2018 AFCCG: Jags v. Pats (Non-Brady Edition)
- Thread starter Red Averages
- Start date
According to DVOA, the 2011 field were the weakest (on average) that the Patriots have faced in the era. They have the 2011 Broncos at -11.8% DVOA, -9.8% weighted, with the Ravens and Giants both having pedestrian scores. Runner up is 2016, with the Texans at -21.9% DVOA, -18.2% weighted driving the issue. 2017 Titans are only showing up as -5.6% DVOA, -7% weighted, with the Jaguars decent and either of the Vikings and Eagles as quite strong. For the 2017 field to be comparable to 2011 or 2016, you'd need to get the Eagles and assume they're currently an average team, rather than the 23.5% DVOA they're currently listed at.
Assuming I collected the data correctly.
Run Lewis and Burkhead between the tackles a lot (especially behind Mason). Throw screens and flares and wheel routes to the RBs. Short crossers and seam passes to Gronk. Unless Jacksonville does something specific (and different), these are going to be their most productive avenues.
Oh good. The referee of the famous non-PI on Gronk at Carolina in 2013 and then this debacle.
Also played a role in Deflategate. He was one of the guy's doing the measuring.
By my count the Pats are 3-5 in games reffed by Blakeman. That dates back to 2008. That is kind of astounding considering their overall win % during that timeframe.
In addition to that Jets game and the Carolina game, he also screwed the Pats in 2012 in Seattle with the Brady grounding call.
In addition to that Jets game and the Carolina game, he also screwed the Pats in 2012 in Seattle with the Brady grounding call.
Sample size. Unless you want to play the League-is-out-to-fuck-us game and begin complaining about calls 117.5 hours in advance.
Fair enough. For others, who may be conspiratorially minded, what the NFL really wants is a SB anchored by the mammoth Jax and Minn/St. Paul metro areas — that is likely to be over by halftime because the Vikings likely would beat the piss out of the Jags — because the Jags are not really good, because Keenum >>> Bortles, and because everything the Jags can do the Vikings can do better. Yup that’s what the League and its sponsors want.
Interesting. Pete Prisco points out that AJ Buoye covered Travis Kelce 1-on-1 last season. I wonder if he'll do that same on Gronk.
Hogan seemed to have big struggles getting open Sunday because he was getting jammed at the line right on his shoulder. Hopefully he can do better this week, because he’s probably going to be needed.
If they have the balls to put Bouye on Gronk you have to line Gronk outside and loft him some down the sideline at least a few times. The Scott Chandler play, but without Scott Chandler.
If they have the balls to put Bouye on Gronk you have to line Gronk outside and loft him some down the sideline at least a few times. The Scott Chandler play, but without Scott Chandler.
In the short term, they get higher ratings for games involving the Patriots. In the longer term, it's in their interest to have an open and competitive league in which lots of fanbases, including the small market ones, feel they can win it all. This isn't why the conspiracy talk is stupid.
Speaking of stupid talk, I have twice in the last half hour seem that because the Pats lost to Miami, and Miami's defense isn't as good as Jacksonville's, the Jags will be in the Superbowl.
The bad news: Tom Brady's numbers in the AFCCG are less than stellar. 11 games. Only four times has he had a passer rating higher than 85. Five times he's had a passer rating less than 80. Overall rating in these 11 games: 81.9, with 15 td and 12 int. Not good. With their pass defense, and pressure they can generate with just four guys, it's entirely possible - likely, even - that Brady will have a turnover, maybe two.
The good news: The Patriots are 7-4 in AFCCGs, despite Brady generally not playing well. 5-1 in AFCCGs at home. Moreover, they are 14-0 in playoff games when they face an opponent for the first time that season, as opposed to 12-9 when they've played an opponent before. Of course, they haven't played Jacksonville this year. Or Philly or Minnesota for that matter. It's likely that the coaching advantage really shows up in these circumstances.
The good news: The Patriots are 7-4 in AFCCGs, despite Brady generally not playing well. 5-1 in AFCCGs at home. Moreover, they are 14-0 in playoff games when they face an opponent for the first time that season, as opposed to 12-9 when they've played an opponent before. Of course, they haven't played Jacksonville this year. Or Philly or Minnesota for that matter. It's likely that the coaching advantage really shows up in these circumstances.
How does this compare to other quarterbacks with significant conference championship game experience? Aren't they all facing good teams, which in theory would downgrade their passer ratings?
Well one way to look at it is comparing these numbers to Brady's Super Bowl numbers, where he's theoretically playing even better teams (or at least comparable).
Brady AFC Championship Games: 15 td, 12 int, 81.9 rating
Brady Super Bowl Games: 15 td, 5 int, 95.0 rating
As far as other QBs go...we only have a few guys who have played in a decent number of conference championships.
Montana (7 g): 94.5 rating, vs. career rating of 92.3
Elway (6 g): 86.6 rating, vs. career rating of 79.9
P Manning (5 g): 87.3 rating, vs. career rating of 96.5
Brady (11 g): 81.9 rating, vs. career rating of 97.6
So compared to these other guys, Brady's relative performance (stats-wise, not win-loss wise) compared to his regular season performance, has been far worse in the Conference Championship games. Of course, as I just mentioned, he gets a LOT better come the Super Bowl. I don't really understand why his numbers are much worse in the AFCCGs...maybe just statistical noise, who knows. But there's enough games there for me to have concerns.
I have confidence that the Patriots will win the game (which is ultimately what matters), but I have concerns about Tom Brady committing a turnover or two in the AFCCG, yes. They're playing a defense that can get after the QB with just their front four, and they have some outstanding cover guys (#1 pass defense by DVOA). Moreover, they turn opponents over a LOT (#2 in the NFL). Add that to the fact that Brady has thrown 12 interceptions (to go with some fumbles) in 11 AFCCGs, and it's not remotely crazy to worry that he may have a turnover or two in this game. He's had at least one INT in seven of his eleven conference championship games (64% of those games). In four games (36%) he's had multiple interceptions. And turnovers are problematic, yes.
Unless you think the very fact that it's an AFCCG means something, then the fact that the Broncos in 2006, Chargers in 2008, and Ravens in 2011 and 2012 account for 9 of those 12 has not a thing to do with the Jaguars in 2018.
In fact, since that's only 4 games, doesn't the other 7 AFCCG where he only threw 3 strike you as more meaningful?
In fact, since that's only 4 games, doesn't the other 7 AFCCG where he only threw 3 strike you as more meaningful?
Well they put Bouye on Kelce, who is just an inch shorter than Gronk and held him in check.
I'm not saying they won't put Bouye on Gronk, but Gronk is significantly more physical than Kelce. In fact, I don't think there's anything Kelce does better than Gronk while running a route. Kelce is fantastic, by the way, but a healthy Gronk is just so, so good.
If they put either CB on Gronk consistently then the Pats will motion him inside and run all over them, while also mixing in some Lewis or White outside against a LB. They'll have to mix coverages more than that or find some way to disguise it. I trust Brady to figure it out.
Yeah, Gronk is significantly better and I’m not at all worried about it. We were just discussing how they might go about things.
Like I said, in 7 of the 11 games, he's thrown at least one pick. Of course none of those games were against the 2017 Jacksonville Jaguars so does ANY of past performance matter at all? If past performance against opponents where he fared poorly has nothing to do with this game, past performance against opponents where he fared well should also have nothing to do with this game - after all, none of those opponents were the 2017 Jaguars.
I'm just pointing out that in AFCCGs...Brady's numbers are not very good. And they're going up against a defense that plays the pass really well, and turns opponents over a lot.
If you think there's literally nothing to worry about, good on you. Sit back, relax, and enjoy the game. I'd LIKE to do that, but maybe I'm just a bit more of a worrier than you. I'm allowed to be.
A closer look shows less to be concerned about. By your measure, Brady has had 4 "good" AFCCG:
2004: 130.5, 2 td, 0 int, W
2013: 93.9, 1/0, L
2014: 100.4, 3/1, W
2016: 127.5, 3/0, W
In the 3 wins, he was not just good, but outstanding. OTOH, his rating in 2013 is boosted a bit by his 4th quarter numbers, when the Pats were trailing 23-3 entering the final quarter. Also, the one pick he threw in those 4 combined games was actually quite costly (arghh!!).
There is one incomplete: the 2001 game where Brady got hurt and was relieved by Bledsoe:
2001: 84.3, 0/0, W*
Now, onto the so-called "bad" ones:
2003: 76.1, 1 TD, 1 int, W
2006: 79.5, 1/1, L
2007: 66.4, 1/2, W
2011: 57.5, 0/2, W
2012: 62.3, 1/2, L
2015: 56.4, 1/2, L
The 2003 rating is a bit surprising, as the Pats fairly well dominated the Colts. But starting from late in the 3rd quarter, Brady's numbers that game:
2-7, 18 yards, 0 TD, 1 INT.
Take out those 7 passes, all of which occurred with the Pats sitting with a 21-7 lead, and Brady's numbers that game look much better. And all Brady needed to do was to basically do enough to win the game, which he did.
The 2006 rating was hurt by a number of fluky events: Reche Caldwell having a ball bounce off his chest because he was left uncovered; Troy Brown dropping a pass because he tore his ACL on the play; and a game sealing interception on the final drive when Brady was forced to throw into coverage. The Pats had problems that game, but none of them began or ended with Brady. Brady's overall numbers really weren't bad.
In 2007, Brady injured his ankle early in the game and never really recovered. He was seen in a walking boot and hardly practiced during the first of the 2 weeks between the AFCCG and the Super Bowl.
I'm still not sure how the Pats won that 2011 game. I will admit that in both 2011 and 2012, Brady did get owned a bit by a tough Ravens defense. I should point out that Gronk was hurt in that 2012 game, and the Pats defense really didn't do the team any favors. A similar event happened in 2015, when Brady was facing a difficult Broncos defense and Stork couldn't figure out the line calls. But Brady did make it interesting in the 4th quarter, despite nearly becoming a permanent fixture in the Denver turf (sacked 4 times and hit about 25 or 30).
IMO, there are only 3 bad games that would raise one's concern: 2011, 2012, and 2015. All featured a tough defense that was able to get after Brady by pressuring the middle without compromising the coverage. That's a situation that will give just about any QB trouble, not just Brady. And the 2 losses in those 3 games were to the eventual Super Bowl winner, and were to teams noted specifically for their defense.
Gotcha, but I think BJ’s point still holds — the most direct path to losing this game is turning the ball over. Moreso than in any other game where the truism applies.
I imagine Belichick coaching the Jags and concluding, “I need a couple of short fields, at least, and ideally a pick 6 or scoop and score. Even if everything else goes reasonably well I need that cuz Bortles can’t give me enough.”
So take that away. Ball security over everything, and for God’s sake don’t throw the ball up for grabs in our territory.
Be patient. Be comfortable in a close game. They’ll make a mistake or two, then put it away.
I hear you, and you make some good points. But basically what you're doing is explaining away the bad and removing it from the equation. Sure, if you remove the bad numbers, his overall stats are gonna look a lot better.
How many of these games did you look at lucky plays the Pats had - a good call here, a missed INT off a DBs hands there, an incomplete on a tipped ball that fell harmlessly in front of a defender, etc? Or did you just look to explain why the bad numbers might not be so bad, instead of also explaining why some of the good numbers might not be so good?
Over a big enough sample size - and I've already said that 11 games may be nothing more than statistical noise - the bad luck and the good luck even out and you have to take a look at the actual data.
I think there's enough there to be concerned that Brady might be susceptible to a turnover or two on Sunday, especially against a talented defense that can put a ton of pressure on the QB, and that one or two Brady turnovers could potentially be very problematic.
Like I said to DrewDawg, if none of this worries you at all, sit back and enjoy the easy victory. I wish I could be so carefree. But...I'm not. Such is my cross to bear, I guess.
Going to be a long week if we're going to analyze Brady's performance from 16 years ago as a reason to be scared this weekend.
Did Troy Brown really tear his ACL in that game? I have no memory at all of that. But I've tried to block that horrendous game from memory.
My hot take: Brady will be very good this coming Sunday, so fear not.
My hot take: Brady will be very good this coming Sunday, so fear not.
Except I wasn't doing that. OK, I did that for one game: the 2003 game. If anything, that game, and the 2013 loss, show the limits of QB rating, which was really my point. In one game, Brady played much better than the rating indicated; in one game, he played worse.
I don't see anything in the data you presented to indicate that Brady is perhaps more prone to throwing picks in the AFCCG. I do see that really, really good defenses do sometimes give Brady trouble. The same defenses also gave other good QB's trouble.
If your theory is that the Pats need to be careful about turnovers against the Jags, I'll buy that. If your theory is that Jax is the type of team that could give Brady trouble, I'll definitely buy that. In theory, the Jags may be able to generate pressure up the middle rushing 4 lineman and doubling up on Gronk; if they can do that, then Brady may very well end up throwing a costly pick or two, which would be a concern.
If your theory is that Brady is perhaps a below average QB in the AFCCG, or that Brady's past performance in the AFCCG is something to be concerned about, I'll just come out and say your theory is hot garbage.
In the Pats second to last offensive series, Brady threw a pass to Brown on 3rd down. Brown stepped awkwardly in the middle of his route and never got to the ball, and he limped back to the sideline. Had Brown not hurt himself, chances are he catches that pass for first down; Indy would have been forced to use their final timeout, and the Pats would have been able to run out most of the clock. Brown started the 2007 season on PUP, and really just had a cup of coffee with the team that year before retiring.
