Promote your business or product on 700level.com. For
more information about advertising with us CLICK HERE!

Somebody better get an undercover agent on Bill Bellichick immediately because there is absolutely no chance he didn't have a lot of money riding on this game.

They were up 10 points and throwing the ball all over the field with a coupe, minutes remaining. With under a minute remaining, they are calling timeouts down inside the Browns 10 yard line and throwing into the end zone.

The spread was 16.5 and when they finally scored with 30 seconds remaining, they had a 17 point lead.

I could care less because I didn't have any money on this game, but you cannot tell me there isn't something fishy going on there.

Maybe Bellichick is really Art Schlishter in disguise? That sounds fishy, but it also reeks of childishness Bellichick trying to stick it to Crennel also.

He's gotta make up that $500,000 fine somehow.

I'm suprised no one is talking about this in the sports media. When Belichick does anything against Mangini, his childishness is brought to the front. Maybe its just due to Mangini being a bit childish himself. Then again, maybe the Crennel split was far enough in the past (coupled with the fact that the Browns/Pats hardly ever play each other) that no one cares.

I do agree with f-d in that there had to have been some motivation behind it, and in light of the NBA ref scandal of last year, the gambling thing does merit some pondering. I'm just wondering whether or not Bellichick will take up coaching college ball too in his spare time in order to try to beat Weiss?

Just out of curiosity, how many timeouts did the Browns have left?

I just looked at the PBP from that drive... Pats got ball with just under 6 mins left, threw 3 passes early to get into Cleveland territory, then 7 of 8 running plays, killing almost 4 minutes and taking them to the 4. With 1 minute left it's 4th and goal... that's where the timeout was called by the Pats... do they kick to go up 13 and risk a return followed by successful onside kick and touchdown to lose (not likely, but possible outcome up 13), or do you go for the throat, and worst case scenario Cleveland's got 1 minute to go 96 yards, then get the onside kick. The Pats chose, unsuccessfully, to put the game definitely away trying for the 4 yd TD pass. The clock will stop either way after a 4th down play, so passing didn't make much difference in this spot.

Sorry f-d, it doesn't look all that suspicious to me, just looking at the PBP.

They got the ball back with under 6 minutes and a 10 point lead. They open the drive with 4 consecutive passes including 2 deep balls (one incomplete to Moss and a 35 yard successful completion to Watson). Who is going deep with a 10 point lead and less than 6 minutes left...twice in 4 plays?

They are now at the Browns 42 yard line and run 4 times down to the 12 before they have a 1st and goal going into the 2 minute warning.

How do they come out of the two minute warning? They throw AGAIN!

The Pats bring in Vrabel as WR eligible for 3 straight running plays (who specializes in the receiving package at the goal line on offense). Then, when they call their final timeout with :56 seconds remaining, they can ice the game with field goal and throw the ball into the end zone.

13 point lead with 50 seconds means the Brown would get the ball back with about 40 seconds remaining (after kickoff) needing 2 TDs to win.

Doing what they did gave them a potential 3 score lead OR gave the Browns a shot to tie with just a TD and field goal.

The Browns weren't winning no matter what, but no one throw into the end zone there with a 10 point lead. If you're worried enough that they can score 2 TDs in 40 seconds, how can you be willing to give them more time to score fewer points if you don't convert tat TD?

It doesn't make any sense.

Maybe they want to impress the voters in the polls so that they can win a championship the old fashioned way

They are such a force that going 16-0, bores them, and they wanna go perfect ATS

They are such a force that going 16-0, bores them, and they wanna go perfect ATS

That's the only other logical conclusion.

I think it's just typical Belichek knowing that he'll win regardless and wanting to end on a high note.

The 4 passes to start the drive were when the outcome was still in doubt, so you can't question his playcalling there, he just wanted to make sure he got first downs.

So what if he put in Vrabel if he called running plays?

Strategically, going to the TD over the easy FG is the wrong play. One forces the other team to score a TD, recover an onsides kick, and score a second TD, and make both extra points in about 40 seconds, without a timeout.

The other scenario allows the team to tie with a TD and a field goal, plus an additional 15 seconds (or about 2 plays).

Since when do the Pats blow a strategical call? These are the same guys who know when it's appropriate to take a safety in order to change field position and give you a better shot at a field goal when you need 1 more point and losing 2 doesn't hurt you.

Now, all of a sudden, they just say "fuck it" and blow a call like that for the potential to end on a "high note"?

I'm not buying it. Their goal was to eat clock and either retain the ball until the end of the game or seal it with a field goal. A TD didn't help them enough to tackle the risk of throwing the ball down the field, stopping the clock, leaving 3 points on the field, etc.

If Brady misses that long pass to Watson, they could have been looking at giving the Browns the ball at almost mid-field with 2 TOs and 5:40 remaining.

Nothing they did made sense from a strategic perspective. They needed to burn clock and get a field goal if available, but threw low percentage passes, kept stopping the clock, and even went for 6 on 4th down.

It was a very bizarre series of events, IMO.

Like I said, I can't prove it. I just think that he will be investigated behind the scenes because the NFL is big because of gambling and their association with Vegas is nut tight.

Anything this suspicious will be on their radar and both the NFL and Vegas will be on the case. They ended up covering because of a garbage time TD, but Vegas is never happy when favorites cover week after week and I imagine they'd be very interested in whether or not a coach was willing to break all the rules in order to cover each week since that works against their calculations and the house.

"Their goal was to eat clock"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh, didn't see the L there

BTW, I have the Bills tonight and if I see the Boys throwing at the end zone with a 9 point lead and less than a minute left, I'm tossing the TV out of the window.

You should be investigating Kellen Winslow for fumbling it away under a minute and giving the Pats their last TD.

I really don't see this as cut and dry as you do, but I'm just looking at the recap and didn't see the actual game.

Kellen Winslow can't be dirty because when he fumbles, he has no clue if they'll return it for a TD. It could get kicked out of bounds, it could be picked up by a teamate, the Pats could fall on it. If the Pats fall on it, you'd assume they kneel.

I'm not saying you're actually suggesting Winslow was fixing the game, but just showing you why that can;t make sense.

A coach with a team as good as that could fix points by taking his foot off the gas, keeping on it longer than necessary to win, etc. and could justify it in his own mind as simply manipulating how they win (not risking the win).

I guarantee you he will be investigated after that game whether he's guilty or not.

When Vegas makes that spread, they aren't counting on the favorites throwing into the endzone in those scenarios. It's such a peculiar call, I guarantee they'll want to check their bases there.

That Winslow statement was 100% blue.

No, I understood that.

I was watching this game (among others) in a bar with a Pats/Red Sox fan (pity me), and while I was pissed off that they weren't going for a FG because Gostkowski is my fantasy kicker, this fan said that if they topped 30, they'd be the first team in history to top 30 points in the first five games of the season.

I think Bellichek was going for that record.

That's a strange record. I haven;t actually heard that explanation, but there there a lot of teams that have scored 30 points in each of their first 5 games, but none who have scored at least 31 points in each game?

Check that...I just checked the "Greatest Show on Turf" stats and they opened the 2000 season with 8 straight games of 30+ points.

So I guess that was just a Boston fan talking out of his ass.

There's a first for everything.

Go Sawks!

They're such an intolerable bunch of homos now.

BTW, I think my fantasy site mentioned the Pats being the first team to have 5 games in a row with 30+. That's weird.

PFT has an interesting item on two late hits by Vrabel after a clock-stopping spike. It kinda adds fuel to your fire, f-d, given that the first-team defense was completely on the field with 11 seconds left and the Patriots up by a 17-point margin.

1  2 3 4