The Brady "problem" and drafting wideouts

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

    Re: The Brady

    In response to NY-PATS-FAN4's comment:

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:

     

    Well written, but flawed IMO.  I was with you through the first 2 paragraphs.  It is true that the ball is leaving TB's hands quicker.  I too believe that is by design.  But it is also true that his Y/C is above his career avg. in each of the last 3 years and better than his first 3 years.  This, without having a deep threat since Moss left and no great WR with YAC.  Also, while you say that the bubble screen was an "occasional call" in 2004, the reality is they employed the screen pass and checkdowns more in the Weis era.  Maybe it's semantics but middle screens, bubble screens, slip screens, and checkdowns were a huge part of Weis' playbook.  Heck, Kevin Faulk feasted off those plays.  Which brings me to point 3:  I did not see you mention the running game at all.  A successful running game is critical to an overall offense.  In the early years (again under Weis) they ran more 2-back sets and ran the draw more.  In today's NFL, partly due to rule changes, all offenses are more pass-centric.  With a 2 TE set and 1 back (or no back) backfields it stands to reason the QB has less pocket protection and will need to release the ball sooner.

     

     

    Hey catfish,


    On bolded point 1 above, it's good that his Y/C is better, but that is not pertinent when you need to make a first down during the playoffs against a top-notch defense. (In fact, it would be interesting to see if his playoff y/c rate is better.) Those D's could key on Welker and the quick middle hits that the Pats have relied on. In these situations, you need to expend more time so the receivers can get open if the quick-hit isn't there.

    On point 2, I mention the bubble screen because it's such a fast developing play. The ball is usually out of Brady's hands in less than a second. The screens Weis would call took time to develop; the opposing D had to defend near the line of scrimmage and downfield.

    On point 3, I agree completely. A running game is key. I think they have the backs to have an excellent running game. A beefier, beastier OL can only help that.

     

    In essence, what I am saying is before pouring a ton of money into wide receivers, pour it into world class lineman, so the receivers have more time to get open. You can still go quick 2/3 of the time. But when you NEED a first down, you want the extra second.



    agreed brady has not got anywhere ner the time other good o lines give thier qb ie baltimore.

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

    Re: The Brady

    In response to Paul_K's comment:

    The Patriots just set an NFL record for most first downs in a season.  The offense is carrying the defense like Joe Andruzzi carrying a wounded mom.  "Problem" is a curious way to describe the phenomenon.  I'd rather say that BB is deliberately changing the way the NFL game is played, and the other teams can go lump it.  Someday the other 31 NFL teams will figure out that they too need lightning-fast dink and dunk quarterbacks and either explosive guys or guys with massive wingspans that can get wide open 8 yards downfield.  



    "The Patriots just set an NFL record for most first downs in a season"

    yeah but the linie doesnt hold up consistently for mor than a few seconds against better d lines

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

    Re: The Brady

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to NY-PATS-FAN4's comment:

     

    Okay, the title is a little misleading, as it's hard to call one of the 2 or 3 best QBs to ever play the game a "problem". But Brady has changed, by necessity I would argue, and the offensive philosophy has morphed to meet that change...and that has created somewhat of a problem. Fans on this forum like to point out that the Pats won Super Bowls with guys like David Patton, David Givens and Troy Brown as our top receivers, and while that is an inarguable fact, it is highly unlikely that they could do the same today.


    This past weekend, I found a couple of videocassettes of games I taped between the 2001-2004 seasons (finding the remote for the VCR was quite a task, lol), and I watched a good part of 4 or 5 games. And one thing jumped out at me over after over...Brady's toughness.  It was eye-opening (or, more accurately, memory-inducing) to review just how many times the young Tom Brady would stand in the pocket until the very last instant before delivering the ball...followed by taking a monster hit. He was Favre-like in that regard (though better than Favre in everything else). And when Brady took those hits, he would jump off the turf smiling, and talking smack to Jason Taylor or Dwight Freeney. Brady loved the contact, and that lack of fear bought an extra second or more for his receivers to get open downfield.

    Of course, you don't want your 30-something QB taking the same hits that your 25-year-old QB did. (Brady did not jump up smiling when Dumervil planted him into the turf the year before last.) The Pats' response to this has largely been changing the playbook, to where now most passes are out of Brady's hand in under 2.5 seconds, with many escaping in well under 2 seconds. While this forces opposing defenses to be highly alert, it also removes many routes from the receiver tree, making it easier for atheletic, well-coached Ds to focus on short routes to favorite targets. The bubble screen was an occasional call in 2004, not the staple that it is today. This new philosophy has become so ingrained that once the 3-second mark goes off in Brady's head, he begins to "turtle"...even when there is no imminent pressure around him.

    This philosophy also makes it harder to draft wide receivers, and folks are quick to point out BB's poor record here. Many of us talk about our wish for a "tall receiver" or a "speed demon who can stretch the field." But what the Pats covet most, in the current philosophy, is a guy who can consistently read the defense, get open, in the RIGHT SPOT, in under 2 seconds. It's damned hard to draft such guys (or scout free agent WRs, for that matter) when nobody else plays this way.

    While I don't knock the philosophy, I think it must be augmented by beefing up the offensive line to all-world levels. Joe Flacco is not a better QB than Tom Brady. But Joe Flacco looked light years better than Tom Brady in the playoffs this year because Joe Flacco has 4.5 seconds to throw the ball, allowing his guys to make the second or third move to get open. Even the 49ers great D couldn't get to him much; the nimble Kaepernick was out-sacked 3-2 by the Ravens' D. We need to stop just relying on Scar's skillset, and give him some exceptional talent to work with.

    Vollmer (when healthy) is an elite lineman, and Solder could be getting there. Mankins, however, is overpaid while the other guys, while hard-working and well-coached, are JAGs. I'd like to see the Pats cut ties with Mankins, and allot Vollmer type money ($3.5-$6 million apiece) to every position on the line, and grab the beastiest players that money can buy.

    I believe if they did that--so that Brady is given the confidence that he will have 3.5 seconds to get rid of the ball--they won't need to draft all-world receivers.

    Even Ocho and Galloway would have had more productive seasons.

     



    Pretty good post up to the Mankins part. I am sorry but I just do not agree with you there. He is a beast. The prototype of lineman BB wants. If he has underperformed at times it has mostly been due to health I think (consider the last SB v the Giants for example).

     

    I think Solder is going to be especially good - and he is pretty decent now. But he does need to get to the next level. Volmer is a bit better though I do not think he has the upside of Solder as a pass blocker. I think the two places we can upgrade the most are C and RG though both are decent players. BUt I would love to see one of those positions upgraded to a stud and for the reasons you give. And it would help the running game as well.

    I also think we need to continue to improve the running game in order to keep the D more honest and so give TB that extra 0,5 to 1.0 seconds.

     



    "I think the two places we can upgrade the most are C and RG though both are decent players. BUt I would love to see one of those positions upgraded to a stud and for the reasons you give. And it would help the running game as well."

    i said this all year too. but we have so few draft  picks and neend a pss rusher most, a big outside wr who can spearate and snag teh ball in traffic. and we didnt get the extra cb we needed in fa nor abraham. so we coudl go o line with 1 of 3 top picks but we have so many needs.

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

    Re: The Brady

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to NY-PATS-FAN4's comment:

     

    Okay, the title is a little misleading, as it's hard to call one of the 2 or 3 best QBs to ever play the game a "problem". But Brady has changed, by necessity I would argue, and the offensive philosophy has morphed to meet that change...and that has created somewhat of a problem. Fans on this forum like to point out that the Pats won Super Bowls with guys like David Patton, David Givens and Troy Brown as our top receivers, and while that is an inarguable fact, it is highly unlikely that they could do the same today.


    This past weekend, I found a couple of videocassettes of games I taped between the 2001-2004 seasons (finding the remote for the VCR was quite a task, lol), and I watched a good part of 4 or 5 games. And one thing jumped out at me over after over...Brady's toughness.  It was eye-opening (or, more accurately, memory-inducing) to review just how many times the young Tom Brady would stand in the pocket until the very last instant before delivering the ball...followed by taking a monster hit. He was Favre-like in that regard (though better than Favre in everything else). And when Brady took those hits, he would jump off the turf smiling, and talking smack to Jason Taylor or Dwight Freeney. Brady loved the contact, and that lack of fear bought an extra second or more for his receivers to get open downfield.

    Of course, you don't want your 30-something QB taking the same hits that your 25-year-old QB did. (Brady did not jump up smiling when Dumervil planted him into the turf the year before last.) The Pats' response to this has largely been changing the playbook, to where now most passes are out of Brady's hand in under 2.5 seconds, with many escaping in well under 2 seconds. While this forces opposing defenses to be highly alert, it also removes many routes from the receiver tree, making it easier for atheletic, well-coached Ds to focus on short routes to favorite targets. The bubble screen was an occasional call in 2004, not the staple that it is today. This new philosophy has become so ingrained that once the 3-second mark goes off in Brady's head, he begins to "turtle"...even when there is no imminent pressure around him.

    This philosophy also makes it harder to draft wide receivers, and folks are quick to point out BB's poor record here. Many of us talk about our wish for a "tall receiver" or a "speed demon who can stretch the field." But what the Pats covet most, in the current philosophy, is a guy who can consistently read the defense, get open, in the RIGHT SPOT, in under 2 seconds. It's damned hard to draft such guys (or scout free agent WRs, for that matter) when nobody else plays this way.

    While I don't knock the philosophy, I think it must be augmented by beefing up the offensive line to all-world levels. Joe Flacco is not a better QB than Tom Brady. But Joe Flacco looked light years better than Tom Brady in the playoffs this year because Joe Flacco has 4.5 seconds to throw the ball, allowing his guys to make the second or third move to get open. Even the 49ers great D couldn't get to him much; the nimble Kaepernick was out-sacked 3-2 by the Ravens' D. We need to stop just relying on Scar's skillset, and give him some exceptional talent to work with.

    Vollmer (when healthy) is an elite lineman, and Solder could be getting there. Mankins, however, is overpaid while the other guys, while hard-working and well-coached, are JAGs. I'd like to see the Pats cut ties with Mankins, and allot Vollmer type money ($3.5-$6 million apiece) to every position on the line, and grab the beastiest players that money can buy.

    I believe if they did that--so that Brady is given the confidence that he will have 3.5 seconds to get rid of the ball--they won't need to draft all-world receivers.

    Even Ocho and Galloway would have had more productive seasons.

     



    Pretty good post up to the Mankins part. I am sorry but I just do not agree with you there. He is a beast. The prototype of lineman BB wants. If he has underperformed at times it has mostly been due to health I think (consider the last SB v the Giants for example).

     

    I think Solder is going to be especially good - and he is pretty decent now. But he does need to get to the next level. Volmer is a bit better though I do not think he has the upside of Solder as a pass blocker. I think the two places we can upgrade the most are C and RG though both are decent players. BUt I would love to see one of those positions upgraded to a stud and for the reasons you give. And it would help the running game as well.

    I also think we need to continue to improve the running game in order to keep the D more honest and so give TB that extra 0,5 to 1.0 seconds.

     



    the biggest thing beside c and rt guard is improving the sequence of running. josh has never been an oc who is going to maximize both run and pass. he runs only as an aferthought or when he has to. its not mixed into the game plan well nor does he maximize the threat by forcing the defense to leave something that can be exploited open (ie making the defense make a choice we can exploit with 1 of 3 options). its been long enough, i dont think he has it in him. seems to me he will never be more than adequate and if pats win anthing it will have ot be on sheer talent.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: The Brady

    In response to bredbru's comment:

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

     

    In response to NY-PATS-FAN4's comment:

     

    Okay, the title is a little misleading, as it's hard to call one of the 2 or 3 best QBs to ever play the game a "problem". But Brady has changed, by necessity I would argue, and the offensive philosophy has morphed to meet that change...and that has created somewhat of a problem. Fans on this forum like to point out that the Pats won Super Bowls with guys like David Patton, David Givens and Troy Brown as our top receivers, and while that is an inarguable fact, it is highly unlikely that they could do the same today.


    This past weekend, I found a couple of videocassettes of games I taped between the 2001-2004 seasons (finding the remote for the VCR was quite a task, lol), and I watched a good part of 4 or 5 games. And one thing jumped out at me over after over...Brady's toughness.  It was eye-opening (or, more accurately, memory-inducing) to review just how many times the young Tom Brady would stand in the pocket until the very last instant before delivering the ball...followed by taking a monster hit. He was Favre-like in that regard (though better than Favre in everything else). And when Brady took those hits, he would jump off the turf smiling, and talking smack to Jason Taylor or Dwight Freeney. Brady loved the contact, and that lack of fear bought an extra second or more for his receivers to get open downfield.

    Of course, you don't want your 30-something QB taking the same hits that your 25-year-old QB did. (Brady did not jump up smiling when Dumervil planted him into the turf the year before last.) The Pats' response to this has largely been changing the playbook, to where now most passes are out of Brady's hand in under 2.5 seconds, with many escaping in well under 2 seconds. While this forces opposing defenses to be highly alert, it also removes many routes from the receiver tree, making it easier for atheletic, well-coached Ds to focus on short routes to favorite targets. The bubble screen was an occasional call in 2004, not the staple that it is today. This new philosophy has become so ingrained that once the 3-second mark goes off in Brady's head, he begins to "turtle"...even when there is no imminent pressure around him.

    This philosophy also makes it harder to draft wide receivers, and folks are quick to point out BB's poor record here. Many of us talk about our wish for a "tall receiver" or a "speed demon who can stretch the field." But what the Pats covet most, in the current philosophy, is a guy who can consistently read the defense, get open, in the RIGHT SPOT, in under 2 seconds. It's damned hard to draft such guys (or scout free agent WRs, for that matter) when nobody else plays this way.

    While I don't knock the philosophy, I think it must be augmented by beefing up the offensive line to all-world levels. Joe Flacco is not a better QB than Tom Brady. But Joe Flacco looked light years better than Tom Brady in the playoffs this year because Joe Flacco has 4.5 seconds to throw the ball, allowing his guys to make the second or third move to get open. Even the 49ers great D couldn't get to him much; the nimble Kaepernick was out-sacked 3-2 by the Ravens' D. We need to stop just relying on Scar's skillset, and give him some exceptional talent to work with.

    Vollmer (when healthy) is an elite lineman, and Solder could be getting there. Mankins, however, is overpaid while the other guys, while hard-working and well-coached, are JAGs. I'd like to see the Pats cut ties with Mankins, and allot Vollmer type money ($3.5-$6 million apiece) to every position on the line, and grab the beastiest players that money can buy.

    I believe if they did that--so that Brady is given the confidence that he will have 3.5 seconds to get rid of the ball--they won't need to draft all-world receivers.

    Even Ocho and Galloway would have had more productive seasons.

     



    Pretty good post up to the Mankins part. I am sorry but I just do not agree with you there. He is a beast. The prototype of lineman BB wants. If he has underperformed at times it has mostly been due to health I think (consider the last SB v the Giants for example).

     

    I think Solder is going to be especially good - and he is pretty decent now. But he does need to get to the next level. Volmer is a bit better though I do not think he has the upside of Solder as a pass blocker. I think the two places we can upgrade the most are C and RG though both are decent players. BUt I would love to see one of those positions upgraded to a stud and for the reasons you give. And it would help the running game as well.

    I also think we need to continue to improve the running game in order to keep the D more honest and so give TB that extra 0,5 to 1.0 seconds.

     

     



    "I think the two places we can upgrade the most are C and RG though both are decent players. BUt I would love to see one of those positions upgraded to a stud and for the reasons you give. And it would help the running game as well."

     

    i said this all year too. but we have so few draft  picks and neend a pss rusher most, a big outside wr who can spearate and snag teh ball in traffic. and we didnt get the extra cb we needed in fa nor abraham. so we coudl go o line with 1 of 3 top picks but we have so many needs.



    No argument here. THough I am never surprised when a well built team decides to go after either an O or D lineman. Not sexy picks usually but that is where teams are built.

     

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Brady

    As usual rusty doesnt read the post and just the title and looks like a fool. I happen to agree with the poster that the short passing game is a detriment of sorts because we arent challening the outside part of the field and the corner routes are dead. Only time to develop thoses routes is thru playaction which has become a lost art here. Ive see many times where Brady forces it inside and not even look outside but in his defense his outside options compared to what he has outside is like comparing Top Shelf to Bum Juice

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Brady

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    Watch and weep:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qk9Fiy7HARs

    Look at our first drive. What do you see?

    Brady under Center, a reverese and two runs to Dillon. Dillon  only got a few yards per carry! Oh no!

    Not that!  Not the establishment of the run and Brady under Center in the 1st qtr!

    No!  It's too boring!  I want fireworks and bombs to Moss or underneath, predictable plays to Welkie only!

    LOL

    Gee, I wonder how Branch got open, deep, later on off playaction for a 40 yard TD strike? I am so confused.

     

    They rushed for 126 yards in that game and they ran 32 times versus 21 passes so they continued to pound ahead. 125 yards included two around ends apparently by Branch for 37 yards.  Now when the running game isn't going well they pretty much abandon it.

    The Pats no longer throw screens and they are more predictable than they were under Weiss.



     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: The Brady

     

    Wow, you guys write a lot fast.

    Incase the point has not been made, I agree that Brady is less likely to take hits and run for the first down when needed and agree the offense has adjusted by being centered around quick decision making and quick passing.

    The result is, If they play a team that cannot put pressure on Brady they destroy them & theyhave out of this world stats.

    If they play a team that can crowd the recievers and get to Brady they look terrible and usually lose. This has been going on for 6 years.

    Luckily there are no more teams like this in the AFC..but good luck if they get to the SB vs. SF or Seattle.

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts