Eagles vs Patriots SBLII GDT

[WeaponX]

25 minutes ago, lancerman said:

Yes it was the best in ppg from weak 5 on. From that point they gave up more than 20 ppg twice in the regular season to a dominant Steelers offense and to Miami at Miami in a tough divisional game where they usually struggle. They averaged a flat 14 points per game. The Vikings gave averaged 15.8 for the season. From week 5 on the Vikings gave up 14.6 ppg and broke 20 about 3 times including two instances where they gave up over 30 points. So yeah once the Patriots got their defense figured out they've been incredibly dominant. 

Really think about it, the Patriots were 32nd in ppg after week 4 and were on pace to be one of the worst defenses of all time. That's a quarter of a season in. Then they wound up in the top 5 and at their current 

Also I would like to point you to 2016 when this entire board said the Patriots defensive ranking was misleading because of the quality of opponents. And then they won the Super Bowl. 

My point don't sleep on the Patriots defense. There very likely to be one of the best defenses the Eagles see all year and you have to pair that with one of the best offenses they've seen all year (only offense ahead of them was the Rams who the Eagles allowed 35 points and the Rams were a middle of the pack defense). 

Same could be said about the Eagles for the Patriots. 

This will be the best defense the Patriots have faced all year and the Eagles offense has been right up there all season and last week proved they can do it against the best defense in the NFL.

[lancerman]

6 minutes ago, RollEagles said:

Same could be said about the Eagles for the Patriots. 

This will be the best defense the Patriots have faced all year and the Eagles offense has been right up there all season and last week proved they can do it against the best defense in the NFL.

Yes they are both very evenly matched teams. Even though the media hype is "zomg the Patriots are the favorites and the Eagles are the massive underdogs" I don't think most people in the know feel that way. Put it this way in the last two Pats Super Bowls I felt like there was a lopsided mismatch for the Pats. The Falcons defense was not in the ballpark of the Pats offense statistically and the Seattle offense was not in the ballpark of the Pats defense statistically". The Eagles and Pats are both in the same ballpark offensively and defensively. Then again those games were nailbiters anyways, so what do I know. 

[WeaponX]

1 minute ago, lancerman said:

Yes they are both very evenly matched teams. Even though the media hype is "zomg the Patriots are the favorites and the Eagles are the massive underdogs" I don't think most people in the know feel that way. Put it this way in the last two Pats Super Bowls I felt like there was a lopsided mismatch for the Pats. The Falcons defense was not in the ballpark of the Pats offense statistically and the Seattle offense was not in the ballpark of the Pats defense statistically". The Eagles and Pats are both in the same ballpark offensively and defensively. Then again those games were nailbiters anyways, so what do I know. 

I agree with a lot of what you're saying except the Patriots defense. I still think you're really overrating that defense. That's clearly the weakest unit in this game.

[Pats#1]

Pats defense is most definitely NOT better or close to as good as the Vikings defense. 

[SkippyX]

Hey, somebody told me that if I only pick the bad teams that the Patriots played, then they have a good defense!

Its OK to do this as long as they play the bad teams in 7 of their last 8 games then you can just say they got better.

I mean, Jameis Winston and the Bucs marched all over them but that great defense forced them to miss 3 FGs, right?

I am not sure why the Eagles even bothered to go to Minnesota in the face of such a legendary group of defenders.

[lancerman]

4 minutes ago, Pats#1 said:

Pats defense is most definitely NOT better or close to as good as the Vikings defense. 

In ppg they have been since week 5. They've actually been far and away the best in the league since week 5. I wouldn't say that makes them the overall best defense, because alot of that is a superior offense that chews up clock and helps with field positioning and a superior special teams. But yeah when you look at the stat that matters the most they are. Like last year the Patriots were number 1 in ppg. They weren't really the best defense. But they were the best in ppg. And that's a better indicator of what you are likely to see in a game. 

[lancerman]

5 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

Hey, somebody told me that if I only pick the bad teams that the Patriots played, then they have a good defense!

Its OK to do this as long as they play the bad teams in 7 of their last 8 games then you can just say they got better.

I mean, Jameis Winston and the Bucs marched all over them but that great defense forced them to miss 3 FGs, right?

I am not sure why the Eagles even bothered to go to Minnesota in the face of such a legendary group of defenders.

Yeah everyone acknowledges that they were terrible in the first 4 weeks. They've been a lot better since then. And the best offense they played in the whole season was the Steelers. And regardless, even are still top 5 in ppg WITH those games added in. So they would still be classified as a good defense. 

[WeaponX]

If you play 6/11 games against the Jets, Bills, and Dolphins, your defensive numbers better be good over that 11 game stretch

[lancerman]

9 minutes ago, RollEagles said:

If you play 6/11 games against the Jets, Bills, and Dolphins, your defensive numbers better be good over that 11 game stretch

And again I'll point you to when people said the same thing about the Patriots last year and they won the Super Bowl. People have been saying that about the Patriots defense since 2007. It's there schedule, oh they give up a lot of yards, etc. 

 

[WeaponX]

4 minutes ago, lancerman said:

And again I'll point you to when people said the same thing about the Patriots last year and they won the Super Bowl. People have been saying that about the Patriots defense since 2007. It's there schedule, oh they give up a lot of yards, etc. 

 

There's a very strong argument to be made that the talent level on this Patriots defense is the lowest it's ever been amongst the Patriots teams that have made the Super Bowl.

This seems different.

[WeaponX]

This is kind of a pointless discussion because you say it's evenly matched and say the Patriots defense is on the level of the rest of the units in the game. 

I say that it's not. 

You say it's been better than the Vikings since Week 5. 

I say that the Patriots defense is definitely not better than the Vikings defense. 

You say it's statistically been better since Week 5 in one metric. 

I say that the Patriots have been fortunate to have all 6 division games be against horrible offenses in that 11 week stretch. 

You say the Patriots have played bad teams in previous seasons and still won. 

And this point, I'll tell you that this Super Bowl is different. These teams are different. The rings and circumstances of winning those rings from the previous seasons aren't going to help New England in this game.

[lancerman]

7 minutes ago, RollEagles said:

There's a very strong argument to be made that the talent level on this Patriots defense is the lowest it's ever been amongst the Patriots teams that have made the Super Bowl.

This seems different.

There's no such strong argument. 2011 was far and away the worst defense the Patriots brought to the Super Bowl. They averaged 21.4 ppg and gave up over 20 points in 12 of 16 games. They were ranked 18th in ppg and were 31st in yards per game. Statistically I think that team brought the worst secondary in Super Bowl history to the game. And they were essentially a dropped Wes Welker pass from winning. 

So you would be very wrong. 

Again they are a top 5 defense in ppg and have been playing their best stretch off football later in the season. It's a nice narrative, but really most of it's just based off the first 4 games. Realistically talent wise they are a bit less talented up front and a bit more talented in the secondary compared to last year.

[BAConrad]

25 minutes ago, lancerman said:

And again I'll point you to when people said the same thing about the Patriots last year and they won the Super Bowl. People have been saying that about the Patriots defense since 2007. It's there schedule, oh they give up a lot of yards, etc. 

 

There's never been a team in history IIRC to win a SB with a Defensive DVOA as bad as the Pats' this season (ranked 31st in the league). And DVOA puts more weight into games played later in the season...when this Pat's defense was supposedly "dominant", as you or someone said. 

The worst in this century I believe was that Ravens defense in 2012 where they finished TWELFTH in the league that season. And the Pats defense is 2nd last.

Not saying DVOA is the end all be all but it's by far the best measurement of defense and offense ATM. Far better than PPGA 

 

[lancerman]

19 minutes ago, RollEagles said:

This is kind of a pointless discussion because you say it's evenly matched and say the Patriots defense is on the level of the rest of the units in the game. 

It's a top 5 defense in ppg. That's just a fact. 

I say that it's not. 

Well your basing it on very little if not nothing

You say it's been better than the Vikings since Week 5. 

I said they were better in ppg. They have been. 

I say that the Patriots defense is definitely not better than the Vikings defense. 

They probably aren't. If you isolated units to test them like DVOA does, they wouldn't. You just aren't playing an isolated Pats defense though. Your playing one of the best special teams and offenses in the league along with a defense that tends to come up clutch in the redzone.

You say it's statistically been better since Week 5 in one metric. 

They have. Again that's a fact.

I say that the Patriots have been fortunate to have all 6 division games be against horrible offenses in that 11 week stretch. 

Okay one of their divisional teams ended up in the playoffs (non of the Eagles divisional teams did) and the best offense they played all season was in that 11 week stretch.

You say the Patriots have played bad teams in previous seasons and still won. 

No. I said the argument you made was used last year to discount their ppg ranking. That same argument didn't mean much at all when it came to having a successful playoff run and winning the SB. So far the Pats have already made the Super Bowl.

And this point, I'll tell you that this Super Bowl is different. These teams are different. The rings and circumstances of winning those rings from the previous seasons aren't going to help New England in this game.

I never disputed this Super Bowl is an entirely different game. I'm just saying that your arguments have no data to back them up. I was the only person who brought any metrics into this to prove my argument. You just said "I feel", "I say" etc. I had facts to back up my points, you just said you didn't believe them. You also said you thought "this feels different" because you thought this was the worst defense the Patriots brought to the Super Bowl. It's not even remotely true. By virtually every metric the 2011 defense was many magnitudes worse and they almost one.

I can't argue with someone who is just going to say "nah nah nah I don't think anything you say is true" and then not have anything to back it up. The facts are the facts. The Patriots defense is still a top 5 defense in ppg and ppg are historically one of the best indicators of how a defense will perform.

 

[BAConrad]

Also, the mismatch that we have over the Pats up front on both sides of the ball is huge.

NE's linebackers are not very good sideline to sideline players, which is not good for them considering our 3 best players up front in Lane, Kelce, and Brooks are three of the biggest freak athlete's at their respective positions in the NFL. 

Also, our running attack is so good and hard to scheme against because unlike basically every other team who use just one specific run blocking scheme, we use all different kinds in any given game.

"They use a slew of different designs, many of which are aimed at utilizing the mobility of Johnson, Brooks, and Kelce. “[They have] hit home runs on like five different schemes this year,” Schwartz says. “They’ve hit home runs on wham plays, on power plays, on trap plays, on zone plays. They’re just so [varied].” "

-Quote from an article by Mays on www.theringer.com . It's a very good read. Talking about this Eagles OL. And that's former OLineman Geoff Schwartz in the quote as well. 

 

And I don't see how you can say that the Pats defense is top 5 whatsoever. They are easily the worst unit they've had in any of their SBs this era. That front 7 is BAD. And we are talking about an Eagles team that just took what many people said was the best front 7 in football in Minnesota to the woodshed. Completely dominating them up front. 

Your secondary is talented. But the lack of talent up front also can cause even good secondaries to struggle.