This offense is not as good as 2014. Lewis may be slightly more versatile than Vereen, and the WR's are certainly deeper, but Gronk is one of the most dominating players in the league and is irreplacable
The Super Bowl Thread
- Thread starter tims4wins
- Start date
2014 offense finished 11th in yards and 4th in points. This year was 4th / 3rd. By DVOA this year was #2 at 21.2%. 2014 was #6 at 13.5% . And this year's stats are despite Brady missing a quarter of the season. I think you could make an argument this year's offense is better than 2014.
Edit: but that's not really the point. The point is that the Pats offense is on a similar level, but the defense they are facing isn't in the same stratosphere as two years ago
In 2014, the Patriots averaged 29.3 points a game.
In 2016, with Brady, the Pats are averaging 30.0 points a game.
In 2014, the Patriots averaged 36.0 points a game in the playoffs.
In 2016, the Pats are averaging 35.0 points a game in the playoffs.
You could certainly argue that this year's offense is every bit the equal of the 2014 offense, even without Gronk. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I think it's a shit idiom. There are multiple ways to skin a cat in the same sense that there are multiple ways to hang a picture, or take a shower, or to do anything.
But this is a Super Bowl thread so, (a) I'm sorry, and (2) I'll be happy take comments off the air in P&G or in private messages.
The choice facing Bill/Josh on how to skin the cat offensively is fascinating.
On the one hand, keeping the Falcons offense off the field is key, and the Falcons seem susceptible to a power running game, a la the games the Pats had against the Colts in 2014.
On the other hand, the Falcons are not great in the secondary and have the single worst YAC numbers against in the league. And the Pats offense is really hard to deal with when Brady goes up tempo. As Tom has said, getting 40 yards on a play makes a drive a helluva lot easier, and eliminates the need to get 3-4 first downs as they march down the field.
I really do not know which direction I would favor heading into the game. I tend to favor the latter, as I like the idea of putting the most responsibility in the best player's hands.
The reality is that the Pats wont go all in either way. If A isn't working, they will shift to B. And they will almost certainty go into the game planning on a mixture. Among other things, doing that will keep the Falcons off balance, The score of the game will obviously play a huge role in what they do, of course.
I just wonder what their predilection will be in advance. Will they come out firing or grinding? Or both?
On the one hand, keeping the Falcons offense off the field is key, and the Falcons seem susceptible to a power running game, a la the games the Pats had against the Colts in 2014.
On the other hand, the Falcons are not great in the secondary and have the single worst YAC numbers against in the league. And the Pats offense is really hard to deal with when Brady goes up tempo. As Tom has said, getting 40 yards on a play makes a drive a helluva lot easier, and eliminates the need to get 3-4 first downs as they march down the field.
I really do not know which direction I would favor heading into the game. I tend to favor the latter, as I like the idea of putting the most responsibility in the best player's hands.
The reality is that the Pats wont go all in either way. If A isn't working, they will shift to B. And they will almost certainty go into the game planning on a mixture. Among other things, doing that will keep the Falcons off balance, The score of the game will obviously play a huge role in what they do, of course.
I just wonder what their predilection will be in advance. Will they come out firing or grinding? Or both?
A deeper dive on 2014 vs. 2016
OFF DVOA
2016: 21.2%, #2
2014: 13.5%, #6
WEI OFF
2016: 25.0%, #1
2014: 19.3%, #3
PASS
2016: 50.5%, #2
2014: 35.0%, #5
RUSH
2016: -3.4%, #17
2014: -3.7%, #14
VARIANCE
2016: 5.4%, #13
2014: 6.1%, #10
SCHED
2016: -0.7%, #10
2014: -1.8%, #8
TOT YDS
2016: 6,180, #4
2014: 5,848, #11
PASS YDS
2016: 4,308, #4
2014: 4,121, #9
RUSH YDS
2016: 1,872, #7
2014: 1,727, #18
PPG
2016: 27.6, #3
2014: 29.3, #4
RUSH YPC
2016: 3.9, #25
2014: 3.9, #22
PASS YPA
2016: 8.1, #3
2014: 7.0, #20
PASSER RATING
2016: 109.5, #2
2014: 97.5, #5
OFF DVOA
2016: 21.2%, #2
2014: 13.5%, #6
WEI OFF
2016: 25.0%, #1
2014: 19.3%, #3
PASS
2016: 50.5%, #2
2014: 35.0%, #5
RUSH
2016: -3.4%, #17
2014: -3.7%, #14
VARIANCE
2016: 5.4%, #13
2014: 6.1%, #10
SCHED
2016: -0.7%, #10
2014: -1.8%, #8
TOT YDS
2016: 6,180, #4
2014: 5,848, #11
PASS YDS
2016: 4,308, #4
2014: 4,121, #9
RUSH YDS
2016: 1,872, #7
2014: 1,727, #18
PPG
2016: 27.6, #3
2014: 29.3, #4
RUSH YPC
2016: 3.9, #25
2014: 3.9, #22
PASS YPA
2016: 8.1, #3
2014: 7.0, #20
PASSER RATING
2016: 109.5, #2
2014: 97.5, #5
They might be able to grind it out with an up tempo offense. This is where having both Gronk and Bennett would have been enormous. Keep both of them in and pound Blout play after play, up tempo. Or if the Falcons go heavy, then split the two TEs wide. Going up tempo would prevent Atlanta from substituting.
Oh well. Gronk isn't gonna play. So your question is a good one.
Oh well. Gronk isn't gonna play. So your question is a good one.
TS, I was thinking about this earlier today. While in a vacuum, it makes sense for the Pats to run the ball against Atlanta's subpar run defense and control the clock, given the personnel the Pats have and the damage Brady can do against that secondary, that seems like the wrong approach. They've been unstoppable out of the no-huddle, maybe they should come out ultra-aggressive, score their points, and hopefully put the defense in a position where just a couple of stops or turnovers will win the game.
edit: If I were the Falcons, and someone told me the Pats were planning to come out and run the ball a lot...that would make me happy.
edit: If I were the Falcons, and someone told me the Pats were planning to come out and run the ball a lot...that would make me happy.
I know! I was trying to be funny back.
Back to the topic at hand, I'm starting to get nervous. Usually with the Super Bowl, the first week is about savoring the season and having gotten there and then the second week is about being nervous. But I moved to nervous pretty quick.
All that said, it's pretty cool to be a fan of a team that allows you to start a sentence with, "Usually with the Super Bowl."
Agreed. What surprised me in looking at that game was that the Bills had more future HOFers (5 - Kelly, Thomas, Reed, Lofton, Smith) on the field than did the Giants (1 -- LT)
Some other notes about that game (all from Wikipedia):
- "The Bills and the Giants entered the game using contrasting styles: While the Bills led the league in total points scored (428), the Giants led the league in fewest points allowed (211)."
- The Bills D was no slouch: "The Bills had a very talented team with nine Pro Bowl selections on their roster. Their defense was led by defensive end Bruce Smith, who recorded 19 sacks and won the NFL Defensive Player of the Year Award. Behind him, three of the Bills' starting linebackers, Darryl Talley, Shane Conlan, and Cornelius Bennett, were selected to the Pro Bowl. And on special teams, Pro Bowler Steve Tasker was a major threat, forcing fumbles, delivering jarring tackles, and blocking kicks."
- "The Bills were heavily favored to win Super Bowl XXV. Most experts expected that the Giants' defense would not be able to contain the Bills' turbo-charged no-huddle offense, which had scored 95 points in 2 playoff games."
- "As tight end Mark Bavaro later recalled, "we came out with three tight ends, fat slobs picking you up and moving you and letting you tackle O.J., if you could."[citation needed] This enabled them to take time off the clock and limit Buffalo's possessions. The Giants set a Super Bowl record for time of possession with 40 minutes and 33 seconds, including 22 minutes in the second half."
- " In his book "The Education of a Coach", David Halberstam wrote that one of defensive coordinator Bill Belichick's specific plans to combat the Bills involved convincing his defense (who had been the best unit against the run in the NFL that season) that they would win the game if Thurman Thomas ran for more than 100 yards. Belichick also felt that Jim Kelly was not as good at reading defenses as some other elite quarterbacks were (for example, Joe Montana), and that Kelly tended to "freeze" what he was seeing from a series and then use that information on the next one, which meant the Giants could be a step ahead of him all game if they alternated their cover plans from drive to drive."
On the other hand, I'm getting more confident. Especially as I see all the talking hairdos out there pick the Falcons to win in a shootout. Patriots fatigue is so prevalent, and I get that; but somehow it makes me feel better about NE's chances
I seem to recall the Giants offense milking the clock on every play from the start of the game.
I have been thinking the same thing. My thought would be to pound early to wear out the Falcons D, especially Beasley. Then use play-action late. This could apply on a micro level (within any given drive) or macro (over the course of the game).
Here is the officiating crew. The side judge was one of the referees that played a big depart in Deflategate.
I had forgotten that quote from the book. That really exemplifies Belichick's approach---methodically reviews tape, and then thinks about execution and the people involved.
It also may partially explain why Kelly went out of his way to be a jackass about Deflategate.
Presumably you're all familiar with the theory that because the Patriots have played an easy schedule - particularly regarding opposing quarterbacks faced - their overall numbers seem more impressive than the team actually is. How much, if at all, do you buy into that?
That's interesting about Thomas. On the Falcons Jones is of course the amazing talent with the big numbers that everyone talks about stopping,
but he's put up some big numbers in games where the Falcons fell below their usual lofty offensive standards (eg 10 catches for 135 in a 24-15 loss to
Philadelphia) and small numbers while the offense soared (e.g. 4 catches for 35 in a 38-19 win vs Arizona); he missed two games and the Falcons scored 82. I would argue, as most have in this thread, that stopping Jones specifically is not particularly important, it's all about how to slow down the offense as a whole - and if Ryan is forcing it to Jones that might be a good thing - but stopping Julio will be a "key to the game" that we hear about for the next 10 days.
Over the last 15 years I've heard about how the Patriots haven't been tested, but the next team down the pike will be the true test, and after that team is disposed of I learn that actually that team kind of sucked. This happened again last week. I am pretty sure the Patriots are good. It will be interesting to see how good the Falcons are.
Well, stopping Jones IS a key to this game. But THE key to the game is how well they can cover the RBs. They'll move them all over the field to get the best matchup possible.
Speaking of that, I haven't seen the following fun schadenfreude fact on SoSH or anywhere else:
A friend who was on the field for the end of the game and was standing near where Tomlin walked off said the fans in the stands nearby serenaded Tomlin with "Asshole, Asshole, Asshole"...He said that Tomlin's anger was palpable.
Sorry for the non-SB diversion but I could not resist.
I would normally agree, and I doubt that would normally happen.
But that was kind of a lob at the net in light of Tomlin's description of the Pats.
Poetic justice, Mike.
DVOA had them as #16, which feels close to right. I'd probably call them more like top 10-12 in the league.
Prior to the last Steelers drive, Ben was 24-38 for 239, 0 TD, 1 INT. So they handled him pretty well.
Edit: we have also discussed this in depth a bunch. Here is a good discussion
http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/the-best-defense-is-a-good-offense-pats-2016-defense-discussion.16645/page-3#post-2098556
Which "gate" do you want to bring up to follow this gem up?
Tomlin brought it upon himself. Check the god damn moral compass at the door.
For what it's worth (potentially not very much), both 538's ELO system and FO's DVOA have the Pats as approximately 60/40 favorites in this game.
DVOA: Pats 58.6% chance to win
ELO: Pats 61% chance to win
ESPN Matchup Predictor: Pats 55.6% chance to win
ESPN's FPI had them as about 3 points better on a neutral field on Jan 3rd. What's neat is that FPI, DVOA, and ELO all had them as the top teams in their respective conferences, so we get a real 'best of the best' Super Bowl with no surprise underdog that got hot at just the right time.
DVOA: Pats 58.6% chance to win
ELO: Pats 61% chance to win
ESPN Matchup Predictor: Pats 55.6% chance to win
ESPN's FPI had them as about 3 points better on a neutral field on Jan 3rd. What's neat is that FPI, DVOA, and ELO all had them as the top teams in their respective conferences, so we get a real 'best of the best' Super Bowl with no surprise underdog that got hot at just the right time.
Technically not, since he said those words in the locker room, with no intention of broadcasting them to the public.
Belichick, I assume, says as much or worse in the locker room. I could not care less.
If people want to get angry at someone, it could be Antonio Brown, I guess.
Sure. They went 14-2 but against a tougher schedule, they might have only gone 12-4 or something. Maybe 13-3 if Brady plays 16. It would be silly to argue the schedule made no difference, but you can only play the teams on the schedule, and they've dominated. They've played 18 games and only trailed at any point in six of them (none since Week 12).
And one of the six was 3-0 Bills on the opening drive of the game; the Pats then responded with a TD on their first possession and blew them out
Goodell trying to be classy.
“Not for a second,” Goodell said when asked if it would be uncomfortable giving Brady the trophy, via MassLive.com. “This is one of the great opportunities. We have, two dominant teams playing in the Super Bowl. The Patriots and Falcons have both earned the opportunity to be there. They deserve it. And whoever wins that championship is going to have to earn it. These are great teams. So I am going to be thrilled …
“Tom Brady is one of the all-time greats. He has been for several years. He’s on the precipice of at least potentially winning his fifth Super Bowl. He’s an extraordinary player, great performer and surefire Hall of Famer. So it would be an honor.”
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/roger-goodell-sounds-excited-about-possibility-of-giving-tom-brady-the-super-bowl-trophy-195723522.html
“Not for a second,” Goodell said when asked if it would be uncomfortable giving Brady the trophy, via MassLive.com. “This is one of the great opportunities. We have, two dominant teams playing in the Super Bowl. The Patriots and Falcons have both earned the opportunity to be there. They deserve it. And whoever wins that championship is going to have to earn it. These are great teams. So I am going to be thrilled …
“Tom Brady is one of the all-time greats. He has been for several years. He’s on the precipice of at least potentially winning his fifth Super Bowl. He’s an extraordinary player, great performer and surefire Hall of Famer. So it would be an honor.”
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/roger-goodell-sounds-excited-about-possibility-of-giving-tom-brady-the-super-bowl-trophy-195723522.html
I also believe the Georgia Dome is such a storied facility that Roger wanted to be there 2 weeks straight...
But it got out because he can't control his locker room. He deserves what he gets.
It's all bullshit and fuck him.
Still, as far as a response goes, it's a good one and at least he said the words.
He really is an awful extemporaneous speaker. The "on the precipice of at least potentially winning his fifth Super Bowl" took me 5 readings to figure out.
Does that even matter?
Calling other people (and being) an asshole in private still makes you an asshole.
He's a public figure in sports...doesn't matter if he said it to the press, or it got leaked...it's still fair game.
It's just a word, and I think it's gender, sexuality, age, race, nationality, class, and creed-neutral.
He also said it this week .. getting ahead of the situation before the yearly SB press conference. Now that the quotes are out there, he can start any answers on the topic with "As I said a week ago ..." and make it appear the press is beating a dead horse
He is also going to be at the closing ceremony for the Georgia Dome next month; he really needs to be there three times.
No it doesn't matter, that's the whole point - I think we agree here. Some nutter fan chanting "asshole" at a coach who let it out of the locker room has always been par for the course in just about any stadium. It doesn't make any one fan base less or more classy than another.
He actually caught himself before things got really bad. He was *this* close to complimenting Brady for "occupying the winning Super Bowl quarterback space."
Also, the Pats won't panic if they get down by 10 or 14 or even 17 points in the first half (god forbid).
If they're down two scores in the middle of the 1st half, they won't start taking chances...they'll stay disciplined and stick with their plan. They can still run and run/pass and short route...Brady knows he doesn't have to air it out (although they'll certainly look for some mismatches to take advantage of downfield).
And they'll stick with their defensive plan and hope to get a two-fer on a forced fumble or an interception or just one extra stopped drive can/will make the difference in the end.
This is sorta obvious stuff...winning the turnover battle, that sort of thing. But based on points per drive, one extra stop and possession is a swing of almost a touchdown. The Pats won't panic, so they'll continue to try to wear down the Falcons D, and hope to make hay on defense (or pull out the stops near the end, which would suck to have to do)