New England Patriots Thread Mod Warning Post #253

eagle eye · 21-11-2016 09:26AM

SantryRed wrote: »

The lengths you are going to to defend the indefensible is incredible. The Pats D was outright crap yesterday. And the trade of Collins is looking more and more terrible a decision with each game.

The lengths I'm going to? All I'm doing is putting up the stats for scores against our defense. That is hardly going over the top.

If our defense is so bad then how come eight of the ten teams we have played have failed to even match their season average against us?

eagle eye · 21-11-2016 09:28AM

TOss Sweep wrote: »

204 points scored 10 games is 20.4

But Stats do not tell the whole story here and if you truly believe there is no problems with that defense then that is your opinion but that secondary was shocking at times and we should not be allowing a 1-9 team put up a score like that early and allowing a QB who is awful look almost perfect. In the end the game went were a 1-9 team should go and that was lose steam and fold but there are no excuses from certain performances out there.

I made a mistake it was 20.8 before yesterday's game.

Just so you know, our defense is third best in the league on points allowed.

eagle eye · 21-11-2016 09:34AM

Randall Victorious Pentagon wrote: »

And the only SB contender we've played resulted in conceding 31pts (should have been 32pts).
Our D, conceding slightly less than these non-contenders average, isn't exactly filling us with hope come playoff time.

And Philly fell behind us yesterday on points allowed per game after facing the same Seahawks and giving up 26 points. That was the lowest total the Seahawks have scored in the last three weeks having scored 31 against us and Buffalo the week before.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 21-11-2016 10:52AM

eagle eye wrote: »

Just so you know, our defense is third best in the league on points allowed.

But do you think we have the 3rd best D?
We haven't really played any quality teams except Seattle.

We ended the night with 5 sacks, and went about 30mins without conceding a score. So I will give credit to the D for that.
But it was also really poor for a lot of time in the secondary, when better teams (in better conditions for a QB) will put up pts.

eagle eye · 21-11-2016 01:56PM

munstermagic11 wrote: »

But do you think we have the 3rd best D?
We haven't really played any quality teams except Seattle.

We ended the night with 5 sacks, and went about 30mins without conceding a score. So I will give credit to the D for that.
But it was also really poor for a lot of time in the secondary, when better teams (in better conditions for a QB) will put up pts.

Well what I think doesn't really matter because at the end of the day they are getting the job done almost every week.

I understand that we looked poor against Seattle but it wasn't as bad as some people are saying. You have to understand that it was hard to gameplan for them because things changed very suddenly with Wilson getting his mobility back just a week before we played them.

I understand that at times in games we look like there are holes all over the place but while it happens on one or two drives it's not happening all the time. Clearly we can improve upon that but I'm quite happy that we are giving up very little points in most games.

I think because of this we are not seeing our playoff offense because it's not needed.

Mitchell is now starting to come into the game a bit more, Lewis is back healthy and I think everything is coming together nicely. All we need is to have Gronk back healthy now and I think we are in great shape for the playoffs.
A Houston win tonight would be great too.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 21-11-2016 03:00PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Well what I think doesn't really matter because at the end of the day they are getting the job done almost every week.

I understand that we looked poor against Seattle but it wasn't as bad as some people are saying. You have to understand that it was hard to gameplan for them because things changed very suddenly with Wilson getting his mobility back just a week before we played them.

I understand that at times in games we look like there are holes all over the place but while it happens on one or two drives it's not happening all the time. Clearly we can improve upon that but I'm quite happy that we are giving up very little points in most games.

I think because of this we are not seeing our playoff offense because it's not needed.

Mitchell is now starting to come into the game a bit more, Lewis is back healthy and I think everything is coming together nicely. All we need is to have Gronk back healthy now and I think we are in great shape for the playoffs.
A Houston win tonight would be great too.

Well, I think you're being optimistic; while at the same time hoping you are right :P

We had two weeks to get ready for Seattle, so should have been prepared.

The issue I have with the points, is that we will face better teams and QB's in the playoffs that will not fail to convert as the weaker teams have. And they might limit out offense to 20pts. Will our D win us the game in that situation? I have doubts they could.

TOss Sweep · 21-11-2016 03:12PM

eagle eye wrote: »

I understand that we looked poor against Seattle but it wasn't as bad as some people are saying. You have to understand that it was hard to gameplan for them because things changed very suddenly with Wilson getting his mobility back just a week before we played them.

With 2 weeks to prepare for Wilson and having played them previously more than once you are telling me they didn't account for Wilson's mobility? Not that his mobility mattered as that didn't beat us. Underneath passes and passes across the middle beat us. Something we had been good at protecting with Collins around.

I understand that at times in games we look like there are holes all over the place but while it happens on one or two drives it's not happening all the time. Clearly we can improve upon that but I'm quite happy that we are giving up very little points in most games.

It is not happening all the time because we are playing teams that are delivering as expected and that is the key factor here. You can say our defense is the Top 3 of points allowed but at the same time those offenses that we have mostly played are in the bottom of all stats. There is a reason why they failed to beat us even though we were making it easy for them.

eagle eye · 21-11-2016 06:24PM

Everything changed the weekend we were on a bye as regards the Seahawks offense. Just have a look back at the Saints game and then the Bills game and the difference is huge. We didn't have two weeks to prepare for their offense because it was a completely different offense in week 9 to what we seen in week 8.

You say the D makes it easier for opposing Offenses. Please explain then why 8 of our 10 opponents to date have failed to match their average scoring when they face the Patriots D.

After all you say we make it easy for everyone so they should be scoring more than their average points then.

TOss Sweep · 21-11-2016 06:32PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Everything changed the weekend we were on a bye as regards the Seahawks offense. Just have a look back at the Saints game and then the Bills game and the difference is huge. We didn't have two weeks to prepare for their offense because it was a completely different offense in week 9 to what we seen in week 8.

Really? No sh1t sherlock. But this isn't our first rodeo with the Seahawks and they haven't exactly changed much in the last 3 seasons. The only thing that has changed is personnel.

You say the D makes it easier for opposing Offenses. Please explain then why 8 of our 10 opponents to date have failed to match their average scoring when they face the Patriots D.

After all you say we make it easy for everyone so they should be scoring more than their average points then.

You clearly missed my point. Read what I wrote. It couldn't have been any more clearer for you. To sum up these offenses we played against are down the bottom for a reason because they are sh1t and even with our defense under performing these offenses couldn't do enough to keep on par with our offense. It is that simple. Those teams living up to their expectation in the end.

But look it is clear you can't see anything wrong with the Pats as usual so it would be pointless debating this any further. I look forward to the playoffs when you tell us that we should be happy we still made the playoffs if we don't make the bowl.

eagle eye · 21-11-2016 06:53PM

TOss Sweep wrote: »

But look it is clear you can't see anything wrong with the Pats as usual so it would be pointless debating this any further. I look forward to the playoffs when you tell us that we should be happy we still made the playoffs if we don't make the bowl.

I never said that we were great. I'm saying we are doing enough for the regular season and I'm happy with that. I don't expect us to go undefeated every season either and we've had two losses and they happen so I'm not getting excited about it.

I'm pretty confident that when we hit the playoffs you'll see our D much improved. Look through all the seasons of Patriots football under Belichick and you'll find that the defense improves later in the season, that's when we don't have a lot of important players missing.

When the playoffs roll around I'd expect us to wind that D up when it's needed.

The Sheard thing isn't a concern either imo. I would expect that he has been wound down for the last couple of weeks. He suffers with his ankles every season and he missed three games over it last season. I have been saying for a few seasons now that I think players are being wound down mid-season to avoid injury and fatigue. I believe it's why you see a horrible performance from the OL for a week or two and then they look really good again. That is all conjecture though and I can't prove any of it but I said it two seasons back when everybody was giving out at the start of the season after a couple of losses and we went on to win the Superbowl. We'll see how it works out this year but I believe we will win it again this year if we can avoid serious injuries to a number of key players. Outside of Brady I think we can afford to lose two maybe three players and it won't stop us but anymore than that and then it's a big problem.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 22-11-2016 12:06AM

Whatever about Bills decisions this year, I was just thinking back to 2012. SF rolled into Foxboro, and a 4th quarter come back cover by the Pats covered up an otherwise dominant display by SF.

4yrs later, and we're still contending, and SF look years away from rebuilding. It's a hell of a system overall that Bill runs.

TOss Sweep · 22-11-2016 02:39AM

Branch has gotten into trouble over smoking weed. 4 game ban on its way

eagle eye · 22-11-2016 06:53PM

If he got caught for smoking week during the regular season that is absolutely ridiculous. There is no excuse for a professional athlete being so stupid.

I wouldn't mind so much if it happened in the offseason but not during the season.

AbusesToilets · 22-11-2016 09:19PM

eagle eye wrote: »

If he got caught for smoking week during the regular season that is absolutely ridiculous. There is no excuse for a professional athlete being so stupid.

I wouldn't mind so much if it happened in the offseason but not during the season.

Possibly a positive in the long run if it leaves him fresh for the post season.

brinty · 22-11-2016 11:00PM

Is it a first offence?
Second nets a 10 game ban
Third it's a year

Randy Gregory serving for his second strike in Dallas and a third one possibly on the way. If he gets a third, talk is he'll be cut by the cowboys. Wasted talent.

AbusesToilets · 24-11-2016 01:17PM

Sooner the NFL stops testing for weed the better for all.

JaMarcusHustle · 26-11-2016 10:10AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9-XtkJTIYc

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

paulie21 · 26-11-2016 12:45PM

Brady did practice yesterday I thought

Son Of A Vidic · 27-11-2016 02:19PM

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Sooner the NFL stops testing for weed the better for all.

It's a complete joke that players are penalised for a substance which is not a performance enhancing agent. Meanwhile it continues to be legalised across America and it's use is increasingly viewed as a non-issue for most.

eagle eye · 27-11-2016 02:28PM

Well as a former smoker, and I smoked plenty and enjoyed it too, I don't think professional athletes should be doing it. It affects a lot of people in different ways, it's known to lead to depression in too many people and it makes others very lazy. I agree that it's not performance enhancing but I also believe that professional athlete should lead a healthy lifestyle during the work period. I don't think there should be any penalty for anybody caught for weed out of season but I'm fully in favour of penalties for taking it during your work time.
I find it very irresponsible and unprofessional for an athlete to be smoking weed during the season.

AbusesToilets · 27-11-2016 02:33PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Well as a former smoker, and I smoked plenty and enjoyed it too, I don't think professional athletes should be doing it. It affects a lot of people in different ways, it's known to lead to depression in too many people and it makes others very lazy. I agree that it's not performance enhancing but I also believe that professional athlete should lead a healthy lifestyle during the work period. I don't think there should be any penalty for anybody caught for weed out of season but I'm fully in favour of penalties for taking it during your work time.
I find it very irresponsible and unprofessional for an athlete to be smoking week during the season.

There is the argument that is a much better method of pain control than the plethora of addictive pills that are pushed on the players. Not to mention that it can be consumed in other ways than just smoking.

Son Of A Vidic · 27-11-2016 02:47PM

Looking back to the 49er's game and Brady continues to boggle the mind. His movement inside and outside the pocket continues to get better every week. His deep ball is the best in the league and I think finally having some WR's who can get down the field, has given him the chance to show it this season more than ever. At 39, I can't see any evidence of a slow down in any facet of his game, in fact, he's getting better :eek:. Credit to the man for his hunger and his unmatched drive for perfection. The NFL has never before seen a QB at his age, who continues to find ways to get better and improve his game. Then again, the league has never had a QB like Brady before.

eagle eye · 27-11-2016 02:49PM

AbusesToilets wrote: »

There is the argument that is a much better method of pain control than the plethora of addictive pills that are pushed on the players. Not to mention that it can be consumed in other ways than just smoking.

An argument isn't good enough. It would have to be 100% proven to be the case and if that happened I'm sure it would be accepted by all parties.

Son Of A Vidic · 27-11-2016 03:30PM

AbusesToilets wrote: »

There is the argument that is a much better method of pain control than the plethora of addictive pills that are pushed on the players. Not to mention that it can be consumed in other ways than just smoking.

It certainly is a healthier option than the combination of pain killers that players often need & become addicted to throughout and after their playing careers have ended. I'm not going to bore the thread with multiple clinical trial evidence, of the superior benefits of marijuana pain control. But the long term benefits of its use for long term pain management, cancer symptom pain control, palliative treatment in terminal illness are well established. Severe & chronic anxiety is also being increasingly treated with marijuana.

eagle eye wrote: »

Well as a former smoker, and I smoked plenty and enjoyed it too, I don't think professional athletes should be doing it. It affects a lot of people in different ways, it's known to lead to depression in too many people and it makes others very lazy.

The main risks with marijuana, is it's use as a 'gateway drug', in that it can lead some users to experiment with 'harder' drugs and it's when people move onto a hallucinogen like LSD or heroin, that the dangers can be life altering & permanent. Marijuana like any drug can have risks in those of us who may have a disposition towards mental health problems ect. But the most dangerous and depressive drug out there is alcohol and nothing comes close to the impact it has had upon society through its abuse. Afaic, the NFL would be better served clamping down & testing for alcohol abuse, rather than focusing on pot use. I’m a non-smoker but I have smoked pot and I have taken it to manage severe pain, mainly because the prolonged use of the pharmaceutical alternatives posed a much greater risk in the long term.

Just over two weeks ago the NFLPA association announced they were setting up a committee to examine the benefits of Marijuana for pain.....

On Wednesday the NFLPA announced that it was forming an NFL players pain management committee that will study player use of marijuana for pain management purposes, with the goal of determining whether a change to the league’s ban on the drug might be warranted.

http://www.totalprosports.com/2016/11/10/nflpa-investigate-marijuana-use-pain-management/

When the next CBA rollls around, I will be very surprised if marijuana has not been accepted by the NFL for player pain management reasons.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 27-11-2016 10:08PM

Offense stalling. Defense awful. McCourthy never seems to get there to help his corners.

Recognition Scene · 27-11-2016 10:43PM

Collins move continues to look like a worse and worse idea.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 27-11-2016 10:53PM

Recognition Scene wrote: »

Collins move continues to look like a worse and worse idea.

We were giving up these type of plays with Collins.
Gost with another miss. Serious worry about him.

AbusesToilets · 27-11-2016 11:15PM

Oh great, Bennett is down now. Seems about the right time of the year for our team to fall apart.

Son Of A Vidic · 27-11-2016 11:30PM

Recognition Scene wrote: »

Collins move continues to look like a worse and worse idea.

The same Collins who gave up 2 bad TD's against a mediocre player, in the AFC title game against the Broncos last January and most likely cost us a 5th Superbowl in the process.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 27-11-2016 11:32PM

Son Of A Vidic wrote: »

The same Collins who gave up 2 bad TD's against a mediocre player, in the AFC title game against the Broncos last January and most likely cost us a 5th Superbowl in the process.

That's being very generous to our porous OL that night. The biggest reason we didn't get to the SB.

New England Patriots Thread Mod Warning Post #253

Comments