Tom Brady's playoff numbers

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

    Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    Came across this article today. I think it illustrates a point that our offense has struggled in the post season while dropping back 78% of the time as opposed to 72% in the regular season(which is already a very high number) I hope we come out tomorrow night and change this trend.

     

    The Colts’ four-man rush vs. Brady 

     

    "Brady’s postseason play has been part of New England’s recent playoff problem. His 71.1 Total QBR in the regular season since losing Super Bowl XLII is fourth best in the league, but his 45.7 playoff QBR in that span ranks 19th. 

     

    Brady vs. 4 or Fewer Rushers

    From 2008 till 2013 Brady has dropped back 

    71% of the time in the regular season. 78%* in the post season.

     

     

    That means Tom Brady drops back 78% of the time in the playoffs. It is the highest %  of drop backs by any QB other then Drew Brees in the post season for the last 5 years.

     

     

    Comp pct. 65.0% in regular season.  59.9% in the post season

     

     

    Yds per att 7.5 in the regular season, 6.4 in the post season.

     

     

    TD to INT rate 89-37 in the regular season. 12-10 in the post season.

     

     

    Total QBR 75.6 in the regular season. 35.0 in the post season. 

     

     

     

    "Brady has always been good against the blitz. He has 76 touchdowns and six interceptions when opponents send at least five rushers since the start of 2008 (including the playoffs). His plus-70 TD-Int differential is best in the league, and only Aaron Rodgers has even thrown 70 touchdowns. 

     

     

     

    The problem is teams don’t blitz Brady as often in the postseason. The 2007 Giants solidified a basic tenet for beating Brady: don’t rely on extra pass-rushers. Teams have followed that blueprint with success since the 2007 Giants". 

     

    Question....

    Anybody have any ideas on how we should attack a 4 man rush? Or why teams consistently rush 4 and drop 7 in the post season...how do they know that will work? 

    Thoughts?

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    Question....

    Anybody have any ideas on how we should attack a 4 man rush? Or why teams consistently rush 4 and drop 7 in the post season...how do they know that will work? 

    Thoughts?



    What I have observed most times, the O-line IS having problems with a four man rush.  Simple as that.  Opponents see that and, therefore, do not feel the need to rush more than 4 most times.  Especially from an outside edge rusher who collapses the pocket so fast Brady can't make his typical side step moves or step up.

    Another clue, the Pats do not stretch the field and are mostly a short to middle passing team.  So when coverage drops back, the opposing d-backs have no fear for a deep threat and can clog the short to mid lanes.  This requires more time for routes to develop to counter these defensive moves and, by then, Brady is just about out of time. 

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    pointless

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    From 2008 to 2013 Brady has played in 7 postseason games.  In 2 of those games he destroyed the opposing defense (Denver, Houston).  In the 2nd SB against the Giants I thought he played pretty well.  That leaves 4 games, 3 of which came against the Ravens a team who has always played Brady tough.  Idk if I would read too much into this "blueprint".  It was basically carried out by one team with a bunch of HoF'ers on defense with the Jets game being the one exception.

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Question....

    Anybody have any ideas on how we should attack a 4 man rush? Or why teams consistently rush 4 and drop 7 in the post season...how do they know that will work? 

    Thoughts?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    What I have observed most times, the O-line IS having problems with a four man rush.  Simple as that.  Opponents see that and, therefore, do not feel the need to rush more than 4 most times.  Especially from an outside edge rusher who collapses the pocket so fast Brady can't make his typical side step moves or step up.

     

    Another clue, the Pats do not stretch the field and are mostly a short to middle passing team.  So when coverage drops back, the opposing d-backs have no fear for a deep threat and can clog the short to mid lanes.  This requires more time for routes to develop to counter these defensive moves and, by then, Brady is just about out of time. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Interesting,  is the o line struggling maybe because 7 defenders are covering what is usually 4 receiving options and defense's are getting "coverage" pressures and sacks, or the o line just isn't very good?

    Maybe it is just stretching the field. Teams bundle up and take away the middle. I just don't remember very many deep threats before 07 when Bradys post season numbers were far better.

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    From 2008 to 2013 Brady has played in 7 postseason games.  In 2 of those games he destroyed the opposing defense (Denver, Houston).  In the 2nd SB against the Giants I thought he played pretty well.  That leaves 4 games, 3 of which came against the Ravens a team who has always played Brady tough.  Idk if I would read too much into this "blueprint".  It was basically carried out by one team with a bunch of HoF'ers on defense with the Jets game being the one exception.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think by 2008 they meant the 2007 to 2008 season. So it would be 10 post season games of data. So I guess ot would be 2 gints teams, 3 ravens teams, and 1 jets team. So, just bad luck we ran into 6 different teams with personnel to stifle the greatest QB in NFL history?

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    I think by 2008 they meant the 2007 to 2008 season. So it would be 10 post season games of data. So I guess ot would be 2 gints teams, 3 ravens teams, and 1 jets team. So, just bad luck we ran into 6 different teams with personnel to stifle the greatest QB in NFL history?



    The second Giants team was nothing like the first Giants team defensively.  The first Giants team just obliterated our offensive line both because of personnel and because our line didn't appear to be ready for the different personnel groupings the Giants used.  That is probably the biggest example of Belichick being outcoached in a big game that I can remember.  He basically admitted as much after the game.

    The second Giants team did not play that well defensively.  Recall Brady set the SB record for consecutive completions and on the INT Gronk was open but Brady made a poor throw.  The score was low  because the game was slowed down by the Giants keeping the offense off the field.  I don't think the 2011 Giants carried out any blueprint to stop Brady in that game.  Rather the Patriots didn't make the critical plays when they were there.

    The point here of course is that imo neither of these Giants teams were anything like the blueprint being described.  The "blueprint" is playing nickel while still bottling up the run and getting some pressure and coverage pressure by flooding the middle of the field with DBs (something I might add wouldn't  have  been as effective in the earlier years when there were multiple guys that could make plays outside the numbers).   3 of those 4 games were carried out by the Ravens I was talking about.

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    Brady started 10-0 in playoffs, and 7-7 since.....

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    BB is the best HC in the game. I'll let him decide what is best on gameday. You BB haters really need to desist.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from kevin13130. Show kevin13130's posts

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    From 2008 to 2013 Brady has played in 7 postseason games.  In 2 of those games he destroyed the opposing defense (Denver, Houston).  In the 2nd SB against the Giants I thought he played pretty well.  That leaves 4 games, 3 of which came against the Ravens a team who has always played Brady tough.  Idk if I would read too much into this "blueprint".  It was basically carried out by one team with a bunch of HoF'ers on defense with the Jets game being the one exception.



    I think by 2008 they meant the 2007 to 2008 season. So it would be 10 post season games of data. So I guess ot would be 2 gints teams, 3 ravens teams, and 1 jets team. So, just bad luck we ran into 6 different teams with personnel to stifle the greatest QB in NFL history?

    [/QUOTE]

    The Ravens just beat us up at the line of scrimmage every time (except this year!), so they've dominated us in the last three meetings. The first Giants team we faced had the pass rushers, but not the second team. The second time around, Brady played pretty well but ultimately lost because Gronk was limited and we missed a few opportunities.

    The Jets team beat us with a good game plan on defense. They went nickel/dime package, man coverage across the board, and left no one open. I would say Brady got coverage sacked a lot in that game, as opposed to quick pressure by a four man rush. If we had a good running game, we could have taken advantage, but we didn't.

    I think what it ultimately comes down to is misfortune, and by that I mean often having to face teams that have the personnel to create pressure without sacrificing coverage. Not a lot of teams can, even those in the playoffs.

    Now, pertaining to this year's playoffs, I think the only team left in the playoffs who can realistically rush four against Brady are NFC teams: Seattle, San Fran, and Carolina. So I expect Brady to do well tomorrow and next weekend (if applicable). There will be concern, I imagine, if we make it to the Super Bowl.

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    BB is the best HC in the game. I'll let him decide what is best on gameday. You BB haters really need to desist.

    [/QUOTE]

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to ccsjl's comment:

    Brady started 10-0 in playoffs, and 7-7 since.....



    Losing players like Willie McGinist, Tedy Bruschi, Mike Vrabel, Ted Johnson, Ty Law, Richard Seymour, Rodney Harrison, Kevin Faulk, Troy Brown, Deion Branch or Adam Vinatieri has everything to do with that statistic.

    Plus, only the Ravens 9-5, Steelers 9-3 and Giants 8-3 have won more playoff games in that time period.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Question....

    Anybody have any ideas on how we should attack a 4 man rush? Or why teams consistently rush 4 and drop 7 in the post season...how do they know that will work? 

    Thoughts?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    What I have observed most times, the O-line IS having problems with a four man rush.  Simple as that.  Opponents see that and, therefore, do not feel the need to rush more than 4 most times.  Especially from an outside edge rusher who collapses the pocket so fast Brady can't make his typical side step moves or step up.

     

    Another clue, the Pats do not stretch the field and are mostly a short to middle passing team.  So when coverage drops back, the opposing d-backs have no fear for a deep threat and can clog the short to mid lanes.  This requires more time for routes to develop to counter these defensive moves and, by then, Brady is just about out of time. 

    [/QUOTE]

    It's a loaded question. 

    Just because a team doesn't blitz means they "drop seven"? Talk about massaging a concept. 

    That's simply not true. Baltimore didn't blitz New England at all last season in that game, but they stacked the box with an extra safety plenty often. Kind of like when the Ravens' Bernard Pollard hit Ridley, and then he fumbled, and then Baltimore scored ... again.

    Here is their SS's resume for the day:

     S.Vereen right end to BLT 35 for 1 yard (B.Pollard).

    T.Brady pass short left to B.Lloyd to NE 49 for 3 yards (R.Lewis; B.Pollard).

    T.Brady pass incomplete short left to B.Lloyd (B.Pollard).

     Direct snap to D.Woodhead. D.Woodhead left guard to BLT 27 for 7 yards (C.Graham; B.Pollard).

    T.Brady pass short left to A.Hernandez to NE 25 for 5 yards (C.Williams; B.Pollard).

    T.Brady pass deep right to W.Welker to NE 49 for 24 yards (B.Pollard; C.Graham). PENALTY on BLT-B.Pollard, Unnecessary Roughness, 15 yards, enforced at NE 49.

    S.Ridley up the middle to NE 25 for 9 yards (R.Lewis; B.Pollard).

    (Shotgun) S.Ridley right tackle to NE 47 for 8 yards (B.Pollard). FUMBLES (B.Pollard), 

    T.Brady pass short right to S.Vereen to 50 for 5 yards (B.Pollard).

    T.Brady pass short left to A.Hernandez to BLT 22 for 11 yards (B.Pollard) [C.Upshaw]

    Your strong safety isn't making plays from 5 yards and in half the time if you are "dropping seven" into coverage. He's doing it because you are bringing people up to defend the run and short pass. The Ravens SS didn't have 9 tackles because he was deep in coverage. He had nine tackles because he was 10 yards and in. And why wouldn't he be? If Gronkowski is out, New England has a slot WR and a couple running backs as their main targets. How much offense is realistically going to unfold past ten yards from the LOS anyhow? 

    That bold part is very true. New England doesn't force teams to play deep. It's really easy to cover underneath routes and a running game at the same time. It's exacerbated when they lose their biggest deep threat/closest thing in Gronkowski. 

    At any given rate ... any difference between playoff stats and regular season stats the last few seasons are kind of easy to explain. If New England doesn't have Gronkowski, the whole offense doesn't work as well. 

    Anyone not factoring this is negligent or dishonest. 

    2013 Patriots Offense with and Without Gronkowski.

                                    ppg    RZ%  COMP%    Rat

    Without Gronkowski (6)20.840.956.9       79.5

    With Gronkowski (7)3268.864.1       95.8

    ____________________________________

    2010-12 Playoff Games with and Without Gronkowski:

    Without Gronkowski (2) 15             58.9           74.7

    With Gronkowski (4)     32.5           65.8           107.3

    This is so incredibly simple, I don't even understand why people spend so much time poring over numbers and facts and figures. Every single season, New England has lost a hugely important offensive player right as the post-season begins. 

    As far as opponents rushing four, it's very simple. They don't face many teams in the regular season who CAN rush four and still win. Only a select few teams with very good front lines can get away with this: Baltimore, the old Giants, Seattle. 

    This is how New England won three Superbowls: a defense that could get pressure sending just four. McGinest, Seymour, Washington/Green, and Warren were enough to get more sacks than they currently can get sending five. 

    A dominant defensive line, or at least on that is playing dominant, is the one single thing that most Superbowl winners have in common. From Baltimore, NY, Pitt, Green Bay, New England, and a long way back.

    So why rush four more often? Because they can, and they can devote the extra linebacker to be a RB spy, a zone run defender, or to help bracket a WR, or a combination of things. Heck, tehy can load the front end with an extra safety most of the time if you take Gronk away too. 

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Question....

    Anybody have any ideas on how we should attack a 4 man rush? Or why teams consistently rush 4 and drop 7 in the post season...how do they know that will work? 

    Thoughts?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    What I have observed most times, the O-line IS having problems with a four man rush.  Simple as that.  Opponents see that and, therefore, do not feel the need to rush more than 4 most times.  Especially from an outside edge rusher who collapses the pocket so fast Brady can't make his typical side step moves or step up.

     

    Another clue, the Pats do not stretch the field and are mostly a short to middle passing team.  So when coverage drops back, the opposing d-backs have no fear for a deep threat and can clog the short to mid lanes.  This requires more time for routes to develop to counter these defensive moves and, by then, Brady is just about out of time. 

    [/QUOTE]

    It's a loaded question. 

    Just because a team doesn't blitz means they "drop seven"? Talk about massaging a concept. 

    That's simply not true. Baltimore didn't blitz New England at all last season in that game, but they stacked the box with an extra safety plenty often. Kind of like when the Ravens' Bernard Pollard hit Ridley, and then he fumbled, and then Baltimore scored ... again.

    Here is their SS's resume for the day:

     S.Vereen right end to BLT 35 for 1 yard (B.Pollard).

    T.Brady pass short left to B.Lloyd to NE 49 for 3 yards (R.Lewis; B.Pollard).

    T.Brady pass incomplete short left to B.Lloyd (B.Pollard).

     Direct snap to D.Woodhead. D.Woodhead left guard to BLT 27 for 7 yards (C.Graham; B.Pollard).

    T.Brady pass short left to A.Hernandez to NE 25 for 5 yards (C.Williams; B.Pollard).

    T.Brady pass deep right to W.Welker to NE 49 for 24 yards (B.Pollard; C.Graham). PENALTY on BLT-B.Pollard, Unnecessary Roughness, 15 yards, enforced at NE 49.

    S.Ridley up the middle to NE 25 for 9 yards (R.Lewis; B.Pollard).

    (Shotgun) S.Ridley right tackle to NE 47 for 8 yards (B.Pollard). FUMBLES (B.Pollard), 

    T.Brady pass short right to S.Vereen to 50 for 5 yards (B.Pollard).

    T.Brady pass short left to A.Hernandez to BLT 22 for 11 yards (B.Pollard) [C.Upshaw]

    Your strong safety isn't making plays from 5 yards and in half the time if you are "dropping seven" into coverage. He's doing it because you are bringing people up to defend the run and short pass. The Ravens SS didn't have 9 tackles because he was deep in coverage. He had nine tackles because he was 10 yards and in. And why wouldn't he be? If Gronkowski is out, New England has a slot WR and a couple running backs as their main targets. How much offense is realistically going to unfold past ten yards from the LOS anyhow? 

    That bold part is very true. New England doesn't force teams to play deep. It's really easy to cover underneath routes and a running game at the same time. It's exacerbated when they lose their biggest deep threat/closest thing in Gronkowski. 

    At any given rate ... any difference between playoff stats and regular season stats the last few seasons are kind of easy to explain. If New England doesn't have Gronkowski, the whole offense doesn't work as well. 

    Anyone not factoring this is negligent or dishonest. 

    2013 Patriots Offense with and Without Gronkowski.

                                    ppg    RZ%  COMP%    Rat

    Without Gronkowski (6)20.840.956.9       79.5

    With Gronkowski (7)3268.864.1       95.8

    ____________________________________

    2010-12 Playoff Games with and Without Gronkowski:

    Without Gronkowski (2) 15             58.9           74.7

    With Gronkowski (4)     32.5           65.8           107.3

    This is so incredibly simple, I don't even understand why people spend so much time poring over numbers and facts and figures. Every single season, New England has lost a hugely important offensive player right as the post-season begins. 

    As far as opponents rushing four, it's very simple. They don't face many teams in the regular season who CAN rush four and still win. Only a select few teams with very good front lines can get away with this: Baltimore, the old Giants, Seattle. 

    This is how New England won three Superbowls: a defense that could get pressure sending just four. McGinest, Seymour, Washington/Green, and Warren were enough to get more sacks than they currently can get sending five. 

    A dominant defensive line, or at least on that is playing dominant, is the one single thing that most Superbowl winners have in common. From Baltimore, NY, Pitt, Green Bay, New England, and a long way back.

    So why rush four more often? Because they can, and they can devote the extra linebacker to be a RB spy, a zone run defender, or to help bracket a WR, or a combination of things. Heck, tehy can load the front end with an extra safety most of the time if you take Gronk away too. 

    [/QUOTE]

    So your post boils down to...Brady doesn't do well unless he has Gronk? Man, I hope that isn't true, or we are getting piggly wigglied tomorrow.

    I also remember our old defense using lots of blitzes, especially safety and corner blitzing....but hey who am I to question your wealth of knowledge. 

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to digger0862's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccsjl's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Brady started 10-0 in playoffs, and 7-7 since.....

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Losing players like Willie McGinist, Tedy Bruschi, Mike Vrabel, Ted Johnson, Ty Law, Richard Seymour, Rodney Harrison, Kevin Faulk, Troy Brown, Deion Branch or Adam Vinatieri has everything to do with that statistic.

     

    Plus, only the Ravens 9-5, Steelers 9-3 and Giants 8-3 have won more playoff games in that time period.

    [/QUOTE]

    While I understand your point digger, what about in reference to the offense and the post season struggles. 

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

    I think by 2008 they meant the 2007 to 2008 season. So it would be 10 post season games of data. So I guess ot would be 2 gints teams, 3 ravens teams, and 1 jets team. So, just bad luck we ran into 6 different teams with personnel to stifle the greatest QB in NFL history?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The second Giants team was nothing like the first Giants team defensively.  The first Giants team just obliterated our offensive line both because of personnel and because our line didn't appear to be ready for the different personnel groupings the Giants used.  That is probably the biggest example of Belichick being outcoached in a big game that I can remember.  He basically admitted as much after the game.

     

    The second Giants team did not play that well defensively.  Recall Brady set the SB record for consecutive completions and on the INT Gronk was open but Brady made a poor throw.  The score was low  because the game was slowed down by the Giants keeping the offense off the field.  I don't think the 2011 Giants carried out any blueprint to stop Brady in that game.  Rather the Patriots didn't make the critical plays when they were there.

    The point here of course is that imo neither of these Giants teams were anything like the blueprint being described.  The "blueprint" is playing nickel while still bottling up the run and getting some pressure and coverage pressure by flooding the middle of the field with DBs (something I might add wouldn't  have  been as effective in the earlier years when there were multiple guys that could make plays outside the numbers).   3 of those 4 games were carried out by the Ravens I was talking about.

    [/QUOTE]

    Just a brilliant post. 

    First, a lot of those teams play a large nickel. It's not really a secret that New England relies on the play-action pass: it's an erhardt perkins offense after all. Even when they aren't running it short, they are always trying to suck people in with short passes. They wil bring safeties up and in. 

    Eric Smith 2010? 10 tackles with a TFL. 

    Three of the Giants' top five tacklers were safeties! Deon Grant, Kenny Phillips, and Antrell Rolle. Rolle was their FS. They had two SS's on the field at the same time and each recorded a TFL. That's not dropping seven into coverage either. 

    Second, your narrower point, re: SB46 is spot on. The second Giants team was actually not very good on defense. They weren't terrible, but they weren't great either.  

    New England only scored 17 points ... but they scored it on 7 drives. Consider the amount of scoring opportunities they had against, say, the Eagles. 24 points on 13 drives is just not as good a performance. Sure you got an extra TD, but it took you 6 drives to get it. I'd like to think if New England had six more drives, they would have come up with a TD against the Giants in '10. Though by that time, the Giants might have scored another 10-15 points. 

    The real story of that game was how effective the Giants' offense was every time it touched the ball. I don't think they recorded a single three and out, and scored every other time they had the ball, and had some pretty majestic long drives that kept New England on the sideline. 

    New England lost both games in the trenches. The first game was a massive offensive line failure ... the second game was a massive defensive line failure. At any rate, the Giants, overall, controlled the line of scrimmage in both contests ... though they did so with much greater authority in 2007.

    A 2.5 yard per carry along with 5 sacks is a sign that your offensive line is basically getting owned.  

    The irony of it? New England's failed 2007 offense outscored and committed less turnovers than the 2001 offense that won a Superbowl with just 13 points and committing one turnover. 

    The game was, as Bill Belichick says, decided by one or two crucial plays and New England came up short. Situational football is preached here for a reason.

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Came across this article today. I think it illustrates a point that our offense has struggled in the post season while dropping back 78% of the time as opposed to 72% in the regular season(which is already a very high number) I hope we come out tomorrow night and change this trend.

     

    The Colts’ four-man rush vs. Brady 

     

    "Brady’s postseason play has been part of New England’s recent playoff problem. His 71.1 Total QBR in the regular season since losing Super Bowl XLII is fourth best in the league, but his 45.7 playoff QBR in that span ranks 19th. 

     

    Brady vs. 4 or Fewer Rushers

    From 2008 till 2013 Brady has dropped back 

    71% of the time in the regular season. 78%* in the post season.

     

     

    That means Tom Brady drops back 78% of the time in the playoffs. It is the highest %  of drop backs by any QB other then Drew Brees in the post season for the last 5 years.

     

     

    Comp pct. 65.0% in regular season.  59.9% in the post season

     

     

    Yds per att 7.5 in the regular season, 6.4 in the post season.

     

     

    TD to INT rate 89-37 in the regular season. 12-10 in the post season.

     

     

    Total QBR 75.6 in the regular season. 35.0 in the post season. 

     

     

     

    "Brady has always been good against the blitz. He has 76 touchdowns and six interceptions when opponents send at least five rushers since the start of 2008 (including the playoffs). His plus-70 TD-Int differential is best in the league, and only Aaron Rodgers has even thrown 70 touchdowns. 

     

     

     

    The problem is teams don’t blitz Brady as often in the postseason. The 2007 Giants solidified a basic tenet for beating Brady: don’t rely on extra pass-rushers. Teams have followed that blueprint with success since the 2007 Giants". 

     

    Question....

    Anybody have any ideas on how we should attack a 4 man rush? Or why teams consistently rush 4 and drop 7 in the post season...how do they know that will work? 

    Thoughts?

    [/QUOTE]

    What exactly does your source mean by drops back 72% of the time?  We don't pass that much, so what does this telling stat actually mean? 

     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Came across this article today. I think it illustrates a point that our offense has struggled in the post season while dropping back 78% of the time as opposed to 72% in the regular season(which is already a very high number) I hope we come out tomorrow night and change this trend.

     

    The Colts’ four-man rush vs. Brady 

     

    "Brady’s postseason play has been part of New England’s recent playoff problem. His 71.1 Total QBR in the regular season since losing Super Bowl XLII is fourth best in the league, but his 45.7 playoff QBR in that span ranks 19th. 

     

    Brady vs. 4 or Fewer Rushers

    From 2008 till 2013 Brady has dropped back 

    71% of the time in the regular season. 78%* in the post season.

     

     

    That means Tom Brady drops back 78% of the time in the playoffs. It is the highest %  of drop backs by any QB other then Drew Brees in the post season for the last 5 years.

     

     

    Comp pct. 65.0% in regular season.  59.9% in the post season

     

     

    Yds per att 7.5 in the regular season, 6.4 in the post season.

     

     

    TD to INT rate 89-37 in the regular season. 12-10 in the post season.

     

     

    Total QBR 75.6 in the regular season. 35.0 in the post season. 

     

     

     

    "Brady has always been good against the blitz. He has 76 touchdowns and six interceptions when opponents send at least five rushers since the start of 2008 (including the playoffs). His plus-70 TD-Int differential is best in the league, and only Aaron Rodgers has even thrown 70 touchdowns. 

     

     

     

    The problem is teams don’t blitz Brady as often in the postseason. The 2007 Giants solidified a basic tenet for beating Brady: don’t rely on extra pass-rushers. Teams have followed that blueprint with success since the 2007 Giants". 

     

    Question....

    Anybody have any ideas on how we should attack a 4 man rush? Or why teams consistently rush 4 and drop 7 in the post season...how do they know that will work? 

    Thoughts?

    [/QUOTE]

    run the ball relentlessly with Blount and wear them down. I'm happy with short passes and screens. we don't have a one on one deep threat, our guys have to really break fast and get wide open for TB to go deep

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/82357/matchups-to-watch-colts-vs-patriots response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Came across this article today. I think it illustrates a point that our offense has struggled in the post season while dropping back 78% of the time as opposed to 72% in the regular season(which is already a very high number) I hope we come out tomorrow night and change this trend.

     

    The Colts’ four-man rush vs. Brady 

     

    "Brady’s postseason play has been part of New England’s recent playoff problem. His 71.1 Total QBR in the regular season since losing Super Bowl XLII is fourth best in the league, but his 45.7 playoff QBR in that span ranks 19th. 

     

    Brady vs. 4 or Fewer Rushers

    From 2008 till 2013 Brady has dropped back 

    71% of the time in the regular season. 78%* in the post season.

     

     

    That means Tom Brady drops back 78% of the time in the playoffs. It is the highest %  of drop backs by any QB other then Drew Brees in the post season for the last 5 years.

     

     

    Comp pct. 65.0% in regular season.  59.9% in the post season

     

     

    Yds per att 7.5 in the regular season, 6.4 in the post season.

     

     

    TD to INT rate 89-37 in the regular season. 12-10 in the post season.

     

     

    Total QBR 75.6 in the regular season. 35.0 in the post season. 

     

     

     

    "Brady has always been good against the blitz. He has 76 touchdowns and six interceptions when opponents send at least five rushers since the start of 2008 (including the playoffs). His plus-70 TD-Int differential is best in the league, and only Aaron Rodgers has even thrown 70 touchdowns. 

     

     

     

    The problem is teams don’t blitz Brady as often in the postseason. The 2007 Giants solidified a basic tenet for beating Brady: don’t rely on extra pass-rushers. Teams have followed that blueprint with success since the 2007 Giants". 

     

    Question....

    Anybody have any ideas on how we should attack a 4 man rush? Or why teams consistently rush 4 and drop 7 in the post season...how do they know that will work? 

    Thoughts?

    [/QUOTE]

    What exactly does your source mean by drops back 72% of the time?  We don't pass that much, so what does this telling stat actually mean? 

    [/QUOTE]
    http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/82357/matchups-to-watch-colts-vs-patriots

    Sorry, he says we drop back 71% not 72 in the regular season.

    I have always assumed drop backs, meant passes? According to him from 07 to 13 we did 71 % of the time. Sounds about right, what is it 460 runs to 600 passes on average per season?

    You think maybe he made the whole thing up?

     

     

     

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Question....

    Anybody have any ideas on how we should attack a 4 man rush? Or why teams consistently rush 4 and drop 7 in the post season...how do they know that will work? 

    Thoughts?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    What I have observed most times, the O-line IS having problems with a four man rush.  Simple as that.  Opponents see that and, therefore, do not feel the need to rush more than 4 most times.  Especially from an outside edge rusher who collapses the pocket so fast Brady can't make his typical side step moves or step up.

     

    Another clue, the Pats do not stretch the field and are mostly a short to middle passing team.  So when coverage drops back, the opposing d-backs have no fear for a deep threat and can clog the short to mid lanes.  This requires more time for routes to develop to counter these defensive moves and, by then, Brady is just about out of time. 

    [/QUOTE]


    So your post boils down to...Brady doesn't do well unless he has Gronk? Man, I hope that isn't true, or we are getting piggly wigglied tomorrow.

    I also remember our old defense using lots of blitzes, especially safety and corner blitzing....but hey who am I to question your wealth of knowledge. 

    [/QUOTE]

    1.) They have an amazing chance to win tomorrow. Indianapolis vs the Giants/Ravens front seven? New England can run the ball on Indy and feed off that. 

    Here is New England's running line against Baltimore in the last four contests, in which they are 2-2.

    113 att351 yds3.1 avg  2 FUM 5 TDs 14 TFL

    Tackles for a loss are essentially like a sack. It's just so bad. 

    Indy can't touch that. They are ranked exactly one spot above the Bills in run defense and are even worse in pass defense - the Bills have the 3rd best pass defense by rating and 4th by yards. The Colts are 18th and 13th. 

    New England can win that ball game. 

    That is what is so frustrating about all of these injuries: the AFC is so d-a-mn winable. 

    But ... to be honest ... New England will get piggly-wigglied against the Seahawks or 49ers. Outside of some miracle, I don't think they have the horses to compete against those teams minus Gronkowski. 

    2.) New England still blitzes corners: they sent Arrington a few times against the Bills. It was hilarious because Manuel didn't even notice him until the fifth time. 

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

    Re: Tom Brady's playoff numbers

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Question....

    Anybody have any ideas on how we should attack a 4 man rush? Or why teams consistently rush 4 and drop 7 in the post season...how do they know that will work? 

    Thoughts?

    [/QUOTE]

    Because our O-line has been consistently overrated and does not play consistently well against strong front 4s.

    They don't fear our run game and know they can still put pressure on Brady with only 4 rushers. That allows them to dime us to death and the offense to bog down.

    The epitome of this is the safety Brady took on the grounding call in the last SB. Four rushers beat 7 blockers while Brady was looking for 3 receivers to get free against 7 defenders. And out of that he got 4 seconds to find somebody among 3 that were all double covered with an extra guy left over for the Giants. Absolutely disgraceful play by the line+helpers.

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share