Pats-Ravens: Thoughts After the Replay - Page 3 - New England Patriots Forums

***Mike the Brit*** · 10-07-2009, 11:27 AM

Great post!

Agree completely on every point I had noticed (especially points 12 (Maroney) and 13 (Hanson) and the refereeing -- only the spot seemed questionable to me) and was encouraged by the others (the defensive line and the safeties).

Also: it's right to give credit to the Ravens. They're a good team and made some really good plays. (Flacco, Rice, the strip-sack ...)

WelshPat · 10-07-2009, 11:28 AM

To sum up your review:

Everything is great expect the punter.

***mayoclinic*** · 10-07-2009, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WelshPat

To sum up your review:

Everything is great expect the punter.

Not at all. Some other things which come to mind:

- Brady is still not fully in sync
- Light gave up a huge sack that almost turned the game around
- We still don't have a legitimate 3rd WR option
- Our return game is adequate but nothing special
- We had trouble containing Ray Rice

I didn't focus on them in my OP, but there's still plenty of room for improvement.

Patspsycho · 10-07-2009, 11:43 AM

Great comments and assessments- I wish we could have more of those kinds of threads.

Bostonian1962 · 10-07-2009, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayoclinic

Not at all. Some other things which come to mind:

- Brady is still not fully in sync
- Light gave up a huge sack that almost turned the game around
- We still don't have a legitimate 3rd WR option
- Our return game is adequate but nothing special
- We had trouble containing Ray Rice

I didn't focus on them in my OP, but there's still plenty of room for improvement.

Mayo, nice post as usual. I re-watched the game too. My reflex reaction is normally to stick up for Matt Light. One thing I noticed upon rewatching, was that he was beaten more than I realized. Brady fired the ball off before getting sacked, but I guess I didn't originally realize Light was looking like such a turnstile on Sunday. It wasn't even always Suggs. They rotated against him. McGowan and Merriweather did indeed both look really good. Sanders appeared to be out of position a bunch, and took the wrong angle a bunch too. Is that an instinct thing? Not sure. Like many, I was bummed that our punter has such trouble kicking the ball down inside the 20.

BradyBranch39 · 10-07-2009, 12:11 PM

Nice post... makes me kinda giddy.

Although, yeah... totally agree on Hanson.

neuronet · 10-07-2009, 12:18 PM

Awesome post, I especially like:

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayoclinic

The Pats, Indy, Pittsburgh and the Giants are all in a different league in terms of mental toughness, even though the Ravens are comparable in terms of overall talent and ability. They remind me a bit of San Diego in that regard.

pencilneckgeek · 10-07-2009, 12:31 PM

Fine post. Thanks for the reanalysis. I had family guests distracting me during the game, so I missed the fine points.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

The Ngata roughing penalty was a joke. The Suggs roughing penalty had intent behind it and deserved to be called. The Wright roughing penalty was also iffy, but it was a helmet hit and the rules are the rules.

Ray Lewis's complaint, however, is that the rules are stupid and that's certainly a legitimate point-of-view. Suggs dive at the knees has no place in the game (and I'd prefer he got a week off for that play because it looked intentional) and Ngata's swing at the head would be hard not to call, but Wright's incidental smack to the facemask shouldn't be a penalty. Of course, with the inevitable whining after the two prior roughing calls, it's hard not to throw a flag on Wright at that point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradydaman29

Oher did the smart thing. He had to catch the ball in case it was ruled a fumble. You can't take anything for granted. How silly would he have looked if he batted the ball down and then a pat recovered it and they called it a fumble - on further review.

Besides, it's still a penalty, if the ball is not deflected, whether the lineman catches it or knocks it down, and it's only a 5 yard penalty, so there's less harm in grabbing it than letting it go, if it could be a fumble.

condon84 · 10-07-2009, 12:33 PM

Saw last night's game again.

I've been critical of Sanders and his play in the secondary and after watching last nights game and focusing on him, I was wrong. He's not bad, he's awful.

On the bright side, McGowan's a solid player and Merriweather's a stud.

***TruthSeeker*** · 10-07-2009, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayoclinic

9. The only call where we got lucky was the fake field goal. It was clearly a catch. And I can understand the refs ruling that we made the 1st down - it's a judgment call, and NFL refs have always seemed pretty liberal in where they spot the ball when an offensive player reaches out with the ball. But it was a generous spot, and could easily have gone against us.

Recognize that the rule for spotting balls is that it is the location of the ball when the last part of the body moves from in bounds to out of bounds (except when recognizing whether it is a TD or not). If you're aware of the rule, then the replay shows that he clearly had first down yardage; it wasn't that close.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayoclinic

13. Hanson really hurt us in that game. Pinning the opponent deep could have made a huge difference, and he blew it at least twice. For a guy without a particularly big leg, he's got to be able to pin the ball inside the 20.

In my book, most of the blame goes to BB. A very poor choice to punt in that situation as a first down (chances around 50% of getting a first down) is much more valuable than 20-35 yards of field position. Hanson's performance was not unexpected as he has not proven to be adept at keeping it out of the endzone on these shorter kicks.