Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In 2005 we outgained the Broncos 341-197. 5 turnovers didn't help.
    In 2006 we had #2 defense in NFL. Colts #2 offense. Lost a shootout.
    In 2007 we had #4 defense in NFL. Giants defense came to play.

    As for the earlier super bowls we won who cares.Smile

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

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]It's definitely true that our D gave up a lot points late in each of the big games this decade - all 4 Super Bowls, plus the AFCCG against Indy.  I don't think there's any arguing though that those weren't amazing D's, and they dominated the first half of each of those games.  I don't think the 4th quarter collapses mean our D was bad or BB is a bad coach.  It just means that even the best D's can't hold down a super bowl offense forever.  And let's not forget the D had relatively poor assistance from the O in a lot of those games.  Brady staged some late game come backs, but he also failed to move the ball on a lot of drives. It's unrealistic to expect 60 minutes of dominance against a deep playoff team.  You're going to get burned on offense or D at some point, it just comes down to who makes more plays.  Most of the time the Pats did.
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]

    exception the D of the 85 Bears and the Ravens of 2000
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far




    Posts: 885
    First: 9/8/2009
    Last: 8/30/2010
    In 2005 we outgained the Broncos 341-197. 5 turnovers didn't help.
    In 2006 we had #2 defense in NFL. Colts #2 offense. Lost a shootout.
    In 2007 we had #4 defense in NFL. Giants defense came to play.

    As for the earlier super bowls we won who cares.Smile


    This post answers this whole debate.

    In 2003 and 2004 our defense was also near the top in the league and it was that BB built defense coupled with Brady's clutch play that built our dynasty.

    Texas surely you must re-think your stance on this matter


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

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    Just like to compare last years starting defense vs. this years projected one.

    DL - Last year  Ty Warren - Wilfork - Wright
          This year   Gerard Warren - Wilfork - Wright

               Slight downgrade.

    ILB  Last year   Mayo  -  Guyton
          This year   Mayo  -  Spikes

            Spikes will beat out Guyton who is still on team  -  Upgrade

    OLB  Last year   TBC  -  Burgess and others
           This year   TBC  -  Burgess

           Burges with another year tiny upgrade

    Safety  Last year   Merrywether  -  Sanders ( Replaced by McGowen and back)
              This year    Merrywether  -  Chung

            Chung beats out both Sanders and McGowen  Upgrade

    DB       Last year  Bodden  -  Springs/ Wilhite/ Butler late
               This year Bodden  - McCourty/Butler

             If McCourty beats out Butler then big upgrade


    It will take a little time to come together but with improved offense (4 of 6 losses were becasue we could not score in 2nd half)  and from above, an improved defense, we should at least match if not exceed the wins from last year.

    Of course this does not account for depth.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    Returning talent + blossoming players + new talent = total talent.

    The returning talent is the same crew that went 10-5 with some close losses, punted week 17 and then got blown out after losing Wes Welker, probably the receiver scoring the most first downs for the past 3 years.  Wes appears to have returned.  Tom B. has had a whole year to get better, as opposed to a whole year to get his knee working, and there's a difference.

    Who left and who showed up?  Mankins left so this is a minus.  The line is fairly deep but we'll miss his excellence.  Ty Warren was ordinary last year but we'll miss him some.  His replacements are so-so.  Ben Watson left and Alge Crumpler showed up - that's a tie.

    New talent:  Have they made big plays and have they made horrid mistakes so far? 

    Gronk just loves the endzone.  He wants rookie of the year.  Even if all preseason games are a joke, individual rookie effort can be seen.  You can see, first, that Gronk doesn't have any weaknesses, and second, that Gronk can beat people while standing on one leg. 

    Hernandez is going to be overshadowed by Gronk, but not by much.  His game is reportedly undefinable but "6 points" is pretty well defined.

    Tate still needs practice to do the little things Moss does.  His getting past the CB is already in the bag.  BB has some real burners for returners this year.

    This pile is so large that I forgot McCourty!  Maybe a shutdown corner, certainly a bump and run corner who plays the run well, and a great returner.

    Spikes is going to crush each opponent's running game.  Minor trouble in coverage, but he's a tangible asset.

    Cunningham is still a question mark due to injury.  He was a first-team sack specialist in camp.  He's here in my list because I expect that he is as advertised.

    Taylor Price could really blossom next year if not in November.  He has been pushed way back in the competitive line, but it's nice to have a hot reserve with a slightly different skill set:  some height, some muscle, some speed, some lateral explosion.  Someday some team with the wrong type of CB will have to pay.

    Zoltan wasn't that good last Thursday.  His excuse is that he's learning new mechanics, and he does have that leg.  Right now we'll write it off as a tie with the last punter, but we'll see.  Things will probably improve with time. 

    Hopefully blossoming second year players with talent:  Edelman, Tate, Butler, Chung, Vollmer, Brace, McKenzie.  That's a lot of blossoming.

    The net is pretty clear.  This team is going to tear through long lines of opponents. 

    I can't quite say this about anybody else in the AFC.  Indy is the second strongest team but they are notoriously thin and old on talent.  San Diego isn't bad, but they go out of their way to lose and I can't stand their coach Norv.  The Jets will have to win their games by a score of 2-0 --  maybe they should be playing futbol.  Baltimore is strong but their players are going down in droves in preseason -- they just cashiered one more cornerback to IR and are thinking of drafting a street corner.  The Dolphins didn't beat anybody last December and didn't beat hardly anybody this month either.  I see nobody left standing in Cincinnati. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]I didn't read the link before.  Texaspat, are you actually agreeing with that critique of BB?
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]

         To a much lesser extent, yes. I believe that BB has tried to do too much over the past 5 years...and it's catching up with him. I don't understand his reluctance to hire top assistant coaches...and pay them. He seems to spread himself too thin.

         The fact that so many teams have gone to the 3-4 as they base defense has hurt him. You've seen the difficulty the Patriots have had replacing their LBs and DEs. Those positions, along with the NT spot, are the key posts in that defense.  

         Poor drafting and personnel decisions have hurt him. In straining to find the next Willie McGinest and Mike Vrabel, he's depended on the likes of Monty Beisel, Ryan Claridge, Pierre Woods, Shawn Crable, Eric Alexander, Michael Redd, Derrick Burgess, and Jeremy Mincey.
     
         At DB, he has plugged in the likes of "The Human Torch", Duane Starks, Terrence Wheatly, Jonathan Wilhite, Shawn Springs, Guss Scott, Dexter Reid, and Ellis Hobbs.

         On the DL, he has added nobody of note since the selection of Vince Wilfolk in 2004. 

         That said...nobody came make lemonade out of lemons like BB can. His coaching jobs in 2006, 2007, and 2008 were first rate...although a media conspiracy most definitely distracted him, and helped derail him, in that ugly SB loss to the NY Giants.

         But...to win championships, you need talent. On the defensive side of the ball, the current Patriots' front seven is a mess at every position except ILB, and NT. On offense, there still appears to be a hole at #3 WR.       
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    Don't know why you're criticizing our personnel in the first half of 2005 today.  We were coming off a Super Bowl win, had a slump at the beginning of the season but had a remarkable turnaround by the playoffs, which we lost because of random turnovers that had nothing to do with the personnel you listed.

    The only players you listed who actually started for any meaningful amount of time are Hobbs, Wilhite and Burgess.  Hobbs was better than this board gives him credit - we were the #2 D in the league with him in 2006 and he was lights out in the 2006 playoffs.  He declined with injury from kickoffs late in 2007 and 2008.  Wilhite was a second year player last year, no telling how he will turn out.  Burgess, we just needed bodies, that happens to every team.

    This team is loaded with talent on both sides of the ball.  Talent doesn't win championships ... working together as a team does.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    Oh yeah Bruschi had a stroke and Ted Johnson retired ... I'm sure that was BB's fault.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far : Totally false. Preseason is incredibly important and can forecast how the regular season is going to end up.
    Posted by tompenny[/QUOTE]

    Case in point:

    The 2008 Lions were 4-0 in the preseason, 0-16 in the regular season.

    Yeah, preseason CAN forecast a season but often doesn't. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far :      To a much lesser extent, yes. I believe that BB has tried to do too much over the past 5 years...and it's catching up with him. I don't understand his reluctance to hire top assistant coaches...and pay them. He seems to spread himself too thin.      The fact that so many teams have gone to the 3-4 as they base defense has hurt him. You've seen the difficulty the Patriots have had replacing their LBs and DEs. Those positions, along with the NT spot, are the key posts in that defense.        Poor drafting and personnel decisions have hurt him. In straining to find the next Willie McGinest and Mike Vrabel, he's depended on the likes of Monty Beisel, Ryan Claridge, Pierre Woods, Shawn Crable, Eric Alexander, Michael Redd, Derrick Burgess, and Jeremy Mincey.        At DB, he has plugged in the likes of "The Human Torch", Duane Starks, Terrence Wheatly, Jonathan Wilhite, Shawn Springs, Guss Scott, Dexter Reid, and Ellis Hobbs.      On the DL, he has added nobody of note since the selection of Vince Wilfolk in 2004.       That said...nobody came make lemonade out of lemons like BB can. His coaching jobs in 2006, 2007, and 2008 were first rate...although a media conspiracy most definitely distracted him, and helped derail him, in that ugly SB loss to the NY Giants.      But...to win championships, you need talent. On the defensive side of the ball, the current Patriots' front seven is a mess at every position except ILB, and NT. On offense, there still appears to be a hole at #3 WR.       
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    Wow Tex, You paint a picture of a team in serious disarray, when in fact we have been a top 5 team in football over the last 5 years.

    Were Charlie Weiss,Romeo Crennel,Eric Mangini, Josh Mcdaniels considered "top assistant coaches"? (your words) I don't think so at all. BB influenced these guys, some of them slept on his couch as interns out of college. These guys are who they are today because of Belichick (and Parcells to a lesser degree). Why would BB want to bring in a top assistant coach with his own philosophies and risk having them conflict with his own? Why not make the next set of soon to be hired head coaches now? I couldn't disagree more with your entire premise here.

    Sure we have had guys that haven't worked out. That happens in the FA era, but we have had more success then almost any other team in the league. The only argument for better personnel decisions are The Ravens,The Eagles(imo)The Saints,and of course the Raiders(jk). For every Duane Starks you name I will name a Rodney Harrison, or Leigh Bodden. For every Monty Beisel you throw at us I would come back with a Jerod Mayo or Banta-Cain. We have missed the playoffs once since 2002 and that was due to Brady out for the year.

    I think you fall for a lot of the information you get from the multiple articles you read and post. Remember half of these so called journalists are 25 year old interns trying to cook Prime Rib out of Rump Roast. Most people in today's day and age hate the guys on top. We get more negative journalism then almost any team in sports.

    I know you are a knowledgeable Patties fan I just disagree with your sentiments here.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dentris. Show dentris's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far : Typo or incorrect spelling? Good luck, tool.
    Posted by russgriswold[/QUOTE]

    You tell us. You're the Master of the English Language and All Its Uses. You're the one constantly calling out people for typos. Or is it incorrect spelling?

    You are the biggest tool on this board and everyone knows it. Jock sniffing D bag.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far : Wow Tex, You paint a picture of a team in serious disarray, when in fact we have been a top 5 team in football over the last 5 years.
     
    RESPONSE: I painted a portrait of a defensive unit in disarray...not a team
    in such a state. The Pats were a "top 5 team" the past two years?? In 2008, they didn't make the play-offs, and last year, they finished at 10-6...and were blown out on their home field by the wildcard Ravens in the play-offs. Hardly top 5 material.  

    Were Charlie Weiss,Romeo Crennel,Eric Mangini, Josh Mcdaniels considered "top assistant coaches"? (your words) I don't think so at all.
     
    RESPONSE: Of course they were. They proved themselves to be excellent coordinators. But, I wasn't referring to them. I'm referring to BB's apparent reluctance to replace them with top veteran coordinators. This  appears to be based on his philosophy that assistants shouldn't be well paid. Other successful teams, such as Indy and Pittsburgh, paid top guys such as LeBeau , Howard Mudd, and Tom Moore...in order to keep them. In my opinion, by opting to establish his coaching staff from within, he is biting off more than he can chew...and spreading himself too thin. I still have a bad taste in my mouth over former DC Dean Pees, who I thought was kept on too long...and was a terrible coordinator.    

    BB influenced these guys, some of them slept on his couch as interns out of college. These guys are who they are today because of Belichick (and Parcells to a lesser degree). Why would BB want to bring in a top assistant coach with his own philosophies and risk having them conflict with his own? Why not make the next set of soon to be hired head coaches now? I couldn't disagree more with your entire premise here.
     
    RESPONSE: You are likely describing BB's thought process in this area.  

    Sure we have had guys that haven't worked out. That happens in the FA era, but we have had more success then almost any other team in the league. The only argument for better personnel decisions are The Ravens,The Eagles(imo)The Saints,and of course the Raiders(jk). For every Duane Starks you name I will name a Rodney Harrison, or Leigh Bodden. For every Monty Beisel you throw at us I would come back with a Jerod Mayo or Banta-Cain.
     
    RESPONSE: I was describing why the Pats have failed to maintain their elite position within the league. Ty Warren, Seymour, and Wilfolk comprised a great 3-4 DL...backed up by solid reserves. But, Seymour got old and injury prone. BB correctly traded him for what should be a high #1 pick. But, the fly in the ointment has Ty Warren's inability to stay healthy, along with Jarvis Green's failure to be an adequate full time replacement for Seymour. Marquise Hill was being groomed for that...but never seemed to get it going, before he sadly passed away. 

         The search for LBs and CBs has been on-going. After several drafts, and several swings and misses, it finally appears that the Pats have a young secondary with promise. But, OLBs? Pass-rushers?? Pierre Woods? Shawn Crable? Derrick Burgess? Tully Banta-Cain? Has Cunningham shown anything?     


    We have missed the playoffs once since 2002 and that was due to Brady out for the year.
     
    RESPONSE: Making the play-offs and being a legitimate SB contender are two different things. The Pats have stopped being legitimate SB contenders since the SB loss to the Giants.

    I think you fall for a lot of the information you get from the multiple articles you read and post. Remember half of these so called journalists are 25 year old interns trying to cook Prime Rib out of Rump Roast. Most people in today's day and age hate the guys on top. We get more negative journalism then almost any team in sports. I know you are a knowledgeable Patties fan I just disagree with your sentiments here.

    RESPONSE: I'm not mimicking anything I've read. Sometimes, the truth hurts, my friend. I'm also not saying that the Patriots suucck, and won't challenge for their division. I am saying that I no longer see them as a legitimate SB contender. I got to call 'em as I see 'em.

         I hope I'm wrong.

    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    The Arizona Cardinals nearly won the Super Bowl two years ago.  The Steelers won and were a horrible team last year.  The Giants won after a mediocre season with plenty of bad performances.  Saying the Pats aren't "legitimate" Super Bowl contenders is balogna.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from chrisakawoody. Show chrisakawoody's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]The teenager ran away and claimed he had no interest when confronted and asked to back the assertion, which is what I thoght he would do. If this team goes 8-8, I am Mickey Mouse.
    Posted by russgriswold[/QUOTE]

    Wow, you are way more obnoxious than Leon. Who appointed you lord of all the answers?  You, of course.

    FYI, when I referred to "middle-of-the-pack", I did not necessarily mean 8-8. Last year, the middle of the pack was literally better than 8-8 and worse than 9-7. But I meant anywhere within the 10-6-to 7-9 records, where the bulk of the teams finish in a typical year.  

    As far as I saw this pre-season, the Pats' 1st/2nd stringers - with some exceptions - have not made a strong impression at the lines, the RBs, the DBs or LBs.  The kick coverage has been suspect, too.  Just because our Joe Palookas played better than other Joe Palookas in the first two games means little, since most of those Palookas will be gone within the next weeks.

    Our first stringers not being able to beat the Rams Palookas should be a wake-up to homers like you, who probably claimed the Pats would go all the way last year.  My predictions for them last year were pretty much spot-on, for the reasons I supposed.  How about you? I was drilled by jerks like you for expecting them to be out in their first play-off game.  What was your take beforehand? Never mind, I can venture a guess.

    The scariest part about last Thursday is that it looked exactly like the last Ravens' game...if not viewed through rose-tinted glasses...and certainly like much of 2009.  That leads me to believe that a Pats-Jets match-up is bad one for the Pats right now.  I am a Pats fan, but I have to acknowledge that the Jets seem to be rising in the division, and their coach - for all his quirks - has the full adulation of his team. I am not so sure that can be written of BB, with all due respect to his accomplishments.  Hard-liner coaches - even the best of them - eventually wear on their players. Maybe the Pats have reached such a point because the players sure have not played with consistent heart for some time now.

    Here's a wager: If the Pats win their first Jets game, I will retire from posting here, on the condition that if the Pats lose that game, you retire from posting instead.  Now that's a real bet. Do you have the guts to stick to it, Johnny-know-it-all?

    For the record, I am wishing the Pats a great 2010 season and expecting a great 2013 season.

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

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to www.boston.com/community/forums.html?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aSportsForum%3a9690Discussion%3a985fb4f4-929b-431a-a2be-f6d73d9bb4ee&plckFindPostKey=Cat:SportsForum:9690Discussion:985fb4f4-929b-431a-a2be-f6d73d9bb4eePost:ff01c502-28ff-486c-9334-dd77f88842c5">Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far : Typo or incorrect spelling? Good luck, tool.
    Posted by russgriswold


    "You tell us. You're the Master of the English Language and All Its Uses. You're the one constantly calling out people for typos. Or is it incorrect spelling?

    "You are the biggest tool on this board and everyone knows it. Jock sniffing D bag."

    Thank you , thank you, thank you. 

    Let it be written, Russ is this year's least likeable contributor.  Way to go Russ. If we could all make friends like you we'd all still be in 7th grade.

    P.S. - I have a journalism degree and this thread headline is perfectly acceptable, since headlines do not adhere firmly to grammatical or Associated Press style guidelines.  Just shows what Russ doesn't know.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]The Arizona Cardinals nearly won the Super Bowl two years ago.  The Steelers won and were a horrible team last year.  The Giants won after a mediocre season with plenty of bad performances.  Saying the Pats aren't "legitimate" Super Bowl contenders is balogna.
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]

         Hope you're right, Mighty One.

         Both the Steelers and Giants had good defenses, that could pressure opposing QBs, leading to sacks and turnovers. Arizona of 2008 had a hall of fame caliber QB, the best set or receivers in the game, and an underrated front seven on "D". You may recall that the Steelers physically destroyed the Pats in 2008 at home, while the Pats rolled the Cards, 47-7. just a couple of weeks later.   

         The 2010 Patriots could be a close proximatey of the 2008 Cards, if their defense can make a few stops. They will have problems with physical teams, and stopping teams with explosive offenses.  
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggggg. Show underdoggggg's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    Defense wins championships.  Its why the colts have won only once.  Last year they could not stop the Saints in the second half.  Its why the colts did win when they did - their d stepped up during the playoffs. 

    Its why the pats have 3 rings. 

    Without an effective d, no superbowl.  Take it from someone who knows.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far : Ok, so wouldn't it just be that Detroit was that god awful and that's why they were 4-0 in preseason playing hard, trying to win every game so they could have some semblance of a progression to build from? I think so. Meanwhile, a veteran and quality NE or Indy team (in more recent seasons) aren't really playing for anything in the preseason. Preseson means certain things to some teams and other things to other teams. It all depends.
    Posted by russgriswold[/QUOTE]

    Russ

    You could be right about Detroit. 

    I think teams generally try to put their best foot forward in preseason.  I don't think your season is shot if you go 0-4 in preseason, or guaranteed to be great if you're 4-0.  To me, the Patriots try to be competitive when the guys they know are gonna be on the team are playing.  Anything after that is gravy.  It's maddening when people try to draw conclusions from preseason games, just like the ATL and NO games made some people anoint them superbowl champs and others think the St. L game is a harbinger of a down season.  People need to see preseason for what it is, and a lot of posters can't /won't. 
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from chrisakawoody. Show chrisakawoody's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]Defense wins championships.  Its why the colts have won only once.  Last year they could not stop the Saints in the second half.  Its why the colts did win when they did - their d stepped up during the playoffs.  Its why the pats have 3 rings.  Without an effective d, no superbowl.  Take it from someone who knows.
    Posted by underdoggggg[/QUOTE]

    I agree 100% and will expand: Offense can often get the team to the post season, but defense keeps them their.
     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]Defense wins championships.  Its why the colts have won only once.  Last year they could not stop the Saints in the second half.  Its why the colts did win when they did - their d stepped up during the playoffs.  Its why the pats have 3 rings.  Without an effective d, no superbowl.  Take it from someone who knows.
    Posted by underdoggggg[/QUOTE]

         You can't blame last years SB loss on the Indy "D". Had they had a healthy Dwight Freeney, things would have been different. In the first quarter, Freenney was able to pressure Drew Brees, and the Colts led, 10-0, going into quarter #2. But, his ankle injury seemed to worsen, and he was no longer a factor thereafter. It's so ironic, in that Bill Polian went to such great lengths to avoid injury to his key players...only to have Freeney go down with an bum ankle.

         Rookie coach Jim Caldwell also appeared to be out-coached by Saints coach, Sean Payton. The on-side kick to begin the second half turned the momentum of the game firmly in favor of the Saints.

         Finally...there was the obligatory Peyton el foldo...which "choked" off any chance for Indy to turn things around. You would think that the man that Colts' fans and the media tout as the smartest, greatest QB in NFL history, should have been capable of leading his high powered offense to more than just a mere 7 points over the final three quarters.  

         Come on, Dog(gggg)...stop being such a Peyton apologist! 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggggg. Show underdoggggg's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far :      You can't blame last years SB loss on the Indy "D". Had they had a healthy Dwight Freeney, things would have been different. In the first quarter, Freenney was able to pressure Drew Brees, and the Colts led, 10-0, going into quarter #2. But, his ankle injury seemed to worsen, and he was no longer a factor thereafter. It's so ironic, in that Bill Polian went to such great lengths to avoid injury to his key players...only to have Freeney go down with an bum ankle.      Rookie coach Jim Caldwell also appeared to be out-coached by Saints coach, Sean Payton. The on-side kick to begin the second half turned the momentum of the game firmly in favor of the Saints.      Finally...there was the obligatory Peyton el foldo...which "choked" off any chance for Indy to turn things around. You would think that the man that Colts' fans and the media tout as the smartest, greatest QB in NFL history, should have been capable of leading his high powered offense to more than just a mere 7 points over the final three quarters.        Come on, Dog(gggg)...stop making excuses for Peyton! 
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]
    TP - I can't blame the D?  And then you say Freeney wasn't effective in the 2nd half?  What side of the ball do you think Freeney plays on?  Maybe I should be thanking you for helping me make my arguement.  Drew Brees was 16-17 in the second half.  Should I blame that on the kicker or Manning or Lilja? 

    It's only ironic that injury hurt the colts in the SB given the fact that they shut down the team after they had the season in the bag if you believe that the only game to play after the Reg season is the SB.  For those who know there are games before the SB, they understand that getting there is a process and things can happen in the course of that process.  You know this too, but since you want to trash Polian rather than accepting the reality, you conveniently leave it out. 

    How exactly do you coach a receiver to maintain control of a ball during an onside kick?  If you have "hands" guys up front to receive an onside kick and they don't hasn't the coach prepared the team correctly for situation? 

    And yes - Manning threw the pick.  Regardless of whether or not the correct route was run, he is responsible for it.  Of course, if the correct route was not run, then its hard to blame Manning for it given that it was a timing route.  One thing I have learned to expect is that this possibility will always exist for the colts.  They run so many timing routes that there are expectations for the receiver to be in the spot the ball is to be thrown AND the ball must be in the spot where the receiver is expected to be.  When either one of these things does not or both do not happen, bad things can happen as it did in the SB. 

    As for the colts mustering only 7 points.  In the second Q they had the ball less than 3 minutes.  In the second half, They lost the first drive due to the muffed onside kick.  They scored their second possession.  They missed a FG their third, which brings up a critical point that I have made many times here.  How many fg's has a pats kicker missed at a critical time in any playoff game?  The answer, I believe is NONE.  The colts have had it happen at least twice.  Then the colts had the pick, after they had been driving.  The final drive could have been a score but a FG wasn't worth anything so they went for it on 4th and 5 from the 5. 

    The fact is the saints scored on everyone of their last 4 possessions save their kneel down at the end of the game.  The offense had their problems.  The defense could not stop the Saints.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

       Underdogged, Texas is right you cannot blame the D. You could have saved that entire rant. Much like the 07 Pats cannot blame the D(completely) considering the best offense in NFL history couldn't score when they had to. PM couldn't score(or really make a play) when he had to.

    Edit: Sorry the Patriots scored when they had to, what I meant was they couldn't score much before Brady's clutch performance in the 4rth qtr.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far : TP - I can't blame the D?  And then you say Freeney wasn't effective in the 2nd half?  What side of the ball do you think Freeney plays on?  Maybe I should be thanking you for helping me make my arguement.  Drew Brees was 16-17 in the second half.  Should I blame that on the kicker or Manning or Lilja?  It's only ironic that injury hurt the colts in the SB given the fact that they shut down the team after they had the season in the bag if you believe that the only game to play after the Reg season is the SB.  For those who know there are games before the SB, they understand that getting there is a process and things can happen in the course of that process.  You know this too, but since you want to trash Polian rather than accepting the reality, you conveniently leave it out.  How exactly do you coach a receiver to maintain control of a ball during an onside kick?  If you have "hands" guys up front to receive an onside kick and they don't hasn't the coach prepared the team correctly for situation?  And yes - Manning threw the pick.  Regardless of whether or not the correct route was run, he is responsible for it.  Of course, if the correct route was not run, then its hard to blame Manning for it given that it was a timing route.  One thing I have learned to expect is that this possibility will always exist for the colts.  They run so many timing routes that there are expectations for the receiver to be in the spot the ball is to be thrown AND the ball must be in the spot where the receiver is expected to be.  When either one of these things does not or both do not happen, bad things can happen as it did in the SB.  As for the colts mustering only 7 points.  In the second Q they had the ball less than 3 minutes.  In the second half, They lost the first drive due to the muffed onside kick.  They scored their second possession.  They missed a FG their third, which brings up a critical point that I have made many times here.  How many fg's has a pats kicker missed at a critical time in any playoff game?  The answer, I believe is NONE.  The colts have had it happen at least twice.  Then the colts had the pick, after they had been driving.  The final drive could have been a score but a FG wasn't worth anything so they went for it on 4th and 5 from the 5.  The fact is the saints scored on everyone of their last 4 possessions save their kneel down at the end of the game.  The offense had their problems.  The defense could not stop the Saints.
    Posted by underdoggggg[/QUOTE]

         Come on, Dog(gggg)...enough already with the Peyton excuses! Every time I bring up the latest Peyton choke, you go into convulsions, and write a thesis dedicated to his defense. As usual, you end up embarrassing yourself.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far

    In Response to Re: Patriots Among Handful Of Teams Looking Strong So Far : Wow Tex, You paint a picture of a team in serious disarray, when in fact we have been a top 5 team in football over the last 5 years.
     
    RESPONSE: I painted a portrait of a defensive unit in disarray...not a team
    in such a state. The Pats were a "top 5 team" the past two years?? In 2008, they didn't make the play-offs, and last year, they finished at 10-6...and were blown out on their home field by the wildcard Ravens in the play-offs. Hardly top 5 material. 

    Response: IMO Disarray is not the correct term we should use to describe our defense. More accurate to say rebuilding wouldn't you agree. We have to be close to the youngest defense in the league. BB rode the aging vets as long as he could and it was one crazy play away from 4 Superbowls in 7 years. I said top 5 team over the last 5 years but I would argue the last 2 years had more to do with Brady's devistating knee injury and less to do with poor defense.

    Were Charlie Weiss,Romeo Crennel,Eric Mangini, Josh Mcdaniels considered "top assistant coaches"? (your words) I don't think so at all.
     
    RESPONSE: Of course they were. They proved themselves to be excellent coordinators. But, I wasn't referring to them. I'm referring to BB's apparent reluctance to replace them with top veteran coordinators. This  appears to be based on his philosophy that assistants shouldn't be well paid. Other successful teams, such as Indy and Pittsburgh, paid top guys such as LeBeau , Howard Mudd, and Tom Moore...in order to keep them. In my opinion, by opting to establish his coaching staff from within, he is biting off more than he can chew...and spreading himself too thin. I still have a bad taste in my mouth over former DC Dean Pees, who I thought was kept on too long...and was a terrible coordinator.   

    Response: Why replace guys you personally developed into respected coaches with guys from another organization? Why not promote other guys you developed? You have the track record of turning out head coaches. The assistants you named above are rare example and have all outlasted the head coaches of their organizations as they are top in the league at respective positions. Was it better to replace Weiss with his understudy McDaniels? Was it better to replace RAC with Mangini? I say yes so why change now?


    BB influenced these guys, some of them slept on his couch as interns out of college. These guys are who they are today because of Belichick (and Parcells to a lesser degree). Why would BB want to bring in a top assistant coach with his own philosophies and risk having them conflict with his own? Why not make the next set of soon to be hired head coaches now? I couldn't disagree more with your entire premise here.
     
    RESPONSE: You are likely describing BB's thought process in this area.  

    Sure we have had guys that haven't worked out. That happens in the FA era, but we have had more success then almost any other team in the league. The only argument for better personnel decisions are The Ravens,The Eagles(imo)The Saints,and of course the Raiders(jk). For every Duane Starks you name I will name a Rodney Harrison, or Leigh Bodden. For every Monty Beisel you throw at us I would come back with a Jerod Mayo or Banta-Cain.
     
    RESPONSE: I was describing why the Pats have failed to maintain their elite position within the league. Ty Warren, Seymour, and Wilfolk comprised a great 3-4 DL...backed up by solid reserves. But, Seymour got old and injury prone. BB correctly traded him for what should be a high #1 pick. But, the fly in the ointment has Ty Warren's inability to stay healthy, along with Jarvis Green's failure to be an adequate full time replacement for Seymour. Marquise Hill was being groomed for that...but never seemed to get it going, before he sadly passed away.
         The search for LBs and CBs has been on-going. After several drafts, and several swings and misses, it finally appears that the Pats have a young secondary with promise. But, OLBs? Pass-rushers?? Pierre Woods? Shawn Crable? Derrick Burgess? Tully Banta-Cain? Has Cunningham shown anything?     


    Response: Why is Ty Warren the fly in the ointment? He missed 2 games you cannot say BB expected Ty to miss this season? He also brought in 2 (under rated) former 1st rd picks with beef to bolster the position.You say BB made the right move in trading Seymour but then chastise him for replacing him with Green?
    Crable never had a chance how can you say it was a bad pick when the guy was injured and never played? Woods has been a top ST player and solid fill in starter( not bad for an undrafted FA I would say) TBC led us in sacks and looks good this year.Looking at the CB situation I again would argue that the Pats not being dominant the last 2 years had more top do with not having one of the best QBs to ever play the game and less to do with Shawn Springs and Deltha Oneal. They still went 11-5(without TB) and 10-6 with a legit all around "Rebuilding" year on defense.


    We have missed the playoffs once since 2002 and that was due to Brady out for the year.
     
    RESPONSE: Making the play-offs and being a legitimate SB contender are two different things. The Pats have stopped being legitimate SB contenders since the SB loss to the Giants.

    Response: Can't disagree more. Brady is healthy, we are loaded with top round draft picks. LOADED with 1st and 2nd round talent across the board on defense. Again the biggest difference between this year and the last 2 years will be a healthy Tom Brady and year 2 of the rebuilding project on defense.

    I think you fall for a lot of the information you get from the multiple articles you read and post. Remember half of these so called journalists are 25 year old interns trying to cook Prime Rib out of Rump Roast. Most people in today's day and age hate the guys on top. We get more negative journalism then almost any team in sports. I know you are a knowledgeable Patties fan I just disagree with your sentiments here.

    RESPONSE: I'm not mimicking anything I've read. Sometimes, the truth hurts, my friend. I'm also not saying that the Patriots suucck, and won't challenge for their division. I am saying that I no longer see them as a legitimate SB contender. I got to call 'em as I see 'em.

         I hope I'm wrong.


    Response: This is your truth Tex, I think you are selling this team and this coach short. Absolute Superbowl contenders in this fans opinion. Anyway keep the posts coming your always a good read.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share