unmentioned element of run game

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    The Giants passed on 61% of their snaps in the Super Bowl and ran on just 39%. Wozzy keeps talking like they went ground and pound, but they ran 43 pass plays to 28 rushing plays (and one of those rushing plays was Manning taking a knee.)  That pass-run ratio is the same as the Giant's regular season ratio and actually slightly more pass-heavy than the Pats' regular season record.  

    I simply can't understand why a pass-run ratio that is bad for the Pats is good for the Giants.  Maybe Wozzy is just a Giants fan.  I'm beginning to think that's it. 

     




    We ran 10 less times. What does that say for us?

    Go ahead, defend it.

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    The Giants passed on 61% of their snaps in the Super Bowl and ran on just 39%. Wozzy keeps talking like they went ground and pound, but they ran 43 pass plays to 28 rushing plays (and one of those rushing plays was Manning taking a knee.)  That pass-run ratio is the same as the Giant's regular season ratio and actually slightly more pass-heavy than the Pats' regular season record.  

    I simply can't understand why a pass-run ratio that is bad for the Pats is good for the Giants.  Maybe Wozzy is just a Giants fan.  I'm beginning to think that's it. 

     




    We ran 10 less times. What does that say for us?

    Go ahead, defend it.



    It says our offensive line was getting beat to heck by the Giants defensive line.  That was the real issue.  Number of running plays was a symptom of that, not a cause.  

     

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    Wozzy,

     

    Why do we try with these guys? We have brought back balance. Tommy had a tough time acclimating to being under center again for the 1st time in 5 years but that is over. Prepare for dominance. I even think we will run on Seattle despite their massive run stuffing front 7. At this point I would say the Pats are match up proof on offense. Been a long time coming! Go Pats...

     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    The Giants passed on 61% of their snaps in the Super Bowl and ran on just 39%. Wozzy keeps talking like they went ground and pound, but they ran 43 pass plays to 28 rushing plays (and one of those rushing plays was Manning taking a knee.)  That pass-run ratio is the same as the Giant's regular season ratio and actually slightly more pass-heavy than the Pats' regular season record.  

    I simply can't understand why a pass-run ratio that is bad for the Pats is good for the Giants.  Maybe Wozzy is just a Giants fan.  I'm beginning to think that's it. 

     




    We ran 10 less times. What does that say for us?

    Go ahead, defend it.



    It says our offensive line was getting beat to heck by the Giants defensive line.  That was the real issue.  Number of running plays was a symptom of that, not a cause.  

     

      They also had more plays per drive than us which  gave them more opportunity to run and pass more.  If they had an equal amount of plays per drives, their run plays would have dropped significantly as  they were winning with the pass game, not the run.


     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    Wozzy,

     

    Why do we try with these guys? We have brought back balance. Tommy had a tough time acclimating to being under center again for the 1st time in 5 years but that is over. Prepare for dominance. I even think we will run on Seattle despite their massive run stuffing front 7. At this point I would say the Pats are match up proof on offense. Been a long time coming! Go Pats...


    Tommy had a hard time acclimating to being under center?  Is that why the backs had a couple of poor games against good D's?   Btw, they are still running shot gun nearly 50% of the time.

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    Imagine that! Planning your offense around the opponent's defensive strenths and weaknesses! It's a good thing Babe is here to tell us share his vast storage of new insights!

    And then there's this gem..."In two of the three games we have played Brady threw more than 40 passes because the running stank."

    If it weren't for Babe I never would have known you can have a 3 and 2 record by playing only 3 games.

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    Peyton back in the day could rip off 40 yards in the air like nothing.  That's a passing game, and it didn't particularly help Indy's D, except the D was much happier with a 21 point lead because they knew passes were coming.

    BB built the Patriots around a dink and dunk passer, Brady, quick little receivers like Welker and Edelman, and huge targets like Gronkowski who don't have to be open 40 yards downfield.  So, the Patriots actually have two running games, one with the familiar running back, and the other where Brady zings in lots of high percentage short passes and then the receivers rack up wonderful yards after the catch.  Either way, the defense has to accept that an offensive lineman is likely to be downfield pancaking their free safety, and free safeties weren't made for that kind of constant punishment. Then when someone on the defense wears out, Brady picks on his substitute.

    One great future predictor of a win is the number of running plays added to the number of successful passing plays in the first half.  Just throw out the incompletions and sacks. 

    By throwing eight yard passes all day, the Patriots smash down the opponent's defense into hamburger (89 offensive plays in one game against Denver!). 

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to glenr's comment:

    Imagine that! Planning your offense around the opponent's defensive strenths and weaknesses! It's a good thing Babe is here to tell us share his vast storage of new insights!

    And then there's this gem..."In two of the three games we have played Brady threw more than 40 passes because the running stank."

    If it weren't for Babe I never would have known you can have a 3 and 2 record by playing only 3 games.




    Thanks for pointing out the misstatement. You get a gold star for that. Always the stickler for grammar mistakes, typos, spelling errors and all other inadvertent miscues others just let slide, aren't you Rusty? I repaired it.

     

    Breaking news: Some here think you keep running no matter what the opponents defensive strength is. I know it's basic football, but then why don't some here learn to live with that fact.




    Misstatement. Not knowing how many games we've played is not a misstatement. It's a sure signature of a pink helmet.

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    The Giants passed on 61% of their snaps in the Super Bowl and ran on just 39%. Wozzy keeps talking like they went ground and pound, but they ran 43 pass plays to 28 rushing plays (and one of those rushing plays was Manning taking a knee.)  That pass-run ratio is the same as the Giant's regular season ratio and actually slightly more pass-heavy than the Pats' regular season record.  

    I simply can't understand why a pass-run ratio that is bad for the Pats is good for the Giants.  Maybe Wozzy is just a Giants fan.  I'm beginning to think that's it. 

     




    We ran 10 less times. What does that say for us?

    Go ahead, defend it.



    It says our offensive line was getting beat to heck by the Giants defensive line.  That was the real issue.  Number of running plays was a symptom of that, not a cause.  

     

    [/QUOT
    You mean the offensive line that  is regularly voted top 5 in the league? The offensive line that just paved the way for 500 rusing yards, except plus Matt Light, a healthy Mankins, and a healthy Volmer? 

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    The Giants passed on 61% of their snaps in the Super Bowl and ran on just 39%. Wozzy keeps talking like they went ground and pound, but they ran 43 pass plays to 28 rushing plays (and one of those rushing plays was Manning taking a knee.)  That pass-run ratio is the same as the Giant's regular season ratio and actually slightly more pass-heavy than the Pats' regular season record.  

    I simply can't understand why a pass-run ratio that is bad for the Pats is good for the Giants.  Maybe Wozzy is just a Giants fan.  I'm beginning to think that's it. 

     




    We ran 10 less times. What does that say for us?

    Go ahead, defend it.



    It says our offensive line was getting beat to heck by the Giants defensive line.  That was the real issue.  Number of running plays was a symptom of that, not a cause.  

     

    [/QUOT
    You mean the offensive line that  is regularly voted top 5 in the league? The offensive line that just paved the way for 500 rusing yards, except plus Matt Light, a healthy Mankins, and a healthy Volmer? 

      Are you saying the O-line played well in the SB?  Were ManKins and Volmer healthy?

    I could have sworn Mankins had torn ACL's in both knees and Volmer had a back and ankle injury.  Must have been a bad dream I was having.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from 15315k. Show 15315k's posts

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    Guys we have the best offense in the NFL. We have a top 5 back and the best QB in the league. Brady looks as good as ever in this offense. They must be doing something right to be number one, we have nothing to complain about on offense.

    The scary thing for the rest of the league is that they get better every week.

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    The Giants passed on 61% of their snaps in the Super Bowl and ran on just 39%. Wozzy keeps talking like they went ground and pound, but they ran 43 pass plays to 28 rushing plays (and one of those rushing plays was Manning taking a knee.)  That pass-run ratio is the same as the Giant's regular season ratio and actually slightly more pass-heavy than the Pats' regular season record.  

    I simply can't understand why a pass-run ratio that is bad for the Pats is good for the Giants.  Maybe Wozzy is just a Giants fan.  I'm beginning to think that's it. 

     




    We ran 10 less times. What does that say for us?

    Go ahead, defend it.



    It says our offensive line was getting beat to heck by the Giants defensive line.  That was the real issue.  Number of running plays was a symptom of that, not a cause.  

     

    [/QUOT
    You mean the offensive line that  is regularly voted top 5 in the league? The offensive line that just paved the way for 500 rusing yards, except plus Matt Light, a healthy Mankins, and a healthy Volmer? 



    Did you watch the game?

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    I watched the game, here's how I remember it...

    4 punts for the Giants, 3 for the Pat's.

    2 turnovers by the Pat's offense, one of which resulted in points for the Giants, Giants had zero turnovers.

    Eli 40 pass attempts, Brady 41 = same

    Giant's RB's rushed 27 times / Pat's RB's 17 times = 10 more rushes despite less success

    Giant's time of possession 37:05 to the Pats 22:55

    If you don't think running the ball helped keep their offense on the field, control the clock, wear down and keep our defense off balance as well as keep Brady off the field than you're hopeless.  

    The Giant's offense executed in crunchtime because our defense was exhausted.  Why?  

    Our offense scored zero points in the 4th quarter.  Our D was on the field the entire 2nd half because our offense was anemic.  

    The offense threw a pick to start the fourth quarter and on a first down play; the opposite of clutch.  

    Despite that disastrous interception to start to the 4th our defense held the Giants forcing them to punt, our offense got the ball back two more times and did nothing until they dropped 3 straight passes to end the game.  Despite 3 possessions in the 4th the offense came away with zero points.

    That's why they've switched back to a smashmouth offense, so they can get back to controlling the clock when need be, so they can execute a run or a pass under duress.  

    The fact that the team is returning to it's old form is a testament to this and the fact that we're still arguing it is the dying gasps of the pass happy fantasy crowd refusing to acknowledge the obvious... they've been wrong for years.

     

     

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    I watched the game, here's how I remember it...

    4 punts for the Giants, 3 for the Pat's.

    2 turnovers by the Pat's offense, one of which resulted in points for the Giants, Giants had zero turnovers.

    Eli 40 pass attempts, Brady 41 = same

    Giant's RB's rushed 27 times / Pat's RB's 17 times = 10 more rushes despite less success

    Giant's time of possession 37:05 to the Pats 22:55

    If you don't think running the ball helped keep their offense on the field, control the clock, wear down and keep our defense off balance as well as keep Brady off the field than you're hopeless.  

    The Giant's offense executed in crunchtime because our defense was exhausted.  Why?  

    Our offense scored zero points in the 4th quarter.  Our D was on the field the entire 2nd half because our offense was anemic.  

    The offense threw a pick to start the fourth quarter and on a first down play; the opposite of clutch.  

    Despite that disastrous interception to start to the 4th our defense held the Giants forcing them to punt, our offense got the ball back two more times and did nothing until they dropped 3 straight passes to end the game.  Despite 3 possessions in the 4th the offense came away with zero points.

    That's why they've switched back to a smashmouth offense, so they can get back to controlling the clock when need be, so they can execute a run or a pass under duress.  

    The fact that the team is returning to it's old form is a testament to this and the fact that we're still arguing it is the dying gasps of the pass happy fantasy crowd refusing to acknowledge the obvious... they've been wrong for years.

     

     




    Do you see the Gints had 10 more plays and 16 more minutes on the clock to score?

    The pick to start the game was an O-line breakdown.

    Eli completed 75% of his passes, because........?  Is he the bestest or was he playing aginst the Pats practice squad?

    O scored zero points in the 4th which consisted of 2 whole flippin drives.  The Gints scored in both of theirs.  One of the Pats drive was 6 minutes and one 57 seconds.

    The D was on the field for the whole game, not just the second half, because the D was enemic- not the O  The Pats averaged 2 minutes and 45 seconds per drive.  Do you know what they are averaging per drive at the moment.? ? ??  You might want to check that out before you  proclaim that running is the answer to keeping them on the field.

    First downs are the key to keeping them on the field.  Those are usually achieved with execution and taking what the D gives you.   The Jints O was averaging 3+ a drive  and over 4 minutes for each one and they had a pretty easy job of it. Obviously.

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to glenr's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    There's so many advantages to having a GOOD running game, I'm just glad that it appears we have one. I think the real question will become...can we run it against good defenses? And can we run it when they load the box? The good part is we have a QB that can audible out of a run if they look like they're gearing up to stop it.

    I'm real curious to see if Ridley is what he appears to be. I think he has improved some over last season - he looks lower and he seems to be getting yards that aren't really there. More than once last week he was being tackled or was about to be tackled and he got very low and slithered ahead for a couple of extra yards. This is what impressed me most about his play and to think he is 4th in the league in rushing yardage without the advantage of breaking a long garbage time run (almost all his stuff has been from hard running four to seven yard runs). I hope they keep giving him the ball 25 times a game.



    I agree with this.  I think we witnessed Ridley's running talent last year too.  The questions are really about ball security and ability to contribute on pass plays, I think.  

     




    One more thing -- running in the winter. Important since our most likely playoff games will be in cold weather outdoors. It also connects somewhat to your ball security question



    True. Cold ball...the thing is tough to grip in your hands, etc. We have a distinct advantage in that part of it though - our runners will be practicing in that weather starting somewhere in November. It doesn't mean they won't fumble, but it is a slight advantage over most teams and a huge advantage over a warm weather team.  

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to glenr's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    There's so many advantages to having a GOOD running game, I'm just glad that it appears we have one. I think the real question will become...can we run it against good defenses? And can we run it when they load the box? The good part is we have a QB that can audible out of a run if they look like they're gearing up to stop it.

    I'm real curious to see if Ridley is what he appears to be. I think he has improved some over last season - he looks lower and he seems to be getting yards that aren't really there. More than once last week he was being tackled or was about to be tackled and he got very low and slithered ahead for a couple of extra yards. This is what impressed me most about his play and to think he is 4th in the league in rushing yardage without the advantage of breaking a long garbage time run (almost all his stuff has been from hard running four to seven yard runs). I hope they keep giving him the ball 25 times a game.



    I agree with this.  I think we witnessed Ridley's running talent last year too.  The questions are really about ball security and ability to contribute on pass plays, I think.  

     




    One more thing -- running in the winter. Important since our most likely playoff games will be in cold weather outdoors. It also connects somewhat to your ball security question



    True. Cold ball...the thing is tough to grip in your hands, etc. We have a distinct advantage in that part of it though - our runners will be practicing in that weather starting somewhere in November. It doesn't mean they won't fumble, but it is a slight advantage over most teams and a huge advantage over a warm weather team.  




    Yup. It's why I'd really like to see the Texans have to come up here for a playoff game.

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    Wozzy,

     

    Why do we try with these guys? We have brought back balance. Tommy had a tough time acclimating to being under center again for the 1st time in 5 years but that is over. Prepare for dominance. I even think we will run on Seattle despite their massive run stuffing front 7. At this point I would say the Pats are match up proof on offense. Been a long time coming! Go Pats...



    Truechamp ask yourself this question...do you think Belichick decided to run it more because he spent the summer reading your posts? Or do you think he runs it more now because his runners are better equiped to run than the guy who was the "lead" back last year?

    I already know what your answer will be! It will read if they only gave the ball to BENNY more often they would of had that balance. And I would say you're flat out wrong. I think Benny is proving further right now (on another team) that you don't want to give the ball to Benny too much, because it will absolutely kill your offense. Kill the momentum. Kill the balance. Kill the flow. Now Benny may get some good yards today going up against the worst run defense in the NFL, but what if he can't even muster that? Would you get it then? I doubt it.  

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    I watched the game, here's how I remember it...

    4 punts for the Giants, 3 for the Pat's.

    2 turnovers by the Pat's offense, one of which resulted in points for the Giants, Giants had zero turnovers.

    Eli 40 pass attempts, Brady 41 = same

    Giant's RB's rushed 27 times / Pat's RB's 17 times = 10 more rushes despite less success

    Giant's time of possession 37:05 to the Pats 22:55

    If you don't think running the ball helped keep their offense on the field, control the clock, wear down and keep our defense off balance as well as keep Brady off the field than you're hopeless.  

    The Giant's offense executed in crunchtime because our defense was exhausted.  Why?  

    Our offense scored zero points in the 4th quarter.  Our D was on the field the entire 2nd half because our offense was anemic.  

    The offense threw a pick to start the fourth quarter and on a first down play; the opposite of clutch.  

    Despite that disastrous interception to start to the 4th our defense held the Giants forcing them to punt, our offense got the ball back two more times and did nothing until they dropped 3 straight passes to end the game.  Despite 3 possessions in the 4th the offense came away with zero points.

    That's why they've switched back to a smashmouth offense, so they can get back to controlling the clock when need be, so they can execute a run or a pass under duress.  

    The fact that the team is returning to it's old form is a testament to this and the fact that we're still arguing it is the dying gasps of the pass happy fantasy crowd refusing to acknowledge the obvious... they've been wrong for years.

     

     




    Do you see the Gints had 10 more plays and 16 more minutes on the clock to score?

    The pick to start the game was an O-line breakdown.

    Eli completed 75% of his passes, because........?  Is he the bestest or was he playing aginst the Pats practice squad?

    O scored zero points in the 4th which consisted of 2 whole flippin drives.  The Gints scored in both of theirs.  One of the Pats drive was 6 minutes and one 57 seconds.

    The D was on the field for the whole game, not just the second half, because the D was enemic- not the O  The Pats averaged 2 minutes and 45 seconds per drive.  Do you know what they are averaging per drive at the moment.? ? ??  You might want to check that out before you  proclaim that running is the answer to keeping them on the field.

    First downs are the key to keeping them on the field.  Those are usually achieved with execution and taking what the D gives you.   The Jints O was averaging 3+ a drive  and over 4 minutes for each one and they had a pretty easy job of it. Obviously.



    Yes the Giant's had 16 more minutes to score because they controlled the time of possesion and ran the ball. They converted first downs because they were balanced and kept our D off balance.  Figure it out.  If they passed an even amount of times and punted about an even number of times, how did that happen?  Running is the answer.

    The Pat's offense started the 4th with the ball and received it two more times = 3 possessions.

    One INT, one punt after the D saved their azz by forcing NY to punt and then three straight dropped passes by the offense.

    The offense scored 17 points with the no huddle (which coincidently doesn't take a lot of time off the clock) and did nothing else but turn it over twice.  

    The defense played better than it was supposed to, it gave the team a chance, the offense failed to move the ball when it had to, zero points in crunch time... who underachieved?

     

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

    Re: unmentioned element of run game

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    I watched the game, here's how I remember it...

    4 punts for the Giants, 3 for the Pat's.

    2 turnovers by the Pat's offense, one of which resulted in points for the Giants, Giants had zero turnovers.

    Eli 40 pass attempts, Brady 41 = same

    Giant's RB's rushed 27 times / Pat's RB's 17 times = 10 more rushes despite less success

    Giant's time of possession 37:05 to the Pats 22:55

    If you don't think running the ball helped keep their offense on the field, control the clock, wear down and keep our defense off balance as well as keep Brady off the field than you're hopeless.  

    The Giant's offense executed in crunchtime because our defense was exhausted.  Why?  

    Our offense scored zero points in the 4th quarter.  Our D was on the field the entire 2nd half because our offense was anemic.  

    The offense threw a pick to start the fourth quarter and on a first down play; the opposite of clutch.  

    Despite that disastrous interception to start to the 4th our defense held the Giants forcing them to punt, our offense got the ball back two more times and did nothing until they dropped 3 straight passes to end the game.  Despite 3 possessions in the 4th the offense came away with zero points.

    That's why they've switched back to a smashmouth offense, so they can get back to controlling the clock when need be, so they can execute a run or a pass under duress.  

    The fact that the team is returning to it's old form is a testament to this and the fact that we're still arguing it is the dying gasps of the pass happy fantasy crowd refusing to acknowledge the obvious... they've been wrong for years.

     

     




    Do you see the Gints had 10 more plays and 16 more minutes on the clock to score?

    The pick to start the game was an O-line breakdown.

    Eli completed 75% of his passes, because........?  Is he the bestest or was he playing aginst the Pats practice squad?

    O scored zero points in the 4th which consisted of 2 whole flippin drives.  The Gints scored in both of theirs.  One of the Pats drive was 6 minutes and one 57 seconds.

    The D was on the field for the whole game, not just the second half, because the D was enemic- not the O  The Pats averaged 2 minutes and 45 seconds per drive.  Do you know what they are averaging per drive at the moment.? ? ??  You might want to check that out before you  proclaim that running is the answer to keeping them on the field.

    First downs are the key to keeping them on the field.  Those are usually achieved with execution and taking what the D gives you.   The Jints O was averaging 3+ a drive  and over 4 minutes for each one and they had a pretty easy job of it. Obviously.



    Yes the Giant's had 16 more minutes to score because they controlled the time of possesion and ran the ball. They converted first downs because they were balanced and kept our D off balance.  Figure it out.  If they passed an even amount of times and punted about an even number of times, how did that happen?  Running is the answer.

    The Pat's offense started the 4th with the ball and received it two more times = 3 possessions.

    One INT, one punt after the D saved their azz by forcing NY to punt and then three straight dropped passes by the offense.

    The offense scored 17 points with the no huddle (which coincidently doesn't take a lot of time off the clock) and did nothing else but turn it over twice.  

    The defense played better than it was supposed to, it gave the team a chance, the offense failed to move the ball when it had to, zero points in crunch time... who underachieved?

     


    So the D that got zero pics, zero 3 & outs, was on the field for 2/3rds the game, limited the O's possessions to 8 and never stopped the gints in their own territoy giving the Pats O extremely poor field position and gave up the game winning drive, allowed Eli a 75% pass completion,  played good enough to give them a chance?  

    Sure would hate to see what a D that didn't give their O a chance would look like.

     
Sections
Shortcuts