State Of The Franchise

[Guts]

Maybe the Pats should start disrespecting opponents
like their opponents disrespect them...Every single time a team talks smack about the Patriots and the Patriots just sit there and take it instead of playing with fire and anger...sorry probably just a knee jerk reaction from the loss yesterday

 

[Ring 6]

Maybe the Pats should start disrespecting opponents
like their opponents disrespect them...Every single time a team talks smack about the Patriots and the Patriots just sit there and take it instead of playing with fire and anger...sorry probably just a knee jerk reaction from the loss yesterday

Seriously, where do you get the idea that they didn't play with fire and anger?
They lost. That doesn't mean they were afraid or didn't care. This isn't Pop Warner.
Probably a good idea that when you feel the need to add that least sentence, tp hold down the backspace button for a few seconds instead

 

[SVN]

IMO the team needs a physical identity and mentality. We have good leaders and almost all of them are passive .Brady has to shoulder the lead for both the offense and defense right now from a leadership perspective. 2004 and before the defense used to challenge the offense . Right now they are following brady. Vince and mayo - great players and great leaders but lack the presence our 2003/2004 teams had. We are more like the colts now unfortunately .Even our forum threads are all about how we run our offense and how someone will stop us etc etc. Not much balance with defense. We used to win 17-13 /13-10 games. Not anymore.

 

[jnug]

We might be simply trying to deal with an issue that we are finding hard to face and skirting the real issue by describing it differently. The Ravens were much more physical than the Pats in this game and are a more physical team generally. Like it or not it mattered. But I think discussing the issues in terms like fire or anger just misses what is happening.

One hope I have is that if we become a more physical secondary it will help the rest of the defense in that regard. It may not make sense to anybody that has not been part of it but you have no idea how much of an impact even one big monster hit has on a defense. All of you start going crazy out of your minds and often people start hitting and flying around the ball like a bunch of rabid animals. No matter how sophisticated the game gets and it certainly is a very sophisticated game at the pro level hits still have that impact on a defense. You have to be a little crazy to play defense anyway.

 

[DocHoliday]

Seriously, where do you get the idea that they didn't play with fire and anger?
They lost. That doesn't mean they were afraid or didn't care. This isn't Pop Warner.
Probably a good idea that when you feel the need to add that least sentence, tp hold down the backspace button for a few seconds instead

Safeties and LBs pummel our skill players into the turf and hobble them. Our secondary is afraid of a 15 yard penalty when they're probably going to give up those 15 yards over the middle anyway.

It's time we realized big hits are actually a viable defensive strategy. All of our receiving options except Lloyd were demolished last night.

 

[Ring 6]

Safeties and LBs pummel our skill players into the turf and hobble them. Our secondary is afraid of a 15 yard penalty when they're probably going to give up those 15 yards over the middle anyway.

It's time we realized big hits are actually a viable defensive strategy. All of our receiving options except Lloyd were demolished last night.

You seriously have to be joking.

 

[DocHoliday]

You seriously have to be joking.

I'm sure Wes and Ridley laughed off the hits they took last night.

You come out here and peddle that losing to the Ravens is because we missed some plays and has nothing to do with the fact that there is a certain type of defense this offense simply cannot beat.

That's not a joke?

 

[Ring 6]

I'm sure Wes and Ridley laughed off the hits they took last night.

You come out here and peddle that losing to the Ravens is because we missed some plays and has nothing to do with the fact that there is a certain type of defense this offense simply cannot beat.

That's not a joke?

Its a fact. We moved the ball up and down the field, and failed to convert on plays that were there to be made, not because they were challenged but mostly because we just didn't execute.
Feel free to go ahead and lump every team we lose together because the one thing they all have in common is they scored more points than us. Beyond that, you are simply whining.
But just so we are straight, you are saying the Patriots lost because they were afraid to get hit?
It would be nice if you could show me all of the players we **** our pants on.

 

[DocHoliday]

Its a fact. We moved the ball up and down the field, and failed to convert on plays that were there to be made, not because they were challenged but mostly because we just didn't execute.
Feel free to go ahead and lump every team we lose together because the one thing they all have in common is they scored more points than us. Beyond that, you are simply whining.
But just so we are straight, you are saying the Patriots lost because they were afraid to get hit?
It would be nice if you could show me all of the players we **** our pants on.

They weren't challenged? Of course they were challenged. Ravens had good coverage that forced difficult throws.

You had Welker slowed by injury and Vereen dropped an easy catch because hed been watching his teammates get hit and took his eyes off the ball to look upfield.

We moved the ball up and down the field only to get stopped in the red zone... Where you have more players in a smaller area. Coincidence that their D, which was already effective stopping the Pats O was doing even better? No.

We lost primarily because the recieving options we had left couldn't beat coverage without the aid of the quick no huddle and schemes that afford easy catches against mismatches. They were giving up the dink and dunk and punishing us for it.

And it certainly helped that they were hitting our players hard, because it made each subsequent catch harder to make on that player.

 

[Ring 6]

They weren't challenged? Of course they were challenged. Ravens had good coverage that forced difficult throws.

Not really. Most of them were there.
We missed 8 3rd downs.
Welker dropped 2.
The ref got in Bradys way on another
Solder had a hold on one we converted
Vereen dropped a 2nd down wide open pass that would have made 3d unecessary.
Lloyd stumbled and was wide open and couldnt recover in time to hold the ball
Thats 6 of the 8 right there that were unforced without even looking it up.

You had Welker slowed by injury and Vereen dropped an easy catch because hed been watching his teammates get hit and took his eyes off the ball to look upfield.

Welker was fine. You are embellishing 100% to blame Vereen's drop in some ficuticous hit that is in your head.

We moved the ball up and down the field only to get stopped in the red zone... Where you have more players in a smaller area. Coincidence that their D, which was already effective stopping the Pats O was doing even better? No.

That is a theory that doesn't hold up to what happened on the field.
Exactly how were they 'already effective at stopping the Pats O' outside the red zone if they got inside the 25 6 times and had 428 yards of offense? That is exteremely effective up to the 25.

We lost primarily because the recieving options we had left couldn't beat coverage without the aid of the quick no huddle and schemes that afford easy catches against mismatches. They were giving up the dink and dunk and punishing us for it.

They consistently beat coverage. They had 428 yards of offense. There was no punishment going on. Ridley got hammered, that is a play not a game.

And it certainly helped that they were hitting our players hard, because it made each subsequent catch harder to make on that player.

Again, a theory that doesn't match what happened on the field. You sound like you didn't see the game and believe what must have happened because you heard the Ravens 'are physical'.

 

[jnug]

I might just not be understanding this part of the discussion so I apologize if I am just not getting the gist of what you guys are discussing.

At the risk of being way off, the discussion can't be that the Ravens were not much more physical in this game than the Pats particularly the Ravens defense in relation to our offense. To my eyes their defense was much more physical than our defense.

If we accept that, is the discussion that it did not matter or was not a factor? Physical play has a cumulative impact. It usually does not show up as something that is actually having an impact on the way players play until later in the game. It is not an issue of courage either although sometimes it can look like that. Harkening back to that Rams/Patriots SB game there is no question that the Rams receivers eventually got a real bad case of alligator arms as they had just plan had enough....and put up the surrender flag.

I did not see any of that in the Pats/Ravens game. However you can start to tell when players are feeling it even if they don't end up playing with self preservation as the goal. You just get punchy after awhile. Wes definitely looked punchy at the end of this game. He was not moving like he normally moves....his gait was not the same. Ridley was flat knocked out of the game. I should have paid more attention to what was happening to some of the other guys that handle the ball for the Pats. But there is no question that part of the Ravens strategy was to physically beat up on the Pats ball handlers.

I cannot pick out a specific play that looked like a Patriot played differently like the Rams alligator armed receivers in that SB. Clearly the Ridley fumble was caused by the hit. I can not point to a specific play with Wes where I could say definitively that Wes had been effected by the physical play but I can tell when a guy is moving like he is a bit punchy and Wes was moving like that later in this game. Was the Wes drop earlier caused by already being a bit punchy at that point? I cannot say. His gait, the way he was moving around the field at that point in the game did not suggest that to me. However I just can't say for sure. Had he dropped a ball like that later in the game after I saw clear signs that he was a bit punchy I definitely would have pointed to the physical play as relating at that point.

 

[DocHoliday]

Not really. Most of them were there.
We missed 8 3rd downs.
Welker dropped 2.
The ref got in Bradys way on another
Solder had a hold on one we converted
Vereen dropped a 2nd down wide open pass that would have made 3d unecessary.
Lloyd stumbled and was wide open and couldnt recover in time to hold the ball
Thats 6 of the 8 right there that were unforced without even looking it up.



Welker was fine. You are embellishing 100% to blame Vereen's drop in some ficuticous hit that is in your head.


That is a theory that doesn't hold up to what happened on the field.
Exactly how were they 'already effective at stopping the Pats O' outside the red zone if they got inside the 25 6 times and had 428 yards of offense? That is exteremely effective up to the 25.



They consistently beat coverage. They had 428 yards of offense. There was no punishment going on. Ridley got hammered, that is a play not a game.



Again, a theory that doesn't match what happened on the field. You sound like you didn't see the game and believe what must have happened because you heard the Ravens 'are physical'.

You didn't see Wes limping to the huddle? Funny.

So the Patriots just happen to not execute for no apparent reason every time the Pats play the Ravens D? Had nothing to do with Ravens playing us the way they always do?

That's it?

I hope that isn't your excuse for the 49ers loss, the Seahawks loss, the Cards loss, the other Ravens loss, the Giants loss....

Not like all those Defenses have something in common.

 

[hellolin]

The patriots has offically became the new york yankees of football, so do the fans...

 

[hellolin]

As many people including me have observed the PATS are like the Yankees, Everyone expects us to make the post season every year, and anything short of a SB victory is considered a failure.

So based on this assumption the next step we should take is find our own A-Rod to buy 2 championships?:rocker:

 

[harrylime70]

I find it less difficult each year actually.

In the beginning, it felt like we just couldn't lose and we didn't so when we did (2006) it was really tough to take.

2007 remains to this day such a huge defining moment for me. I'll never care that much again. I just won't.

The more stuff like this happens, the more I realized, this is the norm. Making the Superbowl is HARD. It is not easy to win a championship every year, or most years or even any year. I'm not sure I really believed that in, say, 2004.

What I'm most tired of is supposed fans turning on the team, the coaches, whatever when a week ago it was all love and kisses. I expect that crap from opposing fans but when its our own I just get really sick of it.

I am the opposite to this...It has become something I almost need them to do now after so many close misses, and I'm taking it worse each year as the realization dawns that they might not win another Superbowl in this era.

In saying that, I do realize, like you, how hard it is to win one and I don't turn on the team every game they lose as I understand how hard it is to win in the NFL no matter what standards they have set. I think most fans do this in the heat of the moment but when they start to rationalize it all they realize these guys cannot win every game. Unfortunately there is also a minority of the fan base that do still criticize even after they have calmed down!!

 

[DarrylS]

Had to distance myself from the talk radio, news or anything else yesterday... need to decompress.. now that I have slept on this, my enthusiasm has not wained.

Sunday night our offense did not execute as well as it should have, and our D did not stop them.. but look deeper, Justin Francis(an udfa) started in place of Jones, Kyle Love went down replaced by Deadrick, Talib went down and he was replaced by Arrington another udfa.. this coupled with two other rookies on Defense Dennard and Hightower. While there are no excuses offered, if we were to have completed the game with all of the defense the game would have been much closer.. and perhaps a win.

What I have noticed is that BB has realized that he just cannot put JAG's in the d backfield.. and needs to find better guys there, it looked good for a while, but injuries decimated us.. yes everyone has injuries, but our injuries to Gronk, Jones and Talib were significant...

Heard some of the talk and read some of the stuff out there, but I am a believer in BB and this system.. to have gone to the Superbowl last year and the AFC title game this year, is all I need to keep on believing.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

....

I do not think an 8-7 record since 2005 in the post season, 4 AFCCGs (2-2) and 2 SB trips and losses is a bad run unless you believe their is an entitlement to winning the SB every year.
I think the solid foundation, and steady success sets fans up to feel disappointed by the results.
...
We tend to believe the result define the talent, but I don't think that is entirely accurate. This team without BB would not come close to what it has done, nor would it without Brady.
...
The reality is that this is most likely an average collection of talent plus Tom Brady and Bill Belichick which results in being able to dominate many teams, but is in a dog fight and roughly a 50/50 shot vs the cream of the crop.

That, over the long haul is better than just about any franchise out there, but in the short haul needs some things to go right to get all the way.

...

Andy, I disagree with you from time to time, but the statements I have highlighted above are probably the wisest words I have read out here in a long, long time.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Had to distance myself from the talk radio, news or anything else yesterday... need to decompress.. now that I have slept on this, my enthusiasm has not wained.

Sunday night our offense did not execute as well as it should have, and our D did not stop them.. but look deeper, Justin Francis(an udfa) started in place of Jones, Kyle Love went down replaced by Deadrick, Talib went down and he was replaced by Arrington another udfa.. this coupled with two other rookies on Defense Dennard and Hightower. While there are no excuses offered, if we were to have completed the game with all of the defense the game would have been much closer.. and perhaps a win.

What I have noticed is that BB has realized that he just cannot put JAG's in the d backfield.. and needs to find better guys there, it looked good for a while, but injuries decimated us.. yes everyone has injuries, but our injuries to Gronk, Jones and Talib were significant...

Heard some of the talk and read some of the stuff out there, but I am a believer in BB and this system.. to have gone to the Superbowl last year and the AFC title game this year, is all I need to keep on believing.

Ditto. Although I did hear the good news that the oracle known as Felger IS predicting this team as the AFC representative in the NYC superbowl in February 2014. It's the moronic era's over window's closing on these chokah's crap I have to steer clear of because it makes me insane. I think Bill knows both how close they were and how tight their margin was again and even what he needs to do to change the equation. Just think he hasn't quite identified the answers yet. Although he has tried both in beefing up the offense via drafting RB's and signing FA WR's. Set himself back with Ocho, did better with Lloyd although given the margin that has been repeatedly stretched due to injuries to his centerpiece TE's he may have to do better yet again. They need to be able to stretch the field more consistently whether that is horizontal or vertical and that means some combination of speed and physicality. And continuing to redevelop a running mentality that insures they can when they must.

He finally said uncle on the pass rush and secondary. Unfortunately he has to do more since just a couple of untimely injuries landed them back on the margin yet again. Meanwhile he has to retain or place three incumbant players he can't afford to lose the production value of, each of whom for one reason or another has reached the point where cost benefit is bordering prohibitive. Hopefully for that reason some of the players he drafted last season who showed promise better make that all important sophomore jump and he needs to have a solid draft again in 2013 to be in position to upgrade talent.

I'm not worried about them being competitive. Been that since the day Brady arrived here and will continue to be as long as he remains. And probably for a time thereafter until BB no longer remains provided he locates an above average game manager. Won't be slam dunk contenders but probably will remain competitive based simply on superior coaching and scheme. And unlike some knuckleheads here I wouldn't trade decades of consistent competitiveness for just one more ring followed by years of win now cost driven mediocrity.

They don't have to win it all every season or even any season for me to be OK with what transpires. It's frustrating to be that close time and again only to come up inches or minutes short. But I feel worse for the team and the players when that happens than I do for myself or an entitled fan base that all too often turns on them. They invest a lot more emotionally as well as physically in each season's journey than any fan ever does despite what fans tend to think. I said it then and I meant it. They haven't owed me a damn thing since February 4, 2002. Everything since has been gravey. I'd love to see them win at least one more before Brady departs, just to shut up their moronic critics although I expect it really wouldn't, but mostly because I think he's earned it. He can't control the way 22 other guys execute or dictate roster construction. All he can do is keep showing up season after season and giving this 110% effort and their best chance of winning. Which is why I refuse to tolerate the moronic attacks he endures here where even spoiled rotten entitled fans should know better.

While there are no excuses there are a variety of reasons a team comes up short. Generally speaking those are lack of talent or functional depth related often exacerbated by injuries and one or two guys having a bad day at work (execution which given human nature is never going to be perfect). You can't control or predict the latter no matter how hard you try. But you have a shot at controlling or rectifying the former. But that responsibility rests with the guy who has total control of football ops. He's done a better job more consistently than any other guy in his position to be sure. But I believe he could do better still. When he walked off the field after that first superbowl victory he said to Ernie "can you believe we won with this team?". Had we won last season he'd have probably said the same thing. And had we gone on to win it all this season without Gronkowski and probably Talib or Jones he'd have at least thought about saying it again.

He needs to tweet the roster and build a team that doesn't have to operate on a margin so tight that it simply doesn't allow for any error or significant injury. He's done it before so I believe he can do it again.

 

[bagwell368]

We still have a very young and deep roster with some picks and cap room flexibility to do more.

More and more it looks like Brady is done by the end of 2015, so I'm glad BB is at the helm. His time is coming to an end as well. Perhaps he'll kick himself to GM for a couple of years while his heir - probably the OC - learns the ropes on the field.

 

[Steve102]

State of the franchise is this: The New England Patriots are the measuring stick for the other 31 teams in the NFL.