New England Patriots Thread Mod Warning Post #253

j8wk2feszrnpao · 14-01-2018 01:52AM

Devin McCourty really p1$$es me off at times. Got a huge contract, but is so late to the ball too often imo. Butler gave up the TD, but starts with a play where he is very late, and then a nothing tackle for another 10yrds after the catch.

Earleybird · 14-01-2018 02:11AM

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Devin McCourty really p1$$es me off at times. Got a huge contract, but is so late to the ball too often imo. Butler gave up the TD, but starts with a play where he is very late, and then a nothing tackle for another 10yrds after the catch.

Ah come on, Butler covered almost perfectly, needed a perfect throw and one handed catch to beat him

j8wk2feszrnpao · 14-01-2018 02:17AM

Earleybird wrote: »

Ah come on, Butler covered almost perfectly, needed a perfect throw and one handed catch to beat him

Got beat on the stop and go route from what I saw. Great catch, thought the pass could have made it easier.
But maybe being too harsh, only saw it once and one replay; but it’ll go down against Butler.

Earleybird · 14-01-2018 02:19AM

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Got beat on the stop and go route from what I saw. Great catch, thought the pass could have made it easier.
But maybe being too harsh, only saw it once and one replay; but it’ll go down against Butler.

Clinical driving in last 5 mins though, that was a thing of beauty

PhuckHugh · 14-01-2018 01:29PM

Lasted until the Bolden TD and hit the hay...

Sluggish start but once the O upped the pace and the D kept Mariota in the pocket, we obliterated them. Couple of home town calls but didn't affect the outcome. White, Hogan and particularly Flowers back, made a huge difference. Hogan needed a game and Burkhead looks to be on track for next week.

D took care of Henry fairly handy enough... All in all, Bill won the battle.

Gronk shut Bayrd up.

eagle eye · 14-01-2018 10:12PM

The D was very impressive last night. If they keep up that level we are going back to back again.

Shedite27 · 15-01-2018 10:51AM

Is the kickoff time for the AFC and NFL championship games rotated every second year? We always seem to be the late game the past few years.

Earleybird · 15-01-2018 10:52AM

Shedite27 wrote: »

Is the kickoff time for the AFC and NFL championship games rotated every second year? We always seem to be the late game the past few years.

We're the early game this year.

BizzyC · 15-01-2018 11:50AM

Impressive display I thought, was particularly encouraged by how well our D stood up.
Looking on to Jacksonville I can see the gameplan being similar, take Fournette away and force Bortles to beat us with his arm.
Their D is going to be a big challenge though, that front gets a lot of pressure and their secondary could force Tom to hold onto the ball longer that he likes to.

ELM327 · 15-01-2018 12:02PM

Shocking as it would have sounded 3-5 years ago that JAX would even be near the conference championship, this will be a good game.
I'm encouraged by our great showing on offense and defense last weekend.

paulie21 · 15-01-2018 12:03PM

Shedite27 wrote: »

Is the kickoff time for the AFC and NFL championship games rotated every second year? We always seem to be the late game the past few years.

Yep it changes around every year. AFC will be the home team for the Superbowl so if we make it we'd have choice of colour and get home dressing room which would be interesting against the Vikings if they make it

bruschi · 15-01-2018 12:28PM

paulie21 wrote: »

Yep it changes around every year. AFC will be the home team for the Superbowl so if we make it we'd have choice of colour and get home dressing room which would be interesting against the Vikings if they make it

http://www.startribune.com/even-with-nfc-as-the-super-bowl-road-team-vikings-would-be-afforded-all-of-the-advantages-of-home/467938353/

seems the AFC team wont get the home locker or practice facilities and they will let the Vikings keep what they are familiar with if they get there.

ArmaniJeanss · 15-01-2018 02:05PM

That no team has got to a Superbowl in their own stadium is slightly surprising.
You'd expect it to have happened once every 16 years in a 32 team NFL, and once every 13 years back when it was 26 teams.
You'd also expect some instances of teams putting more resources (salary, picks) at it the year they were hosting thus increasing the chances of a home host.

Was there maybe some rule in the early days that the host wasn't picked until the finalists were known? Or did they have a Wembley type stadium for finals that wasn't actually anyones home venue?
Or maybe its just a slight statistical anomaly.

Shedite27 · 15-01-2018 05:04PM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

That no team has got to a Superbowl in their own stadium is slightly surprising.
You'd expect it to have happened once every 16 years in a 32 team NFL, and once every 13 years back when it was 26 teams.
You'd also expect some instances of teams putting more resources (salary, picks) at it the year they were hosting thus increasing the chances of a home host.

Was there maybe some rule in the early days that the host wasn't picked until the finalists were known? Or did they have a Wembley type stadium for finals that wasn't actually anyones home venue?
Or maybe its just a slight statistical anomaly.

There's a weird relationship (intentional or not) between how good a team is and how many times they've hosted the superbowls.

Tampa, New Orleans, San Diego, Arizona Detroit and Houston have held 25 of 50 superbowls between them, but only made 6 of 100 appearances.

New England, Pittsburgh, Dallas, Denver, San Fran, Green Bay, New York and Washington have only held 4 of 50 between them, but have made 54 of 100 appearances.

Miami are the only reasonably successful team (5 appearances) who've held a lot (10 appearances)

Minnesota were picked in May 2014, coming off a 5-10-1season

BonnieSituation · 15-01-2018 06:17PM

Shedite27 wrote: »

There's a weird relationship (intentional or not) between how good a team is and how many times they've hosted the superbowls.

Tampa, New Orleans, San Diego, Arizona Detroit and Houston have held 25 of 50 superbowls between them, but only made 6 of 100 appearances.

New England, Pittsburgh, Dallas, Denver, San Fran, Green Bay, New York and Washington have only held 4 of 50 between them, but have made 54 of 100 appearances.

Miami are the only reasonably successful team (5 appearances) who've held a lot (10 appearances)

Minnesota were picked in May 2014, coming off a 5-10-1season

All to do with the weather. The game in Metlife when we got trashed by the Hawks was the first proper cold weather game. Normally at that latitude they're played in doors; see Lucas Oil and BoA Stadia.

It'll be along time til they repeat that experiment I would say.

---

In Pats related news, I really hop that your D was more to do with a blunt Titans O. Or may God have mercy on us all.

Hazys · 15-01-2018 09:19PM

Anybody else gleeful that the Steelers crashed out after all the constant sh1te that they we're taking about the Pats all season (all last couple of seasons)?

Even their players are fed up with it: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/01/14/david-decastro-on-teams-pregame-obsession-with-patriots-its-embarrassing-and-stupid/

Tomlin is the biggest culprit of constantly talking ****e about the Pats and I'm glad his demeanor followed onto to the players and the Jags whooped them.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 15-01-2018 10:40PM

Hazys wrote: »

Anybody else gleeful that the Steelers crashed out after all the constant sh1te that they we're taking about the Pats all season (all last couple of seasons)?

Even their players are fed up with it: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/01/14/david-decastro-on-teams-pregame-obsession-with-patriots-its-embarrassing-and-stupid/

Tomlin is the biggest culprit of constantly talking ****e about the Pats and I'm glad his demeanor followed onto to the players and the Jags whooped them.

Steelers on paper represented a far bigger threat, but their coach sucks.
He loves to go for it on 4th down, and that onside kick, was just screaming "look at the big balls on me" rather than real management.

Earleybird · 15-01-2018 10:48PM

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Steelers on paper represented a far bigger threat, but their coach sucks.
He loves to go for it on 4th down, and that onside kick, was just screaming "look at the big balls on me" rather than real management.

The onside kick was the right call, the execution was the only problem. I guarantee Bill would have done the same. Gives you 2 shots at it with nothing on the clock. Hindsight is great, the extra few yards got them the winning FG but I still think it was the percentage move.

Hazys · 15-01-2018 10:48PM

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Steelers on paper represented a far bigger threat, but their coach sucks.
He loves to go for it on 4th down, and that onside kick, was just screaming "look at the big balls on me" rather than real management.

He made some awful decisions at the end of the game. Going for the onside kick and taking TOs after the 2 min warning.

TOss Sweep · 15-01-2018 10:48PM

Steelers fans will disagree with but I think Tomlin's time in Pittsburgh should be done. He came into the NFL and inherited one of the best defenses in the league and rode his luck with 1 Superbowl win and another appearance which they could have won.

His problem is his decision making and like Rex Ryan his nonsense comments and fueling the fire and not putting his players in their place when they say stupid things. The Steelers lack discipline and that starts at the top.

But Steelers fans will disagree and lay blame on Haley. Any head coach with that amount of talent who fails to deliver time after time should be sacked. Your coaching is stale and you had your chance now move on.

TOss Sweep · 15-01-2018 10:49PM

Earleybird wrote: »

The onside kick was the right call, the execution was the only problem. I guarantee Bill would have done the same. Gives you 2 shots at it with nothing on the clock. Hindsight is great, the extra few yards got them the winning FG but I still think it was the percentage move.

I disagree. With the amount of time on the clock there was plenty of time for their defense to make a stop and their offense to get the ball back and have one more shot. I also wouldn't say confidently that is what Bill would have done. To add I would nearly go as far and say Bill would have given them the ball back and put faith in his defense knowing they force the 3 and out, Brady will have more than enough time to win the game.

Guffy · 15-01-2018 10:57PM

Earleybird wrote: »

The onside kick was the right call, the execution was the only problem. I guarantee Bill would have done the same. Gives you 2 shots at it with nothing on the clock. Hindsight is great, the extra few yards got them the winning FG but I still think it was the percentage move.

I dont think it was personally, nothing to do with hindsight. I was dumbfounded by the decision during the game. Neither was letting the clock roll to 2 minutes.

Earleybird · 15-01-2018 11:01PM

Guffy wrote: »

I dont think it was personally, nothing to do with hindsight. I was dumbfounded by the decision during the game. Neither was letting the clock roll to 2 minutes.

There were some bizarre calls towards the end I agree, twice turning back inside when they should have stepped out was further madness but I'd have gone onside. If I'd known it was over a decade since their last onside recovery I might have backed the D instead...

Shedite27 · 16-01-2018 10:00AM

Earleybird wrote: »

The onside kick was the right call, the execution was the only problem. I guarantee Bill would have done the same. Gives you 2 shots at it with nothing on the clock. Hindsight is great, the extra few yards got them the winning FG but I still think it was the percentage move.

Totally agree.

If you booted it long, you get a touchback, 80 yards to go, with 2 timeouts and 2 minute warning at 2:18. Force a 3 and out...
you get the ball back at about your 30 with 1:50 left.
But one first down ices the game.

If you onside kick and lose, they get the ball at your 45, again with 2 timeouts and a 2 minute warning at 2:18. Force a 3 and out....
you get the ball back at about your 10-20 with 1:50 left.
But one first down ices the game.

So for the chances of an extra 10-20 yards to drive, you get the chance to compete at a onside kick.

Again, the execution was the problem.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 16-01-2018 10:51AM

Earleybird wrote: »

The onside kick was the right call, the execution was the only problem. I guarantee Bill would have done the same. Gives you 2 shots at it with nothing on the clock. Hindsight is great, the extra few yards got them the winning FG but I still think it was the percentage move.

2007 was the last time they recovered an onside kick. Given that recovering an on side kick is a low percentage, and they appears to be poor at it (based on their record and then the two attempts we saw were awful), he played it very poorly. It was an all or nothing call with 2 timeouts (+2 min warning) and 2:18 on the clock.

Again, it was the big balls call for himself rather than the correct play for the team. Much like his talk about playing the Pats again.

TOss Sweep · 16-01-2018 09:40PM

Shedite27 wrote: »

Totally agree.

If you booted it long, you get a touchback, 80 yards to go, with 2 timeouts and 2 minute warning at 2:18. Force a 3 and out...
you get the ball back at about your 30 with 1:50 left.
But one first down ices the game.

If you onside kick and lose, they get the ball at your 45, again with 2 timeouts and a 2 minute warning at 2:18. Force a 3 and out....
you get the ball back at about your 10-20 with 1:50 left.
But one first down ices the game.

So for the chances of an extra 10-20 yards to drive, you get the chance to compete at a onside kick.

Again, the execution was the problem.

Thing is of the 2 scenarios you have a much higher % of kicking it and stopping them and getting the ball back than you will ever have with an onside kick. There is a website that mathematically broke it down and you have a 26% chance of getting the ball back from an onside kick.

With Punting and plenty of time on the clock you control more of your own destiny and the odds are going to much greater of getting the ball back with time on the clock.

Onside kicks should be last resort in the dying seconds. 2 mins left is far too much time to be risking on a 26% chance of succeeding.

Hazys · 16-01-2018 09:47PM

Shedite27 wrote: »

Totally agree.

If you booted it long, you get a touchback, 80 yards to go, with 2 timeouts and 2 minute warning at 2:18. Force a 3 and out...
you get the ball back at about your 30 with 1:50 left.
But one first down ices the game.

If you onside kick and lose, they get the ball at your 45, again with 2 timeouts and a 2 minute warning at 2:18. Force a 3 and out....
you get the ball back at about your 10-20 with 1:50 left.
But one first down ices the game.

So for the chances of an extra 10-20 yards to drive, you get the chance to compete at a onside kick.

Again, the execution was the problem.

But the Jags went 3 and out and kicked a 45 yard FG, basically ending the game

ELM327 · 17-01-2018 07:50AM

Hazys wrote: »

But the Jags went 3 and out and kicked a 45 yard FG, basically ending the game

Yes but they could have gone 3 and out 20-30 yards further away from the endzone out of field goal range, punted, then PIT would have had another posession.

I agree, the onside kick is rarely the correct option unless the game is lost already

TOss Sweep · 17-01-2018 08:07AM

ELM327 wrote: »

Yes but they could have gone 3 and out 20-30 yards further away from the endzone out of field goal range, punted, then PIT would have had another posession.

I agree, the onside kick is rarely the correct option unless the game is lost already

Well not really. The Steelers onside kick came with a penalty for not going far enough which is common in failed onside kicks.

The Jags got the ball on the Steelers 41 so on 1st down would have made it a long kick at 58 yards. But the Jags ground out 9 yds and the Steelers messed up their Timeouts and the Jags kicked a 45 yards field goal from Steelers 27.

People forget Kick Offs happen from your own 35 yard line so an onside gives the return team the ball on your own 45 yard line if the kick makes it. That leaves most kickers within 10-15 yards of field goal range.

With a 26% success rate of recovery you are almost guaranteeing the game is over if the other team recover the ball. Unless there is less than a minute on the clock kick it long and let your defense do their job.

ELM327 · 17-01-2018 08:09AM

So are you saying the onside was the correct decision statistically?
Because if I'm a coach, especially of a team with a defensive history and mindset like PIT , I'd like to think my defense has a higher statistical chance of stopping the Jags than 26%!

New England Patriots Thread Mod Warning Post #253

Comments