Re: Impact balance can have on a great offense.
posted at 10/30/2012 11:31 PM EDT
In response to Neal Page's comment:
In response to wozzy's comment:
The impact of balance is blatantly evident in the rushing 1st down stat. They have almost as much rushing 1st downs through 8 games as they did for the entire season last year.
It's evident that Brady's hyper efficiency and 3 interceptions are a direct result of running and play action, if Brandon Lloyd didn't drop about 2 TD's on average a game his numbers would be that much more impressive. Did I mention the Patriots rank #1 in the NFL with the fewest INT's?
But the impact will really be evident in the post season.
I'm pretty sure Ridely, Vereen and Law Firm were on this team last year and Obie used none of the above. Last year they finished 17th in the NFL in rushing attempts and 20th in rushing yards, Danny Woodhead had a featured role and Tom Brady was their 4th leading rusher with 43 rushing attempts. This year they're ranked #2 in attempts and 5th in yards, that's not an increase, that's not more balanced?
This year Brady's run 11 times mostly on third and inches type situations, not because he was running for his life. Since the O Line has started gelling, Brady hasn't been sacked in the last two games and his sack % is shrinking every week, it's already substantially lower than last year.
This team is getting better, it started getting better the moment they signed Josh McDaniel. #1 in points, yards and 1st downs, top ten in every offensive statistical category. They've never come close to being that good under Obie, never came close to that kind of balance.
It's funny how every news outlet, sports talking head on the planet acknowledges this, but the pass happy proponent here are in a state of denial... laughable.
They just can't be honest. They think because they're a group here who can bully people around, that they own the board in their Brady panties at a computer in a basement.
Most normal adults would simply say "you know what, you've been right this whole time, kudos to you", but they can't do it due to an immaturity and an apparent devastating embarrassment within a delicate human existence.
All the evidence sits there and they want to tell us 2+2 = 5.
NO BODY IS SAYING DIVERSITY IS BAD. Where do you morons even get this.
We are saying in the 3 losses the running game was ineffective and the D gave up 2 score leads. (twice in one game)
What part of this is hard to understand? When the RB's are averaging 2.8 ypc, that is not a good thing.
When the D gives up 2 score leads half way through the 4th, that is not good.
When the D is still losing games despite being on the field for only 28 minutes, that's not good.
When the highly effecient O is AHEAD by 2 scores half way thru the 4th, that IS good.