I find folks on here get so hung up on semantic arguments and instead of taking a visual/gutteral big picture view.
If stats were the be all to end all...Fanduel would not be a profitable venture for its owners and Las Vegas would simply be thruway to California.
You are backward on this. A defense allowing points or taking the ball away is not 'stats' its production and success.
I'd be very surprised if collectively anyone doesn't believe that Rex has historically been successful against Brady. The blueprint itself you can only pull off if you have the personnel and coaching....like the Giants did....twice.
Why would anyone opinion matter, when there are facts? How can you call 4-9 successful?
The Giants ABSOLUTELY, ENTIRELY, COMPLETELY, WITHOUT QUESTION did NOT follow a Rex Ryan blueprint.
This is what is wrong with your thinking. You think Rex Ryan = pass rush. While that really isn't even true, to think that any team that rushes the passer owes it to Rex Ryan is moronic. The Giants limited our offense in the first game because they had DL that won the one on one battles with our OL. Thats football. Thats not a blueprint. The second time was because Gronk was on one leg, Welker dropped the game winning pass, and our defense couldn't get off the field. Nothing about Ryan there.
You are just making stuff up now.
Even though our defense is a huge upgrade over previous years....our Offense is what still in the end wins us games more than not.
Actually we win with both offense and defense, but lately it has been more defense.
Our defense is not stifling...it is not a shutdown defense. We do not dictate the flow of the game with it. Our D is good at adjusting to what the other team is dictating and minimizing damage. It's like a being a kid that gets pummeled by a bully with 15 punches in a row...gets bloodied...but is able to slip in a shot to the nose that ends the fight. The bully lost...but the kid paid for it.
You cannot be watching games. You should. Our defense has allowed 1 TD in the second of the last 6 games.
Back in 2007 when the Pats played the Eagles and Baltimore....we won those games. But those games scared me...a team I viewed as a juggernaut had a few noticeable flaws. The secondary's deficiencies were major.
Every team has flaws. If a 16-0 team with 2 sort of close losses scared you, what team wouldn't? Your standard is ridiculous. Everything perfect everygame, flawless team, total domination. Does not happen.
I see the same here...but the flaws have changed. An O-line...with a complete lack of grit and a level of talent I would describe as basic..
Explain how they lack grit.
Explain how an OL that allowed 4 sacks in 8 games lacks BASIC talent.
A secondary that when playing in nickel and dime situations doesn't have the horses to stop teams with good receiving depth.
1) We HAVE stopped those teams already
2) What team has 'the horses' you think we lack?
....and here's one more....our QB is getting old...he can't sidestep trouble the way he used....he doesn't want to get killed behind what he knows is a substandard line.
Looks pretty F-ing good to me.
You don't need stats to see this on your TV screen.
I look on my TV screen and I see them winning 10 of 11, 8 of them by 9 or more points, 6 of them by more than 3 TDs. I see them scoring 27 or more in 8 of those 11 games, and allowing less than 17 points in 4 of the last 5.
I see the best team in the NFL. You don't?
It would appear you want to find things to complain about with no context whatsoever.
This has turned from Yay I love Rex to OK Im ignoring the proof he sucks to the Patriots really suck they just hide it well.
I think we are done here.