FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- The Patriots' 35-31 victory over the Ravens was arguably the most exciting playoff game in the history of Gillette Stadium (opened in 2002), and this week's mailbag has a mix of looking back while also focusing on the challenge ahead -- the underdog Colts coming to town for the AFC Championship Game.
This situation reminds me a bit of the 2010 season, when the Patriots crushed the Jets 45-3 in December, only to lose to them 28-21 in the divisional round of the playoffs.
The Patriots hammered the Colts 42-20 on Nov. 16, so this sets up similarly to the 2010 season. Can the Patriots avoid a repeat of history?
Let's get to the questions:
Q. Hi Mike, do you think many of the media pundits and also the fans are underestimating the Colts and the ease with which the Pats will prevail? I do think the Pats will win, but I also believe the Colts are a better team than they were two months ago. Arthur Jones is now healthy and so is TE Dwayne Allen, who combines with Coby Fleener for a nice tandem. On the Pats' side, the DL was very disappointing, unable to stop the run or pressure the QB; and, can anyone at all cover a RB coming out of the backfield on a pass? -- Tman (Belmont, Massachusetts)
A. I'd start with this, Tman. I love this spot if I'm the Colts. Nothing to lose, got blasted by the Patriots on Nov. 16, and you're playing with house money at this point. So let it rip. I agree with everything you said: The Patriots should win, but the Colts are dangerous and are trending in the right direction when it comes to players' health, while New England is not. Furthermore, with the Colts' offense, I think their varied skill-position players give them the ability to manipulate matchups, a la the Patriots, and after what we saw from the New England defense on Saturday, that should naturally lead to some concern. And offensively, I don't think it's a stretch to say that the Patriots will not be running for 244 yards this time around.
Q. With center Bryan Stork possibly out, who backs up Ryan Wendell in the event of injury? Dan Connolly is already playing, so in an emergency would they switch him to center and have Josh Kline and Marcus Cannon as the guards? A bit nerve-wracking? And do you see Cameron Fleming and James Develin playing a role in heavy run formations similar to what NE did to the Colts the last time? -- bevanmanson (Oxnard, California)
A. Connolly would probably be the next man up. I think we'd see Josh Kline at left guard and Cameron Fleming at right guard in that scenario. On the Fleming/Develin part of the question, we know Fleming played 37 snaps as a sixth offensive lineman in the Nov. 16 game, so you figure the Patriots will show that look to see how the Colts handle it. But I'd be surprised if we see it as much as we did early in that mid-November game.
Q. Mike, I was not happy to see the defense (especially the front seven) perform so poorly against the Ravens. However, I'd like your take on how much of that was bad play by the Pats and how much of it should be credit given to a big, tough zone/cut/chop blocking Ravens line coupled with what looked like a really good game plan by Gary Kubiak? That zone blocking scheme with a quick one cut runner like Forsett has proven very successful in NFL history. -- Scott (Charlotte, North Carolina)
A. Scott, the run defense was poor, and I thought this was a game where the season-ending injury to Jerod Mayo showed up more than any other. When they're in the base defense as much as they were with those three big defensive tackles flanked by ends Chandler Jones and Rob Ninkovich, you need those big guys to press blockers and control gaps, but it looked to me like they were getting walled off, and the angle blocks and cut blocks were creating nice running lanes. That's a credit to the Ravens, absolutely. But I think the Patriots can play it better and, in retrospect, subbing out a big defensive tackle for a linebacker like Mayo would have made a big difference from this view. I don't see them facing another team that can do the same thing to them the rest of the way.
Q. Hi Mike, my question is about the pass rush. In the previous years we used to say that a third DE would be really useful in terms of getting fresh legs on the field and resting Chandler Jones and Rob Ninkovich. Now we have one, Akeem Ayers, and he played as many snaps on defense as Gronk (1). It's not like CJ and Nink are generating great pass rush, so why not use Ayers more? -- Memo (London)
A. I'd be surprised if we don't see more of Ayers against the Colts, because the game plan will be different. Against the Colts, I wouldn't expect the Patriots to be in the "heavy" 5-2 defense we saw whenever the Ravens came out in two tight ends or a fullback/running back combination. Priority No. 1 for the Patriots was stopping the run against Baltimore and they sacrificed some pass rush to do it (Ayers isn't viewed as good of a run defender as Jones and Ninkovich). The priorities, I believe, will shift to the passing game this week.
Q. Mike, whew. Survive and advance! Two quick questions: 1. What has happened to TE Tim Wright? 2. Am I right in thinking the Patriots have started most games in a zone of some sort, and that it has generally been torched? Any thoughts on why they do that? -- Bob Q. (Coventry, Rhode Island)
A. Bob, Wright played only three snaps against the Ravens as the Patriots preferred Michael Hoomanawanui as the second tight end. What I read into that is that the Ravens usually matched that Gronkowski/Hoomanawanui grouping in their base package and the Patriots liked that matchup to attack in the passing game better than the sub defense (which would have been on when Wright was on the field). Since Wright's five-catch game against Detroit on Nov. 23, he's had a total of three catches over five games. I thought it would go the other way, but that's part of the football chess match that is fun to chronicle. As for the defense, that varies on a game-to-game basis and will be mixed throughout every game. They've also opened in man.
Q. Hi Mike, some of us can not understand the reduction of Tim Wright's playing time after performing well enough to be more of a regular Brady target. Given what has befallen the O-Line again, it leaves questions as to whether the value gained was really worth the value lost in the trade of Mankins for Wright. Your thoughts? -- Jake M. (Vancouver, BC)
A. Jake, as evidenced by the fact that the Patriots are in the AFC Championship Game, the Mankins for-Wright/fourth-round pick trade hasn't stopped the team from being two games away from its ultimate goal. So let's start with that context. I've shared my viewpoint that I wouldn't have made that trade, but it's more about Mankins than Wright. As for Wright specifically, he's obviously helped this year, although maybe not as much as we initially envisioned. He still has a lot of upside. As for his recent lack of playing time, it's essentially either him or Danny Amendola right now, and after what we've seen from Amendola, why take him off the field?
Q. Hi Mike, I am puzzled as to why Brandon Bolden has seen increased snaps at running back in the past few games, including starting against the Ravens. His productivity hasn't been notable. The Pats will need production from that spot to go all the way, so maybe it's time to reintroduce Jonas Gray. -- Rick H. (Falmouth, Massachusetts)
A. Rick, they are two different backs, so I don't necessarily see the comparison. Bolden isn't really a power back like Gray as much as a hybrid who can pass protect, catch the ball, run a bit between the tackles, but also get to the edge. If you look at the winning touchdown catch on Saturday, it was Bolden looping under Brady in pass protection, being in position to keep things clean. So while the numbers on the stat sheet might not scream "he's really helping the team," I think this is a case where it helps to look beyond the stat sheet. That said, I do think we'll see Jonas Gray active this week. It makes sense to think it will be a different game plan than we saw Saturday, with more power running incorporated.
Q. Can you explain why the Pats did not try a running play at the very end of the game to run the clock out? I was shocked at their poor clock management. We were lucky the Hail Mary pass was incomplete. -- Ashley (Worcester, Massachusetts)
A. Sure, Ashley. I asked Bill Belichick about it Monday and he explained that he didn't want any added risk of quarterback/running back exchanges going awry or a negative play in the running game like we saw on the goal line on the first-down play prior to Tom Brady's touchdown run, not to mention a penalty that would have pinned them in deep. So it was a conservative approach. There are different ways to do it, but I don't think this approach was negligent.
Q. Mike, quick question about the clock management at the end of the game: Wouldn't it be safer to take an intentional safety (with Ryan Allen stepping out of bounds into the end zone) just to burn some additional seconds? That probably would have prevented the Hail Mary (and certainly there would be no time for two Baltimore plays -- possibly a short pass and a FG for the win). -- Flavio (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil)
A. Flavio, I couldn't support any decision that would have made it a two-point game and given the ball back to the Ravens and strong-legged kicker Justin Tucker for a chance to win with a field goal. To me, that's just way, way too risky.
Q. Mike, I see Bill Belichick playing head games with the Colts already as Chuck Pagano is already trying to figure things out, even before the Colts game with the Broncos. Might we see more trick plays and disguised formations? I hope so as they certainly made the game much more exciting for the fans viewing the game with the Ravens and most likely so with the Colts. -- Harry (Canada)
A. Harry, as the divisional-round game showed us, this is the time to empty out the bag of tricks. The only thing we can truly expect at this point, from both teams, is the unexpected.
Q. Mike, my eyes didn't believe what I was seeing when I saw Stephen Gostkowski line up as the punter only to see him run off and Ryan Allen come back in. What was the strategy behind that that little exchange? -- Anonymous
A. David, Bill Belichick said he didn't want to get into it for obvious reasons. Might have been lining up a fake there, or perhaps trying to get Baltimore to burn a timeout. We could see it again, but as it turned out, a delay-of- game penalty led the Patriots to swap out Gostkowski for Allen on the next play.
Q. I thought that was a perfect throw by Tom Brady to Brandon LaFell to put the Patriots ahead. With that said, I was surprised to read your blog and read Brady say: "It was a better catch than it was a throw, [LaFell] had one hand on it, the guy kind of had his right arm and he made the catch." What are your thoughts on the play? -- David (North Attleborough, Massachusetts)
A. One of the best plays I've seen, David, and an example of how it takes a village to make it happen. Also, if that was Randy Moss on the receiving end, I think we'd be talking about it a lot more than we are now. The way Brady called out the mike linebacker before the snap, then corrected himself, then set the protection -- it was just mental football at its best coupled with the excellence of all involved to pull it off physically. That is a football gem right there.
Q. Hey Reiss, do you think Andrew Luck's ability to run will turn out to be a problem for our defense? And do you think CB Brandon Browner will be ready to play on Sunday? -- Ismael C. (Vallejo, California)
A. Ismael, Luck's scrambling ability is absolutely a problem that must be kept on the radar. As for Browner, he told ESPNBoston.com's Lee Schechter after the game Saturday that he wouldn't miss any time and he sat as a precaution.
Q. Darrelle Revis is good but he played a bad game Saturday. Is it fair to say he needs to pick up his game? -- Griff T. (Winchester, Virginia)
A. Griff, this falls into the category of "if Revis is the Patriots' biggest problem, things must be going pretty well." I agree that Saturday wasn't his best game. One thing I didn't pick up at the game, but it came through in film review, was that he got away with what would have been a critical defensive holding penalty in the end zone on the Ravens' fourth-quarter drive that ended in a field goal.
Q. Hi Mike, I have a question on Revis: The conventional wisdom has seemed to be that his contract for next year is basically fake, that Bill Belichick will cut him and work to re-sign him. However, given his performance, that doesn't seem likely to me. I realize that it's a lot of money for next year, but if the plan is to find a way to sign him, then I think they'd want to make it an extension to the current contract, as that would take the best advantage of the cap money already devoted to it and allow for spreading that money out over some time. And, to boot, would remove the possibility of some other team (like the Bills or Jets) snagging him up in free agency. So, I think they keep the contract, and work to negotiate an extension in the offseason to lessen the cap hit. What do you think? -- Sean (Acton, Massachusetts)
A. Sean, I've been thinking about the different scenarios with Revis. The key marker is an option that has to be picked up before the end of the 2014 league year. So if the Patriots commit to that option, Revis will earn a $12 million roster bonus on April 1. At that point, assuming the Patriots pick up the option, the leverage shifts to Revis' side in negotiations because he will already be $12 million ahead of the game. So ideally you'd like to have everything worked out by then, but if not, would the Patriots consider keeping him at the astronomical $25 million cap charge? I would have said no entering the season, but I'm not so sure now. Maybe they would.
Q. Mike, thoughts on Sunday being the last time we see both Peyton Manning and Wes Welker put on a uniform in the NFL? -- Anand (New York, New York)
A. I'm obviously not too close to that situation, Anand, but I thought they both showed they can still help a team if they want to put themselves through the grind. For Welker, it's obviously as a niche player at this point. So I'll say we'll see them in 2015.