Downplaying our team's expectations despite personnel losses?

[NEPettyOfficer72]

I just got through having a conversation with three friends about an hour ago, and we were talking about football. They ask me how come I wasn't as optimistic as I was a few weeks ago about our superbowl chances and I told them I am still optimistic. Richard, one of my long time friends then proceeded to say that we are "spoiled" and always "win". And my other friend Bruce had this to say quote by quote.

"You NE fans amaze me, critical of this and critical of that? You have arguably the best signal caller of all time and he ain't done yet or close to it, the best tightend that I've ever seen, a Canton bound brain child of a coach, great backs in the backfield and a group of young players who's as talented as there is in the entire national football league on both sides and you want to be critical of your team? "

And of course I mention our personnel losses and then Rich adds to Bruce...

"So what? In Houston, if we lose Owen Daniels who do we have? You guys lose Hernandez but you get Jake Ballard, as a backup? We would kill to have a luxury like that, the guy helped a team win a Lombardi trophy for crying out loud... And what about Wes? You guys lose him and get someone better, brittle yes but damn great receiver, you guys lose Woodhead, and get the second freagin coming of Kevin Faulk, but faster. This is insane, and you have room to complain?"

And I bring up the unknowns and potentials but uncertains and Rich adds even more

"You guys have unknowns and potentials every year, and yet you continuously win 12 or more games and are annual contenders, so whats different about this year?

So I have to admit, my tail is a bit tucked in between my butcheeks now, even trying to be realistic to other fans I guess is being wrong. But now that I think about it, maybe they have a good point. I mean, how many games have we won? with so much less? IDK, I'm kind of crying to you guys now, I need some feedback and support lol

 

[supafly]

I think it's always very reasonable to expect a double digit win season around here, more along the lines of 11 to 12 wins.

That said, I also think that you are very warranted in your concerns that you brought up. We all have reasons to be concerned that the team has gotten worse in some areas, but there also seem to be others that are solid or may even have gotten better too--so it'll be the total team aspect that may add or subtract any number of wins this season.

I'm personally still expecting 11 wins or more myself, but most yrs I predict a solid 12-4 season. This season I'm going with 11-5.

 

[brdmaverick]

I think it comes down to this......

The Pats will continue to win, but they'll be closer games. They won't be the 40 point drubbings that we witnessed when we had all the luxuries you just described.

Now without Welker, Hernandez, and Woodhead the team will still win, it will just look a little more like the 2003 Pats. If it ends with a Lombardi trophy, I'll take it.

 

[37Harrison]

I think the major concern in Pats land is not so much who we lost but where we lost them. The team hasn't done a good job developing receivers in as long as I can remember. Yeah, 2006 we had arguably a worse team then we do now and still made the AFC Championship. That said, the Pats lost to the Colts and by the looks of it right now... Denver and Manning are the team to beat. The difference between the 2006 colts and 2013 Broncos... on paper the Broncos look better on both sides of the ball.

I think the Pats are going to be fine with some struggles along the way. As someone said, I don't believe we are going to witness the "drubbings" we are used to but close games that can go either way. Because of that I believe Brady will be the difference in many of the close games and am hoping one of our rookie WR's can match or exceed Lloyd's production this year.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

If Gronk comes back fine and their running game is as good as it was last year. Double digits once again. ( think this happens)

 

[Kontradiction]

We have Tom Brady, meaning that we'll win the division and advance into the playoffs. How deep we get into the playoffs depends on how good the rookie WR's are coming out of the gates, how Ballard will mesh with Gronk in the passing game vs. how Hernandez meshed with Gronk, and whether or not the pass rush has seen any improvement.

 

[dales804]

I'd guess, NEPO, that the difference between fan bases is Patriots fans are used to winning in the regular season. It's the post season where there have been failures. Your concerns are valid for that time of year, as Kontra pointed out. There are question marks around every team, every year. The Patriots have Brady and Belichick and that helps them to overcome those personnel questions during the regular season. But again, it's the playoffs that really count.

 

[Oswlek]

"Spoiled" is a loaded word, but you are both correct.

Most franchises would kill (figuratively, of course) to have as bad an offseason as NE has had and still be viewed as a lock for double digit wins. At the same time, it is reasonable for Patriot fans to look at the WR and DT spots and ask "are these strong enough to win a championship with?"

I only stick my nose in when I think people are stretching that question too far.

 

[NEPettyOfficer72]

Thanks guys, however he did make me feel good about Jake Ballard, Danny Amendola who he called "brittle, but a great receiver" and Shane Vereen "the next freagin coming of Kevin Faulk". But I guess you are right.

 

[Observer]

We have the best coach-QB combo in the NFL, without question, and that counts for a lot. We also have potentially the worst division in the league, that too counts for something. However, to get 12+ wins every year is not automatic and is a result of good decision making both in and out of season. We will have to wait and see if the decisions of the past offseason will pan out during the season. Losing your 40 million dollar weapon was definitely not part of the plan and I am not sure Welker would have been allowed to go if this had been foreseen so clearly some of the decision making will have been derailed. We'll have to wait and see how they compensate, glad we only have to beat the Jets, Bills, and Dolphins.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Patriots win because of TB and BB. The question in a year like this is whether or not they can take even more on their shoulders.

Will they make the playoffs? Almost certainly.
Will they be a true threat to win the SB? Not unless the offense greatly outperforms what it should reasonably be expected to do and the defense learns to keep opponents off the field during the playoffs.

 

[Insaneirish]

Spoiled is a great word, and I'm guilty of it too. I live in Redskin land now, and most of my friends who are 'Skins fans would kill to have our caliber of talent each year. It's amazing how the Pats can manage 10-12 wins every year no problem, yet still complain. Again, I myself am guilty as I easily get discouraged after we somehow either completely blow the "big" game, or show up with too many injuries, or just get beaten outright to end the season each of the last 6 seasons.

 

[Oswlek]

The Patriots win because of TB and BB. The question in a year like this is whether or not they can take even more on their shoulders.

Will they make the playoffs? Almost certainly.
Will they be a true threat to win the SB? Not unless the offense greatly outperforms what it should reasonably be expected to do and the defense learns to keep opponents off the field during the playoffs.

What is reasonable? I think any expectation of less than 26 ppg is being pessimistic and that is certainly good enough to win a SB with.

The defense is going to have to take on more responsibility, but they've been surprisingly competent in the playoffs lately, save for a terrible half that we'd all like to forget.

 

[Deus Irae]

What is reasonable? I think any expectation of less than 26 ppg is being pessimistic and that is certainly good enough to win a SB with.

The defense is going to have to take on more responsibility, but they've been surprisingly competent in the playoffs lately, save for a terrible half that we'd all like to forget.

You're significantly overrating what the defense has done, IMO, and I don't think 26 ppg wins the SB for this team unless that defense makes an enormous leap forward, and gets rid of its "anti-clutch" ways, although I don't really look at the PPG as an issue as much as the ability to consistenty move the ball and score against the better teams.

 

[Ivan]

We have Tom Brady, meaning that we'll win the division and advance into the playoffs. How deep we get into the playoffs depends on how good the rookie WR's are coming out of the gates, how Ballard will mesh with Gronk in the passing game vs. how Hernandez meshed with Gronk, and whether or not the pass rush has seen any improvement.

I think Gronkowski's role at TE is going to change somewhat, with Ballard being the on -line blocking TE and Gronkowski splitting out more often while Vereen takes some of the plays that Hernandez would have run wide and out of the backfield.

 

[Oswlek]

You're significantly overrating what the defense has done, IMO, and I don't think 26 ppg wins the SB for this team unless that defense makes an enormous leap forward.

The defense was disappointing against NY in 2010, no doubt, particularly after playing well down the stretch.

In 2011, however, they dominated a bad Denver offense, won the AFCCG almost singlehandedly and held a very good NY squad to 19 points. I see people mention the TOP a lot, but that overlooks two critical factors.

1) Brady's unforced error that led to a safety and putting the defense back on the field with only one play of rest. A good drive there and TOP is even. Hell, just two firsts and a punt and the TOP split is acceptable.

2) More importantly, though, is the fact that NE wanted NY to run. Any play that ended without a forward pass attempt was seen as a win. Why else start White and play in nickle/dime most of the game?

NE's DL didn't hold up their end of the bargain, but the Patriots were perfectly willing to trade a few long FG drives to negate killer pass plays. And it worked well enough to win had the offense done their share.

In 2012, they played well enough to win against Hou and then held Baltimore to 7 first half points before collapsing in the second half. That's the same team that put 21 first half points up on SF just two weeks later, so it isn't as if they let a bunch of stiffs up and down the field. And a strong case could be made that injury was a factor in the second half issues.

No, I'm not overrating anything. 26 is more than enough to win, assuming that NE puts together an offense that travels with them in the playoffs. That's been the big issue in recent years more than anything.

 

[tonyto3690]

No one is saying we'll be awful. WE've run into a lot of bad situations this offseason and as a result many don't think we're true contenders. We'll be a playoff team just because our division is mediocre and we have Brady/Belichick. However on paper and actuality we just do not have nearly the amount of talent the other elite teams have. Particularly Niners, Broncos, Seahawks and arguably Falcons.

Thankfully only one of those teams is in the AFC, and Peyton will choke away the season for the Broncos eventually. I think we can get to the SB and you never know what could happen there- it's only a one game series and only takes a couple plays to win it (as we've unfortunately seen twice).

We have a shot, but I think we're in the second tier of "contenders" as opposed to leading/being 1a 1b in the first tier like we did in 10, 11, 12.

We're spoiled. Not seeing the team as the 1st or 2nd best team in the NFL seems like we have no chance just by the fact we've been there every season.

But no, we are not one of the best teams in the NFL.

 

[Ivan]

Unless the rookie WR's way outperform expectations their points offensively are going to go down significantly and they are going to have to rely on their defense to really take a step forward, which I honestly expect them to do. I am also going to be really interested in how they set up their defense against the read and react offenses and I think there is a good chance they go 3-4 base for containment purposes. Ultimately 11-5 is a realistic expectation and their play-off performance will be dependent upon their growth as a team during the season, the development of their defense, and their health. We'll see, should be a really enjoyable and interesting season to watch.

 

[everlong]

Using the law of averages let's say for argument's sake half the things that need to go right for this team do and half don't.

So as examples:

Amendola stays healthy but neither Dobson or Boyce are effective.
Chandler Jones takes the next step but Collins is a red shirt.
Gronk recovers and is a factor but no other TE fills Hernandez's role.
Talib is a #1 corner but nobody fills the #2 role with Dennard being reduced.
Armstead is a factor but Kelly isn't.

You can flip these however you want but at the end of the day they would be a 11-13 win team that wins the division, maybe gets a bye, probably wins one playoff game and is done. They are going to have to hit on a lot of their question marks. So no I don't think the expectations are being downplayed.

 

[tonyto3690]

The defense was disappointing against NY in 2010, no doubt, particularly after playing well down the stretch.

In 2011, however, they dominated a bad Denver offense, won the AFCCG almost singlehandedly and held a very good NY squad to 19 points. I see people mention the TOP a lot, but that overlooks two critical factors.

1) Brady's unforced error that led to a safety and putting the defense back on the field with only one play of rest. A good drive there and TOP is even. Hell, just two firsts and a punt and the TOP split is acceptable.

2) More importantly, though, is the fact that NE wanted NY to run. Any play that ended without a forward pass attempt was seen as a win. Why else start White and play in nickle/dime most of the game?

NE's DL didn't hold up their end of the bargain, but the Patriots were perfectly willing to trade a few long FG drives to negate killer pass plays. And it worked well enough to win had the offense done their share.

In 2012, they played well enough to win against Hou and then held Baltimore to 7 first half points before collapsing in the second half. That's the same team that put 21 first half points up on SF just two weeks later, so it isn't as if they let a bunch of stiffs up and down the field. And a strong case could be made that injury was a factor in the second half issues.

No, I'm not overrating anything. 26 is more than enough to win, assuming that NE puts together an offense that travels with them in the playoffs. That's been the big issue in recent years more than anything.

I think the defense actually played pretty well in 2010 against the Jets. And against the Giants in the SB.

The problem is twofold. One, playing well is not winning the game. Sure, it should have been enough to win, the offense should have performed better. But that's still putting pressure on Brady and the offense to always be good-great. It would be nice for once if the defense just clamped down and dominated and won a game for us for once in the playoffs. We've seen the offense do it, but the defense has yet to win us a playoff game.

The second problem is the offense has collapsed. Better defenses, and defenses are allowed to get away with much more in the playoffs. The Ravens were all but jumping on Patriots players backs- and the problem with having a bunch of 5'3 130 pound receivers is that they can't fight it off and beat that physicality.

We do so well in the regular season because teams aren't allowed to commit murder in the secondary but in the playoffs refs are much less likely to call it. We haven't had that guy who could beat it and make plays for us downfield and punish defenses for playing so aggressively- in the box and up tight on receivers. Gronk in the past two post seasons got hurt and Welker/Branch in 2010 couldn't do it.