The "problems" with last year's offense

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

    The "problems" with last year's offense

    We've been over it too much already ourselves, but it's interesting to hear Brady talk about the offense's limits last year.  Here are three interesting quotes from Brady's interview with Kirwan and Ryan, courtesy of Mike Reiss on ESPN Boston:

    ON THE LACK OF DEEP AND PERIMETER RECEIVERS

    Last year’s passing attack and how much the Patriots attacked the perimeter? 
    “I think the strength of our team was between the numbers and that’s where a lot of the passes went. If they didn’t cover us outside, we threw it out there, but when you have Aaron [Hernandez] and Rob [Gronkowski] and Wes [Welker] on the inside, you have three pretty good players. Now Deion [Branch] made plenty of catches for us out there, but in terms of the contributions made on the outside, that was kind of our guy. Now you have Donte’ Stallworth, and Jabar [Gaffney] and Brandon, and still have Deion. There are some guys out there where we can really take advantage of some matchups. If you cover us inside, we’re going to throw it outside. If you cover us outside, we’re going to throw it inside. If you want to play deep, we’re going to throw it short. I think that’s good offensive football.” 

    ON THE WAY DEFENSES ADJUSTED TO THAT LACK OF DEEP/PERIMETER THREATS

    Have you noticed opponents packing in with underneath coverages? You have so many underneath options. 4-under is never enough. Five might not be enough the way you set it up. Do you see some unusual underneath coverages? 
    “Yeah, and I think over the course of the season, a lot of teams were trying to pack it in tight, and make us throw the ball deep and up the sideline. I think hopefully we can take advantage of that. Like I said, if you’re going to guard us short, we have to be able to throw it past you. And if you’re going to guard us deep, we’ll throw it underneath. You have to change up and have a lot of weapons. Like a boxer, you can’t just have one punch. You have to have many punches, and be able to set them up and throw them when you want to throw them, and bait a guy into thinking this is what you’re doing with something else.” 


    ON THE RUNNING GAME

    You were an effective first-down team throwing the football last year. I want you to talk about your running game – Stevan Ridley, Shane Vereen, Danny Woodhead – and how when that improves it will create more throwing opportunities on the early downs. 
    “As I said earlier, part of the passing game is seeing what they’re taking away, then doing something different. That’s the running game too. If they want to play pass and double coverage and who we’re bracketing, then you have to run it. I think we have some guys that we can really make some big plays with – between Woody and Rid and Shane, to see what they’re able to do. They’re out here working hard. That’s part of what the offense needs to be. It can’t be 2 yards, 3 yards. You have to make them pay. Some of the best offenses that we’ve ever had here, the running game was a huge part of what we did, especially situationally. You’re not always going to be able to pass it. When it’s third-and-1, you have to be able to run it. When you’re on the goal-line, you have to run it. When you’re backed up, you have to run it. Four-minute offense at the end of the game with the lead, you have to run it – they know you’re running it and you still have to make yards. That’s part of being a great running team, too.” 

    Better deep/perimeter threats, better runners . . . and I'd add better receivers out of the backfield . . . and we have the diversity on offense we didn't have last year.  Should help us in the playoffs and allow our HOF QB to fulfill his potential.  


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

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

    I have been preaching ever since they got rid of Moss that the deep threat would ultimately do the pats in and it has ever since Moss left.  They couldn't find a good replacement until hopefully now with Lloyd.

    And I have been preaching that the same thing will happen with the short to mid threat that Welker gives to this offense. 

    But nobody listens to me!!  Someone please tell BB to come read the forums.
     
  3. This post has been removed.

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

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

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]I have been preaching ever since they got rid of Moss that the deep threat would ultimately do the pats in and it has ever since Moss left.  They couldn't find a good replacement until hopefully now with Lloyd. And I have been preaching that the same thing will happen with the short to mid threat that Welker gives to this offense.  But nobody listens to me!!  Someone please tell BB to come read the forums.
    Posted by TFB12[/QUOTE]

    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.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

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

    19-0.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

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

    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.
     
  7. 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]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 did play better when Moss was traded.  BJGE ran for over 1,000 yards and Brady threw 4 INTs all season.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

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

    I heard the interview and thought this was exactly what I and others saw last year - an offense that couldn't threaten you outside. He is clearly trying not to throw Branch under the bus in the interview as well and he's classy enough not to mention Ocho by name.

    In my opinion despite the gaudy numbers from our offense, it was not a dominant or super talented group...it was two excellent tight ends, a great slot guy and an elite QB. Over and over again I watched our QB put that ball into some ridiculously tight spaces and then I would turn on the Packers or Saints and watch their QB's throw to guys that were separating all over the field.

    The thing about having your offense go through your tight ends is that you better believe that they will NOT be getting the pass interference calls that wide receivers get. Those guys were getting mugged. A guy like Hernandez maybe didn't get mugged as much because he has very rare explosiveness for the position, but Gronk had to use his size and strength a lot and some of those passes had to be perfect (great plays by both QB and tight end).

    Real good defenses can stop an offense like this and they did (Giants and Ravens)...with a running game and some outside threats it will be different.
     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

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

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]This really means nothing until they start changing the way they call plays on GAMEDAY! I mean I would love to get excited and all, but it was Joshy who introduced the spread right??  Yea, this is just preseason smoke up the *ss!
    Posted by patsfan76[/QUOTE]

    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.


     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

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

    I loved Charlie Weiss' playcalling. I've read that the Patriots are spending a lot of time working on screen passes in camp. That should help keep defenses off Brady.

    Another play I've heard them working on is the quick toss, a play other teams used often against our slow d-linemen last year.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

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

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]I loved Charlie Weiss' playcalling. I've read that the Patriots are spending a lot of time working on screen passes in camp. That should help keep defenses off Brady. Another play I've heard them working on is the quick toss, a play other teams used often against our slow d-linemen last year.
    Posted by digger0862[/QUOTE]

    I've read that too, good news. Creating plays that allow our playmaker's to gain yards after the catch and get the ball out of Tom's hand early are a plus. 

    Hopefully the backs get involved in the pass game more as well, pitches, screens and underneath dump off passes will be a welcome sight.  

    We need to go back to the days of "whoever is open" gets the ball and methodically grinding out first downs.  McDaniel did it in 07' and even more in 08' so I have high hopes.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sam-Adams. Show Sam-Adams's posts

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

    I still blame Obrien for it. It was very predictable what the Pats had for weapons and he didn't mix it up or try to keep anyone off balance. They had BJGE who ran for over a 1,000 the previous year and two kids with tons of potential and they still passed and passed.
    They had Ocho and other guys with speed who if they couldn't pick up the playbook at least keep them in there to take a corner out of the play. 

    And maybe it was me but did anyone else notice the lack of screens to Danny? 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

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

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]I still blame Obrien for it. It was very predictable what the Pats had for weapons and he didn't mix it up or try to keep anyone off balance. They had BJGE who ran for over a 1,000 the previous year and two kids with tons of potential and they still passed and passed. They had Ocho and other guys with speed who if they couldn't pick up the playbook at least keep them in there to take a corner out of the play.  And maybe it was me but did anyone else notice the lack of screens to Danny? 
    Posted by Sam-Adams[/QUOTE]

    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 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...


     
  15. 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]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]

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

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

    Laz, that is one of the best posts I have read on this subject. Very, very well done.
     
  17. 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]I still blame Obrien for it. It was very predictable what the Pats had for weapons and he didn't mix it up or try to keep anyone off balance. They had BJGE who ran for over a 1,000 the previous year and two kids with tons of potential and they still passed and passed. They had Ocho and other guys with speed who if they couldn't pick up the playbook at least keep them in there to take a corner out of the play.  And maybe it was me but did anyone else notice the lack of screens to Danny? 
    Posted by Sam-Adams[/QUOTE]

    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.
     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

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

    Did the Pats win a Super Bowl with Moss?

    Do I wish they had Randy back? Absolutely. I hope Brandon breaks all the single season records for WR w/Tom Brady and we get taht 4th Lombardi.

    Keep your eyes on the ball people . . . Defense wins championships. Not sure?
    Ask the Giants.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

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

    My only concerns for the Pats offense are: can they run the ball effectively when they need to, will Lloyd's presence mean the field opens up on intermediate routes;  can the offensive line  stay healthy? If the answer to all these questions is yes....then watch out. Another concern will be how this offense plays against the good Ds on the schedule (Ravens, Steelers, Texans, 49ers). Can the O win a TOP/Field Position game? The goal of most teams will still be to keep Brady and the O off the field and get the Pats D tired by the 4th quarter. The good news is it looks like Bequette and Jones will be part of the D Line rotation and LB corps (add Hightower) looks as good as it has (on paper) in the last five years.
     
  21. 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]Laz, that is one of the best posts I have read on this subject. Very, very well done.
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    Thanx man...  Appreciate it a ton.  Maybe I'm gettin' back into the swing of things in my posting...See, the way I can tell is when I'm 27 paragraphs into a post I feel needs mentioning in depth, and I say to myself, "Jesus God, laz...you DO know that you're all of only abouts 1/3rd of the way with typing out the ideas you wanted to broach on the subject, right?"

    Not sure I'd recommend anyone joining the twitter community...except.  Undetailed and borderline st#p!d ideas formatted in an EXTREMELY succinct and bare bones format, is probably just the thing I need. 
     
  22. 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]My only concerns for the Pats offense are: can they run the ball effectively when they need to, will Lloyd's presence mean the field opens up on intermediate routes;  can the offensive line  stay healthy? If the answer to all these questions is yes....then watch out. Another concern will be how this offense plays against the good Ds on the schedule (Ravens, Steelers, Texans, 49ers). Can the O win a TOP/Field Position game? The goal of most teams will still be to keep Brady and the O off the field and get the Pats D tired by the 4th quarter. The good news is it looks like Bequette and Jones will be part of the D Line rotation and LB corps (add Hightower) looks as good as it has (on paper) in the last five years.
    Posted by JohnHannahrulz[/QUOTE]

    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. 
     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

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

    If there is a "problem" with the Pats' offense, IMHO, it does not live up to the expectations of the fans 100% of the time.  Seems the O is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't.  If an offense can perform at peak efficiency every game, that is one thing, but, a team's overall play can vary game to game.  Haven't we seen last year an offense that couldn't be stopped or a defense that seemed to be the dominating defense we wanted then the very next game we are all going: " What the F is this?"  We also have to give credit to the other team as they may bring new schemes to the game not expected.  I do not think if you asked other NFL teams if the Patriots offense has problems they'd say "yes" overwhelmingly like we seem to see here.  It is all in the expectations placed on it versus what the team knows it can do. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

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

    In Response to Re: The "problems" with last year's offense:
    [QUOTE]Wozzy , Charlie may have been the first but it wasnt the featured formation. We still established the run first and only went to the spread in no hudlle, 2 minute situations mostly. When Joshy came he made it the Primary Base offense. I have never felt this team didnt have enough offensively to win. Some years were better than others, but the year in 06 when Brady had nothing we were still 2 minutes from going to a SB so I dont buy the personnel stuff. Its just arrogance. Last year as well as we played, our playaction was NON-Existent. This and our lack of passes to running backs and lack of screens made our offense VERY PREDICTABLE. Most of it couldnt be noticed on game day when you are in front of the t.v. watching T.B. move the ball but when an opposing defense coordinator looked at the film, they would clearly see a 2 man offense in Gronk in Wes with no RUN game to turn to and no playaction either as a result of not establishing the run. In his Hay, Brady was by far and away the best playaction passer in the league and his qb rating was over 100 in those situations. Last few years there has been no run commitment and no playaction which used to drive this offense.  So when Brady was young, we gave him all the help he needed and now that he is aging we are asking him to win by himself??!?!!  yea, sounds good! Like I said, I will believe IT, when I see IT! After 5 years of fundementally F*cked Football, you would think SOMEONE would wake up by now....smh
    Posted by patsfan76[/QUOTE]

    All I can say is McDaniel's channeled the ghost of Charlie Weis in 08' when Brady went down and Cassel took over and he did an amazing job, so I have to assume he can do it again. Beyond that I can't disagree with anything you said.

     

Share