2003/4-esque performance

For all those who said we've gotten soft, today's game was typical of 03 and 04 Pats.

On offense:
Control the LOS with our OL. Pound the ball with the run and use play-action effectively.
Convert on key 3rd downs to keep drives alive.
Multiple formations to keep D off balance.
Make just enough mistakes to keep the other team in it (as weird as it sounds, this is true - we rarely blew anyone out in those days).

On defense:
Maybe not a lot of sacks, but a ton of pressure all day.
Only allowing the run in passing (3rd and long) situations.
Preventing big plays and forcing FG's (long pass to Smith aside, obviously).
Punishing receivers who go across the middle.
Good tackling (best tackling I've seen from this team in a long long time).

on ST:
Quality ST teams, allowing our team to control field position while giving the opponent little room for error).

Coaching:
Superior 2nd half adjustments (Fox and co. are a pretty good staff strategically, so this was nice to see).

Not saying everything is fine and dandy though. Moss had an awful game and Brady still has tunnel vision for Welker at times. We still can't find anything resembling a threat as a 3rd receiver. The offense still turns the ball over way too much. We still did give up a big pass play to Smith - can't do that against good teams). However, this did prove to me that somewhere deep down the Pats have it in them to be a dangerous playoff team. It better come out soon though...

However, all of the mistakes i.e. dropped passes, dropped int's we're very unlike 03-04

i think we get to high with the wins and to low with the looses

yes they run the football and they need to do more of that but they still only throw to welker. and had 3 turn overs


on D yes they was better but matt more. is not much better then Mark Sanchez,

but when i look how the colts. jags, san diego. denver, and cincy. played today i say yes they all can be beat by the pats and yes the pats can go deep in the playoffs

if they can mix it up with the run and the pass and hold teams under 20 points on D

Take away the red zone fumbles and it's a solid 30+ point performance against a middle of the pack defense. I love seeing this team RUN the football.

I'm glad we have to face teams of Carolina's caliber to remind ourselves of the good times.

Just an aside-

Don't those seasons seem so far away right now? It feels like it's been forever since the Pats won a Super Bowl. I was listening to some NFL Films music tonight, and all I could think of was that February 2004 to June 2005 era when this team was the pinnacle of professional sports.

I remember a thread maybe a year or two ago, when people were asking when this team would truly make its fall from grace. There was a general agreement that we probably wouldn't be able to see it happening, as it would be gradual, but looking back over the decline we'd be able to tell.

Right now, even with the Pats win today, that's the feeling I have; that the Patriots just haven't been the same since their peak level as a franchise in early 2005. That was nearly four years ago. The parades, the t-shirts, the DVDs, the rings, the Lombardi's - all of that is just Hall of Fame nostalgia right now. (Good thing there's a Hall of Fame for that now, too...) It's ancient history.

I can't see how the decline is billed as gradual when the Patriots looked great in 2007-2008.

And the year before that they were the best team in football as well. One could argue they were just as good in 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 as they were in 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. The combined two year record is identical.

They lost two big games they should have won, the 2007 AFCG and the 2008 Super Bowl.

It is closer to the 2003 season. In that season the defense won games and the offense stalled a lot. The difference is that the 2003 offense, even though it wasn't all that productive, didn't turn over the ball.

upstater1 said:

I can't see how the decline is billed as gradual when the Patriots looked great in 2007-2008.

And the year before that they were the best team in football as well. One could argue they were just as good in 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 as they were in 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. The combined two year record is identical.

They lost two big games they should have won, the 2007 AFCG and the 2008 Super Bowl.

Click to expand...

I agree, except I was talking more in an organizational sense. Spygate was part of that decline.

The team played like garbage in the first half, and played mediocre in the second half. I don't remember a whole lot of that in 2003-2004.

upstater1 said:

I can't see how the decline is billed as gradual when the Patriots looked great in 2007-2008.

And the year before that they were the best team in football as well. One could argue they were just as good in 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 as they were in 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. The combined two year record is identical.

They lost two big games they should have won, the 2007 AFCG and the 2008 Super Bowl.

Click to expand...

cause the D slowley got older every year and never got replaced by younger players until last year and this year and. now it will take time to get the D back where it was

Deus Irae said:

The team played like garbage in the first half, and played mediocre in the second half. I don't remember a whole lot of that in 2003-2004.

Click to expand...

Holy Cow. I have been agreeing with you a lot lately. I hate that!

Anyway, 2003-2004? What?????? There are ZERO similarities between that team and this team 'cept Brady, Faulk, Light and Koppen.

Sorry, I don't see any resemblance between today's performance and that of the teams of 03--04. They played poorly to OK against a so-so team without its QB and came away with a ten point win.

Deus Irae said:

The team played like garbage in the first half, and played mediocre in the second half. I don't remember a whole lot of that in 2003-2004.

Click to expand...

But you see, that's where time shows its effects. I remember many of these games:
Squeaking by a terrible Browns team in OT which needed a last second TD to Graham and a a huge sack in OT by Willie Mac to take them out of FG range.

I remember allowing Jay Fiedler to rack up 350+ passing yards against us one time as well.

And don't tell me you've forgotten an amazing Monday night game against Denver being led by the infamous Danny Kanell replacing an injured Jake Plummer. The Pats were mediocre for the entire game safe for an ingenious call by BB to concede a safety, a great stand by the D, and a clutch drive by the O.

The truth is, these games were the norm. The big difference between those (and you can throw in 07 too) and this one is the fact that rather than doing just enough to win. More often than not we are doing just enough to lose (Broncos, Jets, Colts, Dolphins). The only two close games we won were Buffalo and Baltimore. Flip our 2-4 record to 4-2 or 5-1 (as it would have been in the hay day) and then we are sitting pretty and the tone of the season is entirely different.

Now some may say that the team is different or the core is different or whatever. IMO, though, good teams learn to win close games. As opposed to the other 2 close games we won this year in which it could be argued that opponents errors helped more than Pats making plays, the boys really took control of this one. The offense pounded the rock to kill time and the D made the stops it had to. I'm looking forward to hoping that this can spark a change and allow them to get some confidence heading to the show. After that, anything is possible...

Great post. I'm watching the Eagles/Vagiants game and it is VERY entertaining. But these teams are either both terrible on defense or incredible on offense, or just evenly matched (which is an insult to the eagles).

I think some folks are mad cuz the game wasn't terribly "entertaining." In retrospect, this game may well have been a great jumping off point for a turnaround.

kas said:

But you see, that's where time shows its effects. I remember many of these games:
Squeaking by a terrible Browns team in OT which needed a last second TD to Graham and a a huge sack in OT by Willie Mac to take them out of FG range.

I remember allowing Jay Fiedler to rack up 350+ passing yards against us one time as well.

And don't tell me you've forgotten an amazing Monday night game against Denver being led by the infamous Danny Kanell replacing an injured Jake Plummer. The Pats were mediocre for the entire game safe for an ingenious call by BB to concede a safety, a great stand by the D, and a clutch drive by the O.

The truth is, these games were the norm. The big difference between those (and you can throw in 07 too) and this one is the fact that rather than doing just enough to win. More often than not we are doing just enough to lose (Broncos, Jets, Colts, Dolphins). The only two close games we won were Buffalo and Baltimore. Flip our 2-4 record to 4-2 or 5-1 (as it would have been in the hay day) and then we are sitting pretty and the tone of the season is entirely different.

Now some may say that the team is different or the core is different or whatever. IMO, though, good teams learn to win close games. As opposed to the other 2 close games we won this year in which it could be argued that opponents errors helped more than Pats making plays, the boys really took control of this one. The offense pounded the rock to kill time and the D made the stops it had to. I'm looking forward to hoping that this can spark a change and allow them to get some confidence heading to the show. After that, anything is possible...

Click to expand...

Even in victory, I looked at today's performance as more reason to panic. Playing a bad team at home with a very inexperienced quarterback after two straight losses, I expected an absolutely destruction today. Instead, it was 7-7 at halftime with the Pats looking not just bad, but ugly. That was as UGLY as I can ever remember them playing during the Belicheck era. I love Moss, but he was draggin' a** out there, and the team didn't even seem to care when after dropping passes. The team had absolutely zero life. Honestly, it looked like the fire was gone. I'm an optimist by nature, so I was not too down after last week's loss, but honestly, I am feeling a lot worse AFTER this win.

JSn said:

Great post. I'm watching the Eagles/Vagiants game and it is VERY entertaining. But these teams are either both terrible on defense or incredible on offense, or just evenly matched (which is an insult to the eagles).

I think some folks are mad cuz the game wasn't terribly "entertaining." In retrospect, this game may well have been a great jumping off point for a turnaround.

Click to expand...

Huh? I don't think anybody is mad because the game wasn't "entertaining". I think people are mad because the team didn't show any fire today and it took everything they had to beat a 5-8 team whose starting quarterback wasn't even playing.

Yes, I remember those games (great recall on Danny Canell, though!)

What's the difference? In those days, the Patriots would make a stop in the fourth quarter and TB would win the game with a heroic final drive combining unexpected plays with flawless execution. Now that seems to be what the other teams do ...

KontradictioN said:

Huh? I don't think anybody is mad because the game wasn't "entertaining". I think people are mad because the team didn't show any fire today and it took everything they had to beat a 5-8 team whose starting quarterback wasn't even playing.

Click to expand...

I agree. This game was very frustraing to watch, not because of an entertainment level, but for the fact that the Pats didnt have any spark at all and at times it seemed like they were just going through the motions out there. We really cant build on this game, we just have to wait to next week and put forth a good solid 60 minute effort on the road against the Bills.

kas said:

But you see, that's where time shows its effects. I remember many of these games:
Squeaking by a terrible Browns team in OT which needed a last second TD to Graham and a a huge sack in OT by Willie Mac to take them out of FG range.

I remember allowing Jay Fiedler to rack up 350+ passing yards against us one time as well.

And don't tell me you've forgotten an amazing Monday night game against Denver being led by the infamous Danny Kanell replacing an injured Jake Plummer. The Pats were mediocre for the entire game safe for an ingenious call by BB to concede a safety, a great stand by the D, and a clutch drive by the O.

The truth is, these games were the norm. The big difference between those (and you can throw in 07 too) and this one is the fact that rather than doing just enough to win. More often than not we are doing just enough to lose (Broncos, Jets, Colts, Dolphins). The only two close games we won were Buffalo and Baltimore. Flip our 2-4 record to 4-2 or 5-1 (as it would have been in the hay day) and then we are sitting pretty and the tone of the season is entirely different.

Now some may say that the team is different or the core is different or whatever. IMO, though, good teams learn to win close games. As opposed to the other 2 close games we won this year in which it could be argued that opponents errors helped more than Pats making plays, the boys really took control of this one. The offense pounded the rock to kill time and the D made the stops it had to. I'm looking forward to hoping that this can spark a change and allow them to get some confidence heading to the show. After that, anything is possible...

Click to expand...

Time isn't showing any effects. Go take a look at the similarities you claimed, and you'll find that almost none of them were there in this game. The LOS was not "controlled" by the Patriots OL, particularly in the first half, etc....

As for the Kannell game, the Patriots held a former starter to 163 yards on a 45% completion rate, and that Denver squad was a 10 win team. In that game, it was 14 Patriots penalties and a punt return for a touchdown that played a huge role in keeping Denver in the game, and neither of those things were issues in today's game. This current Panthers teams is 5-8, and well on the way to a possible 5-11 finish, making the quality level of the respective opponents significantly different. If you want to say that this game was similar to most games where teams play badly and still manage to win, that makes sense. If you want to claim that it was like most of 2003-2004, I'm just not buying it.