Denver was a soft team - Page 4 - New England Patriots Forums

***JSn*** · 10-22-2008, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by muzz

They were outwitted because of 2 recovered fumbles?

That's a new one to me.

Yeah, I wanted to keep the sections limited, it was the best one.

Our team had a better time keeping alert (or their wits about them) in diving on fumbles and snagging INT's. That's all I meant.

***ctpatsfan77*** · 10-22-2008, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by memento

matt cassel is doing a great job not turning the ball over and scoring points, but anyone comfortable with the oline/pocket presence combo causing us 4 sacks a game needs to take off their rose colored pat-patriot glasses.

The way I see it, BB was thinking, "Let's see if we can get an FU touchdown here. If not, just DON'T TURN IT OVER." Honestly, the Pats could have just taken a knee to end the half if they wanted.

chris_in_sunnyvale · 10-22-2008, 02:53 PM

I think there's a lot of piling on NoCal for his original post. He has a point to a degree: What can we take away from a 41-7 victory over Denver? Just like one could ask what could be taken away from the blowout losses to Miami and San Diego? Was the team truly as good as they were Monday night or truly as bad as they were in those two games?

Here's what I think we can take away from the 41-7 victory:

1. When the DL comes to play, the Pats' D is tough. After watching what the DL did to Denver, to the Jets and to KC, I'm convinced the DL's shortcomings vs. Miami, San Diego and SF point to off days rather than serious fundamental problems. The DL played like poop vs. Miami and at San Diego and nothing more.

2. Brandon Merriweather is turning into a heck of a a safety.

3. Ellis Hobbs plays his best in bump-and-run rather than 10yds off the receiver. He did this vs. Cotchery and Marshall to great success.

4. When the Pats' coaching staff smells blood, they go for the kill. Knowing Cutler's finger was going to prevent fast and accurate throws, they amped up the man-coverage, daring Cutler to zing one in tight coverage. Cutler failed miserably. This coaching adjustment was reminiscient of employing the 2-5 D on SF when BB rightly guessed Martz would abandon the run.

5. When the Pats get production from the running game, they are tough to stop. Cassel can get away with the repeated WR screens and dumpoffs when it's 2nd-and-4 for much of the game.

6. Sammy Morris has been the team's best RB the past two years. He hits the hole hard and fast, Corey Dillon 2004-style. I really wish he was able to play in SB42.

On the other hand, here are some things I'm not sure what we learned:

A. Is the running game legit? Maybe it was the return of Neal that greatly helped the run blocking. Maybe it was the heavy use of Evans as a lead blocker (like they did in the 2nd half of the AFCCG last year). I'm sure Denver's D was the reason they ran for a sick 260yds instead of a great 150yds they may have otherwise gotten if the running game truly has come around. Still the jury is out.

B. Can the Pats reliably defend the middle of the field? Pennington smoked the Pats with passes to the TEs. Gates' presence forced the Pats to give him serious attention, allowing the outside WRs opportunities to hurt them deep. Denver was without Scheffler and slot receiver Stokley, so they had no scary threat across the middle that the Pats had to pay serious attention to. This allowed them to double Marshall and hope O'Neal could hold his own against Royal who is no serious deep threat anyway. Once Cutler banged up his finger, Pittman left injured and Hall fumbled his way into Shanny's doghouse, the D could focus on the two WRs, put pressure on Cutler and it was no surprise that Denver didn't get into the red zone until the last play of the 3rd quarter.

C. Can Cassel produce when the running game doesn't? Cassel played well, but he was very fortunate the running game put him in a position to succeed. The WR screens continue to be used heavily and against Denver who had to keep guys in the middle of the field to stop the run, they worked great. Aside from the SF game where he made multiple great throws to Gaffney and Welker across the middle and to Moss on outs, he for the most part avoids those kinds of throws. His pocket presence is still lacking. Despite a 3 TD night, I don't think anyone can truly say he's turned a corner like Brady did vs. San Diego in 2001.

I'm hoping the coming weeks allow us to take a lot more away from that Denver game, showing us that nothing was a mirage and that all the good we saw was a true measure of how good this team is.

Regards,
Chris

***Lloyd_Christmas*** · 10-22-2008, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris_in_sunnyvale

I think there's a lot of piling on NoCal for his original post.

I agree. I don't know the OP's history, but I don't think his post is off base.

While I think we played very well, I don't think the Broncos were as good as advertised. Don't believe me, go read some of their message boards. They were feeling the pending implosion even before our game.

They've been banged up and their defense has sucked all year. The only thing they had going for them was their offense, even though it is turnover happy. Cutler hurt is finger on the first play, which reduced their normal production. On top of that, we played great defense.

On offense, we completely exploited their weakness (run defense) as I would expect from a BB gameplan and they had even more injuries.

The positive is that even after you take in all the other factors, our team is improving. I like our chances against the Rams this week, even though I think they are a resurgent team since the HC change.

SeymourTrophies · 10-22-2008, 06:56 PM

The broncos are 4-3. Granted it should be 3-4, it isn't. I don't think it matters who we played, we needed to take someone behind the woodshed. Our D-line did some damage to a line that is a pretty good line, and Seymour worked his man over for most of the game. That's more important to our season than by how much we slaughtered the broncos, and we got it from that game.