A novel theory - New England Patriots Forums

AzPatsFan · 05-05-2011, 12:06 PM

Many have complained here that it does little good to compile records like 11-5, and 14-2 if you immediately lose in the Playoffs. Real Patriots fans remember the dreary decades of hoping for merely .500. They then describe what they believe the reason is for losing to a club that they had beaten soundly in the regular season.

We have all heard the ideas: can't rush the passer, can't force the run, can't go deep with a game-breaking WR, etc.

I propose a much more mundane suggestion. The Patriots are not yet deep enough to withstand a rash of injuries, especially at critical positions.

But I think everyone overlooks THE most critical position of all. The last two seasons we staggered into the playoffs with a throughly beat-up QB.

Both off seasons, Tom Brady had to go in for surgery. Even now we have a report that Brady is still not fully recovered but making good progress. How can you win, if your GOAT QB is walking wounded, by the 'Second season'?

I know that BB hasn't felt that he could force Tom Brady to sit, and send in a QB to mop up, or take over in a lopsided game, and try to pull it out, when the danger of injury is greatest. Hoyer is still learning and with his limited athletic talent, needs to use every bit of it, and his head to succeed. I expect Hoyer will eventually be able to do so, but he isn't ready to do that yet.

Ryan Mallett is another kettle of fish though. If or when, Mallett gets his legs under him, Belichick will be able to force Tom Brady to sit, and that is what it takes to make the competitor to sit down. Hopefully the Team will have him healthy, and more ready to go in the Playoffs.

I'd much rather enter the playoffs with a healthy Tom Brady, rather than walking wounded, staggering into the playoffs, unable to avoid the sacks (2010), or throw well (2009), hampered with a broken foot or a bum shoulder.

Snake Eyes · 05-05-2011, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AzPatsFan

Many have complained here that it does little good to compile records like 11-5, and 14-2 if you immediately lose in the Playoffs. Real Patriots fans remember the dreary decades of hoping for merely .500. They then describe what they believe the reason is for losing to a club that they had beaten soundly in the regular season.

We have all heard the ideas: can't rush the passer, can't force the run, can't go deep with a game-breaking WR, etc.

I propose a much more mundane suggestion. The Patriots are not yet deep enough to withstand a rash of injuries, especially at critical positions.

But I think everyone overlooks THE most critical position of all. The last two seasons we staggered into the playoffs with a throughly beat-up QB.

Both off seasons, Tom Brady had to go in for surgery. Even now we have a report that Brady is still not fully recovered but making good progress. How can you win, if your GOAT QB is walking wounded, by the 'Second season'?

I know that BB hasn't felt that he could force Tom Brady to sit, and send in a QB to mop up, or take over in a lopsided game, and try to pull it out, when the danger of injury is greatest. Hoyer is still learning and with his limited athletic talent, needs to use every bit of it, and his head to succeed. I expect Hoyer will eventually be able to do so, but he isn't ready to do that yet.

Ryan Mallett is another kettle of fish though. If or when, Mallett gets his legs under him, Belichick will be able to force Tom Brady to sit, and that is what it takes to make the competitor to sit down. Hopefully the Team will have him healthy, and more ready to go in the Playoffs.

I'd much rather enter the playoffs with a healthy Tom Brady, rather than walking wounded, staggering into the playoffs, unable to avoid the sacks (2010), or throw well (2009), hampered with a broken foot or a bum shoulder.

The QB wasn't the reason we lost the last 2 playoff games. We couldnt stop the Jets running game and their DBs blanketed our receivers. Hopefully Dowling and Bodden will help the secondary become nasty, then if we can get Kiwi and Fitzgerald we'd be loaded for bear.

***mgteich*** · 05-05-2011, 12:34 PM

I do beleive that we have depth. We deal with injuries as well as any team. The problem in the past couple fo years is that we just asked for the problem by carrying the three oldest running backs in the nfl on our roster.
----------------------------------------------------
Yes, this is a novel theory. Your position is that this team is plenty good enough to win playoff game if Tom Brady is healthy going into the playoffs.

While I agree, the question is HOW to keep Brady healthy going into the playoffs.

Some suggestions include
--------------------------------------------------
1) Have a backup QB who does some mopup duty during the season and plays when Brady is injured during the season.

While this sounds good, I don't think either Brady or Manning have ever handed over the ball unless they absolutely couldn't walk into the huddle. And the record of these two teams has been the best in the nfl over the past 10 years.
--------------------------------------------------
2) Have an improved OL.

Yes, fewer hits lead to a stronger Brady in the playoffs. I would argue that Belichick has done all he can in this regard, other than paying a LG starting LT salary.
---------------------------------------------------
3) Give Brady more targets and go-to receivers, and shorten the offense.

If Brady can get rid of the ball faster, then he will be hit less. Belichick got rid of Moss. Belichick has drafted Gronk, Hernandez and Price in the last two years. And now, he has added Vareen as a target to replace Faulk.
---------------------------------------------------
4) Make sure that the blitz will be picked up on third down.

A blocking TE and a running back who can pickup the blitz are essential. Crumpler and Gronk are the answer, with Smith as the replacement for Cruimpler. Vareen relaces Faulk in this regard. Also, Ridley is a fine blocker.
----------------------------------------------------
5) Have a running game that uses up clock and can be counted on in short yardage situations.

Having Brady as our short yardage back is just not a great idea. Welcome Mr. Ridley!

The running game has been very predictable, or so our opponents have indicated. Green-Ellis in the game means run. Woodhead in the game means pass. In addition to the inflexibility of these two, the problem was that the other running backs were always injured.
Having four (or even 5) running backs with different roles will help a lot.
----------------------------------------

***NEGoldenAge*** · 05-05-2011, 12:47 PM

The most obvious explanation is that we're dealing with such a small sample size of games when talking about the Pat's playoff losses.

patriot lifer · 05-05-2011, 02:22 PM

I agreed with you up through the qb depth being the issue. I do agree that we all look for silver bullets that solve all our team's problems when it comes down to playing well for that one game in a sudden death tournament.

As for depth, one of the things I look at in our post-season loss against the Jets is the fact that so many of our DL was hurt and out. We weren't missing stellar players or anything but when Wright, Brace, Pryor, and Deaderick are all hurt (or out) that's a huge amount of our depth. Love and Cohen should not have been seeing the field against other playoff opponents. Defensive back was also an issue. From the get-go losing Bodden and then even Wilhite and Butler getting banged up. While a guy like Wilhite is no allstar, the loss of depth brings Chung up into playing nickel.

I look to this lack of depth as a significant contributing factor in our loss...plus the fact that the Jets just played well and were emotionally supercharged for the game.

Metaphors · 05-05-2011, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake Eyes

The QB wasn't the reason we lost the last 2 playoff games. We couldnt stop the Jets running game and their DBs blanketed our receivers.

The last 3 playoff losses are so confounding to people because everyone looks for THE reason why they happened. The Pats could easily survive a single breakdown. These losses were the result of inefficiencies for a team that was built around being efficient in all 3 phases of the game.

Check out the drive charts for these games. The Pats offense couldn't sustain drives, turned the ball over uncharacteristically and didn't build early leads when the opportunities where there. The defense didn't get turnovers when they were available, gave up big drives late and allowed offenses to stay in a comfort zone and continue doing what they do well. Special teams typically lost the field position battle and failed to pin opponents deep.

All of these were departures from the norm for those teams. One position didn't lose the games. Neither didn't one unit. They were systematic failures which a smart and deep team should be able to avoid. That makes the losses hard to absorb and even harder to take a concrete action to "fix".

Injuries happen, but I can't see the Pats losing any of those games if everyone just did their job to expectations. I think that explains a draft full of players that are technically clean and coachable with predictable motors...and lacking guys with high upsides but even higher uncertainty. It is all about efficiency.

Snake Eyes · 05-05-2011, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metaphors

The last 3 playoff losses are so confounding to people because everyone looks for THE reason why they happened. The Pats could easily survive a single breakdown. These losses were the result of inefficiencies for a team that was built around being efficient in all 3 phases of the game.

Check out the drive charts for these games. The Pats offense couldn't sustain drives, turned the ball over uncharacteristically and didn't build early leads when the opportunities where there. The defense didn't get turnovers when they were available, gave up big drives late and allowed offenses to stay in a comfort zone and continue doing what they do well. Special teams typically lost the field position battle and failed to pin opponents deep.

All of these were departures from the norm for those teams. One position didn't lose the games. Neither didn't one unit. They were systematic failures which a smart and deep team should be able to avoid. That makes the losses hard to absorb and even harder to take a concrete action to "fix".

Injuries happen, but I can't see the Pats losing any of those games if everyone just did their job to expectations. I think that explains a draft full of players that are technically clean and coachable with predictable motors...and lacking guys with high upsides but even higher uncertainty. It is all about efficiency.

If you want to go all the way back to the loss in the Superbowl you’re talking a bigger conversation, and I think the flaws are obviously a result of coaching and personnel, but just about all the problems stem from that, and each has an impact on the other.

In a nutshell, the biggest flaws have been:

- 07, the O-line couldnt stop a wet fart, Brady gets beaten to a pulp
- 09, D-line can’t stop the Ravens running game, the Offense was beyond predictable
- 10, our receivers were owned by the Jets DBs, we didnt have a running game that could truely keep the defense honest. Weak D can’t stop the Jets running game, and allows Sanchez to appear competent

letekro · 05-05-2011, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake Eyes

If you want to go all the way back to the loss in the Superbowl you’re talking a bigger conversation, and I think the flaws are obviously a result of coaching and personnel, but just about all the problems stem from that, and each has an impact on the other.

In a nutshell, the biggest flaws have been:

- 07, the O-line couldnt stop a wet fart, Brady gets beaten to a pulp
- 09, D-line can’t stop the Ravens running game, the Offense was beyond predictable
- 10, our receivers were owned by the Jets DBs, we didnt have a running game that could truely keep the defense honest. Weak D can’t stop the Jets running game, and allows Sanchez to appear competent

I blame the ESPN culture of over-analysis. Bottom line: The 07 and 10 teams were good enough to win the SB, but in a loser goes home format, there are no guarantees. Every year a flawed team wins a SB and equally flawed teams get bounced.

The 09 team was garbage. No Welker. Brady coming off ACL surgery. Adalius Thomas. Poor secondary play, locker room issues.

borg · 05-05-2011, 03:51 PM

More running plays will keep Brady healthy.....and....what do you know. Drafted 2 OLs....Drafted 2 RBs.....and 1 blocking TE

Snake Eyes · 05-05-2011, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by letekro

I blame the ESPN culture of over-analysis. Bottom line: The 07 and 10 teams were good enough to win the SB, but in a loser goes home format, there are no guarantees. Every year a flawed team wins a SB and equally flawed teams get bounced.

The 09 team was garbage. No Welker. Brady coming off ACL surgery. Adalius Thomas. Poor secondary play, locker room issues.

Ok, so you gave detailed reasons why the 09 team failed yet you think it's silly to analize why the 07 and 10 team failed because it just happens

Thanks, that helped.