The Nation's Tears: Volume III

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,015
Mansfield MA
So you need to prepare for the unknown?

I am not sure how you do this. Is it known unknowns? Or unknown knowns? Or the tricky unknown unknowns?
Yeah, I think this is important. Given how many different looks that Patriots have shown on tape that you have to account for, how much time are you going to spend accounting for all the different possibilities of looks they haven't put on tape? There are only so many practices and hours in the day, even with two weeks to prepare. Belichick has said similar about the Wildcat - it's not that they hadn't considered the possibility (or recognized they might be vulnerable to it), it's just that it doesn't seem like a good use of precious time to worry about something you've never seen before.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,803
Boston, NY
Putting McVay aside, what I find to be remarkable— and I know, nothing should really surprise us by now — is that the Pats played on D in the biggest game of the year in a manner that they had not played in all season. Yeah, the Rams didn’t practice for it. But the Pats tried something they had not done in the prior 18 weeks. They never had a dry run in a game. What if players got confused? Or if just was better in concept than reality?

I realize that this isn’t the first time a team showed something new in the SB. But damn it takes balls.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,100
Hingham, MA
Putting McVay aside, what I find to be remarkable— and I know, nothing should really surprise us by now — is that the Pats played on D in the biggest game of the year in a manner that they had not played in all season. Yeah, the Rams didn’t practice for it. But the Pats tried something they had not done in the prior 18 weeks. They never had a dry run in a game. What if players got confused? Or if just was better in concept than reality?

I realize that this isn’t the first time a team showed something new in the SB. But damn it takes balls.
I mean in a way they tried it the year before and it bit them in the ass. One of the biggest mysteries, to me, of this era is why every single Super Bowl they have played in has been a one score game (yes I know last one was 13-3). Just due to random variance there should have been a blowout or two in there. The Pats blow out good teams in the regular season all the time. I guess the Atlanta game should have been a blowout in the opposite direction. The Carolina game had a chance to be a multiple score win pretty easily (Brady picked in the end zone with the Pats up 21-16 IIRC). The Rams game might have been the closest in that Brady was picked in FG range, Gost missed a kick, they passed up another FG attempt, and generally dominated in yardage. Of course flip side is the McCourty play and the Harmon play. But man they play weird, close Super Bowls.

I will also mention they got boned by the safety in the second Giants Super Bowl. They dominated that game from about mid first quarter into the 3rd quarter.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,317
Putting McVay aside, what I find to be remarkable— and I know, nothing should really surprise us by now — is that the Pats played on D in the biggest game of the year in a manner that they had not played in all season. Yeah, the Rams didn’t practice for it. But the Pats tried something they had not done in the prior 18 weeks. They never had a dry run in a game. What if players got confused? Or if just was better in concept than reality?

I realize that this isn’t the first time a team showed something new in the SB. But damn it takes balls.
This is my Patriots tin foil hat moment but I feel like the significance of the 13-3 domination will get lost or marginalized over time since it’s the Patriots. This performance was an all-time epic defensive beat down of such a great offense.

To this day, I remain amazed at what they accomplished. They damn near shut down a team that averaged 33PPG with a defensive roster that nobody was gushing about.

Simply amazing, especially when you add the context of the prior SB where they couldn’t make a single stop.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
25,590
I mean in a way they tried it the year before and it bit them in the ass. One of the biggest mysteries, to me, of this era is why every single Super Bowl they have played in has been a one score game (yes I know last one was 13-3). Just due to random variance there should have been a blowout or two in there. The Pats blow out good teams in the regular season all the time. I guess the Atlanta game should have been a blowout in the opposite direction. The Carolina game had a chance to be a multiple score win pretty easily (Brady picked in the end zone with the Pats up 21-16 IIRC). The Rams game might have been the closest in that Brady was picked in FG range, Gost missed a kick, they passed up another FG attempt, and generally dominated in yardage. Of course flip side is the McCourty play and the Harmon play. But man they play weird, close Super Bowls.

I will also mention they got boned by the safety in the second Giants Super Bowl. They dominated that game from about mid first quarter into the 3rd quarter.
The punter for the Rams almost single-handedly prevented a blowout, plus the Pats kind of stayed conservative on offense once they saw the Rams offense was not much of a threat.



This is my Patriots tin foil hat moment but I feel like the significance of the 13-3 domination will get lost or marginalized over time since it’s the Patriots. This performance was an all-time epic defensive beat down of such a great offense.

To this day, I remain amazed at what they accomplished. They damn near shut down a team that averaged 33PPG with a defensive roster that nobody was gushing about.

Simply amazing, especially when you add the context of the prior SB where they couldn’t make a single stop.
Nationally, the fact that the Rams never had a snap inside the Pats' 25-yard line is very under-appreciated.
 

DrewDawg

Dorito Dink
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
35,378
Yeah, if he wants to talk about it, he can say that they anticipated some potential wrinkles/unknowns, but BB threw some other stuff in, that's why he's the greatest, etc.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
3,247
New York City
Yeah, if he wants to talk about it, he can say that they anticipated some potential wrinkles/unknowns, but BB threw some other stuff in, that's why he's the greatest, etc.
If the situations were reversed and Belichick were asked this question, we all know what is answer would be: "Players could have played better and coaches could have coached better. LA is a great team and we didn't do enough as a team to overcome that. I'm not going to comment on specifics, there are a lot of things that go into preparing for and winning a Super Bowl and we didn't win so obviously there are things we could have done better in every phase."

I continue to be amazed that more coaches don't take the "Belichick approach" - what could possibly be gained from McVay's comments?
 

steveluck7

Member
SoSH Member
May 10, 2007
2,871
Burrillville, RI
I continue to be amazed that more coaches don't take the "Belichick approach" - what could possibly be gained from McVay's comments?
This might be a little unfair to Mcvay but, to me, it reads like someone who is concerned with his legacy and wants to have the media “come along for the ride” as he progresses through his career.
Having this out there now sets up a great narrative if he is ever to break through and win.
Even if that hypothetical game requires no callback to lessons he may ha e learned in this Super Bowl, the media will be all too happy to talk about his growth, etc.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
8,222
This is my Patriots tin foil hat moment but I feel like the significance of the 13-3 domination will get lost or marginalized over time since it’s the Patriots. This performance was an all-time epic defensive beat down of such a great offense.

To this day, I remain amazed at what they accomplished. They damn near shut down a team that averaged 33PPG with a defensive roster that nobody was gushing about.

Simply amazing, especially when you add the context of the prior SB where they couldn’t make a single stop.
There's a good article to be written about the best Belichick gameplans of his career.

1990 NFCCG, toppling the 2-time defending champs with an offense that was barely passable
1990 SB, beating Jim Kelly in a gameplan that's in the HOF
1994 AFC WC, Browns/Testaverde over (Parcells-led) Patriots/Bledsoe by intercepting him 3x and kicking the crap out of Ben Coates
2001 SB, obliterating the Greatest Show on Turf
2003 AFCCG, taking the Colts and getting 5 turnovers and a safety as Manning goes criminally insane
2006 AFC DIV vs the 14-2, somehow beating peak Chargers (despite 3 Brady INTs)
2014 AFC DIV vs BAL, the ineligible-receiver stuff and sheer depth of his bag of tricks
2018 SB, taking a rag-tag defense, completely remaking it in 2 weeks, and sowing absolute chaos with a formulaic but powerful Rams offense

(you can argue the 2018 AFCCG was a better overall coaching job in terms of focus, preparation, situations, overtime coin toss calling, etc, but in the SB, the gameplan itself was sublime)

Hon. Mention:
- 1986 NFCCG, shutting out the Redskins 17-0, who had just taken it to the defending champ Bears the week before
- 2011 AFC DIV vs the Tebow Broncos, 45-10 and it wasn't even that close - after Tebow had just knocked off the Steelers the week before

I'm not saying the 2018 SB wins a fair, football-educated vote, but it's certainly in the discussion. Also, how different does the Parcells legend look if Belichick isn't there to create absolute magic in back-to-back weeks in 1990 and let him go out on top? Does he get the Patriots job in 1993?
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,694
Portsmouth, NH
2006 vs Chargers, I’m not sure why that’s in there. They won that game because of Troy Brown’s strip and 3 total fumble recoveries, plus an int and a missed FG. They kept Rivers in check mostly, but LDT ripped a 23/124 and 2 catches including a 58 yarder. The game plan I don’t think belongs in his highlight reel.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
21,721
There's so much going on defensively in the Super Bowl, but the one thing I take away is the mvoement and disguise of who is going to rush. And that is something they showed some during the year, and have shown more in past years (with the old 'walking around' defensive fronts).

I agree that it is hard to know what specifically to prepare for. I imagine that McVay did some quality-countrol scouting and asked Wade Phillips "how would you attack the offense?" and planned for what he thought was most likely. I also think the reality of the Rams offense, especially with Gurley hurt, is that they have to 'do what they do' because they aren't good enough to beat you all sorts of different ways. That's not McVay's fault---it makes it impressive he got what he did from that group---but it also is why Belichick is so brilliant, he never lets his teams get into the situation where another coach can do that to him, and he doesn't miss when he can do it to someone else.
 

kelpapa

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 15, 2010
2,564
If the situations were reversed and Belichick were asked this question, we all know what is answer would be: "Players could have played better and coaches could have coached better. LA is a great team and we didn't do enough as a team to overcome that. I'm not going to comment on specifics, there are a lot of things that go into preparing for and winning a Super Bowl and we didn't win so obviously there are things we could have done better in every phase."

I continue to be amazed that more coaches don't take the "Belichick approach" - what could possibly be gained from McVay's comments?
I think there is value for some coaches to get the media on your side. I prefer Belichick's approach, but that's not going to work in every situation, especially with new coaches.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
12,863
I think there is value for some coaches to get the media on your side. I prefer Belichick's approach, but that's not going to work in every situation, especially with new coaches.
That could also be why "double-doink" seems to be the 2nd or 3rd most popular word in Matt Nagy's vocabulary. "We're on to 2019" doesn't seem to be his style. "Confronting failure head-on" is a popular media trope.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
49,537
San Andreas Fault
The comments surprisingly aren't all garbage. Let me spare you the effort:

pregame video of Sean McVay to an assistant…. "WOW this place is awesome isn't it?... look at that roof ! … amazing... Bill Belichick to ref "we're closing that roof before kickoff right" …. "well it takes eight minutes to close so will it be closed for kickoff or not"​
Of course, CBS had that pregame video for all of us to watch. McVay like the little kid reacting to the new bike at Christmas vs. grizzled veteran house flipper Belichick demanding several home repairs before he'll make an offer. It was all over the gamethread here. The other thing the video caught was McVay's obsequious sycophantism toward Bill. Huge respect but over the top. Let's see how the Rams do this year.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,100
Hingham, MA
Ed Reed thanks Bill Belichick instead of Brian Billick


Tom E. Curran

@tomecurran


Greatest Freudian slip in HOF history. Ed Reed thanks "Coach Belichick and his staff" right after Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti. Bisciotti looked like he'd seen a ghost. Goes on to thank "Coach Harbaugh and his staff" and camera cuts there in time to see Harbaugh make the gas face
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
49,537
San Andreas Fault
Ed Reed thanks Bill Belichick instead of Brian Billick


Tom E. Curran
@tomecurran


Greatest Freudian slip in HOF history. Ed Reed thanks "Coach Belichick and his staff" right after Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti. Bisciotti looked like he'd seen a ghost. Goes on to thank "Coach Harbaugh and his staff" and camera cuts there in time to see Harbaugh make the gas face
I ran into Ty Law's speech flipping around the dial so I listened to the rest of that. Eeemotional. They showed Ed Reed in the audience, and BB, and I wondered, with the mutual respect those two have, if Ed would mention Bill in his speech somehow. Funny how it turned out.
 

Cotillion

lurker
Jun 11, 2019
30
The Deadspin "Why Your Team Sucks" series covered the Falcons today, and those poor ATL fans still aren't over 28-3. I guess they never will be.
I'm dreading the New England one because it's been pretty stale for awhile now. It used to be so good, but he's gone to the same well over and over. Plus even the "fan" responses are pretty rote at this point.

Maybe he'll surprise us, but I am not expecting it to be any good.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
30,478
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I'm dreading the New England one because it's been pretty stale for awhile now. It used to be so good, but he's gone to the same well over and over. Plus even the "fan" responses are pretty rote at this point.

Maybe he'll surprise us, but I am not expecting it to be any good.
Every single entry in that series this year has some sort of comment about the Patriots, either from Drew or from the emailed comments he prints. Every single one.

The New England one will be funny only because Drew gets worked up into a froth about the Pats. But I agree that the themes on all of these are getting old.
 

brandonchristensen

mad photochops
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
23,845
The 1986 World Series is like the 2003 ALCS in the same way that having both legs amputated after a motorcycle accident is like getting stung by a wasp.
I just mean because you still had Game 7 in 86. Where the Sox had a comfortable lead in the ALCS, and it was looking good. Then - everything went wrong. It was confined to one game.
 

Cotillion

lurker
Jun 11, 2019
30
Every single entry in that series this year has some sort of comment about the Patriots, either from Drew or from the emailed comments he prints. Every single one.

The New England one will be funny only because Drew gets worked up into a froth about the Pats. But I agree that the themes on all of these are getting old.
Maybe if he just dumped a one-liner or some version of "Fuck it, I'm done with these guys" or "They've broken me". They are the reason I had my brain injury.
 

mwonow

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
4,994
Thanks for posting this. Ouch. Reminds me of how I felt after the 1986 World Series. I chose to move halfway around the world over 2 very good job offers in NYC.
FWIW, I still deny that the 1986 WS happened.
 

streeter88

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 2, 2006
951
Melbourne, Australia
Funny and harsh all at the same time. Really surprised the NFLPA would slam a team like that, however true it might be. Ouch!
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
8,222
conversely, pretty impressive by PIT to be +90 in W/L over that span while only being +6 net turnovers.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
10,675
My amazing aspect of that is that the Pats haven’t even had a high interception for multi-years guy contributing to it.
Conversely, over 17 seasons (not including the 5 seconds he played in 2008), Brady averages 10 INT's a season. The league average comes out to roughly 16 per season since 2001.

So, the difference between the Patriots and the second place team (+101) is identical to the difference between Brady and the average NFL quarterback (+102). I think we know what separates the Patriots from everyone else, and its not a higher focus on ball control or deflated footballs.
 
Last edited:

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,930
around the way
Conversely, over 17 seasons (not including the 5 seconds he played in 2008), Brady averages 10 INT's a season. The league average comes out to roughly 16 per season since 2001.

So, the difference between the Patriots and the second place team (+101) is identical to the difference between Brady and the average NFL quarterback (+102). I think we know what separates the Patriots from everyone else, and its not a higher focus on ball control or deflated footballs.
This post should be fucking bronzed. What a great observation.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
16,355
Philadelphia
Conversely, over 17 seasons (not including the 5 seconds he played in 2008), Brady averages 10 INT's a season. The league average comes out to roughly 16 per season since 2001.

So, the difference between the Patriots and the second place team (+101) is identical to the difference between Brady and the average NFL quarterback (+102). I think we know what separates the Patriots from everyone else, and its not a higher focus on ball control or deflated footballs.
I'm not sure your last conclusion really follows. The data shows is that if the Patriots had a league average QB throughout this period, they'd still be the 2nd best out of 32 teams in turnover differential. So factors other than Tom Brady are taking them from an anticipated 16th or 17th out of 32 (just based on having a league average QB) to 2nd.

I don't think its deflated football but its probably got a lot to do with coaching.