Using the Lions to Bait the Dolphins

[QB12]

Rappaport reports that Brady hardly, if ever, audibled out of any of the blitzes by the Lions, and if he had, the ball would have been out much sooner.

Anyone else think that BB was using the Lions game to 'bait' the Dolphins into attempting a similar blitz strategy against the Patriots?

 

[Sicilian]

I'm always tempted to give BB and the team credit for stuff like this, but even if we went vanilla on purpose (which I think we always do in preseason), we still got whooped in the one-on-one matchups. Also, Brady skipping several passes short of his receivers likely wasn't to throw off the Dolphins corners.

 

[billdog3484]

are you (or Rappaport) suggesting BB purposely allowed Brady to take a beating?

 

[rojo8401]

You never know with BB but I would find it very hard to believe he would put Brady in such physical jeopardy all game for a feint or slight-of-hand.

That would be fairly reckless and the epitome of arrogance. This whole 'vanilla game-planning' stuff goes out the window when it comes to protecting your QB during ANY game, preseason or otherwise.

 

[QB12]

Do you think BB and his former assistant, Jim Schwartz, talked about how the game would be played, before gametime? Blitzing by Lions, no cheap shots on Brady, no audibles by Pats, no blitzing by Pats, zone coverage on the back end, test the slot corner and test McCourty. Given the relationship between the 2 of them, this does not require a huge leap of logic.

Reportedly, the reason why New Orleans blitzed the heck out of San Francisco the first preseason game was b/c Sean Payton was upset that Jim Harbaugh didn't call Payton before the game to discuss how it would be played.

 

[QB12]

You never know with BB but I would find it very hard to believe he would put Brady in such physical jeopardy all game for a feint or slight-of-hand. . . .

Maybe he wants to show Brady that he needs to step into his throws even in the face of pressure, and to 'stop seeing ghosts' where there are none . . .

 

[PatsDeb]

I think BB went vanilla on purpose on both O and D, but he still expected the team to execute (as did the rest of us) and it did not go as planned. Maybe the Lions are that much improved, or maybe BB showed himself and his team that they are going to have to rely on game planning and match-up scheming much more than they thought. Brady still should not have been on the ground as much as he was with the starters in there, whether they were vanilla or chocolate. The D I will give a pass as they were missing a bunch of people and were obviously trying a different scheme from the week before, but the lack of pass rush and open middle of the field were still a big bummer.

 

[NinjaZX6R]

are you (or Rappaport) suggesting BB purposely allowed Brady to take a beating?

Brady did say that he wanted to get used to getting hit...

 

[Mogamedogz]

Anyone else think that BB was using the Lions game to 'bait' the Dolphins into attempting a similar blitz strategy against the Patriots?

Yea, that's exactly what he was doing. Great observation.

 

[QB12]

The game is chess bro, not checkers.

 

[ScottieC]

are you (or Rappaport) suggesting BB purposely allowed Brady to take a beating?

I think the O-Line failed miserably. But I do believe that Bill saw what he needed to see out of Games 1 and 2 and toned down all aspects of the Patriots Game in Detroit.

I think he went vanilla purposely on Defense and Offense as not to give the league any tape on what his actual plan will be starting the season.

All that said, I do believe that the O-Line was caught off guard by the Lions - and the Lions played what they thought was they Pre Season Super Bowl.

 

[Major **********]

The game is chess bro, not checkers.

And you can't play chess without a King.

 

[ensoul]

are you (or Rappaport) suggesting BB purposely allowed Brady to take a beating?

I was about to post this. Is that the "Keeping letting him me until they get tired" strategy?

While I am not overly concerned as it was a preseason game it is still something to keep an eye on considering Brady took a beating at times last year as well.

 

[QB12]

Touche' Major.

I continue to maintain that the Patriots failure (or refusal?) to adjust to the Lions' blitz packages was too obvious to not be by design.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

I probably look at things more simply than most, because I'm not an Xs and Os guy, so perhaps I'm just missing details the rest of you are seeing.

What I saw was our team get beat in the way that it has gotten beaten in some big games -- beat the O line and not let Brady get comfortable; get the defense back on the field as much as possible.

Whether it was "plain vanilla" or not, I don't know. I suspect that for a hard blitzing team, we'll have ways to beat them better. Still, that game left me with a very pronounced sense of unease. I'm all for wishful thinking, but there is no part of me that thinks the design was intended to lull other teams. Do I think the game was good for the team in sense of helping understand some weaknesses? Yes. But the rope-a-dope theory always seems to come out after we take a beating, and I think it's just a way to make ourselves feel better. The part that makes me feel better is that the game didn't count.

 

[PittPatriot]

Rappaport reports that Brady hardly, if ever, audibled out of any of the blitzes by the Lions, and if he had, the ball would have been out much sooner.

Anyone else think that BB was using the Lions game to 'bait' the Dolphins into attempting a similar blitz strategy against the Patriots?

Is Rappaport kissing up to the Pats to make up for his tweeting huring Mrs. Kraft's funeral services? Whatever. This sounds like the Manny Ramirez worshippers who think he passed on pitches the first time around so he could punish a pitcher for when it really counted. Wow.
If this is true then, here are some other tasty gems:

1. The Pollard hit was set up by BB to get a 2nd round pick for Matt Cassel
2. We blew away the 2006 AFCCG so the Colts and Manning could win a SB and lose their hunger.
3. We went 18-1 so that it would be even more awesome to go undefeated after the 18 game season.

 

[tombonneau]

I think BB went vanilla on purpose on both O and D, but he still expected the team to execute (as did the rest of us) and it did not go as planned.

This is what I think happened. I think he saw enough of the new stuff and didn't want to bother putting anything else on film for the early regular season.

Unfortuantely, this perceived insouciant attitude toward game 3 might have had a trickle down effect to the players who just sort of went through the motions while the Lions treated this like a playoff game. That's a recipe for an asskicking on the NFL level.

 

[borg]

Is Rappaport kissing up to the Pats to make up for his tweeting huring Mrs. Kraft's funeral services? Whatever. This sounds like the Manny Ramirez worshippers who think he passed on pitches the first time around so he could punish a pitcher for when it really counted. Wow.
If this is true then, here are some other tasty gems:

1. The Pollard hit was set up by BB to get a 2nd round pick for Matt Cassel
2. We blew away the 2006 AFCCG so the Colts and Manning could win a SB and lose their hunger.
3. We went 18-1 so that it would be even more awesome to go undefeated after the 18 game season.

The Manny scenario was true. He was quoted as saying...."I no hit...then I hit. Then I cash grande check." Case closed

 

[Metaphors]

Benchmarks for a successful preseason:

1) Stay healthy
2) Only put plays on tape that you want opponents to see
3a) Shake off rust (for vets)
3b) Get acclimated to the speed of the NFL (for rooks)
4) Execute, execute, execute

Getting Brady knocked around a little (3a) doesn't override the prime directive. While I do think the gameplan wasn't optimal (#2), it was just a fairly weak effort by the offense. 2nd-and-20, 2nd-and-24, 2nd-and-25...those were 3 of the first 4 drives. Major penalties killed them and took Brady's shorter options off the table. Add in a 3rd and 1 at the Lions 14 that wasn't converted (paging Mr. Ridley) and the Pats had self-inflicted wounds stop them the whole first half.

There is definitely substance to the notion of holding back a lot in the preseason. I also believe that you show things to influence early opponents. Couple of examples that I saw:

- Welker running deep routes. Too many teams bracket Welker with CB and LB/S squatting on shallow routes. Running two go routes (first one should have been a TD also) should make teams think twice about leaving the deep middle exposed against Welker.

- Mayo moving everywhere. Teams got too comfortable last year by playing off of Mayo...confident in the notion that they knew where he was and what he was going to do. Accounting for Mayo as a rusher (even when he doesn't blitz) leaves less attention to the outside guys.

 

[Rob0729]

I think Belichick went into the game with a certain agenda to try things on both sides of the ball which may or may not have been condusive to winning, but I don't think Belichick had some master scheme to play possum to trick the Dolphins to think the Pats were seriously flawed.

The Pats came into the game with a vanilla nickel base defense with no substitutions and an offensive gameplan to work the deep part of the field with little or non adjustments as the game went on. But I think he did that because he wanted to evaluate players and certain things.

The Lions clearly treated it like a statement game and a dress rehersal. I don't know if the Patriots did. That said, Belichick wouldn't risk seriously injuring Brady to make the Dolphins and the rest of the league think the Pats offense is seriously flawed in some way.

Whatever Belichick was trying to evaluate, the team failed miserably at it. Probably why Sanders was one of the first cuts.