I Swear Guys This 2016 Team Is Special

[PatriotsPimp136]

Brady moves FAR better in the pocket than he did in 2010. That long pass to Edelman yesterday doesn't happen in 2010.

That's something he has worked on late in his career. I wish he had done it earlier in his career.

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

I was going to write exactly the same thing. That 2010 team seemed destined and we saw what happened. But yes, this team has a special vibe.

Agree, plus I don't think our running game in 2010 was as effective, and our core of players were still quite inexperienced

 

[PatriotsPimp136]

Anything could happen come the playoffs. Anything less than an afc championship appearance would be a huge dissapointment. They have to be in that game to give themselves a shot.

 

[VrabelJr]

I feel like this team is reminiscent of the 2010 team but BB been thru the sh*t so I feel very comfortable going forward, I know BB has the right game plans going forward this time round

2010 we overachieved. Our team was crazy young (Gronk, McCourty, and You-Know-Who were all rookies) and we looked exactly like what a young team looks like: peaks and valleys.

This year's team has a nice mix of youth and experience as well as 3 to 4 years of continuity at positional groups like the Secondary.

 

[Kontradiction]

The 2010 defensive unit was worse than this one. That one needed turnovers to stop opposing offenses. This one does not.

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

2010 we overachieved. Our team was crazy young (Gronk, McCourty, and You-Know-Who were all rookies) and we looked exactly like what a young team looks like: peaks and valleys.

This year's team has a nice mix of youth and experience as well as 3 to 4 years of continuity at positional groups like the Secondary.

Yes, looking back on it, it makes a lot of sense why we lost.

I'm curious....what do you guys feel is our most fluky postseason loss?

I'd probably go with the 2005 Divisional game in Denver, which saw Brady throw 4 interceptions in the fourth quarter, and Troy Brown fumbling a punt (!)

The 'Tyree Catch' is up there, because.....oh nevermind

 

[Bradyking12]

2010 we overachieved. Our team was crazy young (Gronk, McCourty, and You-Know-Who were all rookies) and we looked exactly like what a young team looks like: peaks and valleys.

This year's team has a nice mix of youth and experience as well as 3 to 4 years of continuity at positional groups like the Secondary.

I wish Moss would of gotten over himself, could of been the difference maker. On paper that 2010 team looked deadly

Gronk
Hernandez
Moss
Welker

 

[Bradyking12]

Yes, looking back on it, it makes a lot of sense why we lost.

I'm curious....what do you guys feel is our most fluky postseason loss?

I'd probably go with the 2005 Divisional game in Denver, which saw Brady throw 4 interceptions in the fourth quarter, and Troy Brown fumbling a punt (!)

The 'Tyree Catch' is up there, because.....oh nevermind

If we would of beat the Jets we win the Super Bowl imo

 

[Huckleberry1]

The 2010 defensive unit was worse than this one. That one needed turnovers to stop opposing offenses. This one does not.

It's not even close.

 

[mosslost]

what i worry is that maybe i'm too confident. i feel like no way in hell afc teams can beat us at home in foxboro. but i felt the same way about 2010 team.

The 2010 team probably had the easiest path to a Super Bowl just set up for them. Major Epic fail that year was.

 

[mosslost]

I hate to say it but I feel like Gronk is done. Just too beaten up to count on for a season. A bright shining star but to me he is like a retired player.

Interesting on the post game Brier didn't say that Gronk ius done, but he DID alude to the fact that BRADY might be ultimately better off without him, in the same way he was "ultimately" (not at first) better off without Randy.

He went to say that with Randy or Gronk BRADY definitely feels that there is someone to "feed" in the passing game. And in 2010 when Randy was gone, and this season (with all the other weapons he has) Brady goes all the way back to "whoever is open gets the ball". He said he plays like a point guard with the distribution. Gronk is the beast, but it was interesting opinion.

 

[billikens]

Interesting on the post game Brier didn't say that Gronk ius done, but he DID alude to the fact that BRADY might be ultimately better off without him, in the same way he was "ultimately" (not at first) better off without Randy.

He went to say that with Randy or Gronk BRADY definitely feels that there is someone to "feed" in the passing game. And in 2010 when Randy was gone, and this season (with all the other weapons he has) Brady goes all the way back to "whoever is open gets the ball". He said he plays like a point guard with the distribution. Gronk is the beast, but it was interesting opinion.

I have thought similar things. Just because Gronk is a unique and exceptional offensive player does not necessarily mean that the offensive unit he is on will be better than any other. I thought Brady would try to force it to Gronk (with defenses knowing that) the same he did to Moss. Remember after the Tyree catch? A 4-out with a sack and three bomb incompletions to Moss to end the game. Compare that to the end of the 2001 Superbowl.

Without Gronk, Brady still has a wealth of talent with a great receiving corps (Last year Floyd might have been starting at this point) and three backs with great hands as receivers. Add that fullback in, too. Yes, our tight end position is shallow, but honestly I think Brady being forced to dish it, and defenses not having Gronk to focus on, makes us a more dangerous offense in a funny way

 

[patfanken]

Please don't take this the wrong way but I would say you didn't see enough Pats teams or football yet so i think your not judging it as well as others can. It is not that you are not smart enough. Purely an experience thing. That 2010 team was good particularly on O but the running game was so-so and the D though good on paper had injuries and the secondary was suspect. The offense was championship caliber (though it was 1 dimensional pretty predictable with limited options that were good) but the D was not.
The team could have won in a VERY weak year... that year was not particularly weak for other teams.

The D and run game are both better this year as is the passing game for that matter even without Gronk. This run game has a more diverse back field and the OL has better run blockers. Also the backs are just plain better. Blount > BJGE and White/Lewis > Woodhead.

Also this D is better particularly at CB. We did not have a #1 CB in 2010. McCourty did well of course but he had holes in his game that i think started to get figured out near the end of 2010. Also our safety play was not near as good. Take it from me this D is better and more apt to not be scored on or let offenses stay on the field as long as they did in 2010 (or 2011 for that matter)

In the end, as we saw in 2007, NO team is invunerable the way the NFL playoffs are run. The "one and done" formula makes predicting the results impossible, because if ANY team can beat another on any given Sunday (Monday, Thursday, Saturday), then it is even more so in the playoffs where you are obviously going against better teams.

Thus, although I have no doubt that the Pats are the best team, ON PAPER, in the league. Top 5 offense, and depending on category, top 5 defense. They are relatively healthy, and have great chemistry. So they are certainly set up to have a great Superbowl run, as we have seen, bad bounces, bad calls, and great plays by over achieving opponents, can derail even the finest teams.

In the end the margin of victory is so small in the NFL, especially in the playoffs, that it is hard to charactize any loss as a "choke" necessarily. It would be terribly disappointing to see this team lose in the playoffs, but as good as it is, I would never be shocked now, mostly because I have seen so many "shocking" losses over the years. Eventually you come to realize just how HARD it is to win a championship and how much it should be savored.

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

2010 we overachieved. Our team was crazy young (Gronk, McCourty, and You-Know-Who were all rookies) and we looked exactly like what a young team looks like: peaks and valleys.

So true....makes me wonder how far Dallas can go in the postseason with two rookies spearheading their offense

 

[patfanken]

Interesting on the post game Brier didn't say that Gronk ius done, but he DID alude to the fact that BRADY might be ultimately better off without him, in the same way he was "ultimately" (not at first) better off without Randy.

He went to say that with Randy or Gronk BRADY definitely feels that there is someone to "feed" in the passing game. And in 2010 when Randy was gone, and this season (with all the other weapons he has) Brady goes all the way back to "whoever is open gets the ball". He said he plays like a point guard with the distribution. Gronk is the beast, but it was interesting opinion.

That is just ANOTHER dumb comment by Breer, and there are so many. NO team is "better off" without a talent like Gronk. He can just do too many things that makes your offense so much better. He a premium blocker that forces your defense to stay balanced. He's a premium receiver that forces you to pay special attention, thus opening opportuniies for others to make plays. He's a smart veratile player who can be used as an in line TE, slot receiver, and even outside receiver.

So no, Brady is NOT better off without Gronk. But that kind of comment from Breer is definitely not suroprising. If he ever tried to ask BB whether Brady is "better off" without Gronk, he'd either fall over laughing or give him "THE snort" and just move on to the next question. Yes it's THAT stupid

 

[Pessimistic Pete]

All this 2010 talk is going to make me nauseous, that year still makes no sense to me.

 

[The Gr8est]

This team is special. They play for each other and the team is balanced between O and D and ST. But we've seen teams this good lose the SB before. Any given Sunday and all that.

To keep from getting too exuberant, I just remind myself that Seattle came to Foxboro and beat us pretty handily-- and that was WITH Gronkowski on the field.

That was the first game after bye and after Collins was traded. We had just traded for Van Noy but he was too new to be helpful. The defense hadn't figured itself out yet.

That may have been the best the Seahawks have been, or will be, this season. They had all of their injured players back, they sprung a fresh CJ Prosise on us, and Russell Wilson looked like his old, healthy self.

 

[BobDigital]

One other thing worth noting is i think this team is ready and able to play 3 good games in a row against good teams. I don't see them having a let down game.

They will not play all 3 games in their "A" range but a "B" i think is the worst we will see. We will not see this team lay an egg. They will play well and at the worst be in a position to force the other team to beat them making good plays or with a lucky play. That is my feel on this team.

 

[gitgronked82]

i'm more confident this year than last. very similar feeling to 2014. we have more strengths, more ways to win. if one thing falters, it likely won't be enough to beat us

 

[patsfan13]

In the end, as we saw in 2007, NO team is invunerable the way the NFL playoffs are run. The "one and done" formula makes predicting the results impossible, because if ANY team can beat another on any given Sunday (Monday, Thursday, Saturday), then it is even more so in the playoffs where you are obviously going against better teams.

Thus, although I have no doubt that the Pats are the best team, ON PAPER, in the league. Top 5 offense, and depending on category, top 5 defense. They are relatively healthy, and have great chemistry. So they are certainly set up to have a great Superbowl run, as we have seen, bad bounces, bad calls, and great plays by over achieving opponents, can derail even the finest teams.

In the end the margin of victory is so small in the NFL, especially in the playoffs, that it is hard to charactize any loss as a "choke" necessarily. It would be terribly disappointing to see this team lose in the playoffs, but as good as it is, I would never be shocked now, mostly because I have seen so many "shocking" losses over the years. Eventually you come to realize just how HARD it is to win a championship and how much it should be savored.

THe 2007 team had some age and was struggling towards the end of the year in some games (Ravens). However if Brady doesn't' suffer high ankle sprain in the week before the SB the Pats win, but injuries are a part of Football.