Just a few thoughts to mull on a dead media day...

[patfanken]

......and I have an hour to kill.

1. Much of the talk about potential Patriot weaknesses have focused on the LB position and moreso on its depth. I WAS as concerned as the rest, UNTIL it occurred to me, my concern should be mitigated by the fact that INCREASINGLY, the role of the LB is being diminished by the rise of the spread/no huddle offense. More and more the number of plays that the LB (especially the ILB) has decreased as they are being substituted for by various DB packages

Given the flexibility and diversity of the basic Patriot's defensive philosophy, all defenses have become "situational" and the use of "situational personel packages" have become the order of the day. So based on who we are playing on a particular week, and the game situation, a guy like Tedy Bruschi might not have more than 20 snaps, while Thomas might get 60

Basically what I'm saying is there for a significant percentage of the defensive snaps there are NOT going to be 4 LBs on the field, ergo the need for the number of "proven" LBs might be a bit overrated in our minds.

We have already seen what spread formations and multiple formations has done to the FB position in diminishing the number of plays we see one on the field. The same can be said (to a lesser degree) for the number of plays we see a full compliment of LBs on the field.

Comments?

2. I managed to watch the last 28 Minutes of the AFCCG. Believe me it wasn't easy, plus I was trying to some other things as I watched, but here are my impressions.

a. I was correct in my original gut feeling that the Peyton Manning was the real culprit of the Pats demise. His ability to make the key 3rd down play was dramatic. Many of those passes were completed under severe pressure, with several knock downs occurring on completed passes

b. At the same time I was kind of surprised how well the defense played given who was in there most of the time (Baker, Alexander, Wright TBC, etc) Given the carnage, you forget how many times the Pats took the Colts to 3rd down, and how long those drives were. They were litterally battles of attrition, that in the end the Pats lost because a multitude of reasons already discussed

c. When you think about it Fatigue was another critical factor, especially when concider how well the Pats defense did in the first half. THis is a perfect segue to the new conspiracy theory we should promote. I propose that the diabolical, evil GM of the Colts was pumping in hot air to raise the Temperature of the Dome adding to the woes of the undermanned, flu ridden, jet lagged, Patriots. Many commented on how hot it was in there. How come. It was winter outside and the Dome is SUPPOSED to be temperature controlled. I DEMAND AN IMMEDIATE INVESTIGATION!!!

d. Eric Alexander wasn't as bad as he has often been made to seem, however he wasn't as good as I thought (at least in the second half). I can see how people might be outraged by how badly he was beaten in the long play of the final drive. However any ILB on a WR SHOULD be beaten badly. It was another example of the Manning finding the right guy under great pressure and getting him the ball. There is no blame here, just good execution.

e. Ultimately the Pats defense was physically done in that 4th quarter. In order to win the game we had to have made that critical 4th down and 4. We didn't....period and we lost.

f. The lack of a call on the Caldwell play in the endzone still baffles me, especially given the call against Hobbs that went in the Colts favor. This guy actually pushes Caldwell with BOTH hands well before the ball gets to him. So how was it NOT interference.

g. I'm still confused about the Hobbs call. At first I had no problem with it because it was a clear example of "face guarding". No contact was made. Then it comes out that there IS no rule against "face guarding" So what's up.

Well my hour is up and I have to run. Thanks for the venue for venting.

 

[Mike the Brit]

......and I have an hour to kill.

1. Much of the talk about potential Patriot weaknesses have focused on the LB position and moreso on its depth. I WAS as concerned as the rest, UNTIL it occurred to me, my concern should be mitigated by the fact that INCREASINGLY, the role of the LB is being diminished by the rise of the spread/no huddle offense. More and more the number of plays that the LB (especially the ILB) has decreased as they are being substituted for by various DB packages

Given the flexibility and diversity of the basic Patriot's defensive philosophy, all defenses have become "situational" and the use of "situational personel packages" have become the order of the day. So based on who we are playing on a particular week, and the game situation, a guy like Tedy Bruschi might not have more than 20 snaps, while Thomas might get 60

Basically what I'm saying is there for a significant percentage of the defensive snaps there are NOT going to be 4 LBs on the field, ergo the need for the number of "proven" LBs might be a bit overrated in our minds.

We have already seen what spread formations and multiple formations has done to the FB position in diminishing the number of plays we see one on the field. The same can be said (to a lesser degree) for the number of plays we see a full compliment of LBs on the field.

Comments?

2. I managed to watch the last 28 Minutes of the AFCCG. Believe me it wasn't easy, plus I was trying to some other things as I watched, but here are my impressions.

a. I was correct in my original gut feeling that the Peyton Manning was the real culprit of the Pats demise. His ability to make the key 3rd down play was dramatic. Many of those passes were completed under severe pressure, with several knock downs occurring on completed passes

b. At the same time I was kind of surprised how well the defense played given who was in there most of the time (Baker, Alexander, Wright TBC, etc) Given the carnage, you forget how many times the Pats took the Colts to 3rd down, and how long those drives were. They were litterally battles of attrition, that in the end the Pats lost because a multitude of reasons already discussed

c. When you think about it Fatigue was another critical factor, especially when concider how well the Pats defense did in the first half. THis is a perfect segue to the new conspiracy theory we should promote. I propose that the diabolical, evil GM of the Colts was pumping in hot air to raise the Temperature of the Dome adding to the woes of the undermanned, flu ridden, jet lagged, Patriots. Many commented on how hot it was in there. How come. It was winter outside and the Dome is SUPPOSED to be temperature controlled. I DEMAND AN IMMEDIATE INVESTIGATION!!!

d. Eric Alexander wasn't as bad as he has often been made to seem, however he wasn't as good as I thought (at least in the second half). I can see how people might be outraged by how badly he was beaten in the long play of the final drive. However any ILB on a WR SHOULD be beaten badly. It was another example of the Manning finding the right guy under great pressure and getting him the ball. There is no blame here, just good execution.

e. Ultimately the Pats defense was physically done in that 4th quarter. In order to win the game we had to have made that critical 4th down and 4. We didn't....period and we lost.

f. The lack of a call on the Caldwell play in the endzone still baffles me, especially given the call against Hobbs that went in the Colts favor. This guy actually pushes Caldwell with BOTH hands well before the ball gets to him. So how was it NOT interference.

g. I'm still confused about the Hobbs call. At first I had no problem with it because it was a clear example of "face guarding". No contact was made. Then it comes out that there IS no rule against "face guarding" So what's up.

Well my hour is up and I have to run. Thanks for the venue for venting.

Thanks, Ken.

What you say confirms my memories of that awful first night I spent in Berlin, watching the German feed until 4 am ...

I think that Manning played a game for the ages and we have to admit it. He was so nearly sacked so often but held it just until the critical moment. Got to admire that.

But there is still one thing that puzzles me. How was it that the Indianapolis O-Line kept off the pass rush even that long and yet the tight end/running back were available as outlet receivers? Of course, it looked like a lot of holding to me, but I'd be interested in what a "coach's view" with a bit of distance thought.

 

[patsox23]

The lack of a call on the Caldwell play in the endzone still baffles me, especially given the call against Hobbs that went in the Colts favor. This guy actually pushes Caldwell with BOTH hands well before the ball gets to him. So how was it NOT interference.

g. I'm still confused about the Hobbs call. At first I had no problem with it because it was a clear example of "face guarding". No contact was made. Then it comes out that there IS no rule against "face guarding" So what's up.

Those were the two that stand out to me the most, as well. But then, good teams overcome that kind of junk, and the Pats weren't good enough to do so. Given how much they outplayed the Colts in the first half, it shouldn't have been close enough for those plays to matter. But I agree, horrendous officiating.

 

[DaBruinz]

Those were the two that stand out to me the most, as well. But then, good teams overcome that kind of junk, and the Pats weren't good enough to do so. Given how much they outplayed the Colts in the first half, it shouldn't have been close enough for those plays to matter. But I agree, horrendous officiating.

Good teams can over-come one or even two bad calls. However, if you add in all the holding that was clearly committed by the Colts O-line, there was just no way for the depleted Pats to over-come.

Well, I take that back. Had the Pats run the Ball on the 1st 3 plays after the Graham reception in the 4th quarter, they probably would have burnt two minutes off the clock. Even if they didn't get a 1st down, they would have burnt precious time off the clock and probably made it so that the Colts would have had to burn time outs or made it harder for the Colts to get in and score. Putting the pressure more on the Colts than the Pats offense.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

Thanks, Ken.

What you say confirms my memories of that awful first night I spent in Berlin, watching the German feed until 4 am ...

I think that Manning played a game for the ages and we have to admit it. He was so nearly sacked so often but held it just until the critical moment. Got to admire that.

But there is still one thing that puzzles me. How was it that the Indianapolis O-Line kept off the pass rush even that long and yet the tight end/running back were available as outlet receivers? Of course, it looked like a lot of holding to me, but I'd be interested in what a "coach's view" with a bit of distance thought.

It looked like a lot of holding because there was a lot of holding.

Not to cry over spilled milk, so to speak (the game is over), but we're just stating the obvious here.

However, we have a new season coming up, and since we face these guys again (even if it is out there), I feel confident a measure of justice will be served.

 

[theONLYJerseypatsfan]

Regarding your first issue...I think the spread offense and diminishing need for a ILB is exactly why AD is going to be so valuable to us.....his speed allows him to cover WRs if needed and his strength will make it possible for him to stop the run and get at the QB...that being said, I still think his speed is the reason he should stay outside...especially in the SD game...with Colvin on one side and Thomas on the there will be no "finding the corner" for LT

 

[sieglo]

f. The lack of a call on the Caldwell play in the endzone still baffles me, especially given the call against Hobbs that went in the Colts favor. This guy actually pushes Caldwell with BOTH hands well before the ball gets to him. So how was it NOT interference.

g. I'm still confused about the Hobbs call. At first I had no problem with it because it was a clear example of "face guarding". No contact was made. Then it comes out that there IS no rule against "face guarding" So what's up.

Hopefully now that Maning has his ring the NFL will tell the refs they can go back to calling games evenly.

 

[patfanken]

one other thing I forgot to mention originally. Not to dismiss the 2 Caldwell drops, however neither really cost the Pats. After the first one, we immediately scored on the great catch by Gaffney in the back of the endzone 2 plays later. On the second, because the Pats got out there so late, there was a defender who would have tackled him after about a 2-3 yd gain.

Again this isn't to infer that they weren't bad drops, but to refute the idea that we would have won the game if Caldwell catches those 2 balls. There were about a dozen individual plays I can name that might have changed that game. Neither of these 2 passes are among them.

 

[patfanken]

Thanks, Ken.

What you say confirms my memories of that awful first night I spent in Berlin, watching the German feed until 4 am ...

I think that Manning played a game for the ages and we have to admit it. He was so nearly sacked so often but held it just until the critical moment. Got to admire that.

But there is still one thing that puzzles me. How was it that the Indianapolis O-Line kept off the pass rush even that long and yet the tight end/running back were available as outlet receivers? Of course, it looked like a lot of holding to me, but I'd be interested in what a "coach's view" with a bit of distance thought.

Mike I'm sorry but I really didn't look at the Colt OL carefully. Based on the numerous posts talking about it, I can assume the refs were letting a lot of stuff go. However to see if it was really bad refereeing or merely consistant calling, you'd have to check and see what they were letting the Pats get away with. If it they were letting BOTH sides get away with it, then OK.

BTW- The Hit to the head by TBC late in the game, was a real nickel and dime call. If the ref were honest he would have told the crowd the call was made because of a touch to the helmet and not a hit, it was that incidental. One made, I think, because the Pats were really pounding Manning in that game. I don't believe it effected the outcome though.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

No matter whether it was an officials call against us or whether it was an interference does not really matter.

What you can all say is one thing and even though as a devout Patriots fan I must say that Peyton in that 4th quarter was magnificent and played like a true future Hall Of Famer,You may not see too many quarters where a player was so dominant like he was against our D,Tired or not.

 

[BelichickFan]

I know it's become politically incorrect to say this but there's nothing that cost us that game more than the players we had out. Some injuries you can withstand, when you're on your 4th and 6th Safeties against the best passing game in the league you can't. Bad luck for us, that's why it's tough to win every year. Sometimes the breaks go against you. But put Rodney and Wilson back in and there's no talk about how great Manning played - or take Clark and one of their WR out.

Whining about injuries ? Nope. Just stating a fact that the better team was way more banged up and still almost overcame it.

 

[amazinPats]

Excellent analysis, patfanken. You did us a public service by watching the second half of the game all over again. I wouldn't want to do that. It seems that you were able to garner certain insights by viewing the replay. But it is for great analysis such as yours that I read this forum. Great job!

 

[patfanken]

I know it's become politically incorrect to say this but there's nothing that cost us that game more than the players we had out. Some injuries you can withstand, when you're on your 4th and 6th Safeties against the best passing game in the league you can't. Bad luck for us, that's why it's tough to win every year. Sometimes the breaks go against you. But put Rodney and Wilson back in and there's no talk about how great Manning played - or take Clark and one of their WR out.

Whining about injuries ? Nope. Just stating a fact that the better team was way more banged up and still almost overcame it.

I keep telling people who are negative about the Pats defense because of the breakdown in the second half that the Pats will have the following people available THIS year that weren't available for that 2nd half

Harrison, Wilson, Gay, Hawkins, Seau, Thomas, Merriweather- Those are 7 quality football players who instantly make the defense better than the one that finished the year on a bad note. AND if you want to stretch the point even further the fact that Bruschi won't be playing with a broken wrist this season, neither will Hobbs. Seymour will have 2 arms to play with, and I sure Vrabel's back feels better. AND if you want to take it to the extreme, they won't be jet lagged, nor will they have the flu.

 

[BB_dynasty]

I thought we played fine, but the defense was too tired. It just destroyed us. old article along with this subject:

http://www.patriots.com/search/index.cfm?ac=searchdetail&pid=23945&pcid=41

It’s a second-and-seven play on the Patriots 19-yard line. Peyton Manning sets up behind center, checks the coverage and calls for the snap. He takes a three step drop and fires the football into the end zone, aimed for wideout Reggie Wayne, who’s given Ellis Hobbs the slip and is streaking down the sideline for a touchdown catch.

But Hobbs stays with the Colts No. 2 receiver. He closes on Wayne, chopping his feet to avoid bumping into the wideout, a sure penalty since his back is to the passer. Wayne’s eyes widen, indicating the ball is on its way. Free from contact, Hobbs jumps up but doesn’t turn to look for the football, which strikes Hobbs’ left biceps from behind and falls to the turf dead.

Penalty flags fly, and referee Bill Carollo turns on his mic to let everyone know that the penalty’s on the “Defense. Automatic first down. The ball will be placed at the 1-yard line.” Manning hits former Patriot Dan Klecko for a 1-yard touchdown pass. A two-point conversion follows, tying it 21-21.

“Face-guarding,” said CBS analyst and former Giants quarterback Phil Simms during the replay. “Ellis Hobbs jumps up, just tries to get in the way of Reggie Wayne. Does not see the football. Does not play it. Easy call.”

Not so, according to replay official Dean Blandino, who joined Bob Boylston in the booth that day.

In a recent posting by Vic Ketchman, Jaguars.com senior editor, Ketchman responded to a fan’s posting about the play, writing, “You are absolutely correct. Face-guarding was discontinued several years ago and I completely missed it.”

Apparently, Ketchman had already responded to questions about the play, attributing the call to face-guarding just like Simms and countless fans across the nation who tuned in to watch the most viewed AFC Championship game in over 20 years.
There is no NFL rule against face-guarding.

“I talked to Dean Blandino in the league office and he confirmed what you’re saying,” wrote Ketchman. “Ellis Hobbs should not have been flagged for pass-interference. He didn’t make contact with the receiver and in no way did Hobbs impede Reggie Wayne’s ability to catch the pass. Blandino confirmed that the incorrect call was made. … Referee Bill Carollo made no reference to face-guarding in his explanation, but CBS analyst Phil Simms did. Apparently, he, too, doesn’t know the rule no longer exists. The next time you hear a TV analyst say, ‘he wasn’t playing the ball,’ think of the Hobbs play, then turn down the sound.”

 

[PeytonManning'sbrain]

expanding on one of franken's statements, the reason the patriots did lose the game was because the pats defense wore down. I attribute this mostly due to the fact that the team is getting up there in age and there not really used to playing in the dome and the tempature that goes along with it, i heard a couple of them had the flu as well and that could of affected there stamina very easily.

 

[BHSL2]

expanding on one of franken's statements, the reason the patriots did lose the game was because the pats defense wore down. I attribute this mostly due to the fact that the team is getting up there in age and there not really used to playing in the dome and the tempature that goes along with it, i heard a couple of them had the flu as well and that could of affected there stamina very easily.

This is what I don't understand. The only "old" starters we have are Bruschi, Harrison, and Vrabel. (Seau is a situational player) The rest of the starting defense is young. If anything, it the loss can be blamed on the fact that the Patriots were extremely depleted in terms of depth by the time the second half came around.

 

[MetalBleachers]

expanding on one of franken's statements, the reason the patriots did lose the game was because the pats defense wore down. I attribute this mostly due to the fact that the team is getting up there in age and there not really used to playing in the dome and the tempature that goes along with it, i heard a couple of them had the flu as well and that could of affected there stamina very easily.

The reason they got tired is because the Colts had 80 offensive plays. The reason that happened is, as pfKen put it, because Peyton Manning played the game of his life. Hate to admit it, but there it is.

Think back to previous Colts playoff losses in Foxboro, and the Pats' ability to make Manning move in the pocket and thus disrupt him. Now recall last year's regular season game, one play in particular where Rosevelt Colvin was knocking Peyton down, yet he managed to get the ball downfield for a completion (the play where Rodney Harrison got hurt). Peyton was a different guy in 2006. It will be very interesting to see how well he keeps that up, whether everything fell into place for him for one year or if he truly turned up the competitive fire for the rest of his career.

As Pats fans, let's hope for the former over the latter.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

expanding on one of franken's statements, the reason the patriots did lose the game was because the pats defense wore down. I attribute this mostly due to the fact that the team is getting up there in age and there not really used to playing in the dome and the tempature that goes along with it, i heard a couple of them had the flu as well and that could of affected there stamina very easily.

Not to take anything away from the Colts, they played their best game of "team" football in recent memory to earn that win. Robert Kraft later confirmed 15 cases of flu during the week leading up to the game - sounds like those bubbas needed to be issued Airborne or Zicam on the flight home from Dago - crap happens, the Colts earned they're right to represent the AFC by beating three playoff teams, welcome to the Superbowl hangover, this will be a challenging year for Indy.

 

[mac]

I only watched the game live. However, since we are rehashing, a key to the loss was TB looked shaky at the end of the game. He had less time left on the clock than he is comfortable with and had to get a TD not a field goal. He went into the "just sling it" mode, a mode which usually results in a pick and which did. As for the pick, a calmer Brady sees Evans in the right flat, hits Evans and watches Evans get out of bounds to stop the clock like 2002. A jittery Brady forces the ball and gets picked. Manning simply outplayed Tom in that game.

 

[Mike the Brit]

It looked like a lot of holding because there was a lot of holding.

Not to cry over spilled milk, so to speak (the game is over), but we're just stating the obvious here.

There's still Ken's question: were the refs letting both teams do it? We all know holding can be quite subjective and any team is entitled to play to what the refs will allow. What matters is that they apply it equally.