Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation

    I do NOT believe anything in the following stats mean anything for the outcome of the AFC title game but it is fun food for thought and discussion.

    Certainly am expecting a close tough game.

    I do not think 2009 and the 2011 teams have hardly anything to do with each other on any level.

    However, IMO, I do think the 2010 and 2011 teams are very very similar in personnel quality on both sides of the ball. The 2011 team, IMO, showing greater maturity, character, and heart than the 2010 team did throughout the regular season.

    2010 over final 8 games Pats avg 37 pts/gm all Wins
    2011 over final 8 games Pats avg 36 pts/gm all Wins


    2010 jets #3 Total Defense, #6 pts/gm allowed, #9 Pass yrds/gm allowed
    2011 Ravens #3 Total Defense, #3 Pts/gm allowed, #4 Pass yrds/gm allowed


    2010 Jets ranked #1 in adjusted strength of schedule
    2010 Pats ranked #5 in adjusted strength of schedule


    2011 Ravens ranked #23 in strength of schedule
    2011 Ravens adjusted SOS #20
    2011 Pats ranked #30 in strength of schedule
    2011 Pats adjusted SOS #26


    2010 Pats scored 21 pts against Jets and lost in playoffs
    2011 Pats scored ?  Pts against Ravens and ? in playoffs

    Brady vs Ravens
    2004 W 24-3  172yds 0-TD  0-int 15/30 50% comp.
    2007 W 27-24 257yds 2-TD  1-int 18/38 47% comp.
    2009 W 27-21 258yds 1-TD  0-int 21/32 65% comp. 101-QBR
    2009 L 33-14 154yds 2-TD  3-int 23/42 55% comp. 49-QBR
    2010 W 23-20 292yds 1-TD  2-int 27/44 61% comp. 70-QBR

    Totals of 6-TD and 6-int vs Ravens

    Brady has yet to have a 300(1 close enough) yd gm vs the Ravens
    Brady and Pats have not scored more than 30 points against the Ravens so far.

    Everyone mentions 6-1 but i must have missed it because i could only find a preseason loss to the Ravens and a Win back in 1999 but Bledsoe was the QB.

    Flaco vs Patriots
    2009 L 27-21 264yds 2-TD  1-int 27/47 57% comp. 79-QBR
    2009 W 33-14  34yds 0-TD  1-int  4/10 40% comp. 10-QBR
    2010 L 23-20 285yds 2-TD  0-int 27/35 77% comp. 119-QBR

    Totals of 4-TD and 2-int vs Patriots

    So in Brady's 1st 3 times facing the Ravens he had a combined avg comp% of 54 and in Flaco's 1st three tries against the Pats he had a comp% of 58.

    Also in 2010 Flaco shredded the Pats D with that 77% comp% with a similar quality defensive Pats unit. While Brady still having Welker, Gronk, Hernandez, and Branch threw 1 TD vs 2 int's and a QB rating of 70(rounded up).

    In the last 6 weeks of 2010 the Pats D seemed to be coming together and playing well and raised their Defensive Passer Rating from 27th place up to 13th with a final rating of 81.2.

    In 2011 they finished with a 86.11(lower is better). SO the Pats D was on more of a roll than this season and still could not get off the field against the Jets and Mark Sanchez.

    The Ravens in contrast finished with the 68.8 defensive passer rating, the best of the remaining teams.

    The Broncos for comparison who the Pats O just rolled over were a woeful 93.1.

    It's rare to see teams with DPR in the 80's even make the playoffs and 90's virtually never.

    Just another indication of how the league has changed or at least how 2011 was different, if not a trend.
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation

    didn't the pats beat the jets like 57-0 last year before losing to them in the playoffs?

    Teams have bad games.  You just don't want your team to have one next week.
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation

    In Response to Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation:
    [QUOTE]didn't the pats beat the jets like 57-0 last year before losing to them in the playoffs? Teams have bad games.  You just don't want your team to have one next week.
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]
    UD6, talk about stating the obvious.  No one wants the next game to be "that" game.  Then again, how many predicted the final of the Broncos game would be 45 - 10 outside of the fans here?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation

    Bernard Pollard plays for the Ravens. Time to run some crossing patterns with Gronk as lead blocker. Good ol pick and roll til it hurts. Maybe some screens to Hernandez.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation

    In Response to Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation:
    [QUOTE]I think the one glaring statistical set that really translates, and it's not because it favors NE, but that SD 34-7 slapping of Balt on the road is pretty real. ......I had them winning the AFC title last year. Wrong there, too.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]
    RWTK, not a peep out of Ravens land about this game!  This game represents the closest the Ravens came to playing a team on the road with an offense like the Pats and look what happened.  All I hear down here is 2009 and the Pats have a non-existent defense.  Also, not a peep about the most recent meeting in 2010 between these two teams, already pointed out by many.  The Ravens and their fans are desperately wanting to only remember and re-live 2009.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation

    In Response to Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation:
    [QUOTE]Bernard Pollard plays for the Ravens. Time to run some crossing patterns with Gronk as lead blocker. Good ol pick and roll til it hurts. Maybe some screens to Hernandez.
    Posted by JohnHannahrulz[/QUOTE]
    IMHO, the players are well past this event.  Only fans drudge this up for a revenge factor.  Defeating the Ravens badly will be good enough!
     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation

    In Response to Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation : Don't the Ravens have an almost non-existent QB and offense?
    Posted by Patsfansince1966[/QUOTE]
    I do not recall anyone making that claim.  Ravens do have a good back in Rice, a multi-tasker.  Flacco a better arm than Tebow, but, won't run it like him.  If anything in the Pats' favor, the Ravens are an inconsistent team on the road and have not really dominated opponents on the road.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Stats for losers but good for Fun Conversation

    I'm tired of hearing about Flacco and Cutlers arm strength. I guess they can throw it like 68 yards instead of paltry 63 yards everyone else can throw it. Good, for two hail Mary interceptions a year that will come in useful. How about they figure out how to throw it 15 yards into a tight window since that's what 95% of NFL throws are. I know it's not flashy and all but there have been a few mediocre QBs over the years without mega arm strength who've made a career out of doing that like Montana, Brady, Manning, Warner, Brees, etc., etc. I mean those guys aren't as great as Flacco but they used their pathetic physical gifts to carve out a nice niche for themselves in the NFL.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share