PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Analyzing the myth of ATL blowing a sure win by not running the ball up 28-20


Status
Not open for further replies.
This switching between realities made me confused, I may need a coffee.

Well, to make a long story short, they blew it, period. But just like in the Seahawks pass, there was a reasoning to call that play and it's not entirely unjustified. They wanted to go for the dagger because at that point they were crapping their paints and feeling the breath of a savage beast in the back of their necks.

A Field goal is not automatic, the kicker can miss and give great field position, it can be blocked and returned. As usual the Sthepen A Smiths of life are going 100% hindsight.
 
What magic is required?

Atlanta running plays in the 2nd half up before the Hightower sack/fumble

Freeman for -3 yards
Coleman for 5 yards
Coleman for 0 yards
Freeman for 9 yards
Freeman for -3 yards
Coleman for -1 yards
Coleman for 8 yards
Coleman for 1 yard (Coleman injured, did not return)

8 carries for 16 yards

Patriots vs. Falcons - Play-By-Play - February 5, 2017 - ESPN
Nice cherry picking. Fact is they averaged 5.8 YPC over the game. 1 1st down and it's game over.

Plus what makes you so sure they would have run it on your hypothetical first play from scrimmage with 2:03 left? That's a situation where a nice play-action would have ended the game.
 
Two things.

If the Falcons were up by 11, they likely go into prevent mode, and make NE complete shorter passes in bounds to use up time. I don't think you can therefore say that NE go down the field in the same amount of time as when Atlanta are just trying to stop them.

Second, this all assumes that Atlanta run the ball 3 times for no 1st down when they get the ball back. In your scenario, 1st down with 2.03 remaining is actually a throwing down as there is no need to run the ball when the clock stops on the 2 minute warning anyway. And if they complete a 10 yard pass there the game is likely over.

That said, of course it was possible, but just very unlikely.
 
It was dumb for them to pass plain and simple. The chances are greater that the falcons win than the apatriots winning at 31-20. Tom could have found to way, but to say he 100 percent would have I think is a little over the top. Bottom line is that we won the game. The criticism of them not to run the ball 3 straight times is fair, but if people are trying to take credit wpaway they are fools. We still had to make plays on both sides of the ball
 
I don't think the decision to pass was such a dumb play. It was a safe play call, Flowers just made a great play. It was a shot gun with plenty of blockers and Ryan dropped 12 yards behind the line of scrimmage. He should have had enough time to avoid a sack, but Flowers just burst through the line shoving Mack aside like nothing, barely slowing him down with Ryan right there. Ryan had no time to react. You do not expect that on that play call. And running the ball carries the risk of a fumble as well.

Saying Atlanta blew it isn't giving the Pats' defense and Flowers enough credit.
 
Look...we just saw the Patriots gameplan photo. Practically none of it actually happened, but they won. It's all about execution. The players make the plays, and that aspect gets overlooked. Calling a pass play on second and eleven? Well, you do have an "MVP" quarterback who should probably know the situation, that is, if there's even a sniff of a pass rush, throw the ball away, that the cardinal sin there is to take a sack to take you out of field goal range. You can only blame the coaches so much.

In my opinion, Matt Ryan choked badly and lost this game. I do think the Falcons should have run it on third and 1/third and 2 while up 28-12, but again, as an offensive coordinator there's only so much you can do. Ryan should have been in full protect mode with that lead. Obviously, the first goal is to protect the ball, the second goal is to make a first down. No way he should have gotten stripped by Hightower in that situation.

Both backbreaking plays by the Falcons - the strip sack and the Flowers sack - I think both of those plays are on Matt Ryan more than anyone else.
 
Nice cherry picking.

Cherry picking is omitting items from within a relevant data set.

The Patriots made significant halftime adjustments to successfully stop the run, so the runs ATL made after halftime are fully relevant to what would happen later on in that game. Or they are at least relevant enough to show whether (in your own words) the Patriots stopping the run would somehow be a magical event!

Every single running play the Falcons ran in the 2nd half was listed. I didn't pick the 1st, 5th, 6th, 8th, and so on. You had every single one of them.

Yes, at 2:03 would have been a great time to throw a pass. The Falcons sure looked confident late in the game, don't you think? I think Matty was making a yellow puddle. I'd take my chances...
 
Nice cherry picking. Fact is they averaged 5.8 YPC over the game. 1 1st down and it's game over.

Plus what makes you so sure they would have run it on your hypothetical first play from scrimmage with 2:03 left? That's a situation where a nice play-action would have ended the game.
Aside from the firstvplay of the game they averaged less than 4.
They did not CONSISTENTLY run well.
 
That said, of course it was possible, but just very unlikely.
This is what it boils down to. The notions of "sure, technically, overtime was still possible if lots of things went right" and "it's entirely reasonable that it [still] would have been an overtime game" are wildly different things. The former acknowledges a possibility, the latter consists of a lot of wishful thinking and way too many assumptions.
 
I like your breakdown.

I like not needing a "what if" scenario significantly more.
 
I'm not saying the Falcons were right to not run it there, just that some people will find any way to blame the Falcons rather than give all credit to the Pats.
I don't think it has to do with cynicism towards the Patriots, I think it's just the nature of play-calling in the NFL. Coordinators are criticized no matter. If a team plays it conservatively and it fails, offensive coordinators are grilled for "being cowards" and "playing not to lose". If coordinators are aggressive (like Shanahan was in this scenario) and it fails, they are criticized for "getting too cute" and "not having common sense".
 
The Patriots-hating narrative is to insist that they were gifted another Super Bowl, that Atlanta flat-out gave it away by not running the football late in the game.

I have explored the “alternate reality” of what was very likely to happen if the Falcons had done precisely what the second-guessers insist was the right thing to do. Never mind that the second-guessers ignore the fact that the Falcons achieved their field position, within FG range, by virtue of a 39 yard pass play and a 27 yard pass play!

My conclusion is that the game, for the Patriots, was winnable even if the Falcons ran it into the line repeatedly and kicked a FG to go up 11. The GOAT would have found a way.

----
To recap, Jones made his incredible catch at the 4:40 mark and went out of bounds, thus the clock stopped. Freeman then lost a yard and the clock ran. At 3:56 Ryan snapped it, was sacked, and the Patriots called their 1st TO at 3:50.

In the alternate reality, the Falcons instead ran it. The Patriots STILL called TO. 3:50 left, 3rd down. No difference, of course, besides field position.

Back to the real world, the Falcons then attempted a pass play, were called for holding. The penalty importantly meant that it stayed 3rd down, with the clock at 3:44. They had to repeat 3rd down, threw an incomplete pass, and the clock ran to 3:38.

In the alternate reality the Falcons instead ran it again and were stopped cold. The Patriots immediately called TO #2, the clock was at 3:44, but guess what, with no penalty, it was 4th down, not 3rd down! The Falcons then took a FG, then kicked off at about 3:40, up 11. The Patriots then, as they had all game, likely took the ball after a touchback, at the 25 yard line, down 11, with 3:40 to go, and with 1 TO in their pocket.

Back in the real world, the Patriots had the ball 16 yards further back, at the 9 yard line, with 2 TOs and 3:38 left. Note: They did not use either timeout to drive, rather methodically so as to not leave too much time for Ryan, 10 plays, 91 yards in 2:41.

I argue that the Pats play calling would have been altered if they had been down 11 points to be much more aggressive. Their goal would clearly have been to drive the lesser distance, 75 yards, in under 1:40 (before the two minute warning) rather than 91 yards in 2:41. To show that it was indeed feasible, it actually took NE an entire minute in the real world to get from the 9 yard line to the 25 yard line after the Hogan catch. In the alternate reality, after an ATL FG, KO, and touchback, they would have STARTED THERE!

So let’s say that the Patriots scored and were able to get the (untimed) 2-pt. conversion before the two minute warning, with the one TO still in their pocket. Say, at 2:03. What then?

In the alternate reality, Ghost then blasted it into the end zone so that no time ran off.

The Falcons had 1st and 10 at the 25, they ran it, were stopped, then came the 2 minute warning!

The Falcons had 2nd and 10 at the 25 yard line, ran it, were stopped, the Patriots called their last TO, then 1:57 was left!

The Falcons had 3rd and 10 at the 25 yard line, ran it, were stopped, 40 seconds ran off the play clock. 1:17 was left when the Falcons had to punt. Maybe 1:12 if the play took 5 seconds.

Assume a 40 yard punt, fair caught, the Patriots then had the football at their own 35 yard line, no timeouts, with significantly more than one minute left. They needed to gain ~30 yards to attempt a game-tying FG. Atlanta’s defense was gassed. Brady was on fire.

My conclusion it that it is entirely reasonable that it would have been an overtime game, if the Falcons did EXACTLY what their detractors say that they should have done.

Brady would have found a way.


Not impossible but highly unlikely. The only way the Pats tie the game at that point is if they try and convert an onsides kick. Nothing is ever certain but that pretty much would have iced the game for Atlanta.

Of course Atlanta still has to make the kick. But that was Atlanta's safest bet to win. I don't know how anyone can argue that.
 
Last edited:
Not impossible but highly unlikely. The only way the Pats tie the game at that point is if they try and convert an onsides kick. Nothing is ever certain but that pretty much would have iced the game for Atlanta.

Of course Atlanta still has to make the kick. But that was Atlanta's safest bet to win. I don't know how anyone can argue that.

I laid out a play-by-play a scenario. What did you find so highly unlikely? Stopping the run? Preventing a first down? Driving 75 yards in under 1:40 (like we did anyway, on the last 75 yards of the 91 yard drive)? Stopping the run again? Preventing a first down again? Driving 30 yards in under a minute?

Taken together, I guess it could be considered wishful thinking, but not "highly unlikely". We were stopping the run. We were moving the ball in chunks, without spending TOs. Atlanta WAS rattled. We were well prepared in situational football.

I'm not saying it's a guarantee, but I am rather saying that an ATL win was not a guarantee, were they to run the ball exclusively, to satisfy the second-guessers.
 
I laid out a play-by-play a scenario. What did you find so highly unlikely? Stopping the run? Preventing a first down? Driving 75 yards in under 1:40 (like we did anyway, on the last 75 yards of the 91 yard drive)? Stopping the run again? Preventing a first down again? Driving 30 yards in under a minute?

Taken together, I guess it could be considered wishful thinking, but not "highly unlikely". We were stopping the run. We were moving the ball in chunks, without spending TOs. Atlanta WAS rattled. We were well prepared in situational football.

I'm not saying it's a guarantee, but I am rather saying that an ATL win was not a guarantee, were they to run the ball exclusively, to satisfy the second-guessers.

I was just stating the obvious scenario for what Atlanta should have done to win the game. Lets just say New England burns there time outs and Atlanta makes the FG, I am pretty sure Atlanta wins the game. Of course anything can happen, and maybe they miss the FG.. who the hell knows.
 
Yes, at 2:03 would have been a great time to throw a pass. The Falcons sure looked confident late in the game, don't you think? I think Matty was making a yellow puddle. I'd take my chances...
2:03 would have been the perfect time for play action because you don't need to worry about stopping the clock from an incompletion because the clock stops at the 2:00 warning anyway.

You scenario of trailing by 11 with 3:45 to go requires far, far more "must have" situations than the way things played out.
 
I laid out a play-by-play a scenario. What did you find so highly unlikely? Stopping the run? Preventing a first down? Driving 75 yards in under 1:40 (like we did anyway, on the last 75 yards of the 91 yard drive)?
They didn't do 75 yards in under 1:40 without the benefit of a timeout. They got a free timeout in that drive with the 2:00 warning.

That's the most unlikely part of the scenario you laid out. Knowing they had a 2 score lead changes the offense and defense drastically.
 
Lets just say New England burns there time outs and Atlanta makes the FG, I am pretty sure Atlanta wins the game.

How can NE take three timeouts on two downs? People are forgetting that the holding penalty gave the Falcons an extra down that they would not have had if they had run it.

They is no possible way that NE would have been out of TOs.
to recap:
1) Jones had gone out of bounds, clock stopped, First down
2) they ran it, and the play clock ran, second down
3) Ryan was sacked, the Pats took TO #1 after the sack, they would have done the same after a running play, 3rd down
4) Holding call on ATL, the clock stopped. If they had instead run it and been stopped, it would then be fourth down, the Pats would have taken TO #2, ATL would have kicked the FG, then the Pats immediately would gotten the ball back instead of having ATL replay 3rd down after the holding penalty and then punted.

There is no doubt that the Pats would have had no less than 1 TO left and at least 3:40 left, indeed perhaps 11 points down, but very likely at the 25 yard line rather than at the 9 yard line (big difference!).

A huge challenge? Absolutely! Such an impossible task that ATL should be ridiculed as stupid chokers? No way!
 
How can NE take three timeouts on two downs? People are forgetting that the holding penalty gave the Falcons an extra down that they would not have had if they had run it.

They is no possible way that NE would have been out of TOs.
to recap:
1) Jones had gone out of bounds, clock stopped, First down
2) they ran it, and the play clock ran, second down
3) Ryan was sacked, the Pats took TO #1 after the sack, they would have done the same after a running play, 3rd down
4) Holding call on ATL, the clock stopped. If they had instead run it and been stopped, it would then be fourth down, the Pats would have taken TO #2, ATL would have kicked the FG, then the Pats immediately would gotten the ball back instead of having ATL replay 3rd down after the holding penalty and then punted.

There is no doubt that the Pats would have had no less than 1 TO left and at least 3:40 left, indeed perhaps 11 points down, but very likely at the 25 yard line rather than at the 9 yard line (big difference!).

A huge challenge? Absolutely! Such an impossible task that ATL should be ridiculed as stupid chokers? No way!

So NE has 1 time out down by 11 in a conservative approach for Atlanta. I like my chances if I am Atlanta. But this is all hind sight 20/20 and it doesn't matter because they chose to stay aggressive and go for the kill shot and they got beat.
 
They didn't do 75 yards in under 1:40 without the benefit of a timeout. They got a free timeout in that drive with the 2:00 warning.

That's true, but if you recall the play at the 2 minute warning, it was a sideline catch by Amendola at about the 20. He went down with the catch to stop the clock immediately. If the clock were not about to stop, could he have gotten out of bounds? I'd have to review it again, but I'd say probably yes. If the clock were not stopping, Brady would have been leading him more to the boundary as well.
 
That's true, but if you recall the play at the 2 minute warning, it was a sideline catch by Amendola at about the 20. He went down with the catch to stop the clock immediately. If the clock were not about to stop, could he have gotten out of bounds? I'd have to review it again, but I'd say probably yes. If the clock were not stopping, Brady would have been leading him more to the boundary as well.
You're just pulling **** out of thin air at this point. No way Amendola makes the sidelines on that play.

If the Falcons took an 11 point lead and then EVERY SINGLE THING IMAGINABLE from that point forward goes NE's way, then yes, they could have won the game.

You keep using that final drive as your "proof" but you conveniently ignore the fact that they got a free time out and also that it took them a full minute to go their first 10 yards on that drive. What if the same thing happened in your hypothetical? What if the get the kickoff, trailing by 11, and it takes them 60 seconds to advance the ball 10 yards?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Five Thoughts on the Patriots Draft Picks: Overall, Wolf Played it Safe
2024 Patriots Undrafted Free Agents – FULL LIST
MORSE: Thoughts on Patriots Day 3 Draft Results
TRANSCRIPT: Patriots Head Coach Jerod Mayo Post-Draft Press Conference
2024 Patriots Draft Picks – FULL LIST
TRANSCRIPT: Patriots CB Marcellas Dial’s Conference Call with the New England Media
So Far, Patriots Wolf Playing It Smart Through Five Rounds
Wolf, Patriots Target Chemistry After Adding WR Baker
TRANSCRIPT: Patriots WR Javon Baker Conference Call
TRANSCRIPT: Layden Robinson Conference Call
Back
Top