Is it just me or ...

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

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to DelGriffith's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    Two things changed things yesterday...Lloyd and a running back that could get out of his own way. I hope they all stay healthy because the "Wes Welker all the time" offense doesn't cut it against real good defenses.



    LOL!

    ENjoying BJGE 62 yards in the first half with a TD tonight? Should he be benched, HUrlie?

    bawahahah

     

    [/QUOTE]
    Yes! Yes! It's almost a career game for him - he added another thirty yards in the other half (of course his team is losing 41 to 13, but who's counting?). I like how you get all excited about things in the first week of the season...shows character. Like when you thought Maroney was going to be a pro bowl runner - a bit premature, but who's counting?

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

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    Adding Lloyd changes everything. Just like adding Ocho was supposed to last season. Wes in a contract limbo also changes everything.



    Or perhaps it could have been that the Pats were a threat to run the ball on all 3 downs?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    (applauds)
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    Adding Lloyd changes everything. Just like adding Ocho was supposed to last season. Wes in a contract limbo also changes everything.



    Or perhaps it could have been that the Pats were a threat to run the ball on all 3 downs?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't think the team's potential for running on a given down had much to do with Welker getting targeted or not.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I think the OPs post was referencing the unpredictability of the O now and not Welker. Since you put it on Lloyd as the difference I was commenting back that I feel it had more to do with the run game on all 3 downs then Lloyd. I did not comment on Welker

     

    [/QUOTE]

    i think the threat of ridley AND lloyd makes the offense more unpredictable and more successful. nothing for the d to focus on like last year
     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    Two things changed things yesterday...Lloyd and a running back that could get out of his own way. I hope they all stay healthy because the "Wes Welker all the time" offense doesn't cut it against real good defenses.



    3 other guys accounted for 2,800 yards and 30 tds last season. It wasn't Wes Welker all the time. It was throwing all the time that didn't cut it against real good defenses.

    135 pass att's to 55 rush att's in 3 losses in a row to the Gints prove this.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Yes, play calling was noticeably more varied (especially in the first half--second half it was a bit more predictable/conventional, I thought, but that isn't surprising since we were trying to maintain a lead rather than build it in the second half).

    In addition, the new weapons make a difference.  

    1. Ridley is far more explosive than BJGE and that makes a heavier use of the run possible.  BJGE wasn't going to break a big gain and defenses knew that, so they didn't worry that much about him.  Same with Woodhead.  Ridley forces them to be prepared for the run because if they're caught sleeping (or focusing mostly on the pass), Ridley can burn them. 

    2. Lloyd adds a whole new dimension to the passing game we just didn't have last year.  You can't ignore him, which means safeties can't just key on the short middle zones where the TEs and Welker work best.  Branch just wasn't scaring guys like Lloyd can.  

    Also, the defense helped.  It was clear by the second half that the Titans were going to struggle to score.  This allowed a bit more ball control and running.  The improvements in the defense complement an offensive strategy that relies more on the run.

    It will be interesting to see how it pans out.  The offense actually scored less than they did in the opener last year (5 TDs, 1 FG last year vs. 3 TDs and 2 FGs yesterday).  but they seemed to execute well early and slow down late as the game was in control.  (Last year, the Pats never let up, in part, I believe, because BJGE wasn't as effective as Ridley and in part because the defense never looked fully in control).  

    The offense had a whole different feel yesterday.  It's still new, so maybe it will look less unpredictable after we've seen it for a few games, but for now it really seemed more dynamic.  I think that's part a reflection of the new OC and part a reflection of the new talent.  I also think the better D helps the O.  




    nice observations.
    using ridley and getting lloyd were exaclty what we needed to do on offense (which i pointed out last preseason). now if the o line holds up and we stay healthy we are set on offense.
       on defense if the front 7 stays healthy and our cb crew overperforms (or has a roster upgrade[preferable]), we may have enough to ACTAULLY WIN a sb against a green bay or sf in a super bowl.
          
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think the OPs post was referencing the unpredictability of the O now and not Welker. Since you put it on Lloyd as the difference I was commenting back that I feel it had more to do with the run game on all 3 downs then Lloyd. I did not comment on Welker

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The run game may well be a more viable alternative in certain situations going forward than it was last season. Maybe it won't. We will see. As always, I trust BB & Co. to utilize what is working best. I will go out on a limb and say if Ridley continues to average 6 yac, we will very likely see more runs this season.

    Also, I simply noted that Welker's reduced role in week one might well be because of the weapons available in the passing game rather than a systematic change in approach based on a more robust running game. I think that was a fair point to make.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    Btw Mt, Happen to catch BJGE run over Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, the other mlb, and Mcphee for a 6 yard td on 4rth 1 from the 6?

    18 carries 91 yards and a td for Law Firm...also known as more carries then he had in all but 2 games last year. Only difference is Cinci didn't have 2 pro bowl guards paving the way like we did last year.

    Timely play calling, formations, keeping the defense guessing is what makes a run game successful....jobs of a good O.C!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to SANPAT's comment:

    It will be interesting to see if early in the game the run ge doesnt work.  Will they abandone it soon or stick with it?  Also i dont remember seeing screens or end arounds etc.  hopefully they can  unveil it when its needed or when it matters...



    Unless BB's stated philosophy has changed, we absolutely will see less running if running isn't being effective. I have never seen him say he would run a certain amount just for the sake of running as some persons around here espouse that as their philosophy.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SANPAT's comment:

    Is it just me or our playcallig was totally unpredictable?  I remember last couple of years under bobrian third down meant look for welker.  I for one was happy to see some diversification.  It will really help the offense in playofffs and critical moments.

    Welcome back JMcD



    Night and day. Guys here will protect their argument that OB was fine and personnel and apparently supreme talent at each skill position is the only thing that matters to executing an efficient offense.

    The rest of us will recognize the instant impact that McD has already had.

    Here is a thought. If Lloyd wasn't on this team yesterday, would it be possible that WW would have had his 6 catches for 60 yards? I think so. Lloyd is a good receiver with great hands, but he doesn't make this offense. It is proper timing of play calls, formations, keeping the defense guessing....a great OC is and will be the difference from the last 3 years to now.

    31 passes to 35 rushes. I would be willing to bet it is the 1st time we ran more then threw in maybe 3 years.

    Welcome back McD. Help BB and Brady win a 4rth SB!!!!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You may be setting yourself up for some disappointment here. It is doubtful Ridley will average 6.3 yac in the 1st quarter of every game we play. Failing that kind of start to entice McD and BB to give the run game the ball more, you may not always see the balance you so desperately seek.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    Adding Lloyd changes everything. Just like adding Ocho was supposed to last season. Wes in a contract limbo also changes everything.



    Or perhaps it could have been that the Pats were a threat to run the ball on all 3 downs?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    After week one, minus tonights games, the Patriot's rank #1 in running first downs.  With the threat of Brady under center, you would have to be a complete moron not to run... or Bill O'Brien.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    " With the threat of Brady under center, you would have to be a complete moron not to run... or Bill O'Brien."

    loved that one! :)
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to Iceman4's comment:

    Remember this was only Titans



    +1
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    Two things changed things yesterday...Lloyd and a running back that could get out of his own way. I hope they all stay healthy because the "Wes Welker all the time" offense doesn't cut it against real good defenses.



    +1
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to Pats7393's comment:

    JM or TB are not too proud to win, if they are getting 6 ypc they are going to keep running the rock.  They look commited to be a physical team upfront.



    " 6 ypc"

    i like the sound of that :)
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    Btw Mt, Happen to catch BJGE run over Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, the other mlb, and Mcphee for a 6 yard td on 4rth 1 from the 6?

    18 carries 91 yards and a td for Law Firm...also known as more carries then he had in all but 2 games last year. Only difference is Cinci didn't have 2 pro bowl guards paving the way like we did last year.

    Timely play calling, formations, keeping the defense guessing is what makes a run game successful....jobs of a good O.C!



    " Timely play calling, formations, keeping the defense guessing is what makes a run game successful....jobs of a good O.C!"

    +!

    thank you for saying!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SANPAT's comment:

    Is it just me or our playcallig was totally unpredictable?  I remember last couple of years under bobrian third down meant look for welker.  I for one was happy to see some diversification.  It will really help the offense in playofffs and critical moments.

    Welcome back JMcD



    Night and day. Guys here will protect their argument that OB was fine and personnel and apparently supreme talent at each skill position is the only thing that matters to executing an efficient offense.

    The rest of us will recognize the instant impact that McD has already had.

    Here is a thought. If Lloyd wasn't on this team yesterday, would it be possible that WW would have had his 6 catches for 60 yards? I think so. Lloyd is a good receiver with great hands, but he doesn't make this offense. It is proper timing of play calls, formations, keeping the defense guessing....a great OC is and will be the difference from the last 3 years to now.

    31 passes to 35 rushes. I would be willing to bet it is the 1st time we ran more then threw in maybe 3 years.

    Welcome back McD. Help BB and Brady win a 4rth SB!!!!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You may be setting yourself up for some disappointment here. It is doubtful Ridley will average 6.3 yac in the 1st quarter of every game we play. Failing that kind of start to entice McD and BB to give the run game the ball more, you may not always see the balance you so desperately seek.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    We don't have to average 6 ypc for McD to commit to running the ball. He is not like some on this board...luckily.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think the OPs post was referencing the unpredictability of the O now and not Welker. Since you put it on Lloyd as the difference I was commenting back that I feel it had more to do with the run game on all 3 downs then Lloyd. I did not comment on Welker

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The run game may well be a more viable alternative in certain situations going forward than it was last season. Maybe it won't. We will see. As always, I trust BB & Co. to utilize what is working best. I will go out on a limb and say if Ridley continues to average 6 yac, we will very likely see more runs this season.

    Also, I simply noted that Welker's reduced role in week one might well be because of the weapons available in the passing game rather than a systematic change in approach based on a more robust running game. I think that was a fair point to make.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    " Also, I simply noted that Welker's reduced role in week one might well be because of the weapons available in the passing game rather than a systematic change in approach based on a more robust running game. I think that was a fair point to make."

    youre both right,. all of the above in my eyes.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    So many of you were complaining about McDaniels and how they could not win the super bowl with him and now he is a genius after only 1 game against an average team at best. They have been a great team for the past decade because of the head coach and his QB primarily. Weiss, O'Brien, and McDaniels are along for the ride. If the Pats have built a halfway decent defense they should win another super bowl in the next couple of years. Despite a bad defense over the past couple of years they have gone 27-5 during the regular season and would have won another superbowl (despite the defense) if Brady and Welker could have connected on a wide open pass (bad pass and a worse catch).
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    We don't have to average 6 ypc for McD to commit to running the ball. He is not like some on this board...luckily.

    ````````

    McD ran the ball less than once more per game in 2007 than OB did in 2011. How exactly do you construe that as some kind of an exceptionally greater "commitment" on McD's part?


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

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    We don't have to average 6 ypc for McD to commit to running the ball. He is not like some on this board...luckily.

    ````````

    McD ran the ball less than once more per game in 2007 than OB did in 2011. How exactly do you construe that as some kind of an exceptionally greater "commitment" on McD's part?


     

    [/QUOTE]

    Because when running wasn't affective OB would just give up on it and go full pass unless he had a 2 score lead going into the 4th then he would overload on the run skewing the numbers. Boston.com had a great play predictor the other week from all the plays that were run. Essentially it said OB ran the ball on 1st down pretty much all the time or if the were <3 yds on 2nd down it was almost guaranteed to be a run but other then that it was a pass because he wasn't committed to stuffing the ball down the others team throat regardless of down or yards. He assumed that the run wouldn't work unless he had the extra downs or only short yds to go. That's not commitment that's playing it safe. McDaniels on the other hand ran it on all 3 downs and regardless of yardage left. He ran it on 2nd and 10, 3rd and 4 which is something OB would never have done, that's commiting to the run.

    Then early in the game Ridley started off with 1yd, 17yd, 2yd, 0yd, 17yd, -1yd, -1yd. That's 5 out of 7 plays with less then a 1ypc average. There is no chance OB would continue to try to run the ball like that last year even with 2 big carries. OB is like you where he cherry picks stats (ala BJGE in the other thread you did) and would say we can't maintain a consistent running game so time to go to the pass and almost completely abandon the run in the second half (see Buf). McDaniels however, stuck with the run and wore down the D to the point where Ridley aws able to consistently gain yards and not have essentially no gains.

    Commitment doesn't always mean the amount of runs it's how the runs are used, what situations they are used, and if they are used consistently throughout the game not just early and/or late in the game with nothing in the middle
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    Eng,  I posted this on another thread about the Play Predictor, but I'm not seeing quite the predictability you are.   On 2 and less than 3, they ran about 6.5 out of 10 times.  So about 4.5 in 10 they were passing.   Yeah, it's skewed toward running on short yardage (as you'd expect--a lot of them were probably QB sneaks), but it's hardly run all the time. On second and 3,4, or 5, they are pretty balanced (nearly 50-50).  Beyond five yards, they passed more as you'd expect, but even at those distances there are quite a few runs mixed in.  In fact, at second and 10, they ran almost 4 in 10 times.  At second and 8, they were almost 50-50.  

    Here's my earlier post:

    ______________
    I just ran the numbers . . . yeah, on third and medium-to-long they passed a lot.  Every team does that. I didn't see the trend that Pats Eng describes on second down.  Here are the run percentages on second down: 

    2 and 1: 72% (32 plays) 
    2 and 2: 64% (28 plays) 
    2 and 3: 56% (18 plays) 
    2 and 4: 52% (27 plays) 
    2 and 5: 46% (35 plays) 
    2 and 6: 37% (27 plays) 
    2 and 7: 15% (27 plays) 
    2 and 8: 46% (24 plays) 
    2 and 9: 7% (28 plays) 
    2 and 10: 38% (73 plays) 
    2 and 11+:17% (53 plays) 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Eng,  I posted this on another thread about the Play Predictor, but I'm not seeing quite the predictability you are.   On 2 and less than 3, they ran about 6.5 out of 10 times.  So about 4.5 in 10 they were passing.   Yeah, it's skewed toward running on short yardage (as you'd expect--a lot of them were probably QB sneaks), but it's hardly run all the time. On second and 3,4, or 5, they are pretty balanced (nearly 50-50).  Beyond five yards, they passed more as you'd expect, but even at those distances there are quite a few runs mixed in.  In fact, at second and 10, they ran almost 4 in 10 times.  At second and 8, they were almost 50-50.  

    Here's my earlier post:

    ______________
    I just ran the numbers . . . yeah, on third and medium-to-long they passed a lot.  Every team does that. I didn't see the trend that Pats Eng describes on second down.  Here are the run percentages on second down: 

    2 and 1: 72% (32 plays) 
    2 and 2: 64% (28 plays) 
    2 and 3: 56% (18 plays) 
    2 and 4: 52% (27 plays) 
    2 and 5: 46% (35 plays) 
    2 and 6: 37% (27 plays) 
    2 and 7: 15% (27 plays) 
    2 and 8: 46% (24 plays) 
    2 and 9: 7% (28 plays) 
    2 and 10: 38% (73 plays) 
    2 and 11+:17% (53 plays) 



    You don't see the clear trend? there is a very linear trend with regard to running that if I was a D cord on another team on any 2nd and 5+ play I wouldn't even bother planning against the run and almost play the pass everytime. Just to average it out from 1-5 and 6-11+ they ran almost 60% of the time when under 5yds and ran it about 25% of the time over 5yds on 2nd down. There is a clear downward trend in running attempts split about 5yds. As a matter of fact at the 5yd mark is about their season average for running so except 2 and 8 they ran well below their season average and with less they 5 yds they ran well above there season average. If you were an opposing coach you could clearly guess what he was going to do. McDaniels the other night though ran it regardless of yards left on 2nd down and even ran a number of 3rd down plays with more then 3+yds. You have to mix it up
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    Eng:

    Of course we see the trend.  The Pats ran the ball more on 2nd and short than 2nd and long.  What exactly is controversial about this?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    Eng:

    Of course we see the trend.  The Pats ran the ball more on 2nd and short than 2nd and long.  What exactly is controversial about this?



    My point in the other thread (because you can't see it in the little portion Pro posted) was that last year even though they ran the ball they ran it in an extremely predictable manner which nuetralized the affect of having a running game and limited any potential gains from actually running the ball. With McDaniels even though the amount of times run might be similiar to under OB the fact that McDaniels will mix it up and run it in unpredictable situations (similiar to Weis) which in turn makes the running game that more affective and will increase the ypc total and help neutralize attacking D's.

    The Titans game was a clear indication of the difference. McDaniels ran the ball on all three downs regardless of yardage left and consistently ran it throughout the game leaving the oppossing D to guess when it was coming. OB last year on the other hand would only continue to run the ball if the first couple of series appeared affective or at the very end of the game when it was no longer in doubt. He was also extremely predictive in play calling where depending on situation you could say run or pass almost every time. These are clear trends that many pointed out that needed to change going into the year. Since the play predictor came out right before the game and was based on last years data that's when I posted about it. Pro, doesn't seem the trend that you or I see (see his comments he says he didn't) and Babe clearly refuses to acknowledge have inaffective OB's play calling in reference to running the ball was mearly pointing to amount they ran and not how they ran, so that's where the controversy lies
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from glenr. Show glenr's posts

    Re: Is it just me or ...

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    Adding Lloyd changes everything. Just like adding Ocho was supposed to last season. Wes in a contract limbo also changes everything.



    Or perhaps it could have been that the Pats were a threat to run the ball on all 3 downs?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Don't say that to Babe. He's Brady centric and something like a good running game to set up the passing game doesn't exist in his world.
     

Share