i think its the way we lose, not that we lost has us frustrated...

[jbb9s]

Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

From 2002-2008, the Patriots won 66 games when leading at half and only lost 1. Out of the two big winning streaks, the absence of consecutive losses for so many years, the home winning streak (current), consecutive games scoring 30 (current and past), this 66-1 is equally as impressive.

According to this ESPN article, A New England Patriots win is no longer a sure thing with a halftime lead - ESPN Boston, and adding today, they have lost 6 games now since 2008.

I'm not sure if it reflects the coaching and their halftime (or lack thereof) adjustments or the players and their motivation but I am ruling out a statistical aberration. That could only be possible if all the leads in the glory yrs were huge at half and all the leads since were small, but we know that is not the case - I don't think this is the case. Brady's record in OT games and even games decided by less than 7 used to be spectacular.

I suppose it could reflect on the age or conditioning of the team - but I am still leaning towards something to do with coaching.

There is one thing that happened just about 2007 that could have effected this but I shudder even to think of what those implications are.

What do you guys think?

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

Combination of lack of committment to running, predictable offense, and softer defense.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

What do you guys think?

I think it's a combination of many things, including luck, injuries, rule changes, and Afailius Thomas (in 2009, at least), in addition to the factors PATSYLICIOUS mentioned (which certainly don't help).

But even if the Pats have blown six leads, that still makes them 37-6 since 2008 when leading at halftime.

It's not 66-1, but 37-6 is still pretty damn impressive, given that it means they've been leading at halftime in 84% of the games they've played.

 

[Shockt327]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

Pretty simple really....

No lead is safe with this D.

That wasn't the story with the vets we had from back in the day...as old as they were towards the end.

 

[Patriot to the Core]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

Need more grit in defence, we allowed fitz to much time to pick out a pass for Jones, Nelson and Jackson! Then even when the passes are on the way we are not putting enough pressure on the receivers to put them off or even bring them down fast enough!!

 

[jbb9s]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

I think it's a combination of many things, including luck, injuries, rule changes, and Afailius Thomas (in 2009, at least), in addition to the factors PATSYLICIOUS mentioned (which certainly don't help).

But even if the Pats have blown six leads, that still makes them 37-6 since 2008 when leading at halftime.

It's not 66-1, but 37-6 is still pretty damn impressive, given that it means they've been leading at halftime in 84% of the games they've played.

This is like if your kid has a 4.0 for several years and then starts getting a C- every semester in math.

I'm saying "your kid sucks at math".

Your defense is "but his GPA is still 3.8". Well that's not what is in question.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

This is like if your kid has a 4.0 for several years and then starts getting a C- every semester in math.

I'm saying "your kid sucks at math".

Your defense is "but his GPA is still 3.8". Well that's not what is in question.

No, my explanation is exactly what I said it was: a whole bunch of different factors (three PATSYLICIOUS mentioned, and four others I added).

BTW, here's another way of looking at the data:

2009: 4 losses when leading at halftime
2001-2011, excluding 2009: 3 losses when leading at halftime

This suggests that there WAS a "fluke"—namely, the 2009 season.

 

[BendButDontBreak37]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

Offense chokes in second halves now as well

 

[rickwyman]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

The Patriots have lost there identity on both sides of the ball... Stats on offense, and a weak willed defense. When they were real superbowl contenders, they didn't have the best stats on either side, they just made the plays that needed to be made. Situational football used to be our strength, there were so many examples of this during the game, but the one that bugs me is tackling Jackson at the goal line w under 2 min and 2 timeouts. Remember the intentional safety we gave up by those superbowl teams? That's situational football. That was one of the dumbest decisions I've seen in a long time. I know it's early in the season, but ever since the 07 season, something switched up with this team. I pray they can get something of what they lost back, or were not contending for anything this year...

 

[PatsFan24]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

Just think how the Vikings fans must feel.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

Just think how the Vikings fans must feel.

This.....just another stupid stat

 

[jmt57]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

From 2002-2008, the Patriots won 66 games when leading at half and only lost 1. Out of the two big winning streaks, the absence of consecutive losses for so many years, the home winning streak (current), consecutive games scoring 30 (current and past), this 66-1 is equally as impressive.

According to this ESPN article, A New England Patriots win is no longer a sure thing with a halftime lead - ESPN Boston, and adding today, they have lost 6 games now since 2008.

I'm not sure if it reflects the coaching and their halftime (or lack thereof) adjustments or the players and their motivation but I am ruling out a statistical aberration. That could only be possible if all the leads in the glory yrs were huge at half and all the leads since were small, but we know that is not the case - I don't think this is the case. Brady's record in OT games and even games decided by less than 7 used to be spectacular.

I suppose it could reflect on the age or conditioning of the team - but I am still leaning towards something to do with coaching.

There is one thing that happened just about 2007 that could have effected this but I shudder even to think of what those implications are.

What do you guys think?

I think the stat is simply an indication that the 2008-10 teams are/were not as good as the 2003-2007 teams were.

It's not a shock nor should it be; what is shocking is people expecting the team they root for to be just as good - every single year - as one that had back-to-back 17-2 Super Bowl winning seasons, or one that set all-time NFL records en route to a 16-0 season.

In my opinion the expectations of many Pats Fans are so unrealistic that they are destined for disappointment.

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

Cue the spygate talk.

But hey, maybe the cameras really did help back then. When you objectively look at it, we really have not been as good in the 2nd half of games since they took the cameras away.

We've blown so many leads in the 2nd half and lost so many of the in-game/halftime adjustment battles.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

From 2002-2008, the Patriots won 66 games when leading at half and only lost 1. Out of the two big winning streaks, the absence of consecutive losses for so many years, the home winning streak (current), consecutive games scoring 30 (current and past), this 66-1 is equally as impressive.

According to this ESPN article, A New England Patriots win is no longer a sure thing with a halftime lead - ESPN Boston, and adding today, they have lost 6 games now since 2008.

I'm not sure if it reflects the coaching and their halftime (or lack thereof) adjustments or the players and their motivation but I am ruling out a statistical aberration. That could only be possible if all the leads in the glory yrs were huge at half and all the leads since were small, but we know that is not the case - I don't think this is the case. Brady's record in OT games and even games decided by less than 7 used to be spectacular.

I suppose it could reflect on the age or conditioning of the team - but I am still leaning towards something to do with coaching.

There is one thing that happened just about 2007 that could have effected this but I shudder even to think of what those implications are.

What do you guys think?

Before you give in to message board trolls trying to bring you and the team you root for down, perhaps you and they should consider that it has something to do with the current team not having Willie McGinest, Tedy Bruschi, Ty Law, Rodney Harrison and Mike Vrabel all in their prime at the same time on this current roster.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

I think the team lacks killer instinct on the road when they get out early.

Once the defense gives the other team something to cheer about,it gets the fans riled up and makes it hard and loud to keep that momentum going.

The Pats defense needs to slam the door shut when they are leading into the 3rd on the road...they have left the door with a slight opening crack and the other team has barged inside.

This can probably be a thing that continues yearly until the defense does something about it...problem is I am not sure the defense has enough overall talent to do it.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

Cue the spygate talk.

But hey, maybe the cameras really did help back then. When you objectively look at it, we really have not been as good in the 2nd half of games since they took the cameras away.

We've blown so many leads in the 2nd half and lost so many of the in-game/halftime adjustment battles.

Not vastly more than any other team, I would wager. After all, although the Pats went 66-1, every other team in the league blew AT LEAST seven halftime leads in that span.

 

[supafly]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

This can probably be a thing that continues yearly until the defense does something about it...problem is I am not sure the defense has enough overall talent to do it.

As optimistic as I was in the off-season and TC, I am starting to quickly become afraid that you're right about the defense.

I'm tired of hearing the excuse about not blitzing too often. We consistantly see 4 man fronts get plenty of pressure week in and week out. Hell, the Raiders turned the game around vs. the NYJ today due to good, solid pressure.

Until there's any kind of pass rush, the opposing QB will likely have plenty of time to find the open man. That's a tremendous weakness that opposing QB's don't overlook. No one is afraid of our pass rush, b/c it is non-existant. Not only that, but the teams who gameplan for us are consistantly using the same schemes and plays over and over again, to their advantage. Attack down the perimeter of the sidelines. Throw against McCourty. Chuck the ball at will. Dump it off to the RB in the flat, there's no way the LB's can react quickly enough. Attack the middle of the field..over and over and over.

These are all things that we have been seeing for quite some time now, and yet they still aren't being corrected in the slightest sense.

 

[supafly]

Re: Shocking Trend: Leading at half....then losing

Cue the spygate talk.

But hey, maybe the cameras really did help back then. When you objectively look at it, we really have not been as good in the 2nd half of games since they took the cameras away.

We've blown so many leads in the 2nd half and lost so many of the in-game/halftime adjustment battles.

I don't believe any of that aspect of it for a second.

In my opinion, with the exception of 2009, the offense has been okay.

It's the defense that blows the games. We've seen some major leads blown, and even more that were almost blown such as Indy last yr.

This defense is a major part of why these 2nd half leads are evaporating, not the offense. That is just my opinion, but I believe it's a lot more on the D.

 

[abdul7]

Last time ?

It sucks to lose any game but as a fan since 85 , I can't remember losing a game after being up 21. The AFC game v Colts , I think we were up 18 but my mind won't rest till I know the answer, not that it will help me sleep better ! So thanks to whoever answers this for me. Keep the faith and that was a freak game, and won't happen again in my lifetime. Sure missed Chung yesterday. Love and Peace. Abdul

 

[Sean Pa Patriot]

I think most of us know we were not going 16-0, we were going to lose a game , plus the law of avg we were due to lose to buffalo... plus in this new nfl the defense is going to be on a learning curve and alot of offense's are putting yards up at record pace.. the defense will come around, but the lack of no pass rush is frustrating...


i think what frustrates me as a fan its just seem like we seem to blow too many leads and its just gut wrenching....


2003- we blow the indy lead , held on to win, but still blow a big lead

2006- the afc title game at indy nuff said about that game

2007- the super bowl, but we didnt have a big lead, however could not hold a 4 point lead in the last 2 min....

2009- alot of blown leads, at denver, at indy, at miami...

2011- at buffalo...

i think as a fan I rather lose by ten , then to be in a lead , like a 21 point lead and just see it melt away... This is a good team, if this was a young team with a young qb it would be easier to take.. but this is the best qb/coach combo ever.. This team is still winning the division, and will go deep in jan, this loss does not change that, but as fans we over react because the losses were sure w's .. and that is what is frustrating...

PS.. if this loss at buffalo , means we can sweep the jets , im all for it...:rocker: