Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

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

    Re: Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This is almost interesting...  Hurlman...  What's up with the doom and gloom...?  Come on , party your ask off , we have a great team.  Really .  Watch the game, appreciate the tackling, the passing the catching...  Smoke some weed if it helps man , enjoy it .  18-4...  Almost 22-0...  Listen to yourself .

    [/QUOTE]

    I understand what you're saying coolade, but here is the dealio - I've watched this for 6 years now - we have an offense that is good enough to win it all and a defense that gets punched in the face in the playoffs. Last year we were lucky enough to face Tim Freaken Tebow!! That going to happen again? Last year we were fortunate enough to have a receiver drop a ball that is right in his hands in the endzone. Then we got a kicker to miss a field goal...we going to have that luxury this post season?

    I have grown spoiled...I expect to win a Super Bowl when we have the best coach and QB in NFL history together. How long has it been? Almost ten years? This team is not suppossed to be judged like a team that is just happy to be there. I fully realize that I'm witnessing one of the greatest runs in NFL history, I also realize why it's happening - it's because we have a QB that will be carried into the Hall of Fame by doves. It bothers me that we haven't been able to fix this defense in 6 god damn years. So I'm sorry if I can't pee myself after we beat Mark Sanchez and the Jets...we won't be facing Mark Sanchez's or Tim Tebows this post season.

    [/QUOTE]


    Hear ya...  as aggravating as last year was, it was last year and there are numerous positive changes that have been made to focus on.  here's my top 5:

    1.  O'Brien gone.  Listened to an interview he did the other day on ESPN radio.  He is a complete fraud.  Everything out of his mouth sounded "good" like he practiced it in front of a mirror 50 times.  he had no clue what he was doing last year.  The offense was schizophrenic.  no sensible running game strategy.  Blame him. 

    2. New personnel on defense.  Pats have added 50% new blood to beleaguered last years unit.  Spikes healthy, Hightower, Jones,dennard , talib, Gregory... And in lesser roles Wilson ebner, Francis. These guys bring a new athletic younger element to the D, which makes them better.  Results are showing up steadily.

    3.  MCC at safety.  Best athlete out there can make more plays from fs position and cover more ground.

    4.  Brady hungrier than ever.  Losing 2nd SB has to be burning in this guy... More so than usual, even though that's hard to believe.  Hes throwing it as well as he ever has.

    5. Last but not least... Running game.  This is related to #1...  The usage of all the backs makes Brady's job easier and he plays better when he's not stressed.  O'Brien stressed Brady out.  This year guys like vereen are showing what they can do, woodhead is steady, and Ridley is putting up 1000 yards... NICE.

    I haven't been this excited about this team since the summer of 2007 when those pieces started falling into place and I predicted  "historic" results.  That team fell just short but this team may be better because it is younger and faster at key positions like running back and front seven...  I'm really looking forward to great things for this team for not only this year but many more...

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey, sounds good, I mean we will have a punchers chance with Brady and Belichick anyway - so if you're right we will have much more than that. I hope you're right.

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

    Re: Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]


    I understand what you're saying coolade, but here is the dealio - I've watched this for 6 years now - we have an offense that is good enough to win it all and a defense that gets punched in the face in the playoffs. Last year we were lucky enough to face Tim Freaken Tebow!! That going to happen again? Last year we were fortunate enough to have a receiver drop a ball that is right in his hands in the endzone. Then we got a kicker to miss a field goal...we going to have that luxury this post season?

    I have grown spoiled...I expect to win a Super Bowl when we have the best coach and QB in NFL history together. How long has it been? Almost ten years? This team is not suppossed to be judged like a team that is just happy to be there. I fully realize that I'm witnessing one of the greatest runs in NFL history, I also realize why it's happening - it's because we have a QB that will be carried into the Hall of Fame by doves. It bothers me that we haven't been able to fix this defense in 6 god damn years. So I'm sorry if I can't pee myself after we beat Mark Sanchez and the Jets...we won't be facing Mark Sanchez's or Tim Tebows this post season.

    [/QUOTE]


    Come on mthurl, The receiver didn't just drop the ball. A Pats db actually knocked it out of his hands!

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't have long to talk because I'm going to the game to start the tailgate, but this is a total crock of BS.

    The Patriot's wouldn't even have gone to  the Super Bowl last season if not for the defense... period.  Not only did Sterling Moore make that play at the end of the AFC championship game but Brady threw two picks and no TD's, defense kept the game close the whole time.  

    This year's defense is getting better because they're getting better as a unit, not because we added one magical player.  

    Talib and Dennard are solid press corners, with a really fast, rangey safety behind them we can gamble more, this is kind of like the scheme the Seahawks run with their oversized corners.  

    The anti defense league will blame the defense for everything and give no credit where credit is due.  This offense wouldn't be nearly as potent if the defense didn't give them the ball so often and many times with the shortened field.  All the hand wringing about the defense is by people who refuse to accept Belichick's defensive scheme and think yards is a reason to complain.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    First off the D doesn't give the ball back to the O any more than any other team, in fact in most cases, less. 

    3 t/o's don't equate to 3 more possessions.  They are merely possession changes w/o the punt and are often left with poor field position due to some of them being in the red zone.

    Most teams create those possession changes with 3rd down stops, something this D is extremely poor at.

    That, in a nutshell, is what's wrong with the D, coupled with their love of 20+ completions.  Now at 58!

    They have to do better on 3rd downs, period.  No T/O's means no stops a whopping 56% of the time with most of them resulting in scores..

    Why do you say there were no TD's in that game?  Rushing TD's don't count?   I would think you, run at all cost, would be thrilled with them. Seem to remember TB getting his head nearly knocked off on one of them.

    Sterling Moores play in the EZ was admirable but he also allowed the 29 yard completion to get them the Rz to bigin with, so...... Kind of a wash.

    Not sure I would call the D allowing scores on 80% of the possessions in the 2nd and 3rd quarters, keeping them in the game either.  The pick by Spikes was great and probably prevented a score.  Gotta give them credit there, but again, what would happen without it.

    See latest SB!

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

    Re: Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

    Gotta love Tedy!

    http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/boston/chat/_/id/46184
    Dennis

    Do you honestly, (put your heart aside) think the Pats D can be good enough to help the offense get back to the Super Bowl and win it?? Chances are they'll have to do it on the road for the most part.

    Tedy

    Dennis, this defense has made improvement from last year. Remembering last year's AFC title game, it was basically the defense that won them that game. Tom Brady didn't play very well versus Baltimore, and that was probably my favorite moment last year for the defense -- winning when Brady didn't have his best day. The defense had to step up. It did. It's very possible for them to do that again.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

    In response to digger0862's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Gotta love Tedy!

    http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/boston/chat/_/id/46184
    Dennis

    Do you honestly, (put your heart aside) think the Pats D can be good enough to help the offense get back to the Super Bowl and win it?? Chances are they'll have to do it on the road for the most part.

    Tedy

    Dennis, this defense has made improvement from last year. Remembering last year's AFC title game, it was basically the defense that won them that game. Tom Brady didn't play very well versus Baltimore, and that was probably my favorite moment last year for the defense -- winning when Brady didn't have his best day. The defense had to step up. It did. It's very possible for them to do that again.

    [/QUOTE]

    Nice link there, Troy Brown said the exact same thing. I'd say those guys know a little more about the game and the Patriots than those of us over here on the BDC Patriots fan forum.

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

    Re: Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

    In response to Neal Page's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This is almost interesting...  Hurlman...  What's up with the doom and gloom...?  Come on , party your ask off , we have a great team.  Really .  Watch the game, appreciate the tackling, the passing the catching...  Smoke some weed if it helps man , enjoy it .  18-4...  Almost 22-0...  Listen to yourself .

    [/QUOTE]

    I understand what you're saying coolade, but here is the dealio - I've watched this for 6 years now - we have an offense that is good enough to win it all and a defense that gets punched in the face in the playoffs. Last year we were lucky enough to face Tim Freaken Tebow!! That going to happen again? Last year we were fortunate enough to have a receiver drop a ball that is right in his hands in the endzone. Then we got a kicker to miss a field goal...we going to have that luxury this post season?

    I have grown spoiled...I expect to win a Super Bowl when we have the best coach and QB in NFL history together. How long has it been? Almost ten years? This team is not suppossed to be judged like a team that is just happy to be there. I fully realize that I'm witnessing one of the greatest runs in NFL history, I also realize why it's happening - it's because we have a QB that will be carried into the Hall of Fame by doves. It bothers me that we haven't been able to fix this defense in 6 god damn years. So I'm sorry if I can't pee myself after we beat Mark Sanchez and the Jets...we won't be facing Mark Sanchez's or Tim Tebows this post season.

    [/QUOTE]

    Our offense has barely eeked out AFC title game wins at home in 2007 and 2011. In 2009, Brady threw 4 INTs. Not his fault, Welker was out and it was a mess all the way around.

    You know what gets punched in the mouth? Our finesse, WUSS BAG one dimensional offense. That's what.

    Everyone else knows this but you, Babe and Pezzy. You're really the only 3 left here.  Prolate has even relented a bit.

    2010's offense  vs Jets with a Bye week, put up 3 points by halftime and had only scored 11 points by the end of the 3rd qtr! Pathetic! Absolutely pathetic!  That was with Woodhead as  a lead back, 40+ passes and 60% of the plays in the shotgun.  That's one of literally a dozen absolutely infuriating, avoidable losses by this team in those last "6 years".

    If something changes for this team come playoff time it's the OFFENSE, not the defense.  The defense trends up every year, ready to go, regardless of how bad or good anyone thinks it is.    Last year was flat out, undeniably a perfect example of this. 

    The good news now is, BB's youngest D in the NFL is about ready to take that next step. His rebuild has been brilliant.  Brilliant.  Brady has PLENTY of toys yet again and they're deeper than they were last year, which means more balance. It's fairly clear that SB 46 loss and their one dimensional desires came to the forefront in the offseason because Ridley and Vereen will make the Woodhead obsession go away, which means the odds for this team to hit in the SB, that much greater. It won't be all about Brady like you want it to be.

    I never wanted it to be just about Brady, but since 2007, that's exactly what has happened.  Many of the fans want it to be that, while others simply want the team to win a SB as a TEAM. TEAM.

    For 6 years, I've watched Brady's play in the postseason GET WORSE and the stats back that premise up. It's an offensive era, with all the possibilities for QBs to dominate, yet you want to still pin this on the D.   Guess what? You're in the minority. Pink hats and the anti-BB media agree with you, while the rest of us who get it, know what the answer is.  You've made a complete and utter fool of yourself here and you don't even know it. lmao

    We know the finesse, sputtering offense that is one dimensional actually HURT our OWN D's potential and sustainability over 4 qtrs of games. Period.  All through 2010, the D looked better than it really was, starting 4 rookies, because NE's balanced offense helped them. You act like our own offense should make it tough for our own D. Why?  Every other NFL team strives for complementary football, but you want us to not have that so Brady can chase stats. There is no other reason for you, but that. Stats.

    You're a miserable, miserable Home Economics teacher, who simply hates life.  Why not enjoy the process BB has planned out here and enjoy how incredible this is?

    No one has had more of a degree of difficulty as a GM in this league going into that lockout than BB. It's that simple.

    Bill Polian, this supposed personnel genius, had to tank his season last year because he wasn't budgeted correctly and was in fear of Manning possibly not being healthy again.

    Think about that.

    Meanwhile, BB decided to build his base MOSTLY via the draft (non-FA) going into a lockout.  I saw it from a mile away and told people here, including your ignorant, childish self that this would take a few years and be a process. That was back in 2009. They weren't winning a SB in 2009. They odds were against them to do it in 2010 due to youth and inexperience. This was all by design, but you just admitted what I knew all along.

    You're a spoiled pink hat who wants BB to deliver you a SB ring to your door, and when you don't get that, your panties get stained and you come here and whine like a little girl.

    Go away for good. No one cares about your pink hat antics.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Once again delusion at it's finest.

    No one said the O was great, Alex Smith lover, but they certainly did enough to win while leading in most games with seconds left in the 4th.

    Great teams have a D that can stop a last second drive to win the game.  We have not seen this in years.  Some of us would like to.  You can be happy with the lack of 3rd down stops and 58 passes over 20 against virtually some of the worst QB's in the league, but the realists are not.   90+% of the games lost by this team are the result of 4th qtr leads given up by the D.  This is not acceptable.

    The wussy  top ranked O, as you put it, can't be expected to win every game for this team.  Sometimes you NEED D's to make a game ending stop.   Give credit to the Jints for doing that twice, even though they were on 35 and 57 second possessions.   Give credit to the teams who handed them a L this year with 4th qtr leads.

    Too bad you are too ignorant to see that.

    Please explain again how 3 t/o's give the Pats O, 3 extra possessions?  Does that mean the other team has 12 and the Pat's O has 15?  DOPE!

     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

    In response to Neal Page's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This is almost interesting...  Hurlman...  What's up with the doom and gloom...?  Come on , party your ask off , we have a great team.  Really .  Watch the game, appreciate the tackling, the passing the catching...  Smoke some weed if it helps man , enjoy it .  18-4...  Almost 22-0...  Listen to yourself .

    [/QUOTE]

    I understand what you're saying coolade, but here is the dealio - I've watched this for 6 years now - we have an offense that is good enough to win it all and a defense that gets punched in the face in the playoffs. Last year we were lucky enough to face Tim Freaken Tebow!! That going to happen again? Last year we were fortunate enough to have a receiver drop a ball that is right in his hands in the endzone. Then we got a kicker to miss a field goal...we going to have that luxury this post season?

    I have grown spoiled...I expect to win a Super Bowl when we have the best coach and QB in NFL history together. How long has it been? Almost ten years? This team is not suppossed to be judged like a team that is just happy to be there. I fully realize that I'm witnessing one of the greatest runs in NFL history, I also realize why it's happening - it's because we have a QB that will be carried into the Hall of Fame by doves. It bothers me that we haven't been able to fix this defense in 6 god damn years. So I'm sorry if I can't pee myself after we beat Mark Sanchez and the Jets...we won't be facing Mark Sanchez's or Tim Tebows this post season.

    [/QUOTE]

    Our offense has barely eeked out AFC title game wins at home in 2007 and 2011. In 2009, Brady threw 4 INTs. Not his fault, Welker was out and it was a mess all the way around.

    You know what gets punched in the mouth? Our finesse, WUSS BAG one dimensional offense. That's what.

    Everyone else knows this but you, Babe and Pezzy. You're really the only 3 left here.  Prolate has even relented a bit.

    2010's offense  vs Jets with a Bye week, put up 3 points by halftime and had only scored 11 points by the end of the 3rd qtr! Pathetic! Absolutely pathetic!  That was with Woodhead as  a lead back, 40+ passes and 60% of the plays in the shotgun.  That's one of literally a dozen absolutely infuriating, avoidable losses by this team in those last "6 years".

    If something changes for this team come playoff time it's the OFFENSE, not the defense.  The defense trends up every year, ready to go, regardless of how bad or good anyone thinks it is.    Last year was flat out, undeniably a perfect example of this. 

    The good news now is, BB's youngest D in the NFL is about ready to take that next step. His rebuild has been brilliant.  Brilliant.  Brady has PLENTY of toys yet again and they're deeper than they were last year, which means more balance. It's fairly clear that SB 46 loss and their one dimensional desires came to the forefront in the offseason because Ridley and Vereen will make the Woodhead obsession go away, which means the odds for this team to hit in the SB, that much greater. It won't be all about Brady like you want it to be.

    I never wanted it to be just about Brady, but since 2007, that's exactly what has happened.  Many of the fans want it to be that, while others simply want the team to win a SB as a TEAM. TEAM.

    For 6 years, I've watched Brady's play in the postseason GET WORSE and the stats back that premise up. It's an offensive era, with all the possibilities for QBs to dominate, yet you want to still pin this on the D.   Guess what? You're in the minority. Pink hats and the anti-BB media agree with you, while the rest of us who get it, know what the answer is.  You've made a complete and utter fool of yourself here and you don't even know it. lmao

    We know the finesse, sputtering offense that is one dimensional actually HURT our OWN D's potential and sustainability over 4 qtrs of games. Period.  All through 2010, the D looked better than it really was, starting 4 rookies, because NE's balanced offense helped them. You act like our own offense should make it tough for our own D. Why?  Every other NFL team strives for complementary football, but you want us to not have that so Brady can chase stats. There is no other reason for you, but that. Stats.

    You're a miserable, miserable Home Economics teacher, who simply hates life.  Why not enjoy the process BB has planned out here and enjoy how incredible this is?

    No one has had more of a degree of difficulty as a GM in this league going into that lockout than BB. It's that simple.

    Bill Polian, this supposed personnel genius, had to tank his season last year because he wasn't budgeted correctly and was in fear of Manning possibly not being healthy again.

    Think about that.

    Meanwhile, BB decided to build his base MOSTLY via the draft (non-FA) going into a lockout.  I saw it from a mile away and told people here, including your ignorant, childish self that this would take a few years and be a process. That was back in 2009. They weren't winning a SB in 2009. They odds were against them to do it in 2010 due to youth and inexperience. This was all by design, but you just admitted what I knew all along.

    You're a spoiled pink hat who wants BB to deliver you a SB ring to your door, and when you don't get that, your panties get stained and you come here and whine like a little girl.

    Go away for good. No one cares about your pink hat antics.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    How can I say this politely?? Let's see...YOU ARE DUMB. Yeah that just about covers it.

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

    Re: Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

    In response to Neal Page's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to sporter81's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to digger0862's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Gotta love Tedy!

    http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/boston/chat/_/id/46184
    Dennis

    Do you honestly, (put your heart aside) think the Pats D can be good enough to help the offense get back to the Super Bowl and win it?? Chances are they'll have to do it on the road for the most part.

    Tedy

    Dennis, this defense has made improvement from last year. Remembering last year's AFC title game, it was basically the defense that won them that game. Tom Brady didn't play very well versus Baltimore, and that was probably my favorite moment last year for the defense -- winning when Brady didn't have his best day. The defense had to step up. It did. It's very possible for them to do that again.

    [/QUOTE]

    Nice link there, Troy Brown said the exact same thing. I'd say those guys know a little more about the game and the Patriots than those of us over here on the BDC Patriots fan forum.

    [/QUOTE]


    Tom Brady would also say that, which he pretty much did after the 20111 AFC title game when he said he sucked. HE SAID IT.

    It's disturbing to watch a small few here, so obsessed with Brady, they can't admit it. They've basically destroyed this board with their antics.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm seriously considering renting a function hall that has a big projection screen and just putting a collection of your greatest hits posts up there so everyone can just laugh their a--es off at your stupidity. I think I'll do an open bar for an hour or so and then just let them all roll on that screen...why not? It will be more entertaining than renting a DJ.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]


    I understand what you're saying coolade, but here is the dealio - I've watched this for 6 years now - we have an offense that is good enough to win it all and a defense that gets punched in the face in the playoffs. Last year we were lucky enough to face Tim Freaken Tebow!! That going to happen again? Last year we were fortunate enough to have a receiver drop a ball that is right in his hands in the endzone. Then we got a kicker to miss a field goal...we going to have that luxury this post season?

    I have grown spoiled...I expect to win a Super Bowl when we have the best coach and QB in NFL history together. How long has it been? Almost ten years? This team is not suppossed to be judged like a team that is just happy to be there. I fully realize that I'm witnessing one of the greatest runs in NFL history, I also realize why it's happening - it's because we have a QB that will be carried into the Hall of Fame by doves. It bothers me that we haven't been able to fix this defense in 6 god damn years. So I'm sorry if I can't pee myself after we beat Mark Sanchez and the Jets...we won't be facing Mark Sanchez's or Tim Tebows this post season.

    [/QUOTE]


    Come on mthurl, The receiver didn't just drop the ball. A Pats db actually knocked it out of his hands!

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't have long to talk because I'm going to the game to start the tailgate, but this is a total crock of BS.

    The Patriot's wouldn't even have gone to  the Super Bowl last season if not for the defense... period.  Not only did Sterling Moore make that play at the end of the AFC championship game but Brady threw two picks and no TD's, defense kept the game close the whole time.  

    This year's defense is getting better because they're getting better as a unit, not because we added one magical player.  

    Talib and Dennard are solid press corners, with a really fast, rangey safety behind them we can gamble more, this is kind of like the scheme the Seahawks run with their oversized corners.  

    The anti defense league will blame the defense for everything and give no credit where credit is due.  This offense wouldn't be nearly as potent if the defense didn't give them the ball so often and many times with the shortened field.  All the hand wringing about the defense is by people who refuse to accept Belichick's defensive scheme and think yards is a reason to complain.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    First off the D doesn't give the ball back to the O any more than any other team, in fact in most cases, less. 

    3 t/o's don't equate to 3 more possessions.  They are merely possession changes w/o the punt and are often left with poor field position due to some of them being in the red zone.

    Most teams create those possession changes with 3rd down stops, something this D is extremely poor at.

    That, in a nutshell, is what's wrong with the D, coupled with their love of 20+ completions.  Now at 58!

    They have to do better on 3rd downs, period.  No T/O's means no stops a whopping 56% of the time with most of them resulting in scores..

    Why do you say there were no TD's in that game?  Rushing TD's don't count?   I would think you, run at all cost, would be thrilled with them. Seem to remember TB getting his head nearly knocked off on one of them.

    Sterling Moores play in the EZ was admirable but he also allowed the 29 yard completion to get them the Rz to bigin with, so...... Kind of a wash.

    Not sure I would call the D allowing scores on 80% of the possessions in the 2nd and 3rd quarters, keeping them in the game either.  The pick by Spikes was great and probably prevented a score.  Gotta give them credit there, but again, what would happen without it.

    See latest SB!

    [/QUOTE]

    So when is a turnover not a turnover?  How does getting the ball back, not mean getting the ball back?  Isn't it the defense's job to get the ball back?  

    When a fumble occurs on the opponent's side of the field that's referred to as a "shortened field."  

    The defense gave up 20 points, not exactly a shootout... in fact they only allowed 21 points in the Super Bowl and 10 points in the first playoff game, you do realize they keep score with points right, this isn't fantasy football where yards give you points?

    Oh I remember the last Super Bowl, better than you apparently, our offense score 17 points and turned the ball over twice, the first one resulting in points on the safety.

    So what you're saying is this defense is no good if you take away all the turnovers they create... boy, that's plain dumb.

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

    Re: Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]


    I understand what you're saying coolade, but here is the dealio - I've watched this for 6 years now - we have an offense that is good enough to win it all and a defense that gets punched in the face in the playoffs. Last year we were lucky enough to face Tim Freaken Tebow!! That going to happen again? Last year we were fortunate enough to have a receiver drop a ball that is right in his hands in the endzone. Then we got a kicker to miss a field goal...we going to have that luxury this post season?

    I have grown spoiled...I expect to win a Super Bowl when we have the best coach and QB in NFL history together. How long has it been? Almost ten years? This team is not suppossed to be judged like a team that is just happy to be there. I fully realize that I'm witnessing one of the greatest runs in NFL history, I also realize why it's happening - it's because we have a QB that will be carried into the Hall of Fame by doves. It bothers me that we haven't been able to fix this defense in 6 god damn years. So I'm sorry if I can't pee myself after we beat Mark Sanchez and the Jets...we won't be facing Mark Sanchez's or Tim Tebows this post season.

    [/QUOTE]


    Come on mthurl, The receiver didn't just drop the ball. A Pats db actually knocked it out of his hands!

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't have long to talk because I'm going to the game to start the tailgate, but this is a total crock of BS.

    The Patriot's wouldn't even have gone to  the Super Bowl last season if not for the defense... period.  Not only did Sterling Moore make that play at the end of the AFC championship game but Brady threw two picks and no TD's, defense kept the game close the whole time.  

    This year's defense is getting better because they're getting better as a unit, not because we added one magical player.  

    Talib and Dennard are solid press corners, with a really fast, rangey safety behind them we can gamble more, this is kind of like the scheme the Seahawks run with their oversized corners.  

    The anti defense league will blame the defense for everything and give no credit where credit is due.  This offense wouldn't be nearly as potent if the defense didn't give them the ball so often and many times with the shortened field.  All the hand wringing about the defense is by people who refuse to accept Belichick's defensive scheme and think yards is a reason to complain.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    First off the D doesn't give the ball back to the O any more than any other team, in fact in most cases, less. 

    3 t/o's don't equate to 3 more possessions.  They are merely possession changes w/o the punt and are often left with poor field position due to some of them being in the red zone.

    Most teams create those possession changes with 3rd down stops, something this D is extremely poor at.

    That, in a nutshell, is what's wrong with the D, coupled with their love of 20+ completions.  Now at 58!

    They have to do better on 3rd downs, period.  No T/O's means no stops a whopping 56% of the time with most of them resulting in scores..

    Why do you say there were no TD's in that game?  Rushing TD's don't count?   I would think you, run at all cost, would be thrilled with them. Seem to remember TB getting his head nearly knocked off on one of them.

    Sterling Moores play in the EZ was admirable but he also allowed the 29 yard completion to get them the Rz to bigin with, so...... Kind of a wash.

    Not sure I would call the D allowing scores on 80% of the possessions in the 2nd and 3rd quarters, keeping them in the game either.  The pick by Spikes was great and probably prevented a score.  Gotta give them credit there, but again, what would happen without it.

    See latest SB!

    [/QUOTE]

    So when is a turnover not a turnover?  How does getting the ball back, not mean getting the ball back?  Isn't it the defense's job to get the ball back?  

    When a fumble occurs on the opponent's side of the field that's referred to as a "shortened field."  

    The defense gave up 20 points, not exactly a shootout... in fact they only allowed 21 points in the Super Bowl and 10 points in the first playoff game, you do realize they keep score with points right, this isn't fantasy football where yards give you points?

    Oh I remember the last Super Bowl, better than you apparently, our offense score 17 points and turned the ball over twice, the first one resulting in points on the safety.

    So what you're saying is this defense is no good if you take away all the turnovers they create... boy, that's plain dumb.

    [/QUOTE]


    You might want to look at who the dumb one is here.

    I'm saying a T/O is merely a possession change and WHEN they don't happen, the D has to be able to make stops on 3rd downs and not allow those bone crushing 20+ yrd completions they are prone to.  They are currently averaging 5 of those a game, against the worst QB's in the league, which is ridiculous. 

    They did a good job last week with 3rd down stops, although some of that was on Miami. 

    They also did a good job forcing fumbles but didn't have success in recovering them..

    T/O's will be at a premium against the better teams.

    Case in point:  You can'y rely on them exclusively to get the ball back to the O.

    How many did they get in SB 46, again?

    Expecting the O to score 30+ in a low possession game with TB on his back or running for his life  or not having his best recievers, against better D's is beyond stupid.

    Quit putting every game on the O, it makes no sense.  The D gets paid to limit points too.

    Some times they have to win low scoring games.  No team has ever scored 30+ in every game in any year, in the history of the NFL.  EVER!

    Let's see if they can.

    Funny how you always screech about balance on O with the running game but totally neglect the balance between the O & D.  HELLO TEAM!

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Pats D Averaging 3.2 Turnovers in Last 5

    This defense has been steadily getting better. They are not grEat, but I have more confidence in them now than I have had in a while.

    The pars are good enough to win the whole thing. One key is returning all these guys from injury in time for the run. The injury bug has been especially nasty this year. 

     

Share