In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:
In response to zbellino's comment:
In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:
In response to zbellino's comment:
In response to RockScully's comment:
Do you ever, ever, ever admit to being wrong even when proven wrong? "Serious question".
I don't know? How do you feel about the 40 passes from Brady? That's the formula for a loss right?
I would argue the Pats did a very good job of putting themselves in position to possibly give up that lead by continuing to throw low percentage throws in the 4th quarter with a huge lead.
Frankly I am surprised more people have not complained about it today but then I have to remember that I am not sure anyone on here coaches and you watch a game very differently as a fan than as a coach.
No one will convince me it was good game or clock managment by the Pats in the late 3rd Qtr and most of 4th Qtr.
People always want to rail about the defense giving up a lead late but I would argue that through the process of a game that just a single rush attempt on every given series, especially when already rushing the ball well AND having a sizable lead would easily wipe out 3 or 4 more minutes off the clock at a minimum.
To be honest I was pissed that Brady threw that ball to Vereen down the left sideline for the TD. It worked. It's great in hindsite but that instantaneous TD was not needed in that situation after the turnover on downs with an already good lead of 30-13. It could just as easily have been intercepted as well given it's a low percentage throw and not Brady's strongest attribute in his great skill set.
What WAS needed was chewing up clock and giving your defense a rest after just leaving the field on the turnover on downs and keeping your kickoff coverage unit off the field as long as possible while having a rough night.
There was 13 minutes on the clock still. That game took forever because the Pats never burned much clock and gave the Texans more time of posession. Football is a complimentary game and I personally don't think they did a good job with the sizable lead in that game.
The Pats could have more sytematically tried to work their way down from the 33 to a TD while working clock, continuing to tire and bludgon the Texans D, rest their own D, Maintaining more time of posession, bring the clock ever closer to a time when Texans would need to consider to start using Time outs, prolonging the Texans an opportunity to get their successful KO receiving team on the field, etc, etc.
Even if the drive failed they would have done most of those things I mentioned as well as still be in FG range with a most likely lead stretching FG that takes it to a 3 possession game with much less time on the clock.
Anything can happen with lots of time on the clock no matter how big the lead but when the time runs out game over and nothing bad can happen when you already have the lead with zero time left.
As it turned out the Pats kicked off and the Texans ran it back to the NE 37 and quickly got the TD right back and still no time barely run off the clock.
Sorry but the Pats would have indeed been better off running the ball just a lil bit more with the big lead starting earlier in the game.
Sometimes you win as a coach because your team is just that much better or you made more good decisions than bad but that doesn't mean you made the best decisions in every situation.
BB knows way more than me obviously but he also has not had the headset on many times when the Offense has the ball and didn't during this scenario but I would be willing to bet when he reevaluates the entire thing as it played out he'll have a few questions for McD.
Don't agree at all.
You are talking about trying to sit on a 30 point score with ten minutes to go.
Well, no tricky bounces ... Texas ended up dropping 28 points on the defense.
Now crunch those numbers ... if one bad unlucky bounce happens, an onside kick works, Texas could have easily won it with NE sitting on that lead.
That throw, not the highest, but certainly not a 50/50 proposition was a mismatch that NE spotted and exploited. It put the game a-w-a-y. Over.
Maybe you missed it but BB plays aggressive and he always has. He literally said, just last week ... you don't win games by sitting in foxholes.
Moreover, his thinking was justified. Texas almost got the score they needed, and grinding 2 off the clock was about the only thing slowing the game down there guarantees. And grinding 2 off the clock does less to guarantee a win than a FG or TD.
It's basic win probability.
The next two drives, then they started running because it was over.
I knew you would go to the fox hole thing. Clearly you took from my post what you wanted and didn't read it since I never said anything about not going for a TD and just trying to sit on anything, least of all a lead.
Also no one said to run exclusivley at any point in time or become ultra conservative. We'll agree to disagree since it was obviously lost on you or not written well by me. I am not a great writer, apologies.
Never said to not take advantage of Brady, your best player. I said to do it in a way that was better game and clock management. Being agressive does not mean exclusively taking the path of quickest results or lower probability of success.
I'll have to assume you are insinuating you need to do one or the other. Try and score with bombs and lower percentage throws down the field to consider it NOT sitting in a fox hole? ...or try and mix in some runs with higher percentage throws moving the chains on your way to trying to score a touch down, while purposely using a bunch of clock (sitting in the fox hole as you put it).
I'll take the clock rolling away, my defense off the field, their defense taking more abuse, etc etc WHILE I am trying to score the TD. You're in control of the game, starting already in field goal range. It's a luxury to be able to work clock as you extend your lead from 2 possession to three, even if it ended in a FG and not TD. In that situation I will easily live with the result of 3 points instead of 7 if 4 minutes or more were also taken off the clock in the process.
The average person thinks game or clock management comes down to the final possession of two of a game. When it's predicatable. Let me assure you it doesn't. It especially doesn't when you have a comfortable lead. Coaches know better.
Another great response. I like Z,actually I like all Pats fans on this site. Yet when Z is disagreed with he tends to ignore the crux of the discussion,then exaggerate one aspect to make it seem like the other person is being unreasonable.
Nobody wants to be a run 1st run all the time offense. We want our OC and coaching staff to help Tom Brady by utilizing all aspects of the offense, and yes running the ball/throwing to the rbs to keep our d off the field and wear down the opposing D.
We have done that this season. We lead the LG in rushing tds, and are 2nd in rushing atts only to run 1st Seattle. Every "football guy" I respect on radio, Internet and TV says this is the best/most efficient Pats offense or perhaps any offense ever. It is due to the commitment to the running game and no longer beingprimarily a downfield pass finesse offense.
Yes Rid is better then BJGE but the FACT is that we only run at .2 ypc more then we did under OB last year yet we are 2nd in The LEAGUE IN RUSHING ATTS. Actually Seattle and Washington were 1st and 3rd but they averaged 5 ypc as a team and 4.8 ypc respectively. A lot better then us as we got 4.2 ypc, but we were COMMITED TO THE RUN UNDER MCD.
Anyway I won't let these guys be buzz kills. As you said we will agree to disagree. Our offense is way better then last year and our rebuilt defense is coming along nicely. This is the best chance we have to win a SB since 2004 as our D is not too old, and our offense will run the football, which has more benefits then guys here are apparently aware of.