Snowball's Chance: Thoughts from Canada, eh.

[JSn]

I want to be clear, I don't think we're doooooomed and losing 4 games wouldn't bother me much.

What IS concerning is the collapses on the road and the failure of the tea to keep their wits about them for the entire game. That will be costly in the playoff's. It could be costly on Sunday.

I don't side with those who believe we lack the talent to be dominant. We simply lack the experience and scheming to be dominant.

 

[Patspsycho]

I don't think he looks stupid although he's clearly playing the I told you so card. For all the rational ass covering predictions and prognostications here there remains a widespread irrational subconscious mindset where any loss is proof of impending epic failure. In game threads here it routinely reveals it's ugly head on basically a play by play basis.

I understand your point. What irritates me is how often people just make outlandish claims and just make things up without checking basic facts or doing a little research.

 

[dtbrks]

Well, the schedule this year is harder than last year...

Team totals for the (4) road losses

Wins -34
Losses - 10

Of course the Jets are the only team under .500 they played on the road.

 

[supafly]

Note to all those who, uh, forgot what they predicted at the start of the season, you can click on each response to see who predicted what. This thread should be a sticky. FWIW, supafly said 12-4.

What you are referring to is one of the many "official" prediction threads, and I don't blame you, because it coincidently happens to be the one that is on page one currently. That is the only one where you had to select something in a poll, most of the other "official" prediction threads simply made you state your case for your opinion.

In most of the other "official" season prediction threads what I specifically said was "11-5 at worst, 12-4 at best." It doesn't really matter because I am right on with the prediction regardless, but in this particular poll I must've decided to go with 12-4 instead of 11-5, thank you for pointing out where to find it , etc. I appreciate the contribution.

The point of the statement was a response to "Richard Seymour" who was claiming that most of us were predicting 16-0, and didn't know how to cope with 4 or 5 losses. I was simply pointing out that was not the case at all. When I am wrong, I do not mind admitting it at all, however, if you take the time to look at the other 'official" prediction threads you will see a lot of 11-5 talk from me too. At any rate, 12-4 or 11-5---it isn't much of a difference, but the point was to prove that 16-0 was nowhere near my thinking, nor most here who were rational.

 

[BionicPatriot]

It really concerns me the persistent issues we've had at OL. We seem to have LT figured out, now this season more than ever Koppen is getting ate up. He was the LVP Monday night for us. The man constantly let the blitzing LB/DL through. For all the people crying about the OC, I don't give a damn who's calling plays. No offense is moving the chains when your QB has a man up the middle in his face all day.

 

[MassPats38]

I want to be clear, I don't think we're doooooomed and losing 4 games wouldn't bother me much.

What IS concerning is the collapses on the road and the failure of the tea to keep their wits about them for the entire game. That will be costly in the playoff's. It could be costly on Sunday.

I don't side with those who believe we lack the talent to be dominant. We simply lack the experience and scheming to be dominant.

I didn't take your post specifically as such. My response was more a generalized response to comments I've been seeing. With New York, the game was early in the season and offense was poor. In Denver, the defense played fairly well and the offense lagged (I won't say poor because nobody had put more than 14 points on Denver at that time and the offense rang up 17 in the first half). In New Orleans and Indy, it was likely the opposite. If the offense puts up 30 points, regardless of whether those points come in the first or second half, that unit does its job. If the defense keeps the opposing team to under 14 (let's say 24 with teams like Indy or NO), it does its job.

While the Patriots are a team, I suspect other than when players have a role on both units (and even Vrabel seemed to take little joy in offensive success when he caught TDs), offense, defense and special teams are taught to "do their job" and take care of their side of the ball. These "collapses" tend to be on one phase of the game, and not always the same one. That means if both offense and defense took care of their respective ends, the team would be 10-1 (but as Parcells always says, you are only as good as your record so I am only talking potential here).

On the road question, the Pats have played 4 road games, one of which was against a head coach who spent years with the Pats and likely knew the personnel and units as well as anybody could. Two other losses were against two 11-0 teams. If the road games are truly an issue, and not just the level of competition and the proportionally smaller margin of error to win such games, the rest of the season should spell that out. I take some heart in the 3 quarters in Indy and the fact both offense and defense took the Colts to task in a loud and hostile environment. My suspicion at this point would be "home" and "away" is a red herring, and the deficiencies are more related to the specific opponents and matchups presented at the time.

 

[Kontradiction]

I want to be clear, I don't think we're doooooomed and losing 4 games wouldn't bother me much.

What IS concerning is the collapses on the road and the failure of the tea to keep their wits about them for the entire game. That will be costly in the playoff's. It could be costly on Sunday.

I don't side with those who believe we lack the talent to be dominant. We simply lack the experience and scheming to be dominant.

We do have talent on this team, but we do not have it in the places where we have traditionally had it. The loss of Seymour has killed this team in our losses and at times in which we have gone up against a good offensive line. With Seymour on the team, it made the defensive line more able to generate a push with three or four man fronts which would then allow most everyone else to drop back into coverage. Without Seymour this season, not only have we been susceptible to runs off the right side of the line, we've also not been able to generate the pass rush. Add to that fact that Jerod Mayo looks to be the one true playmaker that we have in the LB corps (AD is not worth what he makes and TBC is a decent pass rusher, but not a game changer) and we have serious problems on the defensive front. Mayo does not blitz all that often and the guys that we do send (particularly TBC and AD) are not getting there nearly enough which leaves our overstretched DB's looking like sitting ducks, particularly against good quarterbacks. And, while our safeties may be one of the best groups that BB has fielded since he's been here, we do not have a true playmaker at the cornerback position either. Wilhite has taken a step back, Bodden is more or less a #2 CB playing a #1 position, Springs is good but is long in the tooth and hurt, and Butler looks like he could be something special but is raw and is a rookie.

The bottom line is that the best thing we can do for ourselves is to either have Crable emerge next season or add a playmaker to the OLB spot and give him AD's money, replace Guyton with someone a little more reliable both in coverage and run support, and hope for the best with Butler (who should be emerging as a major threat this time next season). The defense is ranked high, but is still very much a work in progress.