Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think Belichick is brilliant at assembling a group of complementary players and developing schemes that highlight their strengths while minimizing the impact of their weaknesses.  I also think he's brilliant at analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of opposing players and the schemes opposing teams employ and developing game plans that play to his team's strengths while exploiting the other team's weaknesses. 

    But I think all of this evolves during training camp and the preseason and the regular season, and by the time you get to the playoffs you (and everyone else who's watching closely) knows what you can do, what your strengths and weaknesses are, and how you're generally going to handle different situations and challenges.  You also know this about your opponent.  So by the time you get to the playoffs you and your opponent are both known quantities, and while you can play around with X's and O's, you're not going to radically change what you do or who you are.  Over the season you've developed a certain character as a team based on what you do best. In the playoffs, you don't get away from that . . . you simply execute well so that what you are built to do well, you actually do well. 

    I think that's all BB is saying.  He's not saying that coaching is irrelevant or unimportant.  He's just saying that you spend all season refining your team and getting better and better at what you do, and when it comes playoff time, the key is simply executing well at all those things you developed and perfected over the previous six months. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I heard an interview with Pete Carrol this week where he pretty much stated that he knows what the Falcons are going to try to do and that the Falcons know what the Seahawks are going to do this sunday. The Pats under McDaniels are good for a couple of trick plays a game but i can't imagine the Pats can surprise the Texans too much. Wade Phillips has faced Brady and Belichick plenty of times over the past decade and unless Brady starts running the wildcat I can't imagine Phillips saying after the game that the Pats surprised him.  

    [/QUOTE]


    Pete Carroll is a moron. 

    [/QUOTE]

    It takes one to know one I guess.

    [/QUOTE]

    Look in the mirror. I've forgotten more about the history of this game than you'll ever learn.

    Yes, Pete Carroll is a moron and will never win a SB as a head coach.

    [/QUOTE]

    So this is why you are always wrong, because you can't remember anything. Tie a string around your finger and every time you want to post something look at it and remember to read
    ZBellino's posts and maybe you can start learning about the game again. Glad I could help.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think Belichick is brilliant at assembling a group of complementary players and developing schemes that highlight their strengths while minimizing the impact of their weaknesses.  I also think he's brilliant at analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of opposing players and the schemes opposing teams employ and developing game plans that play to his team's strengths while exploiting the other team's weaknesses. 

    But I think all of this evolves during training camp and the preseason and the regular season, and by the time you get to the playoffs you (and everyone else who's watching closely) knows what you can do, what your strengths and weaknesses are, and how you're generally going to handle different situations and challenges.  You also know this about your opponent.  So by the time you get to the playoffs you and your opponent are both known quantities, and while you can play around with X's and O's, you're not going to radically change what you do or who you are.  Over the season you've developed a certain character as a team based on what you do best. In the playoffs, you don't get away from that . . . you simply execute well so that what you are built to do well, you actually do well. 

    I think that's all BB is saying.  He's not saying that coaching is irrelevant or unimportant.  He's just saying that you spend all season refining your team and getting better and better at what you do, and when it comes playoff time, the key is simply executing well at all those things you developed and perfected over the previous six months. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I heard an interview with Pete Carrol this week where he pretty much stated that he knows what the Falcons are going to try to do and that the Falcons know what the Seahawks are going to do this sunday. The Pats under McDaniels are good for a couple of trick plays a game but i can't imagine the Pats can surprise the Texans too much. Wade Phillips has faced Brady and Belichick plenty of times over the past decade and unless Brady starts running the wildcat I can't imagine Phillips saying after the game that the Pats surprised him.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I think this is true.  While no one knows exactly what plays will be called, after watching film of 16 games (or more), everyone has a pretty good idea what the range of possibilities is.  It's really a matter of getting your players prepared for those possibilities and ensuring that they can execute when a particular possibility becomes reality.  

    [/QUOTE]

    My way of putting it!
    Yes, and that's why Belichick and coaches demand that players know what to do when after a Play is called to shift-up mentally and take notice of what a QB and smart Center will point out at the line as things will/may change. A good Center knows what the blocking schemes are for a certain play and if the 'D' changes up their look, the Center communicates the blocking schemes on the line. This on Q with the QB communicating overall. The Blocking schemes (execution) of the play is then re-focused in mere seconds.  The mental part is done and that leaves the LEVEL of execution. The better talent the better execution.

    The Pats, I believe get more from the talent they have than any Team in the NFL. That's coaching maxing and that is why BB teaches situational football at practice and ramps it up during the season. The film is there - for all teams - and that is what makes the Playoffs more interesting. The coaches although not on the field of play are executing as well.

    I don't think many NCAA teams are very good at that but the NFL Teams require it.

    Note: I'm happy this thread did'nt morph into another past SB thread ....uuughhh ....

    Thanks again ..

     

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to RockScully's comment:
    [QUOTE] 

    Switch out Prolate for ZBellino. Doesn't matter. Each wants to have Tom Brady's baby.

    [/QUOTE]

    No, no, Rusty, some of us are just interested in really understanding the game.  Others, it seems, think this forum exists primarily to puff up their egos. 

    It's not that we love Brady or think he's infallible.  We just don't think a few things that some posters repeat endlessly on this forum are really very credible:

    • That Brady runs the offense all by himself and insists on throwing out of the shotgun when its harmful to the team and that the coaches are powerless to stop him
    • That our past or present offensive coordinators are "clowns" who are overmatched by the game (despite top-of-league offensive production, I might add)
    • That the biggest (and maybe only) problem with team's postseason performance is Tom Brady
    • That a low ranked defense is really a good one--or that it performed well when it allowed the Giants to mount drives averaging nearly 5 minutes each, 50% of which ended in points
    • That basics like blocking and tackling--i.e., execution--are less important than playcalling
    • That there is simplistic formula for how many times a team should throw--or that the number of passing attempts isn't largely the result of the situations a team encounters during the game rather than the result of the "game plan"
    • That running more automatically leads to better results
    • That subbing running backs is bad strategy
    • That the shotgun formation is to be used only rarely and that QBs should be under center most of the time
    • That there's only one way to win football games and it involves "smashmouth" running out of heavy formations

    We actually believe Belichick and his coordinators know what they are doing.  Therefore, when the Patriots do any of these things that you and others pronounce as "bad" we are skeptical.  We prefer to ask why it might be that our coaches (coaches with extraordinary winning precentages and top-level production) choose to run the shotgun so much, choose to sub running backs regularly, develop different game plans than some fans think are the right ones, etc.  We want to understand better why they do these things (which we assume, based on the overall results, are the right things to do), because we appreciate our team and want to know better what has generated its astounding success over the past decade. 

    Others, it seems, have different agendas, which, as I said above, seem mostly about puffing up their little egos.  While blowing your own horn repeatedly and putting others down with childish insults is entertaining for a while, 100,000 posts later I think we'd all agree it's become more than a bit tiresome.

     

     

     

     

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to themightypatriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Z if your right then why even have coaches on game day? You could stick in a Madden player to call plays. You don't give play calling enough credit. There's a reason why certain coaches always win regardless of the players (BB) and why some coaches never win even with the most talented teams

    [/QUOTE]

    Way to completely miss Z's point.  Although you seem to do that with everyone.  Try to follow the threads carefully before you comment.

    [/QUOTE]

    how did I miss it? Z said 90% of it is prep and execution that leaves 10% for actual play calling. If it's 10% then does it really matter who's play calling? You can have the madden auto play calling 10%. Beabe seems to think it's under 5%. Play calling is an important part to the game. If a team only ran draw plays up the middle on every play, I don't care how you execute it you won't win. If you run a dime package and you opponent counters by running the ball and screens I don't care how you execute you won't win if you don't adjust the play calling. There's a reason why these coaches get paid so much and why certain coaches (who are known for great in game adjustments) keep on winning, because they call the right plays and put their players in the right spots to be able to execute the plays! To me that's more than 10% of the game. The coaches have to adapt during the game and put their players into positions to be able to execute. Just having high talented players won't get you anywhere if they aren't in the right positions on the right plays to begin with.

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to themightypatriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Z if your right then why even have coaches on game day? You could stick in a Madden player to call plays. You don't give play calling enough credit. There's a reason why certain coaches always win regardless of the players (BB) and why some coaches never win even with the most talented teams

    [/QUOTE]

    Way to completely miss Z's point.  Although you seem to do that with everyone.  Try to follow the threads carefully before you comment.

    [/QUOTE]

    how did I miss it? Z said 90% of it is prep and execution that leaves 10% for actual play calling. If it's 10% then does it really matter who's play calling? You can have the madden auto play calling 10%. Beabe seems to think it's under 5%. Play calling is an important part to the game. If a team only ran draw plays up the middle on every play, I don't care how you execute it you won't win. If you run a dime package and you opponent counters by running the ball and screens I don't care how you execute you won't win if you don't adjust the play calling. There's a reason why these coaches get paid so much and why certain coaches (who are known for great in game adjustments) keep on winning, because they call the right plays and put their players in the right spots to be able to execute the plays! To me that's more than 10% of the game. The coaches have to adapt during the game and put their players into positions to be able to execute. Just having high talented players won't get you anywhere if they aren't in the right positions on the right plays to begin with.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think what Belichick means is that by the time the playoffs come around, you've figured out all the schemes and plays that work for your team against various types of defenses, so you're not going to win games by doing a whole lot more with X's and O's.  What's most important by playof time is executing well.  The X and O work is done earlier in the season and by the time playoffs come, while you may put in a few new plays, you're not going to be radically changing up everything you do to try to win the game with game planning and play calling.  Instead, you're going to focus on getting execution perfect, because that's what really pays off. 

     

     

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I think what Belichick means is that by the time the playoffs come around, you've figured out all the schemes and plays that work for your team against various types of defenses, so you're not going to win games by doing a whole lot more with X's and O's.  What's most important by playof time is executing well.  The X and O work is done earlier in the season and by the time playoffs come, while you may put in a few new plays, you're not going to be radically changing up everything you do to try to win the game with game planning and play calling.  Instead, you're going to focus on getting execution perfect, because that's what really pays off. 

    [/QUOTE]

    That I agree with, that your playbook won't change and you aren't going to drastically change your playing style but that's completely different from play calling during the game. What is BB known for all those years, half time adjustments. That's all play call adjustments not execution. Half time adjustments don't make players execute better, it puts them in better position to make the execution more effective. Yes you aren't going to make drastic changes but you do adjust your play calling and the best coaches make those adjusts in game, the worst coaches stick to a game plan through the whole game believing the X and O's are done before hand. How many times have we seen the Pats start off slow and adjust during the game then suddenly seem unstoppable? They aren't executing better but they are being put in better positions to take advantage of that execution

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I think what Belichick means is that by the time the playoffs come around, you've figured out all the schemes and plays that work for your team against various types of defenses, so you're not going to win games by doing a whole lot more with X's and O's.  What's most important by playof time is executing well.  The X and O work is done earlier in the season and by the time playoffs come, while you may put in a few new plays, you're not going to be radically changing up everything you do to try to win the game with game planning and play calling.  Instead, you're going to focus on getting execution perfect, because that's what really pays off. 

    [/QUOTE]

    That I agree with, that your playbook won't change and you aren't going to drastically change your playing style but that's completely different from play calling during the game. What is BB known for all those years, half time adjustments. That's all play call adjustments not execution. Half time adjustments don't make players execute better, it puts them in better position to make the execution more effective. Yes you aren't going to make drastic changes but you do adjust your play calling and the best coaches make those adjusts in game, the worst coaches stick to a game plan through the whole game believing the X and O's are done before hand. How many times have we seen the Pats start off slow and adjust during the game then suddenly seem unstoppable? They aren't executing better but they are being put in better positions to take advantage of that execution

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree with this too.  I also think the Pats do make adjustments well . . . but much of the play calling is dictated by situation.   I don't know how you feel, but I don't think the situational play calling in the Super Bowl was bad.  They could have done lots of things differently (more hurry-up, more run plays, etc.), but the key was executing the plays they did call and there were lots of execution failures.  If they had called different plays and executed just as poorly, the results wouldn't have been any better. 

    Simply put, I don't think the plays called were nearly as important as the execution failures.  

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I think what Belichick means is that by the time the playoffs come around, you've figured out all the schemes and plays that work for your team against various types of defenses, so you're not going to win games by doing a whole lot more with X's and O's.  What's most important by playof time is executing well.  The X and O work is done earlier in the season and by the time playoffs come, while you may put in a few new plays, you're not going to be radically changing up everything you do to try to win the game with game planning and play calling.  Instead, you're going to focus on getting execution perfect, because that's what really pays off. 

    [/QUOTE]

    That I agree with, that your playbook won't change and you aren't going to drastically change your playing style but that's completely different from play calling during the game. What is BB known for all those years, half time adjustments. That's all play call adjustments not execution. Half time adjustments don't make players execute better, it puts them in better position to make the execution more effective. Yes you aren't going to make drastic changes but you do adjust your play calling and the best coaches make those adjusts in game, the worst coaches stick to a game plan through the whole game believing the X and O's are done before hand. How many times have we seen the Pats start off slow and adjust during the game then suddenly seem unstoppable? They aren't executing better but they are being put in better positions to take advantage of that execution

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree with this too.  I also think the Pats do make adjustments well . . . but much of the play calling is dictated by situation.   I don't know how you feel, but I don't think the situational play calling in the Super Bowl was bad.  They could have done lots of things differently (more hurry-up, more run plays, etc.), but the key was executing the plays they did call and there were lots of execution failures.  If they had called different plays and executed just as poorly, the results wouldn't have been any better. 

    Simply put, I don't think the plays called were nearly as important as the execution failures.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I think it was a combo of lack of execution and play calling in the end. When you look at it the Giants rushed 4 and played with essentially a nickel secondary all game flooding the 5-15 range with players. Using more draws and screens to set up play action would have been more effective than trying to throw into the teeth of the D repeatedly. Of course you are right without execution play calling isn't going to help but without play calling execution doesn't always matter. Don't forget there's another team who's also executing too. But, I wasn't trying to point to a specific game as a general statement. I was pointing more towards the game as a whole. I do put more weight into execution as broken plays do happen, which no play call can account for, but situational play calling is still play calling in the end. You need the proper play call to put your players in the position in the first place to succeed. Saying it's only a minor portion of the game is completely wrong, how do you expect the players to execute at all if they were put in the wrong position to make the play from the beginning.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UD6's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    That's what I've always thought. 

    I've always thought those that play armchair coach and talk about play calling are full of it.  They are like the people who are great at jeopardy from their couch. 

    People who claim play calling is a reason for a loss never consider talent and more importantly execution as reasons when, in my mind, those make up the majority of the reason why teams win or lose. 

    [/QUOTE]

    You know something UD, with that statement, no matter what plays are called, execution is the key.  With that said, this is what debunks all those claims the Pats won because of "Spygate"!  No matter how much you may know about a play, the execution of that play makes it work.  Don't most teams already know what plays are most likely to occur as a result of a certain formation?  The X-factor is how the players react to the opponent.  I can know a receiver is going to run a "go" route, but, if I am not executing my coverage good enough and the receiver gets separation, I'm toast.  Conversely, an offense knows the defense's tendencies from their formation.  Every play has good intentions and can work IF executed properly on offense, but, a good defender's reaction can wreck it! Hence, execution on both sides of the ball is key no matter how much is known!  


    [/QUOTE]

    AGC - I don't want to delve into this because it will cause another shtstorm and insults that I don't want to have to endlessly defend. 

    I'll just say this.  I understand what you are saying and it is not without merit, but I believe within it you are making assumptions that can't be validated and thus limit your argument's effectiveness.

      

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to themightypatriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Z if your right then why even have coaches on game day? You could stick in a Madden player to call plays. You don't give play calling enough credit. There's a reason why certain coaches always win regardless of the players (BB) and why some coaches never win even with the most talented teams

    [/QUOTE]

    Way to completely miss Z's point.  Although you seem to do that with everyone.  Try to follow the threads carefully before you comment.

    [/QUOTE]

    how did I miss it? Z said 90% of it is prep and execution that leaves 10% for actual play calling. If it's 10% then does it really matter who's play calling? You can have the madden auto play calling 10%. Beabe seems to think it's under 5%. Play calling is an important part to the game. If a team only ran draw plays up the middle on every play, I don't care how you execute it you won't win. If you run a dime package and you opponent counters by running the ball and screens I don't care how you execute you won't win if you don't adjust the play calling. There's a reason why these coaches get paid so much and why certain coaches (who are known for great in game adjustments) keep on winning, because they call the right plays and put their players in the right spots to be able to execute the plays! To me that's more than 10% of the game. The coaches have to adapt during the game and put their players into positions to be able to execute. Just having high talented players won't get you anywhere if they aren't in the right positions on the right plays to begin with.

    [/QUOTE]

    I said what happens in the game. That means the vast majority of coaching that helps a team happens before the play is even called, getting the players trained and mentally prepared to execute. Within that 90% that is execution is a coach. This is what he does. Playcalling is a secondary function. Coaching, preparing players fundamentally to execute whatever play is called in any given situtation (indeed, instilling a cognizance of that situation) is coaching. That is why they are called coaches and not playcallers.

    I'll call the most vanilla game, you get exotic. I'll take players that execute 90% of the time, you take players that execute only 70% of the time. I'll beat you every single week of the season. The team that wins is the team that makes the least errors and the most plus plays.  

    I'll even elevate that and say that of the "execution" the biggest factor, and thus most important, aspect is the front 4-5 players.

    BB is dedicated to making sure his players play with correct leverage, pad height. Watch him at practice, go to Gillette, the majority of what he does is instruct players. Hands on. That is coaching.

    Second, coaches don't win regardless of talent. BB didn't win regardless of talent in Cleveland. The Patriots are a combination of a great QB a great coach and a very good/great (let the jackals debate this) GM. 

    It's synergy. Just saying ... BB is calling the best plays thus they are winning consistently, is reductive. 

    Moreover, I find it insane that people reject this. The idea of running the ball 3-4 more times a game would have more impact that having players execute (not make a mistake, or make a plus play) 3-4 more times a game is absolutely beyond credibility to me. 

    Forget about critiquing the defensive execution, which no one does, but the sheer amount of plays they were simply blown off the ball, played with terrible leverage, terrible hand usage, got their numbers turned, dropped too deep, got caught looking, made silly inexusable penalties to extend a NY drive, or got caught flat footed in that game was over the top. They weren't prepared to play the Giants.

    And this is crucially important now. 

    But espousing the former (playcalling) as a cause of a playoff loss leads you to replace a play where someone did not execute with another play of another variety (run) and to then assume that this play will be executed well, and then that there will be a chain reaction afterward of other plays that will also need good execution. The initial problem is execution -- calling a different play is beside that fact. There were no plays where the opponent could not have beaten if someone didn't do their job.  

    Then espousing the latter, that we fix the execution on 3-4 plays.... well, that guarantees a victory. If one player makes a catch, another breaks up a pass instead of trying to catch it (or another checks down), if Brady takes off running or Mankins can stick his block, if Moore gets him jam down on the Manningham catch (or Chung breaks earlier for the ball, or any of the defensive lineman can apply the slightest bit of pressure), if the Vollmer gets out of his stance better on the first play (not allowing four players to cut through seven, really, one, Tuck), Ninkovich offsides, McCourty getting flat out beat down the middle on 3rd down, 12 man penalty negating a turnover on the Giants' five.

    Give me any three of those and I don't need a hypothetical string of plays assuming good execution down line at a factor of the initial play. I already have a win.   

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I think what Belichick means is that by the time the playoffs come around, you've figured out all the schemes and plays that work for your team against various types of defenses, so you're not going to win games by doing a whole lot more with X's and O's.  What's most important by playof time is executing well.  The X and O work is done earlier in the season and by the time playoffs come, while you may put in a few new plays, you're not going to be radically changing up everything you do to try to win the game with game planning and play calling.  Instead, you're going to focus on getting execution perfect, because that's what really pays off. 

    [/QUOTE]

    That I agree with, that your playbook won't change and you aren't going to drastically change your playing style but that's completely different from play calling during the game. What is BB known for all those years, half time adjustments. That's all play call adjustments not execution. Half time adjustments don't make players execute better, it puts them in better position to make the execution more effective. Yes you aren't going to make drastic changes but you do adjust your play calling and the best coaches make those adjusts in game, the worst coaches stick to a game plan through the whole game believing the X and O's are done before hand. How many times have we seen the Pats start off slow and adjust during the game then suddenly seem unstoppable? They aren't executing better but they are being put in better positions to take advantage of that execution

    [/QUOTE]

    Halftime adjustments do make players execute better. Most of half time discussion is telling players how to play certain situations. 

    This is a fundamental misunderstanding about how a team prepares for a game. 

    1.) They are not writing or adding new plays at half time. The plays that are in the playbook are there by the first practice. Those are the plays the players will run that week, those are the only plays they will run, they won't ask players to suddenly run different plays they aren't prepared for. 

    2.) The play talk that goes on are relatively minor structural changes to the existing plays. For instance a great half time adjustment against SF was totally simple. They started motioning the TE/Slot out against Aldon Smith, forcing him to a come farther away from the QB to match up as an OLB, or declare himself as a blitzer. It worked wonders .... the shift to passing more wasn't by design but circumstance ... they were behind by a boatload of points, needed to score, and needed to extend the game clock as far as they could to ensure they had the possessions necessary to catch up. 

    3.) The majority of the discussion is going to be positional coaches (and HCs) discussing how groups of the players are going to improve what they have done. This means adjusting (also on a micro level) how they are playing the offenders defenders on a matchup by matchup basis stemming from how those players played their matchups. 

    Lastly, screen passes versus four man fronts is not a good tactic IMO. The Pats didn't need to run more screens.

    The Giants gave the Pats trouble last season twice because they are vey strong up the middle. The Pats playcalling the seasons prior to this were all up the middle because that was their strength and perimeter play was a glaring weakness (no good outside WRs, and a RB that isn't good outside/turning the corner).

    All the same, I feel like they had success in the hurry up, and working the outer portion in the first half. They could have stayed there. Then again ... they did ... later on ... and Welker was wide open and they couldn't connect. 

    So, again, execution. 

    They also curiously stood their edge defender up in the second half (which is a minor change in this defense) running a 3-4. I didn't like that. 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Halftime adjustments do make players execute better. Most of half time discussion is telling players how to play certain situations. 

    This is a fundamental misunderstanding about how a team prepares for a game. 

    1.) They are not writing or adding new plays at half time. The plays that are in the playbook are there by the first practice. Those are the plays the players will run that week, those are the only plays they will run, they won't ask players to suddenly run different plays they aren't prepared for. 

    So they adjusted their play calling by calling different plays. No one is saying that you throw out the book nor do they have only a handful of plays per game. They have 100's of plays to call from and lots of formations most of which they won't use in a game even if they practiced it. They don't go into a game saying we are only running 43 so here are the 43 plays were are running this week. They go in with whole playbook and adjust as the game goes on. That's situational play calling

    2.) The play talk that goes on are relatively minor structural changes to the existing plays. For instance a great half time adjustment against SF was totally simple. They started motioning the TE/Slot out against Aldon Smith, forcing him to a come farther away from the QB to match up as an OLB, or declare himself as a blitzer. It worked wonders .... the shift to passing more wasn't by design but circumstance ... they were behind by a boatload of points, needed to score, and needed to extend the game clock as far as they could to ensure they had the possessions necessary to catch up. 

    So they make adjustments to the play calling with slight adjustments before the snap of the play. Again this is play calling, even at the line Brady is making an adjustment to the play call. It doesn't always have to be coaches who make play calls it's also the QB

    3.) The majority of the discussion is going to be positional coaches (and HCs) discussing how groups of the players are going to improve what they have done. This means adjusting (also on a micro level) how they are playing the offenders defenders on a matchup by matchup basis stemming from how those players played their matchups. 

    Yes they make adjustments to individuals but they also makes adjustsments to the group as a whole. Have you ever seen a whole DL shift? That's because they see something the opponent is doing and make a play call adjustment on the field to shift them into a different formation. Before snap adjustments happen all the time which is often a play call adjustment made by the D captian on the field (ever watch Wilfork stand up and adjust the LB or watch Mayo help adjust the secondary depending on formation?)

    Lastly, screen passes versus four man fronts is not a good tactic IMO. The Pats didn't need to run more screens.

    You might be right but I've also seen it work extremely well when the opponent has a nickel package on the field. You get those big OL infront against smaller DB's and damage can be done

    The Giants gave the Pats trouble last season twice because they are vey strong up the middle. The Pats playcalling the seasons prior to this were all up the middle because that was their strength and perimeter play was a glaring weakness (no good outside WRs, and a RB that isn't good outside/turning the corner).

    All the same, I feel like they had success in the hurry up, and working the outer portion in the first half. They could have stayed there. Then again ... they did ... later on ... and Welker was wide open and they couldn't connect. 

    They had some success but no team can go hurry up all the time. This years Pats team is the fastest ever yet you seen them wear down (ala 49ers game). Then teams adjust and the play calling needs to adjust with it. If your team is winded from hurry and the the Giants adjust making plays no amount of execution will succeed at that point. You need to adjust to the opponent or force the opponent to adjust to you. Banging your head into the wall repeatedly because it worked previously doesn't mean it will again no matter if they execute properly or not.

    So, again, execution. 

    They also curiously stood their edge defender up in the second half (which is a minor change in this defense) running a 3-4. I didn't like that. 

    So you didn't like that, are you saying it was bad play calling or that they should have been able to execute better regardless of the play call?

    [/QUOTE]

    execution happens after the snap, play calling happens before the snap. In order for plays to be executed properly they first have to setup in the right positions and even if they are setup in the right positions the players still need to execute the play

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Halftime adjustments do make players execute better. Most of half time discussion is telling players how to play certain situations. 

    This is a fundamental misunderstanding about how a team prepares for a game. 

    1.) They are not writing or adding new plays at half time. The plays that are in the playbook are there by the first practice. Those are the plays the players will run that week, those are the only plays they will run, they won't ask players to suddenly run different plays they aren't prepared for. 

    So they adjusted their play calling by calling different plays. No one is saying that you throw out the book nor do they have only a handful of plays per game. They have 100's of plays to call from and lots of formations most of which they won't use in a game even if they practiced it. They don't go into a game saying we are only running 43 so here are the 43 plays were are running this week. They go in with whole playbook and adjust as the game goes on. That's situational play calling

    Situational in the sense that it responds to the lead or deficit. Aka, pass more if you need points, run more if you want to remove clock time. Also, there are about 1000 plays in a seasonal playbook. Maybe 800. At the NFL level. But on a given week you ARE only going to practice about 60 of them. They do have a finite number of plays based on what they had time to practice. 

    2.) The play talk that goes on are relatively minor structural changes to the existing plays. For instance a great half time adjustment against SF was totally simple. They started motioning the TE/Slot out against Aldon Smith, forcing him to a come farther away from the QB to match up as an OLB, or declare himself as a blitzer. It worked wonders .... the shift to passing more wasn't by design but circumstance ... they were behind by a boatload of points, needed to score, and needed to extend the game clock as far as they could to ensure they had the possessions necessary to catch up. 

    So they make adjustments to the play calling with slight adjustments before the snap of the play. Again this is play calling, even at the line Brady is making an adjustment to the play call. It doesn't always have to be coaches who make play calls it's also the QB

    That is not playcalling, that is a sight adjustment to a play. Entirely different, and unrelated to this entire debate about running and passing. It's instructing people at the line how to run a particular play. Not playcalling. 

    Please don't be obtuse just to be "right".

    3.) The majority of the discussion is going to be positional coaches (and HCs) discussing how groups of the players are going to improve what they have done. This means adjusting (also on a micro level) how they are playing the offenders defenders on a matchup by matchup basis stemming from how those players played their matchups. 

    Yes they make adjustments to individuals but they also makes adjustsments to the group as a whole. Have you ever seen a whole DL shift? That's because they see something the opponent is doing and make a play call adjustment on the field to shift them into a different formation. Before snap adjustments happen all the time which is often a play call adjustment made by the D captian on the field (ever watch Wilfork stand up and adjust the LB or watch Mayo help adjust the secondary depending on formation?)

    Shifting the line isn't playcalling that is obvious. IT also has nothing to do with the argument. It's an adjustment to an existing play. 

    Lastly, screen passes versus four man fronts is not a good tactic IMO. The Pats didn't need to run more screens.

    You might be right but I've also seen it work extremely well when the opponent has a nickel package on the field. You get those big OL infront against smaller DB's and damage can be done

    Meh, big OL have trouble getting out to make blocks on 34 linebackers. Usually screen plays work because there are 5-6 players already upfield on a blitz. Also, the Giants are an elite screen defense. 

    The Giants gave the Pats trouble last season twice because they are vey strong up the middle. The Pats playcalling the seasons prior to this were all up the middle because that was their strength and perimeter play was a glaring weakness (no good outside WRs, and a RB that isn't good outside/turning the corner).

    All the same, I feel like they had success in the hurry up, and working the outer portion in the first half. They could have stayed there. Then again ... they did ... later on ... and Welker was wide open and they couldn't connect. 

    They had some success but no team can go hurry up all the time. This years Pats team is the fastest ever yet you seen them wear down (ala 49ers game). Then teams adjust and the play calling needs to adjust with it. If your team is winded from hurry and the the Giants adjust making plays no amount of execution will succeed at that point. You need to adjust to the opponent or force the opponent to adjust to you. Banging your head into the wall repeatedly because it worked previously doesn't mean it will again no matter if they execute properly or not.

    That is just my feeling. Although the fact that the Giants' offensive coordinator Perrey Fewell wondered why NE dropped the hurry up when it was "killing them" makes me believe that they should have. They scored TDs on two drives ... those were the drives when they ran hurry up. That is what I saw ... the Giants couldn't sub and couldn't keep up.

    So, again, execution. 

    They also curiously stood their edge defender up in the second half (which is a minor change in this defense) running a 3-4. I didn't like that. 

    So you didn't like that, are you saying it was bad play calling or that they should have been able to execute better regardless of the play call?

    It doesn't change the plays. Let me explain. NE runs the same basic set of plays in 34 and 43. It's no big difference. That is a minor strategic adjustment. 

    And the answer is yes. I would have taken 34 or 43 (doesn't matter) if DMC can stay with his man, Moore/Chung can stay with their man, they avoid a 12 man penalty, the DL players aren't getting rerouted or turned around, or Nink being offsides. The list of mistakes that killed them are almost endless and have nothing to do with strategic decisions like 34 vs 43 or or even the plays you call within that structure.  

    34 vs 43 is insignificant compared to how well these players would have executed. Give me those few plays back ... you can take whatever playbook you want. 

    The part that kills me is you know I'm right. I take the execution on the handful of plays ... I win the game. It's that simple. Execution. 

    [/QUOTE]

    execution happens after the snap, play calling happens before the snap. In order for plays to be executed properly they first have to setup in the right positions and even if they are setup in the right positions the players still need to execute the play

    [/QUOTE]


     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    patseng is more right in this argument.  Execution is the buzzword that gives accountability to players.  The equivalent accountability for coaches should be playcalling according to strategy and situation. otherwise coaches (and wannabes proroid, zbell, pezz, will always have the EXCUSE of "execution" .  coaches need to execute their play calls better and according to situational strategy.

     

    I hereby sentence this thread to the executioner...

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    Agree with Coolade and patseng.

    Many of us wanted the Pats offense to be more diverse. Prolate, Pezz and Z-Bo said the offense under OB was just fine despite the poor post season production for the past 3 years.

    Many of us said we were a 1 dimensional offense which relied too often on Brady's arm and used the running game as not much more then a gimmick. This year we lead the LG in rushing td's and as Pat Kirwan and Tim Ryan,and John Madden just absolutely went off about on the radio, we are "balanced", we "can run the heck out of the football", and we are "committed to doing it"!!

    I am not making this up and I hope some of you listen to "moving the chains" on sirius! These guys directly portrayed what many of us have been talking about for years. If I could download the audio I would. (Maybe 1 of you could) As they said almost to a tee, defense's will "NOW HAVE TO GUESS" what N.E will do on offense because of their new found commitment to the run.  We use SG less then ever, and we run more then we have since Corey Dillion in 2004!

    Coach Belichick recognized our offensive short comings in the post season and he went out of his way to address the issue. Z-Bo is not right, and neither is Prolate. Our offense was not ok in the playoffs, or SB. We scored 17 points, had 2 turnovers, and neglected a power run game that netted us 4.4 ypc. Teams knew we would pass to the short intermediate routes and they "ADJUSTED" to it in the playoffs as is illustrated below.

    They no longer sent extra rushers, they dropped 7 and rushed 4. Prolate is wrong saying the O-line is responsible for the Brady's pressure/sacks and Z-Bo is wrong for saying play calling plays little part in the outcome of a game. Passing 2-1 against  the best pass rush in football is a "POOR GAME PLAN" especially when that defense gave up over 4.5 ypc on the year.

     

    Only on this forum can men be called BB haters when they question the offensive game plan even tho BB has always been a defensive coach...but other men claim to have "objective opinions when they say BB cannot acquire talent and our defense "suks" even tho BB is now and has always been the defensive coach/ GM of this team.

     

    Shotgun numbers down in '12 January, 9, 2013 Jan 9 9:00 AM ET By Mike Reiss | ESPNBoston.com

    One statistic that was charted over the course of the 16-game season was how often the Patriots had quarterback Tom Brady in the shotgun.

    The idea for keeping the statistic was sparked after the season opener against the Titans when Brady was in the 'gun just 13 times. That was the first sign of a shift of sorts from what we've seen in recent years from the Patriots, and the feeling here is that it's tied to a greater focus on balance between the run and pass.

    On the season, when including penalties, the Patriots were in the shotgun 47.1 percent of the time (585 of 1,240, including penalties). That is a lower percentage than the norm and reflects, from this view, a commitment to the running game that hasn't been as consistent in the past.

    Usage of the shotgun
    vs. Dolphins:
    31 of 80 (3 runs, 26 passes, 2 pre-snap penalties)
    at Jaguars: 36 of 73 (4 runs, 32 passes)
    vs. 49ers: 59 of 96 (5 runs, 54 passes)
    vs. Texans: 31 of 73 (4 runs, 27 passes)
    at Dolphins: 35 of 79 (3 runs, 32 passes)
    at Jets: 20 of 68 (2 runs, 16 passes, 2 Jets pre-snap penalties)
    vs. Colts: 21 of 61 (0 runs, 21 passes)
    vs. Bills: 38 of 72 (6 runs, 32 passes)
    at Rams: 36 of 69 (4 runs, 32 passes)
    vs. Jets: 42 of 80 (6 runs, 36 passes)
    at Seahawks: 60 of 87 (7 runs, 52 passes, 1 false start)
    vs. Broncos:
    45 of 94 (7 runs, 37 passes, 1 false start)
    at Bills: 30 of 77 (6 runs, 24 passes)
    at Ravens: 41 of 82 (6 runs, 34 passes, 1 fumbled snap)
    vs. Cardinals: 47 of 82 (9 runs, 38 passes)
    at Titans: 13 of 67 (0 runs, 13 passes)

     

    History says Texans shouldn't blitz Brady January, 9, 2013 Jan 9 1:34 PM ET By John Parolin, ESPN Stats & Information

    As the Patriots prepare for their playoff showdown with the Texans on Sunday, they're likely focusing on the fact that Houston is the most aggressive defense in the league. They sent extra pass rushers on 46.9 percent of dropbacks in the regular season. In their blowout loss to New England in Week 14, Houston sent extra rushers on more than half of Tom Brady’s dropbacks, and he finished 13-of-19 for 148 yards and three touchdowns.

    Overall, Brady’s success against added pressure is obvious. This season, Brady posted a +20 TD-Int differential (20 TD, 0 Int) against at least five pass rushers, and no other quarterback in the last five years has thrown 20 touchdowns alone against extra rushers.

    Brady by seconds-before-pass (2012)  Within 3.0More Than 3.0 Comp pct 72%* 41% Yds per att 8.1 6.4 TD-Int 26-4 8-4 Total QBR 87.9 38.4 *17-25, 3 TD in Week 14 vs Texans Part of Brady’s success is in getting the ball out quickly. No quarterback in the league has a shorter average time before pass than Tom Brady (3.03 seconds, NFL average is 3.46). The quick-release timing routes work well against added pressure, but teams have success dropping those extra defenders into coverage and disrupting Brady’s internal clock.

    There is precedent for a heavy-blitzing 3-4 defense playing aggressively in the regular season against Brady and losing, then meeting again in the postseason and winning. The 2009 Ravens and 2010 Jets both lost regular-season meetings and gained redemption in the playoffs, but they had to adjust their strategy:

    2009 Ravens
    * Baltimore sent at least five rushers on 21 of 37 dropbacks (56.8 percent) in a Week 4 loss. Brady finished 14 of 20 for 167 yards and the game-winning touchdown against added pressure, and was sacked only once.

    Tom Brady vs. 5+ rushers, facing
    '09 Ravens/'10 Jets, reg. season & playoffs  

    Reg. SeasonPlayoffs<<

    Pct of Tot Dropbacks 48% 17% Dropbacks/Sack 17.0 8.0 TD-Int 4-0 0-0

    Total QBR 77.3 13.2 >>0-2 record (2-1 in regular seasons) *

    In their playoff rematch, the Ravens sent extra rushers on 10 of 45 dropbacks (22.2 percent), and Brady’s overall numbers in Baltimore’s playoff win were 23 of 42, 154 yards, two touchdowns and three interceptions. Brady also was sacked three times and fumbled on New England’s opening drive, setting up the Ravens at the NE 17-yard line.

    2010 Jets
    * New York sent at least five rushers in their two regular-season meetings on 30 of 69 dropbacks (43.5 percent), with Brady finishing 18 of 28 for 335 yards and three touchdowns. Though the Jets won their first meeting of the season in Week 2, New England won 45-3 in Week 13 on Monday Night Football, highlighted by Brady’s 8-of-13, 199-yard, 3-TD performance against added pressure.

    * In the playoffs, the Jets sent extra pressure on 6 of 50 dropbacks (12.0 percent), and Brady was sacked five times in New York’s win, finishing 29 of 45 for 299 yards, two touchdowns and an interception.

    If history holds, committing extra pass rushers on Sunday would not be wise for Wade Phillips and the Texans’ defense. Those defenders would be better served dropping into coverage and taking away quick-to-develop routes, like the 2009 Ravens and 2010 Jets did in previous playoff victories. Tags:

    New England Patriots, Houston Texans, Tom Brady

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    Funny how BB makes a statement that execution is more important than X's and O's in the playoffs and we have a whole bunch of posters telling us he's wrong.  I guess Champ and Coolade and Wozzy and Rusty all have won more Super Bowls in their illustrious coaching careers than poor misguided Bill Belichick.  

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Funny how BB makes a statement that execution is more important than X's and O's in the playoffs and we have a whole bunch of posters telling us he's wrong.  I guess Champ and Coolade and Wozzy and Rusty all have won more Super Bowls in their illustrious coaching careers than poor misguided Bill Belichick.  

    [/QUOTE]


    If only you could mail in your Draft, and Free agent targets to Bill Belichick so that he might acquire the talent necessary to "execute" and win SB's. As you say we don't have the talent to win, and our offense was only 1 dimensional due to the poor "talent" level. I guess you know more then BB as a GM.

    Oh and our defense suks as you say,  even tho it has been proven that our defense gets better the latter half of the year, every year for the past 3 years.....you know, the same time you have been saying it suks.

    Jackie Mac's article showed us that our defense gives up a 32 passer rating in the 2nd half of the year since 2009 for opposing QB's. Which by the way is 2nd in the National Football league. Fans like you think our D suks due to BB's defensive coaching style...which allows for growth./ He doesn't let the D get after the QB until the latter half of the year. Giving up 17 and 19 points in 2 SB's is not a bad thing. Then again, I am sure you will have a graph of a chart of a spread sheet that shows us that Bill Belichicks defense actually "suks".

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

     

    More from the master on game planning and execution:

    Q: When you have had a degree of success like you did back in December, what is the fine line between trying to repeat what worked well and trying to throw in new wrinkles? 

    BB: I think it’s about creating a game plan that you feel like can be successful against a team that you’re playing. The way certain plays matched up in the first game, first of all, I don’t even know if we’re going to run the same plays or they’re going to run the same plays so that it could even possibly match up in this game. But even if it did, the chances of it matched up, the number of plays that we run and the number of defenses that they run, for it to be the exact same is infinitesimal. It’s not going to happen. I don’t think that’s really important. It’s about being prepared to deal with whatever it is we have to deal with on Sunday and going out there and executing it well. It’s not trying to replicate a matchup, you can’t do it. 

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

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    And for good measure, let's see what Brady has to say (asked about the importance of the hurry up strategy):

     

    “I think there are a lot of different tempos used over the course of the season. We can go fast, we can go slow, there’s two-minute type tempos, there’s no-huddle versions. Whatever we do, we have to do effectively. I think that really is about execution in both the run game and the pass game. It doesn’t do you very good if you go quickly or slowly if you’re not executing, because then you’re going to be off the field, and there’s no better team than the Texans in time of possession. They led the League this year in time of possession. Last week against Cincy, it was almost two to one time of possession. That’s a big strength for them and we have to make sure we stay on the field, especially on third down. But they’re a very good situational team, so they get off the field on third down. They’re very good in the red area; they’re very good in short yardage and goal line situations. It’s easier said than done. That’s why we’re practicing every day. We’re trying to practice hard and get a lot of looks, and hopefully we can be prepared by Sunday.”

    And more on pace, this time from Belichick:

    “Well, pace is just of an overall way you play the game. I think execution is a lot more important than pace. Sometimes we’ve gone faster than others, certainly the Texans have been in the two-minute mode or they’ve not been in it. It all comes back down to execution. It’s how well you can do whatever it is you’re trying to do. Pace is part of the overall system, sure, but it really comes down to executing. If you don’t throw and catch and block and execute the techniques properly and perform in efficient and good plays consistently, then it doesn’t matter what pace you go at, I don’t think your results are going to be very good.” 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Funny how BB makes a statement that execution is more important than X's and O's in the playoffs and we have a whole bunch of posters telling us he's wrong.  I guess Champ and Coolade and Wozzy and Rusty all have won more Super Bowls in their illustrious coaching careers than poor misguided Bill Belichick.  

    [/QUOTE]


    If only you could mail in your Draft, and Free agent targets to Bill Belichick so that he might acquire the talent necessary to "execute" and win SB's. As you say we don't have the talent to win, and our offense was only 1 dimensional due to the poor "talent" level. I guess you know more then BB as a GM.

    Oh and our defense suks as you say,  even tho it has been proven that our defense gets better the latter half of the year, every year for the past 3 years.....you know, the same time you have been saying it suks.

    Jackie Mac's article showed us that our defense gives up a 32 passer rating in the 2nd half of the year since 2009 for opposing QB's. Which by the way is 2nd in the National Football league. Fans like you think our D suks due to BB's defensive coaching style...which allows for growth./ He doesn't let the D get after the QB until the latter half of the year. Giving up 17 and 19 points in 2 SB's is not a bad thing. Then again, I am sure you will have a graph of a chart of a spread sheet that shows us that Bill Belichicks defense actually "suks".

    [/QUOTE]


    PRO and Z are not wrong.  Frankly I don't feel you are qualified to say so.

    The article from BB clearly states what has been mentioned as did the one where he said "I don't see Corey Dillion running out here".  You and your clan pick obscure garbage and ignore the obvious. For one the decrease in the shotgun though over all less has not decreased in certain games and circumstance.  Mainly when the run game is going backwards, but just ignore that.

    Yes there has been an increase in the run but it is due to TALENT  and EXECUTION.  Logan Mankins clearly stated that they run when they do good and not so much when they don't.  He was talking about the line and the backs, either way, execution is the key. PERIOD!!!!!

    AS far as the D sucking, here's something you might understand.  No graphs, just cold hard football FACTS.   It was done in october but that's irrelevant as the stats are not much better to date EVEN with the increase in production.

     

    New England Patriots Pass Defense On Pace For Worst In Team History Cold, Hard Football Facts for Oct 15, 2012



    inShare0 submit to reddit  

     

    Russell Wilson is the latest in a long line of ordinary quarterbacks to produce extraordinary performances against the Patriots and Bill Belichick's once-feared defense.

    Wilson averaged 10.9 YPA, with 3 TD, 0 INT and a 133.7 passer rating in Seattle's 24-23 win over New England on Sunday.

    He entered the game averaging 6.5 YPA with 5 TD, 6 INT and a 75.2 passer rating.

    For a little perspective, Tom Brady has topped 10.9 YPA just 8 times in his prolific Hall of Fame career.

    The Patriots now have a 100.9 Defensive Passer Rating. That's bad, for those of you keeping score at home.

    Here are the worst DPR's in Patriots history, with the team's record:

    2012 Patriots (1-2) – 100.9

    1972 Patriots (3-11) – 92.2

    1989 Patriots (5-11) – 91.6

    1995 Patriots (6-10) – 91.4

    1990 Patriots (1-15) – 89.9

    Only seven teams in history, heading into this year, posted a Defensive Passer Rating of worse than 100.9. Those teams went a combined 13-90 (.126).

    2008 Lions (0-16) – 110.9

    2011 Vikings (3-13) – 107.6

    1982 Oilers (1-8) – 107.3

    2009 Lions (2-14) – 107.0

    1984 Vikings (3-13) – 104.4

    2011 Colts (2-14) – 103.9

    1968 Falcons (2-12) – 101.3

    Clearly, passer ratings are sky high this year. Seven teams are on pace through Week 6 to post Defensive Passer Ratings worse than 100. Just 12 teams have posted a DPR of 100 or worse in NFL history up through 2011.

    Regardless, worst in franchise history is the worst in franchise history. (And the worst in the league is the worst in the league) And the failure to make a key stop on pass defense has haunted the Patriots in their losses to the Ravens and Seahawks this year, as well as in countless big games in recent years, including the team's last two Super Bowls.


    They are now at a 92.6  WHOOPIE!  Did you catch the part about that being the reason for the last 2 superbowl losses..  These are not opinions.  They are facts.

    Try using them before you proclaim much more knowlegeable persons than you, WRONG!

     

    Also either Jackie's figures are wrong or you missunderstood  them.  The pats are 6th of the 8 remaining play-off teams in passer rating differential which is a result of the HIGH DPR cancelling out the excellent OPR.  In other words they are only 6th of 8 because of the sucky D.  And it doesn't appear they played better in the second half of last year including the play-offs if you look at their DPR in those games, they were HORRENDOUS!  It was worst than the 1972 D for cripes sake.

     

    NO TEAM IN THE HISTORY OF THE NFL HAS EVER WON A SUPER BOWL WITH A DPR OF 90.

    FACT!!!!!!  NOT OPINION!!!!!!

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Funny how BB makes a statement that execution is more important than X's and O's in the playoffs and we have a whole bunch of posters telling us he's wrong.  I guess Champ and Coolade and Wozzy and Rusty all have won more Super Bowls in their illustrious coaching careers than poor misguided Bill Belichick.  

    [/QUOTE]


    If only you could mail in your Draft, and Free agent targets to Bill Belichick so that he might acquire the talent necessary to "execute" and win SB's. As you say we don't have the talent to win, and our offense was only 1 dimensional due to the poor "talent" level. I guess you know more then BB as a GM.

    Oh and our defense suks as you say,  even tho it has been proven that our defense gets better the latter half of the year, every year for the past 3 years.....you know, the same time you have been saying it suks.

    Jackie Mac's article showed us that our defense gives up a 32 passer rating in the 2nd half of the year since 2009 for opposing QB's. Which by the way is 2nd in the National Football league. Fans like you think our D suks due to BB's defensive coaching style...which allows for growth./ He doesn't let the D get after the QB until the latter half of the year. Giving up 17 and 19 points in 2 SB's is not a bad thing. Then again, I am sure you will have a graph of a chart of a spread sheet that shows us that Bill Belichicks defense actually "suks".

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah? The Rams only gave up 13 to the Patriots offense in the Superbowl. It doesn't take a graph of a chart to show they got their but handed to them.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    I saw someone on TV a couple years ago talking about play calling, I think it was Matt Light and he said something to the effect of

    "We may have 50 different plays, but all 50 require me to beat the man in front of me."

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    Truechamp (quote)

     

    Agree with Coolade and patseng.

    Many of us wanted the Pats offense to be more diverse. Prolate, Pezz and Z-Bo said the offense under OB was just fine despite the poor post season production for the past 3 years.

    Many of us said we were a 1 dimensional offense which relied too often on Brady's arm and used the running game as not much more then a gimmick. This year we lead the LG in rushing td's and as Pat Kirwan and Tim Ryan,and John Madden just absolutely went off about on the radio, we are "balanced", we "can run the heck out of the football", and we are "committed to doing it"!!

    I am not making this up and I hope some of you listen to "moving the chains" on sirius! These guys directly portrayed what many of us have been talking about for years. If I could download the audio I would. (Maybe 1 of you could) As they said almost to a tee, defense's will "NOW HAVE TO GUESS" what N.E will do on offense because of their new found commitment to the run. We use SG less then ever, and we run more then we have since Corey Dillion in 2004!

    Coach Belichick recognized our offensive short comings in the post season and he went out of his way to address the issue. Z-Bo is not right, and neither is Prolate. Our offense was not ok in the playoffs, or SB. We scored 17 points, had 2 turnovers, and neglected a power run game that netted us 4.4 ypc. Teams knew we would pass to the short intermediate routes and they "ADJUSTED" to it in the playoffs as is illustrated below.

    They no longer sent extra rushers, they dropped 7 and rushed 4. Prolate is wrong saying the O-line is responsible for the Brady's pressure/sacks and Z-Bo is wrong for saying play calling plays little part in the outcome of a game. Passing 2-1 against the best pass rush in football is a "POOR GAME PLAN" especially when that defense gave up over 4.5 ypc on the year.

    (quote).

     

    Good post,...  Hard to believe guys on here are so defensive about the pass-happy disjointed offensive game plan that this team has gone to battle with the last couple years , even after the below average results are in... 

     O'Brien was a greenhorn OC who choked under pressure.  Winning big games requires a big game strategy and the balls / experience to carry it out at the critical moments that win games.  O'Brien couldn't do that.  He didn't have the ability. 

    My sense and the evidence (i.e. less shotgun) keeps piling up, is that McDaniels has the experience  now to execute a multidimensional game plan that will pay dividends at the end of games when an OC earns their money. 

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Bill Belichick on Execution versus Playcalling

    If play calling is so minor and execution is a vastly greater portion then why so many plays to begin with? Think about it, if Light has to practice and remember 50 plays ever game is he going to be as effective as if he only had 5 plays to practice or remember? Wouldn't his execution be much better on those 5 plays if he got 10x as many practice snaps then spreading it out over 50? Why not have 3 passing plays and 2 runs if it's only a matter of execution? If you had only one task to do everyday I'm sure you could master it to the point you could do it blind but if I gave you 50 every week then you won't master every 50.

    Z - why are you being so obtuse. Isn't an audible a play calling adjustment at the line depending on what Brady sees? Why even have minor adjustments to plays (ie left vs right dives, motion, etc) if it's a matter of executing the plays instead of the play calling? There is zero reason for a play to have multiple situational variations because situational play calling is still play calling, even if it's something as minor as putting a WR in motion to let Brady see if it's man or zone coverage.

    This is what I don't understand, there is a reason play books are so massive, esp compared to playbooks in the 50's and 60's. There is no reason to give multiple looks for the same play with the same package group if in the end it boils down to just execution. There is a good reason every one of those plays is in the play book and why there are so many.

    yes once the ball is snapped it's up to the players to execute the play that's called but they can't execute if the wrong play is called from the beginning. The players need to do their jobs and execute to be successful, the coaches have to do their jobs and put the players in the right positions in order to execute. What is so crazy about that? If either fails then the team won't win. I've seen the most talented teams lose because of bad coaching decisions and I've seen the best coaches not succeed because the players couldn't execute their plans.

    BTW you have to take what BB says with a gain of salt. He's a true professional. He takes the blame when something goes wrong (we've heard he say that they lost because of bad play calling in the past) and gives credit when something goes right. He's also someone who never gives a complete answer or comepletely tells you what he's thinking, using the media for his own reasons. It's not the first time he's used the media to light a fire under his players butts before

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share