Idle thoughts - the "3rd and 18" edition

[yukon cornelius]

OL only 9 total pressures on Brady, and only 2 in the 2nd half?

damn good

 

[DaBruinz]

That stuff is in EVERYONE's playbook DB. Let's not ascribe things to Coughlin that don't exist.

Actually, it's not Ken. There were years where you could count on one hand the number of stunts or twists that the Patriots did.

Those were the things Coughlin used in the SB with his defense that our O-line had issues with. And they had issues with them yesterday. They were able to buckle down late and nullify the Jags, but it was something that worked several times and it stood out.

 

[yukon cornelius]

Did you watch the same game as everyone else? They got plenty of pressure on Brady, sacking him 3 times, pressuring him nearly dozen and hitting him more than anyone should like. Saying that it didn't work is pretty insulting to both them and Brady because that would mean that Brady didn't do anything spectacular to lead this team back from 10 points down.

only 9 pressures, only 2 in the 2nd half

 

[NYCPatsFan]

Andy, Ken - Feel bad for quickly moving past yesterday's victory but after watching the Eagles dismantle the Vikings with remarkable ease, I wanted to ask you both right away : do you expect them to be a significantly better opponent than the Jags?

Thanks,

 

[patfanken]

So, during the week, I read Warren Sharp's analysis about how the Jags pass defense and pass rush had been wildly successful against 11-personnel (3WR) and relatively poor against 12, 21 and 22 sets, AND about how the Pats ran pass plays out of 12 personnel more than any other team in the league. So, I was expecting the Pats to run a lot of sets with Gronk + Allen and 2WR, or Gronk + 2RB.

Without re-watching, it appeared that McD had the Pats in 11-personnel far more than their usual (even before Gronk got hurt) and was challenging the Jags' defensive strength straight-up. Even though that likely was a factor in the weakness of the Pats' ground game, it ultimately worked.

BTW - Perhaps the major reason that the Jags swing passes were so successful early on is that their WRs got some tremendous blocks (and Rowe missed a couple tackles).

I was going to mention that...but forgot. I thought the Jags receivers threw a lot of key blocks on those dump offs and swing passes. Very well timed blocks and clearly premeditiated.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Corrente's explanation on the ASJ play seems to say that completing the process of a fumble recovery while falling to the ground has the same stipulation of "surviving the ground" as does completing a catch that is taking you to the ground.

 

[DaBruinz]

That's not true, as we learned in the brouhaha over the ASJ fumble-touchback.

Once the ball comes loose, all the same rules apply as to when a player gets possession of it as with a reception, except that the ball hitting the ground while not in player possession doesn't make the play dead.

Since Lewis was going to ground while trying to recover the loose ball, he needs to survive the ground to be considered to have possession. And without possession, he can't be down by contact.

The ball was clearly pinned against his hip and it stayed against his hip unmoved after Lewis hit the ground. It was ONLY after Jack grabbed it and pulled it out that he lost control. But he was already on the ground and down by that time.

 

[patfanken]

Agreed. Taking a knee with 55 seconds on the clock & holding two time outs? I was at the game, and remember thinking, wow, that is going to cost them. They might have lost the game right there (of course, those thoughts vanished in the 4th quarter when we were down by 10 and seemingly couldn't get anything going).

I think that is a small contention that will be blown out of proportion. Think about it this way. You are ahead 14-10 and will get the ball to open the half. You just had a quick TD scored on you and you have a QB who has been known to give it away. Plus you are moving the ball and while still protecting that QB. Why take a risk and perhaps lose the ball, or give it back to the Pats will 30 odd seconds left.

While I see your point, I can see why Maronne chose to sit on it to close out the half.

 

[Ring 6]

I am getting more confused. The ref said that not surviving the ground was critical in the ASJ play. This is what the NFL ref said:

“He lost the ball,” referee Tony Corrente told a pool reporter. “It came out of his control as he was almost to the ground. Now he re-grasps the ball and by rule, now he has to complete the process of a recovery, which means he has to survive the ground again. So in recovering it, he recovered, hit the knee, started to roll and the ball came out a second time. So the ball started to move in his hands this way … he’s now out of bounds in the end zone, which now created a touchback. So he didn’t survive the recovery and didn’t survive the ground during the recovery is what happened here.”

https://nypost.com/2017/10/15/jets-fall-to-patriots-after-controversial-replay-call/

He wasn’t down by contact. I am not familiar with any rule that said you have to survive the ground or it’s a fumble. Once you are down by contact the ball is dead.

 

[patfanken]

Actually, that isn't true once possession is established. He held onto the ball and was down by contact. The ball was clearly pinned between his thigh.

I agree but I can see the opposite point, that while it seemed like it in the stop-motion snapshot, did he have "control" of the ball?. Or rather was control established enough to overturn the call on the field. The burden of proof was on the Pats in that situation.

 

[SacPete1]

No Pete. Surviving the ground is not an issue here. That only applies to making a catch while going to the ground.
When his knee is down the play is dead. At that instant it certainly looked to me like he had possession even if it was lost immediately after.

I disagree. Surviving the ground is applicable and doesn't just apply to a catch but to a runner after he loses possession. Here is the quote from Tony Corrente on the ASJ ruling and he specifically uses the phrase "surviving the ground".

Referee explains decision on controversial non-TD by Jets' Austin Seferian-Jenkins

Referee explains Austin Seferian-Jenkins play
After the game, referee Tony Corrente defended his crew's decision:

"The final shot we saw was from the end zone that showed the New York Jets' runner, we'll call him a runner at that point, with the football starting to go toward the ground," Corrente said. "He lost the ball. It came out of his control as he was almost to the ground. Now he re-grasps the ball and by rule, now he has to complete the process of recovery, which means he has to survive the ground again. So in recovering it, he recovered, hit the knee, started to roll and the ball came out a second time. So the ball started to move in his hands this way ... he's now out of bounds in the end zone, which now created a touchback. So he didn't survive the recovery and didn't survive the ground during the recovery is what happened here."

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

He wasn’t down by contact. I am not familiar with any rule that said you have to survive the ground or it’s a fumble. Once you are down by contact the ball is dead.

Once you are down by contact, while having possession of the ball, the ball is dead.

It seems that to be declared in possession of the ball, whether you are catching a pass while falling to the ground or recovering a fumble while falling to the ground, possession is attained only by surviving the ground. Unless Corrente is wrong...

I originally agreed 100% with you, but (like Blake Bortles) I am losing confidence by the minute!

 

[Nunchucks]

That's not true, as we learned in the brouhaha over the ASJ fumble-touchback.

Once the ball comes loose, all the same rules apply as to when a player gets possession of it as with a reception, except that the ball hitting the ground while not in player possession doesn't make the play dead.

Since Lewis was going to ground while trying to recover the loose ball, he needs to survive the ground to be considered to have possession. And without possession, he can't be down by contact.

The problem wasn't that ASJ did not regain possession of the ball, the problem was that he was out of bounds when he regained possession. He fumbled right before crossing the goal line and then regained possession in the air and out of bounds.

 

[Ring 6]

I think that is a small contention that will be blown out of proportion. Think about it this way. You are ahead 14-10 and will get the ball to open the half. You just had a quick TD scored on you and you have a QB who has been known to give it away. Plus you are moving the ball and while still protecting that QB. Why take a risk and perhaps lose the ball, or give it back to the Pats will 30 odd seconds left.

While I see your point, I can see why Maronne chose to sit on it to close out the half.

It’s very questionable.

 

[Ring 6]

Once you are down by contact, while having possession of the ball, the ball is dead.

It seems that to be declared in possession of the ball, whether you are catching a pass while falling to the ground or recovering a fumble while falling to the ground, possession is attained only by surviving the ground. Unless Corrente is wrong...

I originally agreed 100% with you, but (like Blake Bortles) I am losing confidence by the minute!

ASJ lost possession before hitting the ground and regained it after he was out of bounds.

 

[patchick]

BUT like most (but not all) of BB's teams, this was a very hard working, focused and mentally tough group that epitomized the concept of the "sum being greater than the individual parts".

Agreed -- I've been thinking that this year is the most that way of any of any Pats team since the 2001 squad. The roster they entered training camp with looked like a juggernaut, but the roster they've been fielding lately simply isn't. In fact, you could form the basis of a solid expansion team out of guys they entered camp with and don't have now. Off the top of my head:

Defense: Hightower, Rivers, Valentine, McClellin, J. Jones, C. Jones, Ebner, Langi, Ninkovich, Ealy

Offense: Edelman, Mitchell, Cannon, Garcia, and of course QB depth with Garoppolo and Brissett

Not that the guys still remaining are any slouches, of course. But on paper, the defensive front seven in particular looks like one of the weakest in the league. ("Hey Ricky Jean Francois, could you take a break from managing your Dunkin Donuts to be a starter in the AFC championship game? Thanks, buddy!")

But they're a heck of a team, having a heck of a season.

 

[PatriotsNumero1Fan]

So the media's *****ing about the pats getting the calls today. They where the right calls. The one you can make an argument about was the one before the half with the brandin cooks PI. That's the only one.

 

[Sfpat]

They were shortening the game, with a 10 point lead, you got to run it. If they pass the ball too much, Bortles might turn into Bortles.

Haven't read through everything but last year Atlanta was criticized for not running the ball in the second half. This year the Jags are criticized for running the ball in the second half. Can they make up their minds!

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

I thought the fumble was called correctly even though it pissed me off

 

[sambam94]

rewatched game..the delay of game near the end of the half was the single most important play of the game. The penalty cost the jags a 1st down on the pats 30 yard line. Drive would have continued and they either would have had a 21-3 lead or 17-3 lead. There would have not been enough time for the Pats to get that late TD to make it 14-10 at the half. Absolutely huge difference..