Did he have more to do with the wins, the loss or the non-Super Bowl years? There was ONE big difference between those years. Can you guess what it was?
I don't think he ever said that. Just that half of the puzzle was missing, Moss had nothing to do with it
Exactly. And on top of that I think McLovin was trying to say that Moss was the reason they didn't win another Super Bowl. And that's just crazy.
No no not at all. I am just saying Brady will find a way to win no matter who he has, and IMO they should have won at least one with Moss.
2001 - NE Ranked 24th in total defense. http://www.nfl.com/stats/categoryst...OTAL_YARDS_GAME_AVG&d-447263-o=1&d-447263-n=1 2003 - 7th (ok close enough) 2004 - 9th. In 2004, Brady was ranked 9th in QB Rating. So, don't they both deserve a little credit. In 2001 he was 6th in QBR so because he didn't have crazy numbers, he was more or less quite efficient which is all you need really.
Actually, I see what you did. You went by yards allowed. LMAO! You go with that stat and I'll go by points allowed and we'll see who wins more games.
Basically what I was trying to say that IMHO, he is a great QB. He isn't selfish about stats, doesn't showboat, you really don't hear him talk trash, he's a great leader and motivator and he knows how to win. He's got great work ethic and you never hear about him on a boat, rape allegations, DUI's and what not. He's got great accuracy and a pretty strong arm too. Sure, their defense was great those years, but youi still have to score on offense and manage the game, right? Look at the Vikings, they had the 2nd best rated defense in the league, but their offense sucks... and their record is 2-5. Really, all in all, I think the guy deserves some credit.
Well, their defense is ranked 28th and they are 6-1 right now, their offense is ranked 19th and he is ranked 5th so someone is finding away for them to win.
Actually EVERYONE goes by yards allowed. When someone says 4 defense they never mean by points allowed. Love it or hate it, thats the way it is.
Correct, but seeing as the team with the most points wins, not yards, points allowed is a more accurate measure of defense IMO.
Not really. Sometimes your team will give up a kick return for a touchdown or a pick six. That goes against the defense, even though they weren't on the field. It's too flawed, IMO.
You too are using yards. Would you rather have an offense that scored 50pts a game or put up 500yds with 10 points? Or how about a defense that gave up 500yds and 10 points a game vs. a defense that gave up 250 yards and 30 points a game? In other words, their defense is not ranked 28th. The first 3 games of the season their defense was horrible and gave up 28 points per game. They were 2-1 then. Since then they are giving up around an average of 18-19 points per game. They are 4-0 in that span. The Ravens give up 18 and the Jests (at number one) give up 16 points. The Patriots defense is playing like the defenses of old and if they continue this way they will be one of the best in the league at the end of the year. With Moss their offense averaged 32 points a game. Without Moss they are averaging 24 points per game. What this tells us is that their defense is once again the reason they are winning games.
And teams can often pick up quite a bit of meaningless yardage during garbage time which would hurt a team like New England, that is leading in a lot of games. Maybe we need something new
Points is a lot better measuring stick. How many KO returns, Punt returns etc are there for one team in a year? Not really much to affect the average at the end of the season.
I promise you they do. Do you think I am lying? I can play this game too. Which defense is better? The defense who allowed five yards, 35 points because the offense fumbled on the 1 yard line 5 times, or the defense that allowed four 99 yard drives and a couple field goals but only 34 points??
I don't think you're lying. However, I do know you're wrong. You said "EVERYONE"...in all caps and everything. Well, Pro-Football Reference lists a defense by both yards allowed and points allowed. So does NFL.com. So does ESPN. I, and many, many, many other people choose to take points allowed as a better measuring stick. You're scenario will never happen. As I wrote earlier, ST's score, offenses commit turnovers etc, however, how many times in one season does one team, allow a KO or punt return for a TD? How many pick-6's will one team have? There will be some, but over the course of the season there is so few points scored that way that it doesn't really affect the overall average. Also, over the course of history, teams that allow the fewest POINTS do better. Not fewest yards. Checkmate.
Nobody laughing except you buddy. When you talk in terms of defense, it's always yards allowed. If you want to discuss points allowed, you have to specify. Ask yourself this, why is San Diego right now called the #1 defense when they are #8 in points allowed? Because everyone goes by yards allowed first. The NFL isn't always just about the points. Sure that's the one thing you can measure. But yards play into it because ball control, controlling the pace of the game. Keeping their offense off the field. Go to NFL.com, select stats, team stats. See what's listed front and center.
It's not "always" yards allowed. I think I've already proven that much. Ball control, controlling the pace is done why? Is it too see how many yards you can hold a team to or to hopefully not allow them to score points? Who says that SD has the number one defense? They give up 23 ppg and are 3-5. If YOU want to say they have the best defense in the NFL go right ahead. LMAO! <<< Still laughing.
I'm not saying that's all you can use. I'm saying if you say best defense it refers to total yards. All other factors are of course relevant to any discussion. However, when you reference "#1 defense in the league" 99.99% most people will think, Total defense i.e. ypg allowed. Keep laughing buddy. The NFL disagrees with you. Read more: http://www.footballnewsnow.com/2010/texans-can-build-on-last-weeks-second-half-performance/ http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/7276345.html http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/11/03/nfl-week-9-preview-houston-texans/ http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/14241157/midseason-report-brady-leads-the-hardware-haul etc. etc. When you want to say points allowed defense, you have to say, points allowed. Everyone (except you) knows that.
Guys, let's get this thread back on topic. And that's Welker being mediocre. Here's hoping he puts up another stinker this week.
Welker- 4 for 36yds and 0 TD's Brady with Moss (4 games)- 9TD, 2INT, 70% comp, 110 QBR Brady without Moss (4 games)-5TD, 2INT, 57% comp, 85 QBR
It has been years since the Chiefs did anything but bleed on defense, but that trend stopped the moment Crennel joined Patriots Midwest. I don't care that they rank 16th in overall defense; what matters is where they rank in points allowed -- fifth. <<< Still laughing
Film! Seriously, just using your eyes is way better than using stats, IMO. Not in baseball, though. Pro Football Focus isn't bad, either.
So, when you read a TD pass stat it's just 6 points but was it really a super-duper deluxe magical 9pt TD that you saw with your eyes?
But he kicked an extra point! Anybody still think Welker is a GREAT WR? Imagine what Moss coulda done for Marshall and Bess.
Note the right-hand column of that table. "DYAR" stands for Defense-Adjusted Yards Above Replacement, and the fact that this number is negative indicates that Welker is actually playing worse than your typical unemployed wideout right now. Go tot he following link in order to read more and see the chart. Looks like the OP was right and I was right to agree with him. Welker, and Brady too, have been exposed since the departure of Moss. http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-...87142/statistical-analysis-patriots-miss-moss
Unfortunately it looks like Brady (who I care more about being good, or hoping that he sucks) may have got his groove back. Welker had a decent game (89 yards) but Brady, despite last week's loss, is playing lights darn good right now. Excluding his first game without Moss, which had the two INTs, he's 7 TDs and no interceptions. That Baltimore game really skews his post-Moss average.
Yeah, it was a decent game for Welker. I still wouldn't call it a great game. No TDs either. I think I can still say Welker is finding it much more difficult to score without a guy like Moss drawing attention at the goal line.
Well when welker first started he did not score many TDs. He eventually learned how, but now with moss gone he'll be back to this non TD scoring ways, but he always put up some catches and yards.
