Overstating the Obvious

rsd · Dec 22, 2014

Deus Irae said:
Nobody is reading into just one game. They are reading into 15 games this year, and years of history before that. You surely know that.

2007 and 2011 are completely irrelevant to this year's team in terms of personnel and whether they can handle a "Giants-like" team or not. Coaching may be relevant, but you'd think at this point the coaches can come up with a plan to handle those types of teams it's a matter of the players executing.

Of course the OL needs to play well for them to succeed and they've had up and down games this year. You can say this about every team.

Deus Irae · Dec 22, 2014

rsd said:
2007 and 2011 are completely irrelevant to this year's team in terms of personnel and whether they can handle a "Giants-like" team or not.

2011 most certainly is not irrelevant, just as 2010, 2012 and 2013 are not irrelevant. And I'm sure you know that, as well.

BradyManny · Dec 22, 2014

I think we Pats fans feel a collective anxiety: a strong paranoia and fear of losing that can only be forged through watching the helmet-catch, toe-just-in-bounds, are-you-f**king-kidding-me type losses that we've experienced during the second, and less fortuitous, half of this dynasty. Because of this, we like to make predictions and anticipate the future, but we forgot what the source of said anxiety was telling us - nothing really matters except for what happens during 60 minutes on a given Saturday or Sunday in January and then February.

I guess I'm done playing the "this season reminds me of ____ season" game. We have a good team, we can win in all three phases. Yes, the offensive line might be the weakest unit amongst a really, really strong team, but we've won with worse. And sure, we've lost with better. That's just my point. Prognostications come cheap this time of year, and I don't think we can look to the past to predict the future.

kennyb · Dec 22, 2014

The ol is who we thought they were. Offensive line, get it?

Ring 6 · Dec 22, 2014

Rob0729 said:
Anyone else surprised that Deus would take a victory lap in he told us so that getting rid of Mankins was a mistake even though this time tomorrow the Pats might have HFA advantage locked up and is currently the odds on favorite to go to the Super Bowl.

The OL allowed 4 sacks in the last 8 games.
With their CAPTAIN out, and rotating numerous players around, they had a bad day.
Of course its time to jump all over the OL, say it sucks, and conclude that one bad game means they will never have a good one again, and I TOLD YOU SO.

Ring 6 · Dec 22, 2014

kennyb said:
The ol is who we thought they were. Offensive line, get it?

What were they when they allowed 4 sacks in 8 games while we were scoring 35 points per game?

Kdo5 · Dec 22, 2014

Slagathor said:
I'm not breaking any new ground here, but as I look at the road ahead and also re-investigate previously failed Super Bowl campaigns....here's the not-so surprising conclusion I've uncovered...

The Patriots inability to protect TB against a strong pass rush, as well as it's inability to generate a pass rush and
take opposing QB's out of their comfort zones will be our undoing.....again.

The O-line is what we all know it is....but the defense cannot depend on our secondary to keep people covered for 10 plus seconds while our pass rush "tries" to get to the quarterback. With guys like Rodgers and Wilson...this will not work.

Also...offenses will just ignore Revis and Browner and pick at Ryan (who is horrific IMO) and Chung.

Much of this reminds me of the 2007 campaign...where as perfect as the regular season was...we saw the glaring weaknesses we had and hoped our high powered offense could overcome them.

I hear ya on some of what you say.

The offensive line has me seriously concerned. The issues have resurfaced and I hope Connolly's return will substantially help w/that. You don't wanna see in game rotating of the OL...especially in week 16. A great defensive front could make life hell for our offense if the situation hasn't been stabilized for the most part. I agree that that could be our undoing unless fixed quick.

I think we have plenty of ability to rush the passer but in the GB game and yesterday's matchup we seemed to refrain from sending blitzes and applying pressure. In theory I understand that, particularly w/Rodgers. But it was boggling to watch us show Geno so much respect and give him all day long to throw.

As for the secondary, I am very confident. But indeed there is quite the drop off from Revis/Browner/Arrington to the next guy. Logan Ryan has been getting picked on throughout the season. But I don't think this is a pressing concern compared to the offense.

Kdo5 · Dec 22, 2014

AndyJohnson said:
The OL allowed 4 sacks in the last 8 games.
With their CAPTAIN out, and rotating numerous players around, they had a bad day.
Of course its time to jump all over the OL, say it sucks, and conclude that one bad game means they will never have a good one again, and I TOLD YOU SO.

It's not that they won't have a good game here on out but if they have just one stinker in the playoffs that could be all it takes.

While they may not have allowed many sacks at all recently that doesn't mean Brady hasn't been getting pressured a lot more. In the past few games the OL has struggled for stretches of games and yesterday for a lot of the game.

Sicilian · Dec 22, 2014

Kdo5 said:
It's not that they won't have a good game here on out but if they have just one stinker in the playoffs that could be all it takes.

Name me a team in the NFL that this doesn't apply to. Seattle is as good as they get, yet against the reeling 49ers their offense accounted for a whopping 290 total yards of offense and allowed Wilson to be sacked 5 times. They won the game, but of course so did the Pats against the Jets. Teams have bad weeks, and yes, all it takes is one bad week for them to lose in the playoffs, which applies to every single team in the league.

rsd · Dec 22, 2014

Deus Irae said:
2011 most certainly is not irrelevant, just as 2010, 2012 and 2013 are not irrelevant. And I'm sure you know that, as well.

No I do disagree. I just looked at 2011 SB roster compared with today's. Of those 17 total players remain. I would also say that of those 17 only 10 were major contributors to both that season and this season (I therefore excluded Ridley (IR), Edelman (backup in 2011), all the OL except Vollmer (rest were backups in 2011), and excluded Mayo since he's been IR for the majority of this season.

Code:

qb    1 (Brady)
rb    2    (Vereen)
WR    2    (Slater)
TE    1     (Gronk)
OL    5     (Vollmer)
DL    1     (Wilfork)
LB    2    (Nink)
DB    3 (McCourty, Chung, Arrington)
    17    10

Ring 6 · Dec 22, 2014

Kdo5 said:
It's not that they won't have a good game here on out but if they have just one stinker in the playoffs that could be all it takes.

While they may not have allowed many sacks at all recently that doesn't mean Brady hasn't been getting pressured a lot more. In the past few games the OL has struggled for stretches of games and yesterday for a lot of the game.

It just illustrates the unreasonable expectations around here. People expect every piece of the team to be perfect at all times. Its unrealistic.
There will be good games and bad games. People seem to want to expect to have the perfect team that has no flaw and is guaranteed to win the SB. Therefore they ***** and whine after a close win as if they were somehow violated by having to endure a football team that did something poorly.
Its ridiculous.

Deus Irae · Dec 22, 2014

rsd said:
No I do disagree. I just looked at 2011 SB roster compared with today's. Of those 17 total players remain. I would also say that of those 17 only 10 were major contributors to both that season and this season (I therefore excluded Ridley (IR), Edelman (backup in 2011), all the OL except Vollmer (rest were backups in 2011), and excluded Mayo since he's been IR for the majority of this season.

Code:

qb 1 (Brady) rb 2 (Vereen) WR 2 (Slater) TE 1 (Gronk) OL 5 (Vollmer) DL 1 (Wilfork) LB 2 (Nink) DB 3 (McCourty, Chung, Arrington) 17 10

The two main offensive problems:

WR
OL

On OL, 4 of the 5 players are still the same, and the problem is the same.
AT WR, the problem remains the same, despite personnel changes.

If you can't see the relevance, you're blind.

Danger Zone · Dec 22, 2014

Deus Irae said:
If you can't see the relevance, you're blind.

Still staying classy..

rsd · Dec 22, 2014

Deus Irae said:
The two main offensive problems:

WR
OL

On OL, 4 of the 5 players are still the same, and the problem is the same.
AT WR, the problem remains the same, despite personnel changes.

If you can't see the relevance, you're blind.

Except for the OL, only 1 person was a starter in both 2011 and 2014. So no you are wrong. If the results are the same you can't just say they sucked in 2011 they are going to suck in 2014. The players are not the same.

Ring 6 · Dec 22, 2014

Deus Irae said:
The two main offensive problems:

WR
OL

On OL, 4 of the 5 players are still the same, and the problem is the same.
AT WR, the problem remains the same, despite personnel changes.

If you can't see the relevance, you're blind.

LT different
LG different
C different
RG different
RT different

So if by 4 of 5 are still the same, you mean none are, then you are right yet again

mayoclinic · Dec 22, 2014

The defense is playing about as well as any in the league, including Seattle's when you consider that they have faced much better offenses. They are averaging 14.2 PPG over the past 5 games (not counting the fumble returned for a TD against San Diego), and have faced much better QBs and offenses than Seattle.

The offense has struggled over the past 4 games. They averaged 39.6 PPG from games 5-11, and the OL played quite well during that period, including against very good DLs (Cincinnati, Detroit). In the past 4 games they've put up 21, 23 and 17 points, and they struggled in the first half against Miami before waking up in the 2nd half. The execution has clearly been off, and the protection hasn't been as good. That needs to be tuned up a bit for the playoffs. If that happens, I like their chances against anyone. Even if it doesn't, they will still be competitive.

Deus Irae · Dec 22, 2014

rsd said:
Except for the OL, only 1 person was a starter in both 2011 and 2014. So no you are wrong. If the results are the same you can't just say they sucked in 2011 they are going to suck in 2014. The players are not the same.

The receivers, and all the players, not all being the same doesn't change the relevance, because many of the problems remain the same. Also, there's a difference between something being relevant and something being identical.

Again, surely you know that.

BradyManny · Dec 22, 2014

Deus Irae said:
The two main offensive problems:

WR
OL

On OL, 4 of the 5 players are still the same, and the problem is the same.
AT WR, the problem remains the same, despite personnel changes.

If you can't see the relevance, you're blind.

Deus, while I agree the OL is an area of concern, I do not agree about WR at this point. How do you not feel pretty good about our top 3 skill players in Gronk, Edelman, LaFell?

I don't think there's any mystery to it - when we block the other guys, we score.

LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady · Dec 22, 2014

Deus Irae said:
I don't buy into the 2007 comparisons, but the basic premise is something a lot of people have discussed this season. The Patriots still have not adequately addressed the recent weaknesses, so meeting up with certain opponents is potentially a major problem.

A lot of these "certain opponents" haven't addressed their weaknesses either. I'm not saying the Patriots are unbeatable or that they don't have weaknesses, I'm just saying every team have weaknesses and most of their weaknesses have been exposed, they are just playing well enough to make up for it. Brady's O-line is improved, but it is still bad, injuries or not. Brady has made up for that with his awareness and new found mobility. I've been watching him in the pocket all season, looking like Neo in The Matrix, ducking hits and blitzes, while still managing to get a first down or a TD. Unless the O-line turns into what they were in the first 3-4 weeks, then I'm not concerned about it. Our defense have weaknesses, but it's not like they will be facing some QB that they haven't already faced and beat before. I'm not in fear of Russell Wilson, put the right amount of pressure on him and he sucks, like the other running, I mean quarterbacks. I'm not in fear of Seattle's defense, they couldn't hold down Antonio Gates, why should I believe they can slow Gronk, a far superior TE, no offense to Gates. Brady has played and beat good defenses in his career, he's no scrub. As long as he stays healthy and Brady never chokes it up, like Manning did last season and the game plan makes sense, I'm not concerned about it. I'm confident the Patriots are just as good as any of these "certain teams," you speak of. But I wouldn't be surprised if we did or didn't win it all.

Clonamery · Dec 22, 2014

Deus Irae said:
The receivers, and all the players, not all being the same doesn't change the relevance, because many of the problems remain the same. Also, there's a difference between something being relevant and something being identical.

Again, surely you know that.

Who is this "surely" you speak of and why does she know "that?"

Overstating the Obvious

On the Game Day Roster

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Pro Bowl Player

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

On the Game Day Roster

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

In the Starting Line-Up

On the Game Day Roster

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Pro Bowl Player

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

PatsFans.com Supporter

Similar threads