Still Have Not Heard It Yet

[sb1]

Of course the 2011 defense sucked. Everyone knows this.

But how did a team with a bad defense end up in the SB? Because of their high powered offense that scored 513points!

The defense performed as expected in the SB. The offense performed below expectations. And that is why its fair to blame the offense for the loss.

Brady and the offense unfortunately did not play well enough to carry a historically wretched defense in SB 46. I already said this. No Pats fans, myself included, absolve the offense of blame for this nor the SB42 loss when the Giants defense just beat us into submission.

But to call a flaming hot trash pile of a defense "good" to further an agenda is just factually wrong and also laughable. As is the idea that such a defense did good if played like merely a hot trash pile of a defense instead of a flaming one.

 

[Kontradiction]

Of course the 2011 defense sucked. Everyone knows this.

But how did a team with a bad defense end up in the SB? Because of their high powered offense that scored 513points!

The defense performed as expected in the SB. The offense performed below expectations. And that is why its fair to blame the offense for the loss.

That offense was playing with a LG on a torn ACL and a TE that was gimpy and mostly relegated to a decoy role. I don't think any of us are talking about not putting any blame on the offense whatsoever for the loss. I would put the blame there on personnel decisions and mostly the OL. Chris, here, is putting the blame solely on Brady, saying he "sucked" and was "trash". That's not accurate. But if you're looking at it as one unit or the other more responsible for the loss, it's the defense. You can try to make it as gray as you want (you'd need to if you're trying to absolve them), but they were handed the game both times with the lead and proceeded to blow the lead on each occasion. That's really as black and white as you need to get with it and it's a very simple concept.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

That offense was playing with a LG on a torn ACL and a TE that was gimpy and mostly relegated to a decoy role. I don't think any of us are talking about not putting any blame on the offense whatsoever for the loss. I would put the blame there on personnel decisions and mostly the OL. Chris, here, is putting the blame solely on Brady, saying he "sucked" and was "trash". That's not accurate. But if you're looking at it as one unit or the other more responsible for the loss, it's the defense. You can try to make it as gray as you want (you'd need to if you're trying to absolve them), but they were handed the game both times with the lead and proceeded to blow the lead on each occasion. That's really as black and white as you need to get with it and it's a very simple concept.

Yeah, and the D was injured, with guys off the street or anything like that.

I am done with this.

Your side is seriously so infatuated with an adult male athlete named Brady, you cannot even admit when he screws up too many times, helping us lose a game.

My god.

Move on already.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

Brady and the offense unfortunately did not play well enough to carry a historically wretched defense in SB 46. I already said this. No Pats fans, myself included, absolve the offense of blame for this nor the SB42 loss when the Giants defense just beat us into submission.

But to call a flaming hot trash pile of a defense "good" to further an agenda is just factually wrong and also laughable. As is the idea that such a defense did good if played like merely a hot trash pile of a defense instead of a flaming one.

This is how I know you don't know NFL history. I can rattle off numerous playoff Ds that were 3"ranked" low, including the 2001 Pats D.

2006 Colts D was ranked 32nd, but even Gomer couldn't screw that one up.

If your D leads the conference in turnovers and holds a lead RB to about 80 -90 yards per game, it's factually impossible, based on the history of the league, to call the 2011 Pats D "historically wretched", Tony Mazz.

Or, are you Felger or "Big Jim" Toolbox Murray?

It's over. The "BB is a big meanie and doesn't have good defenses" 98.5 schtick they've brainwashed you and others with to attack BB's brilliance as a defensive mind, is all over. You know, there's a SB on Sunday, and anti-BB talking heads are trying to brainwash us again, that the D is bad.

The game is about red zone D and turnovers tied to a good/great offense. That's how BB builds his teams.

Sure, the 2011 D lacked talent while starting the rebuild, lacked some depth, but allowing 13 points, begging for the offense to do anything, is on the offense.

I still remember Warren, Vince and Shaun Ellis, wincing in pain on the sidelines, with Brady's inaccurate throw and his buddy Welker's awful drop while wide open.

That had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the D.

 

[Kontradiction]

Yeah, and the D was injured, with guys off the street or anything like that.

I am done with this.

Your side is seriously so infatuated with an adult male athlete named Brady, you cannot even admit when he screws up too many times, helping us lose a game.

My god.

Move on already.

They were. That's why they sucked throughout the season and lost the Super Bowl for the team in the final minutes. Glad to see you're coming around. I'm also glad to see you're taking my advice and stepping away. See you around.

 

[sb1]

This is how I know you don't know NFL history. I can rattle off numerous playoff Ds that were 3"ranked" low, including the 2001 Pats D.

2006 Colts D was ranked 32nd, but even Gomer couldn't screw that one up.

If your D leads the conference in turnovers and holds a lead RB to about 80 -90 yards per game, it's factually impossible, based on the history of the league, to call the 2011 Pats D "historically wretched", Tony Mazz.

Or, are you Felger or "Big Jim" Toolbox Murray?

It's over. The "BB is a big meanie and doesn't have good defenses" 98.5 schtick they've brainwashed you and others with to attack BB's brilliance as a defensive mind, is all over. You know, there's a SB on Sunday, and anti-BB talking heads are trying to brainwash us again, that the D is bad.

The game is about red zone D and turnovers tied to a good/great offense. That's how BB builds his teams.

Sure, the 2011 D lacked talent while starting the rebuild, lacked some depth, but allowing 13 points, begging for the offense to do anything, is on the offense.

I still remember Warren, Vince and Shaun Ellis, wincing in pain on the sidelines, with Brady's inaccurate throw and his buddy Welker's awful drop while wide open.

That had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the D.

That defense was horrible by every objective and tangible measure.

The Super Bowls were no different.

And they deserve a massive amount of blame for the outcome, regardless of what agenda you're trying to chase.

Funny how nobody would describe the 2015 Broncos defense the way you do the Pats. And yet they too were playing in this era.

Those are not opinions. They're facts.

Didn't you say you were done with this?

 

[Kontradiction]

This is how I know you don't know NFL history. I can rattle off numerous playoff Ds that were 3"ranked" low, including the 2001 Pats D.

2006 Colts D was ranked 32nd, but even Gomer couldn't screw that one up.

If your D leads the conference in turnovers and holds a lead RB to about 80 -90 yards per game, it's factually impossible, based on the history of the league, to call the 2011 Pats D "historically wretched", Tony Mazz.

Or, are you Felger or "Big Jim" Toolbox Murray?

It's over. The "BB is a big meanie and doesn't have good defenses" 98.5 schtick they've brainwashed you and others with to attack BB's brilliance as a defensive mind, is all over. You know, there's a SB on Sunday, and anti-BB talking heads are trying to brainwash us again, that the D is bad.

The game is about red zone D and turnovers tied to a good/great offense. That's how BB builds his teams.

Sure, the 2011 D lacked talent while starting the rebuild, lacked some depth, but allowing 13 points, begging for the offense to do anything, is on the offense.

I still remember Warren, Vince and Shaun Ellis, wincing in pain on the sidelines, with Brady's inaccurate throw and his buddy Welker's awful drop while wide open.

That had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the D.

If that throw had been placed where you wanted it to be, it's likely coming back the other way. The safety was making a bee line toward that area. Brady threw it away, Welker adjusted because he saw the same thing, the ball hit Welker in the hands, and he dropped it.

The offense put up enough points to carry the lead into New York's last possession of the game in spite of the fact that Brady was sitting on the sidelines for nearly a quarter less than Eli was, in spite of the fact that the interior was leaking like a sieve (we later learned Mankins was playing on a torn ACL), and in spite of the fact that his #1 target which just enjoyed one of the best seasons for a TE in NFL history was playing with a bum ankle. Nobody is arguing that Brady played his A-game. That's you straw-manning the thread half to death because you don't have much of a point otherwise. We're arguing that he played good enough to win. The defense then did what the defense did so often during that period - collapsed. Folded like a tent. 88 yards and six points later, the game was out of reach.

By the way, I thought you were "done"?

 

[sb1]

If that throw had been placed where you wanted it to be, it's likely coming back the other way. The safety was making a bee line toward that area. Brady threw it away, Welker adjusted because he saw the same thing, the ball hit Welker in the hands, and he dropped it.

Yeah, or Welker gets blown up and it's a fumble. I think Brady's mistake there wasn't the throw itself like many believe...it was waiting too long and letting the safety read him and move toward Welker - and that forced Brady to make a much more difficult back shoulder throw. It was not an easy ball to catch but it was catchable.

 

[Soliel]

It is possible to cut both ways. The giants defense was more effective than I thought they would be. That’s part of it. Brady didn’t have stellar games but I thought he played well enough to win. The defense just didn’t get it done.

 

[IllegalContact]

They were not THE reason (I never said they were) but they certainly were a very large reason. It's myopic or in denial to say they were not to blame and it was all on the offense.

As I said. Giving up nearly 30 carries/115 yards and 7 first downs to the league WORST rush offense... and an 88 yard game losing TD drive...sorry. There is plenty of blame that should go their way.

Wrong......you simply don’t win super bowls scoring 14 points.....you don’t win much more scoring 17

 

[sb1]

Wrong......you simply don’t win super bowls scoring 14 points.....you don’t win much more scoring 17

There is an excellent reason why the 11 Giants are considered by many to be the worst SB champion of all time. 17 points should have been sufficient against that team. If the Pats defense was good or even average...it would have been.

Or perhaps it’s not too much to ask to not get punched in the mouth by the 32nd (last) ranked rush offense in the league and therefore gotten the offense on the field more often to score more points.

Either way... there is no grounds to say the offense deserves all the blame for the loss.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

It is possible to cut both ways. The giants defense was more effective than I thought they would be. That’s part of it. Brady didn’t have stellar games but I thought he played well enough to win. The defense just didn’t get it done.

lol

So, the Safety (2 points), loss of possesion on 1st downs, twice, (the other was the INT where a field goal was right there), so that's 5 points, you wouldn;t like on the scoreboard?

We win the game right there alone.

Unreal. Why do people just completely ignore massive blunders by Brady? How are these good decisions?

On all 3 Brady gaffes, there is potential for 5 point and upwards of 3-4 mins of clock.

Think about that.

If NE's holds Philly to FGs all night on Sunday, we win. Get it?

 

[Chris Stevenson]

If that throw had been placed where you wanted it to be, it's likely coming back the other way. The safety was making a bee line toward that area. Brady threw it away, Welker adjusted because he saw the same thing, the ball hit Welker in the hands, and he dropped it.

The offense put up enough points to carry the lead into New York's last possession of the game in spite of the fact that Brady was sitting on the sidelines for nearly a quarter less than Eli was, in spite of the fact that the interior was leaking like a sieve (we later learned Mankins was playing on a torn ACL), and in spite of the fact that his #1 target which just enjoyed one of the best seasons for a TE in NFL history was playing with a bum ankle. Nobody is arguing that Brady played his A-game. That's you straw-manning the thread half to death because you don't have much of a point otherwise. We're arguing that he played good enough to win. The defense then did what the defense did so often during that period - collapsed. Folded like a tent. 88 yards and six points later, the game was out of reach.

By the way, I thought you were "done"?

False.

#21 is coasting into the frame after Welker drops it. Welker can continue running up the seam if it's on his hip.

Brady threw off his back foot and didn't step into it. That is why the ball was wide left.

There, now I am done.

 

[Kontradiction]

False.

#21 is coasting into the frame after Welker drops it. Welker can continue running up the seam if it's on his hip.

Brady threw off his back foot and didn't step into it. That is why the ball was wide left.

There, now I am done.

Yeah, so, this is all wrong. I’ll post the breakdown NFLN breakdown of that play and then I’ll go from there...



1. Brady didn’t throw off his back foot at all. There is a very clear weight transfer from back to front foot. So that’s another thing you’ve made up out of thin air.

2. The safety is closing in going from right to left on the screen. A throw back toward the middle of the field either sets Welker up for the kill shot or is coming back the other way.

 

[IllegalContact]

There is an excellent reason why the 11 Giants are considered by many to be the worst SB champion of all time. 17 points should have been sufficient against that team. If the Pats defense was good or even average...it would have been.

Or perhaps it’s not too much to ask to not get punched in the mouth by the 32nd (last) ranked rush offense in the league and therefore gotten the offense on the field more often to score more points.

Either way... there is no grounds to say the offense deserves all the blame for the loss.

The offense was the primary problem

 

[Joker]

some good LSD on this thread....

 

[StockingAnarchyNumber12]

Yeah, and the D was injured, with guys off the street or anything like that.

I am done with this.

Your side is seriously so infatuated with an adult male athlete named Brady, you cannot even admit when he screws up too many times, helping us lose a game.

My god.

Move on already.

I rated your post funny because you're burying yourself so deep that its becoming a comedy routine.......

 

[TB_Helmet]

some good LSD on this thread....

Y

Yeah, so, this is all wrong. I’ll post the breakdown NFLN breakdown of that play and then I’ll go from there...



1. Brady didn’t throw off his back foot at all. There is a very clear weight transfer from back to front foot. So that’s another thing you’ve made up out of thin air.

2. The safety is closing in going from right to left on the screen. A throw back toward the middle of the field either sets Welker up for the kill shot or is coming back the other way.

Just sucked it up and watched that play again. Wow, people think Brady threw that ball off his back foot? We must have a drastically different perception of the game of football. That's about as far from reality as saying Dion Lewis didn't fumble the ball against the Jaguars!

It wasn't the easiest catch in the world, but it was still reasonable. 6 out of 10 maybe on the difficulty scale, all things considered. Also, Wes Welker's whole life was leading up to that moment and he did not come through, and that's why he retired without ever having won the Super Bowl. He gets paid millions of dollars because he's expected to make that catch. Any blame on Brady for that play should be limited to 20% at most, Welker gets the other 80%.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Y


Just sucked it up and watched that play again. Wow, people think Brady threw that ball off his back foot? We must have a drastically different perception of the game of football. That's about as far from reality as saying Dion Lewis didn't fumble the ball against the Jaguars!

It wasn't the easiest catch in the world, but it was still reasonable. 6 out of 10 maybe on the difficulty scale, all things considered. Also, Wes Welker's whole life was leading up to that moment and he did not come through, and that's why he retired without ever having won the Super Bowl. He gets paid millions of dollars because he's expected to make that catch. Any blame on Brady for that play should be limited to 20% at most, Welker gets the other 80%.

Any doubt amendola catches that ball? It's unfortunate but the offense carried the team that year and welker just missed it. Simple as that.

 

[RIpats88]

Gronks injury ulimtately was the big factor in us losing in 2011. the giants even said as much. Once they realized gronk was a decoy they stopped doubling him.

if he doesnt sprain that ankle I think we wouldve won that game. Also, those offenses in 2010 - 2012 had a propensity to be stopped by physical defenses as Welker,hernandez, lloyd etc. seemed to be shut down by physical defenses in the playoffs.

that changed somewhat in 2014 when they had Edelman/Gronk. those two guys abuse physical defenses.