Pre-Game Thoughts: My Little Ponies Edition

Ok, I have been thinking about this game a lot so I figured I would throw out some thoughts (plus I wanted to use my "My Little Ponies" reference before I forgot). I actually think this game has blowout potential for the Patriots (just like the last two games vs. Luck). Here are my reasons why:

• The Colts suck in the red zone on both sides of the ball. Ok, they don't suck on offense, but they are average at best with the 16th ranked red zone offense. Considering they are the #1 offense in the league, that isn't very good. They absolutely suck on defense though being the worst red zone defense in the league.

• The Colts cannot pressure the QB with any form of consistency without blitzing. If you blitz Brady, he is likely to eat you apart. If you don't pressure Brady, he is likely to eat you apart. Pick your poison.

• TY Hilton still makes up the lion share of the Colts' passing offense. I think he has caught 28% of Luck's passes and 30% of his yards this season. The Pats are good at taking away what the other team does best and that is Hilton this week. Luck seems to like to focus on one receiver more than others. Can he adjust if the Pats shut down Hilton?

• The Colts aren't a good running team. Yes, they are middle of the pack in attempts and yards, but that is misleading since Luck has rushed 35 times (13.7% of their rushing attempts) for 129 yards (12.6% of their rushing yards). The Pats' biggest weakness on defense is rush defense and I don't think the Colts like to commit to the run. Bradshaw has a very good yards per carry average, but that is misleading too because he faces a lot of 5 and 6 men in the box expecting a pass. He is averaging less than 50 yards a game.

• Luck makes mistakes. The guy is a great QB, but he is a gunslinger and still gambles too much at times which has cost him in fumbles and INTs. For the season, he has thrown 9 INTs and fumbled the ball 3 times. In his two games vs. the Pats, he has thrown 7 INTs and fumbled once.

• No answer for Gronk? The Colts are a smaller, fast defense. Those types of defenses have their advantages, but I think that is a liability to cover Gronk. It would almost be like me playing football with the ten year old kids down the street of my house. Sure they are faster than me, but you could throw jump balls to me all day and they have no shot of covering me. Plus, I could just knock them over at the line of scrimmage. That is the way I see Gronk playing against the Colts.

• Brady shines in the dome. Brady is 11-3 in a dome in the regular season and typically puts up big numbers. Plus he has done very well against Pagano's defenses when he had Gronk.

I admit I could end up being way wrong on all this, but I still think the Pats are a great match up for the Colts because their strengths can exploit the Colts' weaknesses.

I'm much, much more confident about this game than I was about the Jets and Broncos games. Our record after byes isn't actually all that great compared to our overall record so I don't look at that as a plus or a minus. But - this is also a huge game in terms of seeding. A win here gives us a lot of breathing room for a bye. I think they're going to come out hot and stay that way and we'll have a pretty satisfying win with strong performances by each unit. A bye actually was probably a really good thing because it significantly reduces the chance of a let down after that big Denver win.

The only way I see the Colts staying in this game is if they commit to the run in a way that they haven't yet, and even then we're going to put some serious points on the board which will push them away from the run game.

Plenty of reasons to be confident. Also reasons to be wary:

Thanks to @GlobeEricWilbur, updated and correct stat is against teams .500 or better following the game, since 09 on the road, Pats are 8-18

Click to expand...

I generally don't play mixed metaphor police, but it's "eat you alive" or "tear you apart", please chose one...

PlainOldEd said:

I generally don't play mixed metaphor police, but it's "eat you alive" or "tear you apart", please chose one...

Click to expand...

I pull off your arms and legs then start eating your face. You are both torn apart and eaten alive.

Edit: I also probably tear off your ****.

fnordcircle said:

I pull off your arms and legs then start eating your face. You are both torn apart and eaten alive.

Edit: I also probably tear off your ****.

Click to expand...

we all know you are going to start the eating and tearing with the groin area.

Mack Herron said:

Plenty of reasons to be confident. Also reasons to be wary:

Click to expand...

Weren't 6 of those losses in '09?

Would be interested to see how many of those losses came in the first 4-5 games of a season.

It is good to play the colts when our base run defense is banged up (no Chandler Jones, no Easley). We can start and stay in the nickel, except on short yardage.

PlainOldEd said:

I generally don't play mixed metaphor police, but it's "eat you alive" or "tear you apart", please chose one...

Click to expand...

Brady is so good in both those situations that he would eat you alive AND tear you apart. I combined the two to for effect.

mgteich said:

It is good to play the colts when our base run defense is banged up (no Chandler Jones, no Easley). We can start and stay in the nickel, except on short yardage.

Click to expand...

Easley is practicing today. So there is a chance he plays on Sunday.

Mack Herron said:

Plenty of reasons to be confident. Also reasons to be wary:

Click to expand...

Arbitrary stating points are arbitrary.

Mack Herron said:

Plenty of reasons to be confident. Also reasons to be wary:

Click to expand...

Just went back informally to look at our road record against teams that FINISHED above .500... over the past few years.

Can't do this year, obviously. But we lost to KC and Miami, and beat Buffalo... all CURRENTLY above .500.

2013: 0-2. Lost to Carolina and Cincy.
2012: 0-2. Lost to Baltimore and Seattle.
2011: 0-1. Lost to Pitt.
2010: We won multiple games, the most recent of which was against the Bears on 12/12.

The bad news... we've gone three years without a quality road win. AND this year, we got manhandled on the road twice... 2nd half of the Fins game, plus the Chiefs.

The good news... this team NOW is a LOT different than the team that lost those games.

I predict a two-score win over the Colts... and this year ends our quality road win drought.

Among other droughts.

I really don't see a blowout. This is huge for the Colts and I think we'll see plenty of yards gained by both teams. Red zone conversions will determine the winner (outside of turnovers which are tough to predict).

Pats pass rushers will need to be disciplined in their lanes and they have to wrap him up as opposed to going for a big knockout. I've noticed with Luck he will move from the spot pretty quickly if his initial read isn't there so the pass rushers need to trust the coverage, stay in their lane and keep Luck in front of them. If an outside pass rusher loses their lane and goes past Luck, he will turn those into big plays.

I'm not minimizing the POST-BYE-GAME BLUES. I would not be surprised that our current high rides a little lower and runs into a few snags. Like a few more three and outs than we anticipate. And Gronk's little 10 year old defenders (mentioned above) may turn out to be more like pesky urchins.

Mack Herron said:

Plenty of reasons to be confident. Also reasons to be wary:

Click to expand...

Thanks to @GlobeEricWilbur, updated and correct stat is against teams .500 or better following the game, since 09 on the road, Pats are 8-18

Click to expand...

Erm, following what game?

The Brandon Five said:

Erm, following what game?

Click to expand...

Ha! I didn't even notice that. You won't find a more worthless, leading stat. So a team that is 3-3 when NE faces them counts as a loss, but doesn't count as a win. And it's misleading in the other direction, a loss in week 1 to a bad team counts.

The person who came up with that has elementary school analytical and statistical understanding.

The Brandon Five said:

Erm, following what game?

Click to expand...

I interpret this to mean games following the Patriots game. As @oldrover points out, the Patriots have had some difficulties against good teams on the road. This one will be a good measuring stick.

For some reason this game scares the hell out of me. Actually the reason is Luck, so it's not exactly unknown. I think he is the next Brady, Rodgers, Manning and i think that no matter what is around him he is going to keep them in games and will always be scary at the end. Rob lays out logical reasons the patriots should win but logic hasn't exactly carried the day this season and i think this is the Colts statement game, as they have some big wins under Luck but know full well that if they drop this game then they will be considered second tier until they win a big game against a really good team down the stretch. I think Colt fans are going to be revved up higher than they have been since the Manning/Brady matches under the dome. The Patriots can definitely win this game but they need to stay in control of it from the outset and force Luck into risky throws, which he will and can make but also lead to the turnover problems he has had. I think he is going to resolve those going forward I just hope that doesn't happen sooner than later.


To me this is the toughest run of games I have seen them face in years, especially when you throw the Denver game into that mix. I doubt they get the #1 seed but if they go 4-1 over this stretch, including Denver, then they should be able to get the #2 and that's good enough for me, especially after that rough start. They are facing a run of really good QB's and they will face three really good DL's over the course of the season, and if their OL can hold up against Detroit, Buffalo, and the Jets I am going to have a ton of confidence in them going into the play-offs. I love the fact that their schedule is as tough as it is and the challenges it presents because they will be battle tested going into the play-offs, unless of course they blow it, which i doubt.

JMC00 said:

Weren't 6 of those losses in '09?

Would be interested to see how many of those losses came in the first 4-5 games of a season.

Click to expand...

Looking only at teams that finish over .500, the Pats are something like 4–8 overall on the road since 2010 (0–4 in 2009), but 2–1 [sic] after Week 8.

The Colts have no answer whatsoever for Gronk outside of intentionally injuring him. Look for Brady to look for him early and often. The Colts will have to adjust which should leave Edelman and LaFell in a good amount of 1 on 1 situations. They need to produce.