Pats Offense "slowing down"

[ivanvamp]

From John Clayton's 1st and 10 article on espn.com: "The Eagles and
Ravens have made the undefeated Patriots look vulnerable. Both teams
proved that tight coverage on slot receiver Wes Welker and double
coverage of Randy Moss can slow down the Patriots' passing offense.
Both used varied blitzes to pressure quarterback Tom Brady."

Ok, so they can "slow down" the Patriots' passing offense. Let's look
at some numbers:

Brady's combined line: 52-92 (56.6%, including at least 9 drops), 637
yds, 3 td, 1 int

New England scored 31 and 27 points (average of 29 points) in those
two games, against two of the better defenses in the league. Sure,
that's "slowing them down". But it's like slowing Secretariat down.
Ok, so he doesn't win the race by 31 lengths...just 10 lengths.
That's what's happening here. They're slowing the Pats down, but the
Pats are "only" putting up 29 points, with Brady averaging more than
315 yds a game passing.

For reference's sake, here's what the Patriots averaged in terms of
points-per-game since 2001:

2001 - 23.2 (won SB)
2002 - 23.8
2003 - 21.2 (won SB)
2004 - 27.3 (won SB)
2005 - 23.7 (lost in 2nd round of playoffs)
2006 - 24.1 (lost in AFCCG)


So their offense is "slowing down", but it's still averaging more
during this "slow" period than they ever did during any of their past
six seasons - a stretch which includes three Super Bowl-winning
teams!!

 

[Grogan's neck roll]

Posted this in the Steelers' easiest sched thread, but it also fits here:

PATS OFFENSE is sputtering last two games.... steelers dominated their last high flying offensive team....


Pats offense over last two games:

Total yards vs. PHI: 410
Total yards vs. BAL: 326

That second game is only 6 yards behind the Steelers' AVERAGE. Boy is our offense sputtering!

 

[ClevTrev]

I think you can expect to see columns like this, as we've got a bunch of scribes paid to generate words. What's seems like a good column? Well maybe the fact that the Pats haven't scored as much in their last few games. Of course, having scored so much in their previous 9 games, the disparity in points is already in place. Rocket science stuff. It has nothing to do with weather conditions, or teams getting up for the "best team in history," or trying like hell to salvage some essence of pride in a lost season, or a combination of all of the above.

 

[BadMoFo]

So is he completely wrong here? We've seen that the offense has sputtered more these past two weeks than any point of the year. I wouldn't call the Eagles one of the better defenses. The Cowboys and Redskins have pretty good defenses and we handled them fine.

 

[MDPATSFAN]

The Pats uncharacteristically dropped two touchdown passes in Baltimore. They should have never trailed in the game and left 8 points on the endzone turf.

 

[ClevTrev]

So is he completely wrong here? We've seen that the offense has sputtered more these past two weeks than any point of the year. I wouldn't call the Eagles one of the better defenses. The Cowboys and Redskins have pretty good defenses and we handled them fine.

Good question. Are there other factors at work? Not sure we can say he's right or wrong with certainty at this point. I think the game on Sunday against a good defense at home will show what this offense at this point in the season is really made of.

My point is that this was an easy article to write. Hey, I might have written the same thing if I was getting paid by the word.

 

[ivanvamp]

So is he completely wrong here? We've seen that the offense has sputtered more these past two weeks than any point of the year. I wouldn't call the Eagles one of the better defenses. The Cowboys and Redskins have pretty good defenses and we handled them fine.

Well, that was kind of my point. Yes, they've slowed down some the past two weeks. But it's like a Ferrarri going from 150 down to 115. I mean, Brady is still throwing for, on average, over 300 yards a game, and they're averaging 29 points per game - which is higher than they averaged during any of their SB seasons.

So yeah, they haven't quite been as good....but it's because they were *SO* ridiculously good that it's pretty much impossible to keep that up forever.

John

 

[godef]

For reference's sake, here's what the Patriots averaged in terms of
points-per-game since 2001:

2001 - 23.2 (won SB)
2002 - 23.8
2003 - 21.2 (won SB)
2004 - 27.3 (won SB)
2005 - 23.7 (lost in 2nd round of playoffs)
2006 - 24.1 (lost in AFCCG)


So their offense is "slowing down", but it's still averaging more
during this "slow" period than they ever did during any of their past
six seasons - a stretch which includes three Super Bowl-winning
teams!!

Umm... except 2004?

 

[cstjohn17]

From John Clayton's 1st and 10 article on espn.com: "The Eagles and
Ravens have made the undefeated Patriots look vulnerable. Both teams
proved that tight coverage on slot receiver Wes Welker and double
coverage of Randy Moss can slow down the Patriots' passing offense.
Both used varied blitzes to pressure quarterback Tom Brady."

When you average over 40 PPG and then score under 30 points in two games you have slowed down. Pretty simple math. It doesn't mean they are not a great offense, it just means their scoring has slowed.

I think we all expected them to cool down as bad weather and a tough stretch of the schedule set in. Both the Ravens and Eagles did have some success slowing the Patriots, some tweaking and adjustments are necessary from the offense. If Moss and Welker are double covered then Stallworth, Watson and Faulk\Maroney should be open. We saw some of this against the Ravens but the bad weather, Ravens pressure and drops hurt the momentum.

The lack of credible running game has allowed teams to rush the QB like mad men and dedicate more people to coverage. I am very interested to see what subtle adjustments are made to their formations and how they can breath some life into the running game (which wasn't half bad against the Ravens).

 

[scout]

The Pats offense would have scored and moved the ball much easier if there were not gale force winds. I'm thinking along the lines of Steve Young's comments, where the Patriots are in a lull. No way they do not have down games in a 16 game schedule. Hopefully, there are normal game conditions for Sunday, to really gauge the offense.

 

[cstjohn17]

Umm... except 2004?

That was an awesome offense, great balance run versus pass. 2007 is a scoring machine but it is clearly has a pass first, pass second, pass third focus.

The good news is the talent level at QB, QR and O Line is enough to have this scheme set all time records for scoring.

 

[cartmen]

the one thing they failed to mention is the mugging that took place in the ravens game to the point that the police were called to take down a report.

 

[ivanvamp]

Umm... except 2004?

Except 2004 what? The last 2 games, the Patriots have averaged 29 points a game. In 2004, they averaged just over 27. I don't get your comment here.

 

[sieglo]

The Pats offense would have scored and moved the ball much easier if there were not gale force winds. I'm thinking along the lines of Steve Young's comments, where the Patriots are in a lull. No way they do not have down games in a 16 game schedule. Hopefully, there are normal game conditions for Sunday, to really gauge the offense.

35 degrees, cloudy, 6 MPH winds predicted.

 

[Oswlek]

Despite the obvious holds and despite the winds, NE is to blame themselves for not topping 35 in each game offensively. Just Watson and Moss' drops alone would have brought their score up to 35 against Baltimore. Moss "caught" a TD that counts for any other team and they dropped a bunch of passes on other drives.

If NE continues to drop passes, they will be slowed down. Otherwise, no one has done anything to them yet.

BTW, John Clayton is probably the stupidest reporter on the planet.

 

[godef]

Except 2004 what? The last 2 games, the Patriots have averaged 29 points a game. In 2004, they averaged just over 27. I don't get your comment here.

Oops. Yeah, guess I'm losing my mind. Can't even add and divide anymore. Sorry.

 

[Satchboogie3]

Yea, this talk is crazy. We put up 31 against the Eagles and 27 against the Ravens. That is when our offense was "slowed down" and we played poorly. Whats the big deal here? That is still more points than most teams can score, especially against our defense. If we play as well as we can, then you are looking at 40 plus points. They had 2 "bad" games by their standard, but still scored more points than most teams can at their best. Whats the big deal?