Sums Up The Offense

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    As I told your twin woozy, it doesn't say that at all.  It says a high flying offense isn't enough.

    PROVEN THROUGH THE YEARS!!!

    You have to have a defense to go along with that and he blames them several times.

    He also blames your beebee for going the route of the high flying O when he should have been fixing his low flying (crashing) D.

    Shame on beebee for not fixing his D since 2005.

    You can't win with 1/3rd of a team when the other guys have a whole team.

    Not happening, never has and never will.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from joepatsfan111111. Show joepatsfan111111's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    This article also talks about how a balanced team is needed to really be successful. and by balanced it means offensively to defensively.


    2007, the offense blew it. no doubt. but the defense also gave up the final drive.


    2010, we made Mark Sanchez look like a probowl QB


    2011, couldn't get a stop.


    2012, offense sucked and Talib went out so they got killed too


    2013, no one was healthy


     


    Thankfully, the Patriots have slowly moved away from the shotgun and have a RB like Ridley to power it some. And they have a WR corps equal to the 2001-2004 with no studs but 4-5 solid WRs to who contribute.


    And the defense is the best maybe ever for BB but certainly one of the best he has had.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to joepatsfan111111's comment:

    This article also talks about how a balanced team is needed to really be successful. and by balanced it means offensively to defensively.

     

    2007, the offense blew it. no doubt. but the defense also gave up the final drive.

     

    2010, we made Mark Sanchez look like a probowl QB

     

    2011, couldn't get a stop.

     

    2012, offense sucked and Talib went out so they got killed too

     

    2013, no one was healthy

     

     

     

    Thankfully, the Patriots have slowly moved away from the shotgun and have a RB like Ridley to power it some. And they have a WR corps equal to the 2001-2004 with no studs but 4-5 solid WRs to who contribute.

     

    And the defense is the best maybe ever for BB but certainly one of the best he has had.




    Agreed. Thank god the Brady-desired way is over.  He wanted it to be about him like how he saw GOmie getting all the media hype, but he suffered the same fate.

    WHat a waste for so many years.



    seriously, is there something mentally wrong with you? what is this obsession bordering on down right creepy with Brady? Do you really think that BB would allow TB to what ever he pleased? Dont you think all these years of "in BB we trust" also included what was happening on offense and with the QB position? If the past 6 years have been a BRady desire, then BB should be fired tonight

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    I think the facts are this team has had only one thing going for it for the past seven years...a quarterback. Without much else we all see what happens, we lose to better built teams in the playoffs. Plain and very simple.

    The article is crap because it claims we had a high powered offense - not true - we had a pop gun passing offense, with no running game. When we had to be dynamic we couldn't do a thing against a good defense, our offensive line got punched in the mouth and our passing game proved we had nothing on the edges of the field to take the heat of our strength (the inside of the field). It was flawed.

    The real problem however was a defense that just didn't have special players on it beside Wilfork. We had no pass rush. We had a secondary that was poor (despite Belichick trying to hide weaknesses). Those are facts, not opinions. We made opposing quarterbacks look like hall of famer's - I'll never forget Sanchez ripping through our defense like they never made it out onto the field.

    The team has been a lot more flawed than people want to believe, but we have two things others don't have...Belichick and Brady. Those two change things, they make other players better than they are. I'm not saying the team was terrible, it's just that they weren't Super Bowl quality despite contending for it. I think they might be better this year, but they will need a lot of these injured defensive players to come out and play well (Wilfork, Easley, Kelly, Smith).

     

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    Yawn

    [object HTMLDivElement]

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

     

     Funny, the article doesn't talk about the flaws of the offense.  What it actually says is that the Pats made a strategic error in team building by focusing on offense rather than defense.  So I guess Rusty must now agree with this article's author that the Pats'  GM has failed to build a winning team.

     

     The bolded sections below are those that call into question Belichick's team building strategy and that apparently Rusty agrees with.

     

     

    In other words, as counter-intuitive as it may seem, it has ALWAYS been a tragic mistake to build teams around high-powered offenses.

    The Patriots, these masters of statistical history, should have known better when they decided to go down this road after the 2006 season.

    This once dynastic team all but perfected smart, efficient football that was strong in all phases of the game. They rode that strategy go three Super Bowl victories in four years. To put it in terms of physical training, the Super Bowl-winning Patriots had a strong core. The more recent Patriots are merely built for show: big biceps, but weak inside.

    Since 2007 the organization has followed the same failed strategy for six years that have largely yielded the same result: the offense fails when it matters most.

    It’s like Gridiron Groundhog Day. Score 500-plus points and set offensive records in the regular season; fail to come through in the postseason.

    It’s easy to trace the beginning of the end of the New England dynasty. It all fell apart in the 2006 AFC title game, courtesy of the Indianapolis Colts and Peyton Manning’s Finest Hour.

    The Patriots blew a big first-half lead, before falling 38-34, in what was for Peyton Manning and the Colts the greatest comeback in conference title game history.

    The Patriots made a fateful – and erroneous – strategic decision in the wake of the game: they vowed internally never to lose a shootout again; to always have the firepower to outgun the opposition.

    In reality, they should have double-downed on defense. The offense that day proved it could put up points, even with in offense largely devoid of big names outside Tom Brady. It was the defense that failed them that day.

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    This same topic is brought up every week for the past 2-3 years now, same arguments, same facts, etc.

     

    Why the hell we can't we move on from the same debate with the same guy? If you can't appreciate the years we get a QB like Brady, than I am glad the internet wasn't around for people to complain in the lean years.

     

    Where has our running game and defense been since 2004? We lost true balance that brought us SB victories, since those years our running game has never ever been something to fear or worry about and our defense slowly eroded to become, arguably, one of the worst in the league. Until recently the defense is coming around and showing real signs of becoming a top tier defense once again and actually carry out BB's game plan, just a few more pieces missing. Our running game is still nothing to fear or for teams to even have to game plan for. Bring Vereen in it's obvious, bring Ridley its obvious and pray he doesn't fumble. Blount was great for a while then wasn't in the biggest game when we needed him to, key word here, balance our offense.

    Your obsession, it really is by definition from probably any psychiatrist, with Brady bashing is down right stupidly annoying. You make it sound like BB has zero control over this guy for the past few years. Get off it all ready.

     

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to freediro's comment:


    This same topic is brought up every week for the past 2-3 years now, same arguments, same facts, etc.


     


    Why the hell we can't we move on from the same debate with the same guy? If you can't appreciate the years we get a QB like Brady, than I am glad the internet wasn't around for people to complain in the lean years.


     


    Where has our running game and defense been since 2004? We lost true balance that brought us SB victories, since those years our running game has never ever been something to fear or worry about and our defense slowly eroded to become, arguably, one of the worst in the league. Until recently the defense is coming around and showing real signs of becoming a top tier defense once again and actually carry out BB's game plan, just a few more pieces missing. Our running game is still nothing to fear or for teams to even have to game plan for. Bring Vereen in it's obvious, bring Ridley its obvious and pray he doesn't fumble. Blount was great for a while then wasn't in the biggest game when we needed him to, key word here, balance our offense.


    Your obsession, it really is by definition from probably any psychiatrist, with Brady bashing is down right stupidly annoying. You make it sound like BB has zero control over this guy for the past few years. Get off it all ready.


     




    touche!!


    The irony is that the one person who thinks it's only Brady's fault doesn't understand that it ultimately becomes BB's fault for epically failing to recognize Brady's poor playoff performances and getting rid of the bum!!


    How funny is that? It's the running joke of the day......lmao


     

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to OnlyDaTruth's comment:

    In response to freediro's comment:

     

     

    This same topic is brought up every week for the past 2-3 years now, same arguments, same facts, etc.

     

     

     

    Why the hell we can't we move on from the same debate with the same guy? If you can't appreciate the years we get a QB like Brady, than I am glad the internet wasn't around for people to complain in the lean years.

     

     

     

    Where has our running game and defense been since 2004? We lost true balance that brought us SB victories, since those years our running game has never ever been something to fear or worry about and our defense slowly eroded to become, arguably, one of the worst in the league. Until recently the defense is coming around and showing real signs of becoming a top tier defense once again and actually carry out BB's game plan, just a few more pieces missing. Our running game is still nothing to fear or for teams to even have to game plan for. Bring Vereen in it's obvious, bring Ridley its obvious and pray he doesn't fumble. Blount was great for a while then wasn't in the biggest game when we needed him to, key word here, balance our offense.

     

    Your obsession, it really is by definition from probably any psychiatrist, with Brady bashing is down right stupidly annoying. You make it sound like BB has zero control over this guy for the past few years. Get off it all ready.

     

     

     

     



    touche!!

     

     

    The irony is that the one person who thinks it's only Brady's fault doesn't understand that it ultimately becomes BB's fault for epically failing to recognize Brady's poor playoff performances and getting rid of the bum!!

     

    How funny is that? It's the running joke of the day......lmao

     

     



    That's what it comes down to. It has been pointed out many times. You can't blame Brady and exclude BB from the blame as it ultimately rests with him. For some odd reason, a person with a 152 IQ can't comprehend that. I guess there is smart and book smart. Unfortunately he is neither. 

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    The team has been a lot more flawed than people want to believe, but we have two things others don't have...Belichick and Brady. Those two change things, they make other players better than they are. I'm not saying the team was terrible, it's just that they weren't Super Bowl quality despite contending for it. I think they might be better this year, but they will need a lot of these injured defensive players to come out and play well (Wilfork, Easley, Kelly, Smith).

     



    How does that make sense?  If they were contending for it then they must possess the necessary quality.  The fact is, they came as close to losing their three Super Bowl victories as they did to winning their two Super Bowl losses.  In this age of parity, it's often a matter of one poor throw, one missed tackle, one missed interception, one missed catch, etc. that separates the winners from the losers. Health most certainly plays a huge role in how a season turns out.  Last season was a perfect example of that.  The fact that they got as far as they did was a testament to the team...not just BB and TB.  I have the opposite opinion to yours...I don't believe that this team is more flawed than most people think...I believe that it is more talented than most people think. 

     

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:


    You are trying to talk sense to a home ec teacher who is a certifiable moron.




    What a disgrace to bash a teacher.

    You are unemployed and for you to bash any job is a disgrace.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    The team has been a lot more flawed than people want to believe, but we have two things others don't have...Belichick and Brady. Those two change things, they make other players better than they are. I'm not saying the team was terrible, it's just that they weren't Super Bowl quality despite contending for it. I think they might be better this year, but they will need a lot of these injured defensive players to come out and play well (Wilfork, Easley, Kelly, Smith).

     



    How does that make sense?  If they were contending for it then they must possess the necessary quality.  The fact is, they came as close to losing their three Super Bowl victories as they did to winning their two Super Bowl losses.  In this age of parity, it's often a matter of one poor throw, one missed tackle, one missed interception, one missed catch, etc. that separates the winners from the losers. Health most certainly plays a huge role in how a season turns out.  Last season was a perfect example of that.  The fact that they got as far as they did was a testament to the team...not just BB and TB.  I have the opposite opinion to yours...I don't believe that this team is more flawed than most people think...I believe that it is more talented than most people think. 

     



    How does it make sense? They faced Tim Tebow (at home in the cold) to get to the AFC championship game, where Baltimore's kicker blew that game, along with a receiver that dropped a touchdown pass that landed right in his bread basket. Then we went to the Super Bowl...and how did that go? Who stood out in that game? Who? Brady. Tell me another guy on that team that was better - or played better - than the guys on that Giant's team. Who else did? Because if the team was as talented as you say and what I said "didn't make sense", you could easily name 10 players.

    Here's what I came up with...their offensive line vs our defensive line...they won that battle. Their defensive line vs our offensive line...they won that battle hands down...no contest. Their tight ends and runners vs our linebackers...they won. Their receivers vs our secondary...they beat us. Our receivers vs their secondary...close, but I'll give it to them (a healthy Gronk would of changed things). Our running backs and tight ends vs their linebackers...they won. If we had all the talent you said we did, we would of won because we weren't out coached and our quarterback easily was deserving of the MVP that day...he played better than Manning and anyone on our team. That's my point.

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    How does that make sense?  If they were contending for it then they must possess the necessary quality.  The fact is, they came as close to losing their three Super Bowl victories as they did to winning their two Super Bowl losses.  In this age of parity, it's often a matter of one poor throw, one missed tackle, one missed interception, one missed catch, etc. that separates the winners from the losers. Health most certainly plays a huge role in how a season turns out.  Last season was a perfect example of that.  The fact that they got as far as they did was a testament to the team...not just BB and TB.  I have the opposite opinion to yours...I don't believe that this team is more flawed than most people think...I believe that it is more talented than most people think.

    +1


    The Patriots defense blew bigger 4th quarter leads in the Rams and Panthers super bowls yet they are revered because Brady had time to perform his magic in the end. All five of those super bowls could have gone either way. I don't get the blame game.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from OnlyDaTruth. Show OnlyDaTruth's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to digger0862's comment:

    The Patriots defense blew bigger 4th quarter leads in the Rams and Panthers super bowls yet they are revered because Brady had time to perform his magic in the end. All five of those super bowls could have gone either way. I don't get the blame game.



    well, when people take polar opposite positions - it gives people something to talk about?

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    well, when people take polar opposite positions - it gives people something to talk about?
    You mean like this? lol


    polar opposites

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from OnlyDaTruth. Show OnlyDaTruth's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to digger0862's comment:

     

    well, when people take polar opposite positions - it gives people something to talk about?
    You mean like this? lol

     

     

    polar opposites



    exactly :)

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

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    The team has been a lot more flawed than people want to believe, but we have two things others don't have...Belichick and Brady. Those two change things, they make other players better than they are. I'm not saying the team was terrible, it's just that they weren't Super Bowl quality despite contending for it. I think they might be better this year, but they will need a lot of these injured defensive players to come out and play well (Wilfork, Easley, Kelly, Smith).

     



    How does that make sense?  If they were contending for it then they must possess the necessary quality.  The fact is, they came as close to losing their three Super Bowl victories as they did to winning their two Super Bowl losses.  In this age of parity, it's often a matter of one poor throw, one missed tackle, one missed interception, one missed catch, etc. that separates the winners from the losers. Health most certainly plays a huge role in how a season turns out.  Last season was a perfect example of that.  The fact that they got as far as they did was a testament to the team...not just BB and TB.  I have the opposite opinion to yours...I don't believe that this team is more flawed than most people think...I believe that it is more talented than most people think. 

     



    How does it make sense? They faced Tim Tebow (at home in the cold) to get to the AFC championship game, where Baltimore's kicker blew that game, along with a receiver that dropped a touchdown pass that landed right in his bread basket. Then we went to the Super Bowl...and how did that go? Who stood out in that game? Who? Brady. Tell me another guy on that team that was better - or played better - than the guys on that Giant's team. Who else did? Because if the team was as talented as you say and what I said "didn't make sense", you could easily name 10 players.

    Here's what I came up with...their offensive line vs our defensive line...they won that battle. Their defensive line vs our offensive line...they won that battle hands down...no contest. Their tight ends and runners vs our linebackers...they won. Their receivers vs our secondary...they beat us. Our receivers vs their secondary...close, but I'll give it to them (a healthy Gronk would of changed things). Our running backs and tight ends vs their linebackers...they won. If we had all the talent you said we did, we would of won because we weren't out coached and our quarterback easily was deserving of the MVP that day...he played better than Manning and anyone on our team. That's my point.



    WHat?

    Sterling Moore had a better postseason than Brady in 2011. That's not even remotely up for debate. Not remotely up for debate.

    Sad, but oh so true. Moore was fantastic in the title game and in the SB with huge pass breakups and an INT that happened to be called back on a penalty in the SB just when the Giants needed it.

    Sterling Moore.  Is he even still in the league.

    Think about that: Sterling Moore who had a pick 6 in December that year, needed to have one in SB 46 to bail Brady out or to be accepted as playing well by a fan like you.

    Pee your pants comical.




    [object HTMLDivElement]

     

    And where is Sterling now?  Doesn't look like your daddy agrees. 

    Doesn't look like he agrees with anything you say.

    Neither does anyone else.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:



    Not unemployed, dummy.  Make more than you do as a mr. Mom.lmao


     


    what is a disgrace is that hurlie is  a teacher with that grammar.





    Come on Mr. 1099, we know you are unemployed.


    Mr. Mom?  Your still on that even though I prove you wrong about it time and again, lol!  Can't believe a word you say!  I work outside my home, the last gig you had as a telephone customer service rep was inside your little rented condo. Haha!


     


    How do you know Rusty is lying?  His fingers are typing! LMAO!!

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from cyncalpatfan. Show cyncalpatfan's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Offense

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    The team has been a lot more flawed than people want to believe, but we have two things others don't have...Belichick and Brady. Those two change things, they make other players better than they are. I'm not saying the team was terrible, it's just that they weren't Super Bowl quality despite contending for it. I think they might be better this year, but they will need a lot of these injured defensive players to come out and play well (Wilfork, Easley, Kelly, Smith).

     



    How does that make sense?  If they were contending for it then they must possess the necessary quality.  The fact is, they came as close to losing their three Super Bowl victories as they did to winning their two Super Bowl losses.  In this age of parity, it's often a matter of one poor throw, one missed tackle, one missed interception, one missed catch, etc. that separates the winners from the losers. Health most certainly plays a huge role in how a season turns out.  Last season was a perfect example of that.  The fact that they got as far as they did was a testament to the team...not just BB and TB.  I have the opposite opinion to yours...I don't believe that this team is more flawed than most people think...I believe that it is more talented than most people think. 

     



    How does it make sense? They faced Tim Tebow (at home in the cold) to get to the AFC championship game, where Baltimore's kicker blew that game, along with a receiver that dropped a touchdown pass that landed right in his bread basket. Then we went to the Super Bowl...and how did that go? Who stood out in that game? Who? Brady. Tell me another guy on that team that was better - or played better - than the guys on that Giant's team. Who else did? Because if the team was as talented as you say and what I said "didn't make sense", you could easily name 10 players.

    Here's what I came up with...their offensive line vs our defensive line...they won that battle. Their defensive line vs our offensive line...they won that battle hands down...no contest. Their tight ends and runners vs our linebackers...they won. Their receivers vs our secondary...they beat us. Our receivers vs their secondary...close, but I'll give it to them (a healthy Gronk would of changed things). Our running backs and tight ends vs their linebackers...they won. If we had all the talent you said we did, we would of won because we weren't out coached and our quarterback easily was deserving of the MVP that day...he played better than Manning and anyone on our team. That's my point.



    You made my point for me.  It's parity.  Games between two good teams are typically won by the team who executes the best...makes the fewest mistakes...has fewer significant injuries...and is the beneficiary of one or two fortunate bounces of the ball.  Against Denver, well, New England did what you would expect a good team to do against a truly inferior opponent.  They manhandled them.  When it came time for Baltimore, that was a much more evenly matched game.  Our team made fewer mistakes and also made a crucial play when it mattered the most.  That's right, he didn't drop that pass in the end-zone...it was knocked out of his hands by our defender.  I think Rusty mentioned that.

    As for the Super Bowl, again, two good teams and I expected it to come down to those factors I mentioned above.  Brady makes a mistake with the safety, Gronk is injured, Welker drops a difficult (but catchable) pass, a couple of potential fumbles don't go the Patriots' way, an interception, and the defense fails to make a stop at the end.  Brady was no more the sole reason why they were close to winning that game than he was the sole reason why they lost it. It was a combination of factors that cumulatively cost them that game.  They had the talent to get it done, but they failed to execute a few crucial plays that made the difference.  That's all there is to it.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share