Predict Patrots 2010 record

[Ring 6]

The points allowed, has a lot to do with the time an offense keeps the ball.

And the time the offense has the ball has a lot to do with the defense getting it back to them.

 

[BradyMossWelker]

The dolphins added the most overated reciever in football, and all of a sudden are better than the patriots.

 

[Rob0729]

So did the Jets. Your point?

The Jets could have easily been a 12 win team last year.

When did I say anything about the Jets? I am talking about the Patriots. But you can argue the Jets could have also been 7-9 if Indy and Cincy were playing for real.

 

[A.C Vegas]

When did I say anything about the Jets? I am talking about the Patriots. But you can argue the Jets could have also been 7-9 if Indy and Cincy were playing for real.

but according to most jets fans they were playing for real and that is why they are so great.

I said 14-2 and i am sticking by it and i don't care if i am wrong way too many people only seeing the drop offs and not the potental

 

[Mossachusetts]

How worse do you get than Joey Galloway?

David Patten.



8-8

 

[ctpatsfan77]

12-4 = delusional

This team has stayed the same for the most part [except for draft picks, but everyone has draft picks, so it evens out]. In the NFL, staying the same usually means you are not as good the following year.

JEST draft picks, 2009-2010: 7
League average draft picks, 2009-2010: 14
Patriots draft picks, 2009-2010: 24

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I'm going to go out on a limb, and predict the Patriots will somehow manage to go 1,000,000-0 this season.

 

[the wrothbroughterer]

I don't understand that comment. We allowed the 5th fewest points, so I don't know how we suck more than someone who allowed more but don't have the best coach?

Our coaching is better than most teams and is able to get better results out of bad players than others.

 

[Sivy]

16-0

First round bye

Beat ravens ( I would put the jets here, but we all know they aint making the playoffs)

Beat colts

Beat Giants in superbowl

 

[rbh24]

11-5

Will win division and then playoffs..who knows.

 

[Johnny D]

11-5 Hoping for better. Its just a matter of getting the offense firing on all cylinders with adequate protection.

 

[ensoul]

I know this has already been pointed out several times but the pats have a pretty tough schedule. I know they resigned a buch of their players from last year but last years team was average at best. We all watched the games in 09 so I am not going to go into the lack of pass rush, last of great corner play, lack of lack of original play calling on the offensive end (Welker in the slot or throw long to Moss with a little sprinkle of a run here and there) or the fact they did not win in away game until 12/20.

I know Brady will be better but who else is going to be better as well? Do we have enough linebackers to put pressure on the QB or cornes that can make enough plays? Correct me if I am wrong but isn't Belichick going to be the defensive coordinator as well. Obviously BB is a great defensive mind but I am the only one who is concerned he is spreading himself too thin?

I had high expectation in 07 when they got Moss. I had high exceptions in 08 then Brady was hurt in the first game and out for the season. I had high exceptions last year because we were getting Brady back. (The reality is that the pats were a better team in 08 than they were in 09)Well this year I have lower my expectations of this team. There are way too many uncertainties.

For me it is tough to look at the schedule and point out wins and losses because of the nature of football. Pats could beat the Colts then lose to the bills. This team is not in rebuilding mode but I think this is a transition year. When is all said and done I personally see a 9-7 record.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

5th is 5th. Its a stupid argument that 5th isnt 5th 'by watching games'. What did the 5th ranked Patriot D do that was worse than what other teams allowing more points did? Its not getting caught up in stats, its deaing with facts.
Points isnt a 'stat' to get caught up. Getting caught up in stats is exactly using other stats to downplay the one that matters, points.
Please show me all of the defenses that allowed more points but were more effective.

As much as I think the Pats defense sucks and the numbers lie, I can't think of any good defenses in the NFL that are good from top to bottom. It's rare to see a team that can stop the run, pass and really get after QB's. It's seems like every defense has a major flaw.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

The Patrots will be 0-0 and won't lose or win a game since there is no NFL team by that name

 

[Ring 6]

As much as I think the Pats defense sucks and the numbers lie, I can't think of any good defenses in the NFL that are good from top to bottom. It's rare to see a team that can stop the run, pass and really get after QB's. It's seems like every defense has a major flaw.

Well thats kind of the point.
Saying they dont deserve the ranking of 5th requires showing who below 5th deserves a higher ranking.
To say that the 5th ranked defense in 2009 isnt as good as the 15th ranked defense in 2003 is another story.
I don't know how a team that allowed more points is more deserving of being ranked higher than a team that allowed less?
Rankings COMPARE teams. Fans find flaws and assume that all the teams doing worse must actually be better because how could they have that flaw.
Example: Common perception on this board is that we 'couldnt get off the field on 3rd down' right?
Fact: we allowed the 6th fewest 3rd down conversions, 3 more than #1, and were 10th in conversion % (Better than 22 worse than 9 teams) yet the commentary on this board says we sucked on 3rd down.
I am fine with high standards. I want championships. But rankings of 5th, 6th, 10th, etc mean the team is GOOD. The changes needed from good to great are clearly much less than awful to great.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

To say that the 5th ranked defense in 2009 isnt as good as the 15th ranked defense in 2003 is another story.

Are you actually comparing them to someone or are you just saying this in general?

 

[Ring 6]

Are you actually comparing them to someone or are you just saying this in general?

In general.
What I mean is based on the most important yardstick they were the 5th best defense last year. That means 27 were worse, and thats not really arguable. Saying they didnt 'deserve' that rating is ignorant.
Whether defenses as a whole are better or worse could be debated.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

The Pats had like four losses where they were leading in the fourth quarter and collapsed last year. That had to do with a lot of things that might be corrected this season (young players getting more experience, a healthy Brady and Moss, guys like Burgess now understanding the system, a more agressive defense, etc.).

...

I just don't get the talk about our "Fourth Quarter Meltdowns" last year or "not being able to finish" last year.

Let's look at the games where we led going into the fourth quarter and lost (putting aside the Houston game because we were already in the playoffs, because it was the last game and because of the Welker injury).

@Jets and @Broncos. In each of those games we put up no points in the entire second half. So, we didn't all of a sudden fall apart at the end of the game.

@Colts. Another game where we put up no points in the Third Quarter (10 in the Fourth, after a great first half) and where Peyton caught on fire sometime late in the Third Quarter. We still almost won the game on "Fourth and Two." I attribute that loss to Manning and bad luck.

@Dolphins. This is the only game where we just seemed to fall apart at the end and I guess I could agree with you on it. But, still, it was the week after we were destroyed by the Saints, also on the road. Again, we only put up seven points in the third quarter and none in the fourth.

To me, the overlooked statistic is the difference between the first and second halves last year.

We outscored our opponents by 146 points in the first half (282--136) but were outscored by a point in the second half (146--145).

However, the D gave up virtually the same number of points in the first and second halves (136 vs. 145 over 16 games).

Now, here's how the offense scored by quarter last season:

First: 99 points
Second: 183 points
Third: 70 points
Fourth: 75 points.

To me, this isn't a matter of "melting down" or "not being able to finish," but part of a bigger problem where the Offense just didn't get the job done in the entire second half.

The D just couldn't sustain it's ability to offset that great a difference in offensive production between the first half and second half.

I'll grant that that indeed might have "felt like" we were melting down, but that's not what the numbers say was really going on.

If the Pats "couldn't finish" or "melted down," then the D would have done so as well, but the evidence is that it didn't.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

I just don't get the talk about our "Fourth Quarter Meltdowns" last year or "not being able to finish" last year.

People on this board hate it when Brady is blamed as one of the reasons for their "meltdowns". I don't know his exact words but Brady said that himself.

Anybody on this board that thought the Pats defense was going to step on opponents throats when it mattered most, needed to get their head checked. For the last several seasons, I've accepted what defense the Pats have - average at best and don't expect them to come up clutch.

However, what I didn't expect, was such a poor showing of the offense. Statistically, their ranking was good. But as your stats pointed out, they can't finish games. Specifically, I remember watching the Pats-Colts game and extremely impressed with the offense's execution in the first half and was thinking the Pats were going to embarrass the Colts at home. And just when you think the Pats were going to put the nail in the coffin in the second half, Maroney fumbles. It became the '06 title game all over again.

The Pats offense was terrible in the second half of the season.

 

[Ring 6]

I just don't get the talk about our "Fourth Quarter Meltdowns" last year or "not being able to finish" last year.

Let's look at the games where we led going into the fourth quarter and lost (putting aside the Houston game because we were already in the playoffs, because it was the last game and because of the Welker injury).

@Jets and @Broncos. In each of those games we put up no points in the entire second half. So, we didn't all of a sudden fall apart at the end of the game.

@Colts. Another game where we put up no points in the Third Quarter (10 in the Fourth, after a great first half) and where Peyton caught on fire sometime late in the Third Quarter. We still almost won the game on "Fourth and Two." I attribute that loss to Manning and bad luck.

@Dolphins. This is the only game where we just seemed to fall apart at the end and I guess I could agree with you on it. But, still, it was the week after we were destroyed by the Saints, also on the road. Again, we only put up seven points in the third quarter and none in the fourth.

To me, the overlooked statistic is the difference between the first and second halves last year.

We outscored our opponents by 146 points in the first half (282--136) but were outscored by a point in the second half (146--145).

However, the D gave up virtually the same number of points in the first and second halves (136 vs. 145 over 16 games).

Now, here's how the offense scored by quarter last season:

First: 99 points
Second: 183 points
Third: 70 points
Fourth: 75 points.

To me, this isn't a matter of "melting down" or "not being able to finish," but part of a bigger problem where the Offense just didn't get the job done in the entire second half.

The D just couldn't sustain it's ability to offset that great a difference in offensive production between the first half and second half.

I'll grant that that indeed might have "felt like" we were melting down, but that's not what the numbers say was really going on.

If the Pats "couldn't finish" or "melted down," then the D would have done so as well, but the evidence is that it didn't.

I dont know the exact numbers but I believe we were something like 66-1 under BB when leading after 3 quarters before last year, and we lost 4 times when leading after 3 quarters last year.
I don't know how you post changes the fact that we lost leads that we historically never did.