Only One Thing Beats Us . . . .

[BelichickFan]

Not Shanahan. Not the RB. Not Plummer.

Turnovers.

That's it. From a reasonable look at the stats, we will have trouble running, we will have success throwing, we will stop their running game, we'll be OK agains their pass.

Turnovers.

We're -6 on the year, in the lower half of the league. Denver is +20, second in the league. Game, set, match. If we're plus, even, or maybe -1 in turnovers we win. Otherwise we lose.

Take it to the bank.

 

[shirtsleeve]

Not Shanahan. Not the RB. Not Plummer.

correct.

Turnovers.

correct again

That's it. From a reasonable look at the stats, we will have trouble running, we will have success throwing, we will stop their running game, we'll be OK agains their pass.

Ok on the analysis except for our run game. If Corey is really healthy (and now I doubt any medical sources I hear after saying Tedy would play last night. I dont care who sleeps with which transcriptionist...) he will have a break out game at Mile High.

Turnovers.

Correct again. Check out our turnover ratio in the playoffs, when it counts.

We're -6 on the year, in the lower half of the league. Denver is +20, second in the league. Game, set, match. If we're plus, even, or maybe -1 in turnovers we win. Otherwise we lose.

Take it to the bank.

"Yeah, I'd like to cash this check please?"

 

[flutie2phelan]

....
Turnovers.

We're -6 on the year, in the lower half of the league. Denver is +20, second in the league. Game, set, match. If we're plus, even, or maybe -1 in turnovers we win. Otherwise we lose.

Since i accept both the law of large numbers ... and regression to the mean ... these are data from which to take some comfort.

Denver regresses to the mean by losing some of its advantage. New England regresses to the mean by acquiring a net advantage in turnovers.

It's a shame that the numbers involved aren't large enough to feel confident ... that joint regression will occur THIS SATURDAY NIGHT.

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

Since i accept both the law of large numbers ... and regression to the mean ... these are data from which to take some comfort.

Denver regresses to the mean by losing some of its advantage. New England regresses to the mean by acquiring a net advantage in turnovers.

It's a shame that the numbers involved aren't large enough to feel confident ... that joint regression will occur THIS SATURDAY NIGHT.

I hate to say it...but I think our running game is going to be limited -- again. But I still like our chances.

 

[footstepsfrom#27]

Not Shanahan. Not the RB. Not Plummer.

Turnovers.

That's it. From a reasonable look at the stats, we will have trouble running, we will have success throwing, we will stop their running game, we'll be OK agains their pass.

Turnovers.

We're -6 on the year, in the lower half of the league. Denver is +20, second in the league. Game, set, match. If we're plus, even, or maybe -1 in turnovers we win. Otherwise we lose.

Take it to the bank.

Yea that 178 yards and 5.2 a pop you gave up on the ground had nothing to do with it...

That's what you call a "reasonable" look at the stats? Interesting "logic"...especially since you had ZERO turnovers in the Denver game.

This is to easy...

 

[BelichickFan]

Yea that 178 yards and 5.2 a pop you gave up on the ground had nothing to do with it...

Those of us who have watched the Patriots know the answer to that.

You'll see. -1 or better in turnovers the Patriots win.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

We have trouble running when we go into a game with an ass backwards game plan and try to establish the run first.... We do not have a run first, pass second team, rather the opposite.

Sopmetimes it takes too damned long for the offensive coordinator, whever the hell it is, to get the message... Now, in the playoffs, where it's one game and out...we cnnot take that kind of chance, especially on the road.

We need tocome out and attck the Bronco secondary, which is vastly over rated..... And exploit them inside, where they are the weakest, force their linebackers out of the box into pass coverage...INSIDE IN THE SEAMS, then attck with the slicing running game and the screens and quick outs....

But first, soften them up with the slants, crossing and NO HUDDLE as we now know that it works.

I see you're back to normal.

 

[nukin]

i guess another thing that could beat us is if the patriots plane crashed

 

[footstepsfrom#27]

Those of us who have watched the Patriots know the answer to that.

You'll see. -1 or better in turnovers the Patriots win.

Nobody turned it over in this game. You still lost.

 

[BelichickFan]

Nobody turned it over in this game. You still lost.

I'm not talking about that game, numbnuts. The Patriots sucked back then. They don't now. Now (get it ? NOW) we win unless we're -2 or worse in turnovers.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Yea that 178 yards and 5.2 a pop you gave up on the ground had nothing to do with it...

That's what you call a "reasonable" look at the stats? Interesting "logic"...especially since you had ZERO turnovers in the Denver game.

This is to easy...

We gave up that 178 and 5.2 without Bruschi, Seymour or Vrabel yet in the middle. We've cleaned up the run defense a lot since last we met.

We've also stabilized the secondary somewhat with Hawkins in at Safety and Hobbs replacing Starks - who couldn't cover a receiver close enough to catch a cold. We'll take our chances with Jake minus his running game and facing an actual pass rush. You know what the book is on Jake when it's all on him....

 

[footstepsfrom#27]

We gave up that 178 and 5.2 without Bruschi, Seymour or Vrabel yet in the middle. We've cleaned up the run defense a lot since last we met.

We've also stabilized the secondary somewhat with Hawkins in at Safety and Hobbs replacing Starks - who couldn't cover a receiver close enough to catch a cold. We'll take our chances with Jake minus his running game and facing an actual pass rush. You know what the book is on Jake when it's all on him....

We lead the NFL in rushing during the Mike Shanahan era. Everybody always has an excuse when they play us for giving up huge yardage on the ground.

Jake's mistakes in his Zona days are old news...you really need to catch up. He's tossing 1 pick every 65 passes this year...compared to 1 in 37.8 for Brady. His Denver career overall has him throwing 1 every 37.6 to Brady's career stats of 1 in 38.6...about equal. Two out of three seasons he's been here Jake finished with 7 picks, while Brady's thrown double digit INT's every year he's started for the Pats

 

[Joker]

3 out of four years he's started Brady has three Super Bowl rings....uh...Snake?...ZERO

doncha just hate them ugly beatdowns when you start a firefight with a slingshot and the other guy has a bazooka?

 

[skri65]

Two out of three seasons he's been here Jake finished with 7 picks, while Brady's thrown double digit INT's every year he's started for the Pats

Dont even try to bash brady on this one. Brady's a better qb then jake the snake, its a fact.

And just so you know, most of the int's brady has had (minus the one with the jets), have been because we have lacked a running game and have been behind often throughout our 10-6 season. He was trying to make plays because he had no other choice. He had 4 picks in the KC game. One of them was a legit int, just a bad throw. The other three were either tipped balls (two of which were to dwight, who was forced into that position due to injuries) or 4th quarter desperation throws.

 

[footstepsfrom#27]

3 out of four years he's started Brady has three Super Bowl rings....uh...Snake?...ZERO

doncha just hate them ugly beatdowns when you start a firefight with a slingshot and the other guy has a bazooka?

Uh...yea...Jake had a good chance of picking up a ring in Arizona huh? The point was about Jake's propensity for mistakes, not his career with Arizona, or the first two years in Denver. Brady's better....duh...that wasn't what the conversation was about. Besides...Brady won't be playing against Plummer, but against our defense...and visa versa.

 

[footstepsfrom#27]

Dont even try to bash brady on this one. Brady's a better qb then jake the snake, its a fact.

And just so you know, most of the int's brady has had (minus the one with the jets), have been because we have lacked a running game and have been behind often throughout our 10-6 season. He was trying to make plays because he had no other choice. He had 4 picks in the KC game. One of them was a legit int, just a bad throw. The other three were either tipped balls (two of which were to dwight, who was forced into that position due to injuries) or 4th quarter desperation throws.

Jake had 4 picks in one game last year and all four bounced off Bronco receivers hands first. He had 3 in another game, so 7 of his 20 came in two games. If you're saying that QB's need a running game and receivers who can catch...no kidding...like Arizona had either one...right?

So how many Superbowls would Tom have won for the Cardinals?

 

[PatsFan-NH]

In the postseason Tom has thrown the fewest interceptions, ever. Bart Starr is 2nd I think. Tom is something like 3 in 304 attempts, so he averages 1 every 101.xx attempts.

Jake isn't even in the same league.

Denver may win, but the Pats will give them a good game, and it will be very different than the earlier game. BB almost never loses a 2nd game against the same team.

Our defense is back, and if it becomes a duel of QBs you guys are pretty much unarmed.

 

[footstepsfrom#27]

In the postseason Tom has thrown the fewest interceptions, ever. Bart Starr is 2nd I think. Tom is something like 3 in 304 attempts, so he averages 1 every 101.xx attempts.

Jake isn't even in the same league.

Denver may win, but the Pats will give them a good game, and it will be very different than the earlier game. BB almost never loses a 2nd game against the same team.

Our defense is back, and if it becomes a duel of QBs you guys are pretty much unarmed.

This is not a duel of QB's. We will run on you. Don't be mislead. In Denver you have an uphill battle. We own the NFL's best home field advantage since 1973.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

This is not a duel of QB's. We will run on you. Don't be mislead. In Denver you have an uphill battle. We own the NFL's best home field advantage since 1973.

Yes, homefield is a nice advantage for you and your team earned it. I for one wrote them off for this season, good thing I don't gamble.

I'll expand BBfan's turnover point to encompass execution - not just turnovers - during the first half of the week six game the Pats failed to execute. It's as simple as that, they had trouble in the first half of the Jags' game - on offense - and it had more then one person in the game thread nervous.

Shanny does a good job of disrupting a team's ability to execute, so does BB, we'll just have to see which one has his team prepared the best for the game. Hopefully your lads will have a few jitters to start out, we should have gotten past ours with the Jags help, we'll need any edge however brief for your boys.

Our defense seemed to execute well against the Jags and needs to bring that to this game. Numbers are nice, but I look for execution and right now our front seven are playing their gaps and making the offense work hard for each yard.

The O-line has improved some since week six, the run game hasn't been very strong and your front seven are going to limit our run production. The key will be sticking with the run enough to keep the linebackers honest, not much we can do about your DEs, they are coming no matter what.

As always this will be won in the trenchs, if our O-line can give Tommy 3-4 seconds he should be able to find an open receiver. Another nailbiter for our pepto-bismol crowd.

 

[BelichickFan]

Numbers are nice, but I look for execution

The other thing is matchups and I really like the fact that Denver is a run, 2 WR, occasional TE team. Indy matchups up against our weakness (depth at CB) better. And although Denver is better than Jacksonville, the Jaguard had a little bit of a matchup thing with their 3 and 4 WR sets.

Defend the run.
Hobbs on Rod Smith.
Samuel on Lelie with help.
Occasional TE.

That's about it with Denver.

The one thing I don't like is we never seem to play well against Denver.