Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by AndyJohnson, Oct 28, 2012.
Patriots have at least 25 first downs in every game. No other team averages 25 first downs per game.
If they continue in the same manner for this season, will we be the first team to have done so?
i'd rather see them give up a few more first downs than giving up the 20+ and 40+ yard plays.
I was talking about offensively.
This team's offensive philosophy, move the chains..
They are also 7th in time of possession.
Last season they finished 26th.
I think the improved running game is what's helping the Patriots control the ball and get first downs. I wonder what the average 1st downs a game were in 2007 when we were bombing the ball down the field all the time.
Patriots have also run 547 plays. Second most (not counting the Vikes who have played 8 games) is Houston at 483.
Patriots would be leading the league in top by a mile if they werent running hurry up.
I think the New Orleans Saints last year were the first team ever to reach an average of over 25 (they had 26.0). So our 29.0 for this year is ridiculous.
Also the league is progressing a lot in that category, becouse this year the average 1st downs per game seems to be heading towards over 40, when last year it was 38.9 and in 2007 it was around 37.
Now I dont know whether there are some old records in this category, but I scrolled back the history all the way to 2005 and found nothing even close to our this year.
SIDEMARK: Our 2007 average was 24.6.
I hated our 2011 offense for that very reason. I was watching games and cursing to myself when the defense didn't even get their water before they had to come back to the field, regardless of whether we scored or went 3 and out.
I hope that McD is more patient with his playcalling than BOB, and understands that most of the times 4x 5yards is WAY BETTER than 1x 20 yards.
They had 29 1st downs yesterday...
66 Offensive Plays..
They did lose Time of Possession.. 29 to 31...
The Pats are averaging just under 150 YPG rushing (149.625). They've rushed for over 150 yards in 4 of their 8 games: week 1 vs. Tennessee (162), week 4 vs. Buffalo (247), week 5 vs. Denver (251) and week 8 vs. the Rams (152). The Pats went 4-0 in those games, winning by a combined score of 162-69 and scoring 30 or more points in all 4 games, for an average margin of victory of 23.25 PPG. The offense is average over 40PPG and the defense is giving up just over 17PPG when the team rushes for over 150 yards.
In the other 4 games the Pats have gone 1-3 and have averaged 25PPG, while being outscored 101-100 in those 4 games. The only game that they won of those 4 was the one in which they had the best rushing effort, rushing for 131 yards in their overtime win against the Jets. The Seattle and Baltimore games were the two games in which the team rushed for less than 100 yards.
I sense a trend.
Phil Simms noted it yesterday and Ithink they had one more 3 and out for a total of 7 this year (out of 8 games). That's impressive to me, though I have no idea about other team totals.
It's a great trend for winning games and for extending Brady's career. John Elway's two Super Bowl seasons were made possible by a punishing ground game and excellent offensive lines. That's a formula for keeping things going here.
Rushing for 150 yards per game requires a commitment to do that, not just take what is there, especially when Houston and San Francisco roll around. It also has tremendous implications for the playoffs. It makes one wonder if the Super Bowl might have been different - the Pats ran the ball 19 times for 83 yards and threw it 41 times for 276 yards. That would be a loss under the current scenario and it was last February.
Having a healthy tandem of runners among the Bolden/Ridley/Vereen group is essential heading into the playoffs, making the bye all the more important.
Yep. From 1996-1998 (TDs best years) the Broncos finished 1st, 4th and 6th in ToP and 1st, 4th and 2nd in rushing.
Until the defense can consistently stop teams they still need Brady to put up points.
Thanks for the feedback!
They beat the Rams with the passing game. They closed it out with the running game. It's a trend, but it's not the trend people often think it is.
The only problem is that far too many of those have come in the fourth quarter. . . .
if Gronk can grab 8 more TD receptions, 1 per game, his name will be in the pantheon with Rice and Moss for most in a player's first 3 seasons. Pretty amazing.
How can averaging less than 1 3 and out per game mean far too many come at any time?
A few came at VERY inopportune times.
Whether that is true or not, it still doesn't address the comment made.
Interesting Stat: The Kansas City Chiefs have played 7 games and in those games they have NEVER led in any game at any time,the only exception was their OT win against the Saints when they took the lead in OT and won the game.
Thought I would add an interesting stat of my own in here
Far too many of the seven came in the fourth quarter of games where the Patriots could have benefited tremendously from not going 3 and out.
0 3-and-out in the Titans game
2 3-and-out in the Cardinals game, 0 in the 4th quarter
0 3-and-out in the Ravens game
2 3-and-out in the Bills game, 0 in the 4th quarter
1 3-and-out in the Broncos game, 0 in the 4th quarter
1 3-and-out in the Seahawks game, 1 in the 4th quarter
0 3-and-out in the Jets game
1 3-and-out in the Rams game, 0 in the 4th quarter
Unless I erred, or Pro-Football-Reference.com made a mistake in its play-by-play, it's only 7 3-and-out series all season, and only 1 3-and-out series in the 4th quarter all season.
I stand corrected in part: I guess I define a 3-and-out slightly differently than the NFL does.
Apparently, because of the penalty, this doesn't "officially" count as a 3-and-out (it was against the JEST), but it still sounds like one to me (no score, no first downs).
Even counting that, it's only 2 3-and-out series in the 4th quarter.
Separate names with a comma.