The Million Dollar Question.

[PATS16N0]

Are we going to continue to make the same stupid mistakes or have we finally learned our lesson?

In my mind the future of this season rides on the answer.

What's most frustrating about the game against Seattle is that those of us who watched the game know we could have come out of the toughest stadium in the league to play in, having blown out the top defense in the league. Instead we leave with a 1 point loss. That game went from SERIOUS statement & PUTTING THE LEAGUE ON NOTICE to `We need to fix a LOT of things` about this football team and being PUT ON NOTICE ourselves.

I want to remind everyone that last year we lost to the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Giants in back to back games. Our secondary against the Giants was even more horrid than it sometimes looked tonight against Seattle. In fact, that game burned the name "Sergio Brown" into my brain forever.

But I saw great defensive strides in that game against the G-men, enough to make me honestly believe that we were still highly capable of a Superbowl appearance last year.

The sky is not falling. I don't only watch Patriot games. I watch a lot of them. Is there a Patriot fan on this forum that can honestly tell me that they've watched Baltimore against the Eagles, Cincinnati, Cleveland and Dallas, and is SCARED of that football team? Is anyone of the mindset that we CANNOT beat Houston who was torched by the Packers tonight and struggled against the Jets on Monday Night Football?

I'm not scared of either of them. Not in the slightest.

We have now suffered three losses by a GRAND TOTAL of 4 points.

Can ANY 3-3 team say the same?

That is a few minor adjustments away from being a 6-0 football team. Remove the uncharacteristic, amateurish situational football that denied us an easy FG before the end of the 1st half, and two stupid plays that killed 2 excellent drives with turn overs, and right now, instead of talking about a loss, we're talking about how the Patriots put 40 points around the necks of the greatest defense in the league, in their own stadium.

At 3-3, New England could be the best kept secret in the NFL.

We've seen the evidence on the field. We KNOW this team can carve through any defense in the league. We know our defense can create opportunities for our offense to score more points.

Everything seems to me to be riding on whether or not our coaching staff is going to get serious.

I'm not a head coach in the NFL. If put in charge of the Patriots tomorrow my head would probably start spinning 10 minutes into the job.

But I do know we should of went for that field goal with 6 seconds left.
I do know on 3rd down and 1, on a drive where we were carving through the Seattle defense, we should have ran the ball and picked up the conversion, instead of challenging their defensive backs trying to go to Branch on a 20 yard pass down the side line.

I do know that this team is not invincible and you cannot play football games as if the other team has zero chance to do anything. We're a very good team. Potentially a great team. But not so great that we can play with that level of arrogance against a defense like Seattle's.

We know that.

So why doesn't Belichick and McDaniels?
More importantly, do they know it now?

If they don't, I already know how the season ends - with us watching something completely stupid and totally unnecessary ending the Superbowl hopes of the 2012 Patriots.

P.S. Fire our secondary coaches immediately.

 

[Ring 6]

Luckily we have a coaching staff that takes the season one game at a time, and isn't going to emotionally overreact to who is "on notice" in week 6.
We probably have the most humble coaching staff in the NFL,so I really doubt we have lost some close games because they are so arrogant they screw up on purpose to see if they can win anyway.
Reread your post. YOU are arguing this team is great, yet a one point loss created the need to fix a lot of things. If Brady had thrown the last pass of the 1st half at Welkers feet and we got 3, or if the Seahawks didn't score on their last drive, we wouldn't need to fix those many things?
I think you need to separate what the team needs to do to reach its goal, and what it needs to do for you to feel good about bragging rights in week 6. Ultimately your post simply laments that you don't have those bragging rights.

 

[PATS16N0]

Humble?
Man, I'm as much a homer for Belichick as the next guy but humble isn't a word I would use to describe him.

The end of the 1st half says a lot. How many people here were watching at home and saying with 6 seconds left "just kick the field goal."?

I do think this team is potentially great.
But when I watch some of the decisions that have been made during games, I think some people on the sidelines think it's invincible and the opposition is completely helpless.

Just about every team in the NFL would of ran one of our running backs to get the 1st down when Brady threw the interception in Branch's direction.

Almost all of them.

So why didn't we?

And I don't think this is an isolated event. I think that play was typical of this teams decision making sometimes.

 

[Patriots Nation NY]

Humble?
So why didn't we?

And I don't think this is an isolated event. I think that play was typical of this teams decision making sometimes.

Im with ya grasshopper ... we always have to be the smartest kid in class .. always got to get cute ...

 

[Ring 6]

Humble?
Man, I'm as much a homer for Belichick as the next guy but humble isn't a word I would use to describe him.

Well that is because you have decided to attribute and attitude that isn't there to his actions.
Humble. Has he EVER bragged or trash talked? After every loss, he singles himself out as needing to do better.

The end of the 1st half says a lot. How many people here were watching at home and saying with 6 seconds left "just kick the field goal."?

What does that have to do with arrogance? It was the right decision, because there was enough time to run a play and try to get a TD.
Are you suggesting that since you at home thought the FG was the right thing, that means you know more than BB who actually practices the scenario? Who is arrogant?

I do think this team is potentially great.
But when I watch some of the decisions that have been made during games, I think some people on the sidelines think it's invincible and the opposition is completely helpless.

That is a figment of your imagination. I can't even imagine what kind of decision you think would indicate the coaching staff thinks it is invincible and the opposition is helpless. That is just nonsensical.

Just about every team in the NFL would of ran one of our running backs to get the 1st down when Brady threw the interception in Branch's direction.

What are you talking about? Passing the ball is arrogant?

Almost all of them.

So why didn't we?

A) You are making something up, then calling it fact.
B) We have Tom Brady.

But lets get this straight.
2nd and 5 at the +48 half way through the 3rd quarter, leading 20-10 and you think almost every team in the NFL would call a run, and throwing a pass is arrogant?
Even you can't believe that,

And I don't think this is an isolated event. I think that play was typical of this teams decision making sometimes.

Of course it was. Brady was tearing them up, it was 2nd and 5 in + territory. Of course you are more apt to throw than run there. Apparently though any play that is poorly executed should have been forseen by the coaching staff in your mind.
So good result = good coaching, and bad result = arrogance in your world?

 

[nekromantique]

The end of the 1st half says a lot. How many people here were watching at home and saying with 6 seconds left "just kick the field goal."?

they should have taken a time out earlier (i think it was the 30 second mark, they ended up eating too much clock after that).

BUT, they still had enough time for 1 play for a TD, and a field goal try if that didnt work. the problem was the intentional grounding by brady, not the coaching. Brady had gronk open in the back corner, but even if he didnt have enough time for that, a throw to either sideline leaves 1 second left...with no grounding.

Just about every team in the NFL would of ran one of our running backs to get the 1st down when Brady threw the interception in Branch's direction.

passing the ball wasnt the problem. hell for years thats all the patriots did and no one really complained because it worked. the problem was the pass. it was terrible. not only are you throwing to branch who has a much larger defender on him, and he cant gain separation, but brady didnt place the ball well at all, it was practically right to the DB.

P.S. Fire our secondary coaches immediately.

I am not opposed to this.

 

[PATS16N0]

Well that is because you have decided to attribute and attitude that isn't there to his actions.
Humble. Has he EVER bragged or trash talked? After every loss, he singles himself out as needing to do better.

That isn't what I'm talking about. The Patriots always do their talking on the field. Remember when Anthony Smith (or whatever his name was) guaranteed a Steelers victory and Belichick and Brady targeted him for touchdowns all day long? This has been the MO of the Patriots for a long time. There's a thousand examples of him making a point to humiliate teams on the field. I don't know why you would even raise this as an issue of contention.

I'm not knocking them for it. I love them for it.

But there's a time and place.

What does that have to do with arrogance? It was the right decision, because there was enough time to run a play and try to get a TD.
Are you suggesting that since you at home thought the FG was the right thing, that means you know more than BB who actually practices the scenario? Who is arrogant?

No, it was the wrong decision, evident by the fact that if we would of just kicked the field goal (like probably everybody thought we should have done AT THE TIME) we would of won the football game by 2 instead of losing by 1.

Six seconds against the statistical best defense in the league? A team that sacked Rodgers 8 times and held him to zilch? A team that hadn't given up more than 16 points in a single game, holding Dallas to 7 and the Packers to 14? It seems pretty obvious that after wasting the 40 seconds we had, you just kick the field goal and go into the half with a ten point lead.

New England's offense will score its touchdowns.

But with our horrendous secondary, we can't scoff at the idea of a free three points, especially when time and time again that 3 would have won us our games.

What are you talking about? Passing the ball is arrogant?

So you think that despite us averaging about 250 rushing yards our previous two games, while playing the best defense in the league, with very talented defensive backs, it's better to lob one down the sidelines to a covered Branch on 3rd and 1 instead of just send in Ridley or Woodhead to pick up the fresh set of downs?

You don't see a problem with this decision making at all?

You do realize we weren't playing the Bills, yes?.

 

[RayClay]

Their execution and just plain alertness was bad, but i can't believe anyone was arguing against going for a TD when we had plenty of time.

Poor use of time outs and poor execution. You'd be crazy to give up a chance at four more points.

I'm concerned about the secondary, mostly about health, since we don't have a lot of depth, but we just need to work harder and not take plays off in a fog. That includes Mr. Brady, of course.

If our secondary is competent, we should be able to gel as a very talented team on both sides. Our chemistry seems decent too. No time to panic, play better, make the playoffs and play our best ball when it counts, hopefully.

 

[RayClay]

That isn't what I'm talking about. The Patriots always do their talking on the field. Remember when Anthony Smith (or whatever his name was) guaranteed a Steelers victory and Belichick and Brady targeted him for touchdowns all day long? This has been the MO of the Patriots for a long time. There's a thousand examples of him making a point to humiliate teams on the field. I don't know why you would even raise this as an issue of contention.

I'm not knocking them for it. I love them for it.

But there's a time and place.



No, it was the wrong decision, evident by the fact that if we would of just kicked the field goal (like probably everybody thought we should have done AT THE TIME) we would of won the football game by 2 instead of losing by 1.

Six seconds against the statistical best defense in the league? A team that sacked Rodgers 8 times and held him to zilch? A team that hadn't given up more than 16 points in a single game, holding Dallas to 7 and the Packers to 14? It seems pretty obvious that after wasting the 40 seconds we had, you just kick the field goal and go into the half with a ten point lead.

New England's offense will score its touchdowns.

But with our horrendous secondary, we can't scoff at the idea of a free three points, especially when time and time again that 3 would have won us our games.



So you think that despite us averaging about 250 rushing yards our previous two games, while playing the best defense in the league, with very talented defensive backs, it's better to lob one down the sidelines to a covered Branch on 3rd and 1 instead of just send in Ridley or Woodhead to pick up the fresh set of downs?

You don't see a problem with this decision making at all?

You do realize we weren't playing the Bills, yes?.

Looking into the future, seeing the result, then changing strategy to fit that. isn't evidence, it's time travel.

 

[goheels22002]

So you think that despite us averaging about 250 rushing yards our previous two games, while playing the best defense in the league, with very talented defensive backs, it's better to lob one down the sidelines to a covered Branch on 3rd and 1 instead of just send in Ridley or Woodhead to pick up the fresh set of downs?

You don't see a problem with this decision making at all?

I assume you are talking about the next to last drive that went 3 and out and consumed all of 24 seconds because the Seahawks used two timeouts. One first down and the Patriots win 23-17.

That series was Ridley right, Ridley left, and the five wide set in a hurry up with the incompletion to Branch. The Seahawks had their base defense on the field, so the call made sense. A third running play was a possibility but not a sure thing. Brady just didn't throw a good pass. No one's fault really.

The running game was not dominant against that defense on Sunday. The Patriots weren't getting 4+ yard gains in any one place throughout the day, but they had close to 400 yards passing. I think the call was logical.

I would have liked to see play action on that play with Woodhead in the backfield.

The Seattle loss, to me, keeps coming down to leaving two chip shot field goals on the field, and the five long plays by the Seahawks for 45+ yards including the pass interference on the halfback option. All of them came in a Patriots base defense when the passer had time to set his feet and heave it down the field. The lack of pressure on the quarterback was an issue. And this one is on the defensive backs who couldn't make a play on the ball because they were out of position. The Seattle receivers made nice catches but none were of the amazing variety like we see with Brandon Lloyd.

If you want to beat the Patriots, go deep. We'll see a lot of this the rest of the season.

 

[Big-T]

The only thing holding this team back is the defensive coaches: Josh Boyer & Brian Flores coaching the secondary? A guy who couldn't cut it at Kent State and a scout?! Then there's Matt Patricia as coordinator who despite having an extremely talented front 7, doesn't use it in a way to help his poorly coached, sloppy technique using secondary, it's utter madness really.

None of that is going to be sorted this season, so once again it's going to all fall on the offense to carry the team - whether that be Brady or the run game, the team will only go as far as the offense will take them.

3-3 is far from the end of the world and at the end of the day all a team needs to do is make the playoffs to be in with a shout of winning it all, HFA or having a bye are just bonuses, and with that in mind I still trust Brady & the offense to win more games than they will throw away.

Look at the AFC too:
Baltimore: lost starting MLB & CB for the year, Suggs isn't going to be the same player when he comes back straight away.

Houston: looked like crap on Sunday night, a number of injury prone key players

Pittsburgh: old and very inconsistent this year, again injury prone key players

...then what is there? Hardly anything, the AFC looks a very poor division at the minute.

 

[Tanbass]

The way I see it, we have two glaring problems to fix.

You'd have to be living under a rock not to not that this secondary is a major weak spot for this team. They will be targeted every game for the rest of the season. I don't think they are talented enough to be coached out of their poor play. What needs to change is the people scouting defensive backs....we absolutely suck here....and it needs to be addressed. It's been at least 5 years of 1st & many 2nd round picks that all amount to crappy players. The root of this problem is horrid scouting for DBs.

Second, this offense is supposed to be number 1 ranked in the league. Please tell me how with two different opportunities, we can't manage a few first downs and wind the clock down?? We have lost to ability to close out games. Did anyone have the confidence (we used to have) when Brady took the field with 1:20 left, and think we had a chance to get a few first downs and kick a FG to win it like we used to? It (used) to be automatic. That doesn't exist anymore.

I don't claim to know more about footbal than these coaches, but I have yet to come up with a reasonable explanation of how we rush for 250+ 2 weeks in a row, and decide to throw it 58 times. Every time you feed a guy like Ridley 25 times or more, I can (almost) guarantee you 100+ yards. Give this kid the rock already.....I am fully aware that Seattle's defense is tough against the run, but I don't feel like we gave it a solid chance either.

 

[Ring 6]

That isn't what I'm talking about. The Patriots always do their talking on the field. Remember when Anthony Smith (or whatever his name was) guaranteed a Steelers victory and Belichick and Brady targeted him for touchdowns all day long? This has been the MO of the Patriots for a long time. There's a thousand examples of him making a point to humiliate teams on the field. I don't know why you would even raise this as an issue of contention.

I'm not knocking them for it. I love them for it.

But there's a time and place.

They went after Smith because he stinks. To suggest they did it for humiliation is ridiculous. Simply ridiculous.

No, it was the wrong decision, evident by the fact that if we would of just kicked the field goal (like probably everybody thought we should have done AT THE TIME) we would of won the football game by 2 instead of losing by 1.

The correct decision does not work 100% of the time. This was the correct decision, and poor execution.

Six seconds against the statistical best defense in the league? A team that sacked Rodgers 8 times and held him to zilch? A team that hadn't given up more than 16 points in a single game, holding Dallas to 7 and the Packers to 14? It seems pretty obvious that after wasting the 40 seconds we had, you just kick the field goal and go into the half with a ten point lead.

6 seconds is 6 seconds. If Brady doesnt make a huge mental error, there is no issue. You are crying because it didn't work out. Unfortunately people who actually have the authortiy to make decisions don't have the benefit of hindsight.
If we kicked the FG then lost by a point you would be calling BB a wimp for not taking a shot with 6 seconds left.

New England's offense will score its touchdowns.

What does that even mean?

But with our horrendous secondary, we can't scoff at the idea of a free three points, especially when time and time again that 3 would have won us our games.

A good argument for not wasting the chance at 6 when there is clearly enough time to try.

So you think that despite us averaging about 250 rushing yards our previous two games, while playing the best defense in the league, with very talented defensive backs, it's better to lob one down the sidelines to a covered Branch on 3rd and 1 instead of just send in Ridley or Woodhead to pick up the fresh set of downs?

You are kidding right? We ran well in the previous 2 games, and horribly in this one. Your conclusion is that you pick out a pass play that didn't work and say since they ran well the last 2 games it was stupid not to run on that individual play? Come on. You can't be serious. By the way, you didn't respond to your claim that every other team would run in that down, distance and game situaiton.

You don't see a problem with this decision making at all?

I see a major problem with your capricous monday morning quartebacking.

You do realize we weren't playing the Bills, yes?.

No clue what this means either.

 

[IllegalContact]

honestly, it looks like the pats show up unprepared to play.

the end of the 2nd half was ridiculous.

do you mean to tell me that anyting other than human error cause the pats to wait 15 seconds to call a time out after the welker completion and having a 1st and 9? that there was some or any possible intelligent reason to have 19 seconds rather than 32-33 seconds left and one time out?

you'd figure that after this many years and this many games and this many end of half that BB and Brady would have this down......collectively, they seemed to arrogant to give a crap until someone on the sideline reminded BB to stop being so damned arrogant.

I can't even put this on brady simply because everything wrong with this team traces back to one guy......the one who rules with an iron fist.

 

[DaBruinz]

I assume you are talking about the next to last drive that went 3 and out and consumed all of 24 seconds because the Seahawks used two timeouts. One first down and the Patriots win 23-17.

That series was Ridley right, Ridley left, and the five wide set in a hurry up with the incompletion to Branch. The Seahawks had their base defense on the field, so the call made sense. A third running play was a possibility but not a sure thing. Brady just didn't throw a good pass. No one's fault really.

Actually, the call didn't make sense. What they should have done is gone 4 wide with Ridley in the backfield and run a play-action fake. They had success with that all day and usually for large gains. Had they done that, they'd have had a better chance at success.

The running game was not dominant against that defense on Sunday. The Patriots weren't getting 4+ yard gains in any one place throughout the day, but they had close to 400 yards passing. I think the call was logical.

I would have liked to see play action on that play with Woodhead in the backfield.

Play-action with Woodhead OR Ridley would have been a better call, IMHO.

The Seattle loss, to me, keeps coming down to leaving two chip shot field goals on the field, and the five long plays by the Seahawks for 45+ yards including the pass interference on the halfback option. All of them came in a Patriots base defense when the passer had time to set his feet and heave it down the field. The lack of pressure on the quarterback was an issue. And this one is on the defensive backs who couldn't make a play on the ball because they were out of position. The Seattle receivers made nice catches but none were of the amazing variety like we see with Brandon Lloyd.

If you want to beat the Patriots, go deep. We'll see a lot of this the rest of the season.

Pats were in the redzone 7 times. They got 2 TDs, 3 FGs, 1 INT and Nothing. 4 of their last 5 RedZone drives resulted in just 6 points. Out of a possible 28. The Interception was caused because Branch was held and couldn't get across the field. It went uncalled. Then there was the Intentional Grounding call at the end of the half which was marginal at best. I was extremely disappointed that we didn't see the hurry-up with Brady running the QB sneak at any time on the 3rd and short yardage. That's usually good for a 1st down regardless of who they are against.

 

[DaBruinz]

The way I see it, we have two glaring problems to fix.

You'd have to be living under a rock not to not that this secondary is a major weak spot for this team. They will be targeted every game for the rest of the season. I don't think they are talented enough to be coached out of their poor play. What needs to change is the people scouting defensive backs....we absolutely suck here....and it needs to be addressed. It's been at least 5 years of 1st & many 2nd round picks that all amount to crappy players. The root of this problem is horrid scouting for DBs.

Second, this offense is supposed to be number 1 ranked in the league. Please tell me how with two different opportunities, we can't manage a few first downs and wind the clock down?? We have lost to ability to close out games. Did anyone have the confidence (we used to have) when Brady took the field with 1:20 left, and think we had a chance to get a few first downs and kick a FG to win it like we used to? It (used) to be automatic. That doesn't exist anymore.

It was never automatic. Many people erroneously convinced themselves it was automatic, but it never was.

The Pats haven't been able to close out games since the AFCCG in 2006, for a variety of reasons.
2006 AFCCG - Caldwell gets manhandled in the endzone and no call is made. Hobbs breathes wrong on Reggie Wayne and a DPI gets called handing the Colts the Win. Pats have the ball late, but only Heath Evans remains as a healthy RB option since Dillon, Faulk and Maroney had gone down. Pats can't close it out.

2007 SB - Manning in the grasp, Carrey doesn't call it because he's surprised that Manning doesn't go down. Manning completes the miraculous completion to David Tyree who was supposed to be covered by Samuel. Manning then complete the game winning TD to Burress in the End Zone. Burress was covered by Hobbs, who was playing with a sports hernia. Pats offense hadn't been able to close it out on the previous series, which had allowed the Giants to get the ball back.

2011 SB - Pats can't close game out against Giants despite having the Best RB on the team since Corey Dillon. Giants win the game.

I don't claim to know more about footbal than these coaches, but I have yet to come up with a reasonable explanation of how we rush for 250+ 2 weeks in a row, and decide to throw it 58 times. Every time you feed a guy like Ridley 25 times or more, I can (almost) guarantee you 100+ yards. Give this kid the rock already.....I am fully aware that Seattle's defense is tough against the run, but I don't feel like we gave it a solid chance either.

You need a reasonable reason? How about the fact that, in the previous two weeks, the Pats had two capable RBs to do the running in Ridley and Bolden. Bolden went down early in the game against the Seahawks, though Woodhead was running well. Should they have run more? Yep. Why they didn't? Couldn't tell you. The Pats didn't use the screen play enough. They didn't use Play-Action enough. And they didn't run enough. Don't know why. Wish I did. I'm sure we all do.

 

[VJCPatriot]

If you want to beat the Patriots, go deep. We'll see a lot of this the rest of the season.

Honestly, if Russell Wilson can look like a HOFer against this defense, I shudder to think what the good QBs will do. If you go deep against this defense every play, I think it's possible for the other team to score 50 or more points in a game. Yeah, it's THAT BAD!

The only good news is that we are going against the suckiness that is Mark Sanchez next week. Now if our defense manages to make him look like Joe Montana, I will personally DISOWN the Pats secondary. Not the team, not the defense, just that particular unit. They will be known as THOSE THAT SHALL NOT BE NAMED!