NFL 2011

Brother None said:
Last time the Giants won the Superbowl they ended the next regular season as the #1 seed.
Click to expand...

Speaking of last times, last time the Pats lost a Superbowl they spent three years in playoff irrelevance. Would also be funny to see repeated.
 
To be fair about it, if bucs fans could only comment on worse teams sander would have to stop posting in this thread entirely.
he's entitled to his hyperbolic opinions.

Pats defense could use. Some work, but to say it's the worst in the nfl is ridiculous, and it wasn't so much the issue in the superbowl, although it's a team loss.

They didn't get such tremendously different results against the giants than san fran did.
 
Worst? Nah. Bottom-3 or bottom-5 easily, though. 3rd lowest in DVOA, beaten only by the Bucs and Panthers.

I'd be particularly concerned with the front 7 talent, maybe even before the secondary. Wilfork and Mayo are awesome, but look at how easy it was for the Giants to just run away from Wilfork's side.

Also yeah, it was a damn close game even as Eli completed 75% of his passes for like 7.4 YPA. Imagine if Gronk had been able to run routes and block at his normal level, one could easily see a Pats win.
 
eom said:
To be fair about it, if bucs fans could only comment on worse teams sander would have to stop posting in this thread entirely.
he's entitled to his hyperbolic opinions.

Pats defense could use. Some work, but to say it's the worst in the nfl is ridiculous, and it wasn't so much the issue in the superbowl, although it's a team loss.
Click to expand...
Wait, where'd I say it was the worst in the NFL?

The Pats defense had a few decent games in the playoffs, sure. Still a poor defense.
 
Nobody said the Patriots were flawless, it's a league engineered to produce 8-8 teams. You guys have no perspective though if you expect them to excel at everything ...and then say Pats fans are entitled. Wow.

And yeah, how have the Seahawks bounced back from their SB loss? Bucs little blip of success looks like a total anomaly in their franchise's history now.
 
We're 3-3 in the playoffs since the Superbowl loss. Pats 2-3, to compare, albeit over less years.

And yes, it's a parity-based league. And you keep mentioning other teams. I am completely unclear on how this somehow means the Patriots did not field a bottom-3 defense. They did.
 
I'm not sure where you saw me expressing confidence in them throughout the year. Teams in the parity era have flaws, this is news?
 
So basically, you agree with Sander?

And bottom-3 is pretty significant, even for parity-era.

Back on topic, FBO's post-season read is cool. I like how Peyton is miles ahead of Brady in DYAR in less post-season games. It makes sense, he was always asked to do a ton, and other than his first few years and 2006 (when he sucked ass but still won a Superbowl), he generally put up great performances in the playoffs.
 
Perspective please, there's two other phases to the game that need to be taken into account and I don't see any team dominating all three.
 
I know the dynasty's over and all that, but I hope we haven't fallen so far as to be competing with the bucs and 'hawks, now.

Get back to me when pats are bottom 3 in points allowed -- then maybe I'll give a rat's ass.
that's how they actually keep score in the nfl --- points.
not dvoa, dyar, yards, or whatever the dutch equivalent of points is.
 
No bandwagon jumpers for the Giants
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwvTPNMEEGI[/youtube]
Same people were calling for Coughlin's head again this year. Funny how everyone here always loved them now.
 
Didn't Schatz defy his own stat and pick the G-men this year? It has it's flaws, and looking at the Giants it's obvious that the regular season meant fuck all and DVOA can't account for players returning from injury to bolster a team like that. NFL teams don't have static lineups of consistently producing players. You can't entrust everything to a formula, neither did Schatz.
"Random shit" is also a huge factor that can't be predicted.
 
DVOA and DYAR have a ton of flaws and I never deny solely on them, but they're still better than "classic" stats like QBrating, or than just looking at points.
 
Brother None said:
eom said:
that's how they actually keep score in the nfl --- points.
Click to expand...

Sure. And that means analysis starts and stops at points?
Click to expand...

Of course it starts with points ---- it doesn't have to stop with points, but to dismiss points is kind of.......uhm, pointless
 
Cimmerian Nights said:
Yeah, that went over real big in Boston, whatever you need to confirm your narrow-minded prejudices though BN.
Click to expand...
You think I get confirmation from stuff like that? Nah I've got you to pretty much confirm my prejudices with every single worthless post you make in this thread.

Oh, and eom too.

If you want to negate my perspective, you might want to stop acting like a parody.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top