Time to go Dien Bien Phu ~ Bring On The Hate!!

[Ring 6]

But is it enough? In the regular season, we know the answer is yes. As OTG alluded to, things might be different in the postseason.

Things might be different could mean anything. It would only suggest there is nothing to talk about because everything may not be relevant.

I'm thinking about 2010, mostly. I know that team thrived off of turnovers in a way this team doesn't, but it still feels like the closest comparison.

Why? I don’t see similarities. 2010 had a poor secondary and allowed more than 17 points 11 times in the rs and 24 or more in half of their rs games.
This d has allowed more than 17 only 6 times and twice since week 4 and 24 only 5 times.
The only reason to call them similar is to look for a reason for the defense to have a bad playoff game.

Terrible YPG,

Tha hasn’t been the case since week4.

great PPG, great offense, demolished the regular season (in impressive fashion against good teams often on the road). There was nothing to suggest how it would end, but in retrospect, maybe the defensive yards-points allowed disparity is a place to look.

You are starting from an answer then trying to claim the reason you want to use is why with no real backup.
I know that this is the 12th season B.B. has had his defense better than 10 in points allowed and we were in the SB 6 of the previous 11 and Only were in the SB 1 time with a 10 or worse ranking.
I’m comfortable saying that a 6/11 chance (and 5/11 winning it) is good to me.

If you use 7th or better like we are now we have gone to the SB 5 of 7 times.

That seems to have more correlation than yeah but 2010

 

[Ring 6]

How had the defensive yards vs. points allowed anything to say about how 2010 ended ? If Crumpler doesnt drop that ball in the first quarter and we go up by 7 instead of 3 who knows how the game goes ? Or the fake punt ?

I get that people like to somehow build narratives out of random things that go wrong and try to rationalize unexpected results by trying to find things that might have been early indicators of hidden problems but the loss to the Jets was not one of those.

Almost everything that could go wrong went wrong that day and then the season was over.

Teams play bad games. Trying to find a statistical reason in the average numbers over 16 games to predict a future bad game is silly.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Despite what I think is a weak opposing field of teams this post season, I feel that this year's Patriot's chances are strongly limited by the # of starters on IR or on the 53 but not ready to play near their level. Any further losses could kill us vs what seem like beatable teams.
But that is why they PLAY the games. Anything can happen as long as you're IN the Tournament. Coaching & Brady are always a threat to tip unequal scales toward our favor.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Teams play bad games. Trying to find a statistical reason in the average numbers over 16 games to predict a future bad game is silly.

Yup, you just hope that if you have a stinker of a game ( Buf 2003, Miami 2004, Miami this year, KC 2014, KC this year, Clev 2010,Philly 2015 with pick 6/block punt and punt return) it is during the regular season and not during the playoffs (2010 Ravens where it was 24-0 before the first quarter was out). Let anyone think it is just something that affects the Patriots, I think of one game very long ago in particular.
1994 a very pedestrian Philadelphia Eagles went into SF in October and destroyed the 49ers 40-8.. Those same SF 49ers would go on to easily win the Super Bowl blowing out SD...They had a bad day....
On the flip side, some team can turn it on in the playoffs. The one time Peyton's Colts won a Super Bowl they had the league's worst run defense in the regular season. They turned it around in the post season and carried him to a Lombardi.....
It happens to every team throwing up a stinker once in a while ( or if you're Cleveland, on days that end in 'y') and you're right there is no statistical basis for it, but it happens....... like a team blowing a 28-3 lead late in the 3rd quarter....

 

[PatsFanSince74]

...

But just because one Loss can be written off an horrific confluence of bad breaks doesn't mean that we wouldn't've gotten exposed later on.

That is a really interesting sentence.

I often think about the role that randomness in the form of luck, skill or breaks plays in the outcome of a game or season. Randomness that is bad for one team is usually good for another.

Randomness sometimes manifests itself as almost pure luck (the magic helmet catch by a guy who never played another down in the NFL or any time a fumble bounces one way and not another at a crucial juncture) or as skill (Edelmann's catch last year) or as a break that might or might not have occurred but did occur (the Official Reviews in the Tuck Game and with Jesse James' catch two weeks ago...I happen to believe that both of those reviews came up with the right answer, but we all know that there's nothing that says the Officials had to get it right ). Sometimes skill needs luck: it was Hightower's skill that stripped Ryan of the ball, but we needed a little luck for it to bounce where Branch could recover it.

So, what am I trying to say? Teams have at most 19 or 20 games in which weaknesses might or might not get "exposed" as you put it. In the case of the Jets' loss, a lot of things had to go wrong and did (your "horrific confluence of bad breaks"). So, we'll never know what weaknesses might have been exposed "later on."

But, 19 or 20 games doesn't allow for a theoretical "infinitely long run" in which the best team would inevitably prevail. The team that comes out on top in any given year is the team that played well enough to win every game it had to win and was blessed with the right mix of luck, skill and breaks at the right times and in the right places.

So, we're left with outcomes where luck, skill and breaks all have a say in the ultimate winner.

And, this is why it is so remarkable that Belichick and Brady have gotten as far as seven SB's and actually won five of them. Without the Tuck Reversal, the five would almost certainly have been four. Without Butler's pick and Edelmann's catch, the four were almost certainly two.

On the other hand, without the magic helmet catch, the five would likely have been six and without Welker's drop, the six would likely have been seven.

Will we look back on the Officials getting it right on the Jesse James' reversal as the break that propelled the Pats to HFA, another AFC Championship and a sixth Lombardi? I'm looking forward to finding out.

 

[Tunescribe]

The poll is self-indulgent.

 

[Oswlek]

How had the defensive yards vs. points allowed anything to say about how 2010 ended ? If Crumpler doesnt drop that ball in the first quarter and we go up by 7 instead of 3 who knows how the game goes ? Or the fake punt ?

I get that people like to somehow build narratives out of random things that go wrong and try to rationalize unexpected results by trying to find things that might have been early indicators of hidden problems but the loss to the Jets was not one of those.

Almost everything that could go wrong went wrong that day and then the season was over.

To supplement your point, Brady's pick on the first drive was an unforced error that wiped at least 3 points off the board. And the fake punt would have gained at least 20 yards if not for the bobble.

The Jets deserved to win, but it took several bullets in NE's own feet for it to happen.

On the flip side, I like to remind people on occasion that the Pats were a Drew Bennett drop away from likely losing to TN in 2003.

Even "championship caliber" teams need a little luck.... and can lose if luck breaks against them.

 

[supafly]

Even "championship caliber" teams need a little luck.... and can lose if luck breaks against them.

It feels like this statement rings true for us each and every year, particularly the 7 (recent) trips to the SB.

Sometimes it’s creating your own luck...but sometimes it’s just how fate wishes it to be.

 

[luuked]

Even "championship caliber" teams need a little luck.... and can lose if luck breaks against them.

Of course. For the most part football games are decided by 6-7 individual situations. That can be a receiver catching or dropping a ball, the ball bouncing a certain way, a player slipping..

Look no further than Hightower's strip/sack on Ryan in the SB. If he gets there a third of a second later this is an incomplete pass instead of a fumble and everything plays out differently. Yes he made a play but the difference between a turnover and an incompletion was not completely up to him but also a lot to chance.

The flipside of this play is the helmet catch by Tyree where the timing just didn't work out to break up the pass.

People like to go on with those convoluted narratives why teams lost certain games when the reality is that often how a play ends is just pure random chance.

 

[DarrylS]

While luck is a factor, you get luckier when your coach(es) prepare you well for situational football.. SB 49 for example, some of the first words uttered by Butler after the Int. was how the team prepared for that situation.

After the Steelers game, Duron Harmon pretty much said the same thing after his int.... do not think teams get as "lucky" if they are not a prepared for what is or will be happenning.

 

[Off The Grid]

Well done, @Off The Grid .

Your post raises a handful of follow-up questions which I have neither the resources nor time to research. Here are a couple:

-Is it a routine matter for the Pats' defense to get better over the course of the season? Does history show a pattern here? And thus, render the "yards allowed" stats to be essentially meaningless by playoff time?

Thank you kindly, Bro!!

01 ~ Yes, it is indeed a routine matter for the Patriots' Defense ~ and the Patriots' Offense, as well ~ to improve over the course of the season. I'll leave statistical research to anyone who cares to brave that daunting task, but I can tell you that as far back as The Beginning ~ 2001 ~ the Patriots have long established a pattern of stumbling out'f the gate...then gradually forging Greatness.

2001 ~ 1-3
2003 ~ 2-2
2014 ~ 2-2

I don't agree, though, that that refutes the correlation that I've suggested.

 

[Off The Grid]

-Does the tendency towards high "yards allowed" lead to worse field position, thus setting up the essential nature of Brady and the steady offense, as mentioned by @RelocatedPatFan above? Without Brady and the offense, how many "points allowed" would the short field issue cause?

Awesome question.

No way in Hell can I find the time to even begin to research the answer.

"The Best Defense is a Good Offense", they say, and of course the reverse holds some Truth, as well. I've long felt that the Offense's impact on Defense and vice versa is generally criminally understated, but quantifying that is daunting.

 

[Joker]

why would anyone ever want to off the grid?

I love the grid...especially the part that belongs to griddle cakes...

Now let's have a good joke to start the year off right!

 

[Off The Grid]

That's very fair, and I'll be the first to declare the 2010 Team felt like the Alpha Team of the League...In fact, I very recently compared our Divisional Loss to the Jets, inexplicable as it was, to the Miners losing to the Vikings in 1987.

Sometimes the best Team doesn't win it all.

But just because one Loss can be written off as an horrific confluence of bad breaks doesn't mean that we wouldn't've gotten exposed later on.

That is a really interesting sentence.

I often think about the role that randomness in the form of luck, skill or breaks plays in the outcome of a game or season. Randomness that is bad for one team is usually good for another.

Randomness sometimes manifests itself as almost pure luck (the magic helmet catch by a guy who never played another down in the NFL or any time a fumble bounces one way and not another at a crucial juncture) or as skill (Edelmann's catch last year) or as a break that might or might not have occurred but did occur (the Official Reviews in the Tuck Game and with Jesse James' catch two weeks ago...I happen to believe that both of those reviews came up with the right answer, but we all know that there's nothing that says the Officials had to get it right ). Sometimes skill needs luck: it was Hightower's skill that stripped Ryan of the ball, but we needed a little luck for it to bounce where Branch could recover it.

So, what am I trying to say? Teams have at most 19 or 20 games in which weaknesses might or might not get "exposed" as you put it. In the case of the Jets' loss, a lot of things had to go wrong and did (your "horrific confluence of bad breaks"). So, we'll never know what weaknesses might have been exposed "later on."

But, 19 or 20 games doesn't allow for a theoretical "infinitely long run" in which the best team would inevitably prevail. The team that comes out on top in any given year is the team that played well enough to win every game it had to win and was blessed with the right mix of luck, skill and breaks at the right times and in the right places.

So, we're left with outcomes where luck, skill and breaks all have a say in the ultimate winner.

And, this is why it is so remarkable that Belichick and Brady have gotten as far as seven SB's and actually won five of them. Without the Tuck Reversal, the five would almost certainly have been four. Without Butler's pick and Edelmann's catch, the four were almost certainly two.

On the other hand, without the magic helmet catch, the five would likely have been six and without Welker's drop, the six would likely have been seven.

Excellent post!!

No question that, except for a few Clutch Plays and Lucky Breaks, the Patriots could've easily lost or not even made Super Bowls 36, 38, 49, and 51...leaving this storied Franchise with a grand total of ONE Championship.

And I tend to bypass what we did when playing the "what if" game, because within that context, I figure that we control what we do, and should live with it.

But in terms of our having been blatantly and undeniably screwed raw by scum like Goodel and the New York Media conglomerate that's jealous of our intrinsic Yankee Superiority, and've thus stolen Draft Picks and, in the case of the 2006 Championship Game against the Colts, where Ellis Hobbs was flagged for a phantom penalty that didn't even exist anymore, despite what the pathetic, caulksucking TV scum bellowed, and which resulted in nothing less than an officially documented Letter of Apology to the aforementioned Hobbs??

2006.
2007.
2011.
2015.

So, yeah: It could've been ONE Championship.

But it could've just as easily been NINE.

Me? I'm content to split the difference with FIVE. I'm a reasonable guy.

Or as the legendary Dreamer Tatum puts it: "What could've happened...did."

 

[CutiePie]

i dont have a good feel for your intelligence.....but you dont seem like a dummy

but i have always liked your braveheart avatar of stephen the irishman

he was attractive and charismatic

@Off The Grid

 

[Off The Grid]

why would anyone ever want to off the grid?

I love the grid...especially the part that belongs to griddle cakes...

Now let's have a good joke to start the year off right!

Why...thank...you...Brother Joker.

 

[Off The Grid]

i dont have a good feel for your intelligence.....but you dont seem like a dummy

but i have always liked your braveheart avatar of stephen the irishman

he was attractive and charismatic

@Off The Grid

Once more, with feeling: Why, thank you, Bro...I think...

I like to believe that I'm still attractive and charismatic...But'f course I'll humbly leave that assessment to others...preferably Breeders, No Offense Meant.

 

[Off The Grid]

The poll is self-indulgent.

Your impotent hatred of me ~ and you utter inability to stop yourself from flacidly lashing out at me ~ continues to amuse me. Greatly appreciated.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Excellent post!!
...
So, yeah: It could've been ONE Championship.

But it could've just as easily been NINE.

Me? I'm content to split the difference with FIVE. I'm a reasonable guy.

Or as the legendary Dreamer Tatum puts it: "What could've happened...did."

Thanks.

"'What could've happened...did.'" A truism, but one about which many of us, myself included, often need to be reminded too often.

I'm going to steal that and add it to my own favorite truism, which is also all too easy to ignore:

"What cannot continue, must end."

That one is usually attributed to some big shot on Wall Street, but I personally think it was probably made up by some guy in the Mail Room.

Both clearly apply to life in the NFL.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

While luck is a factor, you get luckier when your coach(es) prepare you well for situational football.. SB 49 for example, some of the first words uttered by Butler after the Int. was how the team prepared for that situation.

After the Steelers game, Duron Harmon pretty much said the same thing after his int.... do not think teams get as "lucky" if they are not a prepared for what is or will be happenning.

I don't think you'd disagree that Butler's pick was "skill," honed by preparation, and not a "break" or "luck."

Here's how I'd rephrase what Harmon said (without disagreeing with what he did say):

The teams that succeed are, with rare exception, the teams that hone their "skill" levels so that they can take advantage of good "luck" and good "breaks" while also having a shot at overcoming bad luck and bad breaks.

It's no accident that the two Patriot SB losses were to Tom Coughlin teams.
Yes, Tyree made the magic helmet catch, but the Giants still had to score.
Yes, Welker dropped that pass, but the Giants still had to march down the field to score.

Just like, yes, the Pats got the Tuck Reversal (a "break" that I agree was the right call, but, as I said in my longer post above, there's nothing that says the Officials have to "get it right" on a Review) but the Pats still had to tie and win the game (a fact that Raiders fans seem to forget).