Real issue with Pats offense

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Honestly, I think the "real issue with the Pats' offense" were defenses that were willing to be aggressive at the LOS and not worry too much about the downfield passing game.  I'll have to watch more film to really be sure, but looking at a random sample of offensive plays (both good and bad), it seems that the Pats really struggled against aggressive LBs or defenses that kept their DBs close to the LOS.  I saw a lot of LBs getting through gaps on stretch plays and making tackles from the backside.  In the Cinncinati game, the stretch blocking schemes on play action passes were easily defeated by aggressive LBs and DLs (Brady was sacked three times on play action passes). In the Miami loss and the Cleveland game, it seemed like both teams sent LBs and DBs aggressively at the LOS at the snap. And Denver loaded the box and kept its LBs just a few yards off the LOS most of the first half.  In contrast, Baltimore played much more conservatively, dropping it's LBs and letting them read and react. Again, I haven't studied the film all that carefully, but my impressions from watching some film was that aggressiveness from the LBs in particular, with lots of upfield and horizontal movement and less dropping back or holding position to read and react, gave the Pats' offense a lot of trouble. 

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    THis  premise is false.  Go watch the 2007 postseason with Moss as a downfield threat.

    You don't get the game of football. Ya just don't. I watched NUMEROUS WRs this year get downfield and be a threat and Brady ignores them, doesn't see them or misses them completely.

    How many times have we seen a WR have to wait on his underthrown balls deep, too, by the way?

    These LBs you keep mentioning don't bother playing the run once they see Brady quit on it and turn from it, so they sell out on cover/rush responsibilities as defenders.

    Without Gronk, the key would have been to draw LBs in towards the line, which would have helped playaction and Brady throughout the course of the game.

    Either learn from others who clearly get basic football concepts, or don't bother posting the same stupid garbage.  You and ZBellino try to come off as these football masters, and it's just awkward.

    Excuse after excuse after excuse and you have a whole host of people in here telling what will happen if the offense doesn't do a certain checklist of things, and that's before the game even starts.

    What does it tell you that I can tell the Pats are going to probably lose, simply by how the first or second drive look like, schematically?

    What does that tell you?  It tells a smart person that I've seen this before, it's a pattern and why Brady continues on with it is the big mystery.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    BB had a bad game plan. That was part of the problem.

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

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Honestly, I think the "real issue with the Pats' offense" were defenses that were willing to be aggressive at the LOS....

    [QUOTE]

    THis  premise is false.....  

    What does it tell you that I can tell the Pats are going to probably lose, simply by how the first or second drive look like, schematically?

    What does that tell you?  It tells a smart person that I've seen this before, it's a pattern and why Brady continues on with it is the big mystery.

     [/QUOTE]

    So, when do you replace BB as HC/GM?  Seems you are the Pats solution to all their woes.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    did you guys know that all 6 of Tom Bradys tds passesin our 3 SB victories came off of play action fakes?



    Yes.

    Which is why these Brady Ball Washers who want him in that shotgun all the time or don't care about the run game, just so they can watch Brady bob up and down in a perfect pocket and throw, are dumb.

    Look at the TD bomb he threw to Branch in the 2004 title game. Playaction.

    They don't get it, True Champ. It's because they just became fans mid way through the 2007 season when it appeared the team might go undefeated and Brady might break records.

    That is all they know and all they care about with Brady. That and to stare at him in tights during games.

    [/QUOTE]


    Wow!  Amazing stats.  Someone needs to tell BB that.  It appears he's lost his way.

    Hey, you geniuses wouldn't happen to know how many of TB's other 400 TDs WEREN'T the result of the play action fake, would ya?

    How about the 3 game winning drives that set up the FG's?  Any PA fakes there?

    Seem to remember a lot from the gun.

    Refresh my memory, It was sooooooooo long ago!   LOL

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Honestly, I think the "real issue with the Pats' offense" were defenses that were willing to be aggressive at the LOS....

    [QUOTE]

    THis  premise is false.....  

    What does it tell you that I can tell the Pats are going to probably lose, simply by how the first or second drive look like, schematically?

    What does that tell you?  It tells a smart person that I've seen this before, it's a pattern and why Brady continues on with it is the big mystery.

     [/QUOTE]

    So, when do you replace BB as HC/GM?  Seems you are the Pats solution to all their woes.

    [/QUOTE]


    That's funny.  I can tell by the first 2 possessions that they are going to lose when the D is on the field for most of the first quarter.  10 minutes to start 42=loss, 6 minutes to start,46 and another 5 to add to that=loss.  Low possessions ALWAYS=loss!

    Football 101.  You beat a high powered offense by keeping them on the bench.

    BB should know that from his SB with the Jints, but he's allowed it to happen for the past 6 years +.

    Fail!

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Honestly, I think the "real issue with the Pats' offense" were defenses that were willing to be aggressive at the LOS....

    [QUOTE]

    THis  premise is false.....  

    What does it tell you that I can tell the Pats are going to probably lose, simply by how the first or second drive look like, schematically?

    What does that tell you?  It tells a smart person that I've seen this before, it's a pattern and why Brady continues on with it is the big mystery.

     



    So, when do you replace BB as HC/GM?  Seems you are the Pats solution to all their woes.

    [/QUOTE]


    That's funny.  I can tell by the first 2 possessions that they are going to lose when the D is on the field for most of the first quarter.  10 minutes to start 42=loss, 6 minutes to start,46 and another 5 to add to that=loss.  Low possessions ALWAYS=loss!

    Football 101.  You beat a high powered offense by keeping them on the bench.

    BB should know that from his SB with the Jints, but he's allowed it to happen for the past 6 years +.

    Fail!

    [/QUOTE]

    That makes no sense. When you allow 10 or 13 points and one drive by the opponent is 7+ minutes, it's still only 10 or 13 points allowed by the defense.

    That mean the Pats offense did nothing to help win the game.

    Winnings SBs 10-9 or 14-13 are not going to happen. The fact you think this can happen, is comical to everyone here.

    How many more games of Brady wanting to run the shotgun spreads to start games in January or February, do you need to see?

    He could prefer to do it again like that next year and you'd still be in here unable to see it, clearly blinded by staring at him in tights again for 3 hours on gamedays.

    Did you ever tell us how many dolls you own? Prolate has 5.  TFB12 has 10. Babe owns 25.

    What about you?

    [/QUOTE]


    It makes all the sense in the world, troll.

    Low possessions means low drives (by the O whose D is wasting time) and low drive count means low scores.

    Exactly how the gints and Coughlin as OC beat the Bills, by keeping their O off the field and dominating ToP and low possessions.

    And that's exactly how Coughlin as HC beat BB.

    Now every one knows and more and more are doing it.  The Jets and Browns for cripes sakes!   Shame on BB.  Out coached because of his pathetic D, can't get off the field.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    did you guys know that all 6 of Tom Bradys tds passesin our 3 SB victories came off of play action fakes?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes.

     

    Which is why these Brady Ball Washers who want him in that shotgun all the time or don't care about the run game, just so they can watch Brady bob up and down in a perfect pocket and throw, are dumb.

    Look at the TD bomb he threw to Branch in the 2004 title game. Playaction.

    They don't get it, True Champ. It's because they just became fans mid way through the 2007 season when it appeared the team might go undefeated and Brady might break records.

    That is all they know and all they care about with Brady. That and to stare at him in tights during games.

    [/QUOTE]


    Wow!  Amazing stats.  Someone needs to tell BB that.  It appears he's lost his way.

    Hey, you geniuses wouldn't happen to know how many of TB's other 400 TDs WEREN'T the result of the play action fake, would ya?

    How about the 3 game winning drives that set up the FG's?  Any PA fakes there?

    Seem to remember a lot from the gun.

    Refresh my memory, It was sooooooooo long ago!   LOL

    [/QUOTE]

    So you dont think play action was an important aspect of our SB championships?

     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    TC, I am chuckling at Pezzy thinking shredding bad or average defenses forced to play zone to make it easy on Brady all the time in an offensive era, somehow means that approach or the stats from that approach, also works well in the postseason.

    Again, they are more interested in stat compiling and fantasy football with video games, than they are with learning how we actually won, tighter, lower scoring SB games.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No one cares. 34-17 pats...right. 

    Black sabbath is not a song...right...

    go.

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

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    TC, I am chuckling at Pezzy thinking shredding bad or average defenses forced to play zone to make it easy on Brady all the time in an offensive era, somehow means that approach or the stats from that approach, also works well in the postseason.

    Again, they are more interested in stat compiling and fantasy football with video games, than they are with learning how we actually won, tighter, lower scoring SB games.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I think their is a very important place in our offense for operating out of the gun. I also don't think Brady saying he prefers the gun is an indictment of anything as Im pretty sure most immobile pocket QB's probably prefer it as well. Yet I do agree that this team(as in the coaching staff) has relied too much on it and it has hindered Tom Bradys ability to succeed in the post season. 

    All 6 of his super bowl winning td passes coming off play action is not just a dumb coincidence. He operates the best with a balanced offense where the open man is his favorite target. A predictable finesse offense leads to not many open guys, therefore taking away his favorite target and forcing him to be one dimensional, as his recent post season numbers prove. 

    15.5 ppg scored on offense in 6 straight post season losses. 285 pass attempts to 66 power runs in those 6 exits have produced 9 passing tds, 7 interceptions and 3 fumbles with 17 sacks. 

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

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    After rewatching the first half of the Broncos game ,  It was striking how the offensive line was just blown up into the backfield on running plays.  They looked like high school players.

     The D-line was pretty sad at times as well.  3rd and 10 running play by denver was an example, and the holding by Denver was a joke.  

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    TC, I am chuckling at Pezzy thinking shredding bad or average defenses forced to play zone to make it easy on Brady all the time in an offensive era, somehow means that approach or the stats from that approach, also works well in the postseason.

    Again, they are more interested in stat compiling and fantasy football with video games, than they are with learning how we actually won, tighter, lower scoring SB games.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Sounds like the Pats D against Manning. Good summary Laughing

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

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    After rewatching the first half of the Broncos game ,  It was striking how the offensive line was just blown up into the backfield on running plays.  They looked like high school players.

     The D-line was pretty sad at times as well.  3rd and 10 running play by denver was an example, and the holding by Denver was a joke.  

    [/QUOTE]

    ... and Rusty is insistent the Pats gave up too early, and as a result, Brady lost the game because they started passing.  If the Pats continued to try to run the ball, Rusty would have been all over them for doing that instead of adjusting.  The Pats can't win with his thinking.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    TC, I am chuckling at Pezzy thinking shredding bad or average defenses forced to play zone to make it easy on Brady all the time in an offensive era, somehow means that approach or the stats from that approach, also works well in the postseason.

    Again, they are more interested in stat compiling and fantasy football with video games, than they are with learning how we actually won, tighter, lower scoring SB games.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    And I am chuckling at he fact that you can't understand why they were low scoring games.  It's called an incompetent Defense, that can't get off the field, limiting the offenses possessions, therefore drives, therefore scores.

    You do know that the team who runs the most plays, normally wins.  Don't you?

    Kinda hard to run a lot of plays when you're on the bench, waiting and waiting and waiting for the D to get off the field.

    Major FAIL!

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Honestly, I think the "real issue with the Pats' offense" were defenses that were willing to be aggressive at the LOS....

    [QUOTE]

    THis  premise is false.....  

    What does it tell you that I can tell the Pats are going to probably lose, simply by how the first or second drive look like, schematically?

    What does that tell you?  It tells a smart person that I've seen this before, it's a pattern and why Brady continues on with it is the big mystery.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So, when do you replace BB as HC/GM?  Seems you are the Pats solution to all their woes.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    That's funny.  I can tell by the first 2 possessions that they are going to lose when the D is on the field for most of the first quarter.  10 minutes to start 42=loss, 6 minutes to start,46 and another 5 to add to that=loss.  Low possessions ALWAYS=loss!

    Football 101.  You beat a high powered offense by keeping them on the bench.

    BB should know that from his SB with the Jints, but he's allowed it to happen for the past 6 years +.

    Fail!

    [/QUOTE]

    That makes no sense. When you allow 10 or 13 points and one drive by the opponent is 7+ minutes, it's still only 10 or 13 points allowed by the defense.

    That mean the Pats offense did nothing to help win the game.

    Winnings SBs 10-9 or 14-13 are not going to happen. The fact you think this can happen, is comical to everyone here.

    How many more games of Brady wanting to run the shotgun spreads to start games in January or February, do you need to see?

    He could prefer to do it again like that next year and you'd still be in here unable to see it, clearly blinded by staring at him in tights again for 3 hours on gamedays.

    Did you ever tell us how many dolls you own? Prolate has 5.  TFB12 has 10. Babe owns 25.

    What about you?

    [/QUOTE]


    It makes all the sense in the world, troll.

    Low possessions means low drives (by the O whose D is wasting time) and low drive count means low scores.

    Exactly how the gints and Coughlin as OC beat the Bills, by keeping their O off the field and dominating ToP and low possessions.

    And that's exactly how Coughlin as HC beat BB.

    Now every one knows and more and more are doing it.  The Jets and Browns for cripes sakes!   Shame on BB.  Out coached because of his pathetic D, can't get off the field.

    [/QUOTE]

    If Brady is the GOAT why does he need HOF WRs and TEs and why does he need 10 drives to put up 17+ points in this era?

    10+ drives is what Tom Brady needs to put up that kind of point production.

    That's embarrassing.

    Finally, NE"s D holds to FGs in these games, which is a success in this era, regardless how long a drive is.  FGs shouldn't be winning games in this era on a consistent basis, but they somehow are enough to beat our team because our offense SUCKS, led by Brady.

    Still sucks since 2007 in the postseason. Sucks.

    Sucky offenses led by sucky QBs don't win SBs, so there is no reason to get so bunged up with your panties around your head about it.  

    The real fans wait on Brady.  When you the watch the SB on Sunday, watch how those offenses will actually move the ball and then execute in the red zone. Each team will at least get to 20 points scored.

    Ours sucks and cannot even with a D that leads the conference almost every year in turnovers created.

    Pitiful.

    [/QUOTE]


    TB obviously doesn't need 10+ plays to score. Seen him do it time and time again.

    That's not the point, dope!

    The point is that the PATHETIC D is allowing 10+ long drives, eating the clock and the O is forced to go to a more quick strike, efficient as in moving the ball quickly, offense.

    And yes, QB's (even GOATS) need TE's and Wr's to throw to.  Ask Peyton and Eli and Flacco and Montana. 4 drops in Brady's last 6 passes in 2011?  4 DROPS?????????

    What they also need is the other half of their team to contribute, as in 3 & outs and T/O's and timely stops (game losing score),  and basically.. just getting off the field. so that they can live to play another possession on their own terms.  Not what they are basically being forced to do.

    What's embarrassing is, that you somehow think that none of that matters.

    The GOAT should overcome!!!!!!!!!!!  LMAO@U

    Stick with Plinko.

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

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    After rewatching the first half of the Broncos game ,  It was striking how the offensive line was just blown up into the backfield on running plays.  They looked like high school players.

     The D-line was pretty sad at times as well.  3rd and 10 running play by denver was an example, and the holding by Denver was a joke.  

    [/QUOTE]

    ... and Rusty is insistent the Pats gave up too early, and as a result, Brady lost the game because they started passing.  If the Pats continued to try to run the ball, Rusty would have been all over them for doing that instead of adjusting.  The Pats can't win with his thinking.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not true and a lie or you are not comprehending my premise.

    Blount was subbed in for Vereen on 2nd down.  How many times have I flippin' said to not sub the lead back on a drive?

    We don't use Vereen to establish a run, dummy.  Get it?

    Stop being stupid.  It's annoying. Blount had only 2 carries on the 1st 3 drives.

    UNACCEPTABLE 1st qtr action if the intent is to generate a run game of some kind by halftime.

     [/QUOTE]

    You have a very consistent premise...   Run, Run, Run, with "some" passes.  When runs fail and Brady passes, team loses.  Always Brady's fault.  You also forgot when the run was working against the Colts, TB did audible out of called pass plays numerous times to run the ball.  Brady's ego, huh?   Also, you are totally forgetting BB's presser of a couple weeks ago, huh?  The team does not butt its head against a wall like you seem to want it to in order to satisfy your vision of how it needs to play.  Like you KNOW better than who is on the field from the comfy confines of your recliner with brew in hand.

    So, in a nutshell.. The Patriots just were not trying hard enough in the AFCCG. They just didn't show up.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Real issue with Pats offense

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    After rewatching the first half of the Broncos game ,  It was striking how the offensive line was just blown up into the backfield on running plays.  They looked like high school players.

     The D-line was pretty sad at times as well.  3rd and 10 running play by denver was an example, and the holding by Denver was a joke.  

    [/QUOTE]

    ... and Rusty is insistent the Pats gave up too early, and as a result, Brady lost the game because they started passing.  If the Pats continued to try to run the ball, Rusty would have been all over them for doing that instead of adjusting.  The Pats can't win with his thinking.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not true and a lie or you are not comprehending my premise.

    Blount was subbed in for Vereen on 2nd down.  How many times have I flippin' said to not sub the lead back on a drive?

    We don't use Vereen to establish a run, dummy.  Get it?

    Stop being stupid.  It's annoying. Blount had only 2 carries on the 1st 3 drives.

    UNACCEPTABLE 1st qtr action if the intent is to generate a run game of some kind by halftime.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Better tell the Hc that.  He doesn't seem to understand that you don't send Vereen out, to establish the run and that subbing on a RB by committee team is Really, really bad.

    Jeez, now you're making me question his coaching ability, too!

    Has he lost his mind???????

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share