Super Bowl XLI: Bears vs. Colts, Sun 2/4, 5:30 pm CT

[CubColtPacer]

 

The run defense by the Colts has been a combination of several things.

 

1) Booger Mcfarland has finally gotten comfortable, and now he is drawing constant double teams. That means more free passes for the linebackers.

2) The DE's for the Colts are not running quite as far outside as they did earlier in the season, which is tightening the running lanes

3) Rob Morris has taken over at SSLB-Morris is a good run stopper, even if he's terrible in pass coverage-he replaced Gilbert Gardner, who was the worst player I have ever seen.

4) Sanders-he lets everyone move a little faster, because Sanders can make up for mistakes that others make. He is truly a special player when healthy.

5) When Sanders moves into the lineup at safety, that means that Marlin Jackson can play more corner, and Marlin is the best tackler the Colts have at corner (with Nick Harper also a good tackler, but Jason David struggles against the run because of being tiny).

 

Finally, it's confidence and attitude-the Colts defense was really run down near the end of the season, and that caused them to go a little slower-now they have that swagger back, and it has allowed them to play closer to what the defense did in 2005 with basically the same lineup, instead of the horrible run defense seen in most of 2006.

 

you forgot to mention 3 things:

 

1. the patriots, for some mystifying reason, maybe they wanted to lose or something, ran the ball 5 times in the second half after dominating the line of scrimmage in the first half. why did big fat slobby want brady in the shotgun for the entire half? who knows? all i know is that both dillon and faulk averaged nearly 7 yards per carry in that game and the belichek, looking like he just fell out of bed, doesn't go with the ground game in the second half, unbelievable--this perception of belichek as some sort of genius has made him the ultimate arrogant poo-hole.

 

2. the ravens just kept turning the ball over, and that's a credit to the colts defense, no doubt. but it's not like jamal lewis was held down or anything. both lewis and mike anderson were over 4 yards per carry in the game--they just didn't have a chance to run the ball very much, what with the exalted steve mcnair throwing goal-line interceptions and such.

 

3. the chiefs just didn't have time to get johnson started. most of that can be attributed to the colts ball control offense holding the ball for twice as long as the chiefs.

 

 

I'll just do the Patriots game for now-I can tell you why Belicheck stopped running the ball-it wasn't working! Dillon had the 35 yard run on 4th and 1 (when everyone knows if it breaks through, it can be a big play). Faulk went out of the game with an injury, but before that yes, he had 4 carries for 27 yards, all on draw plays on 2nd and 3rd and long (and the Patriots only picked up 1 first down on any of Faulk's carries, and one other of his draws set up the 4th and 1 that Dillon's long run came from).

 

Other than those runs, the Patriots carried the ball 19 times for 31 yards. They simply could not run the ball effectively on 1st and 2nd down, which made them go to 3rd downs consistently when they tried to run.

 

Also-it's 21-3 Patriots now in the second quarter. Look at their runs after this point (not counting the Brady kneel down):

 

1-10-Maroney for -3

2-5-Maroney for -1

2-10 Faulk for 8 (his last run before his injury, he was really the only back the Colts had trouble with all postseason)

1-10-Maroney for -1

1-6-Dillon for -1

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-10-Evans for 4

 

Your team's only running success has been running draws in passing situations with your 3rd down back, who is now hurt, and a 4th and 1 play where the other teams defense gambled that it would be a QB sneak and lost. Your other 2 runningbacks last 5 runs have all resulted in negative yardage, not even a single one got back to the line of scrimmage, and you have Tom Brady. Are you going to keep running the ball?

[CubsLadyinSTL]

You guys do realize that talking stats has nothing to do with the outcome of the game right???? No matter how little or how much you know. Ever hear the phrase "Any given Sunday??"

 

We could play a game of "who knows the most" though. That could be fun.

 

SORRY, I am just frustrated with all the hype. I WANT THE GAME ALREADY.

[CP_414]

 

The run defense by the Colts has been a combination of several things.

 

1) Booger Mcfarland has finally gotten comfortable, and now he is drawing constant double teams. That means more free passes for the linebackers.

2) The DE's for the Colts are not running quite as far outside as they did earlier in the season, which is tightening the running lanes

3) Rob Morris has taken over at SSLB-Morris is a good run stopper, even if he's terrible in pass coverage-he replaced Gilbert Gardner, who was the worst player I have ever seen.

4) Sanders-he lets everyone move a little faster, because Sanders can make up for mistakes that others make. He is truly a special player when healthy.

5) When Sanders moves into the lineup at safety, that means that Marlin Jackson can play more corner, and Marlin is the best tackler the Colts have at corner (with Nick Harper also a good tackler, but Jason David struggles against the run because of being tiny).

 

Finally, it's confidence and attitude-the Colts defense was really run down near the end of the season, and that caused them to go a little slower-now they have that swagger back, and it has allowed them to play closer to what the defense did in 2005 with basically the same lineup, instead of the horrible run defense seen in most of 2006.

 

you forgot to mention 3 things:

 

1. the patriots, for some mystifying reason, maybe they wanted to lose or something, ran the ball 5 times in the second half after dominating the line of scrimmage in the first half. why did big fat slobby want brady in the shotgun for the entire half? who knows? all i know is that both dillon and faulk averaged nearly 7 yards per carry in that game and the belichek, looking like he just fell out of bed, doesn't go with the ground game in the second half, unbelievable--this perception of belichek as some sort of genius has made him the ultimate arrogant poo-hole.

 

2. the ravens just kept turning the ball over, and that's a credit to the colts defense, no doubt. but it's not like jamal lewis was held down or anything. both lewis and mike anderson were over 4 yards per carry in the game--they just didn't have a chance to run the ball very much, what with the exalted steve mcnair throwing goal-line interceptions and such.

 

3. the chiefs just didn't have time to get johnson started. most of that can be attributed to the colts ball control offense holding the ball for twice as long as the chiefs.

 

 

I'll just do the Patriots game for now-I can tell you why Belicheck stopped running the ball-it wasn't working! Dillon had the 35 yard run on 4th and 1 (when everyone knows if it breaks through, it can be a big play). Faulk went out of the game with an injury, but before that yes, he had 4 carries for 27 yards, all on draw plays on 2nd and 3rd and long (and the Patriots only picked up 1 first down on any of Faulk's carries, and one other of his draws set up the 4th and 1 that Dillon's long run came from).

 

Other than those runs, the Patriots carried the ball 19 times for 31 yards. They simply could not run the ball effectively on 1st and 2nd down, which made them go to 3rd downs consistently when they tried to run.

 

Also-it's 21-3 Patriots now in the second quarter. Look at their runs after this point (not counting the Brady kneel down):

 

1-10-Maroney for -3

2-5-Maroney for -1

2-10 Faulk for 8 (his last run before his injury, he was really the only back the Colts had trouble with all postseason)

1-10-Maroney for -1

1-6-Dillon for -1

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-10-Evans for 4

 

Your team's only running success has been running draws in passing situations with your 3rd down back, who is now hurt, and a 4th and 1 play where the other teams defense gambled that it would be a QB sneak and lost. Your other 2 runningbacks last 5 runs have all resulted in negative yardage, not even a single one got back to the line of scrimmage, and you have Tom Brady. Are you going to keep running the ball?

 

This sounds exactly like what we heard about the Saints run defense. They give up 1 or 2 big plays, but other than that they shut teams down. They had the most stops on running plays for 1 yard or less in the league, or something like that.

 

If I were the Patriots, yes I would have kept running. o start a half up 21-6, and only run the ball 5 times in that half is poor coaching, especially with #18 on the other side of the ball. Maybe they had 7 carries for 4 yards, but they also had quite a bit of success running before those 7 carries. If Brady had gone 1 of 7 for 4 yards on seven consecutive passes at some point in the game, do you stop passing? I don't think so.

[CubColtPacer]

Ok, I guess I'll do the Baltimore game as well. Baltimore really ran the ball well on 1 drive-but that's really it for them. First, let's get rid of 2 of Anderson's carries for 12 of his yards-this is when Baltimore was running out the clock at the end of the first half with the crowd booing, and the yards were meaningless. That gives Anderson 2 carries for 6 yards on the day.

 

Baltimore tried to come out and establish the run early. Lewis ran twice for 3 yards, and then McNair completed a pass short of the 1st down. It would be the 1st of 7 passes that were complete but short of the first down on 3rd down on the day (which I think is an amazing statistic, and possibly some sort of record).

 

2nd possession-only 2 plays, ending with the Heap fumble.

 

3rd possession-a pass for a first down, 2 Lewis runs only results in 5 yards, and on 3rd and 5 forced to pass they complete a pass short of the marker.

 

4th possession-the only Lewis carry on this short drive is a 4 yard pickup on 2nd and 10, which resulted in a 3rd down that Baltimore did not pick up.

 

5th possession-this is the only drive Baltimore did well running the ball. runs of 9, then 3, then 18, then 3 more. After a pass, Baltimore had 1st and goal on the 7, which Lewis took it down to the 3 on 1st down. On second down though, he got thrown back for a loss of 1-3rd and goal from the 4, Ravens forced to pass, INT

 

6th possession-Ravens try to run a 2 minute offense, go 3 and out

 

After Halftime now

 

8th possession (7th one was described above)-Ravens move the ball through the air, get a penalty which sets up 2nd and 19, which means they couldn't run the ball in that situation, and they punt.

 

9th possession-they mix the run in well on this drive, getting 3 runs for 14 yards, but move down the field using the pass. When they get to the Colts 31 yard line though, they get called for a false start. On 1st and 15, Lewis gets stopped for no gain. On 2nd and 15, they get a holding penalty. 2nd and 25 does not allow any more time for any runs.

 

10th possession-their only run is a Lewis run on 1st and 10, and he only picks up 1 yard-which causes them to get in a passing situation, and an INT results.

 

11th possession-Lewis gets 2 on 1st down, they are forced to pass after that (it's getting quite late in the ballgame at this point and they are down), and 2 incompletes result.

 

Baltimore didn't abandon the run that was working all day-the run worked on 1 drive, and was ok on another. The rest of the time, the run just continually set up 3rd and longs that turned into turnovers or punts. Also, penalties kept the running game from getting all the touches they may have wanted it to.

[CubColtPacer]

 

The run defense by the Colts has been a combination of several things.

 

1) Booger Mcfarland has finally gotten comfortable, and now he is drawing constant double teams. That means more free passes for the linebackers.

2) The DE's for the Colts are not running quite as far outside as they did earlier in the season, which is tightening the running lanes

3) Rob Morris has taken over at SSLB-Morris is a good run stopper, even if he's terrible in pass coverage-he replaced Gilbert Gardner, who was the worst player I have ever seen.

4) Sanders-he lets everyone move a little faster, because Sanders can make up for mistakes that others make. He is truly a special player when healthy.

5) When Sanders moves into the lineup at safety, that means that Marlin Jackson can play more corner, and Marlin is the best tackler the Colts have at corner (with Nick Harper also a good tackler, but Jason David struggles against the run because of being tiny).

 

Finally, it's confidence and attitude-the Colts defense was really run down near the end of the season, and that caused them to go a little slower-now they have that swagger back, and it has allowed them to play closer to what the defense did in 2005 with basically the same lineup, instead of the horrible run defense seen in most of 2006.

 

you forgot to mention 3 things:

 

1. the patriots, for some mystifying reason, maybe they wanted to lose or something, ran the ball 5 times in the second half after dominating the line of scrimmage in the first half. why did big fat slobby want brady in the shotgun for the entire half? who knows? all i know is that both dillon and faulk averaged nearly 7 yards per carry in that game and the belichek, looking like he just fell out of bed, doesn't go with the ground game in the second half, unbelievable--this perception of belichek as some sort of genius has made him the ultimate arrogant poo-hole.

 

2. the ravens just kept turning the ball over, and that's a credit to the colts defense, no doubt. but it's not like jamal lewis was held down or anything. both lewis and mike anderson were over 4 yards per carry in the game--they just didn't have a chance to run the ball very much, what with the exalted steve mcnair throwing goal-line interceptions and such.

 

3. the chiefs just didn't have time to get johnson started. most of that can be attributed to the colts ball control offense holding the ball for twice as long as the chiefs.

 

 

I'll just do the Patriots game for now-I can tell you why Belicheck stopped running the ball-it wasn't working! Dillon had the 35 yard run on 4th and 1 (when everyone knows if it breaks through, it can be a big play). Faulk went out of the game with an injury, but before that yes, he had 4 carries for 27 yards, all on draw plays on 2nd and 3rd and long (and the Patriots only picked up 1 first down on any of Faulk's carries, and one other of his draws set up the 4th and 1 that Dillon's long run came from).

 

Other than those runs, the Patriots carried the ball 19 times for 31 yards. They simply could not run the ball effectively on 1st and 2nd down, which made them go to 3rd downs consistently when they tried to run.

 

Also-it's 21-3 Patriots now in the second quarter. Look at their runs after this point (not counting the Brady kneel down):

 

1-10-Maroney for -3

2-5-Maroney for -1

2-10 Faulk for 8 (his last run before his injury, he was really the only back the Colts had trouble with all postseason)

1-10-Maroney for -1

1-6-Dillon for -1

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-10-Evans for 4

 

Your team's only running success has been running draws in passing situations with your 3rd down back, who is now hurt, and a 4th and 1 play where the other teams defense gambled that it would be a QB sneak and lost. Your other 2 runningbacks last 5 runs have all resulted in negative yardage, not even a single one got back to the line of scrimmage, and you have Tom Brady. Are you going to keep running the ball?

 

This sounds exactly like what we heard about the Saints run defense. They give up 1 or 2 big plays, but other than that they shut teams down. They had the most stops on running plays for 1 yard or less in the league, or something like that.

 

If I were the Patriots, yes I would have kept running. o start a half up 21-6, and only run the ball 5 times in that half is poor coaching, especially with #18 on the other side of the ball. Maybe they had 7 carries for 4 yards, but they also had quite a bit of success running before those 7 carries. If Brady had gone 1 of 7 for 4 yards on seven consecutive passes at some point in the game, do you stop passing? I don't think so.

 

The problem was, they simply didn't. Dillon and Maroney struggled most of the game running on 1st and 2nd down. Faulk was out of the game, so the Patriots couldn't use him-he was the only runningback having any kind of consistent success whatsoever. Besides, they couldn't run the ball much more in the 2nd half. Every time they ran the ball, it put them into a passing situation that wouldn't allow them to get another carry (2nd or 3rd and long). When the Patriots passed, they had more success.

[CP_414]

 

The run defense by the Colts has been a combination of several things.

 

1) Booger Mcfarland has finally gotten comfortable, and now he is drawing constant double teams. That means more free passes for the linebackers.

2) The DE's for the Colts are not running quite as far outside as they did earlier in the season, which is tightening the running lanes

3) Rob Morris has taken over at SSLB-Morris is a good run stopper, even if he's terrible in pass coverage-he replaced Gilbert Gardner, who was the worst player I have ever seen.

4) Sanders-he lets everyone move a little faster, because Sanders can make up for mistakes that others make. He is truly a special player when healthy.

5) When Sanders moves into the lineup at safety, that means that Marlin Jackson can play more corner, and Marlin is the best tackler the Colts have at corner (with Nick Harper also a good tackler, but Jason David struggles against the run because of being tiny).

 

Finally, it's confidence and attitude-the Colts defense was really run down near the end of the season, and that caused them to go a little slower-now they have that swagger back, and it has allowed them to play closer to what the defense did in 2005 with basically the same lineup, instead of the horrible run defense seen in most of 2006.

 

you forgot to mention 3 things:

 

1. the patriots, for some mystifying reason, maybe they wanted to lose or something, ran the ball 5 times in the second half after dominating the line of scrimmage in the first half. why did big fat slobby want brady in the shotgun for the entire half? who knows? all i know is that both dillon and faulk averaged nearly 7 yards per carry in that game and the belichek, looking like he just fell out of bed, doesn't go with the ground game in the second half, unbelievable--this perception of belichek as some sort of genius has made him the ultimate arrogant poo-hole.

 

2. the ravens just kept turning the ball over, and that's a credit to the colts defense, no doubt. but it's not like jamal lewis was held down or anything. both lewis and mike anderson were over 4 yards per carry in the game--they just didn't have a chance to run the ball very much, what with the exalted steve mcnair throwing goal-line interceptions and such.

 

3. the chiefs just didn't have time to get johnson started. most of that can be attributed to the colts ball control offense holding the ball for twice as long as the chiefs.

 

 

I'll just do the Patriots game for now-I can tell you why Belicheck stopped running the ball-it wasn't working! Dillon had the 35 yard run on 4th and 1 (when everyone knows if it breaks through, it can be a big play). Faulk went out of the game with an injury, but before that yes, he had 4 carries for 27 yards, all on draw plays on 2nd and 3rd and long (and the Patriots only picked up 1 first down on any of Faulk's carries, and one other of his draws set up the 4th and 1 that Dillon's long run came from).

 

Other than those runs, the Patriots carried the ball 19 times for 31 yards. They simply could not run the ball effectively on 1st and 2nd down, which made them go to 3rd downs consistently when they tried to run.

 

Also-it's 21-3 Patriots now in the second quarter. Look at their runs after this point (not counting the Brady kneel down):

 

1-10-Maroney for -3

2-5-Maroney for -1

2-10 Faulk for 8 (his last run before his injury, he was really the only back the Colts had trouble with all postseason)

1-10-Maroney for -1

1-6-Dillon for -1

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-10-Evans for 4

 

Your team's only running success has been running draws in passing situations with your 3rd down back, who is now hurt, and a 4th and 1 play where the other teams defense gambled that it would be a QB sneak and lost. Your other 2 runningbacks last 5 runs have all resulted in negative yardage, not even a single one got back to the line of scrimmage, and you have Tom Brady. Are you going to keep running the ball?

 

This sounds exactly like what we heard about the Saints run defense. They give up 1 or 2 big plays, but other than that they shut teams down. They had the most stops on running plays for 1 yard or less in the league, or something like that.

 

If I were the Patriots, yes I would have kept running. o start a half up 21-6, and only run the ball 5 times in that half is poor coaching, especially with #18 on the other side of the ball. Maybe they had 7 carries for 4 yards, but they also had quite a bit of success running before those 7 carries. If Brady had gone 1 of 7 for 4 yards on seven consecutive passes at some point in the game, do you stop passing? I don't think so.

 

The problem was, they simply didn't. Dillon and Maroney struggled most of the game running on 1st and 2nd down. Faulk was out of the game, so the Patriots couldn't use him-he was the only runningback having any kind of consistent success whatsoever. Besides, they couldn't run the ball much more in the 2nd half. Every time they ran the ball, it put them into a passing situation that wouldn't allow them to get another carry (2nd or 3rd and long). When the Patriots passed, they had more success.

 

The Colts scored 32 points in the second half, if the Patriots had done a better job of controlling the clock, there is no way the Colts would have been able to score 32 in a half. Dillon had 48 yards on 7 carries. Yes, 35 of them came on 1 play, but if he has 12 more carries, he may bust a few more for 35 as well. The Pats had more success in the first half when they balanced runs and passes than they did in the second half where they passed nearly every play. They scored 14 offensive points in the first half and won the time of possession, while they scored 13 offensive points in the second half and lost the time of possession. If they worked the clock better, and ran more they would have been able to protect their lead better. I also don't get how you can say they couldn't run the ball any more often in the second half. They had multiple drives in the second half where they did not call one rushing play.

[CubColtPacer]

 

The run defense by the Colts has been a combination of several things.

 

1) Booger Mcfarland has finally gotten comfortable, and now he is drawing constant double teams. That means more free passes for the linebackers.

2) The DE's for the Colts are not running quite as far outside as they did earlier in the season, which is tightening the running lanes

3) Rob Morris has taken over at SSLB-Morris is a good run stopper, even if he's terrible in pass coverage-he replaced Gilbert Gardner, who was the worst player I have ever seen.

4) Sanders-he lets everyone move a little faster, because Sanders can make up for mistakes that others make. He is truly a special player when healthy.

5) When Sanders moves into the lineup at safety, that means that Marlin Jackson can play more corner, and Marlin is the best tackler the Colts have at corner (with Nick Harper also a good tackler, but Jason David struggles against the run because of being tiny).

 

Finally, it's confidence and attitude-the Colts defense was really run down near the end of the season, and that caused them to go a little slower-now they have that swagger back, and it has allowed them to play closer to what the defense did in 2005 with basically the same lineup, instead of the horrible run defense seen in most of 2006.

 

you forgot to mention 3 things:

 

1. the patriots, for some mystifying reason, maybe they wanted to lose or something, ran the ball 5 times in the second half after dominating the line of scrimmage in the first half. why did big fat slobby want brady in the shotgun for the entire half? who knows? all i know is that both dillon and faulk averaged nearly 7 yards per carry in that game and the belichek, looking like he just fell out of bed, doesn't go with the ground game in the second half, unbelievable--this perception of belichek as some sort of genius has made him the ultimate arrogant poo-hole.

 

2. the ravens just kept turning the ball over, and that's a credit to the colts defense, no doubt. but it's not like jamal lewis was held down or anything. both lewis and mike anderson were over 4 yards per carry in the game--they just didn't have a chance to run the ball very much, what with the exalted steve mcnair throwing goal-line interceptions and such.

 

3. the chiefs just didn't have time to get johnson started. most of that can be attributed to the colts ball control offense holding the ball for twice as long as the chiefs.

 

 

I'll just do the Patriots game for now-I can tell you why Belicheck stopped running the ball-it wasn't working! Dillon had the 35 yard run on 4th and 1 (when everyone knows if it breaks through, it can be a big play). Faulk went out of the game with an injury, but before that yes, he had 4 carries for 27 yards, all on draw plays on 2nd and 3rd and long (and the Patriots only picked up 1 first down on any of Faulk's carries, and one other of his draws set up the 4th and 1 that Dillon's long run came from).

 

Other than those runs, the Patriots carried the ball 19 times for 31 yards. They simply could not run the ball effectively on 1st and 2nd down, which made them go to 3rd downs consistently when they tried to run.

 

Also-it's 21-3 Patriots now in the second quarter. Look at their runs after this point (not counting the Brady kneel down):

 

1-10-Maroney for -3

2-5-Maroney for -1

2-10 Faulk for 8 (his last run before his injury, he was really the only back the Colts had trouble with all postseason)

1-10-Maroney for -1

1-6-Dillon for -1

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-10-Evans for 4

 

Your team's only running success has been running draws in passing situations with your 3rd down back, who is now hurt, and a 4th and 1 play where the other teams defense gambled that it would be a QB sneak and lost. Your other 2 runningbacks last 5 runs have all resulted in negative yardage, not even a single one got back to the line of scrimmage, and you have Tom Brady. Are you going to keep running the ball?

 

This sounds exactly like what we heard about the Saints run defense. They give up 1 or 2 big plays, but other than that they shut teams down. They had the most stops on running plays for 1 yard or less in the league, or something like that.

 

If I were the Patriots, yes I would have kept running. o start a half up 21-6, and only run the ball 5 times in that half is poor coaching, especially with #18 on the other side of the ball. Maybe they had 7 carries for 4 yards, but they also had quite a bit of success running before those 7 carries. If Brady had gone 1 of 7 for 4 yards on seven consecutive passes at some point in the game, do you stop passing? I don't think so.

 

The problem was, they simply didn't. Dillon and Maroney struggled most of the game running on 1st and 2nd down. Faulk was out of the game, so the Patriots couldn't use him-he was the only runningback having any kind of consistent success whatsoever. Besides, they couldn't run the ball much more in the 2nd half. Every time they ran the ball, it put them into a passing situation that wouldn't allow them to get another carry (2nd or 3rd and long). When the Patriots passed, they had more success.

 

The Colts scored 32 points in the second half, if the Patriots had done a better job of controlling the clock, there is no way the Colts would have been able to score 32 in a half. Dillon had 48 yards on 7 carries. Yes, 35 of them came on 1 play, but if he has 12 more carries, he may bust a few more for 35 as well. The Pats had more success in the first half when they balanced runs and passes than they did in the second half where they passed nearly every play. They scored 14 offensive points in the first half and won the time of possession, while they scored 13 offensive points in the second half and lost the time of possession. If they worked the clock better, and ran more they would have been able to protect their lead better. I also don't get how you can say they couldn't run the ball any more often in the second half. They had multiple drives in the second half where they did not call one rushing play.

 

Maybe Dillon breaks another 35 yarder, but that is not nearly as likely since the conditions of the 4th and 1 play were not likely to happen again (the Colts sent everybody up the middle on that play, while normally they would be pursuing to the outside on even a down like 3rd and 1).

 

Here are the Patriots 2nd half possessions-yes, they could have ran the ball more, but I don't think that much more:

 

1st possession

1-10-Inc Pass

2-10-Faulk for 8

3-10-Pass complete, no gain

More runs? 1 probably-if they ran on 1st down, they wouldn't have run on 2nd down, but they could have ran it on 3rd and 2.

 

2nd possession-

1-10-Maroney for -1

2-11-Pass for 17 yards

1-goal from 5-Dillon for -1

2-goal from 6-pass inc

3-goal from 6-pass, TD

extra runs-0, I don't see anywhere where they should have ran and didn't.

 

3rd possession-

1-10-Pass for 4

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-8-Pass for 6, punt

extra runs-0, the pass on 1st down was as good as a run, they tried running the ball on 2nd down, and that forced them into a 3rd and long

 

4th possession-

1-10-pass for 16

1-10-pass for 14

1-10-penalty for 5

1-15 (from the Colts 18)-pass inc

2-15-pass for 8

3-7-pass inc

extra runs-0-I'm not sure where the Patriots were supposed to run here. The first two passes worked great, and 1-15 from the 18 yard line is not a great place to run, as it's even hard to run a draw from there being so close to the goal line.

 

5th possession-

1-10-pass for 25

1-10-pass inc

2-10-pass inc

3-10-run for 4

extra runs-1, they could have easily run on 1st or 2nd down-although if they had run on one of those downs, they probably wouldn't have run on 3rd down (because the 3rd down run was just to set up the field goal)-so it's 1, but a shaky 1.

 

6th possession-

1-15 (12 men in the huddle penalty)-pass for 7

2-8-pass for 4

3-4-pass inc

runs-1 maybe? The Colts were gearing up to stop the run, as they needed to get the ball back without giving up a single first down-the Patriots were going for the knockout punch, as they usually do-that penalty at the start ruined any chance they had at running for the first down really.

 

last drive they were forced to pass, as I'm sure you agree.

 

Well, there you have it. I think the Patriots could have ran the ball 3 more times in the half, but I don't think that would have made much of a difference.

[Jon]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-01/27629463.jpg

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-01/27629579.jpg

[CP_414]

 

The run defense by the Colts has been a combination of several things.

 

1) Booger Mcfarland has finally gotten comfortable, and now he is drawing constant double teams. That means more free passes for the linebackers.

2) The DE's for the Colts are not running quite as far outside as they did earlier in the season, which is tightening the running lanes

3) Rob Morris has taken over at SSLB-Morris is a good run stopper, even if he's terrible in pass coverage-he replaced Gilbert Gardner, who was the worst player I have ever seen.

4) Sanders-he lets everyone move a little faster, because Sanders can make up for mistakes that others make. He is truly a special player when healthy.

5) When Sanders moves into the lineup at safety, that means that Marlin Jackson can play more corner, and Marlin is the best tackler the Colts have at corner (with Nick Harper also a good tackler, but Jason David struggles against the run because of being tiny).

 

Finally, it's confidence and attitude-the Colts defense was really run down near the end of the season, and that caused them to go a little slower-now they have that swagger back, and it has allowed them to play closer to what the defense did in 2005 with basically the same lineup, instead of the horrible run defense seen in most of 2006.

 

you forgot to mention 3 things:

 

1. the patriots, for some mystifying reason, maybe they wanted to lose or something, ran the ball 5 times in the second half after dominating the line of scrimmage in the first half. why did big fat slobby want brady in the shotgun for the entire half? who knows? all i know is that both dillon and faulk averaged nearly 7 yards per carry in that game and the belichek, looking like he just fell out of bed, doesn't go with the ground game in the second half, unbelievable--this perception of belichek as some sort of genius has made him the ultimate arrogant poo-hole.

 

2. the ravens just kept turning the ball over, and that's a credit to the colts defense, no doubt. but it's not like jamal lewis was held down or anything. both lewis and mike anderson were over 4 yards per carry in the game--they just didn't have a chance to run the ball very much, what with the exalted steve mcnair throwing goal-line interceptions and such.

 

3. the chiefs just didn't have time to get johnson started. most of that can be attributed to the colts ball control offense holding the ball for twice as long as the chiefs.

 

 

I'll just do the Patriots game for now-I can tell you why Belicheck stopped running the ball-it wasn't working! Dillon had the 35 yard run on 4th and 1 (when everyone knows if it breaks through, it can be a big play). Faulk went out of the game with an injury, but before that yes, he had 4 carries for 27 yards, all on draw plays on 2nd and 3rd and long (and the Patriots only picked up 1 first down on any of Faulk's carries, and one other of his draws set up the 4th and 1 that Dillon's long run came from).

 

Other than those runs, the Patriots carried the ball 19 times for 31 yards. They simply could not run the ball effectively on 1st and 2nd down, which made them go to 3rd downs consistently when they tried to run.

 

Also-it's 21-3 Patriots now in the second quarter. Look at their runs after this point (not counting the Brady kneel down):

 

1-10-Maroney for -3

2-5-Maroney for -1

2-10 Faulk for 8 (his last run before his injury, he was really the only back the Colts had trouble with all postseason)

1-10-Maroney for -1

1-6-Dillon for -1

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-10-Evans for 4

 

Your team's only running success has been running draws in passing situations with your 3rd down back, who is now hurt, and a 4th and 1 play where the other teams defense gambled that it would be a QB sneak and lost. Your other 2 runningbacks last 5 runs have all resulted in negative yardage, not even a single one got back to the line of scrimmage, and you have Tom Brady. Are you going to keep running the ball?

 

This sounds exactly like what we heard about the Saints run defense. They give up 1 or 2 big plays, but other than that they shut teams down. They had the most stops on running plays for 1 yard or less in the league, or something like that.

 

If I were the Patriots, yes I would have kept running. o start a half up 21-6, and only run the ball 5 times in that half is poor coaching, especially with #18 on the other side of the ball. Maybe they had 7 carries for 4 yards, but they also had quite a bit of success running before those 7 carries. If Brady had gone 1 of 7 for 4 yards on seven consecutive passes at some point in the game, do you stop passing? I don't think so.

 

The problem was, they simply didn't. Dillon and Maroney struggled most of the game running on 1st and 2nd down. Faulk was out of the game, so the Patriots couldn't use him-he was the only runningback having any kind of consistent success whatsoever. Besides, they couldn't run the ball much more in the 2nd half. Every time they ran the ball, it put them into a passing situation that wouldn't allow them to get another carry (2nd or 3rd and long). When the Patriots passed, they had more success.

 

The Colts scored 32 points in the second half, if the Patriots had done a better job of controlling the clock, there is no way the Colts would have been able to score 32 in a half. Dillon had 48 yards on 7 carries. Yes, 35 of them came on 1 play, but if he has 12 more carries, he may bust a few more for 35 as well. The Pats had more success in the first half when they balanced runs and passes than they did in the second half where they passed nearly every play. They scored 14 offensive points in the first half and won the time of possession, while they scored 13 offensive points in the second half and lost the time of possession. If they worked the clock better, and ran more they would have been able to protect their lead better. I also don't get how you can say they couldn't run the ball any more often in the second half. They had multiple drives in the second half where they did not call one rushing play.

 

Maybe Dillon breaks another 35 yarder, but that is not nearly as likely since the conditions of the 4th and 1 play were not likely to happen again (the Colts sent everybody up the middle on that play, while normally they would be pursuing to the outside on even a down like 3rd and 1).

 

Here are the Patriots 2nd half possessions-yes, they could have ran the ball more, but I don't think that much more:

 

1st possession

1-10-Inc Pass

2-10-Faulk for 8

3-10-Pass complete, no gain

More runs? 1 probably-if they ran on 1st down, they wouldn't have run on 2nd down, but they could have ran it on 3rd and 2.

 

2nd possession-

1-10-Maroney for -1

2-11-Pass for 17 yards

1-goal from 5-Dillon for -1

2-goal from 6-pass inc

3-goal from 6-pass, TD

extra runs-0, I don't see anywhere where they should have ran and didn't.

 

3rd possession-

1-10-Pass for 4

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-8-Pass for 6, punt

extra runs-0, the pass on 1st down was as good as a run, they tried running the ball on 2nd down, and that forced them into a 3rd and long

 

4th possession-

1-10-pass for 16

1-10-pass for 14

1-10-penalty for 5

1-15 (from the Colts 18)-pass inc

2-15-pass for 8

3-7-pass inc

extra runs-0-I'm not sure where the Patriots were supposed to run here. The first two passes worked great, and 1-15 from the 18 yard line is not a great place to run, as it's even hard to run a draw from there being so close to the goal line.

 

5th possession-

1-10-pass for 25

1-10-pass inc

2-10-pass inc

3-10-run for 4

extra runs-1, they could have easily run on 1st or 2nd down-although if they had run on one of those downs, they probably wouldn't have run on 3rd down (because the 3rd down run was just to set up the field goal)-so it's 1, but a shaky 1.

 

6th possession-

1-15 (12 men in the huddle penalty)-pass for 7

2-8-pass for 4

3-4-pass inc

runs-1 maybe? The Colts were gearing up to stop the run, as they needed to get the ball back without giving up a single first down-the Patriots were going for the knockout punch, as they usually do-that penalty at the start ruined any chance they had at running for the first down really.

 

last drive they were forced to pass, as I'm sure you agree.

 

Well, there you have it. I think the Patriots could have ran the ball 3 more times in the half, but I don't think that would have made much of a difference.

 

You are assuming none of those extra runs could lead to more first downs and longer drives. That is not an assumption I would agree with.

[CP_414]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-01/27629463.jpg

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-01/27629579.jpg

 

Excellent Pics.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

I see a few more times - especially with the lead in the second half - where I AND Turner would have run more.

 

I was still on a high from the Bears winning and wasn't paying much attention to this game till the last few drives, but the Patriots need to be running much more in the second half with a lead - especially because it keeps Peyton Manning off the field.

[Soul]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-01/27629463.jpg

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-01/27629579.jpg

 

Love the Brookfield Zoo photo. 8-)

[CubColtPacer]

I see a few more times - especially with the lead in the second half - where I AND Turner would have run more.

 

I was still on a high from the Bears winning and wasn't paying much attention to this game till the last few drives, but the Patriots need to be running much more in the second half with a lead - especially because it keeps Peyton Manning off the field.

 

True-but it wasn't long into the second half before the Patriots weren't trying to keep Manning off the field anymore, but were trying desperately to score points to somehow stay ahead of a Colts offense that was absolutely rolling.

 

I think the Bears running game will do the best any team has done in the playoffs against the Colts-a big key to their effectiveness could be though if Grossman can step up early and make some huge throws to loosen the defense up. I can see the Colts trying to play this game like the Chiefs game in the 1st quarter, and it will be interesting to see if the Bears can respond quickly to that or not.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-01/27629463.jpg

 

Bad ass.

[Chris]

No, I think those are bears.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

I see a few more times - especially with the lead in the second half - where I AND Turner would have run more.

 

I was still on a high from the Bears winning and wasn't paying much attention to this game till the last few drives, but the Patriots need to be running much more in the second half with a lead - especially because it keeps Peyton Manning off the field.

 

True-but it wasn't long into the second half before the Patriots weren't trying to keep Manning off the field anymore, but were trying desperately to score points to somehow stay ahead of a Colts offense that was absolutely rolling.

 

I think the Bears running game will do the best any team has done in the playoffs against the Colts-a big key to their effectiveness could be though if Grossman can step up early and make some huge throws to loosen the defense up. I can see the Colts trying to play this game like the Chiefs game in the 1st quarter, and it will be interesting to see if the Bears can respond quickly to that or not.

 

True enough, but even when the Colts closed the gap, the Patriots should be involving the run game in the offense. This is the same thing the Saints did (whether it was because McAllister was hurt or whatever), just passing is going to get you in trouble (especially when you have the Colts' pass rush).

[dew1679666265]

 

The run defense by the Colts has been a combination of several things.

 

1) Booger Mcfarland has finally gotten comfortable, and now he is drawing constant double teams. That means more free passes for the linebackers.

2) The DE's for the Colts are not running quite as far outside as they did earlier in the season, which is tightening the running lanes

3) Rob Morris has taken over at SSLB-Morris is a good run stopper, even if he's terrible in pass coverage-he replaced Gilbert Gardner, who was the worst player I have ever seen.

4) Sanders-he lets everyone move a little faster, because Sanders can make up for mistakes that others make. He is truly a special player when healthy.

5) When Sanders moves into the lineup at safety, that means that Marlin Jackson can play more corner, and Marlin is the best tackler the Colts have at corner (with Nick Harper also a good tackler, but Jason David struggles against the run because of being tiny).

 

Finally, it's confidence and attitude-the Colts defense was really run down near the end of the season, and that caused them to go a little slower-now they have that swagger back, and it has allowed them to play closer to what the defense did in 2005 with basically the same lineup, instead of the horrible run defense seen in most of 2006.

 

you forgot to mention 3 things:

 

1. the patriots, for some mystifying reason, maybe they wanted to lose or something, ran the ball 5 times in the second half after dominating the line of scrimmage in the first half. why did big fat slobby want brady in the shotgun for the entire half? who knows? all i know is that both dillon and faulk averaged nearly 7 yards per carry in that game and the belichek, looking like he just fell out of bed, doesn't go with the ground game in the second half, unbelievable--this perception of belichek as some sort of genius has made him the ultimate arrogant poo-hole.

 

2. the ravens just kept turning the ball over, and that's a credit to the colts defense, no doubt. but it's not like jamal lewis was held down or anything. both lewis and mike anderson were over 4 yards per carry in the game--they just didn't have a chance to run the ball very much, what with the exalted steve mcnair throwing goal-line interceptions and such.

 

3. the chiefs just didn't have time to get johnson started. most of that can be attributed to the colts ball control offense holding the ball for twice as long as the chiefs.

 

 

I'll just do the Patriots game for now-I can tell you why Belicheck stopped running the ball-it wasn't working! Dillon had the 35 yard run on 4th and 1 (when everyone knows if it breaks through, it can be a big play). Faulk went out of the game with an injury, but before that yes, he had 4 carries for 27 yards, all on draw plays on 2nd and 3rd and long (and the Patriots only picked up 1 first down on any of Faulk's carries, and one other of his draws set up the 4th and 1 that Dillon's long run came from).

 

Other than those runs, the Patriots carried the ball 19 times for 31 yards. They simply could not run the ball effectively on 1st and 2nd down, which made them go to 3rd downs consistently when they tried to run.

 

Also-it's 21-3 Patriots now in the second quarter. Look at their runs after this point (not counting the Brady kneel down):

 

1-10-Maroney for -3

2-5-Maroney for -1

2-10 Faulk for 8 (his last run before his injury, he was really the only back the Colts had trouble with all postseason)

1-10-Maroney for -1

1-6-Dillon for -1

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-10-Evans for 4

 

Your team's only running success has been running draws in passing situations with your 3rd down back, who is now hurt, and a 4th and 1 play where the other teams defense gambled that it would be a QB sneak and lost. Your other 2 runningbacks last 5 runs have all resulted in negative yardage, not even a single one got back to the line of scrimmage, and you have Tom Brady. Are you going to keep running the ball?

 

This sounds exactly like what we heard about the Saints run defense. They give up 1 or 2 big plays, but other than that they shut teams down. They had the most stops on running plays for 1 yard or less in the league, or something like that.

 

If I were the Patriots, yes I would have kept running. o start a half up 21-6, and only run the ball 5 times in that half is poor coaching, especially with #18 on the other side of the ball. Maybe they had 7 carries for 4 yards, but they also had quite a bit of success running before those 7 carries. If Brady had gone 1 of 7 for 4 yards on seven consecutive passes at some point in the game, do you stop passing? I don't think so.

 

The problem was, they simply didn't. Dillon and Maroney struggled most of the game running on 1st and 2nd down. Faulk was out of the game, so the Patriots couldn't use him-he was the only runningback having any kind of consistent success whatsoever. Besides, they couldn't run the ball much more in the 2nd half. Every time they ran the ball, it put them into a passing situation that wouldn't allow them to get another carry (2nd or 3rd and long). When the Patriots passed, they had more success.

 

The Colts scored 32 points in the second half, if the Patriots had done a better job of controlling the clock, there is no way the Colts would have been able to score 32 in a half. Dillon had 48 yards on 7 carries. Yes, 35 of them came on 1 play, but if he has 12 more carries, he may bust a few more for 35 as well. The Pats had more success in the first half when they balanced runs and passes than they did in the second half where they passed nearly every play. They scored 14 offensive points in the first half and won the time of possession, while they scored 13 offensive points in the second half and lost the time of possession. If they worked the clock better, and ran more they would have been able to protect their lead better. I also don't get how you can say they couldn't run the ball any more often in the second half. They had multiple drives in the second half where they did not call one rushing play.

 

Maybe Dillon breaks another 35 yarder, but that is not nearly as likely since the conditions of the 4th and 1 play were not likely to happen again (the Colts sent everybody up the middle on that play, while normally they would be pursuing to the outside on even a down like 3rd and 1).

 

Here are the Patriots 2nd half possessions-yes, they could have ran the ball more, but I don't think that much more:

 

1st possession

1-10-Inc Pass

2-10-Faulk for 8

3-10-Pass complete, no gain

More runs? 1 probably-if they ran on 1st down, they wouldn't have run on 2nd down, but they could have ran it on 3rd and 2.

 

2nd possession-

1-10-Maroney for -1

2-11-Pass for 17 yards

1-goal from 5-Dillon for -1

2-goal from 6-pass inc

3-goal from 6-pass, TD

extra runs-0, I don't see anywhere where they should have ran and didn't.

 

3rd possession-

1-10-Pass for 4

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-8-Pass for 6, punt

extra runs-0, the pass on 1st down was as good as a run, they tried running the ball on 2nd down, and that forced them into a 3rd and long

 

4th possession-

1-10-pass for 16

1-10-pass for 14

1-10-penalty for 5

1-15 (from the Colts 18)-pass inc

2-15-pass for 8

3-7-pass inc

extra runs-0-I'm not sure where the Patriots were supposed to run here. The first two passes worked great, and 1-15 from the 18 yard line is not a great place to run, as it's even hard to run a draw from there being so close to the goal line.

 

5th possession-

1-10-pass for 25

1-10-pass inc

2-10-pass inc

3-10-run for 4

extra runs-1, they could have easily run on 1st or 2nd down-although if they had run on one of those downs, they probably wouldn't have run on 3rd down (because the 3rd down run was just to set up the field goal)-so it's 1, but a shaky 1.

 

6th possession-

1-15 (12 men in the huddle penalty)-pass for 7

2-8-pass for 4

3-4-pass inc

runs-1 maybe? The Colts were gearing up to stop the run, as they needed to get the ball back without giving up a single first down-the Patriots were going for the knockout punch, as they usually do-that penalty at the start ruined any chance they had at running for the first down really.

 

last drive they were forced to pass, as I'm sure you agree.

 

Well, there you have it. I think the Patriots could have ran the ball 3 more times in the half, but I don't think that would have made much of a difference.

 

You are assuming none of those extra runs could lead to more first downs and longer drives. That is not an assumption I would agree with.

 

The thing is, it's not an assumption that they wouldn't have gained more, it was shown throughout the game that they couldn't run the ball consistently. Sure, it's possible that any run could possibly be broken for a long run, but banking on all of a sudden breaking a long run after having next to no success all day is very poor strategy.

Plus, the Pats only had a 21-6 lead in the second half for one drive, a Colts touchdown drive. The first time the Patriots had the ball, they were up one score, 21-13.

At halftime, I said the Patriots would have to score more to hope to win because 21 points rarely beats the Colt offense. When you simply pound the ball and run clock, you're sacrificing the ability to score.

[dew1679666265]

I see a few more times - especially with the lead in the second half - where I AND Turner would have run more.

 

I was still on a high from the Bears winning and wasn't paying much attention to this game till the last few drives, but the Patriots need to be running much more in the second half with a lead - especially because it keeps Peyton Manning off the field.

 

True-but it wasn't long into the second half before the Patriots weren't trying to keep Manning off the field anymore, but were trying desperately to score points to somehow stay ahead of a Colts offense that was absolutely rolling.

 

I think the Bears running game will do the best any team has done in the playoffs against the Colts-a big key to their effectiveness could be though if Grossman can step up early and make some huge throws to loosen the defense up. I can see the Colts trying to play this game like the Chiefs game in the 1st quarter, and it will be interesting to see if the Bears can respond quickly to that or not.

 

True enough, but even when the Colts closed the gap, the Patriots should be involving the run game in the offense. This is the same thing the Saints did (whether it was because McAllister was hurt or whatever), just passing is going to get you in trouble (especially when you have the Colts' pass rush).

 

If the run game is even marginally successful on some consistent basis this is true, but running just to run when there is no consistent success is simply wasting plays when you have one of the best QBs in the game.

[cubweiser03]

Its Tuesday and I'm beginning to get nervous.

 

It's really amazing. You follow a team from day 1 and now they're 1 game away from winning it all.

 

Is this how it feels?

 

Not a familiar site for a Cubs fan.

 

Yeah for real. I worked as a painter this summer and I remember listening to the radio, with all the talk from Training Camp, from the TJ Ced Benson contreversy, to all the talk about Super Bowl or bust. And its all paid off right now. A great, great feeling.

 

Exactly. I remember them talking about how Briggs was demoted to second string after skipping voluntary workouts, and then Vasher threatened to hold out if he didn't get a contract extension. Seems like so long ago...

 

Man I completely forgot about those situations. The whole Vasher and Briggs situations were so stupid at the time and now they even more trivial. How far we've come.

 

This is why ive debated doing like a season journal thing. Ive been thinking of doing that with the Cubs and may do that this year. The media loses perspective or throws out of context many issues. If i had a grandpa or parent that chronicled their own pespective on the seasoon i would like to read that. The championship years are probably the only ones worth saving.

[Soul]

That Pats D has to be blamed too. For most of the 2nd half they simply couldn't stop any play.

 

There's no doubt if Peyton can get the time and find his open receivers, he's going to whoop up on pretty much any team.

 

If the Bears let him stand back there and find open guys all over the field like that, we're going to get plastered, too. That's why he'll be in the hall of fame. He's a great QB, no question.

 

If, on the other hand, we can limit the points and stop a few big plays from happening, maybe then we can have a chance.

[CP_414]

 

The run defense by the Colts has been a combination of several things.

 

1) Booger Mcfarland has finally gotten comfortable, and now he is drawing constant double teams. That means more free passes for the linebackers.

2) The DE's for the Colts are not running quite as far outside as they did earlier in the season, which is tightening the running lanes

3) Rob Morris has taken over at SSLB-Morris is a good run stopper, even if he's terrible in pass coverage-he replaced Gilbert Gardner, who was the worst player I have ever seen.

4) Sanders-he lets everyone move a little faster, because Sanders can make up for mistakes that others make. He is truly a special player when healthy.

5) When Sanders moves into the lineup at safety, that means that Marlin Jackson can play more corner, and Marlin is the best tackler the Colts have at corner (with Nick Harper also a good tackler, but Jason David struggles against the run because of being tiny).

 

Finally, it's confidence and attitude-the Colts defense was really run down near the end of the season, and that caused them to go a little slower-now they have that swagger back, and it has allowed them to play closer to what the defense did in 2005 with basically the same lineup, instead of the horrible run defense seen in most of 2006.

 

you forgot to mention 3 things:

 

1. the patriots, for some mystifying reason, maybe they wanted to lose or something, ran the ball 5 times in the second half after dominating the line of scrimmage in the first half. why did big fat slobby want brady in the shotgun for the entire half? who knows? all i know is that both dillon and faulk averaged nearly 7 yards per carry in that game and the belichek, looking like he just fell out of bed, doesn't go with the ground game in the second half, unbelievable--this perception of belichek as some sort of genius has made him the ultimate arrogant poo-hole.

 

2. the ravens just kept turning the ball over, and that's a credit to the colts defense, no doubt. but it's not like jamal lewis was held down or anything. both lewis and mike anderson were over 4 yards per carry in the game--they just didn't have a chance to run the ball very much, what with the exalted steve mcnair throwing goal-line interceptions and such.

 

3. the chiefs just didn't have time to get johnson started. most of that can be attributed to the colts ball control offense holding the ball for twice as long as the chiefs.

 

 

I'll just do the Patriots game for now-I can tell you why Belicheck stopped running the ball-it wasn't working! Dillon had the 35 yard run on 4th and 1 (when everyone knows if it breaks through, it can be a big play). Faulk went out of the game with an injury, but before that yes, he had 4 carries for 27 yards, all on draw plays on 2nd and 3rd and long (and the Patriots only picked up 1 first down on any of Faulk's carries, and one other of his draws set up the 4th and 1 that Dillon's long run came from).

 

Other than those runs, the Patriots carried the ball 19 times for 31 yards. They simply could not run the ball effectively on 1st and 2nd down, which made them go to 3rd downs consistently when they tried to run.

 

Also-it's 21-3 Patriots now in the second quarter. Look at their runs after this point (not counting the Brady kneel down):

 

1-10-Maroney for -3

2-5-Maroney for -1

2-10 Faulk for 8 (his last run before his injury, he was really the only back the Colts had trouble with all postseason)

1-10-Maroney for -1

1-6-Dillon for -1

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-10-Evans for 4

 

Your team's only running success has been running draws in passing situations with your 3rd down back, who is now hurt, and a 4th and 1 play where the other teams defense gambled that it would be a QB sneak and lost. Your other 2 runningbacks last 5 runs have all resulted in negative yardage, not even a single one got back to the line of scrimmage, and you have Tom Brady. Are you going to keep running the ball?

 

This sounds exactly like what we heard about the Saints run defense. They give up 1 or 2 big plays, but other than that they shut teams down. They had the most stops on running plays for 1 yard or less in the league, or something like that.

 

If I were the Patriots, yes I would have kept running. o start a half up 21-6, and only run the ball 5 times in that half is poor coaching, especially with #18 on the other side of the ball. Maybe they had 7 carries for 4 yards, but they also had quite a bit of success running before those 7 carries. If Brady had gone 1 of 7 for 4 yards on seven consecutive passes at some point in the game, do you stop passing? I don't think so.

 

The problem was, they simply didn't. Dillon and Maroney struggled most of the game running on 1st and 2nd down. Faulk was out of the game, so the Patriots couldn't use him-he was the only runningback having any kind of consistent success whatsoever. Besides, they couldn't run the ball much more in the 2nd half. Every time they ran the ball, it put them into a passing situation that wouldn't allow them to get another carry (2nd or 3rd and long). When the Patriots passed, they had more success.

 

The Colts scored 32 points in the second half, if the Patriots had done a better job of controlling the clock, there is no way the Colts would have been able to score 32 in a half. Dillon had 48 yards on 7 carries. Yes, 35 of them came on 1 play, but if he has 12 more carries, he may bust a few more for 35 as well. The Pats had more success in the first half when they balanced runs and passes than they did in the second half where they passed nearly every play. They scored 14 offensive points in the first half and won the time of possession, while they scored 13 offensive points in the second half and lost the time of possession. If they worked the clock better, and ran more they would have been able to protect their lead better. I also don't get how you can say they couldn't run the ball any more often in the second half. They had multiple drives in the second half where they did not call one rushing play.

 

Maybe Dillon breaks another 35 yarder, but that is not nearly as likely since the conditions of the 4th and 1 play were not likely to happen again (the Colts sent everybody up the middle on that play, while normally they would be pursuing to the outside on even a down like 3rd and 1).

 

Here are the Patriots 2nd half possessions-yes, they could have ran the ball more, but I don't think that much more:

 

1st possession

1-10-Inc Pass

2-10-Faulk for 8

3-10-Pass complete, no gain

More runs? 1 probably-if they ran on 1st down, they wouldn't have run on 2nd down, but they could have ran it on 3rd and 2.

 

2nd possession-

1-10-Maroney for -1

2-11-Pass for 17 yards

1-goal from 5-Dillon for -1

2-goal from 6-pass inc

3-goal from 6-pass, TD

extra runs-0, I don't see anywhere where they should have ran and didn't.

 

3rd possession-

1-10-Pass for 4

2-6-Maroney for -2

3-8-Pass for 6, punt

extra runs-0, the pass on 1st down was as good as a run, they tried running the ball on 2nd down, and that forced them into a 3rd and long

 

4th possession-

1-10-pass for 16

1-10-pass for 14

1-10-penalty for 5

1-15 (from the Colts 18)-pass inc

2-15-pass for 8

3-7-pass inc

extra runs-0-I'm not sure where the Patriots were supposed to run here. The first two passes worked great, and 1-15 from the 18 yard line is not a great place to run, as it's even hard to run a draw from there being so close to the goal line.

 

5th possession-

1-10-pass for 25

1-10-pass inc

2-10-pass inc

3-10-run for 4

extra runs-1, they could have easily run on 1st or 2nd down-although if they had run on one of those downs, they probably wouldn't have run on 3rd down (because the 3rd down run was just to set up the field goal)-so it's 1, but a shaky 1.

 

6th possession-

1-15 (12 men in the huddle penalty)-pass for 7

2-8-pass for 4

3-4-pass inc

runs-1 maybe? The Colts were gearing up to stop the run, as they needed to get the ball back without giving up a single first down-the Patriots were going for the knockout punch, as they usually do-that penalty at the start ruined any chance they had at running for the first down really.

 

last drive they were forced to pass, as I'm sure you agree.

 

Well, there you have it. I think the Patriots could have ran the ball 3 more times in the half, but I don't think that would have made much of a difference.

 

You are assuming none of those extra runs could lead to more first downs and longer drives. That is not an assumption I would agree with.

 

The thing is, it's not an assumption that they wouldn't have gained more, it was shown throughout the game that they couldn't run the ball consistently. Sure, it's possible that any run could possibly be broken for a long run, but banking on all of a sudden breaking a long run after having next to no success all day is very poor strategy.

Plus, the Pats only had a 21-6 lead in the second half for one drive, a Colts touchdown drive. The first time the Patriots had the ball, they were up one score, 21-13.

At halftime, I said the Patriots would have to score more to hope to win because 21 points rarely beats the Colt offense. When you simply pound the ball and run clock, you're sacrificing the ability to score.

 

How are you sacraficing the ability to score by running? They scored more in the first half (even without the INT return) than they did in the second half and they ran a lot more in the first half. Also it is an assumption that the Colts would have stuffed every running play, a huge assumption looking at the rushing stats for the game.

 

Rex Grossman was having a horrible passing game against the Saints, but with the Bears up 18-14 he led a touchdown drive of all passes to put the Bears in control of the game. Up until that point he had very little success passing the ball against the Saints. If Ron Turner had decided to take the ball out of Rex's hands and run all the time could we have assumed Rex was not capable of leading that TD drive the way he did because he had some failures earlier in the game?

[CubsLadyinSTL]

Ok, lets take a poll. How many people stopped reading this thread because your finger hurt after scrolling? Because it stopped making sense to people who want to talk non stat football? Because there is too much quoting???

[CubColtPacer]

Ok, lets take a poll. How many people stopped reading this thread because your finger hurt after scrolling? Because it stopped making sense to people who want to talk non stat football? Because there is too much quoting???

 

So basically, this thread is just like all the baseball threads on the board :D

[CubsLadyinSTL]

Without quoting, yes, just like those.

[cubweiser03]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-01/27629463.jpg

 

Bad ass.

 

Things like this are silly but very cool in a way. I saw the picture of the Bears at the Musuem with the helmet not fitting. They said it was supposed to be fixed today. I wonder if its fixed yet. They did a lot better job with the helmets this time around than last time. too bad it didnt fit right the first time.