Slate.com Writer hits the Nail on the Head

[Grizzafted]

Been meaning to register for a while. Hi. I got high hopes this season, folks, big test coming this Sunday. Tone-setting game.

Anyway, I don't know if anyone posted this yet, but this guy from Slate wrote a great article about the crappy NBC football highlights show (I'd like to throw Bettis under a bus), and he hits the nail on the head about the Patriots, and makes a point I've already been thinking so far this season.

There's all this talk about Brady "not looking good" and "not playing well," and it's making my head hurt. Are football commentators that idiotic? Are their memories that short?? Brady never got credit about being a top-rung NFL quarterback until last season, when he put up huge numbers because their D was putting the offense on the field every 2 minutes. Prior to that, in 04 and 03, his QB rating was always 80-90 and he rarely threw for over 200 yards. They'd score first, the games would stay close for the whole 60 minutes, and they'd survive on a clutch throw or defensive stop.

Anyway, I'm not saying this is another SB year necessarily, just that all this talk about Brady's numbers being no good and the WR issues being a season killer are idiots. Jerome Bettis really said with a straight face that they "don't look like a playoff team" to him. Sour taste in your mouth still, pal?

Rage, Rage Against the Dying of the Highlight
Why football clips aren't as good as they used to be.
By Robert Weintraub
Posted Tuesday, Sept. 19, 2006, at 3:51 PM ET
NBC's Football Night in America team

http://www.slate.com/id/2149978

 

[Sunqueen212]

You should consider posting just a paragraph and a link. It's a copyright thingie.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Good first post Grizz! A good read, but Sunqueen is right, posting the entire story or large enough chunks gets Ian into copyright trouble.

Ignore the fellow with the panty fetish, you won't need as many rabies shots that way.

Welcome aboard!

 

[njpatsfan]

I thought Slate had gone out of business.

Well, at least Grizz won't have to worry about them hiring any lawyers.

R

 

[patsox23]

GREAT first post, interesting stuff. Post more, and welcome aboard.

 

[Hok]

...in 04 and 03...he rarely threw for over 200 yards.

In Brady's 38 regular season and playoff games in '03-'04, he threw for over 200 yards 28 times (or, 74% of the time).

Rarely? I think not.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

I commend him for bringing up how NFL Primetime has been chopped up and sprinkled in an otherwise unwatchable sportscenter.

That is total crap. I hate ESPN! Thank God I am getting DirecTv installed tomorrow.... ESPN needs more competition on traditional cable packages.

 

[kptmorgan04]

great first post.... copywrite excused as your first post (if you ask me haha). never knew that about footage limitations etc.
as far as direct tv and nfl ticket, I am definitly going to get it before next season, luckily I get NFL network now.

 

[Oswlek]

I will agree that the 2003 Pats team played in a bunch of close games, but the 2004 version led the league in average winning margin.

When this team gets its feet set, it will be more like 2004 than 2003.

 

[shmessy]

Good first post Grizz! A good read, but Sunqueen is right, posting the entire story or large enough chunks gets Ian into copyright trouble.

Right on, Box! That's just been fixed.

 

[Grizzafted]

In Brady's 38 regular season and playoff games in '03-'04, he threw for over 200 yards 28 times (or, 74% of the time).

Rarely? I think not.

My memory doth decieve me, I just went and checked his numbers and you're right. Interestingly though, in many of the games where he throws for over 220, he has 2 or more picks too. My point was that ideal numbers for Brady are in the range of 180-250 yds passing, because that means that the running game is firing on all cylinders and they're eating the clock. When he throws for 250-300, it means the game is far too close and they're in a shoot out (or a blow-out, which isn't the case very often with this team).

I'll put it like this: in my eyes, Brady's finest hour was the '04 playoffs. Obviously, the D gets lots of credit for the game planning they put together, but a big part of the wins were the spine-killing drives they would put together at the beginning and end of each half. This was when they shut down the most prolific offense in NFL history and then went into a 15-1 team's house and handed them a huge loss. Brady's numbers?

DATE Opp Score Att Comp Pct Yds TD Int Rate Sac Yds Att Yds Avg Lg TD Fum Rec
01/16 IND W 20-3 Yes 27 18 66.7 144 1 0 92.2 3 29 4 6 1.5 3 1 0 0
01/23 @PIT W 41-27 Yes 21 14 66.7 207 2 0 130.5 2 11 2 -2 -1.0 -1 0 0 0

The Patriots have always been great because of team efforts. When they win, it's because everybody contributes, which is exactly what I've seen so far out of this team. Again, it's early, and the next two weeks are going to be season tone-setters, but I have a good feeling about a deep playoff run at the least.

Anyway, I won't put up any more full articles, I didn't think about copyright issues. Apologies.

 

[shmessy]

Anyway, I won't put up any more full articles, I didn't think about copyright issues. Apologies.

No prob, Grizz. It was an excellent article.

 

[Bella*chick]

I really enjoyed the article and agree with it 100%. Football Night in America is an AWFUL show and I have difficulty even paying attention. I liked Primetime much, much better, but this year's version is no longer "must-see" TV.

The comment about Jerome Bettis "garbling" his comments just cracked me up. It's so true. It's like he's so eager to string together a thought and get it out in his new role as "analyst", he just stumbles over himself. He'll get better, though.

Welcome to the forum!

 

[Grizzafted]

I will agree that the 2003 Pats team played in a bunch of close games, but the 2004 version led the league in average winning margin.

When this team gets its feet set, it will be more like 2004 than 2003.

Go back and look at the schedule in '04. You're right, but I do remember a lot of the games they played against legitimate teams that year being close. The first NYJ game, the Cincinnati game (which I maintain would have been an L if Palmer hadn't gone down in the 4Q), in Buffalo, Edge fumbling twice on the goal line, etc.

The '04 team was a better team than we're fielding this year, in my opinion, but I'm optimistic so far. Digging yourself out of a 10 point hole in the fourth quarter with a defensive stop, two clock-killing drives late in the 4th quarter, Junior Seau taking Ted Johnson's role and playing well... If everybody stays healthy and Eugene Wilson remembers how to tackle, the Pats should beat some good teams this year.

 

[Bella*chick]

The '04 team was a better team than we're fielding this year, in my opinion, but I'm optimistic so far. Digging yourself out of a 10 point hole in the fourth quarter with a defensive stop, two clock-killing drives late in the 4th quarter, Junior Seau taking Ted Johnson's role and playing well... If everybody stays healthy and Eugene Wilson remembers how to tackle, the Pats should beat some good teams this year.

I think this team has to settle in and gel for a bit before any true comparisons to the '04 team can be drawn, although I tend to agree with you that the '04 team may be stronger. I do remember at the beginning of that season, there were plenty of lackluster W's on the Pats part, especially in the first few games (against Arizona being one of them) and most everyone thought the Pats were just going through the motions waiting for the important stuff to start. The real ignition didn't fire until that Rams game after the Steelers loss.

Fortunately for us, our schedule seems to be more forgiving this year, so we should beat plenty of the teams on it. Which is why it's so insulting to have idiots like Bettis predicting us to miss the playoffs.

 

[Oswlek]

Go back and look at the schedule in '04. You're right, but I do remember a lot of the games they played against legitimate teams that year being close. The first NYJ game, the Cincinnati game (which I maintain would have been an L if Palmer hadn't gone down in the 4Q), in Buffalo, Edge fumbling twice on the goal line, etc.

The '04 team was a better team than we're fielding this year, in my opinion, but I'm optimistic so far. Digging yourself out of a 10 point hole in the fourth quarter with a defensive stop, two clock-killing drives late in the 4th quarter, Junior Seau taking Ted Johnson's role and playing well... If everybody stays healthy and Eugene Wilson remembers how to tackle, the Pats should beat some good teams this year.

Yes, there are always going to be some close games. I don't believe that there has ever been a team that didn't have a few nailbiters. However, of NE's 14 wins, 12 of them were by at least 7 points. Only two of those were within one score at the end, the aforementioned Cincy game and the KC game 27-19. That means 10 out of 16 games NE won by more than two scores! There is absolutely no way anyone can say that that isn't a dominant performance.

NE's 2001 and 2003 seasons cast a "close game" shadow on the 2004 version that simply was not and is not accurate. They beat teams handily.

 

[PonyExpress]

Disagree. I like the NBC show much better than ESPN. They get critical of players, and we don't have to listen to Berman's tired blustering cliches. I like Sharpe and Collinsworth, Costas is just an emcee, and Bettis isn't too bad. Bettis' criticism of the Pats not being dominant comes from the fact he never really understood Patriot football. The Steeler under Cowher believe that to win a game you have to beat the opposition not only on the scoreboard, but crush their will and their manhood as well. It is an unnecessarily macho approach compared with BB's clinical scientific understanding of "victory". In Cowher's world, you have to win 24-3 and destroy the other team to be "great". Bettis is just a disciple of that foolishness. I don't hold it against him.

 

[Grizzafted]

Os-

You can't use scores like that, they look one way on paper but are often way different from a game perspective.

First off, the Jets game early in the season was won by 6 points on an incomplete Pennington pass to Chrebet that was broken up by a good defensive play. And the Buffalo game was the same situation: 3rd down, Buffalo redzone possession with a chance to tie (or win, can't remember) the game, and either Bruschi or Seymour hand Bledsoe his lunch and run the fumble back for a TD. The score might look like the Pats won big, but it was a nailbiter. Same thing with the Indy game, and the first Miami game.

By your logic, if Gostkowski hits the field goal last Sunday, you could look on paper and say "not a close game," which doesn't reflect reality. If somebody fumbles or (god forbid) picks off Brady during that last drive it goes to overtime.

There's really no argument here, I'm just not worried about them as a team, and the idea that they shouldn't be ranked in the top 10 in the NFL or mentioned as a team that "might not make the playoffs" is stupid. Commentators have short memories, and every week is a universe for them.

 

[Krugman]

I heartily agree with the article about the demise of" prime time".The NBC replacement is boring.I laughed after the first week,Costas was giving commentary on a number of highlights,no one else said boo.When finished,Costas remarks,"Thanks for the help on that segment ,guys" sarcastically.That was the best part of the show.

 

[Born_a_Patriot]

In Brady's 38 regular season and playoff games in '03-'04, he threw for over 200 yards 28 times (or, 74% of the time).

Rarely? I think not.

Great avatar. Super cool it kind of reminds me of that look Brady sometimes gets when he sees a Opposing DB over celebrating.