New England Patriots thread (MOD WARNING - #4503)

j8wk2feszrnpao

TO. wrote: »

Doesn't this actually back up what those who think our defense was the problem thinks?

Possibly. But who went into the SB thinking our D was going be our X-Factor?
It was all on the offense. If it didn't perform, we weren't gonna win.

Wouldn't you have settled for that D only conceding only 21pts?

I don't disagree that the D wasn't good, they applied little pressure on the QB, and we were just awful in the secondary. A common theme throughout 2011.
That's why we made the changes/drafts in 2012. I think a fit Jones and Talib in 2012 could have swung things in our favor in the AFC game.

Son Of A Vidic

munstermagic11 wrote: »

See, the thing is, we all knew the defense wasn't very good. We saw that throughout the season in 2011 (and 2012).

But yesterday you said this..

munstermagic11 wrote: »

I don't think our defense let us down in the two SB loses.

And that's what caught my attention tbh, because it is not correct.

munstermagic11 wrote: »

The primary focus of the team was on the offense, I never felt that the defense was going to dig us out of a hole, so we needed the offense to fire as that's where the teams focus was placed.

And when the Giants out fought our O line and harried Brady. Shouldn't the blame be on the O line and not the entire offense? Your offense can't function when the O line is getting mauled at times.

munstermagic11 wrote: »

As much as the defense was to blame for the game winning drive, the offense was also to blame for the drop (Tom's pass or Welkers drop) that could have killed the clock.

So now the blame is extending to Welker's drop or Brady's pass? Work away on that can of worms all you want. Because I won't be joining you in that 'could have', 'would have', 'should have' discussion.

Wilfork himself said it a few weeks back. He's sick and tired of the offense carrying the team. He knows the defense could not be counted on when it really mattered. In recent weeks, our defense is finally starting to carry it's share of the weight, as our offense is rebuilt. Long overdue imo.

But this needs to continue. If we can reassembled our formidable offensive wagon then it will be huge. But we will still need this defensive to keep toughing it out like they have in recent weeks. Whether we are finally getting a decent defense together, time will tell at the business end of the season. But we ain't winning nothing without our defense doing it's job.

TO.

Odin Brief Watchband wrote: »

Possibly. But who went into the SB thinking our D was going be our X-Factor?
It was all on the offense. If it didn't perform, we weren't gonna win.

As someone who coaches the game I expect every player to raise there game when it matters. It doesn't matter if the player is just average or one of the best on the field I expect the same effort from all of them. My biggest issue with the Pats defense in both 2007 and 2011 is the fact our defense let us down when it mattered. Sure our offense didn't help either but they are both guilty of not performing.

Those 2 long passes by Eli Manning had nothing to do with our offense though so to say well its on the offense would be silly at best. In any sport you have to raise your game especially when the next mistake or action you do could cost you the game. Our defense let us down in the defining moments of both games. Laying blame to the offense for not scoring more is not acceptable to me as an excuse why our defense didn't do its job either.

Wouldn't you have settled for that D only conceding only 21pts?

It doesn't matter to me what the final score is once the team have won. Christ our defense could have given up 40 points and the Pats were up 43-40 and all was needed from our defense was one last stand to win the game and they did so and I would have been happy as they came through when it mattered. But in this case in both Bowls they failed to do so.

As I said our offense and defense were both average and neither came through when it mattered. I do think as both bowls were lost on the final drives the defense has to hold its hand up and say "Our bad"

I know for a fact before that defense entered the field a coach or a captain would have huddled the defense and given the up to us now speech. And probably said something like it doesn't matter what has happened up to now it is up to us to finish this game out with a win. Dont let yourselves down etc etc. I would be very surprised if something a long those lines didnt happen.

j8wk2feszrnpao

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

But yesterday you said this..

Yes, that was made in comparison to the fault I would lay on the offense.
I would have taken the defense conceding 17pts and 21pts in each SB.

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Your offense can't function when the O line is getting mauled at times.

I fully agree. And you can't expect a less than average D to save you when the offense (OL) isn't functioning.

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

So now the blame is extending to Welker's drop or Brady's pass?

About as much to blame as the game winning drive allowed by a poor D.

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

I won't be joining you in that 'could have', 'would have', 'should have' discussion.

It's all would/could/should have discussions when commenting on past games :P

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Wilfork himself said it a few weeks back. He's sick and tired of the offense carrying the team. He knows the defense could not be counted on when it really mattered. In recent weeks, our defense is finally starting to carry it's share of the weight, as our offense is rebuilt. Long overdue imo.

But this needs to continue. If we can reassembled our formidable offensive wagon then it will be huge. But we will still need this defensive to keep toughing it out like they have in recent weeks. Whether we are finally getting a decent defense together, time will tell at the business end of the season. But we ain't winning nothing without our defense doing it's job.

I don't believe that we there yet on defense, but the signs are positive. Vince is a loss, and we won't know for sure how big a loss until game play out.

j8wk2feszrnpao

TO. wrote: »

I expect every player to raise there game when it matters. It doesn't matter if the player is just average or one of the best on the field I expect the same effort from all of them.

But our D was poor all year. I don't see how average players, who haven't done it all year, were gonna somehow raise their game in the biggest game.
I don't think was lack of effort, it was lack of ability, which was on display for the entire season.

TO. wrote: »

Those 2 long passes by Eli Manning had nothing to do with our offense though so to say well its on the offense would be silly at best.

I think it's silly not to recognize that the offense failed to make enough plays in either game and failed to score the required amount of points.
We had a poor D, that was always gonna struggle. The focus of both those Pats team was on the offense, not the defense, and the offense failed to do their job.

I wasn't surprised that we gave away those last two game winning drives by the defense. I was surprised that we hadn't scored more than 21pts in either game.

TO.

munstermagic11 wrote: »

But our D was poor all year. I don't see how average players, who haven't done it all year, were gonna somehow raise their game in the biggest game.
I don't think was lack of effort, it was lack of ability, which was on display for the entire season.

I could go into this in detail but I wont as it would be long and boring but ask anyone who coaches in any sport including at a pro level. You can get the best out of any player when it matters. It has happened across all sports at some point in time and is not abnormal.

I think it's silly not to recognize that the offense failed to make enough plays in either game and failed to score the required amount of points.

I never said the offense didn't make mistakes in fact I said they did more than once.

We had a poor D, that was always gonna struggle. The focus of both those Pats team was on the offense, not the defense, and the offense failed to do their job.

This focus thing you speak of is absolute nonsense. The media and us fans might consider the focus to be our offense but I guarantee you Bill and his coaching staff do not, and definitely do not favour one over the other. All 3 aspects of his team I bet you in his mind are all as important as each other.

I wasn't surprised that we gave away those last two game winning drives by the defense. I was surprised that we hadn't scored more than 21pts in either game.

This is going to be my final say on this. You keep saying our Offense were the main fault practically because they failed to score. The thing that I don't get is that you say it as if the Giants were that much of a pushover that it should have been easier for our offense to score more. So you are laying blame on our offense even though the Giants Defense in both games man handled Brady and collapsed his pocket more often than not.

2007 he was sacked 5 times and hit more than 10 times and only avg 1.3 sacks per game in the regular season. 2011 Bowl he was hit more than 10 times and only sacked once but how he avoided more sacks is beyond me. 2011 was a tad more complicated offensively than 2007 though. Injuries and lack of width compared to 2007. But the main factor in both games was that the Giants physicality got to Brady and did a cracking job of taking our main assets out of the game. What rings true in both games is that we didn't pressure Eli Manning have as much as we should have and our secondary let us down when it mattered.

What it boils down to is our defense failed us and you said knew this going into the game so I can't see why you can point at the offense as the main problem when the Giants shut us down. If anything by your logic surely saying the whole team sucked that day is why we lost.

Edit: Just to add our history of the playoffs and scoring is as follows:

2011 AFC Champ Win 23-20
2011 Superbowl Loss 17-21
2007 AFC Champ Win21-12
2007 Superbowl Loss14-17
2004 AFC Champ Win 41-27
2004 SuperBowl Win 24-21
2003 AFC Champ Win 24-14
2003 Superbowl Win 32-29
2001 AFC Champ Win 24-17
2001 Superbowl Win 20-17

Total points for/against 240-195

Avg points: 24-19.5 in favour of the Pats.

This shows the Playoffs dont always play out the way a team performs in the regular season and teams raise their games and our losses to the Giants are no exception.

Anyways I am leaving it there this discussion could go on for days and its all in the past at this point.

j8wk2feszrnpao

TO. wrote: »

I could go into this in detail but I wont as it would be long and boring but ask anyone who coaches in any sport including at a pro level. You can get the best out of any player when it matters. It has happened across all sports at some point in time and is not abnormal.

If that was the case, then Bill would have gotten the D to a level that would have prevented those drives. The players weren't good enough.

TO. wrote: »

This focus thing you speak of is absolute nonsense. The media and us fans might consider the focus to be our offense but I guarantee you Bill and his coaching staff do not, and definitely do not favour one over the other. All 3 aspects of his team I bet you in his mind are all as important as each other.

I'm sure that when Bill says he believes that all 3 aspects are equally important, that he means it.
And I'm sure that he coached the D as best as he could. But poor players, even those coached by one of the greats, didn't raise their game (because they couldn't). It's nonsensical suggesting that D could be coached to be better than they were.
The big players for us in both SB loses were on the offensive side of the ball, and they didn't play to their ability in those games.

TO. wrote: »

You keep saying our Offense were the main fault practically because they failed to score. The thing that I don't get is that you say it as if the Giants were that much of a pushover that it should have been easier for our offense to score more. So you are laying blame on our offense even though the Giants Defense in both games man handled Brady and collapsed his pocket more often than not.

I believed that both games would be close, but that our offense should have been able to score more than 21pts in either game given the quality of players we had on offense.
If anything you're making the case for me. The offense (OL) didn't do their job, and put too much pressure on a less than average D.

TO. wrote: »

What it boils down to is our defense failed us and you said knew this going into the game so I can't see why you can point at the offense as the main problem when the Giants shut us down. If anything by your logic surely saying the whole team sucked that day is why we lost.

I didn't have much faith in our D to win the games for us. That was based on the games in the reg season and post season. I think they played to their ability in those SB games. Was it a low standard, possibly, but they kept the score to a level that I felt our offense should have bettered. The offense didn't, and we lost.

They were two very close games, and a play on either side may have changed the result. The Giants made them, and we didn't. That's sport.

JaMarcus Hustle

Brady tattoo finally finished - I love it

j8wk2feszrnpao

JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »

Brady tattoo finally finished - I love it

Big Vince wouldn't fit on there

TO.

Odin Brief Watchband wrote: »

If that was the case, then Bill would have gotten the D to a level that would have prevented those drives. The players weren't good enough.

I am pretty sure Bill and his coaching staff coached his players to stop all aspect of a passing attack. It is still down to the player to perform. You seem to be missing my point on all this so I will leave it there.

I'm sure that when Bill says he believes that all 3 aspects are equally important, that he means it.
And I'm sure that he coached the D as best as he could. But poor players, even those coached by one of the greats, didn't raise their game (because they couldn't). It's nonsensical suggesting that D could be coached to be better than they were.

See above but I laughed at the part in bold.

The big players for us in both SB loses were on the offensive side of the ball, and they didn't play to their ability in those games.

So what? Is that an excuse for the defense not performing also? No it is not.

I believed that both games would be close, but that our offense should have been able to score more than 21pts in either game given the quality of players we had on offense.

Just because you think we should have scored more than 21 points it really doesn't make it fact or make your point any more valid about the Offense being the problem.

If anything you're making the case for me. The offense (OL) didn't do their job, and put too much pressure on a less than average D.

I already told you 3 times now at this point that I thought the Offense played average and could have done better. You seriously need to read what I write a bit more. My point as it has been from the get go is the Defense failed us when it mattered most in both games.

I didn't have much faith in our D to win the games for us. That was based on the games in the reg season and post season. I think they played to their ability in those SB games. Was it a low standard, possibly, but they kept the score to a level that I felt our offense should have bettered. The offense didn't, and we lost.

They were two very close games, and a play on either side may have changed the result. The Giants made them, and we didn't. That's sport.

I am not even going to bother with the rest as it is clear we are going to go nowhere with it.

j8wk2feszrnpao

TO. wrote: »

I am pretty sure Bill and his coaching staff coached his players to stop all aspect of a passing attack. It is still down to the player to perform. You seem to be missing my point on all this so I will leave it there.

You don't seem to comprehend that some players just aren't good enough to perform. Blind belief that they can be coached doesn't work.

TO. wrote: »

I laughed at the part in bold.

Not surprised, not in the least.

TO. wrote: »

So what? Is that an excuse for the defense not performing also? No it is not.

In my opinion, a poor defense (proven by their season long performances) kept a good Giants team to 21pts. By that defenses standard, that's about as good as they could have done.
A very good offense only scored 17pts (and nothing in the last 1/4).

TO. wrote: »

You seriously need to read what I write a bit more.

Less of the self importance please.

TO. wrote: »

My point as it has been from the get go is the Defense failed us when it mattered most in both games.

Every play and moment in a SB matters, on both sides of the ball.
A Wes (not blaming him) catch and I guess this whole discussion wouldn't be mentioned. It's a game of so many moments, that from the 1st to the 60th min, they can all be game changers.

TO.

munstermagic11 wrote: »

You don't seem to comprehend that some players just aren't good enough to perform. Blind belief that they can be coached doesn't work.

:rolleyes: You keep taking what I wrote out of context and reading what you want.

Not surprised, not in the least.

Sure

In my opinion, a poor defense (proven by their season long performances) kept a good Giants team to 21pts. By that defenses standard, that's about as good as they could have done.
A very good offense only scored 17pts (and nothing in the last 1/4).

And that is just your opinion. But as I said no point discussing it anymore as it will go around in circles.

Less of the self importance please.

Self importance? You misread me earlier and you then imply I said the offense didn't have issues to try back up your own claim even though 3 times I told you they had issues but they were not the reason we lost the bowl. But hey you keep reading what you think you see.

TO.

Every play and moment in a SB matters, on both sides of the ball.
A Wes (not blaming him) catch and I guess this whole discussion wouldn't be mentioned. It's a game of so many moments, that from the 1st to the 60th min, they can all be game changers.

Yes but like Chess after you make your move you cannot go back on it. So the next move becomes the most important move. They offense did what they could and both games came down to final drives by the Giants that our defense had a chance to stop. They failed. You keep banging on saying they are just not good enough or the players are not good enough which I completely disagree with but that is your opinion. Our Pass rush in both games did well right up until the final drives our secondaries did reasonably well considering right up until the final drives.

The fact of the matter is they failed when we needed them most. And as any coach will tell you and in fact any player or fan should tell you a game should be treated like a marathon and not a sprint. You got to finish the game the way you started it and our defense failed to do so on both counts. As I said our offense had its issues all game. But had the defense made the stops the game was over simple as.

Neil3030

Lads it's obvious you lost the SB on Special Teams....

....<backs away quietly>....

j8wk2feszrnpao

Meh, letting it go.

j8wk2feszrnpao

Neil3030 wrote: »

Lads it's obvious you lost the SB on Special Teams....

....<backs away quietly>....

True Neil.
We just need some Cinci fan to come in here and bash us, and then myself and TO will gang up on them!

Hazys

Good news on the injury front as Dobson and Dennard are both present at training.


Does anybody find it weird that Wilfork hasn't been placed on IR yet? I presume they want to be 100% and do every test possible before they even fully rule out any chance of him being available at the end of the season.

I remember when Brady got injured, he was on IR on the Monday.

So you're telling me there's a chance?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA

Son Of A Vidic

munstermagic11 wrote: »

JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »

Brady tattoo finally finished - I love it

Big Vince wouldn't fit on there

Rumour has it JaMarcus has a pretty sizeable beer gut and some say he could fit two Big Vince tattoos on it.

j8wk2feszrnpao

Hazys wrote: »

Does anybody find it weird that Wilfork hasn't been placed on IR yet?

He's inactive

TO.

munstermagic11 wrote: »

He's inactive

Inactive doesn't mean IR though.

Id say they are waiting to see the full extent before sticking him on IR. the fact Vereen has filled up the only IR with return slot it might suggest the Pats want to be sure it is a season ending injury before placing Vinny on it.

Im sure Corvus can fill us in on an injury like this given his background. What I read but I could be wrong there will defo be no way back for him from a Achilles Tendon tear this season.

j8wk2feszrnpao

TO. wrote: »

Inactive doesn't mean IR though.

True, and I don't see him making it back from such an injury.

Hazys

Suggs came back from the same injury in 5 months which was supposedly remarkable...but the Superbowl is 4 months away

Son Of A Vidic

TO. wrote: »

Im sure Corvus can fill us in on an injury like this given his background. What I read but I could be wrong there will defo be no way back for him from a Achilles Tendon tear this season.

All going well, I expect Wilfork to be getting back on the field 11 months from now. And it would be nothing short of a miracle if not impossible, for Wilfork to return this season. There's no way to put a nice spin on this, so brace yourselves.

On average 36% of NFL players do not return from Achilles surgery and the 64% that do. Most if not all will never get near the level of performance that they had before the surgery. Now throw in Wilfork's size, weight and age and he has some very serious obstacles to overcome.

The nature of Wilfork's NT position, means that his plays involves a lot of explosive acceleration coming from a static position. Coupled with the sudden directional changes that are involved in any play. So it's not an ideal sport to be trying to return to 100% after an Achilles tear.

I hope the surgery involved a formal open repair, which is more invasive but is less likely to rerupture. If the surgery involved the less invasive option - a percutaneous mini open technique. Then that carries a higher rate of a rerupture,

At best if Wilfork gets back, you will see a big reduction in the overall snaps that he will be involved with from now on. Probably by as much as 50%. Bottom line, we need to be looking now for a long term replacement for Wilfork, because this injury regardless of him coming back, will reduce his remaining career as a Pat.

Sad me for me to say all that, but the best is more than likely behind him. But I will end this on a positive, Suggs made a quick return. But he only had a partial tear to his Achilles and not a complete tear. The difference between both is huge.

Since we don't have access to his medical files, it is possible Vince only suffered a partial tear. If so then the prognosis I spoke of earlier will not be so bleak. Oh it will affect him long term but not to the same extent as a complete tear would. No matter, it's going to be squeaky bum time for all things Vince related for the next few months.

me89

Austin Collie has signed, he will wear #10

Son Of A Vidic

me89 wrote: »

Austin Collie has signed, he will wear #10

This move makes no sense, we need a DT not a WR. The guy is a concussion risk time bomb and he is seriously risking his own health by still trying to play.

Bottom line for me is, this better not take away from the continuing development of our young WR's. Who are now beginning to settle in.

CJC86

I'm guessing that it's a short term thing. Dobson may need some time out after that nasty hit to the head. Collie would be a bit more plug-and-play than the other options out there, since he worked in a similar offense with Manning in IND.

TO.

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

This move makes no sense, we need a DT not a WR. The guy is a concussion risk time bomb and he is seriously risking his own health by still trying to play.

Bottom line for me is, this better not take away from the continuing development of our young WR's. Who are now beginning to settle in.

Am I right in saying we tried Collie last year and he failed to fit in? I cant for the life of me remember and google sucks on my phone.

CJC86

TO. wrote: »

Am I right in saying we tried Collie last year and he failed to fit in? I cant for the life of me remember and google sucks on my phone.

I think you're thinking of Anthony Gonzalez.

TO.

CJC86 wrote: »

I think you're thinking of Anthony Gonzalez.

I knew it was one of those ex Colts. Cheers for that.

eagle eye

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

We didn't limit the Giants scoring ability because they were not a high scoring teams in either of those SB seasons. They averaged 22 points a game in 2007 and 24 points a game in 2011. So how can we absolve the defense of our loss is beyond me. As I have already said, our offense carried us to both SB's. When the O line couldn't protect Brady, we needed the defense to step up and return the compliment to the Giants - they didn't.

I remember watching the game like it was yesterday.The gang I was with were totally despondent when they knew we had to stop the Giants on their final drive. To a man and woman, every Pats fan I watched the game with, had absolutely no faith in the defense making a stop when it really mattered. And predictably they didn't.



We can blame that freak play all we want, but it really came down to the Giants D doing a fine job against us. Our O line could not protect Brady in 2007 or in 2011. There is no secret in beating the pats and there's only one way to do it - get to Brady. The Giants did it both times.

Now while some blame the entire offense, I only blame the offensive line. Any offense will misfire when a QB is tormented in the pocket. Then our D could not do the same job against the Giants and that's the simple fact. For me the O line and defense must share the blame in our losses.





You'll find when your involved with sports - I don't think you are deliberately trying to patronise there. But believe me I have over 30 years of competitive sport under my belt, between Wing Chung, Jiu-Jitsu, Rugby and American Football. So I think I'm pretty well versed in the ups and downs of competitive sport.

And I do agree with you that if it's your day then it's your day. I'm a big believer in destiny. I posted in the Ravens thread before they even got to the playoffs, that 2012 was their year of destiny and it was. So looking back on our losses, especially the 2007 one. It probably wasn't meant to be. But it still should not excuse our failures though.



A well played out game plan brings victory. Ours didn't and the second loss was particularly unforgivable. Yet again we knew the Giants has only one plan - stop Brady and again our O line failed him. Their defense achieved their primary aim, now that's a successful game plan. And yet again in a SB, we couldn't depend on our D to do a similar job on the Giants and they didn't.

All that writing and its plain to see that you believe that the OL was the problem and you are right. They couldn't block for the run and they failed to protect Brady.

Blaming the D is ludicrous and giving the average score for the Gaints is ridiculous because they struggled for a good part of that season. They put 35 points up against us in the last week of the regular season and almost stopped the unbeaten regular season. They went into the playoffs as no hopers but beat every team on the road and their lowest score was in the Superbowl in those playoffs.