Why does Atlanta get blasted for staying aggressive and Philly is touted for it?

[Froob]

Feel like people only judge teams based off wins and losses. Jags went conversative and loss. People seem to pretty much say you should have done the opppsite of whatever you did when you lose.

 

[libra957]

Because last year we had a better defense.

 

[Kontradiction]

Atlanta wasn’t subbing bodies in and out of the line-up like Philly was. Philly was also the more well conditioned team.

 

[mosslost]

Philly was better than us

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Feel like people only judge teams based off wins and losses. Jags went conversative and loss. People seem to pretty much say you should have done the opppsite of whatever you did when you lose.

Atlanta shouldn't be bashed for playing aggressive...that's just a bunch of hindsight crap. They played exactly the way they should have, but they didn't execute on some key plays. The way to lose to the Patriots is to leave points on the board and/or not playing to your strengths for the entire game. Also, the Patriots had completely brick walled Atlanta's run game in the second half.

 

[ScottishPatriots]

Because Atlanta had a game winning FG inside 40 yards if they just ran the ball 3 times.

Philly had the same situation and ran it and made it an 8 point game.

 

[XLIX]

Feel like people only judge teams based off wins and losses. Jags went conversative and loss. People seem to pretty much say you should have done the opppsite of whatever you did when you lose.

This.

 

[Froob]

Because Atlanta had a game winning FG inside 40 yards if they just ran the ball 3 times.

Philly had the same situation and ran it and made it an 8 point game.

That was more reseasonable for sure, but people talk about that whole fourth quarter.

Honestly, I would have kneeled if I were Philly on that third down. Don’t risk the fumble.

 

[PatriotsNumero1Fan]

Feel like people only judge teams based off wins and losses. Jags went conversative and loss. People seem to pretty much say you should have done the opppsite of whatever you did when you lose.

I thought our defense did a good job against the jags. They made adjustments at halftime. Last night no adjustments and no butler!

 

[Deus Irae]

Feel like people only judge teams based off wins and losses. Jags went conversative and loss. People seem to pretty much say you should have done the opppsite of whatever you did when you lose.

Situational football, and the difference between 28-9 and 29-26

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Situational football, and the difference between 28-9 and 29-26

Exactly. Being aggressive (or being conservative) isn't intrinsically wrong or right. It depends entirely on the situation.

Atlanta had a huge lead and so should have been trying to work the clock down more. And when they were in a position where any score would have made it near-impossible for NE to win, they should have played to make sure they got that score. The worst case scenario (aside from a turnover) was failing to score and so they should not have done anything that prevented them from having a good chance at the score. Not to mention draining more clock.

By contract, Philly was in a barnburning shootout and had showed no ability to stop NE (especially in the 2nd half). Going conservative would have ended them.

 

[Joey007]

Because execution matters to the eye of the public.

 

[Froob]

Because execution matters to the eye of the public.

That doesn’t mean the strategy was wrong though. I thought Jags had called a great game and they still lost to a better team.

 

[Joey007]

That doesn’t mean the strategy was wrong though. I thought Jags had called a great game and they still lost to a better team.

If Wilson throws a TD at the end of SB 49 instead of a pick at the goal line, everyone is praising that decision as well.

It’s just how it is.

 

[Deus Irae]

That doesn’t mean the strategy was wrong though. I thought Jags had called a great game and they still lost to a better team.

This isn't rocket science, though.

1. One team (Falcons) needed to bleed clock and could settle for field goals. For that team, safe runs and short drops for high percentage passes are smart plays, and 7 step drops for needless deep passes is suspect.
   
2. The other team (Eagles) needed to score touchdowns because Brady was raping its defense and the score was close. For that team, punting the ball is setting itself up for a loss.

 

[StockingAnarchyNumber12]

Because Atlanta lost and their playcalling was the reason. Philly won with their playcalling. Its simple, imo at least.

 

[TB_Helmet]

Because it worked for Philly and not for Atlanta.

 

[lancerman]

Atlanta: Had a huge lead and refused to run and chew up clock and got in field goal range for a game icing kick and didn't play conservative with the game won.

Philadephia: Was in a shoot out and decided to play aggressive to keep drives alive and not settle for field goals and as a result won the game.

 

[upstater1]

Because Atlanta had a game winning FG inside 40 yards if they just ran the ball 3 times.

Philly had the same situation and ran it and made it an 8 point game.

But this is a little hindsight too.

Philly ran it for a 3 yard loss. Then they went to the pass. You could see maybe how another couple of losses on the run would make that a 45 yard FG. And so they elected to go pass.

In hindsight, they shouldn't have. But no doubt they were aggressive.

The difference between the two is that Philly executed their plays, AND they faced a more talented Patriots D.

 

[Uptown]

Simple:

Philly prevailed.
Atlanta failed.