SB Nation - Kevin Faulk

Game Recap: Patriots defeat Panthers, 20-10 and find new identity

MaPatsFan — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:57:10 -0000

More photos » by Elise Amendola - AP

"We knew he was going to shut it down," Panthers cornerback Chris Gamble told me after the game. "That's what we wanted to do him. That's what we did. ... He'd just give up a lot ... Slow down, he's not going deep, not trying to run a route. You can tell, his body language." Gamble continued ... "I know everyone who plays against him, they can sense that. Once you get into him in the beginning of the game, he shuts it down a little bit."

Uhmm... Didn't Chris Gamble's team, like, LOSE?!? These are very tall words from a guy who contributed yet another L to his team's record. When he's watching the Patriots in January, maybe he can take solace in Randy Moss' bad day against the Panthers. Yeah, that's the ticket. Until then...SHUT.YOUR.PIE.HOLE!! My personal opinion? Moss doesn't dog it so much as change his speed and rhythm to throw DB's off. Did he have a rough day against the Panthers? Yep. How about Miami? Sure. But when you're the ONLY deep ball threat on a team, the opposition comes gunning for you. That's a lot of weight to carry on your shoulders. Doggin' it? Please...

It was an ugly win but a win none the less. Would I have preferred stellar, blowout, 2007-type play? You betcha. Would I have loved to see Moss connecting with Wonderboy on a long bomb or two? Sure. Is it going to happen this year? I don't think it will. So what do we have? What's going on that leads us to a glimmer of hope for the current incarnation of the New England Patriots?

I wrote at the beginning of training camp that I was so tired of all the hoopla surrounding Tom Brady's return. I was so sick of the ESPN/SI/Whatever... lovefest that I wanted to vomit. Every rival blogger I corresponded with would ask me what I thought and my catch phrase was, "Cautiously optimistic." The media billed the return of Tom Brady as the Return of the King (my guess is the Hobbits were named Wes and Julian, but I digress). Bleh. In reality, this is a team that for the first 2/3 of the season struggled to be a 2007 incarnation of itself. The difference? There were many, but I'll give you 2: Jabbar Gaffney and Donte Stallworth.

Neither of them is a stellar receiver, but they were lethal as #3 and #4 guys. Put Moss, Welker, Gaffney, and Stallworth on the field and you likely witnessed grown men on the opposition soiling themselves. Technically, it's called "spreading the field". I called it a freakin' JSF aerial assault. The biggest threat today? Well, other than Wes Welker, who's making a case for the best wide receiver of 2009, you have ~~special teamer~~ Sam Aiken and rookie Julian "Broken Forearm" Edelman. Hmm... What could be wrong, what could be wrong?

I had every intention of writing a full fledged game recap with stats and play-by-play analysis and things and stuff, but my ADHD brain got in the way (did you know the third of an Aminor is a C?). Where was I... Recap, things, stuff... Oh Yeah! This is a team that has struggled all year to find its identity. The absolute "broadside of a barn" misses with Greg Lewis and Joey Galloway cost us dearly. The loss of veteran RB Fred Taylor cost us dearly. Playcalling lost its creativity. I truly felt like this team was a ship without a rudder. Until this past Sunday, that is. No, I'm not delusional enough think the ship has been righted, but I do think they're beginning to find their way. Why? Read on, my captivated friends.

For most of the season, we have complained this team can't finish a game. They wrack up a crapload of points in the first half and then fizzle out in the second. We've seen it time and time again in big games against the Colts and Dolphins, to name a few. And it was true. Our New England Patriots seemed to have ZERO staying power. This past Sunday, however, I saw something that gave me hope. It was a running game. Bill Belichick has finally realized that his passing attack is not what it used to be, that Tom Brady bombs to Randy Moss are not going to work. So he put Laurence Maroney, Sammy Morris, and Kevin Faulk to work. They ate turf, they fought, they grinded to the tune of 187 yards and 1 TD. Finally, coach Belichick didn't abandon the running game. Oh, and did I mention TE Benjamin Watson scored the other TD? I have been whining that Brady needs to find Watson more often and gets the ball to him for 6. Coach? Call me anytime. Keep it coming, would be my advice.

Only time will tell, but I think they're finally finding their identity. They're abandoning 2007 and facing the cold, hard reality of what they have to work with. Let's hear it for the 2009 Patriots!!!

Quick Recap: Patriots defeat Panthers, 20-10

MaPatsFan — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 21:09:18 -0000

More photos » by Elise Amendola - AP

Browse more photos »

A W is a W, however ugly it is. Randy Moss was essentially non-existant with drops more often than not. Maybe we can count him as productive as a blocker or decoy - who knows. All I know is Wes Welker is an absolute rock star. 10 receptions for 105 yards puts him over 100 receptions for the year...and he missed 2 games this season.

Offensively, I was happy to see us mix the run and the pass. Laurence Maroney with 94 yards and Kevin Faulk with 58 simply chewed up the clock and kept Carolina off balance. Defensively, things look a bit better. The defensive backfield had some nice blocked passes.

This game, overall, was too close. We needed some key Carolina penalties to keep the game going. Against a team with better fundamentals, it would've been a different story.

New Orleans Saints' Defensive and Special Teams Player Grades vs. Patriots

saints-nation — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:00:15 -0000

by Dave Martin - AP

24 days ago: New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady sits on the sidelines during the fourth quarter of an NFL football game against the New Orleans Saints, Monday, Nov. 30, 2009, in New Orleans. (AP Photo/Dave Martin)

View full size photo »

You know the drill by now, below are the grades.

Patriots vs Saints coverage

Patriots vs Saints recap

Patriots vs Saints boxscore

Will Smith: B+ (2.88) Early in the game, Laurence Maroney ripped off a 22 yard run, and Will Smith had a clear shot at him around the line of scrimmage. Sometimes I feel like he's focused on improving his sack total and his run defense has suffered from it. That said, he did a good job of staying in Brady's face despite double teams for a good portion of the game. He finished with 4 tackles, hit Brady 3 times, and ended with 1.5 sacks. He was the beneficiary of a stat padding sack at the end of the game, and that sack gave him 10 for the season. It's been a while since we've had a double digit sack guy, so that's nice to see 11 games into the season. After having a lower GPA early in the season, Smith's grades have been rising steadily and he continues to pile up consistent performances.

Charles Grant: D (2.24) For an extended portion of the game, Grant was nowhere to be found. He was manhandled anytime a play came his way, and he was unable to get any pressure whatsoever on Brady. On an end around to Welker at one point, Grant showed ZERO pursuit or effort. I was pretty disheartened to see on tape what I concluded was a lazy performance. He did finally get good pressure on a 3rd down play in 4th quarter, though, hitting Brady as he released the ball. It was tough sledding for the Saints' pass rushers though, as they dropped most players they had and often rushed only 4 or sometimes even 3. He finished with 2 tackles.

Sedrick Ellis: C+ (2.71) Nice to have the big man back, and his presence against the run game was felt. He was rusty, though, so I'll expect better things as he gets more reps. I'm sure everyone remembers the fumble fiasco. Hey Sedrick, YOU ARE A DEFENSIVE TACKLE. Fall on the ball already. The fact that he picked up the ball and tried to shimmy his way to the open field like Barry Sanders was laughable. I give him credit for a good all around effort, though. He was sloppy in his tackling at times, but he was also disruptive. He had a terrific tackle at the line of scrimmage at one point on Kevin Faulk. On the Darren Sharper interception, Ellis put nice pressure on Brady to force a bad pass. He finished with 4 tackles.

Remi Ayodele: C- (2.14) Ayodele really didn't play much, surprisingly. When he did, I thought he did an ok job of congesting the middle and forcing Maroney outside. The Saints spent a large part of the game either with a 3 man front, or using Hargrove more because of his superior pass rushing ability and the decreasing threat that the Patriots would run.

Anthony Hargrove: C+ (2.43) As much as Hargrove played he was rather quiet, but he did show terrific effort and a good motor. The plays just didn't really come his way. He finished with 2 tackles, and he did get a chance to force an incompletion by poppin' Brady pretty good right as he released the ball.

Bobby McCray: B (2.00) Finally I saw McCray come in and show me some of those pass rushing skills. Finally! McCray got the other half of the sack with Will Smith, but I felt McCray got the better pressure on that play. He was often coming off the edge and drawing either a double team or a chip block. On one play he absolutely CRUSHED Brady as he released the ball. He also had very good pressure on the long pass to Moss and almost got a sack but Brady evaded him before getting rid of the ball off his back foot. He finished with just 1 tackle, but given the limited help he got rushing the passer I thought his performance was much improved.

Scott Fujita: B+ (2.81) Fujita played MUCH better in the second half. In the first half he was mostly quiet, and I saw him stand out on a play he got beat with on pass play over middle. In the second half, Fujita was dominant. He made a terrific play to force the fumble that Ellis recovered, and he got terrific penetration on that same drive to nail Sammy Morris in the backfield. Kevin Faulk did beat him to the outside on one run, but he was very aggressive and all over the field. He finished with 7 tackles.

Scott Shanle: C- (2.67) Pretty forgettable performance from Shanle who is losing his early season form. He was burned badly by Kevin Faulk on the opening drive of the gain to convert a 3rd down. Then, he was blown up on the 4th down touchdown run by Maroney. He had an absolutely miserable first half. As the game progressed he got more involved and absorbed blocks better, but he was unusually mediocre in pass coverage. He finished with just 3 tackles.

Jonathan Vilma: C+ (2.94) Vilma was up and down during the game. He had 9 tackles, which would lead you to believe he was active and all over the field, but he was also involved in way too many negative plays. Vilma was blown up on first run of the game. Later, he whiffed on Maroney badly to allow the back to get big yardarge. On a pass to Welker, Vilma showed poor awareness. While Welker wasn't his assignment, he had a chance to jump that throw and break up the play or maybe intercept the ball. Instead it was a completion. Like Shanle, his first half was by and large dismal. He did get good pressure on Brady a couple of times blitzing right up the middle. He made up for a shaky start when he BLEW UP Maroney in backfield shooting the gap in the second half. Just when he got on my good side again, though, there was that moronic late hit on Welker out of bounds to give the Patriots 15 free yards. He did get better as game progressed.

Malcolm Jenkins: B (3.06) He was often lined up against Wes Welker and he did an admirable job. He was very physical with Welker, sometimes getting away with possible penalties, and you could tell Welker got frustrated by it. He was PHENOMENAL with tackling all day long, and any time he had a shot at Welker he made sure the slippery receiver went down. He was caught holding twice, once negating an intentional grounding by Brady and another time giving the Patriots a first down - but that was all part of him roughing up Welker. Great job, and I'm glad we have him. Did I already mention he's a terrific tackler?

Chris McAlister: B- (2.67) McAlister was pretty solid all day in coverage, especially in the first half. Despite being matched up against Randy Moss, he didn't allow the future hall of famer to catch a ball until very late in the second quarter. He was however responsible for the long pass to Moss in the second half, and he was fortunate that Brady overthrew a long ball intended for Aiken because McAlister was beaten badly and it would have been a touchdown. He finished with just 1 tackle and he didn't offer much support against the run. Give him credit though, he's only been with the Saints 2 weeks and his he's obviously still capable of covering elite receivers.

Mike McKenzie: A- (3.67) Per Jon Gruden on Monday Night Football "he has guts". I thought that described McKenzie best. He gambled and occasionally lost, but his aggressiveness and fire was instrumental in the win. It was clear the Patriots were going to attack him, and he responded present. It was almost like he never missed a beat from his peak performances 2 years ago. His interception was a HUGE momentum changing play. Later in the game, he had a 3rd down tackle short of 1st down, forcing the Patriots to punt. At one point, beaten by Moss, he dove to make the tackle and somehow jarred the ball loose for a forced fumbled. It was a suspect play, but he saved the Saints from Moss getting major yardage after the catch. He did give too much cushion at times, and was beat on a 3rd and 9 throw curl route to Aiken. The Patriots tried to run that same play soon after and McKenzie jumped the route and almost had another pick. He allowed a first down late by missing a tackle I've seen him make countless times, but he redeemed himself moments later by killing the game with a BIG 4th down play breakup on a pass intended for Moss. He finished with 3 tackles, an interception and 3 defended passes. It's nothing short of incredible that this guy could play at this level after being out of football for a year. The Saints are very fortunate he was available. The welcome back party was in full effect for #34.

Pierson Prioleau: B- (2.67) Prioleau was used as the dime back on some passing downs, and had awesome coverage on a deep pass to Ben Watson down the seam for a breakup. He did a pretty good job in coverage when he was in.

Roman Harper: B (3.21) I have no earthly idea how Harper totaled 10 tackles. He seemed to have a very quiet game, but somehow Harper gets his nose in a lot of plays. He was quiet about his business, but I did notice a big hit he put on Wes Welker on a crossing route early that slowed the receiver down just enough to allow Malcolm Jenkins to knock him down and force the Patriots to kick a field goal. He did get flagged for an illegal contact on a 3rd down to give the Patriots an easy 1st down, which was stupid and negated a good pass rush by Bobby McCray.

Darren Sharper: A- (3.20) Sharper seemed more interested in laying the wood early than getting himself another pick. It seemed like there were passes out there he could have tried to make a play on, but he was focused on crushing anyone that came over the middle. I liked the change in philosophy because he knew he had corners that needed help and he let Pats know early, you go over middle, you pay. Specifically he had a DISGUSTING hit on Faulk that I'm not quite sure how the LSU product got up from. He was very solid all day in coverage and he was a good security blanket limiting the damage when a play would break open. He finished with 6 tackles and was rewarded for his good play with an interception late on a gift wrapped terrible pass by Tom Brady.

Jeff Charleston: C+ (2.33) Not a ton to say, but he played a good amount and was decent pass rushing and decent against the run. He finished with 2 tackles.

John Carney: D (2.61) He was awful. His first field goal hit the upright, and he was fortunate to give the Saints a 3-0 lead when his 30 yard kick bounced in. With the game out of reach he also missed a 36 yarder. So you're thinking, "he was 1 for 2 on field goals, not that bad". True enough, but once again his extra points were VERY dicey. At least three of his point after touchdowns barley made it just inside the right upright. He's already missed 2 this year, and lately it's felt like an adventure with him out there. Not impressed with the guy lately, but I also know he's capable of bouncing back from a bad performance. That said, this extra point thing is nothing new. He's been shaky on those all season long. I've mentioned this before, but I wonder if Brunell being left handed isn't part of the problem? Or maybe the new snapper?

Thomas Morstead: A- (3.09) Every single kickoff he booted went in the end zone, and over half were downed for touchbacks. I mean the guy is just awesome on kickoffs. On punts, it wasn't his fault Welker ripped that big return. He had a nice high and deep punt that the coverage unit should have covered better. He did manage to get another punt inside the 20.

Courtney Roby: B+ (2.97) Roby's best kick return was his first one, which went back to the 35. Two other times he had a shot at getting nice gains but he slipped. As usual he was good and dangerous. He made his grade covering kicks this time. First he caught Welker from behind on that long punt return showing amazing speed. If he doesn't make that play Welker is gone for a touchdown, and McKenzie doesn't come up with a pick on the next play. He also had terrific coverage on a punt to force a fair catch by Welker.

I also need to give props to Lynell Hamilton. He gets an incomplete grade based on limited playing time - but he had a punishing closeline tackle on kick return, and he was a decoy on the touchdown pass to Dinkins.

My Defensive Player of the Game: Mike McKenzie

My Special Teams Player of the Game: Thomas Morstead

Poll

Who Was Your Defensive Player of the Game vs. the Patriots?

Darren Sharper

45 votes

Malcolm Jenkins

41 votes

Mike McKenzie

602 votes

Will Smith

8 votes

Roman Harper

6 votes

Scott Fujita

6 votes

708 votes | Poll has closed

The Big Easy...won't be. Patriots prepare for the Saints

MaPatsFan — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:51:25 -0000

More photos » by Winslow Townson - AP

Browse more photos »

If you look at the nfl.com stats by team, the Saints make their mark in only 2 categories: 1st in Total Offense and 5th in Rushing Offense. That's not burning up the field. A closer look also reveals they give up a lot of yardage and points on defense. So, how is it that they win games if their defense is giving up so much? The answer is offense. Drew Brees and his collection of weapons score a lot of points, to the tune of a league #1 36.9 on average.

So how can the Patriots be successful in New Orleans?

This is a huge game for both teams. To be somewhat egotistical, it's most likely the toughest game on the Saints' schedule. It's certainly the toughest of their remaining 6 matchups. A victory against NE would potentially legitimize the Saints as a "for real" team. From a New England perspective, our Patriots have struggled on the road against quality teams. We're 1-3 on the road with our only W at Wembley (you're not counting Tampa Bay as a quality team, are you?). A statement game for both teams.

As mentioned above, the Saints are not burning up the field in any one area except total offense. However, I can't get rid of this nagging feeling that they remind me of Patriots teams from the "Golden Years", the Super Bowl winning seasons. What the Saints DO have is solid team play across the board; just as there's only 1 or 2 areas where they statistically excel, conversely there's few areas where they're lacking. They seem to cover all of the bases...all of the time. So, what are the keys to coming out ahead of this franchise?

Drew Brees - This answer always pains me because it's so formulaic, but it's very true: take away Drew Brees. Remember how successful our defense was at Indy in the first half? That was from consistent pressure on Peyton Manning. the same is true of just about every quarterback as well; consistently put someone in his backfield, and Brees will have less time to weigh his options.
Saints' Backfield - Bush is having an incredible season. Like his team, he is not burning up the charts in any one area, but he's a constant threat. Much like our Kevin Faulk, Bush can hurt you in so many different ways - his yardage rushing is almost identical to his passing yardage. He's listed as questionable in the injury report, by I doubt that has any credence. However, Bush is not the only weapon in the backfield. Much like the Patriots, there's no clear star but there's dangerous ones.
Passing Attack - Our New England Patriots are 6th against the pass for average yards. That's not bad considering the defensive backfield of 2008 was a joke, in my opinion. Taking away Brees' targets is paramount to winning this game. However, he has so many. Marques Colston at 6-4 225 lbs is a serious threat to defensive backs; not only does he have the height, but he has the strength and poundage to win against CB's and safeties. Then there's TE Jeremy Shockey. Jettisoned by the Giants, he's found a home in New Orleans and appears to be thriving.
RedZone Defense - New Orleans is 5th in the league at 65.3%. Unfortunately, New England is 28th in RedZone defense. We let our opponents score 65% of the time inside the 20. Ugghh...
Score more points - As basic as that sounds, it's a classic Belichick answer to how a team wins a game. New Orleans is a high scoring team and to combat that, New England has to keep pace. That means throwing the ball A LOT. NO will be smart enough to take away Randy Moss. Sure, Wes Welker is super dangerous at moving the chains, but a guy like Moss puts points on the board. With Moss most likely covered, who do we go to? As I'm fond of saying, Benjamin Watson, Julian Edelman, and Sam Aiken. Let's not forget screens to our running backs; Sammy Morris (if he plays) can be successful as an option and Kevin Faulk is the master of this backfield at that particular scenario.

What are you keys to winning? Is it any one of three phases? Play well on all phases? Any player in particular that has to step up or an NO guy we need to neutralize?

New York Jets Run Defense vs. New England Patriots Run Offense

John B — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:43:56 -0000

More photos » by Charles Krupa - AP

Browse more photos »

The Pats have almost a 50-50 run-pass split offensively, but they do most of their real damage through the air. Their running game is nowhere near as dynamic. Their top back, Fred Taylor, is nursing an ankle injury. Laurence Maroney has 94 carries and 378 yards for a pedestrian 4.0 average. He and Kevin Faulk, who has a 5.1 average, are both quick enough to be effective on draws. My guess is the Pats use a lot to try and catch blitzers up field. Aside from this, I don't expect the Pats to try and pound the ball despite New York's defensive struggles against the run (18th ranked run defense). Their strength is passing the ball. They won't go away from that.

Sione Pouha will have his hands full with Dan Koeppen, Steven Neal, and Logan Mankins, all quality run blockers. The Jets don't have the luxury of giving him much help today with four man fronts they may have had against Miami and Jacksonville. The Jets need to primarily play 3-4 to disguise the blitzers. Pouha has done good work holding the point of attack. He'll need to have his best game to help slow down the New England run game. He has to occupy two blockers.

Sammy Morris will also see action for New England. He has a 3.6 average on 30 carries.

New York Jets Pass Defense vs. New England Patriots Pass Offense

John B — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:32:12 -0000

by Michael Perez - AP

View full size photo »

Last time the Jets shut down Tom Brady with non stop pressure. That's been their formula for success against Brady in the past, sending men from all angles, confusing his protection, and forcing him to throw early. It's the only way to beat an offense like this. If a quarterback this good has time, he'll find a window. If receivers this good have time, they'll eventually get open.

This kind of matchup favors the Pats. The Jets probably won't change much from what was successful the first time. Why would they? New England has the ability to adjust. It's funny because in the past, New England adjusted to New York's blitzing of Brady by the formula they tried in the first game, spreading the field and getting the ball out quickly. That won't work because the Jets will just send more men than blockers once again. At least one guy will run free to Brady and force an early throw. This time I think the Pats leave in extra blockers. As long as they leave Brady standing, he can find somebody.

In the first game, Darrelle Revis shut down Randy Moss with very little safety help. The Jets played a lot of cover zero and cover one. When he had help, he didn't need it. The one area the Pats found success was working the middle with Julian Edelman, a shifty slot receiver. Wes Welker will be in the lineup this time. He and Edelman will be working the middle a lot. We'll also see a lot of quick throws and screens to Welker and let him make plays. To get to Brady, the Jets are going to have to ask a lot out of Lito Sheppard, Donald Strickland, and Dwight Lowery. If the Jets are going to win, these guys in particular are going to have to cover and tackle well.

I also think the Pats will look to exploit Benjamin Watson and Chris Baker and test out Eric Smith. Eric will be playing Jim Leonhard's role now, not working underneath and as a blitzer in subpackages. We'll also see Kevin Faulk on a lot of screens out of the backfield to try and catch blitzers overpursuing.

One thing to watch on the line is the play of rookie Sebastian Vollmer, who replaced the injured Matt Light about a month ago. Vollmer has held up exceptionally well against some of the best rushers in the game like Dwight Freeney last week. Light had been the weak link on the line. The interior guys, Steven Neal, Dan Koppen, and Logan Mankins, as well as right tackle Nick Kaczur have been good in pass protection. The Jets should focus again on overload blitzes. It's going to be tough to consistently win matchups against these guys. Just overwhelm them to one side and hope the protection can't slide quickly enough.

A premature look at playoff scenarios: Bengals have the second seed in the AFC

Kirkendall — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:03:55 -0000

More photos » by AJ Mast - AP

about 1 month ago: New England Patriots running back Kevin Faulk (33) is tackled by Indianapolis Colts cornerback Melvin Bullitt (33) on fourth down during the fourth quarter of an NFL football game in Indianapolis, Sunday, Nov. 15, 2009. Indianapolis won 35-34. (AP Photo/AJ Mast)

Browse more photos »

With 2:08 left in the fourth quarter, with a 34-28 lead, the New England Patriots take a timeout Sunday night. They were discussing the upcoming punt situation with two yards to go on fourth down at the Patriots own 28-yard line. Everyone was sure of it. Tom Brady was there, talking about personnel and offering his input about a special teams play. Right? He is, after all, Tom freaking Brady. When Brady returned to the field, you flipped your wrist in a gesture to say "get the hell out", you're just trying to draw the defense offsides. Why do teams do that? When the situation is clearly obvious that the quarterback is trying to... Wait. Dan Koppen just snapped it. Wait. Tom Brady caught the snap in shotgun. Wait. Tom Brady is surveying the field. Wait. He threw the pass to Kevin Faulk. Wait. The official marked it short of a first down. Wait. Indianapolis' ball. What. The. Hell. Just. Happened. Did New England just go for it? The lonely echoes of an electronic guitar playing a sad ballard, like in a bar off an Arizona highway, emanate on the Patriots' sidelines.

In the following minute and 44 seconds, Peyton Manning led the offense on a four-play, 29-yard touchdown drive to win the game with 16 seconds remaining. This, by far, led to one of the biggest sessions of Monday Morning Quarterbacking in recent memory. And it's deserved. But the Patriots' justification, who haven't shied away from making similar choices in the past, makes sense. Before the game winning touchdown, Manning led two touchdown drives, both with a time of possession under 2:04, forcing Bill Belichick to conclude that Manning will score from anywhere; a conclusion that every person that's paid by the NFL and all of their teams have reached. If the Patriots had picked up the first down, the game is over.

From a Bengals fan perspective, that missed fourth down conversation gave the Bengals sole possession of the second seed in the AFC. Granted, it doesn't mean much with seven games remaining. But they are in sole possession of the second seed. Let that digest for a moment. Go ahead, lean back in your chair, interlock your fingers behind your head and grin like only maddening fans of a team with decades of futility can grin. If the playoffs were to start today -- yes, yes, I know they don't -- the Bengals would have a bye week and host at least one home game.

In the meantime, the Bengals are still a trap game away from losing everything they've earned so far. Let's take a look at the Bengals and Steelers remaining schedule.

Side-by-side comparison of the Bengals and Steelers remaining schedule
Date	Opponent	Date	Opponent
Nov 22	@ Oakland	Nov 22	@ Kansas City
Nov 29	Cleveland	Nov 29	@ Baltimore (SNF)
Dec 6	Detroit	Dec 6	Oakland
Dec 13	@ Minnesota	Dec 10	@ Cleveland (TNF)
Dec 20	@ San Diego	Dec 20	Green Bay
Dec 27	Kansas City	Dec 27	Baltimore
Jan 3	@ NY Jets	Jan 3	@ Miami

NOTES:

If the season were to end today. The Steelers and Chargers would be the wild card and the Patriots would host the Steelers during the first weekend. If the Broncos beat the Chargers and the Steelers beat the Patriots, Cincinnati would host the Steelers in the playoffs... again. If the Broncos and Patriots win opening playoff weekend, the Bengals would host the Broncos... again.
The Bengals could find themselves in trouble if the Denver Broncos lose the AFC West to the San Diego Chargers and say another team, like the Houston Texans made a run for the playoffs. The Bengals would lose the tie-breaker to the Broncos and Texans because Cincinnati lost the head-to-head meeting to both teams.

Yahoo! Sports Dan Wetzel is a whiny cry baby

BigBlueShoe — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:41:23 -0000

More photos » by Elise Amendola - AP

about 1 month ago: New England Patriots NFL football head coach Bill Belichick walks from the podium after speaking about his decision not to punt late in their 35-34 loss Sunday to the Indianapolis Colts, at a news conference in Foxborough, Mass. Monday, Nov. 16, 2009. (AP Photo/Elise Amendola)

Browse more photos »

Seriously Dan? I mean, seriously?

The worst call of the final 2:08 of the Indianapolis Colts’ 35-34 victory over the New England Patriots on Sunday wasn’t made by Bill Belichick.
It came courtesy of head linesman Tom Stabile, who on the now-infamous fourth-and-2 attempt, ruled Patriots running back Kevin Faulk(notes) was juggling the pass until he landed on his back inside the 30-yard line.

Replays show Faulk had jumped in the air and initially batted the ball up. Stabile could see that. Faulk, however, then cradled it into his chest as he planted one foot on each side of the 30 before being pushed down.

Whether replay would have been conclusive enough to overrule Stabile’s call is unknown. The NFL may claim the call on the field would’ve stood, but who knows what would’ve been determined.

Since Wetzel is too dense to see just how pathetic he looks writing this stupid, seemingly redundant "the refs blew the game" love letter to Bill Belichick, I'll just state the obvious for him and anyone else who thinks along the same lines.

Wetzel is wrong in his replay assessment. Completely, flatly, and blatantly wrong. Tom Brady's pass hit Kevin Faulk in the hands. He was then met hard and driven back by Melvin Bullitt, forcing Faulk to bobble the ball. Bullitt drove Faulk back and by the time Faulk had complete and total possession of the football, he was a yard short. Using the TV "line" is not official. It is where the stick are on the sidelines, and from the vantage point of just about every possible TV angle, Faulk had possession when he was one his back, one yard short. That was the call on the field, and after about a billion replays, that is what we viewers saw.

But even if Faulk did make the first down (he didn't, but let's speculate just so we can make Wetzel look even more ridiculous), the Patriots were unable to challenge the play because Belichick and Brady had blown all of their second half timeouts. Now, what's funny about this is Wetzel acknowledges that:

Since the Patriots had blown their timeouts and the play came just outside the two-minute warning, which would’ve triggered an automatic review, it’s all a moot point.

Um, OK. If it's a moot point, THEN WHY DID YOU WRITE THIS STUPID ARTICLE BLASTING THE CALL!

I mean seriously, you got paid to write this, Dan? Paid actual money?Good grief. The article is nothing more than a hit piece on the refs, but even in that Wetzel falls short, pathetically trying to frame how "hard" it is to call NFL games.

you can't have it both ways, Dan. You are either blasting the refs about the call, which would make you look like the Patriots homer you so obviously seem to be, or the call was right on the field and you dispel any suggestion that the refs spoiled the game for Belichick and the Patriots.

Bottom line: The call was right. Replay backed up the call, and even if it didn't the Patriots couldn't challenge it because they mis-managed the game.

So, in a nutshell, Wetzel's article is just a quick hack piece he "mailed in" without thinking about how stupid it reads.

Dan Wetzel = lazy and overpaid.

[UPDATE]: Apologies to the self-important grammar Nazis for the spell check adding a "r" to Wetzel's name. I'll also add that "bad journalism" isn't poor grammar or a lack of spell checking. That's being "human," especially when your site doesn't have a gaggle of interns or proof readers to double-check that stuff. Bad journalism is getting the story or the facts wrong, which ~~Wretzel~~... er, Wetzel did.

Shallow Thoughts & Nearsighted Observations

Ted Bartlett — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:30:18 -0000

More photos » by Nick Wass - AP

about 1 month ago: Denver Broncos wide receiver Brandon Marshall is stopped by Washington Redskins cornerback DeAngelo Hall during the third quarter of the NFL football game, Nov. 15, 2009 in Landover, Md. (AP Photo/Nick Wass)

Browse more photos »

Happy Tuesday, friends, and welcome to another edition of Shallow Thoughts & Nearsighted Observations. Here we are again, with another loss to contend with. This one is worse than the last two, because this one looked like a sure victory when we were marking off W's and L's on the schedule. Of course, if Kyle Orton didn't get hurt, it probably is a W, and the Broncos are still sitting on a 1-game lead over the Chargers. Since that's not the way it played out, we have to do the other thing.

We'll get into the details, from soup to chocolate cake, and make some sense of all this, because that's what we do here. We'll explore what happened, we'll find some things to feel positive about, and we'll have some fun. Out of the echo chamber, and into the fire, y'all. Ready..... BEGIN!!!!

1. There's a certain interconnectedness to a football game, and its outcome, among all phases of the game, and all 45 active players. I've talked about this many times before, and John Bena called the loss a team effort in his postgame writeup. I would call this a team effort whose final score is mostly attributable to the poor second half play of the offense, and mostly, of Chris Simms.

What I mean by that is this. Over the first 6 games of the season, the Broncos led the league in scoring defense. They were especially strong defensively in the second half of games. That trend has been turned on its head the last 3 weeks. The last two weeks, especially, I believe that the main reason why the defense struggled in the second half was that they were on the field for too many plays, due to the struggles of the offense. Each side of the ball needs to help the other. The Broncos have been getting shut down on offense, and worn down on defense, and it's been difficult to watch.

Al Michaels and Cris Collinsworth were going on and on Sunday night about how the Colts led the NFL in scoring defense heading into this week. If you've watched the Colts, they don't even have a particularly good defense, if there is any chance you can run the ball against them. They have allowed so few points because they deliberately shorten the game when they're on offense, and because once they get a lead, the strength of their defense comes to the fore. They rush the passer well with four men, and drop 7 men into cover-2. If you stay out of situations that are favorable to Indianapolis, you can gash their defense.

This is what has been happening to the Broncos as well. Remember - in the first 6 games, the offense did its best work in the second half of games. They possessed the ball, they took their time, and they methodically controlled the games. When the defense was on the field, they were fresh, they substituted frequently, and they made plays to get off the field quickly.

Kyle Orton played great in the first half Sunday, just as he'd played very well in the first half of the Pittsburgh game, (outside the one interception). For all the hollering that went on about his lack of deep throwing, he threw a couple very nice deep balls for TDs to Brandon Marshall, and he just barely missed another to Eddie Royal. That opened the field vertically. He also did a very nice job on a few bootleg throws to Tony Scheffler, and a crossing pattern to Marshall. Those plays stretched the field horizontally.

The Broncos had Washington where they wanted them. Remember, they moved the ball on the possession where Correll Buckhalter fumbled, and they had the 17-play drive at the end of the first half, to take the 3-point lead. The Orton injury changed the entire complexion of the game. Simms simply couldn't complete a pass, and didn't seem to know where to go with the ball, and a lot of good work by Knowshon Moreno was wasted.

Most teams will struggle when they lose their starting QB. That's a function of the fact that there aren't 32 good QBs in the NFL, let alone 64 of them. I came into this game thinking that the Broncos are in good shape with Simms, if they needed to use him. I hope that he shows better if he has to play against San Diego, after a week of first-team reps. I still do tend to think that Simms can play.

You hate to have a game get away from you because your backup QB couldn't cut it. The only thing worse would be if two games got away for that reason. I expect that Josh McDaniels will have Simms ready to go next week, and that the gameplan will play to his strengths, if they need to use him.

You have to be careful not to let one game unduly affect an evaluation of a team. All the time, teams lay eggs in games, and lose (or nearly lose) to teams they should blow out. Look no further than New Orleans on Sunday, who seemingly tried to lose to St. Louis. Not to say that Dallas should have blown out Green Bay, but they shouldn't have gotten dominated like they did, either.

There's a lot of Chicken Little stuff going on here, and the one thing that will stop it is a victory against San Diego next week. Yes, I know that the Chargers are on a winning streak and the Broncos are on a losing streak. Remember when the Broncos had won 6 in a row, and the Ravens had lost 3 in a row? The Broncos can beat San Diego, which we know, because they already have this season. If they win that game, they'll re-take command of the division, with a one-game lead, and a sweeping of the head-to-head matchup.

2. In the big-time matchup of the week, the Colts got a win against the Patriots, and on Monday, Bill Belichick is being blamed by everybody who doesn't like him personally (AKA just about everyone). The fact is, Belichick has never curried favor with the media, and reporters tend to be critical of you every chance they get, if you don't pay them their due deference.

Joe Biden could tell you all about how that works. He never trusted the media after their treatment of the death of his first wife and daughter in 1972, and it always hurt him later, particularly in his two Presidential bids. John McCain and Barack Obama both have very deft touches with the media, and longstanding strategies of providing them a lot of access, and it was no accident that both were the nominees of their parties in 2008. If you're going to be a public figure, there's a clear benefit to cultivating relationships with reporters. The thing is, not everybody has the stomach for it, and Belichick is one of those guys who doesn't. Brett Favre benefits immensely from his relationship-building efforts, to the point of it being sickening most of the time. I heard somewhere recently that Favre spends hours with the TV guys on Saturday afternoons, as long as they want to hang out, and they really can't help but love on him.

Back to the lecture at hand, I would have done exactly the same thing as Belichick in that game situation, in going for it on 4th and 2 from his own 28. Why did he do it? Because he was pretty close to certain that he would lose the game if he punted, that's why.

Let's say you go by the book, and punt. Over all 2,293 punts in the NFL in 2008, the average net change in field position was 39.53 yards. The right call, if you ask Peter King, or others, was to punt, and give Manning the ball at his own 32, with about 2 minutes, and all 3 timeouts left. I say that that is choosing to lose the game in a way that will leave the coach blameless, as far as the idiot media is concerned. Well, he trusted his defense, and he played the percentages; it's not the coach's fault. Except he didn't play the percentages.

First of all, let's get this nonsense about trusting your defense dispensed with. You should always trust your defense. Former defensive players like Tedy Bruschi, Matt Bowen, and old friend Tom Jackson love this line of thinking, but it's utter horse (manure). You should only trust your defense if you think they are likely to make the stop, and win you the game. If you think they aren't, then it's a fool's errand to trust them. You say to them, hey, realistically, you guys probably weren't going to stop Peyton Manning, which really doesn't make you much different from any other team's defense. There is no room for blind machismo, or making a statement, or worrying about hurt feelings; this is about winning football games, nothing more.

I didn't spend a great deal of time on it, but I took a look at every game recap for the Colts since 2005. (I think 4 ½ seasons is a reasonable sample size.) Since then, including the postseason, Manning has had the ball late in the game, trailing, on 19 occasions which I counted. He came through to either tie or take the lead 15 times, which is a 79% success rate. (In 2007, he was 1-for-4, which was pretty aberrant for this sample. Two of those misses were against the strong 2007 Chargers, whom the Colts struggled to pass-protect against.)

Here's the deal. Statistically, you have a 60% chance of picking up 4th and 2, but that probability is almost certainly greater, due to the fact that you have an outstanding offense, and the Colts have an average-at-best defense. If I were Belichick, I would have put my conversion probability at 70% for that play. That same source says that an average team returning a punt, given those field position- and time parameters, scores 53% of the time. We already know Manning succeeds 79% of the time, because he's one of the greatest QBs ever.

You can choose to probably win, or you can choose to probably lose, in one moment. What do you choose?

Belichick chose to probably win, and came up on the side where the probable outcome wasn't the actual outcome. Serious poker players know exactly what I am talking about here. Sometimes, you play the hand correctly, and you go all-in with the best cards, but you lose anyway. It's a fact of life. You accept it, and you don't complain about it, because you know you made the right call, regardless of the outcome. The next time you're faced with the same situation, you do the same thing, again, because it was the right call.

When I got home Monday night, all I saw and heard was TV talking heads second-guessing the decision. Stuart Scott pretty much butchered the stats, but he actually cited our friends at AdvancedNFLStats.com. The shockingly anti-intellectual Steve Young promptly claimed that the stats aren't legitimate (except they are). We got to hear from Tedy Bruschi how he'd feel as a defensive player on the Patriots, as if that's germane to anything at all. Trent Dilfer's blood boils when he hears the "other side" of the argument, AKA the correct side. Blah, blah, blah. (Sorry, brief possession by an ex-wife-like-entity again.)

Just imagine the reaction if Kevin Faulk had made the 2 yards. The stories today would have been about the stones on Belichick, and how he is such a great coach to make a risky call. It would be like Mike Shanahan going for 2 in the Hochuli Game last season. (Shanahan correctly thought that was his best chance to win. He felt he had a better-than-50 percent chance of scoring the conversion, and he knew that he had a 50% chance of winning a coin toss, and about a 98% chance that the Chargers would score in overtime, if he lost the toss.)

I'm no great defender of Belichick, the man, but when he's right, he's right. If it's an average QB, and an average offense, you might punt in that situation, but against Manning, that's always going to be the wrong call on 4th and 2. Once again, Belichick is smarter than the average bear, and smarter than every member of the football MSM.

3. Information From My Eyes - Broncos at Redskins

a. All four deep throws Orton made were good throws. Eddie Royal misjudged the one incompletion, and Brandon Marshall got out-fought by DeAngelo Hall on the second, but both were definitely well-thrown balls.

b. That fake field goal was a debacle, but I don't personally blame Mike Priefer. My goat on that play is Darrell Reid, who was telling Marcus Thomas to cover Mike Sellers, while he decided to contain the left edge of the offense, as the play flowed right. Alphonso Smith caught some initial blame, but I disagree there. He was in deep center field, and flowed with the play, like anybody would coach him to. Who knew Hunter Smith could throw back across the field?

c. Ryan Clady got beat badly once on Sunday. That doesn't happen often at all, obviously. That's the first sack he allowed that I would say was fully on him.

d. From the department of good news, Matt Prater doesn't seem to be having a second-half slump this season.

e. I was very impressed with Knowshon Moreno's vision and quickness on Sunday.

f. I've already made my evaluation of Mitch Berger, so everybody knows where I am at on that one. I saw somewhere where Frank Schwab, some beat reporter, speculated that Mitch Berger's 65-yard punt might save his job. If a kick that went about 42 yards in the air, and rolled 23 on the ground can do that, something absurd is going on.

g. I had a busy workday Monday, which set my schedule back, and is unfortunately going to preclude me from taking the time to do Between The Lines this week.

On watching the game a second time, though, it occurred to me that the bulk of Washington's success in running the ball was on zone-blocked plays. As I think about it, the Broncos haven't faced much of that this season at all; really just Oakland, who does it crappily. That's really something to work on, because the lateral movement seemed to unsettle the Broncos defensive line.

h. D.J. Williams got blocked a lot, and took a lot of bad angles. Again. This is getting to be an annoying habit.

i. Andra Davis continued to be a bright spot. He is a terrific blitzer and has a great sense of timing for delaying his rush. His missed tackle on that Devin Thomas catch and run in the 4th quarter was bad, but he otherwise graded out very well.

j. On a painful second pass watching the game, Chris Simms lacked timing with the receivers, as much as anything. Every throw was a little late. It seems like Orton may be able to play next Sunday, but if it's Simms, I hope a week's worth of reps will help him build some timing.

4. Information From My Eyes - Other Games:

a. I was really curious to see the Buffalo-Tennessee game, and I recorded the Short Cut overnight, and watched the game Monday evening. Why would I care about this game? Well, the two teams played in the Hall of Fame Game, way back when it was still warm in Cleveland, and my girlfriend at the time called at halftime to break up with me.

In that game, the Bills couldn't block Tennessee, and the Titans looked like a Super Bowl team. So, I wanted to watch Sunday's game, because I wanted a good sense of where these two teams are. Tennessee probably isn't going to make the playoffs, after starting 0-6, but they've righted their ship, and they'd be trouble if they did make it. Their defensive line is still nasty, and I continue to be impressed with the job William Hayes is doing in replacing Jevon Kearse.

b. On the other side, the Bills still are below average on their offensive line. Their two highly-drafted rookies, Eric Wood, and Andy Levitre, particularly struggled, as they both had in the preseason game. Levitre even ended up playing some LT, due to an injury, and he really struggled outside. Wood got pushed backwards consistently in the passing game, and he's been generally pretty good as a rookie. The Bills need to shore up their offensive line in the offseason, and I am sure their new head coach will make that a priority, if they hire a competent one.

c. I am ready to make a pronouncement. If Vince Young couldn't run, he'd be the second coming of Trent Dilfer. He really isn't much of a thrower of the ball, and he leaves too much air under his throws. You can get by with him in a run-heavy offense, which is what the Titans really are.

Because he can run, he adds a useful element, and the team is really dangerous on option plays, and QB runs. His running ability can dictate that teams play man-to-man defense, and keep a guy out of coverage to spy him. Really, the Titans are back to being the 10-6ish team they were in 2007. I think they'll ultimately decide to stick with Young for next season, and look to build up the interior of their offensive line, and their back 7 on defense.

d. It seems like forever ago, but I did watch the Chicago-San Francisco game intently last Thursday. I think my first thought that I'd like to share is that the Bears defense played like they had some pride. I think Tommie Harris playing well made a huge difference. He is really the key to their whole scheme. I ripped him, and them, last week, and I told the guy from WCG who took exception that I'd say when they played well on defense. They did.

e. I don't really feel like I should say anything about Jay Cutler, because this column aims to stay away from saying obvious things. I'll just say it must be nice to have so many apologists when you mess up. He's like the second coming of Ronald Reagan with how teflon he is.

(Tangential ST&NO story - Reagan is a member of my fraternity. When he died in June of 2004, I was a senior at CSU, and President of my chapter, and I was asked to go on local television, to talk about Reagan as a fraternity man. Our guys did a fundraiser, and jumped on a trampoline for 54 straight days in the 80s, to break a Guinness record, while Frater Ronnie was POTUS. He sent us a congratulatory letter, so I focused on that with the news chick, Angie Lau. I had nothing but nice things to say, as Ronnie was definitely a good fraternity man.)

f. Peter King is really proud of himself for naming San Francisco's Aubrayo Franklin a midseason All-Pro as a NT. When Franklin got that scoring-area INT early on last Thursday, I kind of groaned, because I knew there was going to be some crowing about it.

I never have felt like Franklin jumped out, so I watched him closely, and my review is mixed. He didn't play a lot of snaps, so I wonder about his conditioning. He did play pretty stout against the run at times, and I felt like he was a good player overall when he was on the field. I could easily name 10-12 interior defensive players who are better, though. I guess it's fun to have a guy who is your guy, though.

g. Is Marc Bulger a veteran QB? I have always thought he was, but his command of clock management seemed really bad on Sunday. The Rams had a pretty good shot to beat the Saints, and Bulger and his receivers blew it. Man, I can't tell you how much I would hate to be associated with that team, in any capacity. It's got to be so disheartening to have no talent, be almost completely uncompetitive, then have a chance to beat an undefeated team, and blow it. Can you imagine what it's like to be a fan of such a team?

h. Reggie Bush had a really big game for the Saints on Sunday, stepping up from his usual "highly-paid-decoy" role. It's interesting to speculate on how the Saints value him. Obviously, they don't think he's a full-time RB, but he's paid like he's Adrian Peterson. I'd be happy to have him as a swing player, between RB and WR, but he's a backup at both positions, and I'd only pay him backup money. We'll soon see what the Saints think, because if I recall correctly, his contract is pretty well back-loaded.

i. Josh Freeman continues to look like he's the real deal for the Buccaneers, and Raheem Morris continues to look like he's gotten his bearings as a Head Coach. Both did a nice job in Sunday's game, despite Miami's comeback victory.

j. Speaking of Miami, I want to address the "Wildcat." The Dolphins are the only team which has had a lot of success with it, and every time they have a game with limited success, somebody speculates that the "trend" has run its course.

The thing is, Miami doesn't treat it like a trend. They treat it as a key part of the way they play offense, which puts their best players on the field together. They are committed to it, and they will continue to run it. They trade the disadvantage of being formationally unlikely to throw for the advantage of having 2-3 players who are good ball-carriers, who might get the ball in the running game. Other teams are finding that the direct-snap game maybe doesn't work for them. For Miami, it will continue to be an important part of their gameplan.

k. Joey Porter has had a pretty sub-par year, and he was a healthy scratch on Sunday. That raised some eyebrows, and Tony Sparano wouldn't comment on it. It actually parallels Adalius Thomas basically being shut down by the Patriots. Both teams are showing that having a big name and a big salary doesn't guarantee playing time, if you aren't producing on the field. Expect both players to be released after the season.

l. Another game I decided to watch on Monday was Jacksonville at the Jets. The Jets miss Kris Jenkins terribly, and their defense is nowhere near as good as it was when he was healthy. They are having to scheme to stop the inside run, and to keep Bart Scott and David Harris clean, and these things used to just happen. I expect New England to blow them out this coming week.

m. I can see why people like Mark Sanchez, but I continue not to be a fan. He's well-coached, and he has excellent fundamentals. I just think he's very limited as a natural thrower of the ball. I consider him to be a poor man's Matt Ryan, which is another way of calling him a middle class man's Chad Pennington.

Sanchez plays in a windy place, which I have noted before, and that's going to always be an issue. Another issue is that the offensive scheme he is playing in is very vertical, and Sanchez is a poster boy for the West Coast Offense. Rex Ryan inherited Brian Schottenheimer as offensive coordinator, but I don't think Schottenheimer and Sanchez are a very good match. I have to wonder if the Jets don't make a change in the offseason, to bring in somebody to make the passing game's design more horizontal. Mike Shanahan could do wonders with Sanchez, although he won't be going to New York.

Really, as I think about it, if Sanchez and Jason Campbell could trade offensive coaching staffs, they'd probably both be much better off. Two owners traded teams once; why couldn't this happen?

n. There was a crazy sequence in the third quarter, where Sanchez threw an interception to Quentin Groves, then Maurice Jones-Drew fumbled at the goal line, and then Braylon Edwards fumbled at the end of a 41-yard catch. It was a whole lot of ugly going on at once, like the perennially sloppy tendencies of the Jaguars were rubbing off on the Jets.

o. Torry Holt was a great player for many years, despite playing for some obscure St. Louis teams. Really, you could make a case that he was a better player than a few Hall of Famers. (How about Art Monk, Steve Largent, and Lynn Swann to name a few?) I would go so far as to say that he was better than any WR the Broncos have had in my lifetime, a little ahead of Rod Smith.

My point in giving Holt credit, is that I have to say that I think he is getting pretty close to the end of the line. He has really struggled to get any separation, in the times I have watched him this season. He had two strong games, against St. Louis (bad defense) and Seattle (garbage time in a 41-0 game), but I haven't been impressed with his recent work.

p. I loved the call by the Jaguars to have Jones-Drew take a knee and run the clock out. His apology to his fantasy owners made me cringe, though. I may be 7-3 in the official MHR league, but fantasy football is at odds with my beliefs about football, and I have a hard time reconciling the two things.

q. I couldn't talk myself into watching the Cincinnati-Pittsburgh game. Sorry, I know it was a key game, but a game with zero offensive touchdowns offends my sensibilities. (Just in case you were wondering why I had nothing on this game.) I'm sure it was ugly, and I feel fine, personally, having seen the highlights. When I walk into a smelly restroom, I get out as quick as possible. No need to hang around for half an hour, to have a good idea what happened there.

r. Jake Delhomme had a dangerously solid game on Sunday. It was the type of fool's gold performance that makes the regime think they are okay with him as their QB, and really, Jake has been having those games his whole career. The Panthers are suddenly 4-5, and back in the picture for a Wild Card spot, but I really believe that they need a better QB if they ever want to really compete for a championship.

s. Matt Ryan struggled mightily again on Sunday, and his two interceptions were a lot of the reason the Falcons lost the game. His first INT, in the second quarter, led to a TD which set the Falcons behind 21-10. The one he threw in the 4th quarter was converted 3 plays later into the TD which put the game away for Carolina.

Don't get me wrong; Ryan is mostly a good QB, but he has definite limitations, which I have highlighted in the past. He really struggles to beat tight coverage, and he's seen a lot of it lately.

t. Speaking of Hall of Fame-caliber guys who look washed up, old friend Jason Elam seems to have really lost his fastball. He's now 9 for 14, and he's only 3 for 6 between 30 and 39 yards. I would be surprised if he kicks after this season.

u. I always thought Beanie Wells was soft when he was at Ohio State, and he didn't do a lot early this season to change my mind. Lately, though, he's shown a lot better, and he's a big reason why the Cardinals are 6-3, and squarely in control of the NFC West. I've also been more impressed with the play of RT Levi Brown than ever before. He's been blowing some people off the ball in the running game.

v. The Chargers have been really tough in the scoring area lately. Of course, the Eagles helped them out by not even trying to run the ball down there. You have to make the defense think that they have to defend everything, or else they are at a distinct advantage. Only getting field goals of 18, 25, and 25 yards on visits deep into San Diego territory was the difference in that game. A defense can get shredded, as the Chargers did, and if they toughen up in the scoring area, they make up for it. A lot of Donovan McNabb's 450 yards were low-quality.

w. The Chargers sure are paying Darren Sproles a lot of money not to participate very much on offense. He's a lot like Reggie Bush, in being a highly-paid decoy who is never going to be much more than what he is.

x. Hey, Adam Schefter. From a money guy, "large" means thousand. When you say "two hundred fifty thousand large," that means $250 Million. He said that on Monday Night Countdown (Served by Applebee's... really). People misspeak all the time; I just wanted to make sure he knows what "large" means. This is coming from a helpful place.

y. I have to hand it to the Browns. They played really well on defense Monday night. Their offense is just so terrible, that it's no use. Those defensive players are playing for jobs next year, whether it be in Cleveland under a new regime, or elsewhere. Guys who show some pride and effort on bad teams will have some good film for their agents to shop them with. Guys who pack it in will be out of the league, like so many guys who played defense in Denver last season.

z. I actually like to listen to MNF nowadays, as I finish ST&NO every week. The main reason is that I actually think that both Ron Jaworski and Jon Gruden are value-adding to listen to. The guys at Mickey Mouse-land spent so many years looking for a good third man, with such horrible results, and they've finally found a good 3-man booth. I actually don't like Mike Tirico, who is good at basketball, but bad at football play-by-play (much like Joe Buck is great with baseball, and abysmal with football).

5. I know the Bengals have always been willing to take on troubled players, but it's hard to imagine what they are thinking in reportedly bringing in Larry Johnson. As LJ was to be the key RB on the Shallow Thoughts team in the official MHR Fantasy League, I can tell you that his performance has been garbage this season. Some of his bad performance can certainly be attributed to bad offensive line play in Kansas City, but Johnson is clearly lacking quickness to the hole, and the leg drive he had in his prime. I just don't see what value the Bengals are going to get out of him.

I've reached midnight, and unfortunately, I need to call it a night. My company is in the process of being acquired, which has caused me to be much busier than normal at this time of the month, and I have an early morning meeting Tuesday. I hope you enjoy this edition of ST&NO, and have a great week. I'll see you all again next Tuesday, hopefully with time to give you my normal output.

Game Recap: Colts defeat Patriots, 35-34

MaPatsFan — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:07:57 -0000

More photos » by Elise Amendola - AP

about 1 month ago: New England Patriots NFL football head coach Bill Belichick speaks at a news conference in Foxborough, Mass. Monday, Nov. 16, 2009, in the aftermath of Sunday's 35-34 loss to the Indianapolis Colts. (AP Photo/Elise Amendola)

Browse more photos »

I am stunned, but not surprised. I am stunned because as our biggest rival in the AFC, a win would've meant a lot: a chance to go 2-4 against Indy, a better face-to-face record for potential home field advantage (if tie breakers come into play), seeding... you name it. Most of all, I simply wanted to beat Indy. And for a large portion of the game, New England had the upper hand.

I am not surprised because the Colts are that good. When the Patriots get up on a team with as wide a margin as they had, it's usually lights out. Rivals simply can't recover and usually get stymied in all three phases of the game. Not so with the Colts, especially Peyton Manning. I remember thinking to myself that Manning just wasn't clicking with his receivers Reggie Wayne, Pierre Garcon, and Austin Collie. If he DID begin clicking, it would create problems.

For most of the first half, Tom Brady appeared to be firing on all cylinders and doing an excellent job of finding the weak spots in the Indy defense. As I discussed in my game preview, picking on the young, inexperienced Indy secondary was one of the keys to success and Brady did a good job of that. With the half coming to a close, Brady had managed 24 points and our defense held Peyton Manning and crew to 14, an admirable task. I remember thinking, "This is cool. We seem to have control of the game, but it ain't over until it's over." Boy, was I right.

The third quarter remained scoreless which was ok in my book; maintaining a 10 point lead against Indy for 15 minutes is a VERY good thing. Then, as if to guarantee the win, Wes Welker broke loose for a 69 yard punt return to the Indy 7 yard line. A 2 yard pass to Kevin Faulk was followed by a beautiful leaping grab by Randy Moss for a 5 yard TD. Brady put the ball where the 6-4 Moss could catch it and no one else. 31-14 - a 3 score lead with 14:23 left in the 4^th quarter. As if in response, the Indy offense drove down the field with 5 plays in 2:04 minutes to reduce the lead to 10. I remember thinking, "Uh oh." The Patriots, working off of a Jonathan Wilhite interception, marched back down the field, only to settle for a Stephen Gostkowski field goal; 34-21.

Some call it momentum, but I call it pacing. NE seems to have a methodical, calculated approach to pacing a game - much like our head coach is perceived to be. After teams are lulled into this pacing, we switch it up. The Colts' hurry up offense is a major weapon in their arsenal and one that appears to win games on a regular basis. It's built for sprinting down the field and sets a frenetic pace that defenses have a hard time adjusting to. The result is a defense that can't work in substitutions, causing them to get gassed, especially the large defensive linemen.

In yet another sprint, the Colts scored on a 6 play, 1:49 minute drive; 34-28. A really big, "UH OH!!" NE would get the ball on their 20 after a McAfee touchback and before the drive even started, Brady burned timeout #2. Kevin Faulk went up the middle for no gain. Timeout #3. Then, Brady went to his old standby, Wes Welker, for an 8 yarder up the middle, putting us at third down and 2. Another pass to Welker was broken up by Powers, leaving us with fourth and 2. Decision time.

We've discussed the odds ad nauseam on this site. From a statistical perspective, going for it was the right thing to do. And Belichick trusted his offense to convert. Knee the ball 3 times, punt away, and Manning has almost no time to score. That was Bill's calculated risk. There's more. Belichick won't say this, but his defense was exhausted and he probably felt the offenses' chances of converting that fourth and 2 were better than the defense's chances of sustaining another Peyton Manning drive, even if a Chris Hanson punt would've planted Indy at their 30 or so. After all, the Indy offense had just demonstrated how they can score with a pair of 2 minute sprints. Hindsight is 20/20 and we now know Belichick's calculated risk more than likely lost the game. We all know what happened next. Handing the ball to a Manning lead offense on your own 29 is most likely suicide. And it was.

1 single play, player, or coaching decision does not win or lose a game; I have never subscribed to that theory because it ignores the hundreds of plays and decisions that lead up to it. But there are some that are certainly memorable.

To correct a misconception, the Laurence Maroney fumble would not have been the difference maker in the game. Horrid to see, but Indy did nothing with that gift, punted away to Welker for a 69 yard return, and a 5 yard TD pass to Moss followed. The most a LoMo TD could've accomplished was to keep 2 minutes on the clock.
The 31 yard PI against Darius Butler with 3:03 left in the fourth was questionable, but Austin Collie made a veteran play by recognizing he didn't have the ball and slowing down, allowing Butler to collide with him and giving the refs the impression Butler impeded his progress.
A questionable timeout to start NE's last drive. We may never know what the reasoning was, but Brady felt he needed it.
Not converting with 4:17 left in the fourth, forcing a field goal. RedZone efficiency (or lack thereof) strikes again.

There are a number of positives from last night:

The rust appears to have worn off. Brady and his receivers are connecting well and didn't seem to make any mental errors like we saw in the beginning of the season.
Sebastian Vollmer is a beast. Any rookie who can take on Dwight Freeney and be relatively successful is ok in my book. He's made a case for a starting position at left tackle while Matt Light should be moved to right tackle and Nick Kaczur benched; Colts DE Robert Mathis abused Kaczur, allowing too much pressure on Brady.
The return of Julian Edelman was good to see. The more receivers we have, the more opponents have to worry about. Spreading the field is a good thing.
This game was so close, it came down to a yard. If we can do that against Indy, just think what we can accomplish against the rest of the NFL.

That's all I can stomach for now. I'd like to send a shoutout to the Stampede Blue crowd for a fun week of cross blogging leading up to this matchup. We had many well mannered and thoughtful exchanges which is what it's all about for me.