When the Patriots have the ball...

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
When you have Brady, it's hard not to make him the key for your offense, but to me the Falcons sure look like candidates for bringing in Fleming to block and bashing the crap out of them a la the Colts.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,345
Philadelphia
My thoughts exactly reading this. It's astounding and an indictment of this article in my opinion that he can get through this whole analysis and not mention LG(or White or Lewis) a single time. Sure, this might suppress Brady's numbers, but it sure doesn't seem like a winning strategy to me. The only discussion of the RBs at all is as passers. I'd think even Lewis would excel as a change of pace runner if they use this defensive gameplan.
I think what is even weirder is that he doesn't actually discuss the personnel involved on the Falcons defense. To make an obvious point, when you play a 4 man line - as the Falcons basically always do - then you need one of your linemen to drop into coverage if you're only going to rush three. Who is that going to be? The other key point is that Vic Beasley is obviously a key player for the Falcons and he is a guy who has proven to be a liability against the run when lined up at DE (which usually only happens in obvious passing situations) rather than OLB. But you don't want to waste him in coverage all the time. So what exactly is the plan here? Play nickel with Beasley at DE, then frequently drop the other DE (Brooks Reed? Adrian Clayborn?) into coverage?
 

Bowhemian

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2015
5,701
Bow, NH
Yeah, I really think the Falcons are in big trouble up front. There are many ways to exploit it I think. I would stay away from Beasley, since he is by far their best up front. My guess is they have him on sort of a delayed blitz up the middle in a lot of situations, like what the Texans did. They want their best player busting up the middle where they can. Fast LBs are nice to have, and certainly helps sideline to sideline, but speed doesn’t always get them up to the line to fill the gaps quicker. The key is LBs being able to recognize the play quickly. If I was a Pats offensive coach, I would be a little unconventional offensively. First down quick passes when they are expecting a run. Falcons expecting a pass, run it up the gut (draw play could be nice) when they drop everyone and their brother into coverage. Obviously you can’t use that strategy the entire game. But it will get you going and hopefully get you a nice long drive to start the game.
 

hawaiirsn

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 22, 2006
757
Honolulu, HI
I think what is even weirder is that he doesn't actually discuss the personnel involved on the Falcons defense. To make an obvious point, when you play a 4 man line - as the Falcons basically always do - then you need one of your linemen to drop into coverage if you're only going to rush three. Who is that going to be? The other key point is that Vic Beasley is obviously a key player for the Falcons and he is a guy who has proven to be a liability against the run when lined up at DE (which usually only happens in obvious passing situations) rather than OLB. But you don't want to waste him in coverage all the time. So what exactly is the plan here? Play nickel with Beasley at DE, then frequently drop the other DE (Brooks Reed? Adrian Clayborn?) into coverage?
Yes this is even more true. I guess the weakness of this article and idea is illustrative of the challenge the Falcons face. It is hard to think of what they can do so that the Patriots don't completely exploit the personnel the Falcons have up front defensively. I think the major question is whether they will use their speedy linebackers in blitz packages similar to what the Texans attempted to do or if they'll primarily use them in shallow coverage. This is where I see the Patriots using their quiver of RBs to change the pace and keep the Falcons from getting to comfortable in any defensive set.

Edit: Or yeah, basically what Bowhemian said.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
If you think about it, part of the core philosophy behind "take away what a team does best" is the idea of making a team one-dimensional. Part of what makes the Pats successful, on offense for a long time, and more recently, on defense, is the ability to be multi-dimensional from within one package. Run from a spread offense, throw in a heavy lineup, have Chung play LB, have Sheard drop into coverage, make Ryan set the edge, etc.

As others have noted, the problem with that article is it assumes that the Pats would stubbornly pound their heads into an unrelenting wall. That is the way of Mike Martz or Mike Tomlin, not of BB/MP/JMcD.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
If you think about it, part of the core philosophy behind "take away what a team does best" is the idea of making a team one-dimensional. Part of what makes the Pats successful, on offense for a long time, and more recently, on defense, is the ability to be multi-dimensional from within one package. Run from a spread offense, throw in a heavy lineup, have Chung play LB, have Sheard drop into coverage, make Ryan set the edge, etc.

As others have noted, the problem with that article is it assumes that the Pats would stubbornly pound their heads into an unrelenting wall. That is the way of Mike Martz or Mike Tomlin, not of BB/MP/JMcD.
Well, they did do that to a degree against the Giants in '08. They took a long to switch to spreading everyone out.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,333
Yeah, I really think the Falcons are in big trouble up front. There are many ways to exploit it I think. I would stay away from Beasley, since he is by far their best up front. My guess is they have him on sort of a delayed blitz up the middle in a lot of situations, like what the Texans did. They want their best player busting up the middle where they can. Fast LBs are nice to have, and certainly helps sideline to sideline, but speed doesn’t always get them up to the line to fill the gaps quicker. The key is LBs being able to recognize the play quickly. If I was a Pats offensive coach, I would be a little unconventional offensively. First down quick passes when they are expecting a run. Falcons expecting a pass, run it up the gut (draw play could be nice) when they drop everyone and their brother into coverage. Obviously you can’t use that strategy the entire game. But it will get you going and hopefully get you a nice long drive to start the game.
This is where Lewis can really do some damage. Can fit any formation, run up the gut, spread out as a WR, whatever you need. Blount will be important in this game, especially beating down a tired (I hope) defense late, but Lewis has a chance for a really special game because of his versatility. The run blocking needs to be there in a way that it wasn't last week, of course, but Atlanta is a different defense.
 
One nearly universal assumption I've noticed both here and elsewhere is that Tom Brady is going to have a monster game against this Atlanta defense. In the spirit of being contrarian, I thought I'd ask...is this a safe assumption? Here are Brady's stats in each of his previous six Super Bowl appearances:

--2001: 16/27, 145, 5.4 YPA, 1 TD, 0 INT, 86.2 rating
--2003: 32/48, 354, 7.4 YPA, 3 TD, 1 INT, 100.5 rating
--2004: 23/33, 236, 7.2 YPA, 2 TD, 0 INT, 110.2 rating
--2007: 29/48, 266, 5.5 YPA, 1 TD, 0 INT, 82.5 rating
--2011: 27/41, 276, 6.7 YPA, 2 TD, 1 INT, 91.1 rating
--2014: 37/50, 328, 6.6 YPA, 4 TD, 2 INT, 101.1 rating

All of these would seem to qualify as "good, but not great". Atlanta's defense might be the worst of the seven he'll have faced in a Super Bowl - would you agree with that? - but that's not to say Brady will automatically pick it apart. He's got a lot on the line on Sunday: winning a fifth ring, giving Goodell the ultimate FU, and knowing he's not going to have many (if any) chances left. I've heard several suggestions here that the Falcons might come out nervous, never having been here before and all that...but what if Brady comes out overly pumped up and/or nervous himself, and the athletic playmakers on the Atlanta defense pick off a pass or two? Brady has historically been a slow starter in Super Bowls, right?
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
One nearly universal assumption I've noticed both here and elsewhere is that Tom Brady is going to have a monster game against this Atlanta defense. In the spirit of being contrarian, I thought I'd ask...is this a safe assumption? Here are Brady's stats in each of his previous six Super Bowl appearances:

--2001: 16/27, 145, 5.4 YPA, 1 TD, 0 INT, 86.2 rating
--2003: 32/48, 354, 7.4 YPA, 3 TD, 1 INT, 100.5 rating
--2004: 23/33, 236, 7.2 YPA, 2 TD, 0 INT, 110.2 rating
--2007: 29/48, 266, 5.5 YPA, 1 TD, 0 INT, 82.5 rating
--2011: 27/41, 276, 6.7 YPA, 2 TD, 1 INT, 91.1 rating
--2014: 37/50, 328, 6.6 YPA, 4 TD, 2 INT, 101.1 rating

All of these would seem to qualify as "good, but not great". Atlanta's defense might be the worst of the seven he'll have faced in a Super Bowl - would you agree with that? - but that's not to say Brady will automatically pick it apart. He's got a lot on the line on Sunday: winning a fifth ring, giving Goodell the ultimate FU, and knowing he's not going to have many (if any) chances left. I've heard several suggestions here that the Falcons might come out nervous, never having been here before and all that...but what if Brady comes out overly pumped up and/or nervous himself, and the athletic playmakers on the Atlanta defense pick off a pass or two? Brady has historically been a slow starter in Super Bowls, right?
 

Norm loves Vera

Joe wants Trump to burn
SoSH Member
Dec 25, 2003
5,370
Peace Dale, RI
Barnwell had an interesting piece about the game including how the Patriots might be able to take Beasley effectively out of the game:

"When opposing teams have three or more wideouts on the field, Beasley has played 74.6 percent of snaps. When they have two wideouts or fewer, Beasley's playing time dips to just 19.7 percent of snaps. The Patriots were in those two-or-fewer looks 49.9 percent of the time on offense, which was the fourth-highest rate in the league during the regular season. (That fell to seventh after Rob Gronkowski was injured in Week 10.) Beasley has played only four such snaps during the postseason, so the Falcons will have to make a choice about how they want to use their star edge rusher."
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18599645/barnwell-super-bowl-li-preview-new-england-patriots-atlanta-falcons
 

Dr. Gonzo

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2010
5,213
That's interesting and leads into this stat I just saw


#Falcons yards/carry allowed, by opponent’s fullback snaps 0 FB snaps: 4.2 YPC (7 games) 4-14 snaps: 4.4 YPC (7) 23+ snaps: 5.7 YPC (4)

Also has this too:

#Patriots James Develin led all fullbacks in snaps since their Week 9 bye & averages 29.1/game since. He was PFF’s top-graded blocking FB.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
Barnwell had an interesting piece about the game including how the Patriots might be able to take Beasley effectively out of the game:

"When opposing teams have three or more wideouts on the field, Beasley has played 74.6 percent of snaps. When they have two wideouts or fewer, Beasley's playing time dips to just 19.7 percent of snaps. The Patriots were in those two-or-fewer looks 49.9 percent of the time on offense, which was the fourth-highest rate in the league during the regular season. (That fell to seventh after Rob Gronkowski was injured in Week 10.) Beasley has played only four such snaps during the postseason, so the Falcons will have to make a choice about how they want to use their star edge rusher."
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18599645/barnwell-super-bowl-li-preview-new-england-patriots-atlanta-falcons
That's interesting and leads into this stat I just saw


#Falcons yards/carry allowed, by opponent’s fullback snaps 0 FB snaps: 4.2 YPC (7 games) 4-14 snaps: 4.4 YPC (7) 23+ snaps: 5.7 YPC (4)

Also has this too:

#Patriots James Develin led all fullbacks in snaps since their Week 9 bye & averages 29.1/game since. He was PFF’s top-graded blocking FB.
So, 20 personnel with LGBT, Develin, Jules, Danny, and Hogan, and they're unstoppable!
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
One nearly universal assumption I've noticed both here and elsewhere is that Tom Brady is going to have a monster game against this Atlanta defense. In the spirit of being contrarian, I thought I'd ask...is this a safe assumption? Here are Brady's stats in each of his previous six Super Bowl appearances:

--2001: 16/27, 145, 5.4 YPA, 1 TD, 0 INT, 86.2 rating
--2003: 32/48, 354, 7.4 YPA, 3 TD, 1 INT, 100.5 rating
--2004: 23/33, 236, 7.2 YPA, 2 TD, 0 INT, 110.2 rating
--2007: 29/48, 266, 5.5 YPA, 1 TD, 0 INT, 82.5 rating
--2011: 27/41, 276, 6.7 YPA, 2 TD, 1 INT, 91.1 rating
--2014: 37/50, 328, 6.6 YPA, 4 TD, 2 INT, 101.1 rating

All of these would seem to qualify as "good, but not great". Atlanta's defense might be the worst of the seven he'll have faced in a Super Bowl - would you agree with that? - but that's not to say Brady will automatically pick it apart. He's got a lot on the line on Sunday: winning a fifth ring, giving Goodell the ultimate FU, and knowing he's not going to have many (if any) chances left. I've heard several suggestions here that the Falcons might come out nervous, never having been here before and all that...but what if Brady comes out overly pumped up and/or nervous himself, and the athletic playmakers on the Atlanta defense pick off a pass or two? Brady has historically been a slow starter in Super Bowls, right?
You tell yourself whatever makes you feel better, bub. ;)
 

nothumb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 27, 2006
7,065
yammer's favorite poster
Per that Beasley stat, don't we want 2 WR on the field (so LGBT / Develin / Jules / Hogan / Bennett)?
Yeah I thought this too but figured I was just being dumb / missing something.

You could do this with Lewis too. They have ahown willingness to audible into a spread look with Devlin split wide, doing that with him and Lewis in space on the same time would be fun. Plus no Beasley to rush the QB.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
Vereen had 15 touches against seattle. I expect Lewis to get at least that many, but the ratio may be reversed from Vereen's 11 pass/4 runs.
 

MainerInExile

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2003
4,825
Bay Area
Yeah I thought this too but figured I was just being dumb / missing something.

You could do this with Lewis too. They have ahown willingness to audible into a spread look with Devlin split wide, doing that with him and Lewis in space on the same time would be fun. Plus no Beasley to rush the QB.
I think this is right. I think they'll want to be able to throw out of the formation as well as run, so Lewis makes sense.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
One nearly universal assumption I've noticed both here and elsewhere is that Tom Brady is going to have a monster game against this Atlanta defense. In the spirit of being contrarian, I thought I'd ask...is this a safe assumption?

All of these would seem to qualify as "good, but not great". Atlanta's defense might be the worst of the seven he'll have faced in a Super Bowl - would you agree with that? - but that's not to say Brady will automatically pick it apart. He's got a lot on the line on Sunday: winning a fifth ring, giving Goodell the ultimate FU, and knowing he's not going to have many (if any) chances left. I've heard several suggestions here that the Falcons might come out nervous, never having been here before and all that...but what if Brady comes out overly pumped up and/or nervous himself, and the athletic playmakers on the Atlanta defense pick off a pass or two? Brady has historically been a slow starter in Super Bowls, right?
My reaction:
1) Those lines are pretty darn good - 3 100+ QB ratings, which is great especially given some of the defenses faced (see below)
2) NYG 2011 is close, but Atlanta's defense is far worse than the 2001 Rams, 2003 Panthers, 2004 Eagles, 2007 Giants, and 2014 Seahawks. These were all top-10 defenses in points or yards or both, with the Seahawks first in points allowed and the Eagles second.
3) This is a better group of weapons for Brady than 2001, 2003, 2004, or 2011 with Gronk hobbled. The run game and OL are better than '14.
4) Brady could certainly throw a pick or two. Interceptions are low probability events with high variance. Over a long period of time, however, Brady has proven to be maybe the best ever at avoiding interceptions. If you had to bet on one of these QBs throwing one to the other team, the smart money would be on Ryan.
5) When Brady has struggled (Denver last year, Giants in '07), it tends to be against teams that can get pressure up the middle, or who can press the WR at the line and pressure with four. I don't think Atlanta figures to do either of those things; that's not their coverage scheme or DB personnel, and their rush has been edge-heavy. Who knows, maybe Hageman and / or Jarrett play out of the their minds on Sunday? It's one game, stuff happens. No one thought Justin Tuck was going to take Logan Mankins' lunch money all day in '07.

TL;DR - I don't think I would go so far as to assume Brady will have a monster game, but I view it as likely.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
Per that Beasley stat, don't we want 2 WR on the field (so LGBT / Develin / Jules / Hogan / Bennett)?
Yes, you are correct. I somehow read it backwards and was being flip, but now reading it correctly I think that your suggestion is a good one. Or (returning to flippancy)... 30 personnel with a wishbone backfield!

edit: I do think they could do a lot of damage with a 21 personnel, either using LGBT and Develin or Lewis/White and Develin, and go non-hurryup no-huddle to prevent defensive substitutions.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
When you have Brady, it's hard not to make him the key for your offense, but to me the Falcons sure look like candidates for bringing in Fleming to block and bashing the crap out of them a la the Colts.
OK, I heard Jim Rome basically have the same view today, even touting Blount as the eventual game MVP. Now I can only conclude I am way off.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
I don't think there's any reason to think the Falcons' defense limits any game plan the Pats want to use. Run heavy would simply be to burn the clock and limit possessions for Atlanta. I think they can run or pass with equal ability and they will dictate the pace of the game as they desire.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
Have to do something they haven't done in a while. Last RB to throw a pass was Faulk in 2008.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,429
I don't think there's any reason to think the Falcons' defense limits any game plan the Pats want to use. Run heavy would simply be to burn the clock and limit possessions for Atlanta. I think they can run or pass with equal ability and they will dictate the pace of the game as they desire.
Agreed. My feeling is that, while we want to keep the Falcons offense off the field, the best chance we have to distance ourselves from them is by holding serve on offense and then trying to force turnovers and/or punts. Grinding out an 8 minute drive is nice until the Falcons put up a TD in 3 minutes. There is a lot more risk on botching a 3rd down with long drives then there is by slinging it around the field. As Patriots fans that have watched BB defenses force offenses into long and precise drives, we know that more than most.

I think we see the Pats come out throwing the ball all over the field, and then their defense does what they've always done on defense, which is wait until the other offense makes a mistake. What a mistake is in THIS game is different then most games. A turnover would be nice, but a punt and even a field goal is a fuck up because you aren't holding serve. Thats how you get separation in this game.
 

nothumb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 27, 2006
7,065
yammer's favorite poster
Agreed. My feeling is that, while we want to keep the Falcons offense off the field, the best chance we have to distance ourselves from them is by holding serve on offense and then trying to force turnovers and/or punts. Grinding out an 8 minute drive is nice until the Falcons put up a TD in 3 minutes. There is a lot more risk on botching a 3rd down with long drives then there is by slinging it around the field. As Patriots fans that have watched BB defenses force offenses into long and precise drives, we know that more than most.

I think we see the Pats come out throwing the ball all over the field, and then their defense does what they've always done on defense, which is wait until the other offense makes a mistake. What a mistake is in THIS game is different then most games. A turnover would be nice, but a punt and even a field goal is a fuck up because you aren't holding serve. Thats how you get separation in this game.
Spread early, power late has been a great weapon for the Pats over the years against weaker defenses. I agree with this, but I also think you might see them throwing out of a heavier group (with Lewis, Bennett and Develin on the field, say) in order to dictate matchups. If ATL wants to sit in zone, you can motion guys all over the place and either force their guys to defend zones they aren't used to, or get some absurd matchups.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Have to do something they haven't done in a while. Last RB to throw a pass was Faulk in 2008.
My crazy trick play prediction is a Hogan pass. He's lefthanded so it could catch a team by surprise. They run a jet sweep to the left and then Hogan stops and airs it out. It's not likely Sunday unless they fall behind, but I bet we see it sometime in the next couple years.

Agreed. My feeling is that, while we want to keep the Falcons offense off the field, the best chance we have to distance ourselves from them is by holding serve on offense and then trying to force turnovers and/or punts. Grinding out an 8 minute drive is nice until the Falcons put up a TD in 3 minutes. There is a lot more risk on botching a 3rd down with long drives then there is by slinging it around the field. As Patriots fans that have watched BB defenses force offenses into long and precise drives, we know that more than most.

I think we see the Pats come out throwing the ball all over the field, and then their defense does what they've always done on defense, which is wait until the other offense makes a mistake. What a mistake is in THIS game is different then most games. A turnover would be nice, but a punt and even a field goal is a fuck up because you aren't holding serve. Thats how you get separation in this game.
Agreed with all of this.

Spread early, power late has been a great weapon for the Pats over the years against weaker defenses. I agree with this, but I also think you might see them throwing out of a heavier group (with Lewis, Bennett and Develin on the field, say) in order to dictate matchups. If ATL wants to sit in zone, you can motion guys all over the place and either force their guys to defend zones they aren't used to, or get some absurd matchups.
Could see this too. I think they will like the matchups against run and pass from this look, depending on how the Falcons respond.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
58,907
San Andreas Fault
My crazy trick play prediction is a Hogan pass. He's lefthanded so it could catch a team by surprise. They run a jet sweep to the left and then Hogan stops and airs it out. It's not likely Sunday unless they fall behind, but I bet we see it sometime in the next couple years.
We heard in "Do Your Job" that BB and Josh McD had an agreement that as long as they had Tom Brady, only he would throw passes for the New England Patriots. That was after someone else threw a pass and it was intercepted (Givens in 2003?). They broke that rule in the Baltimore playoff game in 2015 of course, but Edelman played QB in college. You think the rule is soft now? The Baltimore game had gotten into desperate territory though, both coaches admitted. Hogan has in game passing experience?
 

nothumb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 27, 2006
7,065
yammer's favorite poster
Yeah I kind of doubt they use a trick play like that simply because they probably won't need to in order to score. But SN kind of alludes to that in his original post.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
Why does it have to be a back or receiver? What about a fumblerooski-pass? Which lineman has the best arm?

(In case it isn't 100.000% clear, I'm kidding. Fumblerooskis are actual against NFL rules, anyway.)
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
We heard in "Do Your Job" that BB and Josh McD had an agreement that as long as they had Tom Brady, only he would throw passes for the New England Patriots. That was after someone else threw a pass and it was intercepted (Givens in 2003?). They broke that rule in the Baltimore playoff game in 2015 of course, but Edelman played QB in college. You think the rule is soft now? The Baltimore game had gotten into desperate territory though, both coaches admitted. Hogan has in game passing experience?
Yeah, it would be kind of a desperate times / desperate measures thing, or a response to a particular weakness shown on film, like if they see a team has the FS crash down on jet sweeps, leaving the MOF wide open. They also ran a play where Amendola threw a pass last year in the Philly game.

Hogan has thrown an NFL pass: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000554314/Bills-Chris-Hogan-pass-to-Tyrod-Taylor-for-4-yards
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,345
Philadelphia
Agreed. My feeling is that, while we want to keep the Falcons offense off the field, the best chance we have to distance ourselves from them is by holding serve on offense and then trying to force turnovers and/or punts. Grinding out an 8 minute drive is nice until the Falcons put up a TD in 3 minutes. There is a lot more risk on botching a 3rd down with long drives then there is by slinging it around the field. As Patriots fans that have watched BB defenses force offenses into long and precise drives, we know that more than most.

I think we see the Pats come out throwing the ball all over the field, and then their defense does what they've always done on defense, which is wait until the other offense makes a mistake. What a mistake is in THIS game is different then most games. A turnover would be nice, but a punt and even a field goal is a fuck up because you aren't holding serve. Thats how you get separation in this game.
Bingo. Keeping the opposing offense off the field is kind of a stupid concept in general. You always just want to maximize your expected points and, if you think you're the better team (which I believe to be the case and I bet BB does as well), then you definitely don't want to reduce the number of possessions per team.
 

Hoodie Sleeves

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2015
1,204
Bingo. Keeping the opposing offense off the field is kind of a stupid concept in general. You always just want to maximize your expected points and, if you think you're the better team (which I believe to be the case and I bet BB does as well), then you definitely don't want to reduce the number of possessions per team.
Exactly. The two teams have similar offenses and the Patriots have better defense and special teams - they should be trying to maximize the overall number of possessions, not minimize. Every additional pair of possessions should increase the Patriots chance of winning

(of course this no longer remains true if you have a big lead and its late in the game - then shortening makes sense)
 

nothumb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 27, 2006
7,065
yammer's favorite poster
Yeah, it would be kind of a desperate times / desperate measures thing, or a response to a particular weakness shown on film, like if they see a team has the FS crash down on jet sweeps, leaving the MOF wide open. They also ran a play where Amendola threw a pass last year in the Philly game.

Hogan has thrown an NFL pass: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000554314/Bills-Chris-Hogan-pass-to-Tyrod-Taylor-for-4-yards
With an ANY/A that low, I don't like Hogan's chances. Better let Edelman throw it instead.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,345
Philadelphia
Exactly. The two teams have similar offenses and the Patriots have better defense and special teams - they should be trying to maximize the overall number of possessions, not minimize. Every additional pair of possessions should increase the Patriots chance of winning

(of course this no longer remains true if you have a big lead and its late in the game - then shortening makes sense)
Agreed 100%.
 

Mooch

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,494
Have to do something they haven't done in a while. Last RB to throw a pass was Faulk in 2008.
I was thinking that it's been forever and a day since the Pats ran that "fake snap over Brady's head, directly to the RB" red zone play... Just sayin'.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
I was thinking that it's been forever and a day since the Pats ran that "fake snap over Brady's head, directly to the RB" red zone play... Just sayin'.

Have they *ever* run Brady on a naked bootleg near the goal line? Its not like he has to be fast, i remember a legless Joe Namath scoring in OT vs the Giants in 1974. He didn;t tell the RB he was keeping the ball.
 
Atlanta's single worst, stupidest offensive play in the NFC Championship Game came when they tried to direct snap the ball to Taylor Gabriel as he came in motion behind the center. Led to a fumble which Green Bay should have recovered, at a time when the Falcons were gashing the Packers defense at will and didn't need any help from trickeration.

All of which is to say that the Patriots probably shouldn't need to risk any trick plays more complicated than the flea flicker they executed against Pittsburgh. (Right?)
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
14,203
Yeah, it would be kind of a desperate times / desperate measures thing, or a response to a particular weakness shown on film, like if they see a team has the FS crash down on jet sweeps, leaving the MOF wide open. They also ran a play where Amendola threw a pass last year in the Philly game.

Hogan has thrown an NFL pass: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000554314/Bills-Chris-Hogan-pass-to-Tyrod-Taylor-for-4-yards
Hogan threw a pass THIS YEAR against the Jets. Doesn't show up in the stats because he drew a pass interference penalty.

http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/sports/20161128/patriots-notebook-chris-hogans-trick-pass-play-worked-well
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,432
Atlanta's single worst, stupidest offensive play in the NFC Championship Game came when they tried to direct snap the ball to Taylor Gabriel as he came in motion behind the center. Led to a fumble which Green Bay should have recovered, at a time when the Falcons were gashing the Packers defense at will and didn't need any help from trickeration.

All of which is to say that the Patriots probably shouldn't need to risk any trick plays more complicated than the flea flicker they executed against Pittsburgh. (Right?)
Not that they'll use it but the Pats' direct snap wasn't much of a risky play. Faulk was lined up in the backfield so it was fairly straightforward play that they practiced regularly.

https://gifs.com/gif/kevin-faulk-direct-snap-yPBvRW
 
Last edited:

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
I also believe the Patriots will attempt to score more points than the Falcons.
 

BlackJack

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2007
3,456
You are laughably incorrect. Clearly the Pats strategy should (and will be) to prevent the Falcons from scoring as many points as they (the Patriots) score.

They don't call it prevent defense for nothing!
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
15,069
UWS, NYC
You are laughably incorrect. Clearly the Pats strategy should (and will be) to prevent the Falcons from scoring as many points as they (the Patriots) score.

They don't call it prevent defense for nothing!
You're paying too much attention to the popular points. The game is won or lost with the electoral points.
 

BuellMiller

New Member
Mar 25, 2015
449
My reaction:
1) Those lines are pretty darn good - 3 100+ QB ratings, which is great especially given some of the defenses faced (see below)
2) NYG 2011 is close, but Atlanta's defense is far worse than the 2001 Rams, 2003 Panthers, 2004 Eagles, 2007 Giants, and 2014 Seahawks. These were all top-10 defenses in points or yards or both, with the Seahawks first in points allowed and the Eagles second.
3) This is a better group of weapons for Brady than 2001, 2003, 2004, or 2011 with Gronk hobbled. The run game and OL are better than '14.
4) Brady could certainly throw a pick or two. Interceptions are low probability events with high variance. Over a long period of time, however, Brady has proven to be maybe the best ever at avoiding interceptions. If you had to bet on one of these QBs throwing one to the other team, the smart money would be on Ryan.
5) When Brady has struggled (Denver last year, Giants in '07), it tends to be against teams that can get pressure up the middle, or who can press the WR at the line and pressure with four. I don't think Atlanta figures to do either of those things; that's not their coverage scheme or DB personnel, and their rush has been edge-heavy. Who knows, maybe Hageman and / or Jarrett play out of the their minds on Sunday? It's one game, stuff happens. No one thought Justin Tuck was going to take Logan Mankins' lunch money all day in '07.

TL;DR - I don't think I would go so far as to assume Brady will have a monster game, but I view it as likely.

I think it's also fair to point out that the two games with a rating < 90, he was dealing with a foot/ankle injury. (and the other game that he was under 100, it was Gronk with the significant ankle injury) Not to make excuses, but it wasn't really (completely at least) the yips of being in a big game or anything.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,032
Oregon
You're paying too much attention to the popular points. The game is won or lost with the electoral points.
This is a fallacy. Unlike the presidential election, football games are won on the two coasts. The middle of the field is just for show
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
You are laughably incorrect. Clearly the Pats strategy should (and will be) to prevent the Falcons from scoring as many points as they (the Patriots) score.

They don't call it prevent defense for nothing!
Your unorthodox methodology intrigues me.

I will set about constructing a research design to discern which of us is correct forthwith!
 

BlackJack

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2007
3,456
Your unorthodox methodology intrigues me.

I will set about constructing a research design to discern which of us is correct forthwith!
I have to concede good sir. That was clearly scoring more than the Falcons rather than preventing them from scoring. A tip of my hat to your superior analysis.