Coaches blew it with situational football

Mark. · Nov 30, 2015

Zuma said:
Throwing deep bombs to Moss is ok. Throwing deep bombs over and over again to Chandler is not. We didn't have that threat in Denver on a wet field.

How many times did we try that play? At least three and came away with the same result every time. Wonder why we didn't throw more to Bolden and White? The game plan was a head scratcher.

MassPats38 · Nov 30, 2015

Situational football?

The Pats just lost a game. I get that some people are disappointed.

Situational football is not telling your designated punt return guy not to field a punt at a point in the field where they should be fielded. Letting the ball roll 20 yards to pin yourself is bad situational football when you cannot rip up and down the field on offense. The yards are critical.

If you have no confidence in the guy fielding punts, then don't let him return punts. I get it, he fumbled. And so did the Broncos return guy, who I do not believe was a stand-in.

Run or pass? With 2:53 left, the Broncos were playing run. So run, when the Broncos were defending run, or try to take them off guard and ice the game? The defense knew Brady didn't have his "go to" targets, and would love to run for a first. They completed the pass to LaFell, which suggests maybe the approach was not completely ridiculous. Which leave really 2 pass plays.

1 timeout, which would have stopped the first run play at 2:50. Two minute warning stoppage. The ball would go back to Denver. And with the sloppy conditions, leaving enough for something crazy to happen. Icing the game with a first down is not bad situational football.

Running the "what if's" on Gronk, the guy missed much of a season blocking on an extra point. It happens. He was healthy before the play, and then he wasn't. Good situational football does not entail playing not to get injuries. How exactly does that work, other than pulling key players when you are trying to win games?

tedy hagler · Nov 30, 2015

While we applaud the usually unpredicatable Patriot playcalling, lack of run calls with a lead like this is either dumb or arrogant. Josh McDaniels can choose which one it is.

We're on to Philly baby.

I.M. Fletcher said:
Why we were passing with 2:40 to go with a fresh set of downs was one of the dumbest coaching moments I can think this staff making.

That cost us the game, and with gronk getting injured, maybe much much more.

aluminum seats · Nov 30, 2015

luuked said:
True, but what your are saying are just more reasons to be more clever in those situations and not risk the ball for 5-8 yards more. If he calls the fair catch then he won't drop the ball. It was the immediate contact that caused Harper to lose it.

Haven't had coffee yet, but I thought Harper dropped it before he was touched.

tedy hagler · Nov 30, 2015

Yup. Chandler came in here with great expectations. But he is not a smooth ball catcher even when he is open.

Mark. said:
How many times did we try that play? At least three and came away with the same result every time. Wonder why we didn't throw more to Bolden and White? The game plan was a head scratcher.

condon84 · Nov 30, 2015

tedy hagler said:
Yup. Chandler came in here with great expectations. But he is not a smooth ball catcher even when he is open.

Yeah Chandler wasn't really much a mismatch for the LBs covering him. Other than when Von let him release in the endzone for that TD catch, he couldn't get much separation from the other LBs covering him.

I think Tim Wright would have killed that role last night.

Froob · Nov 30, 2015

MassPats38 said:
Situational football?

The Pats just lost a game. I get that some people are disappointed.

Situational football is not telling your designated punt return guy not to field a punt at a point in the field where they should be fielded. Letting the ball roll 20 yards to pin yourself is bad situational football when you cannot rip up and down the field on offense. The yards are critical.

If you have no confidence in the guy fielding punts, then don't let him return punts. I get it, he fumbled. And so did the Broncos return guy, who I do not believe was a stand-in.

Run or pass? With 2:53 left, the Broncos were playing run. So run, when the Broncos were defending run, or try to take them off guard and ice the game? The defense knew Brady didn't have his "go to" targets, and would love to run for a first. They completed the pass to LaFell, which suggests maybe the approach was not completely ridiculous. Which leave really 2 pass plays.

1 timeout, which would have stopped the first run play at 2:50. Two minute warning stoppage. The ball would go back to Denver. And with the sloppy conditions, leaving enough for something crazy to happen. Icing the game with a first down is not bad situational football.

Running the "what if's" on Gronk, the guy missed much of a season blocking on an extra point. It happens. He was healthy before the play, and then he wasn't. Good situational football does not entail playing not to get injuries. How exactly does that work, other than pulling key players when you are trying to win games?

Problem here is people grade playcalling 100% based on results. Not sure who else could even return punts. LaFell maybe....? Maybe Gronk could catch it?

varjao · Nov 30, 2015

Froob said:
Problem here is people grade playcalling 100% based on results. Not sure who else could even return punts. LaFell maybe....? Maybe Gronk could catch it?

Chung or McCourthy

50-yard-line · Nov 30, 2015

Bobsyouruncle said:
Complaining about the playcall is stupid. You have 3 minutes left, the two minute warning, a timeout and RBs averaging less than 3YPC. You need a first down to win.

The next drive Denver went 82 yards in 1:15. What in the world makes anyone think Denver wouldn't have done that if they ran 3 times.

It's not stupid.

The 36-yard pass to Thomas would have happened on the OTHER SIDE of the 2-minute warning (if it even would have happened with the Pats playing 2-deep on safeties, which they could have if they were inside 2-minutes and no Donkey timeouts.

How many seconds come off the clock on that play alone? Thomas makes the catch out by mid-field, 36 yards form the line of scrimmage...they've got to get up there, get set and do something.

This is not Monday-morning quarterbacking on my part - I was screaming at them to RUN RUN RUN before the play. They essentially gave Denver 2 extra timeouts.

And there were 7 seconds left on the play clock when they snapped that ball on the Gronk injury play - the play ended with 2:49 left in the game.

Play the run out and do the math. Remove the 7 seconds (Brady uses all the clock)...2:42 even IF Denver is right to their timeout.

Let's say they gain nothing on the RUN. 2nd and 10, timeout, 2:42. Rinse and repeat - 3rd and 10 AT THE TWO Minute warning.

Rinse and repeat, then punt. Denver gets the ball back, NO TIMEOUTS, somewhere around 1:10 left in the game...you afraid of that scenario?

Even if they then complete that lob-bomb to Thomas, they're at mid-field and we're WAY under a minute left, no timeouts and needing a touchdown.

Yeah, that was bad clock management, sorry, and I'm the biggest homer on this board.

Froob · Nov 30, 2015

varjao said:
Chung or McCourty

And if one of them gets hurt people are *****ing that key players are returning punts.

50-yard-line · Nov 30, 2015

Bobsyouruncle said:
1st down snap 2:53
TO
2nd down snap 2:48
3rd down snap 2:03
Punt 2:00

There were 7 seconds left on the play clock when they snapped the ball on the Gronk injury play. So 3rd down comes AFTER the 2-minute warning.

Still want to make that argument?

vyrago · Nov 30, 2015

I.M. Fletcher said:
Why we were passing with 2:40 to go with a fresh set of downs was one of the dumbest coaching moments I can think this staff making.

That cost us the game, and with gronk getting injured, maybe much much more.

Thought the same thing. It was clock-chewing time. Where's Corey Dillon when you need him?

aluminum seats · Nov 30, 2015

The calls at the end were fine, they're playing to win the game. Bringing Gronk's injury into the conversation in that context is asinine.

The only complaint I would have is not trying to score at the end of the half. Your QB is Tom Brady, you've got 2 minutes. Put the ball in his hands, odds are better than not he gets you at least 3. Mistake.

vyrago · Nov 30, 2015

Kdo5 said:
I totally agree, OP. It made no sense for Harper to return the ball when it was not necessary. And the kid has barely fielded any punts during regular season games. And it's snowing like hell.

Put someone like Chung back there and call the fair catch. Even better let it bounce. Very frustrated with the coaching there.

Feel bad for Harper. He wanted to be the hero.

upstater1 · Nov 30, 2015

MassPats38 said:
Situational football?

The Pats just lost a game. I get that some people are disappointed.

Situational football is not telling your designated punt return guy not to field a punt at a point in the field where they should be fielded. Letting the ball roll 20 yards to pin yourself is bad situational football when you cannot rip up and down the field on offense. The yards are critical.

The ball last night was rolling like a ball made of lead. In other words, the ball wasn't rolling at all. It was dying out there. It was cold, the field was wet and soggy. Balls were going nowhere.

Bobsyouruncle · Nov 30, 2015

50-yard-line said:
There were 7 seconds left on the play clock when they snapped the ball on the Gronk injury play. So 3rd down comes AFTER the 2-minute warning.

Still want to make that argument?

I was already being generous with the times giving 5 second plays. The run by Blount on the previous play was 2 seconds. Two more of those and they don't get to the two minute warning. Even in your fairy tale the Broncos have 1:20 and they drove 80 yards in 1:16 on the next drive, and 90 in 1:10 after that. So they should run three times in hopes the plays are long enough (with no evidence they would be) in hopes of giving them the ball in 1:20, in hopes they wouldn't be able to score in that time even if though we know they can and did. And the only reason they even have a chance to do this pipe dream was because of the previous pass to Gronk.

sambam94 · Nov 30, 2015

50-yard-line said:
It's not stupid.

The 36-yard pass to Thomas would have happened on the OTHER SIDE of the 2-minute warning (if it even would have happened with the Pats playing 2-deep on safeties, which they could have if they were inside 2-minutes and no Donkey timeouts.

How many seconds come off the clock on that play alone? Thomas makes the catch out by mid-field, 36 yards form the line of scrimmage...they've got to get up there, get set and do something.

This is not Monday-morning quarterbacking on my part - I was screaming at them to RUN RUN RUN before the play. They essentially gave Denver 2 extra timeouts.

And there were 7 seconds left on the play clock when they snapped that ball on the Gronk injury play - the play ended with 2:49 left in the game.

Play the run out and do the math. Remove the 7 seconds (Brady uses all the clock)...2:42 even IF Denver is right to their timeout.

Let's say they gain nothing on the RUN. 2nd and 10, timeout, 2:42. Rinse and repeat - 3rd and 10 AT THE TWO Minute warning.

Rinse and repeat, then punt. Denver gets the ball back, NO TIMEOUTS, somewhere around 1:10 left in the game...you afraid of that scenario?

Even if they then complete that lob-bomb to Thomas, they're at mid-field and we're WAY under a minute left, no timeouts and needing a touchdown.

Yeah, that was bad clock management, sorry, and I'm the biggest homer on this board.

3 runs and they win the game...no doubt about it 1:10 from their own 20 or so with no time outs? No way brock marches them down for a TD..no way.

I also hated taking the ball first in OT..no offensive weapons at all, and Bradyu is supposed to get a TD? Even a FG means that Denver has 4 downs every time to get 10 yards to get in FG range. Weather, Pats D playing great....give the rook the ball.

QuantumMechanic · Nov 30, 2015

The point is that if there were only 1:20 left and zero timeouts when Denver got the ball, NE could have conceded the short middle and clamped down harder on the long stuff. But with the time Denver had, NE had to defend the whole field.

50-yard-line · Nov 30, 2015

Bobsyouruncle said:
I was already being generous with the times giving 5 second plays. The run by Blount on the previous play was 2 seconds. Two more of those and they don't get to the two minute warning. Even in your fairy tale the Broncos have 1:20 and they drove 80 yards in 1:16 on the next drive, and 90 in 1:10 after that. So they should run three times in hopes the plays are long enough (with no evidence they would be) in hopes of giving them the ball in 1:20, in hopes they wouldn't be able to score in that time even if though we know they can and did. And the only reason they even have a chance to do this pipe dream was because of the previous pass to Gronk.

It ain't a fairy tale, and 5 seconds isn't generous for a football play, sorry (and you can run longer-developing plays, as well, you know?).

Their "1:17" TD can't happen if the 2-minute warning doesn't stop the clock on a 36-yard completion - they can't even throw to the middle of the field that far down (to the 50) without losing half the time on the clock trying to get set.

There's a huge difference between having 80 yards to go with no timeouts and around 1:10 on the clock, and having it WITH the 2-minute warning (which keeps the middle of the field open on that play).

So please knock it off with the insults (stupid, fairy tale). We'll just agree to disagree, as in "I think you're dead wrong."

sambam94 · Nov 30, 2015

I want to know if coaches instructed Harper to fair catch if anyone is around..if not, why? No way he should be trying to advance that punt with adefender right on him.

Coaches blew it with situational football

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Practice Squad Player

Pro Bowl Player

Practice Squad Player

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Independent Investigator & pliable af

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Independent Investigator & pliable af

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

In the Starting Line-Up

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

Hall of Fame Poster

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Burn it all down!

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Similar threads