From the players comments, it sounds like it was always a run heavy game plan, but they went to the extreme after seeing the conditions.
It also helped that they never trailed so they never were in a position where they were forced to throw.
Let's say BB stays on until he retires. What does that mean for the franchise?
- Thread starter Eddie Jurak
- Start date
It also helped that they never trailed so they never were in a position where they were forced to throw.
One of the players - maybe Harris - said they didn't really 100% know what the play calling would look like until the day of the game. I think they were prepared for all scenarios. They didn't decide on Tuesday or Wednesday they would run it 95% of the time.
Why should it be off the table to criticize an obviously idiotic coaching decision that turned what could have been an easy win into a win in the final seconds? I guess I just don't udnerstand the mindset. I'm not calling for BB to be fired or otherwise put out to pasture.
Isn't "no margin for error" typical of how they won so many games (especially Super Bowls) in the BB era? I've said this in other threads, but I dont think it's possible to both slaughter all your opponents AND be a contender year after year after year. The former may lead to a couple of dynomite years, but eventually requires salary cap shenanigans that are destined to result in at least a couple of years of mediocrity (like every "great" other team in the BB era). The latter is sustainable, roster-wise, but leads to closer results as the games get harder. We all recognize that the Patriots could have won or lost several of the SBs that they won and lost.
This is the key that the people who are shitting on the gameplan keep ignoring. BB wouldn't have only thrown it 3 times if they lost the lead. Belichick decided that, until the Bills take the lead, he wasn't going to deviate.
You know, stick with what's working. God forbid you do what works.
it’s worth noting that when the quarterback is running like that he doesn’t get any extra protection. The same rules that apply to RBs and WRs apply to Allen there. Now imagine that flag being thrown if it were a RB. Awful call.
My sense is that things are called differently when a QB is involved, but this is a good point. I understand not wanting players crushed after they have gone out of bounds, too, but players should not be allowed to exploit rules intended to protect them as a way to gain yards.
Its not off the table. But where is the line between "idiotic coaching decision" & "abject failure by a player to do the thing that has been drilled into him 5 billion times"? McDaniels said something last week that, while mostly pabulum, had what I think is a dose of reality. Speaking of Jones, he said they dont give players things to do in games that they haven't mastered in practice. *That's* what I thought of once Harry stumbled. Just get away. And he didn't.
(If it turns out that Harry has never even practiced punt returns, then that's a big problem).
Allen hadn't even officially gone out of bounds; the ball was still live and so was spotted for a first down after it cleared the marker. It's hard to get much worse of a call than that.
I didn't love having NH back there either, it's fair game for criticism. But your vehemence feels like a bit of an over-reaction, and I think you're over-selling how much it almost cost them the game.
I don't know precisely where the line is, but "guy who has been in the NFL for almost 3 years, never before fielded a punt in the NFL, and will be asked to do so for the first time during a gale" seems on the wrong side of it. BB knows what it is like to be burned by an inexperienced punt returner (Hi Chris Harper!), and, importantly, Harry was not BB's choice for the role when Gunner missed a week.
The gameplan was fine. It is interesting to think that BB didn't think Mac couldn't throw it but just chose to not have him throw it. If that's true I feel better about this game rather than worse. That would make the 32 straight runs less motivated by necessity and more about "FU Sean McDermott," which I'll take.
Fair point. (he did return some punts in college, but this *is* different). I still tend to think the failure is the player's, but as usual, we'll never know the reasoning behind it.
I have no issue with a game plan that was 90% (or whatever) run considering the weather, I just feel like it was a mistake not to even try to convert a couple of those third downs, or mix in a screen or something once the Bills were selling out to stop the run towards the end. They scored 14 points, it was enough because the D held the Bills twice in the 4th in the red zone, but it isn't like they went up and down the field on the Bills all night long. They had three scoring drives. I don't think it is completely out of bounds to not be in love with extreme rush/pass ratio the likes of which we've never seen in the modern NFL regardless of how bad the weather has been.
What I find especially amusing is that BB still has his A-game going to the extent that he's probably the favorite for Coach of they Year while at the same time TB12 is in the discussion for MVP.
If I have a criticism of the game plan, it's on their last field goal drive. I thought in that situation, with the wind at their back, down close in the red zone where the ball doesn't need to travel far, they maybe should've been more aggressive taking a couple of shots at the end zone, through the air. Otherwise, it was absolutely the right call to try and shorten the game, eliminate turnovers, and grind it out. And not enough praise can go to the o-line and backs for doing so against, mostly, a 9 or 10 man box all night.
We actually do know. Belichick was quite candid about weather conditions in the daily press conferences. He said they plan for contingencies but don't make the final calls until they are getting to the stadium and have to adjust to changes in the weather all game. I'm sure there were multiple game plans in place. Practicing outdoors all the time allows the players to get exposed to a variety of conditions, and adjusting to a more run-heavy attack is easier for the players than the inverse. So, I'm sure they repped a lot more pass plays in practice this week.
The coaches do prep on play designs and play calling for a variety of conditions both in-season and the off-season, and even BB is still learning how weather affects the kicking game as he's mentioned how Nick Folk has opened his eyes to a number of wind factors that he hadn't previously considered.
Yep. They really shortened the game by keeping the clock chugging and limiting possessions. They don't always win this game, but put themselves in a great position to by controlling the game the whole way. If the ball misses N"Keal's helmet by being 2 inches off, the Patriots likely dominate the game.
I don't think screens would have worked at all. Screens are a misdirection play predicated on inviting the pass rushers up the field and slipping the RB and blockers behind the rush. The Bills had the entirety of their defense packed within five yards of the LOS and everyone was keyed in on the RB. IIRC their third and final pass was a screen and it was close to working out, but it also was only something they tried in what passed- last night- as a must pass situation. IIRC, the Bills tried a WR screen/quick hitter or two and they were disastrous.
Regarding Harry being back their on punts, Belichick said simply that Harry was back there for ball handling purposes. He said you need field coverage in crazy wind conditions.
I have no doubt Harry has performed well in this role in practice or he wouldn't be on the field. Harry is also on the hands team for onside kicks, so it makes sense, he just made a mental blunder in the moment. I also didn't have a good look at the trajectory the ball took. It's possible there was a weird gust that shook things up. Just gotta clear out better.
BB isn't above occasional criticism, but putting Harry back there probably was well thought out, like everything this staff does.
I have no doubt Harry has performed well in this role in practice or he wouldn't be on the field. Harry is also on the hands team for onside kicks, so it makes sense, he just made a mental blunder in the moment. I also didn't have a good look at the trajectory the ball took. It's possible there was a weird gust that shook things up. Just gotta clear out better.
BB isn't above occasional criticism, but putting Harry back there probably was well thought out, like everything this staff does.
Watching the first Mac pass back again you can sort of see why they didn't throw much afterwards. That was against the wind but the ball sailed like hell and took a long time to get there. The play design worked perfectly, Smith was as wide open as you can possibly be, and it took an Odell catch to gain seven yards. That play goes for 20+ (or all the way to the house if the deep safety misses the tackle) if it works that way under normal conditions and Mac hits Jonnu in stride with a normal ball.
Unless you have a guy with an absolute cannon like Allen then the risk/reward with throwing the ball is pretty ugly in those conditions. Throwing over the middle is basically out of the question because if the ball sails you'll get picked. Screens aren't going to work because the pass rushers aren't firing up field and, maybe more importantly, the LBs aren't dropping. Your safest options are going to be misdirection plays where you try to clear out all the defenders from one side or get the QB rolling out to that side and that's what they tried a few times. But even then it didn't really come off.
Unless you have a guy with an absolute cannon like Allen then the risk/reward with throwing the ball is pretty ugly in those conditions. Throwing over the middle is basically out of the question because if the ball sails you'll get picked. Screens aren't going to work because the pass rushers aren't firing up field and, maybe more importantly, the LBs aren't dropping. Your safest options are going to be misdirection plays where you try to clear out all the defenders from one side or get the QB rolling out to that side and that's what they tried a few times. But even then it didn't really come off.
Sure, maybe they convert a third down. Or maybe Mac gets sacked/fumbles or is picked while trying to throw for one of those firsts.
Then the revisionist historians would be saying, "Why did BB try to get so cute?! Why didn't he stick with what was working!?"
You can't retroactively look back at a game and just assume that, had they passed a few more times, there would have been better final results. There's just as likely a chance that the results would have been negative.
Yeah. The game plan was fine and worked and was brilliant.
However, half of New England watching that game said out loud "why the fuck is Harry out there" when that fumble occurred. During a snow hurricane is not the time to add a new punt returner into the mix. I'm the biggest Belichick stan there is, but that was a pretty stupid thing to do. I'd have preferred just having nobody back there.
They had Gunner back in his normal spot and Harry behind him. My assumption is that Gunner was supposed to be the primary returner and Harry was back there to help jump on a fumble, block for Gunner, or to grab a long rolling punt if he can do so safely before it rolls 70 yards to the 2 yard line or something.
It's honestly not a bad plan. You expect a field position game and don't want the other team to be constantly punting for 60-70 yards when they have the wind. Harry is clearly one of your best hands guys. He does the right thing trying to get out of the way, but he stumbles and it takes an unlucky bounce. He obviously should have tried to recover it instead of pretending it didn't hit him but up to that point he's basically doing what you hope him to be doing.
you know its a bad call when Patriots fanboy Dew Magary says that the Pats got hosed on that call
View: https://twitter.com/drewmagary/status/1468054332914417664
And 3/4 of New England was saying "what the fuck is BB doing" for most of the game. Meanwhile, maybe 1% of New England actually knows what its talking about.
I keep going back and forth on if it was one of BB's greatest games ever. Game plan? Maybe. Execution of a game plan? Probably. BB might be one of a few coaches who could come up with that game plan, drill the effectiveness into his team, get them to execute, stick with it and not panic when things got close. Who knows what would have happened if Buffalo could have executed defensively, maybe BB and Josh had a good plan B, but 3 pass attempts in 2021? Impressive. BB also has the advantage of being the greatest ever and owning more rings than jewelry stores, so he doesn't have to care what the media "experts" say or what people are Twittering about on Instaface. Would someone as new as Robert Saleh or on the hot seat like Matt Nagy or as stupid as Mike McCarthy have the leeway to risk that game plan? Doubtful. And as much as everyone hates N'Keal Harry the wide receiver and is terrified of N'Keal Henry the punt returner, N'Keal Henry the run blocker is pretty fucking outstanding and an integral part of the team success. A lot of us would have cut him and tossed him in the Charles, but BB is sticking with him for now and it has not been a net negative for the team. This was a fastball game; the Bills knew what was coming pretty much every time and couldn't hit it.
I mean, that's not what I am doing. During the game I didn't like the fact that they didn't even try to incorporate some basic passing plays, and I don't feel differently just because they won. Thankfully the Bills shat themselves/the Pats defense made plays in the red zone at the end. And again, I'm not saying Mac should have been chucking the thing all over the stadium, a heavy run game plan was the right game plan. I just felt like there were times where a safe pass play was worth the risk, rather than a give-up run that had no chance of getting the first down. The Bills moved the ball well on the Pats in the 4th quarter and had the ball twice in the red zone, counting on them coming away with zero points on those two drives doesn't seem like a great strategy to me.
The other thing is if the Bills did score at the end there and the Pats had 2:00 or so with two timeouts to get points, you are basically asking Mac and the offense to do something they haven't done all game for a chance to win. Allen had issues throwing the ball but he seemed to get more comfortable with it towards the end. I think it would have been hard for Mac to just start chucking it there at the end if he had to.
We also still don’t know how many pass play there were that Mac audibled out of.
The Harry punt return thing was also a bad coaching decision and it was bad execution.
Bolden has been back before plenty of times for returns. If you are that worried, just put back the guy that has done it plenty of times in the NFL to go with Gunner.
The Harry punt return thing was also a bad coaching decision and it was bad execution.
Bolden has been back before plenty of times for returns. If you are that worried, just put back the guy that has done it plenty of times in the NFL to go with Gunner.
Felt like the first 3rd down of the game - the pitch that Harris dropped - was an audible. But it may have been an audible from a run to a different run.
Yeah, I agree with this. Just look at the other sideline: Allen has a much better arm than Jones, much more suited to driving through the wind, Buffalo's receivers are much better, and mostly the Pats D was playing pretty conservative, and every pass was still an adventure. Knox dropped one, maybe two, a couple of Allen's passes sailed or tailed, Diggs failed to track what would have been an easy TD under normal circumstances. The Bills wound up averaging 4.1 yards per pass play and 4.0 per run play, so passing didn't help them much either, and they have a lot better passing offense than we do.
I think it's also telling that on both of Mac's non-screen pass attempts, he rolled out to create an even shorter throw, even though that hasn't been in the playbook much this year. And he still threw a bad ball on the completion to Jonnu.
In fairness, it's hard to hit them when every fastball is thrown right at your fucking head.
But that's not TD's claim to fame. “The Trent Dilfer of SoSH” calls to mind someone who the rest of the board carried to victory via a herculean effort, despite a pedestrian performance by themself.
Belichick's most famous game plan, the one that actually is in Canton, was one wide-right FG attempt away from being a loss. So is Scott Norwood the only reason that game plan is in the HOF?
I don’t see what that game has to do with the one last night.
But the answer to your question might very well be yes. Would Schilling’s bloody sock be in the HOF if he lost the game that night? Probably not.
If the Pats had lost last night on that last drive, do you really think the overriding view of BB would be “wow that was amazing to only throw three times in the hopes you could do something that has never been done before in NFL history”, or more like “what was he THINKING?... you have to throw SOME!”?
I was referencing your earlier point "I just think we ought to remember that one play at the end and the Pats lose, and we are all looking at BB's "masterpiece" very very differently, wondering just WTF he was doing never passing at all. People would call him "arrogant" and all that. But they hold on to win and it's a game for Canton." My point was that the Super Bowl game (coincidentally also against the Bills) was another game where "one play at the end" and [BB's team] loses. The fact that a game is one play from changing outcomes shouldn't change our opinion of the game plan as a whole.
He said just we shouldn't because of the fact that the game is one play away...not if they lose. And he's right because the game was one play away last night and people are gushing over Bill's game plan nationwide.
No. He said, “So is Scott Norwood the only reason that game plan is in the HOF?” The implication is that because he missed BB’s plan is in the HOF, but if he had made it, it wouldn’t be.
If it was just “one play away”, then Norwood would be irrelevant to the discussion.
If it was just “one play away”, then Norwood would be irrelevant to the discussion.
I'll drop it after this because it's not that important, but if you read his follow up clarification that he made for you, that's not what he's saying. I think you're misunderstanding the Norwood comment. It was meant to be a rhetorical question, and you both agree that the answer to that question is "Yes...they were one play away."
The potential for bad conditions was known last weekend when the look ahead Total of 46.5 opened on Sunday at 45.The confidence level in the forecast increased on Wed/Thurs when the Total was bet down to 43.5 amidst much talk about wind/snow and then on Friday it was hammered down to 41.5 when the 30-40mph winds looked certain which is a ridiculous low number for these two offenses in normal conditions. During the day on Monday it was bet down to 39.5 or 39 which you don’t even see in today’s game with two anemic offenses (Denver/Detroit is 41.5 this week). There is every indication that Belichick knew with pretty good certainty what the conditions were likely going to be when he woke up Friday morning about 86 hours prior to kickoff and aside from a Monday report of a potential slight decrease in 2H wind there was nothing to suggest that wind wouldn’t be a major factor in the game since early Friday morning.
Edit: A good Twitter follow for NFL weather is Kevin Roth at @KevinRothWx He tends to be a little conservative in his estimates which isn’t a bad thing as he’s never going to go flying over the edge……and if he does it’s pure Armageddon.
Last edited: