Zbellino School of Football

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

    Re: Zbellino School of Football

    In response to sporter81's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to sporter81's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    They wet one dimensional last year. Passing game and Brady was great like always. Other than maybe the Oakland game and the 2nd jet game they didn't run the ball for much production . 

    Nobody here is an expert, luckily we have Belchick and Brady, the best coach / QB combo ever.

    [/QUOTE]


    They ran more than the average NFL team last year. And they are only running once more per 20 plays this year. Around 3 whole times a game.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah but they are much more effective this year. They didn't run very well last year. . They are one of the top rushing teams in the league this year,  7th compared to 20th last year. Teams didn't respect the Patriot run game last year with BJGE, they have to this year or Ridley can make them pay. The passing game is always the focus with Brady back there but IMO the offense is better this year with the improved run game.

    [/QUOTE]


    Ahh, got it. I agree. By one dimensional you meant effectiveness. Yeah, they are more effective this year and that does enhance the dual threat.

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

    Re: Zbellino School of Football

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    O'Brien was so bad they went to the super bowl. McDaniels was so brilliant the
    Broncos became competitve right after he left.

    [/QUOTE]

    O'Brien got bounced in the 1st round in 09', got bounced in the 1st round in 2010 (can you say embarrassment), and last year had to have the perfect lucky trifecta of Tim Tebow in the 1st round to move on, had the defense bail him out in the 2nd round to beat the Ravens, before finally scoring 17 points and losing two turnovers in the Super Bowl... no, you're right he was brilliant.

    When Babe says anyone could coordinate Brady and this offense to some degree he is correct, the difference is McDaniel's is actually a talent.

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

    Re: Zbellino School of Football

    In response to garytx's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Of all the classless things.  Starting a thread on a fellow fan and on Zbellino of all people.  Took this blog to a new low. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I was praising an excellent post of his.

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

    Re: Zbellino School of Football

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    O'Brien was so bad they went to the super bowl. McDaniels was so brilliant the
    Broncos became competitve right after he left.

    [/QUOTE]

    O'Brien got bounced in the 1st round in 09', got bounced in the 1st round in 2010 (can you say embarrassment), and last year had to have the perfect lucky trifecta of Tim Tebow in the 1st round to move on, had the defense bail him out in the 2nd round to beat the Ravens, before finally scoring 17 points and losing two turnovers in the Super Bowl... no, you're right he was brilliant.

    When Babe says anyone could coordinate Brady and this offense to some degree he is correct, the difference is McDaniel's is actually a talent.

    [/QUOTE]


    No the team got bounced in the first round of 2010. The offense was fine against the Ravens except for a dumb 4th quarter int by Brady, not O'Brien. Wozzy I long ago gave up on you ever being right about the Pats so don't worry keep being wrong. Those 4th quarter runs by Ridley were the deciding factor against the Texans I am sure.

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

    Re: Zbellino School of Football

    Why can't we just agree that O'Brien and McDaniels are both great coaches.  Every coach loses games - even Bill Belichick.  

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Zbellino School of Football

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    O'Brien was so bad they went to the super bowl. McDaniels was so brilliant the
    Broncos became competitve right after he left.

    [/QUOTE]

    O'Brien got bounced in the 1st round in 09', got bounced in the 1st round in 2010 (can you say embarrassment), and last year had to have the perfect lucky trifecta of Tim Tebow in the 1st round to move on, had the defense bail him out in the 2nd round to beat the Ravens, before finally scoring 17 points and losing two turnovers in the Super Bowl... no, you're right he was brilliant.

    When Babe says anyone could coordinate Brady and this offense to some degree he is correct, the difference is McDaniel's is actually a talent.

    [/QUOTE]


    No the team got bounced in the first round of 2010. The offense was fine against the Ravens except for a dumb 4th quarter int by Brady, not O'Brien. Wozzy I long ago gave up on you ever being right about the Pats so don't worry keep being wrong. Those 4th quarter runs by Ridley were the deciding factor against the Texans I am sure.

    [/QUOTE]


    Hey ditz, wozzys post its correct.  The rafvens game last year, offense needed 1 first down to finish game obie choked ... Terrible big game OC.  BAD gameplanning , in- game, not to mention pig-headed arguments .

    I wish all the obie lovers would just line up and be slapped and corrected .  Mcd is way superior in every area most notably experience.  Postseason and more big games on the way . hopefully it will become apparent to you and the rest but it's quite possible that his fans are as pigheaded as their hero.

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

    Re: Zbellino School of Football

    In response to sporter81's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to sporter81's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    They wet one dimensional last year. Passing game and Brady was great like always. Other than maybe the Oakland game and the 2nd jet game they didn't run the ball for much production . 

    Nobody here is an expert, luckily we have Belchick and Brady, the best coach / QB combo ever.

    [/QUOTE]


    They ran more than the average NFL team last year. And they are only running once more per 20 plays this year. Around 3 whole times a game.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah but they are much more effective this year. They didn't run very well last year. . They are one of the top rushing teams in the league this year,  7th compared to 20th last year. Teams didn't respect the Patriot run game last year with BJGE, they have to this year or Ridley can make them pay. The passing game is always the focus with Brady back there but IMO the offense is better this year with the improved run game.

    [/QUOTE]


    At the beginning of the year without BJGE, the Pats running back stable consisted of a 1) a kid with potential but who was an unknown quantity due to some fumbling issues (Ridley), 2) a guy who spent most of last year injured (Vereen), 3) a change of pace back (Woodhead) and 4) an undrafted FA (Bolden).  None in that group was a sure thing. To your point, some early opponents basically dared the Pats to run by playing a sub package and the Pats ran all over them.  They established early on that they will take advantage of what the defense is giving them and not be a pass-first team. So yes, to me they are more effective running the ball because they have committed to it.  And being committed to it has made their offense more diverse and dangerous.     

    Some argue it's personnel (both players and the OC), scheme or attitude that has led to the success of running the ball.  I say all three of those contribute to the reason for the improvement. Here we are here two months later and teams now respect the Pats' running game.  The O is less predictable, and when they need to put teams away they have been able to do so by running the ball.  They don't abandon the run easily, and for the most part it has made Tom Brady's life much easier.      

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

    Re: Zbellino School of Football

    In response to CablesWyndBairn's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    At the beginning of the year without BJGE, the Pats running back stable consisted of a 1) a kid with potential but who was an unknown quantity due to some fumbling issues (Ridley), 2) a guy who spent most of last year injured (Vereen), 3) a change of pace back (Woodhead) and 4) an undrafted FA (Bolden).  None in that group was a sure thing. To your point, some early opponents basically dared the Pats to run by playing a sub package and the Pats ran all over them.  They established early on that they will take advantage of what the defense is giving them and not be a pass-first team. So yes, to me they are more effective running the ball because they have committed to it.  And being committed to it has made their offense more diverse and dangerous.     

    Some argue it's personnel (both players and the OC), scheme or attitude that has led to the success of running the ball.  I say all three of those contribute to the reason for the improvement. Here we are here two months later and teams now respect the Pats' running game.  The O is less predictable, and when they need to put teams away they have been able to do so by running the ball.  They don't abandon the run easily, and for the most part it has made Tom Brady's life much easier.      

    [/QUOTE]

    Good post

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

    Re: Zbellino School of Football

    In response to CablesWyndBairn's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     So yes, to me they are more effective running the ball because they have committed to it.  And being committed to it has made their offense more diverse and dangerous.     

    [/QUOTE]

    Explain what you mean when you say "committed"? The word gets thrown around a lot and has a nebulous meaning so it's pretty much "footballbabble" without defining it specifically.

     

     

     

Share