The More Talented Team?

[PatsBoy12]

Here we are just over 2 days away from a seventh SB in 15 years. Multiple division championshops, playoff berths and AFCCG's are also in two. But...

One popular narrative that I have heard over and over and over again is how this team or that team was more talented than the Patriots. Once again, I just heard how Atlanta is more talented overall than the Patriots. This may or may not be true. But how many times has it been true over the years? Look, I get that we have the greatest coach and QB individually and as a tandem. I get that they've been really the only constants throughout this dynastic 17-year run.

My question to all is do you believe that these teams we've beat were ALL truly more talented? I'll concede that the 2014 Seahawks were on defense, but overall? I don't know. The Rams certainly were overall. But I don't know if I believe the Panthers were (though they sure were doped up). I don't know if I believe the Eagles were either. Those 2003 and 2004 Pats were stacked, even with Law shelved midway through the season. The 2007 Giants definitely weren't. The Patriots 2011 team was smoke and mirrors, but it's not like the Giants strolled out there with a HOF line-up either. It can get murky if we look at all playoff rounds, so I'm interested in SB opponents only. In your opinion, how many of them, including the upcoming opponent, do you all believe truly were more talented than that year's version of the Patriots? Discuss.

 

[Tony2046]

I've been hearing the same thing. I think some of these mediots get talent and athleticism confused.

I also think there's a difference between a talented individual and a talented team.

BB gathers players to build a talented team.

 

[randomk1]

Well almost all other teams we play have higher draft picks while our offense has like one 1st rounder in the lineup and our defense doesn't produce high sack guys and etc. so i can understand the perception that the other team might be more talented. Other teams might have more high end talent with ****ty depth behind them. BB likes the roster to be balanced from the top to the bottom.

 

[PatsBoy12]

Well almost all other teams we play have higher draft picks while our offense has like one 1st rounder in the lineup and our defense doesn't produce high sack guys and etc. so i can understand the perception that the other team might be more talented. Other teams might have more high end talent with ****ty depth behind them. BB likes the roster to be balanced from the top to the bottom.

I hear you. Good point. But depth matters in the any discussion of a team, no? If we usually have more or better depth, doesn't that count? Or is it inaccurate to say we had more or better depth?

 

[tasmlab]

Wrong metric, because "we're not collecting talent, we're building a team."

 

[patriot1136]

Doesn't matter. We are the smarter, tougher, and better prepared team. Not to mention better coached.

 

[BelichickFan]

Our DB and DT are certainly talented. We have a 1,2,3 draft pick group at DT (Brown, Branch, Valentine). McCourty was a 1, Rowe & Chung were 2s. Ryan was a 3, Harmon a 4. And Butler has the talent of a 1,he slipped for reasons we know.

LB, Hightower and McClellin were 1s (latter likely a reach) and Van Noy was a high 2.

DE, Sheard was a 2. Flowers a high 4. This is a tougher group as Long was a high 1 but his best is in the past and Ninkovich was underdrafted but also getting up there.

Plenty of talent even with Jones and Collins gone.

Won't bother with offense due to TB12 raising everyone but our OL has plenty of talent when you account for Cannon being a 1 or 2 before the cancer diagnosis. 1,2,UDFA,2,4.

 

[PatsBoy12]

Wrong metric, because "we're not collecting talent, we're building a team."

I hear you, tas. I get that's what BB says, but the individual parts still must be talented. It's like "Do Your Job" . . . well.

 

[newenglandsports11]

Pure talent Rams 01' and this year stick out as being outmatched. The thing is I don't think BB gives a f*ck who is talented. If that were the case Jamie and Chandler would still be here.

You could make the argument for 14' but our receiving core was better and to be honest our D with Revis, McCourty, Browner, Collins, Chung, Jones, Wilfork is one of the most talented units I have ever seen on this D.

Bottomline: I don't think the talent matters on Sunday. All about execution. Wes Welker and Asante Samuel were talented and guess what, when it came time to execute they didn't do their jobs (well).

 

[randomk1]

I hear you. Good point. But depth matters in the any discussion of a team, no? If we usually have more or better depth, doesn't that count? Or is it inaccurate to say we had more or better depth?

Of course depth matters but most people look at superfreaks like Julio Jones and Vic Beasley and they automatically look more talented.

But this team trades away Chandler Jones and Jamie Collins and then loses Rob Gronkowski and still cruises to a SB appearance. I wonder what the falcons season looks like if they lost Julio Jones mid season.

 

[Pats1989]

Well Atlanta definitely has more pure talent. Ryan can run, Julio can do things not many others can, they have a monster RB tandem. Sano would be a # 1 on most NFL teams. They have an elite pass rusher in Beasley.

I realize our D has played well. I truly hope this isn't the game we say: " Would've been nice to have Jones & Collins."

 

[RobertWeathers]

Scouting of the Patriots's QB. Not very talented to say the least.

• Poor build - skinny
• Lacks great physical stature and strength
• Lacks mobility and ability to avoid the rush
• Lacks a strong arm- can't drive the ball down the field
• Does not throw a tight spiral
• System-type player who can be exposed if forced to ad-lib
• Gets knocked down easily
• Below-average speed

He sucks!

 

[BelichickFan]

Sano would be a # 1 on most NFL teams

No he wouldn't.

 

[Ring 6]

Here we are just over 2 days away from a seventh SB in 15 years. Multiple division championshops, playoff berths and AFCCG's are also in two. But...

One popular narrative that I have heard over and over and over again is how this team or that team was more talented than the Patriots. Once again, I just heard how Atlanta is more talented overall than the Patriots. This may or may not be true. But how many times has it been true over the years? Look, I get that we have the greatest coach and QB individually and as a tandem. I get that they've been really the only constants throughout this dynastic 17-year run.

My question to all is do you believe that these teams we've beat were ALL truly more talented? I'll concede that the 2014 Seahawks were on defense, but overall? I don't know. The Rams certainly were overall. But I don't know if I believe the Panthers were (though they sure were doped up). I don't know if I believe the Eagles were either. Those 2003 and 2004 Pats were stacked, even with Law shelved midway through the season. The 2007 Giants definitely weren't. The Patriots 2011 team was smoke and mirrors, but it's not like the Giants strolled out there with a HOF line-up either. It can get murky if we look at all playoff rounds, so I'm interested in SB opponents only. In your opinion, how many of them, including the upcoming opponent, do you all believe truly were more talented than that year's version of the Patriots? Discuss.

It depends on how you define talent. To me football talent is doing the things that win games not running faster or jumping higher.

 

[Hop Hop Schaefer City]

 

[deroc5050]

Well Atlanta definitely has more pure talent. Ryan can run, Julio can do things not many others can, they have a monster RB tandem. Sano would be a # 1 on most NFL teams. They have an elite pass rusher in Beasley.

I realize our D has played well. I truly hope this isn't the game we say: " Would've been nice to have Jones & Collins."

I will give you Julio as an elite talent, but I think New Englands running backs are very versatile also. Atlanta might have 5 or 6 top shelf guys but New England is deeper and more versatile.

 

[PatsBoy12]

Of course depth matters but most people look at superfreaks like Julio Jones and Vic Beasley and they automatically look more talented.

But this team trades away Chandler Jones and Jamie Collins and then loses Rob Gronkowski and still cruises to a SB appearance. I wonder what the falcons season looks like if they lost Julio Jones mid season.

Exactly. That's my point, random. Doesn't that mean the Pats are more talented if that's the case? I know coaching and Tom erasing deficiencies is definitely part of it, but it can't all be that simple, can it? I'm asking, not debating to be clear.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Talent is not synonymous with what a stopwatch and a tape measure will tell you.

intelligence is a talent
so is versatility
so is mental toughness
so is focus
so is coachability

We are extremely talented and yet probably not at or even particularly near the very top in terms of elite athleticism. That fine, because those factors above are actually more important!

 

[RecoveringCowboy]

Wrong metric, because "we're not collecting talent, we're building a team."

I remember a number of offseasons Daniel Snyder (early 2000's or late 1990's) got a BUNCH of free agents. His attempt at being George Steinbrenner failed. Deon Sanders was spent - others were incompatible with what Washington had.

 

[Nikolai]

When they say more talented, they're usually confusing that with "better team for drafting fantasy players".