The "problems" with last year's offense

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

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : I listened to you. BB has been groping to replace Moss ever since he left. His Ocho flop last year was certainly a huge disappointment to him. Can you imagine what 2007 would have been like if in addition to Moss and Welker they had a Gronk? They would have had to apply a mercy rule in half the games.
    Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]
    Thank you for listening.  And yes, had the Pats had Gronk then we probably would have seen the greatest offensive team in NFL history and they would have kicked the dolphins and their record and champagne to the wasteland.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]I thought when Moss was traded this team played a lot better cause they didnt throw the ball into coverage to Moss every series. But hey, thats just my opinion.
    Posted by Philskiw1[/QUOTE]
    They played good, matter of fact they played great because they caught everyone off gaurd of what they had in the short to mid range offense.  But ULTIMATELY, the short to mid was all they had left and D's could focus on that and have no worries about the deep threat.  The lack of the deep threat was the downfall and has been ever since. 
     
  3. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    Great read Laz
    Most of what you say is true but unfortunately (again) I have to point out one major flaw.
    The D dictates the ToP (ball control) not the O.  It helps if both are efficient but the D has to get the ball back to be successful.
    Do you think it is coincidence that the teams with BEST D's also are the teams with the Best ToP (ball control)
    PIts #1 D and  #1 ToP         # 11 on O
    Houston #2 D and #2 Top     #13 on O
    This is especially true when a team has a good or great O to complement it.
    Ex. Balt and Jest have good D's but sucky O's, so it didn't matter how often they put the ball in the hands of the O because they didn't know what to do with it once they got it.

    Look at the Pats in comparison since 2003


    YEAR /D RKG/TOP RANKING

    2003   7TH   8TH           (15th in O)  good D, ok O, Good ToP
    2004   9TH   6TH           (9th)
    2005  24TH  17TH ****  (6th)          Bad D, Good O, Bad ToP
     2006  10TH  6TH          (11th)
    2007   5TH   7TH            (1st)
    2008  10TH   2ND            (5th)
    2009   9TH   3RD             (4th) 
    2010   25TH  23RD****    (7th)        Bad D, good O,   Bad ToP 
    2011  31ST   27TH****   (2nd)         Bad D, good O,  Bad ToP
    Pretty consistent throughout.   D good = ToP good.  D bad= ToP Bad
    No matter what the offensive rankings, it still remains constant!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from DoNotSleepOnThePats. Show DoNotSleepOnThePats's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : They played good, matter of fact they played great because they caught everyone off gaurd of what they had in the short to mid range offense.  But ULTIMATELY, the short to mid was all they had left and D's could focus on that and have no worries about the deep threat.  The lack of the deep threat was the downfall and has been ever since. 
    Posted by TFB12[/QUOTE]

    They won 3 Super Bowls without a true deep threat.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : They played good, matter of fact they played great because they caught everyone off gaurd of what they had in the short to mid range offense.  But ULTIMATELY, the short to mid was all they had left and D's could focus on that and have no worries about the deep threat.  The lack of the deep threat was the downfall and has been ever since. 
    Posted by TFB12[/QUOTE]

    TFB-

    Imo ya gotta re-define what you're saying here exactly...  IF you're saying a TRUE long-ball pass bomb "deep threat" like Moss, I completely disagree.  But, IF you're broadening this to NE's 2012 Offense not even having anyone whom could offer up just an intermediate mid-field or short-middle-deep sideline threat, I completely agree. 

    Branch doesn't have the quickness he once had to at least threaten enough initial speed and/or seperation to be a recognizable intermediate (or deep) threat as a check to an opposing Defense; Ocho hadn't lost as much speed and quickness as Branch, but after 12 years or so, He's certainly lost some, and after ya combine that with the fact that He went from playing in the only Offense he knew in the pros, which I'm fairly certain was based on drawing squiggly route trees in the open sandy spot in the middle of each huddle, To an Offense which bases it's designs more in the neighborhood of algebraic NASA formulations to land a rover (read: wideout) on the exact milimeter they want him when he reaches Mars...So he didn't offer this up either.  And Welker?  Let's just say that when you're having your 5'09 slot wideout on 20-25 yard sideline fly routes...well, you've hit the bottom of the barrel elsewhere.  Gronk ain't an easy outlet to count on for these intermediate routes either.  Not easy releasing from a block your tasked with making, or simply a jam someone else is tasked with holding you up, and gettin' that 6'7 mass up to speed to get 25 yards downfield before Brady gets creamed.  It happens w/ Gronk...but it ain't THE best outlet to bank on for this, lol.  After that, ya got Hernandez, but Hern's ability to be a mismatch neccesitates that he do things like go in motion, release late (maybe better hope he can square off against a slower out of place LB attempting to cover him), or Hern making a seal-off block on 1 side of the O-Line before releasing.  Either way- Hern's really fast for a TE...but for a WR, Hern's 6'1 245+lb frame is a hybrid, built for everything: speed, quickness, power, enough mass, etc.  Far cry from a 6'1 200-205lb "blazer" WR.

    Again- If you're talking solely 50 yard+ bombs to Moss, I disagree.  But if you're broadening this to be far more of the intermediate to sideline receiving threats, I 100% agree.  
                   
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : Hannah,(and I will copy this to Prolate) I agree with your questions, however how much more open do you think the field can get on intermediate routes? i see 3 guys using intermediate routes for the majority of the game, WW,Gronk and AH. They all caught over 70% of their targets which is good for top 5 or 6 in the league. If 3 guys play primarily in the middle of the field and catch over 70% of their 300 targets EDIT:(400 targets)then do we really need improvement in that area? I think your last question ties into that as well...can we play well against good defense's? In order to do that it is going to have to be about more then Brandon Lloyd stretching the field. It has to be about utilizing every player on the offensive roster. We no longer do that imo. Guys like JR Redmond,Marc Edwards, Fauria, were never great players but we used them anyway because it kept the defense guessing. We don't need all stars at every skill position like we have now, we need to execute a diverse game plan. The personnel imo has less to do with that execution then does a sound offensive game plan. 
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    Agree.

    On earlier thread I mentioned using the Pats RBs effectively. This could mean using Ridley on goaline and short yardage (traps etc); Woodhead as 3rd down back; Vereen as a sweep guy and receiver out of the backfield. It could be interesting to see who gets the blocking FB role (Kettani, Fiammetta, Larson). Keeping the O Line healthy will be key. The Pats offense has so many weapons that no defense can double-team all of them, but the Pats O has struggled with teams that can provide decent coverage(nickel and dime) and an effective pass rush (Steelers, Ravens). My point is this current offense can win the track meet and I am hoping that McDaniels/BB's gameplans enable them to win the low-scoring TOP game that will inevitably come.

    I still believe that teams have to stop the rhythm and timing of the Pats offense. Camp reports aside. I would like to see what the Pats O has in terms of the running game. I don't see Lloyd as solely a deep threat....he's more like Branch (good solid route runner) than Moss (big play deep threat).

    The key on Offense is can the Pats run the ball effectively when they have to.

    There is also the remote possibility that Brady throws a clinker (see Buff) and that the running game and the defense will have to pick him up. That said I truly believe that this offense can be lethal if McDaniels can get everyone on the same page, Lloyd develops rapport (read/relay coverages) with Brady, and the offensive line can stay healthy.
     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : They won 3 Super Bowls without a true deep threat.
    Posted by DoNotSleepOnThePats[/QUOTE]

    They may not of had a "true deep threat", but they had three receivers that were young and explosive...also all three could run deep at any time. Patten had good deep speed, Branch was maybe the quickest receiver in football when he was young and he had some decent deep speed...Givens ran decently and had size. The only guy that didn't/couldn't be expected to go deep was Brown and he had unusual short area quickness. Everyone of these guys got separation on his routes...that wasn't the case last year in the receiver department.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]Great read Laz Most of what you say is true but unfortunately (again) I have to point out one major flaw. The D dictates the ToP (ball control) not the O.  It helps if both are efficient but the D has to get the ball back to be successful. Do you think it is coincidence that the teams with BEST D's also are the teams with the Best ToP (ball control) PIts #1 D and  #1 ToP         # 11 on O Houston #2 D and #2 Top     #13 on O This is especially true when a team has a good or great O to complement it. Ex. Balt and Jest have good D's but sucky O's, so it didn't matter how often they put the ball in the hands of the O because they didn't know what to do with it once they got it. Look at the Pats in comparison since 2003 YEAR /D RKG/TOP RANKING 2003   7TH   8TH           (15th in O)  good D, ok O, Good ToP 2004   9TH   6TH           (9th) 2005  24TH  17TH ****  (6th)          Bad D, Good O, Bad ToP  2006  10TH  6TH          (11th) 2007   5TH   7TH            (1st) 2008  10TH   2ND            (5th) 2009   9TH   3RD             (4th)  2010   25TH  23RD****    (7th)        Bad D, good O,   Bad ToP  2011  31ST   27TH****   (2nd)         Bad D, good O,  Bad ToP Pretty consistent throughout.   D good = ToP good.  D bad= ToP Bad No matter what the offensive rankings, it still remains constant!
    Posted by pezz4pats[/QUOTE]

    TOP is controlled by both the offense and the defense not just the offense as you suggest. Hard to argue with that.

    Also I notice the years we ran the ball the most we had the best TOP, when we had bad rushing years our TOP suffered and get ready for this.....so did our defensive ranking.

    In short our worst TOP statistics came during the seasons we ran for the least amount of yards....

    YEAR   R-YDS   TOP

    2011     1,764    27th  4rth worst rushing yards for a season and worst TOP.

    2010     1,973    23rd

    2009     1,921    3rd

    2008     2,278    2nd  The most rushing yards of the decade leads to our best TOP.....

    2007     1,849    7th

    2006     1,969    6th

    2005     1,512    27th...... 2nd worst rushing yards 2nd worst TOP

    2004     2,134    6th..... 2nd most rushing yards 6th best TOP

    2003     1,607    8th 

    2002     1,508    Worst rushing yards lead to 29 min ave TOP, which would be in the 20's most years.

    Now also note that as NFL offense's have accumulated yards more easily since the rule changes our rush yards have not increased as our passing yards have gone form 3,700 to 4,700 on average from the 1st half of the decade to the 2nd. WHY? Why not balance the offense, increase TOP and help the defense by keeping our O on the field more?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : They may not of had a "true deep threat", but they had three receivers that were young and explosive...also all three could run deep at any time. Patten had good deep speed, Branch was maybe the quickest receiver in football when he was young and he had some decent deep speed...Givens ran decently and had size. The only guy that didn't/couldn't be expected to go deep was Brown and he had unusual short area quickness. Everyone of these guys got separation on his routes...that wasn't the case last year in the receiver department.
    Posted by mthurl[/QUOTE]

    The way I remember it was these smurfs would catch deep balls when Weiss exploited the weakness of the defense and got them WIDE OPEN....Examples off the top of my head:

    Branch in the AFC game against Pitt, when BB,Weiss and Crennel spoke about the play after the game and said they saw something on film where the safety would bite and it worked.

    Troy Brown in OT in Miami 2003, game winner wide open as the defense got duped.

    Patten with no safety help over the top(most likely because the saftey was worried about another Antowain Smith run for 4 yards up the middle) was the only guy that would beat his man deep and come down with the ball, and only a few times..

    Those guys had good speed and quickness but none of them did anything outside of NE's system, meaning they were not nor should they ever be considered "deep threats". They had the advantage of playing for a coordinator who put them in position to succeed. The talent we have had on the offensive side is 10x what it was in the dynasty years, yet has trouble getting 1st downs, staying ont he field and scoring points in the post season.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : No need to take too much offence about being a NE Patriot all the way back to to the days of yore (i.e. at least 2000-01).  Your response just means that you were a Pats Fan & were watching them execute their Offense each game during the span of their 3 Lombardi SB Championships...  Ya know, The SB winning Offense's never ONCE tailored to the "deep ball" passing threat?  NE's Offense at that time could be labeled as 1 thing and 1 thing only, because they DEFINED it...better than I had ever seen anyone do it before in my entire life:  Ball-Control Offense.  Dat was it...  5 Linemen, 1 Quarterback, 1 TightEnd, and either 1 RB and 3 WRs, or 2 RBs and 2 WRs, or (VERY rarely then) 2 TEs and a mix at RB or WR...usually RB attempting to look so "big" up front in short-yardage sits, that NE might be able to exploit a quick crossing route to a TE or WR for a hopeful huge gain (see the trying effort to attempt to incorporate the smaller quicker sure-handed TE that we drafted in '06 I believe...David- got it- David Thomas).   More often than not, NE simply used the above (5 OL, 1 TE, 1 QB), and either 2 RBs and 2 WRs or just 1 RB & 3 WR...which occured far more often than not- On Certain passing downs or when they wanted to go up-tempo or IF they trully felt that the D match-up was built for a tough Front 7, yet had a VERY underperforming Secondary (and even with this, it simply meant that they might just use the 3 wideout set a bit more in that given game). No Deep Ball #1 WR deep-field threat.  So how did it work?  Didn't Defense's simply crowd the box and move closer to the LOS?  No...  Because NE used at Wideout almost the same breed of player all-over-  Small, quick (quick...not "long-strider fast deep down the field") WRs built for sure-hands, quick cutting angles, and quick/fast when it came to making it into those intermediate mid-range route areas- D. Patten, D. Givens, T. Brown, D. Branch...heck, even Reche Caldwell, and D. Bebe's 1 year here=ALL built of almost precisely the very same physical form, and extremely similiar skill-set @ wideout-Quick, quick, really quick- Sure handed, and cognizant of how the D was developing on any given play.   RB- NE used bigger RBs...and that worked ideally for BOTH- Brady's trademark & exceptional ability of stepping up in the pocket (with a Big between the tackles/Guards interior rusher, IF DTs were to simply shoot their gaps to attempt to simply get Brady and just pressure the pocket's interior, totally dismissing NE's run-game- This bigger-sized bruising back would make them pay on a play-action...WHICH Happened REGULARLY- ALL the time- 4-3 DTs trying to spearhead through O-Line gaps because Brady's eating them alive in the passing game...and wham- Next play (Brady under center...NOT in the shotgun)- TB would hike it, look up and sell the pass (which he did better than anyone back then), and bang- Handoff to Big RB who tears through the middle for a 4 yard gain- And these DTs trying to solely disrupt the passer pocket, can only get 1 mitt, or 1 arm, or 1 unleveraged small knock on this bigger interior rushing RB, which usually wasn't enough to stall or thwart the momentum of the bigger RB NE deployed- Through the middle-4 yards...and that KILLS a pro d, when your RB is able to truck up straight directly through the middle of your D even when it's just for just 4 yards, it simply FEELS compounding and extra disheartening for a D). #2 (why a bigger RB)- Because NE's O-Line is a zone-blocking scheme.  NE figured early on, that by acquiring excellent pass-blocking O-Linemen who most often don't have the true girth of a man-blocking run-first O and O-Line has (see teams at this time such as: Philly, Minnesotta, Dallas, NYG-Massively "hefty" O-Linemen), NE could get deploy longer rangier guys excellent at pass-blocking, but offering a bit less total body weight in comparison to other clubs, AND by using a zone-blocking set-up in the run game, NE could have BOTH: The best of the passing world w/ fleeter quick moving O-Linemen, and a very minor drop-off in run-blocking (b/c the lesser "girth" of NE's O-Line and O-Linemen) by using a zone-scheme (zone-blocking:  O-Linemen flowing to the action of the rushing play direction...NE's Linemen not tasked with blocking "fill-in proper name of individual defender" 1-1, more of- flow to this space and clear out the first guy ya see/flow to this area and aide in the help of another O-Linemen attempting to wall-off some defender...more like this).    ^ This was predicated to, and worked ideally in conjunction with: A Bigger-sized between the tackles Runningback...and it played out all over, because: ~Again, NE's Offense was ball-control- Control the entire tempo off the game.  Wear 'em out (quick note: I've heard this over and over from NFL O-Linemen, RE: How much they'd rather Run-Block as opposed to pass-block.  They do.  The reasons being- When you're run-blocking, YOU are the 1 attacking the defender.  Pass-blocking?  -You're on the Defense...you're being attacked.  YOU have to react directly to what they do, NOT the other way around).  NE used to wear THE sh#t outta the opposing side's Defense.   People forget?  I guess people forget... Ball-control Offense.  Control the tempo of the game, and make them far more reactive to what your front lines on Offense do.  Control the gameclock.  Ice the other team's Offense, and keep'm cold.  If they do a 3 and out after you just drove 80 yards and knocked off 8 minutes of the gameclock...and then you can do even ANY-thing close to this on your subsequent series:  Kill a buncha time, use every play, and even if ya get just 2 or 3 1st downs, while taking an added 5 minutes off the clock...You just controled a whopping 13 Minutes of the game, while they ran 3 plays.  They are frustrated, rhythmically & mentally colder, evenb physically "colder" seein' how they were on the field for less than a minute out of the last 14 minutes of clock-play.  Meanwhile, your D is poised to be in a FAR better spot, to react to a frustrated and less-synced Offense...which is what NE's DEFENSE was predicated on:  Allow the opposing Offense to make a frustrated mistake in their gameplay, and then make them pay dearly for it (3-4 Fairbanks-Bulloughs- Ideal for this, because it's gravy bend-don't-break form of 3-4 offering less guys up front <i.e. potentially giving up smaller amounts of short yardage gains vs having 4 D-Linemen up at the LOS, AND it being a 3-4, it offers that 4th LB, which offers up greater forms and intricacies at disguising what your guys are gonna do and end up, pre-snap />- BOTH, also built to take advantage of a frustrated Offense that knows that they MUST get on the field for a successful series.  They are now primed for a mistake that YOU are primed (as NE's D Unit) to take advantage of. Meanwhile NE's Offense did it's thing...and did it Awesome.  Better situational play to help and enhance your D Unit when they took the field (yea...they were actually rested during these times- 1 more reason why NE didn't lose games in the 2nd half...EVER, during this time- Complimentary O-D, and D-O...NE's D more rested when they took the field of play, and they were more primed to exploit the Offense's frustrations leading to errs...as opposed to a desperate feeling that they themselves needed to take risks in scheme or individual play, so that they could get NE's O back on to the field as quickly as possible; NE's O meanwhile was built to enforce THEIR will on whatever opposing D they faced:  Ball-control, More dedication to the run (remember?- O-Linemen being the one's acting and actively doing the hitting, not the one's reacting and the one's reacting to moves and blows by the opposing D guy attempting to get to Brady in the shotgun passing pocket); Game-clock control, ZERO turnovers by NE's Offense.  Why...? Answer:  Because they didn't do impulsively st#p#d and risky moves, for NO other reason than them being in the mental mindset that NE's O is a bonafide spread shotgun pass-happy formation and overall scheme of pass-first (and second...but not always "3rd"...but alot of pass 3rd's still).   2-3 wideouts who had absolutely solid hands, and were quick and cognizant enough to simply get to those intermediate mid-range routes whenever they (or Brady pre-play) recognzied that the opposing D was crowding guys in a little closer to the overall LOS.  Those intermediate mid-range routes would KILL Defenses.  These guys were in NO way the #1 WR long-strider deep-field purely fast threat that Moss offered (for instance).  But those mid-range routes once it was recognized that the opposing D was crowding the box, would simply break those Defenses.  And it wasn't the quick and painless deaths of getting 6 points on the board by shotgunning the ball all over the field for 3 and 1/2 minutes en route to a TD...No- Because these carefully deployed mid-range passes would simply result in a 15-20 yard play...bringing nothing but a new fresh set of downs for NE's O, as the gameclock wore ever onwards after Patten/Branch/Givens/Brown was tackled in bounds in the middle of the field of play here.   THIS was a long, tedious, and very excruciating weary "death" that NE's O used to bring to the table.  Not as many points...FAR more toll taken on the opposing D and WAY more help affored to NE's defense and the way NE's Defense was built. NE's Offense wasn't primetime...But it was almost like a fortress.  Little to no weak points.  4-3 Defense's interior DTs attempting to fly through their gaps & collapse the pocket with little to no consideration to the running threat, OR Brady sensing a zone-blitz/OLB pass-rush from the outside of the lines?  Bang=Call a between the tackles inside rush to your big-bruising RB in order to get THEM back on the defensive...to get them back on their heals and reacting to you.  Opposing D is crowding the interior, and keeping their deep guys back a bit while their Front 7 is attacking (i.e. D set to play the Inside pocket collapse/pass-rush/run stopping power and a Secondary backing them up by staying back a bit <due to a greater attacking mindset in the front 7 here />)-Bang- Delayed screen pass to the outside...Front 7 guys are bitting on everything and going full-force up-field, while the Secondary is nowhere in sight.  1 more thing that just ain't gonna be sold with that same delay, IF Brady's in shotgun and not under center.  Brady's standard passes during this span that he'd mix in?  Ehh- 7 or 8 yarders...nothin'  High-percentage of successful completion and ball-control with long drives taking massive time off the gameclock.  And finally, when the opposing secondary steps up because NE's just running the ball up the gut here and there, doing screen passes, and doing high-percentage dink and dunk 7-8 yarders?  Wham- Brady opens it up with a play-action (fake handoff), and a 15-AT MOST-20 yard intermediate pass to his quick shifty sure-handed wideouts.   And so wadd'ya do on Defense in order to stop this?  Idk...?  Change how the game's played in the NFL rulebook, and make enough of a st!nk that 'cha inevitably and ultimately just hope that NE will change up this brand of extremely successful (albeit unglamorous or "glitzy") Offense.  They did.  It doesn't work however.  It doesn't...Since 2000, High-scoring & Pass first, yet utterly 1-dimensional Offenses, KILL during the Regular Season...yet by an astounding margin about how well they do during the regular season, they far more often than not, crash and burn come playoffs and fail to take the trophy.  And no...it ain't about Tom Brady or Belichick or Devin McCourty's pass-coverage...This is about scheme and scheme alone:  It's about this-  The scheme that NE used to win there 3 SBs scored less points than what they used the past 5 years or so.  YET, It was an absolute compliment to NE's Defense.  NE's Defensive set-up in turn, complimented this.  NE's Offensive greater system during this span, did INFINITELY more to both physically wear out and tire the opposition's defense, while also mentally wearing out, frustrating, and tiring the opposition's Offense.  They scored less points...yet they had SO much absolute control about the tempo of how each game was played, that it worked (heck, The Giants used this old NE Offensive style in this past SB AGAINST us...THEY did, carbon copy down to the gameclock management, greater receiving corp type, bigger RB, you name it). Have the new-age P{ats Fans say WhateverTH they will.  Bring up any delusional "QBFRSDETRYOJKN" rating systems and ESPN/PFT bad articles.  Pats Fans know d#mn well what NE used and what worked to win SBs here in the past...and it wasn't a 70 yard deep-wideout (and only deep wideout) threat in Moss.               
    Posted by LazarusintheSanatorium[/QUOTE]

    Nice. I think perhaps this whole "deep threat" thing is being misread a bit and if you listen to Brady's interview I don't think he even mentions it. It's more of how the offense didn't have guys that played on the perimeter last season, opposed to too much center of the field stuff (predictability).

    I remember those offenses well that we had and the thing that stood out to me was the versatility of all those receivers...they all got separation. Branch WAS as quick as anyone and he would stretch a defense on occasion to keep things honest. Patten ran a 4.3 and had equal quickness (although no height)...he would do basically what Branch would do - get separation and be able to get behind a D on occasion. Givens was the only receiver they had that didn't have that unusual quickness, but he would use his size and above average speed to go deep. Brown was quick as hell. They all had one thing in common...they got separation and they DIDN'T have to play ONLY in the middle of the field. These guys could run a 20 yard out or in, it's not exactly deep, but that's what was missing last year.

    I do think they were more diverse back then, they were probably the heaviest screen team in football...tight end screens, screens to the back and full back, and of course they made that wide receiver screen famous. I think losing a guy like Faulk hurt them a bit and we didn't have a true runner that could scare teams enough. We basically were limited to (with Benny), dives and off tackles to the left. Defenses figured that out after his first go round here - they literally were waiting for him to run off tackle because they knew he couldn't bounce it outside or cut back. For all the talk of Benny being a tough runner, this was a guy that could not break tackles consistently unless he built up a head of steam (which he usually didn't). There's a reason why the guy is gone and it's not because we didn't have the money. Bash the runners we used to have, but they were bigger and they could break more tackles...big difference.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]We are talking about a team that passes from the Shotgun on the Goal Line! The problem has never been the lack of a deep threat.(sorry TFB) but rather the lack of commitment to run the ball making us predictable when we DO decide the run here and there and then when we absolutely need a 1st down, they are scared to run and get stuffed so they pass again! This team has squandered 3 years of certain SB Titles(06',07',11') with nothing but Bad playcalling and philosophy!  Thats it. Nothing more..
    Posted by patsfan76[/QUOTE]

    NE was tied 3rd for rushing TD's per game LY, 2nd on 07, and 3rd in 06.
    24th, 16th , and 11th in rushing first downs those years.
    Teams with the highest 1st down rushing %'s are the The Denvers, Jacks, carolinas and minny's of the world. 
    Either no or new or back-up QB's. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : They won 3 Super Bowls without a true deep threat.
    Posted by DoNotSleepOnThePats[/QUOTE]

    It's a whole different game these days compared to when they won their 3 Super Bowls.
     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : TOP is controlled by both the offense and the defense not just the offense as you suggest. Hard to argue with that. Also I notice the years we ran the ball the most we had the best TOP, when we had bad rushing years our TOP suffered and get ready for this.....so did our defensive ranking. In short our worst TOP statistics came during the seasons we ran for the least amount of yards.... YEAR   R-YDS    TOP 2011     1,764    27th  4rth worst rushing yards for a season and worst TOP. 2010     1,973    23rd 2009     1,921    3rd 2008     2,278    2nd  T he most rushing yards of the decade leads to our best TOP..... 2007     1,849    7th 2006     1,969    6th 2005     1,512    27th...... 2nd worst rushing yards 2nd worst TOP 2004     2,134    6th..... 2nd most rushing yards 6th best TOP 2003     1,607    8th  2002     1,508     Worst rushing yards lead to 29 min ave TOP, which would be in the 20's most years. Now also note that as NFL offense's have accumulated yards more easily since the rule changes our rush yards have not increased as our passing yards have gone form 3,700 to 4,700 on average from the 1st half of the decade to the 2nd. WHY? Why not balance the offense, increase TOP and help the defense by keeping our O on the field more?
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    I'm looking at defensive play dictating Top.
    As illustrated, the offensive play( rushing and passing) and rankings are secondary to the D's play as the D stats hold true and the O's do not.
    Some of your rushing stats are wrong and some are not supporting your premise.
    For ex.  2006,
    2nd most rushing yards and 6th best Top.  That's 6th best out of 9 years,  So you make 6th best look good when it's actually in the lower 1/3rds of the rankings.
     08 was a dumbed down O with Cassell but still a pretty good D, so that doesn't work either.
    The D's were decent in the years they rushed more .  That further supports my premise. You need the more balanced D to be able to take advantage of the ToP.

    The NFL being a passing league more so now than ever would account for the increase in passing yards and would not support any increase in running yards.
    That's the point...Teams are passing more and the ones that can't, rush.
    Those teams are in the bottom of the league.

    Nope, the only constant is bad D= bad Top,  League wide.
    Good D = good Top.
    Bottom line is (and there is no disputing this), The O can't control the ToP if the D can't get off the field.   The O has to have the ball to control Top, not the other way around.   Plain and simple!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : TFB - Imo ya gotta re-define what you're saying here exactly...  IF you're saying a TRUE long-ball pass bomb "deep threat" like Moss, I completely disagree.  But, IF you're broadening this to NE's 2012 Offense not even having anyone whom could offer up just an intermediate mid-field or short-middle-deep sideline threat, I completely agree.               
    Posted by LazarusintheSanatorium[/QUOTE]
    Here's the thing... Moss kept defenses honest.  They had to respect him and his ability to take the top off the defense so they had to defend the entire field.  Short, medium and long.  When Moss left, so did that deep threat.  All the Patriots had was the short to mid field and when D's figured that out all they had to defend was that part of the field. 

    The Patriots tried others in Moss's spot but nobody was the threat Moss was.  Chad was brought in but we see what happened there.  Now with Lloyd here hopefully he will demand the type of deep threat Moss did or in other words the threat that defenses have to defend not only the short to mid fields but even the deep field. 

    The Super Bowl was perfect example of this.  The only person they could send deeper then the mid field who demanded respect was Gronk but he was hurt and couldn't be used that way.  The safety was due to not having a deep threat too.  The Giants knew the Patriots didn't have anyone who could go deep on them so instead of having to cover all areas of the field they only had to concentrate on the short to mid field, which they did perfectly.

    Now if Lloyd can make defenses spread out and cause them to worry about the deeper part of the field then look out... this is going to be an even more exciting season to watch then it was when Moss was here.  And by the sounds of training camp, Lloyd seems to be that missing link since Moss left, finally!!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sam-Adams. Show Sam-Adams's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In response to "Re: The "problems" with last year's offense": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : What was especially revealing to me was the departure from the offensive philosophy.   Dave Meggett was the third down back for the Super Bowl winning Giant's back in of the late 80's/early 90's.  He comes to play for the Parcell's Patriots and plays the same role. He passes the torch and knowledge on to Kevin Faulk who mans that position better than one can hope for a decade. When the time comes for Woody to take over, O'Brien makes him a featured back on every down and turns this offensive system on it's head.  The offense was blatantly predictable and utterly inefficient, only the best QB in the game could mask the weaknesses of it and only in the playoff's against superior defense were the weaknesses exposed. They handed a Ferrari over to a novice... Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE] Exactly, This was a huge part of the Pats gameplay for many years. I really don't think Bill was a good OC.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In response to "Re: The "problems" with last year's offense": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : I'm looking at defensive play dictating Top. As illustrated, the offensive play( rushing and passing) and rankings are secondary to the D's play as the D stats hold true and the O's do not. Some of your rushing stats are wrong and some are not supporting your premise. For ex.  2006, 2nd most rushing yards and 6th best Top.  That's 6th best out of 9 years,  So you make 6th best look good when it's actually in the lower 1/3rds of the rankings.  08 was a dumbed down O with Cassell but still a pretty good D, so that doesn't work either. The D's were decent in the years they rushed more .  That further supports my premise. You need the more balanced D to be able to take advantage of the ToP. The NFL being a passing league more so now than ever would account for the increase in passing yards and would not support any increase in running yards. That's the point...Teams are passing more and the ones that can't, rush. Those teams are in the bottom of the league. Nope, the only constant is bad D= bad Top,  League wide. Good D = good Top. Bottom line is (and there is no disputing this), The O can't control the ToP if the D can't get off the field .   The O has to have the ball to control Top, not the other way around.   Plain and simple! Posted by pezz4pats[/QUOTE No, 6th best TOP in the league not of 9 years. We had our 3rd best rush total and it lead to the 6th bes TOP in the league. I am not saying you are wrong, great defense surely helps with TOP, but you seem to be trying to dispute the fact that the more we ran, the better our TOP was. A good run game and a good defense goes hand in hand. I wasn't smart enough to come up with that. I stole it from more then one of the all time great coaches. Here is one for you, the more your offense is on the field the less chance your defense has of giving up points. In a game of few possessions the gianst ran the ball 10 more times then we did despite being the worst run team in the league and despite playing from behind most of the game. Weird huh? Pretty good game plan they had if u ask me.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sam-Adams. Show Sam-Adams's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In response to "Re: The "problems" with last year's offense": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : I share the same opinions Sam, and yes the screen pass was seldom used. It is really an enigma because Brady is the most accurate short to midfield passer of all time imo, and the best play action QB to ever live, yet we didn't use screens, FB's, RB receptions, or really much more of an offense other then the big 3 with some occasional Branch mixed in. Some here think we were short on talent. I think that is preposterous, as we scored 33 ppg and broke a 30 year passing record for yards. We just didn't call a diverse game plan. Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE] Tom Brady is the best quarterback that ever played football. We know it but the rest of the country won't until after he stops playing. With Josh calling plays, two serious outside threats, two young backs and dare I say fullbacks.........plus all the same weapons they had last year..........and........the schedule they ended up with...........19/0
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    The "problems" with last year's offense":

    1. Brady and Welker just missed connecting on a pass that would have pretty much sealed the Super Bowl.

    2.

    Hey look, there is no number two. If that one connection had been made and it iced the game, then no one is discussing that there was no deep threat all year, or that the running game was non-existent for stretches. Each year is different, but the Pats receiving corps looks deeper this year (at least on paper), and they have two RBs that were untested rookies last year who have a full season plus a full offseason program under their belts (remember they had no spring practice or OTAs last year).  The O-Line always seems to come together under Dante, and they also picked up extra TEs and FBs. The offense should be at least as potent this year and plenty good enough to get back to the Super Bowl!!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: The "problems" with last year's offense": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : I'm looking at defensive play dictating Top. As illustrated, the offensive play( rushing and passing) and rankings are secondary to the D's play as the D stats hold true and the O's do not. Some of your rushing stats are wrong and some are not supporting your premise. For ex.  2006, 2nd most rushing yards and 6th best Top.  That's 6th best out of 9 years,  So you make 6th best look good when it's actually in the lower 1/3rds of the rankings.  08 was a dumbed down O with Cassell but still a pretty good D, so that doesn't work either. The D's were decent in the years they rushed more .  That further supports my premise. You need the more balanced D to be able to take advantage of the ToP. The NFL being a passing league more so now than ever would account for the increase in passing yards and would not support any increase in running yards. That's the point...Teams are passing more and the ones that can't, rush. Those teams are in the bottom of the league. Nope, the only constant is bad D= bad Top,  League wide. Good D = good Top. Bottom line is (and there is no disputing this), The O can't control the ToP if the D can't get off the field .   The O has to have the ball to control Top, not the other way around.   Plain and simple! Posted by pezz4pats[/QUOTE No, 6th best TOP in the league not of 9 years. We had our 3rd best rush total and it lead to the 6th bes TOP in the league. I am not saying you are wrong, great defense surely helps with TOP, but you seem to be trying to dispute the fact that the more we ran, the better our TOP was. A good run game and a good defense goes hand in hand. I wasn't smart enough to come up with that. I stole it from more then one of the all time great coaches. Here is one for you, the more your offense is on the field the less chance your defense has of giving up points. In a game of few possessions the gianst ran the ball 10 more times then we did despite being the worst run team in the league and despite playing from behind most of the game. Weird huh? Pretty good game plan they had if u ask me.
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    I believe the jints ran more in the 1st half when they were not behind but were clock eating.  They did run some in the second half but their passing completion % was alot higher too.  They got their yards by passing, not running.
    Here's what I think is getting lost in all this.
    A good D affords you the luxury of being more diverse, offensively.
    Do you think Eli would have rushed as much as he did if his D couldn't get off the field.  I don't.

    Ok, throw out all the stats and just answer this.
    If a team has a bad D do they generally throw more than the average or rush more than the average? 
    Without thinking too hard, the answer should be obvious.
    Pass= move the ball quickly.
    Rush = eat the clock
    What are you going to do when you are either behind or can't trust the D to hold the lead?   Sit on the ball?  Not if you want to score, you don't.
    This is all I am saying
    You want a more diverse O, you gotta fix the D.
    A perfect run/pass ratio isn't going to matter that much if the D never leaves the field.  You have to lean to the pass.

    Here's the thing, if Tom Brady has a bad day, the whole team has a bad day. If a defense is keyed in on removing what Brady is doing, they have nothing else to lean on at that point.  A run/pass balance would certainly help but the D has to pull their weight in order for that to happen.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : Josh didn't introduce the spread offense, that was probably done before he was born.  Charlie Weis introduced Brady to the empty backfield 5 wide set, but he mixed in plenty of I-Formation with it. You are correct when you say better play calling is the answer, call a well rounded, balanced, unpredictable game and it will be 2007 all over again, hopefully with better results in the end because Joshy learns from his mistakes. There are and always have been plenty of fast guys on the Patriots, deep passes are usually the result of good play action drawing a defense up to the line and then burning them over the top.  We haven't seen that lately because without the threat of a run, there is no play action.
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

    ain't that the truth
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: The "problems" with last year's offense

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense : Hannah,(and I will copy this to Prolate) I agree with your questions, however how much more open do you think the field can get on intermediate routes? i see 3 guys using intermediate routes for the majority of the game, WW,Gronk and AH. They all caught over 70% of their targets which is good for top 5 or 6 in the league. If 3 guys play primarily in the middle of the field and catch over 70% of their 300 targets EDIT:(400 targets)then do we really need improvement in that area? I think your last question ties into that as well...can we play well against good defense's? In order to do that it is going to have to be about more then Brandon Lloyd stretching the field. It has to be about utilizing every player on the offensive roster. We no longer do that imo. Guys like JR Redmond,Marc Edwards, Fauria, were never great players but we used them anyway because it kept the defense guessing. We don't need all stars at every skill position like we have now, we need to execute a diverse game plan. The personnel imo has less to do with that execution then does a sound offensive game plan. 
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    In the majority of games, we actually were fine challenging just the middle of the field.  People seem to forget, but this was a top three offense that scored a ton of points. The issue was against the best defenses it could "freeze up." The better deep and perimeter game helps us avoid that in three ways:

    1. It adds a new dimension to the offense in its own right--a way to get yards when other things aren't working. 

    2. It pulls defenders away from the middle of the field and near the LOS, opening up more space for the underneath passing game.  That game was very effective last year most of the time, but there were times when it was shut down against good defenses.  If safeties and corners have to worry more about the edges of the field, though, it will be a lot harder for them to flood the underneath zones and double team Welker and Gronk.

    3. It should also open up the running and screen game.  Pull safeties back and the running backs have more room to work.  



     

Share