Don Banks SI Power Rankings (Playoff Edition)

Deus Irae said:

Anyone without the Patriots homer glasses should grasp those differences without the words being said.

Click to expand...

If you're honestly trying to argue that the 2009 Patriots are the same as this year's and that's rational to say what happened a year ago on a different team against different competition has any bearing on a game yet to be played, then kindly illustrate for us why every team who wins the Superbowl doesn't repeat. Or three peat. Or why the team with best record doesn't always win. If it's so obvious that we should all grasp it intuitively.

It's a dumb argument, it's a lazy argument. Otherwise there is no point in playing the game. Unless the only one you care about is the one played in the media.

Btw, wasn't Hernandez coming back from injury i'n the playoffs last year and against the Steelers this year as well?I believe he said "at full speed."

These power rankings questioning the Patriots ability to compete in the playoffs can only serve to rev these guys up. It's better than last year when, as the #1 seed, the Patriots were projected to kill the Jets (again) and the Patriots came out in a daze. This crap just piles more fuel on the fire and the defense will be stoked, like the Denver game, ready to smack the opponent in the mouth.

Whoever they play, I expect an aggressive defensive performance from a group of guys with fresh legs in front of a rabid Saturday night crowd.

Good friggin' luck to whomever comes to Foxboro.

Bella*chick said:

If you're honestly trying to argue that the 2009 Patriots are the same as this year's and that's rational to say what happened a year ago on a different team against different competition has any bearing on a game yet to be played, then kindly illustrate for us why every team who wins the Superbowl doesn't repeat. Or three peat. Or why the team with best record doesn't always win. If it's so obvious that we should all grasp it intuitively.

It's a dumb argument, it's a lazy argument. Otherwise there is no point in playing the game. Unless the only one you care about is the one played in the media.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry you've chosen to wear the homer goggles instead of seeing the obvious, but I'm not going down this road with someone who's just going to move the goalposts instead of dealing with the point at hand. Good luck to you.

Don Kipines said:

Green Bay has proven it a lot more than the Pats have recently. They give up a lot of yards, but they have a lot more playmakers than we do, and they don't have even one wide receiver playing defense, let alone two.

Click to expand...

Were you equally critical when a LB played TE and a DE played FB? How about an OT playing TE?

Deus Irae said:

I'm sorry you've chosen to wear the homer goggles instead of seeing the obvious, but I'm not going down this road with someone who's just going to move the goalposts instead of dealing with the point at hand. Good luck to you.

Click to expand...

Lol, aka " I can't do it."

I'll break it down for you, sport. You think the media's dumb, lazy argument has merit. So much so that it doesn't need explaining why you should crown the team with the worst ranked defense and dismiss us because of our second to last ranked defense.. I think it's dumb. I think it requires the explanations you provided because at least they provide some context for things. But the reason no one is saying it is because to say that what happened before has any bearing on what happens now on different teams in different years (especially 2009, with Brady coming back from surgery) against different competition is POINTLESS. just ask the NY Jets, who are sitting at home after two straight years of AFC Championship games.

You don't have to agree with me. Tom Brady does because I heard him say it on WEEI. Want to wish him good luck too, or are you busy trying to show what a contrarian you are?

Bella*chick said:

Btw, wasn't Hernandez coming back from injury i'n the playoffs last year and against the Steelers this year as well?I believe he said "at full speed."

Click to expand...

YES. I keep meaning to mention this. He was definitely not himself in that playoff game v the Jets.

Bella*chick said:

Lol, aka " I can't do it."

Click to expand...

No, Bella.... it's a/k/a the "no repeat", for example, has nothing to do with why someone should/shouldn't be less harsh on Green Bay's defense than New England's. You knew you had no point on the issue at hand, so you tried to broaden the argument. I choose not to do that.

Deus Irae said:

No, Bella.... it's a/k/a the "no repeat", for example, has nothing to do with why someone should/shouldn't be less harsh on Green Bay's defense than New England's. You knew you had no point on the issue at hand, so you tried to broaden the argument. I choose not to do that.

Click to expand...

They are not being "less harsh" on Green Bay's defense. They aren't being harsh at all. And they're calling us frauds. I'd say it's about as opposite end of the spectrum as possible.

Given our coach and QB, it's not really that fair, IMO. You think it is fair. That's the difference.

Bella*chick said:

They are not being "less harsh" on Green Bay's defense. They aren't being harsh at all. And they're calling us frauds. I'd say it's about as opposite end of the spectrum as possible.

Given our coach and QB, it's not really that fair, IMO. You think it is fair. That's the difference.

Click to expand...

Given our coach and QB? Are you freaking' kidding me?

"Our coach and QB" have been part of the disasters in the past two seasons. Of COURSE it's fair.

Deus Irae said:

Given our coach and QB? Are you freaking' kidding me?

"Our coach and QB" have been part of the disasters in the past two seasons. Of COURSE it's fair.

Click to expand...

Different year, different team, different competition, different injuries. Dumb argument.

You amuse me so, Deus. You're like one of clown blow up dolls that you punch, you just bounce right back for one more post, and one more post and one more post, and one more post.

I just want to make sure I understand the rules Deus...If you bring up the fact that GB won the SB last year and the Patriots haven't won a playoff game since 2007, to make a point that should clearly "be obvious to everyone", then that is ok?

But, if someone else points out (in this case Bella) that last year's team(s) and results have absolutely zero bearing on the outcome of, as she pointed out, a game(s) that has yet to be played...then that is moving the goal post on the conversation?

That makes absolutely zero sense. Every player and Coach in the NFL will tell you that each year it is a new team, and that should be obvious to anyone who follows the sport with even the slightest interest.

I will go back to reading now....

PatsWickedPissah said:

My take is this. Perhaps it has to do with like the GB team sliced through the playoffs months ago and won that SuperBowl thingy, with the same cast of team members? A recent Lombardi win means something. It gets people's respect vs going 0-2 in playoffs the last 2 years.

It will be delicious to toss this Colts-style monkey off our back.

Click to expand...

Except that the Green Bay from last year is different on both offense and defense from this year.

They were without Finley and Grant last year. This year they lost Colledge and Cullen Jenkins.. Plus they have injuries in their secondary.. Amd Raji's play has suffered with the loss of Jenkins.

mgcolby said:

I just want to make sure I understand the rules Deus...If you bring up the fact that GB won the SB last year and the Patriots haven't won a playoff game since 2007, to make a point that should clearly "be obvious to everyone", then that is ok?

But, if someone else points out (in this case Bella) that last year's team(s) and results have absolutely zero bearing on the outcome of, as she pointed out, a game(s) that has yet to be played...then that is moving the goal post on the conversation?

That makes absolutely zero sense. Every player and Coach in the NFL will tell you that each year it is a new team, and that should be obvious to anyone who follows the sport with even the slightest interest.

I will go back to reading now....

Click to expand...

Well, it's obvious to Tom Brady And Bill Belichick. But since they were such an integral part of the last two years of shameful football failures, we should probably disregard their opinions for not being intuitive enough, like those of the media.

Lloyd_Christmas said:

I think the reason GB gets a pass is that they only lost 1 game this year, played better teams than the pats, and are not coming off two "one and done" playoff appearances.

All of that being said, the GB defense is statistically worse than the Patriots in yards and points allowed and they are getting a pass from the media when they probably shouldn't be.

Click to expand...

Actually, the opponents for both GB and NE had the same combined record 117 - 139. Plus, the average defense (based on points allowed) faced by the Packers was something like 22nd whereas it was 18th for NE

Deus Irae said:

It's pretty easy to see why people are evaluating the two teams differently. It just requires that people take off the homer glasses:

The Packers played a tougher schedule, went 15-1, were on the second longest winning streak in league history, and are coming off of a Super Bowl victory.

The Patriots haven't won a playoff game since 2007, have looked bad in the last two playoff losses, and, so far, are repeating last year's basic pattern only with a worse defense.

Click to expand...

Deus, I agree that Green Bay has earned the right *as a team* to be given a little slack. They have some cache for the reasons you mentioned. But my original post goes after a very specific issue. People are saying New England is almost certainly going to fall short because they have a terrible defense (ranked 31st in yards allowed). Never mind the fact that they have the 15th ranked defense by points allowed...which is better than many of the teams in the playoffs. But forget that for a minute. My beef is that NOBODY dismisses Green Bay - nobody - even though, statistically, their defense is *WORSE* than New England's - both in yards allowed and points allowed. By either measure, New England had the better defense this year.

Yes, Green Bay had a really good defense last year, but as we know in the NFL, things can change dramatically from year to year. Take Pittsburgh, 2008-10.

2008 (12-4; won the SB)
#1 rank pts allowed
#1 rank yds allowed
8.2 dSRS

2009 (9-7; missed playoffs)
#12 rank pts allowed
#5 rank yds allowed
0.7 dSRS

2010 (12-4; lost in the SB)
#1 rank pts allowed
#2 rank yds allowed
7.7 dSRS

They were still really good in 2009, but they weren't nearly as good in 2009 as they were in either 2008 or 2010.

Or take New England, 2004-2006

2004 (14-2; won SB)
#2 rank pts allowed
#9 rank yds allowed
6.5 dSRS

2005 (10-6; lost in 2nd round of playoffs)
#17 rank pts allowed
#26 rank yds allowed
-0.5 dSRS

2006 (12-4; lost in AFCCG)
#2 rank pts allowed
#6 rank yds allowed
5.9 dSRS

Not saying this happens all the time, but it certainly can be the case. Heck, even the mighty Ravens dealt with it, from 2006-2008:

2006 (13-3)
#1 rank pts allowed
#1 rank yds allowed
7.8 dSRS

2007 (5-11)
#22 rank pts allowed
#6 rank yds allowed
-1.8 dSRS

2008 (11-5)
#3 rank pts allowed
#2 rank yds allowed
5.6 dSRS

You get the idea. Even what is normally a great defense can have a pretty bad year the very next year after a great performance the previous year. Last year Green Bay was really good on defense: #2 pts, #5 yds, 7.9 dSRS. This year, not so much: #19 pts, #32 yds, -0.1 dSRS.

I think it's fair to give GB as a team the benefit of the doubt. But if you (generic you, not Deus specifically) are going to argue that the Pats really don't have much of a chance *BECAUSE OF THEIR DEFENSE*, then that very same exact criticism HAS to be applied to Green Bay. UNLESS, that is, Green Bay's offense is unbelievable, while New England's is not. Well, we certainly know that GB's offense is unbelievable (#1 pts, #3 yds), but so is New England's (#3 pts, #2 yds). So what carries GB (incredible offense led by a SB-winning, MVP caliber QB putting up insane numbers, and having HFA throughout the playoffs) is *exactly* the same thing that carries NE (incredible offense led by a SB-winning, MVP caliber QB putting up insane numbers, and having HFA throughout the playoffs).

But NE also has this advantage, IMO: They don't have New Orleans in their conference. GB may have to go through what is quite possibly the best overall team in the league, top to bottom. NE wouldn't have to deal with that until the Super Bowl.

So your point is understood (by me anyway). But I think it's not quite fair to the criticisms I have raised of Banks' thought process (and of others like him).

patsfan-1982 said:

because the pats have lost 3 playoff games in a row they will get no respect from the media untill they win one

Click to expand...

yup and the green bay and new orleans defenses recently won championships. hence why we are number 3.

It isn't that simple to project regular season results onto the playoffs. The main difference being weather. An October game in Green Bay is just not the same as one in mid-January. The Packers and Saints are not just passing teams...they are downfield passing teams that don't run the ball particularly well (the Saints actually run well as a change-up from their passing sets). In a wind and cold situation, that turns them from a 35-40 point team to a 20-24 point team. Maybe even less if a running team like the Giants, 49ers or Falcons can stick to the ground without having to play catch-up.

The Patriots are semi-immune to this because of the routes they run and Brady's ability to spin the ball through wind. While it does affect Brady, it affects him FAR less than any opposing QB while also protecting the Pats DBs against the deep ball.

Greetings,
I think people thinking this team will disappoint soley because of this defense has gotten really old. I understand that this is not a championship like defense that has a lot of issues, but Green Bay is not much better if your going to go there. Now, if people bring up they will disappoint because they (A). Have laid two goose eggs at home in the playoffs back to back and (B). Have not won a playoff game in four years and (C) The offense for years has gone Jeckyl\Hyde from regular season to playoffs, then they are correct for their reasons of doubt.
Celticboy04

I understood it fine too. But I don't think it's fair at all and Deus does.