< Back to Front Page Text size – +

Positional groupings

Email|Link|Comments (6) Posted by Mike Reiss, Globe Staff September 16, 2008 07:00 AM

A look at the positional groupings utilized by the Patriots in their 19-10 victory over the Jets:

3 WR/1 TE/1 RB -- 24 of 59 snaps

2 WR/1 TE/1 FB/1 RB -- 20 of 59

2 WR/1 TE/2 RB -- 9 of 59

1 WR/2 TE/1 FB/1 RB -- 5 of 59

3 TE/1 FB/1 RB -- 1 of 59

ANALYSIS: In all, the Patriots had two backs on the field for 35 snaps. Putting that number in context, the offense -- which prides itself on changing from week to week based on the opponent -- only had two backs on the field for 15 snaps in the season opener. ... The team's touchdown came out of its "jumbo" package (3 TE/1 FB/1 RB) at the goal-line.

» Back to Front Page

6 comments so far...

Mike, are you categorizing the snaps where Morris was playing FB as the "2 RB" sets or the "1FB/1RB" sets?

Posted by MarkZ September 16, 08 09:39 AM

Hi MarkZ. Similar to last year, these are pure positional groupings. So even while Morris lined up in the fullback position at times, I characterized those plays as 2 RB. I don't have the system down yet where I can categorize it differently. It's the same thing with the TE play. Sometimes the TE is split wide like a receiver, other times he is on the line. These groupings don't specify the specific usage.
--Mike

Posted by Mike Reiss September 16, 08 10:02 AM

MIke,

Was vrable the 3rd TE? I'm pretty sure i saw him out there on goal line for the score.

Also, with spach gone, what personnel do you think the pats would go with for a 3 TE if watson is still out for sunday?

Posted by jeff tartarkin September 16, 08 10:41 AM

Hi Jeff. Vrabel was the third tight end. I don't think the Patriots would have cut Spach if Watson wasn't ready. As for a third tight end, at the goal-line it would probably be Vrabel again. In the middle of the field, perhaps a tackle like Mark LeVoir could play in a blocking-only role.
--Mike

Posted by Mike Reiss September 16, 08 10:55 AM

thanks mike, another thing i was wondering is what you think of cutting spach to begin? With the horses they have in the backfield, I would think spach as a 3rd would be more beneficial than eckel (not cause of injuries but from a personnel stand point). special teams have something to do with it?

Posted by jeff tartarkin September 16, 08 11:38 AM

Hi Jeff. Eckel would be more special teams based, in my opinion. Probably tied to the Eric Alexander calf injury.
--Mike

Posted by Mike Reiss September 17, 08 08:30 AM

DO NOT HIT THE SUBMIT BUTTON MORE THAN ONCE!

You must be logged in to submit a comment.

This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.

Mike Reiss, Christopher L. Gasper and the rest of the Globe team provide regular updates –and a behind-the-scenes look– on the daily happenings of the Patriots.

see all globe blogs