That looked better!
It was nice to see the Pats finally roll over a bad team instead of playing down to the level of the bad team as the Pats far too often do. I’m feeling pretty good about the offense (with one big caveat, see later). Dillon looked more like his old self, and Faulk really does turn out to be key at converting third downs. I realize the Jets and Bills aren’t very good, but I think the improved TOP and Faulk returning are not coincidental.
I’m less convinced about the defense. Certainly, they’ve looked great the past two weeks. But they’ve also played two of the worse QBs in the NFL, and then Buffalo suspended one of its top receivers for the game. So while I think the front seven has improved (and Colvin has been a monster lately!), I still reserve judgement on the secondary.
As for the secondary, what it really needs to just have the same players playing together. All the injuries have been big, sure, but I think a lot of the problem is not so much the lesser level of talent, but that there are always different players back there. The DBs need to get time in playing together.
And then there’s the caveat…Brady’s leg. I didn’t think there was much to it — sure, he was limping a bit, but it didn’t look bad and they certainly did nothing to protect him or it. But then I read in “Shank” Shaugnessey’s column that Brady was “limping badly” at the end of the game and that the knee was X-rayed before the team left Buffalo.
December 16th, 2005 at 07:31
After the first exhibition I told my son that it was painfully obvious that the Pats could not stop a running game right up the middle, as long as they persisted in playing a 3 man line. This same 3 man line can not and has not produced any pass rush whatsoever, thereby putting added strain on an already shaky backfield.
Remember the definition of insanity. DO THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER, AND EXPECT A DIFFERENT RESULT.