2020 Game Goat Thread: WCG vs Titans

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
I hope he gets it. Special teams work was great on the whole this year, but I wouldn't want 2019 Patriots WR Coach on my resume.
A recommendation from BB would seem to carry significant weight with the Giants. Of course, Josh is also a candidate there.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,278
AZ
The salary cap hit is indeed part of the question. The Pats were snug against the cap this year, and had to borrow from 2020 just to deal with in-season injuries. That $15M cap hit for Cooks would have cost the team elsewhere. Anyway, it's a moot point, and we agree on Barnwell.
I haven't read the Barnwell article, but if we're going to play this game, in addition to the cost that Cooks involved, don't we have to imagine a world where we don't have Isaiah Wynn?

The point is that if they have Cooks, they don't have pick 23 in 2018. One cannot say for sure what they would have done in any draft if they had not had that pick, except it is very certain that they would have had to spend even more on the cap if they had not had a player at a crucial position with a relatively small cap number.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,057
Hingham, MA
I haven't read the Barnwell article, but if we're going to play this game, in addition to the cost that Cooks involved, don't we have to imagine a world where we don't have Isaiah Wynn?

The point is that if they have Cooks, they don't have pick 23 in 2018. One cannot say for sure what they would have done in any draft if they had not had that pick, except it is very certain that they would have had to spend even more on the cap if they had not had a player at a crucial position with a relatively small cap number.
Barnwell assumes that A) Solder would be here and B) he wouldn’t suck. Bridge too far.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
I'm sure every team is looking for precision and timing with receivers, but every subjective piece of commentary that we get on this--alll the quotes from former players, the comments by announcers, the commentary by tape guys--suggests that Brady and the Pats are on an extreme on this point. Now I'll bet some of that is media bull (Edelman may have been a late round pick but he's not putting up multiple thousand yard seasons on precision and work ethic and game knowledge-he's also a super athletic guy) but is any of it real, and if so is there a cost.
I guess we're all about "do your job" until the offense has one bad season and then we're like, "should we really be asking them to do their job?" Isn't that one of the things that makes the Patriots great: they set high standards and they demand accountability when the standards aren't met? I'd imagine there are places that are more willing to let sloppiness go, and those are generally places that don't win very much. I think it's strange to frame this as a *Brady* foible when it strikes me as totally consistent with how *Belichick* runs every other phase of the operation.

To put it differently does a team like, I don't now, Pittsburgh--which gets great production out of rookie wide receivers pretty frequently--do things a little differently? Do they let the young guys play and make some mistakes that don't end up on the stat sheet but affect games? Or are they just uniquely good (or the Pats uniquely bad) at finding and coaching productive rookie players?
Honestly, I think it's mostly Wyatt Earp effect - the signal-to-noise ratio is something like analyzing which team is best at drafting a specific position over a certain numbers of years is really low given the small sample sizes we're talking about. Some team is going to be have the best results, and they're going to look like they have a specific genius, when in actuality it might be nothing more than variance.

And while the Steelers have produced a ton of hits at WR, they didn't all make an impact as rookies. Antonio Brown had less than 200 receiving yards. Emmanuel Sanders had less than 400 (and didn't really break out until he left Pittsburgh). And they've had busts, too: Limas Sweed, Markus Wheaton, Sammie Coates. I don't know where James Washington will fall but he definitely struggled in 2018.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
I guess we're all about "do your job" until the offense has one bad season and then we're like, "should we really be asking them to do their job?" Isn't that one of the things that makes the Patriots great: they set high standards and they demand accountability when the standards aren't met? I'd imagine there are places that are more willing to let sloppiness go, and those are generally places that don't win very much. I think it's strange to frame this as a *Brady* foible when it strikes me as totally consistent with how *Belichick* runs every other phase of the operation.

Honestly, I think it's mostly Wyatt Earp effect - the signal-to-noise ratio is something like analyzing which team is best at drafting a specific position over a certain numbers of years is really low given the small sample sizes we're talking about. Some team is going to be have the best results, and they're going to look like they have a specific genius, when in actuality it might be nothing more than variance.

And while the Steelers have produced a ton of hits at WR, they didn't all make an impact as rookies. Antonio Brown had less than 200 receiving yards. Emmanuel Sanders had less than 400 (and didn't really break out until he left Pittsburgh). And they've had busts, too: Limas Sweed, Markus Wheaton, Sammie Coates. I don't know where James Washington will fall but he definitely struggled in 2018.
Two points. With receivers it's easy to think of it as a Brady foible because we see Brady's shitty sideline comportment. Brady is pretty different from a Watson or a Wilson or Big Ben--he really lets guys have it. Now players who have been with Bradyfor years swear by Brady's leadership but it looks bad to the casual fan (or even the more than casual fan) where on some random missed pass brady is just laying into another rookie.

I assume the randomness of drafting is part of it but I think it is notable that the Pats target veteran at wideout more than they do at just about any position--I suspect the challenges of knowing who will run NFL precise routes is part of that.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
Two points. With receivers it's easy to think of it as a Brady foible because we see Brady's shitty sideline comportment. Brady is pretty different from a Watson or a Wilson or Big Ben--he really lets guys have it. Now players who have been with Bradyfor years swear by Brady's leadership but it looks bad to the casual fan (or even the more than casual fan) where on some random missed pass brady is just laying into another rookie.

I assume the randomness of drafting is part of it but I think it is notable that the Pats target veteran at wideout more than they do at just about any position--I suspect the challenges of knowing who will run NFL precise routes is part of that.
I've seen plenty of heated sideline conversations between QB's and receivers around the league, including Roethlisberger. I do not believe Brady is unique in that regards, nor is he even an outlier. And the guy Brady laid into most was the veteran Dorsett after he missed an obvious signal from Brady to adjust his route.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
I assume the randomness of drafting is part of it but I think it is notable that the Pats target veteran at wideout more than they do at just about any position--I suspect the challenges of knowing who will run NFL precise routes is part of that.
I agree with this. College WR don't face nearly as much press as they will in the NFL, so there's more projection at WR than at most positions. And the Patriots have generally done a good job identifying veteran WRs who can work for them. Obviously the slot guys like Welker were undervalued, but they've also landed dudes like Jabar Gaffney, Brandon Lloyd, Brandon LaFell, Chris Hogan who were better in NE than elsewhere.

But the veteran market inefficiencies have dried up. You need three or four good WR and there just aren't that many to go around, so you see Adam Humphries signing an eight-figure deal and Albert Wilson signing for three-years, $24 MM. And there are too-many ex-Pats decision-makers around the league that are competing for system fits. So they've spent the last two offseasons just throwing darts at dudes like Kenny Britt, Jordan Matthews, Eric Decker, Maurice Harris, Dontrelle Inman, Demaryius etc., with nothing to show for it, and during the year have had to swing moves for question marks Gordon and Brown and finally paying through the nose for Sanu. That Belichick was trying to make last-minute pleas to grab Humphries and Jared Cook should say it all about where this receiver group was on paper, and the on-field results certainly backed that up. Drafting Harry - their first first-round WR - I see as an adjustment to the relative risk/reward in the WR draft market vs FA.

I'm sure they knew Harry was going to be a bit of a project based on his college tape, but I think they thought his physicality would play into the power run game they had going at the end of 2018. Then Sony had 14 yards on 15 carries in Week 1 (with Wynn and Develin!) and it became obvious they were not really going to be able to run the ball this year, either.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
https://edjsports.com/articles/risky-business-wild-card-weekend/
One of the things that gets overlooked in the game was BB's poor decisions on 4th downs. BB argues against analytics, but punting at several points in the game, especially with 3 minutes left, was the wrong move. Also, as suspected, the time-wasting on penalties by Vrabel actually helped the Patriots in their win probability.
If Edelman makes that first down catch, the Pats get the ball first and ten from the NE 44 (or so). Only needing another 20-25 yards, with 3:25 or so on the clock. If they assumed that it was four-down territory at that point (which they didn't but should have...grrrrrrr), the Pats would likely have been able to run the clock down and gotten a GW FG with very little time left, which would have meant that Vrabel's game could have cost them dearly.


EDIT: Though I will say, punting on that fateful fourth down late... the Pats DID get Ten in a 3rd and 8 from their 15 yard line. And when this Pats' defense knows you are going to pass, they've generally been lights out defending, especially in 3rd and long situations - the very best team in the league in those situations. So I think for any of us, if we knew that within short order the Pats would force a 3rd and 8 and force Tannehill into a straight drop-back pass situation from their own 15 yard line, I think we'd ALL have taken it. Every single one of us.

Too bad they gave up what ended up being a pretty easy completion for the first down. Killer.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
Was that Brooks who gave that up? I felt like he showed up earlier in the season but it seemed like every time his name was called against the Titans after Chung got hurt it was because he let up some big play (the TD being the most obvious).
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Was that Brooks who gave that up? I felt like he showed up earlier in the season but it seemed like every time his name was called against the Titans after Chung got hurt it was because he let up some big play (the TD being the most obvious).
He only played six snaps, too. But I don't think Brooks was 100% healthy, either; he played only one snap on special teams, which is unusual for him. He had missed the Miami game with injury.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Was that Brooks who gave that up? I felt like he showed up earlier in the season but it seemed like every time his name was called against the Titans after Chung got hurt it was because he let up some big play (the TD being the most obvious).
Well Tennessee only had three completed passes of consequence last weekend. The 3rd and 10 touchdown on their opening drive, the 22-yard screen to Henry that led to his TD before the half, and this 3rd and 8 conversion late in the game.

Two of those (the TD and 3rd down conversion) were against Brooks.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
Well Tennessee only had three completed passes of consequence last weekend. The 3rd and 10 touchdown on their opening drive, the 22-yard screen to Henry that led to his TD before the half, and this 3rd and 8 conversion late in the game.

Two of those (the TD and 3rd down conversion) were against Brooks.
Felt like Jamie Collins/Owen Daniels all over again
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Felt like Jamie Collins/Owen Daniels all over again
Speaking of Jamie Collins.... He's a FA and I think he's gone, unless he's willing to take really small dollars to stay. Incredible first half of the season (DPOY-caliber first half), but basically turned invisible in the second half of the year. Not sure why. Did he wear down? Was he battling nagging injuries that went unreported? Did he start free-lancing again, falling back into his old ways? No idea what happened but he vanished. The first half Collins was an absolute wrecking machine. The second half was...well...the Jamie Collins who was jettisoned the first time around.

Not saying I definitely want him gone, but I definitely do NOT want them to pay a lot of money for him to stay.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
Speaking of Jamie Collins.... He's a FA and I think he's gone, unless he's willing to take really small dollars to stay. Incredible first half of the season (DPOY-caliber first half), but basically turned invisible in the second half of the year. Not sure why. Did he wear down? Was he battling nagging injuries that went unreported? Did he start free-lancing again, falling back into his old ways? No idea what happened but he vanished. The first half Collins was an absolute wrecking machine. The second half was...well...the Jamie Collins who was jettisoned the first time around.

Not saying I definitely want him gone, but I definitely do NOT want them to pay a lot of money for him to stay.
Yup. Really disappointing second half of season. Would be surprised if he’s back. Looked to me like he took himself out of several Henry runs with poor angles. Reminded me of that Buffalo game. Still a very nice signing but I’m ready to move on for good unless he comes dirt cheap again.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,240
I'm sure every team is looking for precision and timing with receivers, but every subjective piece of commentary that we get on this--alll the quotes from former players, the comments by announcers, the commentary by tape guys--suggests that Brady and the Pats are on an extreme on this point. Now I'll bet some of that is media bull (Edelman may have been a late round pick but he's not putting up multiple thousand yard seasons on precision and work ethic and game knowledge-he's also a super athletic guy) but is any of it real, and if so is there a cost.

To put it differently does a team like, I don't now, Pittsburgh--which gets great production out of rookie wide receivers pretty frequently--do things a little differently? Do they let the young guys play and make some mistakes that don't end up on the stat sheet but affect games? Or are they just uniquely good (or the Pats uniquely bad) at finding and coaching productive rookie players?
Somewhat tangentially, the Steelers have also missed the playoffs several times in the current era. To put it in analytic-ish terms, does that mean that being really good at getting that WR production doesn't correlate to winning as much as being good at something else? The baseball analogy might be that those teams that historically led the league in "productive outs" rarely led the league in "wins." . Or the NBA player who scores 30 a game but gives up 40.
The part I bolded may speak to this possibility. The WRs may be racking up yards, but there's more to it than that.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
I agree with this. College WR don't face nearly as much press as they will in the NFL, so there's more projection at WR than at most positions. And the Patriots have generally done a good job identifying veteran WRs who can work for them. Obviously the slot guys like Welker were undervalued, but they've also landed dudes like Jabar Gaffney, Brandon Lloyd, Brandon LaFell, Chris Hogan who were better in NE than elsewhere.

****
Drafting Harry - their first first-round WR - I see as an adjustment to the relative risk/reward in the WR draft market vs FA.

I'm sure they knew Harry was going to be a bit of a project based on his college tape, but I think they thought his physicality would play into the power run game they had going at the end of 2018. Then Sony had 14 yards on 15 carries in Week 1 (with Wynn and Develin!) and it became obvious they were not really going to be able to run the ball this year, either.
It's partially risk reward changing but the Pats have also never been a pure value team--they want good players of course but ones who fit in a particular role on the team. Between the the glaring hole at WR, the cost of WR, the desire to have some big bodied dudes who can add physicality to the run game and be effective in short passing games off of play action, etc. he made a lot of sense as Brandon LaFell 2.0

But man was he frustrating. Tis is verging towards Bill Simmons body language level analysis but I watched quite a bit of Harry in college (I'm a pac-12 fan) and he's just not the same guy--as a college receiver he was just aggressive attacking the ball on every catch, running through guys if needed, controlling his body, boxing people out, whatever--and just hungry for the ball in traffic. From time to time we saw that this year but he seems like a pretty timied but it was strange watching him (against obviously better players) being fairly passive when the ball was coming his way as a pro, most famously on the pick-6 a few weeks ago but on a few other occasions as well. I don't know if he's just overthinking things or he's lost confidence or he doesn't have the technique now that he can't just overpower DBs but he's not playing stylistically like the guy I'm familiar with.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Somewhat tangentially, the Steelers have also missed the playoffs several times in the current era. To put it in analytic-ish terms, does that mean that being really good at getting that WR production doesn't correlate to winning as much as being good at something else? The baseball analogy might be that those teams that historically led the league in "productive outs" rarely led the league in "wins." . Or the NBA player who scores 30 a game but gives up 40.
The part I bolded may speak to this possibility. The WRs may be racking up yards, but there's more to it than that.
Even with all the Pats' "misses" at WR over the years, they've still always (well, not this year, but otherwise) had an elite offense. Yes, Tom Brady. But....yes, Tom Brady. They've always been able to be incredibly productive on offense even with a lot of misses at WR because they've had excellent coaching and the greatest QB of all time at the trigger. So this year, yeah, they had a bunch of misses at WR, but they still had excellent coaching and the greatest QB of all time at the trigger. Unless....he no longer is playing like the greatest of all time. NOW, suddenly, they need more help at WR, and can't afford to "miss" at that position as much because the guy throwing isn't quite the same and may not be able to carry a less talented WR group like he used to.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
Even with all the Pats' "misses" at WR over the years, they've still always (well, not this year, but otherwise) had an elite offense. Yes, Tom Brady. But....yes, Tom Brady. They've always been able to be incredibly productive on offense even with a lot of misses at WR because they've had excellent coaching and the greatest QB of all time at the trigger. So this year, yeah, they had a bunch of misses at WR, but they still had excellent coaching and the greatest QB of all time at the trigger. Unless....he no longer is playing like the greatest of all time. NOW, suddenly, they need more help at WR, and can't afford to "miss" at that position as much because the guy throwing isn't quite the same and may not be able to carry a less talented WR group like he used to.
Or, the wretched nature of the TE contingent kept the offense from passing or running effectively beyond occasional bursts.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Or, the wretched nature of the TE contingent kept the offense from passing or running effectively beyond occasional bursts.
That point is not necessarily mutually exclusive to mine. In other words, I agree with you, but I think it's also partly Tom. (and the OL too)
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
That point is not necessarily mutually exclusive to mine. In other words, I agree with you, but I think it's also partly Tom. (and the OL too)
The last time TB12 had a receiving corps this bad, and an average tight end was 2001-2006.

From 2001-2006, these were his stats:

61.9% completion percentage, 147tds (4.8%), 78ints (2.5%), 88.4QBR, 6.12 ANY/A

Here are his stats this year:

60.8% completion percentage, 24tds (3.9%), 8int (1.3%), 88.0QBR, 6.24 ANY/A

Bottom line, a quarterback can't do it himself. Never could, never will.

His W/L record from 2001-2006: 70-24. In 2019: 12-4.

Same guy, IMO. And from 2001-2006, he had something this team didn't have in 2019. An offensive line and a running game.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
Even with all the Pats' "misses" at WR over the years, they've still always (well, not this year, but otherwise) had an elite offense. Yes, Tom Brady. But....yes, Tom Brady. They've always been able to be incredibly productive on offense even with a lot of misses at WR because they've had excellent coaching and the greatest QB of all time at the trigger. So this year, yeah, they had a bunch of misses at WR, but they still had excellent coaching and the greatest QB of all time at the trigger. Unless....he no longer is playing like the greatest of all time. NOW, suddenly, they need more help at WR, and can't afford to "miss" at that position as much because the guy throwing isn't quite the same and may not be able to carry a less talented WR group like he used to.
Part of the reason the Pats got away with their draft misses at WR is that they did bring in veteran receivers that worked out for them. LaFell, Hogan, Amendola, Cooks, and even Josh Gordon and Coradelle Patterson were all productive players here. And, of course, the tight ends. Not just Gronk, but TE2's like Chandler and Martellus Bennett. The talent drop off from those guys to what Brady had this year was tremendous, especially once you factor in Edelman's myriad injuries and Josh Gordon's season-long decline and the well-documented losses in the run blocking.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
The last time TB12 had a receiving corps this bad, and an average tight end was 2001-2006.

From 2001-2006, these were his stats:

61.9% completion percentage, 147tds (4.8%), 78ints (2.5%), 88.4QBR, 6.12 ANY/A

Here are his stats this year:

60.8% completion percentage, 24tds (3.9%), 8int (1.3%), 88.0QBR, 6.24 ANY/A

Bottom line, a quarterback can't do it himself. Never could, never will.

His W/L record from 2001-2006: 70-24. In 2019: 12-4.

Same guy, IMO. And from 2001-2006, he had something this team didn't have in 2019. An offensive line and a running game.
Different era. So his stats should be better now than they were then. And don’t misunderstand. I’m not really being critical of Brady. Dude is 42 years old. He’s not SUPPOSED to be as good as he was in his prime. That he’s still as good as he is right now is just remarkable. But he can’t carry guys like he used to.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,158
Once Wynn came back, I really didn't see the OL being as much of a problem. The first half of the season, Brady seemed to have almost no time to pass (and the team couldn't run). But, the second half of the season (more or less) it seemed markedly different. In that last game there must have been a number of times when it seemed like Brady had quite a long time to throw and still couldn't find anyone open. So, to me, the season seemed to be two different seasons.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Once Wynn came back, I really didn't see the OL being as much of a problem. The first half of the season, Brady seemed to have almost no time to pass (and the team couldn't run). But, the second half of the season (more or less) it seemed markedly different. In that last game there must have been a number of times when it seemed like Brady had quite a long time to throw and still couldn't find anyone open. So, to me, the season seemed to be two different seasons.
I agree with this. I think they thought that Wynn coming back would stabilize the OL and Harry and Sanu would offset the loss of Gordon. The former was true, but Harry and Sanu (hampered by injury) wound up being much worse than Gordon, so the OL improvement was totally cancelled out by the decline in the receiving corps.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
I agree with this. I think they thought that Wynn coming back would stabilize the OL and Harry and Sanu would offset the loss of Gordon. The former was true, but Harry and Sanu (hampered by injury) wound up being much worse than Gordon, so the OL improvement was totally cancelled out by the decline in the receiving corps.
I also think while Wynn's return improved the line (without looking, I suspect Brady's sack and hurry numbers went way down), the running game never quite got into a groove (tho it also improved). I'm not sure whether that's on Wynn so much as the absence of Develin and the TEs.

Bigger question: do we simply blame injury luck on this past year? Poor roster construction from Bill (who defended the offense a bit in his final presser FWIW)? Weirdly unpredictable things like Gronk retiring too late to adequately replace him or AB having a slew of sexual misconduct cases come out of the blue? Or all of the above?

The meta narrative now that the season's over and we're discussing whether Brady will come back seems to be that "they didn't put enough talent around Brady" -- I'm not sure I totally agree with that, but it certainly seemed that way once the injuries kicked in. I just have a hard time imagining Bill deciding to cheap out on weapons for the sake of it.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
In terms of the 2019 offense, I'd estimate the blame pie as something like:

OL: 47.5%
TEs: 27.5%
WRs: 20%
RBs: 2.5%
QB: 2.5%


The OL did improve a bit with Wynn's return, but opponents also backed down on the pressure packages as they recognized that it was so hard for the offense to work its way down the field that it made less sense for defenses to risk Brady burning them for a big chunk on a blitz. Defenses could give Brady more time to throw, but receivers couldn't get open enough to make it hurt. Running game wasn't worth worrying about either so put more DBs on the field.
 
Last edited:

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
Different era. So his stats should be better now than they were then. And don’t misunderstand. I’m not really being critical of Brady. Dude is 42 years old. He’s not SUPPOSED to be as good as he was in his prime. That he’s still as good as he is right now is just remarkable. But he can’t carry guys like he used to.
Was it really that much different of an era?

In 2006, his stats were 61.8%, 24tds, 12ints, 87.9QBR

In 2007, his stats were 68.9%, 50tds, 8ints, 117.2QBR.

I would say the difference between 2006 and 2007 isn't era-related. It's Randy Moss and Wes Welker vs. Reche Caldwell and final-season Troy Brown-related.

I think the whole "Brady used to be able to carry his team" stuff is overblown. He still "carried" his team to a 12-4 record in 2006, just like he did in 2019, with basically the same stats and the same terrible skill position players. In 2006, they made it a little further, but really its' because they played the Jets and Chargers in the 1st 2 rounds, before losing to Manning and the Colts. In 2019, the Pats offense scored the 7th most points in the NFL and had the 15th most yards. In 2006, they scored the 7th most points and the 11th most yards. Defensively, they were #2 in the NFL in scoring in 2006 and #1 in 2019. By almost any metric, the 2006 and 2019 Pats and TB12 were basically the same team and same QB. If you give TB12 a in-his-prime Randy Moss and Wes Welker, do people really think the offense struggles like they did this year? Maybe he doesn't throw 50tds, but 35-40 certainly gets the job done. The biggest difference between the two teams, in 2006, they were 12th in the NFL in rushing yards and 4th in rushing touchdowns. In 2019, they were 18th in rushing yards and 10th in rushing touchdowns.

I remember folks saying in 2013 that it looked like Brady's passes didn't have as much zip. They said he was losing his fastball. Meanwhile, I'm in the stands watching him throw rockets and telling people his arm looked like it was stronger than it was at any point in his career. Then he goes for 126tds, 27ints and a 103.0 QB rating over the next four years. In 2013, he lost Gronk after 6 games and was left with an offense that featured Julian Edelman, an aging Shane Vereen, Aaron Dobson and Kembrel Thompkins. That's why he had 25td's, 11ints and an 87.9QBR in 2013, not because he couldn't throw hard anymore. Again, just like this year.

Brady has had these ebbs and flows in his career. And they virtually all coincide with shitty skill position players or injuries to important ones. The idea that he used to put up massive numbers with crappy players is a fallacy. He never did. He basically put up the same numbers he put up this year. Nobody, not peak Tom Brady, not peak Peyton Manning, nobody, was going to put up 35td's, and 4,500 yards and a 100+ QBR with the guys he had this season around him.

Now, if the Pats don't plan to put some weapons around him, get him a tight end, shore up the offensive line, etc., they should just blow it up and start over and let him walk. They aren't going to win it next year with this group, but if they simply tweak some things around him, I honestly have seen no evidence to indicate he's any different a QB than he was in 2013 or 2006.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
I hear Austin Collie may be available.

I pretty much agree with all of that ... right down to
If you give TB12 a in-his-prime Randy Moss and Wes Welker, do people really think the offense struggles like they did this year? Maybe he doesn't throw 50tds, but 35-40 certainly gets the job done.
And
Nobody, not peak Tom Brady, not peak Peyton Manning, nobody, was going to put up 35td's, and 4,500 yards and a 100+ QBR with the guys he had this season around him.
Ultimately I think it comes down to this:
Now, if the Pats don't plan to put some weapons around him, get him a tight end, shore up the offensive line, etc., they should just blow it up and start over and let him walk.
Like a lot of people, I've been yo-yo'ing around this topic a bit ... wondering if I want him back if they aren't going to maximize what they have around him. But if they do? I'm pretty sure I'm all in. Obviously that's mostly on Bill and whether he wants to do it ... but unless there's something we don't know, I can't imagine he wouldn't think that TB12 gives the Patriots the best chance to win a Super Bowl, all things considered.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Was it really that much different of an era?

In 2006, his stats were 61.8%, 24tds, 12ints, 87.9QBR

In 2007, his stats were 68.9%, 50tds, 8ints, 117.2QBR.

I would say the difference between 2006 and 2007 isn't era-related. It's Randy Moss and Wes Welker vs. Reche Caldwell and final-season Troy Brown-related.

I think the whole "Brady used to be able to carry his team" stuff is overblown. He still "carried" his team to a 12-4 record in 2006, just like he did in 2019, with basically the same stats and the same terrible skill position players. In 2006, they made it a little further, but really its' because they played the Jets and Chargers in the 1st 2 rounds, before losing to Manning and the Colts. In 2019, the Pats offense scored the 7th most points in the NFL and had the 15th most yards. In 2006, they scored the 7th most points and the 11th most yards. Defensively, they were #2 in the NFL in scoring in 2006 and #1 in 2019. By almost any metric, the 2006 and 2019 Pats and TB12 were basically the same team and same QB. If you give TB12 a in-his-prime Randy Moss and Wes Welker, do people really think the offense struggles like they did this year? Maybe he doesn't throw 50tds, but 35-40 certainly gets the job done. The biggest difference between the two teams, in 2006, they were 12th in the NFL in rushing yards and 4th in rushing touchdowns. In 2019, they were 18th in rushing yards and 10th in rushing touchdowns.

I remember folks saying in 2013 that it looked like Brady's passes didn't have as much zip. They said he was losing his fastball. Meanwhile, I'm in the stands watching him throw rockets and telling people his arm looked like it was stronger than it was at any point in his career. Then he goes for 126tds, 27ints and a 103.0 QB rating over the next four years. In 2013, he lost Gronk after 6 games and was left with an offense that featured Julian Edelman, an aging Shane Vereen, Aaron Dobson and Kembrel Thompkins. That's why he had 25td's, 11ints and an 87.9QBR in 2013, not because he couldn't throw hard anymore. Again, just like this year.

Brady has had these ebbs and flows in his career. And they virtually all coincide with shitty skill position players or injuries to important ones. The idea that he used to put up massive numbers with crappy players is a fallacy. He never did. He basically put up the same numbers he put up this year. Nobody, not peak Tom Brady, not peak Peyton Manning, nobody, was going to put up 35td's, and 4,500 yards and a 100+ QBR with the guys he had this season around him.

Now, if the Pats don't plan to put some weapons around him, get him a tight end, shore up the offensive line, etc., they should just blow it up and start over and let him walk. They aren't going to win it next year with this group, but if they simply tweak some things around him, I honestly have seen no evidence to indicate he's any different a QB than he was in 2013 or 2006.
Fair enough. But in 2013, Shane Vereen was 24 and in his third season. He was just entering, in 2013, the first year of his prime. He wasn't "aging" (though of course, by definition, we are all "aging" at every moment of our lives).
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
I also think while Wynn's return improved the line (without looking, I suspect Brady's sack and hurry numbers went way down), the running game never quite got into a groove (tho it also improved). I'm not sure whether that's on Wynn so much as the absence of Develin and the TEs.
Wynn returned for the Dallas game. From then on, Michel averaged 4.3 yards per carry, which pretty close to his 2018 average. That said, you're not wrong; the run game was up and down. It's just really hard to sustain offense through the run game in the modern NFL. The extent to which they "found an identity" around the power run game down the stretch last year has been totally overblown. The run game was hit-or-miss in 2018, too.

Bigger question: do we simply blame injury luck on this past year? Poor roster construction from Bill (who defended the offense a bit in his final presser FWIW)? Weirdly unpredictable things like Gronk retiring too late to adequately replace him or AB having a slew of sexual misconduct cases come out of the blue? Or all of the above?
I don't think the injury luck was that bad to be honest. Andrews was unfortunate, as were losing two FB. The injuries to Wynn and Harry were reported as week-to-week so I'm not sure why they went on IR at all, and it's not any clearer in hindsight. The D had excellent injury luck and still wore down at the end of the year. This isn't a 2013 or 2015; the Patriots probably didn't have any worse injury luck than any of the remaining playoff teams.

The meta narrative now that the season's over and we're discussing whether Brady will come back seems to be that "they didn't put enough talent around Brady" -- I'm not sure I totally agree with that, but it certainly seemed that way once the injuries kicked in. I just have a hard time imagining Bill deciding to cheap out on weapons for the sake of it.
I don't think he decided to cheap out for the sake of it; I think he decided to cheap out because the market is ridiculous. I mean, $9 MM a year for Adam Humphries? Who wants to pay that?

But Belichick pretty clearly indicated he thought WR/TE was a problem. He made late runs at Humphries and Jared Cook even as the bidding got into the ridiculous. He took repeated dart throws at WR/TE all offseason: Harris, Inman, Ellington, Thomas, LaCosse, Watson, Seferian-Jenkins, Kendricks, Saubert, etc. He used a first on Harry, and gave UDFA deals to Meyers and Gunner and a lot of money to Andrew Beck. He hopped on Antonio Brown immediately even though he was crazypants. He paid a 2nd to get Sanu. At every turn, Belichick was telling us they didn't have enough receiving help. And the results certainly bear that out.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
Fair enough. But in 2013, Shane Vereen was 24 and in his third season. He was just entering, in 2013, the first year of his prime. He wasn't "aging" (though of course, by definition, we are all "aging" at every moment of our lives).
Sorry, I meant to say "injured" not "aging." In 2013, he only played 8 games.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
Like a lot of people, I've been yo-yo'ing around this topic a bit ... wondering if I want him back if they aren't going to maximize what they have around him. But if they do? I'm pretty sure I'm all in. Obviously that's mostly on Bill and whether he wants to do it ... but unless there's something we don't know, I can't imagine he wouldn't think that TB12 gives the Patriots the best chance to win a Super Bowl, all things considered.
Here's my thing. If Tom Brady goes somewhere else with weapons in place, and lights it up for 2-3 years, and we're stuck watching a 4-12 team with no QB on the horizon, I will spend the next 2-3 falls physically ill.
 

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
4,684
Amstredam
Was it really that much different of an era?

In 2006, his stats were 61.8%, 24tds, 12ints, 87.9QBR

In 2007, his stats were 68.9%, 50tds, 8ints, 117.2QBR.

I would say the difference between 2006 and 2007 isn't era-related. It's Randy Moss and Wes Welker vs. Reche Caldwell and final-season Troy Brown-related.

I think the whole "Brady used to be able to carry his team" stuff is overblown. He still "carried" his team to a 12-4 record in 2006, just like he did in 2019, with basically the same stats and the same terrible skill position players. In 2006, they made it a little further, but really its' because they played the Jets and Chargers in the 1st 2 rounds, before losing to Manning and the Colts. In 2019, the Pats offense scored the 7th most points in the NFL and had the 15th most yards. In 2006, they scored the 7th most points and the 11th most yards. Defensively, they were #2 in the NFL in scoring in 2006 and #1 in 2019. By almost any metric, the 2006 and 2019 Pats and TB12 were basically the same team and same QB. If you give TB12 a in-his-prime Randy Moss and Wes Welker, do people really think the offense struggles like they did this year? Maybe he doesn't throw 50tds, but 35-40 certainly gets the job done. The biggest difference between the two teams, in 2006, they were 12th in the NFL in rushing yards and 4th in rushing touchdowns. In 2019, they were 18th in rushing yards and 10th in rushing touchdowns.

I remember folks saying in 2013 that it looked like Brady's passes didn't have as much zip. They said he was losing his fastball. Meanwhile, I'm in the stands watching him throw rockets and telling people his arm looked like it was stronger than it was at any point in his career. Then he goes for 126tds, 27ints and a 103.0 QB rating over the next four years. In 2013, he lost Gronk after 6 games and was left with an offense that featured Julian Edelman, an aging Shane Vereen, Aaron Dobson and Kembrel Thompkins. That's why he had 25td's, 11ints and an 87.9QBR in 2013, not because he couldn't throw hard anymore. Again, just like this year.

Brady has had these ebbs and flows in his career. And they virtually all coincide with shitty skill position players or injuries to important ones. The idea that he used to put up massive numbers with crappy players is a fallacy. He never did. He basically put up the same numbers he put up this year. Nobody, not peak Tom Brady, not peak Peyton Manning, nobody, was going to put up 35td's, and 4,500 yards and a 100+ QBR with the guys he had this season around him.

Now, if the Pats don't plan to put some weapons around him, get him a tight end, shore up the offensive line, etc., they should just blow it up and start over and let him walk. They aren't going to win it next year with this group, but if they simply tweak some things around him, I honestly have seen no evidence to indicate he's any different a QB than he was in 2013 or 2006.
Not adding anything to the overall conversation, but the 2007 Pats revolutionized the game.

The use of Welker in the slot changed how the game was played and ushered in a new era of offense.

So yes it was one year, but that one year changed how offense in the NFL has been played over the past 13 years.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
Not adding anything to the overall conversation, but the 2007 Pats revolutionized the game.

The use of Welker in the slot changed how the game was played and ushered in a new era of offense.

So yes it was one year, but that one year changed how offense in the NFL has been played over the past 13 years.
Did they really though, or were they just playing catchup to the Colts? 3 years earlier, Peyton went for 49td's and had 3 receivers go for 1,000 yards, including Brandon Stokley (along with Harrison and Wayne) out of the slot. They basically started the "bubble screen" to the receiver and used the slot all the time.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
The use of Welker in the slot changed how the game was played and ushered in a new era of offense.
I’ve heard people say this but is it really true? Was Welker really used much differently than Troy Brown? I mean, yes, he was used more. But that probably had to do with Welker being a better receiver (no offense to Brown), being surrounded by elite talent like Moss and, perhaps even more so, playing in the post-“Cut That Meat” rules that prevented DB’s from manhandling receivers and probably gifted Manning his first ring.

Maybe 2007 was when it all really arrived and was in some respects run more effectively than before or since. But I’ve never really understood how Welker was really utilized all that differently.

Edit: @Deathofthebambino and I making a similar point here
 

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
4,684
Amstredam
I’ve heard people say this but is it really true? Was Welker really used much differently than Troy Brown? I mean, yes, he was used more. But that probably had to do with Welker being a better receiver (no offense to Brown), being surrounded by elite talent like Moss and, perhaps even more so, playing in the post-“Cut That Meat” rules that prevented DB’s from manhandling receivers and probably gifted Manning his first ring.

Maybe 2007 was when it all really arrived and was in some respects run more effectively than before or since. But I’ve never really understood how Welker was really utilized all that differently.

Edit: @Deathofthebambino and I making a similar point here
Enjoy - https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2017/8/7/16107814/2007-new-england-patriots-tom-brady-randy-moss-wes-welker

@Deathofthebambino

Ten years ago, the Patriots perfected the offense that every team tries to run today. The team was the “coming-out party for the slot receiver,” said former Giants center Shaun O’Hara, now an analyst at the NFL Network. The Patriots’ use of Wes Welker in the slot helped the position become not only ubiquitous but crucial—and in response, defenses now typically employ an extra defensive back. New England was among the first teams to deemphasize the fullback, which would soon become the norm. That Patriots team was also the first in NFL history to run shotgun for a majority of its plays; last year, NFL teams ran 79 percent of their pass plays from the shotgun. The quarterbacks of the four conference championship teams last season were the four best at throwing to five receivers—another staple the Patriots are credited with popularizing. “Their talents allowed everyone to look at things differently in the passing game,” said current Patriots receivers coach Chad O’Shea.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,057
Hingham, MA
The "new era" began in 2004 after they changed the illegal contact rules.

As has been pointed it, it seems way more likely that the similarities in TB12's stats between 2006, 2013, and 2019 have to do with surrounding talent, not some sort of decline.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
As has been pointed it, it seems way more likely that the similarities in TB12's stats between 2006, 2013, and 2019 have to do with surrounding talent, not some sort of decline.
So you’re saying we shouldn’t wait for Bill to hold a press conference announcing that Brady is in the twilight of his career?

Thanks for that, @Silverdude2167, a few things stand out to me:

1) We may have been the first team to deemphasize the fullback but we were also the first team to bring the fullback back w Develin.

2) Chad O’Shea leaving as our receivers coach – could’ve used him this year.
 

Granite Sox

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2003
5,055
The Granite State
Regarding some comments/questions on the performance of Brooks and Collins:
  • Brooks was on the injury report with a groin. I was actually quite surprised that both Brooks and J. Jones played, because I can imagine it gets difficult to move laterally and/or accelerate with a bad groin. Especially defending against the pass. So I chalk up Brooks' limited PT and inefficacy to the groin injury. Once Chung got hurt, the Pats didn't have much flexibility at that position.
  • Collins was listed during the week with a shoulder injury, I believe. It's speculation on my part, but some of the "poor angle" issues in the game might be related to getting in a position to try and take down the runner without further aggravating the shoulder. Overall, I also believe his play dropped off significantly in the second half and that it is unlikely he'll return (combination of $$ and performance), but he may have been playing through something for several weeks as well.
From the Thursday before the game:
ENTklwvWoAc7aiz.jpeg
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
I appreciate the article, but for the most part, it's just not true. With the exception of running more plays out of the shotgun, there really was no difference between what the Pats were doing in 2007 versus what the Colts were doing in 2004. The Colts never used a fullback (sometimes they would use split backs, but a lot of times, it was a tight end in the backfield or in the offset I and they would go out into a pattern) so I'm not sure how they can ascribe the demise of the fullback at that time to the Patriots. They had Edgerrin James in the backfield, Dallas Clark at tight end, Stokley in the slot and Harrison/Wayne on the outside. Manning was the guy who basically was calling plays at the LOS and reading defenses before Brady ever did.

Here's a video of all the touchdowns thrown by Manning in 2004. I haven't watched it in a while, but IIRC, there was a fullback on the field for like none of them. I'm not even sure they had one on the roster that year.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oO3yFVR3IU



Like the article says the Pats "invented nothing but innovated everything." Maybe that's true, but I would argue that Manning and that Colts team was the model by which the Pats changed their offense, and if it weren't for Moss/Welker, nobody is talking about how they innovated anything. They got the weapons they needed, and changed their offense to use them to the best of their ability. Just like the Ravens aren't inventing anything this year, but Lamar Jackson can give them things other teams just can't do because, well, they don't have Lamar Jackson.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
The "new era" began in 2004 after they changed the illegal contact rules.

As has been pointed it, it seems way more likely that the similarities in TB12's stats between 2006, 2013, and 2019 have to do with surrounding talent, not some sort of decline.
Theres just no way his skills aren’t declining *some*. No way. Doesn’t mean he isn’t still good or great. But there’s no way he’s not a little worse than he was at his peak. I mean if he’s not declining at all that means that at 42 he’s at the apex of his ability (or has yet to even reach his apex). Which is insanity.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,057
Hingham, MA
Theres just no way his skills aren’t declining *some*. No way. Doesn’t mean he isn’t still good or great. But there’s no way he’s not a little worse than he was at his peak. I mean if he’s not declining at all that means that at 42 he’s at the apex of his ability (or has yet to even reach his apex). Which is insanity.
I don't disagree at all. It's just very difficult to measure.

Consider the 2017 to 2018 "decline"
Completion %: 66.3% to 65.8%
TD%: 5.5% to 5.1%
INT%: 1.4% to 1.9%
YPA: 7.9 to 7.6
Rating: 102.8 to 97.9
ANY/A: 7.56 to 7.26

So slight decline pretty much across the board. Somewhere in the 2-5% range or whatever. But we also know that Gronk wasn't as good in 2018 as he was in 2017. If Gronk was the same as in 2017, would Brady's stat line have been better? And of course Gronk is just one example - there is plenty of player movement that could impact this one way or the other (Cooks, Edelman, Amendola, Michel, Solder / Trent Brown, etc.).

So yeah, I think he's in some sort of decline. But it's nearly impossible to say how much IMO.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,829
Unreal America
I don't disagree at all. It's just very difficult to measure.

Consider the 2017 to 2018 "decline"
Completion %: 66.3% to 65.8%
TD%: 5.5% to 5.1%
INT%: 1.4% to 1.9%
YPA: 7.9 to 7.6
Rating: 102.8 to 97.9
ANY/A: 7.56 to 7.26

So slight decline pretty much across the board. Somewhere in the 2-5% range or whatever. But we also know that Gronk wasn't as good in 2018 as he was in 2017. If Gronk was the same as in 2017, would Brady's stat line have been better? And of course Gronk is just one example - there is plenty of player movement that could impact this one way or the other (Cooks, Edelman, Amendola, Michel, Solder / Trent Brown, etc.).

So yeah, I think he's in some sort of decline. But it's nearly impossible to say how much IMO.
I wonder if Brady's decline won't be as gradual, as it will be off-a-cliff-like. If we were having this conversation about Peyton Manning after the 2014 season, one could easily point to every one of those stats you posted, and note that they don't look any different than they did in 2007. But then 2015 happened.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MannPe00.htm
My hunch is that if Brady can avoid major injury, he'll be anywhere from serviceable to quite good, until he decides to hang it up.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,057
Hingham, MA
I wonder if Brady's decline won't be as gradual, as it will be off-a-cliff-like. If we were having this conversation about Peyton Manning after the 2014 season, one could easily point to every one of those stats you posted, and note that they don't look any different than they did in 2007. But then 2015 happened.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MannPe00.htm
My hunch is that if Brady can avoid major injury, he'll be anywhere from serviceable to quite good, until he decides to hang it up.
Agree on both points. I don't think we'll ever see a Manning-in-2015 type season from Brady
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
I think his decline will be gradual, but he'll retain enough skill so that on occasion he will show flashes of TOM BRADY. In some ways, that's what we got this year. This year he had:

- 5 games with a passer rating of 70.8 or lower
- 6 games with a passer rating of 80.4 - 88.9
- 5 games with a passer rating of 96.9 - 124.9

Of his top 7 games by passer rating, 5 of them were in weeks 1-6.

So he had some mediocre games and some pretty poor games, but also some brilliant games (week 1 vs Pit: 24-36, 341 yds, 3 td, 0 int, for example).
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
22,089
A Scud Away from Hell
Turns out Edelman was playing with a separated AC joint as well as rib and knee injuries. According to the Athletic's Jeff Howe, the injuries “were described as serious enough that they would have ended some other players’ seasons.”

https://boston.cbslocal.com/2020/01/08/details-emerge-on-julian-edelmans-injury-situation/
This was an all-too-predictable result of not having 1 or 2 other primary targets. Edelman was doubled and got banged even harder than usual, this time not just from the CB but the safety as well.

Not having a viable TE option (perhaps even more so than a 2nd WR option) was this team's Achilles' heel that never got remedied.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
This was an all-too-predictable result of not having 1 or 2 other primary targets. Edelman was doubled and got banged even harder than usual, this time not just from the CB but the safety as well.

Not having a viable TE option (perhaps even more so than a 2nd WR option) was this team's Achilles' heel that never got remedied.
Yup. Losing sucks but I’m glad Jules gets to heal now.