The Patriots vs Jets POST Game Thread

[shmessy]

Since you refuse to see the obvious, let's break this down. Do you have an issue with the Patriots opening drive?

I loved the Patriots first drive.

The D hadn't been on the field yet, and it was not evident at that point that the Mayo absence was going to be a focal point of the Jets attack.

Once the game got flowing, it became evident that the Jets were attacking the hole at LB on the ground.

BB the GM screwed up badly this year in not making sure there is depth at LB.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm only confused by your statement "In this case, BB chose to chew up some clock time and put it in the hands of his defense". I was talking about he whole game - - not just the last drive.

He chose NOT to chew up some clock during the game until the very last "drive".

And a 1-5 team playing on the road and averaging 16 points per game scored 25.

He chose to be effective on offense.
You win by scoring points not by using up time and not scoring.

 

[mayoclinic]

I'm only confused by your statement "In this case, BB chose to chew up some clock time and put it in the hands of his defense". I was talking about he whole game - - not just the last drive.

He chose NOT to chew up some clock during the game until the very last "drive".

And a 1-5 team playing on the road and averaging 16 points per game scored 25.

I look at it this way:

1. BB was playing on 3 days rest with a beat up team.

2. BB was missing 3 key offensive linemen plus Ridley playing against one of the best run defenses in the NFL, so I doubt he had a ton of confidence in his ability to run the ball. The Pats had only 6 OL for the game, plus Barker activated from the PS as an emergency backup.

3. BB was missing his team captain MLB, which certainly didn't help the run defense, against a team that likes to run, and which has been prone to turnovers in the passing game. I understand that the run defense has looked poor at times with Mayo on the field, too.

So it doesn't shock me that the Jets ran the ball and continued to do so when the found success, that the Pats didn't, and that the TOP was lopsided. I doubt BB planned it exactly that way (game plans seldom go exactly as planned), but the bottom line was that he came out with a win in a game where the only objectives were a win and survival without further significant injuries (also achieved). I'm not thrilled with the play, but I'll take it.

 

[shmessy]

Of course I am. We were running the ball to win the game.
You want to count the runs only against a D that is suprised by the run. They all count.

1) No we weren't - - we were running the ball to kill seconds off the clock - - you yourself said so. There were 10 in the box for the Jets

2) I ALL the runs counts, then let's put back in the 17 yarder that deus cherry picked and keep them ALL in. So we are right back to 15 for 63, 4.2 ypc. Not a reason to go 37-15 PtoR.

 

[Deus Irae]

I loved the Patriots first drive.

The D hadn't been on the field yet, and it was not evident at that point that the Mayo absence was going to be a focal point of the Jets attack.

Once the game got flowing, it became evident that the Jets were attacking the hole at LB on the ground.

BB the GM screwed up badly this year in not making sure there is depth at LB.

Let's keep this easy, since I don't want you to have an excuse later.

You're OK with drive #1.

Drive #5 was the drive that ended the first half. Did they need to kill clock with more runs on that drive?

 

[shmessy]

He chose to be effective on offense.
You win by scoring points not by using up time and not scoring.

At the expense of hurting your D?

It did WONDERS for a bad team onthe road who was averaging only 16 points per game.

The game is both Offense and Defense. With everything our D had to contend with 3 days after losing Mayo, playing a clearly 75% Hightower and having just one healthy LB, Matt Patricia should punch out McDaniels for that game.

 

[shmessy]

I look at it this way:

1. BB was playing on 3 days rest with a beat up team.

2. BB was missing 3 key offensive linemen plus Ridley playing against one of the best run defenses in the NFL, so I doubt he had a ton of confidence in his ability to run the ball. The Pats had only 6 OL for the game, plus Barker activated from the PS as an emergency backup.

3. BB was missing his team captain MLB, which certainly didn't help the run defense, against a team that likes to run, and which has been prone to turnovers in the passing game. I understand that the run defense has looked poor at times with Mayo on the field, too.

So it doesn't shock me that the Jets ran the ball and continued to do so when the found success, that the Pats didn't, and that the TOP was lopsided. I doubt BB planned it exactly that way (game plans seldom go exactly as planned), but the bottom line was that he came out with a win in a game where the only objectives were a win and survival without further significant injuries (also achieved). I'm not thrilled with the play, but I'll take it.

I agree with you that BB did not plan it to go the way it did. What I don't like is that BB didn't ADJUST to help his Defense after seeing what was happening.

 

[brdmaverick]

So the pats have barely escaped against two of the worst teams in the nfl....AT HOME! not an encouraging defensive performance...

I find it odd that people actually tagged this post with 'disagree'.

While I don't share the implied 'sky is falling' undertone, it's nearly impossible to disagree with what was said.

It's a fact that the Pats barely escaped home losses from two of the league's worst teams (Oak and NYJ). That's fact. Not sure how you can disagree there.

As for saying it was not an encouraging defensive performance? While this is opinion and can potentially be disputed, I'd be hard pressed to find anyone who found their defensive performance to be encouraging (the opponents ran down our throats and had the ball for 40 min). Is that encouraging defense?

 

[Kontradiction]

At the expense of hurting your D?

It did WONDERS for a bad team onthe road who was averaging only 16 points per game.

The game is both Offense and Defense. With everything our D had to contend with 3 days after losing Mayo, playing a clearly 75% Hightower and having just one healthy LB, Matt Patricia should punch out McDaniels for that game.

The Jets have a better run defense than pass defense. The result was that the Pats went pass-heavy. The Patriots have a better pass defense than a run defense. The result was that the Jets went run-heavy. When you take into account personnel on both sides, this really isn't rocket science. Throwing the ball more gave the Pats the best chance to win whereas running it gave the Jets their's. The result was a Patriots win even though the defense didn't force a punt until 1:38 left in the third quarter. You put the ball in Gray's and Vereen's hands more than the Pats did, and that game is undoubtedly a loss.

 

[shmessy]

Let's keep this easy, since I don't want you to have an excuse later.

You're OK with drive #1.

Drive #5 was the drive that ended the first half. Did they need to kill clock with more runs on that drive?

Very cute.

Drive #5 started with just 1:01 left on the clock in the 2nd quarter. They did not have the luxury of being able to eat up clock. In fact, they used up every second available on that one and didn't give the ball back to the Jets to again torture a very tired and depleted Pats D. Great time management on that one!

The D needed to stay off the field and not have to endure the inevitable 5, 6 or 7 minute Jets drives.

BB needs to get some LB's on the roster - - THIS (and LaGarette Blount) is the area where GM BB screwed up this year.

 

[Deus Irae]

Very cute.

Drive #5 started with just 1:01 left on the clock in the 2nd quarter. They did not have the luxury of being able to eat up clock. In fact, they used up every second available on that one and didn't give the ball back to the jets to again torture a very tired and depleted Pats D. Great time management on that one!

Ok, so we're good with drives 1 and 5 in the first half. Now, drive 6, which was their first drive of the second half..... You're good with that one, too, right?

 

[shmessy]

I find it odd that people actually tagged this post with 'disagree'.

While I don't share the implied 'sky is falling' undertone, it's nearly impossible to disagree with what was said.

It's a fact that the Pats barely escaped home losses from two of the league's worst teams (Oak and NYJ). That's fact. Not sure how you can disagree there.

As for saying it was not an encouraging defensive performance? While this is opinion and can potentially be disputed, I'd be hard pressed to find anyone who found their defensive performance to be encouraging (the opponents ran down our throats and had the ball for 40 min). Is that encouraging defense?

I fully agree.

The run D is troubling especially now with Mayo out.

BB needs to confront that and do whatever he can (personnel/Offense helping to keep TOP at least even) to help that situation.

 

[shmessy]

Ok, so we're good with drives 1 and 5 in the first half. Now, drive 6, which was their first drive of the second half..... You're good with that one, too, right?

LOVED that one.

4 pass-5 Run, took over 4 minutes off the clock and got points out of it.

NOTICE: That more balanced and LONGER Patriots possession was followed by the FIRST TIME ALL NIGHT that the Jets had to punt on their next possession.

Causation or Correlation????????

Look, I'm giving you FAR better and respectful answers to your questions here than your usual "No it isn't" answers.

You deserve no more at this point.

37-15 PtoR and the 1-6 team that had averaged 16 ppg got 25 in Foxboro.

 

[Deus Irae]

LOVED that one.

So, drives 1, 5 and 6 are good. After that, the Jets only put together one time consuming drive, so let's start back with drives 2-4. Let's start with drive 4:

10 players, 80 yards, TD.

How many more runs did they need to have on that drive?

 

[rochrist]

Of course not a gimme.

But why put a game like that even in question at home against a 1-5 team?

Would you say that getting to that last play was part of a game plan?

Nope. Merely pointing out that you were saying if Jones hand was three inches to the left they would have lost as though it was some sort of fact. I would bet that the chances of him making that kick would have been under fifty percent at best. It would have been a career long for him.

 

[Ring 6]

1) No we weren't - - we were running the ball to kill seconds off the clock - - you yourself said so. There were 10 in the box for the Jets

This is where you go off the tracks.
You run because you do not want an incomplete pass. That does not mean you don't try to run effectively.
MANY teams gain first downs on the ground in those situations. Calling it a kneel down is saying we can't run against that defense.

2) I ALL the runs counts, then let's put back in the 17 yarder that deus cherry picked and keep them ALL in. So we are right back to 15 for 63, 4.2 ypc. Not a reason to go 37-15 PtoR.

Its not a math problem. You have to use some insight.
If you seriously think we did a good job running the ball consistently in that game, and would have moved the ball well with a heavy dosage of runs, we should just stop here, because I think that is 100% wrong.
Outside of one well blocked play, we ran 14 for 46. Yes, the one counts, but it is an outlier, not indicative of how we blocked the run all day long. That makes sense doesn't it?
Additionally, we ran draws from the shotgun, we ran on passing downs, we did everything we could to make it look like we weren't running. If we came in with a run heavy approach, we would not have run well.

Your argument is akin to saying running on 3rd and 1 is the same as running on 3rd and 25. If you get 12 on 3rd and 25 you have a good running game and will convert 3rd and 1.
As is always the case with your posting on run/pass ratios, you ignore context.

 

[shmessy]

Nope. Merely pointing out that you were saying if Jones hand was three inches to the left they would have lost as though it was some sort of fact. I would bet that the chances of him making that kick would have been under fifty percent at best. It would have been a career long for him.

Against a 1-5 team at home?

Having it get to even a 50% chance of that kick going through is not good. It should not have needed to even get to that point.

Look, if the Patriots had just played badly, that is one thing. But the O played well, while not helping the TOP at all for the D. The D is very undermanned, running game personnel-wise. The Jets saw that and they went at it like sharks in bloodied water.

 

[Ring 6]

At the expense of hurting your D?

How does it hurt your D to score?
You are arguing that you would rather have a D spend 5 minutes on the sidelines and come back and defend a 7 point lead than spend 2 minutes on the sideline and come back and defend a 14 point lead.

It did WONDERS for a bad team onthe road who was averaging only 16 points per game.

No, the defenses inability to stop the Jets lead to their production. Are you really trying to say it was Josh McDaniels fault for scoring too many points that the defense couldn't stop the run? What if they actually got some stops?

The game is both Offense and Defense. With everything our D had to contend with 3 days after losing Mayo, playing a clearly 75% Hightower and having just one healthy LB, Matt Patricia should punch out McDaniels for that game.

With all due respect, you just do not get it. The defense does not ask the offense to not score points but lay on the field a while so they can rest. If the defense played well, the time of possession would not have been out of whack.
I think I am going to extricate myself from this discussion, because at this point my feelings about your opinion will probably start to come off as insulting and offensive and I do not want to do that.

 

[shmessy]

This is where you go off the tracks.
You run because you do not want an incomplete pass. That does not mean you don't try to run effectively.
MANY teams gain first downs on the ground in those situations. Calling it a kneel down is saying we can't run against that defense.

No. What you are ignoring is that the Jets were playing a different 10 in the box D on that last series.

During the game, they were often in 8 man coverage and just rushing 3. THAT is when the Patriots could have mixed in a few more effective yard-producing, clock-moving runs.

BB (and rightly so, in my opinion) was just trying to play the clock on that last series. If they could break through and get a first down against 10 in the box, then I'm sure he would have been thrilled with that Man Bites Dog story.

 

[shmessy]

How does it hurt your D to score?
You are arguing that you would rather have a D spend 5 minutes on the sidelines and come back and defend a 7 point lead than spend 2 minutes on the sideline and come back and defend a 14 point lead.

It hurts your D to go 3 and out 4 times with a PtR ratio of 10-2 on those 4 series.

In every SCORING series that night, the Patriots had at least 1 run.

In 2 of the 4 Three and Outs (the only four series that they did NOT score that night), they did not run once.

I have no problem with the overall PRODUCTION of the Pats O in that game. I have a problem with how they let their D out to dry and the inevitable result of the Jets scoring 56% points above their season average to put that game in more doubt than it should have.

Alert: The Patriots have a big personnel problem in their Defensive running game. If they want to ignore that and skip along happily, they will get burned when they face teams that are not 1-5, 16ppg circus clowns. They cannot get away with this in the next 6 games. Hell they couldn't against mediocre Miami.

You may interpret them differently than I do and that's ok. Neither of us is going to convince the other, obviously.