Are The Patriots Too Dependent On Brady?

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Here's a video of Brady throwing the interception in the Super Bowl:
VIDEO: Tom Brady And Rob Gronkowski Try For Their Own Helmet Catch, Chase Blackburn Makes Interception - SBNation.com

I don't know how anyone can watch that and claim with a straight face that Brady was under "zero duress."

And the Steelers game was "due" to the Steelers defense.

Ummmmm.......

Considering the fact that the discussion was on the AFCCG against Baltimore, I'm not quite sure what a video in the Super Bowl means.......but thanks for link.....



BTW, you might want to understand that a healthy Gronk makes that a big play and the CORRECT conclusion that should be drawn is the need to minimize the loss of one TE in a two TE based offense.

This is so obvious, the "Czar" wrote a post Super Bowl article about it.

I bet that's why Fells was the first signing this year and why BB wanted him in 2010.

What say you exactly?

Now...onto the 2011 game in Pittsburgh......

Let's take a look at history.

In 1967, at the prelude to war, the various Arab nations were extremely confident of victory for they has superiority in material, manpower, and a dominant geopolitical position.

What Isreal had going for it was superior training, leadership, and stategy. Based on these factors, the IAF initiated hostilities with a crushing pre-emptive strike that crippled their opponent's air forces.

This was combined with a daring armoured offensive that allowed the materially inferior IDF to win a historic conflict over massively bigger opponent inside a week.

Following this, Egypt and Isreal took different paths. Egypt studied this in depth and worked on the solutions to defeat. Isreal was blinded by victory.

By the time 1973 and Yom Kippur rolled around, Egypt was much better prepared, organized, and upgraded while Isreal held their opponents in such contempt, they refused to believe they capable of serious action.

Isreal actually had sufficient warning of an attack but simply brushed it off. As a result, the state barely survived because their underestimation led to near defeat losses as a result of the Egyptian ground air defense system and guided anti-tank weapons.

To their credit, the Isrealis studied the 1973 debacle in depth. The result was a much different military in 1982 that took on the Syrians in 1982 in Lebanon. Through the use of newly developed systems and training (see F-15's and drones), the Isrealis hammered the Syrian air and ground forces that were stuck in the 1970's mindset.

What does this have to due with 2011 in Pittsburgh?

Since 2002, the Patriots have continually lit up the Steelers with the most heinous poundings being administered in "the 'burgh". The strategy of "spreading the out" was first displayed opening night 2002 but was actually an adaptation of the last week game the Steelers lost in 2001 in Cincy.

The staff studied that game in depth and used it as the basis for a decade.

The Steelers having the "elite" defense simply refused to acknowledge they could be lit up so easy so they used excuses like "Spygate" and continued on with "do what we do".

Following the 2011 debacle, the Steeler staff followed the path of Egypt-1967, and Isreal-1973 and studied the problem.

There were several articles in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette about Lebeau spending hours studying the problem and devising solutions.

Furthermore, an even cursory review of the previous Steeler games showed the offense much more willing to "dink and dunk" vs the down field mentality.

What did we have on our side?

Leaks of TB saying that "he has this one".

As a result, the game in 2011 was played with Pittsburgh ready with new offensive and defensive strategies and us "having this one".

The game was decided because the defense was not ready for the Steelers to "take what was given" and an offense thinking they would play their standard zone/ zone blitz packages.

We lost. The reality is that was probably the worst coaching exercise in the Belichick era.

Where does this leave us?

Well for one, considering the dung the defense took following the loss, the reality was they gave up 13 points for the final three quarters and actually set up the first TD with a Guyton INT. This netted 6 effective points for three quarters.

A further review of the Steelers offense through the balance of the year shows defenses adjusting nicely and a marked drop in offensive proficiency. Many writers have wondered why Mike Wallace "disappeared".

That's why.

The defense is more academic.

A poster says the Pats need to "run,run,run...." because we "struggled" against Pittsburgh in 2011.

Numbnuts is entitled to his opinion but before acceptance he should exactly explain How going one dimensional "run,run,run" against a top 10 rush defense solves the problem.

Maybe the problem is solved by getting players that can beat man coverage and solve the problem through the passing game.

By this off season's actions, I wonder what BB thinks is the solution?

 

[lurker1965]

Are Pats too dependent on Brady? - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Could not agree more with the sentiments of this topic and of the analyst panel on this video which has been talked about for some time now.

It's time for a more pronounced running game,time to take the load off of Brady and a little better defense would be nice as well.


Sure we all want to see those high scoring games and tons of passes and 5,000 yards again,but reality says that it's best to become less pass and increase rushing workload.

It's time for Brady to relax just a little and let the guys behind him become more a factor in games or Brady may not make it 3 or 4 more years,he will eventually get worn down.

Name a current team that is RB based or defense based that consistently makes the playoffs.

I won't even hold you to the Patriots standard of in 5 SBs, winning 3. In 6 AFCCs and in the playoffs all but 2 years this century. (2000 was the last year of last century.)

I'd take Pittsburgh level success. (Pittsburgh only became consistently good when they started being a pass first with Roethlesberger.)

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Name a current team that is RB based or defense based that consistently makes the playoffs.

I won't even hold you to the Patriots standard of in 5 SBs, winning 3. In 6 AFCCs and in the playoffs all but 2 years this century. (2000 was the last year of last century.)

I'd take Pittsburgh level success. (Pittsburgh only became consistently good when they started being a pass first with Roethlesberger.)

No one is saying the pats should become "run-based". With gronk, welker, lloyd and hernandez that would be ludicrous. However the pats definitely need a makor improvement in their running game.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I think a couple things come into play when bringing up this topic:

...

I could be wrong, but I think that Brady's abilities and longevity are being played to a strength here.

Well said. Not much to add to that. If ya got the greatest, play the greatest and let tomorrow take care of itself. Thanks.

 

[Mystery Pats Fan]

I believe that ALL teams, not just the Patriots, become very dependent on their quarterback if he is one of the, alleged, elite ones of the time that they are playing.

Peyton Manning would be the first one to come to mind after Brady, for example.

We have seen, on many occasions over the years how a team that has been a perennial contender, or winner, falls to pieces once that elite quarterback retires.

I do not believe this will happen to the Patriots as I believe they have a potentially outstanding quarterback on the roster who will replace Brady once he opts to retire, which may be sooner than many expect, especially if he wins SB ring #4 in the next season, or two.

Ryan Mallett, IMO, is the one. How can I say this, you ask? Dont know, just a gut feeling and from reading and seeing what he did in college. His size, too, is a factor. Hopefully the Pats will let this kid get into games much quicker than they did with Hoyer. Far too many games when the Pats were in huge command, they let Brady stay in way beyond the time he should have been yanked.

My guess is that Brady did not want to come out. He needs to come out of games much sooner now to protect his body while at the same time letting his backup have more opportunities to get NFL game experience.

The experience they get in pre season games is useless as in most cases the backups end up playing against backups and not starters.

I would, for example, in a couple of pre season games start the backup quarterback with the first team offensive lineup against opposing teams starting defensive units. The opponent could do the same if they wanted to.

That, IMO, would give a better picture of the backups ability to play against "real" NFL players, not backups and scrubs.

I can think back to how great the backup Qbs looked in pre season and then fizzled in the regular season. Two that come to mind right away are Michael Bishop and Rohan Davey. And, there have been more.

 

[Ring 6]

I believe that ALL teams, not just the Patriots, become very dependent on their quarterback if he is one of the, alleged, elite ones of the time that they are playing.

Peyton Manning would be the first one to come to mind after Brady, for example.

We have seen, on many occasions over the years how a team that has been a perennial contender, or winner, falls to pieces once that elite quarterback retires.

I do not believe this will happen to the Patriots as I believe they have a potentially outstanding quarterback on the roster who will replace Brady once he opts to retire, which may be sooner than many expect, especially if he wins SB ring #4 in the next season, or two.

Ryan Mallett, IMO, is the one. How can I say this, you ask? Dont know, just a gut feeling and from reading and seeing what he did in college. His size, too, is a factor. Hopefully the Pats will let this kid get into games much quicker than they did with Hoyer. Far too many games when the Pats were in huge command, they let Brady stay in way beyond the time he should have been yanked.

My guess is that Brady did not want to come out. He needs to come out of games much sooner now to protect his body while at the same time letting his backup have more opportunities to get NFL game experience.

The experience they get in pre season games is useless as in most cases the backups end up playing against backups and not starters.

I would, for example, in a couple of pre season games start the backup quarterback with the first team offensive lineup against opposing teams starting defensive units. The opponent could do the same if they wanted to.

That, IMO, would give a better picture of the backups ability to play against "real" NFL players, not backups and scrubs.

I can think back to how great the backup Qbs looked in pre season and then fizzled in the regular season. Two that come to mind right away are Michael Bishop and Rohan Davey. And, there have been more.

Yes, every team puts a heavy burden on their best players, that is what sports is about.
Not sure why it is surprising that BB decides to place winning or losing most heavily in the hands of the GOAT QB. Also not sure why any Pat fan would want it any other way.
As far as your commentary on backups, I think that it would give US more infor about the backups to see more of them, but I think BB has seen plenty of them especially in practice. I'm more concerned with keeping Brady sharp than getting the backups reps in his place in preseason games or blowouts.