|
Post by portfolio1 on Oct 16, 2017 11:26:26 GMT -5
We got out of Dodge with a win. Underwhelming as the team has been so far it is somewhat along the lines of what we have been seeing where we have slow starts regarding quality of play. But having 2 losses, not just weak play, leaves us little room for error and terribly little room for major injury issues.
I love what we are seeing from White and Lewis. Gillislee needs to step it up. He was running better but then his first fumble. It cannot be a choice between mediocre running or ball safety.
Wondering how the D will look if Gilmore is back for the Falcons game. We still have a good way to go before anyone feels confident against an opponent like that.
|
|
|
Post by carawaydj on Oct 16, 2017 11:31:47 GMT -5
No, the ball just out there all by itself without any part of the body grasping it cannot possibly be indisputable lol. I know that is obvious from the pic Einstein. it was even obvious that the ball slightly moved from the video feeds. UNLESS they had other footage to say it was indisputable on when and where he lost and regained the ball you have to stick with the field call. I know its hard to understand for you because bias is a /strong elixir. I'm not saying it wasn't a fumble...im saying form all the angles I saw, and I watched the game twice and that play 6-8 times, its far from overwhelming evidence. more importantly if the shoe was on the other foot I would feel strongly that the call on the field would take precedent over what evidence I saw. You are rapidly becoming a favorite poster of mine. Yesterday you called me a kiddie. I'm getting older so that was flattering. Now you are acknowledging my cranial prowess. Tomorrow you might be calling me handsome. This is how rumors get started. Did you watch the same film that the replay officials watched? The broadcast angles are not anywhere as good as what the officials view. I should look at the coaches film on that play to see if it shows anything better.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Oct 16, 2017 12:33:44 GMT -5
Yes, he did. There were still photos on another thread here that show he clearly was not in possession of the ball. It was a fumble. The ball does not have to hit the ground to be a fumble. Yes he bobbled it. In all my years of watching football that's the first fumble called that never touched the ground. Really? You never saw a fumble up in the air caught by another player? I surely have many times.
|
|
|
Post by texaspat on Oct 16, 2017 13:05:17 GMT -5
4 completions to RB's, all to White. Eventually teams will key on this. Trouble is, if defenses key against White coming out of the backfield, that's one less defender helping out against Gronk...and Amendola and Hogan will draw single coverage. Let them key on White. Pass protection for the GOAT is the key to making the offense go.
|
|
|
Post by digger0862 on Oct 16, 2017 13:08:36 GMT -5
Yes he bobbled it. In all my years of watching football that's the first fumble called that never touched the ground. Really? You never saw a fumble up in the air caught by another player? I surely have many times. Yeah, I had a brain cramp.
|
|
|
Post by fletcherbrook on Oct 16, 2017 13:12:38 GMT -5
I know that is obvious from the pic Einstein. it was even obvious that the ball slightly moved from the video feeds. UNLESS they had other footage to say it was indisputable on when and where he lost and regained the ball you have to stick with the field call. I know its hard to understand for you because bias is a /strong elixir. I'm not saying it wasn't a fumble...im saying form all the angles I saw, and I watched the game twice and that play 6-8 times, its far from overwhelming evidence. more importantly if the shoe was on the other foot I would feel strongly that the call on the field would take precedent over what evidence I saw. they got the call right! why are we trying to argue the other shoe. yes, if it happened to the pats i'd have pissed too - but, when you see the still photo and read the rules it is indisputable. fine, it was hard to see during the game - apparently, the officials didn't thinks so. i agree completely that the call was correct. I'm simply saying that the officials could not have had access to that picture and all the replays I saw were inconclusive at best. I'm saying this from a neutral position knowing that this could just as easily happen to us next week or god forbid in the afc champ game. I would hope that their would be a bit more proof before taking points away from any team---especially us:) karma can be one hell of a bitch.
|
|
|
Post by fletcherbrook on Oct 16, 2017 13:18:58 GMT -5
I know that is obvious from the pic Einstein. it was even obvious that the ball slightly moved from the video feeds. UNLESS they had other footage to say it was indisputable on when and where he lost and regained the ball you have to stick with the field call. I know its hard to understand for you because bias is a /strong elixir. I'm not saying it wasn't a fumble...im saying form all the angles I saw, and I watched the game twice and that play 6-8 times, its far from overwhelming evidence. more importantly if the shoe was on the other foot I would feel strongly that the call on the field would take precedent over what evidence I saw. You are rapidly becoming a favorite poster of mine. Yesterday you called me a kiddie. I'm getting older so that was flattering. Now you are acknowledging my cranial prowess. Tomorrow you might be calling me handsome. This is how rumors get started. Did you watch the same film that the replay officials watched? The broadcast angles are not anywhere as good as what the officials view. I should look at the coaches film on that play to see if it shows anything better. haha:) all in good fun...I agree that better angles and that would certainly change this entire discussion...again I am grateful for it going our way. if nothing else as MUzz stated this rule is ambiguous in a sense.
by the way, George Clooney have a good day!!
|
|
|
Post by ATJ on Oct 16, 2017 13:22:25 GMT -5
Thanks for the chuckle, guys.
|
|
|
Post by agcsbill on Oct 17, 2017 7:06:51 GMT -5
It wasn't a fumble. He never lost the ball. Strange call. But, looking at the replays, he did not have solid possession of the ball, you can clearly see the ball was loose in his arms. Is that "possession"? How many times have we seen a call in which the referee said the player was juggling the ball and did not have possession until after he hit the ground? This play will be debated for ever and the lore of the Pats getting calls will continue in spite of the Carolina game.
|
|
|
Post by mthurl on Oct 17, 2017 17:34:34 GMT -5
I for one think this offense will be better when Burkhead gets back, I think we're going to be pleasantly surprised at what he brings to the passing game.
When Gilislee fumbled I thought...shit, won't see him again for most of this game. Too bad too because he was just starting to get into what I thought was a rythym and was tearing off nice physical yardage (even without playing most of the game he had almost as many yards as Lewis). I really think it's a matter of time before he has a monster game, but let this guy gain some momentum and playing time. Lewis did a nice job but I'd rather see him early in game...get the defense tired from chasing him, then have Gilislee take over.
All in all I thought it was a poor showing by the team, don't care if it's a division game, that was hot garbage they were facing out there Sunday and they looked very similar themselves for half that game. The question is...is that what they are? Half a barrel of garbage/half a barrel of pretty darn good? Because that won't be enough. I'm still looking for them to trade for someone/something that will put another a layer on this team (an element that is missing, because there is something missing).
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Oct 17, 2017 18:09:19 GMT -5
I am really curious at to what anyone saw that did not make them say ..."we need more Lewis"
I am also the first guy to criticize, but Cannon and Shaq played pretty much flawlessly. Solder was much improved.
I had Cooks (in the slot) making a catch and missing taking it to the house by a shoe string tackle by the Jets. I also had Dorsett for 6 if only TB put the ba;ll on target
Can we also agree that this team came out listless, but once they woke up, they held the Jets to virtually nothing for 2 and a half quarters
|
|
|
Post by mthurl on Oct 17, 2017 18:23:39 GMT -5
I am really curious at to what anyone saw that did not make them say ..."we need more Lewis" I am also the first guy to criticize, but Cannon and Shaq played pretty much flawlessly. Solder was much improved. I had Cooks (in the slot) making a catch and missing taking it to the house by a shoe string tackle by the Jets. I also had Dorsett for 6 if only TB put the ba;ll on target Can we also agree that this team came out listless, but once they woke up, they held the Jets to virtually nothing for 2 and a half quarters Honestly I think with Lewis, Belichick doesn't like his size or the chance he'll fumble. I personally don't think he's exactly a sophisticated pass catcher like White, Vereen or Faulk was either. I just think the ship kind of sailed on him in their minds...it's been a long time since he's shown the form he did two years ago (and is he there now?). Or maybe he was just not fully recovered from his hamstring injury and they held him back?
|
|
|
Post by Examiner on Oct 17, 2017 20:36:09 GMT -5
Yes, he did. There were still photos on another thread here that show he clearly was not in possession of the ball. It was a fumble. The ball does not have to hit the ground to be a fumble. Yes he bobbled it. In all my years of watching football that's the first fumble called that never touched the ground. So year(s) meaning two years? I bet I've seen a hundred fumbles where the ball didn't touch the ground.
|
|
Ram
On the Game Day Roster
Posts: 515
Likes: 105
|
Post by Ram on Oct 17, 2017 21:24:14 GMT -5
watched the TV feed and again a 2nd time. -any win in division is a good win. the Jets will be a 6-8 win team. on any given Sunday. -I thought the call in the end zone was the correct call after seeing the replay. If the Jets TE fumbled the ball at the 1 yard line and the ball rolled out of the back of the end zone, the Pats take possession. Yesterdays call was the same thing, except the pile on was involved -many have been calling for it, but nice to see Lewis play well. Would like to see him in the pass game more often as well. -from my view, I also thought Branch played well. I counted a tackle for loss and nice push. Jets unable to run also attributed to both Branch and Brown. -ok lets go over this again with the defense. they are playing a fairly vanilla bend but don't break. forget about yards. hold the opposing team to under 17 (the Pats defense did) and turn the ball over (the Pats defense did). the D-line needs to understand LESS IS MORE! Don't pressure the QB. Stay in your lane and make him stand in pocket and throw the ball. Throwing the ball in an 8 man back field will create turn overs. -Butler made 2 mistakes both under cutting routes. 1 lead to a Jets TD. if you are trying to create turn overs, it is going to happen sometimes. I thought Jones was competitive in the slot. I thought Bademosi had some understandable struggles. Also lets mention that DMC did not play FS all game. Harmon was also in that spot with DMC moving to SS at times. noticeable drop off from DMC to Harmon. -that being said, most any OC is going to find Roberts in pass coverage and target him. Roberts with a bad read play on the Jets TD. took 2 steps forward and then back into coverage. he was beaten on the very first step. credit the Jets for passing and not running against the Pats goal line D -big, big defensive play of the day was Butler on a corner blitz ending the game. good call from MattyP -imo, memories are short. the Pats D struggled last season first 7-8 games against inferior opposition and QB play. they lost to the Phins. Got lucky against the Cards and the Phins a 2nd time before blowing out the Texans. then played poorly against the Bills and lost, before getting the Browns (rookie QB) a 2-4 Bengals team and the Steelers with out BenR. however the D did put it together and did play well the final few games/playoffs(struggled again in the SB) -I find the penalties more concerning than the actual play. Cardona a 2nd time. Wow. these pick plays are so obvious. they need to fix that. -Best game of the year for Gronk, Lewis, Cooks and Solder. TB imo was not his usual self. -kudos and criticism to the staff. I thought the team came out very flat and the Jets were quite chatty. Nice adjustments (esp on D) however sealed this game. a missed FG and fumble made this game closer than the final score. Pats also had 1st and goal at I believe the Jets 6. They come out empty back field. Why?? at least show play action to somewhat freeze the D in the red zone -I get how the Jets feel screwed. I also get that Pats fans may feel lucky. but for crying out loud, is it too much to ask Fouts to at least understand the rule? -I am certainly not HC material. and I enjoy the back and forth on BB, AND I ADMIT BB IS MOSTLY ALWAYS RIGHT!! But I would pull me hair out if Bowles was the Pats coach. Wow, do I disagree with his clock management and play calls -call me crazy. I thought the Pats finally dictated play by stopping the Jets run game and forcing the pass, and having Lewis run for positive yards. again, call me crazy. I think the team missed Blount. I would have been fine with the team signing Gillislee and Blount and not Burkhead. I have not seen that 3rd or 4th quarter eat the clock, stay in bounds, pound the ball from Gillislee yet. I like him running the ball, but prefer Blount in that eat the clock situation -ok. bend but dont break. Dl-men need to stay in their lanes. dont break containment. but for crying out loud, if you do and have the QB in the grasp, BRING HIM DOWN! I have not seen so many missed tackles on the QB in for ever. -just saying. I thought Ealy got away with a cheap shot on TB. kind of his way of giving BB the ole FU! -I have not seen snap counts yet, but I do not recall seeing Harris on the field. that must have been tough on him against the Jets. -I saw Waddle line up a couple of times at TE. not a good sign for Allen You admit BB is mostly right. So do you admit he is not an "asshole who knew about an intentional ball deflation scheme and then lied and covered it up"? Because you are still on the record of thinking this team cheated in deflategate and NO fan of this team actually believes that BS that science proved wrong.
|
|
|
Post by patslifer on Oct 18, 2017 6:44:47 GMT -5
I am really curious at to what anyone saw that did not make them say ..."we need more Lewis" I am also the first guy to criticize, but Cannon and Shaq played pretty much flawlessly. Solder was much improved. I had Cooks (in the slot) making a catch and missing taking it to the house by a shoe string tackle by the Jets. I also had Dorsett for 6 if only TB put the ba;ll on target Can we also agree that this team came out listless, but once they woke up, they held the Jets to virtually nothing for 2 and a half quarters Yes we need more Lewis, but at the expense of whom? In terms of pass catching backs out of the backfield, I like White in this role. I like also like White more lined up on the line of scrimmage as a receiver. In terms of pure running, I am split on Lewis or Gillislee. I think both have shown flashes. Although Lewis is averaging 5 YPC and Gilislee is averaging 3.7 YPC. That is a big difference in Lewis favor. +1 on Cooks. Not so on Dorsett. Dorsett was double covered and draped by 2 defenders. If Brady had laid the ball out there another 6 inches in front of Dorsett, he may have made the catch, or the defender may have made the play. The ball was on target, Brady just threw into double coverage, and Dorsett is no Randy Moss who is going to go up for the ball and battle for it in the same way. Poor decision by Brady I think. Agree on last point. What worries me is we still haven't seen 60 minutes of consistent football out of this team. I get it takes time, but they have looked downright terrible, lost, decent, and great at various points in a game. Maybe this bodes well for them going forward as when things do click.
|
|
|
Post by muzwell on Oct 18, 2017 6:58:29 GMT -5
I thought the pass to Dorsett was badly underthrown. Five more yards it hits him in stride. As it was, Gronk isn't catching that ball with all that traffic.
|
|
|
Post by agcsbill on Oct 18, 2017 7:08:03 GMT -5
to my knowledge the nfl didn't have access to still photos and only the shots we civvies saw. there is no way that that was indisputable evidence. its funny though...if this was called against the pats 95% of you would be screaming that there was not indisputable evidence. from a unbiased perspective based on video it was at best 50/50...no way in hell a sane person can call that overwhelming evidence. imo. Lots of folks seem to have this all bassackward. The evidence was indisputable that the ball was fumbled. Once that became clear, the prior call was a moot point. It changes everything. Like hitting the reset button. So, once that happens, there would have to be clear evidence that the runner regained control prior to hitting the pylon, which there just was not. It's not the other way around. The burden shifted once the ball was dislodged. This is not unlike the Tuck Rule or the process of the catch crap. It's a rule that doesn't seem to make sense...we all saw that he eventually regained control by the time he landed on his back out of bounds. But, we did not see him do that before he hit the pylon, which is what the official would have to see in order to call it a TD once the ball was clearly dislodged. Folks have a gripe with the rule, but it was called correctly in this case. I guess I also don't understand Jets fans...I thought they wanted to tank? There is one undeniable fact to all this stuff about the fumble or non-fumble: If you are the team that benefited from the call, your fan base is pleased. If you are the team that did not benefit from the call, your fan base decries it as screwing their team. Overall, when a call like this favors the Patriots, the howl about how the Pats get the calls rise loud but when such calls benefit other teams, well, stuff like that happens. We certainly see a lot more scrutiny given calls that favor the Pats when similar calls that favor other NFL teams get pretty much the silent treatment. Like when Carolina got some mighty favorable calls in their game against the Pats in their winning drive didn't get much press.
|
|
|
Post by carawaydj on Oct 18, 2017 7:22:08 GMT -5
I am really curious at to what anyone saw that did not make them say ..."we need more Lewis" I am also the first guy to criticize, but Cannon and Shaq played pretty much flawlessly. Solder was much improved. I had Cooks (in the slot) making a catch and missing taking it to the house by a shoe string tackle by the Jets. I also had Dorsett for 6 if only TB put the ba;ll on target Can we also agree that this team came out listless, but once they woke up, they held the Jets to virtually nothing for 2 and a half quarters Yes we need more Lewis, but at the expense of whom? In terms of pass catching backs out of the backfield, I like White in this role. I like also like White more lined up on the line of scrimmage as a receiver. In terms of pure running, I am split on Lewis or Gillislee. I think both have shown flashes. Although Lewis is averaging 5 YPC and Gilislee is averaging 3.7 YPC. That is a big difference in Lewis favor. +1 on Cooks. Not so on Dorsett. Dorsett was double covered and draped by 2 defenders. If Brady had laid the ball out there another 6 inches in front of Dorsett, he may have made the catch, or the defender may have made the play. The ball was on target, Brady just threw into double coverage, and Dorsett is no Randy Moss who is going to go up for the ball and battle for it in the same way. Poor decision by Brady I think. Agree on last point. What worries me is we still haven't seen 60 minutes of consistent football out of this team. I get it takes time, but they have looked downright terrible, lost, decent, and great at various points in a game. Maybe this bodes well for them going forward as when things do click. Actually, that was a knock on Moss too. In fact, in his last full season with the Pats just over half of Brady's interceptions were on throws to Moss. He'd throw to Moss regardless of the coverage and all too often the other team caught the ball. Moss was a generational talent but someone who would fight for the ball he was not. Part of it was due to his technique. He gave no hint that the ball was nearby and would make a movement to catch at the final moment. That sometimes put him in poor position to fight for the ball.
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Oct 18, 2017 7:35:06 GMT -5
I am really curious at to what anyone saw that did not make them say ..."we need more Lewis" I am also the first guy to criticize, but Cannon and Shaq played pretty much flawlessly. Solder was much improved. I had Cooks (in the slot) making a catch and missing taking it to the house by a shoe string tackle by the Jets. I also had Dorsett for 6 if only TB put the ba;ll on target Can we also agree that this team came out listless, but once they woke up, they held the Jets to virtually nothing for 2 and a half quarters Yes we need more Lewis, but at the expense of whom? In terms of pass catching backs out of the backfield, I like White in this role. I like also like White more lined up on the line of scrimmage as a receiver. In terms of pure running, I am split on Lewis or Gillislee. I think both have shown flashes. Although Lewis is averaging 5 YPC and Gilislee is averaging 3.7 YPC. That is a big difference in Lewis favor. +1 on Cooks. Not so on Dorsett. Dorsett was double covered and draped by 2 defenders. If Brady had laid the ball out there another 6 inches in front of Dorsett, he may have made the catch, or the defender may have made the play. The ball was on target, Brady just threw into double coverage, and Dorsett is no Randy Moss who is going to go up for the ball and battle for it in the same way. Poor decision by Brady I think. Agree on last point. What worries me is we still haven't seen 60 minutes of consistent football out of this team. I get it takes time, but they have looked downright terrible, lost, decent, and great at various points in a game. Maybe this bodes well for them going forward as when things do click. perhaps you are referencing the interception? I was not. I was referencing the play that Dorsett had 2-3 steps on the defender and was inside the 10 yard line. TB threw the ball to the outside rather than the inside. DOrsett tried to turn his body, but did not make the play. I assume this is one of the plays that BB referenced when he labeled the team a "work in progress". Really, how many throws does TB have to Dorsett? TB most likely did not miss on that pass. He most likely assumed Dorsett would cut to the corner, but he cut to the post
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Oct 18, 2017 7:45:23 GMT -5
I thought the pass to Dorsett was badly underthrown. Five more yards it hits him in stride. As it was, Gronk isn't catching that ball with all that traffic. That is what I said earlier in this thread. I saw Dorsett have to slow down to try to catch the ball. Unfortunately that put the defender in perfect position as well. Perhaps what Dorsett should have done was a deliberate pass interference to prevent the INT. es, five or ten more yards and it is a TD. As far as Gronk, I agree but then again you never know.
|
|
|
Post by cyncalpatsfan on Oct 18, 2017 7:51:16 GMT -5
to my knowledge the nfl didn't have access to still photos and only the shots we civvies saw. there is no way that that was indisputable evidence. its funny though...if this was called against the pats 95% of you would be screaming that there was not indisputable evidence. from a unbiased perspective based on video it was at best 50/50...no way in hell a sane person can call that overwhelming evidence. imo. Lots of folks seem to have this all bassackward. The evidence was indisputable that the ball was fumbled. Once that became clear, the prior call was a moot point. It changes everything. Like hitting the reset button.
So, once that happens, there would have to be clear evidence that the runner regained control prior to hitting the pylon, which there just was not. It's not the other way around. The burden shifted once the ball was dislodged.This is not unlike the Tuck Rule or the process of the catch crap. It's a rule that doesn't seem to make sense...we all saw that he eventually regained control by the time he landed on his back out of bounds. But, we did not see him do that before he hit the pylon, which is what the official would have to see in order to call it a TD once the ball was clearly dislodged. Folks have a gripe with the rule, but it was called correctly in this case. I guess I also don't understand Jets fans...I thought they wanted to tank? That's exactly how I perceived it. The Ref gave the TD signal because he did not know that the ball had come loose. Once that was established then it became necessary to prove that the player regained control. Absolutely.
|
|
|
Post by patslifer on Oct 18, 2017 7:51:56 GMT -5
Yes we need more Lewis, but at the expense of whom? In terms of pass catching backs out of the backfield, I like White in this role. I like also like White more lined up on the line of scrimmage as a receiver. In terms of pure running, I am split on Lewis or Gillislee. I think both have shown flashes. Although Lewis is averaging 5 YPC and Gilislee is averaging 3.7 YPC. That is a big difference in Lewis favor. +1 on Cooks. Not so on Dorsett. Dorsett was double covered and draped by 2 defenders. If Brady had laid the ball out there another 6 inches in front of Dorsett, he may have made the catch, or the defender may have made the play. The ball was on target, Brady just threw into double coverage, and Dorsett is no Randy Moss who is going to go up for the ball and battle for it in the same way. Poor decision by Brady I think. Agree on last point. What worries me is we still haven't seen 60 minutes of consistent football out of this team. I get it takes time, but they have looked downright terrible, lost, decent, and great at various points in a game. Maybe this bodes well for them going forward as when things do click. perhaps you are referencing the interception? I was not. I was referencing the play that Dorsett had 2-3 steps on the defender and was inside the 10 yard line. TB threw the ball to the outside rather than the inside. DOrsett tried to turn his body, but did not make the play. I assume this is one of the plays that BB referenced when he labeled the team a "work in progress". Really, how many throws does TB have to Dorsett? TB most likely did not miss on that pass. He most likely assumed Dorsett would cut to the corner, but he cut to the post yes, I was referencing the INT. Agree with you on the other target to Dorsett.
|
|
|
Post by digger0862 on Oct 18, 2017 8:10:46 GMT -5
Yes he bobbled it. In all my years of watching football that's the first fumble called that never touched the ground. So year(s) meaning two years? I bet I've seen a hundred fumbles where the ball didn't touch the ground. Brain cramp.
|
|