Looking under the hood: New England Patriots @ New Orleans Saints
by MaPatsFan on Nov 25, 2009 10:17 AM EST
107 comments
Another Sunday gone by. Another division win in the books. An NFC opponent this coming Monday. With Rex "you're dissin' me by playing 60 minutes" Ryan and his silliness behind us, we can take a quick moment to relish the win but we really need to focus on our MNF trip to the Big Easy - land of Dixieland, Madi Gras, and the New Orleans Saints.
Both our NFL South teams, the Colts and the Saints, are undefeated at 10-0. We know from our 2007 season that this is quite an accomplishment. In this day of free agency and salary caps (well, sort of) it's incredibly difficult to field a team that can be this successful. It's also incredibly difficult to field successful teams when the league is doing everything they can to promote (enforce?) parity.
But that's not why I'm here. I'm here to tell you why our New England Patriots are capable of beating the Saints.
If you believe in statistics and you believe they can tell a story, then the 7-3 Patriots are actually ranked higher than the Saints. "Hold on a minute", you may say. "nfl.com has them first in total offense!" Very true. If you're looking at Yds/G, Pts/G, and TotPts, NO comes out on top. The Saints are a scoring machine and do so on a regular basis. But the real question is against whom did they score those points?
A cursory look will show you that they are dominating in a weak division. The NFC South, comprised of NO, Atlanta, TB, and Carolina is anything but burning up the field. About the only competition they're getting these days is from our very own AFC East and possibly Dallas; they just don't have that tough of a schedule. But is this really true? That's where Football Outsiders' stats come in handy.
The weakness of NFL stats is that they're not rationalized against strength of schedule. NFL stats are simply tickers that tick away without any thought as to how they got their. Football Outsiders, on the other hand, applies some thought to the process and ranks teams/players based on who they faced (shake n bake is smiling ;-)). First, lets take a look at Team Efficiency. Guess who's rated first? Not the Saints. Not Indy. The Patriots are rated first. Why? We may have a 7-3 record while those 2 teams are at 10-0, but we've accomplished that record against tougher opponents, among other things. While we're ranked first both overall and in offense, defense is ranked 9th. Not to worry too much as NO is ranked 7th; that's not by that wide a margin.
But all the statistics in the world can't predict how a team will play on any given Sunday, how they'll "get up" for the game. Remember, NO is itching to hang on to their undefeated record and we're playing them in New Orleans. NO also seems to finish games better. That is, score points in the second half. We've struggled with this throughout the season; the Patriots come in strong in the first half and seem to go into prevent mode to end the game. It's like a different team from half to half.
Saints fans, like their players, are up for this game. They want to topple the "Team of the Decade" in decisive fashion. But they arguably haven't faced an opponent as strong as New England. This is going to be an excellent game and it can't come soon enough.
0 recs |
107 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
forgot the "r" Mardi Gras
My life has been a trivial pursuit. Trivia: where three roads meet.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
by SlotMachinePlayer on Nov 25, 2009 10:42 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
And as long as we're being nitpicky
You have “their” instead of “there” in the third paragraph after the jump. :)
It’s also kind of funny that before the jump, you frame this as “Why the Patriots can win,” and then it essentially boils down to “by certain statistics we’re rated higher, by certain statistics they’re rated higher, and no statistics can predict what happens in the game itself.”
I agree do that FO’s Team Efficiency is a slightly better/more accurate method of predicting games, though, and since it’s in line with my homerism I can’t complain!
by sc4rs on Nov 25, 2009 10:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, what a grammatician.
You feel the need to slam the author’s misuse of ‘their’, and lambast the title relative to the context, yet you write a sentence that begins “I agree do that FO’s…”
Pot, meet Kettle.
Nice article MPF. Ignore the English majors here; you can’t please everyone.
by Baggs5 on Nov 25, 2009 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
c'mon... this is Boston
It’s ‘Mahdi Grah’. We’re allowed to drop R’s around here
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Nov 25, 2009 11:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Forgive my midwest sensitivities.
Let’s just call it “Fat Tuesday” and leave the R’s alone.
My life has been a trivial pursuit. Trivia: where three roads meet.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
by SlotMachinePlayer on Nov 25, 2009 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
good article
The only flaw to this strength of schedule thinking is a 10-0 team always gets penalized against a team thats not perfect. The example is you got credit for playing a undeafetd team in Indy and they got credit for playing a 6-3 team with the Pats so it looks down on teams with better records
by simone219 on Nov 25, 2009 10:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Pats can get two big monkeys off their back in this game
1.) Winning a game on the road against one of the few teams with a true home field advantage.
2.) Having a strong second half. They won’t beat the Saints without a strong second half period.
I think they pull it off…
by bbismyhero on Nov 25, 2009 11:05 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I wish you guys had a better record
Because if we win everyone will say we really haven’t beaten any really elite teams with a really good record. You’ll be 6-4. Seems we won’t get any credit unless we beat the Colts or Minnesota.
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
by Philinwood on Nov 25, 2009 11:19 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
gee... thanks... I think...
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Nov 25, 2009 11:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I meant 7-4
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
by Philinwood on Nov 25, 2009 11:21 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
If we win I'll run around saying we've beaten an elite team.
But mostly I just want to crush Dallas. Can anyone stand Tony Romo? I think I dislike him more than I dislike Tom Brady.
by xen-cuts on Nov 26, 2009 10:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And the 'America's team' thing...
when there are 31 other franchises in a variety of other states. Ugh.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 26, 2009 10:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They're not even TEXAS'S team.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 26, 2009 10:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah that really burns me up
I was wondering if anyone else gets irritated about the America’s Team bs. Welcome, brotha’!
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 12:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i read football outsiders every week
they also have philly ranked ahead of us too?!? i wouldnt read too much into the stats, we both have very good teams with excellent qb’s. its going to be fun to watch. luckily mayor drew brees has declared monday and tuesday official new orleans holidays. cheers!
by DrewBreesManCrush on Nov 25, 2009 11:29 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Bad Officiating Prediction: I predict the NFL to favor New England in this game
to promote some parity, to generate more interest, to generate more enthusiasm from New England fans, to give Saints fans something more to fret about… watch which way the calls go.
I predict a first half strongly called in favor of New England. I predict at least two Tom Brady touch 15-yard penalties.
And I predict some lame makeup calls at the end of the second half.
by xen-cuts on Nov 26, 2009 10:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You can't botch that one...
If you are calling someone high, you can’t mess it up like that. Not unless you are asking if I’m high, too, or something along those lines.
Do you not believe that the officiating is one sided pretty often in the NFL? It seems like New England is often involved in piss poor officiated games. Against Baltimore… Against Indy…. And that game where Tom Brady was making calls.
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 12:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Um...
…are you serious? Officiating is rarely one sided. Of course we’ll complain about it, but that’s more out of frustration than fact. The “game where Tom Brady was making calls” I’m pretty sure is the same as the Baltimore one. You do realize that, at that point in time, the Patriots’ Defense the most flagged crew for QB contact? Yeah, that’s not favoritism. It’s the refs calling penalties when they see them. Most of the time, they’re the correct calls.
by The Hill on Nov 27, 2009 12:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
did u see the colts game??? or the bills game?
by mathew.40 on Nov 27, 2009 2:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
any given sunday
that’s why they play the game. there are loads of stats arguing that the pats or the saints can/should win…
i’ll be interested in the stats after the game is played. i’m psyched though. this should be a great battle. good luck to you guys!
by nanvinnie on Nov 25, 2009 11:32 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Game of the Year: Part Two
Indy and the Pats was the game of the Year: Part One, and my Saints and the Pats will be part Deuce…..I circled this game on my calender during pre-season, a tru etest for our Boyz and how they will hold up against one of the most elite teams in the league……Should be fun, high scoring, and no injuries. Geaux Saints!!!
by Lil_joe692 on Nov 25, 2009 11:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I agree on all counts, fun, high scoring, and no injuries
My life has been a trivial pursuit. Trivia: where three roads meet.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
by SlotMachinePlayer on Nov 25, 2009 11:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Curious
you mentioned the beginning of the season – how surprised are you to see how well the Saints have done? Did you have a feeling they would be this good?
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Nov 25, 2009 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Last year
their offense was this good, but they lost in shootouts a lot
"These players, a lot of other people didn't believe in them, but they believe in themselves. And that is all that matters."- Bill Belichick
by Mainiac on Nov 25, 2009 11:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I knew we would
Be good at the begining of the year with the the addition of Greg Williams.
I had no idea we would be this good i thought we were still one linebacker away.
Darren Sharper,Jabari Greer and Anthony Hargrove have made a large diff. since they have stepped up
by simone219 on Nov 25, 2009 12:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think all Saints fans had an idea we['d be very much improved
Just getting rid of the sorry safeties and bringing in Greg Williams. Then picking up Greer and Sharper really made a difference…it is amazing.
by BlackandGold4ever on Nov 25, 2009 7:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I know the Saints as well as any div-rival
And here’s why you guys didn’t go 8-8 this year: Increased focus on the run, meaning you dumb-dumbs finally realized Pierre Thomas is one of the best backs in the league; The D got a major revamping including the bargain that was Sharper, and pretty much every aspect of your team improved. Except Colston, that is. He’s been having some problems, and so has Brees over the past few weeks.
Phin-bassador/ Head Weatherman/ Injury Specialist of the Phinsider.
Current Ranking for Miami Dolphins Player Pick 'Em Contest: Unranked
Current Ranking for New Orleans Saints Player Pick 'Em Contest: #9
by Farorefox on Nov 25, 2009 7:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't you mean "part Deaux?"
As Mr. Sloan always says, there is no "I" in team, but there is an "I" in pie. And there's an "I" in meat pie. Anagram of meat is team... I don't know what he's talking about. --Shaun of the Dead
by JohnHannahRules on Nov 25, 2009 5:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
September 18, 2005
was the last time the Pats lost a regular season game to an NFC team (Panthers).
Just thought that was an interesting tidbit.
by nbradley07 on Nov 25, 2009 11:53 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
February 3, 2008
What about the Giants ?
by French Daddy on Nov 25, 2009 12:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That was the Super Bowl
which was in the postseason, last I checked.
by nbradley07 on Nov 25, 2009 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
REGULAR SEASON
My life has been a trivial pursuit. Trivia: where three roads meet.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
by SlotMachinePlayer on Nov 25, 2009 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
but NE has an amazing record against NFC teams
by mathew.40 on Nov 25, 2009 3:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
New England this decade
has an amazing record against basically every team in the nfl except the broncos
by MOSS81 on Nov 27, 2009 8:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This year has also seen the Pats blow a lot of things they hadn't done before in the BB era
Tom Brady had not lost in overtime EVER until this year
Pats had never blown a 17 point lead EVER until this year
I had never seen so many delay of game penalties committed by the Pats and Brady…
Whatever records the Pats had done previously are out the window this year. I still think they are an elite team… just not as invincible anymore.
by bbismyhero on Nov 25, 2009 12:42 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
some of those records were bound to fall at some point
Too tough to stay untouched, but impressive that they’ve held as long as they have.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Nov 25, 2009 12:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, records were made to be broken
If the Saints beat the Pats 2007 records, the league will just add a couple more games to the schedule and the records will be broken again by lesser teams. That’s the problem with standing on top of the hill; someone’s always trying to knock you off. Can we go back to being underdogs?
My life has been a trivial pursuit. Trivia: where three roads meet.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
by SlotMachinePlayer on Nov 25, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If this was a reply to my post...
I want to clarify that I wasn’t attempting to use a streak to create a presumption of victory, here. Us Pats fans know better than anyone that streaks are meaningless.
What I think it does suggest is a difference in quality between the conferences. The best article I could find on the subject is from 2007, but basically the stats show that the “best” of the NFC doesn’t match up with the “best” of the AFC. So, the 10-0 record of the Colts is much more impressive, and signifies a much stronger team, than the 10-0 record of the Saints.
Having said that (any Curb fans out there?), they play the game for a reason. It will be interesting to see if the Saints can break the trend and prove that the “Best in the NFC” can also contend for “Best in the NFL.”
by nbradley07 on Nov 25, 2009 1:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Whoops
That was supposed to be a reply to BBismyhero
by nbradley07 on Nov 25, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So ranking trumps W-L record???
When did this happen? I didn’t get the memo. Statistic in sports doesn’t tell you the whole story and you are only lying to yourself if you go by statistics alone. Pats’ D needs to be able to stop the insane Saints’ balanced attack. Saints need to get better at stopping the run and force turnovers. The game will ultimately be won at the line of scrimmage, a statistic that is always overlooked and under reported. Also to consider: Pats are playing in the dome, one of the toughest places to play in the NFL.
Bottom line: this game will be better than the Super Bowl so tune and enjoy.
by Jubincali on Nov 25, 2009 1:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
well look at it this way
which team do u think is better? (going with extremes here)
A team that beats the browns 10 times out of 10
or a team that beats the say the colts 6 times out of 4
it’s just the idea that pats had better opponents. While saints are good they did struggle vs some bad opponents…
by lololol on Nov 25, 2009 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Now THAT would be impressive
Beating someone 6 times out of 4?
Does that mean you beat them SO badly 4 times, that each loss is actually 1.5 losses?
by nbradley07 on Nov 25, 2009 1:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
oops i meant 10 but w/e u get what i mean
and yes i would love it if the pats an beat ythe colts 6 times out of 4
by lololol on Nov 25, 2009 2:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's funny!
I didn’t even notice it until you pointed it out
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Nov 25, 2009 3:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
like the pats ...
against the bills and the jets
by r c a on Nov 25, 2009 4:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You Know
You got 2 mastermind coaches on both side of the field no questions about it! I think they try to out wit each other and have a sloppy played game for both teams!! Who ever have the ball last will be your winner!!!!
by Nomoaints on Nov 25, 2009 9:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
About weak schedules
Saints & Patriots schedule, lets look at that schedule
Patriots play 6 games in their division,. Bills 5-7 Jet 4-6 & Finns 5-5
Patriots play the AFC South
Patriots play the NFC south
Patriots play 1 team from the AFC north and west
Saints play 6 games in their division
Saints play the AFC east
Saints play the NFC east
Saints play 1 team from the NFC North and west
So please explain to me and the world how the Patriots or any other team have such hard schedules and the Saints have an easy one, looking at their schedules no one can predict which teams will be bad or good we have a 1-9 team in our division your team has lost a division game and our team beat that team, the patriots beat the Titian 59-0 now the Titian are 4-6
So please explain again in a new article
by Deckape 69 on Nov 26, 2009 12:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
You're showing a superficial understanding of quality opponents
Read this primer on DVOA and come back when ready.
Blogger at SBNation's Patriots blog, Pats Pulpit
by MaPatsFan on Nov 26, 2009 2:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
DOVOA
So a system that needs a Philadelphia lawyer to understand makes that system work for betting a game because you can look at a teams performance.
These system are in place for book makers to give odds and are betting proposes, if I would bet on football games yes this would help me determine if I should take the point spread or not
by Deckape 69 on Nov 29, 2009 8:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
they have played many of the same teams so far
and the pats have played one good team that the saints have not played, indy. baltimore might be good, they have only lost to good teams on a tough schedule.
mapatsfan, pats have also lost to denver and the jets, who are proving to be lesser teams that originally thought. you can say stat this and stat that, bottom line, pats lost 3 times, saints are undefeated. i would probably say though that the pats schedule is slightly harder to date.
i think both teams are fairly evenly matched with saints having advantage for being at home . i don’t think anyone can really say they are confident about the outcome of this game. its gonna be a real exciting game for sure.
go saints!!
by lockguy1 on Nov 26, 2009 6:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comparing the Tom Brady who was QBing the team...
…from the Jets and Broncos game to the one who is playing now is foolish. Look at what Brady did to the Jets this past week. He’s a different player now that he has his turf legs under him again.
by The Hill on Nov 26, 2009 8:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Comparing the Jets now to the Jets at the beginning of the season is also foolish.
They are falling apart.
by xen-cuts on Nov 26, 2009 9:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And?
Teams change over the course of the year. That’s my point. The Patriots at the beginning of the year were a much worse team than the Patriots of now.
by The Hill on Nov 27, 2009 12:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No you are changing your point now.
Your point was that the Pats are really amazing now as evidenced by all these marquee wins. (In fact your point was that Tom Brady is now coming around.) But sticking to the greater point, the pats…the pats have no marquee wins this season. That is why this game against a non-division opponent in the Saints is so important to you. If you cared about all teams changing then you could write a novella on that.
I do think that the Pats actually beat the Colts and that the ball was poorly spotted after Kevin Faulk caught it. But there was still game left to be played and the pats’s defense had an opportunity to stop payton and failed. Nevertheless, that game was won and taken away and that’s your closest thing to a big win on the season.
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 9:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and I agree with you...
the saints have no big wins. We have all these fake big wins against paper teams like the Giants and Jets and Falcons and Panthers… so we need a marquee win, too. I hope that was self-evident in my prior post but I didn’t want people to think I was drinking the koolaid too much ;)
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
man... the Giants have been folding big time
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Nov 27, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
oh yeah and...this article makes no sense
the author is trying to say that the saints are blowing out weaker opponents and thats how they got their number one ranking on offense. playing against the same teams, jets, buf ,atl, tampa, miami, pats have scored 133 points and saints have scored 170. i had to average the jets games because there were two for the pats. saints ARE #1 in offense, period. pats have a better defense. again, gonna be a good game.
by lockguy1 on Nov 26, 2009 6:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Bear in mind that Tom Brady was coming back in after a whole year of injury and rehab
and even the most optimistic Tom Brady fans would say his play in the first 8 or 9 weeks was sub-par.
You’re comparing the Saints offence and the Pats offence by looking at five or six games, including the Bills game, the first Jets game and the Falcons game. Those were Brady’s first three games after a year off; consequently, the three games he looked the most rusty.
Brady’s current form bears absolutely no resemblance to his form during those early games, so having confidence that the Pats offence now is weak because of how they performed then is amusing. It’s no coincidence that Brady has now thrown for four or five consecutive 300 yard games.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 26, 2009 7:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Brady's big games are coincident with playing against weak defenses.
I’m not sure whether the Saints scoring is exaggerated or not? The Saints’ defense has been putting up big numbers.
But you have to admit that Brady has been a bit off. He doesn’t make turnovers which is great, but he has not been hitting down the field passes that well. His numbers have come against terrible teams like Tampa Bay. I don’t know if the Saints can cover Moss so we’ll see what happens. But Brady is only marginally more confident now than he was at the beginning of the season and he consistently gets rattled by pressure. If the Saints D-line can get any pressure it’s going to be a long day for New England. That’s easier said than done but it’s standard operating procedure for any team playing against the Pats.
by xen-cuts on Nov 26, 2009 9:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He's looking sharper, and I imagine the confidence is building
He was hitting the deep passes against the Colts and the Bucs (granted, not top defences). So he can make the throws at the moment. He didn’t do it last week, but then his top deep target was being swamped by one of the best (if not top two) cornerbacks in the league. There’s no real point in forcing deep passes if Welker’s open enough to get nigh on 200 yards. Brady’s definitely improving, even if he’s not quite 2007-ish yet. If the Saints get pressure on, I’d just expect Watson and Baker to be kept on the line and Brady would just find Moss, Welker and Faulk all day. One of those three is almost always open.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 26, 2009 10:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Saints need to get pressure without massive blitzing
We need our front four to actually do something for once. They are good at stopping the run but they suck huge at dominating the line and getting sacks. So I anticipate a lot of blitzes.
I do not think that your screens will be open. Vilma should rock your screen pass world. Not sure about the tight ends…our other linebackers kind of suck. But Foogeetuh is finally back from injury so if he’s playing okay he can probably cover the tight ends effectively.
Moss, as always, is going to get special attention. I don’t think he can break big ones against this defense. I’m really interested to see him test our secondary just to know what we have back there.
How good is the Pats’s D-line at stopping the run? Can your linebackers keep up with the Shocker? How good are your d-backs at keeping up with our big/fast receivers? And are your safeties going to be able to keep Bush in check on screen passes? I’m wondering about all of that stuff.
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 12:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Pats use a lot of bubble-screens
which basically involve the ball going from center-Brady-Welker as fast as is physically possible, and then Welker getting 5, 10 yac from a standing start – Vilma would have to line up outside to really have a chance of stopping it, which is fine, because then Brady would audible into some TE post route to put a pass catcher when Vilma would normally be. It’ll be pick-your-poison – have Vilma try to sit on Welker and let Baker and Watson do what they wish, or vice versa.
As for the Pats D-line, they’ve been solid at clogging up the middle, not having let too many yards between the tackles. They closed down the Falcons and Ravens, both of whom have solid rushing attacks, and they only surrendered yards to the Titans when the Titans bounced it out beyond the linemen.
Were I to guess, they’ll tag McGowan and/or Chung on Shockey all day. McGowan’s developed a rep for closing down good TEs – he limited Kellen Winslow to two catches and under a dozen yards, Tony Gonzalez to one catch (!) for a few, and even had a decent crack at closing out Dallas Clark last week. I don’t see why they’d change the blueprint on closing down TEs now, so expect McGowan to be in Shockey’s face.
The D-backs have been okay at keeping up with big/fast receivers. They kept TO out of the Bills game, they did pretty well to keep Braylon Edwards out of the Jets game (and got two picks straight out from under Edwards’s nose), and didn’t do too badly at forcing Manning away from Reggie Wayne for three quarters.
As for Bush, he’s the most difficult matchup this week, and I’d imagine he’s the one that Belichick will be most worried about. The Pats struggled in early weeks with pass-catching RBs – they surrendered a bunch of yards to Fred Jackson on swing passes. In a few games they’ve looked incapable of truly closing the edge on swing passes and tosses, but have done better of late, especialy when Jerod Mayo back in the lineup. He’s truly got sideline-to-sideline speed, and great instincts. Mayo and Guyton in the middle ought to have between them a fair chance of containing Bush, or at least preventing him from rattling off a massive play. He is the guy I’d be most worried about scheming for, though.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 27, 2009 5:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I just hope that Reggie can play
his knee has been banged up.
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 9:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and i guess you could say
some of those points were on defense, but that is the style of defense the saints play, big risk big reward and that is a form of offense.
by lockguy1 on Nov 26, 2009 6:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Real Matchup: Belicheck versus Payton
I agree with MaPatsFan that this game can go either way. It’s a battle of the coaches. I don’t think the stats say much of anything. Each team is capable of scoring and adapting to the other. As Canal Street Chronicles (the Saints fan site) suggests, this is a chess match.
I think the Saints have the better team, but I don’t think that really matters. This game is about the coaches putting players in a position to win. Every week the Saints seem to come out flat and just get rolled over during the first half. They can come back but it’s going to be difficult to mount a comeback against the Pats.
Likewise, the Saints have had a bad track record of pulling away from bad teams as of late. This is due to massive numbers of injuries or walking wounded on the defense. I have no idea what to expect out of these defensive players. Really only the Saints’s players and coaches know. This is because many key players who helped pull games out in the past are now injured or coming off injuries. Furthermore, if there is one game that the Saints can lose, it should be to an out-of-division opponent who can’t damage home field advantage for Nola.
I think the Saints can step up. I think this Saints team is ready for the big stage. And I think that New England, while solid, is holding on with players who are not that talented or who are over the hill. But it still comes down to that coaching chess match. I can’t wait to see what happens on Monday night and I wish you guys a good and fun game.
I should also add that many of us Saints fans have an irrational disdain for the Pats due to your coach’s arrogance and Tom Brady’s silver spoon life. But we’ll always remember the LSU greats like Kevin Faulk. Makes me happy to see that guy doing well and I still think he got the first down in that Colts game. Seeing the LSU love that the Pats have had in the past goes a long way to mitigating my dislike of a few personalities on that team. Plus, you have to respect the workmanlike approach that the Pats bring every year. It’s just impressive.
BTW, why did the Pats give up that fullback who now plays for the Saints? I can’t remember his name off the top of my head. The guy is injured and out for the rest of the season, but my god he was good!
by xen-cuts on Nov 26, 2009 9:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
a) the coach…we refer to him as the Hoodie.
b) he isn’t arrogant..he hates talking to the press.
c) Heath Evans was a good Patriot but i guess he wanted more money. he is amazing cause he could block, run, help out on screens…basically a mutli tasker
by mathew.40 on Nov 26, 2009 10:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
thanks!
a) ha ha, seriously? I personally would rather a stocking cap but the hoodie works fine. It’s really a fashion statement: bankrobber versus homelss guy.
b) he loves being misleading in the press.
c) that guy can do anything. I think he was the best fullback in the league.
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 12:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
a) yeah…The Hoodie looks like a hobo
b)…why not?
by mathew.40 on Nov 27, 2009 2:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
on c) Heath was/is one of the better Fullbacks in the league. Its a disappearing position. I wish we still had him. I think it has been detrimental to how both Maroney and Green-Ellis run to not have a fullback.
Until he retired in 2007(neck injury), Mack Strong was IMHO the best blocking fullback in the league having cleared the way for many, many 1000 yd seasons for 3 different runners . Perfect name for his position and lived up to it. I wouldn’t disagree too strongly with people who think Tony Richardson or Lorenzo Neal were the best during that era. All were great.
Of the current crop, while I’d include Heath Evans in my top 6 or so, I’d probably rate Greg Jones, Ovie Mughelli and LeRon McClain as the top fullbacks right now, in no particular order.
The guy for the Giants (name is escaping me) is also a beast of a blocker.
by mmmmm on Nov 27, 2009 1:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't remember who it was
but Hoodie himself said who he thought was the best fullback around. I think it was the fullback for the Falcons, but I can’t quite remember. It wasn’t LeRon McClain, though, if that’s worth something. McClain plays as much time as a tailback as he does as a true fullback, too.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 27, 2009 7:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
McClain has mostly been pure fullback this year
and has been a beast. He was great last night, pushing Steelers around like little girls on MNF.
Ovie Mughelli is the FB for the Falcons – he’s pretty awesome and I won’t argue with BB if he thinks he’s the best.
by mmmmm on Nov 30, 2009 5:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No, he didn't want more money
in fact, he wanted less – he said he’d do anything to play in NE again, including playing for the minimum money that the Pats are allowed to pay him. Hoodie wasn’t interested, for whatever reason.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 27, 2009 5:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He liked Evans
It came down to a numbers thing – “can’t keep everyone”
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Nov 27, 2009 7:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
oh..my bad i thought he wanted $
but i rather keep him than sammy morris
by mathew.40 on Nov 27, 2009 8:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
though i would keep all 6 backs if possible
by mathew.40 on Nov 27, 2009 8:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
we always end up needing them
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Nov 27, 2009 11:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess he didn't offer enough elsewhere
As far as I can remember, he wasn’t a special teamer, unlike BJGE; he didn’t play another position, unlike Faulk, Morris and BGJE; he wasn’t a true rusher, unlike Morris, Maroney, etc; and at the time the Pats had Alex Smith in camp as a TE/H-back. If Smith had worked out, I suppose he’d have played a bit at FB, but that wasn’t to be, and then the Saints offered draft-picks for the other H-back capable guy, David Thomas.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 27, 2009 7:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Belichick has won Superbowls with so-so talented guys and over-the-hill guys
so it’s not really a worry if you think the Saints are more talented, as long as Hoodie’s in charge of the roster. Pretty much every year the Colts or the Ravens or the Chargers or the Cowboys seem stocked with talent and self-destruct before or during the playoffs.
As to why the Pats let Heath Evans go, I think it was an indication of Belichick’s disdain for the traditional fullback spot, as well as a way to get five halfbacks on the roster. Heath Evans actually volunteered to be paid the base minimum salary of a veteran to stay in New England, but Hoodie declined to keep him around. Instead New England had five halfbacks to start the season – Maroney, Fred Taylor, Sammy Morris (who can play a bit at FB), BenJarvis Green-Ellis (who’s been taking occasional snaps at FB with Morris hurt) and Kevin Faulk. It’s also useful to bear in mind that the Pats have not one by two good all-round blocking/receiving TEs in Watson and Baker, so that makes a FB slightly less necessary, too.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 26, 2009 10:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If the Hoodmeister were as good as you guys make him out to be, you'd never lose.
But I respect your spirit and that dood can do some serious game prep.
Ya, Watson has been a solid player for you guys. Who hasn’t been solid or better on the Pats in the past decade? It’s ridiculous. If Belichadkf coached the Saints they’d win 100% of the time.
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 12:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, I'm not delusional about his abilities
but he gets consistent performances, year after year, irrespective of who is playing. He got the 2008 Pats, who lost Tom Brady after 15 minutes of the season and starting RB after 5 games, to an 11-5 record overall. Would the Saints go 11-5 if they lost Brees and Bush or Thomas or Bell? Or the Colts go 11-5 without Manning and Addai?
And it was only a couple of seasons ago when the Pats didn’t lose… at least until that Superbowl-game-that-will-never-be-mentioned.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 27, 2009 5:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ha ha, fair enuf!
should be a fun game! I bet people will start tailgating in Nola on Sunday.
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 9:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and not just Brady
He also lost Adalius Thomas, who was having a great start to the season last year.
by mmmmm on Nov 27, 2009 1:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And Rodney Harrison, too
Yeah, after I typed it up I realised just how many key guys got injured last year. Seymour was also nicked up and missed a few, Watson was playing hurt, the O-line was never 100% healthy, Thomas and Harrison were injured. Eww.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
by Comedic.Sans on Nov 27, 2009 7:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Where are the Patriots holding onto old players?
Seau is the oldest and he doesn’t really play- he’s just added as insurance.
And where are there not talented players?
I feel like you’ve just come here and have been posting eloquently unfounded statements all over this thread.
by The Hill on Nov 27, 2009 12:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
At least they are eloquent?
I’m not trying to make you feel bad. More like I’m saying how impressed I am with the Hoodie team. But along the old players, what about kevin faulk. To me he’s one of the most underrated players in the league every year and he’s still amazing to this day. Some of the line seems a little long in the tooth although they are playing at a high level. The dbacks are unknowns (off the old point but along the same lines of making someone good who is normally not that good.) It’s really impressive that Hoodie gets this much out of players. I still don’t understand why he didn’t work out in Cleveland? Oh well, it definitely did in New England!
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 9:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"I still don’t understand why he didn’t work out in Cleveland?"
Nothing ever has ;)
by The Hill on Nov 27, 2009 10:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ha ha, seriously. It just makes no sense.
You should come down for the game! Nola is rockin’!
by xen-cuts on Nov 27, 2009 11:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Browns had big time problems before he got there.
And moved to Baltimore at the end of his time. The owner was a POS and he had no say in the drafting process. When that happens, you get players that don’t fit your scheme. Like 4-3 linemen that don’t fit the 3-4 scheme.
Parcells had the same problem once when he said something like, “If they want me to cook, they should at least let me buy some of the groceries.”
My life has been a trivial pursuit. Trivia: where three roads meet.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
by SlotMachinePlayer on Nov 27, 2009 12:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Plus... the owner loved the press
and Belichick would often find some of his game plans had been leaked to the press and printed up in the paper prior to the game. That might have caused a bit of friction there too.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Nov 27, 2009 12:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Heath Evans
and i was wondering the same thing…
by MOSS81 on Nov 27, 2009 8:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
lame
I don’t like the “toughest schedule” talk because it doesn’t take into account rivalries and seems to be centered around New York every time I look at it. I don’t feel like delving into the Pats’s schedule but the Saints supposedly have an easy schedule. Only it turns out that Carolina is looking better and Tampa Bay is actually coming around. Only Atlanta seems to be on the snide and that’s probably due to Turner getting banged up again. And all of these teams in the NFC South play about 2x as well against other NFC South opponents. It totally sucks playing against them….they have nothing to lose, the players are all auditioning for next year, and they play their hearts out.
by xen-cuts on Nov 28, 2009 1:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Media requests: Please email patspulpit at gmail.com
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
