Bedard Pats/Colts Film Review

[patfanken]

E


Exactly. 1:25 to go in the half, on your own 17 yard line? 3rd and 1. In a game where their DL couldn't stop the run.

Bad game management. Itmade the game closer than it should have been at the half.

Good thing BB reamed McDaniels/Brady out at the half for that.

I get your frustration, and the reasons for it, Shmess, but I think Bedard got it right. "That's what they do" When they see an A+ match up, they go to it, regardless of the situation. They have THAT much confidence in their system.

The error on that play wasn't the call, but the bad blocking on the OL, and the recklessly poor decision by Brady to throw the ball under such pressure. BTW-one of the reasons that Brady made that call was that the Colts had committed 9 players in the box, so even though we'd had success against the run, it would have been no sure thing to pick up that yard.

So while all your arguments against the call are legitimate in one sense, its not how the Pats run their offense. Given the same situation, I bet they call the play action pass 9 time out of 1o......minus the bad pass protection and the ill advised throw under pressure.

 

[shmessy]

I get your frustration, and the reasons for it, Shmess, but I think Bedard got it right. "That's what they do" When they see an A+ match up, they go to it, regardless of the situation. They have THAT much confidence in their system.

The error on that play wasn't the call, but the bad blocking on the OL, and the recklessly poor decision by Brady to throw the ball under such pressure. BTW-one of the reasons that Brady made that call was that the Colts had committed 9 players in the box, so even though we'd had success against the run, it would have been no sure thing to pick up that yard.

So while all your arguments against the call are legitimate in one sense, its not how the Pats run their offense. Given the same situation, I bet they call the play action pass 9 time out of 1o......minus the bad pass protection and the ill advised throw under pressure.

Ken, I'm ok with that in the middle of a quarter......or out at the 35 yard line.......or when you feel liek you can't get 1 yard against a certain DL.....or in a situation where you aren't getting the ball back at the beginning of the 2nd half.

The situation was bad.

This game also saw another useless timeout midway through the 3rd quarter when the Pats couldn't get a play off when the Colts D was in complete disarray.

Then (for the umpteenth time in the past few years) Ol' Ernie Adams was half asleep in the booth and told Belichick to throw the challenge flag later in the quarter to use usp the 2nd TO on the Fleener catch that EVERYONE IN TV LAND could plainly see 2 seconds in on replay was a good catch. A full 15 seconds after 30 million Americans saw the NBC replay, BB throws the flag to toss away TimeOut #2.. This was before even getting to the 4th quarter.

The Patriots video booth problem, by the way, is becoming a repetitive issue. I hope it doesn't come back to bite them down the line, because it needs to get fixed.

The Pats DOMINATED both lines of scrimmage Sunday night. THAT won the game.

What was between their ears, however, needs to be fixed.

 

[patfanken]

BTW- I listened to the show for most of Bedard's time there, and I have to say, I found it hard to take. Mazz's constant shouting and uninformed blather was horrifying. Though I think Bedard's analysis is must hear radio, in the future, I think I'm going to "hear" his mostly astute observations, from this thread. Its just easier on my ears

 

[Ring 6]

E


Exactly. 1:25 to go in the half, on your own 17 yard line? 3rd and 1. In a game where their DL couldn't stop the run.

Bad game management. Itmade the game closer than it should have been at the half.

Good thing BB reamed McDaniels/Brady out at the half for that.

Actually that is the perfect spot for a play action pass, and as it turned out the call was great, because Gronk was 5 yards behind every defender. If Brady got anything on the ball its a TD.
You could never factor into a play call that Brady would dive backward and throw up a blind pass if there was a rush.

By the way, according to Brady BB said nothing about it at half.

 

[shmessy]

Actually that is the perfect spot for a play action pass, and as it turned out the call was great, because Gronk was 5 yards behind every defender. If Brady got anything on the ball its a TD.
You could never factor into a play call that Brady would dive backward and throw up a blind pass if there was a rush.

Once again, I have no problem with it the way you described it.

However given the time, yardline, possession at the beginning half, etc. Nope.

Hell, the Pats had better field position when they kneeled on it a mere 36 seconds later.

 

[RobertWeathers]

BTW- I listened to the show for most of Bedard's time there, and I have to say, I found it hard to take. Mazz's constant shouting and uninformed blather was horrifying. Though I think Bedard's analysis is must hear radio, in the future, I think I'm going to "hear" his mostly astute observations, from this thread. Its just easier on my ears

Felger and Mazz are unlistenable. Period. Hell, after the Pats/Dolts game he was challenging Troy Brown on WR receiver play and Ty on how Revis should be used in coverage...My god.

Bedard needs to be on Gresh and Zo...At least they have educated and informed opinions on football.

Just need to remind yourself that their core belief is to be the contrarian no matter how right the other individual is on a specific topic.

 

[shmessy]

Ken, I'm ok with that in the middle of a quarter......or out at the 35 yard line.......or when you feel liek you can't get 1 yard against a certain DL.....or in a situation where you aren't getting the ball back at the beginning of the 2nd half.

The situation was bad. BTW, 9 in the box means that Brady should have known that someone was going to be coming in unblocked anyway. To be shocked and surprised that someone was in his face is on him.

This game also saw another useless timeout midway through the 3rd quarter when the Pats couldn't get a play off when the Colts D was in complete disarray.

Then (for the umpteenth time in the past few years) Ol' Ernie Adams was half asleep in the booth and told Belichick to throw the challenge flag later in the quarter to use usp the 2nd TO on the Fleener catch that EVERYONE IN TV LAND could plainly see 2 seconds in on replay was a good catch. A full 15 seconds after 30 million Americans saw the NBC replay, BB throws the flag to toss away TimeOut #2.. This was before even getting to the 4th quarter.

The Patriots video booth problem, by the way, is becoming a repetitive issue. I hope it doesn't come back to bite them down the line, because it needs to get fixed.

The Pats DOMINATED both lines of scrimmage Sunday night. THAT won the game.

What was between their ears, however, needs to be fixed.

 

[Oswlek]

Disagree --- I immediately thought of the 99 yard touchdown to Welker in 2011 against Miami. The Patriots hit that play, and the game is effectively over as the safeties cannot honor the threat of the run by getting into the box anymore. Gronk was open and he was going to be good for at least forty or fifty yards including the last 15 giving someone a piggyback ride.



Now the Pats did not hit on the play, but the concept and intent of the play was valid in my mind. There is always a big difference between evaluating the outcome of a play and the design/intent of a play. Outcome sucked, intent and the thought process behind the play was aggressive but not absurdly so.

Enormous situational differences between the plays. On the Welker play, it was simply a result of coverage. It wasn't like NE spread them out specifically looking for a huge gainer to ice away a game that was nearly iced away, they routinely do spread when backed up so it was more of the same that happened to generate a great result. In the Indy game, they specifically changed up to go for a kill shot on a team that was already dead.

I see the reasoning, I just think that - as I wrote before - the upside of 7 extra points in a game you were already dominating didn't outweigh the fact that the downside would offer Indy their infinitesimal chance of getting back in the game. Not every play with a favorable match up is the right situational play.

 

[patfanken]

Ken, I'm ok with that in the middle of a quarter......or out at the 35 yard line.......or when you feel liek you can't get 1 yard against a certain DL.....or in a situation where you aren't getting the ball back at the beginning of the 2nd half.

The situation was bad.

This game also saw another useless timeout midway through the 3rd quarter when the Pats couldn't get a play off when the Colts D was in complete disarray.

Then (for the umpteenth time in the past few years) Ol' Ernie Adams was half asleep in the booth and told Belichick to throw the challenge flag later in the quarter to use usp the 2nd TO on the Fleener catch that EVERYONE IN TV LAND could plainly see 2 seconds in on replay was a good catch. A full 15 seconds after 30 million Americans saw the NBC replay, BB throws the flag to toss away TimeOut #2.. This was before even getting to the 4th quarter.

The Pats DOMINATED both lines of scrimmage Sunday night. THAT won the game.

What was between their ears, however, needs to be fixed.

BB explained the challenge flag call post game. He stated that he knew that it was a long shot to get it overturned, but he felt this wasn't the kind of game where have a bunch of TO's would be important and he felt the team could use the time to get a few things straightened out.

As for your main complaint, your initial frustration with both the play call and poor decision by Brady, is perfectly understandable. But like I said, you'd better get used to it because Brady is likely to make that same call most of the time under similar conditions. Right or wrong, that's the way he's been taught to play the game.

 

[Ring 6]

Once again, I have no problem with it the way you described it.

However given the time, yardline, possession at the beginning half, etc. Nope.

Hell, the Pats had better field position when they kneeled on it a mere 36 seconds later.

I don't understand why a play that totally fools a defense is not a good call because of the yardline.
If Brady stayed in and took the hit, the game was over.

 

[mayoclinic]

Enormous situational differences between the plays. On the Welker play, it was simply a result of coverage. It wasn't like NE spread them out specifically looking for a huge gainer to ice away a game that was nearly iced away, they routinely do spread when backed up so it was more of the same that happened to generate a great result. In the Indy game, they specifically changed up to go for a kill shot on a team that was already dead.

I see the reasoning, I just think that - as I wrote before - the upside of 7 extra points in a game you were already dominating didn't outweigh the fact that the downside would offer Indy their infinitesimal chance of getting back in the game. Not every play with a favorable match up is the right situational play.

I think it's fine to audible and go for it if the opportunity was there. It was 2nd down, and the way the Pats were running the ball it would have been a gimme.

What wasn't fine was throwing up a blind lame duck when the protection broke down. The primary objective should have been avoiding what actually occurred.

 

[Ring 6]

Ken, I'm ok with that in the middle of a quarter......or out at the 35 yard line.......or when you feel liek you can't get 1 yard against a certain DL.....or in a situation where you aren't getting the ball back at the beginning of the 2nd half.

The situation was bad.

This game also saw another useless timeout midway through the 3rd quarter when the Pats couldn't get a play off when the Colts D was in complete disarray.

Then (for the umpteenth time in the past few years) Ol' Ernie Adams was half asleep in the booth and told Belichick to throw the challenge flag later in the quarter to use usp the 2nd TO on the Fleener catch that EVERYONE IN TV LAND could plainly see 2 seconds in on replay was a good catch. A full 15 seconds after 30 million Americans saw the NBC replay, BB throws the flag to toss away TimeOut #2.. This was before even getting to the 4th quarter.

The Patriots video booth problem, by the way, is becoming a repetitive issue. I hope it doesn't come back to bite them down the line, because it needs to get fixed.

The Pats DOMINATED both lines of scrimmage Sunday night. THAT won the game.

What was between their ears, however, needs to be fixed.

Wow, I'm going to bail out of this because I simply cannot believe that post was written after a 42-20 win on the road with #1 seed to date on the line.
Perhaps you aren't saying the Patriots staff are a bunch of morons and if they were as smart as you we'd be great, but it sure is coming off that way.

 

[luuked]

I don't understand why a play that totally fools a defense is not a good call because of the yardline.
If Brady stayed in and took the hit, the game was over.

I think the issue is not so much with the play but with how Brady reacted to the pressure.

I don't necessarily have an issue with risky plays deep in your own territory. But for goodness sake, please, take the sack or even grounding if things go wrong. The probability to successfully complete the play was very, very low once Vollmer (?) was beaten. At that point it is sheer stupidity to even attempt a throw.

In a nutshell.. have a safer exit strategy and don't try to be a hero..

 

[shmessy]

Disagree --- I immediately thought of the 99 yard touchdown to Welker in 2011 against Miami. The Patriots hit that play, and the game is effectively over as the safeties cannot honor the threat of the run by getting into the box anymore. Gronk was open and he was going to be good for at least forty or fifty yards including the last 15 giving someone a piggyback ride.



Now the Pats did not hit on the play, but the concept and intent of the play was valid in my mind. There is always a big difference between evaluating the outcome of a play and the design/intent of a play. Outcome sucked, intent and the thought process behind the play was aggressive but not absurdly so.

Once again - -the SITUATION.

That was not 1:25 left in a half when you are getting the ball back first thing in the next half.

That was a 14 point lead with 5:57 left in the game against an offense that was not known for its fire power.

 

[shmessy]

Wow, I'm going to bail out of this because I simply cannot believe that post was written after a 42-20 win on the road with #1 seed to date on the line.
Perhaps you aren't saying the Patriots staff are a bunch of morons and if they were as smart as you we'd be great, but it sure is coming off that way.

I'm not saying that at all and you know it. They make mistakes plenty of times, they are human.

I also criticize their video booth shenanigans the past several games.

There are plenty of areas that even the best coaching staffs can clean up.

Even a "footy pajama fanboy" like me can criticize them sometimes.

 

[Deus Irae]

Once again - -the SITUATION.

That was not 1:25 left in a half when you are getting the ball back first thing in the next half.

That was a 14 point lead with 5:57 left in the game against an offense that was not known for its fire power.

Perfect time for the call, and they had it, if the OL had done its job. That keeps getting ignored, because.... agenda.

 

[shmessy]

True - but if that play was executed, we're up 18 - getting the ball to start the 2nd half, that's almost game over. That was a TD if it connects. I actually had no issue with the call - at worst that should've led to a punt, but Brady goofed.

".....at worst that should've led to a punt".

No, we saw that a punt was not the worst possible outcome of that.

 

[shmessy]

Perfect time for the call, and they had it, if the OL had done its job. That keeps getting ignored, because.... agenda.

" if the OL had done its job."

You mean against the 10 men in the box (8 on the line)?

No agenda. I don't understand your need to get personal here. Can't you just argue the point?

 

[Deus Irae]

" if the OL had done its job."

You mean against the 9 men in the box?

No agenda. I don't understand your need to get personal here. Can't you just argue the point?

You have no point. You only have your "run it!" agenda, which is absolutely ridiculous.

And, yeah, the OL is supposed to stop the guys coming straight up the middle. This shouldn't be news to you.

 

[Oswlek]

" if the OL had done its job."

You mean against the 9 men in the box?

No agenda. I don't understand your need to get personal here. Can't you just argue the point?

FWIW, I disagreed with that play choice as it happened (though not nearly as much as the first pick ) The result reinforced - and perhaps exaggerated - my displeasure, but it wasnt the cause.

I'll restate my contention. I'm fully aware of the upside of this play, and the fact that much of it went to plan. I'm also fully aware that a long TD increases NE's chances of winning. I just felt that NE's odds of victory were so high as to make a big play there somewhat meaningless. We had reached the plateau on the probability chart. However, a kill shot attempt that led to a pick, or even simply an incomplete pass that stopped the clock, increased Indy's chances of making a come back by a greater amount.

I could be wrong, it happens frequently enough.