what about “Pigskin Chicken Little” or for a Sox spin on it, “Premature Career Twlight Predictor”
Let's say BB stays on until he retires. What does that mean for the franchise?
- Thread starter Eddie Jurak
- Start date
I agree. I thought a flea flicker might have been so effective that my father could have scored untouched if thrown out there at WR.
Not interested in a RB having to take false steps to the precipice of the line in a 9 man box so he can hopefully pitch it back to the QB for a knuckleball 25 yards downfield. It might work, ie you may get a guy sprung off a corner with the single high safety late, but it’s a pretty risky play in those conditions and a loaded box.
If you’re in 22 personnel with a max protect? I think it could have worked because after literally like 30 straight run plays that WR might not have anyone within 15 yards of him, so you’re in “TD or incompletion” territory. Obviously, BB didn’t think it was a good call, so it’s a moot point. I guess the fact that the wind was so extreme that a punter’s drop got materially affected suggests that the pitch back to the qb would have been high risk.
I thought the League employed sideline police to discourage such egregious behavior.
I don't think protection is the issue and it's not just the toss back to the QB. A flea flicker invoves 4 exchanges of the football, three of which involve the ball in the air. With wind gusts of 50 mph, I can't see BB going anywhere near this play as long as the Pats were leading.
Pat McAfee talked about how Bailey adjusted the way he was dropping the ball, and how low he was kicking it so close to his drop hand to help reduce the amount of time that a wind gust would deflect it. It wasn't normal "football" wind 10-15 mph. This was sustained 25-30 with much larger gusts.
So yeah, I doubt the Pats were going to try a lot of throws of the ball just floating in the air like flea flickers tend to as it's tossed between the RB and QB. Even the stretch tosses looked like they were somewhat adventurous the few times the Pats did them. I turtled in fear every time they did one hoping it wouldn't get blown off course.
We literally saw a ball thrown by Allen (who has one of the biggest arms) with wind at his back get turned sideways on an 8 or 9 yard route. The first one that almost got picked.
So yeah, I doubt the Pats were going to try a lot of throws of the ball just floating in the air like flea flickers tend to as it's tossed between the RB and QB. Even the stretch tosses looked like they were somewhat adventurous the few times the Pats did them. I turtled in fear every time they did one hoping it wouldn't get blown off course.
We literally saw a ball thrown by Allen (who has one of the biggest arms) with wind at his back get turned sideways on an 8 or 9 yard route. The first one that almost got picked.
Not only this in all caps, but the reactions from opposing teams *after* they've lost like this in the past 20 years was well-represented by the "seeing ghosts" Bills' head coach's post game sour grapes.
Teams have routinely lost close games to the Pats then just can't understand how, on paper, they lost. It's not necessarily field position, total offense, total defense, or other stats on the sheet. BB preaches situational football, and in games like this and other fabled razor-thin victories the Pats win it's because the losing team lost more in-game situations than the Patriots did, which is what is reflected in the final score.
"Let's not give BB too much credit" is just like when losing teams say "the better team didn't win today" when the games are played this close and the loser is the team that blinks first.
Last edited:
I agree, but I want to push back a little in that it didn't really work as well as we thought. Yes they had a big day rushing the ball, but they got stoned a TON as well. They only scored 14 points. They only had 241 yards of offense and 11 first downs. I loved that game and am very glad it played out the way it did. But it wasn't like the Pats were just pounding the ball down their throat all night long.
Here were NE's possessions:
3 plays, -1 yards, punt
3 plays, 5 yards, punt
3 plays, 69 yards, TD (the 64-yard TD run on 3rd down by Harris)
9 plays, 52 yards, FG
3 plays, 4 yards, punt
4 plays, 25 yards, half
5 plays, 4 yards, punt
14 plays, 59 yards, FG
3 plays, 6 yards, punt
4 plays, -9 yards, game (we won't count this one as it was just them kneeling to end the game)
So in 9 legitimate possessions, the Pats had one great possession (the TD) highlighted by one huge run on 3rd and 5 for a long TD. They had two solid possessions that ended up in field goals. And the rest were garbage, where they got absolutely stuffed. I don't want to play the "if you take this one away" game because every play counted, but if we take away the 64 yard TD, the Pats ran for 158 yards on 45 carries. Take away the last possession, and it was 167 yards on 41 carries, which is 4.1 yards a carry.
Which is PHENOMENAL when facing 9, 10, and 11 men fronts selling out to stop the run. So I want to give full credit for that because you're not supposed to get those kinds of yards against that kind of defense.
BUT...it didn't really lead to that much production in reality. 241 total yards is a bad offensive game. 11 first downs is a terrible offensive game. 14 points is a bad offensive game. I'm fully on board with how they chose to play it given the weather conditions, but let's not pretend that they rammed it down Buffalo's throat all night long. They had one great run, two other solid drives, and the rest of the game they got absolutely stuffed.
What I thought was outstanding was the way it ate up time of possession. That was a huge factor and a big reason they won the game. But McDermott is right - at the end of the game, Buffalo had two great chances to score and win the game, and they couldn't. Missed FG and then the fourth down stop at the end.
This is a pretty objective take, and I get it. But, "two great chances to score" are balanced out by "the muffed punt", in the coulda woulda shoulda category. Wind affected all three of those plays, so it's not like you can discount one and not the others. And there were other "almosts" that the Pats had. Almosts aren't worth all that much.
But also, are those actually bad offensive numbers, given the context? If 100 teams played in those conditions 100 times (sample size: 5,000 games!), what do you think the average stats would be? You can't compare the stats from Monday to "every other game". Hell, we regularly compare dome stats to outdoor stats on this site (with some mixed results).
I'm not saying no team could have gotten better stats. But how much better, on average? The conditions basically eliminated the most important and dynamic aspect of football in this era. Peak TB12 maybe would have managed to eke out one more score, and probable one more FG chance that might have missed anyway?
Plus, keep in mind that both teams had paltry offensive yards (Pats 241, Bills 230). So the elements really affected both teams ability to move the ball.
Cause McDermott's plan relied on high variance outcomes where Wind was the major factor. The Patriots' plan relied on low variance outcomes where wind wasn't a factor.
And it's true... you play that game a 1000 times, and Pats would not win all of them. They'd win a huge chunk of them I'd bet.
And it's true... you play that game a 1000 times, and Pats would not win all of them. They'd win a huge chunk of them I'd bet.
I would argue they had 2 outstanding possessions. The TD, and the 2nd field goal drive. They took over possession with 6:35 left in the 3rd quarter. At this point, the whole world knew that they were only running. Despite that they, A) killed the rest of the quarter and thus did not give Buffalo another possession with the wind, and B) drove it deep into Buffalo territory and were able to kick a FG with the wind. This forced Buffalo into needing a TD, or two FG's while driving into the wind. As we saw a few minutes later, kicking FG's into that end of the stadium was a futile effort.
Well, I think the Pats ran GREAT considering they were going up against 9/10/11 men in the box, all committed to stopping the run. Especially considering they didn't even TRY to throw all game long.
And obviously they did better than the Bills, who at least tried to throw.
So maybe 14 points was about the most you could have expected for a team to score. But still, let's not pretend they ran up and down the field all day long, because they didn't. It was impossible for them to have done that, and they didn't. But they still played very well. I'm not saying otherwise.
This is really well-said.
In the Belichick era, much of the success had been attributed to the coach (fairly IMO). While he deflects this and points to the execution of the players, he's the one who drills situational football again and again. If you've been to training camp, the practices are run like a Swiss watch. Hell, we saw the videos of them working on the Malcolm Butler interception play months before.
We win because situational football is everything. Winning between the 20s is far less important. And Bill knows that and trains that and finds players who will execute that.
I'm not even asking about whether the Pats would win more often than not. In most of those games, the Pats don't muff a punt and basically gift them a TD. At the same time, in many, maybe most, of those games that pass towards the end isn't deflected, or that early-game handoff isn't bungled, etc. etc.
But, if that game is played 1000 times, what would be the average offensive production of any/all of the teams. Would it be all that much better than what the Pats did?
@Chad Finn with what I can only assume is some excellent sub-tweeting of this thread.
GRIEVANCE OF THE SEASON
It’s simple: The grievance is with anyone who dared, when the Patriots started 2-4, to suggest that Belichick “had lost it” or was never an equal partner with Tom Brady in the two decades of extraordinary success. Unoriginal sports radio hosts have to do this stuff. You don’t.
GRIEVANCE OF THE SEASON
It’s simple: The grievance is with anyone who dared, when the Patriots started 2-4, to suggest that Belichick “had lost it” or was never an equal partner with Tom Brady in the two decades of extraordinary success. Unoriginal sports radio hosts have to do this stuff. You don’t.
Not sure the best place to post this, but I've been thinking a lot about the ball vs. wind decisions from Monday night and how the game might have played out differently. I think this BB thread is the most appropriate thread, because I would argue that McDermott screwed up with his decisions related to the coin toss:
I think the optimal strategy on Monday, if you won the toss, was to take the ball in the first half. This would set up a situation where the other team has to make the choice at halftime of either getting the ball, or risk not having the wind in the 4th quarter. Had McDermott taken the ball to start the game, if the Pats had the same 11-7 lead at halftime that occurred, I bet there is a better than 50% chance that BB would have elected to take the wind in the 4th quarter, thus giving both the ball and the wind to Buffalo in the 3rd and an extra possession to the Bills. This would have taken some forethought on McDermott's part instead of the normal, safe "defer" choice.
It also makes me wonder what BB would have done had the Pats won the toss.
I think the optimal strategy on Monday, if you won the toss, was to take the ball in the first half. This would set up a situation where the other team has to make the choice at halftime of either getting the ball, or risk not having the wind in the 4th quarter. Had McDermott taken the ball to start the game, if the Pats had the same 11-7 lead at halftime that occurred, I bet there is a better than 50% chance that BB would have elected to take the wind in the 4th quarter, thus giving both the ball and the wind to Buffalo in the 3rd and an extra possession to the Bills. This would have taken some forethought on McDermott's part instead of the normal, safe "defer" choice.
It also makes me wonder what BB would have done had the Pats won the toss.
Pats would have deferred had they won. Even at the opening kick, one cannot be certain what the weather is going to be in the second half. There's probably value in getting to choose later.
Can a team win the toss and choose the wind? Or are they limited to choosing between kick/receive/defer?
This came up briefly in one of the other threads. Teams can choose which side to defend
I think it's unlikely, possible but unlikely, Belichick chooses wind in 4th with Bills getting an extra possession. Either way you are getting the wind for one quarter and the wind direction didn't change the Pats game plan. Mainly a factor in kicking decisions.
However, you're also only looking at it with hindsight with the way the game unfolded. If you think having the wind in the 4th is that important and the correct decision going in then McDermott made the correct choice. He doesn't have the benefit of knowing score at halftime.
Perhaps he decided at half with the score and way teams were playing it was better to have the extra possession.
I think it's unlikely, possible but unlikely, Belichick chooses wind in 4th with Bills getting an extra possession. Either way you are getting the wind for one quarter and the wind direction didn't change the Pats game plan. Mainly a factor in kicking decisions.
However, you're also only looking at it with hindsight with the way the game unfolded. If you think having the wind in the 4th is that important and the correct decision going in then McDermott made the correct choice. He doesn't have the benefit of knowing score at halftime.
Perhaps he decided at half with the score and way teams were playing it was better to have the extra possession.
Yes, a team can choose direction. There's a famous example of where a team was trying to do exactly that (because of wind) and accidentally selected kick instead, see "We'll kick to the clock." (Intended to attack the clock end, but "we'll kick" controlled, so they both didn't get the ball AND didn't get the wind, but as I recall the defense held and it worked out in the end.)
Haynes was quick on his feet defending what could have been a bonehead decision:
When asked about his mistake following the game, Haynes said "I knew we'd need the wind behind us in the sixth quarter."
I officiated high school and prep football for 10 years or so and remember being trained to be sure the kids coming out for the coin flip knew what their coach wanted to do. When the wing officials brought out the teams, we’d ask the captains what they were going to choose if they won the flip. Usually done close to the sidelines so the coach could hear.
I thought the choice to take the wind in OT was deliberate, but perhaps I'm misremembering.
Taking the wind in OT can be the right choice, especially with the current rules. In the 2nd possession, a FG can either win or extend the game. You just need to hope that your defense doesn't give up a 48 yard passing play to Ryan Fitzpatrick.
Take the wind might have been the intention, but Slater chose “kick off” and the Jets got to pick the direction.
Let's be clear here. There was no wind in the calculation to kick off that day in New York in 2015. That's what made the decision so fucking ridiculous. Only 3 teams have ever deferred in overtime, and BB has done it twice. The first time was because of wind, and the Pats won, but the wind in New York that day was negligible, at 11mph (the average wind at Gillette is over 13mph for reference).
| deferred) |
| Patriots |
| outdoors |
| fieldturf |
| 3:05 |
| 78,160 |
| 57 degrees, relative humidity 83%, wind 11 mph, wind chill 0 |
| New England Patriots -3.0 |
| 45.0 (over) |
CLIFF!
I'm actually surprised that this thread hasn't resurfaced. It's not about the actual losses...any given Sunday, etc. etc. It's more the manner of it. Sloppy and uninspired play, mental errors, lack of discipline, etc.
To be clear, I don't think it means he's "lost" his fast ball. Maybe a bit of a dead arm the last few weeks, which is weird coming off the bye. It's not about McCorkle, it's about overall readiness.
But we'll see.
I'm actually surprised that this thread hasn't resurfaced. It's not about the actual losses...any given Sunday, etc. etc. It's more the manner of it. Sloppy and uninspired play, mental errors, lack of discipline, etc.
To be clear, I don't think it means he's "lost" his fast ball. Maybe a bit of a dead arm the last few weeks, which is weird coming off the bye. It's not about McCorkle, it's about overall readiness.
But we'll see.
Has this been the worst end of season for the Pats in the whole BB era? There are only a few contenders.
Going into their by week, the Patriots were 9-4 and the 1 seed in the AFC.
Coming out of the bye week, they finished out the season 1-4 including losing the playoff game they backed into. The one win was a blowout against hapless 3-14 Jacksonville. The 4 losses (2 to Buffalo, 2 to 9-8 non playoff teams) had something in common: the Pats fell way behind in each and every one of them. In all 4, the Patriots came out lifeless on both sides of the ball* and fell insurmountably behind. In the reg season games they did make efforts to come back but could not count ont he defense to step up with a late stop.
Anyway, in BB's 22 years coaching the team, this has been one of the words ends of a season, maybe THE worst. There are only a few contenders.
In the Matt Cassel year, when they missed the playoffs, they closed out the season 4-0 and 5 of their last 6, which was better.
In 2002, they dropped 2 of their last 3 to win up 9-7 and out of the playoffs. But that is only 2 of 3, not 4 of 5.
In 2000, BB's first year, they dropped 2 of 3, and 3 of 5, but that was a 5-11 team
In 2020, they also faded late, dropping 3 of their last 4 to finish 6-9 and out of the playoffs.
And then there is 2019, another playoff year. That team, like this one, faded late and lose their playoff game, but not quite as badly and this team did. The 2019 team closed 2-4 instead of 1-4, and was not routed in their playoff game (one TD loss).
For my money this was the biggest fold of the whole 22 year (so far) run, because of 1) how good things looked entering this stretch, and 2) how thoroughly lifeless the team looked after the bye, and 3) they were awful on both sides of the ball.
* Mac Jones did not come out lifeless in this one. Converted 2 third and longs to keep the drive going, one . Threw what should have been a great TD pass to Agholor but for a great play be the safety to intercept. But he was the sole sign of life in the Pats offense, and even he sputtered out after the pick. On that drive, he had to deal with one of his receivers tipping a pass away from another one - which suggests he was in the wrong place to begin with - and he had to deal with a wide open Brandon Bolden simply dropping a ball 20+ yards downfield.
Going into their by week, the Patriots were 9-4 and the 1 seed in the AFC.
Coming out of the bye week, they finished out the season 1-4 including losing the playoff game they backed into. The one win was a blowout against hapless 3-14 Jacksonville. The 4 losses (2 to Buffalo, 2 to 9-8 non playoff teams) had something in common: the Pats fell way behind in each and every one of them. In all 4, the Patriots came out lifeless on both sides of the ball* and fell insurmountably behind. In the reg season games they did make efforts to come back but could not count ont he defense to step up with a late stop.
Anyway, in BB's 22 years coaching the team, this has been one of the words ends of a season, maybe THE worst. There are only a few contenders.
In the Matt Cassel year, when they missed the playoffs, they closed out the season 4-0 and 5 of their last 6, which was better.
In 2002, they dropped 2 of their last 3 to win up 9-7 and out of the playoffs. But that is only 2 of 3, not 4 of 5.
In 2000, BB's first year, they dropped 2 of 3, and 3 of 5, but that was a 5-11 team
In 2020, they also faded late, dropping 3 of their last 4 to finish 6-9 and out of the playoffs.
And then there is 2019, another playoff year. That team, like this one, faded late and lose their playoff game, but not quite as badly and this team did. The 2019 team closed 2-4 instead of 1-4, and was not routed in their playoff game (one TD loss).
For my money this was the biggest fold of the whole 22 year (so far) run, because of 1) how good things looked entering this stretch, and 2) how thoroughly lifeless the team looked after the bye, and 3) they were awful on both sides of the ball.
* Mac Jones did not come out lifeless in this one. Converted 2 third and longs to keep the drive going, one . Threw what should have been a great TD pass to Agholor but for a great play be the safety to intercept. But he was the sole sign of life in the Pats offense, and even he sputtered out after the pick. On that drive, he had to deal with one of his receivers tipping a pass away from another one - which suggests he was in the wrong place to begin with - and he had to deal with a wide open Brandon Bolden simply dropping a ball 20+ yards downfield.
I know you’re talk in g about more than just ‘the last game’, but the postseason loss to the Jets in…2012? Whatever. That was really bad, as a single game thing…
that being said, your overall point still stands. Things just seemed to unravel in mulate aspects of the game since November.
As an admittedly fair-weather fan, I find it hard to top 2019 for worst-finish. Dropping the regular season finale with a bye on the line and then being unceremoniously dispatched by a Titans team when you had the greatest quarterback of all time on your side. If anything, TB's Super Bowl victory last year has only magnified the extent to which Brady's last year was squandered here. Anyone who thinks this year was a worse ending really needs to re-evaluate their expectations for what rebuilding with a rookie QB in the NFL looks like.
The case for 2019 as most dissappointing would be that that team was coming off a SB win, still had Brady - who had at least one more SB in him, and got off to a 10-1 start.
The case for this year is the fact that the team charged into its by week with a 7 game win streak that vaulted it into the 1 seed and was completely and utterly lifeless after that, offensively and defensively. And lost its playoff game by 4 TDs, not one.
I will say I did have an irrational hatred for the 2009 team, but had forgotten they won 3 of their final 4 games to earn a division title, and the loss was a meaningless one as far as playoff seeding went. Of course, the also lost Welker that game. Still, I did not feel optimistic about the team's future after they got their helmets handed to them to the tune of a 33-14 score that seemed deceivingly closer than it really was. Their defense was old and slow and lacked any promising young players aside from Mayo.
But this year's team seems like it will take a much longer rebuild on the defensive side. It's not the coaching, but the roster. I think their #1 seeding pre-bye week was a bit of a mirage, to be honest.
I would go with 2019, you can see the future here. Beyond 2019 was just staring at a cliff.
I understand why you say this, and it may be right, but the major 180 the defense pulled from before to after the bye week is still hard to reconcile with 'mirage.' The offensive struggles fit that case much better.
You're going to have to convince me why the coaching isn't part of the problem also.
Why do you think it is a problem?
They have the best defensive coach in history, its not crazy to think they know what they are doing.
Coaching can’t suddenly make Bentley mediocre in coverage or give McCourty a few steps back.
The defense was decent early in the season, and played the Bucs tough in the Brady Bowl. Then it struggled the following week against a bad Texans team, and couldn't stop Dallas at all.
Then they had a good stretch, against mostly weaker opponents: Jets, Chargers, Panthers, Browns, Falcons. Caught the Titans when they were still adjusting to the loss of Derrick Henry. Then the Bills game in the hurricane. Still, the D played well.
Something happened to Judon (probably injury or CoVid related), and the rigors of the season caught up to the older players: Collins, Van Noy, McCourty, Hightower, which happens. And they got probably the worst matchup possible in the Bills a 3rd time.
Judon played significantly more snaps this year than he had ever done in the past. So it could be several things but I assume fatigue is at least one factor.
I have a problem with the coaching staff punting at the wrong time. That is 100% coaching, but has nothing to do with the defense.
It's not the plays or the schema on the D. With few exceptions, the players are either old, slow, or both. I'm convinced Judon got hurt. There is only so much the coaching can do to cover up these type of faults. The league rewards speed these days, and the Pats defense has very little of it right now.
If it didn't end poorly, it probably wouldn't end.
Time passes everyone by eventually. The true test for Belichick, now, is how he responds. If we get more of the same drafting and free agent duds and they go 9-8 or worse, then it's probably time to call it. If they get into the playoffs again, it's hard to call for his head.
The only years they haven't gone to the playoffs in his tenure were Brady's first full year (thanks in part to the Jets(?) tanking it in the last game of the season), the year Cassel had to lead the team (going 11-5, which is usually good enough for a berth), and with Cam. I think he's earned at least one more season at the helm.
Time passes everyone by eventually. The true test for Belichick, now, is how he responds. If we get more of the same drafting and free agent duds and they go 9-8 or worse, then it's probably time to call it. If they get into the playoffs again, it's hard to call for his head.
The only years they haven't gone to the playoffs in his tenure were Brady's first full year (thanks in part to the Jets(?) tanking it in the last game of the season), the year Cassel had to lead the team (going 11-5, which is usually good enough for a berth), and with Cam. I think he's earned at least one more season at the helm.
Someone needs to do an "And I took that personally" meme with a box of Kraft in place of MJ.
At least one year?
I mean, no kidding, he’s not getting fired after a playoff berth with a promising rookie QB.
I know the NFL is a tough, cut throat business, but I think Bill’s job security is just fine.
2015 should get a mention, too - started 10-0, finished 2-4 to blow the #1 seed, squeaked by the Alex Smith Chiefs and lost to a punchless Broncos team in the AFCCG.
For as much as Belichick's teams have a reputation for peaking late, it hasn't been the case as much as it has over the past decade.