Let's not act like Tom Brady doesn't have what it takes to make passes in double coverage. If he's not allowed to take a shot in double coverage when they just got the ball at the 50 yard line and are an 83% favorite to win for a chance to put the game away...nobody is.
The only thing the Pats don't have now to be able to do that more often is a guy like Moss. Wes Welker isn't that dude and not to mention, how often have they practiced this recently? Tebow does it better for Christ's sake. He's #1 in air passing yards efficiency. Patriots aren't built for that. They don't have tall lanky or speedy vertical threats and they don't even even have short physical threat like Steve Smith that can do this on 40+ yard passes. I don't care what anyone says, Cam Newton has a cannon, but that cannon doesn't aim right. Steve Smith makes it aim close to 60%. Converting successfully in double or triple coverage on long bombs is more about the receiver than the quarterback.
I guarantee you Matthew Stafford "has" one of the highest conversion % in double coverage without even looking it up. "He" has got be top 5 in the league.
A receiver is a quarterback's arm extension. You're ability as a quarterback is solely decided by your ability to play to your receiver's advantages.
Your own ability to throw the ball deep or short, is meaningless in comparison to being able to exploit the strengths of your receivers vs the weakness of their opponents.
But when you only have 1 deep WR threat with Ocho never really turning out to be what promised, you're bound to run into that situation.
And the funny thing is, it was also a great play by the Ravens. So why not give those defensive players some credit? Guy had to jump in the air, bat the ball backwards in the air, and pass it to his other man.
I mean....ok...in that case I guess you can really say Brady "got" picked off. Who cares? It was a 60 yard pass in double coverage which left them with a 61% chance of winning the game. Had the other players been on point and not let them return it, the Patriots would actually STILL be the favorite team to SCORE next even though they just gave the ball away.
If you pin that defender right there in the endzone...the Pats still had the greater chance of scoring next even though they would be playing defense.
100% correct call no matter how you analyze it.
If you wanna know more about how you have the greater chance of scoring while on defense here's an in-depth analysis of a similar situation from the 49ers game.
After the punt, the 49ers win probability was 37% (and their expected points were +0.34, meaning they were actually expected to be the next team to score even though the Giants had the ball).
Advanced NFL Stats: Should The Niners Have Kept The Punt?
Yes this is possible. So not all turnovers are created equal. That's why Pats can win with a - turnover margin. It's not just if you turnover the ball, but WHERE you turnover the ball and WHEN. Sometimes it's to your advantage to take the risk and turn it over.
If you are backed up at your 30 yard line, it's 3rd and long and you have the worst punt coverage special teams unit in the league, you should take a shot into triple coverage down field...it won't hurt you any more than punting.
If it's 4th and long and time is running out you should DEFINITELY take a shot into quadruple coverage downfield and PRAY it gets picked off by a ******ed defensive player. Already happened once this year. I can't remember which game but a defensive player picked off a 4th and long pass instead of just letting it end up in an incompletion. He wiped away a bunch of yards of field position by greedily, and stupidly intercepting the ball.
But people don't know this. Coaches do. People see a pass that "should have been intercepted" when in reality that player might just be smart enough to know he should let it go and force a punt.
It's not always cut and dry and football never has nor will it ever be a simple sport. It takes a life time to really learn it. And even then you might only just get close. Chess is easier to figure out. Chess is simple in comparison to football.