Chatham's breakdown of NE/GB game

[Oswlek]

As reiss pointed out today, the 2nd drive of the game down 6-0, we came out pass ,pass,pass.. thenin the 3rd Q , we come with a pass play to start, get a holding call and then are forced to pass.
I dont know if the running game wouldve made a difference or not but the lack of it put a lot on our oline. They shouldve pushed the run game especially after how bolden ran.
Damn, more I think of this, more I see missed chances.

Tons of them. But I suspect that things might look different the second time around, even if only swapping Cannon for Fleming.

 

[luuked]

Rodney on WEEI said that he peeked in the backfield on 3rd and 2 and that split second ended in a disaster.

This wold explain why hia first step was so much slower than Adams'.

 

[IllegalContact]

Thanks for the link. Excellent piece.

On 30 snaps, Shane Vereen gave us 1 reception for 26 yards and 3 carries for 6 (net 32 yards, or 1 yard/snap). On 19 snaps, Blount gave us 58 yards (3 yards per snap). I will be curious to see if Josh keeps trotting out Vereen for those inside runs to nowhere.

like I keep saying........this game was played as though they will meet again when the stakes are much higher

the game film will be useless to the packers

 

[Anteros]

This got my attention because it has been making my blood boil.

"The right half of the above screen shot shows the politicking that inevitably goes on when players know the league has created stupid loop hole rules. It turns players into advocates for flags on nearly every play."

This is the very reason why I don't love soccer as much as I could, were this removed from the game. I hate to see the NFL going down this route.

 

[hwc]

So you are saying he should have tried to stay on top of Adams?

I'm saying that the number 1 priority for a Patriots DB is to "Get the **** back" and not allow the receiver to get past him for a quick strike touchdown. Anything more than that is gravy.

 

[Deus Irae]

Except the ball was not out yet when he turned his back to Rodgers and follows Adams along towards the sticks.

So you are saying he should have tried to stay on top of Adams?

Looking at the play in the all22 footage it looks like he was simply not quick enough at the beginning of the play and already had lost the match up long before the double move.

But my question remains.. how do you defend as CB against a double move in a situation like that? You essentially give up on the first down?

Think of Ryan as a lesser McCourty. Both belong at safety because, among other things, neither can handle the double move, and neither is adept enough at press to overcome that by knocking opponents off route enough at the start. With Ryan stuck at CB, however, there's only so much he can do. He's got to acknowledge his weakness and avoid jumping routes. Unfortunately, he's had enough success in the INT department where he's not likely to stop, so he's a pretty easy target to hit repeatedly.


just my $.02

 

[Ring 6]

I'm saying that the number 1 priority for a Patriots DB is to "Get the **** back" and not allow the receiver to get past him for a quick strike touchdown. Anything more than that is gravy.

Not on 3rd and 2.
Actually there are no hard and fast rules on defense.
Every defensive call gives the offense something. If you think you can only play one way, then you give them the same thing all day and get roasted.

 

[luuked]

Think of Ryan as a lesser McCourty. Both belong at safety, because neither can handle the double move, and neither is adept enough at press to overcome that. With Ryan stuck at CB, however, there's only so much he can do. He's got to acknowledge his weakness and avoid jumping routes. Unfortunately, he's had enough success in the INT department where he's not likely to stop, so he's a pretty easy target to hit repeatedly.

That positive reinforcement of "bad" instincts due to a couple of INTs last year is actually a good point. The (successful) play on Manning in last year's comeback win comes to mind...

 

[hwc]

Not on 3rd and 2.

Yes. Even on 3 and 2, the absolute worst thing you can do is get beat over the top for a TD bomb. You can't sell out to stop the first down only to give up a cheap 7 pt deep ball. Especially against a QB like Rodgers whose specialty is extending the play.

 

[Archeryaddict12]

Think of Ryan as a lesser McCourty. Both belong at safety because, among other things, neither can handle the double move, and neither is adept enough at press to overcome that by knocking opponents off route enough at the start. With Ryan stuck at CB, however, there's only so much he can do. He's got to acknowledge his weakness and avoid jumping routes. Unfortunately, he's had enough success in the INT department where he's not likely to stop, so he's a pretty easy target to hit repeatedly.


just my $.02

I would bet that deus is right on this one. Packers knew what Ryan would most likely do before Ryan knew

 

[tmajr3]

Good stuff. Thanks for the link.

- The Pats' O got too cute, and left a bunch of points and opportunities on the field. Doubt that will happen twice.

Agree completely. Felt this way in the AFCCG last year and SB 46. Brady had what, 16 straight completions in that SB, then changed up the offense instead of his bread and butter. 12 yards and in, Brady is DEADLY accurate, more importantly putting it in the spot the WR is hit in stride

 

[Deus Irae]

Agree completely. Felt this way in the AFCCG last year and SB 46. Brady had what, 16 straight completions in that SB, then changed up the offense instead of his bread and butter. 12 yards and in, Brady is DEADLY accurate, more importantly putting it in the spot the WR is hit in stride

Given that Brady pretty clearly seemed to re-injure his shoulder when Tuck got him at the end of the streak, it's just possible that the real issue was that.

 

[tmajr3]

Given that Brady pretty clearly seemed to re-injure his shoulder when Tuck got him at the end of the streak, it's just possible that the real issue was that.

Very true, I've had an AC Joint separation in my non-throwing shoulder as well (granted, I wasn't playing in the NFL), but it almost makes you throw up from the pain when it first happens. Completely forgot about the injury when writing the earlier post

 

[Deus Irae]

Very true, I've had an AC Joint separation in my non-throwing shoulder as well (granted, I wasn't playing in the NFL), but it almost makes you throw up from the pain when it first happens. Completely forgot about the injury when writing the earlier post

It's a tough one for us outsiders to really know about, given that the Patriots aren't exactly loquacious on the topic of injury. It might have had nothing to do with things, and it might have had everything to do with things. At least with 2007, the ankle issue was obvious both before and during the game.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Thought that was the best article this week on the game. Completely agree with most of it although the Packer fans sure took exception to it.

 

[RayClay]

We were disjointed on offense, they were focused. Excellent piece, I'll go back and read more thoroughly later. I really wish he'd take a bigger role in pre season broadcasts.

 

[supafly]

Rodney on WEEI said that he peeked in the backfield on 3rd and 2 and that split second ended in a disaster.

Yeah, L.Ryan hasn't gotten beat too badly from what I've seen--but he is consistently a step or two behind, and that's frustrating.

I'm certainly nowhere close to giving up on him, since he's got enough athleticism to be able to play some role in the secondary, but he's got to show some improvement.

 

[mosi's man]

I think Chatham is the best there is at breaking down the truth about each game. He has forgotten more about football than I will ever know. Having said that, I think the notion that the Pats were "a play or two away" against the Packers is simply not true. We talk about Gronk's catch (a very difficult one at best) and the missed field goal or one or two other plays but we never mention the two Packer drops in the end zone or their missed field goal. In addition to racking up 480 yards of total offense the Packers left 7-10 points on the field with their own easily correctable mistakes. Forget about their other misses; if Adams catches that routine slant and Crosby hits his field goal it's 33 points allowed, nearly 500 yards against and no one is claiming satisfaction at our defensive effort.

Looking back at the games that we have struggled on defense, I think there is a pattern. They have come against qbs that can run. When we utilize a "contained rush" we don't fare particularly well. Against Miami, the Jets (where Geno Smith looked like a star), and the Packers (hell even Oakland) in games when we have employed a less aggressive approach at "getting after the qb", our defense has struggled as long as the qb doesn't make stupid mistakes and turn the ball over. Chatham makes it sound like defensively the game went according to plan aside from a play or two but I disagree. Forget about TOP or total yards, does anyone think that Rogers won't replay the game tape, be disappointed in his own efficiency and do a better job scoring the next time he sees the same strategy? I don't think that, against a top notch offense, any defense can allow the opposing qb to sit back in the pocket unthreatened for the length of time Rogers was afforded and not get picked apart. Let's stop blaming the fourth-string cornerback when he's playing the best qb in football and we're giving him all day to throw the ball. We either need to keep the ball out of Rogers' hands better (better offensive efficiency adds to the "pressure" we apply) or we need to keep him in the pocket but create more pressure or he'll murder us again.

A side note: I must say, I also never realized what a fine coach Mike McCarthy is. That was a hell of a game plan and the first time in a long time I felt like we didn't have a decided coaching advantage.

 

[mayoclinic]

I think Chatham is the best there is at breaking down the truth about each game. He has forgotten more about football than I will ever know. Having said that, I think the notion that the Pats were "a play or two away" against the Packers is simply not true. We talk about Gronk's catch (a very difficult one at best) and the missed field goal or one or two other plays but we never mention the two Packer drops in the end zone or their missed field goal. In addition to racking up 480 yards of total offense the Packers left 7-10 points on the field with their own easily correctable mistakes. Forget about their other misses; if Adams catches that routine slant and Crosby hits his field goal it's 33 points allowed, nearly 500 yards against and no one is claiming satisfaction at our defensive effort.

Looking back at the games that we have struggled on defense, I think there is a pattern. They have come against qbs that can run. When we utilize a "contained rush" we don't fare particularly well. Against Miami, the Jets (where Geno Smith looked like a star), and the Packers (hell even Oakland) in games when we have employed a less aggressive approach at "getting after the qb", our defense has struggled as long as the qb doesn't make stupid mistakes and turn the ball over. Chatham makes it sound like defensively the game went according to plan aside from a play or two but I disagree. Forget about TOP or total yards, does anyone think that Rogers won't replay the game tape, be disappointed in his own efficiency and do a better job scoring the next time he sees the same strategy? I don't think that, against a top notch offense, any defense can allow the opposing qb to sit back in the pocket unthreatened for the length of time Rogers was afforded and not get picked apart. Let's stop blaming the fourth-string cornerback when he's playing the best qb in football and we're giving him all day to throw the ball. We either need to keep the ball out of Rogers' hands better (better offensive efficiency adds to the "pressure" we apply) or we need to keep him in the pocket but create more pressure or he'll murder us again.

A side note: I must say, I also never realized what a fine coach Mike McCarthy is. That was a hell of a game plan and the first time in a long time I felt like we didn't have a decided coaching advantage.

Fine post.

With respect to Chatham, I think that his claim was that without Chandler Jones and with Easley limited the Pats didn't feel they had the horses to pressure a more mobile QB like Rodgers more aggressively, and that an early scramble gave them pause about such an approach. But I think that when the Pats get too cautious about playing contain it generally gets a bit ugly. Their best defensive games have been the ones in which they were more aggressive.

 

[mosi's man]

I hope Jones comes back soon and is able to play at 100%. Having said that, if you are in fact at the Mayo Clinic I"m sure you know how tricky hip injuries can be. I don't know what his diagnosis is (labral tear?) but he may not be 100% again this year. As for Easley, I loved the pick and expect him to be a fine player eventually. But we are waiting for him to be a difference maker this year? Any suggestion so far that that might happen? If that's what we're waiting for I'm not overly optimistic about our ability to pressure the qb at all rushing just four.