Felger: 2016 Patriots not an "all-time Pats team", just winning during a "bad year for league"

[Rob0729]

No, you just keep going on about "the eyeball test" and how Dallas' defense was horrible. Don't tell us that the GB-Dal didn't factor into your "eyeball test" and I would bet you had no idea the Cowboys were #5 in points allowed.
Yeah, the Patriots haters are saying the same thing about our defense.

If your contention is that the overall quality of NFL play is significantly worse today versus 2 years ago (based solely on your own silly little "eyeball test") then that comment is too ridiculous to address.

LOL! Please tell me what stat measures a completely blown coverage. Can you please provide me stats that shows that TDs by receivers wide open because no was covering him is the same as it was ten years ago. You can't. There is no such stat. That is only done by the eyeball test.

This isn't baseball. Stats in football are not black and white to determine quality of play. In 2015, Tyrod Taylor had a higher QB rating than League MVP, Cam Newton. Are you telling me that Taylor had a better season? Because that stat says he did. That same season, Blake Bortles was tied for second in TDs. Does that mean he was a top QB in the League.

And the stats says the Pats were the best defense in the league at least according to scoring. They clearly weren't the best defense in the league especially earlier in the year. The haters go overboard with the fact the Pats faced bad competition to say it isn't a good defense, but they are right that stat is misleading to how good the defense is. It is still a very good defense. Just not the best.

And yes, the level of play is significantly worse than two years ago. In 2014, you had several truly elite teams like the Pats, Seahawks, and Broncos. Those three teams alone would have carved up this year's sets of teams. That year, the AFC North was a truly great division (there isn't one this year).

The level of play has consistently gone down since the new CBA has taken away all but 13 padded practices a season and true double sessions in the preseason. The addition of weekly Thursday night games have taken its toll. And the revolving door policy of at least 4-5 teams a season firing their head coaches is catching up to the quality of the coaching in this league. None of that is recorded in a stat.

 

[Rob0729]

Here's a list of 12+ regular season win teams over the past several years.

- In 2016, we had 1 team with 14 wins, 1 with 13 wins and 2 with 12 wins
- In 2015 we had 1 team with 15, 1 with 13 and 3 with 12. Who was the dominant team that year? The 15-1 Panthers? How'd that work out for them?
- In 2014, there were 5 teams with 12 wins (not a single team with more than that). Who's the dominant team when 5 teams all have 12 wins?
- In 2013, there were 2 with 13 wins and 3 with 12.
- In 2012, there were 2 with 13 and 2 with 12. - none of whom made the Super Bowl

Just not seeing anything this year that is ridiculously out of whack from previous years, and I won't care what DVOA says until they start assigning playoff seedings based on DVOA.
2016 NEP points allowed: 250
2015 Denver points allowed: 296

I sure am glad our coaches are more concerned with silly things like points allowed instead of the serious stuff like DVOA.

First, you ask for a stat that shows the quality of play this year is down. Then someone provides an advanced state that does and you dismiss it by providing an irrelevant stat to the quality of play in the League. How does the number of teams with 12 or more wins mean anything to the quality of play in the League?

I am not a fan of using stats in the NFL to judge quality of a team or advanced stats, but DVOA does measure points scored and points allowed. It just factors in things like quality of the opponent into the equation.

 

[Rob0729]

This post reinforces my noting the uselessness of these discussions. I'm not a fan of McCarthy, but only someone invested in an answer, rather than in real discussion, would argue against Reid or McCarthy as decent hires. McCarthy has shown he can win a SB with an elite QB, which the Patriots have, and Reid has shown that he can put a consistent playoff team on the field, and give them at least a chance at winning it all. Arguing against them as great coaches is one thing, but arguing against them as decent hires is crazy talk.

Jim Caldwell went to the Super Bowl with Peyton Manning. Would he be a decent hire?

Reid has been lucky enough that he has a GM that has built him one of the most talented defenses in the League. Reid consistently spits the bit in the playoffs with conservative and poor coaching decisions. Hell, but by the way you describe him, Marvin Lewis would be a decent hire. I am sorry, but a head coach who can't win in the playoffs is not a decent hire.

 

[Doctor DDS]

The narrative of this team can only be written after the Super Bowl and may even change again depending on what happens next year. If the Pats win the SB this team will compare favorably to their 2001 and 2014 versions and if they somehow won it again next year this team(s) will be compared to 2003 and 2004 dynasty teams as well. People forget all of the challenges, close wins and good fortune those teams had. Hindsight makes us forget the warts and only remember the successes. And when Felger and his ilk talk about not being tested due to a weak schedule I think this team is more able to handle it as this season is really just a continuation of the last several. They can recall the Baltimore and Seattle comebacks in 2014, the mistakes they made in Denver last season and so forth. If the Pats had played Oakland with Carr instead of Houston no one would have been saying how down the AFC was this year. (AFC actually had a winning record against the NFC).

 

[Nunchucks]

The state of the league is what it is. Who cares whether teams are better or worse from year to year. I'd say that maybe the Patriots were just that much better than the league and we get a warped perspective because of it.

The Patriots defense has been stellar these last few months. Corners are in tight coverage, the DL is holding up and stopping the run. I think the Patriots are being underrated in this game. I feel good about the defenses chances.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Since Polian whined about teams playing defense against his team in 2004, here are the best scoring defenses and their point totals (you will notice that it took a year for defenses to adjust at first, but then the totals dropped significantly but seem to have been creeping up ever since):

2004 Steelers 251
2005 Bears    202
2006 Ravens   201
2007 Colts    262
2008 Steelers 223
2009 Jets     236
2010 Steelers 232
2011 Steelers 227
2012 Seahawks 245
2013 Seahawks 231
2014 Seahawks 254
2015 Seahawks 277
2016 Patriots 250

 

[PatsBoy12]

The state of the league is what it is. Who cares whether teams are better or worse from year to year. I'd say that maybe the Patriots were just that much better than the league and we get a warped perspective because of it.

The Patriots defense has been stellar these last few months. Corners are in tight coverage, the DL is holding up and stopping the run. I think the Patriots are being underrated in this game. I feel good about the defenses chances.

Exactly. Down year or not, every team played in the same down league. I doubt Atlanta's fan base is commiserating over ATL being in the big game. But somehow it's being considered illegit for the Patriots by some.

On a somewhat rated note, there's actually a thread discussing a blowout vs a close game and which is preferred as though a win is guaranteed and only the margin is in question. Both strike me as a bit arrogant, no? Maybe entitled?

 

[cstjohn17]

Who cares? championships are forever. Felger can suck it. Another obvious and shallow attempt at trolling.

If they win they beat the teams in front of them just like every other champion. Lest us forget the 80s and 90s when every Superbowl was a blowout.

Part of Felger's problem is that being among the best ever is not good enough. Winning a 5th championship puts the Patriots in the most rarest of air, you can argue about who is the "best" but anytime you are in the argument the mission is accomplished. Among the best ever, still not good enough for Felger. Sad little man.

Hopefully as fans we can appreciate the level of excellence.

 

[PatsBoy12]

He actually admitted to a caller that he trolls deliberately yesterday. Mazz thought it was hilarious of course. He said it's what he's paid to do.

 

[XLIX]

So, to borrow a phrase from your playbook, you're just going to "ignore the stuff that doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions".

Yes I look at silly things likes wins and point scored.

 

[XLIX]

First, you ask for a stat that shows the quality of play this year is down. Then someone provides an advanced state that does and you dismiss it by providing an irrelevant stat to the quality of play in the League. How does the number of teams with 12 or more wins mean anything to the quality of play in the League?

DVOA does absolutely nothing if the sort. It's like saying "quality of play is down because there were fewer points scored."

There is nothing significantly different this year compared to the past several years, and I proved that. All the DVOA in the world changes nothing.

 

[Joey007]

The only thing I will agree with is that this is a year without any other juggernauts in the NFL really. But that's not our fault, as what matters is how you perform against your top competition.

This is definitely a far cry from, say the AFC in 2006 though.

 

[Rob0729]

DVOA does absolutely nothing if the sort. It's like saying "quality of play is down because there were fewer points scored."

There is nothing significantly different this year compared to the past several years, and I proved that. All the DVOA in the world changes nothing.

You proved nothing. You threw out a bunch of stats and your interpretation of them. That isn't proving anything. I mean you value number of teams of 12 or more wins (which is meaningless to judge the quality of play in the league if all the teams are worse this year) over DVOA which is a value added stat.

So you will not accept the eyeball test or stats that go against your argument. Of course you proved your point in your own mind because you are not debating the point. You are forcing your theory on anyone else and discounting the rest.

And the eyeball test is important. I will point to the weekly segment on Zo and Bertrand called "Why the Other Team is Stupid". In that segment, they point out all the stupid coaching decisions, ill timed penalties, and mental breakdowns by the Pats' opponent which most of them do not show up in the stat sheet any way.

I pointed out to Deus about the stupid moronic coaching decision by Andy Reid last year vs. the Pats in the playoffs where down by 10 with six minutes or so left he decided to mount a slow methodical drive. Statistically, it was successful because it ended in a TD, but according to the eyeball test it was a massive failure because he ate up all the clock and had no time to score a second time.

I can point out thousands of examples why the eyeball test is better than stats. Again, this isn't baseball. Football stats can be completely misleading. I can point to thousands examples like Philip Rivers was in the top 5 in terms of yards and TDs this season, but he clearly wasn't a top 5 QB. The Chargers were down a lot and he was forced to throw a lot in the second half and they had no running game that explains his stats which you need the eyeball test or at least a more detailed examination of the stats and situations to explain why he is so high in those stats.

 

[Rob0729]

Who cares? championships are forever. Felger can suck it. Another obvious and shallow attempt at trolling.

If they win they beat the teams in front of them just like every other champion. Lest us forget the 80s and 90s when every Superbowl was a blowout.

Part of Felger's problem is that being among the best ever is not good enough. Winning a 5th championship puts the Patriots in the most rarest of air, you can argue about who is the "best" but anytime you are in the argument the mission is accomplished. Among the best ever, still not good enough for Felger. Sad little man.

Hopefully as fans we can appreciate the level of excellence.

I agree it really doesn't mean much. You play in the season you play. Twenty years from now, no one is going to say either the Falcons or Pats are not legitimate Super Bowl winners because the League sucked. Most people don't even remember that from year to year.

In fairness to Felger (or better to explain what he is doing), he is just trying to find topics to generate lively discussion on the radio in what is a Super Bowl where the opponent doesn't generate many good storylines. Felger's schtick is being the contrarian. So of course, he would blow the argument the Pats haven't played anyone and the League sucks out of proportion. That is what he does.

 

[XLIX]

You proved nothing. You threw out a bunch of stats and your interpretation of them. That isn't proving anything. I mean you value number of teams of 12 or more wins (which is meaningless to judge the quality of play in the league if all the teams are worse this year) over DVOA which is a value added stat.

So you will not accept the eyeball test or stats that go against your argument. Of course you proved your point in your own mind because you are not debating the point. You are forcing your theory on anyone else and discounting the rest.

And the eyeball test is important. I will point to the weekly segment on Zo and Bertrand called "Why the Other Team is Stupid". In that segment, they point out all the stupid coaching decisions, ill timed penalties, and mental breakdowns by the Pats' opponent which most of them do not show up in the stat sheet any way.

I pointed out to Deus about the stupid moronic coaching decision by Andy Reid last year vs. the Pats in the playoffs where down by 10 with six minutes or so left he decided to mount a slow methodical drive. Statistically, it was successful because it ended in a TD, but according to the eyeball test it was a massive failure because he ate up all the clock and had no time to score a second time.

I can point out thousands of examples why the eyeball test is better than stats. Again, this isn't baseball. Football stats can be completely misleading. I can point to thousands examples like Philip Rivers was in the top 5 in terms of yards and TDs this season, but he clearly wasn't a top 5 QB. The Chargers were down a lot and he was forced to throw a lot in the second half and they had no running game that explains his stats which you need the eyeball test or at least a more detailed examination of the stats and situations to explain why he is so high in those stats.

"Eyeball test" is what someone says when they have nothing. Your "eyeball test" said the Cowboys have no defense. I pointed out they have the #5 defense. Your "eyeball test" said the Seahawks had a dominant defense 2 years ago, far better than NE this year. I pointed out the Patriots actually surrendered fewer points.

Keep believing what you want to believe. Doesn't bother me that you're wrong.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Please, no. In fact, please let's not talk about this dbag on this forum. Felger is a contrarian. His job is to stir up emotions. If he says it, it's #FAKENEWS.

I think even calling it fake news is misleading. It implies that what he writes would be somewhat believable.

Felger probably watches 3 games a year, knows next to nothing about football, and doesn't even believe anything he writes.

I can't believe people tune in to hear what this guy says. I would rather listen to anyone else's opinion, even if they don't watch football, because at least it would be honest, even if misguided and ignorant. Felger just says what he thinks will generate clicks.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I think Felger's missing a plot line. Brady just keeps getting smarter, more accurate, and more committed... but not younger. Pure physical prowess, never his strong suit, probably down from say 2007. When that happens and you're famous for a QB what else can you do? Oh I don't know, maybe have the league's best running attack and the league's best scoring defense.

Face of the team is the QB, so an idiot can say "well he isn't throwing 50 TDs anymore." But that's about it.

Win this game, and this will be one of my favorite Pats teams ever, if not my single favorite Pats team. Gronkless and not hopeless, that says something right there. A lot of role players in the receiving corps - Hogan's the star. No Bennett's the star. No it seems like Mitchell's the star.

Whoever's open is the star, that's something not every QB gets you.

And the running game makes play action a threat, which buys the time on many plays to get guys open in intermediary/downfield routes... and gives the Pats another way to beat you if it turns into a slugfest in the trenches.

Yeah I really want them to win this one... I don't get calling our most balanced team since Corey Dillon was here substandard.

 

[Rob0729]

"Eyeball test" is what someone says when they have nothing. Your "eyeball test" said the Cowboys have no defense. I pointed out they have the #5 defense. Your "eyeball test" said the Seahawks had a dominant defense 2 years ago, far better than NE this year. I pointed out the Patriots actually surrendered fewer points.

Keep believing what you want to believe. Doesn't bother me that you're wrong.

First, I said that the Cowboys defense was a significant weakness. Not that they had no defense. I think they have an average defense which is a significant weakness in the playoffs. I don't care what one stat says. The 2007 Patriots defense was near the top at the top in scoring defense, but that was because the offense got such a huge lead that opponents became one dimensional on offense which made it easier to defend (which happened this year to a lesser extent).

Second, I never said anything about the Seahawk's defense two years ago. You are putting words in my mouth (or my posts). I said the League was better in terms of talent that year. I also said that 2014 Seattle along with the 2014 Pats and 2014 Broncos were elite teams and better than any teams this year probably even the Patriots. I didn't say the defense specifically.

Third, who cares if the Pats surrendered fewer points than the 2014 Seahawks? It means nothing in a vacuum. What was the quality of offenses the 2014 Seahawks face and how does that compare to the quality the quality of the offenses the Pats faced this year.

Fourth, the 2014 Seahawks gave up 15.9 PPG vs. 15.6 PPG for the Pats. You are talking about 0.3 PPG or a total of less than a TD difference for the entire year (4.8 points for the entire year). How many points did each team give up on offense and special teams (which count to the points given up on defense and shows how this stat is overrated by you)? I bet the Seahawks gave up more on offense and special teams since the Pats had so few turnovers.

Again, another reason why you shallow and superficial analysis doesn't hold water. Thank you for pointing out an irrelevant fact.

Fifth, it is clear that it doesn't bother you that you are wrong either. Seriously, it is like I am playing chess and you are playing checkers. You don't know how bad you are losing this argument because you clearly cannot see beyond a few basic stats that mean nothing when comparing them year to year without any context.

 

[Rob0729]

Yes I look at silly things likes wins and point scored.

If you are trying to compare the quality of the play in this league this year vs. the quality of play in another year, you are right, you are wasting your time looking at silly things as wins and points scored. It is irrelevant. I just doesn't tell you anything in terms of the quality of play from year to year.

 

[50-yard-line]

See how you got all angry and wanted to disagree?

That's how they get the call-in lines to light up. Talk radio is a formula designed not to inform, but to cause aingst and outrage. True of political, sports - any talk radio.

Anger is like pornography. Lights up the same parts of your brain to engage you. Talk radio is anger porn.