josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

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

    josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    Why have seven pitches when all you need is 2 good ones (maybe 3) to get a batter out?

    And the football analogy:

    why shuffle amongst 3 running backs , 4 tight ends, multiple groups and formations... When a simpler approach like focusing on getting your best 11 players on the field, finding a sustainable  rhythm for these players, and rather mixing your play selections to keep the defense guessing...

    also, when you have a successful 10 yard run on first down , can you refrain from automatically giving the ball back to the same guy on the next play only to get stuffed since the d is now keying on him?  This seems like a good time for play action , perhaps.

    Also it doesnt appear like you ever think multiple plays ahead according to a strategy of attacking the whole field... But what do fans know anyway..?

    thanks

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    I think he is still seeing what they can do out there.  I'm sure they understand the importance of continuity. 

    They are only half way through the season.  I think after the bye week, we will see more of a consistant attack. 

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    I think the personell at the end is key. Why trot out Connoly as a FB and think you are gonna fool someone.

     

    I like Vareen to be the guy in the backfield at the end of games. He is our best pass catcher in case they want to throw it and he is also the best back at getting to the corner in case a team wants to stuff the middle, he could get outside and get much coveted 1st down we usually need to end the game.

    I would want Gronk, Hernandez, Wes, Lloyd, and Vareen . Just our basic 12 personell, but you can use different alignments like having Hernandez play FB then run playaction, he is wide open(FBs always are) or show a Two tight end to one side look and run to the weakside. Counter plays used to be used when we had Maroney but no more. Just keep your best players in and dont lean towards pass or run with your alignments and keep them guessing by changing it every week but call the same 3-5 plays from that personell for a while and then when its gets old, switch it up again. If we dont use Connolly during the game at FB, dont do it at the end. Its a dead give away and only causes more defenders to attack the line. Maybe they are setting up playaction to Connolly but thats overthinking IMO

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    I posted last week about a gameplan focusing on throwing to back out of the backfield .  1st play... Bang completion to vereen 10 yards.  Then not so much until  tying drive... Bang completion to woodhead 20 yards and again to set up FG.

    isolating backs on lb in open space always seems like a win to me.  Especially quick guys like woody and vereen.  Just scratching the surface with this guy so far.  Could he turn into a Thurman Thomas or at least a Kevin faulk...? 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    In response to Getzo's comment:

    I think he is still seeing what they can do out there.  I'm sure they understand the importance of continuity. 

    They are only half way through the season.  I think after the bye week, we will see more of a consistant attack. 




    I agree with Getzo and I have also been saying this for several days now on here too. 

     

    In a way I like how the Patriots game plan around who they are going to play against and then they develop a plan and use the players who best fits that plan.  Then again, I wish they would just say okay, Ridley is the starting RB, he is going to stay in and play until he is hurt or isn't doing anything then at that time we will sub a player if needed.  Same on defense with the CB's/Safeties.  They change everything up every week, how can a team play consistant like that week in and week out?  Seems like they over think some game plan and it backfires on them. 

     

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    They are using the season as a scouting report on their own players.  Even Reiss said something about this the other day.  Coaches are now in a race to learn their teams as opposed to training their teams better.  I guess those extra practices were important afterall.

    Now they are getting a look at all their players and understanding what they can do., and how they can use them to their 'strengths'.

    Then IF/When an injury occurs the next guy up has sometime playtime on their resume, and the coaching staff knows how to impliment the player properly. 

    At least I assume all these things I just said....

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    Offenses have gotten more complex.  Different packages of players are used to allow you to get different combinations of skills on the field to force the defense into defending multiple things.  It's how an offense avoids becoming one-dimensional. 

    The idea that you should never sub for the running back (or the TEs or the WRs) is an idea that certain fans on this website have been promulgating for a year or two now, but most NFL coaches are going in a different direction exactly because they don't want to become one-dimensional. NFL football is increasingly a game of specialization and while versatile players have their value still, most coaches also want guys who are really good at a particular skill.  The back who can power up the middle is not likely the same guy who runs screens really well or blocks well on passing plays or can line up wide and play receiver when you want to morph into a five-wide look.  If you can find someone who does all of these things at a super high level, then you can leave him on the field all the time.  But the reality is you tend to have players who are versatile and can do a lot of things okay or specialized who can't do everything good, but who do one or two things really, really good.

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    Good point Getzo, it also makes teams prepare for more and keeps the predictability factor down. Hope that's some of it anyways.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    Stop throwing/forcing the ball to Lloyd.  That growth on his hip is actually a CB and he has really bad hand eye coordination.

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Offenses have gotten more complex.  Different packages of players are used to allow you to get different combinations of skills on the field to force the defense into defending multiple things.  It's how an offense avoids becoming one-dimensional. 

    The idea that you should never sub for the running back (or the TEs or the WRs) is an idea that certain fans on this website have been promulgating for a year or two now, but most NFL coaches are going in a different direction exactly because they don't want to become one-dimensional. NFL football is increasingly a game of specialization and while versatile players have their value still, most coaches also want guys who are really good at a particular skill.  The back who can power up the middle is not likely the same guy who runs screens really well or blocks well on passing plays or can line up wide and play receiver when you want to morph into a five-wide look.  If you can find someone who does all of these things at a super high level, then you can leave him on the field all the time.  But the reality is you tend to have players who are versatile and can do a lot of things okay or specialized who can't do everything good, but who do one or two things really, really good.




    I understand the concept of specialization or role players... Since the thread is about baseball analogy, you see that with pitchers being specialized for one inning or one batter.

    In football , the versatility is what makes the play work.  The back who can go up the middle AND catch gives an offense a double threat which is harder to defend.

      Using different formations and special groupings can be a tip off to the defense as to the play you're going to run...! This is what we are seeing ...

    I'm suggesting throwing to vereen or Ridley out of "Running " set to establish the double threat and then max out this duality to the fullest.  woody does this on 3rd down but he doesn't represent as much of a run threat except in open space.

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    Ridley may not run like Green Ellis but he seems to catch the ball like him.

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    In response to Getzo's comment:

    I think he is still seeing what they can do out there.  I'm sure they understand the importance of continuity. 

    They are only half way through the season.  I think after the bye week, we will see more of a consistant attack. 



    "I think he is still seeing what they can do out there.  I'm sure they understand the importance of continuity. "

     

    cannot agree with this, you dont play to see what different things you cn do AT TEH EXPENSE OF LOSING THE GAME.

    i also disagree with the premise there is nothing wrong with tryng different things, if yo knwo when to call them and if your players are executign it ok in practice.

    josh fails in all  accounts 

    and if bb's ego were not so huge (or more acuartely, he didnt feel so small inside), he woulld have the best coaches in the league at every position (ditto in the drafting dept) , and wed have beaten the giants twice.

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Offenses have gotten more complex.  Different packages of players are used to allow you to get different combinations of skills on the field to force the defense into defending multiple things.  It's how an offense avoids becoming one-dimensional. 

    The idea that you should never sub for the running back (or the TEs or the WRs) is an idea that certain fans on this website have been promulgating for a year or two now, but most NFL coaches are going in a different direction exactly because they don't want to become one-dimensional. NFL football is increasingly a game of specialization and while versatile players have their value still, most coaches also want guys who are really good at a particular skill.  The back who can power up the middle is not likely the same guy who runs screens really well or blocks well on passing plays or can line up wide and play receiver when you want to morph into a five-wide look.  If you can find someone who does all of these things at a super high level, then you can leave him on the field all the time.  But the reality is you tend to have players who are versatile and can do a lot of things okay or specialized who can't do everything good, but who do one or two things really, really good.




    I understand the concept of specialization or role players... Since the thread is about baseball analogy, you see that with pitchers being specialized for one inning or one batter.

    In football , the versatility is what makes the play work.  The back who can go up the middle AND catch gives an offense a double threat which is harder to defend.

      Using different formations and special groupings can be a tip off to the defense as to the play you're going to run...! This is what we are seeing ...

    I'm suggesting throwing to vereen or Ridley out of "Running " set to establish the double threat and then max out this duality to the fullest.  woody does this on 3rd down but he doesn't represent as much of a run threat except in open space.



    Versatility is just one strategy that works.  Another is putting your best players on the field in roles that accentuate their strengths.  If you tip off the defense, you don't care, because you think those best players are good enough to beat the defense even if the defense knows what you are going to do.  Brady talked about this in the offseason and I'm sure it was a point of emphasis for Josh during camp.  Brady basically said it was important to be able to run the ball--and get more than 2 or 3 yards--in situations when the defense was expecting the run.  Good running teams can do this.  They don't have to constantly use deception and disguise to get positive yards.  The old coaching philosophy was that there were three ways to win with an offensive play: deception (which is hiding what you're doing or faking the defense out), power (which simply means getting more bodies or more powerful bodies to the point of attack than the defense can get there), or speed (which means getting to the point of attack faster than the defense).  The latter two strategies rely more on player talent, while the first strategy relies more on coaching and play design.  If you pursue a talent strategy, you want your best talent on the field to maximize the mismatches.  If you are trying to be deceptive, then maybe versatility is more useful.  

    BB really likes versatility--especially on defense.  It's sort of why guys like Ninkovich start rather than guys like Dwight Freeney.  

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    One other comment. Woodhead continues to be used over Ridley on many downs because he's a better pass blocker and receiver. Anytime the Pats want to use the spread passing offense a lot, Woodhead is going to be in.  Ridley might be a better runner, but if putting him in is likely to lead to more sacks then that will outweigh the advantage on the running plays. You could be more deceptive by leaving him in, but that won't necessarily produce better results if more passing plays break down when he's in.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    It's really amusing how skewed our image of the Pats offense is.  People are saying how bad Josh is or how crappy our offense has been playing, what a load of crap! 

    The Pats are first in the NFL in total offense and points per game and in the top 5 in most offensive catagories.  Have a little perspective people!

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    In response to fessin's comment:

    It's really amusing how skewed our image of the Pats offense is.  People are saying how bad Josh is or how crappy our offense has been playing, what a load of crap! 

    The Pats are first in the NFL in total offense and points per game and in the top 5 in most offensive catagories.  Have a little perspective people!




    yeah but multiple 3and outs in a row against the jets while all this personnel shuffling is going on... Makes you go hmmmm... (Or scream at the TV while throwing  crap).

    agree that Brady mcd BB all are doing their job well under tough scrutiny and pressure .  Totally appreciate the efforts of these guys and the entire team for their dedication and hard work .

    that said fans have a right to critique all aspects of the game.  we're just tryin to get better like BB says...

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Offenses have gotten more complex.  Different packages of players are used to allow you to get different combinations of skills on the field to force the defense into defending multiple things.  It's how an offense avoids becoming one-dimensional. 

    The idea that you should never sub for the running back (or the TEs or the WRs) is an idea that certain fans on this website have been promulgating for a year or two now, but most NFL coaches are going in a different direction exactly because they don't want to become one-dimensional. NFL football is increasingly a game of specialization and while versatile players have their value still, most coaches also want guys who are really good at a particular skill.  The back who can power up the middle is not likely the same guy who runs screens really well or blocks well on passing plays or can line up wide and play receiver when you want to morph into a five-wide look.  If you can find someone who does all of these things at a super high level, then you can leave him on the field all the time.  But the reality is you tend to have players who are versatile and can do a lot of things okay or specialized who can't do everything good, but who do one or two things really, really good.




    I understand the concept of specialization or role players... Since the thread is about baseball analogy, you see that with pitchers being specialized for one inning or one batter.

    In football , the versatility is what makes the play work.  The back who can go up the middle AND catch gives an offense a double threat which is harder to defend.

      Using different formations and special groupings can be a tip off to the defense as to the play you're going to run...! This is what we are seeing ...

    I'm suggesting throwing to vereen or Ridley out of "Running " set to establish the double threat and then max out this duality to the fullest.  woody does this on 3rd down but he doesn't represent as much of a run threat except in open space.



    Versatility is just one strategy that works.  Another is putting your best players on the field in roles that accentuate their strengths.  If you tip off the defense, you don't care, because you think those best players are good enough to beat the defense even if the defense knows what you are going to do.  Brady talked about this in the offseason and I'm sure it was a point of emphasis for Josh during camp.  Brady basically said it was important to be able to run the ball--and get more than 2 or 3 yards--in situations when the defense was expecting the run.  Good running teams can do this.  They don't have to constantly use deception and disguise to get positive yards.  The old coaching philosophy was that there were three ways to win with an offensive play: deception (which is hiding what you're doing or faking the defense out), power (which simply means getting more bodies or more powerful bodies to the point of attack than the defense can get there), or speed (which means getting to the point of attack faster than the defense).  The latter two strategies rely more on player talent, while the first strategy relies more on coaching and play design.  If you pursue a talent strategy, you want your best talent on the field to maximize the mismatches.  If you are trying to be deceptive, then maybe versatility is more useful.  

    BB really likes versatility--especially on defense.  It's sort of why guys like Ninkovich start rather than guys like Dwight Freeney.  

    [/QUOTE


    good points... Speed, power or deception  , or some some combination of two , or even better all 3 at the same time... The deception is important since power and speed can be stacked against you on the other side...

    the vanilla power play can work better if more plays are run off it. Again the duality . It would be good to see more reverses screens and go routes as a way to attack the whole field but also to get better at running these essential plays IMO.  

     

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    In response to bredbru's comment:

    In response to Getzo's comment:

    I think he is still seeing what they can do out there.  I'm sure they understand the importance of continuity. 

    They are only half way through the season.  I think after the bye week, we will see more of a consistant attack. 



    "I think he is still seeing what they can do out there.  I'm sure they understand the importance of continuity. "

     

    cannot agree with this, you dont play to see what different things you cn do AT TEH EXPENSE OF LOSING THE GAME.

    i also disagree with the premise there is nothing wrong with tryng different things, if yo knwo when to call them and if your players are executign it ok in practice.

    josh fails in all  accounts 

    and if bb's ego were not so huge (or more acuartely, he didnt feel so small inside), he woulld have the best coaches in the league at every position (ditto in the drafting dept) , and wed have beaten the giants twice.




    No one is trying to lose.  They are trying to see if these things work, new or old.... There are so many skill players, I think they are trying to make them all chip in...

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from sml1210. Show sml1210's posts

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K


    "I think he is still seeing what they can do out there.  I'm sure they understand the importance of continuity. "

     

    cannot agree with this, you dont play to see what different things you cn do AT TEH EXPENSE OF LOSING THE GAME.

    i also disagree with the premise there is nothing wrong with tryng different things, if yo knwo when to call them and if your players are executign it ok in practice.

    josh fails in all  accounts 

    and if bb's ego were not so huge (or more acuartely, he didnt feel so small inside), he woulld have the best coaches in the league at every position (ditto in the drafting dept) , and wed have beaten the giants twice.

     

    Part of BB's issue is his ego, but it's just not his issue I'm afraid. Both Weis and Crennel have been failures as head coaches, but I feel it's a "once you have the taste of the power" thing, there's no interest in coming back due to their egos. So I don't think the lack of top OC and DC talent is necessarily just BB's issue. Takes two to tangle.

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Offenses have gotten more complex.  Different packages of players are used to allow you to get different combinations of skills on the field to force the defense into defending multiple things.  It's how an offense avoids becoming one-dimensional. 

    The idea that you should never sub for the running back (or the TEs or the WRs) is an idea that certain fans on this website have been promulgating for a year or two now, but most NFL coaches are going in a different direction exactly because they don't want to become one-dimensional. NFL football is increasingly a game of specialization and while versatile players have their value still, most coaches also want guys who are really good at a particular skill.  The back who can power up the middle is not likely the same guy who runs screens really well or blocks well on passing plays or can line up wide and play receiver when you want to morph into a five-wide look.  If you can find someone who does all of these things at a super high level, then you can leave him on the field all the time.  But the reality is you tend to have players who are versatile and can do a lot of things okay or specialized who can't do everything good, but who do one or two things really, really good.




    I understand the concept of specialization or role players... Since the thread is about baseball analogy, you see that with pitchers being specialized for one inning or one batter.

    In football , the versatility is what makes the play work.  The back who can go up the middle AND catch gives an offense a double threat which is harder to defend.

      Using different formations and special groupings can be a tip off to the defense as to the play you're going to run...! This is what we are seeing ...

    I'm suggesting throwing to vereen or Ridley out of "Running " set to establish the double threat and then max out this duality to the fullest.  woody does this on 3rd down but he doesn't represent as much of a run threat except in open space.



    Versatility is just one strategy that works.  Another is putting your best players on the field in roles that accentuate their strengths.  If you tip off the defense, you don't care, because you think those best players are good enough to beat the defense even if the defense knows what you are going to do.  Brady talked about this in the offseason and I'm sure it was a point of emphasis for Josh during camp.  Brady basically said it was important to be able to run the ball--and get more than 2 or 3 yards--in situations when the defense was expecting the run.  Good running teams can do this.  They don't have to constantly use deception and disguise to get positive yards.  The old coaching philosophy was that there were three ways to win with an offensive play: deception (which is hiding what you're doing or faking the defense out), power (which simply means getting more bodies or more powerful bodies to the point of attack than the defense can get there), or speed (which means getting to the point of attack faster than the defense).  The latter two strategies rely more on player talent, while the first strategy relies more on coaching and play design.  If you pursue a talent strategy, you want your best talent on the field to maximize the mismatches.  If you are trying to be deceptive, then maybe versatility is more useful.  

    BB really likes versatility--especially on defense.  It's sort of why guys like Ninkovich start rather than guys like Dwight Freeney.  

    [/QUOTE


    good points... Speed, power or deception  , or some some combination of two , or even better all 3 at the same time... The deception is important since power and speed can be stacked against you on the other side...

    the vanilla power play can work better if more plays are run off it. Again the duality . It would be good to see more reverses screens and go routes as a way to attack the whole field but also to get better at running these essential plays IMO.  

     



    All three is the holy grail!  I think part of the diversity fans are looking for may come as Ridley and Vereen develop. As it is now, Woodhead is in when they are emphasizing spread formations and passing, Ridley when they'retrying to power run more. They do mix it up, but there are clear tendencies. Still it's hard to keep Ridley in all the time if you want to pass around 60% of the time, which is often what they're doing when they go spread. The Denver strategy was a cool twist though, where they showed spread with Ridley in the backfield, then kept switching to power runs.  

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    Understood, except when they go spread and put Ridley split wide.

    I saw this formation with polite last year out wide and again was mystified although I can see that the defense must commit a player as cover.  not sure of the wisdom  behind this idea. 

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    actually I think I know... The personnel group on defense is geared to stop run offense so spreading out to pass means you won't get a pass rush... Or am I over thinking it like josh and co.

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    Understood, except when they go spread and put Ridley split wide.

    I saw this formation with polite last year out wide and again was mystified although I can see that the defense must commit a player as cover.  not sure of the wisdom  behind this idea. 



    They used to do it with Faulk all the time - but Faulk was actually a decent receiving threat out wide. Ridley hasn't shown great receiving ability yet (that drop Sunday was ugly), which is another reason why Woodhead gets trotted out much of the time when they go to that spread offense. Vereen can catch well, but I'm not sure he's got the rest of the role down (i.e., pass blocking).  Bolden seems to actually have pretty good hands--surprisigly. he may turn out to be the most versatile back with both breadth and depth of skill.

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

    Re: josh turning NE offense into football version of DICE-K

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    actually I think I know... The personnel group on defense is geared to stop run offense so spreading out to pass means you won't get a pass rush... Or am I over thinking it like josh and co.



    The details of when and why they do this are a bit beyond my expertise, but I think Brady often makes the decision at the LOS based on how the defense lines up, what defensive personnel are in the game, and what Brady thinks is happening with the pass rush.  When he flexes the back out, I think he's looking to create mismatches against the pass defenders on the side the back swings out to or force more defenders to that side of the field.  They may also flex out the back in the hope the defense will tip its hand on whether they are playing zone or man-to-man.  A lot of times putting a receiver or TE in motion is done to see how the defense reacts (if someone follows the man in motion then they're probably playing man coverage) as well as to change the strength of the formation after the defense lines up.  

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share