BB Visibly On The Sideline

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: BB Visibly On The Sideline

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Last year's offense was very good. This year's offense is very good.  You guys have this weird theory that last year they were awful and this year they are way better.  The reality is this year the offense scored two more TDs than last year.  That's a bit better . . . but it's not some radical change. 

    Yes, it is more versatile this year.  And yes, there's been a bit more emphasis on the run (though it remains an offense heavily dependent on spread formations).  But the success in the running game is mostly because of the improved talent at RB.  If they had tried to do the same with BJGE, they would not have been nearly as successful. 

    Talent matters. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We average .2 ypc more then we did last year, yet we were 2nd in the LG in rushing atts. How do you explain this? Actually the 1st and 3rd rankedrunning teams were at 4.8 and 5.2 ypc. We were at 4.2. Every pro team has talent but only the teams that are committed to using talent get results. 2nd in the Lg in rushing atts and the most versatile offense we've had since 2004. 

    Enjoy it.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: BB Visibly On The Sideline

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Last year's offense was very good. This year's offense is very good.  You guys have this weird theory that last year they were awful and this year they are way better.  The reality is this year the offense scored two more TDs than last year.  That's a bit better . . . but it's not some radical change. 

    Yes, it is more versatile this year.  And yes, there's been a bit more emphasis on the run (though it remains an offense heavily dependent on spread formations).  But the success in the running game is mostly because of the improved talent at RB.  If they had tried to do the same with BJGE, they would not have been nearly as successful. 

    Talent matters. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We average .2 ypc more then we did last year, yet we were 2nd in the LG in rushing atts. How do you explain this? Actually the 1st and 3rd rankedrunning teams were at 4.8 and 5.2 ypc. We were at 4.2. Every pro team has talent but only the teams that are committed to using talent get results. 2nd in the Lg in rushing atts and the most versatile offense we've had since 2004. 

    Enjoy it.

    [/QUOTE]


    But our lead back averaged about 20% more yards per carry this year. Of course we gave him the ball 60% more times because of that dramatically better effectiveness.

    The 4.2 you cite includes all runs, QB sneaks etc.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: BB Visibly On The Sideline

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Last year's offense was very good. This year's offense is very good.  You guys have this weird theory that last year they were awful and this year they are way better.  The reality is this year the offense scored two more TDs than last year.  That's a bit better . . . but it's not some radical change. 

    Yes, it is more versatile this year.  And yes, there's been a bit more emphasis on the run (though it remains an offense heavily dependent on spread formations).  But the success in the running game is mostly because of the improved talent at RB.  If they had tried to do the same with BJGE, they would not have been nearly as successful. 

    Talent matters. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We average .2 ypc more then we did last year, yet we were 2nd in the LG in rushing atts. How do you explain this? Actually the 1st and 3rd rankedrunning teams were at 4.8 and 5.2 ypc. We were at 4.2. Every pro team has talent but only the teams that are committed to using talent get results. 2nd in the Lg in rushing atts and the most versatile offense we've had since 2004. 

    Enjoy it.

    [/QUOTE]

    Champ, you, Wozzy, and Rusty continue to bring up irrelevancies.  I did a thorough comparison of the offensive statistics from 2011 and 2012 and posted it previously.  It shows very little difference in production between last year's offense and this year.  You, Wozzy, and Rusty ignored that thread for the most part because it doesn't square with your opinions.  But the reality is that the statistics (i.e., the factual data) don't support your opinions.  

    For the record, here's what I previously posted, though the bottom line is pretty simple if we think that what matters most is points scored: over 16 games, the offense in 2012 produced exactly 2 TDs and 1 FG more than the offense in 2011.  

    _____

     

    For what it's worth, a few interesting offensive statistics comparing this regular season with last:

    In 2012, the offense ran an amazing 1,191 plays. That's up 109 plays from a very respectable 1,081 last year. 

    Average plays per game were up to 74.4 in 2012 from 67.6 in 2011 (up 6.8 plays per game)

    Those plays were spread over 180 drives (compared with 173 last year).*  This means we ran, on average, 6.6 plays per drive, up from 6.3 last year.  

    We also had more drives per game in 2012, an average of 11.3 per game in 2012 compared with an average of 10.8 last year.  

    Drive length was also slightly longer--an average of 2:45 minutes, up from 2:40 last year

    Not surprisingly, with more drives, more plays, and slightly longer drives, average time of possession was up by 2:09 minutes per game (from 28:47 to 30:56).

    Average time per play was actually down from 26 seconds in 2011 to 25 seconds in 2012--so the extra drive time and overall time of possession came from more plays being run, not from plays that ate more clock. 

    Despite more drives, more plays, and slighlty longer drive times, total yards were almost the same--427.9 in 2012 versus 428.0 in 2011.  

    The only way you can run 109 more plays and end up with the same number of yards is if yards per play was shorter.  In fact, the average play got considerably fewer yards in 2012 than in 2011--6.3 yards per play in 2011 down to 5.7 in 2012. 

    Part of that decline in average yards per play can be attributed to the higher number of run plays in 2012.  In 2012, the 74.4 plays per game were divided into 32.7 running plays and 41.8 passing plays; in 2011, the 67.6 plays per game were divided into 27.4 running plays and 40.3 passing plays.  So the Pats increased running plays by 5.3 per game and passing plays by 1.5 per game. Overall, the run-pass mix changed from 40.5%-59.5% in 2011 to 43.9%-56.1% in 2012. Running plays averaged 4.2 yards per carry in 2012, up from 4.0 in 2011, but of course still produced fewer yards than passing plays, so the increase in running plays would result in a reduction in average yards per play.

    More running plays, however, aren't the most significant reason for the decline in yards per play.  Far more significant is the decline in yards per passing play.  In 2011, the Pats averaged 13.1 yards per completion.  In 2012, that dropped by more than a yard per play to 12.0 yards per completion.  If you account for incompletions and sacks, the Pats yards per passing play in 2012 was 7.0 yards per play while in 2011 it was 7.9 yards per play.  The pass completion percentage was down slightly from 65.7% in 2011 to 62.7%, but the major difference seems to be be fewer yards per completion not a lower completion percentage. (Sacks were also down by 5, but the difference in yards lost to sacks was insignificant, just 9 yards overall.) 

    While season averages can obscure almost as much as they reveal, they do provide some interesting information on general trends.  To me, the most surprising are these: 

    Despite running more in 2012, the Pats actually used up less time per play in 2012 than in 2011. The increase in TOP in 2012 was therefore due to the number of plays run more than to the time used up per play. The interesting question is whether this is due mostly to even greater use of the hurry up offense or whether it is really more the impact of the defense getting off the field faster and therefore giving the offense more time to run plays. 

    Despite a significant increase in plays per game, the yards per game was almost exactly the same in 2012 and 2011.  This seems to be the result of yards per completion declining by a full yard in 2012.  An interesting question is whether this was because the passes were generally shorter or because the receivers got fewer yards after the catch.  The stats on NFL.com don't tell (they don't record YAC), but it would be interesting to know.  

     _____

    Addendum:

    Should have also mentioned scoring:

    In 2011, we scored 57 offensive TDs (18 rushing, 39 passing); In 2012, we scored 59 (25 rushing, 34 passing)--with a few more drives in 2012, the percentage of drives resulting in TDs is the same--33%.

    We had 29 field goals in 2012 and 28 in 2011. (16% of drives resulted in FGs both years.)

    Overall scoring difference on offense is small and can mostly be attributed to the increased number of drives; the bigger difference in scoring was that in 2012 our defense and special teams had 8 TDs, while in 2011 they had just 4.  If the defense was partly responsible for the greater number of offensive drives (by getting the opposing offense off the field faster), then the difference in scoring overall (which amounted to 2.7 points per game more in 2012) may be mostly attributable to better defense!

     

    And turnovers:

     

    Turnover differential increased by 8 turnovers from +17 to +25.  Most of that was due to increased turnovers created by the defense. 

    ·   The offense and special teams turned over the ball 16 times in 2011 (5 fumbles lost and 12 interceptions); the offense and special teams turned over the ball 15 times in 2011 (7 fumbles lost and 9 interceptions).

    ·   The defense created 34 turnovers in 2011 (11 fumbles and 23 interceptions).  It created 41 in 2012 (21 fumbles and 20 interceptions).

     

    ____

    * All stats are from NFL.com (or are simple calculations made from stats available on NFL.com) except for the drive count, which is from Football Outsiders. Football Outsiders excludes end-of-half kneel down drives from the drive count. 

     

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: BB Visibly On The Sideline

    To be fair Prolate I do not think the offense last year puts up the numbers they do if Gronk and Hern miss as much time as they did this year.  There is something to be said for that.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: BB Visibly On The Sideline

    Q: Do you think the same could be said for play-calling as well or is that something that is different from hands-on coaching, like during a game?  


    BB: During a game, I talk to all the play callers, to Scott [O'Brien] to Billy [O'Brien] to Matt [Patricia]. First of all, we go into the game with a plan of how we want to try to start things, believe it or not, I know everybody doesn't think that's the way it is but we actually talk about, ‘This is how we want to start the game and these are the calls that we would make in this situation, second and long, third and short, third and medium, red area, goal line,' and then after the game starts to unfold then you kind of say ‘OK well we want to sort of stay with the way we mapped this out or they're doing this and these don't look as good, these look better or maybe we have to make an adjustment and say, ‘Well we can run these plays but if this happens we have to do something else,' that type of thing. We talk about that over the course of the game.  

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: BB Visibly On The Sideline

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Q: Do you think the same could be said for play-calling as well or is that something that is different from hands-on coaching, like during a game?  


    BB: During a game, I talk to all the play callers, to Scott [O'Brien] to Billy [O'Brien] to Matt [Patricia]. First of all, we go into the game with a plan of how we want to try to start things, believe it or not, I know everybody doesn't think that's the way it is but we actually talk about, ‘This is how we want to start the game and these are the calls that we would make in this situation, second and long, third and short, third and medium, red area, goal line,' and then after the game starts to unfold then you kind of say ‘OK well we want to sort of stay with the way we mapped this out or they're doing this and these don't look as good, these look better or maybe we have to make an adjustment and say, ‘Well we can run these plays but if this happens we have to do something else,' that type of thing. We talk about that over the course of the game.  

     




    Crickets!  This should atleast keep Rusty quiet for a while. So much for BB not "micromanaging"  lol.  I would call this overseeing,. not micro managing. Its funny that every clip you see from last year, you can hear BB on the headset with O'brien saying "Throw It Billy, Throw It!"  LMAO!!!

     

    DEAD!

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from glenr. Show glenr's posts

    Re: BB Visibly On The Sideline

    Why is this even a discussion? The offense is in good hands. The defense is young and has less than a season together in it's current configuration. Doesn't it make sense that BB a former DC would give the D his personal attention while leaving the offense in the cabable hands of JM and TB?

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: BB Visibly On The Sideline

    In response to glenr's comment:

    Why is this even a discussion? The offense is in good hands. The defense is young and has less than a season together in it's current configuration. Doesn't it make sense that BB a former DC would give the D his personal attention while leaving the offense in the cabable hands of JM and TB?




    Anyone who's watched BB on the sidelines during games knows that he moves around a lot and focuses on different things depending on what's happening.  Sometimes he's watching what's happening on the field, at other times he's talking to one of the units on the bench (defense, special teams, offense, or certain players and coaches).  It all depends on what he thinks is most pressing.

    He's a great coach . . . and he's involved in all aspects of the game, but he changes his focus based on where he thinks he's needed most at the time.

     

Share