Re: When's the last time the Pats won scoring only 13?
posted at 9/13/2013 3:06 PM EDT
In response to PatsEng's comment:
In response to zbellino's comment:
In response to anonymis' comment:
In response to PatsEng's comment:
It was a great win for the D for sure. The scary stat to me is when was the last time the Pats were 4/18 on 3rd downs and 0/3 in the redzone? Maybe 06'? but I can't even remember a time I saw them that bad on O before
I swear by lil 10 pound bearded baby Jesus
shhhh, we don't really want to talk about 3rd down conversion rate and red zone offense, do we?
It was terrible. But, I mean ... give them a break. This team has been #1 in those stats three years running.
Right now they have no one. Ok, Edelman, a decent slot, that's who they've got.
That's the issue Z, how do you go from 70% conversion and one of the best 3rd down teams all time last year to that last night in the course of a single offseason?
It happens by losing every single one of your starting targets and your third down back and replacing them with rookies who don't know the playbook and one backup?
Sorry, PE ... did you miss the offseason man?
It's pretty cut and dried. There were literally about 20 threads over the summer about how this would hurt .... there were even threads about how bad it might get if Amendola goes down (like he does every season). There were threads about how Brady was going to take the field with only one player who'd ever even caught a pass from him. There were threads on top of threads.
You, right now, are witnessing what people said in the worst case scenario. Many people whistled past the gravyard on this one. Here are the refrains when those threads about roster turnover, missing Welker/Hernandez/Gronk and if Amendola goes down:
a.) Run the ball, it always works. (Well it's not. And for future reference ... running does not always work ... that's wy NFL teams pass, you know, occaisionally. More importantly, NE isn't that good at running that they can run at will. They've run behind the pass for seasons now.)
b.) Spread the ball around. (That works when WRs know where they are supposed to be.)
c.) As long as we have Tom, we are ok. (He's only one player, and he's not perfect.)
d.) Hernandez wasn't that talented. (He would instantly be the best skill player NE has right now by a mile stretch.)
e.) Edelman is as good as Welker even if Amendola goes down. (He isn't.)
f.) [Really the best] Get the rookies involved. (They've seen nearly 60 targets and come down with about six or seven of those targets.)
The people that were worried about this exact scenario were called Doom and Gloom, trolls, handwringers, etc. Well, it has come to pass. Amendola went down. Gronk wasn't ready for the start of the season.
Outside of Tom Brady and Ridley ... this is not a starting caliber NFL offense out there. And Ridley is playing well beneath the standard he set last season.
I'm not saying they won't be, but they aren't now.
When/if Gronk comes back healthy, and when/if Amendola comes back healthy, and when/if the rookies can start doing things right most of the time (they don't even need to be perfect) then you will see the offense start to bounce back.
Sorry to ramble on, but these games really put a stake in the heart of so many arguments that bashed NE for how they ran their offense.
They ran the offense through Gronk and Welker because those guys and Brady were the offense. Without them, Ridley isn't a 1000 yard back, all of those outside WRs who hobbled around were JAGs.
With Gronk out the offense takes a huge step back. Without Welker (or in this case Amendola) backing him, it takes an even larger step back.
Right now NE doesn't have a skill position player to hang their hat on. It's going to be a bumpy ride until the rookies start to get it, and until their starters start to get healthy.
For the time being ... enjoy the defense which has figured out how to play at a very high level without an offense spotting them 30+ points and converting a mind boggling percentage of third downs and a league low three&outs.