Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    This is from an article on ESPNBoston.com:

    http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4700690/belichick-why-bother-with-p-a-t?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

    "Philosophically, plays that are non-plays shouldn’t be in the game. I don't think it is good for the game. Extra points, when the odds are 99 percent range in extra points it is not a play. Lets move the ball back to the 15-20 yard line and not make it a tap in. Let them kick it. Same thing with the kickoff return, if you’re just going to put the ball on the 20, put the ball on the 20,"
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from apdynasty23. Show apdynasty23's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    I don't know about you guys, but I love hearing this guy talk. It seems like something intelligent and logical is always coming out of his mouth and it comes out so dry and mundane that it screams of, 'I can't believe you idiots don't see it.' I can see why people think Belichick's condescending but I find it hilarious. Also, less is more. He's not like a certain coach in our division that's always blabbering to the media so when he does say something, it carries weight.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    In Response to Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s:
    [QUOTE]I don't know about you guys, but I love hearing this guy talk. It seems like something intelligent and logical is always coming out of his mouth and it comes out so dry and mundane that it screams of, 'I can't believe you idiots don't see it.' I can see why people think Belichick's condescending but I find it hilarious. Also, less is more. He's not like a certain coach in our division that's always blabbering to the media so when he does say something, it carries weight.
    Posted by apdynasty23[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, I found myself laughing yesterday with the exchange he had with Shaunessy about Haynesworth. The only thing as a fan that I don't like (although I got used to) is the lack of any information what so ever. As a fan I'd like to know a thing or two about the players on the team from time to time and he gives you nothing. Now this is just fine as long as they keep winning, but if they ever were to have an off season (6-10), then you'd need something to keep you interested. If you listen to other coaches press conferences, it's like night and day.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from apdynasty23. Show apdynasty23's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    In Response to Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s : Yeah, I found myself laughing yesterday with the exchange he had with Shaunessy about Haynesworth. The only thing as a fan that I don't like (although I got used to) is the lack of any information what so ever. As a fan I'd like to know a thing or two about the players on the team from time to time and he gives you nothing. Now this is just fine as long as they keep winning, but if they ever were to have an off season (6-10), then you'd need something to keep you interested. If you listen to other coaches press conferences, it's like night and day.
    Posted by mthurl[/QUOTE]

    Agreed. I guess if he could just tell the fans, maybe he would, but he doesn't put stuff out there to give another team a competitive advantage or anything that gives them insight into the Patriots locker. The players respect that and that's why another team's average player sometimes become stellar under Belichick. As long as they keep winning, I have no issues with how he does things. It's hard to find synergy like he, Kraft, and Brady have. Why ruin a good thing? Another interesting thing yesterday was Koppen's interview with WEEI. They played the clip from Gerald McCoy and how he was laughing like a kid when talkign about how fast the Patriots offense operated. I saw the video of Koppen's interview and he was like 'I can't believe he said those words like that' and when asked if a Patriot would ever come out and talk like that, he was like 'no, I don't see one of our guys coming out like that.' Speaks of the professionalism and the winning attitude. You're expected to win and if you don't, get better and start winning.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    Belichick doesn't say a lot,but he says a lot when he speaks.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188. Show Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    In Response to Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s:
    [QUOTE]This is from an article on ESPNBoston.com: http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4700690/belichick-why-bother-with-p-a-t?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter "Philosophically, plays that are non-plays shouldn’t be in the game. I don't think it is good for the game. Extra points, when the odds are 99 percent range in extra points it is not a play. Lets move the ball back to the 15-20 yard line and not make it a tap in. Let them kick it. Same thing with the kickoff return, if you’re just going to put the ball on the 20, put the ball on the 20,"
    Posted by mrmojo1120[/QUOTE]

    Love it

    automatic extra points and touchbacks are in fact pointless
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BizzaroLaw. Show BizzaroLaw's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    Cool
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    Might not be a bad idea moving the PAT back, would it make more teams go for two?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    While BBs take is interesting there is a side effect: if PATs become harder and therefore less frequently converted then FGs will become more significant as well - because you will not always get the full 7 points you normally get with the PAT.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s


    Exactly.And if you have a strong kicker as we do in Gostkowski, then you are golden if the NFL adopted what BB laid out.

    Honestly, I think it's a shot at the NFL and Goodell for the new kickoff rule. I don't think he enjoys watching these eggheads at NFL HQ change the game like they are doing. His comment I think (at least to me) was , "Ok, if you are going to move the ball up 5 yards on kickoffs, why not just get rid of extra points?"..what's next is my question with Goodell in office. I for one would like him impeached if that is possible...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    Ask BB a general question about football and no one will give you a better, more thorough, or more interesting answer.  BB won't answer questions that give away key info that might affect the next game, but if you ask him about general football strategy or the history of the game, he can be quite expansive.  I'd love it if he wrote a book about football strategy and history.  I bet it would be a fabulous and fascinating read for true football junkies.

    I love his suggestion, by the way, of making the PAT a bit more difficult.  In my opinion there should be about an 80%-85% chance of making the one-point conversion and a 35%-40% chance of making the two pointer. This still keeps the one pointer a better choice in most circumstances but it makes the odds close enough that the two-pointer is more tempting for a team that is good at it and might be tried more when the single point will make a difference. 

    On kick-offs, we definitely should not have a rule that results in a high percentage of touchbacks.  Increasingly, I'm thinking that, if we can't move the restraining line back to the 30 yard line, we change the kick type from a place kick to a punt (as happens in a safety kick under current rules) and move the restraining line near midfield.  This would create a much shorter kick (and therefore a shorter, maybe slower sprint for the coverage team), but if the restraining line was set appropriately, still produce a large number of returns and a small number of touchbacks. 

    Just a thought . . .  
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Vacilando. Show Vacilando's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    I think moving the PATs back is a fascinating idea that surprisingly I've never heard before.  I'm crediting BB with this idea but simply stating that it should be given more thought. 

    The ramifications of moving it back would completely alter the game planning across the board from drafting (kickers / special teams), late game play (ie clock mgmt), etc...

    The LEGITIMATE problem with football right now is that it's borderline boring with too many commercials, pushing the KO forward makes it another mute play right along with the PAT.  If I wasn't a Patriots fan I'd have a hard time sitting through 50% or air time commercials just to watch my team lose.

    This is a serious topic that could breathe some life back into the game that been recently sucked out of it...
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Belichick's interesting take on P.A.T.'s

    I agree . . . one thought would be to give teams the choice of snapping the PAT from either the 15 yard line or the current 2 yard line.  If they choose the 15 yard line they can either kick for one point (a 32 yard kick) or go for two points by running or passing the ball into the endzone.  If they choose the 2 yard line they can only go for two points.  The goal would be to make the kick a little harder while keeping the 2-point conversion roughly the same difficulty as it is now. 

    The kickoff also needs to be addressed though.  I fully agree with BB that a kickoff rule that results in a very high percentage of touchbacks quickly turns the kickoff into a meaningless play.  My preference is to go back to the 30 yard restraining line that the NFL has used since 1993, but in the absence of that, I'd consider replacing the current place kick with a punt (from a free kick formation, just as in a safety kick) and moving the restraining line up to somewhere near midfield.  This would provide more returns and reduce the number of touchbacks, but would also shorten the length of the coverage team's downfield run and thereby (I suspect) reduce the number of full speed collisions. 


     

Share