According to football outsiders DVOA, Tom Brady is suffering the 2nd worst single-decline by a QB in the past 23 years behind only Farves 2010 season.

[Yehoodi]

He and ray rice are killing my fantasy team

lol . . . I have the same problem . . . oh well . . .

[Dustin]

are you sure about this ? . . . do you have a link to adjusted for drops stat ?. . . for what it is worth I heard on the radio the other day that our WR drop percentage is about 4% over the league average . . . so if they were average our passing percentage would be about 4% higher or Brady would be around 60% . . . which I think would put him in the mix of QBs . . .

I am too lazy and don't have the time to look this up to confirm this and was hoping you might have something handy . . .

PFF premium stas have his accuracy percentage at 31st in the league. Id give you a link but it's behind a pay wall.

[Yehoodi]

Do you ever actually look at info, or just throw out comments based on your love for a single player? I'm really starting to question this. I think the fact that they are winning is more because the AFC East because Tom Brady has been terrible.

 

AFC East? . . . the 2-4 placed teams in the AFC east have he third most wins of any 2-4 placed teams in a division, only behind the two west divisions . . . so they are not chump change . . . also we beat NO and had close loses to both Cinn (6-2) and the Jets . . . no we have not run through the league with killer wins, but we have not been blown out, and have been in every game this year and are 6-2 to date . . .

[Yehoodi]

PFF premium stas have his accuracy percentage at 31st in the league. Id give you a link but it's behind a pay wall.

 

no worries, thanks . . . is that before adjustment or after drop adjustment . . . thanks . . .

[Dustin]

no worries, thanks . . . is that before adjustment or after drop adjustment . . . thanks . . .

After. It account for drops, tipped passes, hit as the qb is thrown, ect..

[Yehoodi]

I'm talking about this season alone. Outside of the New Orleans game I have seen Brady on his back, throwing picks, and fumbling. The only thing saving him from Miami was a ill timed, and bad penalty called on Miami for illegal touching. Otherwise that game might have had a different outcome.

 

maybe next time tell the Miami defender not to bat the ball out of FG range and away from a pats player falling on the ball . . . when one is trying to grab a ball with his finger tips, it does not go 15 yards up field after his misses the ball . . . and like I mentioned, it all happened to coincide with the ball being knocked away from a falling pat and "moved" to a location outside of FG range . . . to say this was an accident is to not understand the laws of physicals, the NFL rules and the situation, it was very very beneficial for that ball to move the way it did for the dolphins . . . ie if you can get it, make sure they done and if you can knock it out of FG range . ..    

[Yehoodi]

After. It account for drops, tipped passes, hit as the qb is thrown, ect..

okay thanks

[Yehoodi]

I don't know if it's hate. Just acknowledging that Brady is having a bad year. I'm not a huge advocate of DVOA, but that stat takes drops and whatnot into consideration. Brady has been staring receivers down, overthrowing and underthrowing, etc. Just not a good performance by him, even considering the rough circumstances.

 

You have to mention that his favorite receivers have been gone, and the potential replacements have been hurt and slow to catch on. That's absolutely true, and there's no doubt it's impacted his play. And the team is 6-2 despite the stilted passing game. But saying Brady isn't playing well this year isn't hate. It's just what the situation is right now.

 

I hear you, but what sometimes can get lost in the shuffle with stats are intentional throwaways and so on . . . if your offense is not the best to date, one can not afford a turnover and need to do what one can with each possession . . . and he if does not feel a WR will get open or is open, Brady will throw the ball away, which is better than taking a sack or get another INT, where some QBs might do . . .so I am not too worried about some of the lower numbers . . . for the most part we have been in all of the games and are 6-2 against not the weakest schedule as our opponents are combine 28-32 and 26-26 without our games . . .

[chad72]

Oh, so many folks have watched film on NFL Network and opined that Brady has been missing open WRs several times, I mean open ones. So, on top of half of his production from last year gone in terms of new pass catching options, his play has not been at the same level.

 

Belichick is again proving why he went 11-5 with Matt Cassel, and it was not just because of the cup cake schedule Cassel had, it was excellent coaching that gets the most out of his team, the Vince Lombardi of this generation. Other than Andy Reid, coach of the year nominee would be Belichick, can't think of anyone else.

[GoPats]

I'm curious to know what the angle is for people who want to see Brady fail.

 

Do you think he suddenly forgot how to throw a football accurately? Or is it more likely that there are other factors? 80% of last year's targets gone from the roster? Two rookie receivers playing prominent roles? The permanent loss of one TE and temporary loss of another who have been the focal point of the offense for the past couple of seasons? His sausage-like-fingers swollen up on his throwing hand? 

 

Maybe the hope/angle is that this is the "real" Tom Brady and his average performance is a truer indication of the type of player he is?

 

Here's what I've (objectively) seen this season:

 

Started off ugly, epitomized in that Thursday night game with the Jets. For the first few weeks, receivers were dropping balls, running wrong routes, etc. Statistically the Patriots still are the worst NFL team in drops, and most of that happened in the first few weeks. 

 

Beginning with the loss to the Bengals, Brady started playing a bit poorly. It wasn't as much like the first few weeks where he was throwing to a spot where a receiver should have been, or hit someone in the chest with it and they dropped it. Some throws were just a foot or two off, some were much worse than that. I don't know when he banged up his right hand but it would stand to reason it happened around that time. 

 

So ask yourself what's more likely when it comes to his statistical decline. Did one of the game's top QBs for over a decade suddenly start throwing bad passes to the wrong spots? Or is it probable that the near-complete turnover of pass-catching personnel, coupled with an untimely injury to his hand, is more likely the culprit? 

 

I'm not making excuses for him here - he hasn't been perfect by any means. But I have a hard time believing that Tom Brady suddenly turned 36 and forgot how to play football. Or that he hit some kind of magical "age wall." He's still humming it out there... just hasn't been getting the results. 

[Superman]

True, but I think it's blown a little out of proportion.  Take away Decker, Julius for a few weeks, Welker, and Thomas, and replace them with rookies who are consistently dropping passes, and even Peyton would struggle.  Any QB would.

 

The Colts lost everybody but Reggie at one point or another in 2010. Manning had some struggles, of course, mostly limited to three brutal games in the middle of the season. But he had a great completion percentage and threw for a ton of yardage. And that was without any running game, which the Patriots actually have right now. Aaron Rodgers is without a lot of his best targets, and he put on a clinic the other day.

 

Brady isn't the first quarterback to suffer through something like this. As a matter of fact, it's not the first time Brady has suffered through something like this. His targets in 2005 and 2006 were atrocious as well, and to me, that's when he really showed that he was capable of carrying a team. Now, he's becoming a product of his environment. You expect some drop-off in these circumstances, but this is not just a lull that's totally attributable to the injuries and absences. Brady himself isn't playing well.

[Superman]

I'm curious to know what the angle is for people who want to see Brady fail.

 

Do you think he suddenly forgot how to throw a football accurately? Or is it more likely that there are other factors? 80% of last year's targets gone from the roster? Two rookie receivers playing prominent roles? The permanent loss of one TE and temporary loss of another who have been the focal point of the offense for the past couple of seasons? His sausage-like-fingers swollen up on his throwing hand? 

 

Maybe the hope/angle is that this is the "real" Tom Brady and his average performance is a truer indication of the type of player he is?

 

Here's what I've (objectively) seen this season:

 

Started off ugly, epitomized in that Thursday night game with the Jets. For the first few weeks, receivers were dropping balls, running wrong routes, etc. Statistically the Patriots still are the worst NFL team in drops, and most of that happened in the first few weeks. 

 

Beginning with the loss to the Bengals, Brady started playing a bit poorly. It wasn't as much like the first few weeks where he was throwing to a spot where a receiver should have been, or hit someone in the chest with it and they dropped it. Some throws were just a foot or two off, some were much worse than that. I don't know when he banged up his right hand but it would stand to reason it happened around that time. 

 

So ask yourself what's more likely when it comes to his statistical decline. Did one of the game's top QBs for over a decade suddenly start throwing bad passes to the wrong spots? Or is it probable that the near-complete turnover of pass-catching personnel, coupled with an untimely injury to his hand, is more likely the culprit? 

 

I'm not making excuses for him here - he hasn't been perfect by any means. But I have a hard time believing that Tom Brady suddenly turned 36 and forgot how to play football. Or that he hit some kind of magical "age wall." He's still humming it out there... just hasn't been getting the results. 

 

I don't necessarily want to see Brady fail. Ironically, he's my QB in my deepest league, so I'm actually invested in his success.

 

But little things can throw a QB off. Remember when Kurt Warner fell off for about five or six years? One of the things that kept him from getting back into gear was a recurring thumb injury. It affected the way he threw the ball, and even caused his delivery to slow down a little. Talk about someone forgetting how to throw a football... Everyone thought he was toast, until he finally got it going in Arizona and had those two or three really good years, and now people are saying he's worthy of the HOF (which is another topic that I should start one of these days). He was 36 when he started playing well again, and a year later, they were two minutes from winning the Super Bowl. 

 

I don't think Brady's skills have diminished. Maybe his hand is really bothering him; sounds reasonable, but the way the Patriots treat injury information makes it difficult to know what's going on and when it started. There's obviously something going on, and it's not a magical age wall (if you believe in such things). 

 

The point, though, is that this isn't just a case of "he's not playing poorly, it's just all of his receivers are hurt/gone, what do you expect?" He actually is playing poorly, compared to the standard of excellence he's set over the past few years. He's missing throws, taking sacks at the highest rate since his first year as a starter, has the lowest completion percentage of his career, the lowest touchdown rate of his career (and it's not even close, it's like half of his career average), and on and on. I don't think you can blame all of that entirely on his receivers. Like I said, this isn't the first time Brady's had to deal with substandard receivers. It is the first time his play has been so severely affected by it.

 

I doubt that Brady's stats recover over the second half of the season to be more like what we're used to seeing from him. He won't finish with 18 TDs and a 56% completion rate; those will trend upward, I'm sure, but he's also probably not going to have 30+ TDs and nearly 5,000 yards. It's plausible, but unlikely. But even if his hand continues to bother him, he'll find a way to compensate. He's too good, too experienced, too well-coached... His ability didn't just fall off a cliff over night. 

[Superman]

I hear you, but what sometimes can get lost in the shuffle with stats are intentional throwaways and so on . . . if your offense is not the best to date, one can not afford a turnover and need to do what one can with each possession . . . and he if does not feel a WR will get open or is open, Brady will throw the ball away, which is better than taking a sack or get another INT, where some QBs might do . . .so I am not too worried about some of the lower numbers . . . for the most part we have been in all of the games and are 6-2 against not the weakest schedule as our opponents are combine 28-32 and 26-26 without our games . . .

 

All of this is true and relevant. I'm not ignoring it. I'm simply saying that he hasn't been playing well, and it's not just because of his receivers. That's a legitimate and valid excuse, but it's not the sole reason.

[GoPats]

 

The point, though, is that this isn't just a case of "he's not playing poorly, it's just all of his receivers are hurt/gone, what do you expect?" He actually is playing poorly, compared to the standard of excellence he's set over the past few years. He's missing throws, taking sacks at the highest rate since his first year as a starter, has the lowest completion percentage of his career, the lowest touchdown rate of his career (and it's not even close, it's like half of his career average), and on and on. I don't think you can blame all of that entirely on his receivers. Like I said, this isn't the first time Brady's had to deal with substandard receivers. It is the first time his play has been so severely affected by it.

 

 

I didn't indicate at all that Brady shouldn't share in the blame, did I? (Asking honestly, because that was not my intent.)

 

Reading through my post again I think I stated that pretty clearly. I'm not sure he started this season out as "part of the problem," but I think it's reached that point. Whether that's due to injury, frustration, or some kind of decline in skills, I don't know. 

 

And yes, Brady's had to deal with turnover before (particularly 2006), but that situation was a little different. He still had Troy Brown (though Brown was not the same player by that time), he still had Kevin Faulk... I don't know if any QB has had 80% of his previous season's targets removed from the roster in one way or another and still somehow gotten them to 6-2 to start the season. 

 

They haven't been playing well, but after the last few seasons, I'm starting to believe that the teams that play their best football in October or November are not the teams that win it all. Sometimes you have the wire-to-wire teams like the '09 Saints or the '10 Packers, but you also have teams that looked dead in the water at different points only to get hot and win it all (Giants, twice, last year with the Ravens, the Steelers in '08, etc-etc). If they can keep winning and keep pace within the AFC, things should be vastly improved by December and January. 

[amfootball]

All of this is true and relevant. I'm not ignoring it. I'm simply saying that he hasn't been playing well, and it's not just because of his receivers. That's a legitimate and valid excuse, but it's not the sole reason.

I think a bigger reason is the complexity of the NE offense. I am amazed to be honest that these young WRs have caught on at all given the Pats history with drafting WRs. Even Sudfeld who looked pretty good at TE in the preseason could not catch on with the real games began and he was cut. I do wish McD would simplify things sometimes but I get that the complexity is also what makes the offense so good when it is executing. It also requires that the receivers be reading the coverage the way Brady is which is a lot to expect out of a young group. And I am not sure why the Pats have not been running more. They have arguably the best set of RBs in the game and yet McD has Brady drop back after drop back when he has nowhere to go with the ball. His receivers just are not getting enough separation which is why the sacks have gone up and the throw aways.

[Warhorse]

To say that Brady is failing, is silly. I rarely get into this carp, but I will state a few things I feel are real.

 

*Brady is nearly unstoppable when he has a clean pocket and capable WR's.

*When pressure is repeatedly applied, his QB abilities drops significantly.

*With a clean pocket, Tom can make receivers that are not all that.

*When pressure is repeatedly applied, he cannot make WR's that are not all that.

[BOTT]

Oh, so many folks have watched film on NFL Network and opined that Brady has been missing open WRs several times, I mean open ones. So, on top of half of his production from last year gone in terms of new pass catching options, his play has not been at the same level.

 

Belichick is again proving why he went 11-5 with Matt Cassel, and it was not just because of the cup cake schedule Cassel had, it was excellent coaching that gets the most out of his team, the Vince Lombardi of this generation. Other than Andy Reid, coach of the year nominee would be Belichick, can't think of anyone else.

I think BB has been getting a little too much credit. I heard people praising him after the Miami win, when I thought their play was mediocre. They won because they got the breaks in the 2nd half and Miami sorta of imploded.

I thought the one game NE really looked impressive was vs NO. Granted they almost lost, but it always felt they were in total control of the game.

[cdgacoltsfan]

No he's not. He's playing terribly. His accuracy percentage (adjusting for drops) is one of the worst in the league.

He's regressed but is still a serviceable NFL regular season QB. Pats are still managing to eek out wins over inferior competition despite him and all the injuries to the D. 

[amfootball]

I think BB has been getting a little too much credit. I heard people praising him after the Miami win, when I thought their play was mediocre. They won because they got the breaks in the 2nd half and Miami sorta of imploded.

I thought the one game NE really looked impressive was vs NO. Granted they almost lost, but it always felt they were in total control of the game.

If it's not Bill and if it's not Brady that are responsible for the 6-2 record then who is??? Giselle? lol. Pats are complete enigma this year. No one knows.

[Superman]

I didn't indicate at all that Brady shouldn't share in the blame, did I? (Asking honestly, because that was not my intent.)

 

Reading through my post again I think I stated that pretty clearly. I'm not sure he started this season out as "part of the problem," but I think it's reached that point. Whether that's due to injury, frustration, or some kind of decline in skills, I don't know. 

 

And yes, Brady's had to deal with turnover before (particularly 2006), but that situation was a little different. He still had Troy Brown (though Brown was not the same player by that time), he still had Kevin Faulk... I don't know if any QB has had 80% of his previous season's targets removed from the roster in one way or another and still somehow gotten them to 6-2 to start the season. 

 

They haven't been playing well, but after the last few seasons, I'm starting to believe that the teams that play their best football in October or November are not the teams that win it all. Sometimes you have the wire-to-wire teams like the '09 Saints or the '10 Packers, but you also have teams that looked dead in the water at different points only to get hot and win it all (Giants, twice, last year with the Ravens, the Steelers in '08, etc-etc). If they can keep winning and keep pace within the AFC, things should be vastly improved by December and January.

 

Maybe not, but you did strongly suggest that those who are pointing out Brady's play have an axe to grind. Kind of sets up an either/or mentality. 'Either you acknowledge that Brady's problem is primarily the roster turnover, or you're biased against him and this is your hatred showing itself.' Maybe that's not how you meant it, but that's the tone I got from your post. I apologize if I'm overstating it. You're aces in my book, sir.

 

To your point, it's unlikely that any other top QB has ever had to deal with the kind of roster attrition Brady has been dealing with, at least at the very beginning of the season, before the team gets into a groove. Going 6-2 under those circumstances is probably unprecedented, but aside from the game-winning drive against the Saints, Brady hasn't exactly been carrying the Pats. He's still Brady, and he's still heavily involved in any success they have, as he influences the defensive gameplan every time he's on the field. But it's not like he's been willing them to victory every week. This past week, they relied heavily on the run game, and the special teams made some big plays. That's how you win football games, so I'm not dinging Brady for that. Just saying, the team has been picking up some of the slack for the struggling passing game lately.

 

And that's a good thing. Like you say, October and November don't win you Super Bowls. As long as the Pats are in the playoffs, you don't count out a Tom Brady / Bill Belichick team. To do so would be asinine. And if the team learns to compensate for substandard passing performances, that comes in handy in January when high flying offenses can be grounded by matchups, weather, or just having a bad day. If the ground game and the defense and special teams have been hardened by battle and can pick up the slack, it actually works to the Patriots favor. They're more like the dynasty Patriots right now than they were in 2007 and 2010. I'm not writing them off like some people are.

 

Compare that to Denver, Manning can't always rescue you, especially in the playoffs against the league's best (which is what Irsay was trying to say). You're not going to get 51 points in the playoffs, most of the time. You're hard pressed to score 33 in a hostile environment, like they did against the Colts (and could have won that game, if not for a couple of ball bounces). The past season and a half, the Broncos have the worst luck at recovering fumbles. Their secondary seems to get worse each week. The defense has to step up. You need big plays on special teams every once in a while. You have to be able to control the clock with the run game, convert 3rd and short, etc. The Patriots are doing those things right now. If the passing game starts to click, they're back to looking unstoppable again. Better for that to happen in late December and into January than for the team to peak in October. 

[-JJ-]

I think BB has been getting a little too much credit. I heard people praising him after the Miami win, when I thought their play was mediocre. They won because they got the breaks in the 2nd half and Miami sorta of imploded.

I thought the one game NE really looked impressive was vs NO. Granted they almost lost, but it always felt they were in total control of the game.

 Well the reverse is NE didn't implode. That's kind of the point to win a game isn't it- play 60 min without imploding.

 

 You're not going to get 16 "impressive wins" with any team. And NO was just as impressive except they were on the losing end. Game of inches.

 

So it's always "A" team won only  because "B" team didn't get the breaks, imploded, made mistakes etc.  

Yeah- sounds like football to me..

[BOTT]

Well the reverse is NE didn't implode. That's kind of the point to win a game isn't it- play 60 min without imploding.

 

 You're not going to get 16 "impressive wins" with any team. And NO was just as impressive except they were on the losing end. Game of inches.

 

So it's always "A" team won only  because "B" team didn't get the breaks, imploded, made mistakes etc.  

Yeah- sounds like football to me..

Teams can play poorly, but the better teams don't often implode. Miami is making a habit of it.

[amfootball]

Maybe not, but you did strongly suggest that those who are pointing out Brady's play have an axe to grind. Kind of sets up an either/or mentality. 'Either you acknowledge that Brady's problem is primarily the roster turnover, or you're biased against him and this is your hatred showing itself.' Maybe that's not how you meant it, but that's the tone I got from your post. I apologize if I'm overstating it. You're aces in my book, sir.

 

To your point, it's unlikely that any other top QB has ever had to deal with the kind of roster attrition Brady has been dealing with, at least at the very beginning of the season, before the team gets into a groove. Going 6-2 under those circumstances is probably unprecedented, but aside from the game-winning drive against the Saints, Brady hasn't exactly been carrying the Pats. He's still Brady, and he's still heavily involved in any success they have, as he influences the defensive gameplan every time he's on the field. But it's not like he's been willing them to victory every week. This past week, they relied heavily on the run game, and the special teams made some big plays. That's how you win football games, so I'm not dinging Brady for that. Just saying, the team has been picking up some of the slack for the struggling passing game lately.

 

And that's a good thing. Like you say, October and November don't win you Super Bowls. As long as the Pats are in the playoffs, you don't count out a Tom Brady / Bill Belichick team. To do so would be asinine. And if the team learns to compensate for substandard passing performances, that comes in handy in January when high flying offenses can be grounded by matchups, weather, or just having a bad day. If the ground game and the defense and special teams have been hardened by battle and can pick up the slack, it actually works to the Patriots favor. They're more like the dynasty Patriots right now than they were in 2007 and 2010. I'm not writing them off like some people are.

 

Compare that to Denver, Manning can't always rescue you, especially in the playoffs against the league's best (which is what Irsay was trying to say). You're not going to get 51 points in the playoffs, most of the time. You're hard pressed to score 33 in a hostile environment, like they did against the Colts (and could have won that game, if not for a couple of ball bounces). The past season and a half, the Broncos have the worst luck at recovering fumbles. Their secondary seems to get worse each week. The defense has to step up. You need big plays on special teams every once in a while. You have to be able to control the clock with the run game, convert 3rd and short, etc. The Patriots are doing those things right now. If the passing game starts to click, they're back to looking unstoppable again. Better for that to happen in late December and into January than for the team to peak in October. 

This is a bit off-topic but relevant to your post about Manning and team design. A few years back, Joey Porter said the following about Manning and the Colts:

"They don't want to just sit there, line up and play football. They want to try to catch you off guard. They don't want to play smash-mouth football. They want to trick you. They want to catch you substituting. They want to make you think. They want it to be a thinking game instead of a football game."

 

I wonder if this approach by Manning and his Indy offense that he has brought to Denver isn't more the problem then personnel. Because he is so good at outhinking and outsmarting the other team, it becomes about that instead of football. In addition, the whole team takes on that mentality and can't win a tough nosed football game. I am not sure how many times I saw Decker turn and look for flags against the Colts. It becomes a state of mind - outsmarting vs. smash mouth football and that will never win the war.

 

When I honestly watched those Colts teams from the Dungy era, I did not see some fatally flawed team but a team unable to line up and play football. Often they were outplayed not over-matched and that speaks to the identity of the team not the personnel.

[bayone]

 I saw Decker turn and look for flags against the Colts. It becomes a state of mind - outsmarting vs. smash mouth football and that will never win the war.

 

When I honestly watched those Colts teams from the Dungy era, I did not see some fatally flawed team but a team unable to line up and play football. Often they were outplayed not over-matched and that speaks to the identity of the team not the personnel.

 

I have said 2 things of late

 

some players seem to think they are  entitled to win on this Denver Team

 

as u say, Decker doesnt complete the play, he should try and just may find he cant get to the ball, yet he often just sttops and looks around with arms out wondering where is the flag, he has done this the last 3 gamews at least

 

That is as soon as things start going bad, thats a bad sign

 

Even after a good catch and run last game he came to sidlines and ripped off  helmet chin straps  like he was in disgust with a mean bad look to him that he just wasnt happy being there

 

DT , well he 1 fine player, But hey man , u had that ball, once u have it fight to keep it, dont let a smaller Deangello hall take it out of your hands, just becuase u have it dont think its secure, Make it secure

[GoPats]

Maybe not, but you did strongly suggest that those who are pointing out Brady's play have an axe to grind. Kind of sets up an either/or mentality. 'Either you acknowledge that Brady's problem is primarily the roster turnover, or you're biased against him and this is your hatred showing itself.' Maybe that's not how you meant it, but that's the tone I got from your post. I apologize if I'm overstating it. You're aces in my book, sir.

 

...

 

 They're more like the dynasty Patriots right now than they were in 2007 and 2010. I'm not writing them off like some people are.

 

 

 

I probably projected that first part more than I meant to... as a person who worked in journalism I should know better and write a cleaner lead sentence! I just know that, league-wide, there will be much rejoicing when Brady finally either retires or starts to decline, lol... 

 

On the second point, totally agree. This team is a lot more like the 2003 team than any other version I think. Seven of their 14 wins that season were by 7 points or less. Lots of nail-biters, and it wasn't an offensive show every week. 

[Superman]

This is a bit off-topic but relevant to your post about Manning and team design. A few years back, Joey Porter said the following about Manning and the Colts:

"They don't want to just sit there, line up and play football. They want to try to catch you off guard. They don't want to play smash-mouth football. They want to trick you. They want to catch you substituting. They want to make you think. They want it to be a thinking game instead of a football game."

 

I wonder if this approach by Manning and his Indy offense that he has brought to Denver isn't more the problem then personnel. Because he is so good at outhinking and outsmarting the other team, it becomes about that instead of football. In addition, the whole team takes on that mentality and can't win a tough nosed football game. I am not sure how many times I saw Decker turn and look for flags against the Colts. It becomes a state of mind - outsmarting vs. smash mouth football and that will never win the war.

 

When I honestly watched those Colts teams from the Dungy era, I did not see some fatally flawed team but a team unable to line up and play football. Often they were outplayed not over-matched and that speaks to the identity of the team not the personnel.

 

The passing game is based on execution. When you're physical with receivers and can hang with them, the way the Colts were with the Broncos receivers, it throws off timing. That only matters if you can get some pass rush, which we did. Decker was looking for flags because he's not used to all the contact he was getting, and a lot of the contact could have been flagged, as it was borderline. But like Collinsworth said, you might get a couple of those calls, but you won't get all of them, so it's almost worth it for the defense to push their luck, which the Colts DBs did. Decker still produced, it was DT who was really affected.

 

But that has little to do with the running game. The Broncos offensive line has been decimated with injuries. Their backs have been working on getting into a rotation all season long, and Hillman's fumbles have hurt that. I think Joey Porter's comments are a sign of frustration from a player who wants to physically dominate, but has to play a little slower against a Manning-led passing attack. 

[-JJ-]

Teams can play poorly, but the better teams don't often implode. Miami is making a habit of it.

Right, that's my point. We're the better team

[amfootball]

The passing game is based on execution. When you're physical with receivers and can hang with them, the way the Colts were with the Broncos receivers, it throws off timing. That only matters if you can get some pass rush, which we did. Decker was looking for flags because he's not used to all the contact he was getting, and a lot of the contact could have been flagged, as it was borderline. But like Collinsworth said, you might get a couple of those calls, but you won't get all of them, so it's almost worth it for the defense to push their luck, which the Colts DBs did. Decker still produced, it was DT who was really affected.

 

But that has little to do with the running game. The Broncos offensive line has been decimated with injuries. Their backs have been working on getting into a rotation all season long, and Hillman's fumbles have hurt that. I think Joey Porter's comments are a sign of frustration from a player who wants to physically dominate, but has to play a little slower against a Manning-led passing attack. 

I was talking larger picture not just this season. That the reason Manning-led teams have struggled in the post-season is because of a mentality of trickery vs. just lining up to play football. I am not saying I necessarily agree with it but it seems like a plausible explanation given how much tougher playoff games are especially for finesse teams that are used to their QB putting up a lot of points which can allow for the defense/SP to relax during the course of a season and then be unable to turn it up when the O struggles.

 

In terms of Porter, his comment I believe was made after the Steelers beat the Colts in the playoffs in 2006 (21-18) en route to the championship. I need to double check it for sure though.

[amfootball]

Right, that's my point. We're the better team

Guess Miami must have forgotten to implode when they played the Colts this season. ;)

[Mameluc]

True, but I think it's blown a little out of proportion.  Take away Decker, Julius for a few weeks, Welker, and Thomas, and replace them with rookies who are consistently dropping passes, and even Peyton would struggle.  Any QB would.

we dont have to imagine...it happened to us some years ago when we started playing tom santi, blair white, etc.... heck even when collie and garcon started for the first time, we just got lucky that those 2 adjusted pretty quickly... but manning had the same rough season when he lost wayne, clarck, collie and garcon(for a few weeks with a hand issue)

[Superman]

I was talking larger picture not just this season. That the reason Manning-led teams have struggled in the post-season is because of a mentality of trickery vs. just lining up to play football. I am not saying I necessarily agree with it but it seems like a plausible explanation given how much tougher playoff games are especially for finesse teams that are used to their QB putting up a lot of points which can allow for the defense/SP to relax during the course of a season and then be unable to turn it up when the O struggles.

 

In terms of Porter, his comment I believe was made after the Steelers beat the Colts in the playoffs in 2006 (21-18) en route to the championship. I need to double check it for sure though.

 

Porter's comments were before that game. I don't think what he said really had any bearing on the way the game went. To me, the line played poorly and Manning was out of rhythm with the receivers. It wasn't a philosophical issue. Add to that the hangover from Dungy's son dying, and I just don't think that game speaks to a problem with the way the Colts played. JMO.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs05/news/story?id=2289603

 

As for your idea about why Manning's teams haven't had more success, I disagree, but you knew I would. I can't subscribe to the idea that it's a bad thing to have an effective passing game because it takes pressure off the rest of the team. I think the rest of the team needs to make plays as well. I don't think the Manning offense is about trickery, either. Trying to keep teams from substituting isn't trickery or deception. Audibling at the line isn't trickery. Adjusting protections isn't trickery. It's just trying to maximize your chances to win games. 

[braveheartcolt]

Well, Brady is a system QB, and the system is a little broken. Have I nailed it?

[Flying Elvis]

It's an interesting twist that some think that the Patriots are winning in spite of Tom Brady.

[BOTT]

Right, that's my point. We're the better team

Yeah, I'm not sure point I was trying to make with that comment. I guess I meant patriots pretty much looked log turdish and won only because of breaks and maimi looking even more dog Turkish.

[amfootball]

Well, Brady is a system QB, and the system is a little broken. Have I nailed it?

No.

[amfootball]

Porter's comments were before that game. I don't think what he said really had any bearing on the way the game went. To me, the line played poorly and Manning was out of rhythm with the receivers. It wasn't a philosophical issue. Add to that the hangover from Dungy's son dying, and I just don't think that game speaks to a problem with the way the Colts played. JMO.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs05/news/story?id=2289603

 

As for your idea about why Manning's teams haven't had more success, I disagree, but you knew I would. I can't subscribe to the idea that it's a bad thing to have an effective passing game because it takes pressure off the rest of the team. I think the rest of the team needs to make plays as well. I don't think the Manning offense is about trickery, either. Trying to keep teams from substituting isn't trickery or deception. Audibling at the line isn't trickery. Adjusting protections isn't trickery. It's just trying to maximize your chances to win games. 

Yeah, I don't think it is a big reason either but his comments were interesting and one that I thought about as I saw the Colts out physical the Bronocs which seems to be the mark of Manning-led teams. An inability to play hard nosed, smash mouth football.

[Guest TeamLoloJones]

No.

I've always been annoyed when people say Brady is a system quaterback.  Does he have a system built to around him to maximze his skill set? Yes.  Does he have inflated numbers because of that system? Maybe.  Could he thrive if he was put into any other offense in the NFL?  Absolutely he would.

[amfootball]

I've always been annoyed when people say Brady is a system quaterback.  Does he have a system built to around him to maximze his skill set? Yes.  Does he have inflated numbers because of that system? Maybe.  Could he thrive if he was put into any other offense in the NFL?  Absolutely he would.

My response is always the same. What has been Brady's system exactly? The one from '01-'03 where it was a dink and dunk offense that took what the defense gave it? Or is it the one in '04-'05 that morphed into a power running attack behind Corey Dillion? Or was it the fun and gun offense with Moss and Welker where Brady threw for a record 50 TDs? Or is it the one from 2010 to present that is predicated on the TEs?

 

The Pats offense is a chameleon year to year. Brady is anything but a system QB.

 

[Superman]

Yeah, I don't think it is a big reason either but his comments were interesting and one that I thought about as I saw the Colts out physical the Bronocs which seems to be the mark of Manning-led teams. An inability to play hard nosed, smash mouth football.

 

I don't think the quarterback is responsible for whether the team playing hard nosed, smash mouth football. That's on the offensive line and the defense. And the next season, the offensive line and the defense definitely showed some physicality in the playoffs, including beating up on the Bears top notch defensive front all night in the Super Bowl. The defense shut down two of the best power rushing attacks in the league to get to the Super Bowl. I just think it's a silly, disproved notion.

[amfootball]

I don't think the quarterback is responsible for whether the team playing hard nosed, smash mouth football. That's on the offensive line and the defense. And the next season, the offensive line and the defense definitely showed some physicality in the playoffs, including beating up on the Bears top notch defensive front all night in the Super Bowl. The defense shut down two of the best power rushing attacks in the league to get to the Super Bowl. I just think it's a silly, disproved notion.

I think you are right to a certain point. But if an offense is predicated on the pass then the Oline is backing up instead of moving forward so it tends to be a softer line for that reason. A team that has a stout run game can wear down a defense and enforce its will, whereas a pass focused offense is more at the mercy of the defense if the defense is phsyical and getting to the receivers and QB. I think that is what we saw Sunday night in Indy. A defense that was bent on shutting down the pass leaving the Broncs with little alternative which is what we saw time and time again in Indy as well.

 

I think another thing to consider here is time of possession as well. Manning runs his offense so quick that at times he gases his defense. While I think you score as many points as you can, there is something to be said for long, ball controlled drives to keep the defense off the field.

 

My overall point here is that Manning-led teams make it hard on themselves because they are predicated so much on him and the pass which effects the other units. Often his teams have had a tough time playing complementary football and I think the style of football of his teams has something to do with it.