Grist For The Mill

[Snake Eyes]

:confused2:

You're posting on competency and you can't spell competent.

I've made spelling mistakes in the past and I'll probably make a few more before I die, that doesn't take away from the fact that failing to effectively run the ball has cost this team a TON.

It should be a pretty obvious concept but if you can't grasp it I suppose you can take pleasure in your spelling.

 

[BradyFTW!]

The New England Patriots offense hung the New England Patriots defense out to dry in the Super Bowl:

Offensive Drives
1 - play drive (intentional grounding - pass play)
3 - play drive (2 passes, 1 rush)
3 - play drive (2 passes, 1 rush)
5 - play drive (interception - pass play)

The New England Patriots offense essentially turned over the ball twice on passing plays, one on an interception and the other a safety. On the two three-and-outs, each time two pass plays were called to one rush play.

Two three and outs and an interception does not = "hanging the defense out to try"

 

[bucky]

The New England Patriots offense on three drives did not flip field position nor gave the New England Patriots defense sufficient time to recuperate.

Out of 8 drives (excluding the last one), they had 3 bad drives, 3 scoring drives that averaged 80 yards/drive, and 2 more drives where they were able to flip field position. Their average field position was the 15 yard line - thanks to the defense.

On the other hand, the defense had 8 drives - 4 ended in scores and the other 4 flipped field position and pinned the Patriots deep in their own end.

The only reason you would be happy with such a performance by the defense is because we are used to them giving up a ton of points. But in turn they gave up 2 TDs and 2 FGs, forced 0 turnovers, made crucial mental errors, and the shortest drive they allowed was 7 plays. That's not the kind of defensive contributions we should be proud of.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Out of 8 drives (excluding the last one), they had 3 bad drives, 3 scoring drives that averaged 80 yards/drive, and 2 more drives where they were able to flip field position. Their average field position was the 15 yard line - thanks to the defense.

On the other hand, the defense had 8 drives - 4 ended in scores and the other 4 flipped field position and pinned the Patriots deep in their own end.

The only reason you would be happy with such a performance by the defense is because we are used to them giving up a ton of points. But in turn they gave up 2 TDs and 2 FGs, forced 0 turnovers, made crucial mental errors, and the shortest drive they allowed was 7 plays. That's not the kind of defensive contributions we should be proud of.

Seriously. Anyone who can watch that game and conclude that the offense "hung the defense out to dry" has no idea what they're watching. The defense was the weak link on this team all year, and that continued to be true in the Super Bowl. The offense was one play from bailing them out and pulling off a pretty ridiculous feat (winning the Lombardi with a genuinely bad defense).

This is all good news, going forward. If the defense can simply be upgraded to "league average", the Pats become a juggernaut.

 

[Deus Irae]

I've made spelling mistakes in the past and I'll probably make a few more before I die, that doesn't take away from the fact that failing to effectively run the ball has cost this team a TON.

Being incompetent in your attempt to spell "competent" takes away from your post. Being clueless as to the difference between an already discredited opinion (failing to run the ball has cost this team a TON) and an actual truth (correlation is not the same as causation) takes away from the "run!!!!" argument.

It should be a pretty obvious concept but if you can't grasp it I suppose you can take pleasure in your spelling.

You, along with a few others, been posting mostly gibberish since the end of the season. Instead of pretending that others can't grasp your so-called obvious concept, you might wish to engage your brain in the activity of figuring out why passing teams are winning Super Bowl after Super Bowl.

I'll give you a hint: It's not because they all just throw the passing game away and run the ball down their opponents' throats.

 

[BradyFTW!]

While Brady may go down as a top 3 QB of all time,the bottom line he is 35 and you simply cannot rely on an aging QB to carry a team to a title...regardless of how close it was....close only counts in horseshoes.

A 35 year old QB starts more and more to rely on his OL and his RBs to share the workload.....and the defense of course as well.

Does anyone here think Elway at 37 wins ANY Super Bowl if he didn't have a stud like Terrell Davis or a defense that had playmakers?

QBs who win SBs after 35 are extremely rare and you simply cannot put the burden of winning and losing on Brady's 'sore' Shoulders anymore....its time to change philosophy and run the ball more.

Brady isn't going to be passing for 5,000 yards each year for the next 4 years as he nears 40years old...its time for some change,not major change but definately some change.

If we don't have a Dillon type back who can do this on this current roster already then we need one.

John Elway, at his very best, wasn't half the QB that Brady is. Add in that Brady's healthier, plays a style that ages better, and plays in a league that protects QBs and WRs, and the whole Elway comparison falls apart. Don't look at the age- look at what he can and can't do. When Brady's skills diminish, then yes, an adjustment may be required. To date, they have not diminished to any meaningful degree. He's every bit as good as he was 12 months ago, when he won the only unanimous MVP in NFL history.

 

[bucky]

Seriously. Anyone who can watch that game and conclude that the offense "hung the defense out to dry" has no idea what they're watching. The defense was the weak link on this team all year, and that continued to be true in the Super Bowl. The offense was one play from bailing them out and pulling off a pretty ridiculous feat (winning the Lombardi with a genuinely bad defense).

Indeed. If the Patriots' offense had the luxury of playing against the Patriots' defense in every game, I don't think there would be any complaints about play-calling, balance, Brady getting hammered, or outcomes of games.

 

[ATippett56]

Out of 8 drives (excluding the last one), they had 3 bad drives, 3 scoring drives that averaged 80 yards/drive, and 2 more drives where they were able to flip field position. Their average field position was the 15 yard line - thanks to the defense.

On the other hand, the defense had 8 drives - 4 ended in scores and the other 4 flipped field position and pinned the Patriots deep in their own end.

The only reason you would be happy with such a performance by the defense is because we are used to them giving up a ton of points. But in turn they gave up 2 TDs and 2 FGs, forced 0 turnovers, made crucial mental errors, and the shortest drive they allowed was 7 plays. That's not the kind of defensive contributions we should be proud of.

If the New England Patriots defense was considered a major problem than explain the following draft philosophy:

2011 New England Patriots Draft Picks

1st Round – Nate Solder, OT, Colorado
2nd Round – Ras-I Dowling, DB, Virginia
2nd Round – Shane Vereen, RB, Cal
3rd Round – Stevan Ridley, RB, LSU
3rd Round – Ryan Mallett, QB, Arkansas
5th Round – Marcus Cannon, OL, TCU
5th Round – Lee Smith, TE, Marshall

Six of the first seven selections in the 2011 NFL Draft were offensive players. It seems that even more offense was the direction of the New England Patriots for the 2011-12 NFL Season.

As for the New England Patriots defense, the New England Patriots organization should have never cut safety James Sanders. To compound matters, James Ihedigbo was the worst starting safety in the NFL this past season. At least James Sanders knew how to align the defensive backfield properly.

 

[bucky]

If the New England Patriots defense was considered a major problem than explain the following draft philosophy:

2011 New England Patriots Draft Picks

1st Round – Nate Solder, OT, Colorado
2nd Round – Ras-I Dowling, DB, Virginia
2nd Round – Shane Vereen, RB, Cal
3rd Round – Stevan Ridley, RB, LSU
3rd Round – Ryan Mallett, QB, Arkansas
5th Round – Marcus Cannon, OL, TCU
5th Round – Lee Smith, TE, Marshall

I don't have an explanation. I expected the '11 draft to be weak overall, but I was definitely expecting Cameron Jordan at 17, then Wilkerson or Heyward at 28, and finally Jabal Sheard at 33. I was wrong every time. But that is a topic for a different thread.

 

[BradyFTW!]

If the New England Patriots defense was considered a major problem than explain the following draft philosophy:

2011 New England Patriots Draft Picks

1st Round – Nate Solder, OT, Colorado
2nd Round – Ras-I Dowling, DB, Virginia
2nd Round – Shane Vereen, RB, Cal
3rd Round – Stevan Ridley, RB, LSU
3rd Round – Ryan Mallett, QB, Arkansas
5th Round – Marcus Cannon, OL, TCU
5th Round – Lee Smith, TE, Marshall

Six of the first seven selections in the 2011 NFL Draft were offensive players. It seems that even more offense was the direction of the New England Patriots for the 2011-12 NFL Season.

As for the New England Patriots defense, the New England Patriots organization should have never cut safety James Sanders. To compound matters, James Ihedigbo was the worst starting safety in the NFL this past season. At least James Sanders knew how to align the defensive backfield properly.

1) For the most part, the Patriots draft the best player available
2) Perhaps Belichick figured that improving the offense would be more beneficial to the team than improving the defense, regardless of the relative strength of each unit
3) Belichick may have been hesitant to commit too many draft picks to the defense in a year where the Pats would be switching their base defense
4) Maybe Belichick just didn't like the talent that was available on defense when the Patriots picked

All in all, I spent most of the year wondering wtf the Pats were doing, personnel-wise, on defense. So who knows. Any one of those could be the answer. The idea that the Patriots' offense must be a problem because the Pats drafted offense-first, though, makes no sense at all.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

John Elway, at his very best, wasn't half the QB that Brady is. Add in that Brady's healthier, plays a style that ages better, and plays in a league that protects QBs and WRs, and the whole Elway comparison falls apart. Don't look at the age- look at what he can and can't do. When Brady's skills diminish, then yes, an adjustment may be required. To date, they have not diminished to any meaningful degree. He's every bit as good as he was 12 months ago, when he won the only unanimous MVP in NFL history.

No one,especially any fan will know what kind of pain Brady was in on a weekly basis in that non throwing shoulder and it's a given that age gives you more and more aches and pains as you age.....I can attest to that.

Shoulder problems as in AC joint which is the diagnosis given to his injury have been known to become arthritic in some cases, so it's not certain that it will or won't affect him as he hits 35 and beyond.

Whether that affects his play down the road remains to be seen....every year is a new year.

 

[ATippett56]

All in all, I spent most of the year wondering wtf the Pats were doing, personnel-wise, on defense. So who knows. Any one of those could be the answer. The idea that the Patriots' offense must be a problem because the Pats drafted offense-first, though, makes no sense at all.

With regards to the New England Patriots offensive pass-run ratio, we can just agree to disagree, nothing personal.

Looking forward, I hope that the 2012 NFL Draft for the New England Patriots is focused heavily on improving the defense.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

With regards to the New England Patriots offensive pass-run ratio, we can just agree to disagree, nothing personal.

Looking forward, I hope that the 2012 NFL Draft for the New England Patriots is focused heavily on improving the defense.

....and signing Peyton Hillis in FA

 

[Onedaful]

....and signing Peyton Hillis in FA

I've been meaning to ask is Peyton Hillis a viable FA pickup or no? Despite having a terrible season last year could he be worth it? I don't know much about this guy btw, I know he had a monstrous season and then a terrible one thats as much as i know about him

 

[cmasspatsfan]

I've been meaning to ask is Peyton Hillis a viable FA pickup or no? Despite having a terrible season last year could he be worth it? I don't know much about this guy btw, I know he had a monstrous season and then a terrible one thats as much as i know about him

Not if the rumors are true about him and McD

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

I've been meaning to ask is Peyton Hillis a viable FA pickup or no? Despite having a terrible season last year could he be worth it? I don't know much about this guy btw, I know he had a monstrous season and then a terrible one thats as much as i know about him

I think he is...the Browns still don't know if they want to re-sign him or not.

 

[Off The Grid]

Funny...

Brother Ken's latest Idle Thoughts bit ~ a particularly good one, I think ~ has suddenly brought me ALL the way back to why I posted this thread in the FIRST place...

~ It wasn't to argue "Balanced" Offense versus "Passing" Offense.

~ It was to say: "Hey...Let's get back to WORK."

Fans always have a part in this...Because if wasn't for us, the league simply wouldn't exist.

It is an HONOR to root for this team...a true PRIVILEGE.

And I guarantee you: Coach BILL isn't moping around.

He got back to work on our next Championship ~ OUR next Championship ~ the very next DAY!! :rocker:

 

[patsfaninpa]

I really think the injury to Vollmer and then BJGE's toe hurt our running game. That set with Solder lined up as a te just outside Light. Gronk off RT and brought in motion annihilated the Jets in the first game. Ran the bell well at Oakland. Then just kind of petered out as the season went along. Hopefully, some explosive backs like Ridley and Vereen cause defenses to try to defend it more than they have been the last few years.

 

[BradyFTW!]

No one,especially any fan will know what kind of pain Brady was in on a weekly basis in that non throwing shoulder and it's a given that age gives you more and more aches and pains as you age.....I can attest to that.

Shoulder problems as in AC joint which is the diagnosis given to his injury have been known to become arthritic in some cases, so it's not certain that it will or won't affect him as he hits 35 and beyond.

Whether that affects his play down the road remains to be seen....every year is a new year.

Sports medicine has improved by leaps and bounds in just the last decade. 20 years ago, Brady's knee injury might have derailed his career, but instead he's gone on to submit two straight MVP-caliber seasons; arguably the most impressive two-season stretch in NFL history. And there are now treatments to aggressively combat arthritis that simply didn't exist even a decade ago (PRPT: ex- Alex Rodriguez, Kobe Bryant).

Long story short, players' primes in every sport are being dramatically extended, and guys like Brady--insane work ethic and discipline--are the prime beneficiaries. Nobody said that Brady was impervious to aging. I simply said that age, especially nowadays, is just a number. Roethlisberger is five years younger than Brady, but in all likelihood he'll reach the "past his prime" stage of his career before Brady does. There are a lot of reasons why players' primes end, and, especially in football, age (in of itself) is one of the lesser determining factors.

Brady isn't an "aging quarterback" until he starts showing his age on the field. Considering that he just strung together back-to-back MVP-caliber seasons, acting as though he's past his prime is clearly more than a little premature. When he starts showing his age on the field, let's revisit the point. Until then, nobody really knows how long his prime might last. It's entirely plausible--likely, even--that he could still be playing at this level when he's 38.