Patriots have a top 10 ...

[Uncle Rico]

Offense and defense, based on scoring (not yards)

Pats: Top 10 in scoring offense, defense - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Offense jumped from 17th to 9th this week, and I expect them to stay top ten and even rise a bit as the year goes along. Some decent D's ahead so they certainly won't score 55 every week, but I expect they'll continue to get better.

Defense dropped from a 5th-place tie to 8th. Obviously we're all worried that the injuries will lead to this trend continuing. Talib getting (and staying) healthy would obviously help.

 

[fxkane]

Maybe (thanks to Mark Blount) but this last game was the only one that was not a dog fight--although even this one was for about 10 minutes in the second half.

Truth is we could be 8-0, but also could be 1-7.

 

[Uncle Rico]

...

Truth is we could be 8-0, but also could be 1-7.

Yup, Could have 6 SB trophies could have none. Etc.

 

[signbabybrady]

Bruschi has gone and done it. Something we have been complaining about when the pundits talked about our D the last few years which is who cares about Yards Allowed. Well bru came up with his own index, the BDI (Bruschi Defensive Index), which combines TO, Scoring, red zone effeciency, and third down effeciency while also not counting offensive and STs contributions to these areas to make it solely about the D.

And based on this we have the 5th best D in the league this year.

Introducing the Bruschi defensive index - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Bruschi instead has put together his own formula, averaging what he views as the four key statistics: points allowed (only on defense, not including pick-6s or special teams scores), red zone defense (measured by percentage of touchdowns allowed vs. total trips), third-down percentage and total turnovers (created solely by the defense, not including special teams).

 

[signbabybrady]

Maybe (thanks to Mark Blount) but this last game was the only one that was not a dog fight--although even this one was for about 10 minutes in the second half.

Truth is we could be 8-0, but also could be 1-7.

I think your point is valid though I disagree with the could be 1-7 as we have had several games that could have gone either way but I think 3 games the Steelers game, The Bucs game, and the Falcons game all were solid wins, I know the Falcons had a chance their at the end but we dominated that game and fell asleep in prevent time. Those 3 wins were IMO handidly won by us and werent games that could have gone either way.

 

[crypto]

Maybe (thanks to Mark Blount) but this last game was the only one that was not a dog fight--although even this one was for about 10 minutes in the second half.

Truth is we could be 8-0, but also could be 1-7.

Nuh-uh, that's not how math works.

What you're saying is analogous to saying Obama could easily have lost the 2012 Florida election just because he only won by a tiny margin (<1%). The margin of victory isn't what matters; what matters is the probability that the losing candidate might actually have turned that tiny margin on its head. Just because it's the outcome is a close win doesn't mean it's very likely that it might have gone the other way and been a close loss.

The Pats are winning by an average point differential of 6.6 points. The 2003 Pats' average point differential was a comparable 6.9 but they went 14-2, were a generally dominant team, and won the SB. To claim that they might have wound up 9-7 or something is at best an empty statement and at worst a wrong one.