Fake punt by NE was pure arrogance
Hammer
expect from the team that thinks it's the underdog and needs that play
to win the game, or the move I would expect from the team that thinks
it's so wonderful that there's no way it can lose. Benching Welker in
the beginning was the same type of move - I'm going to bench my guy
and we'll still win handily.
Harlan Lachman
<1a207506-cc03-47cd...@i17g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>,
Hammer <stuart.f...@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes to the first. He saw a tendency we have shown all year and thought
he could humiliate us.
I think the second is different because for some reason I don't
understand, I think BB actually respects or likes Rex. It did not cost
the Pats the game and it signaled what is and is not in bounds.
I found Welker's remarks humorous. But they were at the expense at a
coach's family.
BB, at least, thought it went too far.
harlan
Hammer
> In article
> <1a207506-cc03-47cd-a452-cde029c3d...@i17g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>,
I was surprised to see the extended hug between Rex and BB...maybe
it's because Rex acknowledges BB's coaching talent?
Harlan Lachman
<83ff4c34-91c7-4745...@u3g2000vbj.googlegroups.com>,
Hammer <stuart.f...@gmail.com> wrote:
Only a moron or a brain dead fan would not.
We had more talent this year. Yet BB got home field advantage and killed
us the last time.
It is a good thing we won this year, cause the young-uns are only gonna
get better, and the multiple draft picks are gonna translate into more
of the same.
h
Grinch
Different point of view:
Bill saw he was behind half way through the game, fighting a D he and
Tom were making no progress solving, and knew he needed points.
The same thing that drove him to go for a two-point conversion early
in the game, and then try a 4th and 12 rather than a long FG.
That's what a coach does when he's behind and sweating it -- and I for
one enjoyed seeing it.
He was *behind* and the Jets D was playing lights out.
> the type of move I would
> expect from the team that thinks it's the underdog and needs that play
> to win the game,
Which is exactly the situation he was in.
BB's a lot of things, but he's sure not stupid. He knows damn well
you win the game first, rub it in their faces later.
And how many plays was Welker benched. Two? That was purely
symbolic.
John Vamp
The Pats' defense was the youngest in the league this year, and they
were missing two of their best players all season (Ty Warren, Leigh
Bodden). And one of their best DLinemen has been out the last month
(Wright). Everyone deals with injuries, obviously, so it's not an
excuse. In fact, in the long run, it may benefit the Pats b/c other
young guys got valuable experience.
But the youngest D in the league that improved greatly from the
beginning of the year, adding three of its best players back from
injury will only make it better. They have a bunch of young
playmakers on offense as well. And 3 of the first 33 picks, plus 6 in
the first three rounds total...
...well, it's a formula for long-term, sustained, success, even if it
doesn't result in a championship every year.
No worries Jets fans, the Pats will be in the thick of it for the next
5 years, no question.
Harlan Lachman
<8f41e247-ecc5-4a6a...@f9g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>,
Grinch <oldn...@mindspring.com> wrote:
FWIW, lil Bill's refusal to discuss the play, other than to say "it
[unspecified antecedent] was a mistake", indicates something. Since the
punter stated Chung called the play based on overmatch (8 versus 6 IIRC
correctly) it is not unreasonable to wonder if the mitake/stupidity was
allowing a player in a Division game to be able to make the call in his
end of the field.
It appears BB had nothing to do with the call other than not removing
the green light.
Also, I believe Welker was out for the first series. I will check again
(this DVR tape got saved :-).
harlan
Harlan Lachman
<9abc8135-4168-4080...@k25g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
John Vamp <jvamp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No worries Jets fans, the Pats will be in the thick of it for the next
> 5 years, no question.
Sounds like worries to me pale face.
h
MZ
> On Jan 16, 6:09 pm, Hammer <stuart.feldha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Bellichik wanted to shut the Jets up. That's the type of move I would
> > expect from the team that thinks it's the underdog and needs that play
> > to win the game, or the move I would expect from the team that thinks
> > it's so wonderful that there's no way it can lose. Benching Welker in
> > the beginning was the same type of move - I'm going to bench my guy
> > and we'll still win handily.
>
> Different point of view:
>
> Bill saw he was behind half way through the game, fighting a D he and
> Tom were making no progress solving, and knew he needed points.
>
> The same thing that drove him to go for a two-point conversion early
> in the game, and then try a 4th and 12 rather than a long FG.
FWIW, "long FG" and "Shane Graham" don't exactly go hand in hand. His
leg is probably weaker than mine. Also, the wind was having a big
impact, per the pre-game reports.
Beiselbub©
> Bellichik wanted to shut the Jets up.
It's funny what the FACTS can do to a REALLY dumb argument, isn't it?
The fake was called on the field...to Belichick's credit, as is his
tendency, he didn't blame anyone.
--
"...Chung apparently saw the look in the Jets’ special teams that for
the Pats is supposed to trigger a fake punt attempt. There was an
imbalance on the right side — eight Patriots against six Jets — and
Chung called for the fake.
'You hear it, and first you want to make sure you heard it right,'
long snapper Matt Katula said. 'Then you just go back to what you
practice all year.'
Katula snapped it directly to Chung, who bobbled and dropped the snap.
"
http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2011/01/belichick_didnt_sign_off_on_pa.html
---
And from Zoltan Mesko, Pats' punter:
"We had the numbers -- eight on six," he said.
With those numbers on their side, Mesko said there is a signal or a
call that players can make to try the fake.
On their 38-yard line, and with 1:14 left on the clock, Mesko said
Chung called for the fake.
"We trust the decision Patrick makes," Mesko told Jeff Howe of
NESN.com. "It just didn’t work out in that particular occasion. That’s
why the coaches trust him to run it, and that's why they give him the
green light, if he has it."
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post?id=4691965
--------
Chung has a green light. What's your excuse?
Beiselbub©
> John Vamp <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > No worries Jets fans, the Pats will be in the thick of it for the next
> > 5 years, no question.
>
> Sounds like worries to me pale face.
>
> h
Sounds like what you want to hear, to me. I agree with John, the Pats
have been dominant for a decade. It's a lot tougher to sustain
success than you realize--you haven't had any in 50 years. I put
money on Belichick getting back before I do a team lead by Rex's mouth
and a bunch of mercenary signings. Do it once first--then talk about
doing it again. :)
Grinch
>
> - Show quoted text -
4th and 13 and seriously needing a FG. Not 4th and 2 and not.
If SG really couldn't kick from there and they knew they'd have to go
for it on 4th and 13, then on 3rd they should've run a high% short
pass to get some of the yards to set up SG closer or make the 4th down
try easier -- instead of having Brady run around for what seems like
30 seconds looking for somebody downfield, and then throwing it away.
Pretty much like BB's 4th and 2 go-for-it call against the Colts last
year that caused so much furor. That call was exactly correct and to
his credit he knew it while so many "expert" analysts couldn't believe
it. But if he was going to go for it on 4th then on 3rd he had much
better calls for the first down in "two down territory" than he
actually made. (IIRC, he admitted that after the game, which was to
his credit too.)
Grinch
> On Jan 16, 4:09 pm, Hammer <stuart.feldha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Bellichik wanted to shut the Jets up.
>
> It's funny what the FACTS can do to a REALLY dumb argument, isn't it?
>
> The fake was called on the field...to Belichick's credit, as is his
> tendency, he didn't blame anyone.
He'd better not! If he really let that play run on automatic the
fault is entirely 100% his own.
He doesn't have the rule ".... UNLESS we are behind close at the end
of the half with under 2 minutes left"?
The risk-reward tradeoffs on that play were horrible. If it works,
not much, if it doesn't you hand full control of the game to the other
team.
It wasn't *just* that it gave the Jets a cheap 7 points, it was much
worse than that,
The Jets were running the only credible game plan they could -- ball
control with safe high percentage passing and a low number of passes
against the Pats bend/don't break defense.
But that game plan works *only* if you are ahead or very close.
Behind it is suicide.
If the Jets go into the second half up only 7-3, the Pats can take the
lead on any play, and the Jets still have to try some edgy/risky stuff
to keep the lead, which they are not good at.
But up two TDs, the Jets are free to run their ideal game plan with
impunity. With the great way the Jets D was playing yesterday, those
free 7 points were a real game turner, probably game winner/loser.
Because BB let's his punter automatic a fake when benind in that
situation?
Maybe BB's forgotten what it's like to play from behind.
> --
>
> "...Chung apparently saw the look in the Jets’ special teams that for
> the Pats is supposed to trigger a fake punt attempt. There was an
> imbalance on the right side — eight Patriots against six Jets — and
> Chung called for the fake.
>
> 'You hear it, and first you want to make sure you heard it right,'
> long snapper Matt Katula said. 'Then you just go back to what you
> practice all year.'
>
> Katula snapped it directly to Chung, who bobbled and dropped the snap.
> "
>
> http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2011/01/belichick_didnt_sign_off_on_...
MZ
BB may have that rule. It's possible Chung just screwed up. Let's
not forget he's a 2nd year player who's seeing his first year of
action. Might be trying to make a name for himself. He also just got
snubbed for the pro bowl (it's an absolute joke that Meriweather got
it...he's not as good as Chung, and maybe not as good as Sanders
either...but that's another story).
Honestly, not sure why Chung is the personal protector on punts
anyway. Used to be Aiken. Morris makes more sense to me, and I think
he's on the punt coverage team anyway.
Hammer
>
> > Bellichik wanted to shut the Jets up.
>
> It's funny what the FACTS can do to a REALLY dumb argument, isn't it?
>
> The fake was called on the field...to Belichick's credit, as is his
> tendency, he didn't blame anyone.
>
> --
>
> "...Chung apparently saw the look in the Jets’ special teams that for
> the Pats is supposed to trigger a fake punt attempt. There was an
> imbalance on the right side — eight Patriots against six Jets — and
> Chung called for the fake.
>
> 'You hear it, and first you want to make sure you heard it right,'
> long snapper Matt Katula said. 'Then you just go back to what you
> practice all year.'
>
> Katula snapped it directly to Chung, who bobbled and dropped the snap.
> "
>
>
> ---
>
> And from Zoltan Mesko, Pats' punter:
>
> "We had the numbers -- eight on six," he said.
>
> With those numbers on their side, Mesko said there is a signal or a
> call that players can make to try the fake.
>
> On their 38-yard line, and with 1:14 left on the clock, Mesko said
> Chung called for the fake.
>
> "We trust the decision Patrick makes," Mesko told Jeff Howe of
> NESN.com. "It just didn’t work out in that particular occasion. That’s
> why the coaches trust him to run it, and that's why they give him the
> green light, if he has it."
>
> http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post?id=4691965
>
> --------
> Chung has a green light. What's your excuse?
My excuse is incomplete information. What's your excuse for your
stupidity?
Hammer
>
> - Show quoted text -
In rewatching that play, I see that Eric Smith was massively held. If
he wasn't held, I bet he brings down Chung even if he doesn't drop the
ball.
Harlan Lachman
<fc1de075-a9bf-4f83...@v17g2000prc.googlegroups.com>,
Beiselbub© <yank_e...@yahoo.com> wrote:
BB, learn to read. I clearly meant the worries are ours given the
obvious truth of the argument.
Losing does not wear well on you defensive one.
h
Beiselbub©
>
>
>
>
>
> Beiselbub© <yank_ees_s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 17, 11:03 am, Harlan Lachman <har...@eeivt.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <9abc8135-4168-4080-b5d0-a41458d82...@k25g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> > > John Vamp <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > No worries Jets fans, the Pats will be in the thick of it for the next
> > > > 5 years, no question.
>
> > > Sounds like worries to me pale face.
>
> > > h
>
> > Sounds like what you want to hear, to me. I agree with John, the Pats
> > have been dominant for a decade. It's a lot tougher to sustain
> > success than you realize--you haven't had any in 50 years. I put
> > money on Belichick getting back before I do a team lead by Rex's mouth
> > and a bunch of mercenary signings. Do it once first--then talk about
> > doing it again. :)
>
> BB, learn to read. I clearly meant the worries are ours given the
> obvious truth of the argument.
I read what was written, you failed to communicate what you allegedly
meant.
>
> Losing does not wear well on you defensive one.
>
I don't enjoy losing; I'm far from alone in that. No apologies here.
It wasn't the reason for my comment, however. What wears badly on me
is the classlessness of the entire Jets organization.
Beiselbub©
John C TX
> John, class is sticking your leg out....and owning up to it.
doing?
That the Jets were fined for speaking out of school as a opposed to
fined for lying should help you make adetermination on whether it was
standard practice.
Beiselbub©
Like I said, class was owning up to it. The Jets--they point the
finger, like you. (without any evidence)
Beiselbub©
--
Stay Classy, NY.
Beiselbub©
Own it. You sound like a child on a playground, John. :)
--
Stay Classy, NY.