I totally agree with this.
I don't agree with this. It's possible, but I wouldn't say it's a "very good likelihood". Most NFL games are relatively close.[/QUOTE]
The Game Goat Thread: Wk. 7 vs Chicago
- Thread starter SeoulSoxFan
- Start date
Yeah, the whole "we just looked like X, so therefore we'll do Y in the next game" basically doesn't apply in the NFL. Every game is its own unique entity (as we literally saw last night).
Our matchup against the Jets is entirely different than our matchup with the Bears.
Maybe we can tone down/dial back stuff like the bolded. I get the frustration and all, but that's just wrong IMO.
[/QUOTE]
I mean, the Jets beat the hell out of Miami and Green Bay, two teams the Pats lost to (and in the case of Miami, looked completely ineffectual along the way). Transitive property might not be a thing in the NFL but they are 5-2 and the Pats are 3-4 and both teams have played at the level reflected in their records.
There was no reason the Pats should have gotten destroyed by a very poor Bears team last night. At home. They didn't do anything right last night.
Going on the road, to an arch-rival, armed only with a QB controversy and confusion among the players? No one should be surprised if it gets extremely ugly.
Which was entirely different than the matchup vs Carolina.
Some quotes from Belichick on plan and communication. Sounds like Mac and Zappe knew they would both be playing.
What total bullshit nonsense from Bedard. Sorry, but Judge and Patricia don't have the time to waste a game (and potentially a playoff berth) just to prove a point with Mac Jones. They even rang up some play action plays from scrimmage, something that had been lacking in the 3 games that Mac started.
Not sure how rusty Jones was. 3 games is not a lot of time to miss, and he was at least getting some practice reps prior to this week, where he got the 1st team reps. Nothing looked like his timing was off; he was just bad.
If Zappe started against the Bears and Jones against the Jets, we would hear all about how Belichick did Jones a disservice by bringing him back on a short week for a road game against a divisional rival. Then we would hear questions as to why Mac should make his first start in the game leading up to the bye week or some other nonsense.
If Jones showed in practice that he was ready, then no reason not to start him. At some point, the blame needs to fall on Jones.
EDIT: What I fail to understand was the plan to definitely play both QB's. Aikman and Buck were talking about it during the pre-game, so it's not like it's being used as a post-game explanation either.
I don't understand the rationale of not putting Mac back in. If the game is out of hand, why not take the opportunity to get him NFL reps at game speed?
I doubt it. When he's passed it's usually been on a reverse and he'd be running to the right, on his throwing side.
Is this a regression to habits from his Alabama days? I'm not a draftnik and don't watch college ball so I can't say. Feels like bailing on plays by chucking it up might work alright when you have DeVonta Smith, Jerry Jeudy, Jaylen Waddle, Henry Ruggs, and John Metchie to throw to, not so much in the NFL. (Side note but I'm just seeing DeVonta's 2020 numbers, 117-1856-23 in 13 games, dear lord.)
Last edited:
Well Bill is saying the ankle was part of the reason that he didn't go back. Also that Mac wasn't benched due to performance or injuiry. So we've got a nice clear picture of things.
It it was the ankle and they didn't want to put him in hamrs way, begs the obvious fucking question of why the he was out there in the first place.
View: https://twitter.com/ezlazar/status/1584754744530456581?s=20&t=u_uGQFomKNQ6st60AEJtPg
Fucked the dog came first fwiw. Screwed the pooch was the toned down version popularized by The Right Stuff in the 70s, but fuck the dog traces back to the 30s.
Anyway, back to being pissed at Belichick
I thought the path to success for the Pats was a dominant running game. Pound the ball, chew up clock, keep the defense off the field.
That didn’t happen, including early in the game before it got out of hand. I blame the play calling for that. I’m sure there was an eagerness to see Mac throw down the field, but why not just stick with thw offense that worked so well against Detroit? And stick with it.
A big part of that is execution — the OL wasnt exactly opening up huge lanes. But Brown’s horrid play showed up more in pass pro than in the run game. I still can’t believe they traded Shaw Mason, much less how little they got for him.
But I think the game plan is even more to blame. Commit to the run, damn it!
That didn’t happen, including early in the game before it got out of hand. I blame the play calling for that. I’m sure there was an eagerness to see Mac throw down the field, but why not just stick with thw offense that worked so well against Detroit? And stick with it.
A big part of that is execution — the OL wasnt exactly opening up huge lanes. But Brown’s horrid play showed up more in pass pro than in the run game. I still can’t believe they traded Shaw Mason, much less how little they got for him.
But I think the game plan is even more to blame. Commit to the run, damn it!
The game took a reasonably long time to get "out of hand" too. If the plan was to get back to Mac, they could have done so in the third quarter with a shot at winning.
I think they tried to establish the run game but had no success. In the first half they called 11 designed runs (excluding Mac's scrambles) which produced a grand total of 31 yards. I think they had 15 drop backs or designed passes in the half so it wasn't an air raid situation. On each of Mac's first two drives they ran it on 1st down and got 0 and 3 yards. Both drives ended in punts and they weere down 10. On Mac's last drive, they ran it 4 of 10 plays for 11 yards. Trent Brown threw in a bunch of penalties so they were constantly behind the chains which is not ideal for running. After Mac, Zappe came in and hit chunk plays right off the bat so there wasn't really time to run more. He closed the half in a two minute drill which they coughed up on a running play. Then the next time he touched the ball they were down 9 and it's go time.
So I don't think there was an issue with the gameplan from a running standpoint, they just didn't execute.
I'd put it a little differently. BB is good enough--not yesterday but in general--that the team is likely going to keep doing what it's been doing since the start of 2019 and be ok and not be one of the worst five or ten in the league, but it's increasingly hard to see BB turn this team around into a team that can compete for a bye and the superbowl; there just hasn't been enough growth in what's now our third post Brady year and while there's some youthful talent it's nowhere near enough.
If things don't turn around If I'm Kraft I give BB through 2023 and then step down with BB and let Jonathan pick some new blood.
I agree that it wouldn't shock me if the Jets pound NE. But it's still not "very likely".
Last edited:
I think we've seen in the past that BB led teams can rally around a loss like this. I think this can be a wake up call for the team. Go 1-1 the next two weeks, get to the bye week and then come out rolling.
I will say, last week we were all applauding the rookie class. There are a lot of minutes going to rookies and they make mistakes. Combined with injuries and maybe that all coalesced into the mess we saw last night.
This could also have been the dagger in the back. Will be fun to see how they respond against the Jets.
One thing is for certain, this has not been a boring season.
I will say, last week we were all applauding the rookie class. There are a lot of minutes going to rookies and they make mistakes. Combined with injuries and maybe that all coalesced into the mess we saw last night.
This could also have been the dagger in the back. Will be fun to see how they respond against the Jets.
One thing is for certain, this has not been a boring season.
And even if the matchup was similar, teams just perform differently on different days. And things like fumble luck go differently. Last night I think there were six balls put on the ground and all six went to Chicago.
The NFL is crazy town. Think if you're a Bucs fan. You won 13 games last year. Suddenly your team looks like complete crap. But I think we can all envision a world where they pull it together and start winning. But....maybe they won't. Who knows. Aaron Rodgers - the reigning back-to-back MVP - and the Packers are just 3-4 (same record as NE) and just lost to the Commanders. Denver had HUGE hopes after signing Russell Wilson, and they're 2-5 and going nowhere fast. The Saints, who a lot of people thought could make a run in the NFC this year, are 2-5. San Francisco is 3-4. The Rams - defending SB champs - are just 3-3.
Week to week NFL teams can look like world beaters or like the Little Sisters of the Poor. What we experienced during the 20 year run of greatness was just unimaginably, unfathomably, incredible. 12+ wins, year after year after year, almost always going at least to the AFCCG. Crazy. Absolutely crazy.
I think folks also need to recognize how talented Justin Fields is. He's been put in an awful situation that hopefully the Bears can fix. Just as folks think Mac can be fixed, Justin Fields isn't a finished product.
This team beat the Steelers (2-5), the Lions (1-5), and the Browns (2-5). They lost to the Dolphins (4-3), the Ravens (4-3), the Packers (3-4), and the Bears (3-4). The two winning teams that they lost to have not played like world-beaters. There's greater evidence thus far that they're not a very good team than there is that they are a good team that just had a bad game.
Yes. We are mid now. The doom and gloom after last night's game is too far. The optimism after the wins over the Browns and Lions went too far as well. We can win or lose most of the games on the schedule. The reality is that we haven't known which Patriots team is going to show up week-to-week dating all the way back to 2018 (and we got hot at the right time and won the SB that year!). I don't expect that to change any time soon.
It's called being a mediocre team in a mediocre league. There are only a handful of teams that can lay claim to consistency like the Pats had for 20 years, and they are no longer one of them. We really shouldn't be surprised by any result this team has week to week, and this now goes doubly so given that they have no consistency at the QB position or even a single QB set in stone. This is the NFL purgatory we dreaded when Brady left.
Purgatory isn’t the worst place in the world to be in the NFL. If you can be mediocre for a number of years until you hit on the next quarterback to lead the team, that’s not terrible. What’s terrible is becoming terrible and taking forever to get out of that. That’s where the Jets have been and the Lions have been and a number of other franchises have been. The patriots are not there, not yet anyway. If the down years of this franchise under Belichick turn out to be mediocrity and or purgatory, that’s pretty damned good for the down years.
I think that it's close to impossible to be long-term bad unless you have bad ownership. Bad ownership can be someone who isn't invested enough or too meddlesome. Someone who runs a chaotic org.
This team went 7-9 doing a rebuild during one year of mega dead cap hits and 10-7 with a rookie QB. They won't go 3-14 under this ownership. But they might be done winning titles for a long while, as Robert and Bill won't be here forever. We'll see I guess.
And honestly, if that’s the price to pay for winning 6 titles in 18 years, I’m ok with that. I mean, of course I want more, but no fan base is ever going to have what we had.
And they played in half the title games in that period. That’s just insane.
So the Patriots are going to be mostly terrible for 25 years before going on another multi year Super Bowl run?
That's..............a depressing thought.
I'd have to assume Belichick won't be the coach by then.
But Brady will still be playing.
Yeah, that makes zero sense.
As in none at all.
If his ankle is still not 100% and the "plan" was to start him and then take him out, why bother, just go with Zappe until Jones is 100%.
Mind boggling.
View: https://twitter.com/robertmays/status/1585087663966949377?s=46&t=dCGyV-rIP2XU2JPPbxPXaQ
The more I think about it the more I believe they came up with a great game plan and out-coached and out-executed the Pats.
Patriots struggle with QB runs and mobile QBs. They dialed up some of the exact same plays Baltimore killed us with that they had hardly run this year. Chicago changed their offensive philosophy for this game. Patriots were caught with their pants down.
The more I think about it the more I believe they came up with a great game plan and out-coached and out-executed the Pats.
Patriots struggle with QB runs and mobile QBs. They dialed up some of the exact same plays Baltimore killed us with that they had hardly run this year. Chicago changed their offensive philosophy for this game. Patriots were caught with their pants down.
Hopefully, it won't be that long. But it is looking less likely than it did coming into this season that they had found the QB to lead them on the next run.
Doesn't bode well for the upcoming games vs the Bills (Allen) and Cardinals (Murray). 7 of the remaining 10 games this season should be against pocket passers (Z. Wilson 2x, Tua, Burrows, Carr, Cousins, Ryan).
The coaching staff not anticipating that Fields might run more would be inexcusable and more troubling than the poor execution from the players.
Maybe. I mean, it sure feels like everyone should expect Fields to run. He’s a terrific athlete. But if he only had 18 designed runs all of last year, it would be sort of like suddenly anticipating the Chiefs to have Mahomes run the ball by design 10 times. It’s just not what Chicago does. Except this past Sunday.
I agree that they should have been more prepared for it than they were but if a team simply doesn’t do X, and has shown no inclination at all to do X, and X doesn’t really show up on film at all, how much time should you put in preparing for X? Because you only have so much time and every minute spent on X is a minute not spent on Y or Z, things that the other team actually normally does.
It’s not quite as simple as “you should be prepared for it”.
The larger issue is that they can't pivot to "OK, we've seen this before, let's go back to what worked against Lamar and the Ravens" because that didn't work, either. They've been bad at defending this kind of stuff generally. Which is probably why Chicago did it.
They made zero effective adjustments all game. The coaching staff completely failed this team on Monday night. If it weren’t for QB-gate, that would be the story right now. It was about as pathetic of a coaching performance as we’ve seen in quite some time here.
A couple of things. First, that doesn’t really address my post which was about pregame preparation for what Chicago might or might not do. Second, others have pointed out that the patriots actually did make numerous adjustments on Monday. It’s just that none of it worked. Is that a coaching issue or a talent issue or an injury issue or was it just one of those crappy games that teams have? I don’t really know, and I suspect people here don’t really know either. None of us are inside one patriot place. Obviously there has to be an answer to this question because they got shredded by a team that before Monday night was pretty bad offensively. I just don’t think we know what the answer is.
It’s the Bears. They had plenty of time to prepare for the possibility of Fields running, especially with an extra day. This isn’t the Bills or Chiefs. They have no WR/TE talent and mediocre to decent RBs. Their QB can barely throw accurately. They simply weren’t prepared - across the board. It’s not a talent issue when you’re playing a team with equally shitty talent.
We’ll see what they come up with against the Jets and Colts with Ehlinger, another guy who can run a little.
What should they have spent more time in practice doing to be better prepared? And conversely, given that they have only a certain amount of time available, what should they have spent less time in practice doing?
Just as an example, on the big long touchdown run by fields, Bryant read it perfectly and came up to make the tackle. But he took a terrible angle and Fields got outside and ran in for the score. Bryant seemed prepared for that play and he had a good idea of what to do, but he just took a poor angle. Is that coaching or is that a player malfunction? Is that a lack of preparation or just a mistake by the player?
The Pats were missing both Barmore and Uche, and Jennings was on the injury/practice report all week. And then Duggar left the game early. Barmore and Duggar are their best run defenders, so with the LB corps thin entering the game, it's not hard to see how things escalated.
Before anyone responds, I am not using the injuries as an excuse; the Bears had injuries as well. But the injuries can explain why the Pats were unable to make effective adjustments to contain the Bears running game; they just didn't have the personnel to do that, no matter how well or poorly coached. The personnel on the field matters a lot more than we sometimes like to admit.
Your questions are impossible for a fan who wasn’t at practice to answer, which you obviously know. The players on the field are always the ones who make or don’t make the plays. Myles Bryant is one of the worst players in football. He is truly awful so the fact that he’s even in the game at all could be a coaching issue but is more the talent issue.
The simple answer is that there is no black and white answer without knowing the defensive gameplan. Clearly, no Barmore and Dugger had an impact but I doubt they change the outcome at all. Even Judon was losing containment, which is sometimes an issue for him as the only real pass rushing threat we have. It was a team wide failure.
Exactly. It’s impossible for us to know how prepared or not prepared the patriots were. Maybe they were well prepared and just executed poorly. We really have no idea. On the Bryant play it sure looked like he was prepared but just made a bad play. How do you are I know that this team wasn’t prepared for the game? By the outcome? Maybe if even one of the balls that got put on the ground ended up in New England‘s hands the outcome could have been different. Who knows. Certainly I think things look different if Jakobi Meyers’ fumble was recovered by New England. I just think it’s easy for us to sit back and say they played like crap so they obviously weren’t prepared when in reality we have absolutely no idea how prepared or not prepared they were.
Hopefully not is right, but that's the wildcard with sports; nothing is guaranteed, as long as the Kraft's own the team, they won't slip into mediocrity thankfully.
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.
The poor coaching was displayed in the numerous penalties they took. In 3 more turnovers, being 3rd from the bottom in the league in that category. In the complete ineffectuality of anything they tried.
We don't need to go much deeper than that. A well-coached team doesn't do any of those things.
We don't need to go much deeper than that. A well-coached team doesn't do any of those things.