***** Official Deus Irae 9/7/2014 game observations (and more) thread *****

[Triumph]

Honestly, it's hard to blame the coverage of anybody when Tannehill had all day to throw. Seems like we've seen this movie before. We don't have a dominant pass rusher, and I have no idea why we don't go after one.

On a side note Demarcus Ware had 1.5 sacks last night for Denver. Oh well...we have Chandler "No Moves" Jones.

I can fully relate to your frustration.

The only reason why I am not more vocal is because I hope and believe they can play better.

 

[Sciz]

The draft frustrations are valid IMO. He's arguably the greatest coach ever.. but drafting is NOT his strong suit. It'd be really nice to not have to be relying on Pat Chung for half the snaps every game. That's the result of straight up failures with high draft picks at that position with Harmon and Tavon Wilson.

Which GMs should Belichick aspire to be as successful as when it comes to drafting? Rattling off a list of bad picks doesn't tell you anything when every GM does that.

 

[JackBauer]

I'm not a Solder fan either. He provides me with little confidence on the blind side. Hated that pick.

I think the better question at this point is: who are you a fan of?

 

[condon84]

I don't know how he's going to learn how to take on a block or tackle. He's probably a decent special teamer. Ideally he'd be a rotational nickel LB. He has no business playing every down. It's funny because his one good game against the Colts consisted of him making plays that other LBs make all of the time. When he's compared to our "never make plays" LB core, an interception and a sack seem superhuman. We are in for a long season.

He needs to play weakside OLB in a 4-3 where he can use his speed and athleticism to be disruptive. He's got no business playing LB in a 3-4 where he has to take on OLs. At the very minimum if they are to keep playing in a 3-4, our DEs need to be stronger at the point of attack to free up our LBs to make plays.

Point being, your giving up way too early on this guy who has showed enough to at least give him a chance.

 

[Sciz]

Hits yes, sacks no. That's the difference between having speed and being a step too slow. Chandler Jones is not an explosive athlete. He's a step or two too slow.

In a game where he played out of position at a spot he's 40 pounds too light for, it's his burst you're complaining about?

 

[iapatsfan]

I think the better question at this point is: who are you a fan of?

On O:

Gronkowski is elite when healthy.
Wright intrigues me.
Edelman as a slot would be fine. Not as a #1.
Like Dobson as a #2 or #3.
I think Cannon is a valuable/versatile swing player on the line.
Liked Volmer, but health is robbing him.

On D:

Intrigued by Easley (Wait and see).
Wilfork was great for yesterday's NFL, not today (especially at his pay).
I like McCourty at FS.
Obviously Revis.
Love Dennard. Always seems to make plays.
Chandler Jones is OK, but he is nothing special. I think you need to have explosive pass rushers in today's NFL. He's not explosive.
I know he's hurt, but I like Chris Jones as a pass rushing DT. He seems to get off the ball very quickly.
I liked what I saw out of Siliga last year. Not fair to judge him on yesterday given the cast on his hand.

That pretty much sums it up.

 

[iapatsfan]

In a game where he played out of position at a spot he's 40 pounds too light for, it's his burst you're complaining about?

It's a given he's not a 3-4 DE, but he doesn't impress me as a 4-3 DE either. Gangly, slow moving and lacking pass rush moves.

 

[JackBauer]

I think I've identified the problem.

On D:
I like McCourty at FS.
Love Dennard. Always seems to make plays.
Chandler Jones is OK, but he is nothing special. I think you need to have explosive pass rushers in today's NFL. He's not explosive.

This D is not that talented. Revis elite. Chandler Jones and Wilfork nice players. Rest = JAGS.

 

[iapatsfan]

I think I've identified the problem.

Seems pretty consistent to me, with exception of leaving out Dennard. I forgot about him. I do like McCourty at FS, but I just don't value that position as much. A good front 7 can make a good free safety out of anyone. In other words, if we had a front 7 that created havoc for the QB, I wouldn't care who we put back there. See yesterday's game as an example. Miami could have had you at FS. It wouldn't have made a difference.

 

[50-yard-line]

I hear ya, PP2.

But what about the one where he was WIDE OPEN in the EZ (faked Revis out of his jock) and Tanny overthrow him. Shouldn't that be included too?

Just comparing how one of the 3 best QB's in the NFL was iced against even LOOKING at Sherman, while a decent young QB went at Revis.

The idea was put forth that Revis would effectively shut off half of the field to a QB. That was not true yesterday.

Green Bay put their worst receiver on Sherman's side - they essentially traded their weakest weapon to eliminate the Seahawk's top corner. It was design and had nothing to do with whether or not Rodgers was "looking" at Sherman. It wasn't in the game plan, clearly - and it proved disastrous for Green Bay, as the safeties had a lot less field to cover.

And he went at Revis a couple of times - that's it. Wallace had catches against linebackers - that's bad scheming.

 

[iapatsfan]

Green Bay put their worst receiver on Sherman's side - they essentially traded their weakest weapon to eliminate the Seahawk's top corner. It was design and had nothing to do with whether or not Rodgers was "looking" at Sherman. It wasn't in the game plan, clearly - and it proved disastrous for Green Bay, as the safeties had a lot less field to cover.

And he went at Revis a couple of times - that's it. Wallace had catches against linebackers - that's bad scheming.

I don't blame Revis at all on that near TD. When comparing to Sherman, how often does a QB have enough time to pump fake an out-and-up against Seattle? By the time you've pump faked you're running for your life. If Sherman had to cover for as long as our CBs have to cover, it would be a different story. For this reason, I assume Revis is counting down the days to free agency.

 

[Sciz]

I don't blame Revis at all on that near TD. When comparing to Sherman, how often does a QB have enough time to pump fake an out-and-up against Seattle? By the time you've pump faked you're running for your life. If Sherman had to cover for as long as our CBs have to cover, it would be a different story. For this reason, I assume Revis is counting down the days to free agency.

If you're going to use a play to complain about the pass rush, pick a better one than a 4 man rush into an 8 man protection.

 

[iapatsfan]

If you're going to use a play to complain about the pass rush, pick a better one than a 4 man rush into an 8 man protection.

Ok. How about Wallace's crossing route where he came from the far right side of the field to the far left for about 20 yards. Pick any pass play. Our pass rush was, is and will be terrible. We have a habit of making avg QBs look well above avg.

 

[Sciz]

Ok. How about Wallace's crossing route where he came from the far right side of the field to the far left for about 20 yards. Pick any pass play. Our pass rush was, is and will be terrible. We have a habit of making avg QBs look well above avg.

You just named the one play where Revis realistically could have gotten more help from the DL than he did. I'm not saying the pass rush was good. I'm saying that it hurt Revis on exactly one play yesterday, and that's not enough for him to run off to a crappier team just because they have a better pass rush.

 

[james87654]

I'm tired.

1. Edelman already looks good, although I'd love to hear his explanation of what happen on that deep ball that flew harmlessly over his head while he did a pirouette instead of just turning up field. He'll make a fine WR of all trades again this year.

"Brady made a terrible read on a incomplete deep ball to Julian Edelman, throwing it too far inside after the receiver correctly read the safety and needed the pass delivered along the sideline."

its like ron read what i said and plagiarized it.............and i think borges is the foremost authority on the patriots offense......

Pats report card: First test a clunker | Boston Herald
9:38 in the 4th if anyone wants to look at it again

 

[james87654]

Primarily because Brady has been in this offense for 14 years and he knows it so well that he helps design the offense gameplan for every Sunday. I would daresay he knows the offense better than anyone else associated with the Patriots.

Also you have to remember that from his vantage point, he is in a much better position to recognize what the defense is giving, than a player who's already in his route and having to make a decision at the stem.

"Brady made a terrible read on a incomplete deep ball to Julian Edelman, throwing it too far inside after the receiver correctly read the safety and needed the pass delivered along the sideline."

its like ron read what i said and plagiarized it.............and i think borges is the foremost authority on the patriots offense......

http://bostonherald.com/sports/patr...2014/09/pats_report_card_first_test_a_clunker

9:38 in the 4th if anyone wants to look at it again

Was it intercepted? Would it have been a big gainer had the receiver caught it in stride?

Why would you assume there wasn't an option that would have put edelman where the ball was? Brady can't "misread the pass". If he made a good throw, the pass was his and was decided before Edelman did or didn't make his cut.

 

[Sciz]

I can't see any other explanation for that play than that Edelman misjudged the pass. The coaches film isn't available yet, but from both TV views, he's looking back for the ball long before the pass gets there. The play was over as soon has he turned to face the ball and try to jump straight up for it. He needed to keep running, and regardless of whatever reads Borges is making up (the safety wasn't going to stop Edelman from making the catch had he gotten there), Edelman had plenty of time to adjust his angle. He just basically stopped instead.

 

[supafly]

Well I know supafly and I had a back and forth last night about it. I've seen other posters although some of them were probably gameday trolls that only come out when the Pats lose.

I dare you to quote where I was talking about you. I said according to "SOME". If you didn't say Revis was getting torched all day then it didn't apply to you.

I did not do anything more than suggest that Revis had what I referred to multiple times as a "mixed bag," but I did state that Wallace beat/torched/smoked whatever you want to call it Darrelle Revis a handful of times, which is 100% true on every level. If you don't care for the wording--fine, but the point remains the same.

I also stated that we all expect this to improve, and that Revis was one of the few to even look mediocre yesterday. You are focusing in way too much on ONE word that you didn't care for, and I will even give you the benefit of admitting that it was a poor choice of descriptors if that makes you feel better. I could've said "beaten" or "burned" just the same. The rest of it is true, even if you look past the incompletions and only count the 3-4 times where he beat Revis that counted. Sometimes it's not always "just" about the official stats, as the eye test clearly stated that was not the "usual" Revis out there yesterday, and that Wallace got the better of him much more than we'd have liked to see.


The 22 yd gain in the 2nd quarter

The 14 yd gain on Revis

The TD pass

The 33 yd throw to the EZ where Wallace didn't get both feet in but had clearly beaten him

The right side (defense right) sideline where Tannehill barely overthrew it, where Revis was covering

A pass that Wallace dropped (which may/may not have been one of the previous examples. I feel that it wasn't, but according to one of the sportswriters it was)

Supafly said Kontradiction said it and used that as the crux of his argument

That is absolute ********...I brought up the fact that @KontradictioN (a well respected poster who was live--at the game) was there following it and gave his analysis, but I linked THREE articles as the "crux" of my argument. THREE different sportswriters who pointed out Revis' struggles or what I referred to as a "mixed bag" yesterday.

None of which you cared for or agreed with because it did not support your opinion (go figure). Your response to me was that "I don't listen to others' analysis to form my opinion," and yet you link articles to support your position all the time. Everyone does. The difference in your case is that once I actually showed that others shared the same belief, you chose to then downplay the reporters' analysis.

To suggest that I used Kontra as my "crux" when I posted 3 different sources and links is not only insulting, it's absolutely 100% untrue on every level. I don't need to have anyone else agree with me to prove my stance any more than they need my opinion to prove theirs. I simply pointed out the fact that a poster whom we all know was at the game and had given his similar analysis in another thread--nothing more. That comment from you was silly to say the least.

You may not agree that Revis didn't play "pretty good" (which is how this all started when I responded to a poster who said such), but don't go overboard with insulting comments that suggest that I can't provide my own analysis and links.

 

[james87654]

I can't see any other explanation for that play than that Edelman misjudged the pass. The coaches film isn't available yet, but from both TV views, he's looking back for the ball long before the pass gets there. The play was over as soon has he turned to face the ball and try to jump straight up for it. He needed to keep running, and regardless of whatever reads Borges is making up (the safety wasn't going to stop Edelman from making the catch had he gotten there), Edelman had plenty of time to adjust his angle. He just basically stopped instead.

well, it suffices to say that i disagree.....edelman was open on a straight line to the sideline.....and brady missed it......edelman was gonna keep running (towards the sideline).....but saw that the pass was off and tried to adjust but couldnt

just my opinion

 

[supafly]

well, it suffices to say that i disagree.....edelman was open on a straight line to the sideline.....and brady missed it......edelman was gonna keep running (towards the sideline).....but saw that the pass was off and tried to adjust but couldnt

just my opinion

Personally, if I had to choose, I would agree with you that it was more on Brady (not exactly known for throwing 40-50 yds downfield with the same accuracy anymore) than it was on Edelman. While I do believe that Brady's struggles are overstated with the problems on longer throws, he's given us plenty of examples in the past 4-5 yrs that add some fuel to that belief. Of course, he's not exactly dealing with the top of the tier WRs either.

I also feel that @Sciz is correct in stating that we don't really know 'for sure,' and that it may have been more due to the fact that he and Brady just haven't developed the proper chemistry yet with those long, downfield throws.

As I'm sure you already know, if Borges is saying one thing, I'd go the opposite way