Pats lose!

And there was much rejoicing

Peyton’s stats didnt look impressive.
Looks like Defense and a game-managing-QB
can still win.

w
v

wv wrote:

Peyton’s stats didnt look impressive.
Looks like Defense and a game-managing-QB
can still win.

w
v

True but this wasn’t a good example to cite as support for that idea. Denver got lucky. They didn’t win the game as much as they didn’t lose it.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 10 months ago by nittany ram.

Zooey wrote:

I don’t care about Peyton Manning, and I don’t hate either team, or like anybody on either team.

It’s the 2 defenses.

Each with a completely different task in front of it.

.

I will be score watching more than anything else.

I have 1 for the Panthers in the work pool and 0 for Denver. So if it ends up 21-10 I win 350 bucks.

Come on 21-10 Panthers!!!!

NERam wrote:

t I’m also thinking that there has to be a little more output from the O than what the Rams were putting up.

Well there’s absolutely no question of that.

NERam wrote:

Somewhere I seem to recall reading that the Rams needed 20 points per game to win. That was their magic number.

I just went through the Rams schedule last season.

If the Rams had scored exactly 20 points in every single game last season, they would have ended up with a record of 7-9.

As opposed to their actual record of 7-9.

NERam wrote:

zn wrote:

wv wrote:

Peyton’s stats didnt look impressive.
Looks like Defense and a game-managing-QB
can still win.

w
v

Thought of the day.

Manning: 17/32 (53.125%), 145 (4.53 YPA), 2 TDs, 0 Ints, 3 sacks

Well, the thought of the day got me to thinking. So, here’s what I think.

A good D and a game-managing QB can win, but I’m also thinking that there has to be a little more output from the O than what the Rams were putting up.

Somewhere I seem to recall reading that the Rams needed 20 points per game to win. That was their magic number.

And, that’s what Denver put up yesterday. They just let it get a little toooooo close.

nittany ram wrote:

True but this wasn’t a good example to cite as support for that idea. Denver got lucky. They didn’t win the game as much as they didn’t lose it.

Yeah, they did get lucky. They had absolutely had no business giving up 2, not one, but 2, 4th down conversions on that last drive. 4th and 10 & 4th and 6, I believe. Geeze, major pucker time there.

The Broncos defense was getting worn down. You could see it.

The second half reminded me of a Rams game. The Broncos were getting heroic play from their defense while their offense kept going three and out. They needed Manning the weapon not Manning the game manager late in the second half. They were very fortunate to win. It was a great victory though.

However, I want an offense that can control a game like that. In the second half Denver’s offense couldn’t do anything. Because of that the Broncos were just trying to hold on while the Pats pried their fingers off the ledge one by one. Lucky for Denver the Pats ran out of time before the Broncos ran out of fingers.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 10 months ago by nittany ram.
• This reply was modified 8 years, 10 months ago by nittany ram.

joemad wrote:

Zooey wrote:

NERam wrote:

Somewhere I seem to recall reading that the Rams needed 20 points per game to win. That was their magic number.

I just went through the Rams schedule last season.

If the Rams had scored exactly 20 points in every single game last season, they would have ended up with a record of 7-9.

As opposed to their actual record of 7-9.

DeMarco Farr stated that during one of the game’s broadcast this season. 20 points was the magic number…..

Check your math… Rams would be 9-7, potentially 10-6 if you count the Vikings game if the Rams score 20 in regulation.

20 points would’ve resulted in victories in Baltimore, Minny and vs Steelers.

—————————-

Oooh, an Algebra Battle
between JoeMad and Zooey.

I love the offseason.

I doubt if i watch the SuperBowl
this year. Though I’d smile if it was a low-rated, old-school,
knockdown, mudbowl, game that ended 4 to 0.
In overtime.

Next year the Rams will win ten games,
the Rams will make the playoffs,
and every poster on every board
will sing the praises of
Jeffrey Michael Fisher.

w
v

joemad wrote:

DeMarco Farr stated that during one of the game’s broadcast this season. 20 points was the magic number…..

Check your math… Rams would be 9-7, potentially 10-6 if you count the Vikings game if the Rams score 20 in regulation.

20 points would’ve resulted in victories in Baltimore, Minny and vs Steelers.

And losses against Seattle, Tampa Bay, and @ Arizona.

So you add 3 victories. And subtract 3 victories.

thot this was interesting too:

“Here’s a list of all the offensive linemen the Patriots have drafted in the first three rounds since 2006:

1. Nate Solder, first round, 2011
2. Sebastian Vollmer, second round, 2009

That’s it.”

w
v

wv wrote:

A dirt-stained white jersey, tattered undershirt, bloodied socks. They revealed many of the bruises, cuts and scrapes that come with hitting the deck 20 times before and after throwing a football.

Marc!

====

—

Patriots Report Card: Team effort a failure

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/patriots/2016/01/patriots_report_card_team_effort_a_failure

QUARTERBACK: S (Survivor)

Once again, Tom Brady was a (S)urvivor. It wasn’t his greatest day, but can you blame him after being hit a career-high 23 times? The results of all the concussive chaos were poor decision-making and inaccuracy. The Broncos repeatedly took away his first option, forcing him to hold the ball an average of 2.43 seconds. Most of the season, that number barely was higher than 2. Broncos defensive coordinator Wade Phillips’ scheme put pressure on the Pats line to protect longer. It couldn’t. Brady completed 48.2?percent of his throws, threw three picks (the one on the two-point conversion doesn’t really count, but it ended the season) and converted only 2-of-15 third downs (13.3 percent).

OFFENSIVE LINE: F

If your quarterback gets trampled all day (four sacks, 23 hits) and you can’t open a hole for a single run, you failed miserably at your job. Linebackers Von Miller (21/2 sacks) and DeMarcus Ware (seven hits) embarrassed tackles Marcus Cannon and Sebastian Vollmer. Neither could handle the quickness, agility or power. Cannon gave up a ridiculous 10 pressures, two sacks and seven hurries, plus he had a false start on a third-and-1 QB sneak. Why move if you didn’t block anybody all game? Ware repeatedly beat Vollmer off the line to the outside and with a spin move inside that left him blocking air. Interior pressure also was a problem with guard Josh Klein allowing 11 pressures, four hits and seven hurries. Defensive linemen Malik Jackson and Derek Wolfe created the kind of interior pressure Brady hates, all while Denver blitzed only 17?percent of the time. Center Bryan Stork wasn’t much help and took a stupid penalty for a post-whistle head butt that negated a 5-yard run. On one play, Cameron Fleming cam in to play next to Cannon, putting more than 600 pounds of beef in front of Miller. Miller came out of his stance so fast he was past them both and on a path to Brady before Fleming turned his hips. Noise was a factor for the line, but not as big as the physical mismatches.

—

Broncos’ defense kept Brady under siege throughout

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2016/01/24/broncos-defensive-line-kept-pressure/2XuGT7GrV7lchJFbgHTFkK/story.html

To put that in perspective, it was the most hits taken by any quarterback in any game this NFL season. Brady took 99 hits in his previous 17 games, an average of 5.8 per game. The most he had taken before Sunday was 12 against the Eagles last month. Brady had taken 19 hits in his last four games combined before Sunday.

…

They used an NFL-high 13 starting combinations on the offensive line this year, and it showed. Brady bailed them out of many games by getting rid of the football quickly. But they played Sunday like they had two tackles playing out of position, and a rookie (Mason) playing right guard for only the second time in his life.

Knowing that, why do opposing teams not make more of an effort to jam them up at the snap, and try to disrupt that rhythm.

Just guessing, you can do that if you also have one of the league’s best pass rushes.

It’s the combination, not just one thing. Not just jamming, but beating the OL quickly too.

Remember in early 2014 when GW’s defense had to adjust to teams throwing quickly on them.

wv wrote:

zn wrote:

Knowing that, why do opposing teams not make more of an effort to jam them up at the snap, and try to disrupt that rhythm.

Just guessing, you can do that if you also have one of the league’s best pass rushes.

It’s the combination, not just one thing. Not just jamming, but beating the OL quickly too.

Remember in early 2014 when GW’s defense had to adjust to teams throwing quickly on them.

Yeah, apparently Denver’s D (which i have never watched)
is pretty special. They make it look easy,
but most D’s probly cant get that kind of pressure
that quickly.

Ware and Vonn — Difficult to take them both away.
Which is why I keep squawking about Quinn.
Gotta have ‘both’ Q and AD.

w
v

Agree with both of you.

Having a top tier pass rush just puts the whipped cream & cherry on top, or in this specific case, purple welts on Brady’s body.

And yes, having both AD and Quinn will yield a top tier D. I fully believe that, with the rest of the D intact.

But even without a top tier pass rush, can not a D that jams receivers also benefit the pass rush? Can’t that extra 1 to 2 seconds disrupt the quick strike offense just enough to let the average pass rush get close enough to the QB that it throws off the timing and creates happy feet? I know ZN said it was a combination of jamming and rushing the passer, which I know is true. It was visible all game long. But applying even 1/2 of the equation should also have a positive impact, I would think.

I do remember multiple discussions around the pros and cons of playing the corners back, off the LOS. And the philosophy of conceding the short stuff & protecting against the long strike, with the hopes that the offense makes a mistake somewhere, during the possession. And if the O doesn’t make a mistake, then the D tightens up in the red zone, aided by a short field, with the hopes of giving up just 3 points, and not 7. Bend, don’t break. I get that.

Just with some QB’s, Brady being one of them, I’m not sure that laying back and allowing the receivers to catch short stuff all day long works to the benefit of the D. Once they get that rhythm started, confidence built up, and points on the board, its awful hard to stop them. And once in the red zone, Brady is too accurate. Not to mention trying to pull Gronk down after he’s caught a short pass and is now turning upfield with a full head of steam, basically untouched from the initial snap until he’s turned a short pass into a 30 yard completion.

I’m just thinking that for an offense like that, you hit em in the mouth hard, and throw off their timing. Getting a sack is great if the rush can get there, but hurries and close-call legal hits on the QB are pretty effective too.

Denver had a lot of success doing this. I just think other teams could have maybe had different outcomes as well, if they had taken away NE’s best player. Or player combos. Billy-boy has made a career out of doing that.