Andy Benoit :Final Super Bowl XLIX film study

Some interesting notes:

• He says the Patriots dealt with the read-option by always leaving the DE in contain, and trusting themselves to handle Lynch runs despite what might seem to be a a numerical disadvantage.
• He says Collins didn't spy Wilson much.
• He says Harmon frequently played McCourty's usual spot, while McCourty was more of -- well, I'm not sure whether robber is the correct term.

the safety thing is very interesting...also answers questions about why ppl (including myself) didnt see Devin so much

and he's right, we pretty much dominated that game, take a better defense before the half and seattle has 4-7 less points, and take one or two of their long completion passes away and they could barely do anything

lynch was contained, and if we get to bring wilson down two times when we whiffed instead? seattle may have 2 touchdowns

In a nutshell and all I need to know.. but my highly scientific eyeball test already told me this.

The Patriots were the better unit throughout the game

Click to expand...

The safety alignment is interesting. You sort of assume that they are doing a good job back there, when you don't hear McCourty and Chung's names much, but the telecast doesn't show that part of the field well.

Fencer said:

Some interesting notes:

• He says the Patriots dealt with the read-option by always leaving the DE in contain, and trusting themselves to handle Lynch runs despite what might seem to be a a numerical disadvantage.

Click to expand...

The other way they sometimes combated the read option was to crash the D-end down and loop the LB around to contain Wilson. It looked like they fooled him on the play that he juked Collins behind the line toward the end of the first half, but most of the time, he simply let Lynch take his chance on breaking through the line.

Fencer said:

• He says Harmon frequently played McCourty's usual spot, while McCourty was more of -- well, I'm not sure whether robber is the correct term.

Click to expand...

I wish it had been McCourty instead of Harmon on the Kearse catch. Should've been an INT.

The defensive film study shows that Bill had a lot of faith in his fronts to stop the run, even when they were undermanned. That it took Lynch 24 carries to barely break 100 yards, knowing that, is impressive.

What is funny is that for the most part, I did not notice either McCourty or Chung the entire game and I don't think Luke Wilson had a single pass thrown his way.

mosi said:

What is funny is that for the most part, I did not notice either McCourty or Chung the entire game and I don't think Luke Wilson had a single pass thrown his way.

Click to expand...

I thought willson would be a big factor. Was a non factor instead.

Not sure why so many keep writing that sea had to throw on one of the downs because there were only 26 seconds left. The only reason there were only 26 seconds left is because they wasted 24 seconds after the lynch run.

captain stone said:

I wish it had been McCourty instead of Harmon on the Kearse catch. Should've been an INT.

Click to expand...

....or at least knocked away.

Is anyone else irked that Harmon decided to pirouette over Kearse instead of knocking him into August?

shmessy said:

....or at least knocked away.

Is anyone else irked that Harmon decided to pirouette over Kearse instead of knocking him into August?

Click to expand...

Maybe not knock Kearse but knock the ball into August! I just cannot believe that play….even after watching it 100 times, I cannot believe that happened.

he made an assumption that Kearse would NEVER make that catch...who would? of course, in hindsight....assume makes an ass of u and me

Joker said:

he made an assumption that Kearse would NEVER make that catch...who would? of course, in hindsight....assume makes an ass of u and me

Click to expand...

Yeah, I would expect the coaches would have "had a word" with him about that.

The film shed no new light on Malcolm Butler’s game-winning interception. Russell Wilson’s ball placement was not ideal, but the key was Butler’s outstanding play recognition. Consider it a case of the football gods leveling things out after Jermaine Kearse’s lucky 33-yard catch.

Click to expand...

Right on!

He played it safe. I am still bothered by the last 6 seconds of the half. Might be the worst play of BBs career from a coaching standpoint. No excuse to give up a touchdown there and no reason to. They handed Seattle 4 points.

shmessy said:

....or at least knocked away.

Is anyone else irked that Harmon decided to pirouette over Kearse instead of knocking him into August?

Click to expand...

That's a tough 20-20 hindsight call. If you look at it from Harmon's point of view, he see's that the pass was successfully broken up. If he plows into the falling Kearse, he opens himself up to an unnecessary roughness penalty. In perfect hindsight with the ball taking about 3 perfect bounces, does his decision to avoid contact look like a mistake

Bruins29 said:

He played it safe. I am still bothered by the last 6 seconds of the half. Might be the worst play of BBs career from a coaching standpoint. No excuse to give up a touchdown there and no reason to. They handed Seattle 4 points.

Click to expand...

Those 6 consecutive plays at the end of the half were without question the WORST 6 consecutive plays this defense played all season. If they had executed successfully on any ONE of them, Seattle wouldn't have scored a TD. If Arringington simply hadn't grabbed the face mask, they would have had to go for the FG and a potential TD score at the end of the game would have only meant a tie

Clearly the Pats didn't play a perfect game on either side of the ball, but those 6 plays, IMHO, were the most egregious errors of the game. And if they had lost, I would have pointed to that as the main reason. It is virtually unforgiveable to allpw a team to succeed at an 80 yd scoring drive in 29 seconds. That's like a pick 6.

patfanken said:

That's a tough 20-20 hindsight call. If you look at it from Harmon's point of view, he see's that the pass was successfully broken up. If he plows into the falling Kearse, he opens himself up to an unnecessary roughness penalty. In perfect hindsight with the ball taking about 3 perfect bounces, does his decision to avoid contact look like a mistake

Click to expand...

His real error was not taking the intermediate course of diving low as low as he could while maintaining reasonable assurance of clearing Kearse's body. That was the best risk/reward course, and one that players will probably be coached better on in the future after this extremely visible example.

DarrylS said:

In a nutshell and all I need to know.. but my highly scientific eyeball test already told me this.

Click to expand...

Thats how freaky this game was. That Pats played better but could have very easily lost this game.

Crazy.