Vollmer is back...

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

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    if we don't run or try running we will lose

    if we get up by 2 scores - the Giants will try to stop the run
    and not rush TB as well - and we may get our people
    open down the seams and make a big play

    i think in the dome, the Pats will look for the right
    time to run the no huddle and run the ball while
    mixing in the pass. The giants have a great pass rushing front
    very athletic MLB but the rest are good or not not great-
    they can be beaten

    (and as i have said elsewhere I am wishing/hoping for an Ocho sighting
    and think he will get at least one opportnuity for a play)
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Vollmer is back...


    I'm confident that there's no simplistic formula to win football games.  I'm not sure how we bet on that.  
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vollmer is back... : Actually it was 14 for 58 (my bad on the first post) which is really a 4 YPC. Outside of the very first play of the game which was an 18 yard run, NE produced 40 yards on 13 carries. That is closer to a 3 YPC.  The run production wasn't really that great, despite bringing in Solder.  I know you basically want to blame anything thatever happens bad in any football game ever right down to losing the coin toss on not running the football enough, but you are wrong here.  But the point of the thread is discussing the formation, not (god save us, yet another) run the ball because it always works and never, ever fails, oh yeah O'Brien stinks, thread. LOL. NE's run heavy, extra blocker game plan wasn't very effective -- it is manifestly evident.   The only point in that game where they really moved the ball was the drive before the half for the missed FG, and the drives late in the game, all of which featured a more open formation, Solder on the bench, and more quick passes.  Running more would have had little impact on that game.  Not removing Hernandez or Welker or Branch for a rookie OT to come in and play as a TE might have however. 
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]

    We didn't score zero points because BJGE ripped off an 18 yard run and a 10 yard run and was stuffed a few times(as all NFL rbs are)

    We scored zero points because Brady threw 2 interceptions was sacked for a fumble and had multiple in-completions because the Giants were committed to  taking away our pass.

    There isn't any grey area here. Our run game worked well, our passing game didn't.


    Bennys carries below tell you he was largely effective, but our passing game wasn't.

    18
    5
    3
    11
    4
    3 3rd and 1
    3
    7
    5
    3  3rd 1
    2


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

    Re: Vollmer is back...



    Champ . . . running a lot may be less likely to result in turnovers, but if it doesn't produce first downs and points it will mean lots of punts and we may still not win.  I'm not against running.  I think they should mix in a good number of runs against the Giants.  All I'm saying is that it's more complex than simply saying we can't have turnovers, so we should run instead of pass.  That's fine if we can move the ball that way.  But if we can't move the ball that way, then we will have to pass even if passing carries more risk of a turnover.  It's kind of like investing.  Investing in the stock market does carry risk and you could lose big time as well as win big time . . . but putting your money under the mattress in order to avoid the possible loss isn't necessarily going to make you rich.  Sometimes you need to take the risks to have a chance at reaping the rewards. 


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

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vollmer is back... : We didn't score zero points because BJGE ripped off an 18 yard run and a 10 yard run and was stuffed a few times(as all NFL rbs are) We scored zero points because Brady threw 2 interceptions was sacked for a fumble and had multiple in-completions because the Giants were committed to  taking away our pass. There isn't any grey area here. Our run game worked well, our passing game didn't. Bennys carries below tell you he was largely effective, but our passing game wasn't. 18 5 3 11 4 3 3rd and 1 3 7 5 3  3rd 1 2
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    Champ . . . our run game didn't work well enough to rely on it solely.  See those drive charts I posted above.  Our best drive was the touchdown drive in the fourth quarter that gave us the lead (temporarily).  What worked about that was that it was mostly hurry up from passing formations.  We mixed in some runs with Woodhead that were productive, but the key was going up tempo and passing and running out of the (dare I say it) shotgun . . .
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vollmer is back... : We didn't score zero points because BJGE ripped off an 18 yard run and a 10 yard run and was stuffed a few times(as all NFL rbs are) We scored zero points because Brady threw 2 interceptions was sacked for a fumble and had multiple in-completions because the Giants were committed to  taking away our pass. There isn't any grey area here. Our run game worked well, our passing game didn't. Bennys carries below tell you he was largely effective, but our passing game wasn't. 18 5 3 11 4 3 3rd and 1 3 7 5 3  3rd 1 2
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]


    i'd take those carries all day... like you said, it was the interceptions and the sack that ended most of the drives that day.  hell the redskins who were the last team to beat the giants ran it 40 times. the patriots wont and shouldn't run it that much but they will lose if they play in the shotgun spread all day. they have to run the ball to win this game.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Vollmer is back...

     You have to dance with the girl who brought you to the party.. I think BB will do what he has done all year and focus on exicution.... I think we win because the team is healthy this time around and we have depth on the DL.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vollmer is back... : That's right, but there are patterns and there are probablities, too, which is what I am using to formulate a premise I am confident with in this discussion.
    Posted by RustyGriswold[/QUOTE]

    To be fair simple statistics don't help with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrocausality
     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]Champ . . . running a lot may be less likely to result in turnovers, but if it doesn't produce first downs and points it will mean lots of punts and we may still not win.  I'm not against running.  I think they should mix in a good number of runs against the Giants.  All I'm saying is that it's more complex than simply saying we can't have turnovers, so we should run instead of pass.  That's fine if we can move the ball that way.  But if we can't move the ball that way, then we will have to pass even if passing carries more risk of a turnover.  It's kind of like investing.  Investing in the stock market does carry risk and you could lose big time as well as win big time . . . but putting your money under the mattress in order to avoid the possible loss isn't necessarily going to make you rich.  Sometimes you need to take the risks to have a chance at reaping the rewards. 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    I'm not trying to dumb it down, I'm trying to paint the picture that our heavy spread attack leads to big QB hits,sacks and interceptions against defense's that sell out against the pass.

    They give us the run, but we have been too stubborn to take it sometimes and most of the time in the post season since 07.

    I don't want us to be a running offense, I want us to be an unpredictable offense.

    And to the OP, I think Solder at TE is a great set to use as it gives us flexibility to run or pass.
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vollmer is back... : I'm not trying to dumb it down, I'm trying to paint the picture that our heavy spread attack leads to big QB hits,sacks and interceptions against defense's that sell out against the pass. They give us the run, but we have been too stubborn to take it sometimes and most of the time in the post season since 07. I don't want us to be a running offense, I want us to be an unpredictable offense. And to the OP, I think Solder at TE is a great set to use as it gives us flexibility to run or pass.
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    Yup, the run was there on Bradys pick to Slater last week. Pats CANNOT do that this week. If the run is there, they need to use it... Cant get greedy this time...

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

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]20 carries equals a win every time. with brady under center, the patriots are 17-0 in games that bjge has run 13 or more times, including playoffs.  they have to run the football to beat the giants... 
    Posted by sporter81[/QUOTE]

    I'll take your word for it on the stats without looking it up.  That averages out to about 4 wins per year.  Evidently the Pats have found a formula to win their other 9+ games per year.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]Will Prolate take the bet?
    Posted by RustyGriswold[/QUOTE]


    What exactly do you want to bet about?  
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]Heath Evans is on 98.5 and saying they wanted to run at Strahan in SB 42, got stopped early and then quit on it.  McDaniels failed. CASE CLOSED If they had kept trying and trying, NE wins SB 42. It's that simple. The Giants wouldn't have had all that time at the end to drive down on a gassed D. I don't expect them to make this mistake again and it will be very interesting to see HOW they go about getting BJGE up to 20 carries to win this game.
    Posted by RustyGriswold[/QUOTE]

    Or maybe Strahan continues to stop the run the whole game and they punt over and over?  It's not like everything in the world is binary.  



     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]If BJGE gets 20 carries and NE wins, regardless by how much, you come one here with a loaded mea culpa, admitting you were somewhat arrogant and obnoxious all year ignoring the overwhelming evidence. It's bad enough you haven't done it and didn't after the AFC title game. If NE wins without him getting 20 carries or more, I will come on here and say that NE can  beat a good/great pass rush in man coverage with a commitment to a lead back/run game and do the same (admit I was out of line all year). If NE loses with BJGE getting 20 carries, I do the same. If NE loses, and BJGE doesn't get his 20 carries, you still have to come forward. I'm actually allowing you the wiggle room to be favored on this wager based on your vehement opinion regarding the irrelevance of a running game against the better defenses within our finesse, offensive base (McDaniels pass/spread base).
    Posted by RustyGriswold[/QUOTE]

    I see, if I lose I'm supposed to grovel around with mea culpas and confessions and if you lose, you get to make some kind of statement that sounds like it was written by a politician's PR staff after he gets caught diddling with a congressional page.  

    No, I'll pass on that . . . 


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

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]Ok, so you have nothing to lose, then. In fact, I asked Hurlie to take this bet earlier in the year, but I gave him the 35 pass level as a gift since the 40 level was my premise, and he still was fearful of taking it. Then, the Pats won, but I lost the bet. But, the fact is, he was fearful I was right. SO, if you're so confident, just take the bet! What's the problem? If you win, I'll come on here and admit what you just said about absolutes and me being wrong, is absolutely correct. And if I win, you have to come on here and point out that I have been right the whole time. And the others who I have agreed with/they with me. I've done the research, this is why you're fearful. The chances of NE losing go up when Brady throws more than 35 times and with BJGE seeing well under 20 carries, NE's chances of losing also increase. My premise is, if Brady is held under 35 passes, it's very likely he won't; turn it over adn BJGE will end up with around 20+ carries. YOU are disputing this premise. So, now is your time to back it up. You can't run around being so vocal and then back down when challenged like this.
    Posted by RustyGriswold[/QUOTE]
    I remember that almost bet. I think you set it up where Brady would have to throw it more than 35 times or so and we had to beat the Jets. Which to me was a bad bet....what ended up happening? Brady whipped the ball all over the field and we destroyed the Jets. Conversely I bet you that we had to hold Sanchez to 14 points of less...which I don't think we did. You wouldn't take that bet either.

    I think most people realize that you need to have a running game. I also think Belichick will do whatever is best to win, and for much of this year that has been to throw the ball almost exclusively. Why? Because for much of this year BJGE was not very effective. Out of the 32 starting running backs he was ranked 28th for rushing yards and out of 50 running backs 47 of them had a better average per carry. Now was this because of injury? Who knows. But the facts are that BB thought Brady's arm gave us a better chance to win than the guy that 47 other running backs beat out for yardage per run.

    He ran well against a Baltimore team that was probably concentrating on the pass, maybe that can happen on Sunday? If it does, I hope they pound him 35 times, I honestly do.

     
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vollmer is back... : I'll take your word for it on the stats without looking it up.  That averages out to about 4 wins per year .  Evidently the Pats have found a formula to win their other 9+ games per year.
    Posted by nyjoseph[/QUOTE]


    they are 17-0 over about a 35 game period, that leave them at 12-6 when they don't run him.. i'll take the 17-0 formula.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Vollmer is back... : I see, if I lose I'm supposed to grovel around with mea culpas and confessions and if you lose, you get to make some kind of statement that sounds like it was written by a politician's PR staff after he gets caught diddling with a congressional page.   No, I'll pass on that . . . 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]


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

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    In Response to Re: Vollmer is back...:
    [QUOTE]If BJGE gets 20 carries and NE wins, regardless by how much, you come one here with a loaded mea culpa, admitting you were somewhat arrogant and obnoxious all year ignoring the overwhelming evidence. It's bad enough you haven't done it and didn't after the AFC title game. If NE wins without him getting 20 carries or more, I will come on here and say that NE can  beat a good/great pass rush in man coverage with a commitment to a lead back/run game and do the same (admit I was out of line all year). If NE loses with BJGE getting 20 carries, I do the same. If NE loses, and BJGE doesn't get his 20 carries, you still have to come forward. I'm actually allowing you the wiggle room to be favored on this wager based on your vehement opinion regarding the irrelevance of a running game against the better defenses within our finesse, offensive base (McDaniels pass/spread base).
    Posted by RustyGriswold[/QUOTE]

    Russ the problem is there is little chance Benny is getting 20 carries. I wish he would but not likely.
     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Vollmer is back...

    This is the healthiest the O line has been for months. Because of the injuries they were able to get Cannon in for some valuable reps. I could see them using his 358lb frame at right tackle, using Solder and Vollmer at both ends as TEs. Putting Gronk on the outside and Welker on the other side. Then putting Hernandez in the backfield. This strategy would hopefully accomplish several things.

    First it would keep the 4 defensive line men off the field at the same time because you don't know if a run or a pass is coming meaning they would have leave their defensive tackles in.

    It would wear out their defensive line. The lightest lineman would be Light at 305lbs.

    It would kill the clock keeping their offense off the field.

    They should be able to run where ever Brady sees the weak side if they over load like they like to do.

    If the safeties come up in the box that leaves Gronk and Welker one on one.

    It's to the Patriots advantage to wear out the Giants defense by controlling the line of scrimmage and killing the clock. It will open up the passing game later in the game. Sounds crazy but that's exactly what Dillion did for the Patriots when he played in the Super Bowl. It most likely will not happen but it would be fun to see the Patriots pull out all the stops.  
     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share