Poor sport Patriot fans vs. Super Bowl winning Broncos
- Thread starter Seraphim
- Start date
While Brady didn't replace a HOF QB, Bledsoe had just been awarded the biggest contract in NFL history to stay with the Pats. Robert Kraft was on record that he wanted Bledsoe to spend his entire career with the Patriots. That was before his near fatal injury playing in a Pats game and the discovery of a much cheaper viable option (Brady).
Matt Cassel stepped up to fill in for an injured quarterback with the full understanding that injured quarterback would return and Cassel would return to his backup role.
Trevor Siemian competed with two first round draft picks and won the starting job after the previous QBs left. Before the draft where Denver selected Siemian, Gary Kubiak saw some tape of him beating Notre Dame at Notre Dame. He liked what he saw so watched all available tape and really liked what he saw, calmly throwing perfect spiral bullets in high winds. So he sent Broncos quarterbacks coach Greg Knapp to visit with Siemian and work out the injured QB (ACL) to the extent possible. Knapp liked what hed seen and concluded that once recovered from his injuries that he'd likely be a good player for years to come. A lot of folks have been surprised by Siemian's success but not Gary Kubiak, Greg Knapp and John Elway were not. Now that I think about it, Siemian has a better story than Brady or Cassel. So far anyway... ;-)
Last edited:
Chicks love the long ball. Cutler has a great arm too. Do you want Cutler to be your QB? Bledsoe had a big arm and some good seasons. He is in the Patriot's HOF. As he aged he became indecisive and was always inaccurate and lacked touch in throwing short. He became "Pat" Bledsoe. He would step back in the pocket and pat...pat...pat... the ball; as he went thru his progressions. Late 90's the outcome too often was a sack or an interception as he forced the ball somewhere. I don't care what his contract was, at the end of the pre season Brady had outplayed Bledsoe who was on a short leash. The Patriots lost the first game of the season. Bledsoe was hurt in the second game, they also lost. Brady had outperformed Bledsoe no matter what the contract situation was. Belichick made the move and didn't look back. Belichick new he had to devise a workable offense for Brady. Brady wasn't put into situations where he had to win games. The plan that was devised was a power running game, short passes and stout defense.
Kraft's plan was for Bledsoe to retire a Patriot. It wasn't Belichick's plan. Belichick traded Bledsoe to a division rival. Can you imagine as a Bronco fan trading a franchise QB to the Chiefs or the Raiders? The reason he did that was: 1) he probably got the best value from them 2) he knew Bledsoe posed no danger. He knew how to beat Bledsoe. Bledsoe had one good year in Buffalo and moved on to Dallas. Good not great QB.
Jury is out already on Siemian after three games?
He will have the same issues every new QB has-decision making and consistency. Going into the Bengals game the headline in Denver was "Kubiak Implores Siemian to Make Better Decisions." He threw some good balls no doubt in the game. I also saw a number short balls he threw behind receivers. "Good player years to come"...we'll see. Maybe...maybe not. He is developing.
Bronco's first choice was Osweiller and he turned down their contract. Sanchez was given first chance to win the job in pre season. Didn't work out. Then it was a competition which Siemian won.
If the Bronco's were so certain Siemian was a "good player for years to come" they would not have risked loosing him in the draft. They would have selected him in an early round. The Patriot's weren't sure Brady was a good player for years to come. They didn't draft him in an early round. They drafted him where Siemian was drafted. Pot luck area!
The Patriots drafted Garapollo in the third round. Apparently they think he has more than pot luck potential. A good player for years to come. Who knows? Willing to bet he has the same issues every young inexperienced QB has-decision making and consistency. Garapollo has the top QBR in the league right now! What does it mean? Nothing.
If the Bronco's were so sure about Siemian they wouldn't have offered Osweiller a multi year $16M/year contract. They wouldn't have drafted Lynch in the 3rd round.
Siemian's success? Three games. Three wins. Looks OK...so far. Don't make any reservations at Canton.
I wan't to see Paxton Lynch play. We don't call him Captain Morgan as they do in Denver. We call him "Ichabod" Lynch until he has proven something.
Kraft's plan was for Bledsoe to retire a Patriot. It wasn't Belichick's plan. Belichick traded Bledsoe to a division rival. Can you imagine as a Bronco fan trading a franchise QB to the Chiefs or the Raiders? The reason he did that was: 1) he probably got the best value from them 2) he knew Bledsoe posed no danger. He knew how to beat Bledsoe. Bledsoe had one good year in Buffalo and moved on to Dallas. Good not great QB.
Jury is out already on Siemian after three games?
He will have the same issues every new QB has-decision making and consistency. Going into the Bengals game the headline in Denver was "Kubiak Implores Siemian to Make Better Decisions." He threw some good balls no doubt in the game. I also saw a number short balls he threw behind receivers. "Good player years to come"...we'll see. Maybe...maybe not. He is developing.
Bronco's first choice was Osweiller and he turned down their contract. Sanchez was given first chance to win the job in pre season. Didn't work out. Then it was a competition which Siemian won.
If the Bronco's were so certain Siemian was a "good player for years to come" they would not have risked loosing him in the draft. They would have selected him in an early round. The Patriot's weren't sure Brady was a good player for years to come. They didn't draft him in an early round. They drafted him where Siemian was drafted. Pot luck area!
The Patriots drafted Garapollo in the third round. Apparently they think he has more than pot luck potential. A good player for years to come. Who knows? Willing to bet he has the same issues every young inexperienced QB has-decision making and consistency. Garapollo has the top QBR in the league right now! What does it mean? Nothing.
If the Bronco's were so sure about Siemian they wouldn't have offered Osweiller a multi year $16M/year contract. They wouldn't have drafted Lynch in the 3rd round.
Siemian's success? Three games. Three wins. Looks OK...so far. Don't make any reservations at Canton.
I wan't to see Paxton Lynch play. We don't call him Captain Morgan as they do in Denver. We call him "Ichabod" Lynch until he has proven something.
Had no idea, don't keep up with that.
Well somebody gave Bledsoe that record breaking contract. Are we to believe that Belichick had nothing to do with that? Yet trading Bledsoe and signing Brady was entirety Belichick? I'm confused, sounds like you're selectively giving Belichick credit for what you consider good moves but not for the rest. I have stated multiple times that I consider the math to replace Bledsoe with Brady very simple and exactly what one would expect from Belichick.
I said Siemian had a good story, so far. And it is a good story. But he's got an extremely small number of starts and lots to prove yet. And Paxton on the bench waiting.
I'm sure that's true. It's remarkable how well this year's rookie class doing across the board though. The Patriots just beat Houston 27-0 with a rookie 3rd string quarterback with only one good hand (thumb injury). So much for Houston's new highly paid quarterback, what was that guys name? :-D
I didn't see that "headline" anywhere on local or national news and failed to get any hits on it just now in a Google search.
True, area that needs improvement.
You can never know but obviously fans are optimistic. Siemian has the very talented 1st round pick Paxton Lynch sitting on the bench likely to supplant him at some point so has to maximize his opportunities.
Osweiller was the next guy up on the roster. Osweiller went with who offered the most money, as well as the chance for him to be "the man" not in anyone's shadow. It was an understandable move as was Elway's decision to offer only so much and let him go.
They got equal reps, Siemian flat out won the competition. When Sanchez failed to perform he was cut. The Broncos were out very little money and got the conditional draft pick back from the Eagles trade since he failed to make the roster.
That's not really how I've observed the draft works. And I'm not going to second guess Elway's draft picks. He's done pretty well although nobody is perfect. If you can get somebody later in the draft and get the best guy on the board, that's what you do. That's what the Patriots did with Brady who they were watching throughout the draft. The players who folks are "certain" (many fail anyway) of go at the very top of the draft and there aren't many teams who get those picks, basically only the ones that sucked last year and/or traded the farm to get there. They were also confident of Lynch but round have picked Lynch later if possible. But they had to trade up a bit or lose him. So that's what they did as they've wanted Lynch for quite a while now.
I don't why the Pats drafted Garoppolo where they did. They drafted Bledsoe in the 7th round and Brady in the 6th. The Patriots recently have trended to higher round QB picks though. Perhaps they've noticed Brady's age and statistically how much time he likely has left to play? And now Garoppolo is now looking potentially expendable with Jacoby Brissett in the picture.
The Broncos were confident in Siemian but players aren't given a roster spot, they earn it through competition. Obviously there was a lot invested in Osweiller and they had confidence in him & wanted to keep him all things being equal. But weren't going to match the Houston Texans crazy offer for the QB that the Pats just embarrassed using a hurt 3rd string quarterback. Don't get me wrong, Osweiller will be fine, just saying he wasn't that good to try winning a bidding war for.
Again, I said he has a good story. So far. Don't read to much into that. Paxton Lynch is almost certainly going to play sooner than later but you never know for sure how these things will go.
I completely forgot about the Captain Morgan thing, probably when the veterans shaved his head in rookie hazing, :-D Short lived local thing that's long since over. Lynch is crazy physically talented but that's not all it takes and only time will tell how successful he can be in the NFL. And I don't get the "Ichabod" reference at all.
Last edited:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other...b-siemian-to-make-better-decisions/ar-BBwAwg0
Same story was picked up by a number of Denver sports writers if you look.
Belichick was on board with the signing of Bledsoe. To paraphrase Belichick-It's nice to have players locked up to long term contracts. Bledsoe was the face of the franchise and had taken them to a Super Bowl appearance. He had no other viable candidates at the position. Belichick also knew when to cut bait when a totally unexpected 6th round pick showed something special.
The move from Bledsoe to Brady was not based primarily on salary cutting it was based on performance. They were paying Bledsoe in 2001 and when he was ready to return to the lineup after game 10, he sat when Brady wasn't injured. Even after the Super Bowl win and the trade of Bledsoe, sports writers and fans were still split about the trade. There was still huge support for Bledsoe in New England. In 2002, New England's record with Brady after the Super Bowl was 9-7. Bledsoe took a really bad Bills team to respectability at 8-8. Ron Borges and other sports writers roasted Belichick for years after the Bledsoe benching and trade. (Bledsoe was the 1st pick in the 1993 draft, by the way, not a 7th round pick.)
QB's are probably the most coveted position in football. Super Bowls aren't won without decent QB play. There are very few exceptions. Manning and Dilfer won Super Bowls with sub par play and really good defenses.
There are plenty of first round or early round busts QB busts. The QB position is probably the hardest to draft but most starters are high round picks. Most successful QB's are taken in the 1-2nd round of the draft. You can look at 2016 starting QB's who have played for a few seasons, not just played 3 games, and where they were drafted. Taylor, Cousins, Wilson, Keenum and Hoyer are the exceptions being later round selections or free agents.
Most teams draft best players available; players that they expect to play for a decade in the early rounds. Most teams take flyers on players in the 5-7th rounds and sign free agents on potential who have a high probability of being a bust. If those players are on the roster after year two and are back up players or special team players that's a score. If they become starters they are thrilled at their good fortune. If you are drafting players in the 6-7th round expecting them to make your squad; you aren't very good or there is something wrong with your draft process.
Belichick makes plenty of draft choices that don't work out, as every GM. He can't draft a CB or WR to save his life. He also makes good draft choices as other GM's. He has made plenty of late round QB choices at 5-7 round where he didn't win the lottery, but one did.
Here are QB's Belichick expected to make a contribution or develop to be an asset to trade because they were 4th round picks or higher.
2002-Davey-4th round-bust
2008-O'Connell-3rd round-bust
2011-Mallett-3rd round-marginal at best
2014-Garoppolo-2nd round-undetermined
2016-Brissett-3rd round-undetermined
If the Bronco's really had a feeling that Siemian was going to be a good player for years to come; they wouldn't have exposed him in the draft until the late rounds. "Calmly throwing perfect spiral bullets in high winds" or not; the "experts" analysis was he could be a third string QB in a West Coast offense. He certainly appears to be better than the analysis, sample size three games. Time will tell if he is a good player for years to come.
Brady's contracted thru the 2019 season and he will be 42. Certainly his age hasn't had an effect on his performance to date. At some time his performance will suffer. Manning dropped off the cliff because of age-injury. Brady is aging but athleticism was never a big part of his game and he has remained pretty injury free. You certainly can predict his falling off a cliff but that has been done before by you and others. In a year that everyone predicted his demise, he won the SB.
When Brady's performance suffers and it will, Bilichick will do what he endlessly professes-I do what is best for the team. Wouldn't it be negligent for Belichick to prepare for the future? It may be Garopollo or Bissett or someone else as a successor. I give credit to Belichick not relying on 6-7th round picks to restock his QB position. It is not a place where starting QB's are generally found. He doesn't want to be auditioning QB's in the pre season when Brady retires. I think the replacement will have had a few years in the system when he takes over.
Siemian a better story than Brady? I know you meant that as a joke. I think Siemian needs some 160+ wins, 4 SB wins etc. to be a better story than Brady.
In ending, I and all Patriot fans want to thank Goodell for giving Bilichick the opportunity to evaluate his QB roster and to reduce the workload for Brady. As an added bonus the Patriots have a two game lead in the AFC East conference after 3 games. The Patriots will come out of Brady's suspension with a 3-1 or 4-0 much to the chagrin of the comish.
Same story was picked up by a number of Denver sports writers if you look.
Belichick was on board with the signing of Bledsoe. To paraphrase Belichick-It's nice to have players locked up to long term contracts. Bledsoe was the face of the franchise and had taken them to a Super Bowl appearance. He had no other viable candidates at the position. Belichick also knew when to cut bait when a totally unexpected 6th round pick showed something special.
The move from Bledsoe to Brady was not based primarily on salary cutting it was based on performance. They were paying Bledsoe in 2001 and when he was ready to return to the lineup after game 10, he sat when Brady wasn't injured. Even after the Super Bowl win and the trade of Bledsoe, sports writers and fans were still split about the trade. There was still huge support for Bledsoe in New England. In 2002, New England's record with Brady after the Super Bowl was 9-7. Bledsoe took a really bad Bills team to respectability at 8-8. Ron Borges and other sports writers roasted Belichick for years after the Bledsoe benching and trade. (Bledsoe was the 1st pick in the 1993 draft, by the way, not a 7th round pick.)
QB's are probably the most coveted position in football. Super Bowls aren't won without decent QB play. There are very few exceptions. Manning and Dilfer won Super Bowls with sub par play and really good defenses.
There are plenty of first round or early round busts QB busts. The QB position is probably the hardest to draft but most starters are high round picks. Most successful QB's are taken in the 1-2nd round of the draft. You can look at 2016 starting QB's who have played for a few seasons, not just played 3 games, and where they were drafted. Taylor, Cousins, Wilson, Keenum and Hoyer are the exceptions being later round selections or free agents.
Most teams draft best players available; players that they expect to play for a decade in the early rounds. Most teams take flyers on players in the 5-7th rounds and sign free agents on potential who have a high probability of being a bust. If those players are on the roster after year two and are back up players or special team players that's a score. If they become starters they are thrilled at their good fortune. If you are drafting players in the 6-7th round expecting them to make your squad; you aren't very good or there is something wrong with your draft process.
Belichick makes plenty of draft choices that don't work out, as every GM. He can't draft a CB or WR to save his life. He also makes good draft choices as other GM's. He has made plenty of late round QB choices at 5-7 round where he didn't win the lottery, but one did.
Here are QB's Belichick expected to make a contribution or develop to be an asset to trade because they were 4th round picks or higher.
2002-Davey-4th round-bust
2008-O'Connell-3rd round-bust
2011-Mallett-3rd round-marginal at best
2014-Garoppolo-2nd round-undetermined
2016-Brissett-3rd round-undetermined
If the Bronco's really had a feeling that Siemian was going to be a good player for years to come; they wouldn't have exposed him in the draft until the late rounds. "Calmly throwing perfect spiral bullets in high winds" or not; the "experts" analysis was he could be a third string QB in a West Coast offense. He certainly appears to be better than the analysis, sample size three games. Time will tell if he is a good player for years to come.
Brady's contracted thru the 2019 season and he will be 42. Certainly his age hasn't had an effect on his performance to date. At some time his performance will suffer. Manning dropped off the cliff because of age-injury. Brady is aging but athleticism was never a big part of his game and he has remained pretty injury free. You certainly can predict his falling off a cliff but that has been done before by you and others. In a year that everyone predicted his demise, he won the SB.
When Brady's performance suffers and it will, Bilichick will do what he endlessly professes-I do what is best for the team. Wouldn't it be negligent for Belichick to prepare for the future? It may be Garopollo or Bissett or someone else as a successor. I give credit to Belichick not relying on 6-7th round picks to restock his QB position. It is not a place where starting QB's are generally found. He doesn't want to be auditioning QB's in the pre season when Brady retires. I think the replacement will have had a few years in the system when he takes over.
Siemian a better story than Brady? I know you meant that as a joke. I think Siemian needs some 160+ wins, 4 SB wins etc. to be a better story than Brady.
In ending, I and all Patriot fans want to thank Goodell for giving Bilichick the opportunity to evaluate his QB roster and to reduce the workload for Brady. As an added bonus the Patriots have a two game lead in the AFC East conference after 3 games. The Patriots will come out of Brady's suspension with a 3-1 or 4-0 much to the chagrin of the comish.
Not really. Not that characterization, or rather mischaracterisation. Our local news has ready access to Kubiak and if anyone picked up a story, it's surely the other way around. I watch/read a lot of local news and never saw that. If you have a link to local Denver sportswriters using that phase, please share, but I already know you don't. :-D Kubiak stated that Siemian has made some poor decisions. He's just had his first few NFL starts so some of that is to be expected, although he's still done well. Kubiak also shared that the Broncos trust Siemian "all over the field" and that he'll continue to grow. He did not "implore" Siemian to do anything. Why Google couldn't, and still can't, find that is a mystery to me.
Last edited:
You are correct it was not a Denver sports writer-national writer(s). I didn't read the by-line accurately. I forgot Denver sportswriters are rarely critical of the Broncos. These are the Kubiak quotes.
“He’s made some poor decisions, athletic decisions,” Kubiak said, via Jeff Legwold of ESPN. “I know that sounds kind of crazy, but it’s just learning that, ‘Trevor, That guy can make that play. You’re not in college anymore. You’re not going to throw that ball through that guy.’ I think some of the speed of the game factors that he’s beginning to understand a little bit is going to make him better each week.”
“There are times that you are sitting there in a game, you’re down three, you have a great defense — do I try to make this throw or that throw? I think some of that probably creeps into your mind, but we really want to get that out,” Kubiak said. “We want him to play and be aggressive in what he’s doing. We threw it 33 times [against the Colts]. We trust him with the ball and that’s all over the field. I think he’ll continue to grow in some of those situations.”
These quotes were after the second game. Stats for Siemian after the second game were 1 TD and 3 INT. (You may want to look at every throw he made in the Panther game. He made some good throws but he also made a number of throws the Panthers got their hands on which didn't result in turnovers.) I didn't watch the Colt game.
Point is....Kubiak was... looking... imploring... asking... wanting...hoping...wishing... commenting...(whatever term you want to use) for Siemian to make better decisions and expected Siemian "to grow in some of those situations."
He got his wish in game three. 4 TD and 0 INT. Do you think that Kubiak thinks good decision making and growth are NOW things of the past after one good game?
“He’s made some poor decisions, athletic decisions,” Kubiak said, via Jeff Legwold of ESPN. “I know that sounds kind of crazy, but it’s just learning that, ‘Trevor, That guy can make that play. You’re not in college anymore. You’re not going to throw that ball through that guy.’ I think some of the speed of the game factors that he’s beginning to understand a little bit is going to make him better each week.”
“There are times that you are sitting there in a game, you’re down three, you have a great defense — do I try to make this throw or that throw? I think some of that probably creeps into your mind, but we really want to get that out,” Kubiak said. “We want him to play and be aggressive in what he’s doing. We threw it 33 times [against the Colts]. We trust him with the ball and that’s all over the field. I think he’ll continue to grow in some of those situations.”
These quotes were after the second game. Stats for Siemian after the second game were 1 TD and 3 INT. (You may want to look at every throw he made in the Panther game. He made some good throws but he also made a number of throws the Panthers got their hands on which didn't result in turnovers.) I didn't watch the Colt game.
Point is....Kubiak was... looking... imploring... asking... wanting...hoping...wishing... commenting...(whatever term you want to use) for Siemian to make better decisions and expected Siemian "to grow in some of those situations."
He got his wish in game three. 4 TD and 0 INT. Do you think that Kubiak thinks good decision making and growth are NOW things of the past after one good game?
Boy, that's a lot if adjectives you're making up there. Quoting what Kubiak actually said is cool. Putting your own spin on it is fine, but don't act like that makes it more valid than a report that didn't do so.
So what is the purpose of bringing up Siemian's poor decision making? Just anecdotal. It is what it is....or did Kubiak expect him to improve?
Well here is what another national sportswriter thoughts about Kubiak's quotes after game two. Read the last paragraph.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/09/24/kubiak-on-siemian-hes-made-some-poor-decisions/
Well here is what another national sportswriter thoughts about Kubiak's quotes after game two. Read the last paragraph.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/09/24/kubiak-on-siemian-hes-made-some-poor-decisions/
Last edited:
Of course Kubiak expects him to improve. That's why he said so in the quoted material. Maybe read what Kubiak actually said (that you just posted above) before some critics opinion?
Well, reporters have space to fill and always looking to make events more dramatic than they are.
Last edited:
I just read the quotes and didn't see the words "expects" or "expected" in Kubiak's quotes. I used the word "implores" from the headline of the original article I posted, look it up. It wasn't my spin to use the word "implores", it was the authors. So your spin, as you call it, is "expects".
Kubiak expects (not implores) Siemian to improve in his decision making.
OK.
Kubiak expects (not implores) Siemian to improve in his decision making.
OK.
Kubiak said "he'll continue to grow". I used the word "expects" because that's how your worded your questioning comment and I was responding to you. And I referred you to Kubiak's actual words so there shouldn't be any confusion.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #134
Pats are going to totally OWN the Broncos in the playoffs this year.
You heard it here first. Mark your calendars.
EDIT:
Looks like we won't have to wait until playoffs. they play on Dec 18
You heard it here first. Mark your calendars.
EDIT:
Looks like we won't have to wait until playoffs. they play on Dec 18
I'm shocked that you think that! :-DPats are going to totally OWN the Broncos in the playoffs this year.
You heard it here first. Mark your calendars.
EDIT:
Looks like we won't have to wait until playoffs. they play on Dec 18
Playing the Patriots is never easy, especially if you have to play in Foxborough.
So far, compared to where Brady was at the same point. I guess you missed what I said there earlier?
I gotta say though, the Brady story is pretty interesting at the moment.
Deflategate might have won the legal battle but it certainly didn't seem to be a lock to impact Brady's legacy.
But the tangible proof we've seen that the Patriots don't need him, or Gronk, to be the same dominant team? That's something else.
The Patriots completely destroyed the Texans with an injured one-handed third string quarterback. 27-0, the Texans didn't score a point and their best player, J.J. Watt, is out for who knows how long, perhaps ending any hope for success this season.
I'm sure this isn't lost on Brady. When he comes back, he'll not only be motivated by the perceived injustice of his suspension, but almost certainly looking to salvage his image/legacy after this. At least with the general public.
The Patriot faithful probably don't need anything proved to them. They have faith, by definition.
A dominant Patriots team with an ultra motivated Brady back from suspension sounds like a dangerous beast. That's a pretty good story. Well, unless you have to play them soon, hah.
Last edited:
I agree looks good so far. At this point, 3 Siemian wins is a anecdote or footnote to a story with an undetermined outcome. He has had two OK games and a very good game. Defenses plan to confuse young QB's and take away what they have done well once they have established a book on them. QB's have to react and adjust. Same for Garoppolo and Wentz.
Wentz looks good at the moment. The game plan for Wentz has been exceptional. The ball is out so fast in shot gun and three step drops it made the Steeler defense look like they are playing at 3/4 speed. Teams better start hitting receivers at the line and covering backs out of the backfield. They need to implant some doubt in his mind because they aren't getting any pressure on him, at least the Steeler's didn't. Eagles receivers aren't great, tight ends are good, and Sproles is a real problem in the open field.
The Patriots are a game plan team on offense and defense; without Brady even more so.
Texan game. Brissett had the mastery of probably 15 plays. Short horizontal passes and quick slants and roll out passes, and run options up the middle and a naked reverse. Brissett never ran the offense with the number one offense in pre-season. This certainly wasn't Brady's game plan.
Here is how the Patriots beat the Texans:
KISS for Brissett
Run the ball
Win the turn over battle (2 special team fumble recoveries on mortar kicks)
Win the field position battle (6 punts within the 20 yard line)
Make Texans play from behind early
Contain Hopkins, mix up coverages on him (great player going to get his yards)
Take away Fuller (100 yard receiver first two games but a rookie, zilch production against the Patriots)
Lots of these points are keys for the Patriots each week but the offensive game plan was totally unique for Brissett only.
It also didn't help that the Texans didn't show up. They should have worn their letterman jackets to Gillette again.
I saw you posted that Siemian was AFC offensive of the month. Blount was AFC offensive player of the month. The Patriots lead the league in rushing per game and Blount is the leagues leading rusher. Not what you see out of a Patriot Brady led offense unless they are playing the Colts.
Allen was special team player of week 3 with 6 punts inside the 20 yard line and 0 return yards.
Don't need Brady or Gronk to be the same dominant team? Almost. Probably a better way to put it is: Didn't need Brady, Gronk , Hightower, Lewis, Ninkovitch, Mason, to win the first three games of 2016 in a different way.
The keys to the early wins is the improvement and depth of the offensive line under coach Scarnechia, both run and pass. It could all crumble with injury or inconsistent play but it is much improved right now. Thuney looks to be a good player. Depth is good enough that they cut Knighton, survived the loss of Stork and Cooper is still a big fat ?.
Wentz looks good at the moment. The game plan for Wentz has been exceptional. The ball is out so fast in shot gun and three step drops it made the Steeler defense look like they are playing at 3/4 speed. Teams better start hitting receivers at the line and covering backs out of the backfield. They need to implant some doubt in his mind because they aren't getting any pressure on him, at least the Steeler's didn't. Eagles receivers aren't great, tight ends are good, and Sproles is a real problem in the open field.
The Patriots are a game plan team on offense and defense; without Brady even more so.
Texan game. Brissett had the mastery of probably 15 plays. Short horizontal passes and quick slants and roll out passes, and run options up the middle and a naked reverse. Brissett never ran the offense with the number one offense in pre-season. This certainly wasn't Brady's game plan.
Here is how the Patriots beat the Texans:
KISS for Brissett
Run the ball
Win the turn over battle (2 special team fumble recoveries on mortar kicks)
Win the field position battle (6 punts within the 20 yard line)
Make Texans play from behind early
Contain Hopkins, mix up coverages on him (great player going to get his yards)
Take away Fuller (100 yard receiver first two games but a rookie, zilch production against the Patriots)
Lots of these points are keys for the Patriots each week but the offensive game plan was totally unique for Brissett only.
It also didn't help that the Texans didn't show up. They should have worn their letterman jackets to Gillette again.
I saw you posted that Siemian was AFC offensive of the month. Blount was AFC offensive player of the month. The Patriots lead the league in rushing per game and Blount is the leagues leading rusher. Not what you see out of a Patriot Brady led offense unless they are playing the Colts.
Allen was special team player of week 3 with 6 punts inside the 20 yard line and 0 return yards.
Don't need Brady or Gronk to be the same dominant team? Almost. Probably a better way to put it is: Didn't need Brady, Gronk , Hightower, Lewis, Ninkovitch, Mason, to win the first three games of 2016 in a different way.
The keys to the early wins is the improvement and depth of the offensive line under coach Scarnechia, both run and pass. It could all crumble with injury or inconsistent play but it is much improved right now. Thuney looks to be a good player. Depth is good enough that they cut Knighton, survived the loss of Stork and Cooper is still a big fat ?.
Not to mention that the Eagles defense is underrated and blitzing a rookie kinda makes reads easier on him.
I wondered if you'd bring that up again, [emoji1]
Go check, my post was/is "Trevor Siemian and Carson Wentz named Offensive Players of the Week". Your mistake, not mine.
Belichick wins in a different way all the time. He's changed approaches many times, to stay dominant, over the years. And yes, with Brady. In fact, that's kinda my point. With such good coaching, are some players riding the coattails of the coaching and neither as critical or great as many claim? Looking that way to me, and I'm not the only one.
Scarnechia. Now there's a guy the Pats can't seem to do without. Been there longer than Belichick or Brady I believe.
Last edited:
In general the problem with most rookies is reading defenses. I wouldn't think that Wentz's strength right now is in reading defenses. The reason for quick short quick slants back dump offs is not to have Wentz running long developing plays requiring Wentz to read the defense. When he took deep drops they ran a number of screen plays the Steelers didn't detect or respond to. Wentz took a few deep drops to throw long to keep the Steelers honest.
Eagles defense has played terrific.
Belichick game plans every week.
Not going to even address the Brady bashing. Great player and the records speak to his play. The response to anyone who doubt as to who will play after week 4, who Belichick thinks should play QB and any notion that Brady has dropped off the cliff. Belichicks response. " J____ C____!"
Gronkowski that's a good one. Laughable. Fewest games to 60 touchdowns. Gronkowski has the same production in a fraction of games Sharpe played. Gronkowski also is a great blocker unlike some receiving tight ends-Graham. Guess Shannon Sharpe wasn't that good. It was just Shanahan's brilliance.
Take a look at the catch Gronkowski made over the middle double covered at the end of the AFC Championship game. Take a look at the TD catch in the end of the end zone. In fact, review the two point conversion try. If Brady had waited a fraction of a second Gronkowski had broken open and...we would still be playing. I give credit to the Bronco's. They played a great defensive game and far outplayed the Patriot offensive line. In the end they made one more play during the game. That's it. One play. That's all it takes. Bronco's won fair and square no excuses!
Gronkowski has had better production in quarters than Virgil Green has had in his career. Not slamming him, but average production at best. Elway built his team with WR not TE. Bilichick built his team with slot receivers and TE. Both work. Gronkowski...riding the coattails. Many think if Gronkowski had been healthy in the SB versus the Giants... another ring. I tend to agree.
Scarnechia is a very good coach. He isn't a miracle worker. He is a coach that really does get the most out of his players. He has some talent this year. There are always injuries to deal with as you know.
Eagles defense has played terrific.
Belichick game plans every week.
Not going to even address the Brady bashing. Great player and the records speak to his play. The response to anyone who doubt as to who will play after week 4, who Belichick thinks should play QB and any notion that Brady has dropped off the cliff. Belichicks response. " J____ C____!"
Gronkowski that's a good one. Laughable. Fewest games to 60 touchdowns. Gronkowski has the same production in a fraction of games Sharpe played. Gronkowski also is a great blocker unlike some receiving tight ends-Graham. Guess Shannon Sharpe wasn't that good. It was just Shanahan's brilliance.
Take a look at the catch Gronkowski made over the middle double covered at the end of the AFC Championship game. Take a look at the TD catch in the end of the end zone. In fact, review the two point conversion try. If Brady had waited a fraction of a second Gronkowski had broken open and...we would still be playing. I give credit to the Bronco's. They played a great defensive game and far outplayed the Patriot offensive line. In the end they made one more play during the game. That's it. One play. That's all it takes. Bronco's won fair and square no excuses!
Gronkowski has had better production in quarters than Virgil Green has had in his career. Not slamming him, but average production at best. Elway built his team with WR not TE. Bilichick built his team with slot receivers and TE. Both work. Gronkowski...riding the coattails. Many think if Gronkowski had been healthy in the SB versus the Giants... another ring. I tend to agree.
Scarnechia is a very good coach. He isn't a miracle worker. He is a coach that really does get the most out of his players. He has some talent this year. There are always injuries to deal with as you know.
I'm not bashing them, as much as questioning the hero worship. Clearly the Patriots can win without Brady and other "key" players like Gronkowski often by fans as critical/indispensable. Do any of us think they could win as convincingly without Belichick and "key" coaches? Maybe so, guess someday well find out. But I doubt it.
Good enough so when Scarnecchia retired after a 32-year NFL coaching career, including 30 in New England, his replacement was soon fired to bring the 68 year old back out of retirement. Don't see that happening for Brady or Gronk.
Last edited:
