Official Post Game Thread- Pats beat the Ravens

[JoeA]

And the way Brady keeps the ball often until the last moment it is a wonder he has not landed on IR with a serious injury every year.

I mean at some point maybe we need to acknowledge that it is not coincidence that things happen a certain way -- especially when observed over a long period of time -- but maybe those players just have found things that work for them.

I agree with you. That said, one reason why I wanted to look at the basic stats is to see how QB who always seem to run with never securing the ball compare to everyone else. Seems for the most part that QB's who run with the ball hanging off the end of their hand just waiting for someone to knock it out actually fumbles no more than "great" pocket passers who are forced to run out of the pocket.

Personally, I would of thought Cam, Vick and Cunningham fumbled a lot more than others, but as you said, seems that guys for the most part have found things that work for them.

I was actually surprised that Cam was pretty low on the overall fumble list. That said, comes to quantifying the stats and what you're looking for.

For example, Esiason had 1,598 rushing yards after 13 years with 123 fumbles (123 yards rushing per year) with 37,920 passing yards (2,370 per year in passing. Cunningham had 4,928 rushing in 16 years with 308 yards per year rushing with 29,979 yards passing (1,873 yards per year). Neither QB won a superbowl. Who was better?

Ultimatley what people remember is what you won, not individual stats. In that reguard, people may not know Brady's stats, but they know he won, and I would respectfully argue that's what is most important in a team sport.

 

[luuked]

Personally, I would of thought Cam, Vick and Cunningham fumbled a lot more than others, but as you said, seems that guys for the most part have found things that work for them.

I agree that intuitively it should be more risky but who am I to question 9 years of evidence. And we are talking about the NFL so you know that coaches and opponent players have seen him holding the ball like that on tape and made it a target.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Who was the poster who predicted Meyers throwing a pass? Something like "Edelman to Amendola becomes Meyers to Byrd". I can't find the post.

That's some sorcerer-level foresight!

 

[Jim Beankie]

I'm surprised they won. I thought they'd lose by double digits. So what does their winning show us?

There's a lot of talk about "11 and 5 is back in play," about how though the team may lack talent "they play hard," and so on.

11 and 5 is not back in play, and the evidence is clear that they don't always play hard. They've wilted in two or three games.

What the win does demonstrate, though, is that there are some good young players on the team, young players who need to play to show what they have and to develop it. We don't yet know how many such players there are, of course, because of Belichick's reluctance to play rookies and other newbies, resulting for example in our having to resort to gossip and guesswork re the skills of a player like Stidham. This is partly because Bill values the attributes of character and technique which experienced players bring, but it is partly also because Belichick drafts such p***-poor players at certain positions. We don't yet know how many such players we have of course, because they're not on the field.

Given all this. Should we conclude on the basis of the win that the team ought to revert to playing those vets - Cam chief among them - whom one might feel "give the team the best chance to win"? It does not. This is a lost year. They're not going to win the chamionship, and I very much doubt they're going to get into the playoffs.

The purpose of this year remains entirely getting ready for next year and the years following. Playing "tried-and-true" mediocrities, fading vets, and shiny trivial objects like Cam remains foolish. Cam is irrelevant to next year, so he ought to be seen as irrelevant to this year. Sit him, and find out what else you've got. Play the newbies. See what you have. Maybe (probably) creep up the draft ladder.

The win was a nice surprise, but its value - as a way of assessing the roster - will find realization not this year but next.

I get it - you're one of those glass half full fans. Totally understandable. Some of the people closest to me have been like that. When someone gets overly optimistic, I switch to play devil's advocate, but most of the time, I stay optimistic until they're truly out of it (let's say 7 losses given who's in front of them) - even when we were down 10 to the Jets of all teams in the 4th quarter.

I vividly remember in 2001 watching a mid November Pats game in which they were HUGE underdogs with a backup QB who was drafted in the way lower rounds. They went toe to toe but lost to make them 5-5. I was watching with my best friend and said, "they have guts. I can see them running the table and seeing [the other team] again in the Super Bowl." It wasn't anywhere realistic, but I'm that kind of fan pretty much every year - it's like buying a powerball ticket and thinking about what I'm going to do if I win - pointless from a rational standpoint but fun. Until they're truly out of it, next year is relatively irrelevant to this year. The person who decides when they feel like they're out of it is BB. Players for the most part want to win (see Jamal Adams comments on being depressed while on the Jets), so not giving them the best chance to win is disheartening and morale-busting. I definitely don't want to relive 1-15.

As for your clear desire to sit Cam to play the "newbie," we've seen a lot of Stidham already - 3rd NFL throw in his 1st ever series was an interception (to Jamal Adams). Career 13for27 for 138yds, 1TD, 4INT. He's played 3 games of note and had an INT in all of them. You only get so many opportunities. Cam is technically the newbie here which is what BB is probably evaluating. Stidham's had lots of time to work with Harry/Edelman/Meyers. I do side with you in a way that I really wish they had started Stidham in KC, but even that is telling about how they feel.

 

[JoeA]

I agree that intuitively it should be more risky but who am I to question 9 years of evidence. And we are talking about the NFL so you know that coaches and opponent players have seen him holding the ball like that on tape and made it a target.

THANK YOU! if an idiot like me who only played high school football (went to track senior year and in college, point being I did "play" sports) could see a guy running with a football carrying the ball in one hand out in the open, I would think "professional coaches" could see the exact same thing on film.

Cam had a bad fumble at the wrong time at Buffalo. I wasn't able to watch the game as I had to work out back on the land, but I thought reading about here about that game someone posted that Cam kept them in the game with his overall play. Thing is, the only thing people will remember about that Buffalo game this year is that Cam "lost it" on that one fumble. Ironically enough, the only thing I really remember about Brady is that he won superbowls, not that he fumbled or how great his passing was. The reality is football probably one of the biggest TEAM sports you will find. Did Brady win all those SB's himself or did he have help?

Joe Namath pretty much sucked his entire career. Look at winning on super bowl did for him in the eyes of people.

 

[luuked]

Thing is, the only thing people will remember about that Buffalo game this year is that Cam "lost it" on that one fumble. Ironically enough, the only thing I really remember about Brady is that he won superbowls, not that he fumbled or how great his passing was. The reality is football probably one of the biggest TEAM sports you will find. Did Brady win all those SB's himself or did he have help?

I mean we are talking about a fanbase that has reduced Welker to that drop he had in the SB and still harps on Ghost for a missed XP but ignores the fact that Brady turned the ball over twice -- one essentially a pick 6 in their own redzone -- in the same game against the Broncos just because it is mathematically convenient to do so.

 

[Scotty]

Maybe a trivial thing but no locker room celebration after the Ravens game (or the Jets). Maybe they have stopped this until they have a winning record !

 

[luuked]

Maybe a trivial thing but no locker room celebration after the Ravens game (or the Jets). Maybe they have stopped this until they have a winning record !

More likely they don't want to get any video out there of players potentially breaking some aspect of the COVID protocol. I think the Saints got into some trouble for exactly that.

 

[Scotty]

Yeah , maybe the got a penalty after the Raiders game.......Oh no , dont touch the draft picks......lol

 

[Soliel]

Is there any way to get another system quarterback?

 

[JoeA]

I mean we are talking about a fanbase that has reduced Welker to that drop he had in the SB and still harps on Ghost for a missed XP but ignores the fact that Brady turned the ball over twice -- one essentially a pick 6 in their own redzone -- in the same game against the Broncos just because it is mathematically convenient to do so.

And at the end of the day, no matter how many SB's Brady has won or how many times Cam fumbled the ball, their is no direct correlation between my own personal happiness in life in general andhow how a sports team that I like to follow performs. If that doesn't make me a "fan", so be it.

I don't play football, I watch football. There is a difference.

 

[Nikolai]

They are incorrectly giving his defensive snaps to Cody, the other C Davis on defense. The last two pages here have the correct values:

https://nflcdns.nfl.com/liveupdate/gamecenter/58314/NE_Gamebook.pdf

I knew I wasn't going crazy. Thank you good sir.

 

[Mike the Brit]

I watched the fourth quarter again. The Ravens consistently had ten men up at the line of scrimmage but the Patriots weren't tempted to pass and just ran the ball time after time. They didn't mind punting and giving the Ravens the chance to make ground. Which the Ravens did somewhat -- but immediately after Jackson shook off a tackle in the backfield and ran for a 15-yard gain, they had a bad snap and the drive was dead.

In effect, the Patriots gave up the chance of adding to their score in order to be sure not to turn the ball over and bet that a six point lead would be enough. That was great coaching -- Bill Belichick at his stubborn, determined best.

 

[1960Pats]

people underestimate the effects commentators and media folk have on the public opinion. I really don’t think it was THAT bad a call if it even was bad but collinsworth was clearly frustrated and needed to cry like a little b**** about something

The power of the press is a real thing, in and out of sports and for good and bad. The same nonsense occurred when Jim Nants, the original Tuckhead, started that ball rolling.

The Pats' run is unequaled and will never be close to being matched. For 19 straight years of the B&B Show, the Pats had the best record in the AFCE every single season. The whiners can s**k on that.

 

[1960Pats]

That's what I thought...The ball was against Andrews' chest, but it was Dugger's hand that was underneath it...I didn't see Andrews demonstrate Full control of it at Any point during the catching process...

I think the receiver gets credit for a catch when both players have a piece of it. Once the receiver hits the ground the play is over and the defender would have to have obvious control. That's how I think it went.

 

[PatsBoy12]

Upon rewatching, I really liked what I saw with Uche. He had good power, decent leverage and seemed quick. He'll have to develop more moves, though. I'll be watching him closely.

 

[1960Pats]

I agree with you. That said, one reason why I wanted to look at the basic stats is to see how QB who always seem to run with never securing the ball compare to everyone else. Seems for the most part that QB's who run with the ball hanging off the end of their hand just waiting for someone to knock it out actually fumbles no more than "great" pocket passers who are forced to run out of the pocket.

Personally, I would of thought Cam, Vick and Cunningham fumbled a lot more than others, but as you said, seems that guys for the most part have found things that work for them.

I was actually surprised that Cam was pretty low on the overall fumble list. That said, comes to quantifying the stats and what you're looking for.

For example, Esiason had 1,598 rushing yards after 13 years with 123 fumbles (123 yards rushing per year) with 37,920 passing yards (2,370 per year in passing. Cunningham had 4,928 rushing in 16 years with 308 yards per year rushing with 29,979 yards passing (1,873 yards per year). Neither QB won a superbowl. Who was better?

Ultimatley what people remember is what you won, not individual stats. In that reguard, people may not know Brady's stats, but they know he won, and I would respectfully argue that's what is most important in a team sport.

Lamar Jackson, who the mediots have already declared "great," leads the world in fumbling and has two one and done playoffs in two tries.

I don't think there's a stat that measures how often a player runs with the ball away from their body, but players who do, like Jackson, fumble more than players who don't, like Cunningham.

Cam's main problem is that he's not a good passer, which in the Polianic era of the NYFL is a hinderance.

As for pocket passers, how often they fumble is determined by how well they feel pressure coming. Those that feel it, like Brady, don't fumble as often as those that don't, like Drew Bledsoe.

 

[1960Pats]

I get it - you're one of those glass half full fans. Totally understandable. Some of the people closest to me have been like that. When someone gets overly optimistic, I switch to play devil's advocate, but most of the time, I stay optimistic until they're truly out of it (let's say 7 losses given who's in front of them) - even when we were down 10 to the Jets of all teams in the 4th quarter.

I vividly remember in 2001 watching a mid November Pats game in which they were HUGE underdogs with a backup QB who was drafted in the way lower rounds. They went toe to toe but lost to make them 5-5. I was watching with my best friend and said, "they have guts. I can see them running the table and seeing [the other team] again in the Super Bowl." It wasn't anywhere realistic, but I'm that kind of fan pretty much every year - it's like buying a powerball ticket and thinking about what I'm going to do if I win - pointless from a rational standpoint but fun. Until they're truly out of it, next year is relatively irrelevant to this year. The person who decides when they feel like they're out of it is BB. Players for the most part want to win (see Jamal Adams comments on being depressed while on the Jets), so not giving them the best chance to win is disheartening and morale-busting. I definitely don't want to relive 1-15.

As for your clear desire to sit Cam to play the "newbie," we've seen a lot of Stidham already - 3rd NFL throw in his 1st ever series was an interception (to Jamal Adams). Career 13for27 for 138yds, 1TD, 4INT. He's played 3 games of note and had an INT in all of them. You only get so many opportunities. Cam is technically the newbie here which is what BB is probably evaluating. Stidham's had lots of time to work with Harry/Edelman/Meyers. I do side with you in a way that I really wish they had started Stidham in KC, but even that is telling about how they feel.

That Rams game in 2001 was when I decided that the Pats had a chance. If not for Smith's fumble down near the goal line the Pats probably would have won.

Then after the last game of the year and when I was sitting at the local bar, a discussion about the Pats chances in the playoffs came up. I was one of the few sitting there who gave them a chance. I can still hear one of the fans saying, "yeah, they may make the super bowl but there's no way they're beating the Rams." Here we are 20 years later and I still remind him of that when I see him.

The Pats have had the best record in the AFCE every year since 2001. It's going to a tough task and we'll need some help, but I wouldn't doubt that the Pats could pull it off this year too. Man, what a ride it's been.

 

[JoeA]

Lamar Jackson, who the mediots have already declared "great," leads the world in fumbling and has two one and done playoffs in two tries.

I don't think there's a stat that measures how often a player runs with the ball away from their body, but players who do, like Jackson, fumble more than players who don't, like Cunningham.

Cam's main problem is that he's not a good passer, which in the Polianic era of the NYFL is a hinderance.

As for pocket passers, how often they fumble is determined by how well they feel pressure coming. Those that feel it, like Brady, don't fumble as often as those that don't, like Drew Bledsoe.

Not certain if you were born in 60 or that's when you attended your first game, but your issue is you don't quanitify that statistics you provide.

See below, even an idiot like me can find this information online pretty quick as I sincerely have better things to do with my time. Point being, for 2020, it appears you are incorrect in your statement per Lamar Jackson. When you state that Lamar Jackson leads the world in fumbling, can you at least provide information (and games played) in how you assumed your statement as factual?

 

[JoeA]

As for pocket passers, how often they fumble is determined by how well they feel pressure coming. Those that feel it, like Brady, don't fumble as often as those that don't, like Drew Bledsoe.

Brady has had 126 fumbles in 20 year playing = 6.3 fumbles per year.
Beldsoe had 123 fumbles in 19 years = 7.68 fumbles per year.

The question becomes who had more passing yards per year on average to put that fumble ratio into perspective?