Mike and Mike and the Pats

[Rex Ryan's Gut]

Whatever you say, boss.

Touche'

 

[TBradyOwnsYou]

Correction: In the past ten years, beginning in 2001, the Patriots have missed the playoffs twice. Once at 9-7 and once at 11-5. That luck thing is even worse than you wrote!

And if I recall they were at both times the highest record in the AFCE, we just failed the tiebreakers.

Quote me:

The Patriots will be a slightly above average team at best in 2010.

9-7 at the very highest.

Well, come on. I know you're a Jets fan, and there is definitely at this point in the year potential for them to end up 9-7, but saying 9-7 is the "very highest"? Even a Jets fan has to give us credit for the "potential" for higher than 9-7.

 

[shmessy]

They gave up a total of 96 points in the 4th last season. 21 of those in a meaningless game to Houston, so that leaves 75 points. 21 more in that Colts abomination, where the offense failed to (officially, anyway) get two yards. But that's still a meltdown, of course.

That leaves 54 points over the remaining 14 games, which is just under 4 points per 4th quarter. If I remember correctly, they didn't allow more than 7 points in the 4th in any of those games, either. More often than not, that defense was on the field for most of the 4th quarter, because that Pats second-half offense was horrendous.

I stand corrected, then.

In the meantime, those three losses -- Houston, Indy and Miami -- do show that two of those three had 4th quarter defensive meltdowns or being outfoxed strategically.

The Miami game was only 3 points in the 4th put up by the Fins.

In sum, the D couldn't hold in the 4th quarter of 2 of those losses. The O pooped away the game against Miami in the 4th.

The 2009 Patriots HAD THE LEAD entering the 4th quarter in 4 of their 6 losses (Denver, Indy, Miami, Houston). That is just plain pathetic and very uncharacteristic of a BB team.

Coaching and poor strategy.

 

[Deus Irae]

Quote me:

The Patriots will be a slightly above average team at best in 2010.

9-7 at the very highest.

Since you felt the need to jump into this, let's compare and contrast:



Based upon personnel, in what areas have the Patriots have gotten weaker?

Based upon personnel, in what areas have the Patriots gotten stronger?

Based upon personnel, in what areas of the Patriots are questions?



Based upon personnel, in what areas have the Jets gotten weaker?

Based upon personnel, in what areas have the Jets gotten stronger?

Based upon personnel, in what areas of the Jets are questions?



Based upon personnel, in what areas have the Dolphins gotten weaker?

Based upon personnel, in what areas have the Dolphins gotten stronger?

Based upon personnel, in what areas of the Dolphins are questions?

 

[Halifax_Pats_Fan]

Look, I appreciate the desire to debate and discuss among ESPN and their posee, but to quote one of their own...."that's why they play the game"

Talk, and ESPN has a lot of it, is cheap.

 

[Fixit]

I stand corrected, then.

In the meantime, those three losses -- Houston, Indy and Miami -- do show that two of those three had 4th quarter defensive meltdowns or being outfoxed strategically.

The Miami game was only 3 points in the 4th put up by the Fins.

In sum, the D couldn't hold in the 4th quarter of 2 of those losses. The O pooped away the game against Miami in the 4th.

The 2009 Patriots HAD THE LEAD entering the 4th quarter in 4 of their 6 losses (Denver, Indy, Miami, Houston). That is just plain pathetic and very uncharacteristic of a BB team.

Coaching and poor strategy.

The offense scored 24 fourth-quarter points on the road last season. Total. Their inability to get first downs, let alone score, meant that a lot of inexperienced players spent an inordinate amount of time on the field. If the offense puts up just a FG in the Denver game, they go 11-5 and everyone raves about the defense.

 

[Kontradiction]

Quote me:

The Patriots will be a slightly above average team at best in 2010.

9-7 at the very highest.

Sure. You certainly won't be the first Jets fan on here in the history of the board to make a brutally awful prediction before the season starts. I'm sure you won't be the last. I'll keep this one in my sig.

 

[dhamz]

I can't get excited about preseason record predictions.

9-7 and 8-8 from the ESPN Radio morning guys? Neither really seem all that uneasonable to me for a team counting on a lot of young players and facing a tough schedule. That said, 12-4 and 11-5 don't seem unreasonable to me if some of those young players improve as we hope they will and #12 stays healthy.

 

[Ryan]

The day Mike and Mike are right about anything is the same day I become head coach of the Patriots.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Greenberg said he thinks that Belichick is the best coach in the NFL but year after year he stockpiles picks and never makes any high picks and wonders if he doesn't know what he is doing.

This part that I agree with. Not counting 2007, we all know the drafts from 2004-2008 have been overall bad. The Pats tried to upgrade positions of need, it's just they ended up taking the wrong players. It happens, but it's one of the big reasons why the Pats haven't won a super bowl since 2004.

The problem with the Pats stockpiling picks is that just when you think they could trade up for any player they want, they sit there our trade out again. These last two drafts are going to determine which direction the Pats franchise goes. With Crable getting cut and pretty sure Wheatley will follow, the 2006 and 2008 drafts are the worst in the BB era.

With that said, I still think the Pats are going to easily win the division while the Jets and Dolphins are going to disappoint (although I don't know why anybody would have high hopes for the Dolphins).

 

[spacecrime]

Quote me:

The Patriots will be a slightly above average team at best in 2010.

9-7 at the very highest.

Jets fans have been saying for years the Pats are cooked and it is the Jets turn to rise. Jets fans are like ESPN talking heads. Lots of words and never an admission they are wrong, even though they are wrong year after year after year.

But it is interesting to hear you say that 9-7 is slightly above average, because the Jets couldn't even go 9-7 without two laydowns.

 

[Rob0729]

This part that I agree with. Not counting 2007, we all know the drafts from 2004-2008 have been overall bad.

I disagree with this assessment at least for 2005:

2005 Draft:
Logan Mankins 1st round (a top 3-5 guard in this league)
Ellis Hobbs 3rd round (decent #2 CB and great kick returner)
Nick Kazcur 3rd round (multiple year starter at RT)
James Sanders 4th round (Started at safety, great pick at spot).
Matt Cassel 7th rounder (Started all of 2008 and netted the Pats a high second rounder in trade)

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

I disagree with this assessment at least for 2005:

2005 Draft:
Logan Mankins 1st round (a top 3-5 guard in this league)
Ellis Hobbs 3rd round (decent #2 CB and great kick returner)
Nick Kazcur 3rd round (multiple year starter at RT)
James Sanders 4th round (Started at safety, great pick at spot).
Matt Cassel 7th rounder (Started all of 2008 and netted the Pats a high second rounder in trade)

I guess we can agree somewhat with this draft. However, Hobbs wasn't very good at the other CB spot but a great returner. Kaczur has started but has been the weak link every year. Ditto with Sanders. Cassel had one good year with the Pats which I will always appreciate because they could've easily ended up 5-11.

But remember, I'm talking about overall (2004-2008).

 

[Rob0729]

I guess we can agree somewhat with this draft. However, Hobbs wasn't very good at the other CB spot but a great returner. Kaczur has started but has been the weak link every year. Ditto with Sanders. Cassel had one good year with the Pats which I will always appreciate because they could've easily ended up 5-11.

But remember, I'm talking about overall (2004-2008).

First, when you get four starters out of a draft (five if you count Cassel) and turn a seventh round pick into a high second, you had a good draft. Hobbs, Sanders, and Kazcur were all starters on a team that went 18-1.

Second, you have to look at where a player is picked. A fourth rounder who starts for any significant time is a good pick up. Successful fourth rounders are borderline solid role players to decent starters. Cassel was one of the better draft picks the Pats have had in the Belichick era. He won the Pats 11 games and netted them a high second rounder in trade. If he was a high draft pick, I would say he was a bad pick. As a seventh rounder, Cassel was a grand slam home run pick.

Third, I still don't think people give Ellis Hobbs enough credit. The guy played hurt and was a tough SOB. His play was better than people gave him credit for. He was just one of those targets for fans on this board where every mistake was magnified and every good play was ignored.

Sorry, four starters out of a draft is a good draft no matter how you want to spin it. This will be my last word on the subject though since I don't want to highjack this thread and turn it into a 2005 draft thread. Feel free to have the final word.

 

[tuckeverlasting]

one's a jet fan, one's a dolphin fan. have you ever met a jet fan or dolphin fan ? yikes !!

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

LOL. All this 8-8 talk will be dismissed by the end of week 2. A typical beatdown of gang green on their on turf will drive that point home. I wouldnt worry. Greenie pretty much has no idea what he's talking about. Jets fans all know that.

I think it is the Jets who go 9-7...again.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

First, when you get four starters out of a draft (five if you count Cassel) and turn a seventh round pick into a high second, you had a good draft. Hobbs, Sanders, and Kazcur were all starters on a team that went 18-1.

Second, you have to look at where a player is picked. A fourth rounder who starts for any significant time is a good pick up. Successful fourth rounders are borderline solid role players to decent starters. Cassel was one of the better draft picks the Pats have had in the Belichick era. He won the Pats 11 games and netted them a high second rounder in trade. If he was a high draft pick, I would say he was a bad pick. As a seventh rounder, Cassel was a grand slam home run pick.

Third, I still don't think people give Ellis Hobbs enough credit. The guy played hurt and was a tough SOB. His play was better than people gave him credit for. He was just one of those targets for fans on this board where every mistake was magnified and every good play was ignored.

Sorry, four starters out of a draft is a good draft no matter how you want to spin it. This will be my last word on the subject though since I don't want to highjack this thread and turn it into a 2005 draft thread. Feel free to have the final word.

Debating him is useless. Easy way to elevate the coversation- debate a brick wall.

Debating about the draft centers on two things that pundits don't get.

The draft is there to improve the team not get players.

Will someone explain how in 2007, a 2nd and 4th were not a good deal for Moss and Welker? Still you see people talk about how the Pats got nobody in 2007.

Drafting quantity when you need quantity

BB is smart for not drafting if the value is there. Stockpiling picks in the early years means more players drafted when your core guys come to their end. It's amazing how we have so many picks at the exact time the team needed to be turned over.


Look at the Steelers' defense. Almost all the starters are well north of 30. Try replacing that over two years.

 

[stcjones]

the jets are weaker at RB,OL,DL.

they have improved at WR,DB(although revis holding out hurts alot)

their offseason moves have really done nothing to fix their weaknesses the biggest one being the entire passing game away from revis (teams can throw at will to their TE's as well as their secondary targets.

I also believe if they go blitz-happy again, that their LB group will wear down and suffer some injuries that will cause the entire defense to fall apart by the time the leaves are cold.

Do you (or anyone else) think that the Jests have gotten weaker at RB with Shonn Greene and LT.........than having Jones and Washington (and some greene filled in)?? I for one do not........I think Greene looked good towards end of last year....and the Jest OL is very good in run blocking. I don't see them missing a beat here this year to be honest. I hate their friggin guts and their piece of dog sh#t coach......but they are going to be tough to beat I think........Alot hinges on Sanchez though....and I could see him f'ing up alot if they take the conservative wraps off him.....

 

[Ring 6]

Do you (or anyone else) think that the Jests have gotten weaker at RB with Shonn Greene and LT.........than having Jones and Washington (and some greene filled in)?? I for one do not........I think Greene looked good towards end of last year....and the Jest OL is very good in run blocking. I don't see them missing a beat here this year to be honest. I hate their friggin guts and their piece of dog sh#t coach......but they are going to be tough to beat I think........Alot hinges on Sanchez though....and I could see him f'ing up alot if they take the conservative wraps off him.....

Greene had 100 carries. Jones was the reason the Jets were the #1 rushing offense. I dont believe how easily people toss aside an extremely productive player and think a 2nd year guy who has not come close to proving he can handle the full time load is an upgrade. Greene could be better than anyone expected he would ever be on the day he was drafted and still be a downgrade from Jones. LT is terrible.
As far as the OL, replace your best run blocker with a division 1AA rookies LT moving to G and you have made a dramatic change.
I don't get how these things just get ignored.

 

[Rob0729]

Do you (or anyone else) think that the Jests have gotten weaker at RB with Shonn Greene and LT.........than having Jones and Washington (and some greene filled in)?? I for one do not........I think Greene looked good towards end of last year....and the Jest OL is very good in run blocking. I don't see them missing a beat here this year to be honest. I hate their friggin guts and their piece of dog sh#t coach......but they are going to be tough to beat I think........Alot hinges on Sanchez though....and I could see him f'ing up alot if they take the conservative wraps off him.....

Shonne Greene at this point is a more talented version of BJGE. Greene was great in a few games (granted big games), but they were against a banged up Cincinatti interior defense that was gameplanning for Thomas Jones and a Chargers defense that was mediocre vs the run (ranked 20th during the regular season giving up 117.8 YPG and 53 of his yards in that game was because the Chargers totally whiffed trying to tackle him. The only games he looked really good in the regular season was in a blow out over Oakland and vs. the Colts' back ups.

Greene could end up being the real deal, but people are making too many grandeous expectations based on a very small sample of work. He wasn't very durable last year and his running style opens him up for injuries. He has never been "The Guy" that teams gameplan for.

I think losing Jones and Faneca will hurt the Jets more than they are willing to admit. I think adding Coles and Homes may come back to bite them since they will be more committed to throwing the ball and the more Sanchez throws the more turnover happy he becomes. Early camp 11 on 11 drills haven't really alleived that concern since he has thrown a number of picks.