No more late 4th Qtr Field Goals to go up by 6

[aluminum seats]

.

Asking in this situation (4th and 9 after 3 straight failed plays) is just silly.

If you are 4th and 9 after a holding penalty backs you up, 2 plays get you 6 and 5 yards and one is dropped; ok again MAYBE we could talk. but that is not what it was.

I don't understand this line of thinking at all. A couple of unsuccessful plays fundamentally transforms the potential of the Patriots' offense?

 

[aluminum seats]

You can't count on that when he's been carving you defense up the whole day. I also don't doubt they could've turned the ball over, but the only reason they did so was because they had to take a shot in the endzone to take the lead. Had the Bills needed only a FG to tie it, they most likely would've been more conservative once they were in the redzone.

As you say, he was carving up the defense all day--there would have been no need for the Bills to go needlessly conservative and play for the tie.

 

[goheels22002]

Any idea why we rushed up to the line after it was 1st and Goal at the 1-yard line and got off a **** play that resulted in a 3 yard loss because of it?

In the NFL, when you're up by 3pts and there's 2 minutes and 30 seconds on the clock and you have just run for a first down to the opponents goal line common sense tells you to let the clock run down to the 2-minute warning because yes, time is in fact on your side, go to the sideline and talk about the next 3-4 plays that you'll run to put this game away.

So rushing the play actually caused the right-side of our OLine to be out of synch to allow Ridley to get blown up. The chances of NFL teams scoring from the 1-yard line on 4 probably plays has to be around 93%. There was no frigin need to rush up to the line to try and catch the Bills quickly or anything, not sure if that was Josh or not, but the idea is to kill the clock and score the TD, that was beyond foolish.

My reaction to the Ridley hurry up play was to spread my arms and hollar. "What in the hell was that?" You are absolutely right about letting the clock run down and run something that was fairly conservative and that would eat some clock like a simple off-tackle or draw play.

 

[goheels22002]

But what's the risk? A TD beats them either way. I think it might have been preferable to encourage the tie.

The risk is that the Bills would have to travel all 80 yards - which they did not - as compared to going from their 20 to the Patriots 38 and kicking a game tying 55-yarder. They covered the needed 42 yards in like three plays.

Instead, you try to stop them on four downs anywhere, but you most often get them into the Red Zone which made us all clutch our chests like George Jefferson, but is actually advantageous for the defense because it packs all 11 defenders into a tight area making it harder to score and easier to get a takeaway which the Patriots did! Yay for us!

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

But what's the risk? A TD beats them either way. I think it might have been preferable to encourage the tie.

It's just not worth the risk on such a low percentage attempt. 4th and goal from the 9 I'd imagine the odds of making that is very very low. You take the points. What if Buffalo fumbles the KO and there's a little over 2 minutes, they still have 2 TO's. If we're up 6 we can ice the game with a FG even if they force a 3 and out. If we miss the 4th and 9 conversion - which most likely would have happened - and Buffalo fumbles the next play, we're back to square one. So even the slightest advantage, you want to take over such a low percentage risk. Otherwise you're essentially just tossing away points.

If we're talking about 4th and 3 or something in that range, then this becomes a legit discussion. But in that (EDIT: that refers to yesterday's situation), you definitely kick the FG and make them go for the end zone.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

No, it's not certain at all. I have no problem imagining Fitzpatrick throwing an interception no matter what the score was.

You also need to consider maybe Fitzpatrick doesn't force such a terrible throw if he only needed a FG to tie instead of a TD. I wouldn't assume Fitz throws that ball regardless of score.

 

[aluminum seats]

You also need to consider maybe Fitzpatrick doesn't force such a terrible throw if he only needed a FG to tie instead of a TD. I wouldn't assume Fitz throws that ball regardless of score.

Look, the Pats won, so that's something. And like I said, I would have taken the 3 as well.

But the Pats going up by 6 with a couple minutes left with this defense creates a very bad feeling. Just sayin'.

 

[Avenger]

What was the deal on that fumble in the final drive? Looks like we had it, I was working so I was in and out of a room with a TV, it looked like we had it on the replay

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

What was the deal on that fumble in the final drive? Looks like we had it, I was working so I was in and out of a room with a TV, it looked like we had it on the replay

I was thoroughly confused; it looked like the official didn't even dig to see who got it. If there was clear possession you certainly couldn't tell from any of the shots I saw.

 

[Ring 6]

From here on in, I'd go for it on 4th down, to possibly seal the game, instead of the recipe-for-heartbreak field goal to go up by 6.

So they could kick a FG and send it to overtime?
We did win you know.

 

[Easy Eason]

The clock management was absolutely atrocious at the point of the game that you are referencing, and I don't really care what anyone else's opinion is.

There was a point where we had about 2:25 on the game clock and I wondered if they'd even run another play before the 2 minute warning, yet somehow they actually ran multiple plays and actually kicked the FG with about 2:06 on the clock!!!

It was absolutely insane in my opinion, and I'd hope that many others would agree.

I thought their clock management was particularly poor on the whole drive. On the last drive with the clock running they snapped the ball with 19, 10, 12, 15, 11, 0 (I thought they were going to be flagged for DOG on this play),4, 25, 10 seconds left on the play clock. Brady and the offense have historically been much better at burning of the clock than that. The decision to quick snap it and run the play to Ridley was disastrous given that they lost two yards and saved the Bills a ton of time. If TB runs the play clock to 1 or 2 seconds they don't need to run another play before the 2 minute warning unless the Bills take one of their last two remaining TOs. If they ran all three times and were stopped, the Best case scenario for the Bills would be the Pats kicking for the FG right after the 2 minute warning with no TOs. They would have got the ball on the on the 20-yrd line with 1:56 left and need to go the full 80 without the use of a timeout.

When the Bills got the ball back with 2:11 left and two timeouts, I figured the Patriots had a 30% of winning the game. I thought they would either need a penalty or turnover to stop the Bills, who had the luxary of four downs and plenty of time to move down the field. I can't recall a Patriot's defense that has been so pathetic in the Red Zone. Their bend and then break sytle of play is almost 100% gauranteed unless they can create a turnover or force a penalty which they haven't done often enough. They were bailed out by a poor Fitzpatrick decision/throw which is the only reason they won the game.

If they had run the ball three times once they were inside the two yard line,
the defense will protect the lead over 90% of the time with a quarterback of Fitzpatrick's caliber.

I missed the postgame interview but did anyone ask TB or Bill about their final drive clock mgmt?

 

[chasa]

I remember thinking during the game how I'd rather them run it 3 times, and go for it on 4th down as opposed to kicking a field goal and leaving 2+ minutes on the clock.

I'd rather have a 2 score lead or fg = overtime, then the other team having to 4 downs for 2+ minutes with 2 timeouts.

In a lot of cases 4th and short a team will try for overtime as opposed to going for the win, And i think in overtime i like the pats chances of scoring a td.

 

[brdmaverick]

im actually surprised more teams don't go it on 4th down against the patriots defense......not like they can stop it.

It's because they don't need to. They get the first down on downs 1-3.