Commentary
Jets matchup good prep for Pats Let's not pump the tires of a 3-11 team, but Rex's bunch is a decent sparring partner
-- This is a week to reflect a bit on some of the Patriots-Jets games over the past six years, as Bill Belidick has matched wits with Rex Ryan. Ryan's future as Jets coach is on shaky ground, his team now 3-11, and Sunday could mark their last head-to-head matchup.
The Ryan dynamic is an interesting one to me here in New England, as I sense a level of respect for him among Patriots followers. Some emailers to the mailbag, in the past, have even wondered about the possibility of him one day joining Belidick's coaching staff (that won't be happening).
Meanwhile, Tom Brady often makes the point that Ryan's defenses are traditionally some of the toughest he has to prepare against.
Let's get to the questions:
Q. Mike, do you think Brandon Browner's penalties will be a liability in the playoffs? The refs are definitely watching him extra-close, and I can't see him getting the benefit of the doubt on any call. If I'm an opponent, I'm throwing the ball his way just about every time, especially if I'm trailing late in a game, simply because it seems there is a 50-50 chance it draws a penalty. To me, this is kind of like Hack-A-Shaq. He's one of your best players, but can you afford to leave him in on a critical late-game play? -- Keith (Foxborough, Massachusetts)
A. This is a good topic, Keith. Browner had three penalties Sunday and easily could have had a fourth. I thought they were all legitimate penalties, as there was illegal contact prior to the throw on the one that I initially thought was uncatchable on the sideline. Browner has 15 penalties in eight games this season, easily a team high. I think you are balancing two things here -- you don't want to take away his aggressiveness, that's what makes him who he is, but you have to be careful that it doesn't cost you a game. Prior to this past week, it was my belief that some of those calls were "reputation-based" and if he had a No. 24 on the back of his jersey, maybe 4-5 of them aren't called. But this past week was different. I don't think we're at a point that the coaching staff is thinking of removing Browner, but I do think it's a fair issue to bring up and monitor. It's a fine line there.
Q. While New England still "runs the East," it travels to MetLife Stadium to play the New York Jets this week. I feel the Patriots are coming full circle at the right time and will come out victorious. But even at 3-11, this Jets team could prepare the Patriots for the postseason. The Jets can still run pretty well and have a mobile quarterback in Geno Smith. On defense, they have one of the better front-sevens against both the run and pass. All these have given New England problems this season and will likely run into these teams in January/February. Add in the fact this is a road game against a divisional opponent who is playing for their coach, it could potentially provide a playoff atmosphere. Thoughts? -- Alvin (Amherst, Massachusetts)
A. Alvin, I don't think the atmosphere will be playoff-like, but you're absolutely right in the sense that every game is a tuneup for the postseason and valuable lessons are always learned along the way. I'm not going to pump the Jets' tires -- they're 3-11 for a reason -- but one only needs to look back at the Week 7 game between the teams to see that the Jets played well enough to win. Anything can happen in this league. If you let your guard down, prepare to be beaten. In that sense, this game reminds me a little bit of the Week 16 game at Jacksonville in the 2012 season. It can be tough to get up for these games, so it can really test a team's mental toughness.
Q. Any chance the Pats take the Jets lightly this week? You can be sure Rex will have the Jets fired up and ready to spoil the Pats' path to the home field advantage. I think this game is a gut check for the mental focus of the Pats. They should start fast and not give the Jets a reason to think they can upset the Pats. -- Scott (Charlotte, North Carolina)
A. I don't think they take them lightly, Scott, and the main reason is that most of the Patriots players were here on Oct. 16 when the Jets took them right down to the wire. I mean, you live through that experience, doesn't that produce immediate respect? The Jets played very well that night and Ryan often seems to bring out the best in his team against New England.
Q. Hi Mike, why is it that the Pats can never seem to finish the first half of games strong? Whether it is an untimely pick or letting up a big score downfield, the Pats seem to make mistakes to allow the opposition to gain momentum at the half. Is there a specific reason in their play/coaching or is it just a coincidence? -- Al (Worcester, Massachusetts)
A. Al, I'd have to look at each situation to have an informed opinion on the big-picture reasons for any struggles, but specific to this last game it started with a missed block on first down by center Bryan Stork. That draw play by Shane Vereen had a chance to produce something promising if that block on linebacker Philip Wheeler is made, and then the whole situation changes; maybe you're quickly into the two-minute attack and you're putting the pressure on the opposition. The punt coverage was also poor, and one could also make the case that Ryan Allen should have punted that ball out of bounds (points to coaching). And then you just tip your cap to Ryan Tannehill, Mike Wallace and the Dolphins for the touchdown -- great play.
Q. Mike, enjoying the ride immensely this year. I'm curious about your take on the touchdown pass to Wallace at the end of the first half. How could the Pats not have had multiple safeties lined up at the goal line and cornerbacks protecting the boundary, given that the Dolphins only had 11 seconds to work with and no timeouts? -- John (Acton, Massachusetts)
A. Real good question, John. The Patriots had two safeties deep (Devin McCourty and Duron Harmon) and the Dolphins ran four vertical routes -- one essentially up each sideline and then two to the inside part of the field. The two safeties were put in a tough spot there. Probably safe to say that's a coverage/personnel package they'd like to have back. One less player in the box and one more on the back end, with a different coverage call, could have helped avoid that. You're also protecting against the quick pass and field goal there, so I'm sure that was part of the consideration.
Q. I noticed that the Patriots have been throwing to the "big" backs more lately, which makes sense to me since defenses know there is a 90 percent chance the Pats will throw with Vereen in the game. I'm thinking Vereen is on his way out of town after the season given the contract situation. What do you think? -- Bob (Coventry, Rhode Island)
A. Bob, in this last game against the Dolphins, we saw LeGarrette Blount (2) and Jonas Gray (1) each show up on the receiving stat sheet, which was a bit unusual. They were more check-down options, as I saw it, and that was probably tied to the team playing with more run-based personnel but trying to throw on the Dolphins' base defense. Sort of a game plan thing more than a big-picture change in approach. So I see it as unrelated to the future of Vereen with the team. Based on the club's history of retaining running backs in recent years (e.g. outbid by Chargers for Danny Woodhead, outbid initially by the Steelers for Blount), I don't think anyone would be surprised if Vereen joins that list.
Q. Will the Patriots re-sign Vereen? He knows the offense and is familiar with Brady. He has been overthrown on the wheel route several times, much like Brian Tyms and others on deep routes. He is a good blocker in blitz pick-up. He might be hard to replace. -- Mike (Canton, Ohio)
A. Mike, Vereen is a top-notch locker room guy, one of the real professionals from my viewpoint. He'd help any team and I agree that his blitz pickup is an often overlooked aspect of his game; it showed up Sunday against the Dolphins with a couple of excellent pickups. As for the future, I expect the Patriots will set their number and stick to it, and if another team is willing to go further, the sides could part ways. By drafting James White in the fourth round this year, it's a succession plan if that's the way it unfolds. Easy to forget that Vereen himself, like White, hardly played in his rookie year.
Q. Hi Mike, why was Jonas Gray more effective than Blount on Sunday? Was this simply because of better execution by the OL in the second half, different scheme (e.g. more James Develin), or did Gray hit the hole quicker or better in some way? It seems likely that Gray will be more involved in the mix going forward, but would you say Blount is still the "primary" big back? -- Matt (California)
A. Matt, I thought Gray hit the hole quicker and that's what they needed in this game. It wasn't like the run blocking was all of a sudden that much better; Gray still had a 1-yard loss on his second carry as things got stacked up in the middle. The Patriots, as we saw Sunday, will ride the hot hand. I think that means Gray and Blount are now closer to even footing at this point, but that can fluctuate quickly as we've seen.
Q. I can't remember hearing Gray's name on special teams much this year, but I saw him make a tackle in the second quarter. Is he new to this unit or have I not been paying attention? Might this contribute to him getting back in the field? -- Craig (Weehawken, New Jersey)
A. Real sharp observation, Craig. Gray's role on special teams has expanded the last few weeks. Against the Lions on Nov. 23, he wasn't on any top units. But against the Packers the next week, we saw him show up on the kickoff return unit (front line). On Dec. 7 against the Chargers, Gray was on kickoff coverage, punt return and kickoff return, and then he was on a couple of units against Miami as well. What's the fastest way out of Belidick's doghouse? One could say a willingness to get hands dirty on special teams is close to the top of the list.
Q. Hi Mike, it was good to see Josh McDaniels not overthinking in the red zone as he had in the Chargers and Packers games. Respecting and using the run game and allowing power running backs to do what they are trained to do exemplified by Blount's play and later Gray's. More run and less thoughts. Your thoughts? -- Jake (Vancouver)
A. Jake, we touched on this a little bit last week, the idea of maybe simplifying things a bit in the red zone and letting that power running game do its thing. That was good, specific to Blount. At the same time, I think it's important to point out that some of the other red-zone plays are "run-pass" checks, which means that if quarterback Tom Brady sees something pre-snap, he has the flexibility to change the call. My assumption is that's exactly what happened on Vereen's 3-yard touchdown run. Brady saw the double coverage on tight end Rob Gronkowski, who was split out wide to the right, saw favorable numbers in the box, and checked to the run. So we can't really have it both ways -- sometimes those checks work, sometimes they don't.
Q. Mike, could you clarify a play? Right before the half, a Dolphins punt returner ran out of bounds without being touched and was the first player to touch the ball. I thought no player could run out of bounds on his own, then make a play. Is that only for receivers on passing plays? I tried to search the rulebooks but couldn't find that situation. Not illegal touching? Thanks! -- Craig (Weehawken, New Jersey)
A. Craig, I thought CBS analyst Dan Fouts explained it well, as it was something I was initially curious about as well. If the member of the receiving team of a punt goes out of bounds, doesn't re-establish himself in the field of play, and then is the first to possess the ball, the play is immediately dead. That's obviously different from if a player from the coverage team does that.
Q. Hi Mike, I know you've said that you have some fear for the Patriots if they end up facing the Ravens in the playoffs, and I've heard some analysts mention the Steelers in the same way, but I wonder whether you may be overestimating them. The AFC North drew the AFC and NFC South this year, the two worst divisions in the NFL. The Colts are the only good team out of those 8 games, so I think the records of the Ravens, Steelers and Bengals (all of whom may end up in the playoffs) are inflated. I don't think any of them are as good as their records seem to show. And so far, except for the Steelers' win over the Colts, those teams have lost every other game to the other division leaders and teams that are realistically in the wild card hunt. This is the NFL, so anything can happen in any game, but I think you're paying way too much respect to the teams in the AFC North. -- Jack (Denton, Texas)
A. I think that's fair, Jack. I'm going to shoot at you straight, as I always do, and tell you that I've probably seen a total of two Ravens games. And each time, I was really focusing more on the other team, such as last week with Miami, which had played Baltimore the week before visiting the Patriots. So this is not a very informed opinion. For context, I was asked which team the Patriots might want to avoid, and my response was something like this: "I don't think the Patriots need to avoid anyone, but in terms of teams that I think wouldn't be intimidated by coming to Foxborough, and would play a tough game, I'd say Baltimore."
Q. Hey Mike, I had noticed an article from Chicago about the Bears signing rookie quarterback David Fales from their practice squad to their active roster. The interesting part was that it was spurred by the Patriots "pushing" to sign Fales. Any insight on why the Pats would be that interested? Seems like a third quarterback on the active roster is not a necessity. -- Michael (Las Vegas)
A. Michael, I view it as similar to the team drafting Jimmy Garoppolo in the late second round this year. When it comes to positional value, quarterback trumps all. If you don't have a player at that position, you put the entire team at risk, and if the Patriots see promise in a prospect, there shouldn't be hesitation. This is also the time of year when teams start planning for the future by poaching some players from practice squads. From an overall perspective, maybe the best example I could pass along is that in 2000, the Patriots decided to keep four quarterbacks on their roster because they saw promise in a No. 4 option. That Brady guy turned out to be pretty good.
>
espn.go.com/b...d-prep-patriots