Pats' performance in playoffs

[H78]

Also, here's a video of Ray Lewis talking about the altitude (I think Pees gets in there as well - can't watch, at work):

http://wnst.net/nfl/ray-lewis-says-hes-never-been-affected-by-altitude-in-denver/

 

[Leather]

If you live there, you don't experience the acclimation process every day at all. You've acclimated. And there's a big difference between getting out of a plane at 5,000 feet and just walking around and, say, deciding to go for a run. The harder you exert yourself, the more you will feel the difference. For that reason, people who are in good shape actually get into the most trouble because they push themselves harder and run into oxygen depletion faster than people who are slower/less aggressive.

So, while nobody's playing football on top of Mt. Elbert, the fact that the players will be exerting themselves at a near-max level for 3+ hours compounds the altitude issue, however modest it might be. And since it typically takes weeks to fully adjust to higher altitude, getting to Denver a day or two earlier than normal probably won't make much of a difference.

 

[Stitch01]

Numbers don't show Denver having any particularly strong homefield advantage.

 

[H78]

Does Ray Lewis count as a source?

 

[lexrageorge]

Football games are 3 hours, and involve repeated intense bursts of exertion, which is different from running 5 miles. There is actual science that shows that altitude does affect even well conditioned athletes over 3 hours. Plus there's the parade of anecdotal evidence. So, I wouldn't say the altitude affects are "hardly noticeable". The former players vehemently disagree with that statement.

Now, in terms of the game outcome, I'm not surprised if the altitude affects get overblown a bit, much like the cold in Green Bay, the snow in Foxboro, or the heat in Miami in September. But fatigue has been cited as a factor before in late and close games. Remember the Pats defense struggled down the stretch during the AFCCG in the hot Hoosier Dome, and heat was cited as a factor.

 

[H78]

Again:

I'm. Not. Denying. A. Slight. Difference.

It's there.

But it's not deciding football games the way people think it is. And no football player is playing for three straight hours; they're playing for about an hour and a half spread over three hours.

There is a difference, but it's minimal. It's not what people outside of Denver think it is. Hence my description of it simply being "overblown."

 

[bakahump]

Not a world class athlete by any means (not that you would mistake me for 1 LOL)...

But I went from Okinawa Japan (about 12 feet above sea level) to Fort Carson Colorado. One right after the other. I went from running 2 Miles in about 12:45 to about 16 mins in the first week or so in Colo.

Never did get back into the 13 minute mark (Got back to low 14s). A couple deployments and Old Chicago Restaurant and World Beer tour had a something to do with it.......but the altitude is no joke.

 

[dcmissle]

Pretty much exactly this. Just about every playoff team has laid at least one serious egg this year.

At various points over this season, the Patriots, Broncos, Packers (early), Seahawks (late), Steelers, Cardinals, Bengals, and Panthers were viewed as top 5 teams/teams no one wanted to play in the post season. And now that the Chiefs have been so hot, you can't completely discount them either. That's part of the reason I would not be shocked if 8 of those 10 teams made the Superbowl (not buying the Redskins argument). The best team they beat this year were the Bills or Rams.

Say what you want about Washington, but Gruden, Cousins and McCloughan have made fools out of a lot of people the last 8 weeks, most notably their notoriously impatient owner. And check out Cousins' performance during that span, a span in which he has had no running game to speak of.

Football has really "evolved" squeezing patience out of almost every evaluation of HCs and QBs. People threw the towel in on Cousins based on a half dozen starts last year when he never had anything approaching full backing of the team. We may never know how close Washington may have come to throwing Gruden and Cousins out the door.

 

[Devizier]

Numbers don't show Denver having any particularly strong homefield advantage.

Yes and no.

 

[dcmissle]

Numbers don't show Denver having any particularly strong homefield advantage.

Has a study been done? I would think it would turn at least in part on the delta between home and road performance, compared to that of other teams over the same period.

Any leads on this would be interesting.

 

[Boston Brawler]

I get that a lot of people here don't mind as much this year since number four came last year, but I want (badly) for TB to get to five to tie Haley for rings as a player (and break away from Montana and Bradshaw in the QB ring discussion). And for BB to get to seven to tie Dahlen.

 

[tims4wins]

http://grantland.com/features/bill-barnwell-best-home-field-advantages/

from 2002-2013, the Broncos had the #1 HFA

 

[Stitch01]

Yeah, you have the right idea. Here's one, there are others out there as well but this was the easiest to find.

http://grantland.com/features/bill-barnwell-best-home-field-advantages/

It isn't definitive by any measures, but provides some support to the idea altitude is a bit overblown.

 

[dcmissle]

Yeah, you have the right idea. Here's one, there are others out there as well but this was the easiest to find.

http://grantland.com/features/bill-barnwell-best-home-field-advantages/

Thank you both.

 

[Devizier]

http://grantland.com/features/bill-barnwell-best-home-field-advantages/

from 2002-2013, the Broncos had the #1 HFA

You've got it backwards -- their #1 HFA is from 1992-2002.

They are more middle of the pack since.

If you take the 20-year span (this excludes teams like the Ravens, for obvious reasons), the Broncos are still up near the top.

Even a ten year sample is pretty small sample size, since each team only plays 8 home games a year. And there's a lot of game-to-game variance in the NFL, thanks to injuries.

 

[tims4wins]

Ah thanks I was skimming

 

[Boston Brawler]

http://grantland.com/features/bill-barnwell-best-home-field-advantages/

from 2002-2013, the Broncos had the #1 HFA

That was from 1990-2002. From 2002-2013 it's the Seahawks. Broncos are in the bottom half for 2002-2013.

Edit: beaten by Devizier, not meaning to pile on...

 

[8slim]

I'm an incorrigible optimist when it comes to the Pats. As someone who started seriously following them during their 2-14 season in 1981 I'm not sure how I couldn't be, given the past 15 years.

As bad as the 2-4 stretch to end the season seems, football is such a random game of small sample sizes. The Pats really cruised to 4-0, but after that they were only up 6 on the Colts early in the 4th before Pagano ran the worst play in the history of the NFL. They were trailing the Jets in the 4th, beat the Giants on a last second FG, and had to hold off the Bills in the 4th. All games they deserved to win, of course, but it wasn't like they were just blowing everyone out on the way to 10-0.

Then 2 of their 4 losses were in OT, and another by a TD when they gave the Eagles three completely gift-wrapped scores. Obviously the offense has looked downright horrible at times recently, and that's a huge concern. But we've seen this franchise find a way to get their sh!t together after bad stretches time and time again.

If Edelman comes back effective and they can use these 2 weeks to find a way to make the OL merely serviceable then there's no one in the AFC they can't beat. I suspect all of their games will be close though.

 

[grimshaw]

Say what you want about Washington, but Gruden, Cousins and McCloughan have made fools out of a lot of people the last 8 weeks, most notably their notoriously impatient owner. And check out Cousins' performance during that span, a span in which he has had no running game to speak of.

Football has really "evolved" squeezing patience out of almost every evaluation of HCs and QBs. People threw the towel in on Cousins based on a half dozen starts last year when he never had anything approaching full backing of the team. We may never know how close Washington may have come to throwing Gruden and Cousins out the door.

It's a nice story - and I'm not against rooting for them for once . . but their 9 wins were against teams with a combined 58-84, and only 3 of those teams had as many as 7 wins.

The only quality teams they played (NE, the Jets and Carolina) they lost by 2 TD or more to. The Dolphins and Falcons also beat them.

 

[amarshal2]

Does Ray Lewis count as a source?

I guess I should have been more specific. ;-)

I appreciate those who posted the Barnwell article. My memory was a different time horizon that had them top 5 -- which in longer horizons they are.

 

[brandonchristensen]

Hell, Brady only threw the ball 21 times. I'd bet you would have to go back a bunch of years to find that few attempts by Brady.

To satisfy my curiosity...

Last year in Week 2, he threw 21 attempts against Minnesota.
In 2013, he threw 22 against Miami.
2012, 27 was the fewest.
2011, 27.
2010, 25.
2009, 23.
2008, ignore this.
2007, 25.
2006, 23 (2x)
2005, 21.
2004, 19!!!!
2003, 21.
2002, 22.
2001, 19 again.

So you have to go back to 2004 to see a game where he threw less.

 

[TheoShmeo]

If Edelman comes back effective and they can use these 2 weeks to find a way to make the OL merely serviceable then there's no one in the AFC they can't beat. I suspect all of their games will be close though.

I am usually a Pats optimist. But I am having trouble seeing how they can find a way to make the OL serviceable during the next 11 days.

For those who are optimistic, how do you reconcile the poor offensive line play over the last several weeks with your optimism? The answer is likely tied to Vollmer, at least in part, but I question whether his return alone is enough. Perhaps some will answer that Edelman's quick release will allow Brady to throw faster and Vollmer's return will be enough along with that to bridge the gap. I want to believe that and the offense clearly looks different with Julian in there (and Amendola and Gronk healthier than they appeared to be in Miami).

Looking at the offensive line itself, I keep wondering why they don't insert Andrews at C and put Stork at one of the guard spots (or even Cannon's spot). But perhaps I am overrating Andrews.

 

[tims4wins]

@TheoShmeo

For me, I look back to the games after Solder went down for the season (the Cowboys game) and before Edelman got hurt. Here is how the offense performed during that stretch:
34 points @ Indy
30 points vs. the NYJ
36 points vs. Miami
27 points vs. Washington *Lewis went down in this game; also had a ton of OL injuries forcing Stork to RT
and then they scored a TD and a FG for 10 points on their first three drives with Edelman against the Giants before he got hurt

That is pretty good offensive performance. The Jets played them pretty well defensively but they have a great D. Washington got a pick inside the red zone which kept the scoring down; just a bad play by Brady or a misread. And then they looked good again early against the Giants.

I don't remember during those games thinking that the OL was a massive problem. If they can approximate that level of performance, I think they'll be fine. Granted, they had Lewis for part of that stretch (he played the Indy and Miami games, got hurt vs. Washington; but did not play vs. the NYJ or in the Giants game), but not all of it.

 

[Marceline]

Again:

I'm. Not. Denying. A. Slight. Difference.

It's there.

But it's not deciding football games the way people think it is. And no football player is playing for three straight hours; they're playing for about an hour and a half spread over three hours.

There is a difference, but it's minimal. It's not what people outside of Denver think it is. Hence my description of it simply being "overblown."

There are clearly documented physiological changes that take place when a person has acclimated to altitude over a period of time.
For example, see here:

According to an extensive review, when un-acclimatized sea-level residents are rapidly and directly transported to altitude, there is an immediate reduction in maximal aerobic capacity (or VO2max) that is directly proportional to elevation. According to the U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine’s Altitude Acclimatization Guide, submaximal physical performance is initially compromised at altitude, and the amount of decrement varies based on the activity duration. Of particular importance is that pulmonary ventilation increases over the first seven to nine days at altitude with the majority of this change completed by the fifth day, at which time submaximal exercise improves.

The elevation of Glendale, CO, is 5,280 ft. At this elevation, the average expected VO2max reduction would be 5–10% relative to that at sea level, and there will be no improvement for at least three weeks. After a few days at altitude, even though VO2max will not increase, the ability to perform the sports activity will improve because of altitude acclimatization (specifically ventilatory and circulatory acclimatization). Athletes will generally be able to perform for longer periods of time at a higher proportion of VO2max after a week at altitude than they were able to do in the first couple of days. This will provide a competitive “edge” relative to those who did not train similarly at altitude. There is little objective scientific data to support the concept that fitness levels will be lower at seven days than they were on first arrival. Go to Glendale, CO, nine or so days ahead of the competition date as planned to gain as much altitude acclimatization as possible before the competition.

http://hprc-online.org/environment/altitude/short-duration-altitude-acclimatization

 

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

I am usually a Pats optimist. But I am having trouble seeing how they can find a way to make the OL serviceable during the next 11 days.

For those who are optimistic, how do you reconcile the poor offensive line play over the last several weeks with your optimism? The answer is likely tied to Vollmer, at least in part, but I question whether his return alone is enough. Perhaps some will answer that Edelman's quick release will allow Brady to throw faster and Vollmer's return will be enough along with that to bridge the gap. I want to believe that and the offense clearly looks different with Julian in there (and Amendola and Gronk healthier than they appeared to be in Miami).

Looking at the offensive line itself, I keep wondering why they don't insert Andrews at C and put Stork at one of the guard spots (or even Cannon's spot). But perhaps I am overrating Andrews.

I think it's going to be a long couple of weeks in here and that people are firmly entrenched in the OL will or will not improve camp. There is really no imperial evidence to support the optimistic crowd but there are many reasons and things to point at as upside. I don't think many people are going to change sides of the debate at this point.

I generally use pessimism as a type of Patriots defense mechanism; it's easier to take a loss if you expect one is coming. But this year I feel nothing but optimism. Amazing what a Super Bowl win can do to one's psyche.

 

[DegenerateSoxFan]

There are clearly documented physiological changes that take place when a person has acclimated to altitude over a period of time.
For example, see here:
http://hprc-online.org/environment/altitude/short-duration-altitude-acclimatization

From my own previous experience of living in a locale at 7,000 feet, I think it really takes a few months for a person to fully acclimate. Yes, that's a wee bit higher than Denver, but the difference becomes noticeable around 4,000.

Then when you go back to sea level, it feels like you've got an oxygen tank strapped on. No lie, when I was living in the mountains of northern Arizona and hit the beach in Mexico, I couldn't believe how much beer I could consume with little discernable effect. I have no doubt that the altitude is a not-insignificant advantage for the Broncos, especially late in the game. I really don't want the Pats going to Denver, even though they could easily win if the horses are healthier and the O-line doesn't soil itself. I just don't.

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

Anybody have a ProFootballFocus account? One of their stats is time from snap-to-release. It would be interesting to plot actual times by game and compare to injuries.

I've found a couple articles quoting that through the first 3 games, Brady was the fastest in history (averaging 1.99 seconds).

And this Ryan Hannable article : http://m.weei.com/sports/boston/football/patriots/ryan-hannable/2015/12/08/full-circle-patriots-offensive-struggles-co

Edelman was lost in the first quarter of the ninth game of the year against the Giants, while Gronkowski was lost in the fourth quarter in the 11th game against the Broncos.

In the first eight games of the season, our numbers had Brady averaging two seconds from snap-to-throw. Starting with the Giants game (game No. 9), Brady has averaged 2.42 seconds from snap-to-throw -- almost a half second increase, which is a big deal for a quarterback when standing in the pocket.

The article was written in early december - and I think he's gotten worse.

He also goes on to say that Brady had 36 attempts with a greater than 3 second time between snap and release in the 3 games following Edelman getting hurt, and had only 36 attempts like that in the prior 8 games. He had 16 against the Eagles alone.

The line is only a problem because Brady is taking forever to throw - and Brady is only taking forever to throw because nobody is getting open.

Numbers don't exactly match, but similar:

 

[EL Jeffe]

My expectation is that we'll be seeing a lot more 5-wide once the playoffs begin. The skill position injuries really forced their hands the 2nd half of the season which led to a lot more two TE sets (especially where Williams is a complete non-factor as a receiving threat).

LaFell & the RB out wide (likely Bolden or White) with Amendola & Edelman inside and Gronk playing in-line or flexed out. They can also motion the RB next to Brady if they feel they need the blitz pickup help. This has always been one of their more dangerous looks but losing Edelman in particular really neutered them with their formation package options. If Edelman is indeed back to being Edelman, I wouldn't be surprised if #11 and #87 ended up getting about 60-70% of the targets.

 

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

My expectation is that we'll be seeing a lot more 5-wide once the playoffs begin. The skill position injuries really forced their hands the 2nd half of the season which led to a lot more two TE sets (especially where Williams is a complete non-factor as a receiving threat).

LaFell & the RB out wide (likely Bolden or White) with Amendola & Edelman inside and Gronk playing in-line or flexed out. They can also motion the RB next to Brady if they feel they need the blitz pickup help. This has always been one of their more dangerous looks but losing Edelman in particular really neutered them with their formation package options. If Edelman is indeed back to being Edelman, I wouldn't be surprised if #11 and #87 ended up getting about 60-70% of the targets.

Does anyone know where to get pre-Edelman injury/post-Edelman injury data on how often they went five wide? That split would be interesting to see.

 

[amarshal2]

Yeah, you have the right idea. Here's one, there are others out there as well but this was the easiest to find.

http://grantland.com/features/bill-barnwell-best-home-field-advantages/

It isn't definitive by any measures, but provides some support to the idea altitude is a bit overblown.

I'm not sure if it provides that support, actually, because it just compares the Broncos at home to on the road. I'm not sure how else you'd quantify it, but it seems possible it doesn't take into account any benefit the Broncos receive on the road because they live and train at altitude. To be clear, I don't know for sure that they do receive a benefit and if they do how much. But like DegenerateSoxFan, I have anecdotal experience where I felt like I could run forever after coming back from hiking at high altitude (albeit much higher, was pretty much above 9k ft for a week topping out around 14k).

My worthless experience aside, I do know that as you acclimatize your blood carries a higher proportion of oxygen to your brain, on average, and that the effect doesn't disappear immediately upon return to sea level. With the typical caveats that I'm no doctor or scientist and haven't searched for any academic articles, this at least seems plausible.

 

[awallstein]

but it seems possible it doesn't take into account any benefit the Broncos receive on the road because they live and train at altitude.

It certainly does NOT take that factor into account, but that benefit (whatever it might be) is irrelevant to this question, as the extent to which Broncos players are in better shape than others will be a factor anywhere, at high altitudes or at sea level.

 

[joe dokes]

There is really no imperial evidence to support the optimistic crowd

Sez you:

 

[Marceline]

I'm not sure if it provides that support, actually, because it just compares the Broncos at home to on the road. I'm not sure how else you'd quantify it, but it seems possible it doesn't take into account any benefit the Broncos receive on the road because they live and train at altitude. To be clear, I don't know for sure that they do receive a benefit and if they do how much. But like DegenerateSoxFan, I have anecdotal experience where I felt like I could run forever after coming back from hiking at high altitude (albeit much higher, was pretty much above 9k ft for a week topping out around 14k).

My worthless experience aside, I do know that as you acclimatize your blood carries a higher proportion of oxygen to your brain, on average, and that the effect doesn't disappear immediately upon return to sea level. With the typical caveats that I'm no doctor or scientist and haven't searched for any academic articles, this at least seems plausible.

The Broncos don't have any advantage on the road due to training at altitude and then moving to sea level, at least based on the studies I found this afternoon when I was digging up the link I posted earlier.

While there are physiological adaptations that allow those who are acclimatized to altitude to perform better than someone who has just arrived at altitude, those advantages don't translate to any advantage at sea level performance.

 

[8slim]

I am usually a Pats optimist. But I am having trouble seeing how they can find a way to make the OL serviceable during the next 11 days.

For those who are optimistic, how do you reconcile the poor offensive line play over the last several weeks with your optimism? The answer is likely tied to Vollmer, at least in part, but I question whether his return alone is enough. Perhaps some will answer that Edelman's quick release will allow Brady to throw faster and Vollmer's return will be enough along with that to bridge the gap. I want to believe that and the offense clearly looks different with Julian in there (and Amendola and Gronk healthier than they appeared to be in Miami).

Looking at the offensive line itself, I keep wondering why they don't insert Andrews at C and put Stork at one of the guard spots (or even Cannon's spot). But perhaps I am overrating Andrews.

Tims4wins posted what I had in mind. There was a stretch of games this season where the OL was competent, and it was post-Solder injury, but largely pre-Edelman and Lewis injuries.

I'm placing a lot of hope on Edelman's return, and that it will have a cascading effect that'll help LaFell, Amendola, Gronk and of course the OL.

I'd be more pessimistic if it weren't for that stretch. They had it in them to be at least OK.

 

[amarshal2]

Something I've noticed anecdotally is that teams that struggle to protect the QB had a really rough time against the Pats this year when Collins, Hightower, Sheard, and Jones were on the field. Teams that protect the QB well fared much better. This moreso than then WR match-ups is the reason the Pats struggled to defend the Jets to my eye (I believe Fitz was the least sacked QB in the NFL per snap) and the Rapist (and the Giants to a degree). It also explains how the Broncos were able to come back once injuries and the snow neutralized the pass rush.

Good news: The AFC playoff teams in general did a poor job protecting QBs. Alex Smith took 45 sacks! We already know the Pats can get to Hoyer with ease as they nearly decapitated him last time. Brock takes tons of sacks -- 23 in limited play -- and was being lit up by the Pats in the first 3 quarters. Peyton is of course much more difficult to sack than Brock because he gets it out quicker but he looked very affected by the poor play of his o-line earlier this year even if it didn't result in tons sacks. By contrast the Bengals (with Dalton) and Steelers do a good job and will be a tougher task but they play each other this weekend so it's just one team.

On the NFC side I'm not sure the Seahawks can protect Russ well enough to make the SB with 3 road games to get there even with the improvement they've shown. If they do, they'll struggle against the elite pass rush AFC teams (Broncos, Pats, KC, Cinci). Same with the Packers. On the flip side, Arizona could be really tough.

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

Adding on to the above, Manning has been sacked 16 times in ~8.5 games. His previous career high was 29 back in 2001. His last three seasons before this one, he was sacked 21, 18, and 17 times.

 

[dcmissle]

Because BB throws around compliments like manhole covers, I love it when he goes out of his way to praise players, especially accomplished vets. Today, he walked Steven Jackson through a rose petal garden, per CSNNE. *he's working so hard, you'd think he is a rookie* and so forth.

 

[Hendu for Kutch]

Poor Stephen Jackson. After never finishing above .500 in his entire career, he joined the powerhouse Patriots and promptly went 0-2, meaning that the Patriots will have to win the Super Bowl in order for him to finally win more games than he loses in a season.

Win it for S-Jax!

 

[ifmanis5]

It's pretty hard to shake the overall storyline of this being 'the year everyone got hurt.' I want to be an optimist but it just feels like the die has been cast.

 

[Hendu for Kutch]

It's pretty hard to shake the overall storyline of this being 'the year everyone got hurt.' I want to be an optimist but it just feels like the die has been cast.

We haven't had to use Danny Amendola at CB, so we've got that going for us.

 

[dcmissle]

Just another reason why I so want this to end well:

FOXBORO, Mass. — Tom Brady and Bill Belichick have unsurprisingly made a strong impression on Steven Jackson during the veteran running back’s short time with the New England Patriots.

Jackson talked up Brady after playing just the final two regular season games with the Patriots. The quarterback has lived up to Jackson’s already lofty expectations.

“It’s everything I thought it would be,” Jackson said. “True field leader. He has a great pulse of the team, knows how to motivate guys. You understand why they win around here.”

Jackson, who officially signed with the Patriots on Dec. 22, is headed to the playoffs for just the second time in his 12-year career. Jackson played two postseason games in his rookie season with the St. Louis Rams and didn’t make it back in his next 10 seasons.

“It’s been a long time,” Jackson said. “It’s been a long time. The last time I appeared in a playoff game was 2005. You get the feeling, but at the same time, all things considered, it’s been a long time.”

Making the playoffs is business as usual when Belichick is head coach. Jackson and Belichick have mutually admired one another since the running back declared for the 2004 NFL Draft.

“Great, he’s great to coach, works hard,” Belichick said. “You would think he’s a rookie — he’s just trying to soak everything in, understand everything as well as he can. He practices hard, he runs scout team, does the things he needs to do to improve and work on some things he hasn’t been able to do in months when he was working out but not playing football, so he’s trying to take advantage of all those opportunities.

“He’s been great, he’s got a great attitude and he’s picked things up well and has gotten better. Really literally every day he walks of the field is better than it was the day before, including the games, which again are limited, but hopefully there will be more of them.”

Jackson, who has 21 carries for 50 yards and a touchdown and one catch for 20 yards, returned the praise.

“Well you know, over the years we had a chance to cross paths and going back to 2004, to even some Pro Bowls where we crossed paths,” Jackson said. “One thing about coach Belichick is, you get what you get. He’s a true professional. Very hard on the details and making sure guys are smart and aware of what they are supposed to be doing. He hasn’t let me down yet.”

 

[Cabin Mirror]

Do you guys think the extra day between Divisional and Championship round for the 2 seed played any role in the approach to the Miami game? IF so how much?

The more I think about it, the more I think they were completely content with the 2 seed. An extra day for prep and recuperation may be more important to this year's banged up team. I mean it is kind of weird and not what I would do, but maybe it's what BB would do?

 

[tims4wins]

Do you guys think the extra day between Divisional and Championship round for the 2 seed played any role in the approach to the Miami game? IF so how much?

The more I think about it, the more I think they were completely content with the 2 seed. An extra day for prep and recuperation may be more important to this year's banged up team. I mean it is kind of weird and not what I would do, but maybe it's what BB would do?

Except they didn't announce the divisional schedule until week 17 was over. Last year the Pats were the 1 seed and played the Saturday game. So it pretty clearly was not a factor.

 

[Cabin Mirror]

Except they didn't announce the divisional schedule until week 17 was over. Last year the Pats were the 1 seed and played the Saturday game. So it pretty clearly was not a factor.

Well, there goes that theory

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[DegenerateSoxFan]

Just another reason why I so want this to end well:

FOXBORO, Mass. — Tom Brady and Bill Belichick have unsurprisingly made a strong impression on Steven Jackson during the veteran running back’s short time with the New England Patriots.

Jackson talked up Brady after playing just the final two regular season games with the Patriots. The quarterback has lived up to Jackson’s already lofty expectations.

“It’s everything I thought it would be,” Jackson said. “True field leader. He has a great pulse of the team, knows how to motivate guys. You understand why they win around here.”

Jackson, who officially signed with the Patriots on Dec. 22, is headed to the playoffs for just the second time in his 12-year career. Jackson played two postseason games in his rookie season with the St. Louis Rams and didn’t make it back in his next 10 seasons.

“It’s been a long time,” Jackson said. “It’s been a long time. The last time I appeared in a playoff game was 2005. You get the feeling, but at the same time, all things considered, it’s been a long time.”

Making the playoffs is business as usual when Belichick is head coach. Jackson and Belichick have mutually admired one another since the running back declared for the 2004 NFL Draft.

“Great, he’s great to coach, works hard,” Belichick said. “You would think he’s a rookie — he’s just trying to soak everything in, understand everything as well as he can. He practices hard, he runs scout team, does the things he needs to do to improve and work on some things he hasn’t been able to do in months when he was working out but not playing football, so he’s trying to take advantage of all those opportunities.

“He’s been great, he’s got a great attitude and he’s picked things up well and has gotten better. Really literally every day he walks of the field is better than it was the day before, including the games, which again are limited, but hopefully there will be more of them.”

Jackson, who has 21 carries for 50 yards and a touchdown and one catch for 20 yards, returned the praise.

“Well you know, over the years we had a chance to cross paths and going back to 2004, to even some Pro Bowls where we crossed paths,” Jackson said. “One thing about coach Belichick is, you get what you get. He’s a true professional. Very hard on the details and making sure guys are smart and aware of what they are supposed to be doing. He hasn’t let me down yet.”[/QUOTE]

The bolded is why I think Pats haters cling to the cheating narrative as a means of explaining the team's prolonged success in the salary cap era. The truth must be pretty tough for them swallow.

 

[dcmissle]

Yes. And the musical chairs and hair trigger firings this week out a spotlight on the incentive for blaming "cheating" -- on the part of owners, executives and coaches. All of those roles pay very well.

 

[chilidawg]

The Broncos don't have any advantage on the road due to training at altitude and then moving to sea level, at least based on the studies I found this afternoon when I was digging up the link I posted earlier.

While there are physiological adaptations that allow those who are acclimatized to altitude to perform better than someone who has just arrived at altitude, those advantages don't translate to any advantage at sea level performance.

I live at 6000', and anytime I go to sea level I run like a hero (at least in my delusional world). I've heard the same from many friends. We're mostly fit but hardly elite athletes though. My anecdotal evidence is totally at odds with the "studies"

 

[Marceline]

I live at 6000', and anytime I go to sea level I run like a hero (at least in my delusional world). I've heard the same from many friends. We're mostly fit but hardly elite athletes though. My anecdotal evidence is totally at odds with the "studies"

I don't think it's at odds. You're obviously going to run better at sea level compared to what you're used to doing at altitude.

What you aren't going to do is run better at sea level after training at altitude vs. if you had just trained at sea level the whole time to begin with.

 

[Erik Hanson's Hook]

Lived in Denver for a year. Would literally wake up in the middle of the night gasping for breath (full disclosure: I'm a smoker). Would climb a flight of stairs and have to sit down for a minute. When I got back to Massachusetts, I felt like Jesse Owens. I'm running races down the street against dudes with Marlboro Reds hanging out of my mouth. There is something to the altitude thing.

Regarding expectations for the playoffs: I'll be satisfied with a close AFC championship contest (outcome either way)...I'll be thrilled to win and play another 60 minutes in the Super Bowl...and absolutely over the moon if they somehow pull it off again. But my expectations are tempered, due to the injury scene. Not just Edelman et all, but players like Lewis, Easley, and Solder, who I think added so much to this team early on.

We'll see what happens this weekend. And then...giddyup.