The Game Goat Thread: Wk. 3 vs Ravens

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
I know everyone wants to be depressed about this game and harp on the Mac mistakes but I wonder whether Bill is actually happier about this game and the offense's progress than we are.

As evidenced by the Mark Daniels and Chatham tweets, for the first time, this offense looked--dare I say--dynamic -- and they did so for most of the game. Their RBs (and run blocking) looked dominant. Parker was absolutely outstanding. Jonnu was involved in some pretty nice, explosive plays. And most important of all, Mac looked like he was in command of all the options available to him for most of the game. Did he try to force it sometimes? Yes. Were there some plays he should've made but didn't? For sure -- there was one breakup to Parker in the end zone that should've netted six with a bit more distance. But during this game, he was decisive, moving in and out on his feet, and finding guys who were the third or fourth (or in the case of Jonnu on that one play, even fifth) read. This despite the fact that his security blanket was out. Sure, the pass in the back of the end zone to Parker was overly aggressive. But on the next drive that throw to Agholor was fucking money. Mac didn't lose this game for them -- he came pretty close to winning it.

So I dunno. A loss is a loss. Mac's injury will hurt even if he manages to hobble back onto the field next week. But even though it's far from perfect (I agree with @SMU_Sox above), I have a hard time with anyone who disputes that this offense is making more plays, using more of its weapons, and is harder to scheme today than they were last week and the week before that.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
  • Mac's decision making - several terrible reads, like the early 4th down pass to Bourne, the near-goal line pick, the throw to Harris in the flat with two defenders bearing down on him, and so many picks.
I'd have to look at how they coach (there are old playbooks out there) it but on a lot of those designed plays like that it's more or less a one read and let it rip decision. FWIW.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,733
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I'd have to look at how they coach (there are old playbooks out there) it but on a lot of those designed plays like that it's more or less a one read and let it rip decision. FWIW.
The 4th down play was 100% on Mac. He panicked and threw it far too early. He’s got to be better than that.that was amateur hour.
 

gattman

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
263
Silver Spring, MD
I fucking hate when people drag Drew Bledsoe. The shit that guy takes from Pats fans is really unconscionable. Yes he was very limited by the time Mo Lewis almost killed him, but he was a good QB early in his career, albeit in a different era so his stats don’t stack up to guys who have played during the last 20 years or so. If Mac Jones ends up having Drew Bledsoe’s career (adjusted for era, statistically) we should be very happy about it.
Bledsoe was amazing. He zipped balls into windows that didn’t exist. To the likes of Michael Timpson, Vincent Brisby & Leroy Thompson. Bledsoe in 1994 especially was extraordinary. Dueling with Marino, the comeback against the Vikings, the run late in the season. And then battling through the broken finger in 1998. He was a warrior. And the second best QB in Pats history.
 

heavyde050

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2006
11,257
San Francisco
Bledsoe was amazing. He zipped balls into windows that didn’t exist. To the likes of Michael Timpson, Vincent Brisby & Leroy Thompson. Bledsoe in 1994 especially was extraordinary. Dueling with Marino, the comeback against the Vikings, the run late in the season. And then battling through the broken finger in 1998. He was a warrior. And the second best QB in Pats history.
In 1994, he had some great games and some really bad ones. Not really fair to bring up skill players in 1994 and leave out Ben Coates - probably the best TE in football.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BledDr00/gamelog/1994/
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,154
Westwood MA
Bledsoe was amazing. He zipped balls into windows that didn’t exist. To the likes of Michael Timpson, Vincent Brisby & Leroy Thompson. Bledsoe in 1994 especially was extraordinary. Dueling with Marino, the comeback against the Vikings, the run late in the season. And then battling through the broken finger in 1998. He was a warrior. And the second best QB in Pats history.
He was amazing and without a doubt the second best QB in Patriots history, he played lights out in the first half of the Super Bowl until Reggie White turned Max Lane into a turnstyle and if he was not the back up in the 2002 AFCCG, I don't know if that team gets to the Super Bowl vs the Rams and the dynasty might not have been born at that time.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,099
With the right talent, Bledsoe was really good in New England, and probably the franchise's 2nd best QB of all time. As the talent and coaching quality declined precipitously after the Packers Super Bowl, Bledsoe's decision making indeed limited him. Also, the sacks were really starting to pile up in the latter part of his Pats career and in Buffalo, and he was pretty beat up by the time he arrived in Dallas.
 

cornwalls@6

Less observant than others
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
6,248
from the wilds of western ma
I'll echo others with my admiration for Drew. He was one half of the duo that restored credibility to the franchise, played a big role in keeping it here, and was always a tough, indefatigable competitor. I have many found memories of fall Sundays in 1994, watching him, at times, single-handedly win games and keep them in the playoff hunt that year. '96, as well. He had limitations as a QB, and obviously BB made the only choice he could in 2001. But Drew was a key player in the transition from laughingstock to dynasty. If I ever see him a bar, the first couple, at least, are on me.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,282
AZ
It really feels like the ball is often early or late. Even when the receivers make catches it feels like ball hangs in the air forever and the safeties are always closing. Also, when I watch other games or our opponents it seems like they have so many more plays. There is no variety. Have we run a slant all year? Maybe a shovel pass or a sweep? A fucking wheel route? Is this a personnel issue or a playbook issue? Successful or not I feel like we make things easy on our opponents and hard on ourselves.

But anyway, red zone and late fumbles have been a problem for two and 3/17ths years.

When the Patriots got a first down right at the 10 I knew there was not a high chance they would score. Getting ten yards down there seems impossible for this team if you gave them 5 downs. I assumed a FG though.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,093
Positives

1. Welcome, Devante Parker. Have been waiting for a game like this and glad to see him contribute.

2. RBs both looked good, especially Rhamondre.

3. Wise is making plays this year. One sack away from breaking his career high of 4.5.

Negatives

1. Turnovers. I mean, c’mon.

2. Mac. His throws are weak and his decision making is even weaker. We needed him to make a leap this year and he hasn’t. And now he’s hurt. Not sure what we have here but I’m less confident about his long-term potential than I was this spring. Hope that changes when he comes back.

3. Tight ends…again. Spent a shit ton of money on 2 guys who we can’t even figure out how to get involved.

All in all, what a turn of events. We were so close to a nice win that really could have gotten things going. And now you take an L and lose Mac. This franchise just seems to have no real direction at the moment.
 

JohnnyK

Member
SoSH Member
May 8, 2007
1,941
Wolfern, Austria
I was watching on TV and I'm not blaming the refs for the loss but did it honestly look like Stevenson was touched down on the 2 point conversion when he pitched the ball back to Jones for the conversion? I was shocked that replay overturned the call.
Blandino actually explained this on the broadcast, he wasn't down by contact by the guy who touched him after he went down, he was down by contact because he went down due to a Ravens defender tripping him up. As soon as the knee then hits the ground the play is over.
 

Garshaparra

New Member
Feb 27, 2008
527
McCarver's Mushy Mouth
It’s impossible to know this, they very well may have a single option play called on short down plays.
Looking at the highlight film of the 4th-and-3 play in the 2nd quarter, it seems clear there are 5 routes run from a compressed shotgun formation (nobody wide):

- Henry releases immediately and goes up the seam. He appears to be one-on-one with his defender, but there's likely a safety upfield offscreen. Seems like a good target though.
- LJ gets picked off early coming through the line and is not a viable option while caught up in the wash.
- The back (Harris, I think) delays his release briefly, and blocks nobody. He ends up one-on-one, but in the midst of line traffic. He begins a cut into the space Henry has cleared by going upfield, and in hindsight, was probably the best bet to gain the yardage. Mac did not allow the play to develop though, perhaps because he didn't trust the line to win a 5-on-4 battle, and just went with his first read.
- Now for Bourne. Mac 100% stares him down, throws to a nice location in stride, but without much zip.
- Parker ends up open, but only because his defender drops off to double-cover the stared-down Bourne with the ball.

Maybe Parker could have picked his defender, but at this point, we didn't know how lax the refereeing would be, so that would've been a bad play. In any case, there were 5 options here, not just one.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
Man, just looking at the play-by-play of that game...so frustrating.

- Went for the fourth down early and ran a dumb play instead of kicking the field goal. Three lost points.
- The Mac INT late in the corner that cost them minimum of 3 points, maybe more.
- The Agholor fumble...I mean, the Pats got the ball back and that was a great throw and run right up til he lost the ball. The Ravens recovered at their own 27 with 5+ minutes left. If NE had the ball there in that situation....who knows how the game ends.
- Of course the INT and injury on NE's last play....now hampers them for weeks to come too.

This game was RIGHT THERE for the taking, even though Lamar kinda went bonkers on them.
 

Time to Mo Vaughn

RIP Dernell
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
7,204
I'm surprised that people a few people are giving Patricia shit in this game. The team scored 26 points despite having 4 turnovers and a turnover on downs at the Baltimore 33. One interception was in the end zone and the fumble was at the Baltimore 27. They should have scored 35 or 40 points.

There were a number of times I was upset with Mac on which receiver he was throwing to including on the 4th down in the first half. I don't know why Mac keeps throwing to a covered receiver running a flat route 1-2 yards off the line of scrimmage when the situation clearly calls for more yardage. He did it in the first few games and did it at least twice today. It's fine to run those routes and hope the receiver slips out uncovered, by you absolutely can't throw that pass when even if it's completed the guy is immediately going to be tackled.
 

jose melendez

Earl of Acie
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2003
30,972
Geneva, Switzerland
But he has Bledsoe’s decision making.

Again, not a compliment.

For the record I watched every game Bledsoe started for the Pats. Great arm, tough player. Had some great games and a very good career. But his decision making was inexplicable.
How? In year 1 we were blacked out a bunch. Or were you at those games in person?
 

macal

New Member
Jul 31, 2005
74
- Now for Bourne. Mac 100% stares him down, throws to a nice location in stride, but without much zip.
- Parker ends up open, but only because his defender drops off to double-cover the stared-down Bourne with the ball.
I think you are spot on with this analysis. If he is going to go to Bourne, he needs to be staring down Parker. Either that or continue to stare down Bourne and then go to Parker, if his defender starts to peel off. If Parker's defender didn't peel off, I think there is a reasonable chance that Bourne gets the first down just in front of his defender. Either way, this was on Mac and not the play call.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
The reaction to this game in the Globe is completely over the top. I mean, look at this:


Sports

DAN SHAUGHNESSYThere was a time when championships were all we knew, but those glory days appear long gone
The golden era of sporting success in New England took another hit with the injury to Mac Jones and the play of the Patriots.

TARA SULLIVAN
Patriots quarterback Mac Jones limped off the field late in the fourth quarter after throwing an interception.
Mac Jones’s injury casts a pall over a concerned Patriots’ locker room
The sense of uncertainty was impossible to ignore, with hushed players moving quietly to change and empty their lockers.

PATRIOTS
Mac Jones ran for 31 yards Sunday vs. the Ravens.
Patriots quarterback Mac Jones suffered high ankle sprain, but no timetable set for his recovery
Results from additional exams on Monday will determine whether Jones will be out for an extended time and require a possible stint on injured reserve. 2 hours ago

Box score: Yankees 2, Red Sox 0
CHAD FINN | UNCONVENTIONAL REVIEW
Nelson Agholor's fumble in the fourth quarter was one of four turnovers by the Patriots.
Sobering reality is Patriots may not make progress toward future contender status this season
The Patriots are 1-2, with the distinct possibility of facing Aaron Rodgers and the Packers next Sunday with Brian Hoyer at quarterback.

JIM MCBRIDE | BETWEEN THE HASH MARKS
Nelson Agholor was stripped and fumbled with the Patriots trailing, 31-26, with 5:45 left in the game.
Loss of Mac Jones hurt, but most of the Patriots’ wounds were self-inflicted against Ravens
The Patriots committed turnovers on three of their final four drives, and four total in the loss.

BEN VOLIN | INSTANT ANALYSIS
Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson ran all over the Patriots and accounted for five touchdowns, four through the air.
Patriots finally put some points on the board, but this loss shows they aren’t ready for prime time
The Patriots could not make key plays despite the Ravens being down to a fourth-string left tackle and an injury ravaged defensive line.

Mac is dead. We don’t win championships anymore. The team isn’t ready (and never will be). Even when they do things right, it’s not enough.

I shudder to think what they’ll write when the team actually plays a bad game.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,464
Gallows Hill
The reaction to this game in the Globe is completely over the top. I mean, look at this:


Sports

DAN SHAUGHNESSYThere was a time when championships were all we knew, but those glory days appear long gone
The golden era of sporting success in New England took another hit with the injury to Mac Jones and the play of the Patriots.

TARA SULLIVAN
Patriots quarterback Mac Jones limped off the field late in the fourth quarter after throwing an interception.
Mac Jones’s injury casts a pall over a concerned Patriots’ locker room
The sense of uncertainty was impossible to ignore, with hushed players moving quietly to change and empty their lockers.

PATRIOTS
Mac Jones ran for 31 yards Sunday vs. the Ravens.
Patriots quarterback Mac Jones suffered high ankle sprain, but no timetable set for his recovery
Results from additional exams on Monday will determine whether Jones will be out for an extended time and require a possible stint on injured reserve. 2 hours ago

Box score: Yankees 2, Red Sox 0
CHAD FINN | UNCONVENTIONAL REVIEW
Nelson Agholor's fumble in the fourth quarter was one of four turnovers by the Patriots.'s fumble in the fourth quarter was one of four turnovers by the Patriots.
Sobering reality is Patriots may not make progress toward future contender status this season
The Patriots are 1-2, with the distinct possibility of facing Aaron Rodgers and the Packers next Sunday with Brian Hoyer at quarterback.

JIM MCBRIDE | BETWEEN THE HASH MARKS
Nelson Agholor was stripped and fumbled with the Patriots trailing, 31-26, with 5:45 left in the game.
Loss of Mac Jones hurt, but most of the Patriots’ wounds were self-inflicted against Ravens
The Patriots committed turnovers on three of their final four drives, and four total in the loss.

BEN VOLIN | INSTANT ANALYSIS
Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson ran all over the Patriots and accounted for five touchdowns, four through the air.
Patriots finally put some points on the board, but this loss shows they aren’t ready for prime time
The Patriots could not make key plays despite the Ravens being down to a fourth-string left tackle and an injury ravaged defensive line.

Mac is dead. We don’t win championships anymore. The team isn’t ready (and never will be). Even when they do things right, it’s not enough.

I shudder to think what they’ll write when the team actually plays a bad game.
Given how much the sports media hates Bill Belichick, I am not at all surprised by these reactions. They have literally been waiting for decades to hammer him.
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
8,713
Hmmmmm....I suppose. That's 325 total yards with five touchdowns (4 passing, 1 running). That's kinda bonkers.
The amount of Lamar Jackson minimization that happens around here is really something. Dude is awesome. Yeah, he may throw some inaccurate balls and make a few bad decisions and of course, he's always on the verge of a catastrophic injury that will surely derail his career, but he's an absolute beast and I welcome his addition to the New England Patriots roster in the summer of 2023.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,099
Some of the media takes in the Globe are not all that wrong: the Pats are 1-2 and likely have lost their starting QB for a few weeks at least, and their backup options are not particularly good. And had they not turned the ball over 4 times (not including the failed 4th down attempt), the Pats may have pulled out a victory, so calling out the turnovers is perfectly fair, especially given Bill's philosophy on turnovers. And the defense was too inconsistent (allowed 7.2 yards per carry while the Ravens scored on 6 of 11 drives, with only one of them being a short field).

But Shaughnessy has always hated Belichick (he's #2 after Ortiz on his hate list), and Volin typically tries to (poorly) channel his inner Borges. Takez from either are best ignored.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,476
Melrose, MA
Mac has been missing guys underneath and floating into his throwing lanes and that's been an issue last year, in pre-season, and this year. His post-snap vision is leading to turnover worthy plays.
I don't disagree about the bolded, but this year looks like a significant turn for the worse. 2 TDs and 5 INT in 3 games. Were he healthy, he'd have to go 20-8 the rest of the way to just match last year.
Does Mac really need to be “a lot better”? This game was a one score game, inches from being a 3-point game, late in the 4th. Admittedly I watched this game in DVR so I knew the outcome already but Mac was far more in control of the offense yesterday for most of the game.
He needs to play clean football and have situational awareness at the goal line.
I'm surprised that people a few people are giving Patricia shit in this game. The team scored 26 points despite having 4 turnovers and a turnover on downs at the Baltimore 33. One interception was in the end zone and the fumble was at the Baltimore 27. They should have scored 35 or 40 points.
The running backs carried the ball 23 times for 114 yards. The short/flat passing attack was terrible. The near pick at the goal line, the 4th round pass to Bourne for zero, passes to the backs that went nowhere (like the -4 one to Harris). The godawful whatever-the-fuck-it-was-supposed-to-be on the failed 2-point conversion. I think they passed up opportunities to run the damned ball which they generally did well.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,432
Looking at the highlight film of the 4th-and-3 play in the 2nd quarter, it seems clear there are 5 routes run from a compressed shotgun formation (nobody wide):

- Henry releases immediately and goes up the seam. He appears to be one-on-one with his defender, but there's likely a safety upfield offscreen. Seems like a good target though.
- LJ gets picked off early coming through the line and is not a viable option while caught up in the wash.
- The back (Harris, I think) delays his release briefly, and blocks nobody. He ends up one-on-one, but in the midst of line traffic. He begins a cut into the space Henry has cleared by going upfield, and in hindsight, was probably the best bet to gain the yardage. Mac did not allow the play to develop though, perhaps because he didn't trust the line to win a 5-on-4 battle, and just went with his first read.
- Now for Bourne. Mac 100% stares him down, throws to a nice location in stride, but without much zip.
- Parker ends up open, but only because his defender drops off to double-cover the stared-down Bourne with the ball.

Maybe Parker could have picked his defender, but at this point, we didn't know how lax the refereeing would be, so that would've been a bad play. In any case, there were 5 options here, not just one.
Just looking at the clip. Mac certainly is completely focused on Bourne all along and releases ball before Parker can even run his guy off. He doesn't even leave Parker until the ball is released and is there as soon as Bourne catches it.

Bourne is already outside the numbers when he catches the ball though so Mac can't wait too much longer on that route.

Maybe if Parker gets a clean release, he pulls his guy, Humphrey, away. maybe. Inside release probably works better there, might pull Humphrey away and potentially works as a rub for trailing defender. Also possible, Bourne should have be running that a little deeper. Either way, Mac should have seen Humphrey and DB both in good position. Perhaps, Jones thought Parker would continue to engage his guy and then up to Bourne to make play on DB.
 

Gash Prex

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 18, 2002
6,823
With the right talent, Bledsoe was really good in New England, and probably the franchise's 2nd best QB of all time. As the talent and coaching quality declined precipitously after the Packers Super Bowl, Bledsoe's decision making indeed limited him. Also, the sacks were really starting to pile up in the latter part of his Pats career and in Buffalo, and he was pretty beat up by the time he arrived in Dallas.
I hope all you fondly remembering Drew Bledsoe ( and I’m one of them) also remember what years 1-3 of Bledsoe looked like
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
8,713
An underrated bad sequence in the game was giving up a 43-yard PR up 21-20 followed immediately by a 38-yard Lamar run to set Baltimore up at the six. Bill Belichick, a lover of the field position game, could not have appreciated that.
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,371
Those turnovers really did a number on our defense that I thought was handling Lamar well in the first half. Things could have been worse looking at the Bryant muff and a pick 6 that the Ravens simply dropped that we punched in the next play (that would have been a 14 point swing for the Ravens) so we got lucky I think in the turnover department. Wise Jr and Judon had solid games as well as the secondary who were not covering Andrews. Running backs were solid.

We just need to take fucking care of the football better ... backs and Parker and Bourne and even some tight end action (prom night) were nice to see.

But 4 great plays getting constantly wiped out by one bone headed turnover ... those 4 are my GOATS
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,154
Westwood MA
Given how much the sports media hates Bill Belichick, I am not at all surprised by these reactions. They have literally been waiting for decades to hammer him.
This.

The wolves have been circling for 20 years.

The media in this town really does suck.

Have to admit though; the crack about the pie to Belichick's face was somewhat comical.........."He'd just complain about the crust."
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,154
Westwood MA
One of my goats is whoever whiffed on the sack on third down when Lamar was dead to rights that kept the drive going and led to their first TD; you've 100% got to wrap him up there, I think two players missed on that one, that can't happen in that situation.
 

Garshaparra

New Member
Feb 27, 2008
527
McCarver's Mushy Mouth
One of my goats is whoever whiffed on the sack on third down when Lamar was dead to rights that kept the drive going and led to their first TD; you've 100% got to wrap him up there, I think two players missed on that one, that can't happen in that situation.
They collided. IIRC, it was Wise and Judon, both coming from slightly different angles.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
An underrated bad sequence in the game was giving up a 43-yard PR up 21-20 followed immediately by a 38-yard Lamar run to set Baltimore up at the six. Bill Belichick, a lover of the field position game, could not have appreciated that.
The punt return was sprung by a blatant hold by two guys on Slater AND a block in the back on Henry, both right in front of the refs, and Slater - the last guy in the world who argues - was all over the refs even plays later about it.

Hard to blame the punt team for that when the only reason the play happened was two blatant penalties missed by the refs.

The 38 yard run by Lamar is a different matter, of course.
 

Bongorific

Thinks he’s clever
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,433
Balboa Towers
The punt return was sprung by a blatant hold by two guys on Slater AND a block in the back on Henry, both right in front of the refs, and Slater - the last guy in the world who argues - was all over the refs even plays later about it.

Hard to blame the punt team for that when the only reason the play happened was two blatant penalties missed by the refs.

The 38 yard run by Lamar is a different matter, of course.
The block in the back on Hunter was egregious and the ref was 2 feet away.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,559
Here
Looking at the highlight film of the 4th-and-3 play in the 2nd quarter, it seems clear there are 5 routes run from a compressed shotgun formation (nobody wide):

- Henry releases immediately and goes up the seam. He appears to be one-on-one with his defender, but there's likely a safety upfield offscreen. Seems like a good target though.
- LJ gets picked off early coming through the line and is not a viable option while caught up in the wash.
- The back (Harris, I think) delays his release briefly, and blocks nobody. He ends up one-on-one, but in the midst of line traffic. He begins a cut into the space Henry has cleared by going upfield, and in hindsight, was probably the best bet to gain the yardage. Mac did not allow the play to develop though, perhaps because he didn't trust the line to win a 5-on-4 battle, and just went with his first read.
- Now for Bourne. Mac 100% stares him down, throws to a nice location in stride, but without much zip.
- Parker ends up open, but only because his defender drops off to double-cover the stared-down Bourne with the ball.

Maybe Parker could have picked his defender, but at this point, we didn't know how lax the refereeing would be, so that would've been a bad play. In any case, there were 5 options here, not just one.
Well, they’re obviously going to have players run routes to spread the field, but it doesn’t answer whether the play is designed internally to just have Mac throw an immediate screen.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Well, they’re obviously going to have players run routes to spread the field, but it doesn’t answer whether the play is designed internally to just have Mac throw an immediate screen.
Yeah, that looks like a one-read play, to Bourne on the flat route (it's not a screen). None of the other receivers even looks for the ball.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
The block in the back on Hunter was egregious and the ref was 2 feet away.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Belichick goes over a play like that on film. I mean, on the one hand, he could be like, look guys, it doesn't matter if they hold, block you in the back, tackle you to the ground, whatever. You gotta make a play and not let the guy get that many yards on a punt return. But on the other, he might say, well, we played that pretty perfectly, but Baltimore actually sprung that by committing two egregious penalties, and there's a reason why those things are illegal, so if we play it like that every time, we'll actually be just fine as long as either (a) the other team doesn't commit the penalties, or (b) the refs actually call it.

I bet he approaches it the first way, at least when addressing the team.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
Given how much the sports media hates Bill Belichick, I am not at all surprised by these reactions. They have literally been waiting for decades to hammer him.
There was a drumbeat of commentary over the offseason about (1) how the offense looked unbelievably terrible--Bedard repeatedly spoke about having seen the worst practices and pre-season performances he'd ever seen from the Pats offense (2) that the offensive coaching staff was clueless/inexperienced/couldn't be trusted to run a reasonable operation and (3) the o-line was awful because Patricia was inexperienced and distracted. [A common theme is that the reporters, especially Bedard, really hate Patricia].

Three weeks in the offense looks kind of average, the play calls and overall offensive operations seems normal (not like Denver or something), and the o-line is pretty good.

I don't think this team has the horses to be much better than a 9 or 10 win team if everything breaks right for them--and it hasn't so far and Mac Jones's injury probably pushes that down to more like 6 or 7 wins--but the idea that this coaching staff and organization was uniquely inept really speaks to me to how desperate local sports media is to bury the team.
 
Last edited:

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
There was a drumbeat of commentary over the offseason about (1) how the offense looked unbelievably terrible--Bedard repeatedly spoke about having seen the worst practices and pre-season performances he'd ever seen from the Pats offense (2) that the offensive coaching staff was clueless/inexperienced/couldn't be trusted to run a reasonable operation and (3) the o-line was awful because Patricia was inexperienced and distracted. [A common theme is that the reporters, especially Bedard, really hate Patricia].

Three weeks in the offense looks kind of average, the play calls and overall offensive operations seems normal (not like Denver or something), and the o-line is pretty good.

I don't think this team has the horses to be much better than a 9 or 10 win team if everything breaks right for them--and it hasn't so far and Mac Jones's injury probably pushes that down to more like 6 or 7 wins--but the idea that this coaching staff and organization was uniquely inept really speaks to me to how desperate local sports media is to bury the team.
I think the jury is still very much out on the coaching. Not sure how much we can read into the BAL game given how banged up the BAL D is. The line play is encouraging but what still gives me pause is there seem to be some obvious tendencies building. I saw a stat during the game that approx 75% of the time Mac is in shotgun they pass and 85% of the time he is under center they run. Numbers might be off a smidge but that was the ballpark, if that doesn't adjust a bit teams are likely going to have an easy time game planning for NE as more film is available. Granted they can always change it up but until they do the offense seems a bit vanilla to me.

GB has an upper tier D so it is rather unfortunate we won't see Mac in that game. Would have been a good barometer for the offensive play calling.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
There was a drumbeat of commentary over the offseason about (1) how the offense looked unbelievably terrible--Bedard repeatedly spoke about having seen the worst practices and pre-season performances he'd ever seen from the Pats offense (2) that the offensive coaching staff was clueless/inexperienced/couldn't be trusted to run a reasonable operation and (3) the o-line was awful because Patricia was inexperienced and distracted. [A common theme is that the reporters, especially Bedard, really hate Patricia].

Three weeks in the offense looks kind of average, the play calls and overall offensive operations seems normal (not like Denver or something), and the o-line is pretty good.

I don't think this team has the horses to be much better than a 9 or 10 win team if everything breaks right for them--and it hasn't so far and Mac Jones's injury probably pushes that down to more like 6 or 7 wins--but the idea that this coaching staff and organization was uniquely inept really speaks to me to how desperate local sports media is to bury the team.
I'm going to push back against this a little bit. If people who have watched every training camp for over two decades tell me this is the worst the offense has looked in that period, I'm inclined to believe them. Why not say that last year, or even in 2020 if there was any desperation to bury the team? They definitely don't seem to be doing the wide zone stuff that reportedly looked awful during installs, which leads me to believe they scrapped it after realizing it was looking as bad as the reports suggested. This idea that the Boston media was just waiting for Bill to show any slight sign of failure to bury him rings hollow to me, they spent two decades deifying him, even Mike Felger thought Belichick could make the AFCCG with Brian Hoyer at QB. The overall feeling in the region was "as long as Bill is here they'll contend", just look at the reactions when they got Cam Newton.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
I think the jury is still very much out on the coaching. Not sure how much we can read into the BAL game given how banged up the BAL D is. The line play is encouraging but what still gives me pause is there seem to be some obvious tendencies building. I saw a stat during the game that approx 75% of the time Mac is in shotgun they pass and 85% of the time he is under center they run. Numbers might be off a smidge but that was the ballpark, if that doesn't adjust a bit teams are likely going to have an easy time game planning for NE as more film is available. Granted they can always change it up but until they do the offense seems a bit vanilla to me.

GB has an upper tier D so it is rather unfortunate we won't see Mac in that game. Would have been a good barometer for the offensive play calling.
I've heard the complaint before but the Pats have been pretty predictable about running from run sets and passing from pass sets for quite a while, dating back to Corey Dillon and continuing through Maroney, Sony Michel and it looks like up to the present. (Likewise Faulk, Vereen, White weren't going to run the ball very much when they're in). That doesn't bother me; it seems to be intentional that when they want to run they have heavier sets and a bigger back and when they want to pass they have a third down back and more good receivers.

I haven't studied enough to see if their play calling is vanilla (and it is earlier in the season, they often get more dynamic as the season progresses). It might be? The great playcallers spend all that time charting stuff up so they can make minior adjustments and trick other teams or isolate particular matchups, and that part of the game is just too subtle for me to tell. But so far they're looking like a reasonably normal NFL offense to me.


I'm going to push back against this a little bit. If people who have watched every training camp for over two decades tell me this is the worst the offense has looked in that period, I'm inclined to believe them. Why not say that last year, or even in 2020 if there was any desperation to bury the team? They definitely don't seem to be doing the wide zone stuff that reportedly looked awful during installs, which leads me to believe they scrapped it after realizing it was looking as bad as the reports suggested. This idea that the Boston media was just waiting for Bill to show any slight sign of failure to bury him rings hollow to me, they spent two decades deifying him, even Mike Felger thought Belichick could make the AFCCG with Brian Hoyer at QB. The overall feeling in the region was "as long as Bill is here they'll contend", just look at the reactions when they got Cam Newton.
Bedard repeatedly said in training camp that it was the worst offense he'd ever seen in the NFL; that they're merely meh right now suggests there's hyperbole there.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
Over the three weeks, here's been the evolution of the offense:

Week 1 - 7 points, 271 yards, 17 first downs, 3 turnovers (loss)
Week 2 - 20 points, 376 yards, 18 first downs, 1 turnover (win)
Week 3 - 26 points, 447 yards, 22 first downs, 4 turnovers (loss)

Clearly they're moving the ball better and scoring more points. The issue is the turnovers. This past week, the turnovers came:

- late 3rd Q, down 28-20, on the NE 28. Mac throws a pick that leads to a Raven FG. (costs NE 3 points)
- mid 4th Q, down 31-26, on the Bal 10. Mac throws a pick in the end zone. (costs NE min of 3 points)
- mid 4th Q, down 31-26, on the NE 33, Mac hits Agholor for a huge gain, but he fumbles, leading to a Bal TD. (costs NE probably 10 points)
- late 4th Q, down 37-26, on the NE 44, Mac throws a pick to end the game.

Those four turnovers cost NE a minimum of about 16 points, in terms of what they lost out on, and then what the turnovers led to for Baltimore.

But aside from the turnovers (other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?), the offense definitely is looking better.