Welcome to PatsFans.com

Does anyone think Jags are pulling a Rope-a-dope with QB selection

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by JoeSixPat, Jan 4, 2006.

  1. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,858
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +50 / 2 / -0

    I can't help but get the feeling that the Jags might be pulling a rope-a-dope with their annoucement of Leftwich as QB.

    The guy broke his ankle just more than a month ago - and while he's recognized as a pocket passer, not a scrambler, strategically the Pats would know that he's even less likely to be able to scramble now.

    ...not to mention the fact that he may be rusty after more than a month off...

    Meanwhile the Jags scrambling backup QB might actually present a more challenging matchup for the Pats, requiring that they put one of their LBs in an elephant position rather than solely pressuring the QB and taking pressure off the secondary

    ...and obvisously, winning 5 out of 6 games Garrard is not a bad QB

    The fact that these two QBs are so different and require different game planning and preparation by the Pats leads me to believe there's a good chance that this may be a rope-a-dope

    BB of course has probably already taken this into account, but ultimately he's going to have to make a choice on what QB to focus on - so he's probably focussing 75% of his gameplanning attention on the announced starter, Leftwich

    I would not be shocked to see Leftwich start, falter under the intense pressure Patriots LBs are sure to bring, and see Del Rio switch to Garrard, hoping that he can take advantage of the fact that the majority of the Patriots game planning was for Leftwich.

    Am I looking at this from the grassy knoll or do others share my suspicions?

    If the shoe were on the other foot and BB were the coach of the Jaguars, I expect that's exactly what he would do.
  2. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,426
    Likes Received:
    149
    Ratings:
    +306 / 9 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    I don't think it makes much difference. Belichick has said before that he prepares well for the backup QB in every game because the backup QB is one hit away from coming into any game.
  3. Willie55

    Willie55 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2005
    Messages:
    2,803
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    BB was pissed when the Falcons pulled that crap. Vick was probable until two days before the game and then on Saturday he was ruled out. The following week everybody on the Pats was probable until Thursday or Friday, and then downgraded to questionable.

    And yes I think the Jaguars are playing games with who will start.
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2006
  4. mgcolby

    mgcolby Woohoo, I'm a VIP!!! PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,606
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    I would think they are preparing for Gerrard first because he brings the running element, I don't see Byron having a much better passing arm then Gerrard. Leftwich is probably a better QB at finding the open reciever if for no other reason then experience. Honestly I don't think it matters the Pats will be focused on the run and force the QB to beat them; I don't see that happening.
  5. Michael

    Michael Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,006
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

  6. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    Byron has a much better arm than Garard. In fact that is really all he has. No way BB would play a QB who hadn't seen action in 6 weeks vs. a guy he had been winning with. But surprisingly in the NFL he is the exception to the rule. This is a political decision as much as anything. Byron is the franchise QB, has an ego on the line, and Del Rio is a players coach. Most analysts are certain he will start, just not very certain he will play well enough to remain in the game. The only problem with that approach is Garard for all his scrambling ability is not a very big scoring threat. If he has to come in to bail Leftwich out, he can't make the deep throws that have often saved Leftwich games in the end. Del Rio has tended to play smarter with him in, but if they're behind it will likely be too late to play smart.

    BB has plenty of film on both of these guys now - it's not like Garard is some secret unseen weapon. And either one of these two is going to get the lions share of the snaps in practice this week, or each is going to get half the snaps - and preparation is half the battle. Brady is getting all the snaps here.

    I saw an interview with Byron last night and he seems a little miffed by some of the talk. He said at one point he knows the offense and it's not like he got "any dumber" just because he's been out. OK by me.
  7. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,858
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +50 / 2 / -0

    I think BB will have considered a rope-a-dope... but ultimately you do have to devote a majority of your game planning and practices to the QB you deem most likely to start and play

    Del Rio is saying that is Leftwich - do you take Del Rio at his word and devote 80% of your practice/planning to Leftwich? Do you assuming he might be lying and go 50/50?

    Such choices can make a strategic difference - BB knows this better than anyone - and if it didn't make a difference you wouldn't see BB doing his best to keep injury reports so minimal

    Ultimately I think BB will prepare most for the QB he considers most likely to play the majority of the game

    I'm just getting the feeling that that might not be Leftwich... and that Del Rio might have announced Leftwich the starter with that same expectation

    We'll see
  8. c_nice_37

    c_nice_37 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I tend to think that Leftwich is far superior, even though rusty. Remember him at Marshall, getting carried down the field and standing back in the pocket? He's decent and much better than Garrard.
  9. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,858
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +50 / 2 / -0

    No one's ever going to say Leftwich isn't a tough QB... and may be the better pocket passer.

    But strategically I think the Pats have turned their season around by unleashing the full force of their LBs at opposing QBs.

    Strategically, the Jags can lessen that impact by requiring one LB to assume an elephant position.

    Its not a huge differential, but if there's not a significant dropoff between Leftwich and Garrard - and I don't think there is as evidenced by Garrard's play - if I were Del Rio I would probably pull a quick change if Leftwich falters even slightly.
  10. Box_O_Rocks

    Box_O_Rocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0

    I don't have much time before they triangulate on me and send the helicopters: Leftwich plays, the Jags are going to rely on their run game to slow the Pats' pass rush and keep Byron clean. Garrard comes in only if Byron leaves on a stretcher, he doesn't have Byron's come from behind arm.
  11. T-ShirtDynasty

    T-ShirtDynasty Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,562
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    :rofl: :rofl:
  12. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,858
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +50 / 2 / -0

    Of course you know who is behind ALL conspiracy theories, don't you?

    The GOVERNMENT!!!!

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>