Curran:Patriots left peeved and proud after loss

Oswlek said:

Either I'm missing something, or this is a seriously eye-roll worthy comment.

Click to expand...

You are missing something.

Galeb said:

When Bedard confirms what I have been saying, will you reconsider your position?

Click to expand...

Bedard is not the grand guru of film break down that he presents himself as. He sounds good because he's sitting next to Felger and Mazz, but that's like saying my singing voice is beautiful because I'm accompanied by a sea gull who's choking on a hazelnut.

I know I'm going to take a lot of grief for this, but is Brady capable of winning big games anymore. Two Super Bowls where he did not play well. AFCCG in Denver last year over throwing wide open receivers. If I had to go into a big game I would take AR over Brady.

Sicilian said:

Bedard is not the grand guru of film break down that he presents himself as. He sounds good because he's sitting next to Felger and Mazz, but that's like saying my singing voice is beautiful because I'm accompanied by a sea gull who's choking on a hazelnut.

Click to expand...

Bedard is good at breaking down individual linemen's play. Where he struggles is that he assumes too much when breaking down coverages and "missed" passes, as well as determining the root causes of issues. He also puts far too much stock in what other "journalists" say.

Bombdog said:

I know I'm going to take a lot of grief for this, but is Brady capable of winning big games anymore. Two Super Bowls where he did not play well. AFCCG in Denver last year over throwing wide open receivers. If I had to go into a big game I would take AR over Brady.

Click to expand...

Your absolutely right...you're going to take a lot of greif for this.

The Patriots did not get dominated at the line, we know this because the Packers running game was stuffed. The Patriots did not rush the passer well because they were worried about the QB scrambling. Simple as that.

Nunchucks said:

The Patriots did not get dominated at the line, we know this because the Packers running game was stuffed. The Patriots did not rush the passer well because they were worried about the QB scrambling. Simple as that.

Click to expand...

Lacey had 21 rushes for 98 yards, a 4.7 ypc. The LBs were solid in their run defense and disrupted a number of runs in the backfield. The DBs also had a couple of good plays stopping runs in the backfield. Why would GB run more when Rodgers usually had more than 5 seconds to throw the ball?

Galeb said:

Lacey had 21 rushes for 98 yards, a 4.7 ypc. The LBs were solid in their run defense and disrupted a number of runs in the backfield. The DBs also had a couple of good plays stopping runs in the backfield. Why would GB run more when Rodgers usually had more than 5 seconds to throw the ball?

Click to expand...

Lacey also had about 40 yards on 3 carries on the first drive. After that, the Patriots did an excellent job holding up against the run. If you watched the game, you would see the Patriots DL consciously deciding to not break the pocket. It was obvious that they were holding their lanes to keep Rodgers from scrambling.

Nunchucks said:

Lacey also had about 40 yards on 3 carries on the first drive. After that, the Patriots did an excellent job holding up against the run. If you watched the game, you would see the Patriots DL consciously deciding to not break the pocket. It was obvious that they were holding their lanes to keep Rodgers from scrambling.

Click to expand...

The Pats LBs and DBs did a good job of tackling Lacie. The DL got pushed around.

I realized that the Pats concentrated on containing Rodgers. That doesn't justify consistently giving a passer more than 5 seconds to throw.

Galeb said:

Bedard is good at breaking down individual linemen's play. Where he struggles is that he assumes too much when breaking down coverages and "missed" passes, as well as determining the root causes of issues. He also puts far too much stock in what other "journalists" say.

Click to expand...

Bedard is a layperson who tries to break down film and can sound knowledgeable to people who have never broken down film. He's never played or coached at any meaningful level. He's also never learned how to break down film. He provides a service but don't be fooled because most don't know the difference.

Bombdog said:

I know I'm going to take a lot of grief for this, but is Brady capable of winning big games anymore. Two Super Bowls where he did not play well. AFCCG in Denver last year over throwing wide open receivers. If I had to go into a big game I would take AR over Brady.

Click to expand...

One player can only do so much. If the other 21 don't step up, you will lose. Give Brady the same time Rodgers had in the pocket, and we walk out with a win. OL and DL need to play better. Same as it was in the beginning of the season. Brady is still elite and very much clutch. He needs to be better protected and JMcD needs to call better plays.

Oswlek said:

Totally agreed. The Pack was giving 5 free yards on every down and NE could have easily punched it in with 90 seconds or so left. (Maybe not "easily", but it was still functionally a lot easier) So why go for broke right there? Made no sense whatsoever. Nor did the FG try, which still would have required a 3 and out that was terribly unlikely, certainly less likely than a 4th and 18 conversion. And even if the 4th down was slightly less likely, the odds of winning are higher because you are in position to score a go-ahead TD whereas a stop on D still requires driving down the field with no TOs.

Really bizarre time management there.

Click to expand...

Brady (and BB) have a history of this however [IMO seemingly since the Moss acquisition]. IIRC, on the SB play where Welker didnt catch it; there was a wide open guy in the 10-yd range (on like a 3d and 4 or 3d and 6); but TB went for it all then; and he did it again yesterday. He has done it in several other games as well; [looking past the open short guy for 'all the marbles'].

When it works, everyone says they 'went for the DAGGER to the jugular and put them down for the count.' When it doesn't; .... well read what is being written here in this thread as a result.

I would prefer that he be a bit more judicious about those deep throws when there is an opprotunity to 'beat the opponent mercilessly and slowly'; but it is a matter of conjecture as to which method would end up with more wins or more points. A judgement call: and certainly those 2 guys know a lot more about football than I do.

Galeb said:

I don't understand all this "Pats should have won" crap. If the other team doesn't turn it over, you don't win games where you lose in both trenches.

Click to expand...

That's because that Patriots shouldn't have won. They got outplayed in every facet of the game last night. They weren't embarrassed, and they held their own, but they got outplayed.

FirstAndGoal said:

Bedard is a layperson who tries to break down film and can sound knowledgeable to people who have never broken down film. He's never played or coached at any meaningful level. He's also never learned how to break down film. He provides a service but don't be fooled because most don't know the difference.

Click to expand...

...which explains his shortcomings that I cited. It takes a lot less football knowledge and instincts to break down technique and when someone successfully blocks or is blocked vs. what is going on in the passing game.

That all said, you don't have to be a former coach or player to become skilled at breaking down film. Bedard has a pretty good handle on technique and mechanics.

Gumby said:

Brady (and BB) have a history of this however [IMO seemingly since the Moss acquisition]. IIRC, on the SB play where Welker didnt catch it; there was a wide open guy in the 10-yd range (on like a 3d and 4 or 3d and 6); but TB went for it all then; and he did it again yesterday. He has done it in several other games as well; [looking past the open short guy for 'all the marbles'].

When it works, everyone says they 'went for the DAGGER to the jugular and put them down for the count.' When it doesn't; .... well read what is being written here in this thread as a result.

I would prefer that he be a bit more judicious about those deep throws when there is an opprotunity to 'beat the opponent mercilessly and slowly'; but it is a matter of conjecture as to which method would end up with more wins or more points. A judgement call: and certainly those 2 guys know a lot more about football than I do.

Click to expand...

In both cases Brady didn't have enough time to go through all reads. And this was not a problem based on how the routes were set up but he was not given enough time by the OL. As much as it hurts take a look at the Welker drop from the SB and the massacre that goes on around Brady.

I can't fault Brady for Gronk being his first read on that play. And if the timer goes off in his head then it is not surprising that he won't get through all progressions..

Oswlek said:

Either I'm missing something, or this is a seriously eye-roll worthy comment.

Click to expand...

Galeb said:

You are missing something.

Click to expand...

Sadly, it appears it was the latter.

FWIW, and I offer this with the most genial of intentions, you should take everything Bedard says with a boulder of salt. Maybe even an entire mine.

Enjoy the last word.

Galeb said:

...which explains his shortcomings that I cited. It takes a lot less football knowledge and instincts to break down technique and when someone successfully blocks or is blocked vs. what is going on in the passing game.

That all said, you don't have to be a former coach or player to become skilled at breaking down film. Bedard has a pretty good handle on technique and mechanics.

Click to expand...

Based on what? Sounding like he does? How is that being verified?

Galeb said:

Unfortunately, that isn't the case. After watching some early, blatant holds by GB's OL that weren't called, I focused much of my attention on the plays of both lines. Although Branch held his ground, it looks like his conditioning may be limiting his snaps. It was shocking seeing Wilfork get pushed around (granted it was often by double teams) on so many plays. Seeing Chris Jones get pushed around wasn't nearly so shocking.
NE's OL was significantly worse than the DL.

Bedard's commentary on the Felger and Toady show will confirm what I am telling you.

Click to expand...

That's not really what the box score says. http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=400554371

The box score and the eye test showed two evenly matched teams that played well. The Packers and Patriots came into this game #1 and #2 respectively in takeaway ratio. Neither team committed a turnover. There were a total of 8 combined penalties - four for each team. These guys played a remarkably clean game.

The defensive line did fine. The Patriots sacked Rodgers three times, and forced Rodgers to run five times. None of those runs were plays called for Rodgers. The Patriots collapsed the pocket and Rodgers took off. The sacks and the scrambles were also the result of good play by the Patriots secondary. The Packers were 0-4 on 3rd down in the Red Zone.

The Patriots OL only gave up one sack. The Patriots running game produced 4.7 yards per carry. The run blocking was fine. What I saw was an offense out-of-synch on the road against a team with no glaring weaknesses to exploit. We can second guess the play calling, and maybe the Patriots should have run the ball more. The first series was three ineffective running plays which I thought was odd, and Brady didn't target Gronkowski until the third drive. But overall, this was a match between two heavy-weights.

The key play in the game was the TD just before the half when Jordy Nelson broke away as Revis was being rubbed off as he made the catch. Great play design and execution. McCourty should have been in position to make a tackle after the catch. But was that a mistake? It was an outstanding play in a hurry up by an elite QB and receiver.

Both the Patriots and the Packers have three losses - all on the road. These QBs do well when they can read the defense and go with what will work best for them in a particular situation. That is much harder to do on the road when the crowd is into it, as it was last night.

FirstAndGoal said:

Based on what? Sounding like he does? How is that being verified?

Click to expand...

I have listened to Bedard breakdown several games that I have watched. I have identified his weaknesses and also made note of his strengths. He is one of the few journalists that offers much of any insightful analysis these days. Has there been another analyst who's weekly interviews generate multiple threads giving commentary every week?

As I have said before, Bedard is one of the best in the biz right now, but that is more of an indictment on the current media talking heads and fans than a credit to Bedard himself.

goheels22002 said:

That's not really what the box score says. http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=400554371

The box score and the eye test showed two evenly matched teams that played well. The Packers and Patriots came into this game #1 and #2 respectively in takeaway ratio. Neither team committed a turnover. There were a total of 8 combined penalties - four for each team. These guys played a remarkably clean game.

The defensive line did fine. The Patriots sacked Rodgers three times, and forced Rodgers to run five times. None of those runs were plays called for Rodgers. The Patriots collapsed the pocket and Rodgers took off. The sacks and the scrambles were also the result of good play by the Patriots secondary. The Packers were 0-4 on 3rd down in the Red Zone.

The Patriots OL only gave up one sack. The Patriots running game produced 4.7 yards per carry. The run blocking was fine. What I saw was an offense out-of-synch on the road against a team with no glaring weaknesses to exploit. We can second guess the play calling, and maybe the Patriots should have run the ball more. The first series was three ineffective running plays which I thought was odd, and Brady didn't target Gronkowski until the third drive. But overall, this was a match between two heavy-weights.

The key play in the game was the TD just before the half when Jordy Nelson broke away as Revis was being rubbed off as he made the catch. Great play design and execution. McCourty should have been in position to make a tackle after the catch. But was that a mistake? It was an outstanding play in a hurry up by an elite QB and receiver.

Both the Patriots and the Packers have three losses - all on the road. These QBs do well when they can read the defense and go with what will work best for them in a particular situation. That is much harder to do on the road when the crowd is into it, as it was last night.

Click to expand...

I would argue that the coverage downfield played more of a factor in forcing Rodgers to run for first downs. The score differential was deflated by GB receivers dropping multiple easy touchdowns.

• GB had 478 yards of total offense vs 320 for NE.
  
• Greenbay had 35:35 TOP vs 22:35 for NE
• GB was 10/17 (58%) on 3rd down vs NE 4/10 (40%)

This was not an evenly matched game. That said, give credit to NE for keeping it as close as they did.