Coaching vs Talent - Page 4 - New England Patriots Forums

DocHoliday · 01-23-2013, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyJohnson

Did they score 35 points?
Were they "manhandled" while they scored those 35 points?
Or are we now saying that we have an offense that gets manhandled for a quareter if playing a team that has a certain player who got injured and then they weren't manhandled any more, so we need to change the offense in case that might have been why?

You're just lashing out randomly now. They didnt get manhandled during the scoring spree but the Oline got clobbered by the D before and after that, with the O giving up record for the season number of pressures.

Soon as that went, the Pats established no huddle till pressure was reestablished.

We don't need to change the offense - when healthy its unstoppable. It's just easily stopped by certain teams without Gronk.

So it makes sense to get someone to partially alleviate his loss.

***AndyJohnson*** · 01-23-2013, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brady2Moss

I don't really care to argue, I can't name a specific person and give you how many times he laid a guy out. I'd say guys like Pollard set the tone hitting dudes in the head and just crushing people illegally or legally. Goldson on the 49ers, Polamalu back when he was healthy, Rodney for us in the past. Maybe its more of a reputation that a defense is going to smash you every play.

The reputation of our D is that they'll gladly be dragged into the endzone with you while you score a TD

And there we have it. Your novice misconception is being called reputation.
I think we are done here.

***AndyJohnson*** · 01-23-2013, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DocHoliday

You're just lashing out randomly now. They didnt get manhandled during the scoring spree but the Oline got clobbered by the D before and after that, with the O giving up record for the season number of pressures.

Soon as that went, the Pats established no huddle till pressure was reestablished.

We don't need to change the offense - when healthy its unstoppable. It's just easily stopped by certain teams without Gronk.

So it makes sense to get someone to partially alleviate his loss.

No the argument was that our offense gets manhandled by good defenses.
This has turned into we scored 35 vs the 49ers but they really manhandled us because they would have if Smith wasn't hurt, and those points don't count because you think the 49ers forgot how to play defense, but would have manhandled us if they wanted to.

As far as getting someone behind Gronk, I don't know how you expect to have 3 starting caliber TEs with the 3rd being better than the 2 border line starter caliber guys we had here.
What starting caliber TE is going to come here to be #3 so he can be Gronk insurance?

***AndyJohnson*** · 01-23-2013, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brady2Moss

Lol you have 4 different people telling you your wrong and because I do not want to go through a bunch of games to find some names and numbers for you you're right? Are you sure you and Deus Irae aren't the same person you sure post in the same snobish manner.

If you think this team is physical enough in the playoffs that's your opinion, it'll keep you happy till next January when they get knocked out by the same gameplan.

You are trying to establish that a big hitter makes a huge difference. You are wrong. The reason you are wrong is that the biggest hitters deliever less than one of those hits a game. It does not have players running around in fear of it.
I don't really care who disagrees with me when the argument is a bad one.

Being 'physical' has nothing to do with why they lost this game. If it makes you feel better to think they are pussies and scared of the Ravens, go with that, but it just isn't true.

***AndyJohnson*** · 01-23-2013, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brady2Moss

You just want to make his post appear stupid he clearly meant getting an outside receiver to alleviate the loss, not getting Vernon Davis to back up Gronk

He said back up TE.

DocHoliday · 01-23-2013, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyJohnson

No the argument was that our offense gets manhandled by good defenses.
This has turned into we scored 35 vs the 49ers but they really manhandled us because they would have if Smith wasn't hurt, and those points don't count because you think the 49ers forgot how to play defense, but would have manhandled us if they wanted to.

As far as getting someone behind Gronk, I don't know how you expect to have 3 starting caliber TEs with the 3rd being better than the 2 border line starter caliber guys we had here.
What starting caliber TE is going to come here to be #3 so he can be Gronk insurance?

1.) they manhandled us, they suffered an injury, allowing us to get into the game, then resumed manhandling our now tired LT/RT with backup DTs at DE.

2.) you are replying against many different people, so address them separately. My thought is that this D gets manhandled when Gronk is out, which has been the case this year, last year, and in 2010 when Gronk was a rookie.

3.) see next post, but no TE will replace Gronk, easier to spruce up 3 WR with physical deep threat.