I can't believe I'm gonna write this... but...

[Juke99]

I saw your qualifier, Cap'n. I just didn't see the point in wishing that we wouldn't have lost AS bad, and addressed the notion in general terms.

Yes. That was what I was hoping for. That we lost by less points.

OY.

Never mind.

 

[superpunk]

Yes. That was what I was hoping for. That we lost by less points.

Seems like a silly thing to hope for, but to each his own.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I think every team in the league -- probably every team in football -- would prefer to just run the ball down the opponents' throat. It's the simplest, safest, most demoralizing way to beat defenses. But most teams can't do that, and we've shown that we can't either, at least early in games.

And you can make an argument that Witten and T.O. are our strengths, and their corners and safeties their weakness, so it's natural we'd attack there.

But I *do* think we should have run it more in the third quarter when we had some success -- the drive where Julius got off those two good runs and then Barber did, too. At that point, the Pats were almost looking tired. We were getting into their secondary and they were uncharacteristically tackling very poorly. That's when I thought things were really looking good for us, because you usually don't out-physical them.

Hey, it's likely that when Garrett looks at the film, he wishes he'd done things differently. Maybe next time we do try to run it more.

 

[EPL0c0]

A Bill Parcells game plan was what we needed to employ yesterday.

I think the Pats are simply the better team but we needed to slow that game down and NOT get into a shoot out with them.

The running game was working. I think it should have been relied on to keep the ball out of Brady's hands.

In the end, the penalties killed any chance of winning...and I think the Pats would have won regardless of the game plan...but...I think the running game could have changed the tempo and would have kept things much closer...it would also have kept our defense off the field.

Clearly the universe is officially coming to an end when I post something positive about Parcells.

With just 14 rushing plays, keeping Romo in the pocket and going for the FG late... I thought we WERE imploying a Parcells-type game plan...

where were the teeth?!

 

[CATCH17]

A Bill Parcells game plan was what we needed to employ yesterday.

I think the Pats are simply the better team but we needed to slow that game down and NOT get into a shoot out with them.
The running game was working. I think it should have been relied on to keep the ball out of Brady's hands.

In the end, the penalties killed any chance of winning...and I think the Pats would have won regardless of the game plan...but...I think the running game could have changed the tempo and would have kept things much closer...it would also have kept our defense off the field.

Clearly the universe is officially coming to an end when I post something positive about Parcells.

Its kind of hard to slow a game down when the team jumps up 14-0 on you.

 

[Juke99]

Its kind of hard to slow a game down when the team jumps up 14-0 on you.

14-0 in the first quarter? tons of time left.

Are you suggesting that any time a team goes behind 14-0 before the end of the first quarter that they should abandon the run?

Ya score ONE time and it's a one possession game with three quarters still left.

 

[Juke99]

Seems like a silly thing to hope for, but to each his own.

A waste of sarcasm that was.

In any case, BP is right about your AV.

 

[goshan]

We couldn't run the ball early. We tried to.

 

[Doctor32]

A Bill Parcells game plan was what we needed to employ yesterday.

I think the Pats are simply the better team but we needed to slow that game down and NOT get into a shoot out with them.

The running game was working. I think it should have been relied on to keep the ball out of Brady's hands.

In the end, the penalties killed any chance of winning...and I think the Pats would have won regardless of the game plan...but...I think the running game could have changed the tempo and would have kept things much closer...it would also have kept our defense off the field.

Clearly the universe is officially coming to an end when I post something positive about Parcells.

Come on...

 

[superpunk]

A waste of sarcasm that was.

If it was sarcasm, either it was used incorrectly, or you have no idea what you are trying to say in this thread.

If you weren't hoping that we lost by less, then you must've made the post hoping that it would have given us the win - only you've already acknowledged that you think the Pats win regardless. Since I recognized that line of thinking was ridiculous, I moved on to what actually hurt us in this game, much moreso than blaming the coaching staff...again.

 

[Juke99]

If it was sarcasm, either it was used incorrectly, or you have no idea what you are trying to say in this thread.

If you weren't hoping that we lost by less, then you must've made the post hoping that it would have given us the win - only you've already acknowledged that you think the Pats win regardless. Since I recognized that line of thinking was ridiculous, I moved on to what actually hurt us in this game, much moreso than blaming the coaching staff...again.

I think you need more bran in your diet.

Just a suggestion.

 

[CATCH17]

14-0 in the first quarter? tons of time left.

Are you suggesting that any time a team goes behind 14-0 before the end of the first quarter that they should abandon the run?

Ya score ONE time and it's a one possession game with three quarters still left.

No but when your down 14-0 and the offense cant stay on the field and the defense cant get off of it you gotta pick up the tempo, and guess what? It got us back in the game.

After we took the lead the Patriots walked right back down the field and scored again and we got owned on offense our next series out.

Our time of possesion vs theirs ultimately killed us and we couldn't do anything about it because we found ourselves in a whole from the get go.

I wish we didn't get the ball first yesterday.

 

[George]

A Bill Parcells game plan was what we needed to employ yesterday.

I think the Pats are simply the better team but we needed to slow that game down and NOT get into a shoot out with them.

The running game was working. I think it should have been relied on to keep the ball out of Brady's hands.

In the end, the penalties killed any chance of winning...and I think the Pats would have won regardless of the game plan...but...I think the running game could have changed the tempo and would have kept things much closer...it would also have kept our defense off the field.

Clearly the universe is officially coming to an end when I post something positive about Parcells.

I agree with what you say except for the "Bill Parcells game plan". The game would have been a shoot out whether we used a running game or a passing game. A running game, IMO, appeared to be effective and would have kept our defense off the field. Our defense appeared wore out. Bill Parcells would not have run the ball effectively and would not have had as an emotional team as the Cowboys have become.

 

[Mr Cowboy]

Having a conservative game plan on offense doesn't work if you go three and the first three times you have the ball, while the other team is scoring points.

Our biggest problem is the slow starts.....if we had had long time consusming drives, with points, in the fist quarter it might have been different. It seems that we start games with no plan of attack. Just sort of throw a little bit of this and a little bit of that out there see what sticks.

A conservative game plan only works if your defense can stop the other team a few times.............

 

[Carolina Cowboy]

A Bill Parcells game plan was what we needed to employ yesterday.

I think the Pats are simply the better team but we needed to slow that game down and NOT get into a shoot out with them.

The running game was working. I think it should have been relied on to keep the ball out of Brady's hands.

In the end, the penalties killed any chance of winning...and I think the Pats would have won regardless of the game plan...but...I think the running game could have changed the tempo and would have kept things much closer...it would also have kept our defense off the field.

Clearly the universe is officially coming to an end when I post something positive about Parcells.

I said the exact same thing to my son yesterday.

 

[CATCH17]

This thread just shows you guys did have a lot of faith in Bill!

I love it.

 

[khiladi]

We did start to establish the run in the second half, i.e. the two long runs by JJ, but we were forced into a lot of thrid and longs because of mistakes. We abandoned the run because of our own mistakes.

What I do think we need to do is run in the first half with Barber... he needs to set the tone..

 

[Bleu Star]

If we already agree that the secondary is a problem, than maybe we should establish a running game to milk the clock and keep high scoring offenses off the field a little more. Just something to consider.

We couldn't run the ball early. We tried to.

Solution: Start MB3 and finish the game with him as well. Use JJ as a "meat of the game" change of pace back. That's basically what he is. Ask that Oline. I bet money they say they're more confident blocking for MB3.

 

[theogt]

We did run the ball in the first half. We still couldn't keep our offense on the field and our defense off of it.

The Patriots didn't run the ball in the first half, yet they kept their offense on the field and their defense off of it.