Again, is your argument that the AFC East wasn't the BEST division? Because I won't quibble over that. All I've been doing is showing that Yam Bag's assertion that the AFC East was not only bad, but "historically bad" is total crap.
The division had 2 10-6 teams and one 11-5 team miss the playoffs in an era where 10 normally suffices for a wild card.
And in that same stretch...
I haven't since it takes time and the Steelers are the closest thing to the Pats (albeit still very far), so I just wanted to look at that. I also think it being a good division is weighted pretty heavily towards the early era since the non-Pats AFCE was legitimately good from 01-04 in the first part of the dynasty, but I think it was pretty trashy from 05-19.
The '08 Pats are certainly an anomaly, but they also had two 9-7 teams (09 Jets and 17 Bills) make it and while the 09 Jets were actually really good, they only made it because the Colts tanked a perfect season.
Do you have specific examples of how it was better? It was just a historically weak forum because while the Pats were winning Superbowls there was nobody posting about what a lousy coach BB was. Also annoyingly, through a large part of Brady's career, BB was given credit for picking him when he had a Probowl QB then giving him the Probowl QB's job when nobody else on earth would have done that. It was like they were caught up in the present and the previous decade or so of accomplishments.
I wouldn't say it's "incredibly rare", although it is rare as rookie QBs have only made the playoffs 22 other times, but the list of coaches who have recently accomplished this feat includes luminaries such as Jason Garrett, Mike Smith, Marvin Lewis and Rex Ryan, so I don't know if this is a "wow, only Bill" sort of thing here.
Here's the rest of the AFCS in interdivisional games during the Manning Colts era:
It really is the just type of thing you hear from English and history Grad students. Being a contrarian seems creative and edgy.
I don't think you're wrong. But it was a weird area to gamble on, because it's been the strength of the O the past several seasons and because the O did not have another obvious strength to compensate. The receivers and Mac are fine if they had a pretty good OL. But they're not good enough with an OL that's below-average or probably even one that's just OK. And the run game totally falls apart with the OL, even though the RB are still really good. Was the offense's path to success basically "we're gonna stay completely healthy on the OL (even though our two tackles miss half the season basically every year)"?
I certainly don't contest your main point, but Lennon dropped out for much of the '70's and was just beginning to reemerge in 1980. Had he lived, I think his contributions would have been substantial. McCartney had already established himself as a schlock artist.
Give BB that Tampa roster Brady joined without Brady and I would not be shocked if he also won at least 1 Superbowl...
Yeah, we seem to forget that Tampa's defense steamrolled the high-flying Chiefs attack, chasing Mahomes out of the stadium in the process.
Sorry, the assigned narrative is that BB sucks at drafting and Steve B’s only qualification is his last name.
You're not doing what's best for the team each week when you hire that offensive coaching staff.
They still need a CB1 and a younger player at FS than McCourty. Even just pick up a CB1 and get Barmore back next year and there are some players there now. But sliding every CB down one matchup would make everything click. Unfortunately, the CB market is hot garbage this offseason from what I can see, so absent overpaying Marcus Peters for his 2019 season, I'm not sure they're going to find what they're looking for.
I mean, they already did this. Detroit came into New England with the #2 offense in the NFL. Even now they're #5 in points scored and #4 in yards gained.
They just won on the road, by 2 TDs, on the West Coast, without their best receiver and their RB2. And then they lost their RB1 and Parker during the game in the first half, not to mention Jack Jones.
This feels like the right tone. There is a lot to be unhappy about with this season and most of it (all of it?) falls on Bill, but they’re 7-6 and have foundational pieces to hope on for the future. If I trust BB to make smart coaching hires for next year, my expectations will be reasonably high.
Yup. As bearish as I am with the offense/OL, I'm the complete opposite with the defense. The emergence of Uche, the Jones', Dugger's continued development, the LBs, etc. is exciting.
I'm sure they've done the math to determine that a few bumps in draft position isn't worth it. It's more beneficial to try and develop players and try and get playoff experience. You can find good players without great draft position and hopefully they can refresh the coaching tree on offense.
This is why I keep arguing that BB, the coach, is not the problem.
Don't want this post to get lost in the subject matter of this thread.
My guess from afar is that:
It would make sense of the Matt Patricia thing. See if, in a transitional year, he can figure out offense and show enough improvement over the course of the year that he'd actually be a viable OC when you have the pieces. It certainly appears to not be the case now.
Agreed, if they had won 1 of the Fins, the Vikings or the Bears it would be a much different vibe.
Right, but the question remains as to why they're trying to "dumb down the game plan because turnovers". Some percentage of that is Mac surely. We can argue over how much that is, but it's obviously not all of it. How much is bad OL talent? How much of it is bad OL and OC coaching? I have no idea, but anyone pointing specifically to either Mac or the OL as root cause should bring some math imo.
If the deep shot isn't wide open, and assuming the O Line holds up, what receiver on this team is going to go up and make a 1 on 1 contested catch? I mean, we all saw a couple bounce off Agholor's hands last night. 5 of Mac's picks are balls that were intended for Parker.
Well, the WR and TE aren't making it easy on him sure. But this team has won Super Bowls with similarly talented receivers IMO. I'd like to see them get a difference-maker too, but frankly having an OL that can both pass block and run block would be really nice. I sure as hell don't know whether the talent is that bad, coaching is that bad, or both. Depth definitely has something to do with it too.
Jakobi makes a ton of contested catches. We've seen what Bourne can do. WR is the least of their worries.
Lost in all the "FIRE MATTY P INTO THE SUN" back and forth is whether it's not the playcalling that's stumping Patricia -- but coaching the OL. It would be interesting if in the offseason they kept Patricia in his current role as playcaller but hired a guy to coach up the OL.
Agreed -- I actually think 1-5, this is one of the most talented groups of receivers they've had, putting aside that there's no elite talent there. Meyers/Parker/Agholor/Bourne/Thornton plus Henry/Jonnu is a lot of guys who can make plays. The question is whether they can consistent get them the ball. @FL4WL3SS thinks Mac is the problem -- I think it's the OL (and Mac knowing how to work with them -- he seems to be making a ton of pre-snap adjustments on every play).
