Film review - how the SB was won?

[chad72]

 

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/02/film-review-the-falcons-didnt-blow-the-super-bowl-bill-belichick-took-it-from-them

 

I know, I know, it might bring up painful memories for some but if you notice Wade Philips' defenses, they don't give much production underneath to TEs and slot wide outs, you have to beat them on the outside. So, when you combine a Wade D with great man CBs, it is mighty hard to put up points on that Broncos' D, as teams found out the last few years.

 

Why do I bring up Wade in the context of the Patriots-Falcons SB? Wade used the "robber" concept in the middle to deny easy completions, something that Dan Quinn had properly prepared for and had worked for him early on in the SB. They just ran out of gas to do the same things for 4 quarters. The pick six put the D back on the field for the Falcons again and the moment the Falcons' O stopped scoring and controlling clock, the D's legs were exposed with a lop sided TOP.

 

I thought the above was a good read w.r.t Belichick going against what he wanted to do, having to blitz eventually to get to Matty Ice. As a fan of football, I liked it, so I thought I'd share. Belichick and his coaches sure do make quick adjustments, IMO. 

[GoPats]

That was a good read. Interesting look into the chess match aspect of it. What Atlanta did early on was impossible to sustain once TOP became the issue. Basically they tired 'em out... it's really that simple. 

[chad72]

34 minutes ago, GoPats said:

That was a good read. Interesting look into the chess match aspect of it. What Atlanta did early on was impossible to sustain once TOP became the issue. Basically they tired 'em out... it's really that simple. 

 

To sustain that kind of defense, the Falcons needed their O to run plenty of clock to help out the D (or) have a pass rusher that could win 1-on-1s like a Von Miller that would allow them to play zone D enough to not have tired legs as the game went on, neither of which ended up being the case. 

 

The Seahawks, in the 4th quarter of the SB 49, had enough 3 and outs, plus Cliff Avril went out which were the 2 keys to turning the game around. The Pats' D tightened up in the 4th qtr. of both SB 49 and 51, that is why they won eventually. Like the Giants' DL Justin Tuck used to say "defense keeps you in games by not letting it get away at critical moments but the QB still has to finish the job".

[King Colt]

The Pats "Play to win the game". The contrast between the Seahawks victory and the Falcons victory sums it all up in a pea pod.

[BloodyChamp]

They blew it. Yes the Pats adjusted and there were results but none of that had anything to do with that dropped INT, 3rd and 2, running backwards, letting Tom Brady run 13 yards, etc. They blew it.

[GoPats]

On 7/26/2017 at 11:16 AM, BloodyChamp said:

They blew it. Yes the Pats adjusted and there were results but none of that had anything to do with that dropped INT, 3rd and 2, running backwards, letting Tom Brady run 13 yards, etc. They blew it.

 

Did you read the article? 

 

 

[BloodyChamp]

Yep

[-JJ-]

That was a great chess like strategy read Chad. Thanks for posting.

 

They knocked the pawns out and move the King in for the kill...or was it the Queen

[Valpo2004]

On 7/26/2017 at 11:16 AM, BloodyChamp said:

They blew it. Yes the Pats adjusted and there were results but none of that had anything to do with that dropped INT, 3rd and 2, running backwards, letting Tom Brady run 13 yards, etc. They blew it.

 

I agree.  Forget about the X's and O's and think about this.  At the end of the game the Falcons had the ball in field goal range.  I think there was maybe like 4 minutes left in the game and the pats where down by a TD.  I believe they tried twice to throw the ball.  One of those I think was incomplete and stopped the clock and the other one was a sack.  The sack took them out of field goal range.  

 

At that point 90% of coaches run the ball 3 times to milk the clock, kick the field goal and put the opposing offense down 2 scores.  

 

The Falcons inexplicably attempted to throw.  Twice

 

They blew it.  They made some sort of decision that they where going to continue to be aggressive instead of trying to run the clock and they blew the game.  

[chad72]

17 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

I agree.  Forget about the X's and O's and think about this.  At the end of the game the Falcons had the ball in field goal range.  I think there was maybe like 4 minutes left in the game and the pats where down by a TD.  I believe they tried twice to throw the ball.  One of those I think was incomplete and stopped the clock and the other one was a sack.  The sack took them out of field goal range.  

 

At that point 90% of coaches run the ball 3 times to milk the clock, kick the field goal and put the opposing offense down 2 scores.  

 

The Falcons inexplicably attempted to throw.  Twice

 

They blew it.  They made some sort of decision that they where going to continue to be aggressive instead of trying to run the clock and they blew the game.  

 

That sequence of events led me to truly appreciate why Peyton milked the entire 40 seconds off the play clock, whether it was a pass or run play. There was a reason why Belichick went for the 4th & 2, and for those 4th downs vs Peyton in the 2015 AFCCG, he knew that Peyton knew how to use time real well.

 

If not the time factor, the timeout factor, they left the Pats with 2 timeouts and all common sense went out the door during that sequence of events where they were caught up with their own aggression. It was just a series ago where they fumbled the ball trying to go deep. You would have thought they'd have learned from that and played conservative, especially after that circus catch by Julio that could have been picked off as well. It just wasn't meant to be.

 

However, if not for the offensive adjustments that NE made, they'd not have had a puncher's chance in the game, coming off the half, magnifying every mistake the Falcons made.

[BloodyChamp]

We all know I'm a Favre homer right, so no matter what I think of the Packers I do keep up with them just because I've been doing so since I was raised to by my parents before Favre was being thought about lol! So anyway between him and Rodgers, not to mention Manning who I've always admired, I've seen a ton of games that were decided by either shooting for the jugular until you finally hit it or merely surviving. The Falcons should have just tried to survive aka run it out once that Pats got within 3 scores. Like chad72 said...common sense ultimately dictates some of these outcomes. I mean pick up on a vibe or something...the only way to have won that game if you're a Falcon was to survive. The Colts have blew a game or 2 like this over the last 2 rough years, namely the Texans last year. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

All the Falcons had to do was run the ball and if they don't get the 1st down, kick a FG and the game is pretty much over. That is just keeping it simple. They tried to get cute and keep Passing and cost them.

[Synthetic]

 

On 7/31/2017 at 4:15 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

All the Falcons had to do was run the ball and if they don't get the 1st down, kick a FG and the game is pretty much over. That is just keeping it simple. They tried to get cute and keep Passing and cost them.

 

 

Atlanta blew 5 leads in the 4th quarter last year. Of their 11-5 record, 4 of those losses were from blown leads in the 4th quarter. They almost blew a 6th one in week 17 when they let the Saints overcome a 24 point deficit and make it a one possession game coming down to a failed onside kick. No lead was ever safe with them. 

 

Check out their game vs San Diego. They had a 17 point lead in the 4th quarter and let it completely fade away, allowing SD to come back and tie the game and win in OT. The Super Bowl went pretty much like that game. 

 

It falls on coaching. Shanahan was their perfect scapegoat fall guy, but this is also on Quinn. They learned nothing from those 4 losses in the regular season, just like the 2001 Rams who blamed everything with their SB loss on anything but themselves. 

 

 

I don't know why everyone keeps saying Atlanta blew this like it's some shock...Remember the 2012 NFCCG? Again, they blew a 17 point lead (10 point lead in the 4th quarter). This team under Matt Ryan, has never been an effective team to close important games. The Falcons have a history of being choke artists in the clutch. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

32 minutes ago, Synthetic said:

 

 

 

Atlanta blew 5 leads in the 4th quarter last year. Of their 11-5 record, 4 of those losses were from blown leads in the 4th quarter. They almost blew a 6th one in week 17 when they let the Saints overcome a 24 point deficit and make it a one possession game coming down to a failed onside kick. No lead was ever safe with them. 

 

Check out their game vs San Diego. They had a 17 point lead in the 4th quarter and let it completely fade away, allowing SD to come back and tie the game and win in OT. The Super Bowl went pretty much like that game. 

 

It falls on coaching. Shanahan was their perfect scapegoat fall guy, but this is also on Quinn. They learned nothing from those 4 losses in the regular season, just like the 2001 Rams who blamed everything with their SB loss on anything but themselves. 

 

 

I don't know why everyone keeps saying Atlanta blew this like it's some shock...Remember the 2012 NFCCG? Again, they blew a 17 point lead (10 point lead in the 4th quarter). This team under Matt Ryan, has never been an effective team to close important games. The Falcons have a history of being choke artists in the clutch. 

It really didn't shock me, I pick the Pats to win you know that. Blowing a 28-3 lead though is pretty bad. Matty Ice LOL

[ReMeDy]

35 minutes ago, Synthetic said:

 

 

 

Atlanta blew 5 leads in the 4th quarter last year. Of their 11-5 record, 4 of those losses were from blown leads in the 4th quarter. They almost blew a 6th one in week 17 when they let the Saints overcome a 24 point deficit and make it a one possession game coming down to a failed onside kick. No lead was ever safe with them.

 

Atlanta starts strong and finishes atrociously. The Colts start atrocious but finish strong! I guess to me, I'd rather have the former rather than the latter to keep fans in their seats.

[Synthetic]

7 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

It really didn't shock me, I pick the Pats to win you know that. Blowing a 28-3 lead though is pretty bad. Matty Ice LOL

 

I wish I blogged for the Saints, cause I would've dug up every game they've ever blown in the past 5 years and went to town with the jokes.  It's seriously more than just a handful, this goes back a few years. They don't call him Matty Ice for nothing, he MELTS in the 4th quarter. 

 

We personally did not think they would top that 17 point meltdown in the NFCCG a few years ago vs the 49ers. That was a classic, but the SB completely blew that out the water.