20 Points

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    I'm not sure if this info has made it way to this propaganda thread yet, so I'll repost it.

    Hannahman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Rusty you do realize the Pats are 5th in the NFL in pts per game...

    [/QUOTE]

    And that should end this latest "if I repeat it enough, people will believe me as long as no one checks the facts" BS from the boardouche.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    This team has averaged 23.3 ppg on the road this year. Add in Ghost's missed FG and they are right on their away average vs the #9 points allowed D in the NFL.

    That also happens to be just about the average scoring for an NFL team this year. It seems rather foolish to expect 30 points without Gronk in this game.

    So why does this thread even exist?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hannahman. Show Hannahman's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hannahman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Rusty you do realize the Pats are 5th in the NFL in pts per game........stop acting like they are not doing thier job....... The D is the problem..... Period!!!!!

    [/QUOTE]

    The D has been decimated you gutless, disgusting puuke.   Scum of the earth kind of fan as Brady tapdances around thinking it's about him and Gronk like last week or about him this week with poor red zone play and 33 passes in the 4th, with only 3 runs.

    [/QUOTE]

    5th in the NFL in pts per game and thier the problem....... Are you braindead or what...... Every single talking head that covers this team or has any affiliation with this team knows the D isva problem..... Has it hurt by injuries... Yes but so have other teams..... The D is pisss poor and you are THE ONLY ONE who doesnt see this....... And calling me a puuuke.... What are u 12..... Real classy coming from someone like u who claims he has 170 IQ

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hannahman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Rusty you do realize the Pats are 5th in the NFL in pts per game........stop acting like they are not doing thier job....... The D is the problem..... Period!!!!!

    [/QUOTE]

     and 33 passes in the 4th, with only 3 runs.

    [/QUOTE]

    Take that up with the greatest coach of all-time.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from CatfishHunter. Show CatfishHunter's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This team has averaged 23.3 ppg on the road this year. Add in Ghost's missed FG and they are right on their away average vs the #9 points allowed D in the NFL.

    That also happens to be just about the average scoring for an NFL team this year. It seems rather foolish to expect 30 points without Gronk in this game.

    So why does this thread even exist?

    [/QUOTE]


    The only thing I can figure is he wanted the Pats to kick a FG on the last drive to get to 23 points.   You know and I know that they still would have lost by 1, but remember who we are talking about here.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I can't think of any season in the Goodell era, where 20 points was regularly a winning point total for an NFL team.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Well, the O would have had 26 points if we didn't miss the 48 yard FG and then be forced by the D collapse to go for a TD at the last minute instead of kicking a short FG to win.

    Isn't that right? Would 26 points have been enough for you on the road against a bitter rival who is desperate to make the playoffs?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes.  We need to score more than 20 points in any game in this league. It'a an offensive league.

    Why is this so difficult?  I don't think the offense should be off the hook because they can't score more than 20 points barring a pick 6 or STs TD by our D.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    So, SPECIAL TEAMS held us to the 20. Not the offense. We would have conceivably scored 26 and won if he didn't miss that FG.

    [/QUOTE]

    No. We were 1/4 in the red zone without the missed 48 yarder.  A 48 yarder is not a gimme either.

    The D held to 17 and our offense did nothing in the 3rd qtr and into the mid 4th.  That's way too many drives in a row of not moving the sticks in a game where your only behind by 1 score or down by 4.

    [/QUOTE]


    ^ What does all this gibberish matter?

    If we hit the FG we would have scored 23. If we hit that FG we wouldn't have needed a TD to overcome Miami's lead at the end and could have kicked an easy FG for 26 points.

    Why is it so hard to admit that if the FG wasn't missed we would have very likely scored 26 points instead of 20?

    Is it impossible for you to blame anybody other than Brady (or the O) for a loss?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree. It would have been nice if he hadn't missed a makeable kick on the road.  I am just tired of looking at these long, long stretches of the game where the offense is abysmal in general while the D is doing its job.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    TD, TD, FG, punt, TD in the last 5 possessions is doing it's job?  You do know they're not supposed to let them score 24 points on the last 5 drives, right?

    Hmmmm... maybe you don't?  Maybe you just don't know better.  Maybe you actually have the O and D confused.

    The O is the one that scores most (not all) of the points.

    The D can also score points but must prevent the other team from scoring more, to win.

    Got it?

    What's the average score per team in the Nfl, including offensive, defensive and ST scores?  Do I have to remind you, again?

    [/QUOTE]

    All I know is the Saints scored 16 points today on the road to the Rams, gave up 27 and lost.

    This league is about offense. If your offense can't produce and be consistent, you don't succeed in this league.

    Brady can pad those fantasy stats with Amendola and Edelman spoiling him to the moon and back with his addiction, but if you don't run it and stay with the run, avoiding red zone whiff jobs, you can't win in this league.

    That was Miami's SB right there.  

    I'll take your wager for next week. Put up or shut up time, Pezzy. Take the challenge, you coward.

    [/QUOTE]


    What does that gibberish mean?  The Ram's D is better than the Pat's D?  Is that what you mean? 

    Ya, you'd be correct,  The Rams D held the high scoring Saints to 16 and the Pats D held the bottom 10 Fins O to 24 and is giving up 28 points a game since the bye.

    What's the average points per team again?  Can you please tell me?

    [/QUOTE]

    No, it means that the Rams suck and we have a better QB who should be able to move the chains and convert in the red zone better than a 25% clip.

    The only good thing from Brady today was incredible grabs from his WRs/TEs and the fact he didn't throw any INTs.

    Our QB should be helping our D more than he has been.   Last week, 0 points in the first half!  LOL!

    That is pathetic.  Still getting texts on that one.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Ummm.  The D should be helping the O more than it has been by not giving up 28 points a game against some of the worst QB's in the league, while the O plays some of the best D's.

    Do you know the O has never played a Defense worse than their own?

    It's impossible.  There aren't any, BWAHAHAHA

    What's the average points per team again, in a 12 possession game, including offensive, defensive and ST scores?  Surely someone as smaat as you knows.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Rusty, did you watch the game yet?

    [/QUOTE]

    Are you blind?   What did you think of that 3rd qtr offense?

    [/QUOTE]

    Not nearly as bad as the defense in that quarter.  The offense moved the ball fairly well, but wasn't able to score (missed field goal and punt).  The defense meanwhile was like butter to Miami's knife, giving up two scoring drives. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from PATSchampsSB. Show PATSchampsSB's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    He has a point guys, look at this week winners, nobody won with 20 or less points.

    I really hate the defense, and I think they played a poor second half but, that`s true you usually don`t win with 20 or less

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeadowlandMike. Show MeadowlandMike's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Ben Roethlisberger is 13/15. He is shredding the D and the run game is running on them, too.

    Yes, I am watching the game and no, I am not counting the punt return TD.  

    I am mocking you idiots who don't think other teams or other games feature teams who move the ball down the field.

    From there, it's about points.  If the point total allowed matches the yards gained, then that is poor D. If it doesn't match, then it isn't.

    Dalton has also not turned it over to hurt his D like Brady has been prone to do to hurt ours, especially in title games.

    Pitt is driving again, with ease.  You're welcome to join the game thread on that one, pinkies.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Is this another claim that it was Brady's turnovers today that made the D give up 3 passing TDs?  Oh my, what a fool.

    [/QUOTE]

    No, actually it isn't.  I also don't want Marquice Cole on Mike Wallace either.  Again, no offense can score 20 points and win a game in this league on a regular basis.

    Look at our offense last week with Gronk for most of the game, Bustchise.

    STL just beat New Orleans. 27-16. Saints scored 16. Loss.

    Get it?

    Offense.

    [/QUOTE]

    So, are you saying that 16 is the same as 20 or are you trying to claim that the Saints three turnovers had nothing to do with their low point total? Maybe you missed the 4 sacks on Brees?  

    One similarity, Kellen Clemmens had a Tannehill kind of day, 2 TD no picks, 120+ rating.  Yep, tough to win when the opposing QB puts up those numbers.  Why can't the Jets get a guy like that?

    Did you notice Seattle only scored 23 today? Somehow they won by 23.  Strange.

    [/QUOTE]

    The Giants suck.  Cap hell, which I warned you about, and did I mention they suck?

    We had multiple sacks on Tannehill. What happened to our offense scoring more than 20?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep, they suck, just like the Paper Tiger Pats.  Warnings were out.  When the opposing QB puts up a rating of 120 with 3 TDs and the D can't get a single turnover, you're not gonna win.  Tannehill made big play after big play.  When a good D for the Pats run D means the other team only gets 4 ypc and it's at the expense of a career day for a second year QB, your D blows. And there it is.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from CatfishHunter. Show CatfishHunter's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    He has a point guys, look at this week winners, nobody won with 20 or less points.

    I really hate the defense, and I think they played a poor second half but, that`s true you usually don`t win with 20 or less

    [/QUOTE]


    Or looking at it another way 9 teams (including the Pats) scored 20 or less.  So, the Pats could have kicked the FG on the last drive and beaten 8 other teams.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    The offense moved the ball fairly well (two seven minute drives of 15 and 16 plays) but couldn't score TDs in the redzone.  The problem is simple: without Gronk, Thompkins, and Dobson, they have almost no one with the size to win battles for the ball in tight spaces.  It has nothing to do with Brady or the play calling.  It has to do completely and utterly with the lack of decent red zone receivers. 

    Also, the Pats were trying to play more ball control (despite what Rusty thinks) and run whenever they could.  That helped them mount a few very long, slow drives.  But the downside is that when you play ball control and mount longer drives you end up with fewer possessions and fewer scoring chances.  Ball control requires a decent defensive showing because of that.  If the defense can't hold the other team from scoring, then ball control is a losing strategy.  This was a 10 drive game, but two of the drives were end of the half drives with time running out, so really it was more like an 8 drive game.  You don't score lots of points in games like that. 

     

     

     

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from CatfishHunter. Show CatfishHunter's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This game reminded me of 2009 down there except Brady clearly has much better talent and balance now than then.

    I'll never forget it.   They scored only 7 points in the second half. LMAO

    We forced them to kick 3 FGs which is a sign of a D holding, but the turnovers and the fading offense is just very reminiscent with how Brady developed an attitude and rebelled not being more spoiled that year in the transition year.

    The only difference is Brady had 2 INTs, but his talent around him on offense was far more top heavy, so he had a nice built in excuse.

    It was in December as well.

    Brady QBR 60.2.  Henne 74.1

    Neither QB played well, but to make excuses as to why Brady, a HOFer, continues to struggle now with far superior talent all around, is just sad.

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=291206015

    [/QUOTE]


    This post reminds me of a person who takes an inkblot test and sees the same image every time.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from CatfishHunter. Show CatfishHunter's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Umm, these teams aren't fighting for a wild card or playoff position.  

    There are 32 teams in the league. 9 is not a good number for your to cite to make your point. lol

    Face it, Brady never plays well down there in December (not sure why) and the offense disappeared in the 3rd and 4th.

    [/QUOTE]

    16 games per week.  23 points (with a FG on the last drive) wins half of them.   Are you a math expert too?

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The offense moved the ball fairly well (two seven minute drives of 15 and 16 plays) but couldn't score TDs in the redzone.  The problem is simple: without Gronk, Thompkins, and Dobson, they have almost no one with the size to win battles for the ball in tight spaces.  It has nothing to do with Brady or the play calling.  It has to do completely and utterly with the lack of decent red zone receivers. 

    Also, the Pats were trying to play more ball control (despite what Rusty thinks) and run whenever they could.  That helped them mount a few very long, slow drives.  But the downside is that when you play ball control and mount longer drives you end up with fewer possessions and fewer scoring chances.  Ball control requires a decent defensive showing because of that.  If the defense can't hold the other team from scoring, then ball control is a losing strategy.  This was a 10 drive game, but two of the drives were end of the half drives with time running out, so really it was more like an 8 drive game.  You don't score lots of points in games like that. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Dude, they were 1/4 in the red zone. Don't tell us about ball control and then excuse the red zone work.

    FAIL

    Our SB Ds never had to deal with that crap, let alone a decimated D.

    Finally, ball control absolutely does not mean you get fewer drives. What a dumb statement that is just riddled with lack of understanding of the game.

    You could use a rushing style, ball control offense have 4-6 minute drives and get TDs in the end zone.

    We suck at icing games and controlling the clock because our QB is hellbent about making it about him or showing no patience.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Dude, we already learned you don't watch the games before ranting. Now it's clear you don't read before ranting either.

    You are so completely off base it's not even worth responding.  You've finally gone off the deep end. 

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PATSchampsSB's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    He has a point guys, look at this week winners, nobody won with 20 or less points.

    I really hate the defense, and I think they played a poor second half but, that`s true you usually don`t win with 20 or less

    [/QUOTE]


    Or looking at it another way 9 teams (including the Pats) scored 20 or less.  So, the Pats could have kicked the FG on the last drive and beaten 8 other teams.

    [/QUOTE]

    Face it, Brady never plays well down there in December (not sure why) and the offense disappeared in the 3rd and 4th.

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady was doing just fine until yet another D collapse late forced him into a do or die gotta get a TD, a FG won't do, drive.

    He had 2 TDs, zero INTs and 300+ yards before the D caused desperation yet again.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The offense moved the ball fairly well (two seven minute drives of 15 and 16 plays) but couldn't score TDs in the redzone.  The problem is simple: without Gronk, Thompkins, and Dobson, they have almost no one with the size to win battles for the ball in tight spaces.  It has nothing to do with Brady or the play calling.  It has to do completely and utterly with the lack of decent red zone receivers. 

    Also, the Pats were trying to play more ball control (despite what Rusty thinks) and run whenever they could.  That helped them mount a few very long, slow drives.  But the downside is that when you play ball control and mount longer drives you end up with fewer possessions and fewer scoring chances.  Ball control requires a decent defensive showing because of that.  If the defense can't hold the other team from scoring, then ball control is a losing strategy.  This was a 10 drive game, but two of the drives were end of the half drives with time running out, so really it was more like an 8 drive game.  You don't score lots of points in games like that. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Dude, they were 1/4 in the red zone. Don't tell us about ball control and then excuse the red zone work.

    FAIL

    Our SB Ds never had to deal with that crap, let alone a decimated D.

    Finally, ball control absolutely does not mean you get fewer drives. What a dumb statement that is just riddled with lack of understanding of the game.

    You could use a rushing style, ball control offense have 4-6 minute drives and get TDs in the end zone.

    We suck at icing games and controlling the clock because our QB is hellbent about making it about him or showing no patience.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Dude, we already learned you don't watch the games before ranting. Now it's clear you don't read before ranting either.

    You are so completely off base it's not even worth responding.  You've finally gone off the deep end. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Finally?????????

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Seems to me we still have some rubes in here who think this is enough to win games in this league.

    I can't think of any season in the Goodell era, where 20 points was regularly a winning point total for an NFL team.

    Brady sure made some fantasy owners happy today, though, didn't he?  Fantasy owners happy, diehard fans? Not so much.

    NEWSFLASH: We ain't winning postseason games with just 20 points. It has to be more than that.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah your right. So long as our bend over and break it off defense gives up 24 to 120 passer rating Joe Montana tannehill. 

    what does this fantasy being owned by Brady have to do with it cupcake? 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WazzuWheatfarmer's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    True, Rusty.  But come on.  Our defense has to be able to stop teams on 3rd and 17 if they don't want to be considered a joke.  Seriously, how many of those have we given up this year? We don't deserve to win if we can't make those stops.  I know the offense has a lot of work to do too.  I'm not saying they are anywhere where they need to be.  Pathetic effort today.

    [/QUOTE]

    "Effort"? Your now questioning the character of this team? Wow.

    Fact is, 20 points is the marker I always reference here.  Ds give up 3rd and 15s all Sunday long around this league. Happens all the time.

    That's one play.

    I am talking about how people think our D should focibly be held to a standard of 19 points allowed our less when our offense only score 20.  It's lunacy.

    Look at the scoreboards today in the NFL or any day, really. Teams don't win with only 20 points on the board.

    Teams don't win by making excuses for their GOAT QB either.   He has to audible better or less.

    I refuse to hold a decimated Ds feet to the fire when all the offense had to do was not go 1/4 in the red zone.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Excuses is all you have. 

    In case you missed last weeks game too, Gronk is out. You know, the one red zone target that boosted our red zone efficiency up by like 40 points when he returned. Gee, you seem to be glossing over the facts tonight. Go get yourself a warm cocoa and have mommy tuck you back in. Night junior. Don't let the defensive bedbugs bite.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The offense moved the ball fairly well (two seven minute drives of 15 and 16 plays) but couldn't score TDs in the redzone.  The problem is simple: without Gronk, Thompkins, and Dobson, they have almost no one with the size to win battles for the ball in tight spaces.  It has nothing to do with Brady or the play calling.  It has to do completely and utterly with the lack of decent red zone receivers. 

    Also, the Pats were trying to play more ball control (despite what Rusty thinks) and run whenever they could.  That helped them mount a few very long, slow drives.  But the downside is that when you play ball control and mount longer drives you end up with fewer possessions and fewer scoring chances.  Ball control requires a decent defensive showing because of that.  If the defense can't hold the other team from scoring, then ball control is a losing strategy.  This was a 10 drive game, but two of the drives were end of the half drives with time running out, so really it was more like an 8 drive game.  You don't score lots of points in games like that. 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Dude, they were 1/4 in the red zone. Don't tell us about ball control and then excuse the red zone work.

    FAIL

    Our SB Ds never had to deal with that crap, let alone a decimated D.

    Finally, ball control absolutely does not mean you get fewer drives. What a dumb statement that is just riddled with lack of understanding of the game.

    You could use a rushing style, ball control offense have 4-6 minute drives and get TDs in the end zone.

    We suck at icing games and controlling the clock because our QB is hellbent about making it about him or showing no patience.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    They were 1/4 in the ez thanks to the pathetic receivers that drop more than they catch.

    They scored 4 times in 8 possessions, should have been 5.

    The Fins also scored in 4 possessions except they got to play the Pats D.  who allowed 3 TD's out of 4 scores.  Tannehill on his way to Canton, this very moment.

    They were playing ball control as Pro said.  They won ToP, they converted more 3rd downs and had more first downs.  They had 14 more plays and only 1 less rush attempt.

    They also scored 20 points in 8 real possessions.  The Hawks and Falcons who were also not high scoring games, scored their points in 13 possessions, each game.

    That's a difference of 5 possessions.  The Pats were averaging 2.5 points per possession (which is high).  At that rate, they would have scored an additional 13 points.  (16 if he doesn't miss the FG.)  Problem is at that rate, the D would have allowed 16 additional points, also.

    In comparison the Hawks averaged 1.78 points a possession @ 13 possessions and 23 points. 

    Ball control absolutely means less possessions.  Are you really this daft?

    The Pats had 2 possessions totaling 15 minutes on 0.  15 minutes normally means 6 possessions with the average possession @2:30 minutes, which is what the league average is per possession.

    Ball control IS only effective if your D isn't giving up scores on 4 of 5 last possessions, which is why THEY HAD TO ABANDON IT and the run game that goes with it.

    Tell us again, how you played football.  LMAO@U

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from joepatsfan111111. Show joepatsfan111111's posts

    Re: 20 Points

    offense didnt score enough surprise rusty says this. i agree 20 is low. but not THAT bad. still a winnable score if we had any form of a defense. 3 weeks in a row we make 3 crap QBs (Keenum, Campbell and Tannehill) look great. this D is doing better against the run. yes. (credit better play by Dont'a) but still the D could not win us a game today. they couldnt get the timely stop or even holding Miami to a FG on the final drive. imagine if they did?! we win! tom woulda drove us inti FG range and Gostk woulda smashed it through and we have the one seed. but we dont. the the D isnt doing so hot.

    Arrington on the outside v. Wallace all game, why? Not a ton of Logan Ryan, why? more hightower than Collins on pass downs, why? Gregory over Harmon, why?

    those are all killers.

     

Share