The Game Goat Thread: Wk. 7 vs Chicago

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
Well, that can go the other way. We don’t know that they weren’t properly prepared nor do we know that they were. The results is all we, as fans, can really go off of. And when I see the entire team basically f’ing up, I generally assume there is a larger problem at hand here. But it’s obviously hard to allocate blame to the various factors that also play into it, like injuries and just poor execution, as you have pointed out.

The bad fumble luck was definitely a material factor. It’s often unfulfilling to blame bad luck but they did have some in this game, which I readily acknowledge.
Sure. We don't know. So when we make pronouncements that the team just wasn't prepared....we really can't say that with such confidence. Like...at all.
 

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,333
Sure. We don't know. So when we make pronouncements that the team just wasn't prepared....we really can't say that with such confidence. Like...at all.
As someone with no horse in this race, I'm not trying to be a dick but they were 8.5-point favorites and lost by 19. That...doesn't happen every day. I think people are entirely justified in questioning the preparedness.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
As someone with no horse in this race, I'm not trying to be a dick but they were 8.5-point favorites and lost by 19. That...doesn't happen every day. I think people are entirely justified in questioning the preparedness.
You're not being a dick. This is a good point. And I agree. I have no problem with people questioning it. I pushed back because it was claimed pretty forcefully that the team simply wasn't prepared, and I don't honestly know if they got bludgeoned because they weren't prepared, because the players executed terribly (as in the Bryant example I've mentioned), because of injuries, because of fumble luck, or because even the best teams (which NE is NOT) sometimes just have absolutely crappy games. I mean...it happens.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,734
Deep inside Muppet Labs
You're not being a dick. This is a good point. And I agree. I have no problem with people questioning it. I pushed back because it was claimed pretty forcefully that the team simply wasn't prepared, and I don't honestly know if they got bludgeoned because they weren't prepared, because the players executed terribly (as in the Bryant example I've mentioned), because of injuries, because of fumble luck, or because even the best teams (which NE is NOT) sometimes just have absolutely crappy games. I mean...it happens.
I mean this very sincerely with no snark: what would you need to see to conclude that the team wasn't adequately prepared? Honest question.
 

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,333
You're not being a dick. This is a good point. And I agree. I have no problem with people questioning it. I pushed back because it was claimed pretty forcefully that the team simply wasn't prepared, and I don't honestly know if they got bludgeoned because they weren't prepared, because the players executed terribly (as in the Bryant example I've mentioned), because of injuries, because of fumble luck, or because even the best teams (which NE is NOT) sometimes just have absolutely crappy games. I mean...it happens.
It's possible. It is the Bears, but it was probably set up for them to play their best game of the year - they were coming off a mini-bye and had literally no one on the injury report. That being said, it's the Bears and to get bludgeoned in that fashion is pretty inexcusable. Even worse, the score was probably closer than the game. The Bears certainly had all the fumble luck, but the Pats' entire offense was two plays and they were dominated up and down the field all night.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
I mean this very sincerely with no snark: what would you need to see to conclude that the team wasn't adequately prepared? Honest question.
That's not really the right question, and I mean THAT sincerely too. What I would need to see is to be in on their practices and watch what they go over. Because I offered a bunch of other possible explanations for Monday night:

- Bad preparation
- Talent issue (maybe NE just isn't that good)
- Injuries (not having Barmore and Uche and then losing Dugger really really hurt them on Monday?)
- Bad fumble luck (all six balls put on the ground went to Chicago; think the game looks different if Jakobi recovers his own fumble there?)
- Poor execution by players (think: the Bryant play I've been referring to; he was in the right spot, just misjudged the angle)
- Bad in-game coaching decisions (which is still on the coaching staff, but isn't so much about "preparation" as it is play calling, which is different)
- Just a crappy performance that sometimes even plagues the best teams

Bad preparation is certainly one possible explanation, but these other ones are too. And unless we actually see what they go over in practice, we have NO idea if they really weren't well-prepared.

I mean, if they weren't prepared, what do you think they actually did this past week in practice? That's an honest question. How did they use their time?
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
DMC said in his interview that they did not expect Chicago to run as much and that the used some of the runs Baltimore did that gave them issues. To me it’s both a coaching issue and a defensive strategy issue with what fronts to use. Patriots players didn’t mentally play these runs right. They also struggled with their responsibilities in zone coverages (especially the ILBs and safeties). So to me that strikes me as being ill-prepared. Chicago made massive changes to what they normally do on offense which makes being unprepared understandable but not being prepared for zone coverage responsibilities is weird. I don’t want to play sports psychologist but I wonder how much of them feeling overwhelmed by the new offense Chicago was using bleed into other facets of play - like they generally were uncomfortable all night.

I only got through about a quarter of the game last night but seeing Taylor’s clips and watching live, AND hearing what DMC said I think it’s clear they were unprepared on defense.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
It's possible. It is the Bears, but it was probably set up for them to play their best game of the year - they were coming off a mini-bye and had literally no one on the injury report. That being said, it's the Bears and to get bludgeoned in that fashion is pretty inexcusable. Even worse, the score was probably closer than the game. The Bears certainly had all the fumble luck, but the Pats' entire offense was two plays and they were dominated up and down the field all night.
100% it's inexcusable. It was a catastrophe for NE. Nobody is saying otherwise. That doesn't mean the reason it happened was because the team "wasn't prepared". (it MIGHT be the reason, but it might not be)
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,734
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I mean, if they weren't prepared, what do you think they actually did this past week in practice? That's an honest question. How did they use their time?
I'm sure they used their time to prepare for the game. But:

- they didn't use it well enough or properly anticipate strategies the Bears might use against them (Fields does one thing well which is run and they seemed shocked he ran the ball)
- they clearly didn't work enough on avoiding silly penalties
- the sloppy handoff between Zappe and Meyers indicates a lack of attention to detail and to proper practice.
- neither Jones or Zappe was game-prepared well enough to play winning football. IN RETROSPECT, splitting starter snaps in practice between them was a massive mistake.

The bare facts of the matter is they got blown off their own field by a team much worse than they are. Bad fumble luck accounts for some of it, but this coaching staff is supposed to be one of the best in the league. And they got pantsed on national TV. It's unacceptable.

Is it the only reason they lost? No. But all indications were that it was a major one. They done fucked up good.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
I'm sure they used their time to prepare for the game. But:

- they didn't use it well enough or properly anticipate strategies the Bears might use against them (Fields does one thing well which is run and they seemed shocked he ran the ball)
Last year he ran 18 planned runs all season. 18. That's essentially one per game. He might be good at it, but if they basically never did it, it's not reasonable to spend a lot of practice time preparing for it. It would be like preparing for Buffalo to run Singletary 30 times a game. They never do it, so you don't prepare for that because it's essentially, by the percentages, a waste of time.

- they clearly didn't work enough on avoiding silly penalties
What does this even mean?

- the sloppy handoff between Zappe and Meyers indicates a lack of attention to detail and to proper practice.
LOL what? Meyers took his eyes off the ball because he was about to get hit. That's not a "preparedness" issue. The Patriots prepare in terms of fumbling/ball security as well as, or better than, all the other teams in the league. This is widely known. Sometimes players fumble anyway.

- neither Jones or Zappe was game-prepared well enough to play winning football
I'm not sure what this means either.

The bare facts of the matter is they got blown off their own field by a team objectively much worse than they are. Bad fumble luck accounts for some of it, but this coaching staff is supposed to be one of the best in the league. And they got pantsed on national TV. It's unacceptable.

Is it the only reason they lost? No. But all indications were that it was a major one. They done fucked up good. And it's not acceptable.
They clearly got clobbered. And it's inexcusable.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
It's hard to attribute the penalties to a coach when so many are by one player who doesn't get coached that much. Was Trent Brown high? It was strange.

Sometimes good coaches--even BB---get outcoached. This clearly happened yesterday and it does happen now and again to BB, generally about once a season (usually against the Dolphins at the end of the year). If it starts happening more than once or twice a season, then I'll get concerned. Until then I'll chalk it up as a bad day at the office.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,734
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Last year he ran 18 planned runs all season. 18. That's essentially one per game. He might be good at it, but if they basically never did it, it's not reasonable to spend a lot of practice time preparing for it. It would be like preparing for Buffalo to run Singletary 30 times a game. They never do it, so you don't prepare for that because it's essentially, by the percentages, a waste of time.
Or, you know that you cannot stop running QBs worth a damn and it's been going on for years, you know that Fields can't do anything well BUT run, and you anticipate their strategy for their attack.


What does this even mean?
Exactly what I said. Poorly coached teams commit penalties at a high rate, it's one of their most enduring traits. The Pats have committed an ungodly number of penalties this year. Why hasn't the coaching staff fixed that?


LOL what? Meyers took his eyes off the ball because he was about to get hit. That's not a "preparedness" issue. The Patriots prepare in terms of fumbling/ball security as well as, or better than, all the other teams in the league. This is widely known. Sometimes players fumble anyway.
Look at the play again. Zappe held the ball incorrectly. That's lack of attention to detail and practice at work. That play appeared to all the world that they didn't practice it before running it. I'm sure that's not true, but they certainly didn't practice it enough.



I'm not sure what this means either.
Decision-making and field reading was poor all night.



They clearly got clobbered. And it's inexcusable.
Only thing we seem to agree on.

I honestly have no idea where they go from there. It's been a 3 year rebuild and they've accomplished nothing.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
Yeah but I can’t stress this enough @Smiling Joe Hesketh that the quote from Robert Mays who is a bear fan and watches every game in detail and knows X’s and O’s is legit. They ran different kinds of runs from different looks that had not been on tape. That and the frequency of those runs was something Chicago hadn’t done last year or even this year before last night. He had the most runs all year and the most designed runs and designed run options all year. He had scrambled before and run some this year but not like this. They were not prepared for it. Should they have been? In hindsight, yes. But I’m not sure if they could have predicted it. Teams will see what Baltimore did this year to them as well as what Allen did last year on designed runs and copy that if they can. They have a running QB problem. Death, taxes, and BB having a running QB problem.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,734
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Yeah but I can’t stress this enough @Smiling Joe Hesketh that the quote from Robert Mays who is a bear fan and watches every game in detail and knows X’s and O’s is legit. They ran different kinds of runs from different looks that had not been on tape. That and the frequency of those runs was something Chicago hadn’t done last year or even this year before last night. He had the most runs all year and the most designed runs and designed run options all year. He had scrambled before and run some this year but not like this. They were not prepared for it. Should they have been? In hindsight, yes. But I’m not sure if they could have predicted it. Teams will see what Baltimore did this year to them as well as what Allen did last year on designed runs and copy that if they can. They have a running QB problem. Death, taxes, and BB having a running QB problem.
Fields can't do anything but run. The Pats have never been able to contain a running QB. It doesn't take a genius to figure out the Bears might run with Fields.

Even if they didn't anticipate it....where were the adjustments? There were none. They didn't put a spy on him. Didn't have the DEs avoid overrushing the pocket. They did nothing to change things up. And they got slaughtered.

If the Pats crash and burn this season, Monday night's game will be the trigger point.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
Fields can't do anything but run. The Pats have never been able to contain a running QB. It doesn't take a genius to figure out the Bears might run with Fields.

Even if they didn't anticipate it....where were the adjustments? There were none. They didn't put a spy on him. Didn't have the DEs avoid overrushing the pocket. They did nothing to change things up. And they got slaughtered.

If the Pats crash and burn this season, Monday night's game will be the trigger point.
They used Wilson as a spy but sent him on a green-dog blitz. He missed. Then they had Wilson spy on him again and Fields outraced Wilson to the side. Those are just two off the top of my head watching live from the second half.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,734
Deep inside Muppet Labs
They used Wilson as a spy but sent him on a green-dog blitz. He missed. Then they had Wilson spy on him again and Fields outraced Wilson to the side. Those are just two off the top of my head watching live from the second half.
OK. Maybe try another guy? At some point they just gave up on the idea.

I say this with zero emotion: what happened on Monday night should never take place for a competent NFL team.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
You're putting all the mistakes made by players on the coaches as a matter of "not being prepared". Bryant read the play correctly but took a bad angle and Fields ran by him for a touchdown.

Is that an issue of the team not being prepared, or was that a mistake by the player?

Six times the football hit the Gillette Stadium turf. All six times the ball was recovered by the Bears. Were the Patriots not prepared to recover fumbles?

The Bears did things they'd never done before. Should Belichick have prepared all week for stuff the Bears literally never did before and had NO tape on whatsoever?

Ok enough. This is getting to be like our conversations in the main Sox forum.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
Real quick though @Smiling Joe Hesketh we both agree they were unprepared. I think they should have been more prepared for the QB runs but I think I’m giving them more leeway for being caught with their pants down given Chicago's tendencies this year than you. We’re not far off.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
I’ll have to rewatch to see who else was going to spy. Usually that role goes to Dugger but he was out.
 

PedrosRedGlove

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2005
670
I'm sure they used their time to prepare for the game. But:

- they didn't use it well enough or properly anticipate strategies the Bears might use against them (Fields does one thing well which is run and they seemed shocked he ran the ball)
- they clearly didn't work enough on avoiding silly penalties
- the sloppy handoff between Zappe and Meyers indicates a lack of attention to detail and to proper practice.
- neither Jones or Zappe was game-prepared well enough to play winning football. IN RETROSPECT, splitting starter snaps in practice between them was a massive mistake.

The bare facts of the matter is they got blown off their own field by a team much worse than they are. Bad fumble luck accounts for some of it, but this coaching staff is supposed to be one of the best in the league. And they got pantsed on national TV. It's unacceptable.

Is it the only reason they lost? No. But all indications were that it was a major one. They done fucked up good.
They played a clip on the radio this morning of Bill talking about the Bledsoe/Brady situation, didn't catch the original source. He recounts the week Bledsoe came back, and how he split practice reps that week. Brady subsequently played poorly in the loss to St. Louis. He then concluded that wasn't a good plan on his part, and it was understandable that Brady might not play amazingly, and that it was on him as HC to make the decision and pick a guy and go with him.

Bill knows this was a massive mistake. It's going to be interesting to see how he handles it going forward.

Also funny coincidence Brady's line in that game is eerily similar to Zappe's, 19/27 185 1/2 vs. 14/22 185 1/2.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
OK. Maybe try another guy? At some point they just gave up on the idea.

I say this with zero emotion: what happened on Monday night should never take place for a competent NFL team.
What happens on Monday happens a couple times a week, particularly to teams with average talent. We just don't think it happens here because we had a hall of fame QB for 20 years.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,734
Deep inside Muppet Labs
You're putting all the mistakes made by players on the coaches as a matter of "not being prepared". Bryant read the play correctly but took a bad angle and Fields ran by him for a touchdown.

Is that an issue of the team not being prepared, or was that a mistake by the player?

Six times the football hit the Gillette Stadium turf. All six times the ball was recovered by the Bears. Were the Patriots not prepared to recover fumbles?

The Bears did things they'd never done before. Should Belichick have prepared all week for stuff the Bears literally never did before and had NO tape on whatsoever?

Ok enough. This is getting to be like our conversations in the main Sox forum.
Fumble luck is random and always has been. On that much we are agreed.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,099
What happens on Monday happens a couple times a week, particularly to teams with average talent. We just don't think it happens here because we had a hall of fame QB for 20 years.
The Brady era Pats were always good for 1 or 2 of these per season. I recall the infamous Payton Hillis game in Cleveland against Mangini.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
It reminded me of the Miami wildcat game. A heavy underdog came in and unveiled something they previously hadn't done before (designed runs for Fields) and it caught the Pats flat flooted. It wasn't quite as dramatic as the wildcat stuff but similar result.
 

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,333
What happens on Monday happens a couple times a week, particularly to teams with average talent. We just don't think it happens here because we had a hall of fame QB for 20 years.
I don't think 8.5-point favorites get blown out very often. Sometimes big favorites lose close games and sometimes slight favorites (or dogs) get blown out, but you rarely ever see a big favorite get blown out. Obviously they'd still be pissed, but I don't think the board would be apoplectic if they lost a nailbiter.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
I don't think 8.5-point favorites get blown out very often. Sometimes big favorites lose close games and sometimes slight favorites (or dogs) get blown out, but you rarely ever see a big favorite get blown out. Obviously they'd still be pissed, but I don't think the board would be apoplectic if they lost a nailbiter.
Road game, but Tampa was -13 and blown out by Carolina last week. Green Bay was -7.5 at home to the Jets the week before and lost by 17. The Rams were -5.5 to Dallas and lost by multiple scores (12). Buffalo was -7 at home to Indy last year when they got blownout 41-15.

I think it does happen.
 
Last edited:

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Short answer, BB. This might be for another thread, but Bill is involved in so many aspects in the building and running of this team his fingerprints are literally all over the franchise. From the draft and contracts to the mystery as to who is actually running the offense and defense there has been a clear overall decline in the roster and coaching staff. It's been a Hell of a run since Belichick arrived here and the fact that it was sustained for as long as it was is incredible, but that aside the game seems to be passing him by. Why would you pull Jones after 3 possessions if he's not hurt? I mean he is/was the future at the position and he doesn't get the chance to show that he's recovered from the ankle sprain? Was it because of the record? I've no idea, but personally I'm not buying the "plan to play both QBs". Then with about 9 minutes or so left in the game and down 3 scores you're running the ball? The play calling on those last couple of possessions was head scratching. If BB feels the need to be so involved in every aspect of this team, then Monday's loss, more specifically the way that they lost, is mostly on Belichick.
 

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,333
Road game, but Tampa was -13 and blown out by Carolina last week. Green Bay was -7.5 at home to the Jets the week before and lost by 17. Buffalo was -7 at home to Indy last year when they got blownout 41-15.

I think it does happen.
Yeah, it does happen a little more than I thought. I just didn't think this result had much of a chance of happening even with an up-and-down team like the Pats, especially considering the box score looked even worse than the actual score. I'd venture to bet the Bears won't win another game by even 13+ the rest of the year.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
Yeah, it does happen a little more than I thought. I just didn't think this result had much of a chance of happening even with an up-and-down team like the Pats, especially considering the box score looked even worse than the actual score. I'd venture to bet the Bears won't win another game by even 13+ the rest of the year.
I think the Bears are going to get crushed this coming week. Hey, that's the NFL.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,829
Unreal America
I think they did spy in the second half to no effect.
Yep, and I think the idea that you can just put a single spy on a mobile QB and all will be well defensively is pure silliness. Fields is faster than everyone on the Pats D. The only way a spy can bottle him up individually would be by anticipating where Fields is going and being extremely disciplined at beating him to the edge. It's possible, but likely not going to be without plays where physically the spy just gets beat. You need a team effort to limit a mobile QB, and the Pats rarely have the front 7 athleticism to do that.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
And to add to that @8slim unless your spy is a track star good luck to him catching up to Fields. Wilson is an athletic ILB. I don’t get the complaints about the front 7 athleticism. They play in big nickel a ton and their 3 safeties are all athletic especially Dugger who is often in the box. Barmore is athletic. Wise is athletic. Judon is no slouch even if he is more of a power edge. Godchaux, Guy, Carl Davis, etc are bigger players. Tavai and Bentley are a little slower - same for Jennings but he is playing like he is finally over his injuries and has some juice this year. Uche is a freak. Wilson and McMillan in limited snaps have juice. Peppers has juice. They have speed on defense. Not everyone is fast but they have plenty of athletic guys on the field.
Edit: I think they have enough athleticism in the front 7 so that they shouldn’t be pantsed every time they face a mobile QB.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
Basically I don’t think it’s lack of athleticism vs guys not playing correctly (so coaching) and scheme (fronts, strategy, etc). I’d put players probably 3rd on that list but YMMV. I think they should have better results with the guys they have.
 

Bowhemian

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2015
5,701
Bow, NH
Guys, you are all missing the mark here. We all know that BB is a big student of the history of the game. Of course he wants to pass Halas in HC wins. But he respects the history of the game so much that he threw the game so that his 325th win didn't come against the Bears.
/sports talk radio
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,463
Basically I don’t think it’s lack of athleticism vs guys not playing correctly (so coaching) and scheme (fronts, strategy, etc). I’d put players probably 3rd on that list but YMMV. I think they should have better results with the guys they have.
Yeah, I think the LBs are a lot more athletic this year (outside Bentley).... I also think they aren't very good. The best chance to spy Fields with any level of success went out the door when Dugger got hurt. He's not ideal, but he's the only guy with the size/speed/tackling combo to even try it. Mack Wilson can't keep up, Wilson couldn't either, and he couldn't tackle when he did.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,829
Unreal America
And to add to that @8slim unless your spy is a track star good luck to him catching up to Fields. Wilson is an athletic ILB. I don’t get the complaints about the front 7 athleticism. They play in big nickel a ton and their 3 safeties are all athletic especially Dugger who is often in the box. Barmore is athletic. Wise is athletic. Judon is no slouch even if he is more of a power edge. Godchaux, Guy, Carl Davis, etc are bigger players. Tavai and Bentley are a little slower - same for Jennings but he is playing like he is finally over his injuries and has some juice this year. Uche is a freak. Wilson and McMillan in limited snaps have juice. Peppers has juice. They have speed on defense. Not everyone is fast but they have plenty of athletic guys on the field.
Edit: I think they have enough athleticism in the front 7 so that they shouldn’t be pantsed every time they face a mobile QB.
I am the furthest thing from an Xs and Os expert, so I appreciate the perspective!
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,291
Yeah, I think the LBs are a lot more athletic this year (outside Bentley).... I also think they aren't very good. The best chance to spy Fields with any level of success went out the door when Dugger got hurt. He's not ideal, but he's the only guy with the size/speed/tackling combo to even try it. Mack Wilson can't keep up, Wilson couldn't either, and he couldn't tackle when he did.
Yeah, there is some athleticism but how is the total package? We know that the athletic guys aren't great in general because they all get less than a third of the team's snaps on D. Aside from Judon, Bentley is the only guy out there most of the time (74%) and he is slow + very limited in coverage. Tavai is next up at 55% and he looks to me like he is behind every play that is near him, whether because of instincts or speed or a mix of factors.

They need better linebackers, period. Are any of Tavai/Wilson/McMillan/Uche/Jennings any good? It's not clear to me that any of this group is more than just a guy. Bentley at least knows the D and can be a destitute man's Hightower I guess but I see a real talent gap here between this and the better linebacking groups in the league who are able to run out guys who can handle 80+% of snaps.

And yes, it's not like you can just get guys like that easily, but the mix and match they have currently seems limiting to me, though I definitely defer to SMU on Xs and Os.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
Tavai is having a decent year but I don't think he played well on Monday. He's actually been surprisingly good as a KVN type. Jennings is having a good rotational year. Wilson and McMillan and Uche have been up and down. I don't think a lot of them minus Uche has some juice as a pass rusher and Wilson's athleticism on passing downs has lead to some good results. He's a liability against the run though. Dugger, Phillips, and Peppers get reps in the box and I love those guys.

X's and O's are my weakest area. You know who does a lot of clinics and seminars and reviews that help? Check out: https://twitter.com/CoachVass I learn a ton from him that I can apply here and elsewhere. The Athletic Football Pod and their youtube helps. Also the QB School and JT's Patreon is great. Oh and Taylor Kyles who I have posted a lot of. Those 4 sources are fantastic resources. If you ever get stuck on a term the ITP glossary is a fantastic resource too.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,283
AZ
Yeah but I can’t stress this enough @Smiling Joe Hesketh that the quote from Robert Mays who is a bear fan and watches every game in detail and knows X’s and O’s is legit. They ran different kinds of runs from different looks that had not been on tape. That and the frequency of those runs was something Chicago hadn’t done last year or even this year before last night. He had the most runs all year and the most designed runs and designed run options all year. He had scrambled before and run some this year but not like this. They were not prepared for it. Should they have been? In hindsight, yes. But I’m not sure if they could have predicted it. Teams will see what Baltimore did this year to them as well as what Allen did last year on designed runs and copy that if they can. They have a running QB problem. Death, taxes, and BB having a running QB problem.
It feels like this can happen in any one game from time time to time in the NFL. It feels like the Patriots played games like this during the height of their greatness where another team in the first ten games of the year or so could treat it like the super bowl and give them a rough ride.

The Patriots are very different now than they were then, and so that's not the comparison that I am trying to draw. The point is that you see games like this that are very lopsided but don't seem to mean as much as one might think.

I still think the 2022 Patriots stink. Take away the lucky muff against the Steelers and I think that's way more obvious. That's not fair because it all evens out and they won the game but I just think they have a good enough coach and a few good enough playmakers that they can win games, but by and large they are not very good. They are unfortunately the worst kind of not very good -- not quite bad enough to draft really high. I don't think Belichick is a give up kind of guy and with the national media counting his wins I suppose we're in for 7-9 wins. But I'd be fine if we get stuck on 3.

Anyway, that's a long diversion for saying that I think the fact that the Bears were able to put lots of eggs in the basket and make the Patriots look awful on a Monday game is not indicative of how good this team actually is.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
The question is: Do we REALLY think that the Patriots are 19 points per game worse than the Bears? Like, for real? Because the Bears aren't very good, and that would essentially make the Patriots one of the worst teams of all time.

Clearly...they are not one of the worst teams of all time.

So what you have here is probably something like this: A roughly middle of the pack NFL team dealing with some key injuries, having bad fumble luck, being caught by surprise by the opponent's game plan, and executing at an uncharacteristically poor level, while the other team did most everything right (contrary to how they typically play) all rolled into one crap show of a game. That's how you get a game like Monday night.
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,371
I’ll have to rewatch to see who else was going to spy. Usually that role goes to Dugger but he was out.
Anferee Jennings was the second half spy on at least a few plays from what I remember

Edit: Fields is more of a Josh Allen / Cam Newton type of runner. Dugger is a better match against a Lamar Jackson / Kyler Murray type of runnier IMO
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,476
Melrose, MA

Too late to add SkyCam to the list of goats? Mac's INT clearly hits it and changes trajectory.
"Trying to throw the ball away" is a stretch. Mac had cleared the pocket, so if that was his goal, anything that crossed the line of scrimmage would have sufficed and he could have thrown it out of bounds.
 

Pesky Pole

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2001
2,465
Phoenixville, PA
"Trying to throw the ball away" is a stretch. Mac had cleared the pocket, so if that was his goal, anything that crossed the line of scrimmage would have sufficed and he could have thrown it out of bounds.
It’s not my tweet and I agree with you. It also wasn’t what lost them the game. The clip was interesting which is why I posted it. ESPN has disputed it being accurate since then. It gave me some hope that Mac didn’t make as bad a decision as we all saw live.