We are balanced.

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

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]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. 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    I hope so, I promise the results would be more favorable...
     
  2. 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. : +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.
    Posted by pcmIV[/QUOTE]

    KC's offense took a nose dive after he left, they stopped running the ball coincidently...
     
  3. 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. : I hope so, I promise the results would be more favorable...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

    On offense, I'd love to see a back who can run with speed and power and also catch out of the backfield.  Maybe Ridley will turn out to be that guy. That would resurrect our screen game as well as give us a better straight-up running game.  And having a good outlet receiver wouldn't hurt either when Brady's under pressure. 

    Add a big, fast wideout or two to the mix to keep the safeties honest and you have a recipe for an unstoppable offense . . . 

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

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]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.
    Posted by JohnHannahrulz[/QUOTE]

    I agree Hog. This is what I have been so upset about, and really its been this way since 07 although last year I really thought we would go back to a "Brady under center" offense that controleed t.o.p and commited to the run game. We did so more then we had previously done but went away from it in the playoffs.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp'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]

    No need to run him every play, just run him nore then 10 times in the SB. It sounds like when presented with sound logic that you revert back to "Parelli" like responses.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : 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.
    Posted by sporter81[/QUOTE]


    People aren't questioning how the defense is run like you folks do the offense. They question its quality. Why do you people try to equate the two things? They are entirely different.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli'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]


    According to your definition 4 NFL teams were "balanced" last year Einstein.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : 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...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]


    Whatever you prefer, I'm sure BB will get right on it.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : 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...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

    Brilliant. Any damned fool would run the ball more if Cassel was their QB instead of Brady.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : KC's offense took a nose dive after he left, they stopped running the ball coincidently...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]


    As I predicted Cassel would take a nose dive as he wasn't playing the joke schedule this last season.
     
  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. : No need to run him every play, just run him nore then 10 times in the SB. It sounds like when presented with sound logic that you revert back to "Parelli" like responses.
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]


    I don't know about sound logic, just simply got tired of repeating the same points over and over . . . 

    Maybe next year, Belichick will run Benny 30-35 times a game and we'll see if your predictions come true.  If he decides not to do that, I guess we'll go to our graves never knowing the answer . . . 





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

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : I don't know about sound logic, just simply got tired of repeating the same points over and over . . .  Maybe next year, Belichick will run Benny 30-35 times a game and we'll see if your predictions come true.  If he decides not to do that, I guess we'll go to our graves never knowing the answer . . . 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]


    Obviously no facts will sink in with these guys. They will just ignore them and try to substitute some pseudo-fact.

    Hell, they even try to compare their questioning of how BB runs the offense to other people's lament about the quality of the defense. If one cannot even grasp the basic understanding that those are two completely different things, how can you ever reason with them no matter how many facts you provide?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    People seem to complain a bit about the SB specifically with regards to the play calling.

    In it's simplest form any reasonable person could at least see where they are at least coming from looking at some basic facts.

    Pats In the SB game.

    Pats pass and run percentages (last drive removed, obvious passing situation)
    63% pass
    37% run

    Pats pass and run percentages (including their last drive)
    68% pass
    32% run

    Avg pass and run percentages of 12 teams with winning records in 2011 (who cares about the league as a whole, I always want to know what the teams that are winning are doing)
    56% pass
    44% run

    Pass and run percentages of Ravens, 49ers (the two teams one could make an argument would have been in the SB had it not been for mental mistakes in the championship games)
    Ravens (regular season)
    54% pass
    46% run

    49ers (regular season)
    48% pass
    52% run

    Giants in SB game
    59% pass
    41% run

    So, in it's simplest form, I again state that any "reasonable" person can clearly see that the Patriots (in that SB game) is off the normal ratios of all the winning teams and the 2 other conference championship game competitors numbers.

    7% lower in running vs the avg of the 12 winning teams during the regular season.

    You can make an argument that the only reason the Ravens and 49ers run so much is they don't have a TB. I would agree 100% except that in the SB he basically didn't have 1 of his top two targets. That changes the argument completely back in favor of being a lil bit more protective of the passing game. Not only that, but in spite of TB being one of the greatest ever, let's be honest he has not been great at protecting the ball for more than a few years now in the post season.

    Now the Giants were at least somewhat close in ratio to the Pats but again they had their full complement of receivers and yet the Pats with a gimpy Gronkowski still threw a greater percentage.

    Again, let me be clear. I am not writing to say I have a problem with the season ratios or balance. Only saying I can at least see where people are coming from. Especially in the SB minus Gronkowski, basically.

    My concerns have not been the ratio but how, who, and when they use the RB's period.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from rochfan. Show rochfan'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]

    I didn't realize he was the HC at Florida this past season. His high octane offense with all that SEC talent finished a whopping 105th in the nation.
     He was so good at that gig..and his other HC gig..he was hired straightaway by Kansas..like I said...a swell coach.Now Mark Mangino..there was a coach worth his weight.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]People seem to complain a bit about the SB specifically with regards to the play calling. In it's simplest form any reasonable person could at least see where they are at least coming from looking at some basic facts. Pats In the SB game. Pats pass and run percentages (last drive removed, obvious passing situation) 63% pass 37% run Pats pass and run percentages (including their last drive) 68% pass 32% run Avg pass and run percentages of 12 teams with winning records in 2011 (who cares about the league as a whole, I always want to know what the teams that are winning are doing) 56% pass 44% run Pass and run percentages of Ravens, 49ers (the two teams one could make an argument would have been in the SB had it not been for mental mistakes in the championship games) Ravens (regular season) 54% pass 46% run 49ers (regular season) 48% pass 52% run Giants in SB game 59% pass 41% run So, in it's simplest form, I again state that any "reasonable" person can clearly see that the Patriots ( in that SB game ) is off the normal ratios of all the winning teams and the 2 other conference championship game competitors numbers. 7% lower in running vs the avg of the 12 winning teams during the regular season. You can make an argument that the only reason the Ravens and 49ers run so much is they don't have a TB. I would agree 100% except that in the SB he basically didn't have 1 of his top two targets. That changes the argument completely back in favor of being a lil bit more protective of the passing game. Not only that, but in spite of TB being one of the greatest ever, let's be honest he has not been great at protecting the ball for more than a few years now in the post season. Now the Giants were at least somewhat close in ratio to the Pats but again they had their full complement of receivers and yet the Pats with a gimpy Gronkowski still threw a greater percentage. Again, let me be clear. I am not writing to say I have a problem with the season ratios or balance. Only saying I can at least see where people are coming from. Especially in the SB minus Gronkowski, basically. My concerns have not been the ratio but how, who, and when they use the RB's period.
    Posted by Low-FB-IQ[/QUOTE]

    This is the most rational post I've read from the "pro-run" side, Low-FB-IQ.  As I'm sure you're aware, if they had switched two of their pass plays to run plays, they would have had the same running percentage as the Giants (excluding the last drive, which of course was all passes). So the difference in ratios between the Giants and Pats (up to the last Pats drive) was fairly negligible. 

    I do tend to agree that they should probably have had a back-up plan for Gronk.  That may have meant running more--or it may have meant involving Ocho or Edelman more.  Or maybe it meant taking a risk with Ridley.

    I have trouble, though, believing Belichick didn't consider all those options.  Belichick has a history of getting the most out of players--witness even Maroney who was at least able to play at a mediocre level in New England, despite being unable to play at all elsewhere. I think if it was possible to get more from Ocho or Edelman or anyone, Belichick would have been the guy to do it. 

    My feeling is the team still needs a few pieces to be truly championship calibre.  My take on this season is that Belichick did a brilliant job getting a flawed team to the Super Bowl.  He almost won the Super Bowl too . . . but in the end, the team wasn't quite good enough to beat a good Giants team. With a healthy Gronk the outcome may have been different.  But I was at the Ravens game and when Gronk got hurt (and I thought he was done for the season at that point) I turned to my friend and said "That's it. We can't win without him." Our offense just doesn't have enough weapons and losing a key one like Gronk really makes it limited. Combine that with a shakey defense and I didn't think this team had what it takes to win.  

    I think the Super Bowl showed that. I'm not complaining about the coaching. In fact, I think they did a great job to do as well as they did.  I think what matters now is the offseason--can we get the pieces on offense and defense we need to get a better shot next year? Put the right talent with Brady and Belichick and I have no doubt this team has another ring in its future.  But we need the talent.  And right now, we're a piece or two away.


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

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]People seem to complain a bit about the SB specifically with regards to the play calling. In it's simplest form any reasonable person could at least see where they are at least coming from looking at some basic facts. Pats In the SB game. Pats pass and run percentages (last drive removed, obvious passing situation) 63% pass 37% run Pats pass and run percentages (including their last drive) 68% pass 32% run Avg pass and run percentages of 12 teams with winning records in 2011 (who cares about the league as a whole, I always want to know what the teams that are winning are doing) 56% pass 44% run Pass and run percentages of Ravens, 49ers (the two teams one could make an argument would have been in the SB had it not been for mental mistakes in the championship games) Ravens (regular season) 54% pass 46% run 49ers (regular season) 48% pass 52% run Giants in SB game 59% pass 41% run So, in it's simplest form, I again state that any "reasonable" person can clearly see that the Patriots ( in that SB game ) is off the normal ratios of all the winning teams and the 2 other conference championship game competitors numbers. 7% lower in running vs the avg of the 12 winning teams during the regular season. You can make an argument that the only reason the Ravens and 49ers run so much is they don't have a TB. I would agree 100% except that in the SB he basically didn't have 1 of his top two targets. That changes the argument completely back in favor of being a lil bit more protective of the passing game. Not only that, but in spite of TB being one of the greatest ever, let's be honest he has not been great at protecting the ball for more than a few years now in the post season. Now the Giants were at least somewhat close in ratio to the Pats but again they had their full complement of receivers and yet the Pats with a gimpy Gronkowski still threw a greater percentage. Again, let me be clear. I am not writing to say I have a problem with the season ratios or balance. Only saying I can at least see where people are coming from. Especially in the SB minus Gronkowski, basically. My concerns have not been the ratio but how, who, and when they use the RB's period.
    Posted by Low-FB-IQ[/QUOTE]

    The problem is that if you look at the actual averages on runs by our backs in both SBs they were low. If the running game is not effective you're going to pass it more if that is being more effective. And it was.

    Half the time they weren't getting over 3 yards on a run in this SB. Almost three quarters of the time they weren't getting as much as the NFL average per carry.

    Gronk well or not, Brady minus the last desperate drive had a 101 passer rating. (34/25 246 2 1) And would have had a much higher rating if not for all the drops.

    And again people keep taking the 7 passes of that last desperate drive and using it to compare the balance. Take those passes away and the ratio was pretty close to our season norm which I showed at the start of this was close to the NFL norm.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: We are balanced.

    In Response to Re: We are balanced.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We are balanced. : I agree Hog. This is what I have been so upset about, and really its been this way since 07 although last year I really thought we would go back to a "Brady under center" offense that controleed t.o.p and commited to the run game. We did so more then we had previously done but went away from it in the playoffs.
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    It's still running back by committee and we have yet to see what Ridley can really do (includes playoffs) and nothing from Vereen as yet. Add Solder and a healthy Gronk to the run game and line looks alright. My concern is that none of Law Firm, Light and Waters will be back and all were solid contributors. Benny is unspectacular, but he always falls forward and never fumbles; Waters was a great addition to the O Line so I hope they bring him. Also have to get Cannon,  Solder and Vollmer healthy to know what the line could be like in 2012.

    The issue is if you put out a pass-heavy offense you have to score a ton of points to win games. If the pass heavy offense only scores 14-24 points then it looks like it is becoming less effective and more predictable. Hernandez and Gronk are literally uncoverable most times and Welker runs great routes and finds holes or seams in the defense, but a team can't be a one trick pony in this league and succeed. The ground game doesn't have to be hugely important, just enough to keep opposing Ds on their toes and aware that it is there. Use draws and screens and off tackle stuff to open up the play action. To be honest no one can really cover Gronk at 100% and he and hernnandez create match-up problems all over the field so its easy to have a pass heavy offense with those players. I am, however, for a more balanced attack that puts the opposing D on its heels and keeps them guessing.
     

Share