The Game ball Thread: Week 7 vs. Jets

[Stitch01]

There's just no way the win expectancy was 94% to start that drive, anyone here ever willing to take 1-19 odds that the Pats win the game when the Jets got the ball back?  Have to look more at their methodology, but doesn't pass the smell test.  Not needing a FG.
 
Winning ugly is fine, its going to happen during the season. I do think there is legitimate reason to be concerned about the front seven going forward.  They've sucked against the run 3 times in seven games, Mayo is gone, and the pass rush is very mediocre.

 

[mascho]

There's just no way the win expectancy was 94% to start that drive, anyone here ever willing to take 1-19 odds that the Pats win the game when the Jets got the ball back?  Have to look more at their methodology, but doesn't pass the smell test.  Not needing a FG.

The Pats' win expectancy was 94% when they started their last offensive drive. It dropped to 84.1% for the start of the Jets' final drive. 

 

[ivanvamp]

The Jets did whatever they wanted to.  They ran for 200+ yards.  They controlled the clock for 40+ minutes.  They didn't turn it over.  Geno had a good game.  THey were 9-16 on third down.  Their kicker was essentially perfect.  They out gained the Pats by 100+ yards.  They didn't punt until the 4th quarter.
 
And they still lost.  
 
Hahaha.

 

[Stitch01]

The Pats' win expectancy was 94% when they started their last offensive drive. It dropped to 84.1% for the start of the Jets' final drive. 

That still seems high based on game circumstances, but makes more sense.

 

[Toe Nash]

I'd say the Jets were much better than 9-1 to get into field goal range when they got the ball back given how the defense had played all night.

With Geno Smith? I'll take my chances against Geno. As it is he only got close enough for a VERY long field goal try.
 
I'm not sure you can be too hard on the Pats for much in this game. It was a short week, the Jets and Rex were playing for their lives and they always treat the Pats like a Super Bowl anyway. Geno probably played the best game I've ever seen from him, the Jets didn't turn it over, their secondary only had one gaffe...I'll take the win.
 
That said, I thought the offensive line played great, especially with Stork and Connolly out. 
 
For goats, I thought the defensive line was poor at containing Geno, especially when they had done so well against mobile QBs (like Tebow) before. They got penetration but allowed him to escape when they needed to hold the pocket and collapse it slowly in. Easier said than done, yes.
 
The run defense was not good either but I'm not very concerned about that. Frustrating, but in 2014, the times you lose because of bad run D are minimal (especially when they didn't allow any long runs)

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

Last night is the blueprint to beat this team as it currently exists. Run the ball, keep Brady off the field, shorten the game. Lucky for us the Jets suck in the redzone. If they don't suck in the RZ and we do, the 14-12 score would have been 28-6. We're that close to getting run out of our own building by a 1-5 team.
 
Good news is we have a 10 day break and a bye week coming up, so hopefully the D gets right against the run. But we won't see a secondary this weak the rest of the year, so those easy picking throws aren't going to be there. 
 
Gameball to Amendola, Brady, Offensive Line, Gronk. I can't see reason to reward the D.

 

[crystalline]

That still seems high based on game circumstances, but makes more sense.

That win expectancy is for an average team in those circumstances and doesn't take into account the performance of the Jets and Pats offenses and defenses in the game so far.
Also it dropped from 94 to 84 percent after three runs. It would have gone up to say 98 percent if the Pats got the first down passing. But it would have gone down (to 40-50%?) if they passed even once and did not get the first down. Running three times might have been a negative EV play but this is a time that the mean of a distribution is misleading.

 

[Super Nomario]

Last night is the blueprint to beat this team as it currently exists. Run the ball, keep Brady off the field, shorten the game. Lucky for us the Jets suck in the redzone. If they don't suck in the RZ and we do, the 14-12 score would have been 28-6. We're that close to getting run out of our own building by a 1-5 team.

FYI, both teams were 2 of 4 in the red zone. I guess if the Jets had been awesome in the red zone and we'd been terrible, things would be different, but it was pretty even. And why are you taking away the Vereen touchdown?

 

[Stitch01]

I know its based on average teams or something like that, think a defense that had been on the field for 40 minutes on three days rest in good kicking conditions with a kicker that was good from 58 to that side of the field earlier skews the numbers higher for the Jets.
 
Its 100% if they get the first down on the 2nd or 3rd play, they kneel it out.
 
I don't think 1st and ten on the 12 with 1:10 left can be 84% and 1st and 10 on the 12 with 1:45 left can be like 50%, but let me find an example and get a number.
 
We're a bit far in the weeds here.  I don't like the conservative direction decision making has taken, I would agree that last night isn't the most egregious example.

 

[gammoseditor]

The CBS graphic said Folk would have been good from 58. That's a bag difference from actually being good from 58. 58 would be a career long for Folk. He's been around for 8 years. The fact that it was blocked is evidence that Folk changed how he kicked the ball from the prior kick that supposedly would have been good from 58.

 

[DJnVa]

I'm not basing it on the results of a single dice roll, it's been a pattern over years.

 
So, your quibble is with the way the best coach of his generation plus manages in-game strategy?
 
Game ball to Tom for his impersonation of an Italian soccer player. Granted he was pushed late prior to that, but the flop was hilarious.
 
It's clear to me that if this OL improves/gets healthy and gives him time, Brady is still top-notch.
 
 
 
 

That LaFell pick gets called illegal contact on the DB like four times a game this year, refs obviously have "watch LaFell picking" in their pregame notes so need to burn that play or run it with one of the other receivers for a big.

     
 
You think eventually that memo would be "watch Denver's entire passing offense".

 

[Stitch01]

Yes.  I think he's bad on 4th down strategy now. 

 

[Stitch01]

The CBS graphic said Folk would have been good from 58. That's a bag difference from actually being good from 58. 58 would be a career long for Folk. He's been around for 8 years. The fact that it was blocked is evidence that Folk changed how he kicked the ball from the prior kick that supposedly would have been good from 58.

Those win expectancy numbers had us as a coin flip before the kick, which seems right.

 

[tims4wins]

Yes.  I think he's bad on 4th down strategy now. 

 
Part of that is the offense, and the line. He doesn't have as much confidence in picking up a yard as he used to, and I agree with him for the most part.

 

[DJnVa]

Last night is the blueprint to beat this team as it currently exists. Run the ball, keep Brady off the field, shorten the game.

 

Luckily not every game is a division rival, on short rest (4 games in 2.5 weeks), after losing our defensive captain and starting RB on that short week.
 
 
That said, the "blueprint" thing is becoming overused. Unless of course the next team that wants to use it can completely replicate the exact conditions leading into the game the blueprint was formulated.

 

[Stitch01]

 
Part of that is the offense, and the line. He doesn't have as much confidence in picking up a yard as he used to, and I agree with him for the most part.

Im sure that's why he's adjusting, but unless you think they can't convert some of these 4th downs at 30% clips he's overadjusted.
 
Probably should just move the discussion to a different thread, I was venting and it wasnt a major factor last night.
 
EDIT: 20% is overstating it

 

[tims4wins]

Im sure that's why he's adjusting, but unless you think they can't convert some of these 4th downs at 20-30% clips he's overadjusted.
 
Probably should just move the discussion to a different thread, I was venting and it wasnt a major factor last night.

 
I've noticed it too, he passed up a couple in Buffalo as well. But on the flip side, they got stuffed on 3rd and short a couple times in Buffalo too. I don't have too much of a problem with his 4th down strategy this year. If the offense continues its current trajectory I could see him being more aggressive.
 
You also have to consider the defensive side of the ball here. BB probably has more confidence in the D this year, which means there is less of a need to go for the 4th downs in a general sense. Before, it was partly out of necessity due to having a really bad D.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

I know its based on average teams or something like that, think a defense that had been on the field for 40 minutes on three days rest in good kicking conditions with a kicker that was good from 58 to that side of the field earlier skews the numbers higher for the Jets.
 
Its 100% if they get the first down on the 2nd or 3rd play, they kneel it out.
 
I don't think 1st and ten on the 12 with 1:10 left can be 84% and 1st and 10 on the 12 with 1:45 left can be like 50%, but let me find an example and get a number.
 
We're a bit far in the weeds here.  I don't like the conservative direction decision making has taken, I would agree that last night isn't the most egregious example.

If they throw on second down, they probably have to throw on third down too, in which case the Jets may get the ball with more than 1:45 or 1:50.

I think your first point is the right one, which is why I think whatever league-wide numbers say, giving the Jets the ball with an extra 40 seconds in the context of that game felt like it would make a very large difference. I was thinking hard last night about what the proper play was there on second down. I would have run. I would not have run the play they ran, to be sure. A turnover potential behind the line of scrimmage play. And, as it turned out, 1:10 was not enough for the Jets to score. Yes, it was uncomfortable, but to me it was not the conservative decision, but the correct decision. You have to factor in that sometimes you get the first down even if you run. So, an important part of the equation is the conversion rate if you pass over the conversion rate if you run, because the latter is a non-negligible number.

Also remember that for pass completions to be game ending, they cannot be out of bounds. This actually matter in these situations because using the whole field sometimes means putting receivers in position where they cannot stay in bounds. A 7 yard sideline completion on second down is fine during the course of a game, but if it happens there it's almost as bad as an incompletion (other than making it third and 7 instead of third and 14) because you still have to run another play on the north side of the two minute warning. Also, passes put turnovers more in play, and while conventional wisdom in that "just need a first down" situation seems to be "it will work because they don't expect it," when you watch those plays the reality is that QBs appear to be coached to be highly conservative. How often do you see the same exact play when a team tries to pass to get a first down to win the game? The QB rolls out at the first sign of pressure and throws 10 yards out of bounds. My point here is that in that situation, there does not seem to the same arsenal of plays available or palatable as in different situations. On the other side of this balance is that sometimes you get the short in bounds pass which is the equivalent of a run anyway.

 

[tims4wins]

Another factor last night (regarding the last series) was that it wasn't like the Jets were throwing the ball with a ton of success all night. The Pats had to like their chances putting the game in Geno's hands. They just didn't defend the sidelines enough (and got unlucky with the no review, which as an aside BB should have called a timeout after to give time for a possible review).

 

[DJnVa]

So, anyone have a gif or anything of that catch on the Jets final drive where it seemed the WR didn't actually make the catch?

 

[Stitch01]

If they throw on second down, they probably have to throw on third down too, in which case the Jets may get the ball with more than 1:45 or 1:50.

I think your first point is the right one, which is why I think whatever league-wide numbers say, giving the Jets the ball with an extra 40 seconds in the context of that game felt like it would make a very large difference. I was thinking hard last night about what the proper play was there on second down. I would have run. I would not have run the play they ran, to be sure. A turnover potential behind the line of scrimmage play. And, as it turned out, 1:10 was not enough for the Jets to score. Yes, it was uncomfortable, but to me it was not the conservative decision, but the correct decision. You have to factor in that sometimes you get the first down even if you run. So, an important part of the equation is the conversion rate if you pass over the conversion rate if you run, because the latter is a non-negligible number.

Also remember that for pass completions to be game ending, they cannot be out of bounds. This actually matter in these situations because using the whole field sometimes means putting receivers in position where they cannot stay in bounds. A 7 yard sideline completion on second down is fine during the course of a game, but if it happens there it's almost as bad as an incompletion (other than making it third and 7 instead of third and 14) because you still have to run another play on the north side of the two minute warning. Also, passes put turnovers more in play, and while conventional wisdom in that "just need a first down" situation seems to be "it will work because they don't expect it," when you watch those plays the reality is that QBs appear to be coached to be highly conservative. How often do you see the same exact play when a team tries to pass to get a first down to win the game? The QB rolls out at the first sign of pressure and throws 10 yards out of bounds. My point here is that in that situation, there does not seem to the same arsenal of plays available or palatable as in different situations. On the other side of this balance is that sometimes you get the short in bounds pass which is the equivalent of a run anyway.

Its pretty much game ending even if they go out of bounds once the Jets are out of TO's.  1st down takes it to the 2 minute warning, 3rd down snap is just under 1:20, Jets get the ball with under 30 seconds left.  Need a blocked punt or a miracle at that point.  Six yard out on 2nd and 10 isnt ideal for sure, but 3rd and manageable gives you a lot of options including a much higher percentage of just running for a first down to end the game so Id say its still much better than an incompletion.
\
According to those pro football reference numbers mentioned above, Jets got to 75% or so to win the game with 20 second left.

 

[Stitch01]

So, anyone have a gif or anything of that catch on the Jets final drive where it seemed the WR didn't actually make the catch?

Havent seen a gif, and maybe there's some goofy catch rule because lol NFL rules, but its incredibly clear watching it on replay that he gets zero feet inbounds after the ball actually stops moving.
 
Hard for BB to know anything is amiss in time to call timeout.  He's on the opposite sideline and neither Pats defender says anything to indicate the call is wrong.  Zero clue how the booth doesnt buzz down.

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

FYI, both teams were 2 of 4 in the red zone. I guess if the Jets had been awesome in the red zone and we'd been terrible, things would be different, but it was pretty even. And why are you taking away the Vereen touchdown?

Jets had 4 field goals to start the game. I was merely flipping TD's to FG's to make a point. So yes Vereen's TD wasn't redzone.
 
I'm optimistic, but KC throttled us with early TD's that the Jets couldn't get, made us one dimensional to catch up and dominated ToP. This is how to beat us IMO, but the season is evolving and I expect the run D will improve as we move forward. 

 

[mascho]

So, anyone have a gif or anything of that catch on the Jets final drive where it seemed the WR didn't actually make the catch?

http://vid809.photobucket.com/albums/zz11/mascho030916/ScreenCaptureProject55_1.mp4

 

[DJnVa]

Jets had 4 field goals to start the game. I was merely flipping TD's to FG's to make a point. So yes Vereen's TD wasn't redzone.
 
I'm optimistic, but KC throttled us with early TD's that the Jets couldn't get, made us one dimensional to catch up and dominated ToP. This is how to beat us IMO, but the season is evolving and I expect the run D will improve as we move forward. 

 

So, the blueprint is to score TDs early instead of settling for FGs?
 
I'm not trying to be snarky here, but, well, of course.

 

[Jettisoned]

That still seems high based on game circumstances, but makes more sense.

 
Yeah it felt like 50/50 at the time.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Its pretty much game ending even if they go out of bounds once the Jets are out of TO's.  1st down takes it to the 2 minute warning, 3rd down snap is just under 1:20, Jets get the ball with under 30 seconds left.  Need a blocked punt or a miracle at that point.  Six yard out on 2nd and 10 isnt ideal for sure, but 3rd and manageable gives you a lot of options including a much higher percentage of just running for a first down to end the game so Id say its still much better than an incompletion.
\
According to those pro football reference numbers mentioned above, Jets got to 75% or so to win the game with 20 second left.

 
Yes, right, on third down.  I was talking about a throw of fewer than 10 yards on second down, which means OOB stops the clock on the north side of 2:00.

 

[bakahump]

Brady.

38 dropbacks, 1 sack, 0 INTs.

You can do a lot of things wrong and still win when you don't turn the ball over.

And the "Sack" was the half hearted Scramble Slide that ended up a yard short of the LOS.   Good night Pass Blocking for the OL.

 

[nazz45]

Despite the low completion percentage, I thought Brady played really well. His worst throw on the day may have been on the first TD pass – Vereen really bailed him out with the diving grab. His throw to Vereen on the second touchdown looked simple but he showed great patience with the Jets basically dropping 10 into coverage – he fit that ball right into a perfect window between a triangle of defenders and led Vereen safely to the ground to avoid a big hit. His scramble play and throw to Amendola was just an awesome play all the way around. He did a great a job all game of avoiding pressure and shifting in the pocket on play-action to allow a free blocker to seal off a free rusher.
 
The offensive line played well, but need to check how often the Jets actually rushed 4 or more. It seemed to be a lot of rush three, drop eight. Later in the game, the Jets brought more designed pressures, and I thought Brady had to get rid of the ball quickly – often just throwing it away. And Brady wasn’t seeing ghosts – the pressure was real. No real guage on the run blocking since the run game was an after-thought - most runs came out of pass personnel/formation with draws against lighter defensive fronts.
 
On the other side, the entire run defense looked out of position all game. Belichick specifically mentioned the run force/contain issues in his post-game PC. But it looked like a full team effort in this regard. The middle of the d-line was getting pushed around, creating huge running/cutback lanes. The second level defenders were out of position on their fits but often completely taken out of the play by second level blockers. Weak run support from the entire secondary, in particular the alley defenders getting caught out of position. The Jets were able to run up the middle, off tackle, outside, didn’t matter how or where.
 
Patriots were playing almost a hybrid 3-4 / 5-2 front throughout the game (with some big nickel mixed in), using heavy personnel in the middle (Wilfork, Chris Jones, Walker). The Jets offensive line just manhandled them. They almost never got Ivory moving laterally and, when they did, the force/contain wasn't present. Also, the Patriots played a good amount of zone coverage (combo of wanting to use coverage to confuse Smith instead of pressure as well as to help out when he scrambled), which should have allowed for better run support from the secondary since all eyes are in the backfield.

 

[mulluysavage]

Brady- especially for that pass to Amendola.

Amendola- for catching that pass. And for kick returns, keep him in that role, please.

Vereen- Stepping up, kicking down doors. Loved him doing Ridley's TD celebration.

Edit- spelling

 

[lexrageorge]

I do believe that on average, a team losing by 2 with no timeouts and the ball on their 12 yard line, will have a 10% chance of winning with only 1:06 left.  We tend to remember the come backs, and we tend to remember last night's almost comeback, but the reality is that in 90% such situations, the losing team either runs out of time; runs out of downs, or throws a game sealing INT.  You need 45 yards in that situation, and the defense is playing the pass and doing everything to keep the play in the middle of the field.  And, as we saw last night, the 58 yard try is by no means a gimme.  
 
As to last night's particular situation, we are victims of confirmation bias.  The Jets made an improbable drive; that does happen 10% of the time.  The Jets hadn't looked that good passing the ball; prior to that drive, Smith had completed 56% of his passes.  There was no chance of the Jets running the ball.  While the defense may have been gassed, they didn't have that hard of a job to do on that drive, and the secondary had played well.  Had the refs made the proper call on the Nelson completion, the Jets would have had 3rd-and-10 on their 31 with 23 seconds left.  
 
I can quibble with the actual Vereen running play that was called on 2nd down after the Jets timeout.   That seemed like a poorly designed play for that situation.  But I cannot quibble with the run/pass selection, as that was the time to play the clock. 

 

[Stitch01]

If you ever find an in game betting line at 9-1 in that spot, let me know so I can shovel the moneys in.

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

 
So, the blueprint is to score TDs early instead of settling for FGs?
 
I'm not trying to be snarky here, but, well, of course.

That's a quality post right there. Have a nice weekend.

 

[Phragle]

Minus 6.4 PFF rating and 5 pressures allowed from Devey last night. 

 

[tims4wins]

Stellar. Get well soon Stork!

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

If you ever find an in game betting line at 9-1 in that spot, let me know so I can shovel the moneys in.

 
But I do think we all agree that whatever the answer to that question, what we're looking for is the delta between that percentage (whatever it may be) and the percentage of scoring with 1:45 to 2:00, right?  To me, in the context of that game, that delta felt very high last night.  1:10 seemed improbable.  1:50 seemed much much more dangerous.  1:10 with no time outs takes substantial parts of the field out of play, or puts them in play with considerable downside.  1:50 does not.   Anyway, let's call that "Delta 1."
 
I think there is decent agreement that run on first down to get rid of the Jets time out was an acceptable call, so let's ask the question in the context of where the team found itself on second down.  Second and ten, 2:20something.  "Delta 2" would be the difference in the percentage likelihood of making a game winning first down by passing on second down versus the percentage likelihood of making the first down by running on second down.  (And by this, I don't mean making the first down on that play -- the question is the percentage of ultimately making a first down based on the difference between running and passing on second down, taking into account all outcomes, including the possibility of turnovers or going on fourth.)
 
So, I think the question here is whether Delta 2 is greater than Delta 1.  To me, the answer taking into account the available information we had, was "no" last night, though I acknowledge it's close to a coin flip.  But at least I hope we're asking the same question.
 
I suppose there's a second question -- should the team have passed on third down once it was third and 14.  I assume we're all in agreement that the answer there is a very easy "no".  So, really what we're talking about is the play call on second down.
 
Edit:  Clarify

 

[Stitch01]

You've for sure convinced me the decision was closer than I originally thought it was although I still would pass.
 
Yes, the play call on second down was the major decision (small other part was lining up in an uber conservative heavy formation on first down rather than just running the ball out of the offensive sets they used all games)

 

[Kull]

 
But I do think we all agree that whatever the answer to that question, what we're looking for is the delta between that percentage (whatever it may be) and the 
 
I suppose there's a second question -- should the team have passed on third down once it was third and 14.  I assume we're all in agreement that the answer there is a very easy "no".  So, really what we're talking about is the play call on second down.

 
Normally I'm with those who say it's better to make the riskier passing plays to get the first down that will seal the game. But there were some key differences in this case that skewed me over to the BB position right from the get-go:
 
- Time on the clock: I'm sure BB knew almost to the second exactly how much time would be left if the Pats had three runs and punted. A run and two failed passes would have left over two minutes on the clock vs. the actual 1:05. That's big.
 
- Jets Offense: It was running, not passing that was moving the ball for the Jets. But with 1:05 left the run game is off the table...as are QB scrambles up the middle. The only remaining scenario requires a young QB with middling passing skills to hit multiple passes, most of which have to wind up out of bounds. Pretty much the best case scenario for the Pats.
 
- Field Position: The Pats were right at mid-field. We're not talking about starting from your 20 or 30, and then lofting a punt that gives good field position to the Jets. Barring a block or some side footed disaster, the worst case normal scenario is Jets ball at the 20 and a very reasonable expectation of something inside that.
 
So it all adds up. Very little clock, a poor passing team, and excellent defensive field position. If three rushing plays and a punt grant you that scenario at the end of every game, you take it 10 times out of 10.

 

[tims4wins]

This situation wasn't incredibly different from the 2004 (well, February 2005) Super Bowl vs. Philly. In that game, the Pats recovered an onside kick at the Philly 41 with 1:47 remaining, with Philly holding two timeouts. So a little less time, but similar situation. Philly was down 3 points, so the Pats couldn't lose with a FG. That does make it a bit different.
 
BB elected to run it 3 times, the last of which ran the clock under a minute. So again, not terribly different from last night.
 
But the key differences were:
 
1) the punt pinned Philly on the 4, instead of the 12;
2) Philly was unable to complete a pass and get out of bounds
 
The Pats quickly ended that drive with a Rodney pick on the 3rd play.
 
But BB played it similarly 10 years ago, it's not like he has changed.

 

[Stitch01]

He's clearly become less aggressive in 4th down situations over time.  He's gone from the most aggressive coach in the league to middle of the pack or below by 4th down aggressiveness stats.  Whether he's changed, his views on 4th downs change, or his views on the team he has changed, who knows we can debate and surmise, but he's clearly less aggressive on that front.
 
End of game decisions are harder to find stats for, would have to go through game by game and harder to do it systematically.  Giving the ball back with 46 seconds left up 3 isn't really the same as giving it back with 1:10 up 2 though.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Part of it also might depend on stuff we're not privy to.  For example, do you have a play that you've practiced that you haven't had to show yet that you think can capitalize on something the defense is showing or has shown during the game?  
 
The Patriots ran a play late in the game -- I don't remember exactly when -- that ended in an Edelman drop that I don't think I had seen all game.  It was a perfect time to try it, and but for the drop it would have been a big play at a crucial point.  I'm sure some of the Xs and Os guys here will say that it wasn't anything special, but to me it looked different from anything else the team had run, extremely well executed, and perfect for the moment.  (Except for the drop!)  If you've got a play like that in your back pocket, maybe things are different.  
 
One thing to note, even though the second down play was a run and turned out to be a disaster, it was not conventional and clearly they were trying to exploit something.  It just got blown up.  It wasn't a pass, but in its own way, it was risky -- not the ultra conservative three runs between the tackles for sure.

 

[Stitch01]

Id rather have just hammered it between the tackles rather than call that play.
 
In some spots, sure, there's some stuff that we're not privy too.  In other 4th down spots, not really a factor.  They had to get the first down like 33% of the time for going for it on 4th down in Carolina to be correct last year, BB doesn't have secret information that says they can't get 1 yard 33% of the time.

 

[Kull]

Part of it also might depend on stuff we're not privy to.  For example, do you have a play that you've practiced that you haven't had to show yet that you think can capitalize on something the defense is showing or has shown during the game?  
 
The Patriots ran a play late in the game -- I don't remember exactly when -- that ended in an Edelman drop that I don't think I had seen all game.

 
Speaking of special plays involving Edelman -  that running play in which he was flashing past Tom right at the snap and got the hand-off while he was moving at a dead run? THAT was awesome. Picked up a bundle of yards with it too.

 

[DaubachmanTurnerOD]

The offensive line is getting a lot of gameballs, but did it really play all that well?

Nazz touched on it a bit up thread, but I thought the o-line looked good mostly because Rex took his 'flood the zones against the Pats' defense to extremes last night.

When the Pats were moving the ball well in the first half, there were almost always only 3 or even 2 rushing. Brady had time and picked the D apart.

The Jets adjusted and brought more pressure in the second half, Brady had much less time, and the Pats offense largely stalled.

Luckily for the Pats, the Jets went back to rushing only 2 or 3 guys on the third and goal play, and Brady had time to find Amendola as the pressure finally started to get to him.

 

[Stitch01]

I think the offensive line was clearly better than in KC, when they were rushing three and still pressuring Brady, so given the injuries people are pretty happy.

 

[Tony C]

Minus 6.4 PFF rating and 5 pressures allowed from Devey last night. 

 
Wow. Yeah, a lot of talk about Mayo/Ridley, but the combo of losing Stork/Connolly (and I guess Fleming, too -- he's better than Devey, anyway) also had a huge impact on this game. It seems that they're all short term injuries, so fortunately should have Devey back on the bench again soon.

 

[SWHB]

http://vid809.photobucket.com/albums/zz11/mascho030916/ScreenCaptureProject55_1.mp4

The worst thing about this is that even if it's a catch, the defender stops his forward progress in bounds and the clock should continue to run, which might have ended the game by itself.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Wow. Yeah, a lot of talk about Mayo/Ridley, but the combo of losing Stork/Connolly (and I guess Fleming, too -- he's better than Devey, anyway) also had a huge impact on this game. It seems that they're all short term injuries, so fortunately should have Devey back on the bench again soon.

I still don't understand the whole thing where Devey started over anyone to begin the season. He was clearly the worst blocker in the preseason, I can't imagine he was showing well in practice. I dunno...