bobobonators Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 While I don't believe the Pats are going to go 8-8. This defense is clearly very slow and lacks overall talent. The Hightower injury really hurts them too. They literally have no one on the Dline that scares you, and they may arguably have the worst LB grouping in the entire NFL. You can improve scheme execution, but you can't improve speed; and boy are they slow. That offense at some point will begin to click a little more I suppose, but injuries are going to hurt them big time. Anyone else notice Gronk was essentially a non factor? Even in his half-assed attempt to spike the ball after that TD that was called back, he looked like half the player he was 5yrs ago. Again, I'm not saying they're going 8-8 any time soon, but man oh man between injuries on O, lack of talent on D, that Pats team looks quite vulnerable RIGHT NOW (i don't care about how they came back 10yrs ago).
boyst Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 The Pats need DL help and bad. They'll trade for someone if they're smart. Butler traded is ideal. He looked awful Gilmore looked amazing despite the blown play
BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 The bad-KC looks good. in 2014 they beat the Pats* 41-14 and people questioned whether the Pats* were done. KC finished that year 9-7 and out of the playoffs
bobobonators Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 The Pats need DL help and bad. They'll trade for someone if they're smart. Butler traded is ideal. He looked awful Gilmore looked amazing despite the blown play I disagree. No one on that D looked amazing. They gave up 42 points at home to an average, to above average Chiefs offense. in 2014 they beat the Pats* 41-14 and people questioned whether the Pats* were done. KC finished that year 9-7 and out of the playoffs Good thing this is no longer 2014, correct?
Sammy Watkins' Rib Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 that Pats team looks quite vulnerable RIGHT NOW (i don't care about how they came back 10yrs ago). What about 3 years ago?
bobobonators Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 What about 3 years ago? Who cares about 2, 3, 5, or 10yrs ago? How many players on that Defense were on the Pats 3 years ago? Maybe 3? How many skill players on that offense were on the pats 3 years ago? 2? maybe 3?
Sammy Watkins' Rib Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Who cares about 2, 3, 5, or 10yrs ago? How many players on that Defense were on the Pats 3 years ago? Maybe 3? How many skill players on that offense were on the pats 3 years ago? 2? maybe 3? Because the one consistent has been Brady and Belicheck. As long as they are still there they have a chance.
section122 Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 @christrapasso If #Patriots want to become more of a vertical attack in '17, it's bad idea. Brady's downfield touch is his weakest (only weak?) attribute. Brady was 7th in Adj. Comp % on passes of 20+yds in '16, but 11th in '15, 30th in '14 & 25th in '13. Bad relative to everything else he does Last night, he was 2 of 10 on attempts 20+ yards downfield per @PFF. Anything w/ tons of air under it from Brady is win for the defense IMO This has been going on for a couple of years. Brady has no deep ball left. Everything he does is underneath which is why Cooks was a bit of a head scratcher for me. He is a deep threat and I guess the idea is that he will open things up underneath but with Edelman out, Gronk not quite looking healthy, and Amendola out there isn't much underneath. I was surprised to not see more James White last night. All of that said I won't write them off yet. I still think they are heavy super bowl favorites. I certainly enjoyed last night. The more hits Brady takes at his age the harder it will be to complete the season!
GunnerBill Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Fundamentally? No pass rush. And the linebackers..... ugly.
bobobonators Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Because the one consistent has been Brady and Belicheck. As long as they are still there they have a chance. I don't disagree. I don't think anyone is saying they don't have a chance. They aren't going 4-12; 6-10; or 8-8. But that offense has major injuries. Gronk isn't 23 anymore; and that defense may literally have the least amount of talent of any BB defense in the last decade. Of course they have a chance, but this is 2017 and anything prior to now is irrelevant in the NFL.
wiskibreth Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 While I don't believe the Pats are going to go 8-8. This defense is clearly very slow and lacks overall talent. The Hightower injury really hurts them too. They literally have no one on the Dline that scares you, and they may arguably have the worst LB grouping in the entire NFL. You can improve scheme execution, but you can't improve speed; and boy are they slow. That offense at some point will begin to click a little more I suppose, but injuries are going to hurt them big time. Anyone else notice Gronk was essentially a non factor? Even in his half-assed attempt to spike the ball after that TD that was called back, he looked like half the player he was 5yrs ago. Again, I'm not saying they're going 8-8 any time soon, but man oh man between injuries on O, lack of talent on D, that Pats team looks quite vulnerable RIGHT NOW (i don't care about how they came back 10yrs ago). Definitely. Gronk looked slow and lumbering, though he still has his size strength and great hands.
bobobonators Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Definitely. Gronk looked slow and lumbering, though he still has his size strength and great hands. I actually wondered if he injured himself on that TD catch; he appeared to get up either winded or lame somehow..anyway, injuries have wrecked his career.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Having an internal debate, do I drop them as my fantasy D/ST? Or do I keep them hoping that I am a curse?
frogger Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Same here. My first impression was that they were SLOW. Very little pass rush. Brady sailed more high and long balls last night then I have ever seen him throw in his career. Not sure what the deal was. The only guy he could hit consistently was Amendola who was playing the Edleman role. He couldn't connect with Hogan at all going like 1-6 to him or something like that. That was the same year they also got blown out in Arrowhead week 4. So they started 2-2. It was definitely sky is falling attitude in New England. We learned how weak the interior of their offensive line is last night, rushing three and getting Brady off of his spots were key. Also, their line's lack of push on those 4th and short. KC has an exceptional Defense, but I like our front 4 as much as their front 3. I'm not expecting to beat NE, but making Brady uncomfortable is easier this year, especially without his bailout slot WRs. The best case scenario for the season regarding New England (for Buffalo) Brady doesn't win the super bowl and we start seeing his age catch up to him. Then in the offseason Jimmy G either is franchised or signs a lucrative deal with NE making him the highest paid backup, while Brady limps into retirement. Then Jimmy G follows in the path of all of the other Brady backups.
bobobonators Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Having an internal debate, do I drop them as my fantasy D/ST? Or do I keep them hoping that I am a curse? Haha. This same Pats defense, minus Hightower, is going to NOLA next weekend. Good luck!
BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Haha. This same Pats defense, minus Hightower, is going to NOLA next weekend. Good luck! I'll start them every week if it means they suck.
Juice_32 Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 While I don't believe the Pats are going to go 8-8. This defense is clearly very slow and lacks overall talent. The Hightower injury really hurts them too. They literally have no one on the Dline that scares you, and they may arguably have the worst LB grouping in the entire NFL. You can improve scheme execution, but you can't improve speed; and boy are they slow. That offense at some point will begin to click a little more I suppose, but injuries are going to hurt them big time. Anyone else notice Gronk was essentially a non factor? Even in his half-assed attempt to spike the ball after that TD that was called back, he looked like half the player he was 5yrs ago. Again, I'm not saying they're going 8-8 any time soon, but man oh man between injuries on O, lack of talent on D, that Pats team looks quite vulnerable RIGHT NOW (i don't care about how they came back 10yrs ago). Gronk looked off, but some of that had to be Berry. He is one of the few out there that can hang with Gronk.
SoTier Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 This entire board sounds like a jealous ex girlfriend. So, true, and it's truly funny. I'm sure that we'll be treated to gloating threads every time Gillislee, Gilmore or Hogan have a bad game or make a mistake. Gilmore was in single man coverage most of the night. He had one screw up ... the problem is that when a CB screws up, it usually ends up in 6 for the other team. Meanwhile, I think that all the gloating over Gilmore ignores the fact that the Pats offense was not impressive ... primarily because of the Chiefs' D. Those boys stopped NE on 4-and-less-than-1 twice. That first fourth down stop down in the red zone after Hunt's fumble changed the entire tenor of that game. Instead of being up 14-0, they were soon tied 7-7. It's like it deflated the entire offense; they played flat the rest of the game. Eric Berry's achilles injury aside, all those draftniks spinning their fantasies about KC sucking this season and the Bills getting a mid/high first rounder for them need to face the reality that it might not even be as high as #27. 13-3, relatively easy. Last night was a fluke. I agree. When the Pats lose 8 games this season, then I'll say they ain't making the playoffs. none of those years did they look bad. Last night they looked really bad. There is a difference. Well when you have posters constantly griping about how great he was (and he never was), how he will be this perennial pro bowler in New England and it keeps getting shoved down our throats, you love it when he's exposed again for who he really is an average corner. LOL! They looked dismal and out-classed when the Bills beat them. Season opening games are the most likely to see upsets. Even the hapless Bills have beat better teams in season openers and falsely buoyed up their fans' hopes. We match up terribly with them. KC beat them with speed. We don't have much outside speed Maybe instead of trying to emulate Carolina, the Bills brain trust should emulate the Chiefs who have been a consistent playoff contender since Andy Reid became their HC. They're a run-first team that mostly use short passes but they've added enough speed to go deep when the opportunity is there ... and they field killer Ds besides having an excellent OL that not only can run block extremely well but is capable of keeping their QB clean. IMO, part of the reason that NE looked bad was that Reid out-coached Belichick. The long TD passes were killers ... and totally unexpected.
Juice_32 Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Having an internal debate, do I drop them as my fantasy D/ST? Or do I keep them hoping that I am a curse? You know what you have to do.
Recommended Posts