To those b!tching about Moss not getting the ball in the first half...

[wiggins!]

....please read Gasper's notebook in the Globe:

Not blocking penalty out - The Boston Globe

"The ball wasn't really designed to go my way," said Moss. "I think we tried to get a couple of looks, but the way the defense was playing it was going to be hard to get me the ball in the first half.

"Early in the week we knew we had to be patient because we knew they weren't going to really give us the big play. Of course it's frustrating to not have the opportunity to make a big, big play. We just had to be patient and inch the ball down the field slowly, but surely."

again..."We just had to be patient and inch the ball down the field slowly, but surely"

NUFF said. Gameplan was perfect and ALMOST executed to perfection. A few people made BIG mistakes (either physically or mentally) and yes the head coach is included in that and that's what cost the Pats last night.

 

[DefenseRules]

1. Two BB coaching decisions(the challenge and the use of that final timeout)
2. Gaffney's dropped pass
3. David Thomas's bonehead personal foul
4. The defense's INABILITY TO MAKE ONE DAMN STOP at key moments in the game.

That's why we lost last night...END OF STORY.

 

[wiggins!]

amen...but i read (or at least tried) to read some of the game-thread from last night and almost punched my computer.

 

[Rob0729]

Face it. Some people look at the offense simplistically. If the Pats aren't getting Moss the ball down field, the gameplan sucks in many people's eyes no matter how well the offense is moving.

Last night Moss was the decoy to draw Bob Sanders away from the line of scrimmage and take him out of the game. I know it is stupid to want to neutralize Sanders because the best way to beat the Colts' defense is to allow Sanders to be in the best position to make as many plays as possible, but McDaniels gambled with trying to make Sanders a non-factor in the game. Personally, I would have been more happy if he was stuffing the run and pressuring Cassel all night, but that is just me.

Anyone without any bias and a grain of football knowledge knows that the offensive gameplan was solid last night. Sometimes I wonder if the McDaniels bashers have either.

 

[Rob0729]

Here's Don Banks' take on the Pats' offense last night:

5. Even without Tom Brady, the Patriots can move the chains. It's not the most exciting offense you'll ever see, and it's far from that record-breaking points-palooza of last year, but New England is doing a pretty good job of getting the most of what it has this season. The Patriots don't swallow up defenses and chunks of real estate in three or four-play drives like 2007, but their slow but steady approach to scoring marches is kind of impressive in its own way.

Cassel is getting fairly efficient at taking what a defense gives him. If the defense is doubling and taking away Randy Moss outside, Cassel looks inside for Wes Welker, who finished with a team-best seven catches for 37 yards against the Colts. And there's always those screens or outlets to Faulk, or feeding tight ends David Thomas and Ben Watson. All told, Cassel found seven different receivers en route to completing 25 of 34 passes for 204 yards, with just one late, Hail-Mary-type interception.
New England produced 22 first downs, and had 342 yards of offense, besting the Colts in both departments (18 and 301). The Pats were 8 of 14 on third downs, ran for 140 yards despite not having Sammy Morris, LaMont Jordan or Laurence Maroney active, held the ball for almost nine minutes longer than the Colts, and punted just once all game.

Is it as breath-taking as Brady and Co.? Of course not. But Cassel and friends can be effective, witness New England's four scoring drives against the Colts, which lasted for 13, 13, 15 and 15 plays. These Patriots aren't going to blow out too many opponents. But their 5-3 record without Brady at midseason is far from a fluke. I say odds are they repeat that showing in the second half, and wind up an AFC playoff qualifier at 10-6.

Five things we learned from the Colts 18-15 win over the Patriots - Don Banks - SI.com

 

[mcsully]

Last night Moss was the decoy to draw Bob Sanders away from the line of scrimmage and take him out of the game. I
.

Here is my issue with this comment.. And I almost fell over when Madden said it..
You dont' use Moss as a decoy to take away Sanders. Sanders responsability was to stop Moss, not vice versa. Moss, mr. 23 tds a year ago, is out there to score points.. In the redzone, the pats didn't throw to him once..

Anyone who knows football should know this.. The best way to free up a WR who is being blanketed is to put him in the slot and motion him out.. IE what the colts were doing with Gonzo

 

[Nunchucks]

When you have a weapon like Randy Moss, you sometimes don't just take what the defense gives you, you take what you want from the defense. That's what the Patriots needed to do to win the game last night. hey needed to take what they wanted.

Madden had it right.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

When you have a weapon like Randy Moss, you sometimes don't just take what the defense gives you, you take what you want from the defense. That's what the Patriots needed to do to win the game last night. hey needed to take what they wanted.

Madden had it right.

Madden was as wrong about that statement as he was when he suggested Brady take a knee in February 2002... 2007 Tom Brady took what he wanted...2006 and earlier Tom Brady took what defenses gave him...and last time I checked the 2007 formula didn't achieve it's ultimate goal because down the stretch even Brady couldn't consistently simply take what he wanted from top 5 defenses with essentially the same team.

The game plan worked exceptionally well last night with the exception of a one dropped pass, one unfortunate penalty and a couple of boneheaded game management decisions by a usually brilliant HC in the second half that haunted/impacted them as that half unfolded.

 

[Rob0729]

Here is my issue with this comment.. And I almost fell over when Madden said it..
You dont' use Moss as a decoy to take away Sanders. Sanders responsability was to stop Moss, not vice versa. Moss, mr. 23 tds a year ago, is out there to score points.. In the redzone, the pats didn't throw to him once..

Anyone who knows football should know this.. The best way to free up a WR who is being blanketed is to put him in the slot and motion him out.. IE what the colts were doing with Gonzo

If the Pats are effectively moving the ball down the field, why wouldn't you use Moss as a decoy? The Pats seemed to have a brilliant strategy. They kept the ball out of Manning's hands and scored on most of their drives and only had to punt once.

 

[Rob0729]

When you have a weapon like Randy Moss, you sometimes don't just take what the defense gives you, you take what you want from the defense. That's what the Patriots needed to do to win the game last night. hey needed to take what they wanted.

Madden had it right.

Sorry, the Pats needed either for Gaffney to hold onto the TD catch or Thomas to not commit a stupid penalty to win the game last night. If either of those two things didn't happen, the Pats probably win the game without taking what "they wanted from the defense" last night.

 

[Nunchucks]

Madden was as wrong about that statement as he was when he suggested Brady take a knee in February 2002... 2007 Tom Brady took what he wanted...2006 and earlier Tom Brady took what defenses gave him...and last time I checked the 2007 formula didn't achieve it's ultimate goal because down the stretch even Brady couldn't consistently simply take what he wanted from top 5 defenses with essentially the same team.

The game plan worked exceptionally well last night with the exception of a one dropped pass, one unfortunate penalty and a couple of boneheaded game management decisions by a usually brilliant HC in the second half that haunted/impacted them as that half unfolded.

It isn't just 1 dropped pass or one poor penalty or 1 coaching decision. When the team puts itself in a position to lose because of any of those things, then it didn't do enough to secure a win. If They put the ball up to Moss and he caught a 20 yard TD pass....then none of those misakes would have mattered.

It doens't hurt to put the ball up there once or twice during the course of a game, Moss has the ability to make those plays and those plays can change the outcome of a game.

 

[SVN]

Face it. Some people look at the offense simplistically. If the Pats aren't getting Moss the ball down field, the gameplan sucks in many people's eyes no matter how well the offense is moving.

Last night Moss was the decoy to draw Bob Sanders away from the line of scrimmage and take him out of the game. I know it is stupid to want to neutralize Sanders because the best way to beat the Colts' defense is to allow Sanders to be in the best position to make as many plays as possible, but McDaniels gambled with trying to make Sanders a non-factor in the game. Personally, I would have been more happy if he was stuffing the run and pressuring Cassel all night, but that is just me.

Anyone without any bias and a grain of football knowledge knows that the offensive gameplan was solid last night. Sometimes I wonder if the McDaniels bashers have either.

i hate this fascination with the long ball and get the ball to moss theories. We have won so many games with the short passing game it was executed at a high % last nite. We had 140 yards rushing with our practice squad RB(!!!) -i dont care what defense that is. We lost by 3 pts. If we had won 18-15 it wouldve been the best ever offensive plan. I do have a problem with the 2nd wildcat call which kinda killed a drive but even in 0'7 until the last 10 mins of desperation against the colts, we had a LOT of inside hand offs.So obviously pats knew there was something there.
why cant we just credit it as another loss .these unleash cassel and throw the ball to moss theories are getting old.

 

[Rob0729]

It isn't just 1 dropped pass or one poor penalty or 1 coaching decision. When the team puts itself in a position to lose because of any of those things, then it didn't do enough to secure a win. If They put the ball up to Moss and he caught a 20 yard TD pass....then none of those misakes would have mattered.

It doens't hurt to put the ball up there once or twice during the course of a game, Moss has the ability to make those plays and those plays can change the outcome of a game.

And if they did it, Manning would have had the ball one more time and might have won by more of a margin. The Pats did try to get the ball down the field to Moss. Every time that Cassel tried to go down the field, Moss was double teamed. The Colts geared their gameplan to take the deep ball out of the game.

People are saying that the Pats don't have any confidence in Cassel's deep ball ability. Obviously, Dungy doesn't agree because their defense was so geared for Cassel not to get that one big play that the Pats destroyed them with the short game.

Why don't people see this?

 

[Rob0729]

i hate this fascination with the long ball and get the ball to moss theories. We have won so many games with the short passing game it was executed at a high % last nite. We had 140 yards rushing with our practice squad RB(!!!) -i dont care what defense that is. We lost by 3 pts. If we had won 18-15 it wouldve been the best ever offensive plan. I do have a problem with the 2nd wildcat call which kinda killed a drive but even in 0'7 until the last 10 mins of desperation against the colts, we had a LOT of inside hand offs.So obviously pats knew there was something there.
why cant we just credit it as another loss .these unleash cassel and throw the ball to moss theories are getting old.

Although I didn't particularly care for the second Wildcat call, I disagree with Madden's assessment. The call did bring the defense closer to the line, but should have opened up the outside for that screen pass. It didn't and it wouldn't be the play I would have called, but I didn't think it was as bad as Madden made it out to be.

 

[Nunchucks]

And if they did it, Manning would have had the ball one more time and might have won by more of a margin. The Pats did try to get the ball down the field to Moss. Every time that Cassel tried to go down the field, Moss was double teamed. The Colts geared their gameplan to take the deep ball out of the game.

People are saying that the Pats don't have any confidence in Cassel's deep ball ability. Obviously, Dungy doesn't agree because their defense was so geared for Cassel not to get that one big play that the Pats destroyed them with the short game.

Why don't people see this?

Yes, they double teamed moss, Sanders is 5'9.......Moss made a career out of making double-teams look non-existent. I am not asking for tons of down the field throws, but how about a play-action on fist down? or how about one on 2nd down and 5?

I am not asking for a radical change the the game plan, I thought it was decent, but instead of calling one of those WR screens to welker...how about a deep pass to moss? Just one....just one.

 

[emoney_33]

Yes, they double teamed moss, Sanders is 5'9.......Moss made a career out of making double-teams look non-existent. I am not asking for tons of down the field throws, but how about a play-action on fist down? or how about one on 2nd down and 5?

I am not asking for a radical change the the game plan, I thought it was decent, but instead of calling one of those WR screens to welker...how about a deep pass to moss? Just one....just one.

When it's really needed, it will be there. Last year they took advantage of Moss early and often, only to watch teams take Moss out of games when it mattered most later in the year. Plus it's Cassel throwing it to Moss not Brady, so there's a greater risk of a turnover.