The Patriots the past 10 years. (1 Viewer)

[Eminence]

The Patriots:

Have had 10 straight winning-season.

Have been in 4 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 5 of 10).

Have won their division 8 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 5 of the last 10 AFC Championships.

In contrast to likely the second-most winning team of the decade

The Steelers:

Have had 8 winning seasons out of 10.

Have been in 2 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 3 of 10).

Have won their division 6 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 4 of the last 10 AFC Championships (two against the Patriot, which the Steelers lost).

It's now apparent as to why the Patriots and Steelers have so many haters. What the Steelers have done is impressive but it looks unimpressive compared to the Patriots stats.

 

[Adebisi]

 

[David Yudkin]

I would still add in the Colts to this analysis.

9 straight seasons with 10+ wins and 11 of the past 12 years.

9 straight years in the playoffs.

7 straight years of 12+ wins (ended this year).

2 SB appearances and went 1-1.

6 division titles in 10 years.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

The Patriots:

Have had 10 straight winning-season.

Have been in 4 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 5 of 10).

Have won their division 8 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 5 of the last 10 AFC Championships.

In contrast to likely the second-most winning team of the decade

The Steelers:

Have had 8 winning seasons out of 10.

Have been in 2 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 3 of 10).

Have won their division 6 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 4 of the last 10 AFC Championships (two against the Patriot, which the Steelers lost).

It's now apparent as to why the Patriots and Steelers have so many haters. What the Steelers have done is impressive but it looks unimpressive compared to the Patriots stats.

I prefer to look at the past five seasons.Steelers 2, Pats 0

 

[Fensalk]

The Patriots have averaged 3.9 losses in the regular season.

 

[tombonneau]

I would still add in the Colts to this analysis.9 straight seasons with 10+ wins and 11 of the past 12 years.9 straight years in the playoffs.7 straight years of 12+ wins (ended this year).2 SB appearances and went 1-1.6 division titles in 10 years.

That 7 straight years of 12+ wins is crazy. I doubt well see another streak like that for awhile. Does anyone know what team is second in that streak? I'm curious. I'll bet it's only something like 4 seasons.

 

[DrJ]

I would still add in the Colts to this analysis.9 straight seasons with 10+ wins and 11 of the past 12 years.9 straight years in the playoffs.7 straight years of 12+ wins (ended this year).2 SB appearances and went 1-1.6 division titles in 10 years.

That 7 straight years of 12+ wins is crazy. I doubt well see another streak like that for awhile. Does anyone know what team is second in that streak? I'm curious. I'll bet it's only something like 4 seasons.

Looking at teams from the recent past, Dallas had 4 of them between 92 and 95.San Fran actually had 16 straight seasons of 10 wins of more from 1983 to 1998, and made the playoffs every one of those years except 1991. But only strung together 3 12 win seasons in there.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

I know nobody seems to care about this, but the Patriots also went 16-0 during the regular season. It's never mentioned because they lost the Super Bowl but that's an amazing accomplishment, especially considering the media hype and pressure week after week.

Their only real superstar is Brady, and when they lost him they went 11-5 (though Moss was a superstar at the time). Really amazing when you think about it.

 

[kyoun1e]

The Patriots:

Have had 10 straight winning-season.

Have been in 4 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 5 of 10).

Have won their division 8 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 5 of the last 10 AFC Championships.

In contrast to likely the second-most winning team of the decade

The Steelers:

Have had 8 winning seasons out of 10.

Have been in 2 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 3 of 10).

Have won their division 6 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 4 of the last 10 AFC Championships (two against the Patriot, which the Steelers lost).

It's now apparent as to why the Patriots and Steelers have so many haters. What the Steelers have done is impressive but it looks unimpressive compared to the Patriots stats.

I prefer to look at the past five seasons.Steelers 2, Pats 0

Well, that's convenient.Are you the steeler switz?

KY

 

[Ned]

The Patriots:

Have had 10 straight winning-season.

Have been in 4 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 5 of 10).

Have won their division 8 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 5 of the last 10 AFC Championships.

In contrast to likely the second-most winning team of the decade

The Steelers:

Have had 8 winning seasons out of 10.

Have been in 2 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 3 of 10).

Have won their division 6 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 4 of the last 10 AFC Championships (two against the Patriot, which the Steelers lost).

It's now apparent as to why the Patriots and Steelers have so many haters. What the Steelers have done is impressive but it looks unimpressive compared to the Patriots stats.

I prefer to look at the past five seasons.Steelers 2, Pats 0

I prefer to look at this season when the Pats hung 39 on that vaunted D.

 

[DoubleG]

I would still add in the Colts to this analysis.9 straight seasons with 10+ wins and 11 of the past 12 years.9 straight years in the playoffs.7 straight years of 12+ wins (ended this year).2 SB appearances and went 1-1.6 division titles in 10 years.

The thing that is pretty amazing about these numbers is that they had very little defense most of that time (save for Freeney), very little running game for parts of it, and not very good special teams either. You have to wonder how bad the Colts would have been had they drafted someone other than Manning.

 

[Sabertooth]

Yeah, but they cheated. That is the thing. They are/were cheaters. So how much of that is ill gotten? Nobody can say.

 

[kyoun1e]

...very little running game for parts of it, and not very good special teams either. You have to wonder how bad the Colts would have been had they drafted someone other than Manning.

Yeah, Edge was absolutely miserable from 1999 - 2005.KY

 

[Godsbrother]

The Patriots:

Have had 10 straight winning-season.

Have been in 4 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 5 of 10).

Have won their division 8 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 5 of the last 10 AFC Championships.

In contrast to likely the second-most winning team of the decade

The Steelers:

Have had 8 winning seasons out of 10.

Have been in 2 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 3 of 10).

Have won their division 6 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 4 of the last 10 AFC Championships (two against the Patriot, which the Steelers lost).

It's now apparent as to why the Patriots and Steelers have so many haters. What the Steelers have done is impressive but it looks unimpressive compared to the Patriots stats.

I prefer to look at the past five seasons.Steelers 2, Pats 0

Well, that's convenient.Are you the steeler switz?

KY

Why is that any more convenient than to just look at the past 10 years? Why not look at both teams since the Patriots joined the NFL?

 

[kyoun1e]

The Patriots:

Have had 10 straight winning-season.

Have been in 4 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 5 of 10).

Have won their division 8 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 5 of the last 10 AFC Championships.

In contrast to likely the second-most winning team of the decade

The Steelers:

Have had 8 winning seasons out of 10.

Have been in 2 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 3 of 10).

Have won their division 6 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 4 of the last 10 AFC Championships (two against the Patriot, which the Steelers lost).

It's now apparent as to why the Patriots and Steelers have so many haters. What the Steelers have done is impressive but it looks unimpressive compared to the Patriots stats.

I prefer to look at the past five seasons.Steelers 2, Pats 0

Well, that's convenient.Are you the steeler switz?

KY

Why is that any more convenient than to just look at the past 10 years? Why not look at both teams since the Patriots joined the NFL?

Um...well...a couple reasons:1. The OP spoke of the last decade, and

2. Starting 5 years ago conveniently leaves out all NE super bowl wins...in the decade.

Come on now.

If you want to compare each franchise and their total history...go ahead...I think we can univerally agree that the Steelers are one of the top franchises in sports history, while the New England Patriots have just recently emerged. Whether NE can stay there remains to be seen.

KY

 

[Godsbrother]

Um...well...a couple reasons:1. The OP spoke of the last decade, and2. Starting 5 years ago conveniently leaves out all NE super bowl wins...in the decade.Come on now.If you want to compare each franchise and their total history...go ahead...I think we can univerally agree that the Steelers are one of the top franchises in sports history, while the New England Patriots have just recently emerged. Whether NE can stay there remains to be seen.KY

Nahhh, I was just pointing out that a 5 year comparison really isn't any less valid than the OP's 10 years, which conveniently includes all of the the Pats Super Bowl victories.Just having a little fun with ya!

 

[David Yudkin]

I would still add in the Colts to this analysis.9 straight seasons with 10+ wins and 11 of the past 12 years.9 straight years in the playoffs.7 straight years of 12+ wins (ended this year).2 SB appearances and went 1-1.6 division titles in 10 years.

The thing that is pretty amazing about these numbers is that they had very little defense most of that time (save for Freeney), very little running game for parts of it, and not very good special teams either. You have to wonder how bad the Colts would have been had they drafted someone other than Manning.

The defense and running concepts are both bordering on urban legends. Collectively over the Pats 10 year run, IIRC the Colts defense allowed less than a FG per game more scoring wise than the Patriots defense did. Adjusting for playing their home games indoors, that makes the defensive scoring numbers almost even.As for the rushing game, until last year and this year, the Colts were far from horrible running the ball. They ranked in the teens in rushing yardage 7 times and another time even cracked the top 10.

 

[kyoun1e]

I would still add in the Colts to this analysis.9 straight seasons with 10+ wins and 11 of the past 12 years.9 straight years in the playoffs.7 straight years of 12+ wins (ended this year).2 SB appearances and went 1-1.6 division titles in 10 years.

The thing that is pretty amazing about these numbers is that they had very little defense most of that time (save for Freeney), very little running game for parts of it, and not very good special teams either. You have to wonder how bad the Colts would have been had they drafted someone other than Manning.

The defense and running concepts are both bordering on urban legends. Collectively over the Pats 10 year run, IIRC the Colts defense allowed less than a FG per game more scoring wise than the Patriots defense did. Adjusting for playing their home games indoors, that makes the defensive scoring numbers almost even.As for the rushing game, until last year and this year, the Colts were far from horrible running the ball. They ranked in the teens in rushing yardage 7 times and another time even cracked the top 10.

Interesting to say the least.Too bad Indy fans will run around those two points with all kinds of convoluted argument.KY

 

[DoubleG]

I would still add in the Colts to this analysis.9 straight seasons with 10+ wins and 11 of the past 12 years.9 straight years in the playoffs.7 straight years of 12+ wins (ended this year).2 SB appearances and went 1-1.6 division titles in 10 years.

The thing that is pretty amazing about these numbers is that they had very little defense most of that time (save for Freeney), very little running game for parts of it, and not very good special teams either. You have to wonder how bad the Colts would have been had they drafted someone other than Manning.

The defense and running concepts are both bordering on urban legends. Collectively over the Pats 10 year run, IIRC the Colts defense allowed less than a FG per game more scoring wise than the Patriots defense did. Adjusting for playing their home games indoors, that makes the defensive scoring numbers almost even.As for the rushing game, until last year and this year, the Colts were far from horrible running the ball. They ranked in the teens in rushing yardage 7 times and another time even cracked the top 10.

In regards to the first paragraph, to see whether or not a "FG per game" is a significant number or not we'd have to look at all the data (i.e. if there are 12 teams between the two, then the difference is fairly large, even though a "FG per game" doesn't sound that big). In large sets of data, numbers tend to clump close together. Just as an example, if you ran most teams W/L records since 1975, the numbers would be amazingly close. In regards to playing the games indoors, that point doesn't make any sense, as many teams play indoors and that also works against the defense, as the opposing teams offenses get to play in perfect conditions as well.In regards to the scond part, I never said they were "horrible running the ball" - I said that they had very little running game for parts (acknowledging they did in fact have a decent running game occasionally). And I was speaking in terms of the "given these accomplishments" mindset. That is to say, having a middle of the pack running game for a team that is one of the best over an entire decade is fairly impressive. Just comparing them to the other two teams in the discussion, the Steelers have had a much better running game over that span - as have the Patriots at certain times.My point simply was that the Colts (unlike the Patriots and Steelers) haven't been at or very close to the top in many categories that most think crucial to being a consistant winning team (i.e. running the ball, run defense, defense overall, special teams,) - categories that the Steelers and Pats have been strong in - and yet still have had very good success over an extended period, despite those weaknesses. I think some of it can also be attributed to Dungy's ability to play to his team's strengths.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Curious how many current Patriots were on a SB winning team:

Brady

Branch

Light

Koppen

Anyone I'm missing?

 

[delusional]

Philly, Pitt, Indy & Pats have 100+ wins I believe since 2000

 

[David Yudkin]

I ran the numbers again on the Pats and Colts. Looking at all regular season games from 2001-2010 for NE and all regular season games from 2002-2010 for IND (the COlts were pretty bad in 2001):

The Pats defense allowed 17.95 points allowed and 318.2 yards per game.

The Colts defense allowed 19.88 points allowed and 320.8 yards per game.

That's a difference of 1.93 ppg and 2.6 yds/gm.

I'd be interested to hear how that slight difference somehow made the Patriots defense that much better than the Colts. Both teams overall were consistently good record wise in all those years, so it's not like either team threw in a bunch of clunkers.

 

[tombonneau]

Curious how many current Patriots were on a SB winning team:BradyBranchLightKoppenAnyone I'm missing?

Wilfork. Faulk & Neal (IR) Think thats it? Maybe Sanders was a rookie?But yeah it's a very inexperienced team with just a few key vets with real playoff/SB experience.

 

[omally]

It's now apparent as to why the Patriots and Steelers have so many haters.

I don't think that is the reason.

 

[Spike]

The Patriots:

Have had 10 straight winning-season.

Have been in 4 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 5 of 10).

Have won their division 8 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 5 of the last 10 AFC Championships.

In contrast to likely the second-most winning team of the decade

The Steelers:

Have had 8 winning seasons out of 10.

Have been in 2 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 3 of 10).

Have won their division 6 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 4 of the last 10 AFC Championships (two against the Patriot, which the Steelers lost).

It's now apparent as to why the Patriots and Steelers have so many haters. What the Steelers have done is impressive but it looks unimpressive compared to the Patriots stats.

Oh stop.

 

[Warsteinner]

Curious how many current Patriots were on a SB winning team:BradyBranchLightKoppenAnyone I'm missing?

Wilfork. Faulk & Neal (IR) Think thats it? Maybe Sanders was a rookie?But yeah it's a very inexperienced team with just a few key vets with real playoff/SB experience.

Banta-CainStephen NealTy Warren

 

[kyoun1e]

I ran the numbers again on the Pats and Colts. Looking at all regular season games from 2001-2010 for NE and all regular season games from 2002-2010 for IND (the COlts were pretty bad in 2001):The Pats defense allowed 17.95 points allowed and 318.2 yards per game.The Colts defense allowed 19.88 points allowed and 320.8 yards per game.That's a difference of 1.93 ppg and 2.6 yds/gm. I'd be interested to hear how that slight difference somehow made the Patriots defense that much better than the Colts. Both teams overall were consistently good record wise in all those years, so it's not like either team threw in a bunch of clunkers.

This is the crux of my gripe with Manning fans.You'd think that Manning has been surrounded by dopes on offense and defense for a decade.Now, it would be interesting to see what the NFL average was for that time period to see how far, if at all, the Colts fall below the averages. And how the Colts rank vs. other teams.KY

 

[Black&Gold]

Super Bowl Wins:

Steelers - 6

Pats - 3

 

[DoubleG]

I ran the numbers again on the Pats and Colts. Looking at all regular season games from 2001-2010 for NE and all regular season games from 2002-2010 for IND (the COlts were pretty bad in 2001):The Pats defense allowed 17.95 points allowed and 318.2 yards per game.The Colts defense allowed 19.88 points allowed and 320.8 yards per game.That's a difference of 1.93 ppg and 2.6 yds/gm. I'd be interested to hear how that slight difference somehow made the Patriots defense that much better than the Colts. Both teams overall were consistently good record wise in all those years, so it's not like either team threw in a bunch of clunkers.

So even though the OP was 10 years, and your own quote of the Colts accomplishments is over a 12 year span, you cherry picked stats to cover only an 8 year span - that by your own admission favor the NE side of the argument? That doesn't seem like a very legit attempt to look at it objectively.As I said in my previous post, simply looking at the Pats and Colts and saying, "Only 2 ppg difference - not a big deal really" doesn't help the discussion anyway. I'd be more interested (as it would be a more valid way of looking at the numbers) in seeing where those numbers fall in context with other teams. When you average stats over a long period, the numbers all bunch together - anyone that has used statistics realizes that to be the case. The Colts and Pats could be 12 teams apart in ppg over the 10-12 year span we were talking about for all we know - and leaving off 3-4 years where the Colts were significantly worse, seems to be a little one-sided anyway.

 

[OldMilwaukee]

Yeah, but they cheated. That is the thing. They are/were cheaters. So how much of that is ill gotten? Nobody can say.

 

[kyoun1e]

I'd be more interested (as it would be a more valid way of looking at the numbers) in seeing where those numbers fall in context with other teams.

Yeah...what I said.Oh yeah, you blocked me so you wouldn't know that.KY

 

[David Yudkin]

I ran the numbers again on the Pats and Colts. Looking at all regular season games from 2001-2010 for NE and all regular season games from 2002-2010 for IND (the COlts were pretty bad in 2001):The Pats defense allowed 17.95 points allowed and 318.2 yards per game.The Colts defense allowed 19.88 points allowed and 320.8 yards per game.That's a difference of 1.93 ppg and 2.6 yds/gm. I'd be interested to hear how that slight difference somehow made the Patriots defense that much better than the Colts. Both teams overall were consistently good record wise in all those years, so it's not like either team threw in a bunch of clunkers.

So even though the OP was 10 years, and your own quote of the Colts accomplishments is over a 12 year span, you cherry picked stats to cover only an 8 year span - that by your own admission favor the NE side of the argument? That doesn't seem like a very legit attempt to look at it objectively.As I said in my previous post, simply looking at the Pats and Colts and saying, "Only 2 ppg difference - not a big deal really" doesn't help the discussion anyway. I'd be more interested (as it would be a more valid way of looking at the numbers) in seeing where those numbers fall in context with other teams. When you average stats over a long period, the numbers all bunch together - anyone that has used statistics realizes that to be the case. The Colts and Pats could be 12 teams apart in ppg over the 10-12 year span we were talking about for all we know - and leaving off 3-4 years where the Colts were significantly worse, seems to be a little one-sided anyway.

It was 9 seasons for the Colts vs. 10 seasons for the Pats.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Curious how many current Patriots were on a SB winning team:BradyBranchLightKoppenAnyone I'm missing?

The funny thing about that is the other day ESPN was talking about how quiet the Patriots were being in response to the Jets trash-talking. because they apparently have that "We've been there and won it all, so we don't need to talk" attitude, but I was like, "Wait, how many players on the current Patriots team were actually on any of the Patriots teams that won a Super Bowl?"

 

[Yitbos69]

Um...well...a couple reasons:

1. The OP spoke of the last decade, and

2. Starting 5 years ago conveniently leaves out all NE super bowl wins...in the decade.

Come on now.

If you want to compare each franchise and their total history...go ahead...I think we can univerally agree that the Steelers are one of the top franchises in sports history, while the New England Patriots have just recently emerged. Whether NE can stay there remains to be seen.

KY

Nahhh, I was just pointing out that a 5 year comparison really isn't any less valid than the OP's 10 years, which conveniently includes all of the the Pats Super Bowl victories.Just having a little fun with ya!

this

 

[David Yudkin]

IIRC, the following won a SB with the Pats . . .

Brady, Faulk (IR), Branch, Light, Koppen, Ty Warren (IR), Wilfork, Banta-Cain

 

[Yitbos69]

IIRC, the following won a SB with the Pats . . .Brady, Faulk (IR), Branch, Light, Koppen, Ty Warren (IR), Wilfork, Banta-Cain

David... when you cheat you don't need the best players....

 

[CrossEyed]

It will be interesting to see if these franchises can continue their success beyond their current ownership/management.

The Steelers were not very good for 40 years until Dan Rooney emerged in the early 70's as the team's president. The Patriots had very modest success until Kraft took control of the franchise. The Steelers seem to have transitioned pretty flawlessly from Dan to his son, Art II, and look to be in capable hands for the foreseeable future (Art in his early 50s). Kraft is in his late 60's. Who takes over for Bob at some point?

 

[David Yudkin]

It will be interesting to see if these franchises can continue their success beyond their current ownership/management. The Steelers were not very good for 40 years until Dan Rooney emerged in the early 70's as the team's president. The Patriots had very modest success until Kraft took control of the franchise. The Steelers seem to have transitioned pretty flawlessly from Dan to his son, Art II, and look to be in capable hands for the foreseeable future (Art in his early 50s). Kraft is in his late 60's. Who takes over for Bob at some point?

Kraft's son Jonathan is already President & COO of the Pats.

 

[CrossEyed]

It will be interesting to see if these franchises can continue their success beyond their current ownership/management. The Steelers were not very good for 40 years until Dan Rooney emerged in the early 70's as the team's president. The Patriots had very modest success until Kraft took control of the franchise. The Steelers seem to have transitioned pretty flawlessly from Dan to his son, Art II, and look to be in capable hands for the foreseeable future (Art in his early 50s). Kraft is in his late 60's. Who takes over for Bob at some point?

Kraft's son Jonathan is already President & COO of the Pats.

Well there you go. Looks like we'll be battling for AFC supremacy for a while then.

 

[Eminence]

The Patriots:

Have had 10 straight winning-season.

Have been in 4 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 5 of 10).

Have won their division 8 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 5 of the last 10 AFC Championships.

In contrast to likely the second-most winning team of the decade

The Steelers:

Have had 8 winning seasons out of 10.

Have been in 2 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 3 of 10).

Have won their division 6 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 4 of the last 10 AFC Championships (two against the Patriot, which the Steelers lost).

It's now apparent as to why the Patriots and Steelers have so many haters. What the Steelers have done is impressive but it looks unimpressive compared to the Patriots stats.

Oh stop.

I can't have an opinion? Listen bro, I'm a Cardinals fan so it's not like I'm being biased here. If the Patriots go to the Super Bowl this year they've made it 5 of the last 10 years. Over the past ten years if you bet on the Patriots to go all the way you'd have a 50% chance of being correct. I'm not exactly sure what the odds for the Patriots have been at the beginning of each season recently but you'd have to think that if you consistently bet on them for the past 10-years; hitting on them 5 of 10 times would yield significant payout.Granted hindsight is a thing of beauty.

 

[Modog814]

I ran the numbers again on the Pats and Colts. Looking at all regular season games from 2001-2010 for NE and all regular season games from 2002-2010 for IND (the COlts were pretty bad in 2001):The Pats defense allowed 17.95 points allowed and 318.2 yards per game.The Colts defense allowed 19.88 points allowed and 320.8 yards per game.That's a difference of 1.93 ppg and 2.6 yds/gm. I'd be interested to hear how that slight difference somehow made the Patriots defense that much better than the Colts. Both teams overall were consistently good record wise in all those years, so it's not like either team threw in a bunch of clunkers.

Looking back over the last couple years, it looks like 18 ppg allowed generally gets you into the top 4 of this stat, while 20 gets you around 10th. So it looks like the 2 ppg is the difference between a very strong defense (elite might be too strong a word) vs a slightly better than average defense. I mean you're talking top 12.5 percentile, vs top 31.25% percentile. Looking at yardage I don't think is very meaningful, based on way defenses play. Some are successful because they just don't let teams move the ball (Pittsburgh is probably the best example of this), while others take a bend but don't break approach where they tighten up aroung the redzone and hold teams to FG's.

 

[Modog814]

Philly, Pitt, Indy & Pats have 100+ wins I believe since 2000

I believe Baltimore also falls in this category (unless your excluding 2000 season), I count 104 wins.

 

[PatsFanCT]

Yeah, but they cheated. That is the thing. They are/were cheaters. So how much of that is ill gotten? Nobody can say.

Keep fighting the good fight, but don't let the truth get in the way.

 

[kyoun1e]

I ran the numbers again on the Pats and Colts. Looking at all regular season games from 2001-2010 for NE and all regular season games from 2002-2010 for IND (the COlts were pretty bad in 2001):The Pats defense allowed 17.95 points allowed and 318.2 yards per game.The Colts defense allowed 19.88 points allowed and 320.8 yards per game.That's a difference of 1.93 ppg and 2.6 yds/gm. I'd be interested to hear how that slight difference somehow made the Patriots defense that much better than the Colts. Both teams overall were consistently good record wise in all those years, so it's not like either team threw in a bunch of clunkers.

Looking back over the last couple years, it looks like 18 ppg allowed generally gets you into the top 4 of this stat, while 20 gets you around 10th. So it looks like the 2 ppg is the difference between a very strong defense (elite might be too strong a word) vs a slightly better than average defense. I mean you're talking top 12.5 percentile, vs top 31.25% percentile. Looking at yardage I don't think is very meaningful, based on way defenses play. Some are successful because they just don't let teams move the ball (Pittsburgh is probably the best example of this), while others take a bend but don't break approach where they tighten up aroung the redzone and hold teams to FG's.

There's gotta be some retorts from Indy fans on this no?What is the defense...on the defense?KY

 

[DoubleG]

I ran the numbers again on the Pats and Colts. Looking at all regular season games from 2001-2010 for NE and all regular season games from 2002-2010 for IND (the COlts were pretty bad in 2001):The Pats defense allowed 17.95 points allowed and 318.2 yards per game.The Colts defense allowed 19.88 points allowed and 320.8 yards per game.That's a difference of 1.93 ppg and 2.6 yds/gm. I'd be interested to hear how that slight difference somehow made the Patriots defense that much better than the Colts. Both teams overall were consistently good record wise in all those years, so it's not like either team threw in a bunch of clunkers.

Looking back over the last couple years, it looks like 18 ppg allowed generally gets you into the top 4 of this stat, while 20 gets you around 10th. So it looks like the 2 ppg is the difference between a very strong defense (elite might be too strong a word) vs a slightly better than average defense. I mean you're talking top 12.5 percentile, vs top 31.25% percentile. Looking at yardage I don't think is very meaningful, based on way defenses play. Some are successful because they just don't let teams move the ball (Pittsburgh is probably the best example of this), while others take a bend but don't break approach where they tighten up aroung the redzone and hold teams to FG's.

Thank you. This is what I was getting at, but didn't have the time nor inkling to research.

 

[CrossEyed]

Hmm, 0-2 in the playoffs at home the past 2 years, no post-season wins in 3 seasons. Some of the lustre starting to wear off.

 

[Sam Quentin]

it's scary to think what Manning could have done with Belicek as his coach...

 

[IvanKaramazov]

it's scary to think what Manning could have done with Belicek as his coach...

I dunno. Manning doesn't seem like the kind of guy to go along with cheating.

 

[ClownDogs]

The Patriots:

Have had 10 straight winning-season.

Have been in 4 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 5 of 10).

Have won their division 8 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 5 of the last 10 AFC Championships.

In contrast to likely the second-most winning team of the decade

The Steelers:

Have had 8 winning seasons out of 10.

Have been in 2 of the last 9 Super Bowls (could turn into 3 of 10).

Have won their division 6 of the last 10 years.

Have been in 4 of the last 10 AFC Championships (two against the Patriot, which the Steelers lost).

It's now apparent as to why the Patriots and Steelers have so many haters. What the Steelers have done is impressive but it looks unimpressive compared to the Patriots stats.

I prefer to look at the past five seasons.Steelers 2, Pats 0

I prefer to look at this season when the Pats hung 39 on that vaunted D.

I agree, this is a great season to look at, huh?

 

[The Jerk]

Hmm, 0-2 in the playoffs at home the past 2 years, no post-season wins in 3 seasons. Some of the lustre starting to wear off.

0-3 in past three playoff games (cumulative score 78-49)2-4 in past six playoff games (starting with 2006 AFCC loss after leading at halftime 21-6)The Patriots have averaged 32 ppg over 48 regular season games in 2007, 2009 and 2010. However, they have scored only 70 points in their past four playoff games combined (17.5 ppg).