that cost them 3 points) is somehow as "mostly excellent".

    Funny how even Brady disagrees with his own obsessive pink panty fanbase.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, but that's not as funny as a guy who tries to claim a secondary  that lets a 70 passer hand a 133 on them played fairly well. Now THAT is funny.

    [/QUOTE]

    The secondary played horrible again. Other than Dennard nobody can cover even average receivers.

    [/QUOTE]

    Did you see Dennard on that fade route for the TD?

     
  12. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    First of all, Brady was mostly excellent in this game. Yes, he made a few mistakes, but fortunately none resulted in points for the Seahawks. The number of absolutely brilliant plays by Brady far outweighed the mistakes. 

    I don't know why anyone thinks putting Brady under center would have worked.  The Seahawks have a great run defense.  We couldn't run effectively against them.  The spread was our only hope in this game. And for the most part, Brady executed it extremely well.

    The score was 23-10 with 9:21 left.  The defense played very well against the run, but (as has been a problem for years) gave up multiple big pass plays at inopportune times near the end of the game.  

    This pass defense is a huge liability.  When the game is on the line, you can almost bet they'll give up not just one bad play, but two or three.  It's the second and third plays that we can't recover from. 

    The run game looked really good the last two weeks against nickel defenses.  Unfortunately, it's not looking nearly as good against big fronts.  

    Once again, it seems to be the case that the Pats cannot win a game if the offense scores an average (or slightly below average) amount of points.  This defense just isn't a defense that can win games on it's own.  That's too bad, because the offense won't be able to win every game.  Sometimes the defense has to be the hero.  I'm afraid this defense will never pitch a shut out or anything close.  You have to assume they will give up 24 points and have to design your offense to score at least that much.  If we had a better defense, we could run a more conservative, run-heavy offense.  Without that defense, though, I'm afraid we're still stuck living and dying by the pass.  [/QUOTE]


    Thanks for a great post again, I enjoy reading you.

    Yes, I think the game plan on O  was good. Overall going forward your spot on I think but whoever and depending on the opponent I think Brady will still spend time UC showing run, just need to do that. Seattle was tough up front going in but like  you described in another post, when Brady shows a tight formation indicating a sure run he does pass and it works. Just becuase they showed it and the opponent knows it, does'nt necessarily mean Bellichick/Josh should not use it again. Still, The D has to execute to stop it in REAL TIME! Things like that concern me as well as coaching decisions.

    The continued lack of playmakers in the D Backfield hurts the improved front D. Much to say ....

    Have a good evening ...

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    In response to Bunker Spreckels' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yeah, he got pulled down by Edwards.  The best part was the flag was on Dennard.  Dennard never touched Edwards.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    And you thought the flag on Brady for grounding at the half was deserved?

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    In response to palookaski's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    First of all, Brady was mostly excellent in this game. Yes, he made a few mistakes, but fortunately none resulted in points for the Seahawks. The number of absolutely brilliant plays by Brady far outweighed the mistakes. 

    I don't know why anyone thinks putting Brady under center would have worked.  The Seahawks have a great run defense.  We couldn't run effectively against them.  The spread was our only hope in this game. And for the most part, Brady executed it extremely well.

    The score was 23-10 with 9:21 left.  The defense played very well against the run, but (as has been a problem for years) gave up multiple big pass plays at inopportune times near the end of the game.  

    This pass defense is a huge liability.  When the game is on the line, you can almost bet they'll give up not just one bad play, but two or three.  It's the second and third plays that we can't recover from. 

    The run game looked really good the last two weeks against nickel defenses.  Unfortunately, it's not looking nearly as good against big fronts.  

    Once again, it seems to be the case that the Pats cannot win a game if the offense scores an average (or slightly below average) amount of points.  This defense just isn't a defense that can win games on it's own.  That's too bad, because the offense won't be able to win every game.  Sometimes the defense has to be the hero.  I'm afraid this defense will never pitch a shut out or anything close.  You have to assume they will give up 24 points and have to design your offense to score at least that much.  If we had a better defense, we could run a more conservative, run-heavy offense.  Without that defense, though, I'm afraid we're still stuck living and dying by the pass.  [/QUOTE]


    Thanks for a great post again, I enjoy reading you.

    Yes, I think the game plan on O  was good. Overall going forward your spot on I think but whoever and depending on the opponent I think Brady will still spend time UC showing run, just need to do that. Seattle was tough up front going in but like  you described in another post, when Brady shows a tight formation indicating a sure run he does pass and it works. Just becuase they showed it and the opponent knows it, does'nt necessarily mean Bellichick/Josh should not use it again. Still, The D has to execute to stop it in REAL TIME! Things like that concern me as well as coaching decisions.

    The continued lack of playmakers in the D Backfield hurts the improved front D. Much to say ....

    Have a good evening ...

    [/QUOTE]

    Thanks for the kind words, palookaski.  I agree that showing the run (and actually running) is a good thing.  But against a team with a great defense, you really need a great defense too.  This team can win shootouts.  But it's in tough shape if it needs to win a defensive struggle.  

     

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

    Re: Lot's of nonsense

    In response to Bunker Spreckels' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PATSthebest's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think PATS have a balanced attack. Against some defenses the mix just needs to be different.

    Brady had a bad game, INT in the Red Zone being the biggest.

    The secondary is awful. I hold my breath everytime a pass is thrown.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]


    I hold my breath when Brady throws from the shotgun 40+ times. No team wins a SB throwing 40+ times.

    Remember that.

    [/QUOTE]


     They weren't playing the Super Bowl.

     

Share