[ad_1]
Bill Belichick may or may not have chosen a defense that could produce unstable results at the end of the fourth quarter, but that would have been wise had he done so. (Photo by Jim Rogash / Getty Images)
While he was looking at the end of an offensive epic of the sideline on Sunday night, Tom Brady had an unusual thought. Tyreek Hill, the receiver of the Kansas City Chiefs, caught a long pass, escaped from the field and shone in front of the New England Patriots' safety Duron Harmon. A touchdown and an extra point would clear the Patriots' seven-point lead with three minutes remaining in the fourth quarter. But while Brady watched the Hill Harmon race, he found himself rooting not for his teammate, but for Hill.
"When he was running, Tyreek was running to score – I said:" Good, mark fast, "Brady said Sunday night at his press conference. "Because then we had enough time. All that was left was a dead time, and it gave us a little time to go down and give the kickoff.
Today's NFL scoring environment requires rethinking the game, reconsidering the very fundamental fundamentals of football. The goal of playing in defense, always and forever, is to prevent the other team from scoring. But what if, under certain conditions, the point of playing in defense should be something else?
The Patriots, even though it was not intentional, provided an answer Sunday night. In the last possession of Kansas City, New England gave a 75 yard touchdown in the first game. On the surface, it looked like a complete failure. After much thought, the Patriots' defense managed to get the ball back with enough time. After Hill scored, the Patriots received the ball with 3:03 to go in a draw. They drove on the court and kicked a goal that went through the amounts in the final second. Patriots 43, Chiefs 40.
Patriot coach Bill Belichick probably did not employ a defense that either meant to impose a change of direction or give a quick score, as fascinating as it could be. "Bill is good," said a long-time NFL defensive coordinator, "but that might well push him."
[[[[NFL Standings, Week 6: It's Now The Rams, Then Everyone]
The idea of allowing the other team to score is not new. But the way tactics can be integrated into the defensive strategy at the end of games should evolve. The Patriots' defense did not necessarily let Hill score Sunday night. But recovering the ball quickly, in any way, even if it meant allowing a touchdown and losing their lead, helped them win.
At the end of a match between high scoring fouls and helpless defenses, the defense should not necessarily aim to avoid a score. It should be a question of recovering the ball quickly and giving the offensive the time to score the last goal, but that must happen.
"You certainly reach that point in a game," said Oklahoma coach Lincoln Riley, a veteran of the Big 12 shootouts. "It's happened often over the years. You feel like the worst thing [that] What can happen is that the other team has lost time. "
At last year's Super Bowl, the Patriots and Eagles combined 74 points and a punt. Playing the defense in the main goal of recovering the ball has become a good strategy. In the fourth quarter, a microphone from NFL Films interviewed Eagles defensive coordinator Jim Schwartz, informing coach Doug Pederson, "I'm going to be aggressive, either because I'm going to get it, or we're going to make. the ball for you. "
"That's good," Pederson replied.
Sunday night, in a match that produced 83 points, Belichick might have had a similar thought. As always, Belichick did not provide any kind of breakdown. But he admitted that Sunday night's circumstances demanded extraordinary game management.
"Every game is different," Belichick said. "Each game has its own dynamics and the team you play and situations. They are all a little different. Sometimes they fall into a general category. Sometimes they fall a little out of this and we just have to try to react and do our best. "
"Once again, each situation is a little different depending on the time, the deadlines, the score, etc.," added Belichick. "But it turned out to be good for us, we had the final possession, we had the last opportunity and we worked on it every week." In both ways – if they had it, if we had it, if we needed a touchdown, a goal in the field, etc., we would try to get ready.
[From murder mystery to love story: A reporter’s two decades covering Rae Carruth]
The Chiefs took control of their own line of fronts to 25 yards while remaining 3h16 late in the night, followed by a touchdown. In the last five possessions of Kansas City, he scored one goal and three touchdowns. The Patriots could secure the victory with a stop, but the chances of getting one were slim. A long drive would probably mean overtime and a tiny chance of victory for the Patriots.
The defensive lineup and pattern of the Patriots did not suggest excessive aggression, and it is more likely that the game was the result of Hill's monstrous speed, not Belichick's genius. But even if the Patriots did not intentionally use the high-volatility approach, the game reveals the merits of such a strategy. Between teams like the Patriots and the Chiefs, the offensive dictates the end of the matches. With a long drive, especially if they were two, the Chiefs could have arranged the last minutes of the match. With the ball and 3:03 left, the Patriots had complete control of their destiny.
"I do not think it's impossible," said George Chahrouri, chief scientist at Pro Football Focus. "I think it's the smart game. In this situation, you must take into account the specifics of the game. If you are confident enough – what the Patriots should have been – that the Chiefs will score, you will find yourself in a draw. . . The strategy is not only wise, but it is also a strategy that the Patriots would be at the forefront in terms of use. "
Allowing a team to score causes a conflict between philosophy and strategy. In football, this conflict is more difficult to solve than other sports. No one blinks when basketball teams make a mistake in the event of a late escape or when a pitcher throws an intentional march. But it is a marginal sacrilege in the eyes of some football coaches to let another team score. They can not bring themselves to tell their players to betray their fundamental task. It does not seem competitive, it's like admitting a defeat.
"It's very difficult to ask the competitive NFL players to leave a quick score to let your QB go back," said the defensive coordinator.
But these coaches and players must keep in mind: The fundamental task of any player is neither to score nor to prevent scoring. It is to give his team the best chance of winning. What's interesting now is that in the current offensive environment, it will be a good idea to let the other team score – or at least bring the ball back quickly to the offensive – at the end of the matches, with a higher frequency. Possessing the ball last can count as much as scoring or avoiding points.
The end of the match went perfectly for the Patriots, mainly because their attack was lucky to dictate it. That's how football works in 2018. Sometimes it means using an unconventional strategy. And sometimes it means you have to root the other team to score.
Read more about The Post:
Clayton: Ranking of the top six candidates in a wild and competitive AFC
Le'Veon Bell would miss week 7 as James Conner continues to shine for Steelers
Breeland Speaks was thinking of calls for dishonest ones when he released Tom Brady
Sam Darnold gives the Jets a reason to hope and the Giants to worry
[ad_2]
Source link
