Can we please commit to the run

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to csylvia79's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Although the game plan was horriable yersteday... when it came down to it they took the ball from Brady and went into thier conservatie run game and what happened. I'm all for the run game but it has to be unpredictable becuase putting your team at third and long in the rain is not smart.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    unpredictable... another key

    yesterday, they ran because that is what you normally do when you get the lead - kinda predictable

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    As much as I love Ridley, and was in utter shock why they weren't giving this kid the ball more yesterday...he looked a bit timid hitting the hole yesterday. Maybe a combination of not having a good hole, and maybe a little scared of fumbling? I don't know....but he did not look like that hard running back that has been hitting holes with a nasty attitude. I predicted early that if they give this kid a chance he's rush for 1000+.......it drives me nuts when they don't give this kid the rock more.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

     I love what Weis did here, but the fact is with TB at QB and Weis at OC we won 21 games where New England scored the same amount they scored yesterday or less.  The offense isn't going to put up 30+ every game (although I think they could have in this instance) and whether you like it or not when that happened in the past our defense won us games.  On Sunday the offense controlled the clock and field position (the only time the Hawks had anything resembling decent field position was bad ST play).  The offense failed when it counted, but the D did them no favors.  Seattle's offense is f'ing terrible and we made them look like some juggernaut. At the end of the day if the offense didn't f up we win this game, but that doesn't absolve the secondary from their absolutely pathetic performance yesterday.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    Please next game if we are leading with 6 seconds to go in the half with the ball inside the 10 and can make it a 2 possesion game please kick the FG. Also if it's 3rd and 1 and up by 10 (or 13 if they had kicked the earlier FG), please run the damn ball. What should have been a 29-10 lead was only 23-10. This game reminded me a lot of there damn decision making in 2009.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to csylvia79's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Although the game plan was horriable yersteday... when it came down to it they took the ball from Brady and went into thier conservatie run game and what happened. I'm all for the run game but it has to be unpredictable becuase putting your team at third and long in the rain is not smart.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I wanted to make another comment on this. They took the ball out of Brady's hand who did what all game? He throw two intentional groundings which if he didn't would have resulted in points, two ints, and scored lower then their season average when they left points on the field. Brady was not Brady and it was right to take the ball out of his hands yesterday. They just did it to late.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    I think it's amazing that Bill Belichick has now hired two offensive coordinators who know less about offense than the average poster on this board. Heck, every Tom, Dick, and Harry can tell you that the sure formula for winning any game is to run at least 25 times and never pass more than 35 times. Why is it that Bill Belichick, Bill O'Brien, and now even Josh McDaniels don't know the simple and universal victory formula? Has there ever been a team run by such incompetents as these? Shocking!  You just can't make this stuff up!

     

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to glenr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here's 4 Red Zone 0 TD trips to look at...

    First and 10 on the 15 - three consecutive pass plays 2 incomplete and the third a yard short of the 1st down marker. FG for 3

    First and goal on the 9 - pass incomplete- pass incomplete - pass/intentional grounding

    First and ten on the 19 - run for 6 - pass for -3 yards - pass for -1 yard FG for 3

    First and ten on the 15 - run for 5 - run for 4 - pass for an INT

    Out of these 4 series we ran 3 times for 15 yards and passed 9 times for a total of +5 yards, an intentional grounding and an INT

    [/QUOTE]

    very telling. where the game was lost

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    LOL. I was quite sure the run fanatics wouls be wringing their hands crying oy vey soon enough when they realized this new commitment to the run "philosophy" was a mirage.

     

    Yeah, running like crap and losing do have a correlation, especially when you throw a crap D into the equation.

    I've told you over and over. BB isn't "commiting" to the run if it isn't effective. He's said so.

    He must be one of us who"look at the ypc average and not understand the full impact of committing to a running can do".

    I guess he just doesn't understand the game like you do. LMAO

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    Oh Babe, I knew it wouldn't be long until your lack of understanding in the game would cause you to comment on this thread. You just don't seem to understand the basic's like how a running game far out impacts the ypc. Such as when you are playing in wet, windy, cold conditions and you see your QB having issues losing his grip on the ball resulting in over throws and under throws then it's far more dangerous to allow the opponents D to sit back in nickel while letting their front 4 to rush without fear of a run game then to have a RB only getting 3.3ypc. It is far more destructive to sustaining drives and momentum while increasing the risk of turnovers. And what happened in the end? Sea stayed back in nickel up until the last drive when they knew the Pats were just trying to run out the clock, caused two turnovers, 1 of which directly cost the Pats points, and caused two intentional groundings, one which brought them out of FG range and another which again directly took points off the board at the half. Even if the Pats running game was averaging 3.3ypc the whole game odds are Sea's D wouldn't have been able to put the full on rush against Brady all game reducing pressure and possible preventng those intentional groundings. Additoinally they wouldn't have been able to stay in nickel all game allowing the Pats to work in more underneath routes shortening the distance for Brady to make a completion increasing his accuracy in bad conditions. Maybe, one day you might understand that a proper balanced attacking O functions more fluidly and opens up far more oppertunities then being one dimensional. BTW if you forgot BB use to pride himself in making teams 1 dimensional because it makes them that much easier to beat

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    there will be times when the run isn't working as well but I think you have to keep with it. That doesn't mean run every down but keep the run/pass balance.  I was shocked to see them throwing around the goal line yesterday, I was saying that it reminded me of Thea game in Buffalo  last year, next play interception.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CaptainZdeno33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Waste of time on this board Eng. Those that don't know, refuse to know, and those that do, don't want to get involved with lengthy responses explaining the impact of a run "commitment".

    This game reminded me so much of the last few years. Not happy with the offense, and of course am not happy with the eventual defensive collapse in the 4rth qtr.

    [/QUOTE]

    Waste of time on this board? I'm sorry TC but do we call the plays? Tell it to the coaching staff, wtf does it matter if the usual curmudgeons on here agree or disagree? A select few seem to have a big problem with how BB is running this team, so instead of whining on here for the next week go take it up with him. I can't read about this frigging topic anymore. Sorry I'm still a little surly from that crapfest yesterday..

    [/QUOTE]


     He never returns my calls Captain.

    [/QUOTE]

    I thought McDaniels was a genius. You guys said so last week. What happened?

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    I still do not believe that the Patriots running game is actually that great. The key to it is getting teams in pass defense mode with personnel. Also, let's not forget that the Seahawks are the number two team in the NFL versus the run... I still do not believe they can get yards when they need them and the other team knows the run is coming...

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I still do not believe that the Patriots running game is actually that great. The key to it is getting teams in pass defense mode with personnel. Also, let's not forget that the Seahawks are the number two team in the NFL versus the run... I still do not believe they can get yards when they need them and the other team knows the run is coming...

    [/QUOTE]


    It's not the actual yardage that matters but it is a proven fact that the more you run the better the defensive backs will play (or so I was told last week). Apparently McDaniels knows this but O'Brien and Belichek didn't.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Oh Babe, I knew it wouldn't be long until your lack of understanding in the game would cause you to comment on this thread. You just don't seem to understand the basic's like how a running game far out impacts the ypc. Such as when you are playing in wet, windy, cold conditions and you see your QB having issues losing his grip on the ball resulting in over throws and under throws then it's far more dangerous to allow the opponents D to sit back in nickel while letting their front 4 to rush without fear of a run game then to have a RB only getting 3.3ypc. It is far more destructive to sustaining drives and momentum while increasing the risk of turnovers. And what happened in the end? Sea stayed back in nickel up until the last drive when they knew the Pats were just trying to run out the clock, caused two turnovers, 1 of which directly cost the Pats points, and caused two intentional groundings, one which brought them out of FG range and another which again directly took points off the board at the half. Even if the Pats running game was averaging 3.3ypc the whole game odds are Sea's D wouldn't have been able to put the full on rush against Brady all game reducing pressure and possible preventng those intentional groundings. Additoinally they wouldn't have been able to stay in nickel all game allowing the Pats to work in more underneath routes shortening the distance for Brady to make a completion increasing his accuracy in bad conditions. Maybe, one day you might understand that a proper balanced attacking O functions more fluidly and opens up far more oppertunities then being one dimensional. BTW if you forgot BB use to pride himself in making teams 1 dimensional because it makes them that much easier to beat

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

     

     

    I understand the game quite well; better than you, for sure. You keep running some even when it is ineffective because you do need to keep the other guy honest. But when the run is anemic, the other guy just pretty much laughs at it. They are quite happy to let you keep handing off to your lead back who is barely getting over 2 yards a carry.

     

    You had better inform BB about how the game of football works while you're at it. LMAO He's the one who says he will run more if it's working.

     

    Like I said, I KNEW you run fetish guys would be crying as soon as it was shown there is no big change in philosophy.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I still do not believe that the Patriots running game is actually that great. The key to it is getting teams in pass defense mode with personnel. Also, let's not forget that the Seahawks are the number two team in the NFL versus the run... I still do not believe they can get yards when they need them and the other team knows the run is coming...

    [/QUOTE]


    It's not the actual yardage that matters but it is a proven fact that the more you run the better the defensive backs will play (or so I was told last week). Apparently McDaniels knows this but O'Brien and Belichek didn't.

    [/QUOTE]


    Not only that.... but if you sacrifice a chicken under the full moon wile a chihuahua howls the tune "Dixie" as you stand on one leg and rub your belly - the O-line plays better as well.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I still do not believe that the Patriots running game is actually that great. The key to it is getting teams in pass defense mode with personnel. Also, let's not forget that the Seahawks are the number two team in the NFL versus the run... I still do not believe they can get yards when they need them and the other team knows the run is coming...

    [/QUOTE]


    It's not the actual yardage that matters but it is a proven fact that the more you run the better the defensive backs will play (or so I was told last week). Apparently McDaniels knows this but O'Brien and Belichek didn't.

    [/QUOTE]

    That only works if you are getting first downs running the ball. Nine of Ridley's sixteen carries went for 2 or fewer yards. How many times are you supposed to run the ball into the line and end up with 2nd and 9 or 3rd and 7 situations? 

    First possession of the game was pass, pass, FIRST DOWN, run, run, 3RD and 7, punt. Would people really have been happier if the ran the ball 10 more times in the first half, punted two more times, went into the locker room down, but had a balanced attack? 

    Seattle's defense is good. I know it has been a long time since we have seen a good defense we in and week out around here, but you cannot just do what you want against a good defense. 

    Seattle stuffed the run the whole game, then by the 4th quarter the figured out how to stifle the passing game. Meanwhile, the Patriots defense go worse as the game went along...

    Outcoached... plain and simple!

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I still do not believe that the Patriots running game is actually that great. The key to it is getting teams in pass defense mode with personnel. Also, let's not forget that the Seahawks are the number two team in the NFL versus the run... I still do not believe they can get yards when they need them and the other team knows the run is coming...

    [/QUOTE]


    It's not the actual yardage that matters but it is a proven fact that the more you run the better the defensive backs will play (or so I was told last week). Apparently McDaniels knows this but O'Brien and Belichek didn't.

    [/QUOTE]

    That only works if you are getting first downs running the ball. Nine of Ridley's sixteen carries went for 2 or fewer yards. How many times are you supposed to run the ball into the line and end up with 2nd and 9 or 3rd and 7 situations? 

    First possession of the game was pass, pass, FIRST DOWN, run, run, 3RD and 7, punt. Would people really have been happier if the ran the ball 10 more times in the first half, punted two more times, went into the locker room down, but had a balanced attack? 

    Seattle's defense is good. I know it has been a long time since we have seen a good defense we in and week out around here, but you cannot just do what you want against a good defense. 

    Seattle stuffed the run the whole game, then by the 4th quarter the figured out how to stifle the passing game. Meanwhile, the Patriots defense go worse as the game went along...

    Outcoached... plain and simple!

    [/QUOTE]


    I promise you i am not disagreeing with you. You commented into thread which is basically never endless for the past 5 years. My sarcasm had nothing to do with your post which was excellant. But I have been on record for a while that being a good run team guarentees you nothing unless you have a good passing attack to go with it. Teams with great QB's win super bowls nowadays more often than teams with great running backs. The offenses only responsibilty is to score more points than the other team. How it does it is up to the coach, run or pass it does not matter to me. I trust that the offensive game plans are designed with thought and since they are always amongst the league leaders in scoring I assume they know what they are doing in general. i disagree with many individual play calls in every game but i assume they call the game a certain way for a reason. The usage of time outs and the defensive manuevering I am not in thrall too because the numbers continue to show problems year after year. This defensive rebuilding project is getting tiresome to watch. i feel the defense is actually better than last year with the draft picks and their run defense. The pass defense may actually be worse despite McCourty having a better year in my opinion. Our safety's may actually be worse than last year. Aikman said he had never seen a worse secondary in a super bowl before the game last year. Just he wait, because the AFC is so week there is a good chance the Pats may return to the super bowl.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    Too me the issue still comes down to coaching. There are so many people in this town who hold Belichick on such a pedestal for things that happened a decade ago now.

    The fact is that since 2004 the Patriots have not been the best team in football... people need to stop pretending that we are still coming off back to back Super Bowls. BB can get stuff wrong. He has not figured out how to coach up his defense. I pointed this out in another thread, but the Seattle defense has gone from 25th to 7th to currently 2nd in Carroll's three years. In that span, the Patriots D has gotten worse. Why can't people around here admit that maybe BB is not infallible?

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Too me the issue still comes down to coaching. There are so many people in this town who hold Belichick on such a pedestal for things that happened a decade ago now.

    The fact is that since 2004 the Patriots have not been the best team in football... people need to stop pretending that we are still coming off back to back Super Bowls. BB can get stuff wrong. He has not figured out how to coach up his defense. I pointed this out in another thread, but the Seattle defense has gone from 25th to 7th to currently 2nd in Carroll's three years. In that span, the Patriots D has gotten worse. Why can't people around here admit that maybe BB is not infallible?

    [/QUOTE]


    BB the GM doesn't hire experienced coaches to delegate to. They are mostly on the job training yes men he has nurtured. The couple of experienced and loyal guys he has kept are excellent (Pepper/Dante).

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    I think most know he is not infallible. The team is on one of the greatest runs in NFL history. I compare it to the Cowboys in the 70's. Maybe they did not win all their super bowls but they were at the top year after year. A victory over the Cowboys in the 70's was huge, fans celebrated way out of proportion than it should have been feasible. Because they win so much people assume their is a method to Belichek's madness. Maybe Bill was lucky he got Brady and that he inherited a bunch of great defensive players from Parcells (most of the early 2000 stars were from the Parcells era and not the Carrol era). I am one that thinks Bill is as smart as there is but things have changed some defensively in the NFL and he has been a slower adapter than you would expect but offensively he is a very quick adapter and that has hid the defensive shortcomings behind some gaudy win loss records recently.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think most know he is not infallible. The team is on one of the greatest runs in NFL history. I compare it to the Cowboys in the 70's. Maybe they did not win all their super bowls but they were at the top year after year. A victory over the Cowboys in the 70's was huge, fans celebrated way out of proportion than it should have been feasible. Because they win so much people assume their is a method to Belichek's madness. Maybe Bill was lucky he got Brady and that he inherited a bunch of great defensive players from Parcells (most of the early 2000 stars were from the Parcells era and not the Carrol era). I am one that thinks Bill is as smart as there is but things have changed some defensively in the NFL and he has been a slower adapter than you would expect but offensively he is a very quick adapter and that has hid the defensive shortcomings behind some gaudy win loss records recently.

    [/QUOTE]

    I guess that is what is boils down to. Would you rather pile up regular season wins or win championships? I know plenty of Bills fans that would give up three of the Super Bowl runs for a victory in just one of them. The 1970's Cowboys run was amazing (making the playoffs 17 of 18 seasons from '66 - '83). But I think most people think of the Steelers 4 Super Bowls in 6 years when the think of who was the best team in the 70's.

    I totally agree that BB has not figured out how to coach defense in the new NFL. The part that drives me nuts about it is rather than bring in a defensive backs coaches from a team that has and make him the coordinator to inject new ideas into the team, he chooses bring up these young coaches from small colleges and be the only one who teaches them. 

    He obviously figured out how to exploit the rule changes for the offense and created the most prolific offenses in history. However, when this team was actually winning Super Bowl we mocked the "Greatest Show on Turf" and the high-powered Manning driven Colts for being all flash and no substance. Now that is the Patriots.

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

    Re: Can we please commit to the run

    I guess that is what is boils down to. Would you rather pile up regular season wins or win championships? 

    There's nothing a fan should appreciate more than having a team that is good enough in the regular season to be in contention for the championship every year.  It seems that our fan base has become so spoiled with constant winning records that it has forgotten the basic truth that winning Super Bowls every year is near impossible and that winning one even once a decade is a major accomplishment for most teams.  The fact is all those "meaningless" regular season wins are what get us into the playoffs, win us first round byes, get us homefield advantage--and generally do all the things that set us up well to contend for the Lombardi. Once we get to the playoffs, our record is actually pretty good. Since the last Super Bowl victory in 2004, we've gotten to the AFC championship game three times and the Super Bowl twice. Three other years, we've been less effective, but it's not like this team just chokes.  The reality is--despite what you read here--playoff football is not very different from regular season football, and what you do successfully in the regular season also tends to bring success in the playoffs.  It's just that when you get to the playoffs the teams you are facing are also very good--and very well prepared after seeing a whole season of film on you. It's a lot harder to win in the playoffs because of this, but the things that allowed you to win in the regular season often set you up well to win in the playoffs--as long as you get the right match ups in your opponents (and there's no guarantee you will get those match ups).

    I am fine with what this team does.  If you're not, go root for Jacksonville or Kansas City or Tampa Bay or one of the dozen other perennial losers in this league.  I'm sure that that will cure you damn quick of whatever spoiled brat tendencies have accumulated thanks to a decade of watching exceptional winning football.

     

Share