The Patriots

[Boltnut]

Oh brother.
OK.
TB on the rise.
Because of the fatties up front.
SMH.
See signature.

Apparently BB didn't get your memo...

[wu-dai clan]

Apparently BB didn't get your memo...

Is Todd Bowles still trying mimic BB ?

Good luck with that.

I am down with gusD.

See signature...

[Bolts223]

I will take your thoughts point by point:

1. It is easy to go 10-6 when you are guaranteed to go anywhere from 4-2 to 6-0 in your division every season. Even in those lesser 4-2 seasons, all that is required is to win 6 of 10 remaining games. Several of those games are going to be against lesser teams since every NFL team plays two full outside divisions every season. So, for example if one assumes 3 wins in 3 games against lesser teams from the other two divisions, even against "better" AFC East competition in which the Patriots only went 4-2, they would be 7-2 with 7 games left against better teams. They could go 3-4 in those games and still win 10 games.

Nobody is disputing that the Patriots have been a very good team over the years, but you seem to want to dismiss the benefit of playing in a crappy division year after year. I have zero doubt that if the Patriots had played in the AFC North all of these seasons instead of either the Steelers or Ravens (much less the Bengals or Browns), they would have lost more games in most of the seasons in the Brady/Belichick era. In short, they would have looked a lot like the Ravens or Steelers.

2. Except for 2007, the Patriots have never been clearly the best team in the AFC. Several times they would have been in that discussion, but just to come out and say that they were clearly the best is overrating them. They secured byes and/or home field advantage because they have had the built in advantage of playing year after year in a weak division. We are talking about a situation in which one more win than a team from another division can make all of the difference in terms of byes and home field advantage. Without getting a bye the Patriots have not reached even a single Super Bowl.

3. The Patriots have not owned the entire NFL over an 18 year period. They have had two four-year windows in which they won three Super Bowls each. During each window, it would be reasonable to consider them as being the most successful team, but not over the whole decade in between in which they failed to win even a single Super Bowl. During that decade, the Steelers, playing in a tougher division, went to three Super Bowls, winning two. The Giants won two Super Bowls over the Patriots. The Colts and Seahawks each went to two Super Bowls and won one. The Ravens, Saints and Packers won a Super Bowl.

4. IMO, you give way too much weight to the Patriots in terms of their impact on other teams/players/coaches. I think the appropriate weight would be ZERO. You think Peyton Manning was initimidated by the Patriots? Really? IMO, Manning saw a Denver team that made the playoffs in 2011 with Tim Tebow at QB and knew that he could make that playoff team much better by upgrading the QB position. And he was right as the Broncos were able to go to multiple Super Bowls. It had nothing to do with the Patriots.

Similarly, Andy Reid took over the head coaching job of the last place Eagles in a division that Dallas had won 6 times and appeared as a wild card once in the preceding 8 seasons. He turned the Eagles around in a competitive division. And yet, under your theory, a coach like Reid would be too intimidated to compete against the Patriots? I disagree with that take.

5. Finally, I would give the Patriots credit for the ineptness of other AFC East teams over the years to the extent that they beat them and directly put losses on their record just as I would give the Chargers credit for beating the Raiders over and over again when the Chargers had good teams from 2004-2010 and the Raiders did not, but to say that the prolonged troubles experienced by the Raiders were due to the Chargers would be giving too much credit to the Chargers just as saying the prolonged troubles experienced by the Dolphins, Jets and Bills have been due to the Patriots is giving the Patriots way too much credit.

The Patriots have had two successful four year runs that were separated by a decade in which they did not win any Super Bowls, but had good teams. The deserve a lot of credit for what they have accomplished, but not as much as you are giving them.

1. The AFC East wasn't always bad during those 10 years. The Jets went to back to back AFC Championship Games during those 10 years. The Pats always go 4-2 or better in that division because they are a really good team. Their win % vs teams inside the AFC East vs teams outside the AFC East is virtually the same.

2. I think the Patriots were pretty clearly the best AFC team in 2014 (Especially once Peyton Manning started to decline towards the end of that season) and in 2016. The 03/04 Patriots were also pretty clearly the best IMO. For all the talk about the 2016 Raiders that team was the epitome of a fluke that won almost every close game they were in. This argument is kind of pointless. Besides 02 and 08 where they flat out missed the playoffs, the Patriots have gotten only not gotten a bye 3 times. (2005, 2006, 2009). In the situation of 2005 and 2009, those were both among the weakest teams in the Brady/Belichick era. The 09 Patriots got blown out at home by the Ravens in the wild card round. No first round Bye or HFA was getting that team to the SB. The 2006 Patriots beat the 14-2 Chargers on the road and very nearly beat the Colts to advance to the SB. That team probably does get a bye in 98% of seasons. They were a 12-4 team that got a #4 seed in an absolutely loaded AFC. Same can be said about the Patriots in 05, they just weren't that great a team. The Patriots get byes so often because they are consistently a top 2 team in the AFC. Obviously HFA helps, but the best teams tend to be the ones that get it on average. Sure I understand the frustration about what happened with our team this year having a better record than them and still getting a wild card, but realistically I don't think we could've won that divisional game regardless of where it was being played. Generally speaking, the Patriots teams that got Byes or HFA did so because they were one of the best two teams in the AFC during the regular season. Just because 2018 happens to be the one exception doesn't make it a general rule. a #5 seed having a better record than a #2 seed had literally never happened before this year.


3. The Patriots since 2001 have averaged about 12.3 wins per season. Their win % vs teams in the AFC East is pretty much identical to their win % against teams outside of the AFC East. The point being: No team does particularly well against them. Even a team like the Ravens who people will point out is 2-5 against the Pats this decade. Postseason success really doesn't have any impact on whether or not the Pats would still be able to dominate them for the division. The Giants had 2 pretty fluky playoff runs, and they've been largely mediocre outside of them. They don't beat the Pats for a division title in 2007 or 2011 or any other year besides 2008. Same thing with the Ravens in 2012. The Ravens have only had 2 seasons in their franchise history in which they finished with a better record than the Pats did in any given year. Brady/Belichick are 10-2 in the regular season against the Steelers and 3-0 in the playoffs. The Titans/Texans/Jaguars were arguably just as bad if not worse than the Dolphins/Jets/Bills in the 2000's. If you are going to criticize the Pats for having a weak division you have to do the same with the Colts.

4. I don't think he was intimidated by the Patriots. I think he is a smart human being who understands that if he wants to win SB's that being in the same division as another HOF QB and the GOAT Head Coach hurt his chances to do so. Same thing goes for Andy Reid or really any desirable coach/QB/player who has winning a SB high on their priority list. Andy Reid was a nobody when the Eagles hired him and at that point in his career he probably just wanted any head coaching job he could get. Andy Reid was a well known and highly sought after Head Coach when the Chiefs hired him in 2013. Big difference. Also the Cowboys were not the same team as the were in the early 90's by that point.

5. As I said already - the Patriots act as a buffer at the top of that division that prevents the Jets/Dolphins/Bills from winning it. They essentially take turns getting last place, and getting last place often results in head coaches and GM's getting fired and making it extremely difficult to establish stability which also makes it harder on a QB's development. The opposite can be said about the Browns who for a long time acted as a buffer that prevented the Steelers/Ravens/Bengals from ever getting last place. All three teams enjoyed remarkable stability for a very long time.

Let me put it this way: If you replaced the Steelers, Packers or Colts in the AFC East do you really think they win 6 SB's and go to 9? All of those teams have had large ups and downs.

The Patriots have been the best franchise in the 21st century and it isn't close. It's the greatest run by a football team in the history of the NFL.

[Boltnut]

Is Todd Bowles still trying mimic BB ?

Good luck with that.

I am down with gusD.

See signature...

From 2015 to 2018, Bowles' Jets blitzed 936 of 2,501 dropbacks (37.4 percent), second most in the league, according to ESPN Stats & Information. Those blitzes resulted in 125 quarterback hits and 26 interceptions, ranking third most and second most, respectively, of any team when blitzing.

When he was the defensive coordinator of the Cardinals from 2013 to 2014, Bowles' defense blitzed 620 of 1,333 dropbacks (46.5 percent), which was the most in the NFL. Quarterbacks were contacted on 92 of those dropbacks and threw 17 interceptions, both numbers more than any other team in the league.

It is probably also why the Bucs made inside linebacker Devin White the 5th overall pick in the draft. Especially with Jason Pierre-Paul's status up in the air, the Bucs will be sending White early and often.

https://www.bucsnation.com/2019/5/23/18626736/welcome-to-a-new-era-of-defense-in-tampa-bay-buccaneers-bucs-todd-bowles-bruce-arians

:beer:

[wu-dai clan]

https://www.bucsnation.com/2019/5/23...s-bruce-arians

:beer:

Are you really predicting a big year for Bucs D ?

Pity the poor DBs.

Nutty, find your inner peace at Fat Man's Misery...

imp:

[Panamamike]

Are you really predicting a big year for Bucs D ?

Pity the poor DBs.

Nutty, find your inner peace at Fat Man's Misery...

imp:

Agreed. Their D is going to force the Bucs O to pass a lot to try to win shootouts

[wu-dai clan]

Agreed. Their D is going to force the Bucs O to pass a lot to try to win shootouts

LOL.
JPP.
Hey it's just a neck injury...

[powderblueboy]

5. As I said already - the Patriots act as a buffer at the top of that division that prevents the Jets/Dolphins/Bills from winning it. They essentially take turns getting last place, and getting last place often results in head coaches and GM's getting fired and making it extremely difficult to establish stability which also makes it harder on a QB's development. The opposite can be said about the Browns who for a long time acted as a buffer that prevented the Steelers/Ravens/Bengals from ever getting last place. All three teams enjoyed remarkable stability for a very long time.

Let me put it this way: If you replaced the Steelers, Packers or Colts in the AFC East do you really think they win 6 SB's and go to 9? All of those teams have had large ups and downs.

The Patriots have been the best franchise in the 21st century and it isn't close. It's the greatest run by a football team in the history of the NFL.

I
Jets/Dolphins & Bills have not won a playoff game since the 2010 season That's right up there with the Raiders (who at least have an excuse of losing their starting qb). The question still remains how much help have the Patriots been getting from this lack of competition within their division? Being able to rest players is huge when the playoffs role around. When last years Pats win the Super Bowl, with the collection of talent they had, you can say that Bellichick is a wizard (Brady didn't do all that much), but their being the healthiest team around was huge for them. The Patriot team in 2013 had no business making it to the AFC championship game. They got throttled by an ordinary Broncos team who got destroyed by Seattle.

Otherwise, i agree with your last statement.

[Boltjolt]

I
Jets/Dolphins & Bills have not won a playoff game since the 2010 season That's right up there with the Raiders (who at least have an excuse of losing their starting qb). The question still remains how much help have the Patriots been getting from this lack of competition within their division? Being able to rest players is huge when the playoffs role around. When last years Pats win the Super Bowl, with the collection of talent they had, you can say that Bellichick is a wizard (Brady didn't do all that much), but their being the healthiest team around was huge for them. The Patriot team in 2013 had no business making it to the AFC championship game. They got throttled by an ordinary Broncos team who got destroyed by Seattle.

Otherwise, i agree with your last statement.

These kind of things are no gauge to judge a team. On any given Sunday any team can be beat. Its minimulizing those types of things that get you in the playoffs and any team can have a down week. Miami beat the Patriots last season on a fluke kickoff runback where it usually never works but did that day.

[Bolts223]

I
Jets/Dolphins & Bills have not won a playoff game since the 2010 season That's right up there with the Raiders (who at least have an excuse of losing their starting qb). The question still remains how much help have the Patriots been getting from this lack of competition within their division? Being able to rest players is huge when the playoffs role around. When last years Pats win the Super Bowl, with the collection of talent they had, you can say that Bellichick is a wizard (Brady didn't do all that much), but their being the healthiest team around was huge for them. The Patriot team in 2013 had no business making it to the AFC championship game. They got throttled by an ordinary Broncos team who got destroyed by Seattle.

Otherwise, i agree with your last statement.

I don't really get why people use this as an excuse as to why last years Pats team was healthy.

You can have players get injured regardless of how good/bad the teams you play are. When Brady tore his ACL in 2008 it was against a Chiefs team that would go 2-14 that year.

The Patriots were certainly not resting players at the end of the season. If they lost a game they lost the first round bye to Houston.

[powderblueboy]

These kind of things are no gauge to judge a team. On any given Sunday any team can be beat. Its minimulizing those types of things that get you in the playoffs and any team can have a down week. Miami beat the Patriots last season on a fluke kickoff runback where it usually never works but did that day.

So what you are saying is that it took a fluke kickoff for one of those teams to beat New England last year? The season ended with a big game against the Pets, where the Pets quit during the pregame intros (according to Patriot commentators). On any given Sunday doesn't apply to the chronically infirm and feeble.

We are gauging the easy path to the playoffs year end year out for the Patriots were they can rest players and win games.

[Bolts223]

So what you are saying is that it took a fluke kickoff for one of those teams to beat New England last year? The season ended with a big game against the Pets, where the Pets quit during the pregame intros (according to Patriot commentators). On any given Sunday doesn't apply to the chronically infirm and feeble.

We are gauging the easy path to the playoffs year end year out for the Patriots were they can rest players and win games.

People seem to forget than the AFC West was a pretty weak division when we owned it from 2006-2009.

That didn't help us with not being injured.