Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

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

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    Hey Rusty, any more Burger King coupons?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Norger. Show Norger's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    If you were talking to me, yes I watch the games just as closely as you and I continue to be amazed the Pats have gotten far with this defense.  The Miami game, I saw a team that came out flat (against a team that has playing well recently, with nothing to lose.)  It didn't help that that Pats O-line in complete disarray and they appeared to have no clue what the protection schemes were supposed to be. The offense was bad in the first half, bu the defense was also bad, as usual. 

    One of the points I was making was that this defense can't be counted on to stop anyone to close out a game; inside of  two minutes it's a mortal lock that any team can and will score 6 on them with the game on the line.  Off the top of my head, instances where the defense has collapsed at the end: Washington, Indy, Miami, Jints (I'm sure there have been more this year).  So am I worried about the offense "turning it around" in the playoffs?  No, not really.  The question is whether the offense will be able to do enough against playoff caliber teams to protect what is a historically bad defense.  If you want call this defense "solid," I'm turning it around.  Do you even watch the games?

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

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    Whatever analyst I read this past weekend who said that the Pats' playoff hopes are riding on the effectiveness of the offense is exactly right in my opinion.  The point he made is that if the Pats O cannot give their D a chance by sustaining long, clock moving drives it will be 1 and done again.  If they miss on 3rd and 1 in the shotgun spread more than a few times in the playoffs and overexpose their D, they're toast.  The O is the better unit.  The play calling and execution will make this team sink or swim. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?:
    [QUOTE]Dear Rusty, Thank you for clarifying how we will win the Super Bowl...Keep Brady and this horrific offense off the field and let the likes of Kyle Love and Sergio Brown carry us to glory!   I can see it now - Brandon Spikes anxiously awaits taking the field - a very nervous Tom Brady stands by...Brandon turns to Brady and says, "worry not amateur, this defense that was crafted of gold by the Gods themselves will lead you to shelter - climb on my back". Brady faints (we all would when surrounded by such greatness). The final score Patriots 6...anyone else who dares 0. The Patriots score their only points off of safeties - they "only" get three safeties because when sacking said quarterback, they kill him - after the third time the opposing team must forfeit because there is no one left to man the position. Tune in next week as Riding with the king breaks down the intricacies of the cover two defense.
    Posted by mthurl[/QUOTE]


     3 safeties, 3 dead QB's......lmao!

    That would be the day!

    In all seriousness, I see Rustys point that the Offense needs to play lights out, but that just proves how bad the defense is.

    The problem is Rusty has no problem pointing out the offensive faults but turns a blind eye towards the defense.

    I admit they usually step up and play better in the playoffs, but they arent winning any games. Brady got us this far and I would keep riding him as well as the run game and hope for the best. We all know Brady wants to win badly and i cant see them coming out with a gameplan anything short of magnificent.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?:
    [QUOTE]You guys do realize that the same amount of time passes between runs and passes right? The time running off a game clock is not representative of actual time passed. Three missed passes takes the same amount of time as 3 runs that don't result in a first down. The game clock stops but the play lock still runs and time passes. The defense resting idea doesn't wash unless you think the runs would have gotten a first down and you have know way of knowing. Any 3 and out, no matter pass or run uses the same amount of real time.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]

    Im sorry, not defending Rusty, but this is false. How does an incomplete pass equal to a run play? Dont matter if its one yard or stuffed behind the line, the clock keeps ticking. It stops after an incomplete pass and in Rustys defense, there were plenty of incomplete passes in the 1st half.

    I kind of agree with Rusty, I just dont throw brady under the bus.

    Brady needs help. He will be befuddled if they dont run at all. Thats pretty much fact. It has happened in the past and the defense aint saving him, Only the Run game can or an unstoppable Gronk!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    It kind of cracks me up that a guy can start a thread trying to "expose" our offense and then get roundly bashed, but he has done dumber things.

    My two cents. Look BB didn't envision this defense to be like this when the season started. The wild cards were Haynesworth, Wright and Pryor. None of them worked out. I'm sure they were counting on Cunningham, Spikes and Chung developing into very solid guys you could count on - that would be the foundation of this defense. Didn't happen. I'm sure he didn't expect McCourty to crap the bed. He deserved what he got out of Rasi Dawling (this kid got hurt during his draft workout for Christ's sake).

    The Carter signing was smart and the risk on Haynesworth was manageable. In my opinion they should of drafted one of the MANY defensive lineman that were available this year. I'm still stunned they didn't - this was as good a collective group of D lineman that has come out in years. I'm not saying it would of turned the season around, but it would of hedged the bet of Wright or Haynesworth working out.

    Who knows? Brady could still lead this team to a Super Bowl this year (Manning did it once without a defense), why not Brady? 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    Im not so enamored with what the 3-4 DE's are doing and I guess with the 3-4 switch, we can be happy they didnt get guys like Cam Jordan who arent doing much...BUT, that dude Aldon Smith!!!  Was def. on my list. I dont care what defense he is playing in, he can play in any defense.

    He is gonna break Kearses rookie sack record and might be the defensive R.O.Y along with Von Miller.

    Def. a lot of talent, but something tells me we would have picked the wrong guy....lol
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    the offense has to play better than their past three playoff games or they are done. no brainer. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from mighty2012. Show mighty2012's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?:
    [QUOTE]You guys do realize that the same amount of time passes between runs and passes right? The time running off a game clock is not representative of actual time passed. Three missed passes takes the same amount of time as 3 runs that don't result in a first down. The game clock stops but the play lock still runs and time passes. The defense resting idea doesn't wash unless you think the runs would have gotten a first down and you have know way of knowing. Any 3 and out, no matter pass or run uses the same amount of real time.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]

    There you go reminding everyone about reality again.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mike-J-D. Show Mike-J-D's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    People aren't seriously excusing an offensive performance like that of the 1st half against Miami, are they?  It was just like the first half against the Giants.  If the offense has a half like that against a good team in the playoffs, the season's over.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In response to "Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround? : Im sorry, not defending Rusty, but this is false. How does an incomplete pass equal to a run play? Dont matter if its one yard or stuffed behind the line, the clock keeps ticking. It stops after an incomplete pass and in Rustys defense, there were plenty of incomplete passes in the 1st half. I kind of agree with Rusty, I just dont throw brady under the bus. Brady needs help. He will be befuddled if they dont run at all. Thats pretty much fact. It has happened in the past and the defense aint saving him, Only the Run game can or an unstoppable Gronk! Posted by JayShizzle45[/QUOTE] Because he's saying that a one minute drive (in game clock time) means the defense only rested one minute. That is not reality, the game clock is not actual time passed. It is just a greater differential in game clock but not real time. Look. 1st down- pass inc. 5 seconds elapse on game clock. The next play still does not come for 40 seconds 2nd down- pass inc. 5 seconds on game clock , next play in 40 seconds 3rd down- pass inc, 5 seconds off game clock, next play in 40 seconds 4th down- punt, 20 seconds elapse off game clock. Change of possession, (Usually TV timeout, no time off game clock, 3 minutes pass.) Actual time passed- 2 min 20 seconds (without tv timeout) Game time clock elapsed- 35 seconds. Running 1st down- run 3 yards-, 40 seconds game clock and real time pass 2nd down- run 3 yards, 40 seconds game clock and real time pass 3rd down- run 3 yards, 40 seconds game clock and real time pass 4th down- punt, 20 seconds game clock pass Change of possession Actual time passed- same as passing 2min 20 seconds, game clock time - 2 minutes and 20 seconds The only difference is in game clock keeps running for a running play, actual time still passes for the 40 second play clock on passes. Since teams do not try to burn game clock unless they are ahead late in the game there is no reason to worry about it. The defense gets no more rest than with a pass or a run. It's not like they are only resting while the game clock is running. The only way to give a defense more rest is by getting a first down, and running the ball does not increase the odds of getting a first down.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?:
    [QUOTE]Here's what I agree with Rusty: Teams like Balt/Pitt/Houston and even Cincy blitz well and all are going to bring it. There seems to be a consistency since the loss to the GMen in SB with teams playing 9-10 in the box and pressing our recievers and blitzing Brady. It has worked the last 4 losses against the Pats in the Playoffs. I agree that the Pats must create some kind of run game early and throughout to allow play action to be effective. If the Pats try to ride the arm of Brady solely, these playoffs they will be done early. Boy would I love Cory Dillon on this team every year!
    Posted by jimmytantric[/QUOTE]
    Name a team against which this WOULD NOT be effective?  In the SB, the Pats tried all too often to go with pass plays that needed time to develop as they were mostly mid to deep patterns.  The two TD drives involved short quick passes to negate the Giants D strategy. Why the Pats did not keep to that pattern the entire game is a mystery. Either way, this season the Pats have too many weapons for a short passing game, the combo of Welker and two TEs, and can beat this strategy today. For those that may point to the Steelers game, the difference there was ToP.. Pit held a 2 - 1 advantage over the Pats.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?": Because he's saying that a one minute drive (in game clock time) means the defense only rested one minute. That is not reality, the game clock is not actual time passed. It is just a greater differential in game clock but not real time. Look. 1st down- pass inc. 5 seconds elapse on game clock. The next play still does not come for 40 seconds 2nd down- pass inc. 5 seconds on game clock , next play in 40 seconds 3rd down- pass inc, 5 seconds off game clock, next play in 40 seconds 4th down- punt, 20 seconds elapse off game clock. Change of possession, (Usually TV timeout, no time off game clock, 3 minutes pass.) Actual time passed- 2 min 20 seconds (without tv timeout) Game time clock elapsed- 35 seconds. Running 1st down- run 3 yards-, 40 seconds game clock and real time pass 2nd down- run 3 yards, 40 seconds game clock and real time pass 3rd down- run 3 yards, 40 seconds game clock and real time pass 4th down- punt, 20 seconds game clock pass Change of possession Actual time passed- same as passing 2min 20 seconds, game clock time - 2 minutes and 20 seconds The only difference is in game clock keeps running for a running play, actual time still passes for the 40 second play clock on passes. Since teams do not try to burn game clock unless they are ahead late in the game there is no reason to worry about it. The defense gets no more rest than with a pass or a run. It's not like they are only resting while the game clock is running. The only way to give a defense more rest is by getting a first down, and running the ball does not increase the odds of getting a first down.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]


    Ummmm, yeah, but thats not what Shen said.

    Even with your elaborate post, it still doesnt hold water. Yes, there is actual time that expires when you pass, but how can you say its 40 seconds either way??

    Also you theory hold no water when we run Hurry up offense. This is where our defense isnt helped. A 3 and out in the no huddle could all happen in less then in a  minute.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround? : Name a team against which this WOULD NOT be effective?  In the SB, the Pats tried all too often to go with pass plays that needed time to develop as they were mostly mid to deep patterns.  The two TD drives involved short quick passes to negate the Giants D strategy. Why the Pats did not keep to that pattern the entire game is a mystery. Either way, this season the Pats have too many weapons for a short passing game, the combo of Welker and two TEs, and can beat this strategy today. For those that may point to the Steelers game, the difference there was ToP.. Pit held a 2 - 1 advantage over the Pats.
    Posted by agcsbill[/QUOTE]


    This isnt entirely accurate. Th Giants had our bubble screens snuffed out and they were doing nothing. We tried it atleast 5 times before we decided it wasnt working. Our passing game was dead in the water.

    Its not until they started finding Wes down the field that we moved the chains.

    What Im saying is that the Giants had a good game plan and not only shut down the deep plays to Moss but also the short stuff at the line to Wes. We ahd success when we started passing to Wes down field, but they werent 50 yard bombs like the Moss plays...


    I believe no matter how many weapons you have, if your Line isnt blocking, you arent gonna do SQAUT and thats a concern for us right now.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Dessalines. Show Dessalines's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    Yes, it would be nice if they ran the ball some more and balanced it out.  However, none of us here are part of the coaching staff, so no matter what we say here, it is going to be whatever they decide its going to be.  We get to watch.  Complain all you want but that's the only scenario for us, because WE ARE ONLY FANS...

    I'll say this though.  Other teams recognize full well that the strength of this team now is the offense.  Based on that understanding, other teams do all they can to stop it and even we know what the prescription is for that, stop Brady..  Other teams aren't high schoolers, they know what's needed, then its a matter of their execution versus ours.  The offense is not the weakness, it is the strength.  As for the defense, I have been waiting all season long for them to improve and to some degree they have in that they seem to be able to at least adjust now, as well as keep the scoring within reasonable bounds but if anyone says its not adventure watching our D play, they aren't watching the games.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In response to "Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround? : Ummmm, yeah, but thats not what Shen said. Even with your elaborate post, it still doesnt hold water. Yes, there is actual time that expires when you pass, but how can you say its 40 seconds either way?? Also you theory hold no water when we run Hurry up offense. This is where our defense isnt helped. A 3 and out in the no huddle could all happen in less then in a  minute. Posted by JayShizzle45[/QUOTE] Well, I am shen and yes my post does hold water. I'm not sure how else to explain it. You could simply sit on your couch Sunday and start a stopwatch at the first snap on first down and stop it at the punt and you will find that no matter what combination of run and pass plays transpire a 3 and out will result in nearly the same amount of actual time elapsing. No they don't have to wait the full 40 seconds on the play clock but we all know they normally wait until the last 5 seconds or so before snapping the ball unless they are trying to conserve game clock like in a drive at the end of the half or game. They still have to get set and wait for the ball to get spotted so there is really not that much difference even in hurry up. Sure they could snap the ball after like 25 seconds but they could do the same after a run. There is certainly no evidence to suggest that they let the play clock run longer after run plays than pass plays so I don't know why you're suggesting that if they snapped the ball early after a pass but waited the full play clock after a run than there would be less rest. We all know they don't actually do that so why bring up such a hypothetical? I mean the opposite is true too, if they snapped the ball early after a run but waited the full play clock time after a pass than the defense would get more rest after the passing plays.
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from CaptainZdeno33. Show CaptainZdeno33's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround? : Once I saw they were some decent signs of potential improvement, I stuck it out.  BUt, ,I was ready to concede the loss just like i did in the Dallas, Pitt and Giants games this year.  Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    Sheesh...so you've conceded the loss at half time in 2 games they've won and another game that they were winning with 1 minute left?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround? : I think that's bogus and another excuse to defend a failed gameplan or ideology. We have the best O LIne coach in the NFL, Ranch Boy Mankins is going to another Pro Bowl, Brian Waters is as well and Matt Light just got hosed on a Pro Bowl nod. It's not about the talent or even the down to down execution as much as it is the O LIne being set up to fail due to mindnumblingly stupid playcalls up against what the other D Coordinator's gameplan and calls are. At some point credit needs to be given to the other team and to what those humans are doing in front of our own eyes. Even if light or Mankins played on Saturday, we'd still see problems because Miami surprisingly blitzed a ton. My question is, why does it take Bill O'Brien an entire half to see what their gameplan is? We've seen this basically since SB 42 as the blueprint. It may not be that many blitzes but it's the same recipe that completely stalls our base offense. Welker and Gronk can drink superhuman juice before the games and if the D covers them well and gets a strong rush from their 3 or 4 rushers, it may not matter how great Welker and Gronk, are, but how well the D is playing as they sell out to defend the pass ONLY. No team beats NE by shutting down our run game.  So, why are we not running it more? The last thing I want to hear is Brady saying we didn't execute well enough and the other team played better than we did. It's becoming a broken record even when he tries to spin why they can't move the ball for an entire half.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]


    You are the only person I know who argues a point with EVERYONE , even the people who agree with you.

    What did I say that wasnt true?  I said the passing game wasnt working and we couldnt protect.  I am not making excuses for Brady. We've been down this road. Giants smelled blood in the water. We played the GIANTS and Brady was in NEw York and got caught by papparazi with a boot on his foot. We still passed 48 times, and NO, I didnt like it. Why are responding that I made an excuse for the offense?

    You need to leave the few people in your corner alone and stop calling people out for reading comprehension skills. You are the worst at it.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?": Well, I am shen and yes my post does hold water. I'm not sure how else to explain it. You could simply sit on your couch Sunday and start a stopwatch at the first snap on first down and stop it at the punt and you will find that no matter what combination of run and pass plays transpire a 3 and out will result in nearly the same amount of actual time elapsing. No they don't have to wait the full 40 seconds on the play clock but we all know they normally wait until the last 5 seconds or so before snapping the ball unless they are trying to conserve game clock like in a drive at the end of the half or game. They still have to get set and wait for the ball to get spotted so there is really not that much difference even in hurry up. Sure they could snap the ball after like 25 seconds but they could do the same after a run. There is certainly no evidence to suggest that they let the play clock run longer after run plays than pass plays so I don't know why you're suggesting that if they snapped the ball early after a pass but waited the full play clock after a run than there would be less rest. We all know they don't actually do that so why bring up such a hypothetical? I mean the opposite is true too, if they snapped the ball early after a run but waited the full play clock time after a pass than the defense would get more rest after the passing plays.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]


    I didnt bring up the hypothetical, I just made a statement about your post. I am not in this argument and i do agree somewhat with you, but we will have to agree to disagree until next week when I actually time it. I just dont see how you can make a claim that the same amount of time runs out in a game via pass vs the run.

    If thats the case, then why do teams run at the end of the game to kill clock?  Why not just pass 3 times and give yourself a better chance at a 1st down.

    No offense, but NO coach would agree with that.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In response to "Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround? : What was you reaction on Saturday on XMas Eve while watching yet another embarrassingly inept 1st half offense at home?  Serious question. Do people high five one another when NE goes 3 and out for a 1 minute drive?  I don't, especially when it happens 6 times in a row. Here is mine, no lie: "I am going to seriously have to shut this  game down so I am not in a bad mood in 2 hours for the party." I ended up waiting for their first drive out of halftime. Once I saw they were some decent signs of potential improvement, I stuck it out.  BUt, ,I was ready to concede the loss just like i did in the Dallas, Pitt and Giants games this year. Let's be real honest here:  If you're a diehard Pats fan and your happy with how your offense has looked in the first half this year, especially at home, you are probably too far gone with the Brady Kool Aid. Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE] To answer your question King, no I wasn't happy with the first half performance of the offense. I wasn't particularly happy with the first half performance of the defense either. It seemed apparent to me that the oline was in disarray and it's fairly understandable since after 5 minutes of the game they were without 2 of their bsst lineman and both were expected to be playing so the backups didn't get to practice for that situation during the week. Now maybe running the ball more would have resulted in less three and outs. I don't know, I see no reason to think that but maybe. But generally speaking this is a league where teams score around 23 points a game so I would say if they exceeded that by the end of the game then they did enough to win. And if the offense gives up more than that then they are not as good as average and aren't helping the team win. Off the top of my head I don't know where Miami's defense ranks (top 5 I believe) and giving up,around 17 PPG, so I think scoring 27 with 2 lineman going out is pretty good in the end. Then you could see how many points Miami usually scores vs how many they scored against the Pats and I think you would find they exceeded their average. There are times when I want the Pats to run the ball more. Buffalo for instance. I thought they were moving it well on the ground and should have stuck with it. But when facing a team that is stuffing the run, and giving up points when on defense I fully expect them to pass because that is the most likely way to get a first down. And first downs are really the only way to hold the ball longer and give the defense rest. I would be thrilled if Ridley can become a guy who can be the Pats go to back, I even think he can. I just think Benny wasn't cutting it and Ridley has taken time to earn the trust of the coaches. I don't think that giving Benny enough carries will make him good or even great, he will get more yards eventually but those yards must be effective enough to help the team get a first down. Sure on the goal line with les than 3 yards I like Benny because he should be able to get 3 yards and he doesn't fumble. But back at midfield running a guy who only get 2 or 3 yards serves to do nothing but put them in a 3rd and long obvious passing situation and that makes them more predictable not less predictable. You can say after every Brady INT that if they had run the ball than the interception wouldn't have happened and you are right but teams don't do that. There is probably no better QB in NFL history at taking care of the ball, you can say I'm a Brady ball washer but the numbers back this up, in term of INT per pass attempt Brady is the best there has ever been. Considering that and the fact that passing plays result in twice as many yards as runs per attempt I think any team given this offensive talent would run about the same plays. You just can't run the ball a ton because you're afraid of an interception, runs would almost certainly result in more punts unless they were averaging around 5 or 6 YPA, and the result of a punt and an interception is nearly the same- a change of possession. Except they are far more likely to punt than to throw INT. So, my position is this: they should run the ball whenever they can be effective running the ball. If its working, do it more, if it's not do it less. If the pass isn't working do more run. If they're way behind then obviously they must pass, if they're ahead they should try to run more. But at the end of the day all that will be decided pre game based off personnel, down and distance. I don't think they will ever track past running and passing play percentages to determine future plays. I don't buy that running the ball say 50% of the time makes them less predictable than 60 or 70%. I don't even buy that predictability is a huge factor in a plays success. Teams know at the end of a half or game with two minutes left that they will pass every down, and yet these are their most productive drives. Teams do nut just guess run or pass and then play one or the other on defense. They play their cues, and react as the play happens, even if they did decide which to play prior to the play it would not likely make much difference in whether the play worked. They still must execute. I would even say that pass plays as a whole are less predictable than runs since the only player who will get the ball on a running play is the RB,and on a pass play it could be any of the RB, TE, or WRs.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?

    In response to "Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround?": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats Offense? Playoff Turnaround? : I didnt bring up the hypothetical, I just made a statement about your post. I am not in this argument and i do agree somewhat with you, but we will have to agree to disagree until next week when I actually time it. I just dont see how you can make a claim that the same amount of time runs out in a game via pass vs the run. If thats the case, then why do teams run at the end of the game to kill clock?  Why not just pass 3 times and give yourself a better chance at a 1st down. No offense, but NO coach would agree with that. Posted by JayShizzle45[/QUOTE] Because if you run the PLAYCLOCK still runs. The point is the PLAYCLOCK is not an actual representation of time elapsed. Actual time elapsed is not changed by whether the PLAYCLOCK is running. I mean the game is 60 minutes long but it takes 3 hours in actual time. Actual time vs PLAYCLOCK time- that is my point. PLAYCLOCK time elapses between runs. PLAYCLOCK time does not elapse after an incomplete pass. This does not change the fact that 30 to 40 actual seconds will still seperate plays. Just because zero PLAYCLOCK time has elapsed after a pass was incomplete to the time the ball was snapped next does not mean that no time has actually passed between those two events, in reality the same amount of actual time will have passed. So my point is this- since any 3 and out will give the defense the same amount of rest (real time not PLAYCLOCK time) the team should run the combination of plays least likely to result in 3 and outs. Unless the point is to run PLAYCLOCK time like when leading at the end of a game.
     

Share