58 replies to this topic

[murf74]

This is like losing when you double down on 11 and then whining that it was a dumb move.

If you were in his shoes, would you be going "make sure you cover Manningham with everything you got. Make them throw to Cruz and Hicks."

I would cover everyone isn't that the idea? Since when do you invite a pass completion to a wr? Great gameplan Bellicheat. "Make him check down or don't let any wrs behind you" that's what I want my coach to say not let them throw to Manningham. He is a good wr

[IGotWorms]

I would cover everyone isn't that the idea?

Holy sh!t, you're a genius murf! Just cover everyone! I wonder why Belichick never thought of that?

[murf74]

Holy sh!t, you're a genius murf! Just cover everyone! I wonder why Belichick never thought of that?

why no " make them check down"

Another ego move by Bellicheat inviting a long pass to a wr

What's the purpose of that game plan? Hoping he drops it?

Fail

[jgcrawfish]

Holy sh!t, you're a genius murf! Just cover everyone! I wonder why Belichick never thought of that?

As much as I understand your point, there's some validity to Murf's statement. Manningham isn't a possession WR, he's a 4 targets a game, lucky to get 2 catches deep ball WR. Belicheat obviously doens't know what route Manningham is going to run (unless he's cheating and stealing plays again) but it's safe to say that based on film, Manningham isn't running a lot drag routes across the middle. That means he's going up the sidelines. If your strategy at the end of the game with the lead is making somebody beat you deep with their best deep threat, well, that's not good coaching. If Belicheat was on tape saying "Don't let anybody get behind you" or "we can't give up the deep ball" then the onus is off him and on the team. But saying "Make them go to Manningham" translates to "cut off every short route and make them beat us deep, even though they clearly need big plays".

why no " make them check down"

Another ego move by Bellicheat inviting a long pass to a wr

What's the purpose of that game plan? Hoping he drops it?

Fail

[murf74]

As much as I understand your point, there's some validity to Murf's statement. Manningham isn't a possession WR, he's a 4 targets a game, lucky to get 2 catches deep ball WR. Belicheat obviously doens't know what route Manningham is going to run (unless he's cheating and stealing plays again) but it's safe to say that based on film, Manningham isn't running a lot drag routes across the middle. That means he's going up the sidelines. If your strategy at the end of the game with the lead is making somebody beat you deep with their best deep threat, well, that's not good coaching. If Belicheat was on tape saying "Don't let anybody get behind you" or "we can't give up the deep ball" then the onus is off him and on the team. But saying "Make them go to Manningham" translates to "cut off every short route and make them beat us deep, even though they clearly need big plays".

Bingo

[Joey Gladstone]

This topic

[murf74]

This topic

Bump

[Joey Gladstone]

I wonder what audio they had on D!ck Lebeau regarding Demaryius Thomas?

[murf74]

I wonder what audio they had on D!ck Lebeau regarding Demaryius Thomas?

DL had an awful gameplan and I won't stick up for him at all. That loss was on him.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

As much as I understand your point, there's some validity to Murf's statement. Manningham isn't a possession WR, he's a 4 targets a game, lucky to get 2 catches deep ball WR. Belicheat obviously doens't know what route Manningham is going to run (unless he's cheating and stealing plays again) but it's safe to say that based on film, Manningham isn't running a lot drag routes across the middle. That means he's going up the sidelines. If your strategy at the end of the game with the lead is making somebody beat you deep with their best deep threat, well, that's not good coaching. If Belicheat was on tape saying "Don't let anybody get behind you" or "we can't give up the deep ball" then the onus is off him and on the team. But saying "Make them go to Manningham" translates to "cut off every short route and make them beat us deep, even though they clearly need big plays".

I would argue that Nicks is, without doubt, clearly a more dangerous deep threat than Manningham - a threat that had been the most dangerous and explosive WR in the playoffs.

I'm no Patriots fan by any means, but I don't see how "Make them go to Manningham" was a bad strategic move....especially when taking into account that a little earlier, he had blown a big gain by losing sight of how close he was to the sidelines.

[murf74]

I would argue that Nicks is, without doubt, clearly a more dangerous deep threat than Manningham - a threat that had been the most dangerous and explosive WR in the playoffs.

I'm no Patriots fan by any means, but I don't see how "Make them go to Manningham" was a bad strategic move....especially when taking into account that a little earlier, he had blown a big gain by losing sight of how close he was to the sidelines.

Yeah other than it resulting in the play of the game leading to the win it was a great strategy and worked flawless ....

[IGotWorms]

As much as I understand your point, there's some validity to Murf's statement. Manningham isn't a possession WR, he's a 4 targets a game, lucky to get 2 catches deep ball WR. Belicheat obviously doens't know what route Manningham is going to run (unless he's cheating and stealing plays again) but it's safe to say that based on film, Manningham isn't running a lot drag routes across the middle. That means he's going up the sidelines. If your strategy at the end of the game with the lead is making somebody beat you deep with their best deep threat, well, that's not good coaching. If Belicheat was on tape saying "Don't let anybody get behind you" or "we can't give up the deep ball" then the onus is off him and on the team. But saying "Make them go to Manningham" translates to "cut off every short route and make them beat us deep, even though they clearly need big plays".

Belichick knew he had to pick his poison. Victor Cruz is one of the most explosive wide receivers in the NFL. Hakeem Nicks is an elite receiver and was having a pretty darn good game up to that point. You can't roll coverage everyone's way: if you focus on covering one receiver then obviously that means you are drawing focus away from other targets on the field. It was the right decision by Bill Belichick but it just didn't work out because the other team made a fantastic play. It happens sometimes.

[Giants Fan]

Clearly Belichick is a crappy football coach.

[murf74]

Clearly Belichick is a crappy football coach.

He is a proven cheater and lost his last 2 superbowls when he couldn't cheat.

But he is best when cheating for sure. Awesome use of illegal videotape!

[Walter34]

Did you order the CODE RED

You're God Damned right I DID!!@@##!!

[Foghorn Leghorn]

Yeah other than it resulting in the play of the game leading to the win it was a great strategy and worked flawless ....

You're right - they should have tripled Manningham and left single coverage on Nicks and Cruz.

You know what....never mind....continue trolling.

[murf74]

You're right - they should have tripled Manningham and left single coverage on Nicks and Cruz.

You know what....never mind....continue trolling.

K

[Reality]

You fockers really are bored over here huh?

[murf74]

You fockers really are bored over here huh?

Sure