Patriots @ Arizona: Week 1
- Thread starter NortheasternPJ
- Start date
2/3/02 +14 vs Rams - Won 20-17
1/27/02 +10 @ Steelers - Won 24-17
10/21/01 +10 @Colts - Won 38-17
9/30/01 +13 vs Colts - Won 44-13
Tonight they closed +9
1/27/02 +10 @ Steelers - Won 24-17
10/21/01 +10 @Colts - Won 38-17
9/30/01 +13 vs Colts - Won 44-13
Tonight they closed +9
The radio guys must be pissed.
Jimmy played well enough to put their stupid Bill mismanaged the the preseason hot take to bed. But he did not play well enough to feed the QB controversy hot take. It's a not win situation for those guys.
I bet they go hard after Blount
Jimmy played well enough to put their stupid Bill mismanaged the the preseason hot take to bed. But he did not play well enough to feed the QB controversy hot take. It's a not win situation for those guys.
I bet they go hard after Blount
I still think the refs screwed the pooch in that 2001 regular season Rams game by calling a fumble on the goal line when Antowain Smith's forward motion had been stopped for an eternity. But us losing probably helped the Rams be a little overconfident in the SB.
I'm not sure Brady does much more in that game than Jimmy did. True they protected him a bit but he played very, very well and made some very tough passes. Even the fumble was more a function of the protection collapsing so quickly than a mistake on Jimmy's part.
He did great. He did what he absolutely had to do -- ball security, avoid giving up short fields -- plus he made plays. And the reserves on that o-line fought their guts out. I don't know how any fan could be happier.
Which, yeah, will piss off the two idiots with the radio mic.
Which, yeah, will piss off the two idiots with the radio mic.
It must really suck when you are forced to sell your soul for ratings. He can't really believe some of the things he's saying but has to run with this schtick to rile things up. Why didn't SoSH radio ever become a thing?
He regularly does what conventional wisdom says. And sometimes he makes mistakes when deviating from that. Or is anyone here going to defend going for it on 4th and 13 against the Giants?
I agree.
I wasn't as impressed with the protection as people seem to be on here - Fleming looked like a turnstyle for a good chunk of the game, and Karras got pulled for Mason because he looked terrible. There were some periods where it seemed like JG had time, but others where he was getting hit almost as soon as he completed the dropback.
I also think people are forgetting that the Cardinals may be the best team in the NFC (they're atleast one of the top 3)
This is sort of an odd argument to me. BB isn't contrarian for the sake of being contrarian and the argument for calling TO isn't that every other coach would have called TO
I love this quote unconditionally from a guy who had the Media on him for not being engaged.
Bennett embraced the role.
“I was just trying to whoop their ass all day,” Bennett told Jeff Howe. “I just like to be the guy where when you see him you’re like, ‘Damn, here he comes again.’”
Bennett embraced the role.
“I was just trying to whoop their ass all day,” Bennett told Jeff Howe. “I just like to be the guy where when you see him you’re like, ‘Damn, here he comes again.’”
The only point I would raise there is that they missed a very make-able kick at the end that would've won it. This wasn't Pittsburgh in '02 complaining that "the better team didn't win." I mean, I wouldn't put it the way Arians did probably but he's not wrong: the Cards SHOULD'VE won the game.
A fair reading of my post wouldn't lead someone to think that I mean that he NEVER does what conventtional wisdom says. And of course it doesn't work 100% of the time.
I said that it seems people complain any time he doesn't do what conventional wisdom says. My point was that if he always did what convention wisdom says, then he's not BB.
No, it's what the game thread wanted.
I guess I didn't make my point as clear as I thought. I'm simply saying the BB has his way of doing things and they are different than what most NFL coaches do and that's a good thing, because I much prefer how he does things than Generic NFL Coach X. And even if I disagree with a call he makes every now and then IN THE WHOLE, I'll take it every day of the week.
You said you didn't understand why people criticized him for not taking a time out, when taking a time out is what 99% of coaches would do in that situation and Belichick is known for not following conventional wisdom.
Being unconventional is not a virtue in itself. Yes, being willing to go against the grain in specific scenarios is part of what makes Belichick a great coach, but sometimes conventional wisdom has a better answer for a certain situation, and if he deviates from it in that particular context, it's more than fair to be critical of him.
Had he followed conventional wisdom, the Patriots would have had at least 20 seconds more to work with had the Cards made that field goal. That's a whole lot of time he let go down the drain for no apparent benefit.
Gotcha. The TO decision was simply a way to make the point that his unconventional approach overall is a good one and NOT specific to any one call.
Shorter: BB gets benefit of the doubt (from me), and he did have reasoning for his decision. It'd be different if someone asked him after the game and he didn't have a reason.
Shorter: BB gets benefit of the doubt (from me), and he did have reasoning for his decision. It'd be different if someone asked him after the game and he didn't have a reason.
More than that, DOTB made the point before the 3rd down play where the clock ran all the way down to 6 or 8 or whatever. They could have forced the FG attempt at like 1:30 or so instead of 40 seconds.
Certainly would vehemently disagree with anyone who criticizes BB's performance as a whole. That would be crazy.
Certainly would vehemently disagree with anyone who criticizes BB's performance as a whole. That would be crazy.
Yep. As noted upthread, the reason he didn't call a timeout right away there was that he wanted to see if they were going to kick it immediately – as most kickers prefer not to wait around and think about the kick too much. He said that in the press conference.
Honestly, we should probably include clock management in the "In Bill We Trust" category. That doesn't mean he'll always be right. But based on what we've seen with games like this and the Seahawks Super Bowl, Belichick's clock management calculations incorporate a lot of data and factors we probably aren't aware of as fans.
Someone upthread mentioned that BB was waiting to see how Arizona was going to deal with the 4th and 5. I think this may be the answer.
Perhaps BB figured that AZ would assume he would instantly call TO and thus could take their time setting up. By NOT calling TO, it forced AZ to hustle to get their lineups overturned.
Perhaps also that BB figured AZ might have been considering going for it on 4th -- wouldn't have been the wise choice, but hey, Bruce Arians. So BB wanted to keep his defense on their until he was sure that they would kick.
And somewhere, here I assume, I read that BB said that as soon as it became clear that AZ was going to milk the clock, he called the TO.
Finally, I'm amazed that no one mentioned how close the Pats came to blocking that kick. ABC focused on the bad snap and that was a factor, no doubt, but I wonder if the kicker could also sense how close the rush was. It was Chung coming in from the kicker's right so he would be more likely to be in his peripheral vision and might cause him to pull it left.
Perhaps BB figured that AZ would assume he would instantly call TO and thus could take their time setting up. By NOT calling TO, it forced AZ to hustle to get their lineups overturned.
Perhaps also that BB figured AZ might have been considering going for it on 4th -- wouldn't have been the wise choice, but hey, Bruce Arians. So BB wanted to keep his defense on their until he was sure that they would kick.
And somewhere, here I assume, I read that BB said that as soon as it became clear that AZ was going to milk the clock, he called the TO.
Finally, I'm amazed that no one mentioned how close the Pats came to blocking that kick. ABC focused on the bad snap and that was a factor, no doubt, but I wonder if the kicker could also sense how close the rush was. It was Chung coming in from the kicker's right so he would be more likely to be in his peripheral vision and might cause him to pull it left.
I saw the reason for the late TO from BB was that he saw something in the demeanor of the opposing team/kicker.
They kind of rushed out onto the field. The kicker kept his head down, he took a practice kick, he moved to his spot, then BB calls the timeout and he looks up with a look of surprise and turns away while putting his hands on his hips.
Breaking up a routine for a kicker in a unexpected way, especially a kicker with a shaky confidence level on kicks over 45 yards, is an astute way to pile on a little more pressure.
I also liked the comment from the booth,"bad snap, this is what happens when you try to save a little money on special teams."
They kind of rushed out onto the field. The kicker kept his head down, he took a practice kick, he moved to his spot, then BB calls the timeout and he looks up with a look of surprise and turns away while putting his hands on his hips.
Breaking up a routine for a kicker in a unexpected way, especially a kicker with a shaky confidence level on kicks over 45 yards, is an astute way to pile on a little more pressure.
I also liked the comment from the booth,"bad snap, this is what happens when you try to save a little money on special teams."
Last edited:
BB clearly marches to his own drum when it comes to clock management. He seems to believe that it's likely to be a better outcome to let the opponent get off a rushed, disorganized play than call TO and give them a chance to settle down. Obviously the Super Bowl vs. Seattle being the ultimate case of that. Like anything there will be successes and failures, but there appears to be a method to the madness. It's Bill, who can argue?
Kicking FG's is part of the game so I would argue Arizona shouldn't have won. I mean he didn't miss a 20 yard FG.
Also, if NE didn't turn it over twice and give Arizona a short field the game wouldn't have been as close.
Arizona just got outplayed for about 3 and half quarters of the game.
I thought Arizona was going to win and from the way they played it seems like they didn't think the game would be tough.
I mean if Fitz doesn't do HoF things and the Pats could tackle game isn't close. If the Pats don't give up almost 20 yards on 3 and 25 at the end, etc.
Not to Felger this thread because this was all in the context of a really well played game by a team with a novice starter and missing key players, but they didn't force a rushed disorganized play either on 3rd or 4th down. Arizona was running down clock deliberately on 3rd down and ended up running a play after a TO and the Pats called timeout before the FG because Arizona was going to lineup and take their time to kick the FG.
Honestly, we should probably include clock management in the "In Bill We Trust" category. That doesn't mean he'll always be right. But based on what we've seen with games like this and the Seahawks Super Bowl, Belichick's clock management calculations incorporate a lot of data and factors we probably aren't aware of as fans.
This is sort of the crux of it. Im not really with this statement on clock management. I don't think he's just mashing buttons down there or anything, but Im super skeptical that these unknown data and factors are worth as much as having 40-50 more seconds on the clock to get into FG range on offense if the other team hits a makeable field goal.
Also think being pissed about Arians comment is reaching a bit. He also said the team got outplayed, was just making the point they still had a chance to win and didn't execute a kick.
Regarding the timeouts, the fourth down delay is understandable and Hightower calling a timeout was good at that point in time, but the real mistake was not calling it immediately after the second down play. Gotta call it then and there, there's no way to give it more value than at that moment.
Ha, enjoyed the picture of Karras first holding penalty
https://twitter.com/MikeReiss?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author
https://twitter.com/MikeReiss?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author
Everyone seems to want to group together field goals in 10 yard chunks, which makes it really difficult to figure out what actual accuracy should be for a given range, but my best guess is that a 47 yarder is in the 75-80% range - so yeah, the expectation for that kick should have been 35 seconds left, Pats down 24-23.
Unless BB's waiting to call timeout screwed with the kicker enough to knock 30+% chance off making the kick, I have a hard time believing that it upped win expectancy over having the extra 40+ seconds to drive down the field.
He made a gamble that drastically decreased their chance of winning if the other team made the kick, and they missed the kick. Maybe he got lucky, maybe it worked, no real way to know.
Thanks for noting this. We were all talking about that where I was watching the game.
I think the issue is at the time there was a real chance they would be going for it on 4th down instead of kicking a FG. If they go for it on 4th and make it you don't want to give them the extra time.
If they go for it on 4th and make it they're going to be kicking a FG from 40 yards or in to win the game. The benefit of extra time for the Cardinals is marginal at best. They're likely running some sort of conservative play and spiking it to set up the field goal to be the last play of the game . Arians is more likely to be aggressive there than most coaches, but we're talking incremental difference between a 35 yarder and a 40 yarder or something most likely. The time most helpful if the Pats give up a 1st down via some sort of 5 yard penalty, but even there clock isnt a big factor for the Cardinals, being at the 39 with something like 1:20 left vs. 40 seconds left isnt really a big improvement. They can still run several plays and dont need very many yards to get into FG range.
There's also the benefit that they can see the formation Arizona is in and call TO if they choose on 3rd down. Cant call back to back TOs so cant do that if you have already called TO before the play.
But give me the extra 35 seconds of clock every time and I dont think its close.
There's also the benefit that they can see the formation Arizona is in and call TO if they choose on 3rd down. Cant call back to back TOs so cant do that if you have already called TO before the play.
But give me the extra 35 seconds of clock every time and I dont think its close.
In that case, Arians needs to find a kicker who's longest FG last season was more than 47 yards. Catanzaro isn't bad, but that wasn't Gost the Cards ran out there for the game-winning points.
If we were talking about a 40-yarder or something like that, I bet Bill plays it more by the book. I think it was right on the fringe of where you take a chance on a rushed kick, and it seemed to pay off. I would've played it more traditionally, but I think the 3rd down TO was the more brutal mistake, and that's less on Bill, more on Hightower.
Does anyone know what Catanzaro's range was in the pre-game FGs?
Does anyone know what Catanzaro's range was in the pre-game FGs?
I thought NBC's sideline person said "up to 60 yards" or some other silliness during pregame
The Arizona GM is a tad upset this morning
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17531077/arizona-cardinals-gm-steve-keim-says-loss-unacceptable
Last edited:
If my tally is correct, Catanzaro was 7-12 on kicks 45 yards or longer in his career going into that game. He was pretty good his rookie season (6-8, makes from 51,51,48,49,49,46; misses from 53 and 49) and not very good last year (make from 47; misses from 47, 51, 55). He has two game-winning kicks in the final two minutes of the game, one of which was that 47 yard make from last year.
It seems to me like Belichick sometimes takes the strategy at the end of games they're winning but need a stop to preserve the victory that you should make decisions in the moment that best prepare you for stopping them, not winning in the event that you fuck it all up. I suspect letting the time pass was to keep the pressure on the Cardinals and calling the timeout when he did was more designed to disrupt the rhythm of Catanzaro but I'm stupid so what do I know?
Another variable was that the Cards long snapper was making his first snap for a field goal in a regular season game with a victory on the line.
It seems to me like Belichick sometimes takes the strategy at the end of games they're winning but need a stop to preserve the victory that you should make decisions in the moment that best prepare you for stopping them, not winning in the event that you fuck it all up. I suspect letting the time pass was to keep the pressure on the Cardinals and calling the timeout when he did was more designed to disrupt the rhythm of Catanzaro but I'm stupid so what do I know?
Another variable was that the Cards long snapper was making his first snap for a field goal in a regular season game with a victory on the line.