Hypothesis ...

[loosebearing]

What if the Defense is "horrible" and gives up 30 points a game (each and every game) 16 games of 30 Points each.

What then would be the record of the Pats?

8-8? Better? Worse?

(Matt Cassel's year would have been 9-7)

 

[Kontradiction]

 

[Ring 6]

What if the Defense is "horrible" and gives up 30 points a game (each and every game) 16 games of 30 Points each.

What then would be the record of the Pats?

8-8? Better? Worse?

(Matt Cassel's year would have been 9-7)

Ive been saying for a couple of weeks that Brady, now 100%, with the best weapons he has ever have would win 12 games this year win anyones defense.

 

[BradyMossWelker]

Ive been saying for a couple of weeks that Brady, now 100%, with the best weapons he has ever have would win 12 games this year win anyones defense.

Agree. It seems like the NFL "world" has been forgetting how the 2007 Brady looked like. If Brady is 100%, we don't need no stinkin defense

 

[loosebearing]

Ive been saying for a couple of weeks that Brady, now 100%, with the best weapons he has ever have would win 12 games this year win anyones defense.

That's why I posted it - The hypothesis is the answer to all the questions of the team's weaknesses. Both Offense and Defense. (By the way I think Special Teams - as in field position - will be a HUGE improvement) If all goes bad - are they still a playoff team.

(Only one team in the last 5 years has given up anywhere near 480 points).

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

What if the Defense is "horrible" and gives up 30 points a game (each and every game) 16 games of 30 Points each.

What then would be the record of the Pats?

8-8? Better? Worse?

(Matt Cassel's year would have been 9-7)

Gee Beaver, what if our Defense gives up a hundred points in a hundred games. What would that mean?

wtf man????, give it a rest

 

[IcyPatriot]

Ive been saying for a couple of weeks that Brady, now 100%, with the best weapons he has ever have would win 12 games this year win anyones defense.

I tend to agree with that Andy ... short of having a complete JAG line but even then Tom is on a mission again now that he is healthy. In a league where many rules have been geared towards making it easier to pass we have the best QB who is surounded by multiple weapons.

 

[efin98]

I tend to agree with that Andy ... short of having a complete JAG line but even then Tom is on a mission again now that he is healthy. In a league where many rules have been geared towards making it easier to pass we have the best QB who is surounded by multiple weapons.

He did it with a JAG line already...

I count Moss, Maroney, Welker, and Brady as guys who have something to prove that should put a fire in their bellies and a pissed off look on their faces on Sundays.

 

[loosebearing]

Gee Beaver, what if our Defense gives up a hundred points in a hundred games. What would that mean?

wtf man????, give it a rest

Thank you

I consult on intelligent thought. Seeing the Obvious is what the illiterates have problems with. They spend all their time on dealing with the minutia, and arguing over trivial points.

It is what it is.

 

[BradyMossWelker]

He did it with a JAG line already...

I count Moss, Maroney, Welker, and Brady as guys who have something to prove that should put a fire in their bellies and a pissed off look on their faces on Sundays.

Agree. Maroney will be NFL's most improved player, Maroney FTW. Everybody better start buying #39 jerseys, it will be worth it.
LM2K

 

[Ring 6]

I tend to agree with that Andy ... short of having a complete JAG line but even then Tom is on a mission again now that he is healthy. In a league where many rules have been geared towards making it easier to pass we have the best QB who is surounded by multiple weapons.

I'm not understanding the negative comments about the line.
Brady was sacked the 3rd fewest times and the 2nd least frequently (I know everyone thinks he miraculously got hit more than the QBs who got sacked more but thats just not true, it just felt that way because every time he got breathed on we feared 2008) and we upgraded RT and have the backup LG elevated to starter. That is not a big change.

 

[Ring 6]

That's why I posted it - The hypothesis is the answer to all the questions of the team's weaknesses. Both Offense and Defense. (By the way I think Special Teams - as in field position - will be a HUGE improvement) If all goes bad - are they still a playoff team.

(Only one team in the last 5 years has given up anywhere near 480 points).

BUT the D needs to at least grow into a competitive if not very good one for the playoff success we want to have.

 

[Patspsycho]

Thank you

I consult on intelligent thought. Seeing the Obvious is what the illiterates have problems with. They spend all their time on dealing with the minutia, and arguing over trivial points.

It is what it is.

You bring up an idiotic premise.. what did you expect? Intelligent answers?

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Good point, BUT let me point out why this reasoning is flawed.

When your defense is a sieve who can't stop the run or the pass and allows 30 points per game, it is not usually a good thing for the offense. When the defense allows teams to score at will, the offense is forced into a desperate one-dimensional passing game. The defense's failure to stop the run and give the ball back to the offense kills momentum and rhythm. Likewise, when the offense moves the ball and controls the clock, it helps the defense. When the offense turns the ball over a lot, it obviously hurts the defense.

When you take an example of Matt Cassel's Patriots going 9-7 (since they scored over 30 points in 9 games), you have to look at the context.

Let's look at those 9 games in 2008 for proof why this argument doesn't work:

Of those 9 games, there was only one game where both teams scored over 30 points, and that was a 34-31 OT loss to the Jets. Let's look at other games where either the Patriots OR their opponent scored over 30 that year....

Miami 38, New England 13 (the wildcat game). Perfect example of why a good offense is rendered useless when the defense collapses.

New England 30, San Francisco 21 (I took my wife on our first date to this game.) Let's put it this way, had the Patriots scored 21 points, and played like the Niners on offense, it would have been 30-21 the other way.

San Diego 30, New England 10. Once again, you see what always happens. Chargers burned our defense, and Patriots went into desperation passing mode. Downward cycle that just gets worse.

New England 41, Denver 7. Obviously Denver's offense was capable of scoring over 7 points. Here's another good point: usually when offenses turn the ball over numerous times, that's why teams get over 30 to begin with.

There are several other games, but why beat a dead horse? Obviously the offense and defense are tied together and effect each other. In the NFL, you see a lot of teams capable of scoring 30- may even do it 10 or more times during the season- but if they allow 30 in any given game, they are probably not going to win.

When one teams scores a lot of points, you much more often see a blowout. Sure, there are some exciting 36-33 games out there, but they are statistically very rare.

This defense is going to have its growing pains, but my hope is with faster, more athletic players, they will at least force some turnovers. Teams have ridden that combination to championships, and good examples are the '06 Colts and '09 Saints, neither of which had a very good defense, but both of whom were able to take away the ball.

 

[Kontradiction]

Good point, BUT let me point out why this reasoning is flawed.

When your defense is a sieve who can't stop the run or the pass and allows 30 points per game, it is not usually a good thing for the offense. When the defense allows teams to score at will, the offense is forced into a desperate one-dimensional passing game. Likewise, when the offense moves the ball and controls the clock, it helps the defense. When the offense turns the ball over a lot, it obviously hurts the defense.

When you take an example of Matt Cassel's Patriots going 9-7 (since they scored over 30 points in 9 games), that just isn't true. The defense's failure to stop the run and give the ball back to the offense kills momentum and rhythm.

Let's look at those 9 games in 2008 for proof why this argument doesn't work:

Of those 9 games, there was only one game where both teams scored over 30 points, and that was a 34-31 OT loss to the Jets. Let's look at other games where either the Patriots OR their opponent scored over 30 that year....

Miami 38, New England 13 (the wildcat game). Perfect example of why a good offense is rendered useless when the defense collapses.

New England 30, San Francisco 21 (I took my wife on our first date to this game.) Let's put it this way, had the Patriots scored 21 points, and played like the Niners on offense, it would have been 30-21 the other way.

San Diego 30, New England 10. Once again, you see what always happens. Chargers burned our defense, and Patriots went into desperation passing mode. Downward cycle that just gets worse.

New England 41, Denver 7. Obviously Denver's offense was capable of scoring over 7 points. Here's another good point: usually when offenses turn the ball over numerous times, that's why teams get over 30 to begin with.

There are several other games, but why beat a dead horse? Obviously the offense and defense are tied together and effect each other. In the NFL, you see a lot of teams capable of scoring 30- may even do it 10 or more times during the season- but if they allow 30 in any given game, they are probably not going to win.

When one teams scores a lot of points, you much more often see a blowout. Sure, there are some exciting 36-33 games out there, but they are statistically very rare.

I can't believe you wrote a doctorate thesis in response to this ridiculous thread. There's 30 minutes of your life you'll never get back.

 

[Othersam]

Edit: sorry for spelling errors Im posting this with an Iphone and get find a spellcheck funtion.

This defense is going to surprise everybody. Why? Not because it's a solid defense, it's not, but because of expectations. As fans we are expecting the 0-16 Lions defense.

Linemen: adequate. This is a big line with athleticism. It's not the old Pats line but it is good enough and big enough to occupy guards and let our extremely physical ILBs stuff backs. Running down the middle will not be easy, same as always. It's runs to tje outside and strech plays that will be troublesome. But coaching can improve this aspect, I expect it will.

Linebackers: ILBs are solid and will become a legit unit later on in the season. Expect Guyton on obvious passing situations. Also expect a different Mayo, he was hurt last year.
OLB: Who doubts Cunnigham will provide a better pass as a rookie than whatever tapdancing Method Burgess was doing with the offensive tackle? We will have a better pass rush than last year, am I the only one that sees this? My concern is the ability of our OLBs to make the occasional drop back to cover a check down receiver, slot receiver, Or TE.

CB - Not as doom and gloom as some claim. It is NOT that much
of a drop off from Bodden to SECOND YEAR Butler. It is not that much. Butler had 8 passes defenses last season and 3 INTs last year. That's about the average achieved by the top CBs in the NFL in their first year, go ahead look it up. Butler has been very close in coverage last season but he did not make enough plays/deflections on the ball, he was a rookie! We should be happy with what he did last year. I expect he will show development this year and make more plays on the ball. The test for him will be covering better recievers.

McCourtey - has the making of a solid #1 man coverage corner.

Wilhite - He will be better than last year. Why? Because he is still young and developing. It's doubtful he will ever be a #2 corner. But I think he will look really good this year with now with 2 years of experience AND playing lesser recievers.

Wheatley - My X-factor. And yours too. Come on admit. I know I know he's been made of glass but he will get healthy eventually. We know nothing of him really. He looked terrible on technique 13 months ago in the preseason. It wasn't his coverage that was bad it was technique off the line of scrimmage. Then this preseason he looked excellent. He has starter caliber potential as we go on.

So overall it's not a solid defense but it's not that bad!

S - Merriweather, Chung, and Page. Non are Rodney Harrison or Miloy in their prime but provide one of the strongest safety units in the league. They will develop further as we reach the latter part of the season.

 

[loosebearing]

You bring up an idiotic premise.. what did you expect? Intelligent answers?

Yes. I expected an epiphany in the reader (maybe not intelligent answers) that even with being non perfect that the team is at worst a Playoff team. Anyones answer to the hypothesis would be BETTER than 8 - 8.

If you set a point total for scoring be it 10, 20, 30, etc You now have a goal on how to construct you team (you scoring higher - them scoring lower) The Jets is probably 12.
Then questions of the offensive line / running backs / 3rd receiver / and Defense all culminate with can you Win, and Win enough to make the playoffs. And will the team mature or not 17 weeks from now in order to advance through the playoffs. Winning means outscoring - not being perfect. To game plan you start with a score you feel confident EITHER team can get to and then the planing flows from that. I made an assumption that the other team will score an unlikely 30 points per game. Can/will the Pats score more than 30 in 10 or more games and thereby get into the tournament. If so that solves the next 17 weeks. Then it starts all over with either a less competent team (injuries) or a more competent team (Experience) with hopefully a lower goal (20 points per game)

By the way the 2007 team would have been 12-4 with 30 ppg.