The Michael McCorkle "Mac" Jones Thread

macal

lurker
Jul 31, 2005
15
What I find most impressive about the Pats handling of Mac is that they have not drafted a QB, that they expect to be a starter, for 28 years. Other teams have had an opportunity to learn from their mistakes multiple times during this span. Very few have learned any lessons. The Pats strut into the room saying "We haven't done this for a long, long time, but we'll show you all how to do it. You in the back, pay attention"
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
What I find most impressive about the Pats handling of Mac is that they have not drafted a QB, that they expect to be a starter, for 28 years. Other teams have had an opportunity to learn from their mistakes multiple times during this span. Very few have learned any lessons. The Pats strut into the room saying "We haven't done this for a long, long time, but we'll show you all how to do it. You in the back, pay attention"
The thing is, as Clark points out, a lot of developing a QB is really just.... being a competent well run organization that builds out it's talent. Bad teams screw up QB development for the same reason they were bad enough to get top picks. If you build a good team and drop in a QB, they have a much better chance of developing.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,566
Berkeley, CA
The thing is, as Clark points out, a lot of developing a QB is really just.... being a competent well run organization that builds out it's talent. Bad teams screw up QB development for the same reason they were bad enough to get top picks. If you build a good team and drop in a QB, they have a much better chance of developing.
What's really odd is you can see tape of Tom Brady in, say, his 17th season and he's unable to handle pressure. Then a bad team with a bad OL gets a high draft QB and expects him to be able to deal with it on Day 1. To me, a good to very-good OL is a must before sending an inexperienced QB out to the sharks. If you know you're drafting a QB, then you should be signing/drafting OL's that very draft/year. Risking the draft capital it takes to get a coveted rookie QB seems foolish and short-sighted, but, as you say, that's why they're a bad team. The Pats and the Niners had the best plans by far for their rookie QB's and it's probably not a coincidence that they've had the most recent success of the franchises that took the QB plunge this year (granted, the Niners have had two down years, but they almost won a SB just a couple of years ago).
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
726
Stumptown via Chelmsford
Updated offensive efficiency numbers for Mac after tonight's win. Mac's first half tonight was solid (13 points in 5 drives). His second half was blech (6 points in 5 drives). The overall game efficiency of 1.9 is particularly surprising given that Mac's completion percentage and YPA were very good tonight.

That being said, I don't think anybody on this board wouldn't have happily taken a 7-4 record through 11 games this season with Mac's performance thus far.

Mac Jones 2021

46640
 
Last edited:

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,477
Mansfield MA
Updated offensive efficiency numbers for Mac after tonight's win. Mac's first half tonight was solid (13 points in 5 drives). His second half was blech (6 points in 5 drives). The overall game efficiency of 1.9 is particularly surprising given that Mac's completion percentage and YPA were very good tonight.
This has been the offense most of the year. The averages are good but they're being skewed by the tremendous performances vs NYJ and CLE. The median in your chart is only 2.0 points per drive (2.27 adjusted). I didn't need another forty-burger last night, but I was disappointed in the lackluster performance against the 31st scoring D. (Fortunately, the defense continues to be awesome)
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,253
around the way
This has been the offense most of the year. The averages are good but they're being skewed by the tremendous performances vs NYJ and CLE. The median in your chart is only 2.0 points per drive (2.27 adjusted). I didn't need another forty-burger last night, but I was disappointed in the lackluster performance against the 31st scoring D. (Fortunately, the defense continues to be awesome)
From a passing POV, the production was closer to the newbie Mac days than the good Mac. One offensive TD, four field goals.

To be fair, I think that Atlanta performed better than their numbers and generated different looks for Mac to process. There were a couple of plays where they clearly were playing some kind of hybrid zone-man thing, and they stepped on their own tails on one of them and gave up a long completion.

If the defense is good and we can run the ball, it's not the end of the world if opponents confuse Mac on a few drives. It would be weird if he didn't look like a rookie occasionally.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
Mac has been really good for a rookie and good for an NFL starting QB. They're running an offense that is heavily focused on giving him support and low risk throws. We're one of the most run heavy teams (especially early down and long distance) teams in the league, we're throwing a ton of screens and other very safe passes. It plays to Mac's strengths and protects his weaknesses. You can be really successful asking your QB to just execute the easy stuff, if he executes as well as Mac has. This team isn't going to be a passing juggernaut, it's going to be mostly a methodical grinder.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
19,939
Philadelphia
Mac has been really good for a rookie and good for an NFL starting QB. They're running an offense that is heavily focused on giving him support and low risk throws. We're one of the most run heavy teams (especially early down and long distance) teams in the league, we're throwing a ton of screens and other very safe passes. It plays to Mac's strengths and protects his weaknesses. You can be really successful asking your QB to just execute the easy stuff, if he executes as well as Mac has. This team isn't going to be a passing juggernaut, it's going to be mostly a methodical grinder.
Agree with that, its just about finding the right mix where you still take shots downfield opportunistically and also trying to minimize o-line mistakes like holding penalties and missed blocking assignments. When every drive is a grind, those mistakes will just kill you.

I thought the offensive game plan last night was very vanilla and conservative - lots of 21 personnel, very few downfield throws, not a lot of misdirection or other unusual wrinkles. I don't know whether that was due to the short week, the opponent, or both. But it definitely looked more like the offense of the first handful of games than the offense we saw against Cleveland.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
13,623
Offensive drives last night:

Punt after failed 3rd down run
FG after failed 3rd down pass attempt
TD
Punt after 1st down sack
FG after 2nd down sack
Punt after holding penalty on 2nd down

Bad INT by Mac
Punt after incompletion followed by short throw failing to pick up 1st
FG after 3rd down sack
FG after clock killing drive to basically ice the game.

What stands out is that there were 3 drives where the offense wasn't able to recover from a long yardage situation early in the series. Yeah, those are difficult series to convert, but good offenses become good by converting some of those into longer drives. There were at least 4 points left on the field from those 3 mid-game drives, and possibly another 4 from the bad sack in the 4th quarter. And definitely left 4 in the 2nd drive of the game.

It wasn't a good night for Mac and the offense, which went 4-12 on 3rd down. But his passes did end up in his teammates hands rather than on the ground, which did help the Pats gain a 5:25 edge in time of possession.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
507
I think you can point to maybe it was a short week and for the fact they played a Dean Pees defense
It seemed like they were just trying to get out of there healthy and with a win. These Thursday night games seem to invite so much variance b/c of the short week that I don't know how much there is to take away from last night outside of them accomplishing those goals. He protected the football (for the most part) and played complementary football - I'm very happy with that.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
12,915
It seemed like they were just trying to get out of there healthy and with a win. These Thursday night games seem to invite so much variance b/c of the short week that I don't know how much there is to take away from last night outside of them accomplishing those goals. He protected the football (for the most part) and played complementary football - I'm very happy with that.
Exactly, so I think that everyone should take a week off from dissecting the offense for this very reason. You want to see an offense that struggled? You should have seen Atlanta's offense last night.
 
Aug 9, 2015
124
Did Harry bear any responsibility for the INT? Seemed like his route was designed to pull the defender toward the sideline, and the CB pulled off pretty quick to undercut Smith. If Harry was a more viable target or sells the route better, a play like that to Smith is probably a lot more open. Jones made a bad decision, but the design also seemed to fail.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
12,286
It seemed like they were just trying to get out of there healthy and with a win. These Thursday night games seem to invite so much variance b/c of the short week that I don't know how much there is to take away from last night outside of them accomplishing those goals. He protected the football (for the most part) and played complementary football - I'm very happy with that.
Exactly right. After the Mac pick, they seemed to get very conservative. Players were staying in bounds, and it looked like they were running the clock out and telying on the defense the entire 4th.

That the team can walk out with a 25-0 win should make us all happy. Now they get a semi-bye week to prepare for the Titans, an extra day of prep for a Monday night game against the Bills, and then their bye week.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
Did Harry bear any responsibility for the INT? Seemed like his route was designed to pull the defender toward the sideline, and the CB pulled off pretty quick to undercut Smith. If Harry was a more viable target or sells the route better, a play like that to Smith is probably a lot more open. Jones made a bad decision, but the design also seemed to fail.
I mean... he was open. I can't imagine the play design is anything other than... "run your route, try to beat your man", Mac made a poor decision and a bad throw off his back foot. If he looks through to Harry he has a nice gain. Looked like he decided early he was taking the shot and rushed it, QBs do it sometimes, it's hard to always remain disciplined and pass up the shot plays when they aren't open.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,477
Mansfield MA
Agree with that, its just about finding the right mix where you still take shots downfield opportunistically and also trying to minimize o-line mistakes like holding penalties and missed blocking assignments. When every drive is a grind, those mistakes will just kill you.
Yes. They had very little in terms of explosive plays last night - just one 20 yard gainer - but you can score like that if you play mistake-free. They didn't.

Exactly, so I think that everyone should take a week off from dissecting the offense for this very reason. You want to see an offense that struggled? You should have seen Atlanta's offense last night.
If last night was an aberration, I'd agree with you, but the offense has struggled to some degree in 8 or 9 of the 11 games they've played so far. It's been fantastic in two. Going against one of the league's worst defenses, seemed like a good opportunity to add another positive, so for me it was a letdown. Fortunately the defense continues to play lights-out.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,624
Dallas
The int was a concept where they forced one of the safeties to either cover Jonnu on his seam route or Harry on a wheel. The safety played it well but by the time Mac threw it was breaking on Jonnu. The throw either had to have been out earlier or Mac should have read that Harry was the more open guy.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,624
Dallas
Unlike 2020 or even 2019 you can see how good the offense can be when they don’t make mistakes. But this year they’ve been inconsistent because they make too many mistakes. We’re 11 games into the year so you’d hope that the offense would stop shooting itself in the foot so frequently.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
19,939
Philadelphia
The int was a concept where they forced one of the safeties to either cover Jonnu on his seam route or Harry on a wheel. The safety played it well but by the time Mac threw it was breaking on Jonnu. The throw either had to have been out earlier or Mac should have read that Harry was the more open guy.
Yup. It was actually a really good play design for that defense (cover 3?). Mac just looks to his left first and when he comes back to the right side of the field he seems to rush a bit, doesn't read 24 correctly, and makes the wrong decision.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,624
Dallas
I don't buy the whole TNF thing as an excuse. So TNF somehow caused Mac to make a bad throw/read? Caused holding penalties? Caused them to fail to pick up rushers? I feel like no matter where I look whether it is here, or twitter, or on a certain slack channel that people are just making excuses for an offense that has been inconsistent this season. They left a ton of meat on the bone last night as they did vs Carolina and the Chargers (to name recent games). I am pessimistic and optimistic. Pessimistic because they've been inconsistent all year shooting themselves in the foot with bad play but also optimistic because 1) they are an offense capable of hitting plenty of 20+ yard chunks and 2) they have the horses that when they don't make mistakes and consistently execute things well they will put up points (See the second Jets game and the Browns). It's ok to be critical of a relatively new group of people - they could get better over time and maybe they finally find their consistency the last 6 games of the year.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,842
Hingham, MA
Yes. They had very little in terms of explosive plays last night - just one 20 yard gainer - but you can score like that if you play mistake-free. They didn't.


If last night was an aberration, I'd agree with you, but the offense has struggled to some degree in 8 or 9 of the 11 games they've played so far. It's been fantastic in two. Going against one of the league's worst defenses, seemed like a good opportunity to add another positive, so for me it was a letdown. Fortunately the defense continues to play lights-out.
I'm not going to argue that the offense played well last night - they didn't.

But we're in mid-November with a rookie QB and the Pats are 5-0 on the road. There are going to be ups and downs. But it's a pretty remarkable statistic.

The 2018 champs only went 3-5 on the road. Winning on the road is not easy.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,624
Dallas
I'm not going to argue that the offense played well last night - they didn't.

But we're in mid-November with a rookie QB and the Pats are 5-0 on the road. There are going to be ups and downs. But it's a pretty remarkable statistic.

The 2018 champs only went 3-5 on the road. Winning on the road is not easy.
All of these things are true and yet it is also true that this unit has been inconsistent. Many of the reasons for the inconsistency are normal when you have a new group of people but seeing OL fail to pick up delayed blitzers, or Mac missing Meyers on a wide open third down, or either offensive holding call, or Mac making the wrong read, or the penalties on ST erasing field position, or Henry breaking his route off the wrong way. Those mistakes add up. Look, good offenses either generate a ton of explosive plays or they execute really well without a lot of mistakes. Last night the Pats had 1 explosive play and then shot themselves in the foot multiple times. In 2019 and especially 2020 it was imo more about the lack of playmakers but this year it's about execution. Remember the 2018 defense? That unit had a lot of highs and lows during the regular season but had a great post-season minus the second half of the Chiefs game (if you want to quibble with my choice of wording here that's fine because you can't just excuse the second half of the Chiefs game but for 10/12 quarters they were great). The point is sometimes a unit can find consistency later in the year. This isn't doom and gloom. The sky isn't falling. But there is room for improvement and a lot of it.

I know you aren't going to argue or trying to argue that they didn't play well so forgive me for quoting just your post.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
507
I don't buy the whole TNF thing as an excuse. So TNF somehow caused Mac to make a bad throw/read? Caused holding penalties? Caused them to fail to pick up rushers? I feel like no matter where I look whether it is here, or twitter, or on a certain slack channel that people are just making excuses for an offense that has been inconsistent this season.
To me, the TNF thing is less about a particular play or plays and more about an approach. Like, last week, Mac made a couple of his best throws this year - a couple of outs to Henry on the sideline and the seam pass to Bourne for a TD. I didn't see a lot of that aggressiveness or risk taking this week (especially in the second half) and the time they did get aggressive, they got burned with the INT. So the priority seemed to be:
- Be careful - don't put the defense in a bad position (even the INT was fairly deep into ATL territory)
- Chew up clock
- Put enough points on the board so the D can comfortably do their thing against a bad offense

The scoring/yardage numbers are going to be depressed if they're not attempting big chunk plays or trying to score quickly or even go for it on fourth and short instead of kicking a field goal. They just didn't need to do that stuff to win this week (but they probably gameplanned that they'd need to do that against a more explosive Browns team) so they didn't.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
I'm not going to argue that the offense played well last night - they didn't.

But we're in mid-November with a rookie QB and the Pats are 5-0 on the road. There are going to be ups and downs. But it's a pretty remarkable statistic.

The 2018 champs only went 3-5 on the road. Winning on the road is not easy.
Wins aren't a QB stat, and we need to stop pretending they are. We have a top 5 defense, a top 10 running game, and a top 10 ST. This team is really good, if we had a different QB.... it would probably still be really good. Not a knock on Mac, but this team's success isn't because of Mac, it's because the defense (and offensive skill positions) were significantly upgraded from a 7-9 team last year.
 

leftfieldlegacy

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
796
North Jersey
I don't buy the whole TNF thing as an excuse. So TNF somehow caused Mac to make a bad throw/read? Caused holding penalties? Caused them to fail to pick up rushers? I feel like no matter where I look whether it is here, or twitter, or on a certain slack channel that people are just making excuses for an offense that has been inconsistent this season. They left a ton of meat on the bone last night as they did vs Carolina and the Chargers (to name recent games). I am pessimistic and optimistic. Pessimistic because they've been inconsistent all year shooting themselves in the foot with bad play but also optimistic because 1) they are an offense capable of hitting plenty of 20+ yard chunks and 2) they have the horses that when they don't make mistakes and consistently execute things well they will put up points (See the second Jets game and the Browns). It's ok to be critical of a relatively new group of people - they could get better over time and maybe they finally find their consistency the last 6 games of the year.
TNF is a different animal. Installing a game plan for the offense in 3 fewer days than normal is a tall order especially for a rookie QB regardless of how quickly he assimilates information. Mac's performance was still remarkably efficient last night and the failed drives were often the result of early down penalties noted upthread by @lexrageorge. Where I agree that TNF is not an excuse is special teams penalties that cause 20-30 yards in lost field position. As a fan, I can accept the holding calls on running plays. It's the cost of doing business if you are a run heavy team. But the holding and blocks in the back on punts and kick offs is infuriating. These are so easily seen by the officials it is amazing that the players think they will get away with them. And just to change direction, why is McDaniels calling that last QB sneak? There is no way with the score and field position as it was that Jones should be putting his head down to get a yard. The defense was just waiting to tee off on him. You have a FB and two power RBs, use them.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
46,178
I don't buy the whole TNF thing as an excuse. So TNF somehow caused Mac to make a bad throw/read? Caused holding penalties? Caused them to fail to pick up rushers
I mean, yes? TNF teams generally play worse on that night than other nights. If you isolate one play and say did he not see that linebacker dropping into coverage because it was Thursday and not Sunday? I mean, I don't know. But if happens.

Games are sloppier on TNF pretty consistently. Why would it suddenly not be a thing, especially with a rookie QB playing on a short week for the first time ever. It's different. The numbers back it up. You are a data guy, why do you not seem to buy that TNF games are just....messier?
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,253
around the way
Agree with that, its just about finding the right mix where you still take shots downfield opportunistically and also trying to minimize o-line mistakes like holding penalties and missed blocking assignments. When every drive is a grind, those mistakes will just kill you.

I thought the offensive game plan last night was very vanilla and conservative - lots of 21 personnel, very few downfield throws, not a lot of misdirection or other unusual wrinkles. I don't know whether that was due to the short week, the opponent, or both. But it definitely looked more like the offense of the first handful of games than the offense we saw against Cleveland.
This is a great perspective. I think that Mac largely took what was there. This was different from the first few weeks of the season where he simply wasn't looking downfield and was dumping off too quickly. Last night Mac made smart choices and didn't force the action. Atlanta was able to confuse him a bit and also got some well timed pressures. And with a full week, our staff likely would have prepared him better for some of Atlanta's schemes and had some wrinkles. I don't remember anything last night on offense that we hadn't seen before.

Tl;dr; last night isn't predictive of much. Take the win and move on.
 

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
10,612
Between here and everywhere.
A 25-0 win. On the road. On a short week. With a rookie QB. After the garbage season we were forced to watch last year. And people are still complaining.

What a spoiled fanbase we are.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
73,291
Oregon
Wins aren't a QB stat, and we need to stop pretending they are. We have a top 5 defense, a top 10 running game, and a top 10 ST. This team is really good, if we had a different QB.... it would probably still be really good. Not a knock on Mac, but this team's success isn't because of Mac, it's because the defense (and offensive skill positions) were significantly upgraded from a 7-9 team last year.
I don't think t4w was saying they were. he said the team was 5-0 on the road with a rookie quarterback, not giving Jones credit for the wins
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
22,204
What's really odd is you can see tape of Tom Brady in, say, his 17th season and he's unable to handle pressure. Then a bad team with a bad OL gets a high draft QB and expects him to be able to deal with it on Day 1. To me, a good to very-good OL is a must before sending an inexperienced QB out to the sharks. If you know you're drafting a QB, then you should be signing/drafting OL's that very draft/year. Risking the draft capital it takes to get a coveted rookie QB seems foolish and short-sighted, but, as you say, that's why they're a bad team. The Pats and the Niners had the best plans by far for their rookie QB's and it's probably not a coincidence that they've had the most recent success of the franchises that took the QB plunge this year (granted, the Niners have had two down years, but they almost won a SB just a couple of years ago).
One of Jerry Jones's positive influences on the Cowboys is an insistence about keeping the OL good.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,842
Hingham, MA
I don't think t4w was saying they were. he said the team was 5-0 on the road with a rookie quarterback, not giving Jones credit for the wins
Correct. Mac has done enough to help them win. Just running the offense on the road vs. at home is a totally different animal.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
17,429
Los Angeles, CA
I’ve noticed how Mac handles himself after plays and am thankful that they did this. He just gets up, brushes himself off, and gets back to work.
 

Gash Prex

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 18, 2002
5,273
Mac is the highest graded PFF QB during the 5 game win streak in the entire NFL. By my count, he had 1 or 2 bad throws over the last 2 games. Every QB has WTF moments - including Brady.

Untimely penalties (again) and bad blitz pickups stalled the Patriots offense - not Mac Jones
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,253
around the way
A 25-0 win. On the road. On a short week. With a rookie QB. After the garbage season we were forced to watch last year. And people are still complaining.

What a spoiled fanbase we are.
Offense put up one touchdown against a statistically dreadful defense. Pointing that out is not complaining. It's discussion.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,477
Mansfield MA
I mean, yes? TNF teams generally play worse on that night than other nights. If you isolate one play and say did he not see that linebacker dropping into coverage because it was Thursday and not Sunday? I mean, I don't know. But if happens.

Games are sloppier on TNF pretty consistently. Why would it suddenly not be a thing, especially with a rookie QB playing on a short week for the first time ever. It's different. The numbers back it up. You are a data guy, why do you not seem to buy that TNF games are just....messier?
Do the numbers back it up? This study seems to think the idea Thursday games are sloppier or lower scoring is overblown: http://harvardsportsanalysis.org/2021/05/thursday-night-football-better-than-you-think/
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
46,178
Do the numbers back it up? This study seems to think the idea Thursday games are sloppier or lower scoring is overblown: http://harvardsportsanalysis.org/2021/05/thursday-night-football-better-than-you-think/
Fair enough. I had numbers too, but they were older and they showed scoring and offensive efficiency were lower.

I do know teams put in more vanilla game plans, players are generally are a bit more beat up with less time off during that week and speaking to last night specifically, it seemed clear Atlanta was no threat, so they went from vanilla game plan to conservative play calls and just won a road game by 25 points.

Not a single person is saying Jones and the offense blew the doors off last night and no one is saying the played all that great, but the dude has been PFF's highest rated QB over the last month. And if last night's 22/26 game with a 96.6 rating is cause for concern, I'll take it. Rookie QBs progress is NOT linear. And his performance in his first ever short week was perfectly cromulent.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
23,632
Mac is the highest graded PFF QB during the 5 game win streak in the entire NFL. By my count, he had 1 or 2 bad throws over the last 2 games. Every QB has WTF moments - including Brady.

Untimely penalties (again) and bad blitz pickups stalled the Patriots offense - not Mac Jones
One thing about the sacks, and blitz pickups... some of that IS on Mac, for one he calls the line coverage for another he at times needed to get rid of it and didn't.
Mac Jones is good, but he is part of the reason this isn't an explosive offense, both on performance, and more so because the coaching staff is running an offense tailored to him with lots of safe throws, which by it's nature is going to be conservative and struggle to handle any penalty or sack. MAc grades out so well in PFF in part because he's rarely asked to make something happen. He's given lots of safe throws, into good sized windows, with the occasional shot. He's rarely playing from a major deficit, and he's getting a lot of running game support. That's not a knock on him, he does well with what is asked of him, but it's also important to recognize that the whole system and roster is built to minimize how much he needs to do, and to encourage him to take the easy stuff.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,624
Dallas
I think it is telling that Belichick’s first comment was about the offense and how they need to stop making so many mistakes and negative plays.

And to your point @DJnVa we discussed this in the gambling forum. There just isn't any data supporting the fear of TNF. If anything, like I said up thread, favorites win more often than on Sunday.

Going to list some links on it:
Link 1
Link 2

Both of these and others suggest that the favorites on TNF win more and the over hits more. I think TNF makes additional game planning harder so. Less time for X's and O's and more importance of Jimmies and Joes maybe? I am speculating on the reason why favorites win more but TNF has this reputation that doesn't make sense to me.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
22,204
Mac is the highest graded PFF QB during the 5 game win streak in the entire NFL. By my count, he had 1 or 2 bad throws over the last 2 games. Every QB has WTF moments - including Brady.

Untimely penalties (again) and bad blitz pickups stalled the Patriots offense - not Mac Jones
Actually, Jones himself took the blame for at least one of the sacks. Said he made a bad line call or something. It doesn't really matter if its true.
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
8,313
Wayne, NJ
If the 2 big runs aren’t called back (Stevenson’s & Harry) the results look a bit different. How long was Stevenson run? Over 35 yards and didn’t they settle for a FG? (I checked - yes a FG after the big 12 yard sack/the run was 28 yards)- what happened after the Harry sweep was called back? Punt but it would have been only the first first down of the drive. Mac missed Myers on the 3rd & 5 with one of his only 2-3 bad throws of the game IIRC

my biggest issue (only issue really) with Mac was his inability to avoid at least one of the long sacks
 
Last edited:

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,842
Hingham, MA
From Phil Perry re: picking up blitzes:

The rookie signal-caller acknowledged after the game that because of some poor communication at the line on his end, those pressures weren't able to be picked up. The commonality between the rushes seemed to be that they all came late; they disguised their intentions until the ball was snapped.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
22,204
If the 2 big runs aren’t called back (Stevenson’s & Harry) the results look a bit different. How long was Stevenson run? Over 35 yards and didn’t they settle for a FG? (I checked - yes a FG after the big 12 yard sack/the run was 28 yards)- what happened after the Harry sweep was called back? Punt but it would have been only the first first down of the drive. Mac missed Myers on the 3rd & 5 with one of his only 2-3 bad throws of the game IIRC

my biggest issue (only issue really) with Mac was his inability to avoid at least one of the long sacks
Does anyone site track/analyze whether the hold is what allowed the long play to happen. We see this alot....."and if you count the play that was called back....." But in theory, anyway, many of those plays don't happen *unless* there was the hold.
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
8,313
Wayne, NJ
Does anyone site track/analyze whether the hold is what allowed the long play to happen. We see this alot....."and if you count the play that was called back....." But in theory, anyway, many of those plays don't happen *unless* there was the hold.
I think the hood was on Andrews. I watched the play a few times. Not sure I’m smart enough to know the answer. Just a shame the run didn’t count. The kid has misleading speed and has a cool way of shifting in space.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
22,204
I think the hood was on Andrews. I watched the play a few times. Not sure I’m smart enough to know the answer. Just a shame the run didn’t count. The kid has misleading speed and has a cool way of shifting in space.
Totally. And even if the hold was significant, he still did actually make the rest of the impressive run.
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
8,092
If the 2 big runs aren’t called back (Stevenson’s & Harry) the results look a bit different. How long was Stevenson run? Over 35 yards and didn’t they settle for a FG? (I checked - yes a FG after the big 12 yard sack/the run was 28 yards)- what happened after the Harry sweep was called back? Punt but it would have been only the first first down of the drive. Mac missed Myers on the 3rd & 5 with one of his only 2-3 bad throws of the game IIRC

my biggest issue (only issue really) with Mac was his inability to avoid at least one of the long sacks
What about the really bad read on the INT?