Well seeing how Greenberg was adamant that one of the reasons the Yets would win big this year was that he knew Sanchez would take the big step up and be an elite QB this year , we can feel good when makes predictions against good things happening for Miami. It's a runaway train .... hard to stop .... 18 in aqua and orange seems very plausible imo.
Greenberg says Manning to SEA, Edwards says MIA
- Thread starter testtubetimmy
- Start date
Brady was the benefactor of some very good defensive teams whereas Indy was lost on D without Bob Sanders. It's no coincidence that the Pats have not had the same post season success over the last several years due to the loss of key defensive guys and inability to rebuild it.
Last I checked the Pats were just in the SB and those Pats Ds were not great defenses and the Colts Ds were very underrated. The Colts Ds have allowed less postseason pts than the supposed great NE D's. Indy has lost more b/c of the play of the QB in January than the defense.
NE defenses were consistently tp 10 when they won Super Bowls. They went to this years Super Bowl by only beating 1 team with a winning record and that was the Ravens in the AFC Championship.
Manning had subpar playoff games, I recall one against the Jets a couple of years ago, but the defenses were not under rated. They struggled big time against the run even with Bob Sanders and we're no where near as good as the Patriots. You may want to review the historical data.
Just to put into perspective, so you can get a handle on what others are seeing:
You claim Peyton's defense carried him; you claim the 2x SB MVP, Eli Manning's defense carried him
BUT
you vehemently and continually deny that Sanchez's defense carried him? How can that be?
At least that's the way it looks.
If you are using rankings he went to the SB w/ the 31st ranked defense this year.
Peyton rarely has played like his regular season self in postseason games and his D has never blown a late lead in a playoff game like Brady's Ds have done time after time after time.
Don't confuse my defense of Sanchez w/ putting him on a level w/ Manning. They are different players, Peyton is an all time great, the standards for him are much higher than for Sanchez and I NEVER said Sanchez's Ds weren't the main reason he had so much team success BUT even w/ the best Ds you still need quality QB play ad we got that.
I didn't say Eli's D carried him this year but the D was great and their contribution is getting lost in the Eli media hype.
Peyton's D was excellent in their SB run, a run where Peyton threw 3 TDs and 7 INTs and had one good half all postseason long.
True but the scoring defense was 14 and the defense actually played better in the playoffs.
In 2003 and 2004, NE was 1st and 6th in point differential and 1st and 2nd in scoring defense.
The New Guy
Starter
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2005
- Messages
- 1,932
- Reaction score
- 74
That 2007 team was embarrassed by Spygate and set out to prove something. They throttled playoff SD, Dal, Pitt and beat Washington 52-7. They had close wins against the Colts (4 points) and Giants (3 points)
Why not compare 08 and 09?
You can talk about playoff bound, but as you know sometimes good teams miss the playoffs and sometimes bad teams make the playoffs. To be fair, I look at the win / loss record of each team.
In 08 without Brady the Pats won 11 games and beat 4 teams that were 8-8 or better. Those teams were:
9-7 Jets
9-7 Cardinals (NFC Champs)
8-8 Broncos
11-5 Dolphins
They lost 5 to:
8-8 SD
9-7 NYJ
11-5 Mia
12-4 Indy
12-4 Pitt (Super Bowl Champs)
In 09 with Brady the Pats won 10 games and beat 4 teams that were 8-8 or better. Those teams were:
Falcons 9-7
Jets 9-7
Ravens 9-7
Titans 8-8
They lost 6 to:
7-9 Mia
8-8 Den
9-7 NYJ
9-7 Hou
13-3 NO (Super Bowl Champs)
14-2 Indy
Looks like very similar seasons with and without Brady. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Brady isn't important to the Pats. I'm just saying he is not as important to the Pats as Manning is to the Colts.
2001 was the only postseason where the pats D played really well throughout and they nearly blew a historic lead in the 4th qtr of the SB becoming the first D to blow a 14 pt 4th qtr lead.
As good as NE was in 2001, the Colts D's have played better in postseason.
In '08 the Jets were not very good despite the record.
In '08 Ari made the playoffs but in 3 NE trips they lost by an average score of Ari 21 Opps 50 and in the NE game Ari barely played their starters-
In '08 NE beat 2 playoff teams, Ari and one of the worst playoff teams of the past decade the Miami Dolphins. In 2009 they beat a team that reached the AFC Championship Game and another team that reached the div rd.
NE was MUCH better in 2009 despite one less win.
Remember, as great as people think those defenses were the Pats were 5-11 in 2000 w/o Brady and started 0-2 in 2001 including a loss to the lowly Bengals. They magically won 11 of 14 when Brady became the starter. Please look up BB's record w/ and w/o Brady.
Brady needed help to reach and win all his superbowls, Payton won his superbowl without much of a defense, or running game.
Brady went down a few years ago, the great Patriot machine continued to win 11 games, Payton goes down, the Colts are now in position to get Luck with the #1 pick after having the worst season they have had since.....well, since Payton got there.
The young QB the Pats used in 08 had no experience, and has done so well in KC, he is about to be replaced.
2413fanphins
Active Roster
Typical greenie being a hated.
greeny is the queen of douchers
The New Guy
Starter
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2005
- Messages
- 1,932
- Reaction score
- 74
I don't agree with that. They were just as good if not better when Favre was healthy. They were 8-3 before finishing the season 1-4. The 09 Jets only got to 9 wins by playing 2 teams to end the season that had no desire to win.
The Cardinals got blown out by two good teams in 08. The Jets 56-35 and Patriots 47-7. I don't understand your logic. You want to discredit the Pats win without Brady against the Cardinals in 08 because they didn't have a great regular season (9-7), yet they won their division and made it to the Super Bowl that year. Then you want to uplift the Pats win with Brady against the Jets in 09 when they wouldn't have even gotten to 9 wins and made the playoffs had it not been for Indy letting them in, and they only made it to the AFCC game. You are not looking at the facts. The 09 Pats with Brady coming off the knee injury were not a much better team than the 08 team without him.
A coach can't have a bad first season with his team and then turn it around the next year? The Pats were 6-10 in 1995, and started 0-2 the next year, but they went on the make it to the Super Bowl with the same starting QB. I really believe that the 2001 Pats would have made it to the Super Bowl had Brady not come in to start. The D and special teams carried that team. They would not have had the long term success that they have had, but I think 2001 plays out the same without Brady.
Really? Peyton's D in 2006 allowed 12.8 PPG in 4 playoff games, Peyton threw 3 TDs and 7 INTs, Addai & rhodes rushed for 600 yds on 4.4 YPC. That certainly shows Peyton winning w/o much help from the D or run game.
In NE's 3 SBs runs the D allowed an average of:
2001: 15.7 PPG, good but not as good as '06 Indy
2003: 19 PPG
2004: 17 PPG
NE run game:
2001: Antowain Smith averaged 3.8 YPC in playoffs
2003: Smith averaged 3.9 YPC
2004: Dillon averaged 4.5
NE was a sinking franchise until Brady took over and rescued it.
Brady went down a year after winning 16 games and despite a much easier sched they only won 10 w/ Cassel as their starter and MISSED the playoffs. Indy was a team ont he decline and went from 10 to 2 wins when the team quit on the season and didn't have a competent QB.
No experience but he watched the best QB in the game for 3 seasons and whether he will be replaced or not means nothing as he helped them win the AFC Weast in 2010. let me know when Curtis Painter helps any team even into playoff contention.
Don't buy the Favre injury excuse, he could throw the ball just fine in December and he supposedly got hurt in noctober then played his best football in November(his onl;y good stretch of football for us all year). We were 8-3 more b/c of an incredibly weak schedule.
The '09 Jets were MUCH better than the '08 Jets and our QB not choking was one of the reasons.
Good teams don't get blown out like that consistently, they also lost by a similar score to Philly. The team in postseason was ot the same team as in the reg season. If we played Ari in January they would have smoked us.
You don't know if we would have beaten Indy or not, we were only down 5 pts. Using that logic down 4 midway through the 3rd at SD we had no shot but they played the game out and we won.
It was just a coincidence that NE was 5-11 in 2000 w/o Brady then started 0-2 in 2001 w/o him before winning 11 of 14 w/ Brady. The 2001 Pats wouldn't have made the playoffs let alone win a SB if Brady didn't take over, BB wouldn't have had a job much longer.
BB w/o Brady(7+ seasons):
51-62, 45%
1 playoff app
1 playoff win
zero div titles
zero div rd wins
zero AFC tile game apps
Zero SBs
2 winning seasons
5 losing seasons
BB w/ Brady(10 seasons):