Analyzing the interception.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    Pats Jets 2010 = 45 Pass atts to 28 runs. 23 runs by rbs, 2 by Brady, 1 by Chung(infamous botched fake) 1 by Edelman, 1 by somebody else.

    That is almost double the pass atts to run atts in the game. 2-1 pass to run ratio.

    Pats Ravens 2009 = 42 pass atts to 18 rushes. 2-1 pass to run ratio

    Pats Giants 2007 = 48 pass atts to 16 rushes. 3-1 pass to run ratio

    All 3 games we lost, and our offense did next to nothing for most of the game, imo we lost because of that.


    In our Sb years we had balance and we didn't abandon the run. 2003 was the 1st time we really started using a lot of spread, but that was also the decline of A Smith and we needed to use K Faulk as our lead back out of neccessity. In other words we had no choice. We have 5 capable rbs on the roster right now, we have a choice.

    01 we had balance. 04 we had balance, and as bad a run attack as we had in 03 we still used it. Now we have token run plays. Our pass heavy offense while one of the best in regular season history has turned in exactly SQUAT in the post season.

     It is predictable, it only produces results against teams who lack the personnel to stop it, Against good defense's it is ineffective, see Cowboys, Giants, jets, Ravens, Steelers. CMON. What are you guys looking at during these games?

    The best Qb to ever play the game is throwing into 7 defenders all day. We have no surprise aspect to our offense. We run out of the same formations. Play action is a joke. The only reason we do much of anything is because Brady is the best at what he does. Imagine if we could actually help him?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : Did I ever say run it 50% of the time? I've said repeatedly run balance doesn't mean 50% of the time it can even be 3:2 run to pass and it can still be effective even if they only average 3ypc. What doesn't help is a 2:1 pass to run ratio which tends to happen in most of our loses. Actually to closer to 50% run to pass the higher the win % of the Pats. Matter a fact Brady's only lost once in his career when the Pats have run />50% of the time. That's doesn't mean you have to run it 50% of the time but you do perform better when you mix in the run and disguise it in a balanced O. On the flip side you don't need a back to get 5+ypc average even a back that gets 3ypc can be affective. Z has numbers that point that out. But, for the majority of posters who fight against balance point to BJGE's ypc average as a sign of ineffective running which simply isn't true. BJGE is a very effective runner in the Pats system when given 15+ carries a game yet he is dismissed instantly because people point out his ypc and lack of homerun threat capability. What else would you say about those people?
    Posted by PatsEng


    WHY?

    Why do you incessantly push the run game? I really want to know. Do you just like the run game better than passing? Is it just a theory you have ?

    Saying we don't run enough or lack balance is a one track mentality that has zero basis in reality.

    This team is within 9 rushing attempts, with 342, of the league average.
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : Did I ever say run it 50% of the time? I've said repeatedly run balance doesn't mean 50% of the time it can even be 3:2 run to pass and it can still be effective even if they only average 3ypc. What doesn't help is a 2:1 pass to run ratio which tends to happen in most of our loses. Actually to closer to 50% run to pass the higher the win % of the Pats. Matter a fact Brady's only lost once in his career when the Pats have run />50% of the time. That's doesn't mean you have to run it 50% of the time but you do perform better when you mix in the run and disguise it in a balanced O. On the flip side you don't need a back to get 5+ypc average even a back that gets 3ypc can be affective. Z has numbers that point that out. But, for the majority of posters who fight against balance point to BJGE's ypc average as a sign of ineffective running which simply isn't true. BJGE is a very effective runner in the Pats system when given 15+ carries a game yet he is dismissed instantly because people point out his ypc and lack of homerun threat capability. What else would you say about those people?
    Posted by PatsEng

    Yeah, but those are nonsense stats, the ones about Brady not losing when they run 50% of the time that is. It's tautological. Like the stat that NE is 30-1 when a RB rushes for 100. 

    Winning teams run more on their final drive or so, while the team that is behind tends to pass almost exclusively. Saying that NE wins when the rushy 50% of the time, is like saying they win because they are winning. 

    Also, run a check of the teams they have gained 100 yards from a single runner on in the Brady era ... only two of them were playoff teams that season, and only four even had winning records. 

    Again, tautological. It's sort of well known that bad teams a.) can't defend the run, and that the b.) team with a lead tends to run the clock. So the only thing that stat says is what we already know. NE beats the tar out of non-playoff teams, and that when they do that, they like to finish games by running clock. 

    What I said was that you cannot abandon the run completely. That's a fact. Though I don't, for the life of me, buy the humbug that a.) running Woodhead doesn't count as a run (???), or that b.) running the ball 28 times to 32 passes in 55 minutes of football, before a couple last ditch drives that only featured passes somehow means NE abandoned the run. 

    In the last three seasons NE is 8-1 when they run for 113 yards or have 28 carries, like in that last playoff game ... that last playoff game is the only one they lost with those numbers. 

    If NE were ahead in that Jets game in the end, they probably would have run it another 8-10 times, while passing it only a few. The end result would have been a clean 50-50 ratio, and people would have been saying  .... see! 50% rushing = win. 

    At any rate, the loss was anomalous. But I wouldn't say NE gave up on the run in that game at any point in time, until the last few minutes when running just wasn't an option. 

    And Shenanigan's point has some merit. But only in situations (for me) where the runner is carrying a 1-2 ypc. 

    3-4 is good enough, statistically. I mean, the 2001 and 2003 Pats average 3.7 and 3.4 for a whole season. And they got by. 

    But then, they had great defenses making up for it, and Tom Brady waiting to run some no-huddle in the last minutes. It was a really winning formula. Great QB plus great defense. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : We aren't fighting against balance, but against the insanity of running it when it isn't working. How mnay rushes does it take to make a first down at 3 yards a pop?
    Posted by Patsfansince1966


    if you rush it twice that leaves 3rd a 4. If you throw an incomplete after running it twice it's 3rd and 7. Brady's a great QB but I'll bet even he will tell you that's it's easier and much higher odds of getting a 1st on 3rd and 4th or 3rd and 7th, esp when you have the threat of picking up the first by running.  That's just the immediate impact impact though which in this system you only need to run it twice a set of downs maybe a couple times a series to keep a D honest. That's not to mention the beneficial side effects of opening up the play action, freeing up passing lanes, and wearing down the D.

    Look at the games where our O was effective through the 2nd half, almost all of them had the Pats running the ball />40% of the time in the first half with BJGE, even averaging less then 3.5ypc. 3ypc can be very effective when Brady is your QB and only needs slight hesitation from LB's/S's or preventing the D from pinning their ears back and killing Brady.
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : 2001 OAK 63% pass 2001 PITT 61% pass 2001 STL 51% pass 2003 TN  60% pass 2003 IND 54% pass 2003 CAR 58% pass 2004 IND 41% pass 2004 PITT 40% pass 2004 PHI 54% pass How is 45 "almost double" 28?  45/28 is about 1.5, not 2.  So three passes for every two runs, not two passes for every run. You also neglect that in 2009 they were behind the Ravens immediately.
    Posted by Patsfansince1966

    Never mind the fact that TrueChamp won't even acknowledge, that 13 (that's right) passes came in the final two drives when NE was down to the last five minutes of the game. 

    Outside of that is was 32-28 ... which is almost spot on 50/50. NE also won TOP. 

    Saying NE didn't run enough in that game is really just a cop out, because the theory that running automatically equals success actually didn't work.

    The players still need to execute. 

    If running automatically equaled success ... I'm pretty sure BB would have discovered that fact and catered to it ... along with the rest of the NFL. 
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : if you rush it twice that leaves 3rd a 4. If you throw an incomplete after running it twice it's 3rd and 7. Brady's a great QB but I'll bet even he will tell you that's it's easier and much higher odds of getting a 1st on 3rd and 4th or 3rd and 7th, esp when you have the threat of picking up the first by running.  That's just the immediate impact impact though which in this system you only need to run it twice a set of downs maybe a couple times a series to keep a D honest. That's not to mention the beneficial side effects of opening up the play action, freeing up passing lanes, and wearing down the D. Look at the games where our O was effective through the 2nd half, almost all of them had the Pats running the ball />40% of the time in the first half with BJGE, even averaging less then 3.5ypc. 3ypc can be very effective when Brady is your QB and only needs slight hesitation from LB's/S's or preventing the D from pinning their ears back and killing Brady.
    Posted by PatsEng

    I don't think Brady is getting killed really. He gets sacked less than most QBs, and takes less hits than most who pass as much as he does. 

    I think, for the most part, NE runs enough to keep defenses honest. 

    The personnel on the field, as always, is dictated by NE's personnel first. Opponents will match. 

    As long as NE has TWO TEs ... defenses will always be in nickel. If you take one off the field ... they won't get honest ... they'll just bring in another LBer. 

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : Yeah, but those are nonsense stats, the ones about Brady not losing when they run 50% of the time that is. It's tautological. Like the stat that NE is 30-1 when a RB rushes for 100.  Winning teams run more on their final drive or so, while the team that is behind tends to pass almost exclusively. Saying that NE wins when the rushy 50% of the time, is like saying they win because they are winning.  Also, run a check of the teams they have gained 100 yards from a single runner on in the Brady era ... only two of them were playoff teams that season, and only four even had winning records.  Again, tautological. It's sort of well known that bad teams a.) can't defend the run, and that the b.) team with a lead tends to run the clock. So the only thing that stat says is what we already know. NE beats the tar out of non-playoff teams, and that when they do that, they like to finish games by running clock.  What I said was that you cannot abandon the run completely. That's a fact. Though I don't, for the life of me, buy the humbug that a.) running Woodhead doesn't count as a run (???), or that b.) running the ball 28 times to 32 passes in 55 minutes of football, before a couple last ditch drives that only featured passes somehow means NE abandoned the run.  In the last three seasons NE is 8-1 when they run for 113 yards or have 28 carries, like in that last playoff game ... that last playoff game is the only one they lost with those numbers.  If NE were ahead in that Jets game in the end, they probably would have run it another 8-10 times, while passing it only a few. The end result would have been a clean 50-50 ratio, and people would have been saying  .... see! 50% rushing = win.  At any rate, the loss was anomalous. But I wouldn't say NE gave up on the run in that game at any point in time, until the last few minutes when running just wasn't an option.  And Shenanigan's point has some merit. But only in situations (for me) where the runner is carrying a 1-2 ypc.  3-4 is good enough, statistically. I mean, the 2001 and 2003 Pats average 3.7 and 3.4 for a whole season. And they got by.  But then, they had great defenses making up for it, and Tom Brady waiting to run some no-huddle in the last minutes. It was a really winning formula. Great QB plus great defense. 
    Posted by zbellino


    Z yes teams tend to run more when trying to kill the clock but it's general made up for in NE with the 2min drive. Usually before the half the Pats run a 2min style O that only uses passes.

    For the most part when the Pats ran a balanced system it was balanced through the entire game.

    again I said balanced didn't need to be 50% but it can't be lope sided and/or formulaic.

    BTW Brady only losing once if they run it />50% of the time is significant because of the volume of games. They've actually won over 50 games when running it >50% of the time. Which means even if they ran the ball exclusively the last couple series a game they still ran it over 45% of the time for the majority of the game which is much more balanced then in their loses
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : Z yes teams tend to run more when trying to kill the clock but it's general made up for in NE with the 2min drive. Usually before the half the Pats run a 2min style O that only uses passes. For the most part when the Pats ran a balanced system it was balanced through the entire game. again I said balanced didn't need to be 50% but it can't be lope sided and/or formulaic. BTW Brady only losing once if they run it />50% of the time is significant because of the volume of games. They've actually won over 50 games when running it />50% of the time. Which means even if they ran the ball exclusively the last couple series a game they still ran it over 45% of the time for the majority of the game which is much more balanced then in their loses
    Posted by PatsEng

    I'm not sure of the math you are speaking here. The 2 minute drives only help the argument that NE runs more than the numbers indicate.

    If you subtracted 2 minute HT drives from lots of games it would show that even when NE is running it 45% of the time, they are likely, down to down, running it closer to 50%. But I digress. 

    If NE has won it 50 times running it 50% of the time (I'd love to see the stat linked BTW) that tells me that They have won it 81 times passing it more than they have run it. 

    Also, Brady is 36-6 when he passes for 325+ yards? Does that mean NE should aim for 325+ yard games to win?

    No ... it just means that when you win ... you pile up certain kinds of numbers. 

    Statisticians, and coaches who DO follow deep statistics, like BB himself throw these ones out ... because they don't indicate anything meaningful. Statistically speaking running the ball more, or even more effectively does not correalate well to winning at all. 

    Playing tough run defense on first down correalates far better to winning. Passing more effectively is one of the most accurate indicators of winning, I think coming in at .84. 

    Which is funny because the Jets passed more effectively than NE in the playoffs, and ran it with about the exact same effectiveness/amount. And they won. 
     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : If it's not 50% then it can't be balanced by definition. They probably ran it more than half the time BEACAUSE they WERE winning those 50 games.  They didn't win those 50 games because they ran it more often. Moron.
    Posted by Patsfansince1966



    There is no need to call anyone a moron. I promise you he is not a moron.

    But that is essentially the point. 

    You tend to run it 50% of the time when you are winning big. It's basically a football fact. 

    It isn't the other way around. 

    There are far, far, far too many examples of teams winning by passing almost exclusively in the playoffs and in the regular season to make that a meaningful fact.

    Heck, even that Pitt game this season where NE (supposedly) didn't run enough to win ... what did the Steelers throw 50 passes or something, to 23 runs? That is supposedly the number you lose with.

    Incidentally, six of Pittsburgh's runs came on their last two, run heavy drives. 

    Without those two drives, their P/R numbers were 48:17. They won TOP by a landslide, and basically punted once all game (at 2:35 in the 4th) that way. 

    Just further, real world, illustration that running = winning stats are really devoid of meaning. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : There is no need to call anyone a moron. I promise you he is not a moron. But that is essentially the point.  You tend to run it 50% of the time when you are winning big. It's basically a football fact.  It isn't the other way around.  There are far, far, far too many examples of teams winning by passing almost exclusively in the playoffs and in the regular season to make that a meaningful fact. Heck, even that Pitt game this season where NE (supposedly) didn't run enough to win ... what did the Steelers throw 50 passes or something, to 23 runs? That is supposedly the number you lose with. Incidentally, six of Pittsburgh's runs came on their last two, run heavy drives.  Without those two drives, their P/R numbers were 48:17. They won TOP by a landslide, and basically punted once all game (at 2:35 in the 4th) that way.  Just further, real world, illustration that running = winning stats are really devoid of meaning. 
    Posted by zbellino


    Additionally, you don't run much when you're behind, which we were the entire Steelers' game.
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : Additionally, you don't run much when you're behind, which we were the entire Steelers' game.
    Posted by BabeParilli


    Well, Ne likes to pass against Pitt. Their run defense is great, and they need to blitz to get pressure usually. So it's a good matchup. Brady has a tremendous career passing against them. That loss was really an exception.

    But to prove the point:

    This year?

    35-12 pass run. 

    16-1 pass run on the final two drives. 

    Last season, another lopsided 43-24 pass/run. 
    2-7 pass run on the final two drives. 

    Before the last eleven minutes NE passed it 19 times to 11 runs this year and lost. 

    Before the final few minutes last season, NE passed the ball 36 times and ran it 17 and won .... BIG. 

    So 63% passing lost big .... and 67& passing won big. 

    The difference is how NE executed. Not in reading tea-leaves for obscure ratios that must be met in order to win.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : Even if they hadn't been behind I doubt one would run much if you're getting less than four yards a pop.
    Posted by Patsfansince1966



    Yeah, I would go with the QB that is putting up the 100+ passer rating over the runners getting 3.5 yards a shot. Call me crazy.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : Never mind the fact that TrueChamp won't even acknowledge, that 13 (that's right) passes came in the final two drives when NE was down to the last five minutes of the game.  Outside of that is was 32-28 ... which is almost spot on 50/50. NE also won TOP.  Saying NE didn't run enough in that game is really just a cop out, because the theory that running automatically equals success actually didn't work. The players still need to execute.  If running automatically equaled success ... I'm pretty sure BB would have discovered that fact and catered to it ... along with the rest of the NFL. 
    Posted by zbellino


    Z, I acknowledge that 13 pass atts came in the final quarter, but you need to acknowledge that 7 of our 23 running attempts came on opne drive in the 4rth qtr when we realized that we couldn't pass our way to victory.
    New England Patriots at 13:00NYJNWE
    1st and 10 at NE 18D.Woodhead left end to NE 22 for 4 yards (B.Pool, D.Harris).  
    2nd and 6 at NE 22D.Woodhead left tackle to NE 24 for 2 yards (M.Devito). FUMBLES (M.Devito), recovered by NE-L.Mankins at NE 27.  
    3rd and 1 at NE 27T.Brady pass short middle to W.Welker to NE 35 for 8 yards (A.Cromartie).  
    1st and 10 at NE 35(Shotgun) T.Brady pass incomplete short middle to A.Crumpler.  
    2nd and 10 at NE 35D.Woodhead left end to NE 39 for 4 yards (B.Pool, J.Taylor).  
    3rd and 6 at NE 39(Shotgun) T.Brady pass short left to D.Branch to NE 47 for 8 yards (D.Revis).  
    1st and 10 at NE 47B.Green-Ellis left guard to 50 for 3 yards (T.Pryce).  
    2nd and 7 at 50D.Woodhead up the middle to NYJ 42 for 8 yards (B.Pool).  
    1st and 10 at NYJ 42D.Woodhead right end to NYJ 35 for 7 yards (D.Lowery).  
    2nd and 8 at NYJ 40T.Brady pass short left to W.Welker to NYJ 31 for 9 yards (D.Revis).  
    1st and 10 at NYJ 31D.Woodhead right guard to NYJ 31 for no gain (S.Ellis).  
    2nd and 10 at NYJ 31T.Brady sacked at NYJ 34 for -3 yards (S.Pouha).  
    3rd and 13 at NYJ 34(Shotgun) T.Brady pass incomplete short right to D.Woodhead. NYJ-D.Revis was injured during the play.  
    4th and 13 at NYJ 34(Shotgun) T.Brady pass incomplete short left to D.Branch.  
    DRIVE TOTALS: NYJ 21, NE 11, 14 plays, 48 yards, 7:45 elapsed


    Unfortunately it was too little too late.

    To say we should discount 13 (thats right 13) pass plays but not 7 running plays because they came in the 4rth qtr is just plain old downright "Tautological"

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : Yeah, I would go with the QB that is putting up the 100+ passer rating over the runners getting 3.5 yards a shot. Call me crazy.
    Posted by BabeParilli

    3.5 yards per carry can't be seen as effective or not effective without looking at how they are gained. 

    Long runs tend to skew the numbers dramatically. 

    A runner who gains 3.5 on 3rd and 3 twice is more effective than a runner who got 9 on second and ten, and then none on 3rd and one. Statistically, the second runner looks more effective.

    I can think of a million reasons why running someone with a 3.5 yards per carry when your QB is passing well is a good thing. 

    One, right off the bat, is expecgted payoff. The longer your QB passes more effectively the higher the payoff will be when you run it. NE tends to have trouble running it when they aren't passing well. 

    We see this with our own eyes. 

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception. : Z, I acknowledge that 13 pass atts came in the final quarter, but you need to acknowledge that 7 of our 23 running attempts came on opne drive in the 4rth qtr when we realized that we couldn't pass our way to victory. New England Patriots at 13:00 NYJ NWE 1st and 10 at NE 18 D.Woodhead left end to NE 22 for 4 yards (B.Pool, D.Harris).     2nd and 6 at NE 22 D.Woodhead left tackle to NE 24 for 2 yards (M.Devito). FUMBLES (M.Devito), recovered by NE-L.Mankins at NE 27.     3rd and 1 at NE 27 T.Brady pass short middle to W.Welker to NE 35 for 8 yards (A.Cromartie).     1st and 10 at NE 35 (Shotgun) T.Brady pass incomplete short middle to A.Crumpler.     2nd and 10 at NE 35 D.Woodhead left end to NE 39 for 4 yards (B.Pool, J.Taylor).     3rd and 6 at NE 39 (Shotgun) T.Brady pass short left to D.Branch to NE 47 for 8 yards (D.Revis).     1st and 10 at NE 47 B.Green-Ellis left guard to 50 for 3 yards (T.Pryce).     2nd and 7 at 50 D.Woodhead up the middle to NYJ 42 for 8 yards (B.Pool).     1st and 10 at NYJ 42 D.Woodhead right end to NYJ 35 for 7 yards (D.Lowery).     2nd and 8 at NYJ 40 T.Brady pass short left to W.Welker to NYJ 31 for 9 yards (D.Revis).     1st and 10 at NYJ 31 D.Woodhead right guard to NYJ 31 for no gain (S.Ellis).     2nd and 10 at NYJ 31 T.Brady sacked at NYJ 34 for -3 yards (S.Pouha).     3rd and 13 at NYJ 34 (Shotgun) T.Brady pass incomplete short right to D.Woodhead. NYJ-D.Revis was injured during the play.     4th and 13 at NYJ 34 (Shotgun) T.Brady pass incomplete short left to D.Branch.     DRIVE TOTALS: NYJ 21, NE 11, 14 plays, 48 yards, 7:45 elapsed Unfortunately it was too little too late. To say we should discount 13 (thats right 13) pass plays but not 7 running plays because they came in the 4rth qtr is just plain old downright "Tautological"
    Posted by TrueChamp

    They are seven to seven on that drive by my count.

    So, NE's pass to run ratio was 21 to 25. Still pretty durn close to 50/50. It really doesn't help your case that NE was passing a lot more than they ran before the last gasp. 

    If anything, it shows that running the football doesn't equal success. It was arguably their most run-heavy drive, and it produced LESS points than the two preceeding drives where they went into the hurry up.

    Given your logic ... that would have been the drive they had scored on.  

    Why can't you just ackowledge that the final five minutes skew that game. It's really a naked fact, that is repeated every single week in and out?

    Also, no need to be sarcastic. If you start getting sarcastic, I'll just leave. 


     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    Ohh cmon I thought you had that coming, sorry if I offended you.

    I'm not gonna post the play by play charts again as we have been through it a lot. Every drive in the 1st half ended like this...

    1st drive Pass = INT

    2nd drive pass = sacked FG.

    3rd drive pass = sacked punt.

    4rth drive pass = incomplete punt.

    5th drive pass = incomplete punt(botched fake Chung)

    Its almost like the Jets knew we were going to pass every 3rd down. Probably because we did just that.

    All of this while the RB's were moving the ball effectively albeit on 10 carries only, and we had the Jets D-line on its heels.

    here is another way to look at it.....

    1st drive pass atts = 5 / rushes 2....result INT

    2nd drive Pass atts = 5 / rushes 4 result our best drive of the half 56 yards but sacked on another 3rd down pass and settled for a fg

    3rd drive pass = 2 / rush = 1 result sacked

    4rth drive pass = 2 / rush = 1 result punt

    5th drive pass = 3 / rush = 2 result fake punt.

    6th drive 2 passes kneel down.

    That is 19 pass attempts to 10 run attempts by a running back. Where is the balance? Where is the production for one of the best offense's in NFL history?

    This resulted in 3 points and ONLY because we ran the ball on the second drive. The Jets were vulnerable to the run and we gashed them to move within FG position but choked up a td opp because of a predictable pass resulting in a sack.



     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    This has been a good if somewhat testy discussion. So what have we learned?


    1. Brady's pass may not have been that bad after all.

    2. Underwood ran a bad pattern.

    3. Underwood gave up the ball like a whimpering little girl.

    4. Brady had every right to lay into him for his abysmal execution.

    5. O'Brien was way off base for getting on Brady because Tom merely told the receiver he screwed up which is his every right.

    6. O'Brien appears to be a psychotic that just doesn't get he is one unbelievably lucky fool to have this job he is grossly unqualified for, who had to be physically restrained from accosting the one player who is keeping this team from being a joke again.

    That about sums it up. Nice work fellow Pats' fans.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Analyzing the interception.

    In Response to Re: Analyzing the interception.:
    Ohh cmon I thought you had that coming, sorry if I offended you. I'm not gonna post the play by play charts again as we have been through it a lot. Every drive in the 1st half ended like this... 1st drive Pass = INT 2nd drive pass = sacked FG. 3rd drive pass = sacked punt. 4rth drive pass = incomplete punt. 5th drive pass = incomplete punt(botched fake Chung) Its almost like the Jets knew we were going to pass every 3rd down. Probably because we did just that. All of this while the RB's were moving the ball effectively albeit on 10 carries only, and we had the Jets D-line on its heels. here is another way to look at it..... 1st drive pass atts = 5 / rushes 2....result INT 2nd drive Pass atts = 5 / rushes 4 result our best drive of the half 56 yards but sacked on another 3rd down pass and settled for a fg 3rd drive pass = 2 / rush = 1 result sacked 4rth drive pass = 2 / rush = 1 result punt 5th drive pass = 3 / rush = 2 result fake punt. 6th drive 2 passes kneel down. That is 19 pass attempts to 10 run attempts by a running back. Where is the balance? Where is the production for one of the best offense's in NFL history? This resulted in 3 points and ONLY because we ran the ball on the second drive. The Jets were vulnerable to the run and we gashed them to move within FG position but choked up a td opp because of a predictable pass resulting in a sack.
    Posted by TrueChamp

    OK, so the two pass attempts with :33 count ... but running reverses don't count?

    Running reverses has been a staple of this team since BB got here. They ran two reverses in each of their playoff games in 2001. It IS running. 19-10 again is an odd number. But I really don't care what funky math you are using to get there.

    And passing and missing a pass on third down is pretty common. You don't run the football on 3rd and 8. That is how teams know you are passing. 

    I don't have anything coming at all. 

    I would be willing to bet that 90% of failed 3rd down conversions happen on passes. That's because the vast, vast majority of failed third downs are THIRD and LONG! 

    Really TC ... 3rd down passes missing doesn't help your argument that NE passed waay more than it ran in the slightest. 

    You are slicing and dicing, discounting runs because you claim they "don't count" all to prove a theory that is not working for you.

    It's not intellectually honest. 

    NE ran almost exactly as much as it passed. They still lost. Yet you just insist that they didn't when the numbers and game are there for even you to see. 
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share