BP's own words....

[Mr Cowboy]

The play call was as bad as the execution.....................becasue we had no time outs, (due to a stupid challenge), they had to throw it to the sidelines. Everyone knew this including the defense. Sure Price was wide open, and Witten and Key probably were open too in the middle of the field. But you couldn't throw it there because we had no timeouts.

 

[Hoods]

LOL...now we have fans that enjoy their own team getting told how to play by the opposition.

First of all, who says they enjoy it? Secondly, why are you acting like this is some sort of revelation or something that's never before happened? Better teams force their opponents to play differently. Unless it's a shoot-out, it happens every single game.

You don't realize how funny you're sounding. It's like saying "Bill admitted that we had to scheme around their probowl DE who was matched up against our rookie LT! (just an example). You guys hear that??? WE ARE CHANGING OUR GAME PLAN FOR ONE PLAYER!!!"

 

[Juke99]

The play call was as bad as the execution.....................becasue we had no time outs, (due to a stupid challenge), they had to throw it to the sidelines. Everyone knew this including the defense. Sure Price was wide open, and Witten and Key probably were open too in the middle of the field. But you couldn't throw it there because we had no timeouts.

BINGO.

 

[Hoods]

Prior to the holding call, maybe. With a time out left, maybe.

My problem is that it's totally inconsistent with everything he did for the entire game. Throw the ball there but go for the FG instead of a TD on the second to last drive?

I just don't "get" his thinking. Often.

By going for the field goal, worst case scenario, they tie the game. Our passing game and our line were both sucking. We don't convert, they score their touchdown, we lose. Of course, we lost either way, but not because of.... ah, forget it. No point arguing over it now. There's no perfect gameplan, however, execution and o-line play had alot more to do with the game's outcome. Believe it or not, but the facts are there. At least I think so.

Agree to disagree if you wish.

 

[Juke99]

By going for the field goal, worst case scenario, they tie the game. Our passing game and our line were both sucking. We don't convert, they score their touchdown, we lose. Of course, we lost either way, but not because of.... ah, forget it. No point arguing over it now. There's no perfect gameplan, however, execution and o-line play had alot more to do with the game's outcome. Believe it or not, but the facts are there. At least I think so.

Agree to disagree if you wish.

My issue is with the last call. If you're going to call a ultra conservative game plan, then stick to it. If you weigh out the risk/gain on that last pass, then surely the same risk/gain equation applied to the second to last drive would dictate that you go for the TD vs the FG.

 

[Jimz31]

First of all, who says they enjoy it? Secondly, why are you acting like this is some sort of revelation or something that's never before happened? Better teams force their opponents to play differently. Unless it's a shoot-out, it happens every single game.

You don't realize how funny you're sounding. It's like saying "Bill admitted that we had to scheme around their probowl DE who was matched up against our rookie LT! (just an example). You guys hear that??? WE ARE CHANGING OUR GAME PLAN FOR ONE PLAYER!!!"

You NEVER let fear of an entire offense dictate how you play the game. Yes, you game-plan around certain players, but it is a defeatist attitude to come out and say "I was shaking in my boots about what I THOUGHT their offense would do..." This deafeatist attitude is one that BP professes to despise yet he may just have it.

Are you saying that we should not dictate to opponents what to do?

 

[Alexander]

You NEVER let fear of an entire offense dictate how you play the game. Yes, you game-plan around certain players, but it is a defeatist attitude to come out and say "I was shaking in my boots about what I THOUGHT their offense would do..." This deafeatist attitude is one that BP professes to despise yet he may just have it.

Are you saying that we should not dictate to opponents what to do?

This is simply Bill Parcells being himself.

He is going to coddle and nurse what he feels is weak and needs protection.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

My issue is with the last call. If you're going to call a ultra conservative game plan, then stick to it. If you weigh out the risk/gain on that last pass, then surely the same risk/gain equation applied to the second to last drive would dictate that you go for the TD vs the FG.

It can still be a conservative call IF (and this is where bledsoe screwed up and even admitted to it) you execute the play.

You either see the guy wide open and can get a pass to him to try to get a first down and end the game, you run forward for any yards (even if negative yards) to get more time off the clock before punting...or you throw the ball away and then punt. But do NOT throw if there is a chance for an INT.

Bledsoe had a few options and he chose the wrong one.

IMO it had NOTHING to do with conservative vs aggressive in that instance...it had to do with execution.

I think it boils down to people just second guessing here (not to say it is right or wrong to do so)....but if we run people say we should have passed, if we passed they say we should have ran....but somewhere in there is the execution that often get's overlooked because it is always easier to throw ire, anger, or any other negative word towards a specific player or coach.

I seen nothing aggressive about that play other then Bledsoes aggressiveness to make something and screwing it up.

Same type of thing about going for the FG over the TD when we were down in the area.

I guarantee if we went for the TD and did not get it, people would be second guessing and jumping up and down. Heck during the chat of the last game or the game before in similar circumstances people were screaming about it.

But if he goes for the FG then you have the other side screaming and second guessing.

I like the idea of going for the TD because if we miss then we should pin the other team in confined spaces, have a better chance of a turn over or saftey and hopefully at least get good starting position if we stop them.
However I can not fault a coach for going for what should be sure points...problem is if it works and the points are made we win the game and nobody is screaming.

Either way....I see execution problems and expect so from two guys that were not named starters this year until injuries put them and they were named at starting positions that we know will effect the QB play.

 

[Jimz31]

This is simply Bill Parcells being himself.

He is going to coddle and nurse what he feels is weak and needs protection.

In other words....our entire offense.

"Keep the Seattle Offense off of the field".

You know what, the game was actually alot better when Seattles' offense was on the field. Our defense was beating them up. Yet, BP wanted to keep them off the field, therefore allowing THEM to dictate the game.

MOST coaches want to dictate how the game is to be played. I have NEVER heard ONE coach say that he wanted to be dictated to.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

In other words....our entire offense.

Our offense, or our defense? Clarify please, Alex...

 

[WV Cowboy]

You know our defense may not be as good as we thought, it seems teams know that they too can play conservitavely, knowing that we will not open it up offensively. All they have to do is play close and try to win it in the end. So far it has worked, except for the Eagles. They thought they could play that way, but BP surprised them and opened it up early and often.

This has to be one of the most ridiculous posts that I have seen in a while.

So you are suggesting that teams aren't trying to score every possession, but just try to just stay close, relying on scoring 10 pts in the final minute of the game.

Somehow I don't agree with that thought process.

See I think that the Seahawks were trying to score throughout the game.

And I think our Defense is every bit as good as we thought, or maybe even better.

We have allowed two TD's in the last 45 or so possessions. I think that is incredible considering we have played the NFL's #1 offense 3 wks in a row.

 

[Jimz31]

Our defense is the real deal....now, when will BP and Company realize that?

This I guess is my point. Our defense can hold anybody (at least for 58 minutes). This SHOULD allow our coaches to start calling games a little bit looser and dare opponents to beat us.....yet, it won't happen as long as we are being dictated to.

 

[Hoods]

It can still be a conservative call IF (and this is where bledsoe screwed up and even admitted to it) you execute the play.

You either see the guy wide open and can get a pass to him to try to get a first down and end the game, you run forward for any yards (even if negative yards) to get more time off the clock before punting...or you throw the ball away and then punt. But do NOT throw if there is a chance for an INT.

Bledsoe had a few options and he chose the wrong one.

IMO it had NOTHING to do with conservative vs aggressive in that instance...it had to do with execution.

I think it boils down to people just second guessing here (not to say it is right or wrong to do so)....but if we run people say we should have passed, if we passed they say we should have ran....but somewhere in there is the execution that often get's overlooked because it is always easier to throw ire, anger, or any other negative word towards a specific player or coach.

I seen nothing aggressive about that play other then Bledsoes aggressiveness to make something and screwing it up.

Same type of thing about going for the FG over the TD when we were down in the area.

I guarantee if we went for the TD and did not get it, people would be second guessing and jumping up and down. Heck during the chat of the last game or the game before in similar circumstances people were screaming about it.

But if he goes for the FG then you have the other side screaming and second guessing.

I like the idea of going for the TD because if we miss then we should pin the other team in confined spaces, have a better chance of a turn over or saftey and hopefully at least get good starting position if we stop them.
However I can not fault a coach for going for what should be sure points...problem is if it works and the points are made we win the game and nobody is screaming.

Either way....I see execution problems and expect so from two guys that were not named starters this year until injuries put them and they were named at starting positions that we know will effect the QB play.

Agreed.

"You NEVER let fear of an entire offense dictate how you play the game."

Yes you do. Coaches do it all the time. Almost every game, infact. If you have a running offense with a bad receiving corps, you bring 8 men to the box and make them throw. On an equal note, if their offense somehow flips and they're receivers are having field days, you drop more people back in coverage. Their offensive success just dictated how you played.

If you have a high powered offense, you do your best to keep the balls away from their hands. Bill did that. Had we executed, we would have won.

 

[dbair1967]

Ya know, this coach is turning out to be the ultimate one trick pony.

Yes, this game plan worked against Buffalo in the superbowl.

post of the day...truer words could not be spoken

Parcells really needs to wake up I think...he so badly wants to prove to everyone "ugly football" wins, but the on field results show it doesnt...he hasnt won a championship in 15 years, and that won was won by the closest of margins when a normally reliable fg kicker blew one...

he's never coached a team to back to back super bowls, or even back to back conference championship games

I've always thought he was a good coach in NY, but somewhat overrated since then...if he had lost that game to Buffalo I doubt people would hold him in such high regard...he gets a free pass from the media and fans when his results show that maybe he shouldnt...I dont care thats he's gotten 4 teams to the playoffs, that honestly isnt THAT great an accomplishment in this day and age...the fact is a dreadful team one yr can turn around and make the playoffs (or even win a superbowl, as the Rams did in 1999 after a 4-12 1998) the next...

David

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Listen, the game plan was fine from the 20 to the 20. Control the clock keep the Seahawks offense off the field. Fine!

My major beef with Parcells is what has been happening for 4 weeks now INSIDE THE 15 YARD LINE.

In the Skins game, the Giants game and now the Seahawk game he has COMPLETELY gone into a shell and played for the FGs and he's done it with a terrible FG kicker!! There is no debate about it, because Parcells himself ADMITTED he's done it.
Our record in those 3 games (that we absolutely controlled for 55+ minutes) is 1-2 and we had to win a coin toss in OT to win the one we did.

I'm sorry but if Parcells and our coaches can't see what's wrong with that picture they never will.

 

[dbair1967]

Our defense is the real deal.....

until they start stopping people when the games are on the line, I am not buying this...

right now we are ok, but we crumble too easily late in games to be a regarded as a dominant or great defense

the potential is there, but the results are not...the defense flat out blew two wins and nearly two others

David

 

[WV Cowboy]

until they start stopping people when the games are on the line, I am not buying this...

right now we are ok, but we crumble too easily late in games to be a regarded as a dominant or great defense

the potential is there, but the results are not...the defense flat out blew two wins and nearly two others

David

Wrong !

The Defense has allowed 2 TD's in the last 45 or so opponents possessions.

Against the NFL's #1 rated offense the past three games.

How in the world can you blame the Defense ?

The offense is to blame.
The offensive line to be specific.

Those games should not have come down to one last possession.

Our Defense is playing great, I wouldn't trade them for any other.

 

[Jimz31]

Agreed.

"You NEVER let fear of an entire offense dictate how you play the game."

Yes you do. Coaches do it all the time. Almost every game, infact. If you have a running offense with a bad receiving corps, you bring 8 men to the box and make them throw. On an equal note, if their offense somehow flips and they're receivers are having field days, you drop more people back in coverage. Their offensive success just dictated how you played.

If you have a high powered offense, you do your best to keep the balls away from their hands. Bill did that. Had we executed, we would have won.

Yes, to a point....but not to the degree where you fear putting their offense even on the field.

 

[InmanRoshi]

You think that's bad, look at this moronic head coach who used a conservative game plan specifically to keep an offense off the field.

Patriots 'D' stifles Colts in 20-3 victory


NFL.com wire reports

FOXBORO, Mass. (Jan. 16, 2005) -- The New England Patriots kept the ball away from Peyton Manning most of the game and shut him down when he had it.

Sound familiar?

For the second year in a row, the Pats made the league's MVP look ordinary and his Indianapolis teammates inept, this time beating them 20-3 behind Corey Dillon 's 144 yards rushing.

"I think our defense is what made this game successful," Patriots quarterback Tom Brady said. "Three points to one of the best offenses in the history of football is incredible."

Manning's quarterbacking brilliance was neutralized as usual by Bill Belichick's punishing defense and the Colts' Super Bowl aspirations ended yet again on this snowy New England field.

Manning is now 0-7 in Foxboro. Brady is 7-0 in the postseason.

For the defending champions, one more win in Pittsburgh and it's on to Jacksonville, Fla., for their third Super Bowl trip in four years.

Tedy Bruschi, Willie McGinest and coach Bill Belichick's defense spent the day frustrating Manning, who was 27-for-42 for 238 yards. In a stunning failure for the NFL's most prolific passing attack, the Colts managed only a field goal.


Tom Brady, Tedy Bruschi and the Patriots are a game away from returning to the Super Bowl.

"It was just the best game plan that we've had since I've been here," Patriots safety Rodney Harrison said.

The conditions were just right for the Patriots' strategy: run the ball, throw short passes and watch the clock tick down, putting together their three most time-consuming drives of the season.

The cold temperatures couldn't have helped Indianapolis, which plays home games in the 72-degree warmth of the RCA Dome. Last year in Foxboro, Manning threw four interceptions in a 24-14 AFC title game loss.

"I don't have a clue," said Edgerrin James, held to 39 yards rushing by the Patriots. "I really don't know what happened out there. I was just trying to do what I can do."

Dillon keyed a ball-control offense that kept Manning on the sideline, while Brady threw for one touchdown, ran for another and completed 18 passes in 27 attempts for 144 yards.

"I'm not even recognizing my last seven seasons right now," said Dillon, who spent them with Cincinnati. "It's all about this year."

New England (15-2) led 6-0 on Adam Vinatieri 's field goals of 24 and 31 yards in the second quarter with the first one capping a 16-play, 78-yard march that lasted 9 minutes, 7 seconds.

Indianapolis (13-5) scored on Mike Vanderjagt 's 23-yard field goal on the last play of the first half.
Patriots RB Corey Dillon had a solid outing in his first ever playoff game of his eight-year career.
Patriots RB Corey Dillon had a solid outing in his first ever playoff game of his eight-year career.
"We just ran into a better team today," Colts coach Tony Dungy said. "That's one thing about them. They find a way to win. We felt pretty good sitting 6-3 at the half."

When Brady threw a 5-yard scoring pass to David Givens to cap a third-quarter drive that lasted 8:16, Manning had to make his remaining possessions count against the hard-hitting defense.

He didn't -- and Brady followed with a 94-yard drive that ended with his 1-yard touchdown run.

Facing a 20-3 deficit with 7:10 left, even Manning couldn't do much.

The Patriots proved once again they could win without their best defenders. Pro Bowl defensive lineman Richard Seymour was sidelined with a knee injury, and starting cornerbacks Ty Law and Tyrone Poole are on injured reserve. But the Patriots' defense still stifled the fifth-highest scoring team in NFL history.

The season ended for the Colts right where it started. They lost the opener in Foxboro 27-24 when Vanderjagt missed a 48-yard field goal attempt in the final minute.

I don't know why they haven't fired the guy. Way, way, way too conservative, and he let the opposing offense and weather conditions dictate how he played the game !!! What a chicken-s#%# coach!!! You never do that. He just like Manning hang around and hang around. He just got lucky that he didn't get beat. He was "playing not to lose".

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Parcells really needs to wake up I think...he so badly wants to prove to everyone "ugly football" wins

I really, really wonder how much this has to do with it. Parcells can be so stubborn, you almost wonder if gets focused more on doing things "his way" than on finding the strategy that is actually the best for his team.

That sounds incredible, but my ears perked up a little at how defiant he was after that big Philly win when the reporters kept asking him if his players had convinced him to open it up and attack more often. He acted as if he were completely repulsed by the idea, even though it was by far the biggest win he'd ever had here.