We're on to Baltimore

[Archeryaddict12]

Just can't get game changin injuries. Some will be injured and will leave but let's all hope it's minor stuff and it toughens us up. I almost think we kinda got a swagger back and aren't as finesse as lately.

 

[Ivan]

A large portion of those yards to the WRs came on crossing routes, so it isn't as simple as yardage for a WR = outside. Rob is right, teams have been forcing Manning to throw outside and the results haven't been that great.

I never thought all their yards came outside the have but many did, and I still believe the key to shutting down the Broncos is D. Thomas and Sanders.

 

[Oswlek]

I never thought all their yards came outside the have but many did, and I still believe the key to shutting down the Broncos is D. Thomas and Sanders.

Which can still be done while forcing tough sideline throws, so it isn't really saying any different than Rob was.

 

[Ivan]

I've made this argument over the past 2 days. I generally agree, so long as we don't get so banged up that it affects us down the road.

Same here. They aren't going to have any gimmes and need to play really good football throughout the playoffs to get a Lombardi. IMO they are healthy enough and ready to do just that. I like their chances and belief Belichick, Brady, and the team in general are b primed for this opportunity.

Can't wait to see it play out but I have to take Saturday off to see it, which sucks.

 

[everlong]

As long as it ends with Browner or somebody else with a set walking up to Suggs and saying "arrogant @#%@# how's that defeat taste? Enjoy the pro bowl. "

 

[RobertWeathers]

I think a lot of people agree Baltimore is the toughest draw we could have had of the 3 teams and the worst match up. I agree with that statement and was initially disappointed.

However looking at it now I am glad we got Baltimore. I do believe there is sometime to the theory of being battle tested in the playoffs. I think if we want to win the super bowl we will need to face at least 1 more good front 4. I think it will be better to face a team like Baltimore now and make us more ready to beat a team like Seattle later on.

D-Bag and The Squealer said the same thing.

Beating BAL does not help NE beat SEA.

 

[Sicilian]

I've never really subscribed to that theory. I feel the NFL is way too much of a week to week thing for it to matter much who you played the week before. That said, I think if you're a serious Super Bowl contender, there shouldn't be anyone you play in the playoffs that you don't feel like you can beat. Whether you play your toughest matchup in the wild card round or the Super Bowl, you've got to beat them all to win it all.

 

[Oswlek]

I certainly take pleasure in how NE took down the clear top three challengers in 2004, but I don't really believe that playing Baltimore somehow makes NE more prepared to face Seattle. In fact, you could make a strong argument that schedule breaks and avoiding bad match ups plays a part in SB championships. Off the top of my head I can think of 2006 Indy (two cakewalks and avoiding SD, plus Manning always had Baltimore's number), 2008 Pitt (Baltimore knocking off TN who had just destroyed the Steelers two weeks prior) and 2011 Giants (would have been trounced if they had to go into NO).

Of course there are plenty of examples of teams who played the best teams 01 Pats, 04 Pats, 07 Giants, 12 Baltimore, but I question whether playing an easier schedule would have somehow diminished their chances of winning.

 

[BradyManny]

However looking at it now I am glad we got Baltimore. I do believe there is sometime to the theory of being battle tested in the playoffs. I think if we want to win the super bowl we will need to face at least 1 more good front 4. I think it will be better to face a team like Baltimore now and make us more ready to beat a team like Seattle later on.

I go back and forth on this one - but unfortunately, I do not think there are any ways to guarantee success in the post-season. If we had two cupcake games or two hard games leading into February, all that matters is what happens in a 60 minute window on Feb 1st.

We also can't bank on it being Seattle who we are playing, should we advance that far. It could be Green Bay. Seattle's probably better - but as we've learned many times, being the best team on paper means nothing in January or February.

 

[Todd Bradley]

I agree 100%. Past Patriot teams were given cupcake opponents the last few years and it did not to help prepare for the best teams, when it all mattered.

- 2011: the Broncos led by Tim freakin' Tebow get demolished by the Pats in a "sit back and put up your feet" kind of victory against a team who had no business even being there. This leads to almost losing to Baltimore in the AFCCG, who certainly looked like the better team that day, and then getting muscled out of a Super Bowl by the hardened Giants.
- 2012: the Texans led by Matt freakin' Schaub, barely put up a fight in that game, leading to another easy divisional round win. A freak Gronk injury and Talib with his usual hip pointer, leads to the battle tested Ravens coming to Foxboro and punching their ticket to the Super Bowl.
- 2013: the Colts, led by a very green Andrew Luck and no defense, come to Foxboro and hang tough for barely a half. With no home field advantage (due to a blown game against the freakin' Dolphins in the regular season) the Pats travel to Denver in a game where they never led and played much, much worse than the final score would indicate. Oh and once again, no Gronk and Talib, along with no Wilfork, Mayo, etc, etc.

This year, we've got Gronk and Wilfork healthy. This year we have an actual defense led by the best CB in football in Darrelle Revis. Now coincidentally enough, we draw a familiar opponent, who plays us tough in the divisional round.

If you can't beat the 10-6 Ravens at home, you won't beat whoever comes out of the NFC in the Super Bowl. Quite frankly, there's no better opponent for the Patriots than the Baltimore Ravens. Go out there and prove you're a championship caliber team.

 

[Ring 6]

I agree 100%. Past Patriot teams were given cupcake opponents the last few years and it did not to help prepare for the best teams, when it all mattered.

- 2011: the Broncos led by Tim freakin' Tebow get demolished by the Pats in a "sit back and put up your feet" kind of victory against a team who had no business even being there. This leads to almost losing to Baltimore in the AFCCG, who certainly looked like the better team that day, and then getting muscled out of a Super Bowl by the hardened Giants.
- 2012: the Texans led by Matt freakin' Schaub, barely put up a fight in that game, leading to another easy divisional round win. A freak Gronk injury and Talib with his usual hip pointer, leads to the battle tested Ravens coming to Foxboro and punching their ticket to the Super Bowl.
- 2013: the Colts, led by a very green Andrew Luck and no defense, come to Foxboro and hang tough for barely a half. With no home field advantage (due to a blown game against the freakin' Dolphins in the regular season) the Pats travel to Denver in a game where they never led and played much, much worse than the final score would indicate. Oh and once again, no Gronk and Talib, along with no Wilfork, Mayo, etc, etc.

This year, we've got Gronk and Wilfork healthy. This year we have an actual defense led by the best CB in football in Darrelle Revis. Now coincidentally enough, we draw a familiar opponent, who plays us tough in the divisional round.

If you can't beat the 10-6 Ravens at home, you won't beat whoever comes out of the NFC in the Super Bowl. Quite frankly, there's no better opponent for the Patriots than the Baltimore Ravens. Go out there and prove you're a championship caliber team.

2012 Texans and 2013 Colts were much better teams than the 2014 Ravens.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Who covers Steve Smith? Arrington? He's too much of a burner for Browner or can he try to jam him with bracket coverage safety on top

Also the Oline needs to be on point

I think they go the other way - Revis on Steve Smith, and then Browner probably gets Torrey, with the stated job of just not letting him off the LOS. If he beats Browner and gets downfield, that's what McCourty is for.

 

[Todd Bradley]

2012 Texans and 2013 Colts were much better teams than the 2014 Ravens.

I personally believe the Ravens will be a much tougher out than those two teams were, but I agree that due to their particular regular season success, or lack there of, that the case can be made.

 

[Ring 6]

I personally believe the Ravens will be a much tougher out than those two teams were, but I agree that due to their particular regular season success, or lack there of, that the case can be made.

Well we blew those teams out, so chances are they will be a somewhat tougher out, but that doesn't mean they are a better team.
They are also a good matchup for us, IMO.
Neutralize the rush and they can be toasted. We always torch the bad secondary teams that live off the rush. Defensively, our secondary is better than their receivers and without deep threats, they won't score much.
The only way to lose this game is by turnovers.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

So we have no Talib for Smith to go after and rattle like the carolina game. You can't rattle Revis nor Browner...what's he going to do!?!

 

[BradyManny]

I personally believe the Ravens will be a much tougher out than those two teams were, but I agree that due to their particular regular season success, or lack there of, that the case can be made.

It's about match ups for me. Brady destroys those soft defenses like the Colts & Texans. They never stood a chance - and those two teams were not as good as their record indicated.

It's not like the 2012 Ravens were world-beaters either. They weren't great in the regular season. I'm not even sure how great they were in the post-season. They just happened to win 4 games when it mattered. I say that flippantly, but it's not to discredit them - that's how Super Bowls are won. They continue to be a tougher matchup for us because of their strength in the front 7. Our OL is the weakest link on the team, their front 7 is their strongest.

That said, I still think we win. We have a healthy Gronkowski this time.

 

[BradyManny]

Neutralize the rush and they can be toasted. We always torch the bad secondary teams that live off the rush.

Not sure I agree with this completely. SB42 is a prime example of a team with a weak secondary that lived off the rush. I fear a team's line more than its secondary. If you give Brady time, I don't care if you had Revis & Ty Law in their primes back there, it's not going to end well for the defense.

 

[Ring 6]

Not sure I agree with this completely. SB42 is a prime example of a team with a weak secondary that lived off the rush. I fear a team's line more than its secondary. If you give Brady time, I don't care if you had Revis & Ty Law in their primes back there, it's not going to end well for the defense.

I didn't consider that a weak secondary, and it was certainly miles ahead of this one.
We also ran a different offense that year based upon throwing the ball deep. Brady had 450 yards in that game to be had if he wasn't hit while throwing a number of times sending passes off target. Other than 2007, Patriots approach to weak secondary relying on pass rush is the short passing game, which, by the way, should be in top form after a bye.

 

[Brit patriot]

It remeinds me so much of the Detroit game that it is unreal. I thought we would strugglr against their DL and we did them good style.

I actually think we have been carrying knocks for a few weeks, plus Connelly has been out. A fresh OL may make this Baltimore DL less of a factor than some people think.

 

[letekro]

Well we blew those teams out, so chances are they will be a somewhat tougher out, but that doesn't mean they are a better team.
They are also a good matchup for us, IMO.
Neutralize the rush and they can be toasted. We always torch the bad secondary teams that live off the rush. Defensively, our secondary is better than their receivers and without deep threats, they won't score much.
The only way to lose this game is by turnovers.

A fair amount of misinformation for such a short post. If the Ravens are a worse team than the other two and a good matchup, why will it be a closer game? Surely this version of the NEP is also better than the other two years....
And "we always torch the bad secondary teams that live off the rush"... This is a whopper. Did you miss the two Jets games this year? Did you skip SB 42 and SB 46?
And how is it that they don't have deep threats? Torrie Smith averaging 16 ypc and Steve Smith averaging 13.5. Plus they draw a lot of interference down the field, even if the coverage is there. Revis is a good match for Sr. but I'm not crazy about any of the matchups against T. Smith unless McCourty plays over the top of him on every play.