Baltimore's New Defense.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    Smash-mouth football: feels like old times for Patriots ground game

    Posted Oct 11, 2012

    Kerry J. ByrneCold Hard Football Factswww.coldhardfootballfacts.com Email Follow on Twitter Follow on Facebook

    Comments: It feels like old times in New England for those of us weaned on the smash-mouth mother's milk of 1970s Patriots football. The 2012 Patriots, through five weeks, are running the ball more often than any team in football and doing it with great success. The Patriots right now rank:
    • No. 1 on the Cold, Hard Football Facts Offensive Hog Index, the best offensive line in football
    • No. 1 in rushing attempts (191)
    • No. 1 in attempts per game (38.2)
    • No. 1 in rushing TDs (10)
    • No. 1 in first-down runs (33.5%)
    • No. 3 in rush yards (827) and rush yards per game (165.4)

    The Patriots are on pace to score 32 rushing touchdowns this year, which would be a franchise record and fall just four scores shy of the all-time standard set by Vince Lombardi's magnificent 1962 Packers.

    The commitment to the run has given the 2012 season a comforting old-school flavor.

    The Cold, Hard Football Facts don't do “feelings.” But if we did, the smash-mouth football we're witnessing right now would just “feel” right here in a cool, cozy and colorful New England autumn. New England this year is not running the ball particularly well. The team averages 4.33 YPA on the ground – good enough for No. 9 league wide, but hardly a lights-out performance.

    That effort pales in comparison to the 49ers, for example. They lead the NFL with an awesome average of 6.08 YPA every time they run the ball, a pace so good it gives them a chance to set the all-time record set by the 1963 Browns (5.74 YPA).

    What's different for these Patriots is something that's been missing around here for quite some time: a commitment to the run.

    It seems in past years New England would abandon the run too quickly, counting on the Hall of Fame arm of Tom Brady to carry the team through any situation.

    But that approach has its limits. Balance is what wins in the NFL. The great formula for success in the NFL is to pair a highly effective passing game with a commitment to the run – no matter how well or how poorly you actually do run the football.

    The key yards will come through the air. But it's that commitment to the run that provides the necessary balance.

    The Patriots have long had a highly effective passing game, and still do today behind Brady, Wes Welker and Rob Gronkowski. What's been missing in recent years is the commitment to provide balance.

    Let's look at the run-pass balance in the Super Bowl-winning seasons of last decade:
    • 2001 Patriots – 473 runs, 482 passes (49.5% runs)
    • 2003 Patriots – 473 runs, 537 passes (46.8%)
    • 2004 Patriots – 524 runs, 485 passes (51.9%)
    Those 2004 Patriots are notable for two reasons. It was the last New England Super Bowl champion. And it was the last New England team to run the ball more than it passed the ball.

    More recent teams – teams that won games but not championships – have been heavily imbalanced in favor of the pass.
    • 2007 Patriots – 451 runs, 586 passes (43.5%)
    • 2008 Patriots – 513 runs, 534 passes (49.0%)
    • 2009 Patriots – 466 runs, 592 passes (44.0%)
    • 2010 Patriots – 454 runs, 507 passes (47.2%)
    • 2011 Patriots – 438 runs, 612 passes (41.7%)

    That's good news for Patriots fans. They can hope that this much-needed balance on offense – that old-school-style smash-mouth football – will yield the same results in 2012 as it did the last time we saw it in 2004.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Oh, yes. Thanks D for giving up 33% more first downs than the average NFL D, and letting Eli make you look like fools at the end to lose another SB for us. You definitely did "what you could".

    [/QUOTE]

    How about you address the lack of scoring instead of blaming the defense for what the offense didn't do.  Both teams had the ball 9 times, actually the Pats had it one more possession than the Giant's with an Eli kneel down before the half... but again, instead of trying to deflect, deal with the facts.

    The offense didn't score enough... period.

    [/QUOTE]

    The 9 times each is a bogus number. Kneeldowns and 57 second desperation drives when you need a TD are moot to the point. They each had 8 legit drives.

    Actually the defense played significantly worse than the offense compared to their regular season numbers per drive (despite the O missing the great Gronk's greatness).

    The D gave up 1.9 points per drive on the season vs 2.62 in the SB. Or 37% more points given up per drive than on the season.

    The offense scored 2.12 per drive in the SB vs 2.79 on the season. That's 24% less points per drive than on the season.

    At 8 drives per team using the regular season averages we should have scored ~22 points and given up ~15. Therefore the O scored 5 points less than they should have and the D allowed 7 points more than they should have.

    The D's inability to get even a single turnover probably led to their giving up more points per drive and the lack of Gronk and effective running from the backs probably led to the O's less point production per drive.

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    My argument with Z is that as a coach he should damn well know that a more balanced offense will lead to a more efficient offense

    [/QUOTE]

    This is bass ackwards. More efficient running leads to a more balanced offense. That's what BB says anyway.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to TripleOG's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Oh, yes. Thanks D for giving up 33% more first downs than the average NFL D, and letting Eli make you look like fools at the end to lose another SB for us. You definitely did "what you could".

    [/QUOTE]

    How about you address the lack of scoring instead of blaming the defense for what the offense didn't do.  Both teams had the ball 9 times, actually the Pats had it one more possession than the Giant's with an Eli kneel down before the half... but again, instead of trying to deflect, deal with the facts.

    The offense didn't score enough... period.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    It had nothing to do with our lack of running game due to our best back riding the bench in the doghouse allowing the Giants Front 4 to Tee off on Brady from beginning to end of the game and this guy still managed to complete 16 straight passes and only struggled when he re-injured his Shoulder after the Tuck hit but STILL put his team in position to win BUT there 3 DROPS on that potential game winning drive. Yea all those things arent important to point out...Carry on Wozzy!  My question is why are you trying so hard to make the stats work for YOU. I will ask the same thing I did last week to our newest Brady basher. DID you Expect him to be perfect??? Do you realize Tom Brady is a human being???

    [/QUOTE]

    You are making his point for him.

    IF, as you correctly suggest, you can not expect Brady(GOAT) to be perfect then you absolutely should help him out and help protect him with NOT putting the whole thing on his arm.

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     Hey I wonder what would have happened if BJGE got 61 more carries in 2010(when he was healthy all year)

     

    [/QUOTE]



    He was healthy this year and couldn't even get up 4 ypc in a league where 4.3 is average.

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]Smash-mouth football: feels like old times for Patriots ground game

     


    Let's look at the run-pass balance in the Super Bowl-winning seasons of last decade:

    • 2001 Patriots – 473 runs, 482 passes (49.5% runs)
    • 2003 Patriots – 473 runs, 537 passes (46.8%)
    • 2004 Patriots – 524 runs, 485 passes (51.9%)

    Those 2004 Patriots are notable for two reasons. It was the last New England Super Bowl champion. And it was the last New England team to run the ball more than it passed the ball.

    More recent teams – teams that won games but not championships – have been heavily imbalanced in favor of the pass.

    • 2007 Patriots – 451 runs, 586 passes (43.5%)
    • 2008 Patriots – 513 runs, 534 passes (49.0%)
    • 2009 Patriots – 466 runs, 592 passes (44.0%)
    • 2010 Patriots – 454 runs, 507 passes (47.2%)
    • 2011 Patriots – 438 runs, 612 passes (41.7%)


    That's good news for Patriots fans. They can hope that this much-needed balance on offense – that old-school-style smash-mouth football – will yield the same results in 2012 as it did the last time we saw it in 2004.

    [/QUOTE]


    We ran the ball 44% of the time this year. Where's the return to the magical balance Byrne is talking about?

    Last year we ran it 41% of the time, a 3% balance difference between this year and last. 1 play in 33.

     (This is what happens when you quote an article written early in the season)

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    What worries me most about facing Baltimore is our ability to run to get our pass game on track. Baltimore limited both woody and Ridley to basically nothing and this was without Suggs. If we can't run against them, I think our passing attack suffers.

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TripleOG's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Oh, yes. Thanks D for giving up 33% more first downs than the average NFL D, and letting Eli make you look like fools at the end to lose another SB for us. You definitely did "what you could".

    [/QUOTE]

    How about you address the lack of scoring instead of blaming the defense for what the offense didn't do.  Both teams had the ball 9 times, actually the Pats had it one more possession than the Giant's with an Eli kneel down before the half... but again, instead of trying to deflect, deal with the facts.

    The offense didn't score enough... period.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    It had nothing to do with our lack of running game due to our best back riding the bench in the doghouse allowing the Giants Front 4 to Tee off on Brady from beginning to end of the game and this guy still managed to complete 16 straight passes and only struggled when he re-injured his Shoulder after the Tuck hit but STILL put his team in position to win BUT there 3 DROPS on that potential game winning drive. Yea all those things arent important to point out...Carry on Wozzy!  My question is why are you trying so hard to make the stats work for YOU. I will ask the same thing I did last week to our newest Brady basher. DID you Expect him to be perfect??? Do you realize Tom Brady is a human being???

    [/QUOTE]

    You are making his point for him.

    IF, as you correctly suggest, you can not expect Brady(GOAT) to be perfect then you absolutely should help him out and help protect him with NOT putting the whole thing on his arm.

    [/QUOTE]


    Or... have a defense that hangs in there in the tough games and gets a stop at the end when given a lead.

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    The reason this debate rages on is that 2 or 3 guys refuse to admit that our offense was "one dimensional" under Obrien

    [/QUOTE]

    Are you seriously trying to tell us that only 3 people here would scoff at the claim that a 3% difference in running balance is going from "one dimensional" to "balanced"?

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from CaptainZdeno33. Show CaptainZdeno33's posts

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    .

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    The reason this debate rages on is that 2 or 3 guys refuse to admit that our offense was "one dimensional" under Obrien

    [/QUOTE]

    The debate rages on because two guys turn every thread into a "running balance" thread.

    (Not that I mind, mind you, but some others might.)

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to neinmd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't understand why this always becomes a religious argument. But since some of us seem enamored with statistics, here are some for the Patriots run offense to chew on:

    Year    Rush att     Rush yards    Average    YPG    Rush 1st downs

    2012      523           2184            4.2         136.5        151

    2011      438           1764            4.0         110.3        107

    2010      454           1973            4.3         123.3        119

    2009      466           1921            4.1         120.1        114

    2008      513           2278            4.4         142.4        145 (Matt Cassell QB)

    2007      451           1849            4.1         115.6        124

    2006      499           1969            3.9         123.1        121

    2005      439           1512            3.4           94.5        101

    2004      524           2134            4.1         133.4        120

    These are the facts, the only years when this team rushed more than 500 times were 2004, 2008 and 2012. 2008 was Matt Cassell's year and Bill was not about to bet the team's fortunes on just his arm. 2004 and 2012 are almost identical in terms of rushing statistics. Maybe we will be lucky enough to get the same results!!!

    No connotative commentary, just wanted to share these stats. I feel good about our chances this year because we have a great passing offense, a pretty decent rushing offense, a strong rushing defense, and a middling but improving pass defense. We are still a little vulnerable to long passes but that has also improved through the year. I think we are about as well-rounded a team as there is in the league, except we have an HOF QB as well.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    One comment on your theory here. We ran 156 more plays in 2012 than we did in 2004 yet ran about the same number of times. That's about 7% less run balance than 2004. (Or, a greater balance difference between 2004/2012 than this year's team vs last years.)

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I made no conclusions on balance or lack thereof at all, and frankly don't much care about the run-pass balance one way or the other. I was sharing data purely on the run offense over the years. And, further, I did not share a theory. Purely an observation that the data looked pretty similar for the run offense. And, yes, I also added the hope that the end result would be the same as well. Just trying to be precise.

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Going from 17th in the league in rushing attempts to 2nd is not opinion.  

    That we had 6 receivers on the roster last year and now have 3 is not an opinion.  

    Truechamp posts stats and facts via Mike Reis and they respond with "percentages" and "averages."  

    How about you guys just admit that a well rounded, balanced offense that can both run and pass under duress is better than a finesse offense that couldn't do either?  

    Don't bother, this year's post season results will be all the proof we need when held up against the 3 rings we did win with the same exact methods in the not so distant past. 

    [/QUOTE]
    As far as I know there's no trophy for having the most rushing attempts. You're always arguing that all that matters is points. Well this year's offense was ahead of last year's by a whopping two TDs and one FG. And those additional 17 points over 16 games were scored with the help of 7 extra drives during the season and an average of two minutes or so more possession time per game. 

    The best way to judge an offense is by points scored. I don't carto where they rank in rushing attempts or passing attempts or what the percentage of shotgun snaps is. Points are what counts and when you compare points scored on offense from last year and this you don't see a heck of a lot of difference. 

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to neinmd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't understand why this always becomes a religious argument. But since some of us seem enamored with statistics, here are some for the Patriots run offense to chew on:

    Year    Rush att     Rush yards    Average    YPG    Rush 1st downs

    2012      523           2184            4.2         136.5        151

    2011      438           1764            4.0         110.3        107

    2010      454           1973            4.3         123.3        119

    2009      466           1921            4.1         120.1        114

    2008      513           2278            4.4         142.4        145 (Matt Cassell QB)

    2007      451           1849            4.1         115.6        124

    2006      499           1969            3.9         123.1        121

    2005      439           1512            3.4           94.5        101

    2004      524           2134            4.1         133.4        120

    These are the facts, the only years when this team rushed more than 500 times were 2004, 2008 and 2012. 2008 was Matt Cassell's year and Bill was not about to bet the team's fortunes on just his arm. 2004 and 2012 are almost identical in terms of rushing statistics. Maybe we will be lucky enough to get the same results!!!

    No connotative commentary, just wanted to share these stats. I feel good about our chances this year because we have a great passing offense, a pretty decent rushing offense, a strong rushing defense, and a middling but improving pass defense. We are still a little vulnerable to long passes but that has also improved through the year. I think we are about as well-rounded a team as there is in the league, except we have an HOF QB as well.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Good post

    [/QUOTE]
    So are they giving away the Lombardi based on rushing stats now?

     

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 9 times each is a bogus number. Kneeldowns and 57 second desperation drives when you need a TD are moot to the point. They each had 8 legit drives.

    Actually the defense played significantly worse than the offense compared to their regular season numbers per drive (despite the O missing the great Gronk's greatness).

    The D gave up 1.9 points per drive on the season vs 2.62 in the SB. Or 37% more points given up per drive than on the season.

    The offense scored 2.12 per drive in the SB vs 2.79 on the season. That's 24% less points per drive than on the season.

    At 8 drives per team using the regular season averages we should have scored ~22 points and given up ~15. Therefore the O scored 5 points less than they should have and the D allowed 7 points more than they should have.

    The D's inability to get even a single turnover probably led to their giving up more points per drive and the lack of Gronk and effective running from the backs probably led to the O's less point production per drive.

    [/QUOTE]

    Numbers per drive is complete horsesh-t!  

    Let's just compare their points scored, points against, and who turned it over... you know, the only stats that matter according to Belichick.  

    These convoluted stats per average are your way of squirming out of having to address the offensive ineptitude.  Its circular logic that leads you back to your own flawed conclusions.

    Points scored, points against and turnovers are the only stats that matter, in that order.  

    The Patriots offense scored 17 points but gave back two on a safety as well as turning the ball over = 15 points.   They turned it over again in cruchtime to start the 4th quarter.  15 points, that's nothing close to their regular season average if that's whats important to you, less than half if my math is correct.

    Yes, the defense played average, in fact right at their season average, but received no help from their offense who stunk the joint up.  If they had received any help from the O by way of controlling the clock, maybe they wouldn't have been spent on that last drive.

    You can look at stats using your secret decoder ring, focus on alternate stats that give you whatever data you need to support your BS premise, the simple fact is they play this game for POINTS.  Not points per drive, not PBRs, DBRs, or some other ridiculous stat that nerds sit around and calculate that add up to a hill of beans.  

    Offense has to score points, defense has to stop them and whoever turns it over reduces their chances of winning drastically.  NE's offense turned it over twice and scored 15 points = loss.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from neinmd. Show neinmd's posts

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to neinmd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't understand why this always becomes a religious argument. But since some of us seem enamored with statistics, here are some for the Patriots run offense to chew on:

    Year    Rush att     Rush yards    Average    YPG    Rush 1st downs

    2012      523           2184            4.2         136.5        151

    2011      438           1764            4.0         110.3        107

    2010      454           1973            4.3         123.3        119

    2009      466           1921            4.1         120.1        114

    2008      513           2278            4.4         142.4        145 (Matt Cassell QB)

    2007      451           1849            4.1         115.6        124

    2006      499           1969            3.9         123.1        121

    2005      439           1512            3.4           94.5        101

    2004      524           2134            4.1         133.4        120

    These are the facts, the only years when this team rushed more than 500 times were 2004, 2008 and 2012. 2008 was Matt Cassell's year and Bill was not about to bet the team's fortunes on just his arm. 2004 and 2012 are almost identical in terms of rushing statistics. Maybe we will be lucky enough to get the same results!!!

    No connotative commentary, just wanted to share these stats. I feel good about our chances this year because we have a great passing offense, a pretty decent rushing offense, a strong rushing defense, and a middling but improving pass defense. We are still a little vulnerable to long passes but that has also improved through the year. I think we are about as well-rounded a team as there is in the league, except we have an HOF QB as well.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Good post

    [/QUOTE]
    So are they giving away the Lombardi based on rushing stats now?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I understood you and others to say that you wanted more statistics and less opinion? I presented rushing stats without an opinion. But never mind.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to neinmd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't understand why this always becomes a religious argument. But since some of us seem enamored with statistics, here are some for the Patriots run offense to chew on:

    Year    Rush att     Rush yards    Average    YPG    Rush 1st downs

    2012      523           2184            4.2         136.5        151

    2011      438           1764            4.0         110.3        107

    2010      454           1973            4.3         123.3        119

    2009      466           1921            4.1         120.1        114

    2008      513           2278            4.4         142.4        145 (Matt Cassell QB)

    2007      451           1849            4.1         115.6        124

    2006      499           1969            3.9         123.1        121

    2005      439           1512            3.4           94.5        101

    2004      524           2134            4.1         133.4        120

    These are the facts, the only years when this team rushed more than 500 times were 2004, 2008 and 2012. 2008 was Matt Cassell's year and Bill was not about to bet the team's fortunes on just his arm. 2004 and 2012 are almost identical in terms of rushing statistics. Maybe we will be lucky enough to get the same results!!!

    No connotative commentary, just wanted to share these stats. I feel good about our chances this year because we have a great passing offense, a pretty decent rushing offense, a strong rushing defense, and a middling but improving pass defense. We are still a little vulnerable to long passes but that has also improved through the year. I think we are about as well-rounded a team as there is in the league, except we have an HOF QB as well.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Good post

    [/QUOTE]
    So are they giving away the Lombardi based on rushing stats now?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    This just shows that those who think we're not rushing more, that it doesn't help or didn't matter in championship years have their head up their azz.

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    Total points scored/allowed is all that matters for evaluating the team as a whole.

    When evaluating the performance of a particular unit in a game, I don't know how you can do that without taking into account the number of possessions they had.  

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Numbers per drive is complete horsesh-t!  

    [/QUOTE]

    It's really not.  If it wasn't what would be the point of trying to beat great offenses by holding the ball.  It's to give them less opportunities to score because most people realize that how many times you score is related to how many opportunities you get.  Think about it.  If your opponent scored a TD every time they had the ball it wouldn't matter how long you held it.  It is the fact that they don't and you think you can stop them a few times that makes holding the ball valuable.  It isn't the whole story, but to pretend it is irrelevant completely flies in the face of the logic behind why you think we should run the ball.

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    So...how did this thread about Baltimore's defense turn into the running game thing again?  Hasn't this been bantered about in other threads? 

    The big difference from the beginning of the season to now is the improvement of the OL.  These guys are doing a terrific job.  You can't pass or run without these guys and they are at the top of their game right now.  The problem will not be about the offense this year even with Gronk out.

    The question is still about the defense and hope that the special teams snafu last game was just a fluke.

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 9 times each is a bogus number. Kneeldowns and 57 second desperation drives when you need a TD are moot to the point. They each had 8 legit drives.

    Actually the defense played significantly worse than the offense compared to their regular season numbers per drive (despite the O missing the great Gronk's greatness).

    The D gave up 1.9 points per drive on the season vs 2.62 in the SB. Or 37% more points given up per drive than on the season.

    The offense scored 2.12 per drive in the SB vs 2.79 on the season. That's 24% less points per drive than on the season.

    At 8 drives per team using the regular season averages we should have scored ~22 points and given up ~15. Therefore the O scored 5 points less than they should have and the D allowed 7 points more than they should have.

    The D's inability to get even a single turnover probably led to their giving up more points per drive and the lack of Gronk and effective running from the backs probably led to the O's less point production per drive.

    [/QUOTE]

    Numbers per drive is complete horsesh-t!  

    Let's just compare their points scored, points against, and who turned it over... you know, the only stats that matter according to Belichick.  

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Do you expect the offense to score the same number of points they get in 11 drives in only 8 drives?

    Do you think a defense would allow less points in 8 drives against them as they would in 11 or 12?

     

     

     

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     

    The Patriots offense scored 17 points but gave back two on a safety as well as turning the ball over = 15 points.   They turned it over again in cruchtime to start the 4th quarter.  15 points, that's nothing close to their regular season average if that's whats important to you, less than half if my math is correct.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Oh, I see. You want to compare it to their average points scored on the season, but don't want to compare the average number of possessions they had to get those points during the season to how many they had in the SB. Got it. LMAO

    Like your cake and eat it too wozzy?

     

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 9 times each is a bogus number. Kneeldowns and 57 second desperation drives when you need a TD are moot to the point. They each had 8 legit drives.

    Actually the defense played significantly worse than the offense compared to their regular season numbers per drive (despite the O missing the great Gronk's greatness).

    The D gave up 1.9 points per drive on the season vs 2.62 in the SB. Or 37% more points given up per drive than on the season.

    The offense scored 2.12 per drive in the SB vs 2.79 on the season. That's 24% less points per drive than on the season.

    At 8 drives per team using the regular season averages we should have scored ~22 points and given up ~15. Therefore the O scored 5 points less than they should have and the D allowed 7 points more than they should have.

    The D's inability to get even a single turnover probably led to their giving up more points per drive and the lack of Gronk and effective running from the backs probably led to the O's less point production per drive.

    [/QUOTE]

    Numbers per drive is complete horsesh-t!  

    Let's just compare their points scored, points against, and who turned it over... you know, the only stats that matter according to Belichick.  

    These convoluted stats per average are your way of squirming out of having to address the offensive ineptitude.  Its circular logic that leads you back to your own flawed conclusions.

    Points scored, points against and turnovers are the only stats that matter, in that order.  

    The Patriots offense scored 17 points but gave back two on a safety as well as turning the ball over = 15 points.   They turned it over again in cruchtime to start the 4th quarter.  15 points, that's nothing close to their regular season average if that's whats important to you, less than half if my math is correct.

    Yes, the defense played average, in fact right at their season average, but received no help from their offense who stunk the joint up.  If they had received any help from the O by way of controlling the clock, maybe they wouldn't have been spent on that last drive.

    You can look at stats using your secret decoder ring, focus on alternate stats that give you whatever data you need to support your BS premise, the simple fact is they play this game for POINTS.  Not points per drive, not PBRs, DBRs, or some other ridiculous stat that nerds sit around and calculate that add up to a hill of beans.  Offense has to score points, defense has to stop them and whoever turns it over reduces their chances of winning drastically.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    The D allowed more points and the D got no turn-overs.  There's your problem in a nutshell and there is really no defense of this.

    By your own, flat standards, they failed unless you think these only apply to offense.

    The Pats D played FAR below their regular season stats.  There is no disputing this either.

    Never in the reqular season, did they go without a 3 & out or a 6 and Out or a turn-over in a single game except the one that counted.

    Their average POOR ( bottom of the barrel) ToP in the regular season was 32 minutes.  They blew that poor stat out of the ubiverse with their stinking 38.

    The facts are the D did NOTHING to help the O and hindered them greatly.

    It is their PRIMARY responsibility to get the ball back to the O.

    You do that by preventing 1st downs.  They allowed the gints 3 + of them a possession, resulting in 10+ play drives.  This is EXTREMELY POOR defensive play. 

    There is no disputing this.

    Listening to Bru, this week he said BB always stresses this to his D,  G.T.F.B.B.

    In case you can't figure it out, it means; GET THE F'N BALL BACK!!!  Major, major FAIL.

    NO TEAM, in the history of the NFL, has ever won a SB with a DPR as bad as the PATS. EVER!  In case you can't understand that, it means NO OFFENSE has ever been able to overcome, with as sh1tty a D as the PATS.    They basically have to beat the other team and over come the hurtin that their own D is putting on them. 

    Montana would have lost with this D.

    Plenty of teams have won with turn overs.  Plenty of teams have won without a pass/run balance.   But NO team has ever won with such a pizz poor DPR.  EVER!!!!!

    There is no disputing this..........................................................................................

    In fact, NO team has even reached the SB with a D as bad as the Pats, EVER!

     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Baltimore's New Defense.

    In response to garytx's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    So...how did this thread about Baltimore's defense turn into the running game thing again? 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Truechamp started it. Surprise surprise. It's on page two.

     

    With this post,,,

     

    ::::::::::::::::::::

    N.E lead the LG in rushing tds.

     

    N.E was 2nd in the LG in rushing att's.

     

    They run the ball out of a no huddle formation more then any team ever has before.

     

    N.E uses the shotgun offense less then ever before as Reiss shows below.

     

    N.E has an offensive CO. who in Tom Brady's words "makes adjustments better then anybody he's ever been around" We were 2nd in the LG in rushing att's despite only improving our rush yards per carry by .2 from last year.

     

     You might think our offense is the same we had under Obrien, but you would be wrong.

     

     

     

    Brady added that offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels' ability to excel when the team has had to adjust this season gives him confidence.

    "That's what Josh does better than anybody else that I've been around; his ability to adjust like he's done all season," he said.

     

     

    9:00 AM ET By Mike Reiss | ESPNBoston.com

    One statistic that was charted over the course of the 16-game season was how often the Patriots had quarterback Tom Brady in the shotgun.

    The idea for keeping the statistic was sparked after the season opener against the Titans when Brady was in the 'gun just 13 times. That was the first sign of a shift of sorts from what we've seen in recent years from the Patriots, and the feeling here is that it's tied to a greater focus on balance between the run and pass.

    On the season, when including penalties, the Patriots were in the shotgun 47.1 percent of the time (585 of 1,240, including penalties). That is a lower percentage than the norm and reflects, from this view, a commitment to the running game that hasn't been as consistent in the past.

    Usage of the shotgun
    vs. Dolphins:
    31 of 80 (3 runs, 26 passes, 2 pre-snap penalties)
    at Jaguars: 36 of 73 (4 runs, 32 passes)
    vs. 49ers: 59 of 96 (5 runs, 54 passes)
    vs. Texans: 31 of 73 (4 runs, 27 passes)
    at Dolphins: 35 of 79 (3 runs, 32 passes)
    at Jets: 20 of 68 (2 runs, 16 passes, 2 Jets pre-snap penalties)
    vs. Colts: 21 of 61 (0 runs, 21 passes)
    vs. Bills: 38 of 72 (6 runs, 32 passes)
    at Rams: 36 of 69 (4 runs, 32 passes)
    vs. Jets: 42 of 80 (6 runs, 36 passes)
    at Seahawks: 60 of 87 (7 runs, 52 passes, 1 false start)
    vs. Broncos:
    45 of 94 (7 runs, 37 passes, 1 false start)
    at Bills: 30 of 77 (6 runs, 24 passes)
    at Ravens: 41 of 82 (6 runs, 34 passes, 1 fumbled snap)
    vs. Cardinals: 47 of 82 (9 runs, 38 passes

     

    :::::::::::::::::

     

    But never fear, if he didn't wozzy would have.

     

Share