Pats' concerning trend of D collapse during crunch time of crucial game. Why?

[bobbutts]

There have actually been very few instances in AFC playoffs game where the Pats lost the lead late. In last years AFCCG the Pats stopped the Jags on their final drive with a chance to take the lead. The 2007 Super Bowl was the biggest issue as the Pats were a play away (or a holding call) from ending the game. 2011 defense was weak and the Giants only needed a FG making it a big challenge. Super Bowls are played in ideal conditions and with 4 downs instead of 3 it is very difficult to stop a team from moving down the field.

I think it's an interesting question and not simple to answer.
My best answer is 4 downs and the opposing team's desperation differentiate final drives from the rest of the game. Also these games feature the strongest competition and highest stakes the NFL has to offer. Given all of that, it seems reasonable to expect these drives to produce more points than other ones.

 

[RayClay]

We've all witnessed these moments. Credit to @Kargetina for cataloging this.

Long story short. Pats have consistently displayed a trend of crunch time defensive collapse during the final minutes of ALL our super bowl victories, as well as several AFCCG's, and also numerous meaningful regular season games.



Why?

How do we explain this trend? Pats could easily have been 0-8 in SB's, or even less appearances in the big game, due to what seems to be an uncannily predictable Defensive collapse during the opposing drive UNLESS rescued by a heroic play on our side/boneheaded play on the opposing side.

Is it merely selection bias? (which Pats SB ever have you felt comfortable during the last 2 mins??)

Is it BB's high stakes all-in high risk vs reward coaching style during late game defense?

Or is it simply an inevitable consequence of making it to the big game (or a crucial juncture thereof) way more than average, so that its given that at that point we'd run into an opponent formidable enough to corner us into a spot?

DISCLAIMER: This is NOT a whiny, ingrate, or chicken little post. Please. I'm ever so grateful for what the Pats' have accomplished, and none of us deserve better. I am merely trying to make sense of what seems to come across as a trend. Does it merit concern, or is it simply the price of unparalleled success? Discuss.

BB only cares about winning games. Giving up yards while the clock runs down, even if it leads to a score is better than allowing a quick touchdown pass, so they play soft. Sometimes it's because the D sucks and great offenses [often in Super Bowl] expose our weakness.

Not sure, with 5 Super Bowl victories, why people don't realize good offenses are going to gain yards, even score sometime. As long as they don't score enough to win in the time left, we win.

Many posters here want us to gamble like maniac while up multiple scores, blitzing and throwing bombs giving the green light to opponents long bombs, but BB don't play that.

Matt Ryan thought he'd close us off by scoring with a long pass instead of a running play and an easy field goal, instead he got sacked. The lack of 3 points [which would have made it a 3 possession game] doesn't show up in statistics, but I'm almost certain we don't win if he made the safe play. Win the game is all that counts.

 

[TomPatriot]

My guess would be quarters or prevent defense plays some role along with Doctor DDS’ explanation.

 

[JMC00]

Imagine cherry picking this narrative after winning 5 super bowls

 

[50-yard-line]

The 8 AFCCG's you're referring to (actually 7, not counting Sterling Moore's heroic play in 2011) don't discount the defensive collapse in each of the 8 SB's. Not one, not two...EIGHT. That's what makes it a trend, not just in the final game of the season, but in the damn super bowl for crying out loud.

To make it simple, perhaps a fairer comparison would be to look at all the SB's played so far, and see how many of those came down to a collapse on the final defensive drive?

Almost every one the Pats won.

The Rams, after tying the game...1:30 left, no timeouts and some kid, practically a rookie, walked down the field and beat one of the supposedly all-time great teams.

The Panthers, with another top Defense, after tying the game on a beat up Pats D with 1:08 to go, couldn't stop the Pats from walking down the field and kicking the game-winner.

Not the Eagles, but the Pats D stomped their last try...

Seattle, whose vaunted (some say GOAT) Legion of Boom D crumbled in the fourth quarter.

Atlanta (28-3), need I say more?

Any other questions?

 

[Jangles]

It’s not a trend. A trend isn’t something where you cherry pick examples and ignore all of the other instances that don’t apply.

Cherry picked examples like the last 8 Super Bowls lol

 

[n6249c]

Your first response was substantial. Despite my disclaimer, pointing out an uncomfortable trend makes doesn't automatically make me a troll, it makes your second response akin to a child blocking his ears and singing nanana. I've been on this forum longer than you, and you're welcome to scrutinize my post history to evaluate if I'm actually a troll or not.

Either way, thank you for your contribution.

MC has a valid observation, that is not trolling.

It’s not a trend. A trend isn’t something where you cherry pick examples and ignore all of the other instances that don’t apply.

That’s why I considered it a troll.

Substantive discussion requires a sound foundation not hand picked examples selected to support a hypothetical scenario. That’s what I asked for, and was pointing out was lacking. The fact is, you chose to attack the second not provide the first.

Your longevity on the board is impressive; if this is representative, quality of posts not so much so.

It could be a good topic for discussion if the clickbait hypothesis were demonstrated to be true, and the Patriots were shown to be more prone to this than the average team. But I don’t think they are.

I think this happens a lot across the league in big games. Not just playoffs, look at the Chargers - Chiefs game last weekend. So maybe a better question to discuss is why do so many big NFL games go back and forth up and fown the field go-hum for three quarters and then come down to the wire in an intense flurry of highlights?

Btw I think we also only notice when the Pats are the victims, and not when the other team collapses from a 28-3 lead or gives up a last-minute drive for a game-winning FG while the announcers proclaim the Pats should be playing to go to OT. And when it’s other teams with the Pats not playing we don’t take the same notice. So lots of selection and confirmation bias based on a flawed premise.

Those are incidentally signs of a troll. If you didn’t mean to troll fix it. Over to you.

 

[TennisBallHead]

It's not just fourth quarter decisions, either. They kicked it short to Carolina with like 10 seconds left. Carolina completed one pass and made a FG to make it 14-10.

And the worst one, giving up 80 yards in like 3 plays to Seattle to make it 14-14. Instead of intentionally fouling the Seahawks with only six seconds left, they just played straight up and gave up a TD.

Had they just mugged the receivers, the ball is at the one with no time left, forcing Seattle to either kick the FG or go for it and maybe get no points. I think Carroll kicks the FG.

Along with Brady's boneheaded pick, that game should have been 17-10, or 17-7.

That's probably why they need these ridiculous comebacks.

 

[TennisBallHead]

Here are the Panthers 4th quarter drives:

6 plays, 81 yards, touchdown
3 plays, 90 yards, touchdown
7 plays, 80 yards, touchdown
Kick return with four seconds left

And that was the BEST Pats defense.

 

[maust]

Hmmm .... IDK.

I guess I could go with the fact that, when the Pats have played in the AFCCG or the SB, they always seem to end up facing one of the top 2-3 teams in the league for that season, a team that's always also fighting for its life.

Maybe if we could fix THAT somehow ...

Aside from that, I'm totally stumped.

^^This!
When the NFC champ is behind and the clock gets tight they take chances and call plays they are not inclined to when it's not a necessity. When a team gets down to nothing to lose time heaving it up to a Tyree, Kearse or Manningham becomes an acceptable option.

 

[Ring 6]

Here are the Panthers 4th quarter drives:

6 plays, 81 yards, touchdown
3 plays, 90 yards, touchdown
7 plays, 80 yards, touchdown
Kick return with four seconds left

And that was the BEST Pats defense.

No it wasn’t because neither starting safety was on the field and the ones out there were special teamers.

 

[Ring 6]

Cherry picked examples like the last 8 Super Bowls lol

The last 8 SBs have 3 cases of the defenses getting stops to win.
And other cherry picked games were added in.

 

[50-yard-line]

Here are the Panthers 4th quarter drives:

6 plays, 81 yards, touchdown
3 plays, 90 yards, touchdown
7 plays, 80 yards, touchdown
Kick return with four seconds left

And that was the BEST Pats defense.

I was at that game...the Pats D and the Panthers D totally balled in the first half and were broken walking wounded in the second half. Delhomme made a couple of unreal throws on the run after escaping pressure.

Both teams get paid.

Bottom line: the Panthers got there with a top tier D and the Pats tore it to shreds when it mattered.

 

[everlong]

SB 52 - back and forth affair where both teams gave up the lead.
SB 51 - Falcons give up 25 point lead
SB 50 - Never close
SB 49 - Seattle gives up 10 point lead in the second half, #1 defense.
SB 48 - Never close
SB 47 - Ravens give up 15 point lead but hold on.
SB 46 - Giants gave up 9 point lead then Patriots 8 point lead. Offense sucked the second half.
SB 45 - Back and forth affair where neither team could stop the other in the second half.
SB 44 - Best pick 6 ever.
SB 43 - Pittsburgh's vaunted defense gives up 14 4th quarter points but AZ can't hold the lead, both defenses are bad.
SB 42 - Just shoot me.
SB 41 - Never close
SB 40 Never close

It happens all the time. The other team has players too.

 

[Deus Irae]

We've all witnessed these moments. Credit to @Kargetina for cataloging this.

Long story short. Pats have consistently displayed a trend of crunch time defensive collapse during the final minutes of ALL our super bowl victories, as well as several AFCCG's, and also numerous meaningful regular season games.



Why?

How do we explain this trend? Pats could easily have been 0-8 in SB's, or even less appearances in the big game, due to what seems to be an uncannily predictable Defensive collapse during the opposing drive UNLESS rescued by a heroic play on our side/boneheaded play on the opposing side.

Is it merely selection bias? (which Pats SB ever have you felt comfortable during the last 2 mins??)

Is it BB's high stakes all-in high risk vs reward coaching style during late game defense?

Or is it simply an inevitable consequence of making it to the big game (or a crucial juncture thereof) way more than average, so that its given that at that point we'd run into an opponent formidable enough to corner us into a spot?

DISCLAIMER: This is NOT a whiny, ingrate, or chicken little post. Please. I'm ever so grateful for what the Pats' have accomplished, and none of us deserve better. I am merely trying to make sense of what seems to come across as a trend. Does it merit concern, or is it simply the price of unparalleled success? Discuss.

Talent

It mostly just boils down to the talent, of both teams, and on both sides of the ball.

 

[TheRainMaker]

SuperBowl 36:

TD allowed with 90 seconds left, 55 yards in 21 seconds

Asking the Pats D to hold down one of the best offenses of all time was asking a lot. The Pats were lucky they held them down for as long as they did.

SuperBowl 38

: TD allowed with 68 seconds left, 80 yards in 1:43 minute.

This was frustrating. Pats were up 21-10 and about to put a dagger in the Panthers, but Brady loved throwing INT's in the redzone early in his career. This gave life to the Panthers after they looked mentally defeated up until that point. Jake Delhomme looked mentally/physically overwhelmed by the Pats D until that momentum went their way.

SuperBowl 39

: TD allowed with 1:50 left, 80 yards in 4 minutes, a double digit lead cut to 3 points.

Pats secured the victory with a Rodney Harrison INT.

SuperBowl 42

: TD allowed with 35 seconds left, 83 yards in 2 minutes

Defense had opportunities throughout the game to help set the offense up for more points but failed. The D should've had 3 INT's in the first quarter alone. And of course, that Pierre Woods moment. However, the replays showed he clearly had possession until that little sh!t Bradshaw came in and wrestled it away.

SuperBowl 46

: TD allowed with 58 seconds left, 88 yards in 3 minutes

I blame the offense more on that one because we all know they weren't built to make big stops on D. They were up 17-9 with Hernandez doing his "RainMaker" celebration in the endzone in the 3rd quarter. They had all the momentum up until that point. They then forget how to move the ball on offense.

SuperBowl 49:

First play of last drive, Lynch wide open for 30 yards. Seahawks come within 1 yard and Butler makes a historic play/Seahawks make a horrible decision to throw in traffic needing a yard.

That catch and run by Lynch made me want to walk out of the room. At least make them earn that sh!t. Then that Kearse catch. I am forever grateful of Butler saving the day. I thought the drought/curse was going to continue.

SuperBowl 51

: First play on last drive, Devonta Freeman wide open for 35 yards, no one near him. Falcons in easy field goal range, gift the ball back instead of doing anything but what they did. Three kneel downs or three runs win the game.

That was frustrating.

SuperBowl 52

: TD allowed with 2:21 left, 75 yards in 7 minutes

Wasn't a shock as they played poorly all game.

AFCCG 2006:

TD allowed with 1 minute left, 81 yard with in 2 minutes

They had 3rd stringers at LB. Manning saw this and their 3rd string TE was looking like an all pro. This was the "Eric Alexander" game.

AFCCG 2011:

Last drive Ravens march without any issue to the Pats 13 yard line, then drop a game winning pass/miss a 32 yard field goal.

Pats are really lucky they won that game. Lee Evans probably thinks about this daily.

2015 Week 16 Pats need a win to secure homefield vs Jets:

First drive in OT, TD allowed, 80 yards in 2 minutes

Had the Pats offense actually tried in the first half, this doesn't happen.

2017 Week 15 ''winner gets homefield in the playoffs game'':

Juju Smith Schuster makes a 69 yard run and the Steelers lose because their TE decides to make a stupid play instead of securing the catch/Ben throws a stupid Int with a secured field goal.

Eric Rowe was the first line of defense. His casual jog after Smith caught a damn drag route was infuriating. Then the rest of the D put on their ice skates and bumped into each other. They really should've lost that game.

 

[Observer]

Talent

It mostly just boils down to the talent, of both teams, and on both sides of the ball.

I was about to say the same thing. When the opponent is in desperation mode and playing at their peak effort, our individual talent has not been good enough to beat it. During other times, the defense’s consistency is sufficient to hold the opponent or force an error.

On the flip side, why are we able to get that last scoring drive? Talent again- specifically Brady’s talent.

 

[Ring 6]

The 8 AFCCG's you're referring to (actually 7, not counting Sterling Moore's heroic play in 2011) don't discount the defensive collapse in each of the 8 SB's. Not one, not two...EIGHT. That's what makes it a trend, not just in the final game of the season, but in the damn super bowl for crying out loud.

You didn’t limit your example to Super Bowls.
3 of them we STOPS.

To make it simple, perhaps a fairer comparison would be to look at all the SB's played so far, and see how many of those came down to a collapse on the final defensive drive?

Well that’s not what you originally posted and you keep exaggerating, calling stops collapses.

 

[Coolade2]

I'm not concerned. It's in the past.

 

[Mountain_Commando]

BB only cares about winning games. Giving up yards while the clock runs down, even if it leads to a score is better than allowing a quick touchdown pass, so they play soft. Sometimes it's because the D sucks and great offenses [often in Super Bowl] expose our weakness.

Not sure, with 5 Super Bowl victories, why people don't realize good offenses are going to gain yards, even score sometime. As long as they don't score enough to win in the time left, we win.

Many posters here want us to gamble like maniac while up multiple scores, blitzing and throwing bombs giving the green light to opponents long bombs, but BB don't play that.

Matt Ryan thought he'd close us off by scoring with a long pass instead of a running play and an easy field goal, instead he got sacked. The lack of 3 points [which would have made it a 3 possession game] doesn't show up in statistics, but I'm almost certain we don't win if he made the safe play. Win the game is all that counts.

Good post. So it seems that there is truth to BB going 'bend but don't break', particularly when holding on to a late lead. Chewed up nails notwithstanding, the success of this strategy is obviously apparent in the overall success of the Pats...so its a small price to pay I guess.