Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Trent Richardson Interviews Fellow Brown Brandon Weeden

New England Patriots Links 1/09/12 - AFC Divisional Round Brings Broncos to Foxboro

Mike Reiss serves up some quick-hit thoughts on Patriots-Broncos.

1. Patriots benefit from rematch. One of the takeaways from the Patriots' 41-23 win over the Broncos on Dec. 18 was how the defense had to adjust to Denver's unique option-based offense. Players talked about how it was one thing to practice against it -- they had Julian Edelman as the scout-team QB on the option package, and Ryan Mallett as the scout-team QB in the passing game -- but something significantly different to actually play against it. The Patriots' run defense struggled in the first quarter before settling down, and that experience should benefit the Patriots in this playoff rematch. Turnovers were big for the Patriots in that Dec. 18 game.

4. Should help to have Spikes back. Given the importance of limiting the Broncos' running game -- they had 252 yards on 31 carries against the Patriots on Dec. 18 -- the return of Brandon Spikes is notable. Spikes, one of the Patriots' best run-stuffing linebackers, did not play that day because of a knee injury. He returned for the season finale, giving him an important tune-up for a game in which the Patriots figure to play their fair share of eight men in the box. Safety Patrick Chung also didn't play in the Dec. 18 game.

5. Broncos struggled against Hernandez. In the Dec. 18 meeting, the Broncos held the Patriots' top two pass-catching weapons relatively in check -- Rob Gronkowski had four catches for 53 yards, while Wes Welker had 4 for 41 -- but it was tight end Aaron Hernandez who hurt them most (9 catches, 129 yards, 1 TD). It was a game in which receiver Deion Branch did not play (groin). The Broncos figure to place a heavy emphasis on better tackling after the catch.

6. Short week and Tim Tebow's passing not to be overlooked. This is good spot for the Patriots, playing at home and getting the Broncos on a short week (they played Sunday and now come back for a Saturday road game). That's one of the big benefits of the bye. Tim Tebow was 11 of 22 for 194 yards against the Patriots on Dec. 18, but he looked like a more confident passer against the Steelers (10 of 21 for 316, 2 TDs), converting on the deep ball. The Patriots figure to play differently than the Steelers, with the idea of not leaving themselves as exposed on the back end to protect against the big play.

Star-divide

TEAM TALK

LOCAL LINKS

NATIONAL NEWS

Comment 36 comments  |  1 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I wasn't aware until last night, of the Colts' attempts at raiding two Pats execs

Good news that Nick Caserio declined the offer to interview, but no word yet from Pats director of pro personnel Jason Licht of what he’ll decide to do.

Keep the faith!

by Marima on Jan 9, 2012 9:37 AM EST reply actions  

Bob Hohler thinks a 2.9 at the University of Arizona is a sign of a sharp intelligence.

God help us.

"Every time I call it a game, you call it a business. Every time I call it a business, you call it a game."

by JohnHannahRules on Jan 9, 2012 9:55 AM EST reply actions  

I'm fairness, it's a sliding scale

I think lamichael James was all PAC 10 academic last year with a 3.0. And the PAC 12 and big 10 generally have the highest standards in the bcs. Players spend a lot of time on football.

Oklahoma State will beat LSU in the National Title game by more than 7 points.

by No Pity on Jan 9, 2012 10:26 AM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Loved this one from Mike Klis:
There may be no rule against McDaniels working immediately for the Pats. But this clearly violates the spirit of fair competition. It’s so Belichick. It’s so McDaniels, for that matter.

In other words, “There’s not rule against it, and nothing really to even suggest that it’s unfair, but it’s probably not a good thing for the team I support, so someone should put a stop to it!”

by nbradley07 on Jan 9, 2012 10:47 AM EST reply actions  

Plus, the Pats sought him out when almost everyone thought they'd be playing the Steelers.

and I don’t expect any real help from him on the Broncos – the Pats already showed they could beat him already, without McD’s help.

Keep the faith!

by Marima on Jan 9, 2012 10:50 AM EST up reply actions  

The only help he might offer

is in creating situations that exploit certain players’ weaknesses. He’ll know off-hand which receivers can be jammed, which are good at finding zone soft spots (and which spots, specifically), what disguises they are susceptible to… He may not offer anything ground breaking, but he’s sure to have some in-depth knowledge that will add at least something to the game plan.

by nbradley07 on Jan 9, 2012 10:59 AM EST up reply actions  

It will never end

No matter what Belichick does, he’s cheating. And Brady is a sissy. And the Patriots are the only team to tape calls. And the Patriots cannot win without cheating (despite going 16-0 and losing due to the biggest fluke catch ever).

The amount of information McD can give is paltry at best. It’s a totally different offense with a different QB. I would like these goofballs to list exactly what they think McDaniels can give them. They can’t and they won’t because they just want to whine about something.

by iLikeStuff on Jan 9, 2012 10:56 AM EST up reply actions  

Hey, Belichick used to work for the Colts, no wonder he's beat them so often.

Same thing with the Jets, and Browns Ravens.

It’s just not fair. It’s also not circus, or sideshow, or vaudeville, or ….

The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
Some people can learn from the mistakes of others, while some people need to pee on the electric fence themselves.
Belichick is looking for a new name for his boat: VI Rings sounds pretty good.

by SlotMachinePlayer on Jan 9, 2012 11:15 AM EST up reply actions  

carnival.

The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
Some people can learn from the mistakes of others, while some people need to pee on the electric fence themselves.
Belichick is looking for a new name for his boat: VI Rings sounds pretty good.

by SlotMachinePlayer on Jan 9, 2012 11:17 AM EST up reply actions  

I thought I smelled cabbage.

True wealth is a shelf full of unread books.

by Hometown Gyro on Jan 9, 2012 2:34 PM EST up reply actions  

Groovy, baby!

NBA Officiating - Corrupt? Incompetent? Which is worse? Does it matter? It sucks.

by mmmmm on Jan 9, 2012 5:35 PM EST up reply actions  

Rex Ryan and his brother Rob openly teamed up to plot against the Pats this year

Wouldn’t that be in some sort of violation of the “spirit” of fair competition in the view of the Denver Post writer Mike Klis? You never heard any wining from the Patriots or the NE media about it though.

Keep the faith!

by Marima on Jan 9, 2012 11:19 AM EST up reply actions  

If only we'd had some tape on the helmetcatch play. We'd totally have punked them.

"Every time I call it a game, you call it a business. Every time I call it a business, you call it a game."

by JohnHannahRules on Jan 9, 2012 11:30 AM EST up reply actions  

rec'd

NBA Officiating - Corrupt? Incompetent? Which is worse? Does it matter? It sucks.

by mmmmm on Jan 9, 2012 12:14 PM EST up reply actions  

There is the letter and the spirit of the law.

This violates neither. It might violate someone’s delicate sensibilities, but there’s nothing to prove they weren’t ravished in the first place.

The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
Some people can learn from the mistakes of others, while some people need to pee on the electric fence themselves.
Belichick is looking for a new name for his boat: VI Rings sounds pretty good.

by SlotMachinePlayer on Jan 9, 2012 11:09 AM EST up reply actions  

When you start appealing to the "spirit of the law"

it usually means your argument is crap. Not always, but usually.

by nbradley07 on Jan 9, 2012 11:23 AM EST up reply actions  

Yeah -- that's like one of the Unwritten Rules.

"Every time I call it a game, you call it a business. Every time I call it a business, you call it a game."

by JohnHannahRules on Jan 9, 2012 11:29 AM EST up reply actions  

I know.

What if O’Brien just up and left or worse, died? Are we supposed to go without a coordinator.

So sorry, you can’t hire someone because it would be, “Bad”.

Michael Silver’s also got his undies in a bind over this. He says it violates the spirit of the player trade deadline where playoff teams can’t stock up late in the season. But wait, that is a deadline, as in a time, right?

Meanwhile, the Dolphins can go shopping for a head coach, and there is no deadline, but we can’t hire a offensive assistant, even though there is NO DEADLINE?

Sense? It makes none. Oh, their season isn’t over? Well, guess what? Either the season is over for everyone, or it’s over for no one. The season is still going, they’re under the same player rules as we are, so why would the coaching rules change?

The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
Some people can learn from the mistakes of others, while some people need to pee on the electric fence themselves.
Belichick is looking for a new name for his boat: VI Rings sounds pretty good.

by SlotMachinePlayer on Jan 9, 2012 1:13 PM EST up reply actions  

If teams want to gain the moral high ground they might start by guaranteeing contracts and not cutting players every day

by quadruple option on Jan 9, 2012 11:52 AM EST up reply actions  

I am dumber having read that.

by tossin on Jan 9, 2012 12:56 PM EST up reply actions  

I think the Pats should play same strategy as steelers

The Steelers played the correct strategy against the Broncos. They just didn’t execute very well AND the Broncos got a little lucky on several big pass plays. I counted at least 4 big pass plays where the defender was in near perfect position and/or touched the ball.

Do the Patriots have a better secondary than the Steelers? No. But the Steelers had too many injuries. They couldn’t get to Tebow as much as they should have and could not bring him down when they did. The Patriots contained well the last matchup and didn’t really let Tebow out of their grasp when they got there.

Tebow doesn’t put the ball high in the air either – which gives very little room for error in the accuracy department. He also doesn’t seem to look off safeties either. The Pats shouldn’t go straight man as much as the Steelers but they should stack the box and take their chances in coverage. And despite the long tosses yesterday, I think they should play underneath routes and force long throws. They might connect on a couple (or none) but forcing Tebow to continually do what he is least suited for is the best strategy.

I was rooting for Denver the entire game, but when they went up big – I started to second guess who I should really root for. A banged up Steelers team not playing their best or the offensively challenged Broncos that shed the moniker before half time? I still like our chances to at a minimum outgun the Broncos.

by iLikeStuff on Jan 9, 2012 10:47 AM EST reply actions  

I was rooting hard for the Broncos

because I absolutely hate the Steelers. But we were all laughing during the 1st quarter, wondering why anyone at all was concerned about playing a very beatable looking Pittsburgh team.

Keep the faith!

by Marima on Jan 9, 2012 10:54 AM EST up reply actions  

Weird. I think it was a bad strategy.

I think the way to defend Tebow is to make him beat you on the intermediate stuff. Take away the underneath and over-the-top options and let him TRY to be consistent enough on the intermediate throws to outscore the Patriots. As good as the game-winning throw was—and it was EXCELLENT—he missed a wide-open 15 yard throw in regulation to end their final drive. It gave the Steelers one last chance, and I’d say 2 out of 3 times, the Steelers win the game on the final drive there.

In conclusion, make Tebow beat you with consistency, not huge chunks. (This also suits the Pats bend/don’t break style).

True wealth is a shelf full of unread books.

by Hometown Gyro on Jan 9, 2012 2:41 PM EST up reply actions  

I have to disagree with your assesment

Part of the reason the Steelers lost was because of the strategy they used, not in spite of it. All game, they had almost everyone in the box, playing the run, and they got burnt, obviously, by Tebow to Thomas. And once, by the way, to the tight end who Tebow almost never throws to, when he did, in fact “look off” Polamalu, and found the tight end wide open for 20 yards.
I am very grateful for how the Steelers played because it showed us how not to play. There is no way we will be allowing Thomas to be single covered, i mean he was 85% of the throwing offense, and absolutely torched the Steelers while 10 guys were rushing up to the line to stop the run. I don’t think we would have been expecting the plays to Thomas, had we not seen them this week, and that is a big advantage for us.

by furiousd on Jan 9, 2012 3:59 PM EST up reply actions  

Or the Pats could use the strategy they used to BEAT the Broncos

Just sayin’.

Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
Contributing Writer at PatsPulpit

by Comedic.Sans on Jan 10, 2012 12:22 AM EST up reply actions  

Having made game plans against teams like New Orleans, Josh will offer more experience with NFC teams.

Having Chung and Spikes back should help minimize McGhee and running game

I think if Patriots play both pass and run, they should be fine. Emphasizing and placing too many players in the box has burnt other teams before. Minimize the big gain plays. Tebow will make some run and pass plays. The key for Tebow is that his receivers make the catches when they are on target enough.

by prioris on Jan 9, 2012 2:20 PM EST reply actions  

Spikes

I think he could be a major factor in this game if he’s not too terribly rusty. This could be the big chance for him to prove himself and become a “real” Patriot since this should be the type of offense that he thrives against.

by Aluminum Penguin on Jan 9, 2012 6:09 PM EST up reply actions  

Taking the Broncos seriously

may have been Pitt’s biggest mistake. Houston,however, looks like a really good team. If they win it will not be a fluke.

by WRMaurer on Jan 9, 2012 2:38 PM EST reply actions  

Houston looked good agains tthe worst team in the playoffs, at home

by the way all home teams won this week. I do think Houston can be a very physical team, and whoever comes out of that game should be good and banged up.

by furiousd on Jan 9, 2012 4:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Reading Greg Bedard's article

Is it really possible the Pats could land Brandon Lloyd? I suppose that would kill Ochocinco’s confidence, but…sometimes you have to be ruthless.

by tossin on Jan 9, 2012 3:17 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A New England Patriots Blog

Media requests: Please email patspulpit at gmail.com


Managing Editor

Patriot_small Greg Knopping

Assistant Editor

Belichick_2_small Marima

Headshotoj_small Richard Hill

Dscn0127_small Jared Stegall

Contributing Writers

Photo_small Austin Martin

Small Stephen Verman

Bill-belichick_small Ashto12

Peter-heisman_small Alec Shane

Moderators

Kiwi_small Comedic.Sans

A-clockwork-orange-alex_small Jack'sAxe