stinkypete

The 2007 Pats caught lightning in a bottle in a way no other team ever has. It is unreasonable to expect any team, any year, any sport, to match that kind of production. Let it rest.

For all their glitz and glamor, the 2007 Pats came to lack something late in the season. For all the same reasons we scoffed at the "Greatest Show on Turf" and the mid-decade Colts teams, the 2007 Pats offense lacked that kind of grit needed to tough out a win in a close game.

Give me the 2003/2004 offenses. Spread the ball, get the TEs involved. Make it count when we drive the ball. That's what I want to see.

Sicilian

Yeah, except for the games against Philly, Baltimore, the Jets in the rain, and the Giants regular season game... aside from those you're right, we never toughed out a close game

emoney_33

I know that, and it's more than likely due to the HUGE dropoff from Brady to Cassel, as I said.

-- Cassel 2008 --

inside the 20: 43.5%
inside the 10: 36.0%

-- Brady 2007 --

inside the 20: 61.6%
inside the 10: 62.0%

etc... etc....

The 2008 offense would have had a comparable year to the 2007 offense if Brady was never injured. The 2008 team ran for more TDs and kicked more FGs, but Cassel couldn't throw deep nor could he succeed often in the red-zone.

__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who do not.

tobias funke

Don't forget the Super Bowl. Tom took the team down the field and scored a TD with 2:42 on the clock to take the lead. But for a miracle, that would have probably been the final score in the game.

Of any of the 2007 team's problems that year, grit at the end of games definitely wasn't one of them, at least on offense.

emoney_33

Do you forget how close the 01, 03 and 04 SBs were? Do you forget how close the 07 SB actually was to being a victory? The reluctance to get a penalty by throwing Eli to the ground, refs holding their whistles JUST long enough, Samuel losing his mind, a glue-like helmet, a ball mere inches away from ending the game in Samuel's hands etc...

None of those things that could have ended the game happened because that team lacked "grit" to touch out a win.

As good as Redmond getting out of bounds was in 2001, a better tackle in that situation by the defense changes the game in an uncontrollable manner (and not in our favor). Please let's stop using the end result as proof of the reason for the end result.

Oh so you want the 2003 offense that needed the defense to get them out of the first round of the playoffs? Nostalgia doesn't help with objective analysis.

__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who do not.

TBradyOwnsYou

I think in 2007 we were striking on all cylinders. In 2010 if all our new additions can immediately help out, especially in the red zone, we should do extremely well. I still think losing Wes is huge. He's consistantly been, well, extremely consistant, over the last 3 years. How many catches has he had each year? I lost count after a million, but I'm poor at math so who knows, but with a couple other recievers stepping up to help take pressure off Moss and our new TEs bringing new options, we could definitely be a very explosive offense!

captain stone

Amen.

The '07 season ended, and the '08 season began, just as I feared it might - with Brady getting beaten-up, then injured.

This OL was not then, and is cert. not now, nearly good enough to sustain offense primarily through 5/7-step drops while waiting for 15/20-yard pass patterns to develop. And a running game based primarily on draw plays from shotgun with no true FB is not a running game at all.

Those November & December squeaked-out victories vs. Philly, Baltimore, Miami, Jets & Jints? They were close games more because of the stubborn insistence on relying on the same warm-weather game plans of September & October, than they ever were because of the ability to tough it out with the cold-weather, game-closing, smash-mouth football that outdoor teams from the Northeast must absolutely have in order to win in January & Febuary.

__________________
Question Authority.

AndyJohnson

It operated very differently, running more, throwing deep a lot less.
640 yards is not insignificant. The difference in points scored is tremendously significant. And the difference between having most of the games out of reach by halftime vs being 11-5 against a weak schedule is gigantic.

5 Rings for Brady!!

Bingo.

Moss older and Welker injuried.

Torry Holt will help, but unless he and Brady mind-meld, it will be tough just to replace Welker's production.

Good offense, yes. Best of all time...2007.

PatsCanDoIt

The 2007 Patriots prove that variation exists. Even Brady said, "There was no way we should have won that game in 2001, but we found a way to win because we executed," he said. "And I think the Giants executed that way against us this year." Sometimes a weaker team executes better than a stronger one and the bounce of an egg shaped ball doesn't help matters. Even the most consistent team can lose because of variation.

In six Superbowl appearances the Patriots were the stronger team three times and we have three rings to show for it, as expected; however, the 2007 Patriots are never going to be Superbowl champions but the 2007 Patriots will always be a great team.

__________________
Three. Word. Chant.