Does Belichick have any faith in his own defense?

[WhoaDirty]

But we went on defense anyway, so those things that could have gone wrong didn't. There just wasnt enough time left to have a great chance to get off the field and leave enough time to drive for a TD.
Lets say we kick deep. What are the odds of scoring? Not great, even with a 3 and out.
If we onside kick, we have the full 2 plus minutes and the timeouts if we get it, and if not we only have a little bit further to go after getting it back. We ended up at the 20 with 19 seconds left. If we kicked it deep, we would have been where, the 35?

Given the Pats return game on Sunday, it probably wasn't going to be any better than the 35. But that 15 yards is significant.

 

[Deus Irae]

Wouldn't a FG from the 40 be a 57 yard FG?

I hated the onside kick call. So many things can go right for a team when the opponent has to get 10 yards, which we saw in the Monday night game. Only one thing has to go wrong for your own team to give the opponent the ball on an onside kick.

Edit: Checking the logs, a FG from the 40 would actually be a 58 yard FG, so the Steelers wouldn't automatically be in FG range.

The ball didn't travel the whole 10 yards. Pitt took over with the ball at the 37.

 

[Ring 6]

Given the Pats return game on Sunday, it probably wasn't going to be any better than the 35. But that 15 yards is significant.

How siginificant when you have 19 seconds?
Thats the point, the shot at recovering the onside kick and a GREAT chance to win the game is worth a lot more than 15 yards when you won't have enough time unless there is a miracle.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I won't lie. I wasn't mad at all when Ghost kicked the onside. I was obviously mad when it came to a stop after 7 effing yards. But I had zero faith that the defense was going to stop them from getting a first down, and lo and behold Pitt gets a first to burn out the clock.

Same feeling I had in the 4th and 2 game, and week 3 in Buffalo after we tied it up at 31. It can't be like that though. At some point you have to be able to rely in your defense instead of just trying to outscore the opponent, it's a mindset we got away from a long time ago. Stopped pounding the ball and started relying too much on Brady, it's not gonna fly in January. If it means winning games ugly and by less than a score more often so be it, sure beats winning every game 38-20 and then getting kicked around by smashmouth teams in January.

 

[WhoaDirty]

The new kickoff spot is the 30. The recovery spot is the 40. In other words, if the kicking team does not recover the onsides kick, the receiving team is either in, or almost in, field goal range already. In this case, it would have been a 54 yard field goal, which is a tough kick in Pittsburgh but, obviously, doesn't even require a first down to put the kicker well in range.

Given that a field goal would have made it a 9 point game, the decision to go for the onsides kick is a concession that the game is basically over at that point if the Steelers recover. The irony of the situation is that it played out EXACTLY that way until the Steelers tried to give the game back to the Patriots by stupidly deciding to pass the ball after getting well within field goal range, and getting the back-to-back sacks.
edit: I reversed the yardage. The new/old spot is the 35, but the rest still holds.

The ball didn't travel the whole 10 yards. Pitt took over with the ball at the 37.

I was just using the 40 yard line you mentioned. They would have had to gain 5 yards to make it it a 50 yarder. No matter though, the point is (like you made), BB didn't have faith in the defense at that point which is too bad because in the end the D stopped them.

 

[WhoaDirty]

How siginificant when you have 19 seconds?
Thats the point, the shot at recovering the onside kick and a GREAT chance to win the game is worth a lot more than 15 yards when you won't have enough time unless there is a miracle.

The difference is a 65 yard Hail Mary versus an 80 yard Hail Mary.

 

[RayClay]

I think he honestly asses whether the defense is tired, or undermanned that day. I doubt overly sensitive players get very far on the team.

"Going rah rah, you tired bunch can stop Peyton, I know it" isn't his style, he's going to do what he thinks gives th ebest chance to win.

I doubt very much he was worried about hurt feelings yesterday when he weighed in his mind the possibility the D would all of a sudden stop a drive yesterday. Why would he have faith in that? Even a monk would have trouble having faith.

 

[SoCal Pmen]

I think he honestly asses whether the defense is tired, or undermanned that day. I doubt overly sensitive players get very far on the team.

"Going rah rah, you tired bunch can stop Peyton, I know it" isn't his style, he's going to do what he thinks gives th ebest chance to win.

I doubt very much he was worried about hurt feelings yesterday when he weighed in his mind the possibility the D would all of a sudden stop a drive yesterday. Why would he have faith in that? Even a monk would have trouble having faith.

Agree. We don't know if it was in fact a lack of faith or if he felt the D was gassed at that point having been out there all day.

 

[Deus Irae]

I was just using the 40 yard line you mentioned. They would have had to gain 5 yards to make it it a 50 yarder. No matter though, the point is (like you made), BB didn't have faith in the defense at that point which is too bad because in the end the D stopped them.

I understand. I'd actually put the wrong yardage on to start. The new line is the old line (35). The recovery line is the 45, but a field goal still makes it a 9 point lead and ends the game. The ball got to the 42, and the 5 yard penalty took it down to the 37.

 

[Dagg]

We should have kicked it deep.

 

[Rob0729]

To tell you the truth, I think more than half of the coaches out there would have done an onside kick in that situation. But Belichick wanted to kick the ball off down the field in that situation. That is what he called. He did give Gostkowski the freedom to audible out into an onside kick if the Steelers left an opening down the center. Gostkowski saw one and audibled.

So I think the lack of faith in the defense is being overblown. If Gostkowski didn't audible out of the down the field kick, we wouldn't be talking about this today.

One thing we can question is the Pats allowing too many special teamers the freedom to audible out of punts and kick offs. This is the second year in a row where such an audible hurt the Pats in a key situation (Pat Chung's audible out of a punt in the playoffs last year was the other).

When everything was said and done. The Pats would have gotten the ball back in much of the same spot they did with just as much time left barring a very good punt return if they did kick the ball down the field.

 

[Sicilian]

When everything was said and done. The Pats would have gotten the ball back in much of the same spot they did with just as much time left barring a very good punt return if they did kick the ball down the field.

This is the point everyone seems to be ignoring. With 2:40 and 3 timeouts, your only real chance at getting into the end zone depended on you stopping the Steelers 3 and out. Once the Steelers got the first, it wouldn't have mattered where they were on the field, the Pats were going to have to go 80+ yards in less than 20 seconds to win. And kicking it deep wouldn't have made it any easier for us to stop them 3 and out, so why not TRY the onside for the additional chance at recovery, knowing your defense has the same exact requirement either way.

 

[borg]

Kicking the onside kick gave the Patriots 2 chances to get the ball back. First chance....recovering the onside kick. If that fails, then his defense has to perform a 3 and out= 2nd chance.
Seems pretty straight forward....Belichick doubled the chance of getting the ball back.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

I won't lie. I wasn't mad at all when Ghost kicked the onside. I was obviously mad when it came to a stop after 7 effing yards. But I had zero faith that the defense was going to stop them from getting a first down, and lo and behold Pitt gets a first to burn out the clock.

Same feeling I had in the 4th and 2 game, and week 3 in Buffalo after we tied it up at 31. It can't be like that though. At some point you have to be able to rely in your defense instead of just trying to outscore the opponent, it's a mindset we got away from a long time ago. Stopped pounding the ball and started relying too much on Brady, it's not gonna fly in January. If it means winning games ugly and by less than a score more often so be it, sure beats winning every game 38-20 and then getting kicked around by smashmouth teams in January.

Did you already forget the Dallas game? the D held them and gave Brady the ball back, difference was there was more time on the clock so Brady got the ball back with enough time to march down field.

 

[Keyser Söze]

Just got my power back, and I'll start by saying GOING FOR THE ONSIDE KICK WAS THE DUMBEST THING I'VE ******* SEEN. 2:40 left with 3 timeouts..

This defensive rebuilding seems to be getting worse.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

This is the point everyone seems to be ignoring. With 2:40 and 3 timeouts, your only real chance at getting into the end zone depended on you stopping the Steelers 3 and out. Once the Steelers got the first, it wouldn't have mattered where they were on the field, the Pats were going to have to go 80+ yards in less than 20 seconds to win. And kicking it deep wouldn't have made it any easier for us to stop them 3 and out, so why not TRY the onside for the additional chance at recovery, knowing your defense has the same exact requirement either way.

The Pats had 3 timeouts with nearly 3:00 to play...If the Steelers went 3 and out the Pats would have probably already burned all thier timeouts but might have had more than a minute to go downfield.

To me Belichick was thinking "no way,will we be able to get Pittsburgh on a 3 and out"

That to me is a bit scary when the HC practically waves the white flag on stopping the Steelers on that drive ,hoping the offense can win the game by trying low percentage shots that was not a fake play or intended to fool the other team just so the defense doesn't have to go back out there to win it is not what a championship caliber team is made of.

If anyone needs to trust thier D,its not the fans, its the Head Coach who formed the team.

Belichick knows we have to score 30 or more points a game and I think he wouldn't deny that.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Just got my power back, and I'll start by saying GOING FOR THE ONSIDE KICK WAS THE DUMBEST THING I'VE ******* SEEN. 2:40 left with 3 timeouts..

This defensive rebuilding seems to be getting worse.

You can't rebuild something when pieces of the foundation keep being pulled out of the ground.

We first need some decent veteran stability who stick around and help the young guys develop into the system,cutting players who may not be great but at least decent, doesn't help.

 

[Sicilian]

The Pats had 3 timeouts with nearly 3:00 to play...If the Steelers went 3 and out the Pats would have probably already burned all thier timeouts but might have had more than a minute to go downfield.

To me Belichick was thinking "no way,will we be able to get Pittsburgh on a 3 and out"

That to me is a bit scary when the HC practically waves the white flag on stopping the Steelers on that drive ,hoping the offense can win the game by trying low percentage shots that was not a fake play or intended to fool the other team just so the defense doesn't have to go back out there to win it is not what a championship caliber team is made of.

If anyone needs to trust thier D,its not the fans, its the Head Coach who formed the team.

Belichick knows we have to score 30 or more points a game and I think he wouldn't deny that.

But the point is, in all likelihood, whether the Steelers start at the 50 or their own 20, a 3 and out is going to give the Pats the same chance at a game winning drive. Yes, it's possible they could have downed a punt at the 1 or something like that, but look at what happened... we ended up with it at the 20. So whether we forced a 3 and out after a kickoff or a failed onside kick, the situation is the same for the offense.

So why not try the onside, have an additional chance at recovery, and at worst your defense has the exact same job to do as if you kicked deep.

 

[Deus Irae]

But the point is, in all likelihood, whether the Steelers start at the 50 or their own 20, a 3 and out is going to give the Pats the same chance at a game winning drive. Yes, it's possible they could have downed a punt at the 1 or something like that, but look at what happened... we ended up with it at the 20. So whether we forced a 3 and out after a kickoff or a failed onside kick, the situation is the same for the offense.

So why not try the onside, have an additional chance at recovery, and at worst your defense has the exact same job to do as if you kicked deep.

Your argument relies on a brainlock that the Steelers underwent, and it still makes no sense. The Steelers had the game won until they foolishly went back to pass once they were already in field goal range.

 

[Sicilian]

Your argument relies on a brainlock that the Steelers underwent, and it still makes no sense. The Steelers had the game won until they foolishly went back to pass once they were already in field goal range.

But the majority of onside kicks go too far, rather than not far enough. Chances are they're NOT in field goal range if that kick is executed in even half decent fashion. Again, the problem was execution, not decision.