Idle thoughts - the "shoot out" edition

[libra957]

The team executed the perfect game plan to perfection. 0 penalties , 43 points, very good 3rd down convertion rate. Belichick has to be pleased in a lot of way, eventhough we could have been better.

 

[maineman209]

Not meaning to come off as argumentative this morning, but it’s hard to view the following statline and come off with the idea that Hill was held in check, prior to his 75 yd TD:

6 catches for 70 yards and 2 touchdowns?

That’s hardly keeping anyone in check in any capacity. At any rate, he finished for 7 catches for almost 145 yards and 3 touchdowns anyway, as it’s a 60 minute game. This wasn’t any type of victory versus Tyreek Hill. He absolutely destroyed our secondary. When was the last time a WR put up those kinds of numbers against this team?

One of Hill's other two TDs was a 14-yarder on KCY's 4th play after Brady fumbled at the NE-29.

The other was a 3-yarder on the 3rd play after the Pats' ST allowed a 97-yd KR.

It's not as if Hill was gouging the defense all game long.

 

[luuked]

Not meaning to come off as argumentative this morning, but it’s hard to view the following statline and come off with the idea that Hill was held in check, prior to his 75 yd TD:

6 catches for 70 yards and 2 touchdowns?

That’s hardly keeping anyone in check in any capacity. At any rate, he finished for 7 catches for almost 145 yards and 3 touchdowns anyway, as it’s a 60 minute game. This wasn’t any type of victory versus Tyreek Hill. He absolutely destroyed our secondary. When was the last time a WR put up those kinds of numbers against this team?

I disagree.

Given that most of the attention went to Kelce (who was kept without a catch in the second half) I think giving up 70 yards and even 2 TDs to Hill would have been a successful evening. The goal is not to shut opponents out but to devise a gameplan that puts you in a position to win the game.

Also I totally disagree with Hill destroying our secondary. I think they played him as well as any team so far this season. One mistake on Hill made it look worse than it actually was. Apart from whatever happened on the 75yd TD he never looked like a game breaker.

This was one of the most encouraging defensive performances I have seen in a longer time because this Chiefs offense might have been the best unit they have faced since the Falcons in the SB.

 

[maineman209]

Even though I am a couple of days late, great work PFK....

When Tyreek Hill was heading toward the endzone with 3 minutes left, I was yelling "let him score, let him score" as the last thing I wanted was for KC to hold on to the ball and either win or tie..

There was no doubt in my mind that #12 would engineer a drive to get us in FG goal range at least.. being used to this level of greatness for such a long time makes me view Pats Football differently..

As someone mentioned before chess and checkers.. perhaps even 3D chess.

I remember a Fins-Colts game from IDK how many years ago, in which the Peyton-led Colts were heavily favored. The game was surprisingly a back-and-forth contest and the booth guys were pretty convinced that the Fins had pulled off the upset after getting a 4-point lead and trapping the Colts inside their own 15 with 52 seconds left on the clock and no timeouts left. Me, I'm thinking, "Oh, f**k no. The Fins left too much time on the clock." Sure as sh it, Peyton marched them down the field for the winning TD as time expired. No sweat.

I have that same sense of inevitability about Brady and the Pats when they have the last possession of the game, almost no matter how much time is left. Three minutes? Piece of cake.

 

[raduray]

Great analysis as always. Just a couple of quibbles though.

You blame the defense for KC's 40 points. But 7 of those should be on the ST for the KO runback and another 7 should be on Brady for that fumble deep in their own end that led to a TD.

Also, regarding the refs, I believe they missed Slater being blocked in the back along the sidelines on that KO runback.

Was an exciting game that delivered on the hype.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I was giggling like an idiot on Hill's 75-yard tying TD.

I knew that KC was going to go down and score - I'd rather have the ball back with 3+ left in the game AND timeouts than go into overtime against that offense, where a flip of the coin would determine the winner. Did anyone really think that Brady wouldn't bring the Pats down the field for a field goal try with 3 minutes to play with?

Reverse of that: the Cinci receiver running out on the 2 in the Pitt game yesterday when there was no need at all to stop the clock. All it did was give Pitt time to win.

Or scoring on 2nd and 1 on the 2. Should have gone down at the 1. Would have given them 4 shots at the endzone and not left Pitt with enough time to come back.

 

[tasmlab]

The league itself, and all of its broadcast partners, are heavily invested in FF. IIRC, in 2017, the now very numerous FF operations took in almost twice as much revenue as the NFL (something around $20Bn, IOW).

The funny thing is that changing the rules for more points doesn't make FF or the games themselves any more competitive, just makes the scores higher. They could keep the rules the same as before and just raise the amount of points: 14 for a TD, 6 for a FG, etc.

Or go full Space Invaders and make a TD 7,000 pts, a field goal 3,000 points, etc., so we can have games that are like 43,000 - 40,000.

 

[PatsDeb]

I'm not even sure that there IS any rigid "depth chart" for WRs the way most people think of it. I think that every legit passing target on the roster is merely a tool in the McD/Brady toolbox, and each tool has different characteristics that are applicable in different situations.

There's no real "better" between Hogan and Dorsett, just as there's no "better" between Gordon and Edelman. Hogan has proven more reliable than Dorsett on deeper routes (15 yds+), but then, that's been Hogan's sweet-spot since his first season with the Pats. However, Hogan has also been less reliable overall on intermediate, possession-type routes (+/- 10 yards) than Dorsett.

Which one of them gets the most use in a particular game probably depends on what the opposing defense is weakest at defending, and on how the game unfolds.

Years ago the Pats basically had an offensive game plan that featured different players every week, and it kept defenses off balance. They've gotten away from that IMO with reliable stars like Gronk and Edelman, but let's see if Dorsett is featured this week before writing him off. One thing I have noticed though is Dorsett is noticeably smaller than everyone else out there and he doesn't find the open spaces like Jules.

 

[maineman209]

Years ago the Pats basically had an offensive game plan that featured different players every week, and it kept defenses off balance. They've gotten away from that IMO with reliable stars like Gronk and Edelman, but let's see if Dorsett is featured this week before writing him off. One thing I have noticed though is Dorsett is noticeably smaller than everyone else out there and he doesn't find the open spaces like Jules.

Dorsett is smaller - identical to Cooks, actually. Jules is better at finding open spaces in the short to intermediate range, but he's also been at it longer than Dorsett (who really just began running a lot of those Edelman/Amendola type routes this season). Jules is also perhaps the best in the league at making open spaces for himself. I can't really fault anyone for not being as good as Jules at that.

I don't know about "featured", but it seems possible that Dorsett gets some action this week. The Bears defense (Fangio's 3-4) seems to bring quick pressure from a lot of different angles, perhaps meaning more quick throws on Brady's dance card. Fangio also appears to use his LBs a lot in the pass rush, so they may leave some soft spots in the short/intermediate range - especially if some combo of Gronk/Gordon/Hogan are running clear-outs. Assuming that the Bears' coverage will be more interested in Edelman, Dorsett may have a few opportunities singled-up with a lesser coverage player. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out, gameplan-wise.

Another thing that's going to be interesting is the Bears run defense against the Pats ground game. I'm not sure that their run-D is actually as good as their ranking.

 

[ivanvamp]

Fun thread. My thoughts....

1. KC's offense is incredibly talented. Mahomes, Hill, Kelce, and Hunt are right at or near the top in the NFL at their respective positions. All of them are explosive. They don't wear you down; they erupt. One thing though: they haven't dealt with injuries on offense. Let's see how good they are if one of their key weapons goes down.

2. The Pats' special teams and offense cost them 14 points. So yeah, while they gave up 40 (31 in the second half), 7 were due to a huge kickoff return and 7 were due largely to a Brady fumble. Not to say that the defense played well, because KC had shots to put TDs on the board in the first half and missed open receivers. But still.

3. I really worry about playing them in KC in the playoffs should it come to that. Mahomes with a full season under his belt. Frenzied home crowd. That game would be...a problem.

4. Michel looks great. Powerful. Explosive. Shifty. And White just keeps getting better at everything.

5. I said when they signed Gordon that I didn't expect Gordon's personal stats to be off the charts, but I did expect that the entire offense would receive a serious boost, because teams would have to account for him in ways that took pressure off others.

First three games (averages): 19.0 points, 300.0 yards, 17.7 first downs
Last three games (averages): 39.7 points, 462.3 yards, 27.7 first downs

Night. And. Day. And yes, the quality of opposing defenses is worse, but not by THAT much (well, KC's is really bad). After that rough start to the year, the Pats have the 4th highest scoring offense in the NFL.

6. Hightower looks better. Still slow, but at least making plays.

7. It's HUGE to have Edelman back. With him and Gordon playing, Hogan went from being the #1 WR (and not up to that task) to being the #3 WR (where he's a perfect fit).

I'd like to see the defense improve but I'm very bullish on the Patriots right now. They look like a force. Let's see how they do against Mack and the Bears in Chicago.

 

[supafly]

I disagree.

Given that most of the attention went to Kelce (who was kept without a catch in the second half) I think giving up 70 yards and even 2 TDs to Hill would have been a successful evening. The goal is not to shut opponents out but to devise a gameplan that puts you in a position to win the game.

Also I totally disagree with Hill destroying our secondary. I think they played him as well as any team so far this season. One mistake on Hill made it look worse than it actually was. Apart from whatever happened on the 75yd TD he never looked like a game breaker.

This was one of the most encouraging defensive performances I have seen in a longer time because this Chiefs offense might have been the best unit they have faced since the Falcons in the SB.

I understand what you’re saying. I just can’t look past 3 touchdowns and think that it was an encouraging performance, that’s all. If that is considered keeping the player in check then we still have a long way to go.

 

[supafly]

One of Hill's other two TDs was a 14-yarder on KCY's 4th play after Brady fumbled at the NE-29.

The other was a 3-yarder on the 3rd play after the Pats' ST allowed a 97-yd KR.

It's not as if Hill was gouging the defense all game long.

He may not have been gouging the defense all game long, but he scored 3 touchdowns. I don’t care what happened to give them the ball on those drives. They allowed a big time player to see the end zone on three separate occasions. That shouldn’t be acceptable unless we’ve really lowered the bar.

 

[maineman209]

He may not have been gouging the defense all game long, but he scored 3 touchdowns. I don’t care what happened to give them the ball on those drives. They allowed a big time player to see the end zone on three separate occasions. That shouldn’t be acceptable unless we’ve really lowered the bar.

I'm not saying that it's "acceptable". I'm saying that the Pats offense and ST didn't do the defense any favors when it came to containing the Chiefs offense.

It doesn't matter much that those two short TD passes (14 yds and 3 yds) went to Hill. There wasn't anything particularly exceptional about Hill's play on those. In those defense-in-a-hole situations, they could just as easily have gone to Ware and/or Harris, instead. Hill would then have caught only 4/10 for 30 yards, plus the one 75-yard TD. We might, then, be praising the defense for how well they did with Hill, except for the one busted coverage.

The point being that, by disproportionately emphasizing the fact that it was Hill specifically who caught those two short TDs, it's like building him up into some monster that the defense never had any control over whatsoever.

 

[supafly]

It doesn't matter much that those two short TD passes (14 yds and 3 yds) went to Hill. There wasn't anything particularly exceptional about Hill's play on those. In those defense-in-a-hole situations, they could just as easily have gone to Ware and/or Harris, instead. Hill would then have caught only 4/10 for 30 yards, plus the one 75-yard TD. We might, then, be praising the defense for how well they did with Hill, except for the one busted coverage.

Taking away the 14 + 3 would mean that Hill would’ve had 4 catches for 53 yards, so I get what you’re saying, but he still would’ve had 4/53/2, and it’s difficult (for me) to praise them when you’re allowing someone to score twice, that’s all.

I understand your point, although this feels like one of those “should we count the stats because a 10 point lead with 5 mins left should be considered garbage time” types of views, which tends to favor the Pats in a debate. The bottom line is that the dude went off for 145 yards and 3 touchdowns, and I think there’s a lot of gray area to how effective the defense really contained him if he had a 6/70/2 line prior to the long catch. You’d have to take away a touchdown or two to convince me that they achieved their pre-game goals. Just my opinion, of course.

 

[Ring 6]

The funny thing is that changing the rules for more points doesn't make FF or the games themselves any more competitive, just makes the scores higher. They could keep the rules the same as before and just raise the amount of points: 14 for a TD, 6 for a FG, etc.

Or go full Space Invaders and make a TD 7,000 pts, a field goal 3,000 points, etc., so we can have games that are like 43,000 - 40,000.

It’s not the integer that they are trying to increase it’s the number of scoring plays.

 

[borg]

One of Hill's other two TDs was a 14-yarder on KCY's 4th play after Brady fumbled at the NE-29.

The other was a 3-yarder on the 3rd play after the Pats' ST allowed a 97-yd KR.

It's not as if Hill was gouging the defense all game long.

The end zone limited his yardage

 

[Tunescribe]

@patfanken

Ken, are you at all dismayed by how radically the NFL game has changed in favor of offense? I find the imbalance a real cause for concern going forward unless the league does something about it, which I have little confidence in.

 

[patfanken]

Years ago the Pats basically had an offensive game plan that featured different players every week, and it kept defenses off balance. They've gotten away from that IMO with reliable stars like Gronk and Edelman, but let's see if Dorsett is featured this week before writing him off. One thing I have noticed though is Dorsett is noticeably smaller than everyone else out there and he doesn't find the open spaces like Jules.

too much is being made of Dorsett's lack of playing time in this game. Thus far this season the has played a decent role and far exceeded most people's expectations. At this point his lack of playing time is more a matter of expectations than anything he's done. I suspect that he will have his moments from time to time, much like Amendola's last couple of seasons. Hopefully he'll be just as clutch as DA.

Personally I'm glad he's on the team.

 

[patfanken]

@patfanken

Ken, are you at all dismayed by how radically the NFL game has changed in favor of offense? I find the imbalance a real cause for concern going forward unless the league does something about it, which I have little confidence in.

well Tune, the ratings would seem to be making the case that "fans" like all the offense. But while I love to see a well executed drive, I miss the physicality the defense used to have the ability to use, especially on the LOS.

When I played OLB and had a running back in coverage, I was able to hit him coming out. Often when I was running with a faster RB and he was about to run past me, I was allowed to fire and arm to his throat (at least that was where I was aiming, in order to break his stride and catch up. I fount it to be very effective. .

I despair on the new QB rules. I was OK with not hitting him low, like the hit that knocked Brady out, and I'm OK with not hitting QB's HARD to the helmet. But its one thing to try and eliminate vicious hits to the QB, but TOUCHING his helmet has now become a penalty. Tackling them hard is now a penalty for Christ's sake. Back in the day the QB was still hitable as long as you were within 2 steps of him throwing the ball. I guess it was considered legal momentum.

But the thing that really drives me nuts is when I heard an NFL official say that Sony Michel's TD run should have been a penalty. Football has ALWAYS been a game where the low man wins. What was he expected to do, run straight up and give the DB's a better target.

No Tune, the game and all the NFL crap that goes with it has turned me off. I can honestly tell you I watch about 10 minutes of football before the Pats came on. I only watch when its the Pats and I listen less and less to all the podcasts and go to fewer sites. I can't remember the last time I went to Patriots.com, or listen to the radio shows they put on. I used to listen religiously. Now I just watch the Pats game, and while I enjoy them its not with the same passion I've had in the past.

I lament the game and fear for its future. Maybe people just aren't as tough as they were in my day. Hopefully I'll die before the game does.

 

[DarrylS]

It appears as though many fans liked this game as well, with very good ratings.. that seems to be as trend this year as the product (lots of O) seems to be resonating with the fans...

Patriots Snap Chiefs’ Winning Streak As ‘Sunday Night Football’ Ratings Rise

In metered market results, last night’s SNF snagged a big league 14.6/25.

Easily taking the top primetime prize for the night, the hard fought Pats v. Chiefs match-up was up 18% in the early metrics from the Houston Texans win over the Dallas Cowboys last week. For the fifth week in a row, SNF was also up double digits from the 2017/2018 season with a very impressive 34% leap over the New York Giants’ 23-10 crushing over the Denver Broncos on October 15, 2017.