Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)

What the Super Bowl showed

  • DerekLarsson2
  • Five Star General
  • Rating: 2.8/5 this site
  • 1125 posts this site

Posted: 2/6/2013 11:17 PM

What the Super Bowl showed Post Rating (1 vote)




Both the Ravens and the 49ers have very physical, very fast, tall, athletic teams in most all positions.  Colin Kaepernick's hips probably come up as high as my shoulders.  The 49ers may well be the NFL team of the future.

As I watched the Super Bowl, I was convinced that The Patriots cannot defeat or matchup well against either one of these teams.  And they did in fact lose to both of them only a few weeks ago.

I look at a guy like Anquan Boldin, or the speedsters like Torrey Smith and Jacoby Jones and we just simply do not have players like that, and we also do not have Defensive players who can ever hope to really cover players like that --- they are either too tall, too athletic, or too fast, or all three. 

Then there is all-important play of the O-Line and D-Line.  The Patriots look great against average teams, but they do not win the O-Line or D-Line matchups against the Elite teams.  Watch the push from the lines and you will see this.

Chandler Jones or no Chandler Jones, they still have no real pass rush.  And because of the shoddy condition of the Secondary, they are forced to almost always play just a base defense...and can not even create pressure with elaborate blitz schemes.

The only place on the field that the Patriots have a real physical matchup advantage is with their two injury-prone and fragile Tight-Ends (Gronk and Hernandez).  

They are not stockpiled with Draft picks this year (as they have been other years), so they may need to be very active in the Free Agency market. 
 
On any given Sunday, any team can always defeat any other team, but I'm not sure how this team upgrades the skill/talent level enough to really go toe-to-toe against these very physical and very athletic Elite teams.


   
   

Last edited 2/6/2013 11:18 PM by DerekLarsson2

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/7/2013 12:07 AM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


I agree with a lot of what you're saying, except ... the Patriots were in sub 57.4 percent of the time this season (644 of 1,121, including penalties). They were in base on 39.4 percent of the snaps (source). Also, the Pats OL is usually ranked in the top 10 (here's one source, there are others if you google around).

As for the TE's, my impression is that TE's who are running routes as much as Gronk and Hernandez get injured a hell of a lot more than blocking TE's. I don't know if I'd call them fragile given that they're out there almost every offensive snap.

The WR corps needs a rebuild. No two ways about it. Welker is still dangerous but was never "fast" - his big plays come from working with TB on mismatches. Edelman will take over from Welker in a couple years but obviously ins't a pure WR. Lloyd can probably have a 1000+ yard season next year but lacks elite speed. And that's all there is. Given how rarely rookies work out learning this offense, and that they need immediate help, I expect them to make a move via FA.

With Chung likely being allowed to become a FA and new questions about Talib, the secondary is once again a big concern.

They need one more big man on the DL to rotate with Vince and Kyle Love. And they need to find a pass rush somewhere. Even if it's up the middle. Who cares. There is a lot of talent in the front-7, they're just not getting it done for some reason. Maybe they need a different DC, or a different LB/DL coach. But whatever they got ain't working.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/7/2013 12:13 AM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


I agree with u that this team needs physical and explosive playmakers.Guys like LLoyd and Welker are not that.Welker is more shifty in the slot.LLoyd plays too much like a possession wr.It wouldnt shock me if they brung back the same unit.I think it has to change.I think what they need is an agile DT/DE that can push the pocket.Big Vince is more of a run stopper although sometimes he can rush the passer.I think Chandler Jones could lose a couple of pounds to get quicker.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/7/2013 12:36 AM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


its not like they where outmatched.They have numerous opportunities and this offense just failed miserably.I would have liked our chances if the score was 17-7 at halftime.That was such a brain fart by Brady and the coaching staff.Seriously.Its boggles the mind.Awful clock management in such a big game!Football is a game of inches.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/7/2013 11:32 AM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


What do you guys think of this for an off season strategy?

1. Resign Talib
2. Resign Vollmer
3. Welker signs a team friendly deal or goes
4. Pull a Falcons move and trade a good portion of your draft to move up and take a top WR. Allen or Patterson.
5. Edelman- This moves up if Welker walks.
6. See if TB will restructure again to fill in with veteran depth and pick up a safety.
It is the NFL...Not a knitting class.
Reply | Quote
  • DerekLarsson2
  • Five Star General
  • Rating: 2.8/5 this site
  • 1125 posts this site

Posted: 2/7/2013 12:40 PM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


1. Resign Talib
2. Resign Vollmer
3. Welker signs a team friendly deal or goes
4. Pull a Falcons move and trade a good portion of your draft to move up and take a top WR. Allen or Patterson.
5. Edelman- This moves up if Welker walks.
6. See if TB will restructure again to fill in with veteran depth and pick up a safety.

Well, I agree with 1 and 2, but I think the Patriots really need Welker right now and their Offense would tank without him.  So I would make signing Welker an absolute urgent priority.  Even with the drops, Welker catches more balls and has more production than any alternative option.

Drafting a WR and hoping for quick results is always a gamble, but they definitely need to do something, and recognize that they just do not have any presence on the Field outside the numbers. Branch is done, and Lloyd plays like a possession receiver and there are no YACs or big plays with him.  The Patriots Offense is based on plays over the middle of the field, and this causes problems when they play the Physical Teams.  They need some wings.

Edelman is not the answer. They tried that experiment early in the year of emphasizing Edelman and holding Welker back...but it didn't work well.  

But they need a lot more than this too.  Talib is a decent CB, but even he is not really a true "shutdown CB".    Belichick may try to may a move for Ed Reed, but I doubt that Reed would move from Baltimore ... especially after they just won the Super Bowl there.

Last edited 2/7/2013 12:41 PM by DerekLarsson2

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/7/2013 2:14 PM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


Welker is a unique player. You don't simply replace what he can do. Edelman contributes a lot to the team but very few players can replace Welker's production by themselves. Everyone wants him to stay in NE. That said, WW is 32 years old - he needs to be realistic about a long-term deal - I can see the Pats giving him a 2- or 3-year deal if it's team-friendly.

Brady should definitely restructure so they can add depth. That would be a good example for Welker to see as well.

I can't see Ed Reed leaving BAL, but I'd love it if it happened. That said, BAL is going to be forced to pay a crapload of money to Falco and Thuggs, so Reed may be a casualty of the numbers game. In which case Kraft will no doubt have the private jet fueled and waiting.

WR ... as much as this team needs a good young WR their track record for drafting the position has been horrible. I don't mind spending the #3 pick on a WR, but #1 and #2 need to be defense or OL.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/7/2013 2:52 PM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


I know the track record is horrible with WR's but the law of averages...ehh your right.  But at the same time it would be nice to get an elite player at the position and those guys don't usually come out in the 3rd round.
It is the NFL...Not a knitting class.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/7/2013 3:48 PM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


The other problem is durability - kinda like with DB's. A kid who's wicked fast in college can turn out to be fragile in the NFL. And some guys seem bulletproof - like Moss and Ocho who somehow seemed to avoid serious injury or missing many games over very long careers.

Which is another reason I shy away from drafting a WR in the 1st and 2nd round. I'm just tired of hearing the word "hamstring" on Pats injury reports.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/8/2013 12:47 AM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


What the Superbowl showed? How obnoxious Ravens fans can be!
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/8/2013 8:41 AM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


What about converting Demps into a reciever. Dude has got blazing speed. (although he has been injured once already) Oh well the injury bug got to hate that guy.
dokgonzo wrote: The other problem is durability - kinda like with DB's. A kid who's wicked fast in college can turn out to be fragile in the NFL. And some guys seem bulletproof - like Moss and Ocho who somehow seemed to avoid serious injury or missing many games over very long careers.

Which is another reason I shy away from drafting a WR in the 1st and 2nd round. I'm just tired of hearing the word "hamstring" on Pats injury reports.







   

         

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/8/2013 11:09 AM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


He's fast but he's Welker-sized. With corners now tending to be 6-footers he'll be challenged trying to fight for the ball. But using him in the passing game like they use Vereen - where the pass is just a way to get the RB into open space - oh yeah, that'll happen.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/8/2013 12:07 PM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


I think Demps will be a kind of utility player.  Return kicks, line up in the backfield and run sweeps, shift out to the slot and run square outs, whatever.  He certainly won't be taking lots of carries as a RB, and I don't think he'd ever be a true WR either.  With his speed yet lack of a true position, he's the kind of guy you use in situations where you can get him in good matchups.


Regardless what they do with Demps, they need to add some WR's this year.  I also don't usually go for drafting WR's in the first round, and I seriously doubt the Pats will do it, despite what a lot of early mocks are saying.  There are some good WR's in rounds 2 and 3 this year, and every year really.  On the other hand if Keenan Allen or Robert Woods is available at the bottom of the first round, I wouldn't hate it if the Pats went for it.
**
**
“I don’t have a response. If I had a response to everything that people said about me or us, then I’d be busy all freaking day responding to things." -- Tom Brady, September 2007
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/8/2013 1:16 PM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


It'd be awesome if Demps turned out to be as sure-handed as Woody/Faulk - then he becomes an incredible weapon.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/9/2013 11:46 PM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


What the Pats really need is for Brady to start playing well in the playoffs. He is turning in to Manning. He will put up great numbers during the season and then stink when the heat is on in the playoffs. He does not have a great running game and defense to bail him out like he did early in his career. He needs to step up this play in the playoffs.

I think i saw that if you take away the Denver game from last year he has a 1 to 1 TD to INT ratio in the playoffs since 2005. I am to lazy to look up and see if that is true.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/10/2013 1:37 AM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


Agreed..
Step it up TFB....and everyone else for that matter. You left coaching out. We started out 10-0 3-SB wins and 12-2 or something like that...
Like vinny....Im too lazy to look..I'll up my game when the pain of missing out on another lombardi wears off. lol
Reply | Quote
  • DerekLarsson2
  • Five Star General
  • Rating: 2.8/5 this site
  • 1125 posts this site

Posted: 2/10/2013 6:03 PM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed Post Rating (1 vote)


> "He does not have a great running game and defense to bail him out like he did early in his career. He needs to step up .."


And no NFL Team has ever won it all with just a Hall-of-Fame QB, and 1 undersized Slot-Receiver.  

It's amazing that Brady has done as much as he has.   His talent has made the Patriots a 560-point #1-in-the-NFL scoring Offense.   But no NFL Team has also ever won it all having to score 30+ points every single game (just in order to make it a close game).

So way too much is put all on him, just him (including the criticism), but they simply do not have the type of Team balance or physical matchups that makes for NFL Championships.

Despite that, if you just traded the receivers, and gave Tom Brady:  Anquan Boldin, Torrey Smith, and Jacoby Jones to throw to.... and gave Joe Flacco:  Welker, Deion Branch, and Brandon Lloyd,  I'd bet you any amount of money in the World that Brady wins that game very easily, and would light-up the scoreboard with that type of receiver talent to work with. 

Brady has had to work with smurfs and midgets most all his life.  People forget that he has always done more .. with a lot less.   Joe Montana had Jerry Rice to throw to for 12 years.

And how worse can it get when you play on a Team with a Defense so pathetic that you're forced to score 30-35-40 points every week in order to avoid losing?  That pressure takes it toll, and a Championship Team doesn't have that weakness.

  
   

Last edited 2/10/2013 6:06 PM by DerekLarsson2

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/10/2013 6:56 PM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


I'm seeing some articles in the local papers speculating that the Pats may let Welker and Lloyd both go. Which would leave them with Edelman and the TE group. The rationale for this speculation seems to be that since no team in their right mind would make such a move, that may be exactly what BB is gearing up to do. He'll somehow magically find a couple big, fast kids or FA's to fit into the system and be working efficiently by Thanksgiving.

Stranger things have happened. That's basically what he did with he TE's and RB's the last few seasons.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/10/2013 7:01 PM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


Derek, - the Pats are among the highest scoring teams in the league, if not the highest, - one season after another. Brady & Co, have done very well with smurfs, ... They need a stronger defense, one that "gets to the qb" consistently, not find a way to score more points. They do that pretty well, ...

Last edited 2/10/2013 7:02 PM by Hunter07

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/10/2013 7:15 PM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


Yeah ... this is something we tend to forget ... this team leads the league in scoring (or is in the top-3) almost every year. Putting up points isn't the problem. 

Scoring points early in big games is a problem. And has been since late in the 2007 season. This slow-start syndrome is not good and hangs the D out to dry early in the game.

As much as Brady would love a big, fast WR I think his overall comfort level would be better if he knew that the D would get him the ball back within the next 3 minutes without giving up any points. Going 3-and-out is a big deal now - with a stronger D, Brady and McD could try more things because the worst they'd lose on a 3-and-out is some field position.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/10/2013 10:49 PM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 



DerekLarsson2 wrote:
> "He does not have a great running game and defense to bail him out like he did early in his career. He needs to step up .."


And no NFL Team has ever won it all with just a Hall-of-Fame QB, and 1 undersized Slot-Receiver.  

It's amazing that Brady has done as much as he has.   His talent has made the Patriots a 560-point #1-in-the-NFL scoring Offense.   But no NFL Team has also ever won it all having to score 30+ points every single game (just in order to make it a close game).

So way too much is put all on him, just him (including the criticism), but they simply do not have the type of Team balance or physical matchups that makes for NFL Championships.

Despite that, if you just traded the receivers, and gave Tom Brady:  Anquan Boldin, Torrey Smith, and Jacoby Jones to throw to.... and gave Joe Flacco:  Welker, Deion Branch, and Brandon Lloyd,  I'd bet you any amount of money in the World that Brady wins that game very easily, and would light-up the scoreboard with that type of receiver talent to work with. 

Brady has had to work with smurfs and midgets most all his life.  People forget that he has always done more .. with a lot less.   Joe Montana had Jerry Rice to throw to for 12 years.

And how worse can it get when you play on a Team with a Defense so pathetic that you're forced to score 30-35-40 points every week in order to avoid losing?  That pressure takes it toll, and a Championship Team doesn't have that weakness.

  
   
So Derek explain why Brady can throw for eleventy billion yards during the season, but come playoff time he cant help his team score 20 points in big games? I mean he does it all season, so why does he stumble in the playoffs?

And it started back in 2005 when he threw a horrible pick against the Broncos at the 1 yard line. Then the next year he choked against SD, but Brown bailed him out with that strip after the INT. 2007 SB, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 playoffs. He just cannot score points in the big games anymore. And yes he had a great game last year vs Denver and Houston this year, but those are not the normal for Brady in the playoffs.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/10/2013 11:33 PM

Re: What the Super Bowl showed 


Uhhh ... it's all Belichick's fault? 

Kind of interesting looking at Brady's playoff stats. While he's got a very low INT rate during the regular season, especially recently, he averages almost 1 INT per game in the playoffs ... 1.3 INT/gm in the last 10 post-season games, when he was setting regular season records and supposedly at the top of his form. In 22 post-season games, he's had 6 with 2 or more INT's - the first was 2005 in DEN - only 2 of these were away games. His QB-rating is about 10 points lower in post-season than regular season as well.

Yeah, you can say that he's facing better opposition in post-season so of course his numbers should drop. But you could also say: "why isn't he playing his best games in post-season?" 

Interesting ... in the 3 SB winning post-season runs (9 games), he only broke 300 yards twice and in 4 games was 201 yards or less, threw 11 TD and only 3 INT. 

Seems like 2005 is the year things changed. Oh yeah ... Weis and Crennel left that year and they switched to a pass-first offense and the D started it's backslide.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/11/2013 11:22 AM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


It all goes back to, "Defense wins Championships". You don't necessarily need a top 10 defense just one that shows up and makes critical plays.

Brady no doubt is a first ballott HOF'er. When he had the defense he won his championships, when he didn't have the defense he threw the team on his shoulders and gave them a shot every year.

The Pats have a young defense. They will get better. On top of that BB has made good personnel moves to make them better since Pioli went. McCourty, Jones, Hightower, Spikes, Dennard. Sure there have been a couple of Dowling's but no team hits every pick.
It is the NFL...Not a knitting class.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/11/2013 11:58 AM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


Good stuff 3rd...Enjoy your posts..I hope you share your opinion on the draft this year.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/20/2013 10:34 AM

RE: What the Super Bowl showed 


Well all know that the Patriots skill postions are dainty.  They need to stop the other team from subbing and camp out at the line for 40 seconds to even have a prayer of stopping the opposing defense from exposing them.
Reply | Quote