The Patriots played better defensively in the 4th quarter than it seemed

[EddardSnow67]

I've seen a lot of people in the media and here state that the Patriots couldn't stop the Chiefs in the 4th quarter and so, had the Chiefs won the toss, they would have easily gone down the field and scored.

In reality - and trust me, I felt at the time that we couldn't stop them, either - the Patriots played well defensively in the quarter. Once you look at the drive logs, you can see what I'm saying.

Firstly, about 60 of the Chiefs around 140 yards came on penalties.

They had 5 total first downs, 3 on penalties.

They ran 16 total plays and only 6 of them actually gained yardage that wasn't penalty yardage.

Obviously there was the fumble recovery that was negated due to, again, a penalty.

Their longest play - the 38 yard pass to Watkins to set up their last touchdown - was an illegal pick play that wasn't called.

Patrick Mahomes was 4 for 14 including incompletions negated due to penalties.

I don't see - after rewatching the game and checking the numbers - how it's reasonable to conclude that the Patriots couldn't stop the Chiefs in the 4th quarter. Oh, they also forced a 3 and out on one of the Chiefs possessions.

The Patriots dominated the game and in reality - not because I'm a homer, as I'm extremely objective - the Chiefs were fortunate to be in the game. Especially considering the two turnovers by the Patriots.

 

[Gumby]

I've seen a lot of people in the media and here state that the Patriots couldn't stop the Chiefs in. . .

I don't see - after rewatching the game and checking the numbers - how it's reasonable to conclude that the Patriots couldn't stop the Chiefs in the 4th quarter. Oh, they also forced a 3 and out on one of the Chiefs possessions.

The Patriots dominated the game and in reality - not because I'm a homer, as I'm extremely objective - the Chiefs were fortunate to be in the game. Especially considering the two turnovers by the Patriots.

You just told us about all the 14 on 11 help the chiefs got, yet you can't figure out how it is reasonable to conclude they wouldn't get the same DPI, pick play entitlements if they got the ball first?????

 

[Ring 6]

I've seen a lot of people in the media and here state that the Patriots couldn't stop the Chiefs in the 4th quarter and so, had the Chiefs won the toss, they would have easily gone down the field and scored.

In reality - and trust me, I felt at the time that we couldn't stop them, either - the Patriots played well defensively in the quarter. Once you look at the drive logs, you can see what I'm saying.

Firstly, about 60 of the Chiefs around 140 yards came on penalties.

They had 5 total first downs, 3 on penalties.

They ran 16 total plays and only 6 of them actually gained yardage that wasn't penalty yardage.

Obviously there was the fumble recovery that was negated due to, again, a penalty.

Their longest play - the 38 yard pass to Watkins to set up their last touchdown - was an illegal pick play that wasn't called.

Patrick Mahomes was 4 for 14 including incompletions negated due to penalties.

I don't see - after rewatching the game and checking the numbers - how it's reasonable to conclude that the Patriots couldn't stop the Chiefs in the 4th quarter. Oh, they also forced a 3 and out on one of the Chiefs possessions.

The Patriots dominated the game and in reality - not because I'm a homer, as I'm extremely objective - the Chiefs were fortunate to be in the game. Especially considering the two turnovers by the Patriots.

Committing penalties and giving up TDs is not stopping the opponent.
Allowing a FG when they have the ball on the -31 with 31 secionds left to force it instead of winning in regulation isn’t stoppping the opponent.

 

[EddardSnow67]

Committing penalties and giving up TDs is not stopping the opponent.
Allowing a FG when they have the ball on the -31 with 31 secionds left to force it instead of winning in regulation isn’t stoppping the opponent.

Well, you're right, of course, that they *didn't* stop them, but my point was that they played well enough to stop them more than they did.

 

[EddardSnow67]

You just told us about all the 14 on 11 help the chiefs got, yet you can't figure out how it is reasonable to conclude they wouldn't get the same DPI, pick play entitlements if they got the ball first?????

This is a good point, but I'm saying that there was nothing about how the Patriots played that suggested they had no chance to stop them.

 

[Ring 6]

Well, you're right, of course, that they *didn't* stop them, but my point was that they played well enough to stop them more than they did.

No. Committing penalties isn’t playing well.

 

[EddardSnow67]

No. Committing penalties isn’t playing well.

Again, I'm referring to their chances to stop KC in overtime and how their play in the fourth quarter reflected them. I don't really know why you're focusing on something that doesn't change my point. Although I could have titled the thread differently, I guess.

 

[Ring 6]

Again, I'm referring to their chances to stop KC in overtime and how their play in the fourth quarter reflected them. I don't really know why you're focusing on something that doesn't change my point. Although I could have titled the thread differently, I guess.

The way they played defense in the 4th quarter was to let the chiefs walk down the field by allowing plays and committing penalties.
How does that equal a high chance of a stop?

 

[EddardSnow67]

The way they played defense in the 4th quarter was to let the chiefs walk down the forms by allowing plays and committing penalties.
How does that equal a high chance of a stop?

Nowhere did I say it was a high chance of a stop. I simply said they had more than the zero chance a lot of people have assumed.

 

[oldrover]

I don't really know why you're focusing on something that doesn't change my point.

You must be new here.

 

[Ring 6]

Again, I'm referring to their chances to stop KC in overtime and how their play in the fourth quarter reflected them. I don't really know why you're focusing on something that doesn't change my point. Although I could have titled the thread differently, I guess.

Their last 3 drives.
2 plays 23 yards 10 seconds TD
5 plays 68 yards 1:36 TD
4 plays 48 yards 31 seconds FG because time ran out

The plays
Incomplete
23 yard td

Incomplete
Penalty resulting in first down
Incomplete
Penalty resulting in first down
Incomplete
38 yards
Td


(With 31 seconds left)
21 yards
27 yards
Incomplete
FG sends to OT

In 3 drives they ran 11 plays gained 139 yards scored 17 points in 2:17 and never faced a 3rd down.

 

[Ring 6]

Nowhere did I say it was a high chance of a stop. I simply said they had more than the zero chance a lot of people have assumed.

So you created this argument and tried to excuse allowing points to say the chances of stopping them were just a bit more than zero?

We were struggling mightily on defense. My point wasn’t rrally about the % odds but your commentary that implied committing penalties isn’t bad defense.

 

[EddardSnow67]

Their last 3 drives.
2 plays 23 yards 10 seconds TD
5 plays 68 yards 1:36 TD
4 plays 48 yards 31 seconds FG because time ran out

The plays
Incomplete
23 yard td

Incomplete
Penalty resulting in first down
Incomplete
Penalty resulting in first down
Incomplete
38 yards
Td


(With 31 seconds left)
21 yards
27 yards
Incomplete
FG sends to OT

In 3 drives they ran 11 plays gained 139 yards scored 17 points in 2:17 and never faced a 3rd down.

There was also a three and out in there, plus I already laid this out play by play in another thread, so this is nothing new to me. It still doesn't change my point, which is that the Patriots had a better than zero chance to stop KC based on how they played in the 4th quarter.

You seem to view penalties as reflective of bad play regardless of their validity as penalties, so I really can't change your mind about that and I'm not going to try.

But again, people have opined that the Patriots didn't have a chance to stop them in overtime. I think their play in the 4th quarter suggests they did have a chance. How good that chance was exactly isn't something I've even attempted to estimate, because that's clearly impossible.

 

[EddardSnow67]

So you created this argument and tried to excuse allowing points to say the chances of stopping them were just a bit more than zero?

We were struggling mightily on defense. My point wasn’t rrally about the % odds but your commentary that implied committing penalties isn’t bad defense.

Ok, I said I wasn't going to do this, but here we go. If a defensive player pressures a quarterback into an incompletion but roughs him, does that or does it not bode well for the chances of pressuring the QB in the near future?

Was it the penalty that caused the incompletion? How likely is that player to commit that penalty again after having already been called for it once?

Also, the chance really was never zero, that's just what some people have been saying. The point is that I feel the chances were better than they may have seemed.

If you disagree, so be it. That's how it goes. But I felt people might be interested in my perspective. Maybe I was being arrogant to think that, I don't know.

 

[tobias funke]

How many points did they score in the quarter? We're done here.

 

[maust]

I don't really know why you're focusing on something that doesn't change my point.

 

[maust]

Ok, I said I wasn't going to do this, but here we go...

 

[EddardSnow67]

How many points did they score in the quarter? We're done here.

Hey, you have a right to disagree.

 

[jah]

There was also a three and out in there, plus I already laid this out play by play in another thread, so this is nothing new to me. It still doesn't change my point, which is that the Patriots had a better than zero chance to stop KC based on how they played in the 4th quarter.

You seem to view penalties as reflective of bad play regardless of their validity as penalties, so I really can't change your mind about that and I'm not going to try.

But again, people have opined that the Patriots didn't have a chance to stop them in overtime. I think their play in the 4th quarter suggests they did have a chance. How good that chance was exactly isn't something I've even attempted to estimate, because that's clearly impossible.

J. C. Jackson was getting called for things that KC wasn't, but they still happened and were technically illegal. He's an undrafted rookie and he got picked on by one of the best offenses in football. It's gonna happen.

 

[EddardSnow67]

J. C. Jackson was getting called for things that KC wasn't, but they still happened and were technically illegal. He's an undrafted rookie and he got picked on by one of the best offenses in football. It's gonna happen.

Maybe, but to me, he had good coverage and got called for a penalty that could have gone either way. The point is that he didn't bust a coverage, he wasn't hopelessly beaten.