NFL 2017: And Now It Begins!

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 minute ago, IamMe90 said:

Sooo to go back to this and eat my own words: yes, absouteo. Of the HIGH scoring kind! Wow. 

Yeah, this was totally unexpected. The Chiefs are for real, methinks.

[Kalbear]

2 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Yeah, this was totally unexpected. The Chiefs are for real, methinks.

Buffalo beat new England 31-0 in the opener back in what, 2004? 

They proceeded to suck, and NE won back to back super bowls. It's one game. 

[Rockroi]

I honestly think that the silver-lining to all this is that I will not have to put up the the 19-0 talk which is insufferable.  The fact that nimrods were talking like that since March is a sign of how much that relief was necessary.  

Quick aside: its been a long while since I hosted a Pats season opener at my home.  I was excited.  Got the wings, the salsa, the beer.  Super happy my friends showed with more beer.  Lots of fun.  

And then the Pats shit the bed.  And I recalled- for not the first time this evening - when was the LAST time I hosted a Patriots season opener... okay, maybe like 10-ish years ago... at home.... against the Chiefs... wait...   The last game I hosted a Pats game- OF ANY KIND - was the 2008 season opener... the one where Brady was KO'd for the season by the Chiefs.  So... yeah... we ... we won't be doing that again... 

So... I watched the game and I have some theories.  Yeah, sure injuries were a factor, but I think the larger issue on that was not JUST injuries but the fact that so many of the current Pats roster were not Pats last season.  So many vets are gone and the guys that are here are not 100% certain what their job is.  When you add in the losses of Edleman (3rd pre-season game), Amendola and especially Hightower you can see why so many players could seem so lost so quickly.  But I don't buy that injuries were the deciding factor.  

If there was one thing that I saw in this game - more than ANYTHING else - was that nobody on the Ptas side of the ball "stepped up" and tried to make the impact needed to take control of the game.  The first culprit of this was Brady- he kept throwing- one could say "OVERthrowing - down field to covered receivers.  He was not doing anything underneath, not hitting anyone consistently.  The next was Gronk.  He seemed like he was running in pudding; he got NO separation from Berry and never pushed through to the second level.  Ever.  Even when Brady got him the ball, Berry was usually all over him.  After that was Gilmore and Butler- the two DBs.  Gilmore generally played okay, but he gave up a HUGE play; Butler got lost on a TD that capped a 90+ yard drive and had a back-breaking PI call.  The D-line seemed listless; the LBs lost after Hightower went down; the O-line could not push forward on two critical 4th downs.  None of the Pats RBs ever got enough momentum to take control of the game.  Cooks was used in limited situations and never got into a groove.  

And things looked good, after Hunt fumbled his first NFL carry (NOTE: One of the mitigating factors in on this day is that I have Hunt on my fantasy team) I HAD to think that the Pats had this thing locked up.  Only to discover that Hunt had 239 yards from scrimmage, 3 TDs and Alex Smith- yes THAT Alex Smith - hung 350+ yards on the Pats and FOUR TDs.  Smith only had 5 300 yard passing games before this ... in his entire career.   The Pats fell apart in the face of - not a great team - but a perfectly good but not great team.  Just a team that knew how to play and avoided major mistakes.  Is that really the team that has the Pats' number?  The one that players ... adequately? 

And the injuries are not something you like to see pile up ... especially the first game of the season.  Hightower is one of 3 players on D the Pats cannot afford to lose and they lost him in the 3rd.  Amendola was the Pats leading receiver- lost him by the 4th.  Losing Edleman was bad enough, but now the team seems patched together and its week 1.  

I hope whenever Gronk finally comes back the team can come back together.  

With all that said the Pats have one silver lining - they have time to fix this.  The Pats are likely going to get the AFC East no matter what.  They have time to bring players into the fold- Cooks and Brady can get together on the same page; Gillisslee showed flashes of talent; Gilmore had a handful of good plays; Branch got good push up the middle.  The Pats will likely bounce back and if they do it well, the season could still go great places.  

Or it could mean just how close to the end we all are...

[Jace, Extat]

That was fun, but if the Patriots do not take the #1 seed I'll eat my special extended edition dvds of the Lord of the Rings.

[A True Kaniggit]

18 minutes ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

 I'll eat my special extended edition dvds of the Lord of the Rings.

How could you say this?! Some things just shouldn't be joked about.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

8 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Buffalo beat new England 31-0 in the opener back in what, 2004? 

They proceeded to suck, and NE won back to back super bowls. It's one game. 

Yeah, you're right. It's too early to start making pronouncements. That said, that was a very impressive road win against a team that simply does not lose at home.

[Maithanet]

59 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Yeah, you're right. It's too early to start making pronouncements. That said, that was a very impressive road win against a team that simply does not lose at home.

Every year the Patriots get at least above average defense from a group of players that is not particularly talented and this has been perhaps Belichick's greatest accomplishment.  Lots of teams can consistently have a top 5-10 offense every year when they have an elite quarterback.  And yet the defense in New Orleans, Green Bay and Indy have all been up and down, and with it the fortunes of the team. 

The first Patriots dynasty was built on solid, aggressive defense, and that held up even as the stars left.  Over and over again Belichick has shown himself willing to see talented defenders leave the team (Law, Seymour, Collins, Jones, the list goes on and on).  And yet, the Patriots defense has remained remarkably effective.  Only two years in the entire Belichick era (2010 and 2011) has the defense been actually bad, and only one more year was it been below average (2013, when it was 20th).  Every other year since B&B got together the Patriots defense has been somewhere between decent and excellent. 

Well, the Patriots last night were awful on defense.  There's a good chance this is just a brief blip and Belichick and co will once again turn this mostly no-name defense into at least an average squad.  But if they can't, Patriots fans are going to have to suffer through the indignity of another loss in the AFCCG. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

17 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

Word is that Goodell is going to actually be out of the stadium before most fans get there. Too bad, because I'd love to have just the chance to see him react to 70,000 Goodell Clown towels waving like some Fear and Loathing at Circus Circus version of Pittsburgh's towels.

So the cat and mouse game continues, and the commissioner of the most powerful sports league in the country keeps dodging one of its cornerstone franchises. He could have just made a quiet appearance at some early game against a dogshit team and deflated this whole thing, but his desire to avoid even a second of vulnerability keeps pumping life into a stale story (strangely similar to how the Pats' stonewalling during Ballghazi made the league office even more determined to nail them). And since he's given fans here a hint that he's avoiding them or that they are getting to him in some way, they'll just never fucking let up.

 

16 hours ago, briantw said:

One thing I always loved about David Stern as the NBA Commish (well, I guess it was probably the only thing I loved about David Stern) was how he just reveled in the hate of the fans.  He fed off it.  He'd walk out with that Vince McMahon swagger and just soak in the hate, and by the time the crowd got tired of booing, you'd swear that Stern looked ten years younger.

100% agree with both comments.

As for the game, why was I such a coward? In Pick’em I originally took KC and then switched it before the game.

[Week]

Does anyone know if Matt Patricia was a rocket scientist? 

He's a rocket scientist as much as I'm an economist (majored in econ -- never worked in the field). I do not understand the Collinsworth love -- he can break down film well about once or twice per game and otherwise he is a complete and utter buffoon.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

49 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Every year the Patriots get at least above average defense from a group of players that is not particularly talented and this has been perhaps Belichick's greatest accomplishment.  Lots of teams can consistently have a top 5-10 offense every year when they have an elite quarterback.  And yet the defense in New Orleans, Green Bay and Indy have all been up and down, and with it the fortunes of the team. 

The first Patriots dynasty was built on solid, aggressive defense, and that held up even as the stars left.  Over and over again Belichick has shown himself willing to see talented defenders leave the team (Law, Seymour, Collins, Jones, the list goes on and on).  And yet, the Patriots defense has remained remarkably effective.  Only two years in the entire Belichick era (2010 and 2011) has the defense been actually bad, and only one more year was it been below average (2013, when it was 20th).  Every other year since B&B got together the Patriots defense has been somewhere between decent and excellent. 

Well, the Patriots last night were awful on defense.  There's a good chance this is just a brief blip and Belichick and co will once again turn this mostly no-name defense into at least an average squad.  But if they can't, Patriots fans are going to have to suffer through the indignity of another loss in the AFCCG. 

Yeah, I thought that was the big story last night. KC has traditionally been a dink and dunk sort of offense, and they racked up a large number of big plays on offense against a team that traditionally does not give up big plays. Seems like everyone this morning was talking about how pedestrian Brady looked, but for me the big surprise was the defensive breakdown.

[Maithanet]

1 minute ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Yeah, I thought that was the big story last night. KC has traditionally been a dink and dunk sort of offense, and they racked up a large number of big plays on offense against a team that traditionally does not give up big plays. Seems like everyone this morning was talking about how pedestrian Brady looked, but for me the big surprise was the defensive breakdown.

Oh totally.  Brady was a little off, but only a little, he still had some great throws like that bomb to Cook.  Remember he was going against a Chiefs defense that is probably a top 10 unit.  Most teams don't have an All-Pro Safety like Berry to blanket Gronk, or pass rushers like Hali and Houston, or a front seven capable of clogging up the middle twice on 4th and short.

But KC's offense is not a fearful unit.  The Andy Reid era has been typified with reliable running, few turnovers and strong tight end play.  It has never been a quick strike offense or capable of winning a shootout.  Until last night.  The question is whether the KC offense has improved, NE's defense has regressed, or if it was just a bad night/matchup and everything will be fine.

My suspicion is it's a combination of all three, but that's kind of a cop out.  So if I had to pick one, I'd say I expect NE's defense will be fine.  They've pulled it together with limited talent so many times, I can't bet against it happening again.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

46 minutes ago, Week said:

Does anyone know if Matt Patricia was a rocket scientist? 

He's a rocket scientist as much as I'm an economist (majored in econ -- never worked in the field). I do not understand the Collinsworth love -- he can break down film well about once or twice per game and otherwise he is a complete and utter buffoon.

One of my majors was psychology, and I’ve never worked in the field outside of labs in college. Do I get to be the board’s pop psychologist, even though I’ve forgotten almost everything I’ve learned? Because some yous needs some help and I’m here to learn yous something.

[Week]

22 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

One of my majors was psychology, and I’ve never worked in the field outside of labs in college. Do I get to be the board’s pop psychologist, even though I’ve forgotten almost everything I’ve learned? Because some yous needs some help and I’m here to learn yous something.

This kid, Tywin, he's unbelievable! Posting at the level he is and he's a PSYCHOLOGIST! That's how he's really able to get under the hood with some folks and really cut through the fat. I call him the Shrink!

/Grudensworth

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

10 minutes ago, Week said:

This kid, Tywin, he's unbelievable! Posting at the level he is and he's a PSYCHOLOGIST! That's how he's really able to get under the hood with some folks and really cut through the fat. I call him the Shrink!

/Grudensworth

 

[Week]

19 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 

Had me fooled -- is there even a real Gruden twit twitting on twitter?

 

[Rockroi]

1 hour ago, Week said:

Does anyone know if Matt Patricia was a rocket scientist? 

He's a rocket scientist as much as I'm an economist (majored in econ -- never worked in the field). I do not understand the Collinsworth love -- he can break down film well about once or twice per game and otherwise he is a complete and utter buffoon.

I'm not sure how you get to be CALLED a "Rocket Scientist, but Patricia has a Bachelor of Science degree in aeronautical engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and was an Application Engineer for two years, Hoffman Air & Filtration Systems, East Syracuse, N.Y.  while I think calling him a "rocket scientist" is an exaggeration, he is a pretty smart guy.  

2 hours ago, Maithanet said:

Every year the Patriots get at least above average defense from a group of players that is not particularly talented and this has been perhaps Belichick's greatest accomplishment.  Lots of teams can consistently have a top 5-10 offense every year when they have an elite quarterback.  And yet the defense in New Orleans, Green Bay and Indy have all been up and down, and with it the fortunes of the team. 

 

This is not always true.  I have done this discussion many times, but there have been historically awful Pats defenses, most notably 2011 where the Pats finished last in DVOA Defense and still made it to the Superbowl; 2013 they were 21st  (not the worst, but not above average either) and made it to the AFC Championship.  Even in years where the Pats won it all - 2001 and 2014 - the Pats had INCREDIBLY MEDIOCRE defenses; in 2001 they were ranked 19th in DVOA and in 2014 ranked 16th.  I'm not saying the Pats always had terrible D's, but they have had about as many bad defenses as most other teams.  

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 minute ago, Week said:

Had me fooled -- is there even a real Gruden twit twitting on twitter?

 

I'm pretty sure he has his own account, but if memory serves it's not nearly as entertaining as the faux one. 

[Week]

Just now, Rockroi said:

I'm not sure how you get to be CALLED a "Rocket Scientist, but Patricia has a Bachelor of Science degree in aeronautical engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and was an Application Engineer for two years, Hoffman Air & Filtration Systems, East Syracuse, N.Y.  while I think calling him a "rocket scientist" is an exaggeration, he is a pretty smart guy.  

I would think you'd need to be published in something legit or have worked in the field for 10+ years. Anything else is college / entry level BS.

Certainly a smart guy ... but C'MON MAN!

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

46 minutes ago, Week said:

This kid, Tywin, he's unbelievable! Posting at the level he is and he's a PSYCHOLOGIST! That's how he's really able to get under the hood with some folks and really cut through the fat. I call him the Shrink!

/Grudensworth

Hmm, deflection much? Are there any other defense mechanisms that you use on a regular basis? We might be able to make some major breakthroughs here if we can give it some time.

*begins writing stuff on my pad*

[Maithanet]

7 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

This is not always true.  I have done this discussion many times, but there have been historically awful Pats defenses, most notably 2011 where the Pats finished last in DVOA Defense and still made it to the Superbowl; 2013 they were 21st  (not the worst, but not above average either) and made it to the AFC Championship.  Even in years where the Pats won it all - 2001 and 2014 - the Pats had INCREDIBLY MEDIOCRE defenses; in 2001 they were ranked 19th in DVOA and in 2014 ranked 16th.  I'm not saying the Pats always had terrible D's, but they have had about as many bad defenses as most other teams.  

Did you read the section immediately after what you quoted?  Because i specifically mention that the 2010 and 2011 defenses were very bad and that the 2013 defense was below average (20th).   

Most of the teams with great quarterbacks and offenses have not been able to maintain even so-so defenses, often because they needed to spend a huge portion of the salary cap on the quarterback and offense.  Brees is the most egregious example, but Manning's Colts and Rodger's Packers have both suffered from defenses that were only effective when they have the lead.  Each of those teams won exactly one championship, and it always coincided with the defense pulling their weight (mostly with turnovers), rather than the offense operating at a level no one could match.