Yes or No... Do the Patriots make the Superbowl this season?

[makoute]

It depends on how this defense performs, so it is hard to say.

 

[BradyManny]

No one knows what the health of this team is going to be, so it's sort of a moot question. Would we have made the Super Bowl back in 2008 if Brady doesn't get hurt? Yeah, probably. But not a lot of good will happen if one of our best players gets injured again.

On paper, it's hard to argue with this being the team to beat in the AFC. It wasn't ready to win the title last year.

It came a play or two short because it was a player or two short. We have those guys now - on both sides.

The vibe I get from this team and its leaders in the early going is of an even increased focus and resolve. It's hard to imagine this team, Tom Brady or Bill Belichick being even more on a mission than they have been over the last 5 years - but they are. At times, the obsession, the mission has felt so strong - for fans and players - that there is a nervous energy, an anxiety. I don't sense that at all anymore. I've never been this excited about the mental makeup of a team before it even hit training camp.

From the attendance thus far, guys being around Foxboro, to what guys are saying, to how they are bouncing back from the SB loss, to the makeup of the rookies we brought in...last season, this team had a taste of the success that comes from listening to Coach Belichick and buying into his program - and came away even hungrier this year.

I expect big things from this team.

 

[patfanken]

This is a dumb thread and only goes to show how desperate we've become for any semblance of Pats talk. The fact that my determination to avoid this thread only lasted less than 2 weeks, only goes to show how desperate we are.

BOTTOM LINE: We have exactly the same chance we've had for the last decade. If things break well for us, we are good enough to be there. If they don't, we won't. The team that plays the best in the playoffs and gets the breaks will win it all. What happens in the regular season, other than qualifying for the playoffs, has proven to be rather meaningless if the last few years have any meaning.

Its been a long time since a team that was dominant in the regular season, managed to win it all.

 

[wizwor]

In June, I always KNOW the Pats will win it all. I don't want to analyze -- I'm a fan. Go Pats!

 

[Rob0729]

I just saw my prediction from last year and I had the Packers beating the Ravens in the Super Bowl. That tells you how much my prediction is worth. So I am not going to touch this prediction.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Having the rug pulled out from under you is starting to piss me off. I truly believe since 05 that there is always something that has prevented this team from collecting their 4th ring. Whether it be 1 play,mistake,series, crazy flag,weird turnover. Since 06 I can honestly point out 1 play that has been the difference. And from 01to 04 pretty much the same.

It all comes down to the defense. 17 points allowed isn't good enough. 21 points allowed isn't good enough as shown during the last 2 super bowls. It should be when it comes to our offense but it has been proven that it is not when they play an elite defense.. If our offense scores 17 then the defense has to give up 16 or less. If our offense only score 3, the defense has got to give up no more than 2. Pretty simple math. Hightower and Jones have got to be difference makers as well as the other draftees and key free agents. Until this defense is once again formidable and feared there will always be doubt surrounding this team in the playoffs at some point.

It's too hard to make these predictions without a sample of the draftees and talent through free agency.. I say no until I've seen more.

 

[QB12]

19-0 baby.

This is why Donte came back.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Having the rug pulled out from under you is starting to piss me off. I truly believe since 05 that there is always something that has prevented this team from collecting their 4th ring. Whether it be 1 play,mistake,series, crazy flag,weird turnover. Since 06 I can honestly point out 1 play that has been the difference. And from 01to 04 pretty much the same.

It all comes down to the defense. 17 points allowed isn't good enough. 21 points allowed isn't good enough as shown during the last 2 super bowls. It should be when it comes to our offense but it has been proven that it is not when they play an elite defense.. If our offense scores 17 then the defense has to give up 16 or less. If our offense only score 3, the defense has got to give up no more than 2. Pretty simple math. Hightower and Jones have got to be difference makers as well as the other draftees and key free agents. Until this defense is once again formidable and feared there will always be doubt surrounding this team in the playoffs at some point.

It's too hard to make these predictions without a sample of the draftees and talent through free agency.. I say no until I've seen more.

So the problem is the defense because the offense sucks?

Here's a unique concept......place "blame" on the unit that actually sucked.

It's always best to arrive at conclusions that accept the reality of human existence.

 

[Brady2Moss]

So the problem is the defense because the offense sucks?

Here's a unique concept......place "blame" on the unit that actually sucked.

It's always best to arrive at conclusions that accept the reality of human existence.

Are you still really saying our offense sucks and our defense played fine? Time of possession was 38 to 22 in favor of the giants. Against a good defense like the giants our offense isn't going to be able to muster up more than 17 points given only 22 minutes with the ball.. on top of being CONTINUALLY pinned within our 10 yard line. Get a clue the defense cost us the game Brady played good enough to win if he was the Giants QB and Eli was ours the Giants would have won by 5 touchdowns.

I cannot believe you still think this :bricks:

 

[BradyManny]

Patsfansinpittsburgh has a very simple view of the football world. If it's not in the box score, it doesn't mean anything.

We'll start winning Super Bowls again when we have a defense that plays complimentary football. That might happen to be this year.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Are you still really saying our offense sucks and our defense played fine? Time of possession was 38 to 22 in favor of the giants. Against a good defense like the giants our offense isn't going to be able to muster up more than 17 points given only 22 minutes with the ball.. on top of being CONTINUALLY pinned within our 10 yard line. Get a clue the defense cost us the game Brady played good enough to win if he was the Giants QB and Eli was ours the Giants would have won by 5 touchdowns.

I cannot believe you still think this :bricks:

Here's reality.

Since the first pigskin took flight, the reality of football is the single biggest determining factor of wins and losses is turnovers. If a team is minus 2 in turnovers, that team has around a 90% chance of losing.
If your team was minus 2 in turnovers AND surrendered 2 safety points, expectations should not be encouraging.
Except in rare cases, the offense is responsible for turnovers.

The main reason your team lost the Super Bowl was the fact that the most important offensive weapon was effectively non existant due to injury. It is reality that if any organization loses their best asset, they will not be as good.
Not to hurt your feelings, but the reality of reality is a severely injured Gronk meant your team was not as good going into the big game. As such, the "margin of error" was much lower.

A universal truth of human competition is the policy that one opponent must take when presented with advantage. The reason sayings have developed warning a participant about "letting the opponent hang around" and sage advice about "going for jugular" have universal truth.
If you have an opponent down, you must put them away. Despite dreadful odds associated with turnovers and a serious degrading of offensive proficiency.....your team was on the cusp of victory and saw it dropped.....make catch-game over.

You "can't believe" because you "wont see".

Believing in nonsense doesn't make it more so.

That's what you have to get over.

 

[BradyManny]

If your team was minus 2 in turnovers AND surrendered 2 safety points, expectations should not be encouraging.

How were the Patriots minus-2 in turnovers? Brady threw one interception. That was the only turnover in the game.

And you're making our point. The Giants put the ball on the ground twice, Eli Manning basically handed Jerod Mayo a pick-6 if he turns his head, and the defense did not capitalize on these plays.

The offense made a lot of great plays in that game. The defense didn't make any. The defense was not awful, and did not give up big plays other than the one, but it also did very little to help the team win. It pinned the offense back, destroying the time of possession battle as well in the process, and never turned the ball over.

You can blame Brady, Welker, Gronk or whoever you want all you want. But it's an absurdly simplistic view of the situation. The Patriots started three drives inside their own 10, eight of their nine drives were inside their own 21, with the other at 29. They averaged more yards per play than the Giants - they just had the ball less. If you don't think that's a factor in the outcome of the game, then you haven't been paying attention.

And I don't mean to derail this thread, but you're the one who brought your nonsense into it.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

How were the Patriots minus-2 in turnovers? Brady threw one interception. That was the only turnover in the game.

And you're making our point. The Giants put the ball on the ground twice, Eli Manning basically handed Jerod Mayo a pick-6 if he turns his head, and the defense did not capitalize on these plays.

The offense made a lot of great plays in that game. The defense didn't make any. The defense was not awful, and did not give up big plays other than the one, but it also did very little to help the team win. It pinned the offense back, destroying the time of possession battle as well in the process, and never turned the ball over.

You can blame Brady, Welker, Gronk or whoever you want all you want. But it's an absurdly simplistic view of the situation. The Patriots started three drives inside their own 10, eight of their nine drives were inside their own 21, with the other at 29. They averaged more yards per play than the Giants - they just had the ball less. If you don't think that's a factor in the outcome of the game, then you haven't been paying attention.

And I don't mean to derail this thread, but you're the one who brought your nonsense into it.

What's the effective difference between a safety and an interception?

2 additional points.:

That pretty much sums up the proficiency of evaluation and comprehension.

Although one must admit safeties, interceptions, and dropped passes in critical points of the game are "big". That's a good point.

As far as the rest of the blah,blah,blah......well...blah,blah,blah.

What's totally fascinating with the "field position" excuse is when the 2009/10 playoffs losses are evaluated.....the fact that 6 of 9 opponents scoring drives began already in field goal position means absolutely squat to the defense truther/birther crowd.

What other nonsense are you confusing yourself with........in a sophisticated manner, ofcourse?

 

[BradyManny]

What's the effective difference between a safety and an interception?

What's the effective difference between a punt and a turnover? What's the difference between a long interception and a punt?

If we're going to look at things with some subjectivity - as you are here by tallying the safety as a "turnover" - and disregard semantics, then that's when your argument will really fall apart. Your entire argument has been purely stat based (namely, the one - that the offense only put up 17 points to the Giants 21), with a complete disregard for any evaluation whatsoever. To suddenly allow interpretation of those stats is rather hypocritical. It's either a turnover or it's not.

But if we are going to analyze it and see that it was effectively a turnover, then we have to analyze the defense's play and see it was crippling the offense.

You cannot have it both ways.

What's totally fascinating with the "field position" excuse is when the 2009/10 playoffs losses are evaluated.....the fact that 6 of 9 opponents scoring drives began already in field goal position means absolutely squat to the defense truther/birther crowd.

What other nonsense are you confusing yourself with........in a sophisticated manner, ofcourse?

Has anyone argued that the offense wasn't terrible in the Ravens game? No, I don't think so. And now that's really off topic. What's your point? Does field position matter or does it not? Does it only matter when it supports your argument? I don't even know what you're saying here. But don't let me stop you from using your typical posting techniques of using straw men and moving the goalposts whenever confronted with any reasonable debate.

Imagine the offense and defense as passengers in a car on a road trip of several hundred miles, the two taking turns driving. The offense gets in and drives a couple hundred miles, but makes two wrong turns in the process, delaying itself from reaching its goal. The defense takes over and never turns on the ignition. The car never moves. It doesn't move backwards or forwards. It sits there for hours and hours as traffic passes by.

The car doesn't reach its destination in time. That about sums up what happened in Super Bowl 46. And assigning more blame to the offense is pretty silly, to me.

The defense is the unit that needs the most fixing. It's improvement is the key to our future success. We have begun that process - and you can argue the process begun last year and was showing dividends late in the season.

 

[PatsSox363804]

What's the effective difference between a safety and an interception?

2 additional points.:

That pretty much sums up the proficiency of evaluation and comprehension.

Although one must admit safeties, interceptions, and dropped passes in critical points of the game are "big". That's a good point.

As far as the rest of the blah,blah,blah......well...blah,blah,blah.

What's totally fascinating with the "field position" excuse is when the 2009/10 playoffs losses are evaluated.....the fact that 6 of 9 opponents scoring drives began already in field goal position means absolutely squat to the defense truther/birther crowd.

What other nonsense are you confusing yourself with........in a sophisticated manner, ofcourse?

You're kidding right? When you put it like that sure but if we look deeper we can all agree that the Baltimore game was an offensive nightmare and a total team dry heave, right? We'll say the offense deserves the lions share of the blame and 4 of the 6 you cite are in that game.

In the Jets game one was off an onside kick at the end of the game and the other was Chung faking the punt.

Superbowl 46 was a total team loss. The offense blew several chances and made some mistakes but for a stretch played brilliantly. The defense played consistent in that they kept giving up yards and got bailed out on a few occasions by penalties (especially the holding Wilfork call) and you know what else? You know how many drives the Giants got into NE territory? ALL OF THEM. Not once did the defense get off the field before the Giants crossed the 50, and that includes drives that started on the 12 and the 8. Its amazing that given all of that we still should have won the damn game.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

What's the effective difference between a punt and a turnover? What's the difference between a long interception and a punt?

If we're going to look at things with some subjectivity - as you are here by tallying the safety as a "turnover" - and disregard semantics, then that's when your argument will really fall apart. Your entire argument has been purely stat based (namely, the one - that the offense only put up 17 points to the Giants 21), with a complete disregard for any evaluation whatsoever. To suddenly allow interpretation of those stats is rather hypocritical. It's either a turnover or it's not.

But if we are going to analyze it and see that it was effectively a turnover, then we have to analyze the defense's play and see it was crippling the offense.

You cannot have it both ways.



Has anyone argued that the offense wasn't terrible in the Ravens game? No, I don't think so. And now that's really off topic. What's your point? Does field position matter or does it not? Does it only matter when it supports your argument? I don't even know what you're saying here. But don't let me stop you from using your typical posting techniques of using straw men and moving the goalposts whenever confronted with any reasonable debate.

Imagine the offense and defense as passengers in a car on a road trip of several hundred miles, the two taking turns driving. The offense gets in and drives a couple hundred miles, but makes two wrong turns in the process, delaying itself from reaching its goal. The defense takes over and never turns on the ignition. The car never moves. It doesn't move backwards or forwards. It sits there for hours and hours as traffic passes by.

The car doesn't reach its destination in time. That about sums up what happened in Super Bowl 46. And assigning more blame to the offense is pretty silly, to me.

The defense is the unit that needs the most fixing. It's improvement is the key to our future success. We have begun that process - and you can argue the process begun last year and was showing dividends late in the season.

Yeah

A punt is just like an interception or safety.

That's why it's standard Belichikean stategary to punt on first down at the Patriots six early in the game.........but only if the Patriots have the honor of spotting the opponent two points.

Thanks for intellectual insight. Need to go back to the film vault and see all the times that strategary has been used.

Call when you can get ONE way.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

You're kidding right? When you put it like that sure but if we look deeper we can all agree that the Baltimore game was an offensive nightmare and a total team dry heave, right? We'll say the offense deserves the lions share of the blame and 4 of the 6 you cite are in that game.

In the Jets game one was off an onside kick at the end of the game and the other was Chung faking the punt.

Superbowl 46 was a total team loss. The offense blew several chances and made some mistakes but for a stretch played brilliantly. The defense played consistent in that they kept giving up yards and got bailed out on a few occasions by penalties (especially the holding Wilfork call) and you know what else? You know how many drives the Giants got into NE territory? ALL OF THEM. Not once did the defense get off the field before the Giants crossed the 50, and that includes drives that started on the 12 and the 8. Its amazing that given all of that we still should have won the damn game.

This "conversation" started @ #126 from some dude named "Patriot Missle".

Perhaps ya might read the "logic" of that post.

See if you agree.

That's the first step.

A healthy Gronk means a healthy 2-3 score win in SB XLVI. It's as simple as that. Do you honestly believe that Blackburn gets the INT if Gronk is healthy?

Welker makes the catch...game over. Brady, under zero duress, makes a better throw....game over.

Late in the game, the offense goes "three and out".

So you're telling pfip that this was all a function of field position?

What was a more critical factor in SB XLVI?

A) The ankle injury that effectively eliminated Gronk
B) Field position

Compare the Giants offensive performance in the Super Bowl to the NFCCG.

Against the Giants, an "elite", "top ranked", "#1" SF produced:

Zero forced turnovers.
Over 33 minutes TOP in regulation
Over 300 yards of offense surrendered in regulation.
When faced with a critical stop late in the game on 3rd and 15, SF puked up a 17 yard TD pass to tie the game and allow a loss in OT.

Was that "great" defense? Is that "clutch"? Is that acceptable because SF really is an elite defense?

 

[BradyManny]

Compare the Giants offensive performance in the Super Bowl to the NFCCG.

Against the Giants, an "elite", "top ranked", "#1" SF produced:

Zero forced turnovers.
Over 33 minutes TOP in regulation
Over 300 yards of offense surrendered in regulation.
When faced with a critical stop late in the game on 3rd and 15, SF puked up a 17 yard TD pass to tie the game and allow a loss in OT.

Was that "great" defense? Is that "clutch"? Is that acceptable because SF really is an elite defense?

The Niners also forced 9 punts from the Giants and one failed fourth down (resulting in 10 failed drives) - all nine were booted from the Giants' own territory, a feat the Patriots never managed to accomplish.

In SB 46, discounting the Giants kneeldown to end the first half, they had only eight possessions, two went for touchdowns, two went for field goals, and four were punts, three of those pinning us inside our own 10 yard line.

So in short, against the Patriots, the Giants scored on 50% of their drives, and punted from the Patriots side of the field the other 50%.

Against the Niners, the Giants scored on 20% of their drives, and punted from their own side of the field the rest of the time.

Great comparison though, otherwise!

EDIT: Looking closer - no game kills your point more than the NFCCG. Consider (excluding kneeldowns)

Giants offensive production
NFCCG vs Niners: 15 possessions, 20 points, 352 yards
Points per possession: 1.33
Yards per possession: 23

SB46 vs Patriots: 8 possessions, 21 points, 396 yards
Points per possession: 2.63
Yards per possession: 50

The Giants were TWICE AS EFFECTIVE against the Patriots defense as they were the Niners.

No two games better encapsulate your inability to grasp the correlation between offense and defense as these two games, and show your shortsightedness at looking at the bottom line with disregard to evaluation and reason, so thank you for bringing this fact to light.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

The Niners also forced 9 punts from the Giants and one failed fourth down (resulting in 10 failed drives) - all nine were booted from the Giants' own territory, a feat the Patriots never managed to accomplish.

In SB 46, discounting the Giants kneeldown to end the first half, they had only eight possessions, two went for touchdowns, two went for field goals, and four were punts, three of those pinning us inside our own 10 yard line.

So in short, against the Patriots, the Giants scored on 50% of their drives, and punted from the Patriots side of the field the other 50%.

Against the Niners, the Giants scored on 20% of their drives, and punted from their own side of the field the rest of the time.

Great comparison though, otherwise!

EDIT: Looking closer - no game kills your point more than the NFCCG. Consider (excluding kneeldowns)

Giants offensive production
NFCCG vs Niners: 15 possessions, 20 points, 352 yards
Points per possession: 1.33
Yards per possession: 23

SB46 vs Patriots: 8 possessions, 21 points, 396 yards
Points per possession: 2.63
Yards per possession: 50

The Giants were TWICE AS EFFECTIVE against the Patriots defense as they were the Niners.

No two games better encapsulate your inability to grasp the correlation between offense and defense as these two games, and show your shortsightedness at looking at the bottom line with disregard to evaluation and reason, so thank you for bringing this fact to light.

Thanks for proving patsfaninpittsburgh's point exactly.

Yeah

And they forced zero turnovers.

And with the game on the line.....that defense puked up a 17 yard TD pass that sent the game into O/T and a loss.

Textbook example of how a clown "thinks". Once the clown deludes himself, torture "facts" to fit the clown's "conclusion".

Once the clown's origional "facts" are exposed as fraud......just come up with new "facts".

Make sure the new "facts" are even more clueless than the origional "facts".

Makin' Captain Kangaroo proud one post at a time.

 

[BradyManny]

Thanks for proving patsfaninpittsburgh's point exactly.

Yeah

And they forced zero turnovers.

And with the game on the line.....that defense puked up a 17 yard TD pass that sent the game into O/T and a loss.

Textbook example of how a clown "thinks". Once the clown deludes himself, torture "facts" to fit the clown's "conclusion".

Once the clown's origional "facts" are exposed as fraud......just come up with new "facts".

Make sure the new "facts" are even more clueless than the origional "facts".

Makin' Captain Kangaroo proud one post at a time.