A little perspective - Page 6 - New England Patriots Forums

RhodyPatriot · 12-01-2009, 07:50 PM

Give it a rest with the chicken little nonsense. This team has many flaws that have been exposed by the good teams they've played and that's what is being discussed here. Your Good Ship Lollipop "perspective" is amusing. I might buy in if the Pats were to meet the Little Sisters of the Poor in the playoffs but sadly they'll face good teams and they'll face them on the road. Not a winning scenario this year unless Fred Taylor comes back and this offense suddenly figures out how to play smart playoff football, i.e you run the ball, you control the clock and the game.

***Rob0729*** · 12-01-2009, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by condon84

The OP asked the question of what those teams had in common and I think he tried to say our current Pats team can emulate what they did. All those teams had bad stretches and but went on a great run to the SB. However, I contended that those teams had one thing in common that we do not have, they all had a great pass rush. Are you trying to say the Giants didn't havea great pass rush? You must have been watching a different team than I was.

Although Manning sucked for the most part of the year and Coughlin was portrayed as a nut prompting everyone to declare him the anti-christ, it still doesn't take away that the Giants had an insane front 4 that pressured teams.

Same with the Colts with Freeney and Pittsburg with Porter and their whole scheme.

So the Colts had a decent pass rush that year. Their DTs were mediocre. They had the worst rushing defense in league history. You keep ignoring that fact. I'd take this Pats defense over the defense the Colts had in 2006. The Colts' defense in 2006 gave up 41 TDs that year.

Even with the five TDs the Pats gave up last night (and based on their remaining opponents they won't give up that many), the Pats are on pace to give up 36 TDs. Obviously barring a complete implosion, they will not give up nearly that many. They currently have given up 25 TDs with five of them from last night.

Also, the Pats have still dominated the time of possession this year (34:35 to 25:51) where the Colts didn't even possess the ball more than their opponents. (29:31 to 30:28) The Pats have already turned over the ball almost as much as the Colts did all year in 2006 (the Pats have 13 INTs in 11 games while the Colts had 15 in 16 and the Pats and the Pats have 10 fumble recoveries in 11 games vs. 11 fumble recoveries for the Colts in 16). In 2006, the Colts allowed opposing teams to convert 47% of their third downs while the Pats are allowing 38% of the third downs to be converted. Even after yesterday, the Pats have given up 14.8 PPG while the Colts in 2006 gave up 16.7 PPG.

So good for the Colts, they had somewhat of a pass rush. Their defense in the regular season was nowhere as good as the 2009 Patriots and that isn't exactly setting the bar to the 2000 Ravens' status.

So if you ignore comparing both defenses overall and just focus in on one area, yes the Colts were better on defense But a pass rush doesn't really mean anything if teams can run all over you and don't even have to throw the ball to move up and down the field and score points now does it? But I will conceed although the 2006 defense is far inferior to this year's Pats defense, their pass rush is better. I'm sure if the Pats end up facing Adrian Peterson in the Super Bowl they would much rather have the worst run defense in history so they can get a better pass rush.

PATSYLICIOUS · 12-01-2009, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RhodyPatriot

Give it a rest with the chicken little nonsense. This team has many flaws that have been exposed by the good teams they've played and that's what is being discussed here. Your Good Ship Lollipop "perspective" is amusing. I might buy in if the Pats were to meet the Little Sisters of the Poor in the playoffs but sadly they'll face good teams and they'll face them on the road. Not a winning scenario this year unless Fred Taylor comes back and this offense suddenly figures out how to play smart playoff football, i.e you run the ball, you control the clock and the game.

The team has flaws, the biggest homers will admit that. But all the 'season is over'/ 'see you in training camp' crap is ridiculous. One blowout doesn't mean we are done and the OP posted several relevant examples of why it doesn't.

***40yrpatsfan*** · 12-01-2009, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patspsycho

How do you get 4 points in football? Two back to back safeties?

We scored a FG on that drive, would have had a TD.

Patspsycho · 12-01-2009, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RhodyPatriot

Give it a rest with the chicken little nonsense. This team has many flaws that have been exposed by the good teams they've played and that's what is being discussed here. Your Good Ship Lollipop "perspective" is amusing. I might buy in if the Pats were to meet the Little Sisters of the Poor in the playoffs but sadly they'll face good teams and they'll face them on the road. Not a winning scenario this year unless Fred Taylor comes back and this offense suddenly figures out how to play smart playoff football, i.e you run the ball, you control the clock and the game.

Shanknancy, is that you?

Patspsycho · 12-01-2009, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 40yrpatsfan

We scored a FG on that drive, would have had a TD.

Ok.. you meant to say we gave up 4 points on that drive.

zoostation · 12-01-2009, 10:10 PM

no kidding.......enough with "the sky is falling" mentality.

***40yrpatsfan*** · 12-01-2009, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patspsycho

Ok.. you meant to say we gave up 4 points on that drive.

yeah, there a good 10 points left out there in the 1st half that we should have had.

patriots pam · 12-02-2009, 12:01 AM

Another thought because I've been living in Florida for quite a while and am surrounded every game..Jags fans...no SB wins and not looking good for them, ever... Bucs with the one SB win in 2002 and totally sucking this year, and even Fish fans with their past glory...they would all kill to have their team be as good as the Pats are right now, even after looking like serious poop against the Saints. Somehow, they don't really feel for me with my team still winning the division so far, and all. Imagine that!

And that's just the local teams...I won't even get into how I'm secretly enjoying the tears of my Steeler fan friends...don't tell them, please! HEE!

condon84 · 12-02-2009, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob0729

So the Colts had a decent pass rush that year. Their DTs were mediocre. They had the worst rushing defense in league history. You keep ignoring that fact. I'd take this Pats defense over the defense the Colts had in 2006. The Colts' defense in 2006 gave up 41 TDs that year.

Even with the five TDs the Pats gave up last night (and based on their remaining opponents they won't give up that many), the Pats are on pace to give up 36 TDs. Obviously barring a complete implosion, they will not give up nearly that many. They currently have given up 25 TDs with five of them from last night.

Also, the Pats have still dominated the time of possession this year (34:35 to 25:51) where the Colts didn't even possess the ball more than their opponents. (29:31 to 30:28) The Pats have already turned over the ball almost as much as the Colts did all year in 2006 (the Pats have 13 INTs in 11 games while the Colts had 15 in 16 and the Pats and the Pats have 10 fumble recoveries in 11 games vs. 11 fumble recoveries for the Colts in 16). In 2006, the Colts allowed opposing teams to convert 47% of their third downs while the Pats are allowing 38% of the third downs to be converted. Even after yesterday, the Pats have given up 14.8 PPG while the Colts in 2006 gave up 16.7 PPG.

So good for the Colts, they had somewhat of a pass rush. Their defense in the regular season was nowhere as good as the 2009 Patriots and that isn't exactly setting the bar to the 2000 Ravens' status.

So if you ignore comparing both defenses overall and just focus in on one area, yes the Colts were better on defense But a pass rush doesn't really mean anything if teams can run all over you and don't even have to throw the ball to move up and down the field and score points now does it? But I will conceed although the 2006 defense is far inferior to this year's Pats defense, their pass rush is better. I'm sure if the Pats end up facing Adrian Peterson in the Super Bowl they would much rather have the worst run defense in history so they can get a better pass rush.

The subject of this thread was to look at those SB winning teams and compare it to our current Patriot team. The OP insinuated that we could make a similar run.

I disagreed. We don't have a pass rush and our coordinators are not bright enough to make adjustments.

You concentrating on the Colts numbers that year is getting way off subject. You can throw stats and numbers all you want, but sometimes numbers don't tell the entire story. For example, Bob Sanders was out for the majority of that year, he came back and solidified their run defense, yet when you look at their run defense for that entire season, it looks horrible. But when you saw them play when he was back, the guy made a difference.

You can skew numbers to fit anyone argument, but lets look at the reality of the situation. Our defense main weakness is pressuring the QB. We don't do that. We don't have the individual rusher that has that ability and we don't have the scheme that pressures the passer. That's something the Steelers, Colts, and Giants had when they won the SB.