In this thread we don't understand sample size. Ignore the fact that they put up 35 on the giants in 2007, because they only scored 14 in the super bowl. This, of course, is because the playoffs are a fantasy land where teams like the patriots just magically play worse.

i definitely dont 'know' that. i have never looked into it because i subscribe to the theory that football in the playoffs is still the same game with the same rules as the regular season. scoring on the whole will probably go down due to super inefficient teams not being on the scoreboard, plus weather is generally worse etc.....that of course just changes the scoring environment and doesnt mean scoring is actually down, just the measuring stick needs to be adjusted.

kinda tired of debating the patriots defense at this point. its not good, and wont be for the rest of bradys tenure i would bet. judging by allocation of resources it appears BB is gambling that having a high paid super efficient offense is better than trying to balance the two out in the late 2000's NFL....or that could just be the way it worked out and hes making the best of it.

I just have a real hard time fathoming that people can think like this. I have nothing better to do with my time right now, so I'm going to go on a crusade to educate people. It's quite sad really.

There's a picture in the funny pics thread in LOL that is pretty much the epitome of me. A girl is calling her boyfriend/husband to bed. He's at the computer and says "hold on a second honey....someone is wrong on the internet."

Anywho, Baltimore has a chance of winning the AFC, whereas the Patriots don't. Baltimore, the team that put together one of the sorriest offense performances two weeks ago. But yeah, only defense matters in the playoffs, so Baltimore has a great shot!

The Ravens have scored 35,13, 37, 34 (albeit 2 defensive touchdowns this game) 29, and 30 in games other then the Jaguars game. That 13 point was against the Titans in week 2. So basically, 25% of the times the Ravens are not having a good offensive game.

but still, lolsample size

The Steelers game was good. The defense had 4 takeaways (3 if you don't count the one at the end of the half), so 35 doesn't tell the whole story, but sure, solid game.

Tennessee game was awful.

Rams have a bottom 5 defense, but sure, that game was fine.

You're actually going to call the Jets game a good offensive game? It was 3 defensive touchdowns, not 2, they averaged less than 4 yards per play and had 3 turnovers. I know the Jets defense is really good, but that's an abysmal performance no matter how many points are on the scoreboard at the end of the day.

Houston game was solid. No argument there.

Jacksonville was an abortion. Less than 3 yards per play!

Arizona game was ok. Yards per play were kinda sucky but put points up on the board due to a crapload of drives and plays. Arizona's defense might be worse than STL's. So average game I'd say.

So basically, 3 above average games (none great), 1 average game, and 3 absolutely horrific games. They're 23rd by FO, 16th by ANS. The Ravens' offense is better than the Pats' defense, no doubt, but not by a large amount.

OK, maybe THIS will put someone's mind at ease:

Yeah, the Pats are ranked 32nd in pass defense. You know who's 31st? The Green Bay Packers.

You think anyone in Green Bay is whining about how they have no shot come the playoffs?

I stand by my position that if the teams that win a lot of games allow a lot of YARDS, then YARDS don't mean much. If you can put up 7's while holding your opponents to 3's, you've got the best of it.

Godgers > Brady though.

Except they allow 40 yards less per game, and average half a yard less per attempt then the Pats. They also have more interceptions.

And the offense has much better output than that of the Pats. While NE has steadily decreased in yppass and ypplay, GB has pretty much stayed consistent, never dropping below 5.7 ypplay and 7.3 yppass (both against Chicago)

I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, something I thought everyone knew but oh well, I don't really care.

I would love to hear what the differences are between the two other than the two obvious ones sublime listed.

i know that conventional wisdom is that playoff scoring is lower than regular season scoring, bit i dont KNOW if thats the actual truth for a few reasons:

1) conventional wisdom tends to be wrong quite often
2) i havent read any studies to show that in this case its either right or wrong

i could of course be lazy and just agree with what everybody else says/thinks.

my intuitive stance is that playoff scoring will indeed be lower than regular season scoring, but that doesn't mean offense is down/less important. it means that the teams who are left playing definitely doesn't include the truly horrible teams in the league, so a whole new environment is created.

if you could collect enough data that shows games where the truly hopeless teams (of course very subjective) are involved are omitted then you have a reasonable baseline for comparison. even then it gets a little dirty because of how different the weather is at the start of a season compared to january.

i have however read a few studies that suggest the notion that 'defense wins championships' is indeed flawed.

this patriots defense is going to allow a lot of yards and do its best to keep 7's off the board. sometimes the other team is going to be playing very good on offense and they will score more 7's than 3's....other times the other team is going to make some mistakes and the patriots will win 35-10 or something, but even then they will probably give up 300+ yards in the air. if you arent prepared to accept that:

a) BB runs a 'soft' prevent defense out of the gate
b) the defensive secondary/pass rush does not have very good players on it

then this season is going to suck for you.

since he has had this philosophy for years, and there isnt some pass rush stud/ed reed available to add midseason...dont expect 'heads to roll' or defensive strategies to be made. there isnt a single owner who wouldn't hire BB in a milisecond if he were available, yet us football peons sit here and question his approach to defense. lol

i havent wanted a patriots teams to win the SB this bad in a long time. of course, after the stretch of weakish opponents in the second half of the season the defense will look better and people will assume there has been some massive improvement/philosophical change and all is well...when in fact all is basically the same.

schedule ftw...getting to play the denver and stl offenses at home when the sample size is only 7 is going to be a pretty big deal.

ne did draw MIA but it was on the road and they just aint nearly as inept as STL nor prob denver.

Well the jets passing offense is pretty sucky too

The defense is clearly the problem.

defense looks pretty good so far (that TD not on them obv) but it's the offense that's ****ting the bed right now


edit: turnovers are huge

I have never seen an offense go From so good to so bad in such a short period of time with no major personnel changes

They have consistently gotten worse every single week since week 1, right? Saw some graph that showed a very clear decline.

yep, but the argument against me was 'schedule tho' so...

defense played well today but when it had to make a stop it couldn't

well they can redeem themselves right here

everyone on this defense should just shoot themselves in front of this crowd total joke, idc how good they were for 3 quarters when it mattered they fkn sucked

no way this team can win with this defense

its ok guys, the offense is ultraelite!!!

That sucked. Eli gets 50 yards of PI out of two horrible throws...sigh.

The Pats better look out, but the AFCE is going to be a dogfight with the Jets. The winner of next weeks showdown will probably be winning the East at 11-5.