Really good game, at least in terms of entertainment. If you told me the Panthers would be in this game after failing to convert on 4th right before midfield, turned the ball over via an INT and muffed punt, I woud have been shocked.
Other thoughts:
Kudos to Dave Canales and his coaching staff. I thought they did a great job. Their team played hard, played well, and I thought they had a great game plan. I watched the regular season game between these two teams, and the Panthers ran the ball a lot, sometimes in heavy personnel. They held on to the all for about 13 minutes in the 3rd. In this game, they passed more, and I’m guessing they thought the Rams would be prepared to stop the run. This could have been a way the coaching staff got to cute, but it didn’t turn out that way.
In a way, the game was close because the Rams missed on some explosive plays (e.g., Stafford missing a wide-open go route, Nacua dropping what should have been an easy completion on a go route). Stafford had a bad INT, and also the Rams allowed a blocked punt, which was huge.
On a similar note, I feel like the Rams hurt themselves when they get away from running the ball from under center, passing from shotgun a little too much. Their run game is awesome in that they can consistently get 3-5 yards. When they keep going to that, and then sprinkle in passes, they’re unstoppable.
Packers@Bears
A tale of two halves. The Packers were dominant, and Caleb Williams seemed to be unraveling and the Bears defense was terrible. I don’t know what happened in the second half, but the Bears defense looked dominant. And then it was McNanus’s turn to fall apart.
The thing that stood out to me the most was that the Jaguars seemed to be fairly effective running the ball from under center, but they went away from that. (I’m saying this so often, I’m wondering if my bias is blinding me.) To me, leaning on the RBs seem preferrable to leaning on Lawrence, who seems shaky as a starting QB.
Is it just me, or was something wrong with the Steeler defense, especially the run defense, and maybe specifically the DTs? The Texans don’t have a good OL, but their interior OL was getting really good push, and making good holes for the RBs. If someone missed parts of the game, they might not have come away with this impression–but I’d argue that’s because the Texans utilized shotgun passing, even though Stroud turned the ball over 3 times, and bobbled a snap and had a snap go to him when he wasn’t ready. The offense was almost giving away the game.
Luckily, the Texan defense was dominant. They look really good, really physical. Between them and the Seahawks, I’m not sure who I would choose. I might actually lean towards the Texans. It’s close.
If you guys watched the game, I would be curious to know if you agree with me or not.
Oh, one other question: Do you guys think this is one of the worst playoff teams you’ve seen? I feel like that. It’s not that there are any bad teams per se, but they also seem just OK or good, but not much more than that. I fee like the Seahawks and the Rams have the most complete teams, but they both have some vulnerabilities, especially the ball security of the Seahawks (Darnold).
I feel like the biggest reason for me to think the playoff teams aren’t viewed as great is a bunch of the star QBs and maybe stars in general are not in the playoffs. We only got Stafford and Allen. We are missing Mayfield, Burrow, Lamar, and Mahomes. And the teams these QBs are on, plus a team like the Lions, are the teams people view as being the good teams. The other reason is the best teams this year all are built on defense. Defensive teams don’t look as impressive especially when they don’t get good QB play.
Forget about how others view the teams–how do you view them? To me, they seem not much more than good, maybe some are much more than that in some areas, but fairly weak in others (e.g., Texans defense and offense). I feel like there really won’t be true upsets, especially with the remaining teams. It wouldn’t be really surprising if both one seeds lose in the first game.
The turnovers and that last DPI in OT basically cost the Bills the game.
The Broncos defense is good, but for a good defense, their run defense is not very good in my opinion. The Broncos offense isn’t all that great, either. Overall, they seem like a relatively weak #1 seed.
Also, not only do I think the Bills should have ran more, maybe feature different runs, including constraint plays (e.g., end arounds). More importantly, I don’t think Joe Brady does a good job of integrating and mixing run and pass.
ST getting a TD and D getting a bunch of turnovers, and I would included 4th down stops in that. The Hawks offense didn’t have to do much, but the seemed to run the ball fairly well.
Darnold surprised me by not having any turnovers–and I don’t think he had anything really close to turnover. (Maybe one play where a defender came close to jumping a pass.)
The Seahawks are going to be very difficult to beat if they can come close to replicating the above.
Turnovers, turnovers, and more turnovers. Stroud can make some nice plays, but he makes some really awful ones, too. Some of his errant throws, that merely lead to incompletions, are really bad as well–to the point where you say something is wrong.
The Texans are a team lead by a dominant defense. The Patriots, to me, are more a balanced team. The balanced team won. Maye made enough plays, and the Patriot run game came alive at the end to put the game away. The Patriot defense also dominated the LOS.
I like the Patriots over the Broncos. I think the Broncos run defense doesn’t look so great. And their offense, overall, doesn’t look so great as well.
I thought the Dennis Allen and the Bears defense played a really good game, keeping them in it. Caleb Williams’s accuracy looked really off all night. His pass catchers had to make some really good catches to help him. Yes, he makes that miraculous TD throw, but he lost the game with turnovers as well.
The Rams to me hurt themselves by getting away from the run.
I’m curious to hear whether you guys agree or disagree with some of my impressions of the playoffs so far.
The quality of the playoff teams seems low–lower than other years. I don’t think there is a really great team, at least not one that consistently plays great.
Most of the playoff teams don’t seem to have great ball security. Maybe the Rams are the best, but I don’t think they’re rock solid–and I think their ball security depends on the effectiveness of the run game, and if number of rushing attempts.
Teams are being a little too reckless with regard to going for it on 4th down. Defenses seem better in 4th down situations.
Offenses are getting too fixated on passing the ball and neglecting the run too much, when they really shouldn’t. (I felt this way watching the Bills, Bears, and Rams.)
Tony Kornheiser and Mike Wilbon have been saying all season it’s been one of the best seasons because there haven’t been clear favorites, but I’m with you. I’m a lot more forgiving than you about a football game — I can watch just about any game with interest, and not just because of fantasy.
I started the season thinking the Bills had finally figured it out. They were winning games with James Cook when Josh Allen wasn’t his best. And then they were winning games on Josh Allen by himself, which is exciting to watch but doesn’t bode well for a team’s long-term success.
I still don’t think the Seahawks and Broncos are very good, and they were the top seeds in their conferences. I tell you, if they win this weekend, it’s going to be the Super Bowl I’ll least look forward to since going back to the Steelers and Rams. I also don’t think the Bears and Patriots are very good.
The thing that saved the season for me was watching the Falcons, Saints, and Dolphins kind of figure a few things out. They were too late, but they made games interesting to me. You can’t take the fight out of the dog, and all that.
Tony Kornheiser and Mike Wilbon have been saying all season it’s been one of the best seasons because there haven’t been clear favorites, but I’m with you.
That’s helpful. It makes me feel that maybe it’s not just me (and I assume you were referring to the quality of the teams. And by the way if some fans like the parity that results from this, that’s fine. I personally don’t really care for this, though.)
They were winning games with James Cook when Josh Allen wasn’t his best. And then they were winning games on Josh Allen by himself,hey were winning games with James Cook when Josh Allen wasn’t his best. And then they were winning games on Josh Allen by himself,…
I feel like they did a bad job of marrying the run and pass games, especially using the run to set up passing opportunities. Compare them to the way McVay does this, especially when he has Stafford under center. It’s old school pro-style football, with the run game setting up the pass, and vice-versa.
The Bills had the run game to do this. They have some solid TEs as well that could make this come alive. My sense is that Allen is not comfortable under center, and/or isn’t so effective if he’s throwing the ball under 30 times a game. (Or maybe he would be really unhappy doing that?)
I still don’t think the Seahawks and Broncos are very good, and they were the top seeds in their conferences.
I’m curious to hear why you don’t think they’re not that good, or is this just a vague feeling?
As for the Patriots, I don’t think they’re a great team, but they seemed like one of those teams that’s good in every facet, having no glaring weaknesses. (Think of Eli Manning’s Giant teams that won the Super Bowl.)
The thing that saved the season for me was watching the Falcons, Saints, and Dolphins kind of figure a few things out
The Saints got a lot better? I kind of wrote them off.
I haven’t watched a lot of games from either team, so I’m not confident in my opinions. With that, I would have favored the Patriots, even if Nix played. The Broncos pass defense seems really good, but their run defenses seems like something that can be exploited, and I think the Patriots run game is good enough to do just that.
The Broncos offense, even with Nix, seems to struggle at times, and I think the Patriots defense is good enough for this to occur in this game. Without Nix, I would expect the Broncos to struggle even more.
The one caveat I would say: Stidham is largely an unknown quantity to the Patriots. I would guess there isn’t much game tape. If Payton really changes the offense to fit his strengths, the Patriot defense could be vulnerable. Having said that, I think this is a low-probability scenario.
Rams@Seahawks
I expect the Seahawks D/ST to play fairly well, if not great, and I think the key to the game will come down to whether the run game, of either team, can consistently keep the offense ahead of the sticks, as well as the offense that runs the ball over and over again. (30 or more carries would be a rough indicator of this.)
If the Hawks can do this, I think the Rams won’t be able able to rely on clever/complex schemes in the pass rush or pass coverage–because the run game will preoccupy them and limit their ability to do this. If they choose not to address the run game, the Hawks will gash them, control the clock and protect the football. If they devote more energy and resources to stopping the run, then I think Darnold will be able to excel.
If the Rams can do this, I think they’re almost impossible to beat. My sense is that McVay’s willingness to stick with the run, make Stafford more of a game manager and allow his RBs to win the game, will ultimately determine this. The Hawks defense has a very good run defense, but I don’t think its’s the type where they’re impossible to run against. Because of that, I think if McVay is patient (e.g., sticking with the run even if it means that some drives stall), the run game will do enough damage. and the passing game will be almost impossible to stop, and could even weaken the Seahawks defense by the end of the game.
I will concede that being patient in the way I describe isn’t necessarily easy as the Rams ST has been a vulnerability. I wouldn’t blame him if he wanted to limit punting the ball because of this. This would even more difficult if the Seahawks offense is extending drives and controlling the ball.
However, I think if he passes too much, especially from the gun, his offense can become too one-dimensional and while defending it wouldn’t necessarily easy, it’s a better match-up for the Seahawk defense. I think it increases the chances of Stafford taking hits and the Rams turning the ball over as well.
Other scenarios/predictions:
If both teams run the ball in the way I describe, I think it’ll likely be close, but I would give the edge to the Seahawks because of their D and ST.
If the Seahawks D/ST have big plays that could lead to a blowout or overcome turnovers by the Seahawks (Darnold).
If the Seahawks really isn’t consistently helping move the chains and the Hawks are relying quite a bit on Darnold, both in terms of difficult throws and the number of throws, I would expect him to turn the ball over, possibly multiple times. And this could lead to a two score victory by the Rams.
I would be really surprised if the Rams ST outplays the Seahawks ST.
For some reason, I’m lacking enthusiasm and interest in this game, as in I should be more enthusiastic. Weirdly, I have a feeling of just wanting it to be over with already.
Maybe I feel like this because my thoughts about the Seahawks winning haven’t changed. For example, I worry that Darnold will get the ball knocked around in close quarters or that the run-game won’t be consistent. If the Hawks are good in both areas, I think they win.
My sense is that too many people are writing off the Patriots. I don’t like that, because I do think that will provide motivation that can make a difference. Additionally, I think both teams are similar, almost mirror images of each other in a lot of ways, and I think the game will be close.
Daniel Jeremiah mentioned that if the Pats win Milton Williams would be the MVP. This worries me because one of the weakest links on the Hawks is their RG, Anthony Bradford. I could see see Williams making 2-3 plays that could be decisive. If the Hawks lose, I hope AB largely has a solid game (and Darnold doesn’t turn over the ball due to a tip or strip).
ST teams could be huge, as both teams seem to have good ST play.
Like other SB where the defense is the MVP, giving it to one defender is really difficult. If you had to give it to one player, though, K9 is a good choice. (Michael Dickson’s performance was also very valuable as well.)
Maye had a tough game. But really, his supporting cast really did very little to help him, especially the OL. I do feel like the Patriots went to the shotgun and abandoned the run a little too early. 12-0, they didn’t have to abandon the run. Once they did that, I thought they would really have difficulty coming back.
Sam proved me wrong. He did a great job of protecting the football. Defenders got a little close jumping his throws, maybe on two occasions, there was a tip at the LOS, but it didn’t pop into the air. Other than these situations, he did a great job, including take sacks and throwing the ball away.
The Pats ST was good, but I thought the Seahawks ST beat them.
This is the worse QB performances by both teams that I can recall in a Super Bowl. Darnold maybe made a couple nice plays, but overall, he was shaky. Maye was horrible. After watching Maye in these playoffs, I have doubts he will be a great QB. Yes, he probably played the top three defenses in the Hawks, Texans, and Broncos (add the fourth defense of the weather in the second half), but he just looks like he was “seeing ghosts” in all those games. In the Super Bowl, he was short arming throws, his accuracy was terrible and just holding the ball way too long.
Overall, Reid and I agree on the frequency of how often teams should run the ball. However, I disagree with Reid on the Pats abandoning the run too early. I thought at some point, maybe when the score was 9-0, they should have gone five wide and just go for it. Maye was looking terrible. I thought, just throw every down and see if they could get him into some kind of rhythm or break out of the slump. I thought that would have been their best chance to win. Get Maye going and hopefully turn the offense around.
This is the worse QB performances by both teams that I can recall in a Super Bowl.
I was going to agree with this, but then I thought of the Ravens-Giants Super Bowl (Trent Dilfer vs. Kerry Collins). One thing I’ll say, though: this might be one of the worst collection of QBs in the playoffs, especially in terms of ball security. Stafford is solid, but I think if a defense can hit him and make him move, he can turn the ball over.
Darnold maybe made a couple nice plays, but overall, he was shaky.
Darnold was shaky, his accuracy wasn’t good at times, but do you think the OL gave him a good opportunity to get comfortable?
Yes, he probably played the top three defenses in the Hawks, Texans, and Broncos (add the fourth defense of the weather in the second half), but he just looks like he was “seeing ghosts” in all those games.
Not only were they the three best defenses, but they faced one of the worst OLs on a Super Bowl team. The Patriot pass catchers aren’t exceptional, either. If not for terrible quarterbacking from Stroud and one disastrous mistake from the Bronco backup, and the Patriots might not have made it to the Super Bowl.
Besides the poor OL, Maye is a young player and played like it.
Also, I don’t think McDaniels did him any favors but not putting him under center and running the ball more. The Pats were having success running from UC, and the score was close enough that they could continue to do this. Add in some short passes (to counter the pass rush) and the Pats could move the chains and hold onto the ball. This could have helped the Patriot defense stay fresher and maybe they would have been able to get a turnover(s). (They came close at times to doing this.)
Maye was looking terrible. I thought, just throw every down and see if they could get him into some kind of rhythm or break out of the slump.
Part of why he was looking terrible was SEA pass rush and coverage. When this is happening, the run game has to come alive and start inflicting damage–force the Seahawk defense to worry about the run. Once that happens, that should create better opportunities for passing.
I agree there are many reasons Maye was playing horribly in the Super Bowl and in the playoffs in general. However, it doesn’t excuse how badly he played. Mahomes, last year, was rushed just as badly (or possibly worse) than Maye, and performed well (At least to me, most thought he stunk, I feel.). Yes, comparing Mahomes and Maye may be crazy, but Maye was a legitimate MVP candidate this year, and Mahomes wasn’t really in the running last year.
My biggest issue was how long Maye was holding on to the ball despite the pass rush. Not all of those sacks are on the o-line, some of them are on Maye. He may have been confused which led to him holding the ball, and hopefully he will mature out of that. But at this point, I don’t see the second coming of Tom Brady.
Give credit to the coaching of Seattle’s d-line though. They seem to really put an emphasis on keeping Maye in the pocket and not creating running lanes.
Oh, and yes, I completely agree that McDaniels was hurting his team. I think the Pats led the league in EPA or points per play. Not sure how they were able to do that with these set of players so kudos to McDaniel on that, but during the playoffs they have to be able to be able to protect the ball and, in this case, protect Maye by running shorter routes with quicker throws. I still feel the Pats should have tried to go more five wide from the shot gun and see if Maye can see the field better, but maybe those plays just aren’t in the playbook.
You thought Mahomes played well in the Super Bowl? Do you mean he performed well, considering he was under heavy pressure? That would make more sense….but I can’t really remember enough details of his performance to have a strong opinion.
Having said that, I don’t think I would even say Maye performed well under the circumstances. But I just think he’s a young QB. The fact that he was an MVP candidate could have a lot to do with a relatively easy schedule, and a down year for the NFL overall. No team was like the 2024 Eagles or Lions (fully healthy). Maybe Seattle was close, but I’m not sure I’d put them at the same level.
My biggest issue was how long Maye was holding on to the ball despite the pass rush.
I would point to the coverage, especially when the Hawks rushed 4. Generally, if a team is rushing only four, the OL has to give more time because the coverage likely will be better. This certainly true against a good defense.
I’m not completely absolving Maye, though. I think he’s just inexperienced.
And I again, I think an even bigger issue is that the Patriots became one-dimensional, especially by operating mostly out of the gun. (They couldn’t run effectively from the gun, either.) They had little chance once they became one-dimensional.
The thing is, the score was low enough for most the game, that they could have ran the ball.
I still feel the Pats should have tried to go more five wide from the shot gun and see if Maye can see the field better, but maybe those plays just aren’t in the playbook.
But you’re one-dimensional and the Hawks can ignore the run. With a guy like Macdonald as the OC, he can throw complex coverages and crazy blitzes at a young QB.
If the Pats started inflicting damage in the run game, and moved the chains, you don’t think this is could have opened up the passing game? In general, if the OL seems overwhelmed in the pass game, the run game has to be able to inflict damage. If it can’t, the offense is going to have a rough day.
My thinking is at some point in the game when the score was closer, the Pats had one chance to win the game and that was to get Maye “going” somehow. At least to me, the best chance to do that is to pass often and to get into a groove. The Pats ran on every series in the first half. They were trying to run the ball. Maybe not successfully and maybe not from under center, but they tried.
In five wide, it can make it actually harder to blitz because the defense is much more spread out and the QB can see where the rusher is coming from and throw in that direction. I’m not saying it would win them the game, but they should have done something drastically different from what they were doing.
In last year’s Super Bowl, the score got out of hand pretty quickly and the Chiefs was out of it in the middle of the second quarter. Although the Pats’ offense was being dominated, the Pats was in it. Turning Maye around in the first half to what we saw at the end of the game, was their best chance to win. I think Vrabel was thinking one turnover from his defense and he’s back in it. In general, especially in the playoffs, I like that approach. Be somewhat conservative and don’t do anything to lose the game especially early. But Maye was so bad, especially when you compare him to his MVP candidate season, my thought at the time was just try to get him back on track. It’s would be different if the Pats had a “game manager” at QB, but they had the leading candidate for MVP for most of the season.
On a side note, I was cheering for Seattle and DLaw.
My thinking is at some point in the game when the score was closer, the Pats had one chance to win the game and that was to get Maye “going” somehow. At least to me, the best chance to do that is to pass often and to get into a groove.
But even if the Patriots were struggling in pass protection? To me, if an offense is struggling in pass protection, they inflict damage in the run game–getting the defense to focus on stopping that. To just pass more–even with 5 WRs–will make the offense more one-dimensional and increase the chances of a turnover.
On this note, for the Pats to win, like the Seahawks, they absolutely could not turn the ball over. That had to have been a top priority, especially since the score was so close. The Pats defense was keeping them in the game, but the turnovers put the game out of reach.
The Pats ran on every series in the first half. They were trying to run the ball.
They ran the ball 8 times in the first half, 13 for the whole game. Some of this was due to negative plays/sacks, but it’s still too little in my view.
In five wide, it can make it actually harder to blitz because the defense is much more spread out and the QB can see where the rusher is coming from and throw in that direction.
They don’t have to blitz a lot, and they can use zone-blitzes where they end up rushing only four. But the Seahawks pass defense is their strength. Any offense that becomes one-dimensional pass offense will have very little chance of beating them in my view.
Although the Pats’ offense was being dominated, the Pats was in it. Turning Maye around in the first half to what we saw at the end of the game, was their best chance to win. I think Vrabel was thinking one turnover from his defense and he’s back in it. In general, especially in the playoffs, I like that approach. Be somewhat conservative and don’t do anything to lose the game especially early.
I agree–but I think everything you say points to running the ball more. And again, what you’re saying doesn’t work if the Pats turn the ball over. (Maye has fumbled the ball, and the pass pro was shaky.)
Rams@Panthers
Really good game, at least in terms of entertainment. If you told me the Panthers would be in this game after failing to convert on 4th right before midfield, turned the ball over via an INT and muffed punt, I woud have been shocked.
Other thoughts:
Packers@Bears
A tale of two halves. The Packers were dominant, and Caleb Williams seemed to be unraveling and the Bears defense was terrible. I don’t know what happened in the second half, but the Bears defense looked dominant. And then it was McNanus’s turn to fall apart.
It was an odd game.
Bills@Jaguars
The thing that stood out to me the most was that the Jaguars seemed to be fairly effective running the ball from under center, but they went away from that. (I’m saying this so often, I’m wondering if my bias is blinding me.) To me, leaning on the RBs seem preferrable to leaning on Lawrence, who seems shaky as a starting QB.
Texans@Steelers
Is it just me, or was something wrong with the Steeler defense, especially the run defense, and maybe specifically the DTs? The Texans don’t have a good OL, but their interior OL was getting really good push, and making good holes for the RBs. If someone missed parts of the game, they might not have come away with this impression–but I’d argue that’s because the Texans utilized shotgun passing, even though Stroud turned the ball over 3 times, and bobbled a snap and had a snap go to him when he wasn’t ready. The offense was almost giving away the game.
Luckily, the Texan defense was dominant. They look really good, really physical. Between them and the Seahawks, I’m not sure who I would choose. I might actually lean towards the Texans. It’s close.
If you guys watched the game, I would be curious to know if you agree with me or not.
Oh, one other question: Do you guys think this is one of the worst playoff teams you’ve seen? I feel like that. It’s not that there are any bad teams per se, but they also seem just OK or good, but not much more than that. I fee like the Seahawks and the Rams have the most complete teams, but they both have some vulnerabilities, especially the ball security of the Seahawks (Darnold).
I feel like the biggest reason for me to think the playoff teams aren’t viewed as great is a bunch of the star QBs and maybe stars in general are not in the playoffs. We only got Stafford and Allen. We are missing Mayfield, Burrow, Lamar, and Mahomes. And the teams these QBs are on, plus a team like the Lions, are the teams people view as being the good teams. The other reason is the best teams this year all are built on defense. Defensive teams don’t look as impressive especially when they don’t get good QB play.
Forget about how others view the teams–how do you view them? To me, they seem not much more than good, maybe some are much more than that in some areas, but fairly weak in others (e.g., Texans defense and offense). I feel like there really won’t be true upsets, especially with the remaining teams. It wouldn’t be really surprising if both one seeds lose in the first game.
Bills@Broncos
The turnovers and that last DPI in OT basically cost the Bills the game.
The Broncos defense is good, but for a good defense, their run defense is not very good in my opinion. The Broncos offense isn’t all that great, either. Overall, they seem like a relatively weak #1 seed.
Also, not only do I think the Bills should have ran more, maybe feature different runs, including constraint plays (e.g., end arounds). More importantly, I don’t think Joe Brady does a good job of integrating and mixing run and pass.
49ers@Seahawks
ST getting a TD and D getting a bunch of turnovers, and I would included 4th down stops in that. The Hawks offense didn’t have to do much, but the seemed to run the ball fairly well.
Darnold surprised me by not having any turnovers–and I don’t think he had anything really close to turnover. (Maybe one play where a defender came close to jumping a pass.)
The Seahawks are going to be very difficult to beat if they can come close to replicating the above.
Texans@Patriots
Turnovers, turnovers, and more turnovers. Stroud can make some nice plays, but he makes some really awful ones, too. Some of his errant throws, that merely lead to incompletions, are really bad as well–to the point where you say something is wrong.
The Texans are a team lead by a dominant defense. The Patriots, to me, are more a balanced team. The balanced team won. Maye made enough plays, and the Patriot run game came alive at the end to put the game away. The Patriot defense also dominated the LOS.
I like the Patriots over the Broncos. I think the Broncos run defense doesn’t look so great. And their offense, overall, doesn’t look so great as well.
Bears@Rams
I thought the Dennis Allen and the Bears defense played a really good game, keeping them in it. Caleb Williams’s accuracy looked really off all night. His pass catchers had to make some really good catches to help him. Yes, he makes that miraculous TD throw, but he lost the game with turnovers as well.
The Rams to me hurt themselves by getting away from the run.
I’m curious to hear whether you guys agree or disagree with some of my impressions of the playoffs so far.
Tony Kornheiser and Mike Wilbon have been saying all season it’s been one of the best seasons because there haven’t been clear favorites, but I’m with you. I’m a lot more forgiving than you about a football game — I can watch just about any game with interest, and not just because of fantasy.
I started the season thinking the Bills had finally figured it out. They were winning games with James Cook when Josh Allen wasn’t his best. And then they were winning games on Josh Allen by himself, which is exciting to watch but doesn’t bode well for a team’s long-term success.
I still don’t think the Seahawks and Broncos are very good, and they were the top seeds in their conferences. I tell you, if they win this weekend, it’s going to be the Super Bowl I’ll least look forward to since going back to the Steelers and Rams. I also don’t think the Bears and Patriots are very good.
The thing that saved the season for me was watching the Falcons, Saints, and Dolphins kind of figure a few things out. They were too late, but they made games interesting to me. You can’t take the fight out of the dog, and all that.
That’s helpful. It makes me feel that maybe it’s not just me (and I assume you were referring to the quality of the teams. And by the way if some fans like the parity that results from this, that’s fine. I personally don’t really care for this, though.)
I feel like they did a bad job of marrying the run and pass games, especially using the run to set up passing opportunities. Compare them to the way McVay does this, especially when he has Stafford under center. It’s old school pro-style football, with the run game setting up the pass, and vice-versa.
The Bills had the run game to do this. They have some solid TEs as well that could make this come alive. My sense is that Allen is not comfortable under center, and/or isn’t so effective if he’s throwing the ball under 30 times a game. (Or maybe he would be really unhappy doing that?)
I’m curious to hear why you don’t think they’re not that good, or is this just a vague feeling?
As for the Patriots, I don’t think they’re a great team, but they seemed like one of those teams that’s good in every facet, having no glaring weaknesses. (Think of Eli Manning’s Giant teams that won the Super Bowl.)
The Saints got a lot better? I kind of wrote them off.
Thoughts on the conference championships.
Patriots@Broncos
I haven’t watched a lot of games from either team, so I’m not confident in my opinions. With that, I would have favored the Patriots, even if Nix played. The Broncos pass defense seems really good, but their run defenses seems like something that can be exploited, and I think the Patriots run game is good enough to do just that.
The Broncos offense, even with Nix, seems to struggle at times, and I think the Patriots defense is good enough for this to occur in this game. Without Nix, I would expect the Broncos to struggle even more.
The one caveat I would say: Stidham is largely an unknown quantity to the Patriots. I would guess there isn’t much game tape. If Payton really changes the offense to fit his strengths, the Patriot defense could be vulnerable. Having said that, I think this is a low-probability scenario.
Rams@Seahawks
I expect the Seahawks D/ST to play fairly well, if not great, and I think the key to the game will come down to whether the run game, of either team, can consistently keep the offense ahead of the sticks, as well as the offense that runs the ball over and over again. (30 or more carries would be a rough indicator of this.)
If the Hawks can do this, I think the Rams won’t be able able to rely on clever/complex schemes in the pass rush or pass coverage–because the run game will preoccupy them and limit their ability to do this. If they choose not to address the run game, the Hawks will gash them, control the clock and protect the football. If they devote more energy and resources to stopping the run, then I think Darnold will be able to excel.
If the Rams can do this, I think they’re almost impossible to beat. My sense is that McVay’s willingness to stick with the run, make Stafford more of a game manager and allow his RBs to win the game, will ultimately determine this. The Hawks defense has a very good run defense, but I don’t think its’s the type where they’re impossible to run against. Because of that, I think if McVay is patient (e.g., sticking with the run even if it means that some drives stall), the run game will do enough damage. and the passing game will be almost impossible to stop, and could even weaken the Seahawks defense by the end of the game.
I will concede that being patient in the way I describe isn’t necessarily easy as the Rams ST has been a vulnerability. I wouldn’t blame him if he wanted to limit punting the ball because of this. This would even more difficult if the Seahawks offense is extending drives and controlling the ball.
However, I think if he passes too much, especially from the gun, his offense can become too one-dimensional and while defending it wouldn’t necessarily easy, it’s a better match-up for the Seahawk defense. I think it increases the chances of Stafford taking hits and the Rams turning the ball over as well.
Other scenarios/predictions:
Any thoughts on the Super Bowl?
For some reason, I’m lacking enthusiasm and interest in this game, as in I should be more enthusiastic. Weirdly, I have a feeling of just wanting it to be over with already.
Maybe I feel like this because my thoughts about the Seahawks winning haven’t changed. For example, I worry that Darnold will get the ball knocked around in close quarters or that the run-game won’t be consistent. If the Hawks are good in both areas, I think they win.
My sense is that too many people are writing off the Patriots. I don’t like that, because I do think that will provide motivation that can make a difference. Additionally, I think both teams are similar, almost mirror images of each other in a lot of ways, and I think the game will be close.
Daniel Jeremiah mentioned that if the Pats win Milton Williams would be the MVP. This worries me because one of the weakest links on the Hawks is their RG, Anthony Bradford. I could see see Williams making 2-3 plays that could be decisive. If the Hawks lose, I hope AB largely has a solid game (and Darnold doesn’t turn over the ball due to a tip or strip).
ST teams could be huge, as both teams seem to have good ST play.
Like other SB where the defense is the MVP, giving it to one defender is really difficult. If you had to give it to one player, though, K9 is a good choice. (Michael Dickson’s performance was also very valuable as well.)
Maye had a tough game. But really, his supporting cast really did very little to help him, especially the OL. I do feel like the Patriots went to the shotgun and abandoned the run a little too early. 12-0, they didn’t have to abandon the run. Once they did that, I thought they would really have difficulty coming back.
Sam proved me wrong. He did a great job of protecting the football. Defenders got a little close jumping his throws, maybe on two occasions, there was a tip at the LOS, but it didn’t pop into the air. Other than these situations, he did a great job, including take sacks and throwing the ball away.
The Pats ST was good, but I thought the Seahawks ST beat them.
This is the worse QB performances by both teams that I can recall in a Super Bowl. Darnold maybe made a couple nice plays, but overall, he was shaky. Maye was horrible. After watching Maye in these playoffs, I have doubts he will be a great QB. Yes, he probably played the top three defenses in the Hawks, Texans, and Broncos (add the fourth defense of the weather in the second half), but he just looks like he was “seeing ghosts” in all those games. In the Super Bowl, he was short arming throws, his accuracy was terrible and just holding the ball way too long.
Overall, Reid and I agree on the frequency of how often teams should run the ball. However, I disagree with Reid on the Pats abandoning the run too early. I thought at some point, maybe when the score was 9-0, they should have gone five wide and just go for it. Maye was looking terrible. I thought, just throw every down and see if they could get him into some kind of rhythm or break out of the slump. I thought that would have been their best chance to win. Get Maye going and hopefully turn the offense around.
I was going to agree with this, but then I thought of the Ravens-Giants Super Bowl (Trent Dilfer vs. Kerry Collins). One thing I’ll say, though: this might be one of the worst collection of QBs in the playoffs, especially in terms of ball security. Stafford is solid, but I think if a defense can hit him and make him move, he can turn the ball over.
Darnold was shaky, his accuracy wasn’t good at times, but do you think the OL gave him a good opportunity to get comfortable?
Not only were they the three best defenses, but they faced one of the worst OLs on a Super Bowl team. The Patriot pass catchers aren’t exceptional, either. If not for terrible quarterbacking from Stroud and one disastrous mistake from the Bronco backup, and the Patriots might not have made it to the Super Bowl.
Besides the poor OL, Maye is a young player and played like it.
Also, I don’t think McDaniels did him any favors but not putting him under center and running the ball more. The Pats were having success running from UC, and the score was close enough that they could continue to do this. Add in some short passes (to counter the pass rush) and the Pats could move the chains and hold onto the ball. This could have helped the Patriot defense stay fresher and maybe they would have been able to get a turnover(s). (They came close at times to doing this.)
Part of why he was looking terrible was SEA pass rush and coverage. When this is happening, the run game has to come alive and start inflicting damage–force the Seahawk defense to worry about the run. Once that happens, that should create better opportunities for passing.
I agree there are many reasons Maye was playing horribly in the Super Bowl and in the playoffs in general. However, it doesn’t excuse how badly he played. Mahomes, last year, was rushed just as badly (or possibly worse) than Maye, and performed well (At least to me, most thought he stunk, I feel.). Yes, comparing Mahomes and Maye may be crazy, but Maye was a legitimate MVP candidate this year, and Mahomes wasn’t really in the running last year.
My biggest issue was how long Maye was holding on to the ball despite the pass rush. Not all of those sacks are on the o-line, some of them are on Maye. He may have been confused which led to him holding the ball, and hopefully he will mature out of that. But at this point, I don’t see the second coming of Tom Brady.
Give credit to the coaching of Seattle’s d-line though. They seem to really put an emphasis on keeping Maye in the pocket and not creating running lanes.
Oh, and yes, I completely agree that McDaniels was hurting his team. I think the Pats led the league in EPA or points per play. Not sure how they were able to do that with these set of players so kudos to McDaniel on that, but during the playoffs they have to be able to be able to protect the ball and, in this case, protect Maye by running shorter routes with quicker throws. I still feel the Pats should have tried to go more five wide from the shot gun and see if Maye can see the field better, but maybe those plays just aren’t in the playbook.
You thought Mahomes played well in the Super Bowl? Do you mean he performed well, considering he was under heavy pressure? That would make more sense….but I can’t really remember enough details of his performance to have a strong opinion.
Having said that, I don’t think I would even say Maye performed well under the circumstances. But I just think he’s a young QB. The fact that he was an MVP candidate could have a lot to do with a relatively easy schedule, and a down year for the NFL overall. No team was like the 2024 Eagles or Lions (fully healthy). Maybe Seattle was close, but I’m not sure I’d put them at the same level.
I would point to the coverage, especially when the Hawks rushed 4. Generally, if a team is rushing only four, the OL has to give more time because the coverage likely will be better. This certainly true against a good defense.
I’m not completely absolving Maye, though. I think he’s just inexperienced.
And I again, I think an even bigger issue is that the Patriots became one-dimensional, especially by operating mostly out of the gun. (They couldn’t run effectively from the gun, either.) They had little chance once they became one-dimensional.
The thing is, the score was low enough for most the game, that they could have ran the ball.
But you’re one-dimensional and the Hawks can ignore the run. With a guy like Macdonald as the OC, he can throw complex coverages and crazy blitzes at a young QB.
If the Pats started inflicting damage in the run game, and moved the chains, you don’t think this is could have opened up the passing game? In general, if the OL seems overwhelmed in the pass game, the run game has to be able to inflict damage. If it can’t, the offense is going to have a rough day.
My thinking is at some point in the game when the score was closer, the Pats had one chance to win the game and that was to get Maye “going” somehow. At least to me, the best chance to do that is to pass often and to get into a groove. The Pats ran on every series in the first half. They were trying to run the ball. Maybe not successfully and maybe not from under center, but they tried.
In five wide, it can make it actually harder to blitz because the defense is much more spread out and the QB can see where the rusher is coming from and throw in that direction. I’m not saying it would win them the game, but they should have done something drastically different from what they were doing.
In last year’s Super Bowl, the score got out of hand pretty quickly and the Chiefs was out of it in the middle of the second quarter. Although the Pats’ offense was being dominated, the Pats was in it. Turning Maye around in the first half to what we saw at the end of the game, was their best chance to win. I think Vrabel was thinking one turnover from his defense and he’s back in it. In general, especially in the playoffs, I like that approach. Be somewhat conservative and don’t do anything to lose the game especially early. But Maye was so bad, especially when you compare him to his MVP candidate season, my thought at the time was just try to get him back on track. It’s would be different if the Pats had a “game manager” at QB, but they had the leading candidate for MVP for most of the season.
On a side note, I was cheering for Seattle and DLaw.
But even if the Patriots were struggling in pass protection? To me, if an offense is struggling in pass protection, they inflict damage in the run game–getting the defense to focus on stopping that. To just pass more–even with 5 WRs–will make the offense more one-dimensional and increase the chances of a turnover.
On this note, for the Pats to win, like the Seahawks, they absolutely could not turn the ball over. That had to have been a top priority, especially since the score was so close. The Pats defense was keeping them in the game, but the turnovers put the game out of reach.
They ran the ball 8 times in the first half, 13 for the whole game. Some of this was due to negative plays/sacks, but it’s still too little in my view.
They don’t have to blitz a lot, and they can use zone-blitzes where they end up rushing only four. But the Seahawks pass defense is their strength. Any offense that becomes one-dimensional pass offense will have very little chance of beating them in my view.
I agree–but I think everything you say points to running the ball more. And again, what you’re saying doesn’t work if the Pats turn the ball over. (Maye has fumbled the ball, and the pass pro was shaky.)