Re: Texans vs Patriots Game Thread
posted at 12/11/2012 12:14 AM EST
In response to TrueChamp's comment:
In response to zbellino's comment:
In response to TrueChamp's comment:
In response to CablesWyndBairn's comment:
Balance is not only about 50/50 run/pass, which some seem to miss the point. Did they not set up play action well tonight despite some modest gains on the ground?
But it is always about reps to you.
You are now making MY point.
33 passes, 19 runs, 8 by 3rd down backs, one by a QB. That is less "running" than they did against the Jets through 3.5 quarters in the playoffs three years ago, and you howled, and howled, and howled about that game.
The difference is the Texans CARE about what Ridley can do, whereas the Jets didn't care what BJGE would do, and the only reason he got any yards was because defenses just didn't care.
It's NOT about balance ... it's about the threat of the running back not the run. Good runners who scare defenses make teams pay attention. Mediocre and bad running backs do not. And not every team requires "running a lot" to win. AS you posted yourself ... Brady is sick against the blitz ... and as I said early on this week, teams that blitz a lot are why the spread was invented .... it neutralizes the blitz.
The number of times you run is practically irrelevant to the effectiveness to the PA pass. The quality of the runner backing that PA is.
Absolutely wrong. We are 6th in the league in rushing attempts proving that just because you have a great QB doesn't mean you shouldn't run. The 1st runs of the game lead to amazing play action play calls that left guys WIDE OPEN. Didn't you coach football? Are you seriously ttrying to sell us that we need top 5 RB's n order to use the run game? hey have you noticed BJGE is 11th in the LG in rushing? C'mon brother, we were a one dimensional offense last year and didn't need to be. The Texans are the best run defense in football, having let up 1 game with a rushing td..,..
No. I didn't say any of that. Why do you have to constantly put words in people's mouths. When did I say you need a top five RB to run the football?
I disagree that a.) NE was 1 dimensional last season.
b.) You need to run the football in order to win.
c.) That running BJGE more would have made a lick of difference in decisive losses. Getting Gronk back in the SB would have made a decisive difference. Welker and Brady connecting on a pass would have, Hern and Welk not have a few drops a piece, BJGE running better on his reps. That makes a differnce.
There is no "magic game plan" .... you win based on execution first ... 90% of football is execution.
Why can't you just admit that instead of stubbornly trying to wriggle and wrangle around games that are anomalous to your "theory." Like this game ... ro the Ravens loss where they ran and ran and ran and still the defense collapsed.
Here is what I say and I repeat most of these for the 100000th time.
1.) First and foremost. There is no magic game plan -- sometimes passing twice as much as you run is a good game plan. Sometimes running 45-50 of the time is a good game plan. It DEPENDS ON THE TEAM AND SITUATION. Balance for balance sake is just silly. If they ran 50% of the time in the first 3 quarters this week ... they would not have had all those points. The Texans can be thrown against and are hard to run against. It's about MATCHUPS.
2.) Run pass balance is dictated by situtation not abstract and arbitrary ratios. You don't run on 3rd and 9 just to say you are balanced.
3.) PA/misdirection etc gains effectiveness based on how good you are at selling it and how much of a threat your RB is to the defense. Running more ... but running terribly won't make defenders "bite".
4.) Running more does nothing to improve the defense, getting better defenders improve the defense. Better defense improves defense.
5.) 90% of football is EXECUTION and gameplans minor changes (4 plays here or there) are meaningless compared to 4 plays poorly or well executed .... which creates a MAJOR swing.
It's you that pushes your argument waaay past where it should end man. Running the football is not the sole deciding factor in whether a team wins or loses. And the number of times you run is usually based on the kind of situations you find yourself in rather than arbitary wishes of fans.
Sorry... I have coached and played. That's how it works dude.
And for the record I love the improved (ie more effective, not more reps) running game .... but it is meaningless compared to how much an improved defense increases stands to increase their chances.