What difference does it make if it's '07,'11 or '14?

Pats D can cover now......except for Logan Ryan.....

Is it just me, or is he always a few steps too slow covering his man?

Rodgers can run, you can't just sell out on the pass rush.

Besides Jones, Easley has been nicked. If healthy, Jones, Easley Hightower, Collins, Ayers, Ninko and Chris Jones is a pretty decent group.

they've already been playing games with Hightower, Ayers and Collin

GB had the superior game plan, as they guessed who we would lock down and didn't even look at their primary receivers. Be decisive, get rid of the ball and be accurate. Hard to counter that.

A man named Brady said:

We can actually cover now. The 2010-2013 Secondaries would've given up 500 passing yards and 45 points in this game

Click to expand...

Fair point i'll give you that, but what happened to you scratch my back and i'll scratch yours? Doesn't mean that just because we have a great secondary now that their has to be an anaemic pass rush does it? They need to work in tandem and not let the other do everything. Hoping Chandler comes back and changes all that but putting chips on one man is dangerous is it not?

English Patriot said:

They couldn't touch Eli in 2007 or 2011 and that will be the case if they make it in 2014. Even if Chandler comes back 100% is it enough to get over the hump? How many more years is there going to be a sub par pass rush at key times?

It's all well and good getting to crap QB's like Geno and EJ Manuel but our pass rush doesn't work against the ones with pocket presence, mobility and awareness.

When it mattered most Brady needed just a bit more time (just like in the 2 SB losses) but they got to him and when we needed to get to Rodgers on that completion to Cobb, surprise, surprise we COULDN'T.

That pressure Seattle put on Peyton was LETHAL and it is pretty much how you beat an elite QB in a SB and that's what the Pats should be aiming for.

Click to expand...

What? Our front seven is currently the nastiest in Patriot history! Our 2014 defense is clearly in the top 3 Patriot units of all-time, because I read it right here on the forum.

In all seriousness, I obviously agree with what you're saying on some level, and it's still an area of weakness (in my opinion, apparently I may be missing the high level of talent that some others speak of as it pertains to the DL). That said, they aren't quite as "bad" as maybe your OP seems to suggest either, and they did get to Rodgers 3 times today.

Bottom line is that it could certainly be good enough to take us pretty far with the right balance and circumstances, but the front seven is still something that I believe needs to be addressed in the offseason. While clearly improving, I'd still like to see ONE more higher round pick selected on the DL.

@MAYOnnaise--get a sense of humor, read the entire post...or even better---both.

You're one of a few select people who rides that "dislike" button like it's your current girlfriend.

supafly said:

@MAYOnnaise--get a sense of humor, read the entire post...or even better---both.

You're one of a few select people who rides that "dislike" button like it's your current girlfriend.

Click to expand...

Lord knows I've been on the receiving end of that kind of crap often enough. I gave you two in the other direction to counteract that silliness.

rochrist said:

Pretty sure the Pats had 3 sacks today to 1 for GB, Negative Nellie.

Click to expand...

That does require a little bit of context:

1 sack per 35 pass plays and 54 total plays
versus 3 sacks per 38 pass plays and 70 total plays

still seems like NE was doing ok
__ NE: 1/23-plays average; = sack-pressure on 4% of plays
__ Pack: 1/54-plays average; = sack-pressure on 2% of plays
but that # of run plays points out that they had balance (which keeps the pass rush off) and patriots didnt.

AND then if you count hits +sacks:
__ NE: 5+3 = 8 per 70 or pressure on 11% of plays
__ Pack: 6+1 = 7 per 54 or pressure on 13% of plays
all of a sudden the Pack starts to look a little better pressure-wise then NE.

AND THEN, if you had the HURRY #s;
__ (I don't); I'm pretty sure it would start to look a bit more lopsided.

AND THEN; if you could get an average Time-In-Pocket for those pass plays (another stat I dont have) and compare those stats for TB vs AR; I think it would be hands-down that the OP does indeed have a point.

Nervous Nellie; he could be. It may be all stuff that is fixable; so no need to worry. But since the last two SB-losses were basically attributable to singular injuries to one OL early in those games (magnified by the Gronk injury) that disrupted the offensive protection; you have to give the nervous nellies a little right for concern.

After three decisive wins against division leaders they are due for a let down.. difficult to maintain the intensity and level of play they displayed the previous three weeks.. ..

The major issue will be how they rebound in San Diego and revert to the form we are used to..

IMO the game plan was confusing.. shut down Cobb and Nelson, but what was the plan for Adams et al??... thought rushing the passer was secondary to shutting down their big threats, they seemed more content with trying to contain Rodgers rather than sack him.

In the end the score was 26-21.. a couple of good plays from winning..

On the road in the impenetrable fortress of Packer Stadium, they did well.

The Packers game plan was to keep Brady off the field, and that worked as the Pats ran only 54 plays.. which is way below their average.

English Patriot said:

They couldn't touch Eli in 2007 or 2011 and that will be the case if they make it in 2014. Even if Chandler comes back 100% is it enough to get over the hump? How many more years is there going to be a sub par pass rush at key times?

It's all well and good getting to crap QB's like Geno and EJ Manuel but our pass rush doesn't work against the ones with pocket presence, mobility and awareness.

When it mattered most Brady needed just a bit more time (just like in the 2 SB losses) but they got to him and when we needed to get to Rodgers on that completion to Cobb, surprise, surprise we COULDN'T.

That pressure Seattle put on Peyton was LETHAL and it is pretty much how you beat an elite QB in a SB and that's what the Pats should be aiming for.

Click to expand...

It's called a containment rush. Whether you agree with the use is one thing, but NE could have given the OL a much harder time if you were willing to see Rodgers scramble for a for more 3rd down conversions. Notice that on most plays that Rodgers had loads of time they didn't do much with the ball.

Well, if it were '07 it'd be before the great recession so that would stand in stark contrast to this year and '11.

A 5 point loss to a very good team, who seemed to get most of the breaks, at their place and we have no hope? I think I'll wait until after the SD game, which actually means something before I draw any conclusions.

English Patriot said:

Like i say, all sacks when they don't count that much just like in the SB's where they can't get to the crap Manning from completing long bombs.

The sack that mattered the most is the one GB got on Brady at the end, the one we couldn't get was the one we needed for the ball back to possibly win it

Click to expand...

NE had 3 sacks, 5 QB hits, and 5 tackles for loss.
GB had 1 sack, 6 QB hits, and 0 tackles for loss.

It sure *felt* like GB was getting more pressure on Brady than vice-versa, I will say that. But strangely, the actual stats show otherwise.

PATSNUTme said:

A 5 point loss to a very good team, who seemed to get most of the breaks, at their place and we have no hope?

Click to expand...

Well, it seems the chicken littles are staying away. It wasn't a totally ugly loss and it was against a team that is probably the best in the NFL right now, and in their house. There are no moral victories in the NFL, but it's not like the 2010 loss to the Browns or somesuch. It more reminds me of the 2004 loss at Pittsburgh.

You have to realize its not about sacks its about pressure. yes we had more sacks but GB constantly in Bradys face made more of a difference. I will take getting sacked 3 times and having a long time (12 seconds was absurd) to pick an open reciever on many many occasions vs 1 sack and constant pressure and throwing before your ready.

Might have had more sacks if Bakhtiari was actually flagged for holding (hands outside the frame of Ayers on literally every snap). Ayers also had a legit sack taken away by that awful call on Browner early in the game.

For the most part they did their job of containing Rodgers in the pocket and they got a few good shots on him too. The fact the Packers 3rd, 4th and 5th choice receiving options were getting open is down to Chung, Ryan & occasionally Dennard - they're all better players than what they showed last night.

Patradomous said:

Pats are a better team.
The play calling was horrendous. Brady made some piss poor decisions.
Why go for the td with 3.50 left in the game on 2nd and 9.

Click to expand...

Like I said in another thread, BB didn't want to show GB all the cards we have. We can afford to lose this game. If we meet GB again in SB, GB has little chance to win.

English Patriot said:

They couldn't touch Eli in 2007 or 2011 and that will be the case if they make it in 2014. Even if Chandler comes back 100% is it enough to get over the hump? How many more years is there going to be a sub par pass rush at key times?

It's all well and good getting to crap QB's like Geno and EJ Manuel but our pass rush doesn't work against the ones with pocket presence, mobility and awareness.

When it mattered most Brady needed just a bit more time (just like in the 2 SB losses) but they got to him and when we needed to get to Rodgers on that completion to Cobb, surprise, surprise we COULDN'T.

That pressure Seattle put on Peyton was LETHAL and it is pretty much how you beat an elite QB in a SB and that's what the Pats should be aiming for.

Click to expand...

Whew, I was really worried when you disappeared for the last 7 weeks.

Pats D played very conservatively against Rodgers for most of the day - remember, BB really doesn't know the guy well.

look, we lost to Green Bay IN Green Bay. have you looked at their record there? Rodgers' td-turnover rate there? The scores of their games in Green Bay?

A couple of bad breaks really hurt (the third and 7 shove on Dennard that wasn't called, the big play at the end of the first half), a little bit of pressing it (throwing deep several times for no good reason), but we played a really good team in their stadium on frozen grass and were 20-yards and 3 minutes away from winning the game.

Give Green Bay credit: they made the plays when they had to. On a neutral field, these two teams will be a brilliant match-up!

But we need to get home field. Denver is cranking it up again. Talib is out, but Ware looks like his old self again. DO NOT want to play the AFCCG in Denver!

saspack said:

Like I said in another thread, BB didn't want to show GB all the cards we have. We can afford to lose this game. If we meet GB again in SB, GB has little chance to win.

Click to expand...

So we've gone from NE having no chance to win on the road to GB having no chance in a rematch?

I think you've swung in the right direction, but you might have overdone it a little.

50-yard-line said:

Ware looks like his old self again

Click to expand...

Miami and KC's below average lines might have something to do with that.