Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by PP2, Feb 4, 2019.
The reason that the Patriots offense sucked so bad was because Patriots have no deep threat. Wade could bring the safeties in without worrying about the deep part of the field. Thanks Gordon; you made the ring that much harder.
the INT was clearly not tipped, you must be thinking of something else
there was a pass to gronk to the left side that he didn't catch that was tipped, only one i recall having been tipped
the INT was a horrible throw in every way
Going 5 wide from the 22 player set....nice
His troubles left us in a tough spot but who knows if we get the bye without him. He still needs to get clean but other than that alls well that ends well.
Was there only one red zone play in the whole game? That is incredible
The INT was a misread. He read man and they played zone - the man came from inside. Brady realized it as the ball left his hand.
How huge were those runs in the last 3 minutes, a thing of beauty to watch.
My brother is a Giants and Cornhuskers fan - he was thrilled for Burkhead
I still cant get my head wrapped around 9 super bowls and 6 wins and hes not done, wouldn't be surprised if TB gets to a couple more and really blows my mind.
Every red zone play went for a TD!
Gronk had three guys covering him on that 29 yard pass to the 2 yard line. They executed when they had too.
if we get to 7, it honestly wouldn't blow my mind, ive come to expect amazing things from this duo
if they hit 8...or somehow more...i wouldn't even know how to comprehend it...
it doesn't get tipped, but the ball comes out wobbly, which might have made it look like it was tipped:
I fell asleep
One thing I noticed on the three receptions using the same play on the TD drive. On all three plays a receiver goes in motion, but a different receiver each time. In the last one, Edelman goes from the left to the right of Brady. Two defenders follow before one realizes that no one is guarding Gronk, and he changes course. Gronk gets a free release and makes his big play.
Same play but with window dressing causing confusion.
Not so much Xs and Os observations but more strategy.
I've watched the game three times now. I believe that Belichick/Flores leaned heavily on the following:
1. Let McVay win the mental chess match, in terms of creating plays to get open, but making sure they are slow to develop in order to pressure Goff. It seemed there were often plays available, but Goff does not do well with pressure. My thought was that last year they made a big error in how they defended the Eagles. They seemed to have the Xs and Os covered decently. The problem was in doing so, they weren't exotic and risk-taking enough. Foles beat them by throwing to guys who were covered but having tons of space and time to place the passes on a dime; part of that was the Eagles o-line and a weaker pass rush, but some of it may have been strategy. I think the Front 7 was the bigger problem in SB52. They made sure this time around they would concede not accounting for every vulnerability if it meant pressuring Goff...hence the zone defense that caused that extra time for Goff to read and react.
2. I read several articles before the game which noted Robert Woods is the best receiver on the Rams. We all know Cooks. He's fast (but not really shifty), he's productive, yet there's always something about him that doesn't sit right. He just doesn't beat you on his own. A $17M receiver should have made that endzone catch (not the McCourty breakup - that was on Goff.) It seemed they dared Cooks to be the guy, in a way they would never do to someone like Julio Jones or Alshon Jeffrey. Cooks got a lot of yardage towards the end of the game nearing garbage time. His small frame makes him very containable, and he isn't physical enough to take over a game. My immediate thought was that Belichick thought lots of targets for Cooks was the best poison to pick. Almost like the Thurman Thomas strategy. And this is why I wanted the Rams over the Saints - because Michael Thomas is a world destroyer that Cooks is not.
3. On that first pick that Brady threw, Edelman was wide open. Brady really played poorly/was confused for much of the game, but he came through as always. But if came with an A game, that was the 38-10 Super Bowl waiting to happen. They were running over the Rams on that first drive and seemed to lose some confidence. But whatever, about time Brady gets one without his A game. I think of it like this: Pats scored 46 points in the last two Super Bowls (23 ppg). 1-1 is what to expect. The defense lost last year's SB and won this year's SB.
Sorry if this is not Xs/Os enough for this thread...curious if anyone has any comments on points 1 and 2 from game film.
I don't know that the Pats were trying to get Goff to throw to slower-developing routes. I think he just prefers the vertical routes. They were bracketing his preferred receiver (Woods) and preferred routes in the middle and leaving the other guys alone, forcing him to throw outside the numbers, much like we've seen teams do to Brady when he lacked a strong No. 1 receiver. Goff didn't take to those outside reads readily and therefore held the ball long enough to get hit or through into coverage.
Take a look at the very first clip from Baldinger on p. 2 of this thread. He harps on how long Goff holds the ball (although that's mostly because he pauses the tape for 5 seconds), but what is apparent to me is that he is looking toward his favorite receiver on a preferred route, even when the play was schemed and executed perfectly to open up the flat route. Goff simply wasn't up for the challenge. I, too, am glad we didn't get the Saints and was happily seeing, hearing, and speaking no evil after the non-call in the NFC Championship game.
Brady also didn't play well. Every time he threw to Hogan, Edelman was wide open. He was relying on pre-snap reads to beat a pass rush that, while it only hit him three times, hurried him several more. Unfortunately for him, the pre-snap reads were well disguised, and he didn't always know where to go with the ball. As ironic as it is to throw this out there on this board, I think that if he simply adopted Edelman as a binky in the first half, they would have won going away.
Not sure about what was run when in man. I know they rolled safety help to Woods and left Gilmore on Cooks, but they did more schematically than that.
In Zone, they played a similar quarters scheme to what they have run historically, where the corners match-up outside and often play press techniques, focusing safety support on the seams and leaving JMcCourty and Gilmore generally alone in the outside zones. Split safeties is a match-up version of quarters coverage, but the specific distinctions are beyond me, so that's much the same in my book. It wasn't a traditional Cover 2 or Tampa 2, as it looked like one of the safeties was responsible for the deep middle, not the middle linebacker.
Hi Fred, and welcome back. Your negativity was sorely missed. However, this thread is for X's and O's. No hot takes, please.
Separate names with a comma.