Kerry Bryne :Pats/Broncos Preview

[SVN]

Tim Tebow, Denver Broncos look to create more magic against New England Patriots - Kerry J. Byrne - SI.com

 

[Mainefan]

This guy writes out of both sides of his mouth.

 

[DEVIOUS 1]

If Kerry wants to talk "Paper Tigers", his weak schedule argument would quantify.

The part of that overall assessment that bothers me the most is it doesn't factor into when we played certain teams, and how those teams were playing at that time. I seem to remember us playing some of these teams early in the year that may have ended their season with a .500 record, but were playing good football when we got them. So once again, perspective is lost in the context of the argument.

Also, another part that is annoying, is he uses the quality opponent metric to further his point of the Patriots being "paper tigers" and possibly not worthy of a respected playoff opponent THIS year, and used previous positive QO numbers from Super Bowl years, but conviently didn't mention last year, when we beat all our quality opponents but still lost our first playoff game.

My point is, he's cherry picking his stats to further his point, when the reality is anybody can win in the playoffs, and all that matters is how your playing at that time of year, not how you played those specific opponents at different points in the regular season. It's a straw man argument, and I hate when people try to make a definitive judgement based on a subjective stat.

 

[Patriots Nation NY]

He was cool when he first came out with his diff stats and what not... he is just annoyingnow and trys too hard

 

[Betterthanmost]

This guy writes out of both sides of his mouth.

Out of both ends you mean?

 

[IndianPat]

I generally like the stats from ColdhardFF. They help you think outcomes clearly. That said, in this article he says that Pats had a cream puff schedule. Agreed. Helped us get t0 13-3 and home field despite suspect defense.
I dont know if it means more than that. Last year, Patriots beat and sometimes hammered every single play off team. How did that turn out?

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

Out of both ends you mean?

This, too much cherry picking being done to take this seriously.

 

[Ron Sellers]

He was cool when he first came out with his diff stats and what not... he is just annoyingnow and trys too hard

I totally agree. Years ago he had a lot of fresh and innovative ways of looking at things; now he seems obsessed with being unbiased after so many labeled him a Pats/Brady fan eight years ago or whenever it was he started writing.

I mean seriously, not only does he trot out the beaten to death '0-2 against winning teams' line, but he he tries to pass that off as something innovative that he discovered? Please ...

I'm also quite underwhelmed about the stat on the number of recent 13 or more-win seasons in comparison to how many another franchise has in their entire history. That's really an apples to oranges comparison considering that for most of the history of the NFL teams played 14 or 12 game schedules.

Then he wraps it up with even more superficial analysis with again another beaten to death line about how 'Denver gave the game away with fumbles', disregarding the fact the Pats forced two of those fumbles, disregarding the adjustments the Pats made, and implying the Broncos would have won if not for unforced errors.

The only original thought I can see from Byrne is noting that the Broncos pass defense is not all that special.

 

[Rob0729]

I hate their "quality opponent" stats. The Giants are a quality opponent because they are 9-7. The Pats won 7 games against teams that ended with an 8-8 record. If the Pats lost all those games and those teams had the same record against their other games, the Pats would have played 9 games against "quality opponents" rather than 2. So the Pats are being penalized by their record.

Also, the idea the Broncos' "gave away" a game where they lost by 18 points is laughable. Yes, the Broncos did have some costly turnovers but other than the muffed punts, don't the Pats get some credit for causing those turnovers? Anderson clearly stripped the ball from Tebow, but he gets no credit for it? How about on the Broncos' first TD, Ninkovitch clearly had Tebow wrapped up to try to sack him but was unable to bring him down. So by Byrnes stupid logic, the Pats gave Tebow that rushing TD and he didn't earn it.

Sorry, this article is absolute crap. I have never been a fan of quality stats and the reality of the argument is there isn't much difference between an 9-7 and an 8-8 team yet it does in FO's stats.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Once they figure out if yards surrendered is or isn't meaningless, I'll return.

These guys got pegged as homers and I think they are defensive about it.

The final three quarters in Denver was 34-7. Denver "gave" it away?

 

[alvinnf]

New England was soft enough to beat Denver by 18 pts in their own building. Outscoring them 41-6 over the 3 final qtrs. Denver profited from a poor game plan by Pitt and worse execution. Week 6, this year, last year or 1978 won't have anything to do with the outcome of this game. The question is whether or not Denver can find a way to reverse the lopsided final 3 qtrs of their regular season match up. Personally I don't think they have a good enough QB or Defense to do what they were unable to do over those 3 qtrs.

 

[Ron Sellers]

I hate their "quality opponent" stats. The Giants are a quality opponent because they are 9-7. The Pats won 7 games against teams that ended with an 8-8 record. If the Pats lost all those games and those teams had the same record against their other games, the Pats would have played 9 games against "quality opponents" rather than 2. So the Pats are being penalized by their record.

Also, the idea the Broncos' "gave away" a game where they lost by 18 points is laughable. Yes, the Broncos did have some costly turnovers but other than the muffed punts, don't the Pats get some credit for causing those turnovers? Anderson clearly stripped the ball from Tebow, but he gets no credit for it? How about on the Broncos' first TD, Ninkovitch clearly had Tebow wrapped up to try to sack him but was unable to bring him down. So by Byrnes stupid logic, the Pats gave Tebow that rushing TD and he didn't earn it.

Sorry, this article is absolute crap. I have never been a fan of quality stats and the reality of the argument is there isn't much difference between an 9-7 and an 8-8 team yet it does in FO's stats.

It's funny, re-reading the article Byrne first gives the Pats no credit for forcing those turnovers; then takes the Broncos to task for their defense not forcing any turnovers; and then a couple sentence later he says you can't count on New England winning the turnover battle.

Which is it Kerry?


As for the "0-2" versus argument, consider this: I could take the same raw data and exclude the game(s) played against each other. Now all of a sudden the Pats are 7-2 against teams that otherwise had a winning record. Granted those other playoff teams records against 'quality opponents' would also rise, but the point is it is a rather arbitrary stat. By bringing up the Colts and Rams he completely misses the basis point that losing teams are always going to have a 'tougher' schedule and winning teams are always going to have a 'weaker' schedule simply because the winning teams won games, and the losing teams lost games. It's a tail wagging the dog argument.


Even more ironic is CHFF's own conclusion on the subject:

No Quality Wins for Patriots = playoff fail? | Cold Hard Football Facts

Being “battle-tested” is largely a myth, at least when defined by playing against teams with winning records. Still, the results here are interesting, as people always thought the teams that get through the tougher schedules are better suited to win in the playoffs. Not true.

 

[PatsDeb]

This article really pi ssed me off. I am tired of the "Pats didn't beat anyone and are the most fraudulent 13-3 I've ever seen" BS. Many of our opponents were in the playoff hunt until the last week or two.

I am getting to the point where I don't just want a win, I want the field wiped with these guys, ala the 59-0 beat-down we put in the Tenn. Titans in 2009! Not just to beat the Broncos but to shut all these guys up!!

Okay, I'm calmer now. A win by any score will satisfy me (but a beatdown from beginning to end would be sweet).

 

[BadMoFo]

This article is no good and the writer sucks because this is negative about the Pats. The best writers only write positive stories about the Pats.

 

[mosi]

He calls the Pats paper tigers after 2004 but fails to mention playoff wins in 2005, two in 2006 and two in 2007. The Pats lost in 2009 because their heart, Wes Welker, was lost in the last game of the season on a freak play.

2010 was, hopefully, an anomaly.

 

[Willie55]

But then Denver simply fell apart in the second quarter -- against a New England team famed for making its opponents pay for their mistakes. Running back Lance Ball, who otherwise had a good day (11 carries, 64 yards), fumbled with 8:31 to play in the first half. The Patriots turned that fumble into a Stephen Gostkowski field goal and their first lead of the game, 17-16.
Tebow fumbled on the very next drive. The Patriots turned that mistake into a one-yard Brady touchdown run and a 24-16 lead.
Then, with just three seconds to play in the half, Quan Cosby muffed a punt return. The Patriots again recovered, this time at the Denver 16. Gostkowski booted a gift field goal and New England entered intermission with a commanding 27-16 lead.
It was a devastating series of events that killed the Broncos in a game in which they were surprisingly competitive before shooting themselves in the foot three times in the span of eight game-changing minutes.

​

Byrne forgets to mention that Ball's fumble and Tebow's fumbles were CAUSED by the Patriots, it's not like they just fumbled on their own. Cosby's fumble was just a bone-head play. He never should have even attempted to catch the ball.
​

 

[RobertWeathers]

This article is no good and the writer sucks because this is negative about the Pats. The best writers only write positive stories about the Pats.

I call them, 'fair and balanced'

 

[upstater1]

Denver finished 8-8.

Yet another creampuff.

Yet another team without a winning record.

It's odd Byrne failed to notice that.

"Habitually lose in the playoffs."

2 games? Really? 2 in a row is habitually losing?

The other loss was in the Super Bowl. Apologies for not winning the 4 Super Bowl in 6 years Mr. Byrne! They lossed one!

The Colts game in 2006 was AT Indy.

Jeez.