Belated Observations about SB 51 -- In General Edition

[TheoShmeo]

So in addition to being an obsessive and still ecstatic Pats fan, I work out every morning and still haven't quit using SB videos as my background. I'm sure that others, like me, have noticed or paid more attention to additional details or aspects of that game as time has gone on.

Some of the things I've noticed or that have noticed much more of late include:

1. Just how much time Tom had to operate on the OT scoring drive. He has a totally clean pocket on every throw.

2. As a related point, just how pinpoint the passes to Amendola, Hogan and Edelman were. Each one was thrown into a tiny window. The strikes to Hogan and Edelman, in particular, could have easily been picked off if they were even slightly off the mark.

3. Just how tough James White's winning TD run was. And how close it was to not being a TD. I'm guessing that White would not have scored under the exact same game conditions if so much was not on the line and that adrenaline and sheer desire played a huge role there.

4. The parallels to SB 49 are so many. The pass to Amendola on the last scoring drive when he was crossing the field right to left was so reminiscent of the pass to Gronk going in the same direction on the last Pats scoring drive of SB 49. That the team they came back on just kind of wore out down the stretch is another commonality. That Brady relied on a RB who was probably not expected to be as involved as a pass catcher is another. Sure, in Vereen's case, it was less of a surprise, but still, his totals for that game were unexpected. And then there's the opposing HC as confused cheerleader element. Last, of course, that the losing team arguably should have run the ball at a key time and did not. That last point is something I knew the night of the game, of course, but the sum total of the similarities did not dawn on me until later.

5. The Pats really should have been called for offensive PI on the Amendola two point conversion. And speaking of parallels to SB 49, that brings to mind the offensive PI on the swing pass to Vereen on the last scoring drive that was negated by an Amendola block down field before Vereen secured the ball.

6. The Pats are lucky that Ryan and Sanu were not called for offsetting face masks on the play that Long drew the holding call.

7. There's literally never a moment when the Pats appear to be losing it or overly frustrated on the sidelines.

8. Kraft has the exact same clenched jaw, steely eyed look at Goodell that he had on the podium in SB 49. A back to back screen shot or video would be fun.

9. Zolak makes the point that the throw to Julio Jones was awful. Not the throw itself but the decision to force it in to that small window. I'm not sure I agree, and it's impossible to criticize the QB's execution, but I have to admit that he was probably forcing it there a bit.

10. That Edelman drops the ball and re-catches it slays me every time. OK, amazing catch, amazing concentration, thank you Jules, but what was that little flip about?

11. I still root for Bennett to catch the ball in OT. He caught a similar ball when he was being interfered with for a TD in the regular season. As much as the White play was gorgeous, a Bennett catch there would have been epic. And would have avoided the potential Historic Brain Fart on the next play. And no, this is not an actual complaint. Read a little whimsy into this one please.

12. Thank whoever you thank that Beasley was on the wrong foot.

13. Some calls were missed but that was a pretty cleanly called game.

14. As a related point, that they called PI on the Bennett pass was clearly the right call and yet I still remain grateful that it was made. I could see them swallowing their whistles there -- "let em play!" -- and that being one of those signature, Ben Dreith like moments.

15. The 3rd and 10 throw to Hogan on the final scoring drive in regulation was in the air for a long time.

16. Mitchell was so good. But each time he slams down the ball after catching it and Aikman comments that he might not have been touched, I want to throttle him.

***

I'm sure there are more things that have occurred to me that I cannot now recall.

What aspects of that game have crystallized or come into greater focus as you've worn out your DVRs or You Tubes?

 

[Bergs]

On the Edelman catch, Periera says "it looks like the ball touched the ground, but he kept control"...the dude is seriously an idiot. It's possible a millimeter of it touched near Jule's pinky, but there certainly was no real indication it hit the ground. That guy would call a hailstorm as a sunny day.

The near-disaster play in the endzone was DPI. Bennett was shoved with the ball in the air. It wasn't hard contact, but it pretty clearly moved him out of the play.

Agreed on the double-facemask. Lucky they didn't call it.

If DeVonta Freeman gets ANYTHING on Hightower, that game is over. Ryan had a guy breaking loose for a massive play, quite possibly a TD.

I still can't believe we gave up no points after that on-side kick.

That Jones catch is amazing.

 

[steveluck7]

I don't think the throw to Jones was a bad decision. We applaud QBs all the time for "putting it where only their guy can make the play" and That's what Ryan did. Jones got seriously UP for that ball. Ryan saw Rowe and so he threw it knowing if he was going to miss, it was going to be high. No chance he was going to underthrow that ball

 

[pedro1918]

6. The Pats are lucky that Ryan and Sanu were not called for offsetting face masks on the play that Long drew the holding call.

I'm not an NFL rules expert, so I ask, wouldn't they have just "offset" and the holding would have stood? Would one penalty on the defense offset two penalties on the offense?

 

[Stitch01]

Everything offsets.

 

[CanturyWalls]

The little flip by Edelman was because in his initial grab, it was the palm of one hand and the back of the other hand...he had to flip the bad hand around.

 

[Average Reds]

I'm not an NFL rules expert, so I ask, wouldn't they have just "offset" and the holding would have stood? Would one penalty on the defense offset two penalties on the offense?

You can't offset individual penalties. You can only offset infractions against a team. So in the example you provided, the entire play would be scrubbed and they would do it again. (Even though one team had an "extra" penalty.)

Edit: Or, what Stitch said.

 

[Koufax]

This is not really new, but I'm not sure I've seen it mentioned specifically. Matt Ryan took a sack after the great Julio Jones catch, a sack that cost the Falcons a lot in terms of field position and field goal possibilities. Later in the game, Tom Brady was faced with very similar pressure. He got rid of the ball. Therein lies a major difference in the QBs, one that may have been pivotal.

 

[m0ckduck]

16. Mitchell was so good. But each time he slams down the ball after catching it and Aikman comments that he might not have been touched, I want to throttle him.

I'm still trying to make sense of that sequence. There was a point when I suspected that he didn't actually catch the ball, and that slamming the ball to the turf was a gesture of frustration. Watching it several more times, though, my conclusion is that he's lost track of the first down marker and is essentially reaching for the sticks here.

What aspects of that game have crystallized or come into greater focus as you've worn out your DVRs or You Tubes?

In the closing minute of regulation, when the Falcons were punting to the Patriots with almost no time left, Bill Barnwell claimed in an espn column that the Pats were trying to set up a fair catch free kick but that Bosher kicked the ball far enough to preclude this. How Barnwell would know this, or whether he was really serious, I have no idea. But can you imagine the collective bafflement around America if BB had sent Ghost out to try to place-kick the ball through the uprights from 65 yards away? And the absolute OUTRAGE that would have rained down had NE won the SB this way— on a obscure play that hasn't been successfully executed in an NFL game since the 1970s? I can't decide if this would have been the most awesome possible outcome, or if the annoyingness of everyone complaining about it forever would have worn me down.

 

[singaporesoxfan]

In the closing minute of regulation, when the Falcons were punting to the Patriots with almost no time left, Bill Barnwell claimed in an espn column that the Pats were trying to set up a fair catch free kick but that Bosher kicked the ball far enough to preclude this. How Barnwell would know this, or whether he was really serious, I have no idea. But can you imagine the collective bafflement around America if BB had sent Ghost out to try to place-kick the ball through the uprights from 65 yards away? And the absolute OUTRAGE that would have rained down had NE won the SB this way— on a obscure play that hasn't been successfully executed in an NFL game since the 1970s? I can't decide if this would have been the most awesome possible outcome, or if the annoyingness of everyone complaining about it forever would have worn me down.

Before the Super Bowl, BB was specifically asked about the fair catch free kick among other situations, and it was clear he had prepared for the possibility:

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/how-bill-belichick-prepares-patriots-players-for-once-in-a-career-type-of-plays-215307295.html

 

[Al Zarilla]

The near-disaster play in the endzone was DPI. Bennett was shoved with the ball in the air. It wasn't hard contact, but it pretty clearly moved him out of the play.

I thought Bennett shoved off more than the defensive guy, but that was from looking at a YouTube on my phone. Gives me a reason to look at it on my DVRed copy later.

 

[Byrdbrain]

You can also see BB telling Edelman to FC the punt if it is short in one or more of the videos I've seen.

 

[tims4wins]

The more I watch, the more I don't buy that the defense was worn down. I don't think that is giving Atlanta enough credit (or the Patriots for that matter - the narrative will be that the Pats winning was inevitable, but they had to earn everything). On the game tying drive, these things happened:
- 1st down from the 9: major pressure on Brady, big hit
- 3rd down from the 9: good pressure, Brady just makes a ridiculous throw to Hogan
- next play: Brady throws one over the middle that the defense gets a hand on and tips, could have ended up as a pick
- play after that: Edelman play

Now after the Edelman play, they barely did anything right defensively. The only good plays they made were the 3 yard loss on the swing pass to White, and the Beasley break up in the end zone. But even on the winning TD, Deion Jones made a great play, and they nearly made the stop. Atlanta's D didn't seem gassed to me.

 

[InstaFace]

In the closing minute of regulation, when the Falcons were punting to the Patriots with almost no time left, Bill Barnwell claimed in an espn column that the Pats were trying to set up a fair catch free kick but that Bosher kicked the ball far enough to preclude this. How Barnwell would know this, or whether he was really serious, I have no idea. But can you imagine the collective bafflement around America if BB had sent Ghost out to try to place-kick the ball through the uprights from 65 yards away? And the absolute OUTRAGE that would have rained down had NE won the SB this way— on a obscure play that hasn't been successfully executed in an NFL game since the 1970s? I can't decide if this would have been the most awesome possible outcome, or if the annoyingness of everyone complaining about it forever would have worn me down.

This would have been fucking awesome, probably even more awesome than the eligible-ineligible trick plays against Baltimore, and would have underscored further that BB is just in a different echelon in having his team prepared for all situations. The announcers would have explained WTF was going on to the TV audience, probably before the kick went up. I mean, the officials would have known what was up and clearly it would be permitted - I'm not sure how anyone could get outraged. It's a rule, it's in the rulebook, it's a type of play. It's not some obscure league conduct regulation like the camera-placement stuff, and frankly it's not even on the edge of the "spirit of the rules" like the eligible-ineligible plays were. It's just something nobody really considers because there are so few opportunities where it might even plausibly come into play, with today's punters and such.

I've been in awe of the sheer depth of BB's tactical toolkit since the intentional-safety play in 2003. A fair-catch-free-kick would have served to entertain (and, slightly, confound), but probably not outrage.

 

[Average Reds]

It's an obscure rule, but it's not like the eligible-ineligible plays. I've seen it used twice - unsuccessfully - and everyone in football (at the coaching level) knows the rule.

I was thinking about it as it unfolded and was disappointed that it wasn't attempted. Would have been epic.

 

[PayrodsFirstClutchHit]

The only thing better than the fair catch/free kick play to end the game would have been Lewis doing a drop kick from the 25 yard line on that last play from scrimmage before OT.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

The series of things that had to go right for the Patriots to win that game, starting around the fourth down conversion, is just amazing to contemplate more than 2 weeks later. I think as time goes by, people will remember the ending as just a Patriots steamrolling of a gassed defense. But the Atlanta defense had repeated chances to make plays. On the game tying drive, Brady threw a couple of balls that could have been picked. He had no choice, really -- downs were too precious. One of the balls that got tipped and could have been picked though looked to be the result of pretty aggressive defense on Edelman way beyond five yards. But even so, the Patriots were also lucky that there wasn't more discussion on Brady's pass to nowhere that landed in between three defenders about intentional grounding. I guess "vicinity" is interpreted broadly, but holy cow, a safety there would have obviously ended the game and even apart from grounding problems, the ball was like 10 feet from three different defenders.

The play where Mitchell falls down and still makes the catch, which also could have been a pick if he loses his footing getting back up, the Bennett play in the end zone, the defense on the Edelman catch. Even the comebacker to Hogan. Was that Brady making a perfect pass, or was it also kind of lucky too? It's Brady so you obviously give the benefit of the doubt, but we've all seen that play go for a pick. All it takes is a little bobble while the defender has his hands there.

Just so many different plays where a call or a tip or a bobble could have ended or effectively ended the game, and they all went right. It's a bit of a disappointment that the final play of the game couldn't have been an obvious touchdown like Bennett hanging on to the back shoulder catch, since the walk-off element of the game was a bit muted by Brady wanting to see if the play would be affirmed or not. But, in the end, the game kind of ended perfectly. The Patriots won by and inch on the final play, and by a cumulative confluence of many literal and figurative inches. Hightower getting there just in time to keep Ryan's arm from going an inch forward on that pass. Amendola getting less than half the ball over the goal line. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Ironically, the play that will probably be forever associated with the game, Edelman's catch, wasn't close to one of the most crucial in the final quarter. I mean, it was critical that it wasn't a pick, but even if he doesn't catch it, it's still just second and ten. (It's kind of like the Kearse catch in that regard. The Seahawks went for that big play, because it was first down and they were already at the 39 yard line with lots of time and two time outs.)

You can also see BB telling Edelman to FC the punt if it is short in one or more of the videos I've seen.

Yup. It also looks to me as though Edelman was a bit disappointed that he went for the fair catch after he looked down and realized he was at the 35. Though, a return TD was not going to be possible there because the coverage was pretty good. No way that you try from the 35, though, given that it was a tie game and the kick is returnable. 75 yards is too far for any kicker.

 

[TheoShmeo]

I meant to add when I wrote the opening post that Butler's coverage on Gabriel on the 3rd and plus 30 was incredibly tight and has been somewhat overlooked. Short of a Julio Jones type tight window acrobatic catch, there was no way for Ryan to complete that pass. And that was more than critical in that the Falcons were still in position to kick a FG if Ryan could have done something there. This says a lot about Butler that blanket coverage on one of the most important plays of the game is somewhat ignored. No doubt, part of it is because the Falcons' decision making, the Flowers sack and the Long holding penalty draw all sort of overshadow it. But damn, Malcom, nice work.

 

[InstaFace]

Malcolm (Butler, CB).

Malcom Brown, DE.

Don't tempt the mods into a new son-of-Buchholz word filter.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Yup. It also looks to me as though Edelman was a bit disappointed that he went for the fair catch after he looked down and realized he was at the 35. Though, a return TD was not going to be possible there because the coverage was pretty good. No way that you try from the 35, though, given that it was a tie game and the kick is returnable. 75 yards is too far for any kicker.

IIRC, Edelman was disappointed there because (following orders) he did the fair catch even though there were no Falcons within about 15 yards of him.

 

[tims4wins]

The series of things that had to go right for the Patriots to win that game, starting around the fourth down conversion, is just amazing to contemplate more than 2 weeks later. I think as time goes by, people will remember the ending as just a Patriots steamrolling of a gassed defense. But the Atlanta defense had repeated chances to make plays. On the game tying drive, Brady threw a couple of balls that could have been picked. He had no choice, really -- downs were too precious. One of the balls that got tipped and could have been picked though looked to be the result of pretty aggressive defense on Edelman way beyond five yards. But even so, the Patriots were also lucky that there wasn't more discussion on Brady's pass to nowhere that landed in between three defenders about intentional grounding. I guess "vicinity" is interpreted broadly, but holy cow, a safety there would have obviously ended the game and even apart from grounding problems, the ball was like 10 feet from three different defenders.

The play where Mitchell falls down and still makes the catch, which also could have been a pick if he loses his footing getting back up, the Bennett play in the end zone, the defense on the Edelman catch. Even the comebacker to Hogan. Was that Brady making a perfect pass, or was it also kind of lucky too? It's Brady so you obviously give the benefit of the doubt, but we've all seen that play go for a pick. All it takes is a little bobble while the defender has his hands there.

Just so many different plays where a call or a tip or a bobble could have ended or effectively ended the game, and they all went right. It's a bit of a disappointment that the final play of the game couldn't have been an obvious touchdown like Bennett hanging on to the back shoulder catch, since the walk-off element of the game was a bit muted by Brady wanting to see if the play would be affirmed or not. But, in the end, the game kind of ended perfectly. The Patriots won by and inch on the final play, and by a cumulative confluence of many literal and figurative inches. Hightower getting there just in time to keep Ryan's arm from going an inch forward on that pass. Amendola getting less than half the ball over the goal line. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Ironically, the play that will probably be forever associated with the game, Edelman's catch, wasn't close to one of the most crucial in the final quarter. I mean, it was critical that it wasn't a pick, but even if he doesn't catch it, it's still just second and ten. (It's kind of like the Kearse catch in that regard. The Seahawks went for that big play, because it was first down and they were already at the 39 yard line with lots of time and two time outs.)



Yup. It also looks to me as though Edelman was a bit disappointed that he went for the fair catch after he looked down and realized he was at the 35. Though, a return TD was not going to be possible there because the coverage was pretty good. No way that you try from the 35, though, given that it was a tie game and the kick is returnable. 75 yards is too far for any kicker.

Fully agree. It is what I was trying to get to in my post. There was NOTHING inevitable about the Pats win. Maybe - MAYBE once they hit OT, but like you said, the throw to Hogan could have been picked, the 2nd to last play could have been picked, and Atlanta was probably inches away from having forced 3rd and goal.

Interesting thought experiment - wonder if the Pats would have gone for a 4th down there if it got that far.

 

[tims4wins]

I meant to add when I wrote the opening post that Butler's coverage on Gabriel on the 3rd and plus 30 was incredibly tight and has been somewhat overlooked. Short of a Julio Jones type tight window acrobatic catch, there was no way for Ryan to complete that pass. And that was more than critical in that the Falcons were still in position to kick a FG if Ryan could have done something there. This says a lot about Butler that blanket coverage on one of the most important plays of the game is somewhat ignored. No doubt, part of it is because the Falcons' decision making, the Flowers sack and the Long holding penalty draw all sort of overshadow it. But damn, Malcom, nice work.

Butler had one of his worst games of the year IMO, but that was definitely excellent coverage.

The play I keep coming back to is the 3rd and 10 to Hogan from the 9, on the tying TD drive. There was some good pressure on Brady, that was a fantastic throw.

 

[Al Zarilla]

V

The more I watch, the more I don't buy that the defense was worn down. I don't think that is giving Atlanta enough credit (or the Patriots for that matter - the narrative will be that the Pats winning was inevitable, but they had to earn everything). On the game tying drive, these things happened:
- 1st down from the 9: major pressure on Brady, big hit
- 3rd down from the 9: good pressure, Brady just makes a ridiculous throw to Hogan
- next play: Brady throws one over the middle that the defense gets a hand on and tips, could have ended up as a pick
- play after that: Edelman play

Now after the Edelman play, they barely did anything right defensively. The only good plays they made were the 3 yard loss on the swing pass to White, and the Beasley break up in the end zone. But even on the winning TD, Deion Jones made a great play, and they nearly made the stop. Atlanta's D didn't seem gassed to me.

I don't know, up until Hightower's strip sack, Atlanta had all those hurries, knockdowns (of Brady) and sacks they kept showing us on the screen. I kept marveling how tough he is (although he always has been) and I was happy he kept getting up. If I were one to look at the TV through my fingers like mostly closed Venetian blinds, there were times in the game for that.

After the Hightower strip sack, except for a small number of plays, Tom could have played in shorts and a T-shirt. Was our O-line protecting that much better? Pass rushers have to be the first guys on the defense that get gassed. I think they were. Too bad the Fox camera guys didn't look for obvious signs, if they were there, like guys bending over with hands on knees.

 

[75cent bleacher seat]

3. Just how tough James White's winning TD run was. And how close it was to not being a TD. I'm guessing that White would not have scored under the exact same game conditions if so much was not on the line and that adrenaline and sheer desire played a huge role there.

I recall having this same thought...

 

[Hendu for Kutch]

What I noticed when watching the game, but was really solidified when watching all the Super Bowls replayed after on the NFL network, was that we'd seen this end of game situation before.

In SB36, the Rams had come storming back in the biggest comeback in Super Bowl history, from down 14 points in the 4th quarter to a tie game. They had 100% of the momentum. When they kicked off to the Pats, I thought it was obvious the Pats needed to go for it, because if that game went to OT and the Rams won the toss, it was over.

The '01 Patriots and the '16 Falcons both took over with the ball well inside their 20, about a minute left and no timeouts to work with.

Brady, with half the weapons and about 5% of the experience, did what Matt Ryan could not do. Drive down the field to set up a FG and avoid OT, making sure his demoralized, run down defense didn't have to do something it was obvious they could no longer do.

 

[Stitch01]

This would have been fucking awesome, probably even more awesome than the eligible-ineligible trick plays against Baltimore, and would have underscored further that BB is just in a different echelon in having his team prepared for all situations. The announcers would have explained WTF was going on to the TV audience, probably before the kick went up. I mean, the officials would have known what was up and clearly it would be permitted - I'm not sure how anyone could get outraged. It's a rule, it's in the rulebook, it's a type of play. It's not some obscure league conduct regulation like the camera-placement stuff, and frankly it's not even on the edge of the "spirit of the rules" like the eligible-ineligible plays were. It's just something nobody really considers because there are so few opportunities where it might even plausibly come into play, with today's punters and such.

I've been in awe of the sheer depth of BB's tactical toolkit since the intentional-safety play in 2003. A fair-catch-free-kick would have served to entertain (and, slightly, confound), but probably not outrage.

Trivia note: That was actually not even BB's first intentional safety against Denver. BB took an intentional safety against Denver in his first win as Patriot head coach in 2000. Didnt work out quite as well tactically, ensuing kick was returned to the house.

Interesting thought experiment - wonder if the Pats would have gone for a 4th down there if it got that far.

From the 2? They are going for it 100% of the time.


What I noticed when watching the game, but was really solidified when watching all the Super Bowls replayed after on the NFL network, was that we'd seen this end of game situation before.

In SB36, the Rams had come storming back in the biggest comeback in Super Bowl history, from down 14 points in the 4th quarter to a tie game. They had 100% of the momentum. When they kicked off to the Pats, I thought it was obvious the Pats needed to go for it, because if that game went to OT and the Rams won the toss, it was over.

The '01 Patriots and the '16 Falcons both took over with the ball well inside their 20, about a minute left and no timeouts to work with.

Brady, with half the weapons and about 5% of the experience, did what Matt Ryan could not do. Drive down the field to set up a FG and avoid OT, making sure his demoralized, run down defense didn't have to do something it was obvious they could no longer do.

Brady had 30 more seconds and six more yards to start, both of which were pretty important. JR Redmond is also the MVP of that drive, he makes an incredible play on 2nd and 10 from the 30 to both get the 1st down and get out of bounds on 2nd down. BB has said if he doesn't do both they go to OT.

That said both the pass to Hooper and the spike were horrendous game management decisions by Ryan.

 

[tims4wins]

V

I don't know, up until Hightower's strip sack, Atlanta had all those hurries, knockdowns (of Brady) and sacks they kept showing us on the screen. I kept marveling how tough he is (although he always has been) and I was happy he kept getting up. If I were one to look at the TV through my fingers like mostly closed Venetian blinds, there were times in the game for that.

After the Hightower strip sack, except for a small number of plays, Tom could have played in shorts and a T-shirt. Was our O-line protecting that much better? Pass rushers have to be the first guys on the defense that get gassed. I think they were. Too bad the Fox camera guys didn't look for obvious signs, if they were there, like guys bending over with hands on knees.

The very first play after the Hightower play was a sack. Then the Pats were in 3rd and 12, when Brady hit Mitchell and he put the ball on the ground. They did score somewhat easily after that.

Then I mentioned all of those plays on the tying drive. The drive itself lasted about 8 or 9 plays, the Falcons D played really well on at least 5 of them.

The OT drive as I mentioned, they didn't really get to Brady, but they did play fairly well in the secondary.

 

[SoxJox]

This is not really new, but I'm not sure I've seen it mentioned specifically. Matt Ryan took a sack after the great Julio Jones catch, a sack that cost the Falcons a lot in terms of field position and field goal possibilities. Later in the game, Tom Brady was faced with very similar pressure. He got rid of the ball. Therein lies a major difference in the QBs, one that may have been pivotal.

Not to nit pick, but sometimes it's not quite that easy or simple. If you have the defense busting up the middle without any impedence and are immediately upon the QB, a) he's still in the pocket, and b) may wind up throwing it nowhere near any receiver with a "realistic chance of completion", as the rule requires to avoid intentional grounding. Net result is still a sack with at least a 10 yard loss.

Now, the two specific plays you mention don't match the hypothetical I state here. I just wanted to point out the age-old "just get rid of it" isn't an end-all-be-all. There are unavoidable sacks. Not that I'm saying Ryan's was one of them.

 

[tims4wins]

What I noticed when watching the game, but was really solidified when watching all the Super Bowls replayed after on the NFL network, was that we'd seen this end of game situation before.

In SB36, the Rams had come storming back in the biggest comeback in Super Bowl history, from down 14 points in the 4th quarter to a tie game. They had 100% of the momentum. When they kicked off to the Pats, I thought it was obvious the Pats needed to go for it, because if that game went to OT and the Rams won the toss, it was over.

The '01 Patriots and the '16 Falcons both took over with the ball well inside their 20, about a minute left and no timeouts to work with.

Brady, with half the weapons and about 5% of the experience, did what Matt Ryan could not do. Drive down the field to set up a FG and avoid OT, making sure his demoralized, run down defense didn't have to do something it was obvious they could no longer do.

Yes, I mentioned this in the OT rules thread. The 2001 Pats had a little more time - 1:21 vs. 0:57 IIRC - but were on their own 16 or 17 (vs. the 25 for the Falcons), and obviously had a first year QB in Brady and like 10% of the skill position talent. And Brady led them to a win, whereas Ryan threw an out of bounds pick. Imagine if Harmon came down with that in bounds, the Pats completed 1-2 passes, and Ghost won with a FG. Ryan's last 3 possessions would have been strip sack, awful sequence to blow a clinching FG, and game losing pick. The narrative of him choking would have been one of the main storylines.

 

[DeadlySplitter]

BB said after the game if the punt was close to midfield, he would have free kicked - it was on the table.

 

[edmunddantes]

Yes, I mentioned this in the OT rules thread. The 2001 Pats had a little more time - 1:21 vs. 0:57 IIRC - but were on their own 16 or 17 (vs. the 25 for the Falcons), and obviously had a first year QB in Brady and like 10% of the skill position talent. And Brady led them to a win, whereas Ryan threw an out of bounds pick. Imagine if Harmon came down with that in bounds, the Pats completed 1-2 passes, and Ghost won with a FG. Ryan's last 3 possessions would have been strip sack, awful sequence to blow a clinching FG, and game losing pick. The narrative of him choking would have been one of the main storylines.

And a vastly different ruleset and emphazied rules that hadn't tipped the game so far in the favor of the offense yet.

 

[tims4wins]

And a vastly different ruleset and emphazied rules that hadn't tipped the game so far in the favor of the offense yet.

Correct, another good point.

 

[Al Zarilla]

The very first play after the Hightower play was a sack. Then the Pats were in 3rd and 12, when Brady hit Mitchell and he put the ball on the ground. They did score somewhat easily after that.

Then I mentioned all of those plays on the tying drive. The drive itself lasted about 8 or 9 plays, the Falcons D played really well on at least 5 of them.

The OT drive as I mentioned, they didn't really get to Brady, but they did play fairly well in the secondary.

To me, either they were gassed, primarily the guys trying to get to Tom, or they gave up. Probably some combination. We did read about BB driving the player's real hard both in Foxborough the last week they were there, and in Houston, so maybe it was in part superior conditioning. Whatever it was, don't ever give up on this team.

 

[tims4wins]

To me, either they were gassed, primarily the guys trying to get to Tom, or they gave up. Probably some combination. We did read about BB driving the player's real hard both in Foxborough the last week they were there, and in Houston, so maybe it was in part superior conditioning. Whatever it was, don't ever give up on this team.

Again, I saw no evidence of them being gassed until basically post-Edelman play. And even after that the secondary showed no signs of it, just maybe the DL.

 

[Al Zarilla]

Again, I saw no evidence of them being gassed until basically post-Edelman play. And even after that the secondary showed no signs of it, just maybe the DL.

That's all it would take (the DL). We always say give Tom enough time and he will kill you. Well, a lot of quarterbacks, but Tom will kill you more.

 

[tims4wins]

That's all it would take (the DL). We always say give Tom enough time and he will kill you. Well, a lot of quarterbacks, but Tom will kill you more.

Sure. I will give you that after the Edelman play, they didn't really come close to Brady over the last dozen or so plays of the game.

 

[reggiecleveland]

Honestly this was like the 04 Yankees. Once the superior team got back on its feet, they just got outplayed. Other than Kevin Brown, who choked on the Yankees? The Sox just played better. Th Pats O got the blocking schemes they wanted and off to the races.

 

[tims4wins]

Honestly this was like the 04 Yankees. Once the superior team got back on its feet, they just got outplayed. Other than Kevin Brown, who choked on the Yankees? The Sox just played better. Th Pats O got the blocking schemes they wanted and off to the races.

If by which you mean a tiny million breaks went the Pats way, any of which going in the other direction might have resulted in a different outcome, then I agree. Because the same was true of games 4-6.

 

[jmcc5400]

The very first play after the Hightower play was a sack.

And that was the third Atlanta sack in the previous four plays from scrimmage. Nothing felt remotely inevitable to me until the Edelman catch. Sure it would have been second and ten, but I felt that the Edelman catch coupled with the hurry-up 25 yard completion to Amendola that followed (a sensational throw and catch, btw) were backbreakers.

With respect to the free kick off of a fair catch, you can see Belichick conferring with the refs on the sideline right before the punt and am pretty sure he says "fair catch." I think he was getting the refs ready for that play if the punt was short enough. (Incidentally, would that free kick be a timed play?)

 

[InstaFace]

If by which you mean a tiny million breaks went the Pats way, any of which going in the other direction might have resulted in a different outcome, then I agree. Because the same was true of games 4-6.

Well, I don't agree that Game 6 was as close as it felt at the time (Tony Clark batting as the pennant-winning run be damned). The 8th inning was bizarre, and it felt like the world was ending until Joe West called A-Rod out for interference, but we were still at 81% to win after Jeter singled in the 2nd run. Unless you think they were close to actually calling the Bellhorn HR as being in-play, which I doubt.

But your overall point stands. Certainly things were on a knife-edge in games 4 and 5.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Trivia note: That was actually not even BB's first intentional safety against Denver. BB took an intentional safety against Denver in his first win as Patriot head coach in 2000. Didnt work out quite as well tactically, ensuing kick was returned to the house.

Interesting thought experiment - wonder if the Pats would have gone for a 4th down there if it got that far.

From the 2? They are going for it 100% of the time.


What I noticed when watching the game, but was really solidified when watching all the Super Bowls replayed after on the NFL network, was that we'd seen this end of game situation before.

In SB36, the Rams had come storming back in the biggest comeback in Super Bowl history, from down 14 points in the 4th quarter to a tie game. They had 100% of the momentum. When they kicked off to the Pats, I thought it was obvious the Pats needed to go for it, because if that game went to OT and the Rams won the toss, it was over.

The '01 Patriots and the '16 Falcons both took over with the ball well inside their 20, about a minute left and no timeouts to work with.

Brady, with half the weapons and about 5% of the experience, did what Matt Ryan could not do. Drive down the field to set up a FG and avoid OT, making sure his demoralized, run down defense didn't have to do something it was obvious they could no longer do.

Brady had 30 more seconds and six more yards to start, both of which were pretty important. JR Redmond is also the MVP of that drive, he makes an incredible play on 2nd and 10 from the 30 to both get the 1st down and get out of bounds on 2nd down. BB has said if he doesn't do both they go to OT.

That said both the pass to Hooper and the spike were horrendous game management decisions by Ryan.

It's going to seem like I'm just playing contrarian, but I disagree with both points.

First, if it had gotten to fourth down in overtime, I'm not sure they would have gone for it. I probably would have preferred a FG. By then, they would have shown all 3 of their best must-convert short yardage goal line plays. Maybe they had a fourth one in the books, just in case. But it would have to be really good at that point. Take the field goal, try to get a stop on D. Once they hit the 35 yard line, they no longer go for it on 4th down.

Second, there was a crucial difference between what the Patriots faced at the end of 36 and what the Falcons faced at the end of 51. The Patriots had two time outs left. The Rams had no time outs left. That meant that in 36, after the first dump off to Redmond, the Patriots were in position that if they ever got to third down, they could simply end the game without the Rams being able to do anything about it. The only downside to the Patriots of going for it was turnover. For the Falcons, a negative play, penalty, or an incompletion puts punting the ball back to the Patriots with time to do something about it on the table.

Here's another thought experiment. Suppose instead of the short passes to start the drive, the Falcons had gone for a longer sideline play to start the drive and it was incomplete. Then they have a short pass in bounds. So, it's 3d and 6, with, say, 40 seconds on the clock and the clock is running. Make it the same play the Falcons ran to Hooper. Do the Patriots call time out? At that point, my guess is that the Falcons take their time getting to the line of scrimmage if the Patriots don't call time out and just let the clock run down. But if the Patriots call time out, it's a pretty big risk. You're betting you can stop them on third down, and if you do, you have at least 30 seconds or so left and one time out to try to get a winning field goal. But if you don't stop them, now it's first down and Ryan has more time to work with. Would have been interesting.

I think the Falcons played it just right at first. The 12 yard completion was the right way to start the drive. Long enough that the Patriots won't use a time out, short enough that you can get back to the line pretty fast. The spike was kind of dumb, but in the end, they got what you sort of hope you'll get in that series when you start on the 11. They took a shot downfield near the sideline with enough time for one more play to get in FG range if they had converted it, but you burn enough time that even if you end up having to punt you've neutralized the Patriots' time outs and you don't give them enough time to do anything if you can execute a decent punt.

I love, though, that even though the punt was a little too long to set up the possibility of a free kick field goal, the Patriots still had a trick play to try to win in the bag.

 

[Stitch01]

FG on 4th and goal from the 2 to start OT is super gross. TD ends the game if they convert. FG cant end the game. If they don't get the TD the Falcons are backed up on the 2 yard line. If the defense makes a stop pretty quickly on the next series they can kick a FG to win the game very easily. They give the defense a huge margin of error against allowing the game ending TD. Theres a small chances they can win the game with a safety. FG gives the Falcons field position and lets them play optimally and take four downs the whole way down the field if needed. Given leverage, kicking from the two yard line on 4th down would have been among the very worst decisions in NFL history.

If you want to see, assign a reasonable probability for

--Chances of the Patriots winning up 3 with Atlanta getting the ball in overtime (Atlanta scored on 52.8% of their drives during the season and scored TD's on 33% of their drives, average 40 yards a drive, and averaged a starting field position of their own 28 yard line)

---Chances of the Patriots winning tied in overtime with Atlanta having the ball at their own 2 yard line.

Then calculate the break even conversion rate needed to justify going for it (its going to be super low)

http://archive.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2012/11/fourth-downs-in-new-overtime-first.html

Somewhat dated, but basically this advocates going for it in OT on 4th and goal from the 6 or closer as a basic strategy, which seems reasonable to me.


I agree the Falcons and Rams situations are different, but the Patriots are basically never calling timeout there unless the Falcons get themselves in real trouble. Like maybe if its third and long the Patriots use a TO, but maybe not even then. The Falcons had the best offense in the league all year and a pretty bad defense that had been on the field for a million plays and given up FG, TD, TD their last three drives. Think they're better off taking their shot at scoring a FG there even with the small risk of the Pats coming back down and scoring if they fail, Falcons are underdogs in OT, live betting odds were like Pats -180 once they won the coin toss in OT Just try and maximize the chances of kicking a FG at that point.

Even if they're playing conservative, throwing a four yard pass that eats up a bunch of time and then spiking the ball is real dumb game management.

 

[tims4wins]

And that was the third Atlanta sack in the previous four plays from scrimmage. Nothing felt remotely inevitable to me until the Edelman catch. Sure it would have been second and ten, but I felt that the Edelman catch coupled with the hurry-up 25 yard completion to Amendola that followed (a sensational throw and catch, btw) were backbreakers.

Exactly. Not until the 2 point conversion to tie it did I really think they could actually win.

 

[Stitch01]

From Barnwell

By the time the fourth quarter rolled around, Atlanta's pass rush was gassed. During the fourth quarter and overtime, its pressure rate on Brady fell from 44.7 percent down to 20.0 percent, including an O-fer on Brady's six pass attempts during the extra period. Unsurprisingly, once the pass pressure went away, Brady picked the Falcons apart. He finished the day with a 64.1 passer rating under duress and a 107.0 mark when avoiding pressure.

Seems like a reasonable (but not definite) conclusion that the Falcons pass rush was getting increasingly tired during the 4th quarter.

 

[jmcc5400]

Atlanta's real screw-up on the last drive was before it even started, when they ran the kick out and burned 10% of the clock at the expense of more than 10 yards of field position. That goes to some of the other comments about Quinn's preparedness versus Belichick's. A drive starting at the 25 would have induced a hell of a lot more anxiety.

 

[jmcc5400]

Exactly. Not until the 2 point conversion to tie it did I really think they could actually win.

That's right. Even after the Edemlan/Amendola plays, I only thought a touchdown was inevitable. The two point conversion was a terrifying coin flip that I transferred all my worry to at that point.

 

[Stitch01]

Same here. Probably to a somewhat irrational extent, but.....win expectancy chart shifted from 21.2% when White scored to 53% after the two point conversion, so that play comfortably increased the chances of the Pats winning more than all the plays leading up to that.

 

[jmcc5400]

By the time the fourth quarter rolled around, Atlanta's pass rush was gassed. During the fourth quarter and overtime, its pressure rate on Brady fell from 44.7 percent down to 20.0 percent, including an O-fer on Brady's six pass attempts during the extra period. Unsurprisingly, once the pass pressure went away, Brady picked the Falcons apart. He finished the day with a 64.1 passer rating under duress and a 107.0 mark when avoiding pressure.

That's post hoc revisionism by Barnwell. Atlanta's defense was not gassed "by the time the fourth quarter rolled around." (I would stipulate that they were in overtime). Here's the 4th quarter log: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017020500/2016/POST22/patriots@falcons#menu=gameinfo|contentId:0ap3000000784377&tab=analyze&analyze=playbyplay

Brady was sacked three times in his first eleven dropbacks in the 4th quarter. Atlanta wasn't yielding yards in huge chunks. Lots of quick developing plays to White. On the game tying drive, it was 3rd and 10 from the 9 (with a lot of pressure on the first down throw) and the throw and catch of the game on 3rd and 10 with 3:04 left. Are they gassed yet? It didn't start getting "easy," in my opinion until the Edelman catch, after which the Atlanta D did kind of fall apart - much like the Pats D post-Tyree.

 

[tims4wins]

Exactly. I have stated that like 3 separate times this thread. After the Edelman catch it got easy. Before then nothing was easy. And even when it got "easy" it was due to 3 ridiculous throws by Brady to Amendola, Hogan, and Edelman - a couple of which were not easy catches. And then the D played well on the goal line.

 

[BuellMiller]

Honestly this was like the 04 Yankees. Once the superior team got back on its feet, they just got outplayed. Other than Kevin Brown, who choked on the Yankees? The Sox just played better. Th Pats O got the blocking schemes they wanted and off to the races.

Well, there was a certain player who went 1-15 in Games 4*-7 (*after a 3rd inning homer), and had two huge plays at the plate in the 8th innings of Games 5 (K with 1 out and runner at 3rd) and 6 (GB-out, P unassisted, runner stays at 1st). But I'm sure he must have been talked about a few times around here since then.
I think your point mainly stands, although, it's not like the Patriots had a star player go out in the 1st half, get a unorthodox surgical procedure and come back in the 2nd half. (and if i missed that, hopefully in a dozen years, he doesn't become a complete loon).