The Game Goat Thread: Wk 4 vs Panthers
- Thread starter SeoulSoxFan
- Start date
It's the fourth time, though Tom's 2nd. Don Meredith did it with 1089 and 14 in 1966, Peyton in 2013 with 1470 and 16, Brady in 2015 with 1387 and 11. All previous instances, the teams were 4-0.
In any case, Flowers aside, the defensive line. Inability to pursuit or finish. Looked a piece short of the puzzle consistently. If you can't win the trenches, you typically won't win a game, with today as no exception. Granted, Kalil and Turner are tough matchups, but still, this was nauseating to watch throughout. Do your job, finish your job. Can't be echoed enough from now until Thursday. I'm on to Tampa's film study, and hopefully, the rest of the team is as well, while they also add in practice.
I want to feed this post a peanut butter jelly sandwich on artisan bread smothered in gravy.
Are you talking about Matt Kalil? He's been pretty bad. Ryan Kalil didn't play yesterday.
Gilmore has been an obvious disaster and he’s my number one goat. By far.
But I will add the D line for again not getting pressure. And really the entire D and the coaching staff. Focusing on one player has its charms but really it’s the whole lot of them. No one is really standing out on the plus side, at least not that much.
Special shout out to Dwayne Allen, too. Another game, another non-catch. Not a good throw by Tom — and I was there and probably did not see it as well as those watching on TV — but if/when Gronk goes out, they are going to rue the day they signed this guy. At some point you have to make a catch on a poorly thrown ball. Allen is by far from the biggest problem but if they ever figure out the D — a big if in my book — then the inadequacy of Allen as a Gronk replacement is going to come into puke Inducing focus.
But I will add the D line for again not getting pressure. And really the entire D and the coaching staff. Focusing on one player has its charms but really it’s the whole lot of them. No one is really standing out on the plus side, at least not that much.
Special shout out to Dwayne Allen, too. Another game, another non-catch. Not a good throw by Tom — and I was there and probably did not see it as well as those watching on TV — but if/when Gronk goes out, they are going to rue the day they signed this guy. At some point you have to make a catch on a poorly thrown ball. Allen is by far from the biggest problem but if they ever figure out the D — a big if in my book — then the inadequacy of Allen as a Gronk replacement is going to come into puke Inducing focus.
And hell, we shouldn't really do this, but that KC game was a hair away from NE going up 2 scores a few times and they couldn't convert 3rd and 1s or 4th and 1s.
It wasn't the best throw and I only saw one replay, but if he had gone deeper with it, I think there was a DB in the area. I believe Brady was hoping that Allen could make that adjustment.
That what I saw too. Also on the early incomplete throw to Cooks, I thought he should have cut in away from the DB instead of going straight downfield. Either a miscommunication or really poor throw. Brady gets the benefit of my doubt.
The Pats could easily be 1-3, but they also easily could be 4-0. As you point out, they could have gone up two scores early and buried the Chiefs. That game was easily there to be had. And then yesterday they had the stop they needed to win the game. No way Brady wasn't putting points on the board if he got the ball at the end.
I know right? The greatest dynasty the league has ever known is off to a -gasp- 2-2 start and looking mortal. What is the world coming to??
It's nice to be spoiled these last two decades.
It's nice to be spoiled these last two decades.
Are we in a worse place than 2-2 in 2014 having lost by two scores to a meh Miami team, won at Minnesota in a decent performance, squeaked out a win against the rookie Carr led Raiders, and blown out at KC? Sure that D looked a fair amount better but the offense basically sucked.
The o-line looked abysmal through four games that year. They managed to fix that, but I was pretty pessimistic after the KC game. I remember @mascho doing some analysis after the KC game that made me think that the o-line issues were fixable, though.
I think the difference this time around is that the defense doesn't look capable of even being average right now and it isn't a matter of fixing one unit. They'll be better than they have been only because they have been so historically awful that they can't be this bad all season, but I don't know that they can do anything to make the defense even average at this point. They'll still win a bunch of games because the offense looks great and the division is still pretty lousy, but this feels more like 2009 right now than 2011 - 2016.
Buffalo fans would lop off limbs to even get into the playoffs at this point, so yeah, first world problems.
I think the difference this time around is that the defense doesn't look capable of even being average right now and it isn't a matter of fixing one unit. They'll be better than they have been only because they have been so historically awful that they can't be this bad all season, but I don't know that they can do anything to make the defense even average at this point. They'll still win a bunch of games because the offense looks great and the division is still pretty lousy, but this feels more like 2009 right now than 2011 - 2016.
Buffalo fans would lop off limbs to even get into the playoffs at this point, so yeah, first world problems.
Yeah, I meant Ryan. Forgot he hadn't played yesterday, mea culpa; thanks for the correction.
Let's also not forget that the combined record of our opponents played so far is 11-4 (12-4 if KC beats Washington tonight). Kansas City is the only undefeated team left in the league, and Carolina and Houston are both looking like solid playoff contenders at 3-1.
If we go 1-2 against the Bucs, Raiders and Falcons in the upcoming weeks, and then drop the Steelers game later in the year, we finish 11-5, win the East, and play the divisional round at home if things break right. If Carr is hurt for any length of time, then we could even go 2-1 in that stretch, and now we're looking at 12-4. It's definitely not what we hoped for a few weeks ago, but it's definitely not over yet, and I expect the team to "get right" against the likes of Miami, Jets, etc. On top of that, it's not like anyone else in the league is smoking the doors off everyone, except KC (although they are struggling tonight against the Redskins at home).
If we go 1-2 against the Bucs, Raiders and Falcons in the upcoming weeks, and then drop the Steelers game later in the year, we finish 11-5, win the East, and play the divisional round at home if things break right. If Carr is hurt for any length of time, then we could even go 2-1 in that stretch, and now we're looking at 12-4. It's definitely not what we hoped for a few weeks ago, but it's definitely not over yet, and I expect the team to "get right" against the likes of Miami, Jets, etc. On top of that, it's not like anyone else in the league is smoking the doors off everyone, except KC (although they are struggling tonight against the Redskins at home).
Carr is out 2-6 weeks and the Pats game is 7 weeks away, so he'll likely be back, but who knows how effective he will be.
As long as he can throw the ball into the proverbial ocean, we know exactly how effective he'll be against the Pats.
There's an assumption that the Pats go 6-0 against the East embedded in that 11-5 scenario which is probably a bit aggressive. The Pats have done that twice in the BB era (2007 and 2012), and two other times they went 5-1 with qualifiers (lost to the Bills last year with Brissett at QB, lost in 2005 to the Dolphins in a game that didnt matter). So even as the smashed the league for the last 16 years they've only gone 6-0 in division about a quarter of the time. So if the Pats go 1-2 against the Bucs, Raiders, and Falcons and then lose to the Steelers, they probably arent going to get to 11 wins.
That said, 10-6 should win the division and a 3 or 4 seed.
That said, 10-6 should win the division and a 3 or 4 seed.
The Patriots will probably win one of the Steelers/Falcons/Raiders games just out of the sheer probability the defense has a game more like the New Orleans performance...they look really bad, but that game does remind us that they can get stops. I agree they prob drop an ugly division game on the road somewhere.
I feel like they are more likely to lose at home where communication issues could be worse for the Defense as the noise will require more hand signals and hamper communication.
They might actually be better off away (at least defensively).
Ever been to Gillette? Crowd noise is usually not an issue for anyone.I feel like they are more likely to lose at home where communication issues could be worse for the Defense as the noise will require more hand signals and hamper communication.
They might actually be better off away (at least defensively).
Scheme, perhaps? The Pats have faced Alex Smith, Brees, Watson and Cam. 3 out of those 4 are mobile QB's that can do damage outside of the pocket and on designed runs. The Pats have always seemed to try to limit what those QB's can do outside of the pocket in lieu of an all out pass rush. I'm guessing things won't get much better against Tampa if they employ the same strategy against Jamies.
I know it's more than rushing yards, but Winston only has 2 more yards rushing than Brady this year. The other 3 QBs are all in the top 10 of QB rushing yards.
#1 Watson-148 (19 rushes)
#8 Newton-90 (22 rushes)
#9 Smith-89 (18 rushes)
Winston is #20 with 19 yards on only 6 rushes. The other 3 teams actually design plays for the QB to run. TB doesn't. Or, at least, hasn't.
#1 Watson-148 (19 rushes)
#8 Newton-90 (22 rushes)
#9 Smith-89 (18 rushes)
Winston is #20 with 19 yards on only 6 rushes. The other 3 teams actually design plays for the QB to run. TB doesn't. Or, at least, hasn't.
I think Thursday's game is huge. I'm really hopeful that this moment in time is one we look back on and think, "remember when we were worried and hoping 9-7 was possible." The Patriots have certainly given us so many "you were ridiculous to count us out" moments that it's not unreasonable to hope that this will be another.
But it's also not unreasonable to note that there's a reason that the Patriots have been so celebrated and so amazing over the past 15 years. It has been their resistance to the very serious and heavy parity pressures that are the hallmark of 21st Century NFL. Playing an extra month, losing cultivated players or undrafted FAs, playing the tougher schedule, being a game that everyone circles on the schedule, drafting at the end of every round. And, maybe most significant, or at least up there -- complacency. You take these players that play in these incredibly meaningful games that come down to inches one way or the other, and then you stick them back in the regular season in a division that is supposed to be "weak" and expect them to redline every week. Nobody is better than Belichick at avoiding complacency, but it's a hard job.
The margin between winning and losing in the NFL is narrow. No matter how much games look like mismatches on paper, every game is a rock fight and even when the Patriots are great and the Jets suck, just as one example, they find ways to give us a game (see, for example, last year). It really doesn't take all that much to lose a football game in the NFL.
I have a feeling that on Friday morning we're going to have a good sense of what we're looking at. Is it that "holy shit, we knew better than to worry" feeling, or is it more a feeling that it's really really hard to maintain the level that the Patriots have maintained. I guess we'll just have to watch and see. I hate that the game is Thursday. It feels like this team could use the full week. But, I guess the good news is that if they can find a way to win and get to 3-2, there isn't a better time for the mini-bye.
I just have to believe that this organization, with the coaching staff that they have, and the quality of players they have on defense (Flowers, Hightower, Butler, McCourty, Chung, etc.) will find a way to make the defense at least average. If it's average, that should be good enough, given the caliber of the offense (best in the NFL), to be a legit SB contender again.
Because they've been so bad to start the year, their final rankings may be in, say, the low 20s when all is said and done. But all they need to be is average FROM HERE ON OUT.
I think they can do it. In the TB/BB era, they've been ranked worse than 10th in scoring defense three times going into this year (17th in 2002, 17th in 2005, and 15th in 2011), but worse than 10th in yardage defense 9 times (24th in 2001, 23rd in 2002, 26th in 2005, 11th in 2009, 25th in 2010, 31st in 2011, 25th in 2012, 26th in 2013, and 13th in 2014).
Of those years (re: yardage D), they made the AFCCG 5 of those 9 years and went to the Super Bowl 3 of those times, winning it twice. So clearly having a subpar defense isn't necessarily a game-ender for them.
They just have to find a way to keep the other teams' scoring down some. I think they'll figure it out.
Because they've been so bad to start the year, their final rankings may be in, say, the low 20s when all is said and done. But all they need to be is average FROM HERE ON OUT.
I think they can do it. In the TB/BB era, they've been ranked worse than 10th in scoring defense three times going into this year (17th in 2002, 17th in 2005, and 15th in 2011), but worse than 10th in yardage defense 9 times (24th in 2001, 23rd in 2002, 26th in 2005, 11th in 2009, 25th in 2010, 31st in 2011, 25th in 2012, 26th in 2013, and 13th in 2014).
Of those years (re: yardage D), they made the AFCCG 5 of those 9 years and went to the Super Bowl 3 of those times, winning it twice. So clearly having a subpar defense isn't necessarily a game-ender for them.
They just have to find a way to keep the other teams' scoring down some. I think they'll figure it out.
Hmmm. That's interesting, because I've heard him say things like "We need to get better here" etc. Wonder if that's a build 'em up thing, or if he knows that the issue is something they can iron out.
Very interested to see what happens Thursday.
This was the exact quote.
http://www.espn.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4806448/bill-belichick-pass-rush-on-defense-competitive-and-consistent
"Really throughout the game, I thought we were OK rushing the quarterback," Belichick said. "We hit him a couple of times but he got the ball off, but I think the rush was competitive. I mean, obviously, it could be better. I’m not saying it was great, but there were times we beat blockers and got to the quarterback, got close to the quarterback, and a couple of times he got rid of the ball. ... I thought it was consistent."
I read it as BB hinting the pass rush wasnt the real crux of the problem Sunday.
http://www.espn.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4806448/bill-belichick-pass-rush-on-defense-competitive-and-consistent
"Really throughout the game, I thought we were OK rushing the quarterback," Belichick said. "We hit him a couple of times but he got the ball off, but I think the rush was competitive. I mean, obviously, it could be better. I’m not saying it was great, but there were times we beat blockers and got to the quarterback, got close to the quarterback, and a couple of times he got rid of the ball. ... I thought it was consistent."
I read it as BB hinting the pass rush wasnt the real crux of the problem Sunday.
I posted earlier this year that after "Winning the Offseason" (Which I like many of you thought we did and had high hopes because of it) those acquisitions have sucked donkey balls.
I should have been more measured
Gilmore and Ealy have sunk this defense.
I am still not thrilled with Gillislee and Burkhead but the game plan/usage might be the culprit there. (aside from the obvious injury)
I should have been more measured
Gilmore and Ealy have sunk this defense.
I am still not thrilled with Gillislee and Burkhead but the game plan/usage might be the culprit there. (aside from the obvious injury)
"Tougher schedule" is a myth. Every team on the Pats' schedule other than Pittsburgh and Houston was determined a long time ago. And next year, no matter what happens this year, the Pats will play IND, JAX, HOU, TEN, GB, MIN, CHI, DET, and the usual intradivisional teams.
So, the Jets get Jacksonville and Cleveland and the Patriots get Pittsburgh and Houston. What about that is a myth?
There are times, to be sure, where placement in the prior year does not equate to how well the team from the 2 AFC non-common-opponent divisions will play the next year. But over the course of 15 years, the two non-common opponents for a first place team will be tougher. The Patriots have played the Broncos every year since 2011, as opposed to every third year like the other teams against which the Patriots are competing for the division's playoff berth.
Given the margin for victory for (most teams) in the NFL, I think two games per season against teams that won the division the prior year is meaningful.
Its not a myth, it just gets overrated in importance sometimes given that its only two games on a schedule. It used to be a much bigger deal before realignment and expansion when it determined four games and the last place team in the AFC East was getting a home and home with the 5th place team in the west while the 1st place team played all the previous division winners.
I havent been able to find any studies about what the last place schedule is worth on average vs. a first place schedule, but I would bet its been studied. Id be pretty surprised if it turned out to be as much as a half win of a disadvantage on average for first place vs. last place schedule.
Last edited:
OTOH, the Patriots get to play the Bills and Jets every year, while those teams are stuck playing the Patriots.
If you do the math, every team plays exactly four games against teams that finished first the year before, four against teams that finished second, four against teams that finished third, and four against teams that finished fourth. The Patriots routinely have the easiest schedule in the division ... because they never have to play themselves.
The Pats can at most play three straight years away against any given team. So if the Pats play Denver at all in 2018-2019, those games will all be in NE.
I think he's also pointing out the fact that two of the biggest plays of the game were quarterback sacks by the Patriots that were wiped out by Gilmore's hands to the face penalties. I actually agree with him. I think the pass rush was about as good as you can expect given how little blitzing the Pats do. The problem is when they finally got home, and made a play, Gilmore wasn't capable of keeping his hands below his own head, and the refs decided it was time to call a penalty that they ignore 95% of the time. Even without those plays, the Pats had 2 sacks and 4 QB hurries. 4 sacks is an above average game in today's NFL, and should lead to 4 defensive stops.
It may turn out to be completely wrong, but in my opinion, this is the worst the other teams in the AFC East have ever been as a group. Buffalo's start notwithstanding, Miami is putrid and literally can't score, and everyone thought the Jets were trying to tank the season based on their roster going in. I think Buffalo's defense is ok, but nothing that will give our offense any trouble, and their offense, well, it's just not good. I don't think any of them sniff 8-8 this year, whereas in prior seasons, there is always at least one team that is semi-decent, and another that is capable of giving us a hard game when it's not expected, but if we need to go 6-0 against these teams this year, I wouldn't have any problem laying money on the Pats to do it.
I agree, I actually thought the pass rush was fine. They had trouble with QB draws (and the running game in the 2nd half) last week and were atrocious at keeping Watson in the pocket, but rushing the passer seems like it might the best part of the defense right now (faint praise and all). The Flowers/Wise combo in particular hasnt been bad.
I pretty much agree with the talent assessment. Bills aren't terrible, but that's a limited offense. Miami isnt as bad as they looked, terrible travel schedule, but that offense is going to have problems. Jets aren't as bad at we thought right now, but McCown is going to get hurt and then they arent going to win any more games. Im not going to worry about not winning the division unless the Pats are like 3-5 or lose to the Jets or something. But for the Pats to be more likely than not to go 6-0 comes out to something a 90% chance to win each individual game. That seems pretty high. Plus this might turn out to be one of the worst Pats teams of the last 15 years and, even with some adjustment, they only go undefeated in the division like 1/3 of the time. So I kinda want to agree with you, but objectively it seems a little aggressive.
For me, it's really a strength/weakness thing. The Bills, Jets and Dolphins are all about average defensively. Our offense shouldn't have any problem dropping 30+ on average defenses. Our biggest weakness, defense, particularly pass defense, is the one thing none of those teams can do at all. Jay Cutler, Tyrod Taylor and Josh McCown are honestly the worst set of QB's I can remember in the AFC east, and there have been some bad groups. When you add that to the fact that the teams got rid of Brandon Marshall, Eric Decker, Sammy Watkins, etc., and the best receiver of all three teams combined might be Devante Parker in Miami (or Jarvis Landry), Ii'm fairly confident even our woeful defense can hold them to less than the 30+ our offense should score.
I hear you that odds are we'll lose one of them, but I think this is a season in which we're going to absolutely need to go undefeated in the division for a number of reasons and the complacency that led to some of those losses in previous years shouldn't be there.
