Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to RSPCB73's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Throw in Crennel too, and you're talking about two more!

    Red Sox 2013 World Series Champs.  Patriots 2014 Super Bowl Champs???!!!

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    at  least...!  How about 5 more...?     This is the elephant in the room on this thread.   Belichick and Weis and Crennel won the 3 SB's.  Non since.     Much like Parcells never won without Belichick....   well....????

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    FIVE more! Hahaha the arrogance of Pats fans...as I always say the Yankees fans of football...

    [/QUOTE]

    That is a couple Pats fans!  Why do you apply these comments as being representative of ALL Pats fans?  Do you agree with comments made by one or two posters on a Giant's board as representative of ALL Giant fans?

    Why is it folks like you read a comment made by one and then think all Pats fans think the same way?

    [/QUOTE]

    Lost Afc championship games...  lost Super bowls...  lost playoff games.   Point is this team has been knocking at the door without the ability to take it over the top.

    Weis and Crennel ,  but in particular Weis did more with Brady in big games than anything close since.  Brady and Weis were UNDEFEATED in the postseason...  You think that was an accident...?   Explain.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Remember 2005...?     That was the year that Belichick didn't think an OC was necessary...   Charlie Weis , one of the best ever , goes on to another job and BB goes..." thanks Charlie ,  you were great and to prove it we are going to go into the season without naming anyone to replace you..."   Oh and to anyone who cares...

    "The plays will get called..."

    Going on 10 years later...  "The plays are being called " and the team loses all those playoff games...  Idiots figure it out.  There is more to it than just reading stuff off a chart you make up the night before.   Weis knew the flow of the game, the flow of a defense, and what to call in the critical moments of the game and how to use plays to set up other plays .  Play sequences, etc.  purposeful playcalling.  NOt random obvious vanilla crap that defenses can read predict and snuff out.  There is a lot more to it than what we have been getting.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    nobody wants to touch these posts....   Too much truth.

    The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical.  For him to Glom all over the OC position like he did after Weis left was his biggest mistake as the head of this franchise. 

    Many have pointed out his bad drafts and GM moves, but that pales to this approach to running this offense and corrupting the process that had produced 3 superbowls with a young QB and a good defense.    To go from proven experienced playcaller like Weis to a green yes-boy in 2005 was an experiment gone bad but nobody had the balls and still don't to tell him that it failed.   Time to hand it over,  BB.  Would be fascinating to get a sean Payton in here for a season to prove this.  Thing is we'll never know will we...?

    the yes-boy grew up but he's now a yes=man.  the offense with no autonomy has had the predictable linear Belichick footprints all over it and it has failed in the big games.  It couldn't evolve  or morph at the exact time that you need it to get over the top in those big games.

    Remember how Brady owned the 4th quarter during the Weis years...?   Here's a borderline rookie (who Weis groomed)  walking down the field , completions, runs screens.   Defenses never knew what was coming.  How is this possible?  Well maybe the OC had developed more varied play list that caused confusion, instead of recognition during those critical drives.  Maybe the OC didn't have the limited view that " plays will get called and players will execute those plays blah blah ... "  like we hear on this board all the time.

    [/QUOTE]

    So apparently having the best winning percentage in the NFL is just luck because BB has "corrupted" the process?

    Again, I really think all of the Super Bowl winning coaches on BDC need to approach Bob Kraft fast and get him to fire Belichick and hire them.  Rusty and Coolade and NoPensionLooting, what kind of money are you making?  I mean Belichick gets millions a year, so unless you're the CEO of AT&T or something, I think you really owe it to yourself to apply. 

     

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You still can't hide from the fact that Blount carried the ball 4 times in the second half....



    I don't even care who they use as a lead back in a gameplan, but just pick one and use that back as the lead back. If they aren't having a good day, use the other.

    My choices would be this:

    Bolden (no fumbling)

    Ridley (fumbling, but explosive)

    Blount  (some fumble risk, but steady)

    Vereen (not an in between the tackles runner, scatback)

    Look at our SB 38 game.  We were up what, 14-10 at the half? How is this any different than last week?  14-10 or 10-7, we have a lead and have/should have set up more plays to be executed easier in the second half.

    The committed running opened the playbook up because it forced the Panthers to respect it.

     

    Antowain Smth, 26 carries, only 83 yards.  But, what did it do?

    That element helped our D or should have helped our D more in that game.

    Our D gets bashed here ridicuously so and it's always when the offense sucks.   Not a coincidence.  

    Brady and McDaniels have get to back to basics against teams that can cover and rush 4 in man.

    Brady shreds zone, so teams like Houston or Pitt, this premise does not really apply to those kinds of teams. 

    For the love of god, make it stop and make this above^

    [/QUOTE]

    Really, man. Do you think the winningest coach in NFL history doesn't know how to manage a football game better than you do?  

    If winning were as easy as handing the ball to BJGE or Blount or Bolden (or whoever your  latest hero "lead back" happens to be) 35 times a game, BB would have done that.  

     By the way, the Pats won TOP last week, so the whole argument of a tired defense is silly.  And if you're saying the defense is so bad they can't be on the field at all, well then the problem really is the defense, because you just can't keep the defense off the field that long no matter what the offense does.

     

     

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    One more point on this.  Running the ball over and over only works if you can do that effectively and mount long, slow drives that result in points rather than punts.  And it's only effective if you have a defense that's not going to give up quick scores.  The way football works, teams normally alternate drives.  Each team generally gets an equal (or nearly equal) number of drives and therefore an equal or nearly equal number of scoring chances.  In a game that's fixed at 60 minutes, long, slow drives mean fewer drives and fewer scoring chances.  So whether you do long drives or short drives, the key is to score at the end of them more than your opponent scores at the end of theirs. Keeping the defense off the field isn't an end in itself, because the opponent is still going to have as many drives and scoring chances as you do. In a ball control game, you can eat up 40 minutes in 6 drives, and your opponent can eat up just 20 minutes in their 6 drives, but if the opponent scores TDs on 3 of theirs and you score FGs on all 6 of yours, you still are going to lose. 

     

     

     

     

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    My Dad used to tell me that sometimes it's easier to deny the truth than it is to confront it....I finally understand what he meant.....

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My Dad used to tell me that sometimes it's easier to deny the truth than it is to confront it....I finally understand what he meant.....

    [/QUOTE]

    Which I guess is why you never acknowledged that the first drive in the fourth quarter ate up 7 minutes despite having a 12-pass / 2-run balance (or imbalance)? 

    Again, man, your premise doesn't hold against the facts.  

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    They hold up quite well...you hold onto 1 drive like a child to a teddy bear....

    The second have is 30 minutes and the entire stats speak for themselves...

    I'm heading down to the caf for my 3rd cup a joe for the day....I'll raise it to your cup of kool aid and wish you well....we will have to agree to disagree....

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to RSPCB73's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Throw in Crennel too, and you're talking about two more!

    Red Sox 2013 World Series Champs.  Patriots 2014 Super Bowl Champs???!!!

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    at  least...!  How about 5 more...?     This is the elephant in the room on this thread.   Belichick and Weis and Crennel won the 3 SB's.  Non since.     Much like Parcells never won without Belichick....   well....????

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    FIVE more! Hahaha the arrogance of Pats fans...as I always say the Yankees fans of football...

    [/QUOTE]

    That is a couple Pats fans!  Why do you apply these comments as being representative of ALL Pats fans?  Do you agree with comments made by one or two posters on a Giant's board as representative of ALL Giant fans?

    Why is it folks like you read a comment made by one and then think all Pats fans think the same way?

    [/QUOTE]

    Lost Afc championship games...  lost Super bowls...  lost playoff games.   Point is this team has been knocking at the door without the ability to take it over the top.

    Weis and Crennel ,  but in particular Weis did more with Brady in big games than anything close since.  Brady and Weis were UNDEFEATED in the postseason...  You think that was an accident...?   Explain.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Remember 2005...?     That was the year that Belichick didn't think an OC was necessary...   Charlie Weis , one of the best ever , goes on to another job and BB goes..." thanks Charlie ,  you were great and to prove it we are going to go into the season without naming anyone to replace you..."   Oh and to anyone who cares...

    "The plays will get called..."

    Going on 10 years later...  "The plays are being called " and the team loses all those playoff games...  Idiots figure it out.  There is more to it than just reading stuff off a chart you make up the night before.   Weis knew the flow of the game, the flow of a defense, and what to call in the critical moments of the game and how to use plays to set up other plays .  Play sequences, etc.  purposeful playcalling.  NOt random obvious vanilla crap that defenses can read predict and snuff out.  There is a lot more to it than what we have been getting.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    nobody wants to touch these posts....   Too much truth.

    The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical.  For him to Glom all over the OC position like he did after Weis left was his biggest mistake as the head of this franchise. 

    Many have pointed out his bad drafts and GM moves, but that pales to this approach to running this offense and corrupting the process that had produced 3 superbowls with a young QB and a good defense.    To go from proven experienced playcaller like Weis to a green yes-boy in 2005 was an experiment gone bad but nobody had the balls and still don't to tell him that it failed.   Time to hand it over,  BB.  Would be fascinating to get a sean Payton in here for a season to prove this.  Thing is we'll never know will we...?

    the yes-boy grew up but he's now a yes=man.  the offense with no autonomy has had the predictable linear Belichick footprints all over it and it has failed in the big games.  It couldn't evolve  or morph at the exact time that you need it to get over the top in those big games.

    Remember how Brady owned the 4th quarter during the Weis years...?   Here's a borderline rookie (who Weis groomed)  walking down the field , completions, runs screens.   Defenses never knew what was coming.  How is this possible?  Well maybe the OC had developed more varied play list that caused confusion, instead of recognition during those critical drives.  Maybe the OC didn't have the limited view that " plays will get called and players will execute those plays blah blah ... "  like we hear on this board all the time.

    [/QUOTE]

    So apparently having the best winning percentage in the NFL is just luck because BB has "corrupted" the process?

    Again, I really think all of the Super Bowl winning coaches on BDC need to approach Bob Kraft fast and get him to fire Belichick and hire them.  Rusty and Coolade and NoPensionLooting, what kind of money are you making?  I mean Belichick gets millions a year, so unless you're the CEO of AT&T or something, I think you really owe it to yourself to apply. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So apparently having the best winning % of the nfl is just luck because BB has corrupted the process by not acquiring the right talent...according to you .

    Again, I think all the super bowl winning general managers need to approach bob kraft fast and get him to fire BB and hire them. Prolate, murtl and babe, what kind of money are you making? Blah blah blah.

    Like I said, hypocrisy.  You have been trying to convince this board that we have not had enough talent, or, " the right mix of talent" for years, so come down off your pedestal. 

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to TripleOG's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Don't you know that most everyone here knows better than O'brien, Pees, McD, Boyer, and Patricia, etc. etc.

    Oh and they know how to pick players in the draft better than the Patriots organization does as well.

    That covers most of it.

    [/QUOTE]


    Do they get these coordinators from another planet where they create perfect football coaches?? Why it is impossible for another human being on this forum to be better at the job? I mean did Patricia go to school to coach football? I dont think so. Do you know the professions of every poster here and there football knowledge/experience as well as coaching? 
    I think its funny how the people who choose to just say "in bill we trust" always have a problem with people saying anything bad about the gameplan. Just because they have the job does not mean we arent qualified to make rationale statements and observations. I take that personally and I consider myself a fan of football and know x's and o's. Some are more casual but this IS a sports forum to discuss like I always say. I dont get when people make comments like this. What are we supposed to do here?  All agree that BB is GOD??? FOH, I know football and Im gonna call what I see. I can only speak for myself but it looks ignorant without a rebutall to just say they know more than you so shut it....wow

     

    So by that logic why does BB take advice from Ernie Adams?? I mean BB must know everything there is to know right?

    [/QUOTE]

    BB has known Ernie Adams since school, he trusts him. He trusted people who came up with him, like RAC, Saban, Lefrentz, Ozzie, Pioli, Weiss, lombardi, and a young Eric Mangini that used to sleep on BB's couch when he 1st started. When you lose guys that were high level assistants in any business, your business will suffer. This is not an outrageous statement.  This is a fact of team building and leadership principals.

    BB doesn't coach this team by himself.

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    One more point on this.  Running the ball over and over only works if you can do that effectively and mount long, slow drives that result in points rather than punts.  And it's only effective if you have a defense that's not going to give up quick scores.  The way football works, teams normally alternate drives.  Each team generally gets an equal (or nearly equal) number of drives and therefore an equal or nearly equal number of scoring chances.  In a game that's fixed at 60 minutes, long, slow drives mean fewer drives and fewer scoring chances.  So whether you do long drives or short drives, the key is to score at the end of them more than your opponent scores at the end of theirs. Keeping the defense off the field isn't an end in itself, because the opponent is still going to have as many drives and scoring chances as you do. In a ball control game, you can eat up 40 minutes in 6 drives, and your opponent can eat up just 20 minutes in their 6 drives, but if the opponent scores TDs on 3 of theirs and you score FGs on all 6 of yours, you still are going to lose. 

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    There you go taking things to extremes again. Nobody wants us to run the ball over and over. Nobody wants us to become the niners or a run Heavy team. We want us to stop falling back on the Tom Brady crutch at the 1st sign of adversity....like we have been doing for years. There will be times when Brady goes on a 2 minute offense and tears up another team, because he is Tom Brady and he's that good, but then during that same game there will be more times where we stall out on our typical 2 pass 1 run 3 and out, which puts the weaker half of our team( the defense) right back on the field. 

    This happens in the biggest games. Dating back to the 07 SB, In 3 losses in a row to the N.Y Giants we passed 135 times and ran 55 times and we scored 14, 20, and 17 points, down from our 37, and 34 ppg average, how did that work out?.  Unfortunately 2 of those games were Super Bowls. Even if that wasn't the game plan, coaching still failed as the other team dictated our actions by either forcing us to be one dimensional,  or waiting for us to once again, become one dimensional. 

    When Brady had the year he had in 2007, it would only be natural to keep wanting those results, and good teams and coaches know this more then ever, they wait until we do what we do, and they know as sure as the sun will rise, we will fall back on Brady and his right arm, it's only a matter of time....and they have been ready.

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    Let's examine closer this premise that the offense is allowing the defense to be "torched" by not controlloing the ball by running more.  Lets go drive by drive, looking at drives in pairs--what one team did and the what the other team did with its ensuing drive.

    1. Dolphins open with a 3:45, 8 play drive.  That's longer than average, but it's hard to blame the offense for what happens before they even take the field.  Maybe you think BB shouldn't defer on the kickoff? The Pats follow with a 7:13, 16 play drive.  That's a very long drive.  The offense only scored three, so they can be faulted for leaving points on the table, but they certainly can't be critcized for not controlling the ball.

    2. Dolphins run a 1:28, 3 and out drive  Pats do a 2:25, 4 play drive to end the first quarter. Pats open that drive with a pass that is called back on a Dolphins penalty, then run for a first down.  They then run again, but lose three yards, putting them in second and thirteen.  Run hurt there.

    3. Dolphins run a longish 4:44, 7 play drive (remember the Pats are dominating TOP so its hard to blame the offense for leaving the D on the field too long.  In fact, the D has been on the field only about 5 minutes 15 minutes into the game and had a seven minute break between their two prior appearances.) Pats come back with a 2:04, three and out. This one started with a 4 yard pass on first down, then followed by a one yard run on second down, setting up third and six.  Run hurt there too.

    4. Miami does another fairly long drive, 4:37, 8 plays, but fumbles the ball away.  The Pats respond with a 1:57, 7 play drive for a TD.  I guess you'll blame the offense for scoring too fast? I guess the mistake was opening the drive with a 30 yard pass on first down.  

    5. Dolphins come back with a 1:06, 8 play drive for a TD. I guess we blame our offense for giving up a 24 yard reception on third down and a 39 yard TD pass? Pats then run out the remaining 32 seconds of the half with two runs that net 13 yards (inflating the run totals a bit for those who just look at stats).

    That gets us through the first half.  I'll do second half later when I get time.  TOP at this point was won by Miami by about one minute.  Pats dominated TOP in first quarter, but the Pats D gave up two longish second quarter drives while the Pats offense really just got one (scoring) drive in. I'm not sure where you find fault with the offense in the second quarter, but I'm sure some will find a way to blame them for the defense giving up too longish drives and for the offense scoring their TD too fast. 

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TripleOG's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Don't you know that most everyone here knows better than O'brien, Pees, McD, Boyer, and Patricia, etc. etc.

    Oh and they know how to pick players in the draft better than the Patriots organization does as well.

    That covers most of it.

    [/QUOTE]


    Do they get these coordinators from another planet where they create perfect football coaches?? Why it is impossible for another human being on this forum to be better at the job? I mean did Patricia go to school to coach football? I dont think so. Do you know the professions of every poster here and there football knowledge/experience as well as coaching? 
    I think its funny how the people who choose to just say "in bill we trust" always have a problem with people saying anything bad about the gameplan. Just because they have the job does not mean we arent qualified to make rationale statements and observations. I take that personally and I consider myself a fan of football and know x's and o's. Some are more casual but this IS a sports forum to discuss like I always say. I dont get when people make comments like this. What are we supposed to do here?  All agree that BB is GOD??? FOH, I know football and Im gonna call what I see. I can only speak for myself but it looks ignorant without a rebutall to just say they know more than you so shut it....wow

     

    So by that logic why does BB take advice from Ernie Adams?? I mean BB must know everything there is to know right?

    [/QUOTE]

    BB has known Ernie Adams since school, he trusts him. He trusted people who came up with him, like RAC, Saban, Lefrentz, Ozzie, Pioli, Weiss, lombardi, and a young Eric Mangini that used to sleep on BB's couch when he 1st started. When you lose guys that were high level assistants in any business, your business will suffer. This is not an outrageous statement.  This is a fact of team building and leadership principals.

    BB doesn't coach this team by himself.

    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly so why it is impossible for someone here to be able to have an idea? I mean of course BB is never gonna hear it, but my point was that coaches are just human too and lots of posters here have enough football knowledge to question certain decisons and not just sit here and say Great, Greater ,. Greatest and Yaaa, Everything the coaches do is Awesome!  What kind of board would that be?

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You still can't hide from the fact that Blount carried the ball 4 times in the second half....



    What does this even mean? How irrelevant is that figure?

    Ridley carried it 4 times in the second half too. Vereen got a couple himself.

    I mean ... it logically implies nothing about the point people are discussing. 

    Here is what is relevant: when they were "mixing it up" they didn't move the ball. When they started passing a lot they ate clock and moved the ball and scored points.

    It is irrelevant whether Blount had zero carries or 15 carries in the third quarter. All that is relevant is that you are saying they shouldn't have passed so much, and the evidence pretty clearly shows that passing worked best in that game at eating clock, scoring points, and moving the ball. 

    Giving Blount more carries later in the game would not have resulted in more points. Anything after that is just second guessing and inserting a prophecy that is based on nothing more than wishful criticism. 

    NE passed it a whole bunch. They also won TOP. They should have won the game, but for missed FGs, a botched KO/OoB, and another defensive collapse.

    [/QUOTE]


    Jesus, Mary and Joseph...for criss sakes it means they allowed their D to get torched.

    If the Pats don't start controlling the clock big time, and keep their weak D off the field, they are DONE.

    [/QUOTE]

    Oh man. Brick wall. 

    They didn't allow their D to get torched. Their D got torched because it stinks right now. 

    What part about NE winning the TOP is hard to understand? Is a 7 minute drive longer if you are running the football as opposed to passing it? Is there some laws-of-physics breaking math that makes 32 minutes TOP longer and more reviving if those 32 minutes are composed of runs?

    Do you even read the posts of people that go through the trouble to have a conversation with you? Or do you copy and paste from a script about "defenses being tired" and "run-run-punt"?

    You keep pointing to time, top, etc ... but (read this closely) NE DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM CONTROLLING THE CLOCK. They had a problem preventing Miami from scoring, and they had a problem kicking the ball out of bounds and through the uprights.

    Running the football, no matter how vociferously you insist, doesn't answer those issues.  

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Let's examine closer this premise that the offense is allowing the defense to be "torched" by not controlloing the ball by running more.  Lets go drive by drive, looking at drives in pairs--what one team did and the what the other team did with its ensuing drive.

    1. Dolphins open with a 3:45, 8 play drive.  That's longer than average, but it's hard to blame the offense for what happens before they even take the field.  Maybe you think BB shouldn't defer on the kickoff? The Pats follow with a 7:13, 16 play drive.  That's a very long drive.  The offense only scored three, so they can be faulted for leaving points on the table, but they certainly can't be critcized for not controlling the ball.

    2. Dolphins run a 1:28, 3 and out drive  Pats do a 2:25, 4 play drive to end the first quarter. Pats open that drive with a pass that is called back on a Dolphins penalty, then run for a first down.  They then run again, but lose three yards, putting them in second and thirteen.  Run hurt there.

    3. Dolphins run a longish 4:44, 7 play drive (remember the Pats are dominating TOP so its hard to blame the offense for leaving the D on the field too long.  In fact, the D has been on the field only about 5 minutes 15 minutes into the game and had a seven minute break between their two prior appearances.) Pats come back with a 2:04, three and out. This one started with a 4 yard pass on first down, then followed by a one yard run on second down, setting up third and six.  Run hurt there too.

    4. Miami does another fairly long drive, 4:37, 8 plays, but fumbles the ball away.  The Pats respond with a 1:57, 7 play drive for a TD.  I guess you'll blame the offense for scoring too fast? I guess the mistake was opening the drive with a 30 yard pass on first down.  

    5. Dolphins come back with a 1:06, 8 play drive for a TD. I guess we blame our offense for giving up a 24 yard reception on third down and a 39 yard TD pass? Pats then run out the remaining 32 seconds of the half with two runs that net 13 yards (inflating the run totals a bit for those who just look at stats).

    That gets us through the first half.  I'll do second half later when I get time.  TOP at this point was won by Miami by about one minute.  Pats dominated TOP in first quarter, but the Pats D gave up two longish second quarter drives while the Pats offense really just got one (scoring) drive in. I'm not sure where you find fault with the offense in the second quarter, but I'm sure some will find a way to blame them for the defense giving up too longish drives and for the offense scoring their TD too fast. 



    It's crazy that the game needs to  be broken down drive by drive to show this. It's something that is apparent to the naked eye. 

    NE ran a whole lot early ... then stopped when they needed quick scores in the fourth quarter. I've done the math to find that there were 32 pass attempts in the 4th quarter, but I didn't even have to.

    It was apparent to the naked eye. They needed quick scores, and every single down series went all the way to 3rd down. 

    The sad truth is that this is an un-winnable argument, even with reason. Some people just will not back down from an errant claim no matter what facts you post. 

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to RSPCB73's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Throw in Crennel too, and you're talking about two more!

    Red Sox 2013 World Series Champs.  Patriots 2014 Super Bowl Champs???!!!

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    at  least...!  How about 5 more...?     This is the elephant in the room on this thread.   Belichick and Weis and Crennel won the 3 SB's.  Non since.     Much like Parcells never won without Belichick....   well....????

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    FIVE more! Hahaha the arrogance of Pats fans...as I always say the Yankees fans of football...

    [/QUOTE]

    That is a couple Pats fans!  Why do you apply these comments as being representative of ALL Pats fans?  Do you agree with comments made by one or two posters on a Giant's board as representative of ALL Giant fans?

    Why is it folks like you read a comment made by one and then think all Pats fans think the same way?

    [/QUOTE]

    Lost Afc championship games...  lost Super bowls...  lost playoff games.   Point is this team has been knocking at the door without the ability to take it over the top.

    Weis and Crennel ,  but in particular Weis did more with Brady in big games than anything close since.  Brady and Weis were UNDEFEATED in the postseason...  You think that was an accident...?   Explain.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Remember 2005...?     That was the year that Belichick didn't think an OC was necessary...   Charlie Weis , one of the best ever , goes on to another job and BB goes..." thanks Charlie ,  you were great and to prove it we are going to go into the season without naming anyone to replace you..."   Oh and to anyone who cares...

    "The plays will get called..."

    Going on 10 years later...  "The plays are being called " and the team loses all those playoff games...  Idiots figure it out.  There is more to it than just reading stuff off a chart you make up the night before.   Weis knew the flow of the game, the flow of a defense, and what to call in the critical moments of the game and how to use plays to set up other plays .  Play sequences, etc.  purposeful playcalling.  NOt random obvious vanilla crap that defenses can read predict and snuff out.  There is a lot more to it than what we have been getting.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    nobody wants to touch these posts....   Too much truth.

    The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical.  For him to Glom all over the OC position like he did after Weis left was his biggest mistake as the head of this franchise. 

    Many have pointed out his bad drafts and GM moves, but that pales to this approach to running this offense and corrupting the process that had produced 3 superbowls with a young QB and a good defense.    To go from proven experienced playcaller like Weis to a green yes-boy in 2005 was an experiment gone bad but nobody had the balls and still don't to tell him that it failed.   Time to hand it over,  BB.  Would be fascinating to get a sean Payton in here for a season to prove this.  Thing is we'll never know will we...?

    the yes-boy grew up but he's now a yes=man.  the offense with no autonomy has had the predictable linear Belichick footprints all over it and it has failed in the big games.  It couldn't evolve  or morph at the exact time that you need it to get over the top in those big games.

    Remember how Brady owned the 4th quarter during the Weis years...?   Here's a borderline rookie (who Weis groomed)  walking down the field , completions, runs screens.   Defenses never knew what was coming.  How is this possible?  Well maybe the OC had developed more varied play list that caused confusion, instead of recognition during those critical drives.  Maybe the OC didn't have the limited view that " plays will get called and players will execute those plays blah blah ... "  like we hear on this board all the time.

    [/QUOTE]

    So apparently having the best winning percentage in the NFL is just luck because BB has "corrupted" the process?

    Again, I really think all of the Super Bowl winning coaches on BDC need to approach Bob Kraft fast and get him to fire Belichick and hire them.  Rusty and Coolade and NoPensionLooting, what kind of money are you making?  I mean Belichick gets millions a year, so unless you're the CEO of AT&T or something, I think you really owe it to yourself to apply. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So apparently having the best winning % of the nfl is just luck because BB has corrupted the process by not acquiring the right talent...according to you .

    Again, I think all the super bowl winning general managers need to approach bob kraft fast and get him to fire BB and hire them. Prolate, murtl and babe, what kind of money are you making? Blah blah blah.

    Like I said, hypocrisy.  You have been trying to convince this board that we have not had enough talent, or, " the right mix of talent" for years, so come down off your pedestal. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, talent has been the issue.  But I've never said BB is a poor GM.  Injuries have been the main issue.  BB hasn't been perfect  (no GM is), but the main issue is having to deal with repeated years of low picks.  That hurts talent, even with a great GM. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to RSPCB73's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Throw in Crennel too, and you're talking about two more!

    Red Sox 2013 World Series Champs.  Patriots 2014 Super Bowl Champs???!!!

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    at  least...!  How about 5 more...?     This is the elephant in the room on this thread.   Belichick and Weis and Crennel won the 3 SB's.  Non since.     Much like Parcells never won without Belichick....   well....????

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    FIVE more! Hahaha the arrogance of Pats fans...as I always say the Yankees fans of football...

    [/QUOTE]

    That is a couple Pats fans!  Why do you apply these comments as being representative of ALL Pats fans?  Do you agree with comments made by one or two posters on a Giant's board as representative of ALL Giant fans?

    Why is it folks like you read a comment made by one and then think all Pats fans think the same way?

    [/QUOTE]

    Lost Afc championship games...  lost Super bowls...  lost playoff games.   Point is this team has been knocking at the door without the ability to take it over the top.

    Weis and Crennel ,  but in particular Weis did more with Brady in big games than anything close since.  Brady and Weis were UNDEFEATED in the postseason...  You think that was an accident...?   Explain.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Remember 2005...?     That was the year that Belichick didn't think an OC was necessary...   Charlie Weis , one of the best ever , goes on to another job and BB goes..." thanks Charlie ,  you were great and to prove it we are going to go into the season without naming anyone to replace you..."   Oh and to anyone who cares...

    "The plays will get called..."

    Going on 10 years later...  "The plays are being called " and the team loses all those playoff games...  Idiots figure it out.  There is more to it than just reading stuff off a chart you make up the night before.   Weis knew the flow of the game, the flow of a defense, and what to call in the critical moments of the game and how to use plays to set up other plays .  Play sequences, etc.  purposeful playcalling.  NOt random obvious vanilla crap that defenses can read predict and snuff out.  There is a lot more to it than what we have been getting.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    nobody wants to touch these posts....   Too much truth.

    The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical.  For him to Glom all over the OC position like he did after Weis left was his biggest mistake as the head of this franchise. 

    Many have pointed out his bad drafts and GM moves, but that pales to this approach to running this offense and corrupting the process that had produced 3 superbowls with a young QB and a good defense.    To go from proven experienced playcaller like Weis to a green yes-boy in 2005 was an experiment gone bad but nobody had the balls and still don't to tell him that it failed.   Time to hand it over,  BB.  Would be fascinating to get a sean Payton in here for a season to prove this.  Thing is we'll never know will we...?

    the yes-boy grew up but he's now a yes=man.  the offense with no autonomy has had the predictable linear Belichick footprints all over it and it has failed in the big games.  It couldn't evolve  or morph at the exact time that you need it to get over the top in those big games.

    Remember how Brady owned the 4th quarter during the Weis years...?   Here's a borderline rookie (who Weis groomed)  walking down the field , completions, runs screens.   Defenses never knew what was coming.  How is this possible?  Well maybe the OC had developed more varied play list that caused confusion, instead of recognition during those critical drives.  Maybe the OC didn't have the limited view that " plays will get called and players will execute those plays blah blah ... "  like we hear on this board all the time.

    [/QUOTE]

    So apparently having the best winning percentage in the NFL is just luck because BB has "corrupted" the process?

    Again, I really think all of the Super Bowl winning coaches on BDC need to approach Bob Kraft fast and get him to fire Belichick and hire them.  Rusty and Coolade and NoPensionLooting, what kind of money are you making?  I mean Belichick gets millions a year, so unless you're the CEO of AT&T or something, I think you really owe it to yourself to apply. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So apparently having the best winning % of the nfl is just luck because BB has corrupted the process by not acquiring the right talent...according to you .

    Again, I think all the super bowl winning general managers need to approach bob kraft fast and get him to fire BB and hire them. Prolate, murtl and babe, what kind of money are you making? Blah blah blah.

    Like I said, hypocrisy.  You have been trying to convince this board that we have not had enough talent, or, " the right mix of talent" for years, so come down off your pedestal. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, talent has been the issue.  But I've never said BB is a poor GM.  Injuries have been the main issue.  BB hasn't been perfect  (no GM is), but the main issue is having to deal with repeated years of low picks.  That hurts talent, even with a great GM. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Right. 

    How many times have I jumped into threads where people were dreaming about drafting Julio Jones, Ndakemuh Suh, or some other tyrant of the field to remind them that NE cannot sniff that kind of talent. 

    The WR position alone is frustrated by this, as is DT.  

    All of the roster spots NE has been thin at are spots that are hit or miss after the first 10-15 players are taken: (WR, DE, DT). You simply don't find quality at those spots after the first few rounds. 

    The only spot that BB really did poorly with was CB/S, but he's finally gotten that on track. 

    Additionally, evaluating talent is more witchcraft than it is science. It's incredibly difficult, and high stakes. Critiquing player selection is like judging a figure skater on the finer points of their technique. 

    The contention that "simply running the football means we win" is so elementary that after these long years catalogs of evidence refuting it, implying that BB is simply missing this over and over and over and over while lesser coaches somehow figure it out, is tantamount to calling Bill Belichik a football ret@rd. 

    Critiquing an abstruse run/pass ratio for this many years is like telling the figure skater they don't even know how to lace the skates up right. 

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to RSPCB73's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Throw in Crennel too, and you're talking about two more!

    Red Sox 2013 World Series Champs.  Patriots 2014 Super Bowl Champs???!!!

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    at  least...!  How about 5 more...?     This is the elephant in the room on this thread.   Belichick and Weis and Crennel won the 3 SB's.  Non since.     Much like Parcells never won without Belichick....   well....????

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    FIVE more! Hahaha the arrogance of Pats fans...as I always say the Yankees fans of football...

    [/QUOTE]

    That is a couple Pats fans!  Why do you apply these comments as being representative of ALL Pats fans?  Do you agree with comments made by one or two posters on a Giant's board as representative of ALL Giant fans?

    Why is it folks like you read a comment made by one and then think all Pats fans think the same way?

    [/QUOTE]

    Lost Afc championship games...  lost Super bowls...  lost playoff games.   Point is this team has been knocking at the door without the ability to take it over the top.

    Weis and Crennel ,  but in particular Weis did more with Brady in big games than anything close since.  Brady and Weis were UNDEFEATED in the postseason...  You think that was an accident...?   Explain.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Remember 2005...?     That was the year that Belichick didn't think an OC was necessary...   Charlie Weis , one of the best ever , goes on to another job and BB goes..." thanks Charlie ,  you were great and to prove it we are going to go into the season without naming anyone to replace you..."   Oh and to anyone who cares...

    "The plays will get called..."

    Going on 10 years later...  "The plays are being called " and the team loses all those playoff games...  Idiots figure it out.  There is more to it than just reading stuff off a chart you make up the night before.   Weis knew the flow of the game, the flow of a defense, and what to call in the critical moments of the game and how to use plays to set up other plays .  Play sequences, etc.  purposeful playcalling.  NOt random obvious vanilla crap that defenses can read predict and snuff out.  There is a lot more to it than what we have been getting.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    nobody wants to touch these posts....   Too much truth.

    The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical.  For him to Glom all over the OC position like he did after Weis left was his biggest mistake as the head of this franchise. 

    Many have pointed out his bad drafts and GM moves, but that pales to this approach to running this offense and corrupting the process that had produced 3 superbowls with a young QB and a good defense.    To go from proven experienced playcaller like Weis to a green yes-boy in 2005 was an experiment gone bad but nobody had the balls and still don't to tell him that it failed.   Time to hand it over,  BB.  Would be fascinating to get a sean Payton in here for a season to prove this.  Thing is we'll never know will we...?

    the yes-boy grew up but he's now a yes=man.  the offense with no autonomy has had the predictable linear Belichick footprints all over it and it has failed in the big games.  It couldn't evolve  or morph at the exact time that you need it to get over the top in those big games.

    Remember how Brady owned the 4th quarter during the Weis years...?   Here's a borderline rookie (who Weis groomed)  walking down the field , completions, runs screens.   Defenses never knew what was coming.  How is this possible?  Well maybe the OC had developed more varied play list that caused confusion, instead of recognition during those critical drives.  Maybe the OC didn't have the limited view that " plays will get called and players will execute those plays blah blah ... "  like we hear on this board all the time.

    [/QUOTE]

    So apparently having the best winning percentage in the NFL is just luck because BB has "corrupted" the process?

    Again, I really think all of the Super Bowl winning coaches on BDC need to approach Bob Kraft fast and get him to fire Belichick and hire them.  Rusty and Coolade and NoPensionLooting, what kind of money are you making?  I mean Belichick gets millions a year, so unless you're the CEO of AT&T or something, I think you really owe it to yourself to apply. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Kind of a dumb retort that ignores the obvious facts in my post.  I am simply reporting the mistake using the nine years of history to prove it.  Sorry if  the truth upsets you. 

    I'm not saying that the team hasn't had some success.  Winning superbowls is a pretty high standard...  but the fact is that this coaching staff has failed in all those big games where the prior staff didn't.    This is hard to quantify and measure but you know it when you see it.    The Patiots became the predictable ones rather than the other way around.  The other coaches made the right moves not the patriots.  The other teams made the right adjustments , had the answers.  Oh well ... better win this week.

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to coolade2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to RSPCB73's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Throw in Crennel too, and you're talking about two more!

    Red Sox 2013 World Series Champs.  Patriots 2014 Super Bowl Champs???!!!

     

     



    at  least...!  How about 5 more...?     This is the elephant in the room on this thread.   Belichick and Weis and Crennel won the 3 SB's.  Non since.     Much like Parcells never won without Belichick....   well....????

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    FIVE more! Hahaha the arrogance of Pats fans...as I always say the Yankees fans of football...

    [/QUOTE]

    That is a couple Pats fans!  Why do you apply these comments as being representative of ALL Pats fans?  Do you agree with comments made by one or two posters on a Giant's board as representative of ALL Giant fans?

    Why is it folks like you read a comment made by one and then think all Pats fans think the same way?

    [/QUOTE]

    Lost Afc championship games...  lost Super bowls...  lost playoff games.   Point is this team has been knocking at the door without the ability to take it over the top.

    Weis and Crennel ,  but in particular Weis did more with Brady in big games than anything close since.  Brady and Weis were UNDEFEATED in the postseason...  You think that was an accident...?   Explain.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Remember 2005...?     That was the year that Belichick didn't think an OC was necessary...   Charlie Weis , one of the best ever , goes on to another job and BB goes..." thanks Charlie ,  you were great and to prove it we are going to go into the season without naming anyone to replace you..."   Oh and to anyone who cares...

    "The plays will get called..."

    Going on 10 years later...  "The plays are being called " and the team loses all those playoff games...  Idiots figure it out.  There is more to it than just reading stuff off a chart you make up the night before.   Weis knew the flow of the game, the flow of a defense, and what to call in the critical moments of the game and how to use plays to set up other plays .  Play sequences, etc.  purposeful playcalling.  NOt random obvious vanilla crap that defenses can read predict and snuff out.  There is a lot more to it than what we have been getting.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    nobody wants to touch these posts....   Too much truth.

    The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical.  For him to Glom all over the OC position like he did after Weis left was his biggest mistake as the head of this franchise. 

    Many have pointed out his bad drafts and GM moves, but that pales to this approach to running this offense and corrupting the process that had produced 3 superbowls with a young QB and a good defense.    To go from proven experienced playcaller like Weis to a green yes-boy in 2005 was an experiment gone bad but nobody had the balls and still don't to tell him that it failed.   Time to hand it over,  BB.  Would be fascinating to get a sean Payton in here for a season to prove this.  Thing is we'll never know will we...?

    the yes-boy grew up but he's now a yes=man.  the offense with no autonomy has had the predictable linear Belichick footprints all over it and it has failed in the big games.  It couldn't evolve  or morph at the exact time that you need it to get over the top in those big games.

    Remember how Brady owned the 4th quarter during the Weis years...?   Here's a borderline rookie (who Weis groomed)  walking down the field , completions, runs screens.   Defenses never knew what was coming.  How is this possible?  Well maybe the OC had developed more varied play list that caused confusion, instead of recognition during those critical drives.  Maybe the OC didn't have the limited view that " plays will get called and players will execute those plays blah blah ... "  like we hear on this board all the time.

    [/QUOTE]

    So apparently having the best winning percentage in the NFL is just luck because BB has "corrupted" the process?

    Again, I really think all of the Super Bowl winning coaches on BDC need to approach Bob Kraft fast and get him to fire Belichick and hire them.  Rusty and Coolade and NoPensionLooting, what kind of money are you making?  I mean Belichick gets millions a year, so unless you're the CEO of AT&T or something, I think you really owe it to yourself to apply. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Kind of a dumb retort that ignores the obvious facts in my post.  I am simply reporting the mistake using the nine years of history to prove it.  Sorry if  the truth upsets you. 

    I'm not saying that the team hasn't had some success.  Winning superbowls is a pretty high standard...  but the fact is that this coaching staff has failed in all those big games where the prior staff didn't.    This is hard to quantify and measure but you know it when you see it.    The Patiots became the predictable ones rather than the other way around.  The other coaches made the right moves not the patriots.  The other teams made the right adjustments , had the answers.  Oh well ... better win this week.

    [/QUOTE]

    As I read it, you have two points:

    "The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical."

    I don't really know what you're trying to get at here.  Give an example of linear, mechanical play calling and some examples of non-mechanical, non-linear playcalling to help. 

    Your second point is really just an opinion or assertion that the new coordinators are worse than the old.  But there's nothing to back that up in terms of actual examples of mis-called plays.  So it's just an assertion backed with nothing.  Sure you can point to recent playoff losses, but there are many possible reasons for those other than playcalling. (Missing Gronk may explain a lot.) You've got to show a connection between play calling and the loss before you have an argument. 

     

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Kind of a dumb retort that ignores the obvious facts in my post.  I am simply reporting the mistake using the nine years of history to prove it.  Sorry if  the truth upsets you. 

    I'm not saying that the team hasn't had some success.  Winning superbowls is a pretty high standard...  but the fact is that this coaching staff has failed in all those big games where the prior staff didn't.    This is hard to quantify and measure but you know it when you see it.    The Patiots became the predictable ones rather than the other way around.  The other coaches made the right moves not the patriots.  The other teams made the right adjustments , had the answers.  Oh well ... better win this week.

    [/QUOTE]

    As I read it, you have two points:

    "The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical."

    I don't really know what you're trying to get at here.  Give an example of linear, mechanical play calling and some examples of non-mechanical, non-linear playcalling to help. 

    Your second point is really just an opinion or assertion that the new coordinators are worse than the old.  But there's nothing to back that up in terms of actual examples of mis-called plays.  So it's just an assertion backed with nothing.  Sure you can point to recent playoff losses, but there are many possible reasons for those other than playcalling. (Missing Gronk may explain a lot.) You've got to show a connection between play calling and the loss before you have an argument. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    OK... One example is a simple play like a reverse.  Patriots have not run reverses this year.  They have a slot end around play that has had success but both Edelman and Amendola were injured with concussions running this play recently  which is kind of freaky.

    POint is it is a play that tries to spring a fast guy into open field but requires some surprise and good timing to execute and get big yards.  We saw Cleveland run it and spring Josh Gordon against the Patriots.  Belichick doesn't run it .  Why not?  He's too straight. 


    Second point is easier.  Charlie WEis won 3 suprbowls with brady when he was just a quasi-rookie.  You think Mcdaniels could have pulled that off...?  Are you denying that Weis' experience calling plays was in integral part in these titles...?  Conversely the lack of big game wins points directly at the playcalling in the critical momnts of the games.  The most dominant team ever   2007 (18-0)  could only muster 14 points.  why ?  because the defense knew what they were going to do .  there was no game plan adjustment, the offense gagged and MCD had no answer.  FAIL. vs win SB.  Pretty simple.

     

     

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Kind of a dumb retort that ignores the obvious facts in my post.  I am simply reporting the mistake using the nine years of history to prove it.  Sorry if  the truth upsets you. 

    I'm not saying that the team hasn't had some success.  Winning superbowls is a pretty high standard...  but the fact is that this coaching staff has failed in all those big games where the prior staff didn't.    This is hard to quantify and measure but you know it when you see it.    The Patiots became the predictable ones rather than the other way around.  The other coaches made the right moves not the patriots.  The other teams made the right adjustments , had the answers.  Oh well ... better win this week.

    [/QUOTE]

    As I read it, you have two points:

    "The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical."

    I don't really know what you're trying to get at here.  Give an example of linear, mechanical play calling and some examples of non-mechanical, non-linear playcalling to help. 

    Your second point is really just an opinion or assertion that the new coordinators are worse than the old.  But there's nothing to back that up in terms of actual examples of mis-called plays.  So it's just an assertion backed with nothing.  Sure you can point to recent playoff losses, but there are many possible reasons for those other than playcalling. (Missing Gronk may explain a lot.) You've got to show a connection between play calling and the loss before you have an argument. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    OK... One example is a simple play like a reverse.  Patriots have not run reverses this year.  They have a slot end around play that has had success but both Edelman and Amendola were injured with concussions running this play recently  which is kind of freaky.

    POint is it is a play that tries to spring a fast guy into open field but requires some surprise and good timing to execute and get big yards.  We saw Cleveland run it and spring Josh Gordon against the Patriots.  Belichick doesn't run it .  Why not?  He's too straight. 


    Second point is easier.  Charlie WEis won 3 suprbowls with brady when he was just a quasi-rookie.  You think Mcdaniels could have pulled that off...?  Are you denying that Weis' experience calling plays was in integral part in these titles...?  Conversely the lack of big game wins points directly at the playcalling in the critical momnts of the games.  The most dominant team ever   2007 (18-0)  could only muster 14 points.  why ?  because the defense knew what they were going to do .  there was no game plan adjustment, the offense gagged and MCD had no answer.  FAIL. vs win SB.  Pretty simple.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I agree.

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to coolade2's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     




    Kind of a dumb retort that ignores the obvious facts in my post.  I am simply reporting the mistake using the nine years of history to prove it.  Sorry if  the truth upsets you. 

     

    I'm not saying that the team hasn't had some success.  Winning superbowls is a pretty high standard...  but the fact is that this coaching staff has failed in all those big games where the prior staff didn't.    This is hard to quantify and measure but you know it when you see it.    The Patiots became the predictable ones rather than the other way around.  The other coaches made the right moves not the patriots.  The other teams made the right adjustments , had the answers.  Oh well ... better win this week.



    As I read it, you have two points:

    "The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical."

    I don't really know what you're trying to get at here.  Give an example of linear, mechanical play calling and some examples of non-mechanical, non-linear playcalling to help. 

    Your second point is really just an opinion or assertion that the new coordinators are worse than the old.  But there's nothing to back that up in terms of actual examples of mis-called plays.  So it's just an assertion backed with nothing.  Sure you can point to recent playoff losses, but there are many possible reasons for those other than playcalling. (Missing Gronk may explain a lot.) You've got to show a connection between play calling and the loss before you have an argument. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    OK... One example is a simple play like a reverse.  Patriots have not run reverses this year.  They have a slot end around play that has had success but both Edelman and Amendola were injured with concussions running this play recently  which is kind of freaky.

    POint is it is a play that tries to spring a fast guy into open field but requires some surprise and good timing to execute and get big yards.  We saw Cleveland run it and spring Josh Gordon against the Patriots.  Belichick doesn't run it .  Why not?  He's too straight. 


    Second point is easier.  Charlie WEis won 3 suprbowls with brady when he was just a quasi-rookie.  You think Mcdaniels could have pulled that off...?  Are you denying that Weis' experience calling plays was in integral part in these titles...?  Conversely the lack of big game wins points directly at the playcalling in the critical momnts of the games.  The most dominant team ever   2007 (18-0)  could only muster 14 points.  why ?  because the defense knew what they were going to do .  there was no game plan adjustment, the offense gagged and MCD had no answer.  FAIL. vs win SB.  Pretty simple.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    First of all Belichick's offenses have been some of the highest scoring in the league most years, so his "linear" playcalling is generally effective.  It's hard to argue BB's playcalling is generally bad (too linear, too mechanical, or whatever).  You maybe could make a case for playcalling in certain games, but generally the offense is a top one in the league so I don't see any evidence of a systemic problem.  (Technically BB doesn't call the plays, but I assume you mean the game plan, which determines what plays will be utilized. )

    As far as the loss in 2007, that mostly had to do with play in the trenches.  No play call or adjustment makes up for the O line getting handed their lunch by just four rushers.  Sometimes the problem is just execution or a talent mismatch.  The coach can't call a play that makes Nick Kazcur block Michael Strahan better. 

     

     

     

     

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     



    Kind of a dumb retort that ignores the obvious facts in my post.  I am simply reporting the mistake using the nine years of history to prove it.  Sorry if  the truth upsets you. 

     

    I'm not saying that the team hasn't had some success.  Winning superbowls is a pretty high standard...  but the fact is that this coaching staff has failed in all those big games where the prior staff didn't.    This is hard to quantify and measure but you know it when you see it.    The Patiots became the predictable ones rather than the other way around.  The other coaches made the right moves not the patriots.  The other teams made the right adjustments , had the answers.  Oh well ... better win this week.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    As I read it, you have two points:

     

    "The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical."

    I don't really know what you're trying to get at here.  Give an example of linear, mechanical play calling and some examples of non-mechanical, non-linear playcalling to help. 

    Your second point is really just an opinion or assertion that the new coordinators are worse than the old.  But there's nothing to back that up in terms of actual examples of mis-called plays.  So it's just an assertion backed with nothing.  Sure you can point to recent playoff losses, but there are many possible reasons for those other than playcalling. (Missing Gronk may explain a lot.) You've got to show a connection between play calling and the loss before you have an argument. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    OK... One example is a simple play like a reverse.  Patriots have not run reverses this year.  They have a slot end around play that has had success but both Edelman and Amendola were injured with concussions running this play recently  which is kind of freaky.

    POint is it is a play that tries to spring a fast guy into open field but requires some surprise and good timing to execute and get big yards.  We saw Cleveland run it and spring Josh Gordon against the Patriots.  Belichick doesn't run it .  Why not?  He's too straight. 


    Second point is easier.  Charlie WEis won 3 suprbowls with brady when he was just a quasi-rookie.  You think Mcdaniels could have pulled that off...?  Are you denying that Weis' experience calling plays was in integral part in these titles...?  Conversely the lack of big game wins points directly at the playcalling in the critical momnts of the games.  The most dominant team ever   2007 (18-0)  could only muster 14 points.  why ?  because the defense knew what they were going to do .  there was no game plan adjustment, the offense gagged and MCD had no answer.  FAIL. vs win SB.  Pretty simple.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    First of all Belichick's offenses have been some of the highest scoring in the league most years, so his "linear" playcalling is generally effective.  It's hard to argue BB's playcalling is generally bad (too linear, too mechanical, or whatever).  You maybe could make a case for playcalling in certain games, but generally the offense is a top one in the league so I don't see any evidence of a systemic problem.  (Technically BB doesn't call the plays, but I assume you mean the game plan, which determines what plays will be utilized. )

    As far as the loss in 2007, that mostly had to do with play in the trenches.  No play call or adjustment makes up for the O line getting handed their lunch by just four rushers.  Sometimes the problem is just execution or a talent mismatch.  The coach can't call a play that makes Nick Kazcur block Michael Strahan better. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Agree but you just shifted your argument from execution to talent .  Agree that you can't design a play that can cause an average player to become superman...   BUT  if you acknowledge that your players have a disadvantage in an area like pass blocking ,  THEN your only approach that would produce success would be to use a play design scheme that would deflect the point of attack away from this mismatch.   lIke a  well executed screen pass for example.    Run the play to get the pass rushers upfield and throw it over their head.   Remember...  there is an entire field out there and 11 players to utilize.  Either you have the ability to envision these plays happening or you don't.

      Instead what we saw ,  was an inflexibility to what was happening on the field.  It was amateur OC 101.  If you can't shift what you are doing in real time and are too rigid, straight, mechanical, onedimensional...  you lose.

     

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Kind of a dumb retort that ignores the obvious facts in my post.  I am simply reporting the mistake using the nine years of history to prove it.  Sorry if  the truth upsets you. 

    I'm not saying that the team hasn't had some success.  Winning superbowls is a pretty high standard...  but the fact is that this coaching staff has failed in all those big games where the prior staff didn't.    This is hard to quantify and measure but you know it when you see it.    The Patiots became the predictable ones rather than the other way around.  The other coaches made the right moves not the patriots.  The other teams made the right adjustments , had the answers.  Oh well ... better win this week.

    [/QUOTE]

    As I read it, you have two points:

    "The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical."

    I don't really know what you're trying to get at here.  Give an example of linear, mechanical play calling and some examples of non-mechanical, non-linear playcalling to help. 

    Your second point is really just an opinion or assertion that the new coordinators are worse than the old.  But there's nothing to back that up in terms of actual examples of mis-called plays.  So it's just an assertion backed with nothing.  Sure you can point to recent playoff losses, but there are many possible reasons for those other than playcalling. (Missing Gronk may explain a lot.) You've got to show a connection between play calling and the loss before you have an argument. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    OK... One example is a simple play like a reverse.  Patriots have not run reverses this year.  They have a slot end around play that has had success but both Edelman and Amendola were injured with concussions running this play recently  which is kind of freaky.

    POint is it is a play that tries to spring a fast guy into open field but requires some surprise and good timing to execute and get big yards.  We saw Cleveland run it and spring Josh Gordon against the Patriots.  Belichick doesn't run it .  Why not?  He's too straight. 


    Second point is easier.  Charlie WEis won 3 suprbowls with brady when he was just a quasi-rookie.  You think Mcdaniels could have pulled that off...?  Are you denying that Weis' experience calling plays was in integral part in these titles...?  Conversely the lack of big game wins points directly at the playcalling in the critical momnts of the games.  The most dominant team ever   2007 (18-0)  could only muster 14 points.  why ?  because the defense knew what they were going to do .  there was no game plan adjustment, the offense gagged and MCD had no answer.  FAIL. vs win SB.  Pretty simple.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The Pats defense had more to do with those super bowl wins than Weis did. Give McDaniels or O'Brien those defenses in their prime the Pats have 2 more super bowl wins minimum, probably another one last year. The Pats offense wasn't great in 2001 and 2003 but the defense was great, especially when it mattered.

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     



    Kind of a dumb retort that ignores the obvious facts in my post.  I am simply reporting the mistake using the nine years of history to prove it.  Sorry if  the truth upsets you. 

     

    I'm not saying that the team hasn't had some success.  Winning superbowls is a pretty high standard...  but the fact is that this coaching staff has failed in all those big games where the prior staff didn't.    This is hard to quantify and measure but you know it when you see it.    The Patiots became the predictable ones rather than the other way around.  The other coaches made the right moves not the patriots.  The other teams made the right adjustments , had the answers.  Oh well ... better win this week.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    As I read it, you have two points:

     

    "The trouble is Belichick is too linear to be a good playcaller.  H'es too straight, too mechanical."

    I don't really know what you're trying to get at here.  Give an example of linear, mechanical play calling and some examples of non-mechanical, non-linear playcalling to help. 

    Your second point is really just an opinion or assertion that the new coordinators are worse than the old.  But there's nothing to back that up in terms of actual examples of mis-called plays.  So it's just an assertion backed with nothing.  Sure you can point to recent playoff losses, but there are many possible reasons for those other than playcalling. (Missing Gronk may explain a lot.) You've got to show a connection between play calling and the loss before you have an argument. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    OK... One example is a simple play like a reverse.  Patriots have not run reverses this year.  They have a slot end around play that has had success but both Edelman and Amendola were injured with concussions running this play recently  which is kind of freaky.

    POint is it is a play that tries to spring a fast guy into open field but requires some surprise and good timing to execute and get big yards.  We saw Cleveland run it and spring Josh Gordon against the Patriots.  Belichick doesn't run it .  Why not?  He's too straight. 


    Second point is easier.  Charlie WEis won 3 suprbowls with brady when he was just a quasi-rookie.  You think Mcdaniels could have pulled that off...?  Are you denying that Weis' experience calling plays was in integral part in these titles...?  Conversely the lack of big game wins points directly at the playcalling in the critical momnts of the games.  The most dominant team ever   2007 (18-0)  could only muster 14 points.  why ?  because the defense knew what they were going to do .  there was no game plan adjustment, the offense gagged and MCD had no answer.  FAIL. vs win SB.  Pretty simple.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    First of all Belichick's offenses have been some of the highest scoring in the league most years, so his "linear" playcalling is generally effective.  It's hard to argue BB's playcalling is generally bad (too linear, too mechanical, or whatever).  You maybe could make a case for playcalling in certain games, but generally the offense is a top one in the league so I don't see any evidence of a systemic problem.  (Technically BB doesn't call the plays, but I assume you mean the game plan, which determines what plays will be utilized. )

    As far as the loss in 2007, that mostly had to do with play in the trenches.  No play call or adjustment makes up for the O line getting handed their lunch by just four rushers.  Sometimes the problem is just execution or a talent mismatch.  The coach can't call a play that makes Nick Kazcur block Michael Strahan better. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Agree but you just shifted your argument from execution to talent .  Agree that you can't design a play that can cause an average player to become superman...   BUT  if you acknowledge that your players have a disadvantage in an area like pass blocking ,  THEN your only approach that would produce success would be to use a play design scheme that would deflect the point of attack away from this mismatch.   lIke a  well executed screen pass for example.    Run the play to get the pass rushers upfield and throw it over their head.   Remember...  there is an entire field out there and 11 players to utilize.  Either you have the ability to envision these plays happening or you don't.

      Instead what we saw ,  was an inflexibility to what was happening on the field.  It was amateur OC 101.  If you can't shift what you are doing in real time and are too rigid, straight, mechanical, onedimensional...  you lose.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    See, I think BB is one of the best in the game at designing schemes that cover for his players'  weaknesses and accentuate their stengths. I just think it's impossible to scheme away all weaknessees.  I'll have to go back and rewatch SB 42, but my memory is that the Giants' D line just over matched our O line in both the running and passing game. I'm not sure you can scheme your way ouyt of that. 

     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Remind me again: Bill O'Brien


    Blowing leads in Super Bowls. Then you must really hate the 2007 and 2011 defenses for the Pats.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share