Rex Ryan: Sources inside Gillette said Jacoby Brissett would be playing

Rex Ryan: Sources inside Gillette said Jacoby Brissett would be playing

FOXBORO -- Rex Ryan said on Wednesday that he thought he knew who would be playing quarterback for the Patriots. He simply didn't want to say anything aloud. 

"If I'm wrong," he said at the time, "it'll be like, 'Oh, he wasn't right. What a shock.' "

After beating the Patriots at Gillette Stadium Sunday afternoon, 16-0, Ryan took to the podium and not only insisted that his instincts were correct, but he explained that he has some solid intelligence being fed to him from behind enemy lines. 

"My sources inside the New England Patriot building said that Jacoby Brissett would be the quarterback," Ryan said. "How's that? I'll stir some stuff. Who was it? I don't know who it was."

BILLS 16, PATRIOTS 0Perry: First impressions from the game | Curran: Best and worst | Bills: Patriots 'disrespect' sparked pregame scuffle | Brown: It was a 'complete debacle' | Notes: First time shut out at home in 23 years |

That sounds like it could have been a fictional tale from a chatty coach who was feeling good after a win. But it was backed by one of Ryan's players. When linebacker Preston Brown was asked if it mattered that the Bills had no idea who was going to be quarterbacking, Brown echoed his coach's sentiments.

"Not really," he said. "We had some inside knowledge that [Brissett] was probably going to play today. Knowing that he was going to play, we knew we were going to get a lot of passes to our left side, easy one-sided reads, so we tried to limit that and pack that side."

The Bills held Brissett to 17-of-27 passing for 205 yards, no touchdowns and no interceptions. They forced Brissett to fumble once, they limited the Patriots to 1-for-12 on third-down conversions, and they kept Julian Edelman, Danny Amendola, Rob Gronkowski and Chris Hogan under wraps. That foursome combined for just two catches. 

Whether the Bills actually knew Brissett would be playing days ago or not -- the Patriots said that they didn't even know Garoppolo would be sidelined until game day -- is irrelevant. They played like it.

"God, it feels good to finally win here," Ryan said. "Been close about six times. Finally won one. It was great." 

Which play will NFL ban next in its anti-Patriots mission?

USA TODAY Sports Photo

Which play will NFL ban next in its anti-Patriots mission?

Hey, guess where the next Patriot-aimed NFL rule change will likely be? Did you say kickoffs? You didn't? I know. There are so many options. It's okay.

Be that as it may. During a Friday morning conference call with reporters, NFL Competition Committee chairman Rich McKay let it be known that the league is eyeballing the pooch kickoff that the Patriots employ so well and looking at whether the kickoff rule needs to be tweaked further.


In 2016, in an effort to drive down the number of kickoff returns and -- ostensibly -- reduce injuries, the league voted to reward return teams by granting them the ball on the 25 as opposed to the 20 after a touchback.

Since field position matters, some teams -- the Patriots being the most high-profile -- avoided touchbacks by kicking moonballs short of the end zone and then hauling ass downfield to bring down returners inside the 25.

The 2017 numbers bear this out. In 2017, Stephen Gostkowski kicked off 99 times. There were 40 touchbacks, 58 returns and one onsides kick. The Eagles were the next closest team in terms of the number of kickoffs covered (47) . Twelve teams had fewer than half the Patriots' 58 returns covered. The Panthers, Niners and Raiders had 12, 15 and 15 respectively. That's the kind of thing that gets a big attaboy from New York.

The Patriots were third-best in the NFL in covering kickoffs, allowing 18.9 yards per return (behind Baltimore and Washington).

The Patriots -- and a few other teams -- clearly altered their strategy based on the new rule. In 2016, Gostkowski had touchbacks on 53 percent of his kickoffs. In 2017 it was down to 41. The Chargers, Bucs and Dolphins also had precipitous drops in the number of touchbacks.

In 2015, the Patriots had the fifth-most touchbacks on kickoffs (67.6 percent). And this is not what the Competition Committee wanted to see when it passed the rule, as McKay made clear.

"The reason we made [the rule change] for one year only was we were concerned about people as a rule beginning to pooch this ball -- kick it high and keep it in the field of play," said McKay, who is also President and CEO of the Atlanta Falcons. "We've seen some of that but it did not change the return percentages really so we're kinda happy with where that is."

Oh, but happy doesn't mean satisfied. The tinkering, adjusting and manipulating never ends, especially when the NFL's ultimate goal is achieving the almighty competitive balance, which New England has avoided for two decades.

The first portion of the conference call was devoted to saluting the fact anybody can win and anybody can suck AT ANY TIME with McKay noting, "One of our hallmarks is competitive balance. Eight of the 12 playoff teams weren't in the playoffs in 2016, that's the most since 2003. Two went worst to first in their divisions including the Super Bowl champions. In 14 of 15 seasons we've had a team go from last to first."

If competitive balance is a "hallmark" then the Patriots' relentless success would have to be . . . what? A stain? An embarrassment? Whatever the league would call it, it's beyond obvious that the Competition Committee (in concert with the league office) takes a hatchet to the New England redwood.

So what further tweak to kickoffs could be coming?

"College has a rule proposal in front of them that would allow you on a pooch kick to fair catch and the ball would come out to the 25," said McKay. "We'll look at that and see how it works for them. But our numbers are where they are. We think there's more work to be done on the kickoff and working on ways to make it safer and we're gonna do that.

McKay was available in advance of next week's owner's meetings in Orlando, in which a fleet of proposed rules changes and bylaws will be reviewed and voted on.

The most discussed is the "catch/no-catch" rule which always created debate and a level of outrage. But the strongest determination to change the ruling came after Steelers tight end Jesse James failed to control the ball after stretching for the goal line in a key regular-season game against the Patriots.

The rule was correctly applied by VP of Officiating Al Riveron -- James didn't establish himself as a runner, went to the ground and lost control of it in the end zone. But when the Steelers proceeded to pee down their legs on the next few plays and blow a chance to win, the outcome ensured the rule would be re-opened.

Who knows how motivated the league would have been if the Steelers won anyway. Or if the play happened in a Cardinals-Bears game in October.

Now, McKay says, that will change "Jesse James would be a touchdown," he stated. "We tried to simplify the rule, tried to make it a definable three-step process, two feet down or a body part and an act -- reaching, tucking, a number of things -- or if you had enough time and didn't do it but didn't have to."


The first of many Patriots-inspired rules changes came in 2004 when -- after the physicality of the Patriots defensive backs in the 2003 AFC Championship unmoored the Colts and Peyton Manning -- Indianapolis president Bill Polian ramrodded through an edict to enforce illegal contact more closely.

After the Patriots 2014 Super Bowl season, the league moved to outlaw the formation trickery the Patriots used to great effect against the Ravens, gave greater empowerment to medical spotters to stop the game and remove an apparently injured player after Julian Edelman stumbled in the Super Bowl after a big hit from Kam Chancellor and then went on to help lead the Patriots comeback over Seattle, and came up with a crapload of cockamamie "protocols" to ensure footballs weren't tampered with before the game. The last was such a point of emphasis, the officials actually left the footballs and the air gauges at their Boston hotel prior to a 2016 playoff game between the Patriots and Chiefs.

Between all these instances AND the under-the-radar admission by NFL VP of Operations Troy Vincent that, by 2017 standards, the Super Bowl touchdown by Corey Clement shouldn't have counted, it's enough to make a franchise, fan base and observing media think there's a conspiracy.



Search continues: Scarnecchia pops up at Notre Dame for look at McGlinchey

AP Photo

Search continues: Scarnecchia pops up at Notre Dame for look at McGlinchey

The effort to replenish the tackle depth the Patriots boasted last year will not stop with the re-signing of LaAdrian Waddle. That much was clear when Dante Scarnecchia was spotted at Notre Dame's pro day on Thursday.

The Fighting Irish offense featured two of the top offensive linemen in the country last season in guard Quenton Nelson and tackle Mike McGlinchey.

Nelson is expected to be a top-10 selection and some believe him to be the best player in this year's class regardless of position. The Patriots probably won't have a shot at him. And they're OK at guard. Scarnecchia (and national scout DuJuan Daniels) were in all likelihood there to scout McGlinchey more thoroughly. 


The 6-foot-8, 312-pounder is considered by many to be the top tackle in this year's draft. McGlinchey spent two seasons on the right side, backing up current Ravens tackle Ronnie Stanley, and he spent the last two seaons on the left. He's thought to be a very good athlete for his size, but he may have some issues with "bull rushers and power at the point of attack," according's Lance Zierlein. 

But even with the blemishes that may show up on his tape, McGlinchey could go in the top half of the first round if a team gets desperate. Or he could slide. It seems a slide to the Patriots would be unlikely but not impossible. That's why the Patriots did their due diligence on the player who may be the only NFL-ready tackle in the draft.

Senior Bowl executive director Phil Savage made that very point on Quick Slants the Podcast soon after the NFL Scouting Combine finished up. 

"It's definitely become a challenge," Savage said of finding pro-ready tackles. "We've always focused and talked about how the spread offenses in college have affected the quarterbacks, but in reality, it's impacted all of the positions, quite frankly. 

"You look at the offensive line nowadays and most schools are building what I call a five-man unit where there's no real distinction between the left tackle versus the right tackle versus the right guard versus the left guard. They're all kind of the same because they play as a unit. There's not as much of a premium placed on that left tackle as a standalone pass-protector...

"This year, amazingly enough, I really only had one tackle [with a first-round grade following the combine, and that's [Notre Dame's] Mike McGlinchey. There's a couple of interior linemen like Will Hernandez from UTEP and Quenton Nelson from Notre Dame that are likely to go in the first round. But as far as just a tackle. Wow. It's staggering to think that there could only be really one tackle to go in the first round this year."

The Patriots have a variety of routes they could take in filling the left tackle void filled by Nate Solder. They could try to figure out a way to get McGlinchey in house. They could go with Waddle. They could flip Marcus Cannon to the left side and use Waddle on the right. Maybe a second-year player -- Antonio Garcia? Cole Croston? -- will surprise and force the team's hand.

Whatever they choose, the search for tackles isn't over. And given how difficult it seems to be for teams around the league to find serviceable ones, it could last a while.