PostGame Thread 2023 OFFICIAL Week 18 PostGame Thread: Patriots Lose to Jets 17-3

[Ring 6]

And if Jordan Richards was like Ed Reed we would have shut the Eagles out in the Super Bowl! So close…

Jordan Richard s played 16 snaps in that game.

 

[50-yard-line]

No I’m pointing out that some are arguing against their own logic when it doesn’t suit them. Weird.

Who is?

You need a lot of ingredients. The Patriots need help in several areas on O, specifically. The OL needs to mature and needs an LT (no small need there). The WR room needs to stay healthy and needs some talent elevation at the top spot (no small need there).

But none of it works without a competent QB who can protect the ball.

Tampa is a good lesson here. They had a good defense. They had talent. They sucked with Winston throwing a billion picks. They won a Super Bowl when Brady and a couple of others came in - the next year.

Jones can’t throw the ball downfield or to the sidelines with any success. The offense was crippled by that alone.

Flood the middle of the field and keep the running game under control.

Add in pure brain farts like the pick in Germany and he was simply terrible.

The Patriots are more than a QB away from competing seriously for a SB. But this year, these particular games, this team win several more games if their QB doesn’t completely suck.

And this offense, with all the help it needs in other areas, looks way better with a AB who can challenge all areas of the field, can protect the ball, and can identify a defense.

Ffs, Mac was audible’ing into plays and then not even trying to execute the plays.

 

[palialka]

Four of the 6 top OL are on rookie deals (one coming off, who should be retained).

Barmore and White are on rookie deals on the DL. Uche and Jennings (keep him) just coming off.

The secondary has several promising rookie-deal players, yes?

That’s a rebuild. They’re missing the skill positions on offense. They need a top WR, need to retain or replace their TEs, need to rework/retain RBs, and need a QB.

They’re not as far away as you think.

Well first I never said we were far away. The truth is no one knows right now, including Pats leadership. Anyone who says otherwise is just speculating.

I agree with you that the D is in place. The issue is with everything else. The offense and ST have been steadily declining for the past 4-5 years. The talent level is at an all time low and we’ve been playing musical chairs with the coaching staff.

There have been no improvements anywhere in years apart from the defense. This qualifies as a destruction, not a rebuild, and it shows that there hasn’t really been a plan in place except for Bill’s ego tbh.

Hopefully the new regime will actually begin a well thought out rebuild process and we’re back in contention in a couple of years.

 

[RobertWeathers]

No, my argument is everyone played how they played and the qb f-ed it up, and had he been minimally competent he wouldn’t have.

I am saying if the patriots got barely competant qb okay they would have won as many games as the bills, and probably swept them.
I’m saying those other 52 players played at a level in their games that if they had the same qb play as the bills they would have the same or better record. I say that based upon the actual games in the field, but a cryptic “who do you think is better”.

How do you know the QB -f-ed up on every single 19 of those INTs? What if it was bad play design? ****ty route? Physical ability? Talent?

1) Your argument is predicated on a static past and one big variable being introduced.

What if Howell is QB? He threw 21 picks but a ton of yards. Are they better or worse?

 

[sb1]

Who is?

You need a lot of ingredients. The Patriots need help in several areas on O, specifically. The OL needs to mature and needs an LT (no small need there). The WR room needs to stay healthy and needs some talent elevation at the top spot (no small need there).

Completely agree. So fans shouldn't pretend that this is a great team and we just needed a QB and we'd make a deep playoff run. No this is not a great team and no we're not close to playoff contention.

But none of it works without a competent QB who can protect the ball.

It's interesting that the main pro-Zappe argument is "he is competent and can protect the ball". In other words he checks that box for what you want in a backup QB.

That's a demonstration right there he has no business starting in this league.

Tampa is a good lesson here. They had a good defense. They had talent. They sucked with Winston throwing a billion picks. They won a Super Bowl when Brady and a couple of others came in - the next year.

Jones can’t throw the ball downfield or to the sidelines with any success. The offense was crippled by that alone.

Flood the middle of the field and keep the running game under control.

Add in pure brain farts like the pick in Germany and he was simply terrible.

Not going to argue about Jones. He's gone. Zappe isn't the answer either, never was, never will be. Full stop.

The Patriots are more than a QB away from competing seriously for a SB. But this year, these particular games, this team win several more games if their QB doesn’t completely suck.

And this offense, with all the help it needs in other areas, looks way better with a AB who can challenge all areas of the field, can protect the ball, and can identify a defense.

If you're talking about Zappe I totally disagree he can identify a defense. Especially not a blitz.

And were they really "way better" with Zappe? I'm not sure they were better at all. His rating was worse and PPG for both QB's was almost identical. And like I said before you can't assume they win several more games saying if this... it doesn't work that way. And both QB's completely suck so it's not relevant anyway. That great QB that can elevate a crappy team to a decent one is not on the roster. This is not a good offense in any aspect of that side of the ball. Talent matters.

It's either all the QB (wins or losses) or it's not. Can't switch back and forth.

Ffs, Mac was audible’ing into plays and then not even trying to execute the plays.

He's a broken QB. Started last season when the HC decided his buddies with close to zero offensive experience were good offensive coaches. Not sure that's a coincidence.

 

[palialka]

Which of those 7 games do we not win with average qb play? In all 7 of those games, with everything the other 52 players did, we almost won, despite putrid QB play. Non-putrid QB play would have resulted in wins.

I am on record saying we win those 7 games if the qb play was better, and average would have easily been enough.

So let’s address that. Which of those 7 games is not a win if the qb did his job at a mediocre to average nfl qb level.

We agree the QBs sucked. We should agree that sucky qb play causes you to lose games you would have won without sucky qb play. I identified 7, and I think it’s not even debatable. Are you saying qb play does t matter?

Respectfully, your premise is completely false. It’s nonsensical to assume that we win all 7 of these games if we just plug in a better QB. Would we have been better, of course, but I’m under no illusion that we are a 10 win team “in disguise”.

Hopefully the new regime will get us going on the right track. We should have 2 new QBs on the roster next season, hopefully with 2-3 new OLinemen and a couple of playmakers at WR.

 

[Ring 6]

Respectfully, your premise is completely false. It’s nonsensical to assume that we win all 7 of these games if we just plug in a better QB. Would we have been better, of course, but I’m under no illusion that we are a 10 win team “in disguise”.

Hopefully the new regime will get us going on the right track. We should have 2 new QBs on the roster next season, hopefully with a 2-3 new OLinemen and a couple of playmakers at WR.

Look at the games. In each game horrific QB play turned what would have been a win into a loss.
Make what you want of it, but it’s indisputable.

Im not interested in vague assumptions, I am saying in each of thise 7 games anything other than terrible qb play results in a win.

 

[50-yard-line]

Completely agree. So fans shouldn't pretend that this is a great team and we just needed a QB and we'd make a deep playoff run. No this is not a great team and no we're not close to playoff contention.

It's interesting that the main pro-Zappe argument is "he is competent and can protect the ball". In other words he checks that box for what you want in a backup QB.

That's a demonstration right there he has no business starting in this league.

Zappe isn't competent and doesn't protect the ball. He isn't even a backup, in my eyes. Maybe a 3rd stringer.

Not going to argue about Jones. He's gone. Zappe isn't the answer either, never was, never will be. Full stop.

If you're talking about Zappe I totally disagree he can identify a defense. Especially not a blitz.

And were they really "way better" with Zappe? I'm not sure they were better at all. His rating was worse and PPG for both QB's was almost identical. And like I said before you can't assume they win several more games saying if this... it doesn't work that way. And both QB's completely suck so it's not relevant anyway. That great QB that can elevate a crappy team to a decent one is not on the roster. This is not a good offense in any aspect of that side of the ball. Talent matters.

The two particular players I mentioned earlier looked like NFL WRs (which both were until this last year for one and these last couple for the other) in the first couple of games of Zappe.

Parker is a serviceable #2/3, but he can't stay healthy. Juju was a very good #2, but who knows with his knee?
I wouldn't have extended Parker. He's getting older and can't stay on the field. The Pats need more speed (and playing speed with all the other ingredients - I'm certainly not talking about Thornton, who hasn't shown ANYTHING).
If I had my preference, Douglas stays, Reagor stays, Bourne comes back, and that's it, unless I could determine if Boutte was held back on a grudge or held back because of Boutte.
Those would be my 3 or 4, filling the slot role, #3 and #4 with TWO fast upgrades for 1 and 2, a proven vet and a high-drafted rookie.

It's either all the QB (wins or losses) or it's not. Can't switch back and forth.

A middling QB can get to the SB and win it. A great QB can get there with less talent.
It's not and never has been ALL the QB for anyone on this board who supports BB. Never. When Ring 6 says they win 7 more games with average QB'ing, he might be wrong, but not by much.
You can watch the entire team deflate on Mac's blunders, and Zappe is so inconsistent that you have to peek through your fingers every time he throws the ball. Zappe has a few better traits than broken Mac, like not turtling at the first sign of pressure, but isn't nearly the answer.

He's a broken QB. Started last season when the HC decided his buddies with close to zero offensive experience were good offensive coaches. Not sure that's a coincidence.

Yes, but he never showed an NFL arm. I wasn't a detractor - after the first year, I thought they had something there and figured the late season drop off was the fabled "rookie wall."
It wasn't. it was NFL DCs figuring out that the offensive field with Mac Jones under center is smaller - within 20 yards in the middle of the field. With the speed of defenses, that's an enormous problem.
Yes, Patricia/Judge didn't help at all, but a proven OC, O'Brien, was arguably worse than those guys. When you're tools are limited, good Ds will eat you up. Mac is broken. he should be traded for anything they can get, for his sake and the Pats.

And while a lot of this IS on BB, it's hard to put a number on it when your QB room is simply AWFUL.

 

[Ring 6]

How do you know the QB -f-ed up on every single 19 of those INTs? What if it was bad play design? ****ty route? Physical ability? Talent?

1) Your argument is predicated on a static past and one big variable being introduced.

What if Howell is QB? He threw 21 picks but a ton of yards. Are they better or worse?

I’m not talking about everyone of 19 ints.
I am talking about the play of the qb in those games.

Yes exactly, my argument is based upon nothing being different except the qb sucking and losing games that should have been wins. That is exactly the exercise: if you eliminate awful qb play what would have happened.

Howell outplaying 10 was the difference in that game. 10 threw a terrible game ending int.

 

[palialka]

Make what you want of it, but it’s indisputable.

Im not interested in vague assumptions, I am saying in each of thise 7 games anything other than terrible qb play results in a win.

There’s nothing indisputable about what you said…

It’s funny that you say your not interested in assumptions but yet you’re automatically assuming that we would have won all the close games we lost with a different QB under center.

Like I said before, we probably would have won some of those games with a better QB. But just to say that all of those games would have had a 100% different result is the definition of “assumption”.

Anyways, there’s no point in continuing to bicker over this. We have common ground in that we both want our team to get better and be competitive again…hopefully sooner rather than later.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I’m not talking about everyone of 19 ints.
I am talking about the play of the qb in those games.

You called out INTs and I agree with you as they are a huge factor in determining wins and losses....but not the only factor.

Yes exactly, my argument is based upon nothing being different except the qb sucking and losing games that should have been wins. That is exactly the exercise: if you eliminate awful qb play what would have happened.

It's more likely they win maybe 2-3 more games than 7 with an average QB as the oline, receivers, RBs, LBs in coverage, pass rush and pass defense are below average.

Howell outplaying 10 was the difference in that game. 10 threw a terrible game ending int.

But he threw 21 picks. You are claiming an average QB wins more games. Is he an average QB? He sure had a lot more to work with than NEP QBs did.

 

[Ring 6]

There’s nothing indisputable about what you said…

It’s funny that you say your not interested in assumptions but yet you’re automatically assuming that we would have won all the close games we lost with a different QB under center.

Like I said before, we probably would have won some of those games with a better QB. But just to say that all of those games would have had a 100% different result is the defining “assumption”.

Anyways, there’s no point in continuing to bicker over this. We have common ground in that we both want our team to get better and be competitive again…hopefully sooner rather than later.

Review the games. Review the qb play. We lost with pathetic qb play. Replace the pathetic play with adequate and clearly it’s win. Take Indy for example, if the qb who played awful all day, and was kept in the game by the defense didn’t choke by underthrowing a wide open receiver in the end zone for the game winning TD 14 years away by 6 years, perhaps the worst pass in nfl history, the game is a win.
Replace awful qb play with adequate in those 7 games, even for one drive in many cases, and they are wins.

It’s like saying if you lose by 2 and your FG kicker missed a last second FG you would have won if he made the kick.

 

[Ring 6]

You called out INTs and I agree with you as they are a huge factor in determining wins and losses....but not the only factor.

It's more likely they win maybe 2-3 more games than 7 with an average QB as the oline, receivers, RBs, LBs in coverage, pass rush and pass defense are below average.

But he threw 21 picks. You are claiming an average QB wins more games. Is he an average QB? He sure had a lot more to work with than NEP QBs did.

No you compared the patriots to the Steelers and ignored that the difference was turnovers.

All of those things consider, they all were part of those games, and if the qb wasn’t horrible they win. Look at the exact games and the plays that occurred. Ask the qb to play adequately. They become wins. Which ones are you saying wouldn’t?
Are you honestly saying you think the patriots pass defense was below average? You just blamed that more than the pathetic qb play.

Please read these words because I’ve said them many times and you keep pretending I said something different. IF THEY HAD ADEQUATE QB PLAY IN THOSE GAMES.
I’m not searching for who am average is, and projecting results. I am watching the tape of those games and saying if the qb was adequate instead of worse than backup level in those games, or even at times in those games, it changes the result.

 

[patsfanfromoversea]

They showed that the patriots lost a lot of games they would have won if they received adequate qb play.

what if the other team would have receied that as well?

 

[patsfanfromoversea]

That's the whole feckin' point! The biggest variable in the NFL is the QB.
Patriots' QB play this year was abysmal.

so was the qb play of the other teams who had better records than the pats
explain that pls
andy isn't getting it

When Zappe played well, for that one half, suddenly Devante Parker looked like an NFL receiver. Like Juju the game before that.
It matters.
And yes, they need an upgrade at WR. QB's make a difference in the entire offense.

 

[Ring 6]

what if the other team would have receied that as well?

They didn’t. I’m talking about what would have won the games we played in.

In other words:
We had the worst qb okay in the nfl and we won 4 games. Some of the losses, despite having the worst QB okay were very close.
Had the qb play been adequate, instead of abysmal how many of those games would we have won?

 

[Ring 6]

so was the qb play of the other teams who had better records than the pats
explain that pls
andy isn't getting it

So pick one of those teams and identify the close games they played in spite of horrible qb play that would have turned out differently if the qb was just adequate and not horrible.

 

[patsfanfromoversea]

They didn’t. I’m talking about what would have won the games we played in.

In other words:
We had the worst qb okay in the nfl and we won 4 games. Some of the losses, despite having the worst QB okay were very close.
Had the qb play been adequate, instead of abysmal how many of those games would we have won?

other teams had equal worse qb#s

you think that zach wilson trevor siemian or tommy devito are better than what the pats have?

you just want to make excuses for BB's performance of talent evaluation and coaching

 

[patsfanfromoversea]

So pick one of those teams and identify the close games they played in spite of horrible qb play that would have turned out differently if the qb was just adequate and not horrible.

the giants lost 13:10 to the Jets while the giants qb threw for 7 yards total

accept it pls

 

[Ring 6]

other teams had equal worse qb#s

you think that zach wilson trevor siemian or tommy devito are better than what the pats have?

you just want to make excuses for BB's performance of talent evaluation and coaching

Probably but that’s irrelevant.

How is it making excuses to identify what the weakness is? Bb drafted the QBs didn’t he?