Random Mid-week thoughts

Oswlek

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2007
Messages
16,993
Reaction score
1,491
Points
113
Age
48
Location
In southcarolina's closet
Just a sprinkling of the snipits that are rummaging through my brain:

* I keep hearing about how tough Jax is and how their "physicality" is going to give NE trouble. I chortle to myself almost every time I hear this because playing physical almost never actual works against NE. The Ravens gave NE a hard time this year this way - in a road game that was the 3rd of three straight night games - and the Giants, with a far, far better DL, gave NE some problems. Other than that? Nada. The other teams that gave NE problems did so with a lot more than just being physical.

This is historically the case as well. Pitt gave a beat up NE team some troubles in the Halloween beat-down, but NE took it to them later that same season. I recall the 2004 Ravens game when Baltimore was supposed to "punch NE in the mouth" and run all over them. NE killed that team. Over and over again, NE rises to the occassion when teams supposedly have an edge in making games a "street fight". NE players love that schit. They love that grind and they live for the battle. Sure, you can't let them bully you around if you want to have a chance, but you need to come with more than just being physical.

* Also, with regard to NE being susceptible to the running game, I don't see this as being the case. Sure, NE has allowed a mediocre ypc, but that number is terribly inaccurate when you really look into things. First off, that number is inflated by teams either a) running when the game was out of reach against a NE defense ignoring the run (Miami, Pitt in the second half) or b) teams that NE played almost the entire game in nickle (Indy, Dallas).

Second, go through the list of close games:

Indy, Philly, Bal, NYJ, NYG

Of those games, only Indy and Baltimore really used the run as a primary weapon. And Indy was mostly successful with the run because NE - despite Indy's success - never once had less than 5 secondary players on the field. Only Baltimore was able to run successfully against a NE defense that was trying to stop the run and make a close game out of it. And, again, Baltimore was a road game that happened to be the 3rd of three straight night games. It was THE PASSING GAME that kept the Giants and Philly (and, to a lesser extent, the Jets) in their matchups, not the running game.

Third, alright, so the Ravens ran the ball very successfully in a narrow defeat. The Steelers also ran well (although some late game yardage makes that look worse than it really was) and kept the game close for a half. Who else ran the ball well against the "tired and old" NE defense down the stretch? Philly didn't. The Jets didn't, with the exception of a run or two using the option set. For all the huffing and puffing about the Giants, wasn't Jacobs held to single digits in the first half? Where was this susceptibility against the run again?

* A few other bits and pieces

1) BB has never lost an opening playoff game.
2) NE has allowed scores of 13, 14, 3, 3 and 16 in their opening playoff games.
3) NE has gone to the SB every single season that they opened the playoffs with a bye.

and one last one for Indy's benefit (stolen from footballoutsiders)

4) Only three teams in the history of the league have followed up a championship season by winning more regular season games. All three went on to repeat as champions.
 
Stolen from Ponyexpress of Patsfans:

Since the offensive rule changes in 1977-78, only 6 teams have ever scored twice as many points as they have allowed. They have all won the SB easily, except the St Louis Rams of 1999, who had to sweat it out vs Tennessee. The other teams are:

SF 1984
Chic 1985
Wash 1991
Packers 1996
St Louis 1999
Baltimore 2000

This season the Pats outscored opponents by more than 2:1.
 
Oswlek on 01-09-2008 at 12:04 PM said:
Stolen from Ponyexpress of Patsfans:


That's a damn interesting factoid right there. I'm sure it's not necessarily a predictor of future events, but it's still damn interesting.
 
I'm still nervous...I do not think I would be if I did not have tix to the AFCCG though...it is just added pressure to want them to win both weeks...
 
You know, I forgot to say that I bet, if NE is stewing over anything this week, it isn't Spicer's words, it is the implication within all the analysts predictions that Jax is tougher than they are.

I have the feeling that Seymour's comments are that issue bubbling over the surface a little.
 
tuning stuff is not that fun
 
Brownfan80 on 01-10-2008 at 08:12 AM said:
Seymour said something to the effect of "Hey, we think we're pretty physical too."

In my estimation, Seymour has played good game/not so good game every other week over the last month. I didn't see him do much of anything against the Giants, so maybe this is his week to let his play do some talking in what has been a difficult season from him trying to come back from a knee.

He'll be matched up against Khalif Barnes-- a good player who is tall and pass blocks pretty well, but is not the kind of physical beast that can sometimes neutralize Seymour.

A Seymour in good health would normally be able to pound a guy like Barnes. We'll see.

Good stuff in this thread. Thanks, Oswlek. Interesting obs.
 
In addition to Seymour (who said essentially what BF80 said, I just can't find the link right now) we now have Vrabel

Patriots linebacker Mike Vrabel scoffed at one local media type who suggested that anyone in the locker room may have insinuated that the team feared their next opponent.

"Who said that?" he asked. "No one in here. We play whoever's up."

and Mankins

“We’re not going to back down, I know that much, no matter how tough they think they are,” Mankins said. “We’re going to try to be as tough, or tougher. We might not run the ball for 200 yards, but the day we don’t run it for 200, we might throw it for 400. Who knows? It’s a give-and-take game. We’ll see who gives and takes on Saturday.

“Everyone talks about the physicality of the Jaguars, but we’re no powder puffs. We’re going to hit you back, so we’ll see what happens.”

and Rodney (in the first link) is in midseason form.

"I don't think everyone expects us to win," Harrison added. "I think a lot of people expect us to lose. The normal mindset is that eventually they're going to lose."

When I read BB's quote about the team making a "statement" on the field after spygate, I knew that they were going to kill SD. I got the same feeling prior to another game when I read one of Brady's quotes.

For some reason, I have the same feeling about this game. I can just picture guys like Seymour, Vrabel, Bruschi, Mankins, Rodney and so on quietly seething over the unsaid insinuation that they are a bunch of pussies.

I really think that they are going to take it to Jax this weekend.
 
Brownfan80 on 01-09-2008 at 12:19 PM said:
That's a damn interesting factoid right there. I'm sure it's not necessarily a predictor of future events, but it's still damn interesting.

In following Confucius and his theories on the importance of rectification:

Factoid's true meaning:
an invented fact believed to be true because of its appearance in print

the more recent definition of:
"a briefly stated and usually trivial fact"
is completely wrong and should be ignored.
 
Yes I have too much time on my hands,

Question:
"what team is not physical?" I hear all these pundits say " oh this is a big physical team" It is such a cliche, and seems to have no correlation to a winning record.
 
Tchok13 on 01-10-2008 at 11:17 AM said:
In following Confucius and his theories on the importance of rectification:

Factoid's true meaning:
an invented fact believed to be true because of its appearance in print

the more recent definition of:
"a briefly stated and usually trivial fact"
is completely wrong and should be ignored.

While nothing is 100% predictive in the NFL, Pony's stat most certainly is useful.

Over the last 22 years, 16 teams that led the league in pythag wins went on to win the SB. That is 73% of a pretty significant sample size. The group NE finds themselves in is a significantly more exclusive group that has won every time.
 
Oh I'm not arguing your facts, or downplaying them
Just Brownfan's use of 'Factoid'. Factoids are bad. Facts are good.

The interesting item from Pny's stat is that Baltimore is on that list with the complete opposite method of the Patriots. The 2000 Raven's defense would win them every game despite their offense. I remember at the time people said you can't win with just defense. They proved that wrong and the Patriots are aiming to proof the same for offense.
 
Brownfan80 on 01-10-2008 at 05:12 AM said:
Seymour said something to the effect of "Hey, we think we're pretty physical too."
I read yesterday that Mankins chimed in with the same thing. I think he's the last guy I'd want not on my side that's going to be on the field on Sat. night.
 
Back
Top