To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to DoNotSleepOnThePats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Bottomline is if you score 17 or less, your chances of winning a SB is very slim.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's true. And if your D can't get off the field causing your O to be limited to 8 possessions, you're probably not going to score more than 17 points, and you will probably lose. Especially if your D folds on the last drive to lose it.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It's not the defense's fault when Brady goes three and out, overthrows a receiver, or turns the ball over with an INT or safety and it's not Brady's fault when the defense allows the other team to score on the last drive.  Team game.

    [/QUOTE]

    Pats often lost time of possession in the first half...and the D continually got gassed in the second. Wilfork week 4. Kelly week 5. Mayo week 6. Lost ALL depth in the front 7.

    Brady had 2 games, I believe, sub-.500. The offense, at times, was a disjointed mess. The D, over the course of the season, fell apart.

    NEITHER side of the ball was good enough by the end of the season. BB is trying to fix that.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     



    Point of clarification: The Pats' O scored just 13 points in 2001 and won.  They got to 20 thanks to Ty Law's pick six. 

     

    Also, these percentages you are calculating don't strike me as more convincing than what actually happened in the game.   Tell me, for instance, how many times a team won the super bowl when its defense gave up scores on 50% or more of the other team's drives in a low possession game?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    For that matter, as I've posted repeatedly, in their last 4 playoff losses the Pats have not forced a turnover.

    Under Belichick:  17-4 when the force a turnover;  1-4 when they don't.

    The one time they won without forcing a turnover was in the halcyon days of yore when they had an elite defense and won a SB.

    When you don't have "difference makers" (plural) on defense you can't apply pressure.

    When you can't apply pressure, you usually can't get a turnover in playoff football.

    I remember back in first grade we had this game on the blackboard of connect the dots. One student had difficulty with this so the teacher shortened the distance between the dots.

    Connect the dots people.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    One of the silly things about this ongoing argument is people ignore how the defense performed all season.  In 2011, they had a terrible pass defense.  I mean Dan f'n Orlovsky had 30 completions and an 81% completion rate against that secondary on December 4. Our pass defense was ranked 31 in the league in yards given up.  Well what happened in the Super Bowl? We gave up 30 completions and a 75% completion rate.  That was Eli's best completion rate in two and a half years! You have to go back to October 2009 to find a better one. Then at a key point in the game, the defense gives up a ridiculous big play because Moore is behind his man and Chung can't get a good angle. We saw those major blow ups all season that year.  Remember the collapse against the Bills where the secondary gave up two big plays late to give the game away? 

    People who think that defense was good have their heads six feet in the sand.  They didn't give up a ton of points in the Super Bowl, but they let the Giants mount long drive after long drive by giving up too many pass completions and, at the end of the game, when a big play in pass defense was needed they couldn't deliver.

    I'm not saying the offense was good.  They had their own problems.  But the idea that the defense played well is just plain wrong. They did what they had done all season: failed to slow the passing game.  

    Fortunately,  BB has finally replaced all that junk we had in our secondary back then. That was the real problem and thankfully it appears to have been solved.

     

     

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    This ... but don't bother with Wozzy ... he's not that dumb ... just that stubborn. 

    Anyone who espouses ball control ... but doesn't understand that total score is determined by chances to score, and chances to score are determined by the defense is dense ... intentionally or otherwise. 

    The issue of "total possessions" explains why BOTH teams have low scores.

    The Patriots' defense played like trash in all of their playoff losses surrendering scores on al ost every single possession and forcing zero turnovers. 

    The offense didn't perform lights out, but were generally pretty efficient in scoring overall. 

     

    Bill gets it ... again some people hear just won't admit it. 

    But I supposed BB just chucked $20+ million (and a boatload of draft picks) at the defense because ... hey ... he wanted to fix his offense. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I am trying to understand why you would say those two statements, particularly inr eference to SB42.

    YELLOW:

    After giving up a FG on the first possession, NYG possessions went INT, Punt, Punt, Punt. Note that the first of those four was actually a TO.

    PINK:

    After scoring a TD, the Pats went Punt, Punt, Fumble, Downs, Punt, Punt. They scored 1.556 points per drive - low by any benchmark; very low by the standard they set in the reg season. That's an efficient O? 

    On both statements you are just plain wrong, more so on the pink than the yellow.

    I don't know if you are lying, or you did not even bother to look at the data, or you just are too biased to accept what the data is saying.

    It does not matter. You are just wrong.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You left off the 8th possession, where they scored and raises that to 1,75 PPP.  1.75PPP is the league average basically scoring 7 points per 4 possessions.

    When you lose 4 possessions due to a high ToP, you can expect to also lose 7 points, at the league average.

    Also if you are on the losing side of that Top, you can expect your plays per possessions to also decrease due to time and that tends to render you one dimensional as you are trying to score quickly, in the most efficient manner, in order to preserve possessions.

    When you are on the winning side of the ToP, your plays per possession are increased.

    If one's plays per possessions are increased, the other has to decrease.

    There are only so many plays in a 60 minute game.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    This ... but don't bother with Wozzy ... he's not that dumb ... just that stubborn. 

    Anyone who espouses ball control ... but doesn't understand that total score is determined by chances to score, and chances to score are determined by the defense is dense ... intentionally or otherwise. 

    The issue of "total possessions" explains why BOTH teams have low scores.

    The Patriots' defense played like trash in all of their playoff losses surrendering scores on al ost every single possession and forcing zero turnovers. 

    The offense didn't perform lights out, but were generally pretty efficient in scoring overall. 

     

    Bill gets it ... again some people hear just won't admit it. 

    But I supposed BB just chucked $20+ million (and a boatload of draft picks) at the defense because ... hey ... he wanted to fix his offense. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I am trying to understand why you would say those two statements, particularly inr eference to SB42.

    YELLOW:

    After giving up a FG on the first possession, NYG possessions went INT, Punt, Punt, Punt. Note that the first of those four was actually a TO.

    PINK:

    After scoring a TD, the Pats went Punt, Punt, Fumble, Downs, Punt, Punt. They scored 1.556 points per drive - low by any benchmark; very low by the standard they set in the reg season. That's an efficient O? 

    On both statements you are just plain wrong, more so on the pink than the yellow.

    I don't know if you are lying, or you did not even bother to look at the data, or you just are too biased to accept what the data is saying.

    It does not matter. You are just wrong.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You left off the 8th possession, where they scored and raises that to 1,75 PPP.  1.75PPP is the league average basically scoring 7 points per 4 possessions.

    When you lose 4 possessions due to a high ToP, you can expect to also lose 7 points, at the league average.

    Also if you are on the losing side of that Top, you can expect your plays per possessions to also decrease due to time and that tends to render you one dimensional as you are trying to score quickly, in the most efficient manner, in order to preserve possessions.

    When you are on the winning side of the ToP, your plays per possession are increased.

    If one's plays per possessions are increased, the other has to decrease.

    There are only so many plays in a 60 minute game.

    [/QUOTE]

    1.75... OK

    1.75 is league average? Prolate just said it was 1.86. So they were either below or at league average at best. 

    Great... The O that going into the game was considered to be the best ever, was expected to perform average and teh you expect the average to below avergae D to perform like the bears. TB laughed at the NYG players who predicted they were going to keep teh Pats down to 18.

    I do not understand the part I highlighted in yellow. I believe what you have there is a circular argument.

    I would understand if you said the team would try to score quicker if they were behind on score, but not because they were losing the ToP battle. 

    The pink part is also not always true. If the Pats answered a 5 min drive with their own 5 min drive, then ToP to that point would be 50%. This pattern recur over and over through out the 60 mins and ToP would equal 50%. The only difference is that if the teams kept exchanging 5 min drives then there would only be 6 possessions per team. 

    Also, it's not ToP that drive the number of plays per possession. When you earn first downs you get a chance to run more plays which then extends time elapsed for that drive.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

     

     

    Great... The O that going into the game was considered to be the best ever, was expected to perform average and teh you expect the average to below avergae D to perform like the bears. TB laughed at the NYG players who predicted they were going to keep teh Pats down to 18.

     



    We all know the O-line played terribly in that game. You're not going to score much with your QB getting hit 25 times. That's the end of that story.

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    Great... The O that going into the game was considered to be the best ever, was expected to perform average and teh you expect the average to below avergae D to perform like the bears. TB laughed at the NYG players who predicted they were going to keep teh Pats down to 18.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We all know the O-line played terribly in that game. You're not going to score much with your QB getting hit 25 times. That's the end of that story.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to TravisBean's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]

    The Pats SB 38 D gave up a whopping 29 points to Jake Delhomme and the Panthers. 

    Did you look at the box score after that game or just thank Jon Kasay? You're a fraud, Prolate.

    A total fraud.

     

    Dude, you know nothing about football. Nothing.  You think Brady is the problem with the team.  Go look at how the Pats defense played through the first three quarters of of the Panthers' Super Bowl. Ten drives--six of them three and outs, seven punts, one turnover.  Ten points given up over three quarters.  The fourth quarter got crazy, but the Pats were in good position to withstand the onslaught precisely because the defense was absolutely dominant through three quarters. 

    NE's 2011 SB D played very well for their level of play. They outplayed the offense in the title game and SB, mainly because Brady as AWFUL in the title game and mediocre in the SB, mainly the 4th qtr being poor, starting with that INT on 1st down.

    Even the Safety to start the game with all kinds of time and room to run to his right shows his head was somewhere else.

    Brady and the offense may have been a big reason why they got the #1 seed in 2011, but boy oh boy, Brady did all he could to sabotage that title game as he did in 2007, didn't he?

    Is it really all that much for Brady to play a clean game?

     

    [/QUOTE]


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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to dwhite1220's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to theshinez's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Seems our boy BB and the new kid in town Lombardi completely disagree with your totally wrong analysis of the team.

     Finally after 10 frutile years of Free Agency and Value Draft picking the boys are throwing some REAL money at the Real problem.....The Defense.

    Thank you Executive of the year Lombardi!!

    [/QUOTE] Agree 100%


    How can the problem be the D?  We only gave up 26 points to the Greatest Offense of all time.  We ONLY scored 16.  THAT'S 16 points!!  And if you look at the other playoff losses the last 5-6 years, you will see that we could not score points. 

    2012 vs. Ravens: 13 pts.

    2011 SB vs. Giants: 17pts.

    Our issues have stemmed mainly from the (lack of ) O-line protection and not being able to score points. 

    [/QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]


    Try to comprehend!  They gave up 26 points on 7 possessions, not 12. 

    AN AVERAGE GAME IS 12!!!!

    THAT'S 3.71 POINTS PER POSSESSION!

    IN CONTRAST, DURING THE REGULAR SEASON, THE BRONCO'S WERE AVERAGING 2.76 POINTS PER POSSESSION @ 13 POSSESSIONS ON AVERAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

    THE PATS D GAVE UP AN ASTONISHING EXTRA POINT PER POSSESSION THAN THE BRONCO'S ALREADY EXCEEDINGLY HIGH AVERAGE POINT PER POSSESSION.

    IN A 12 POSSESSION GAME AT THAT RATE, 3.71 PPP, THEY WOULD HAVE GIVEN UP 45 POINTS!

    The O, on the other hand scored 1.87 points per possession, which is better than average, but not their average.  But what do you expect when you get the ball 4 flippen times, in 50 minutes because peyton is toying with your D to make sure you get as little possessions as possible?

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    For that matter, as I've posted repeatedly, in their last 4 playoff losses the Pats have not forced a turnover.

    Under Belichick:  17-4 when the force a turnover;  1-4 when they don't.

    The one time they won without forcing a turnover was in the halcyon days of yore when they had an elite defense and won a SB.

    When you don't have "difference makers" (plural) on defense you can't apply pressure.

    When you can't apply pressure, you usually can't get a turnover in playoff football.

    I remember back in first grade we had this game on the blackboard of connect the dots. One student had difficulty with this so the teacher shortened the distance between the dots.

    Connect the dots people.

    [/QUOTE]

    Finally it comes out.  Just as important as number of opportunities and making a freaking stop on the opponent's final possession....it's turnovers baby.

    Seattle won the Super Bowl due directly too Turnovers.

    Remember the 4th QTR of Super Bowl 46 we actualy had an INT deep in Giant territory but it was nullified because some TOOL BAG jumped off sides.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    Both teams get the same number of possessions!!!! I mean...wth? It doesn't matter how many possessions because it is an even playing field. Whether you have 20 possessions,  10 possessions or 1 possession. It only matters what you do with them!?!?

    Our offense doesn't need more possessions,  they need to do more with the possessions they have.  They have consistently underperformed in 6 straight playoff losses.  Real talk here. 15.5 PPG scored in 6 years of post season exits. 

     

    As Wozzy and Salcon, and Seattle have all shown, our offense has underperformed, no...greatly underperformed on the biggest stage, after dominating in the regular season.

    Yes we needed to rebuild the defense after the old core was gone entering 2009, it took 3 years but 2012, and last years defense has been far better but decimated with injuries. The offense however continues to stumble on the biggest stage. They can't get 1st downs, they can't stay on the field, they can't score points, they can't stop turning the ball over.

    Just look up the play by play charts for our post season losses. It's ugly.

    This debate is dumb.



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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to TravisBean's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    Great... The O that going into the game was considered to be the best ever, was expected to perform average and teh you expect the average to below avergae D to perform like the bears. TB laughed at the NYG players who predicted they were going to keep teh Pats down to 18.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We all know the O-line played terribly in that game. You're not going to score much with your QB getting hit 25 times. That's the end of that story.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree.

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady chose that. He wanted to lit it up. How is that any different than the title game in 2007 at home where he was horrendous with SD's D knowing his ego was on display trying to make it about him in the postseason?

    If a D knows Brady's desires, it hurts our O Line.

    Kinda funny how it continues to happen with Brady, huh?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    No, your buck fuddy, BB chose that because the O had no possessions and there was no choice.  And yes, the D knew that,,,,,, That's what also makes it more difficult to win when your own D double screws you by stealing possessions and making you predictable and turns around and triple screws you by giving up the lead in the end.

      That's EXACTLY why teams with suckazz D's don't win SB's.

    It's tooooooo easy to keep the O, on the bench.

    And that's EXACTLY how Coughlin and Fox out foxed the helpless, BB. 

    Cat and mouse and then go for the jugular. 

    Ecstatic Lombari and Kraft are finally doing something about 6 years of BB's D, HELL!!!

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    And here is something I would like pro, zbo, and maybe that catfish guy(is he a troll? I can't remember) to respond to.....babe and pezz please don't bother.

    You guus wanted the Pats defense to hold the gints on the last drive of each game scoreless as they needed a td to win on their last drive in both games, can we all agree that is what we all wanted the Pats defense to do?

    Good.

    So, if the Pats defense had held(asante catches the pick etc..) The Patriots would have held the Gints to 10 points, and 15 points in both super bowls as that was their score with 3 minutes left in both super bowls. 

    You are saying the defense failed because they couldn't hold the other team to 10 points and 15 points in 2 different super bowls? 

    Really? Do you realize how sick that is?

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    Both teams get the same number of possessions!!!! I mean...wth? It doesn't matter how many possessions because it is an even playing field. Whether you have 20 possessions,  10 possessions or 1 possession. It only matters what you do with them!?!?

    Our offense doesn't need more possessions,  they need to do more with the possessions they have.  They have consistently underperformed in 6 straight playoff losses.  Real talk here. 15.5 PPG scored in 6 years of post season exits. 

     

    As Wozzy and Salcon, and Seattle have all shown, our offense has underperformed, no...greatly underperformed on the biggest stage, after dominating in the regular season.

    Yes we needed to rebuild the defense after the old core was gone entering 2009, it took 3 years but 2012, and last years defense has been far better but decimated with injuries. The offense however continues to stumble on the biggest stage. They can't get 1st downs, they can't stay on the field, they can't score points, they can't stop turning the ball over.

    Just look up the play by play charts for our post season losses. It's ugly.

    This debate is dumb.


    Boom!

    Dumb indeed... like I need math to tell me that 14 and 17 points aren't enough?  

    There were 9 possessions apiece in the last Super Bowl, do you think the Giants are bemoaning their measly nine possessions?  

    And because we used the same ball control game plans from 2001-2004 that the Giants used on us the last two times... is it their genius for adopting this style of play, or our fault for moving away from it on the offensive end... a bit of a quandry isn't it?  

    The irony is that the same crew arguing on the offense's behalf in past Super Bowls, will also be the first to tell you that a ball control offense doesn't work in today's NFL and we are better off as a pass first/heavy team.

    This is a joke.  Some posters sided with the wrong side of an argument years ago, now we're subjected to " the defense is at fault" threads, when most of us "the defense was average but the offense was worse" people would just as soon let it die.  

    Just because your offense was great in the regular season, it doesn't mean jack if they wilt in the playoffs.  We need to be tougher on both sides of the ball, don't blame the unit that played beyond themselves and let the underachievers walk.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Both teams get the same number of possessions!!!! I mean...wth? It doesn't matter how many possessions because it is an even playing field. Whether you have 20 possessions,  10 possessions or 1 possession. It only matters what you do with them!?!?

    Our offense doesn't need more possessions,  they need to do more with the possessions they have.  They have consistently underperformed in 6 straight playoff losses.  Real talk here. 15.5 PPG scored in 6 years of post season exits. 

     

    As Wozzy and Salcon, and Seattle have all shown, our offense has underperformed, no...greatly underperformed on the biggest stage, after dominating in the regular season.

    Yes we needed to rebuild the defense after the old core was gone entering 2009, it took 3 years but 2012, and last years defense has been far better but decimated with injuries. The offense however continues to stumble on the biggest stage. They can't get 1st downs, they can't stay on the field, they can't score points, they can't stop turning the ball over.

    Just look up the play by play charts for our post season losses. It's ugly.

    This debate is dumb.



    [/QUOTE]


    Well actually, you're dumb.

    Limited possessions = limited plays by the team losing ToP.  Limited plays means limited scoring.

    Let me put it in a way even a 3rd grader can understand.  Maybe you and wobbly too?

    If you have the ball a looooooooong time, that means the other team is going to have the ball a teeny, weeny, little, time.  The team that has the ball a teeny, weeny little time is probably not going to win, because they have to try and score quickly in the teeny, weeny little time they have. 

    It's the defenses job to not let the other team stay on the field so that their own offense doesn't have a teeny, weeny, little time to run the same amount of shrinking possessions.

    The Pats won most of their games because TB threw for a gazillion yards and points.

    That aint happening if he's on the field for 20 minutes a game.

    Thank bb and his worthless D for being on the field for 40/8 and eliminating all those opportunities to score.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And here is something I would like pro, zbo, and maybe that catfish guy(is he a troll? I can't remember) to respond to.....babe and pezz please don't bother.

    You guus wanted the Pats defense to hold the gints on the last drive of each game scoreless as they needed a td to win on their last drive in both games, can we all agree that is what we all wanted the Pats defense to do?

    Good.

    So, if the Pats defense had held(asante catches the pick etc..) The Patriots would have held the Gints to 10 points, and 15 points in both super bowls as that was their score with 3 minutes left in both super bowls. 

    You are saying the defense failed because they couldn't hold the other team to 10 points and 15 points in 2 different super bowls? 

    Really? Do you realize how sick that is?

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, about as sick as thinking the Patriots could hold the greatest show on turf to 17 pts in the SB.  Or Cowboys holding the Bills to 17 and 13 points in back to back SB's or how about the Seahawks holding the highest scoring offense in history to just 8 points.  Sick!! how dare anyone think that is possible.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to TFB12's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And here is something I would like pro, zbo, and maybe that catfish guy(is he a troll? I can't remember) to respond to.....babe and pezz please don't bother.

    You guus wanted the Pats defense to hold the gints on the last drive of each game scoreless as they needed a td to win on their last drive in both games, can we all agree that is what we all wanted the Pats defense to do?

    Good.

    So, if the Pats defense had held(asante catches the pick etc..) The Patriots would have held the Gints to 10 points, and 15 points in both super bowls as that was their score with 3 minutes left in both super bowls. 

    You are saying the defense failed because they couldn't hold the other team to 10 points and 15 points in 2 different super bowls? 

    Really? Do you realize how sick that is?

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, about as sick as thinking the Patriots could hold the greatest show on turf to 17 pts in the SB.  Or Cowboys holding the Bills to 17 and 13 points in back to back SB's or how about the Seahawks holding the highest scoring offense in history to just 8 points.  Sick!! how dare anyone think that is possible.

    [/QUOTE]

    You are citing 1 example of the Goodel era offense and it will go down as one of the greatest defensive performances as well as 1 of the greatest choke jobs in NFL history(PM scoring 8 points)

    Yes, expecting a team that was carried by a 35 ppg offense for 18 games and an average defense to hold the other team to 10 and 15 points(oh wait, 13 points, I forgot our offense spotted them 2 points with the safety) is SICK! 

    The Giants point totals of 17 and 21 points scored are the 2 lowest totals to win a super bowl since BB's 2001 Pats and BB's 1990 Giants both scored 20.

    The last time a team scored less then the gints 14 points to win a SB, you have to go wayyyyy back to the 1973 Dolphins.....but our offense did good scoring 14 and 17 in our 2 super bowl losses, and 15.5 ppg in our last 6 playoff losses....WHAT???

    You think the 2001 Rams greatest show on turf were all pissed off at their defense for giving up 20 points, or were they a little peeved at their 36 ppg offense for scoring 17? Right..

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dwhite1220's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to theshinez's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Seems our boy BB and the new kid in town Lombardi completely disagree with your totally wrong analysis of the team.

     Finally after 10 frutile years of Free Agency and Value Draft picking the boys are throwing some REAL money at the Real problem.....The Defense.

    Thank you Executive of the year Lombardi!!

    [/QUOTE] Agree 100%


    How can the problem be the D?  We only gave up 26 points to the Greatest Offense of all time.  We ONLY scored 16.  THAT'S 16 points!!  And if you look at the other playoff losses the last 5-6 years, you will see that we could not score points. 

    2012 vs. Ravens: 13 pts.

    2011 SB vs. Giants: 17pts.

    Our issues have stemmed mainly from the (lack of ) O-line protection and not being able to score points. 

    [/QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]


    Try to comprehend!  They gave up 26 points on 7 possessions, not 12. 

    AN AVERAGE GAME IS 12!!!!

    THAT'S 3.71 POINTS PER POSSESSION!

    IN CONTRAST, DURING THE REGULAR SEASON, THE BRONCO'S WERE AVERAGING 2.76 POINTS PER POSSESSION @ 13 POSSESSIONS ON AVERAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

    THE PATS D GAVE UP AN ASTONISHING EXTRA POINT PER POSSESSION THAN THE BRONCO'S ALREADY EXCEEDINGLY HIGH AVERAGE POINT PER POSSESSION.

    IN A 12 POSSESSION GAME AT THAT RATE, 3.71 PPP, THEY WOULD HAVE GIVEN UP 45 POINTS!

    The O, on the other hand scored 1.87 points per possession, which is better than average, but not their average.  But what do you expect when you get the ball 4 flippen times, in 50 minutes because peyton is toying with your D to make sure you get as little possessions as possible?

    [/QUOTE]


    Funny how these bad D apologists rag on the O and completely ignore Gronk being out in key games. Brady took a collection of trash all the way to the AFCCG, and they still complain.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    "Thank god they've added to the defense, now maybe the offense will score more than 14 and 17 points in the Super Bowl... see how silly that sounds?"

    It's only silly if you don't understand time of possession. 

    Or, if you didn't watch the last Super Bowl where the superior defense won the game. 

    It's not silly if you remember how when we won Super Bowls the defense was getting key turnovers and sometimes scoring themselves, or shortening the field to enable quick scores. 

    Which is why BB has chosen to aggressively address the defense. I give him credit for learning and changing with the times, unlike some of the posters in this forum.

    Belichick clearly agrees with those of us who believe the D was a big part of the problem, which is delicious for those of us who have called for it and faced mockery from his so-called supporters. Other offseason moves show BB agrees also that Brady needs more weapons. So again, BB agrees with our analysis. Notice, however, BB is making no moves to replace or demote Tom Brady. Another thing his supporters in here should make a note of.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Which is why BB has chosen to aggressively address the defense. I give him credit for learning and changing with the times, unlike some of the posters in this forum.

    [/QUOTE]

    He has aggressively addressed the offense as well.

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

    Thank god they've added to the defense, now maybe the offense will score more than 14 and 17 points in the Super Bowl... see how silly that sounds?

     



    "Maybe now the defense will get off the field so 'the offense will have more than 8 possessions to work with."  "NOT!  They can't score a lot of points while the D is on the field, and with possessions disappearing at an  OBSCENE rate..  Is this really a foriegn concept to you?  Did you not hear them mention at least 5 times during the Pats/Donkeys game?  7 freaken possessions!
    And you've been telling us how smart you are, all these years.  PFFT

     

     

    Apparently bb, with help from Lombardi, agrees and can admit it.  Sorry you can't.

    See how silly you sound?"

    Wozzy...

    Do you go to sleep at night thinking, "Deja vu of redundancy, Time of Posseession, Ball control, Control the tempo...both sides...complementing 1 another, Deja Vu of Redundancy...",  I do.

    This thread is the scariest thing I have ever seen in my life.   I     Have   Lived     Hor-rors.  Please do not respond to me in the here and now.  I like you. 

     

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    Are you back for a while Laz?

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    ^ H#ly S%hh!t.

    In retrospect, that assessment looks really scary.

     

    Delicately...I shall leave it at that...

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    In response to garytx's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Are you back for a while Laz?

    [/QUOTE]

    ple-ase...don't...tempt...me...under this subject matter.  Am...fighting...for All...the power of...errgh...somewhere else, garytx...errrgghh, must   strength    try   stay   strength...errggh <gurgle>...

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

    Re: To all (well the 3) Defense is not the Problem Posters

    come to the dark side Laz!  Sounds like the strength has failed you.  Welcome back!

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share