Bill Belichick defends his decision to go for it rather than attempt a field goal vs. Eagles
FOXBORO -- The Patriots had a really good chance to beat the Philadelphia Eagles on their final drive on Sunday. It may have been an easier chance had Bill Belichick opted for a different decision much earlier in the fourth quarter.
With the Patriots trailing 22-14 with 9:39 left in the game, the Patriots head coach chose to go for it on a fourth-and-3 from the Philadelphia 17-yard line rather than send out rookie kicker Chad Ryland for his first-ever field goal. Had Belichick opted for the points -- and Ryland connected -- it would have made it a five-point game. It was an aggressive play call by Belichick, and one that didn't work out for the Pats.
On that fourth-and-3 play, the pocket collapsed on Mac Jones and he essentially threw the ball away, with his desperation pass falling short of Ezekiel Elliott. New England's 10-play drive ended with a turnover on downs, and the Eagles tacked on a field goal on their next possession to go up by 11 points.
"I felt like it was the best decision for the team," Belichick said when questioned on the decision after the 25-20 loss.
The Patriots had just converted a fourth-and-8 a few plays prior, so it's easy to see why Belichick trusted his offense in that situation. Analytics were on his side with that decision as well.
But it also didn't seem like Belichick trusted his rookie kicker on Sunday.
He also opted to go for two points after the Patriots scored a touchdown on their next possession. The Pats trailed by five after Jones hit Kendrick Bourne for an 11-yard score with 3:37 to play, but his pass to Mike Gesicki on the two-point bid fell incomplete.
Extra point or not, tack on that field goal Belichick opted not to attempt and the Patriots would have been down by just three points at that time. That loomed large when the defense got the ball back to the offense one more time, and Jones and company were able to get to the Philadelphia 20-yard line. That drive could have ended with a game-winning field goal attempt by Ryland had it been a 25-23 game, but instead the Pats had to go for it on a fourth-and-11. New England's chances at stealing a win ended when Kayshon Boutte couldn't get both feet in bounds on a pass along the sidelines from Jones.
Kicking a field goal with 9:39 left likely would have changed how the game played out. But it could have put the Patriots in a position late where a field goal would have won it, instead of the offense having to convert on another fourth down to keep the comeback bid alive.
But Belichick didn't want to hear any second-guessing after the game, defending his play-calling.
"Made the best decision we could at the time," Belichick replied when he was asked if he should have kicked more field goals on Sunday. "Didn't know we would be down there multiple times. [Nine] minutes to go in the game. I don't know. If we had kicked it, I'm sure you would be asking why didn't we go for it."
During his Monday morning radio appearance, Belichick did say he may have opted to punt the ball away when the Patriots faced a fourth-and-17 at the Philly 48 with 2:24 left, a play that came after the Pats were hit with a delay of game penalty.
"Fourth-and-17, looking back on it, we had three timeouts. I might have punted that one," Belichick told The Greg Hill Show. "I don't know how much field position we would have gained but fourth-and-17 after the delay, that was tough."
It's easy to second-guess the decision-making by Belichick in the fourth quarter after the clock hit zero and the Patriots came up short. But there was no guarantee his rookie kicker would have made the kick, or that the game would have played out the way it did had the Pats kicked that earlier field goal.
Belichick chose to trust his offense and be aggressive. It didn't work out, and it may have cost them a better chance at winning Sunday's game. Now we'll see if the offense grows from the experience -- and if Belichick continues to be aggressive in such situations.
