2002 Patriots

[Nehalem]

5 takeaways from the 2002 season

- Troy browns 16 catches in week with against KC
- tom Brady led the league with 28 TD passes
- awful run defense, got gashed all season long
- down 27-6 in third quarter against Chicago, Brady took over the game and led us back for an incredible 33-30 comeback victory.
- Brady with another great 11 point comeback against Miami in week 17 with under 3 minutes to go

So pretty much Brady had more comebacks from down 9+ pts in the 2nd half in his 2nd year as a starter than Rodgers does in his entire career

 

[primetime]

In 2002, BB thought the addition of NT Steve Martin would allow them to switch to the 3-4 full time with Seymour spelling Martin on occasion. As others mentioned, Martin was horrible. He did too much talking on the sidelines and in the locker-room and didn't produce on the field. Belichick cut him in November.

As others mentioned, Milloy's play slipped significantly as well. No forced fumbles. No interceptions. No run stuffs. When your strong safety who is also supposed to be a leader doesn't produce, then that's a major issue.

Martin talked to the NY Post about the Patriots right before they played the Jets. He was cut, like, the next day.

None of the veteran signings that year worked out besides Fauria. Donald Hayes was terrible, Cam Cleeland didn't do anything, Victor Green was over the hill, Steve Martin was terrible, Rick Lyle and Bernard Holsey did nothing.

As for the rookies, Dan Graham didn't do much behind Fauria and Cleeland, Deion Branch slammed into the rookie wall hard and faded after a hot start, and David Givens couldn't catch a cold. I remember a late season game against the Jets were Givens dropped a bomb that went right through his hands and likely cost them the game.

Shows you not to judge a rookie class after one year, since that became the offensive core (and Jarvis Green an important piece) that won them the next two championships.

I remember the Chicago game, which ended very similarly to the Chargers playoff game in 2006, except it was Brady himself forcing out the interception rather than Troy Brown.

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

from The Education of a Coach:

Thank you! I have this book so it's probably where I recall the quote. All the source material blends together as years pass.

I love the quote because it reflects Belichick's humbleness. He knew he stole one. Yet he knew to steal one, it couldn't have been done without the kind of heart those guys played with.

In 2002, while BB thought the talent was slightly better, the heart wasn't quite the same. I think the ugly home loss to the Jetes with the division at stake epitomized that. He fixed that (and then some!) in 2003 by adding Rodney and Big Ted.

Regards,
Chris

 

[sarge]

I have never seen a run defense pushed around as much as that 02 team was.

This!!!!

It was the worst run defense I have seen in my entire life. Not the worst patriots run defense. The worst run defense period.

Never saw a worse run defense before that, never seen one sense that.

And the 2003 team was starting to look the same in the preseason till they signed Washington.

When Washington broke his leg I thought the season was over, but miraculously it wasn't.

Not sure why that run defense was so bad, but you really had to see it to believe it. We knew they were running it, and it never mattered.

Agree completely about the KC game laying the blueprint.

 

[mosi]

The end of that Chicago game is on the short list of craziest finishes. The twice-bobbled pick of Brady turned incomplete, the QB sneak on 4th-and-THREE, the toe drag on Patten's game winner...to close out the 21pt comeback. A forgotten gem.

Regards,
Chris

As crazy as 2002 was, it was fun to watch. The first game against Pitt was amazing and still remains one of my favorite.

 

[brdmaverick]

I'm going to sound like Trent Dilfer but the reality is that the 2002 team just wasn't that good.

What was good is that they had some young talent (Branch, Givens, Graham) that would become key pieces to success later on.

But let's be real, the defense was terrible that season. They ended at 9-7 but it could have been far worse. There were plenty of wins that could have easily have been losses (at CHI, vs MIA, vs KC) but most of their losses were dominating efforts by the other team.

 

[sb1]

Feels like we had exactly this same thread topic a few months ago or so.

I agree with what's been said. It was seeing them getting embarrassed on MNF @ TEN that showed me that this team was just not close to the elite class of the league. Kind of like what the Saints game was in 09.

But still- I don't recall a Super Bowl champ being disrespected as much as this team was before the season. The Brady doubters were still in force. All the ESPN experts picked Pitt to beat the Pats in their brand new stadium in the opener, and people like Prisco were saying Brady and the team weren't that good and I think he even ranked them #6 before the season which is a little crazy for a SB champion that had no major losses in personnel.

 

[Ring 6]

This!!!!

It was the worst run defense I have seen in my entire life. Not the worst patriots run defense. The worst run defense period.

That is ridiculous.

Never saw a worse run defense before that, never seen one sense that.

That must be the only team you have ever watched.

And the 2003 team was starting to look the same in the preseason till they signed Washington.

When Washington broke his leg I thought the season was over, but miraculously it wasn't.

Not sure why that run defense was so bad, but you really had to see it to believe it. We knew they were running it, and it never mattered.

Agree completely about the KC game laying the blueprint.

I'll assume this is just a case of poor memory and leave it at that.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

Even BB said something like, "I can't believe we won it all with that team." in the 2002 preseason. He knew the 2001 postseason run was a series of remarkable (and unlikely) plays made, one after another. Lightning in a bottle, indeed.

Regards,
Chris

Yup, there were a ton of remarkable plays that season, like the Tuck Rule, and my favorite, David Patten being knocked unconscious and losing the ball but keeping possession because his foot was out of bounds in Buffalo.

But despite even Coach Bill's surprise, the 2001 Pats were in fact very good. They got a huge upgrade at QB, where the kid didn't need to be spectacular but just keep his head while he gained some valuable experience. They basically lost only three games with that lineup. And they were very well coached. Essentially, they didn't realize how good they were. But they just weren't about to lose in Pittsburgh after (typically) being disrespected.

They (Tom) really came through in the clutch to beat the Jets (and Dolphins) the second time around. They proved to themselves that they could perform under pressure.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

I don't recall a Super Bowl champ being disrespected as much as this team

The New England Patriots have held the title of Most Disrespected Professional Team for fifty years, or so, unabated.

Yes, there were fiscal and sometimes comical incidents under the Sullivans, but they mutated to abject nonsubstantive denigration by the local and then national media, propagating the myth that the Pats were somehow illegitimate competitively in people's opinions around the country.

Had this team achieved what it has in ANY other city, can you imagine how exalted they would be by everyone? And you can just forget about the stolen draft picks and fake transgressions. Nope, dislike of BB & TB12 would comparatively not exist.

It's all about New England.


I could consider buying Kraft a seeing-eye dog.


Just an idea.

 

[jmt57]

I think there were a couple of things that factored in to that 2002 season.

2. Steve Martin is probably the worse FA signing in the BB era. He was supposed to have a big role in the run defense, and didn't even make it through the entire season before being cut.

A run stopper that is part of a defense that gives up 4.7 yards per carry ... and then allows 238 yards rushing in a loss, before running his mouth to reporters prior to the next game ... smh.

4. Branch and Givens were both rookies and neither were oustanding receivers (though Branch's 400+ yds was the most for a rookie WR for over a decade). When Brown got dinged, they didn't have much in the way of good receivers.

Donald Hayes was signed to what was at that time a fairly large free agent contract. He was supposed to replace Terry Glenn, with Troy Brown on the other side and David Patten in the slot. Hayes was utterly incapable of grasping the concept of running a route based on the defensive coverage, which forced Belichick to play Branch right away. Hayes had three receptions for 54 yards and a TD in the first game. For the entire remainder of the season he had nine catches for 76 yards.

From Management Secrets of the New England Patriots:

New England saw Hayes as a starting receiver, but Hayes had a learning disability, flailed around in early practices and never established himself in Tom Brady's mind as a reliable receiver who would run the right routes (i.e., appropriate to the defensive coverage and run them with decision). Even Hayes admits it took him a long time to pick up the Patriots' system:

"the coaches were expecting me to perform at this high level-which I was myself, too-and then I found out that the way I knew how to learn things was totally different from how they were teaching it. ... Once I got to a point where I knew the offense and everything, they already had a couple of guys in front of me who were having success. They weren't going to make any changes.​

In the end I think the Pats didn't win the close ones they had in 2001. But based on the plan I think BB envisioned in 2000, it wasn't that far off from the master plan.

Agree completely.

BTW- think about this. Since 2001 NO team in the AFCE division has ever won more games than the Pats, and that includes the 2 seasons someone else won the division in tie breakers That's 16 f*cking consecutive years.......and counting, No other team has come close to that kind of domination for so long

An absolutely amazing fact, no matter what the wishful thinking of opposing fans making false claims about it all being about an allegedly weak division.

Amazing streak that is unlikely to ever be repeated as long as free agency and salary cap rules stay intact (and 345 Park Avenue doesn't hire Vince McMahon as the next vice president to the commissioner, in charge of parity and entertainment).


Also, thanks much @primetime to the review of all those free agents. Polar opposite from the successes in free agency in other years, particularly when compared to the previous season. Somehow over time I had thankfully managed to forget most of those missteps, until now.

 

[brdmaverick]

But still- I don't recall a Super Bowl champ being disrespected as much as this team was before the season. The Brady doubters were still in force. All the ESPN experts picked Pitt to beat the Pats in their brand new stadium in the opener, and people like Prisco were saying Brady and the team weren't that good and I think he even ranked them #6 before the season which is a little crazy for a SB champion that had no major losses in personnel.

That's an interesting point made there..............

On one hand we're saying the Pats were disrespected b/c being projected #6 as a defending champ was low.

As it turned out, however, being ranked #6 was giving them far too much credit as they didn't even make the playoffs.

 

[sb1]

That's an interesting point made there..............

On one hand we're saying the Pats were disrespected b/c being projected #6 as a defending champ was low.

As it turned out, however, being ranked #6 was giving them far too much credit as they didn't even make the playoffs.

Power rankings aren't really a projection though. Most power rankings I've seen put the defending champ at #1 unless there were some major offseason losses which was not the case for the 02 Pats. It's the way it should be, really. #1 until proven otherwise.

You had "expert" comments like "this is the last time you will see the Patriots ranked high on this list". And there was still talk that Brady should take a seat and put Bledsoe back in.

I'm also sure no other SB champ had every single "expert" pick then to lose their home opener and IIRC lose big. To the Kordell Stewart Steelers.

I think a lot of it was people still wrapping their heads around the fact the "Patsies" could win anything. This league was all about the big names and big stars on traditional dynasty teams, that's what people loved and teams like the Patsies just knew their place and rolled over for these big names and big teams. And that's the way it just was until this team blew that whole mindset up and people resented this team for that. To this day I think that resentment planted the seeds for the Patriot haters today

 

[FCB02062]

All this "they sucked they didn't even make the playoffs" stuff grates me... They lost the division on common opponents, which is the 3d tiebreaker and they lost the wildcard to Cleveland on conference record. The Pats lost both tiebreakers by 1 game....
Sure, they were outclassed in several games - Tenn and oak come to kind for me, but this team was pretty good....
It was a crap year for the league as a whole...

 

[bormio]

2002 team not yet good enough. 2003 and 2004 were much different than 2001.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

Power rankings aren't really a projection though. Most power rankings I've seen put the defending champ at #1 unless there were some major offseason losses which was not the case for the 02 Pats. It's the way it should be, really. #1 until proven otherwise.

You had "expert" comments like "this is the last time you will see the Patriots ranked high on this list". And there was still talk that Brady should take a seat and put Bledsoe back in.

I'm also sure no other SB champ had every single "expert" pick then to lose their home opener and IIRC lose big. To the Kordell Stewart Steelers.

I think a lot of it was people still wrapping their heads around the fact the "Patsies" could win anything. This league was all about the big names and big stars on traditional dynasty teams, that's what people loved and teams like the Patsies just knew their place and rolled over for these big names and big teams. And that's the way it just was until this team blew that whole mindset up and people resented this team for that. To this day I think that resentment planted the seeds for the Patriot haters today

The national disparagement, which did not let up even as we won two more titles, planted the seeds for the fake camera location Goodell-bomb in September of '07, followed by seven solid months of dragging Belichick through the mud and raking the team over the coals.

All of the subsequent evidence has confirmed that Bob Kraft's tearful apology in front of the owners and coaches on April 1, 2008 was not only the precise opposite of how he should have reacted and behaved, but again, planted the seeds for the ball deflation Goodell-bomb redux.

To date, there has been precious little serious, national, loud debunking of the crap and declaration of the reality of corrupt league bias specifically against the New England Patriots since 1980.

Today, if Kraft wants to hang banners on the towers he should start with images of Grogan and Belichick.

 

[brdmaverick]

All this "they sucked they didn't even make the playoffs" stuff grates me... They lost the division on common opponents, which is the 3d tiebreaker and they lost the wildcard to Cleveland on conference record. The Pats lost both tiebreakers by 1 game....
Sure, they were outclassed in several games - Tenn and oak come to kind for me, but this team was pretty good....
It was a crap year for the league as a whole...

I love the Pats, too, and am usually guilty of being a homer but in this case even I can see that they weren't that good.

Our record was 9-7........pretty average.

Now consider that style points actual make it look worse.

Why.........they were outclassed by TENN,OAK, DEN, GB, at MIA, vs NYJ (second meeting). Sure, in some cases the final score wasn't all that bad due to late scores but anyone who watched the games knows they weren't in those contests. In fact, I don't look at ANY of their losses and think 'we SHOULD have won that game'.

How about the wins..........

There were two that were almost certain losses (at CHI and vs MIA) and another (vs KC) that was a coin flip that went their way.

So yes, they ended up 9-7 but I think that was actually their best case scenario. They could have easily ended up 6-10.

I might try to confirm this later, but if my memory serves me well I think they gave up at least 3, 180 yard rushing performances to individual RBs.

I love my Pats and I'll be honest, even though they weren't great I was still riding high on the '01 championship to be down.

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

I have never seen a run defense pushed around as much as that 02 team was.

Rarely does Belichick point fingers but i recall in a press conference after his defense got pummeled on the ground, he said "it's a secondary problem". It was probably that plus a Steve Martin problem, but he did get rid of Tebucky Jones and bring in Rodney Harrison to replace Milloy in 03'

 

[RobertWeathers]

Rarely does Belichick point fingers but i recall in a press conference after his defense got pummeled on the ground, he said "it's a secondary problem". It was probably that plus a Steve Martin problem, but he did get rid of Tebucky Jones and bring in Rodney Harrison to replace Milloy in 03'

He's not lying but the run D still sucked.

As you say, in 02 he had Law, Otis, Lawyer and T-Buck back there and 3 of the 4 were gone next year.

 

[captain stone]

I would've kept Otis around one more season. I don't think that he was that much of a problem. Victor Green, on the other hand...