Idle Thoughts - The "did you expect anything less" edition

maust1013 said:

Yeah, he absolutely would have caught that ball 2 yards OOB or 5 feet over his head at the back of the end zone

Click to expand...

The ball landed several yards in bounds and short of the end zone.

Palm Beach Pats Fan said:

The ball landed several yards in bounds and short of the end zone.

Click to expand...

It’s difficult to convince me there’s no reciever in the NFL that can make that play. That should be the standard of uncatchable.

203Pat said:

I don’t know why they didn’t give Zeke 40 carries. He was killing us and they just went away from him.

Click to expand...

I feel like I see that all the time during other games.

IllegalContact said:

it's tripping......the guy isn't even engaged in a block until after he sticks his knee out and then steps in that direction

Click to expand...

One thing I've noticed is that the Patriots internally seem to regard Sony more highly than many here (and, from what I understand, in the talk radio wasteland.) During yesterday's post=game press conference, a reporter started a question with 'Sony Michel played well today --" and BB quickly interrupted with "he's played well all year." And I remember Fears earlier in the year mentioning how well they think he's playing.

1960Pats said:

McCourty made up some ground and the angle and still popped the ball out. Too bad it went right back to the WR.

Click to expand...

Would love to get the speed on that one he was freakin flying. While the catch was made, I see that defensive effort as the definition of grit. Loved it.

Uncle Rico said:

One thing I've noticed is that the Patriots internally seem to regard Sony more highly than many here (and, from what I understand, in the talk radio wasteland.)

Click to expand...

Sometimes I think people on the team know more than those on this board.

patchick said:

I think these two could be related. If we're thinking about the same punt, Slater clearly lost track of the ball which never happens. Poor visibility combined with weird wind gusts seem a likely factor.

Click to expand...

Which also would make the Cowboys consistent kick return struggles make more sense. They couldn't filed those pooch kicks to save their life, and kudos to the Patriots for scheming to take advantage of that (even if they were never able to recover one).

Froob said:

Buck is boring but I think he’s fine. I don’t know why Aikman doesn’t get more ****, everyone hates Buck but I think Aikman is the bigger problem.

He brings absolutely nothing to the broadcast. Guy is a hall of fame QB, he’s gotta know more. I’d much rather have Phil Simms paired with Buck than listen to Aikman.

Click to expand...

I think what most, including myself, will never let Buck live down is Randy Moss' "disgusting act". It's not a big deal in reality but he'll never be anything other than that guy to me. As far as his actual commentary I just find him dry.

neuronet said:

Sometimes I think people on the team know more than those on this board.

Click to expand...

I would hope so

Froob said:

?


I think it’s totally reasonable he could have made a play on the ball if he wasn’t held

Click to expand...

You are talking about a specific play. Ken and I were talking about an overall change in the way PI is called and perceived. The idea that a ball does in fact need to be catchable in the field of play in order for PI to occur used to be fundamental to the call standing.

maust1013 said:

You are talking about a specific play. Ken and I were talking about an overall change in the way PI is called and perceived. The idea that a ball does in fact need to be catchable in the field of play in order for PI to occur used to be fundamental to the call standing.

Click to expand...

Ah I thought you guys were talking about that specific play, my bad.

I see what you’re saying, but we did used to get screwed where Gronk was held back and they would claim it was uncatchable when he never had an opportunity to get there. It’s it’s truly uncatchable then it shouldn’t be called.

Froob said:

Ah I thought you guys were talking about that specific play, my bad.

I see what you’re saying, but we did used to get screwed where Gronk was held back and they would claim it was uncatchable when he never had an opportunity to get there. It’s it’s truly uncatchable then it shouldn’t be called.

Click to expand...

Yeah the point there was inviting folks to consider for a moment how often we used to see PI flags picked up when a ball was uncatchable vs how seldom it happens now. It used to be a very common occurrence, not so much now. Even when a ball lands well OOB the call stands, it's nonsensical.

maust1013 said:

Yeah the point there was inviting folks to consider for a moment how often we used to see PI flags picked up when a ball was uncatchable vs how seldom it happens now. It used to be a very common occurrence, not so much now. Even when a ball lands well OOB the call stands, it's nonsensical.

Click to expand...

The entirety of PI calls, non-calls, challenges, lack of reversals, etc. is a complete mess. It's replaced the "what is a catch" from a few years ago. I don't think anyone knows what the refs will do or why.

That's why it would be nice to win games by 2 scores to avoid having refs affecting outcomes.

203Pat said:

Do you follow everyone else around saying stupid things or just me? He averaged 4.1 a carry (21 for 86) and added 4 catches for 40 yards. On drives that he got at least 2 carries the Cowboys ended up with a field goal attempt 4 out of 6 times.

Think before you type.

Click to expand...

so how is that 'killing'?

the majority of his carries in the 2nd half were < 3 yards

IllegalContact said:

so how is that 'killing'?

Click to expand...

He wasn't so much killing us as making in-roads, and since their passing game wasn't working at all, it's surprising that they didn't go to Elliot more. They were only down one score for the majority of the game, so running should have been an option that they used.

PatsDeb said:

He wasn't so much killing us as making in-roads, and since their passing game wasn't working at all, it's surprising that they didn't go to Elliot more. They were only down one score for the majority of the game, so running should have been an option that they used.

Click to expand...

it

wasn't

working

venecol said:

Tripping calls are being over hyped as an excuse against Patriots win. The D shut down Dallas's #1 WR and offense and there was no guarantee they would have scored a TD without those calls. In any event, both OL men kneed rushers on their thighs which caused them to fall down, so calls were correct. It is what it is.

Click to expand...

As I always say, even when the bad call is against the Patriots:

If your game plan involves the refs calling everything right, you're going to lose every time. If your game plan becomes dependent on a single bad call, you did something wrong for the other 59 minutes of the game.

Long story short, it should never come down to a single call.

SlowGettingUp said:

Click to expand...

right....intent is not part of the equation.....both instances had visible leg motions toward the defender that define what tripping is......to me, it looks like a coached motion

I think you'll see more of these calls against the cowboys now that its been outed

The Pats D on 3rd downs showing 8, 9, 10, 0r even 11 men within 5 yards of the LOS, really baited the 'boys into passing, when 3rd-and-2 or 3rd-and-3 could logically be running downs with Zeke. Alignment took it away.