- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 49,582
- Reaction score
- 28,239
Ok, listening around town to people and the media, it seems that both sides of the argument are developing these annoying little myths and spins since he has left. I just want to address some of them:
- Oh no! We are going back to 2011 all over again! I have heard this a lot in recent weeks. When did 2011 become a bad year for the Pats? That year, the Pats were in the Super Bowl and even were leading the game with a minute left in it. And even focusing on the defense, that defense wasn't nearly as bad as people give it credit for. The Pats did not give up more than 27 points on defense in any game. Yes, it was the dreaded "bend, but don't break defense" but the key point was it rarely broke. It wasn't a great defense, but it wasn't horrible either. It was good enough to get to Super Bowl with what looks to be a worse offense on paper than the Pats will have this upcoming season.
- Revis has lost a step and is already 30 and maybe the Pats were concerned about that. The Jerry Thornton argument. It is silly because he is still elite and should be elite for the next two to three years. The Pats did not drop out of the bidding because of his age or his decline in production.
- The Pats are going back to letting mediocre and bad QBs look like Peyton Manning. This never happened. Sure occasionally a mediocre or bad QB would have a really good game vs. the Patriots, but overall these QBs got a lot yards and garbage time TDs, but that was because of the "bend, but don't break" philosophy and the Pats protecting sizable leads. Sure if you looked at the stat lines, these QBs had great games. Watching the games you so a lot of yards with little points and a lot of garbage time stat padding.
- Last year the Pats were great on 3rd downs and the Pats will go back to sucking at it. The Pats were not nearly as good on third downs as people want to believe. They allowed opponents to convert 3rd downs at a 40.2% rate or 16th in the league. In 2011 (since everyone wants to bring up that year), the Pats allowed opponents to convert 43.1% which was 28th in the league. Yes, they were worse in 2011, but not worlds worse as people want to make it out to be. The Pats improved on third downs, but didn't cure the problems. Hell in 2009, the Pats allowed opponents to only convert 37.1% of their passes without an elite CB.
- Browner isn't necessary without Revis. I think this is partially true, but not 100% true. Browner would certainly have a role in this defense without Revis, BUT his role would be reduced. If the Pats use a lot more zone (which is going to happen, but we don't know how much), his value to the team drops because he is not a zone coverage CB. But they could use him on man plays and certain zone situations. The question is was his salary and cap hit worth his reduced role? Obviously, the Pats didn't think so.