What a Mess - Page 7 - New England Patriots Forums

ThatllMoveTheChains!!! · 10-30-2012, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goheels22002

Great statistic!

One of those losses was the most recent Super Bowl when the Patriots passed 41 times (68%) and rushed 19 times (32%). Five more rushing plays and, more likely than not, the Patriots would have won.

Even as a great supporter of "the Pats need to run more" I think the bar should really be set at 35%. Even games that have a 50/50 split through 2 even 3 quarters can get skewed late when down. Take the Cardinals game where the split was pretty even through 3 and then ended up @ 38/62. However the games where they don't use the run much to open generally trend much lower; like the Seahawks game that finished @ 31/69.

***AndyJohnson*** · 10-30-2012, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goheels22002

Great statistic!

One of those losses was the most recent Super Bowl when the Patriots passed 41 times (68%) and rushed 19 times (32%). Five more rushing plays and, more likely than not, the Patriots would have won.

I landed because I fell. I didn't fall because I landed.

***Deus Irae*** · 10-30-2012, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBostonStraggler

Fair enough. I took from your post (the one I originally commented on) that Bradford should have scored more points simply because he had a high completion percentage (replying that YPA is too important a factor to leave out of that equation). But your intended view of factoring in what Bradford missed downfield versus what the Patriots wouldn't give him due to good coverage/scheme??? I got no idea

. I didn't notice the wide view enough to be able to offer an educated guess. I recall he missed a couple of better options but that means little (even TB and the best QBs aren't going to see the best option every time). I look forward to seeing film breakdown (if anyone does that this week).

I hear what you're saying. I'm hoping it's looked at by some of the media, so I can get their take on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBostonStraggler

With that said, I think we all should be happy about one thing, after the first series no more of those really big plays that have been killing the Patriots. A robust offense and a solid run D (as well as solid punting and kicking), the only thing the Patriot secondary MUST do is not allow those big plays. The Patriots can/will win a lot of games with that formula even with opposing QBs consistently having good numbers against our below average coverage secondary.

I see a team that would, or at least should, be runaway favorites to win the Super Bowl if the secondary can get to something like 'average'. That's why I was bringing up the question/issue. If the new starters were getting it done after just a game of playing together, rather than it being more about the opposing QB/playcalls, that would be a really great sign, even with the depletion of the Rams receivers.