Pats D still Number 2 in AFC points against

[Ring 6]

No currently 18 teams have an above .500 record. Thats not half.

Come on. You are going to argue the NFL teams combined go .500?
Oh and 6 of the patriots 11 opponents are over 500 too

 

[deroc5050]

Come on. You are going to argue the NFL teams combined go .500?
Oh and 6 of the patriots 11 opponents are over 500 too

Well yeah when you have a team that is 0-11 and 1-10 that leaves a lot of extra wins on the table. Just because you have a 0-11 team doesn't reciprocate an 11-0 team.

7 games they faced a team that was below .500 and 5 games played or to be played have a 6-5 record at the moment. Take out Seattle, Denver and Miami and thats like 13 games hovering near .500 or below.

 

[Ring 6]

Well yeah when you have a team that is 0-11 and 1-10 that leaves a lot of extra wins on the table. Just because you have a 0-11 team doesn't reciprocate an 11-0 team.

7 games they faced a team that was below .500 and 5 games played or to be played have a 6-5 record at the moment. Take out Seattle, Denver and Miami and thats like 13 games hovering near .500 or below.

6 of 11 are over .500. Not sure what all that other mess you typed is supposed to mean.
But in any event saying OMG half their schedule could have losing records how bad is that just shows you don't get it.

 

[deroc5050]

6 of 11 are over .500. Not sure what all that other mess you typed is supposed to mean.
But in any event saying OMG half their schedule could have losing records how bad is that just shows you don't get it.

simplify: Buffalo 6-5 Ravens 6-5 Steelers 6-5 Texans 6-5 so thats 5 games against teams that are about .500

Below .500 Arizona, Cleveland, Cinci, 49'ers, Rams, the Jets 2x Thats 7 games with teams below .500

Denver, Miami and Seattle are 7-4 or 7-3-1.

By the end of 2016 there is a solid chance that more than 50% of the teams we faced will end up .500 or below. Meaning 9 teams will be .500 or worse. And a good chance the best team we play will be 11-5 and maybe even 10-6.

With that said potential quality wins:
Baltimore at home
@Denver remains to be played
Seattle was a loss
@Miami remains to be played

The toughest part of our schedule is coming up.

Our most impressive win this year is probably beating Pittsburg @Pitt while they played a back up QB.

We dont play the Giants , Redskins, Dallas, Minnesota, Detroit, KC, Oakland, Atlanta, etc.

Thats a relatively weak schedule. No real big time match ups. I know they can only play who is on their schedule but its how they are winning these games that has me questioning if they are good enough to go all the way. My hopes are fading as the season goes on.

 

[supafly]

Im done we won't know until the playoffs. My eyes tell me they are just another good team. Dallas, New England, Seattle, Oakland, Giants, Denver.. they all have weaknesses.

This is probably what it all comes down to, in terms of being in the mix with other teams who are doing well this year. As we've seen, stats etc don't mean anything. It's all about health, matchups and who gets hot at the right time. They all have pluses and minuses.

 

[slash83]

simplify: Buffalo 6-5 Ravens 6-5 Steelers 6-5 Texans 6-5 so thats 5 games against teams that are about .500

Below .500 Arizona, Cleveland, Cinci, 49'ers, Rams, the Jets 2x Thats 7 games with teams below .500

Denver, Miami and Seattle are 7-4 or 7-3-1.

By the end of 2016 there is a solid chance that more than 50% of the teams we faced will end up .500 or below. Meaning 9 teams will be .500 or worse. And a good chance the best team we play will be 11-5 and maybe even 10-6.

With that said potential quality wins:
Baltimore at home
@Denver remains to be played
Seattle was a loss
@Miami remains to be played

The toughest part of our schedule is coming up.

Our most impressive win this year is probably beating Pittsburg @Pitt while they played a back up QB.

We dont play the Giants , Redskins, Dallas, Minnesota, Detroit, KC, Oakland, Atlanta, etc.

Thats a relatively weak schedule. No real big time match ups. I know they can only play who is on their schedule but its how they are winning these games that has me questioning if they are good enough to go all the way. My hopes are fading as the season goes on.

You should just stop watching.

 

[1960Pats]

Another good defensive game. 17 points 2 takeaways mamy key stops in a day the offense was bad.

The Jets game was a perfect example of what you've been talking about in this thread.

 

[Uptown]

Why Pats can still win SB 51 despite underachieving defense via NESN (couldn't get the link)..



The Patriots’ defense certainly isn’t good nor is it atrocious, and it won’t stop New England from winning a Super Bowl despite the unit realistically ranging somewhere between “eh” and “meh.”

The Patriots rank third in Football Outsiders’ offensive DVOA and 21st in defensive DVOA after their Week 11 win over the New York Jets. Let’s look at where other top teams rank in offensive and defensive DVOA, respectively:

Atlanta Falcons: 2nd/24th
Dallas Cowboys: 1st/27th
Seattle Seahawks: 11th/4th
Pittsburgh Steelers: 9th/11th
Oakland Raiders: 5th/26th
Kansas City Chiefs: 15th/13th
Miami Dolphins: 13th/8th
Washington Redskins: 6th/25th
Baltimore Ravens: 30th/1st
New York Giants: 18th/7th
Denver Broncos: 24th/2nd
Minnesota Vikings: 25th/6th
Tampa Bay Buccaneers: 17th/12th
Detroit Lions: 14th/31st
Houston Texans: 31st/14th

The Seahawks and Steelers are the most well-balanced good teams in the NFL. The Steelers might not even make the playoffs, and the Seahawks lost 14-5 to the Buccaneers on Sunday, so, let’s just say they have their own issues. The Patriots laid a similar egg in Week 4 when they had a rookie quarterback facing surgery on an injured thumb. The Seahawks had no such excuse.

For all the concerns about the Raiders, Cowboys and Broncos, those teams are less balanced than the Patriots with an even more glaring weakness. There’s a reason the Patriots, despite their issues, are considered the best among many deeply flawed squads.

Despite the Patriots’ No. 21 ranking in defensive DVOA, the unit is a bit of an enigma. They rank third in points allowed per game at 17.9 but 14th in yards allowed per game. Many believe the Patriots only are allowing so few points because of the cruddy offenses they’ve faced. That isn’t necessarily true. The Patriots are allowing, on average, 3.5 points per game fewer than their 2016 opponents in games not against New England. Take out the Patriots’ win over the Steelers, since QB Ben Roethlisberger wasn’t playing, and that number still is three points per game fewer.

On the other hand, New England is allowing an average of 28.5 yards per game more than their 2016 opponents in games not against the Patriots.

The Patriots don’t like to describe themselves as a bend but don’t break defense, but that’s exactly what they are. They allow long drives, don’t pass the ever-popular “eye test” but do a solid job of keeping opposing offenses out of the end zone.

Fortunately for Patriots fans, there’s a fairly simple fix to the defense that could make them a better bet to win a Super Bowl: force more turnovers.

The Patriots, either by scheme, misfortune or a combination of the two, aren’t generating takeaways at their usual pace. If they begin to play more aggressively on defense, and if footballs start to bounce their way — as they should and as they started to in Week 11 against the Jets — those long drives become a bit shorter. Turnovers can mask some of the Patriots’ weaknesses in covering running backs, getting off the field on third down and rushing the passer.

The Patriots also have seen players begin to play at a higher level. Cornerbacks Logan Ryan and Eric Rowe have strung together two solid games, and newcomer Kyle Van Noy is helping the Patriots’ struggling pass rush. If underachieving players like Jabaal Sheard begin to play to their potential, the defense could be even better.

There’s talent on the Patriots’ defense, and the unit isn’t playing to the high standards set before the season. But it won’t necessarily cost them a fifth ring.

 

[1960Pats]

I didn't bring that game up.
And any use of one game to prove "better" or correlation of statistics is silly.
That game was a failure of the offense by the way.

That game was a failure by both offense and defense but it was more of an offensive failure for sure.

 

[1960Pats]

This is what I see when I read this thread. That's @AndyJohnson in the hoodie...

 

[1960Pats]

This has been a great thread.

I have one stat that I defy any of the stat-masters to disprove. In 100.00% of games played in football the team who scores the most points wins. There hasn't been a single exception in the history of the game.

Having said that, it's my personal belief that all phases of the game are defense. It's the job of players on offense and special teams, as well as on defense, to help keep the other team from scoring. If the kickoff team allows a run back they've played poor defense. Same for an offense that fumbles or gives up a pick. They have failed to provide defense for the team. It all works together.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Fortunately for Patriots fans, there’s a fairly simple fix to the defense that could make them a better bet to win a Super Bowl: force more turnovers.

There is an interesting trend going on with this team.

Year INTs
2010- 25
2011- 23
2012- 20
2013- 17
2014- 16
2015- 12
2016- 5

That is (most likely) 6 straight years we have seen a decrease in INTs from the year before.

With that said, with the NFL going to more of a short passing game and more WR friendly rules, I'm willing to bet the number of INTs league wide has also been steady in decline.

Generating more TOs would help but it's wishful thinking that INTs will dramatically go up.

 

[Keyser Söze]

Everyone remember who the defense apologists are come playoff time.

 

[Ring 6]

Everyone remember who the defense apologists are come playoff time.

So you can't wait for the patriots to lose in the playoffs so you can say posters were wrong?
Bizarre.

 

[qbno12]

If we end up in superbowl, I am pretty sure we'll play the giants. They are not perfect but they're good and still in the hunt. I hate to make it to SB and play giants again.

 

[Keyser Söze]

So you can't wait for the patriots to lose in the playoffs so you can say posters were wrong?
Bizarre.

Yeah because that's what I said right? Kudos. Our corners have no shot of holding up against a good offense. Butler simply isn't that good and he's the best we have.

 

[Ring 6]

Yeah because that's what I said right? Kudos. Our corners have no shot of holding up against a good offense. Butler simply isn't that good and he's the best we have.

Ok pal. How about we play the games.
Why a fan of a team could post you are hoping to lose so optimistic (in this case realistic actually) fans on a message board can be wrong and you can triumphantly come back and tell those fans you were right and the team sucks is amazing. And creepy.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Everyone remember who the defense apologists are come playoff time.

Whoever loses in the playoffs will most likely be because of their defense, Pats included.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Yeah because that's what I said right? Kudos. Our corners have no shot of holding up against a good offense. Butler simply isn't that good and he's the best we have.

Butler rated the second best CB behind Talib.

 

[Ring 6]

Whoever loses in the playoffs will most likely be because of their defense, Pats included.

Or their offense.
Or special teams.

But if its the Patriots there will be swarms of posters bragging that it was because of whatever reason they said it was going to be.
This board takes more enjoyment in complaining about losing that in winning. Hell it takes more enjoyment in complaining about how they won that in winning.
I do not think you can find another board out there where the majority of posters are complaining about how bad the team is after a road division win, and how bad the defense that gave up 17 points is.