Thursday Night Football: Patriots @ Buccaneers

[drfrey13]

1 minute ago, tonyto36 said:

Please tell me where there is complex judgement calls made by the refs in any of those scenarios. 

Any feasible scenario you can come up with. 

There isn't.  It's black and white.  It's simplified it for the refs to make decisions without risk of bias or judgement.

How is mine not black and white.  If a team is set at the line and a player jumps there is no 10 second runoff unless on fourth down.  Refs make decisions every play whether a team is set at the line before a play begins.  if there is illegal motion then the runoff is attached to that violation and not a false start.  All they have to do is remember the down just like the fumble rule.

[drfrey13]

1 hour ago, drfrey13 said:

That ten second run-off was within the rules but not the spirit of the rule.  They might want to think about changing it this off-season to get rid of the ten second rule when the offense is set at the line.  The rule is to stop teams from getting a free clock stoppage.   imagine a team going up to the line when they have a lead and it is 4th with a couple seconds left more than what is on the play clock.  Just jump and game over.

My original statement was black and white.  It is all about when a team is set at the line.

[ET80]

Looks like we have an early leader for Thief of the week in Nick Folk. Got to think he's cleaning out his locker right now. No way he's on the team after this week.

Younghoe Koo is a newly minted FA, but might be just as shaky.

[kyle21121]

This has been three seasons of awful awful kicking for Tampa now. One year is bad enough. I feel for that fan base. 

[Buc Ball]

35 minutes ago, kyle21121 said:

This has been three seasons of awful awful kicking for Tampa now. One year is bad enough. I feel for that fan base. 

It's been longer than that really.

People say it's when Barth got himself injured playing pick up basketball in early 2013, but our kicking game has been a bit of an adventure since we got rid of Matt Bryant in 2009.

As has been argued on this thread, we can't just add 9 to the Bucs' score as making these kicks would have changed the whole dynamic - maybe the Pats become more aggressive offensively, or maybe our offence ignites a bit sooner.

We had a chance at the end to win it regardless and couldn't quite execute. There's a positive in that and something to build off of going into the second quarter of our season.

[Hunter2_1]

Well. The Pats of 2014, 15 and 16 might have 30 or 40 burgered that. We are in some kind of (relative) hole at the minute. Short week doesn't help, but this will be a test of BB's godliness this season. Can't see us making a deep run in playoffs this time. 

 

I wish Tampa the very best for the rest of the season. 

[Kip Smithers]

Patriots score 19 points and their defense is crappy, yet you still can't win.  

[bzane]

6 hours ago, EliteTexan80 said:

Looks like we have an early leader for Thief of the week in Nick Folk. Got to think he's cleaning out his locker right now. No way he's on the team after this week.

Younghoe Koo is a newly minted FA, but might be just as shaky.

Oh, it's The Curse Of Roberto Aguayo! The Bucs will never again have a good kicker!

Farewell, Senor Automatico! We hardly knew ye!

[Hunter2_1]

Brady was asked how he felt about Winston idolising him. He responded by saying that he idolises him back, and wishes he could learn more stuff from the younger QBs. 

What a prima dona. 

[GSUeagles14]

7 hours ago, tonyto36 said:

Yes, you're right.  It ended with TOP essentially even...

..After an entire fourth quarter where the Patriots played a soft zone and called defensive plays SPECIFICALLY to kill clock at the price of yardage.

Don't be thick.  The Patriots controlled the ball and the game for three quarters and then the fourth quarter coughed up a whole bunch of box stats to win the game.

why in the work would you pick 20 minutes when the bucs were driving the ball at the 20 min mark? And the pats got the ball first, abd were leading 3-0 at the time. That is far, far from being in control. Its almost to the point of being delusional.

[SteelKing728]

I feel like the refs missed a bunch of holding calls on the Bucs. I specifically remember Wise getting called for a penalty hitting Winston, but was clearly held by the RT.

how do they miss that?

[Pugger]

9 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

That ten second run-off was within the rules but not the spirit of the rule.  They might want to think about changing it this off-season to get rid of the ten second rule when the offense is set at the line.  The rule is to stop teams from getting a free clock stoppage.   imagine a team going up to the line when they have a lead and it is 4th with a couple seconds left more than what is on the play clock.  Just jump and game over.

If the league wants to stop a team from getting a free clock stopper late in a half then a QB shouldn't be able to spike the ball to stop the clock.  Before somebody says "it's an incomplete pass" isn't he technically' throwing' it towards an ineligible receiver aka his center while inside the tackles thus it should be a 5 yard penalty and loss of down?

[Jetzger]

I don't get it.  Apparently the Bucs moving the ball really well outside of Winston missing a bunch of gimme throws and their kicker blowing field goals isn't cause for concern for the Pats defense and they played just fine, but the Patriots moving the ball really well outside of the red zone means their offense was dominating the game, and them moving the ball but only putting up 3 points against the Falcons in the SB doesn't matter either.  Can't have it both ways.

[GSUeagles14]

23 minutes ago, tonyto36 said:

What?  Those are exactly the "same way".

My point is that box score doesn't always indicate how well or bad a team is performing.  The Patriots gave a ton of yards, but most of those were in the fourth quarter when they were just playing to kill the clock.   The Bucs made mistakes, the Patriots made mistakes.  The Bucs left plays on the field, the Patriots left plays on the field.  But for the entirety of the game the Patriots looked like the more talented, better team.  The Brady interception was horrible, but there is A LOT more credence in that being a flukey thing from Brady than Winston to miss a 30 yard pass.  

The Patriots moved the ball in this game and in the SB pretty easily.  The Bucs had under 100 yards passing and under 100 yards rushing for 3 quarters.

Dominate is not a word I used because it comes off too strong, but the Patriots were in control for most of the game.

I said the first 20 minutes because that is a significant portion of the game.  I also then IMMEDIATELY AFTER did the entire half, INCLUDING the Bucs most successful drive of the night.

Bucs first half drives:

PUNT, 4 plays, 11 yards.  1:29

PUNT, 4 plays, 17 yards, 2:01

PUNT, 3 plays 1 yard, 1:00

TOUCHDOWN, 11 plays, 68 yards, 5:12

PUNT, 3 plays, 1 yard, 1:29

MISSED FG, 3 plays, 40 yards, 0:40 [keep in mind this was more Patriots idiocy than Bucs success]

Thats 138 total yards, including penalties;   For an ENTIRE HALF.   But yes.  They did have 11:51 in TOP which is only 2:1 in favor of Patriots.

Note:  I'd want to see the game tape because I remember that touchdown drive the Bucs for some reason getting huge holes up the middle that weren't there before or after that series.  I want to know if a DT was out for that drive or either the Bucs/Pats did something different schematically, but it was a bizarre drive.

 

Bucs third quarter drives:

PUNT, 3 plays, 7 yards, 1:40

PUNT, 7 plays 33 yards, 3:11

MISSED FG, 7 plays, 22 yards, 3:57

Total:  17 plays, 62 yards, (That's 3.65 Yards per play, good for dead last in the NFL for the season), and 8:48 TOP.  20:39 vs 24:21.  But yes, the Bucs did gain ground on the TOP and it is now 4:5 in favor of the Patriots.  Because that 17 play, 62 yard quarter was very impressive and shows how well they were doing.

 

At this point it's 16-7.  The Patriots hold the ball for 3:34, and there is 10 minutes on the clock for the Bucs to score two times in a game where they hadn't been able to do anything except one weird drive where the Patriots defense fell asleep up the middle.  Definitely not game over but a position where the Patriots were in control.   The Patriots shut it down and went into prevent/clock killing mode.  The Bucs did manage a good drive of 11 plays, 84 yards but it took up 5:06, leaving only about 5 on the clock left [and they missed the FG].  After the missed FG the game was over.  Even if they had made that FG, the Patriots are up 6 points with about 5 minutes left and a FG ends the game.  The Patriots went conservative for the rest of the game on offense to protect Brady/kill clock to force the Bucs to drive ~150 yards in 4 minutes.

 

The Patriots were not blowing out the Bucs by any means, but they were clearly the better team for the entire game.  I'm sure Patricia/Belichick aren't happy that they gave up a 9 play, 74 yard TD drive near the end of the game, but even with just about everything breaking right for the Bucs and them executing well, the best they got was ONE 20 yard shot into the endzone with the entire Patriots defense waiting for it.

Are teams going to have better offensive schemes that can target the Patriots issues?  Yep.  Are all QBs going to miss throws and kickers miss kicks?  Nope.

But it doesn't matter because in this game those things happened and the Patriots were in control because of it.

 

And if we're going to get into the delusional bit.  Why don't you support your own arguments with things besides "this is my opinion and you're wrong, neener neener".   Especially after claiming the Patriots would be 2-2 without Brady and then running away when I presented an argument.

you know whats more signifiant? 25 mins, or 30 mins. but no, you tried go pass off 20 mins as some kinda proof that the pats had the game well in hand the whole time. despite the fact they had only managed 3 pts depite that "dominating" 20 minutes.

and no idea what your "argument" was in the othet thread, if it was as poor as this then it prob went ignored. HOWEVER, i never said the pats would be 2-2 w/o brady and im still postig in that thread. so more delusion with the "running"?

 

[GSUeagles14]

5 minutes ago, tonyto36 said:

I posted a full analysis of the game.  You're harping on that in some feeble defense of me being wrong whiles simultaneously ignoring that was just one point of me showing how they were in control for the first 20 minutes of the game.  Not that that means they controlled the whole game.  I showed other proof for the rest of the game.  

You were trolling asking someone to provide some kind of contextual proof that the Patriots wouldn't be 2-2 without Brady, because as you claimed "history proves otherwise".  I provided a full list of reasons and stats (as did other posters).  And mysteriously you decided to respond in a trolling fashion with no actual rebuttal.   No one except you in the world thinks the Patriots would still have been 2-2 if Brady were out or 3-2 now.

You're doing the same thing you always do.  Make bold assertions with no supporting proof, try to push your personal agenda as if it were strong reason, and then hide behind either petty personal attacks or make horrible simple nitpicks to give the illusion of responding while you are actually avoiding everything you can.

cool beans. this is going no where and the simple fact that you thunk im the one making a bold claim by saying it was a close game shows how silly this is.