We are balanced.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan94. Show redsoxfan94's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    i agree with rusty that eli didnt deserve the MVP, the giants whole d-line deserved it much more than him, specifically JPP for batting down some of brady's passes and making him think twice about throwing that way again...really made the window for passes much smaller....the only passes brady was able to hit to the right of him after that were screens
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    Need to run the ball successfully and I don't care if its BJGE or Ridley, Woody or Vereen. The TOP in games we lost (PITT, NYG twice) was evidently important. Once i saw the offense pinned under the 15 yard line I knew that spelled trouble. In the Bills game Brady came out of the spread so often it was predictable. It is poison for an offense to become predictable. What bothered me is that both the Pats OGs (Mankins and Waters) are very good run blockers. So it's not like the Pats don't have the personel to run the ball.

    And yeah the Giants D line was the MVP in SB 42.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: We are balanced.


    Well Champ, I give you credit for at least going through the drives.  But just saying "run Benny" wherever a play didn't work is a little facile no?  It seems like you want to remove Woodhead, which shows you don't quite understand how important Woodhead's catching ability was to the hurry up drives (the one's that produced TDs).  But then I see you basically think they shouldn't use hurry up, even though it was what was most effective at getting TDs.  Hmmm . . . And you'd abandon the first up-tempo drive that scored a touchdown?  Interesting. You did notice that the drive began on the New England 4 yard line and there was only 4 minutes left in the half when it began?  Not exactly where you want to eat clock, but hey, with Champ calling the plays, I guess that's what we'd do.  Mount a 6 minute drive when there was just 4 minutes left. 

    It seems to me that if they did what you are suggesting they would still be one-dimensional.  But the one-dimension would be Benny.  Sorry, I don't see this team going very far (regular season or playoffs) being a one-dimensional running team with Benny as pretty much the sole back.  If you think that is the way to go, all the power to you . . . but I'm glad Bill Belichick is calling the plays and not you.


     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : Then why the vocal minority that keeps questioning how he runs the team?
    Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]


    Like those who question the defense too right? He can't control it if a quy throws an interception or misses a tackle, right? BB is in control of the entire team but cant control what they do on the field.  right? He does a tremendous job as coach of this team, nobody better. 

    Bashing the defense is bashing BB with the logic of this thread.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : lol, right you are, so why didn't we use that game plan againt the Giants high powered offense, especially when we had the defense with more issues?
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    Ummm, when your defense is bad, you usually want to score more, not less, which is why ball control teams usually also have good defenses.  The Giants offense isn't that high powered . . . it's just that our defense can't make stops.

    But hey, what do I know?  What does Bill Belichick know?  You and Rusty are sure you could have game planned better than Belichick. 

    Okay, go apply for the job. 


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

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]Well Champ, I give you credit for at least going through the drives.  But just saying "run Benny" wherever a play didn't work is a little facile no?  It seems like you want to remove Woodhead, which shows you don't quite understand how important Woodhead's catching ability was to the hurry up drives (the one's that produced TDs).  But then I see you basically think they shouldn't use hurry up, even though it was what was most effective at getting TDs.
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    They were in a "hurry up" to give the Giants the ball back... the offense scored twice.  Brilliant offensive game plan...  

    You can't say hypothetically if the Pats switched to a ball control game plan what the result would be, despite a popular misconception in your own head (and Babe's) you are not god.  You also cannot say that the Patriots can't run the ball well when we've already demonstrated that they were running the ball well already, at least better than the team that eventually ran to a Super Bowl victory...

    You won't concede any of this so I'll just assume I'm talking for my own benefit.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : Ummm, when your defense is bad, you usually want to score more, not less, which is why ball control teams usually also have good defenses.  The Giants offense isn't that high powered . . . it's just that our defense can't make stops. But hey, what do I know?  
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    Ball control protects defenses, good or bad. You know nothing, that's evident...
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: We are balanced.



    Well, whatever . . . I'm dealing with a five sport high school athlete who reads Tom Friedman.  Way above my league.
     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : They were in a "hurry up" to give the Giants the ball back... the offense scored twice.  Brilliant offensive game plan...   You can't say  hypothetically  if the Pats switched to a ball control game plan what the result would be, despite a popular misconception in your own head (and Babe's) you are not god.  You also cannot say that the Patriots can't run the ball well when we've already demonstrated that they were running the ball well already, at least better than the team that eventually ran to a Super Bowl victory... You won't concede any of this so I'll just assume I'm talking for my own benefit.
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]


    Okay, I'll concede.  Next year we run Benny on every play and we go 19-0. I'm sure you're right.


     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : LOL!! Good for you.  Allowing two+ people to ruin this board because they can't accept a definitive problem with offensive ideology is getting out of hand. I wish you guys would speak out more often instead of allowing them to think they are more knowledgeable with the analysis. We're disappointed with the loss again and can admit why.  They can't, even after 6 postseason of proof with differing defenses. We can't let a clique of about 10 people ruin this board.
    Posted by RustyGriswold[/QUOTE]

    Your right, we should just move on to another thread because this wont change. I think these guys are really Patriot fans but we just completely disagree. I'm just as bad for even responding to this thread. 

    OK its time to move on to the draft/free agency..

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1guy1sharp. Show 1guy1sharp's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    If anyone tries to control this board its you Rusty. This board is your entire life. You spend every minute of everyday here. Go get a life. Nice call on Meriweather btw.
     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : Okay, I'll concede.  Next year we run Benny on every play and we go 19-0. I'm sure you're right.
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    50% is balanced, I'm sure I'm right also, as long as we both agree...
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : 50% is balanced, I'm sure I'm right also, as long as we both agree...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]


    Okay, then we should run Benny 30-35 plays a game and throw the other 30-35. Complete agreement.  

    I wonder why Belichick can't see that?  Crazy, huh?   


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

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : Okay, then we should run Benny 30-35 plays a game and throw the other 30-35. Complete agreement.   I wonder why Belichick can't see that?  Crazy, huh?   
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    I prefer running Ridely but ok...

    Since Charlie Weis left he hasn't won a Super Bowl... Charlie knew this so Bill didn't have to, that's why you hire competent people...
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: We are balanced.



    Maybe he could hire one of us? 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]Maybe he could hire one of us? 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    I think McDaniel's can handle it, he ran the ball when Matt Cassel was forced into service and we won with an undrafted QB who didn't start one game in college.

    The ball control offense certainly protected him...
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: We are balanced.



    I thought Rusty blamed this all on the "McDaniels shotgun spread"?  But, hey, we'll see next year. 

    In all seriousness, I would like to see a better run game next year.  I don't disagree with you on that. 


     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from rochfan. Show rochfan's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    Charlie Weis keeps getting jobs...he's a swell coach.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]Charlie Weis keeps getting jobs...he's a swell coach.
    Posted by rochfan[/QUOTE]

    One can be a wildly successful offensive coordinator and a bad head coach, that's been proven again and again...
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : One can be a wildly successful offensive coordinator and a bad head coach, that's been proven again and again...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

    +1

    Honestly though Kansas isn't a terrible fit.  They sucked so badly these past two years expectations can't nearly be as high as they were at ND.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share