ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
1.) Any time you "but" regarding injuries as an attempt to basically ignore them in a discussion like this, you lose your argument because you minimize an extrememly significant part of the puzzle. Naturally, a team that loses its best receivers will be forced to rely more heavily on its remaining quality receivers. Last year's team was certainly not all about Welker, with Gronk catching 90 passes and Hernandez catching 79. It didn't win the Super Bowl, either.
2.) The Patriots went downfield more often that the Packers did this season.
If there was a problem with the Patriots offense beyond injuries, and there were a few, probably the biggest was that Branch aged too much in one season and Lloyd, rather than being that needed 3rd WR, became an upgraded Branch of 2011, which still left the team without a significant option at WR3. The Edelman/Branch duo managed only 37 catches in 199 total games played, and that's not enough production out of the WR3 position when the TEs missed a combined 11 games and were significantly limited in some of the games they did actually play.
There's always a "but" in the NFL. It's the nature of the beast.
It sounds like your option would be to pay Wes, use Lloyd as "Branch 2011" (we're pretty much stuck with his contract), either get what you can from Edelman or dump him, hope that the TEs can hold together better than they have in the past, and ... what, exactly? Hope that a rookie will step in immediately and provide the difference? What makes you think things will be any different in 2013?
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid
"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
And, as we've seen, when the Patriots have lost in the playoffs recently, some combination of these things always seem to happen.
2007 loss to NYG - 22 first downs, 274 total yards. Brady: 29-48 (60.4%), 266 yds, 1 td, 0 int, offense scores just 14 points. Turnovers: NYG 1, NE 1
2009 loss to Bal - 15 first downs, 196 total yards. Brady: 23-42 (54.8%), 154 yds, 2 td, 3 int, offense scores just 14 points. Turnovers: Bal 2, NE 4
2010 loss to NYJ - 26 first downs, 372 total yards. Brady: 29-45 (64.4%), 299 yds, 2 td, 1 int, offense scores just 21 points. Turnovers: NYJ 0, NE 1
2011 loss to NYG - 21 first downs, 349 total yards. Brady: 27-41 (65.9%), 276 yds, 2 td, 1 int, offense scores just 17 points. Turnovers: NYG 0, NE 1
2012 loss to Bal - 28 first downs, 428 total yards. Brady: 29-54 (53.7%), 320 yds, 1 td, 2 int, offense scores just 13 points. Turnovers: Bal 0, NE 3
Common themes:
(1) Subpar performance by Brady. None of these performances would we give Brady an "A". Most not even a "B". His cumulative stat line in these five losses is: 137-230 (59.6%), 1315 yds, 8 td, 7 int, 74.5 rating. This is *not* what we expect from our HOF quarterback.
(2) Losing the turnover battle. The Patriots, over the past handful of years, have been among the best teams in the history of the NFL at taking care of the football. And they've also been one of the best in the league at creating turnovers. And yet in these five games they are -7 in the turnover battle, and not one time out of these five did they win the turnover battle. They have had playoff games where they've lost the turnover battle and still won the game, but in all five of their recent playoff losses, they've never been on the plus side in turnover margin.
(3) Inefficient offense. Whether it's bad penalties (Brady's intentional grounding last year), dropped passes, missed receivers, inability to execute in the red zone, whatever. Suddenly the machine that is the Patriots' offense has ground to a halt in these games.
Here are their regular season game averages vs. their stats in these five games:
I mean, look at that last list for a minute. That's a serious indictment of the offense. Could it just be the matchups? I mean, the Giants and Ravens - who have combined to beat the Patriots in 4 of these 5 games - typically give NE a difficult time. So that's a possibility. But wow, the Ferrari that is the Pats' offense has become a VW Beetle in these playoff losses.
EDIT: And of those 5 playoff losses, 3 were at home, and 2 were on neutral fields. Not a single one of them was on the road, where you would naturally expect a dropoff.
I think you would find that most teams have worse statistics in their losses.
1.) Any time you "but" regarding injuries as an attempt to basically ignore them in a discussion like this, you basically make the discussion usless because you remove an extrememly significant part of the puzzle. Naturally, a team that loses its best receivers will be forced to rely more heavily on its remaining quality receivers. However, last year's team was certainly not all about Welker, with Gronk catching 90 passes and Hernandez catching 79. It didn't win the Super Bowl, either. Perhaps the real solution is to get rid of the "injury prone" Gronk and Hernandez?
2.) The Patriots went downfield more often that the Packers did this season.
If there was a problem with the Patriots offense beyond injuries, and there were a few, probably the biggest was that Branch aged too much in one season and Lloyd, rather than being that needed 3rd WR, became an upgraded Branch of 2011, which still left the team without a significant option at WR3. The Edelman/Branch duo managed only 37 catches in 199 total games played, and that's not enough production out of the WR3 position when the TEs missed a combined 11 games and were significantly limited in some of the games they did actually play.
The real problem was that they ran the offense differently in game 18 than they did in the first 17.
There's always a "but" in the NFL. It's the nature of the beast.
It sounds like your option would be to pay Wes, use Lloyd as "Branch 2011" (we're pretty much stuck with his contract), either get what you can from Edelman or dump him, hope that the TEs can hold together better than they have in the past, and ... what, exactly? Hope that a rookie will step in immediately and provide the difference? What makes you think things will be any different in 2013?
The stay the course approach has merit as well. Marked change because of an uncharacteristically bad day on 6 trips inside the 25 could easily be overreaction.
The real problem was that they ran the offense differently in game 18 than they did in the first 17.
That was a problem in game 18 (and that wasn't the only time they ran a different offense, as they also ran a different offense for games 1-2, and a significant part of game 3 as well), but it's not the only problem.
Whether Welker returns, or not, this team needs a WR3 that needs to be accounted for. The Patriots and Packers are very similar offenses, in that they are both very high scoring and very variable, and they both have had to deal with more injuries among the receiving corps than one would expect statistically. They also each have a flaw that can be fatal against top end teams. In the case of the Packers, it's the loss of their running game. In the case of the Patriots, it's the weakness at WR3.
I'd hoped the addition of Lloyd would have solved that problem, but the Stallworth/Edelman/Branch/Gaffney group flamed out.
__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius
There's always a "but" in the NFL. It's the nature of the beast.
31 teams have to figure out why they didn't win the Super Bowl. The Patriots are one of about 3-4 teams that can look to only a small number of reasons. Being too "Welker-centric" is not one of those problems. It is, in fact, one of the main reasons that the team is one of the aforementionded 3-4. Without Welker last season, the Patriots would have been lucky to win more than 8 games.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mayoclinic
It sounds like your option would be to pay Wes, use Lloyd as "Branch 2011" (we're pretty much stuck with his contract), either get what you can from Edelman or dump him, hope that the TEs can hold together better than they have in the past, and ... what, exactly? Hope that a rookie will step in immediately and provide the difference? What makes you think things will be any different in 2013?
My preference is to fix what needs fixing, not to make holes where none exist. This offense needs:
That's where the offense needs to look. Then, when the next big game against a tough opponent comes along the HC and OC need to call a better game, the receivers need to be healthy, and Brady needs to stop hesitating with the damn ball.
__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius
5. If Hernandez/Gronk/Edelman had been healthy, Welker's individual stats wouldn't have been as high
His stats were even better in 2011, when they were all healthier. . . .
__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
1. The OP would have you belielve that Wes Welker is the only receiver in the NFL who can run a 5 yard, in/out option route. While he might just be the best at it right now, there are other guys who would be very good at it as well.
If that is all you think Welker does, there is no wonder you are so incredibly wrong on this topic.
Quote:
2. The concept that if Welker is gone, the Pats offense will become different is not crazy. The Pats have always been a week to week game planning team, and clearly that has worked for them. Since the OP is asking how the a Welkerless offense will change, there is a lot of history that says it can and will evolve.
The scheme of the offense revolves around Welker. The week to week play calling is within the framework of that scheme.
Quote:
3. I think the Pats created enough offense to win the Ravens game, despite losing the TO battle 2-0. The Ravens scored all 4 times they were in the red zone, while the Pats went 1-4. It was as simple as that.
13 points is not enough to win. Yards do not win games. The red zone is a huge part of what an offense produces. Yards between the 20s and no points is useless.
Quote:
4. I don't buy into the concept that the offense "runs through Welker" as a general philosophy. It certainly did THIS year, but that was because of the injuries. In 2011 the TE's (IIRC) accounted for over 2000 yds of receiving and 26 TDs, so to opine that in 2011 the "offense went through Welker" would be absurd.
There is nothing to buy into, it is a fact. Regardless of who is catching the passes, the role of Welker is the center of the play design, the way the team is defended, and the game planning. If teams take away Welker, that creates the opportunities for other players. Ken, you have more knowledge than you are allowing yourself to show here, because you don't like the answer that knowledge leads you to.
Quote:
5. If Hernandez/Gronk/Edelman had been healthy, Welker's individual stats wouldn't have been as high
They were higher in 2011 when all of those players were healthy, so exactly what are you basing this on? Every shred of evidence says that Welker gets open better than anyone in the NFL. If the defense does not take him away, he gets open and gets the ball. If the defense takes him away it creates for others. When Gronk and Hernandez are healthy, it makes defenses choose, leading to more opportunities for Welker. When Edelman is healthy he plays a little and gets open once in a while.
Quote:
6.By the end of the year, Brady's receiving options had shrunk tojjust 3, and that made the Pats much easier to defend ultimately. Yet they STILL managed over 440 yds of offense
Welker, Hernandez, Lloyd, Vereen, Woodhead, Hooman, Branch, Ridley were all 'receiving options'. Your point seems to prove Welkers value as he had 248 receiving yards in those 2 playoff games.
Quote:
7. I question the coaching staff on why the RB's and other TE's were never fully integrated into the offense, even if only for quick outs and dump offs. We NEVER established any of them as a potential threat, and thus again helped the Ravens D defend us.
They were not consistently getting open. Although you have been arguing it for years now, the fact is you can't just assign a pass pattern to a jag and he automatically gets open.
Quote:
8. One of the hardest things for me personally to get over in the Ravens game was the fact that 3rd and 2 had clearly become a passing down for the 7th best rushing attack in the league. How did THAT happen? We must have failed on about half dozen on of those situations without ever trying a run or even a play action pass. Again making the job of defending us easier. (sorry for this OT rant, but the ravens game results have been mentioned)
3rd and 2 is a passing down for almost every team now. We converted 46% of 3rd downs. 3 drops, a conversion called back by a penalty, and Brady running into the ref were plays there to be made, which would have made up 80%. 3rd down play calling was not close to the problem in this game.
Quote:
9. For 6 years Welker's durability and reliability has been past outstanding. Its been amazing, especially at his size. But players like Manning, Brady, and Mankins all had amazing durability streaks that were even longer....until they didn't. To think that he isn't under an injury risk, just because it hasn't happened yet makes no sense.
You are simply reaching here.
Quote:
10. IIRC, many people claimed that by the end of the Moss era, we were forcing too many balls to him. Predictions of doom were rampant when he was traded.
NO ONE said that.
Quote:
Randy Moss was a "once in a generation player" No one in the league did what he did better. Yet when he was traded, his production was shifted and upgraded to Gronk and Hernandez and the offense actually improved as a whole. Why would we think that a similar result couldn't happen again.
Moss wasn't even trying in 2010.
Once again with the 'it happened once so its proof it will happen now' logic?
Moss was never Brady's go to guy, Welker always has been. While the misinformed thought Moss got Welker open, the opposite actually has been proven to be what happened.
Quote:
11. Even if Welker returns, which would be the best situation, his numbers would likely decline, even if he were at his best and healthiest.
Who cares? Its not about numbers, its about havng the best offense we can.
Quote:
It is likely that the Pats will run the ball more.
How? They ran the 2nd most in the NFL, and have the GOAT at QB.
Quote:
That they will involve the RB's more in the passing game,
Why? Because you want to list that as an argument? There is no evidence this is happening.
Quote:
and of course a healthy Gronk and Hernandez will take targets away from him.
Again, when they are healthy Welkers production goes UP.
Quote:
Given his product and importance this season, Welker earned every penny of his franchise tag. Would he be worth $10MM if his production dropped to 80/850, playing in an offense that was even more successful with 2 healthy TE's and a better running game?
Again, your ignorance of the offense creates a silly question that is irrelevant.
Quote:
12. Since the OL became a topic here, the question of Volmer comes into play. Volmer is one of the top RT's in the game, and has proven he play LT as well. If he isn't resigned, I think it will tell us a lot about what the Pats think about Marcus Cannon. If they think he's ready, I think they'll let Volmer walk, even though the thought of a Cannon/Volmer right side.combination makes me tingle.
You must factor in the cost. What they think of him includes a price tag.
Quote:
13. What the Pats end up doing with Edelman will also be telling, but I'm not exactly sure what it says. Clearly they thought Edelman and Welker could coexist on the same field. So if they resign Edelman does it mean the Pats won't waste one of their top 2 picks on a WR, or will, in their minds, make it easier to let Welker walk? The 3 weeks leading up to FA WILL be fascinating. The speculation possibilities will be AWESOME.
Considering Lloyd is the only WR under contract (legit one) virtually the entire position is being rebuilt (the same or differently).
Quote:
14. It will be interesting to see what the Pats will do if Welker walks. Personally I think the Pats would re-sign Edelman and add finally add a big (6'3+), strong WR who can play outside the number. If he has deep speed as well, so much the better. Edelman would become a different kind of slot receiver, while the TE's and running backs would take care of the middle of the field.
In this event, Edelman would not see much of the field. He wont play ahead of the 2 TEs, or Lloyd or the 6'3+ outside receiver.
Quote:
It would be a more explosive offense, and even more effective in the Red Zone. The ball would be spread around more in the passing game, though overall yardage might shrink because he run the ball more. I could be a more effective offense in scoring points, because as the Ravens game clearly pointed out, a lot of yards don't mean a lot of points.
You just said the offense was fine because it had 440 yards????????
I don't know how you get a higher scoring offense by taking away the most productive player from an offense that has been top 5 in history in scoring 3 timjes in 6 years. If you move the focus of the defense to downfield routes, the offense will become more of a short passing offense by taking what it is given, not more explosive. And again, I don't think we try to become the team that runs the ball the most in the league to take it out of Tom Bradys hands.
I think you would find that most teams have worse statistics in their losses.
That may be true but what do their offenses normally produce? The Pats seem to have a much stronger rate of decline, going from record setting in the regular season to very weak in the playoffs. We're not built for the post-season.
__________________
"The secret of steel has always carried with it a mystery, you must learn it's riddle, Conan, you must learn its discipline, for no one in this world can you trust, not men, not women, not beasts...this you can trust"
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
That was a problem in game 18 (and that wasn't the only time they ran a different offense, as they also ran a different offense for games 1-2, and a significant part of game 3 as well), but it's not the only problem.
Whether Welker returns, or not, this team needs a WR3 that needs to be accounted for. The Patriots and Packers are very similar offenses, in that they are both very high scoring and very variable, and they both have had to deal with more injuries among the receiving corps than one would expect statistically. They also each have a flaw that can be fatal against top end teams. In the case of the Packers, it's the loss of their running game. In the case of the Patriots, it's the weakness at WR3.
I'd hoped the addition of Lloyd would have solved that problem, but the Stallworth/Edelman/Branch/Gaffney group flamed out.
Really you dont even need that if the rest stay healthy.
With Welker, Lloyd, Gronk, Hernandez and a RB there isn't even room for a WR3 on the field when all are healthy.
There in is part of the problem. Who will come here and be happy to be in a role where they won't see the field under normal circumstances but are as good as you are looking for them to be when needed? And how do you afford that luxury?
In a perfect world, its a draft choice who starts in that role, and evolves into a WR2 or even WR1 over time.
82Likes
Re: A Wes-less Offense
Linear Mode
