Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

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

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : Oh, I'd love to see that too, TB does need some pressure off him. They just haven't had that guy.  I was impressed with Vereens limited snaps and Mike Reiss named him as his player to watch this season as he is speedy and elusive. Perhaps he's that guy.  The D will have to be able to hold a lead though or we will see much the same.
    Posted by pezz4pats[/QUOTE]

    If he's half to 3/4 of what Rice is for the Ravens.....look out! Laughing
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : The Giants won because they made a couple of more plays than the Patriots. They got to Brady and the receivers just enought to keep the patriots from scoring 30+ points.  What did the Patriots do to help themselves in that game? The defense really couldn't get off the field, and the D certainly didn't make a stop or two when they needed it, and the offense simply didn't move the chains when they needed to because they couldn't figure out how to move the ball.
    Posted by anonymis[/QUOTE]

    In a 8 possession game the O would have had to score on a minimum of 5 of those 8 possessions to score 30 pts.  And that would have had to have been 4TDs and 1 FG.  If they only scored 3 TD's they would have had to also have 4 FG's to hit 30 pts. That's 7 of 8 possessions.  Nothing else would have gotten them to that point.  That's quite a feat even for the best O.
    Scoring on 7 possessions is much more likely in a 12 possession game.  They did it all year.  The loss of those 4 possessions killed them.
    D has to get off the field to give them more than a 8 possession game.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : In a 8 possession game the O would have had to score on a minimum of 5 of those 8 possessions to score 30 pts.  And that would have had to have been 4TDs and 1 FG.  If they only scored 3 TD's they would have had to also have 4 FG's to hit 30 pts. That's 7 of 8 possessions.  Nothing else would have gotten them to that point.  That's quite a feat even for the best O. Scoring on 7 possessions is much more likely in a 12 possession game.  They did it all year.  The loss of those 4 possessions killed them. D has to get off the field to give them more than a 8 possession game.
    Posted by pezz4pats[/QUOTE]

    I agree a bazillion percent....lol
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmcintosh. Show andrewmcintosh's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    As several of you have pointed out, a big help would come from a defense with better talent, though I marvel at BB's ability to coach up average units with marginal talent, we saw in the superbowl what top-tier passrush can get you..The Pats haven't had a Front 7 guy that the other team has to account for on every snap in years, and though Carter and Anderson racked up good sack numbers last year anyone watching the games knows that much of that pressure was late in plays; there was noone on the roster who could simply put mess things up for the opposing offense.  I think that is changing with guys like Jones and Hightower, hopefully including the health of Pryor and the development of Spikes (who was very good in the SB).  I agree there are times when NE should run a bit more for the sake of balance, but barring the very rare days when he's just not playing well, Brady can and should be throwing it 30-40 times a game.  The passing game is how you pick up chunk yardage, and that's what wins you games.  The mid-decade Colts lost because their defense was undersized and just horrendous on the back end, not because they didn't run well enough.  IMO the real argument to be made is that the Pats need better athletes on defense, I want to see them play more proactively on that side of the ball, "bend but dont break" doesn't work against teams that can pass effectively.  When you look back over the last decade, certainly the last half decade, the Superbowl winners have all had very good-elite passing games combined with a strong passrush.  I just don't see the value in ground and pound anymore.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmcintosh. Show andrewmcintosh's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : The Giants won because they made a couple of more plays than the Patriots. They got to Brady and the receivers just enought to keep the patriots from scoring 30+ points.  What did the Patriots do to help themselves in that game? The defense really couldn't get off the field, and the D certainly didn't make a stop or two when they needed it, and the offense simply didn't move the chains when they needed to because they couldn't figure out how to move the ball.
    Posted by anonymis[/QUOTE]
    Just my opinion, but the Pats lost because

    1.  The defense could not make a single game changing play, or recover any of the fumbles they forced....Inferior athletic talent as a result of too many scrap heap players. I respect Sterling Moore, Matthew Slater, Dig, Tracy White, etc, but they're just not superbowl champion caliber defensive starters.
    2. The O-Line once again chose to have its worst game of the season when it mattered most, Mankins was obviously badly hurt but he was horrible.
    3. Pats WRs were invisible, the last snap of the game, when they literally needed a big play, they trotted out Branch and Edelman.  That is not good enough, period, end of story.  NO legitimate NFL defense is concerned about either of those players, and they shouldn't be.

    IMO the Pats running game had very little to do with the loss.  Could it have helped had they run a bit more?  Maybe, but it's a scary proposition to be running it in such a tight game.  People talk about playing keep-away, but that's what you do with a big lead.  When the score is tight you play to get touchdowns, and that's best done on the right arm of Tom Brady.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    It's funny how we all knew the defense was the weaker of the two units prior to this last season even starting, we knew it going into the Super Bowl... but somehow, now in hindsight, the onus was on the defense to hold the Giants under the two touchdowns they held them to in the Super Bowl?

    Maybe the high powered, unstoppable offense should have done more than spotting the Giant's a two point lead to start the game by giving them a safety, giving them the ball back repeatedly with interceptions and failing to convert first downs, before finally only scoring twice by relying on the 2 minute drill? Just saying...

    The defense was held together with tape, we knew that prior to the season starting, they were rebuilding. The offense had to do more to win, I guess the old maxim is true defense wins championships. The O had to be better to win, they weren't...

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

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?



    Last year the team's run-pass was just just under the league average.  What we need more than a higher run-pass ratio is better diversity in both the passing and running games.  I'm not sure that's purely the result of play calling.  I think a lot of the lack of diversity last year (and really since 2009) has been due to the lack of diversity and quality in many of our offensive weapons. I'm hoping this year we see that diversity improved by:
    • Continuing development of the TE group (now with three different options)
    • The addition of more perimeter receiving threats (Lloyd, Gaffney, maybe Stallworth or Ocho)
    • The retention of our good slot receivers
    • The development of our young running backs, maybe complemented by the addition of a fullback
    • The development of a true receiving threat out of the backfield--a guy who can run screens effectively or keep LBs worried about passes to the flat
    With greater diversity of talent, we will see more variety in play calling and a better mix of plays.  I think McDaniels is creative enough to do that.  Whether his run-pass ratio is a bit higher or a bit lower won't make a big difference as long as the offense is dynamic and less predictable.   
     
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jrcahill. Show jrcahill's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    I think everyone should be excited for the team they will place on the field.  I think McDaniels will run the ball a little bit more, otherwise, why bring in three fullbacks? They certainly won't deviate from the pass that much nor should they. However, I can't help but wonder if BB is somehow planning to run more because more defenses are designed to stop the pass.  Imagine what could be if the Pats were able to establish a good to very good ground game and then have the passing attack there waiting. How the heck would teams game plan for them?  It would be so very awesome to see a season without any major injuries to key players and have opponents worried about a good run game and a great passing attack.  Goose bumps I say, goose bumps!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]Last year the team's run-pass was just just under the league average.  What we need more than a higher run-pass ratio is better diversity in both the passing and running games.  I'm not sure that's purely the result of play calling.  I think a lot of the lack of diversity last year (and really since 2009) has been due to the lack of diversity and quality in many of our offensive weapons. I'm hoping this year we see that diversity improved by: Continuing development of the TE group (now with three different options) The addition of more perimeter receiving threats (Lloyd, Gaffney, maybe Stallworth or Ocho) The retention of our good slot receivers The development of our young running backs, maybe complemented by the addition of a fullback The development of a true receiving threat out of the backfield--a guy who can run screens effectively or keep LBs worried about passes to the flat With greater diversity of talent, we will see more variety in play calling and a better mix of plays.  I think McDaniels is creative enough to do that.  Whether his run-pass ratio is a bit higher or a bit lower won't make a big difference as long as the offense is dynamic and less predictable.     
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    same could be said of the lack of diversity of the D.  Is it because of bad play calling, bad schemes, lack of player quality, lack of playmakers....?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]It's funny how we all knew the defense was the weaker of the two units prior to this last season even starting, we knew it going into the Super Bowl... but somehow, now in hindsight, the onus was on the defense to hold the Giants under the two touchdowns they held them to in the Super Bowl? Maybe the high powered, unstoppable offense should have done more than spotting the Giant's a two point lead to start the game by giving them a safety, giving them the ball back repeatedly with interceptions and failing to convert first downs, before finally only scoring twice by relying on the 2 minute drill? Just saying... The defense was held together with tape, we knew that prior to the season starting, they were rebuilding. The offense had to do more to win, I guess the old maxim is true defense wins championships. The O had to be better to win, they weren't...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

    well, not really. I think we all knew the d was a patchwork of band aid players - and BB did his best to make do with what he had. I don't think that anyone could dispute that BB did a commendable job. That being said, the Patriots have not had defensive playmakers since 2005/2006. Yes, our offense is a jaugernaut (albeit with some flaws that a few teams can stop), and yes, they didn't hold their own against the Giants. So, the question still remains - how do the Patriots beat a team like the Giants. If the offense is shut down again, can we count on the D to come thru and make the stops when needed; especially when it's the SB?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    Imagine if Welker didn't drop the ball?  There would be Zero threads about running the ball more.

    Thanks Wes for crapping your pants at the most inopportune time.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmcintosh. Show andrewmcintosh's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]Imagine if Welker didn't drop the ball?  There would be Zero threads about running the ball more. Thanks Wes for crapping your pants at the most inopportune time.
    Posted by tcal2-[/QUOTE]
    Look I get that Welker's drop was a critical error, but the Pats had plenty of chances to put the game away.  Would they have won had he caught it?  Likely, but it's still a hypothetical.  Games are rarely won or lost on a single snap.  The Pats lost, the defense sucked, the WRs sucked, the O-line sucked...Life goes on, this years squad should be very strong.  We'll see.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : same could be said of the lack of diversity of the D.  Is it because of bad play calling, bad schemes, lack of player quality, lack of playmakers....?
    Posted by anonymis[/QUOTE]

    Player quality (or its lack) was a gigantic issue on D last year in my opinion. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : Player quality (or its lack) was a gigantic issue on D last year in my opinion. 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    more like since 2006?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : more like since 2006?
    Posted by anonymis[/QUOTE]

    Yep . . . we're still rebuilding from the great 2003 and 2004 defenses.  
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]It's funny how we all knew the defense was the weaker of the two units prior to this last season even starting, we knew it going into the Super Bowl... but somehow, now in hindsight, the onus was on the defense to hold the Giants under the two touchdowns they held them to in the Super Bowl? Maybe the high powered, unstoppable offense should have done more than spotting the Giant's a two point lead to start the game by giving them a safety, giving them the ball back repeatedly with interceptions and failing to convert first downs, before finally only scoring twice by relying on the 2 minute drill? Just saying... The defense was held together with tape, we knew that prior to the season starting, they were rebuilding. The offense had to do more to win, I guess the old maxim is true defense wins championships. The O had to be better to win, they weren't...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

    The onus was on the defense in the SB to get something approaching the 1.5 turnovers the average team gets. They got none. The onus was on the defense to attempt to hold Eli to their season average of an 86 passer arting. They couldn't even hold him to his season average of 92. He threw a 103 at them.

    Meanwhile the O was without the effective services of the guy who scored about a third of the offensive TDs. But a stiff like you makes zero allowance for that. Basically, you're clueless.

    But the botton line is and always will be: the D lost the endgame; AGAIN.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]We need to keep our defense off the field.  I like what we did with the draft for the "D".  Until we can stop the other team we need to  keep the ball away from them, that is with a running game
    Posted by Hoier[/QUOTE]

    We ran a normal amount of times last year.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : And that is fine. I'm not asking that they become a run-first team. What I would advocate are less predictable playcalling using similar formations, but very different options (i.e., play action plays), or movement of players along the line near goal line situations (i.e. misdirection plays). The way the Patriots are playing will win a ton of games, but may not win championships (i.e., the old colts).
    Posted by anonymis[/QUOTE]

    One huge component that has been missing from teams of recent vintage is the very dangerous back in the pass game. Faulk was a weapon that so so many times struck when the need was great. Maybe Addai can provide that kind of threat again.

    I leave the play calling to BB and have no suggestions whatsoever for him and the staff he runs. They know what to do.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : The Giants won because they made a couple of more plays than the Patriots. They got to Brady and the receivers just enought to keep the patriots from scoring 30+ points.  What did the Patriots do to help themselves in that game? The defense really couldn't get off the field, and the D certainly didn't make a stop or two when they needed it, and the offense simply didn't move the chains when they needed to because they couldn't figure out how to move the ball.
    Posted by anonymis[/QUOTE]

    Biggest negative for the D other than losing the endgame was the lack of turnovers. It's hard to win any game when the other guy doesn't turn it over at all.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    Bbabe what brought you back? Thought you retired. Not as nice as you thought sitting on your little island and drinking a sweet tropical drink?
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In response to "Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?": [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : The onus was on the defense in the SB to get something approaching the 1.5 turnovers the average team gets. They got none. The onus was on the defense to attempt to hold Eli to their season average of an 86 passer arting. They couldn't even hold him to his season average of 92. He threw a 103 at them. Meanwhile the O was without the effective services of the guy who scored about a third of the offensive TDs. But a stiff like you makes zero allowance for that. Basically, you're clueless. But the botton line is and always will be: the D lost the endgame; AGAIN. Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE] 15.5 ppg scored in 2 SB's by an offense that averaged 35. Your right it was the D's fault for letting up 18 ppg in 2 SB's....BRILLIANT!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmcintosh. Show andrewmcintosh's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?": 15.5 ppg scored in 2 SB's by an offense that averaged 35. Your right it was the D's fault for letting up 18 ppg in 2 SB's....BRILLIANT!
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]
    0 turnovers and 0 big plays by the D, when it mattered most they stunk...which is what happens when many of the starters stink, which is what happens when you constantly give serious snaps to JAGs.  BB the gm hasn't given BB the coach the athletic talent to make those big time plays in recent years, and anyone watching the game has to come to the same conclusion.  Certainly true though, the offense hasn't gotten the job done either, but that's mainly on the o-line.  They've been mauled in both SBs.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]0 turnovers and 0 big plays by the D, when it mattered most they stunk...which is what happens when many of the starters stink, which is what happens when you constantly give serious snaps to JAGs.  BB the gm hasn't given BB the coach the athletic talent to make those big time plays in recent years, and anyone watching the game has to come to the same conclusion.  Certainly true though, the offense hasn't gotten the job done either, but that's mainly on the o-line.  They've been mauled in both SBs.
    Posted by andrewmcintosh[/QUOTE]
    Since there are no teams in the NFL that dominate both sides of the ball, that tells me there are no GMs giving their coaches much athletic talent. Or maybe there's just a lack of talent?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?

    In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Will McDaniels Be Pass Happy or Mix Things Up? : 0 turnovers and 0 big plays by the D, when it mattered most they stunk...which is what happens when many of the starters stink, which is what happens when you constantly give serious snaps to JAGs.  BB the gm hasn't given BB the coach the athletic talent to make those big time plays in recent years, and anyone watching the game has to come to the same conclusion.  Certainly true though, the offense hasn't gotten the job done either, but that's mainly on the o-line.  They've been mauled in both SBs.
    Posted by andrewmcintosh[/QUOTE]

    Well in defense of the defense, they did loose like 8 D starters and a few scrubs to IR.  Several others missed games and others played but were really busted up.  There's only so many you can carry so you have to account for that.
    They were just too thin and had to pick up players nearly every week.
    It's actually been a real problem for the past few years.
    I'd be happy with some solid guys that could stay on the field.
    I'm sure BB would be too!  It was not the D he envisioned when preseason started.  Remember how excited every one was to see a D in their first few games.
     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share