Bill Parcells: Control the game

[Alaskan Ram]

I was listening to Mike and Mike this morning on my drive in. Parcells was on for a bit.
They asked if he could put into words how a team can start a 3rd round quarterback on a short week, and come away with a victory like the one last night. What is Belicheat's secret?

Parcells provided a succinct formula to winning. Simple. Not overly complicated. The secret:
Control the game, you will win.
It should be the primary objective week in and week out.

I remembered a moment in the game that embodied that....the play where they had a 3rd and short coming up; they faked gathering for a huddle, then ran to the line and TOOK the first down with rushing counter play while half the Texans D were still looking at their Linebacker finger pointing the upcoming defensive set.

A win is a win, no matter how ugly. Take Control. Seize it. Steal it. Scrap for it. Fight for it. Claw for it. When you have it, don't let go of it. Similar to what we did last week to the Seahawks. No?


IT takes all 11 guys on the field being on the same page to dominate the control.

Regarding winning the turnover battle, Parcells also says its not rocket science how New England has been toward the top of the league in turnover ratio the last 10 years.
All things being equal....how can there be a rational explanation to that?
He says their differential is lopsided because their opponents are playing from behind.
Their opponents are taking higher risk chances due to playing from behind.
They are playing from behind because the Patriots main focus is TAKING control of the game early.


I don't know. Its an "easier-said-than-done" formula, perhaps.
But to me the conversation struck me as a fan and an observer to the sport.

I'd always believed the overly simplified unique key to winning was "Score more points than your opponent, and you will win". It was the perfect counter to any critical thinking argument in sports. The joke to that mantra is it's a statement that means everything and nothing at the same time.

Control the game and you win. That's a damn good baseline. That's fucking awesome good criteria to factor against every decision a team faces through the course of a game. Does this decision help me take control?
It also unites the team. It reminds them, every moment, that they are in a "game". A game they are in it to win.

Oh well. Thought I'd share my sports epiphany moment courtesy Coach Parcells.

Perhaps the key to being a consistent winner is just that simple.
Go Rams!

 

[dieterbrock]

Similar to what we did last week to the Seahawks. No?

Similar to what we did last week to the Seahawks? No

 

[Selassie I]

Great post @Alaskan Ram

I can settle the turnover differential mystery though... it's not the fact that their opponents are taking more chances,,, although that could be a small contributing factor. It's the deflated balls Man... everybody knows that. LOL

 

[Jorgeh0605]

Similar to what we did last week to the Seahawks? No

Agreed. The fact of the matter is that the Seahawks were given multiple opportunities to win that game. We played abysmal 4th quarter football until that fumble. That hawks game is a game the Patriots team wins 21-3 not 9-3.

 

[DaveFan'51]

Control the game, you will win.
It should be the primary objective week in and week out.

A win is a win, no matter how ugly. Take Control. Seize it. Steal it. Scrap for it. Fight for it. Claw for it. When you have it, don't let go of it. Similar to what we did last week to the Seahawks.

This ^ should sent to the Rams !

 

[Alaskan Ram]

Similar to what we did last week to the Seahawks? No

I regret putting that sentence in the OP if that is your first take away response to the message.

Fair reaction though. I'd counter that while a 9-3 win is an ugly win, it's still a win.
We had less than a one score lead at the end. They had a chance to take back control. We didn't let them.

 

[dieterbrock]

I regret putting that sentence in the OP if that is your first take away response to the message.

Fair reaction though. I'd counter that while a 9-3 win is an ugly win, it's still a win.
We had less than a one score lead at the end. They had a chance to take back control. We didn't let them.

Full on apology as your post was fantastic. I had intended on adding to it, starting with an "lol"
The thing about Parcells teams is that they did score, and they churned out 1st downs when they needed to. I totally get that a 9-3 win is a win no matter what.
But man, that was really close to a 10-9 loss

 

[dieterbrock]

Agreed. The fact of the matter is that the Seahawks were given multiple opportunities to win that game. We played abysmal 4th quarter football until that fumble. That hawks game is a game the Patriots team wins 21-3 not 9-3.

Right on. That's along my thinking, particularly when the Rams were on Seattle 30 yard line in the 4Q and Keenum took 2 sacks to fall out of FG range. 3 points woulda been huge there.

 

[LesBaker]

Did someone say turnovers?

Some stuff I quickly dug up..........

Statistics show that in the NFL, teams with positive turnover ratios have a significantly higher probability of winning. Over the past five full seasons, clubs with more takeaways than giveaways have a combined 810-220-2 (.786) record.

Over the past five seasons, NFL teams have won about two-thirds of their games with zero or one turnover (.666 winning percentage).

Consider this: If an NFL team went the whole season without a turnover, past statistics show that the NFL team would probably end the 16-game season with 12 or 13 wins, probably enough for a first-round bye and possibly home field advantage in the playoffs. In 2014, teams that had no turnovers in a game had a winning percentage of .787; if we look at those same stats from 2010-14, that winning percentage is a near identical .789.

Here’s a look at the winning percentage of NFL teams from 2010-14 when they had from zero to five or more turnovers in a game.

0 turnovers: .789 winning percentage
1 turnover: .575
2 turnovers: .390
3 turnovers: 260
4 turnovers: .178
5 or more turnovers: .056*

Over the past five seasons the Patriots have played the most games with no turnovers with 36. SeewhatIdidthere.

 

[Alaskan Ram]

Full on apology as your post was fantastic. I had intended on adding to it, starting with an "lol"
The thing about Parcells teams is that they did score, and they churned out 1st downs when they needed to. I totally get that a 9-3 win is a win no matter what.
But man, that was really close to a 10-9 loss

Thanks man.
I agree...that was way too close to a 10-9 loss! Especially given that Wussell ran a 2 minute come from behind touchdown drill in week 1.
When we recovered that fumble I was jumping up and down like a teen age girl at a Beiber concert. I was screaming "Oh my god, we're gonna win, we're gonna win"...the wife ran into the living room to check on me. Apparently my voice was shrilly and coming out high pitch. In my best deep voice possible, I told her "I mean, uh, we just won the game".

We need to find a way to move the chains. Give our D just a little rest and they will be elite.

 

[bubbaramfan]

Nice post about turnovers. I think its the main reason Goff isn't starting yet. Keenum doesn't turn the ball over and Goff hasn't earned Fishers trust in that regard yet.

 

[dieterbrock]

Nice post about turnovers. I think its the main reason Goff isn't starting yet. Keenum doesn't turn the ball over and Goff hasn't earned Fishers trust in that regard yet.

Although Keenum does turn the ball over, 5 in 7 starts
Nick Foles didn't turn it over much either, outside of 2 games

 

[PressureD41]

Nice post about turnovers. I think its the main reason Goff isn't starting yet. Keenum doesn't turn the ball over and Goff hasn't earned Fishers trust in that regard yet.

This makes a ton of sense. Its still early folks. I get the feeling week 5-7 is when the Goff era will begin

 

[Merlin]

Nice post about turnovers. I think its the main reason Goff isn't starting yet. Keenum doesn't turn the ball over and Goff hasn't earned Fishers trust in that regard yet.

I do think turnovers are part of the reason. But then again Case has dodged some big bullets with intercept-able throws thus far that weren't converted. It's not accurate IMO to say he's been super safe with the ball, basically. As I said I do think that's part of the reason, as Fish probably assumes Goff would be worse.

But I believe the biggest part of it is Fish is afraid Goff will get injured. IMO it's all about the protections. He wants Goff to have that stuff down cold to where it's just about second nature. If you go back to that Dallas game, Goff didn't diagnose the pressures and when he got hit with the non-throwing shoulder stinger Fish was saying under his breath "Get up Jared, get up jared" and that was about as worried as I've ever seen Fish.

From a pure INT perspective Goff is going to bring TDs to the equation as well. Field position-changing plays, excitement, etc. And when you consider how good the Rams defense is typically in the redzone that tradeoff of add some INTs but also add some TDs might be better for this team overall. Particularly when you consider how poorly Case has been playing.

This is why I am convinced we will see Goff in this game in the third quarter if the Rams are still struggling offensively. It's a really good defense for him to get his feet wet against, I just hope they have him ready in regards to what he'll see in-game.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Similar to what we did last week to the Seahawks? No

Similar to what they tried to do on defense against the Seahawks. Fisher plays to win with his defense. On offense he plays to not lose, which is in no way controlling the game. Hoping you don't make mistakes is a good way to lose. Fisher needs to grasp, believe in and coach the shit out of an offensive philosophy. He treats players like they are all veterans and all need to be handled the same imo. These young guys could use some disciplined coaching on Offense. Wauffle and Williams do it on D and you all see the result. Even last year when Boras, who has been known as a precise technician as a TE coach, had the offense playing mistake free football when it came to penalties. Now they are back into their lax tendencies. Fisher needs to come down hard on this group and help them grow, not make light of the lack of TDs by holding a box of TDs in the end zone. The Rams have one of the youngest rosters in football and that means most of them are still kids that need guidance and discipline.

Fisher hired a disciplinarian in Williams and he needs to find that same type of experienced offensive coordinator. Then Fishers style can balance it all out. Until he does that the offense will continue to struggle IMO.

 

[Roman Snow]

Control the game and you win. That's a damn good baseline. That's freaking awesome good criteria to factor against every decision a team faces through the course of a game. Does this decision help me take control?
It also unites the team. It reminds them, every moment, that they are in a "game". A game they are in it to win.

Great post Alaska. I actually think we are really close to having a breakout game where we control in all 3 phases. A few big plays on offense, and lots of Gurley. Then Benny running 8-10 times in the 4th quarter. A swarming D with 6 sacks and 3 turnovers. Johnny pinning them deep all day, and Tavon taking one to the house.

When we recovered that fumble I was jumping up and down like a teen age girl at a Beiber concert. I was screaming "Oh my god, we're gonna win, we're gonna win"...the wife ran into the living room to check on me. Apparently my voice was shrilly and coming out high pitch. In my best deep voice possible, I told her "I mean, uh, we just won the game".

:redcard:

 

[Rainram]

The Patriots are prepared every game (from a player and coach standpoint).

And they execute! On offense and defense. I don't see many drops, missed tackles, missed assignments, mental mistakes. Sound, mistake-free, fundamental, football. Not perfect...they're beatable...but week in, week out...they're prepared.

Pisses me the f$ off!