Bedard's film review and grades for Baltimore game

[MoLewisrocks]

Aside from Brady and the WR's, doesn't paint a very pretty picture. Seems to think that overthinking the offensive game plan remains a problem. Have to find a way to involve Gronkowski more. Gap control all around a big issue affecting overall defensive performance. Have to find a way to pressure better offenses and QB's via scheme because talent alone still isn't sufficient. That of course impacts back end so something's gotta give.

Patriot defense didn't look revamped in first test - Patriots - Boston.com

 

[SVN]

He also had a bunch of tweets last nite about pats CB play .

https://twitter.com/GregABedard/status/250786665088573440

 

[BradyManny]

Would the corner play have looked so bad if the refs don't continually extend Ravens drives that end up as TDs?

Somewhere in an alternate universe, the Patriots could've won this game 34-17 or something like that. That's basically what could've happened if not for those crucial, game-swigning, Ravens drive-extending* and Patriots drive-halting calls**.

*BS Mayo PI on a failed 3rd & 6 on a TD drive; blown OPI call on Smith costs us a TD; BS McCourty hold on an incomplete 2nd & 14 on a long TD drive; BS Spikes hold negating sack that would've ultimately prevented TD;
**BS Gronk hold and BS Edelman PI potentially cost us a TD

 

[Deus Irae]

He tried covering for McCourty, but then proceeded to point out more McCourty screwups. That sort of thing is what makes his analysis less helpful than it should be. It reeks of something that's either agenda or stubbornness.

 

[BradyManny]

As for the lack of pressure - I blame it on the fact Jones was being held all night.

Really, as I said before, and I don't mean to rehash the debate, but it's hard to evaluate play from that game.

Though I do think Brady & the passing offense looked vintage, which is another reason why it's disappointing they put up an L.

As for Gronkowski, there's a couple factors:
- being asked to block more
- being held all over the field by Ray Lewis

 

[Rob0729]

He tried covering for McCourty, but then proceeded to point out more McCourty screwups. That sort of thing is what makes his analysis less helpful than it should be. It reeks of something that's either agenda or stubbornness.

Bedard has been one of McCourty's sharpest critics this preseason. What agenda would you suggest he has? He is on a crusade to prove his preseason evaluations are a bunch of crap?

As for him trying to cover up and then point out his screw ups, he mentioned six plays he executed well (possibly seven if the "great play" of breaking up Smith on 3rd and 15 is separate plays he mentioned) vs. the two plays he said were bad. As he said on WEEI this morning, McCourty is the first DB to break up four passes in a game in forever.

Here is what he wrote:

It’s a shame that Devin McCourty dropped an interception and had the late penalty (the other one was ticky-tack), because this was his best game in some time with four pass breakups, a pass defensed, and another good pass coverage. Great play by McCourty to knock away the pass to Smith on third and 15 late in the third quarter.

 

[Wrath Mania]

Sorry, I think you guys are being way too lenient with (or hopeful about?) this defense. Yeah, some really bad calls put the defense in bad spots; the Ravens had at least a few 'bull' calls as well. The bottom line is they stopped the Patriots cold at the end (though this was perhaps as much to do with Patriots offense) whereas Flacco moved down the field with embarrassing ease- all he had to do was float balloons towards McCourty and that was that. I don't buy this idea that the Patriots lost cause of the refs; the secondary looked as suspect as last year, and all the Ravens had to do was start running the ball and that mighty front seven vanished. I don't get how anyone can say McCourty had a "decent" game when he dropped two interceptions and was responsible for the worst legit foul in the game. I don't get why we're all so in awe of Chandler Jones just cause he talked trash at the start of the game, when he veritably vanished after the first quarter. It's not just cause he got hold- it's ridiculous to explain everything away with bad officiating. I'm not saying the crappy calls weren't there, but we need to be dead honest about how this defense looked on its own Sunday night: bad.

Things can improve of course, and I hope they do, we can all make arguments that sound nice and are comforting. But 1-2 is 1-2. Thank god Revis is out and the Jets have no clue what they're doing.

 

[JackBauer]

I don't buy this idea that the Patriots lost cause of the refs; the secondary looked as suspect as last year

No, it's pretty clear the Patriots lost because of the refs.

And the reason you didn't see Chandler Jones is because he was going hog tied by the OT the entire game.

 

[Deus Irae]

Bedard has been one of McCourty's sharpest critics this preseason. What agenda would you suggest he has? He is on a crusade to prove his preseason evaluations are a bunch of crap?

Actually, as far as agenda goes, he's now on a "How does BB not know his CB playing style isn't modern enough" kick. However, it could well just be stubbornness, as I pointed out. When Bedard gets an opinion, he is done. We've seen this before. That's fine in some arenas, but it's a problem for him given that he's supposed to be neutrally analyzing.

As for him trying to cover up and then point out his screw ups, he mentioned six plays he executed well (possibly seven if the "great play" of breaking up Smith on 3rd and 15 is separate plays he mentioned) vs. the two plays he said were bad. As he said on WEEI this morning, McCourty is the first DB to break up four passes in a game in forever.

Here is what he wrote:

I know what he wrote. He went CHA and then admitted to more screwups even while trying to CHA there too, by essentially blaming Gregory for McCourty's crap effort on that tackle. Frankly, I found that to be a terrible bit of writing and analysis, and I expect that he'd love to have at least some of that back.


How many screw ups do we allow before we can say that a CB stunk without you homers pretending that it's all unicorns and rainbows?

 

[Rob0729]

Actually, as far as agenda goes, he's now on a "How does BB not know his CB playing style isn't modern enough" kick. However, it could well just be stubbornness, as I pointed out. When Bedard gets an opinion, he is done. We've seen this before. That's fine in some arenas, but it's a problem for him given that he's supposed to be neutrally analyzing.

Again, Bedard was the leading crusader of "If McCourty has reverted back to his rookie form, I haven't seen any sign of it" brigade during the preseason. If he is that stubborn, he would have joined Tom Curran, Ty Law, and a lot of other media people in the "McCourty Sucked" charge from this game.

Also, saying McCourty played well goes against his theory. If McCourty had a great game as he suggests, it tells us that talent and not scheme is the problems with breakdowns on defense for the most part.

I know what he wrote. He went CHA and then admitted to more screwups even while trying to CHA there too, by essentially blaming Gregory for McCourty's crap effort on that tackle. Frankly, I found that to be a terrible bit of writing and analysis, and I expect that he'd love to have at least some of that back.

First, he isn't the only one who feel it was mostly or all Gregory fault on that play. So it isn't like he is making this up. Gregory never makes contact with Pitta to slow his stride and it looks like McCourty's route was based on Gregory at least a little.

Second, I don't think he wants to take any of it back. He went toe to toe with Dennis and Callahan on this issue. If he regretted writing it, he wouldn't have argued as passionately. He said that when he analyzes a player in the game he doesn't put any more weight on the end of the game vs. the beginning of the game and that most of McCourty's critics are putting way too much weight on the final drive and not the rest of the game.

Third, I didn't have any problem with the writing. The difference is that I agree with him and you don't. I wonder if he wrote McCourty sucked and say "yeah, he had a few good plays, but mostly sucked" whether one or both of us would have a different view of the quality of his analysis.

 

[MNF]

No, it's pretty clear the Patriots lost because of the refs.

And the reason you didn't see Chandler Jones is because he was going hog tied by the OT the entire game.

Agreed. It was pretty clear the refs butchered the game. The monday night game got all the headlines for the last play but the Pats game was a 60 minute highlight reel on who is not qualified to ref in the NFL.

 

[Deus Irae]

Third, I didn't have any problem with the writing. The difference is that I agree with him and you don't. I wonder if he wrote McCourty sucked and say "yeah, he had a few good plays, but mostly sucked" whether one or both of us would have a different view of the quality of his analysis.

That's not the difference at all. I've criticized writers regardless of my agreement or disagreement with their position.

In the Sunday night game, there were 6 significant negative plays for McCourty counting the two missed INTs, and that's just on the plays he was involved in. You can pretend that's a good day at the office. McCourty knows better, as do most people.

”You have to make plays, plain and simple,” McCourty said. ”There were more plays, not just on the last drive, but all throughout the game that I can make and my team can make. And it’s simple. I have to make those plays.”...

McCourty knows he’s struggling, but doesn’t seem to have any answers.

”Ijust have to work at it,” he siad. “”I have to get better because I was close on a lot of plays and I just have to get it done.”

 

[Rob0729]

No, it's pretty clear the Patriots lost because of the refs.

And the reason you didn't see Chandler Jones is because he was going hog tied by the OT the entire game.

Eventhough the refs were horrible and their bad calls and non-calls seemed to help the Ravens far more than the Pats, I still blame the Pats for the loss.

 

[JackBauer]

Eventhough the refs were horrible and their bad calls and non-calls seemed to help the Ravens far more than the Pats, I still blame the Pats for the loss.

Had the refs had called a decent game, the Patriots would have won, all else being equal.

 

[Deus Irae]

Had the refs had called a decent game, the Patriots would have won, all else being equal.

I agree. Discussing the player struggles is an intellectual exercise, but good officiating would likely have resulted in a comfortable win for the Patriots.

 

[JackBauer]

I agree. Discussing the player struggles is an intellectual exercise, but good officiating would likely have resulted in a comfortable win for the Patriots.

I think the play in particular that stands out is the 2 yard PI call on Mayo. Next up would be Edelman's OPI, I guess.

The Patriots certainly could of, and perhaps should of, overcome the lousy officiating. But from my vantage, as you said, had this been a normal crew they likely would have prevailed even if the game progressed in a similar manner.

 

[Rob0729]

That's not the difference at all. I've criticized writers regardless of my agreement or disagreement with their position.

In the Sunday night game, there were 6 significant negative plays for McCourty counting the two missed INTs, and that's just on the plays he was involved in. You can pretend that's a good day at the office. McCourty knows better, as do most people.

One negative play was a bad call. One of the dropped INTs was a positive play that people are turning into a negative. Even elite CBs like Revis might not have caught that ball with Smith stripping it out of his hands. I don't know why people call that one a negative play.

I never said it was a good day at the office. He had some great play and some bad play. At times he played like an elite CB and at others, he looked like last year. People are overblowing the few bad plays (I count truly 3-4) and diminishing the good or great plays.

And I never take what players say on face value ever. They all talk Belichickian.

 

[Deus Irae]

One negative play was a bad call. One of the dropped INTs was a positive play that people are turning into a negative. Even elite CBs like Revis might not have caught that ball with Smith stripping it out of his hands. I don't know why people call that one a negative play.

I never said it was a good day at the office. He had some great play and some bad play. At times he played like an elite CB and at others, he looked like last year. People are overblowing the few bad plays (I count truly 3-4) and diminishing the good or great plays.

And I never take what players say on face value ever. They all talk Belichickian.

There were more bad plays where he wasn't targeted, and there were incompletions on plays where he was beaten with the same move. You're ignoring those and also claiming that bad plays weren't bad plays.

With that sort of thinking, it's no wonder you think he did fine. And, when players talk about things in general, the grain of salt is appropriate. When they talk about specifics (gotta make that throw/catch/INT/etc...) that grain of salt is no longer the way to take the discussion.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think the play in particular that stands out is the 2 yard PI call on Mayo. Next up would be Edelman's OPI, I guess.

The Patriots certainly could of, and perhaps should of, overcome the lousy officiating. But from my vantage, as you said, had this been a normal crew they likely would have prevailed even if the game progressed in a similar manner.

I'm with you. The Mayo PI led to 78 yards and a TD that would never have happened. It's the difference in the game, right there. The rest of the calls are bad, but that one's pretty clear.

 

[Rob0729]

There were more bad plays where he wasn't targeted, and there were incompletions on plays where he was beaten with the same move. You're ignoring those and also claiming that bad plays weren't bad plays.

With that sort of thinking, it's no wonder you think he did fine. And, when players talk about things in general, the grain of salt is appropriate. When they talk about specifics (gotta make that throw/catch/INT/etc...) that grain of salt is no longer the way to take the discussion.

I forgot the golden rule of this board, Deus Irae's analysis is always right and anyone who disagrees with his opinion either has a hidden agenda that makes all their opinions biased and inaccurate or to stupid to understand what went on.

I'm done with this this ridiculous argument with you.