Hawg73
Mediocre with flashes of brilliance
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2002
- Messages
- 25,149
- Reaction score
- 11,476
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 68
- Location
- Gumdrop house on Lollipop Ln.
Before you get worked up, I'll explain what I mean by "tank" a bit later. For now, please just consider this:
Postgame presser. Belichick starts out by complimenting his team for competing and fighting so hard. It was sincere, in my opinion.
During the game we all got understandably distracted by the shit refereeing and Gronk's injury and we focused largely on those things, because they were both big deals.
After thinking about it, that game reminds me of the Green Bay game last year. Both were road games against really good teams at approximately the same point in the season. In each the Pats entered the game virtually a playoff lock with home-field advantage still a goal and a closing stretch of games that were favorable. In both losses we broke long winning streaks of seven and nine games, respectively. Eddie Lacy played the C.J. Anderson role and we couldn't stop him, either.
My impression during that game against the Packers was that something was a bit off. It was a close game, but I felt like we were playing conservatively. Or something. There were some faint whispers that we were holding something back for a potential future meeting against a team that was a leading NFC Super Bowl candidate. Of course, that is crazy talk. Wild-ass speculation. But the Denver game made me wonder.
Now, if there is one lesson to be learned from 2007 is that 18-1 isn't nearly as great as it sounds if you lose the last one. I think the Coach felt like he owed it to his players to chase history, but perhaps that took a psychological toll that was a negative factor. That is strictly my guess, but whatever.
Point is, I don't think Bill wants any part of a 19-0 quest redux. No way.
When I use the word "tank" I mean that I think it is entirely possible that Bill Belichick thought it was more important to play this game using a vanilla game plan and save the good stuff for a potential playoff matchup with Denver regardless of whether we won or lost. Injuries would provide a perfect cover.
Why did we sit on the ball with a 7 point lead with more than two minutes to go and time outs in our pocket before halftime? I wondered. It made zero sense. If you're afraid to turn the ball over in THAT situation then when is it ok to not be afraid? You've still got to play the game. We ALWAYS sit on the ball before halftime, standard operating procedure, but not with THAT much time on the clock. You only get so many chances in a game and we clearly just pissed that one away and none of us can really know why.
I also wondered when our game plan seemed to be comprised of fruitless dives into the line and then long bombs. That is not what we do. Ever. I know we are way down on the depth chart at WR, but where were the slants? The trips? Screens? It didn't feel right regardless of the personnel. We dominated the first quarter and then.......it seemed like we just eased off the gas pedal.
I'm not saying Bill Belichick wanted to lose this game. I know he wants a potential homefield advantage that could hinge on a win, but I think it is entirely possible that he felt it was more important to hold something back and play it on the down low in this circumstance regardless of how it affected that home field. Let Denver think what they want but the next meeting would be entirely different, especially with the potential for a return of Jules and Amendola. In short, Denver shot their wad but we didn't.
As Bill noted, the Pats fought hard. I think that is what was really going on here. We're looking at a team that is decimated by injuries, faced the ugly loss of Gronk for the season, was the victim of multiple flags and non-flags and was (perhaps) holding something back scheme-wise and they STILL almost won that game. No wonder he was proud of them. There was your galvanizing team moment of 2015. In a loss. When they are on fumes in all three phases.
Belichick KNOWS his guys can beat Denver next time and so do they. The regular season is nice and all, but 2007 taught him to focus entirely on the end game at all times regardless of how that might conflict with conventional football wisdom.
Postgame presser. Belichick starts out by complimenting his team for competing and fighting so hard. It was sincere, in my opinion.
During the game we all got understandably distracted by the shit refereeing and Gronk's injury and we focused largely on those things, because they were both big deals.
After thinking about it, that game reminds me of the Green Bay game last year. Both were road games against really good teams at approximately the same point in the season. In each the Pats entered the game virtually a playoff lock with home-field advantage still a goal and a closing stretch of games that were favorable. In both losses we broke long winning streaks of seven and nine games, respectively. Eddie Lacy played the C.J. Anderson role and we couldn't stop him, either.
My impression during that game against the Packers was that something was a bit off. It was a close game, but I felt like we were playing conservatively. Or something. There were some faint whispers that we were holding something back for a potential future meeting against a team that was a leading NFC Super Bowl candidate. Of course, that is crazy talk. Wild-ass speculation. But the Denver game made me wonder.
Now, if there is one lesson to be learned from 2007 is that 18-1 isn't nearly as great as it sounds if you lose the last one. I think the Coach felt like he owed it to his players to chase history, but perhaps that took a psychological toll that was a negative factor. That is strictly my guess, but whatever.
Point is, I don't think Bill wants any part of a 19-0 quest redux. No way.
When I use the word "tank" I mean that I think it is entirely possible that Bill Belichick thought it was more important to play this game using a vanilla game plan and save the good stuff for a potential playoff matchup with Denver regardless of whether we won or lost. Injuries would provide a perfect cover.
Why did we sit on the ball with a 7 point lead with more than two minutes to go and time outs in our pocket before halftime? I wondered. It made zero sense. If you're afraid to turn the ball over in THAT situation then when is it ok to not be afraid? You've still got to play the game. We ALWAYS sit on the ball before halftime, standard operating procedure, but not with THAT much time on the clock. You only get so many chances in a game and we clearly just pissed that one away and none of us can really know why.
I also wondered when our game plan seemed to be comprised of fruitless dives into the line and then long bombs. That is not what we do. Ever. I know we are way down on the depth chart at WR, but where were the slants? The trips? Screens? It didn't feel right regardless of the personnel. We dominated the first quarter and then.......it seemed like we just eased off the gas pedal.
I'm not saying Bill Belichick wanted to lose this game. I know he wants a potential homefield advantage that could hinge on a win, but I think it is entirely possible that he felt it was more important to hold something back and play it on the down low in this circumstance regardless of how it affected that home field. Let Denver think what they want but the next meeting would be entirely different, especially with the potential for a return of Jules and Amendola. In short, Denver shot their wad but we didn't.
As Bill noted, the Pats fought hard. I think that is what was really going on here. We're looking at a team that is decimated by injuries, faced the ugly loss of Gronk for the season, was the victim of multiple flags and non-flags and was (perhaps) holding something back scheme-wise and they STILL almost won that game. No wonder he was proud of them. There was your galvanizing team moment of 2015. In a loss. When they are on fumes in all three phases.
Belichick KNOWS his guys can beat Denver next time and so do they. The regular season is nice and all, but 2007 taught him to focus entirely on the end game at all times regardless of how that might conflict with conventional football wisdom.