Options at WR - Page 4 - New England Patriots Forums

The Dynasty · 01-06-2010, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sg14

I am on board with this offense needs help,,

You are what you are, and it has been proven over and over again this year that the offense can be shut down in the second halves of games,
I was hoping to see more from the OL against Houston this last week, but to me where they are now with this offense lays at feet of the coaching staff,,

I don't know where the diversified attack went to,,what happened to getting the ball to 8 receivers per game?? Does the opposing staff of every decent team outcoach us every game after haftime??

Not a bad year so far, but based on this years performance, I was hoping for better.

Her is hoping they keep winning,,,

What was wrong with the OL's play vs. Houston? They didnt play bad at all.

We dont have 8 players capable of making catches thats why you dont see it. Moss, Welker, Edelman, Aiken, Watson, Faulk. Thats only 6. Baker, Morris, Maroney, Taylor, Stanback, Slater are long shots. We dont have the depth at WR and TE like we used to have.

The offense has definitely under achieved this season. It is basically the same offense that set records in 2007 and we havent even come close to any of those numbers this season. We have had trouble scoring all season long and that is something that we definitely didnt think would happen this year. We thought the offense would have to carry the Pats to wins but instead it has been the other way around.

VJCPatriot · 01-07-2010, 05:41 AM

If you don't have a 3rd WR, then use the tight ends more. Baker and Watson are decent receivers. I think we'll see more double tight end sets. Watson will draw the most attention which might leave Baker wide open for some pass receptions.

I think right now Aiken is the favored guy to be #3 but he probably won't see many snaps. The Ravens have an attacking defense, I also expect the Pats to run more wr/rb screens and such to work against their aggression.

sg14 · 01-07-2010, 09:35 PM

Oh I was hoping to see the OL generate another day of 200 yards rushing,, Didn't happen obviously, a week ago we were all saying what a great OL with this player and that player. Watching the game , I thought we could have pulled out a win against Houston if Faulk played even without Wilfork and Warren.

As far as the 8 receivers, Tommy Terrific has done ok with a rangy set of cast of characters in the past, We use to have such plays as a fullback screen and other oddities. It really is the diversity of plays, players used.

I think they have been outcoached,,

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dynasty

What was wrong with the OL's play vs. Houston? They didnt play bad at all.

We dont have 8 players capable of making catches thats why you dont see it. Moss, Welker, Edelman, Aiken, Watson, Faulk. Thats only 6. Baker, Morris, Maroney, Taylor, Stanback, Slater are long shots. We dont have the depth at WR and TE like we used to have.

The offense has definitely under achieved this season. It is basically the same offense that set records in 2007 and we havent even come close to any of those numbers this season. We have had trouble scoring all season long and that is something that we definitely didnt think would happen this year. We thought the offense would have to carry the Pats to wins but instead it has been the other way around.

The Dynasty · 01-07-2010, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sg14

Oh I was hoping to see the OL generate another day of 200 yards rushing,, Didn't happen obviously, a week ago we were all saying what a great OL with this player and that player. Watching the game , I thought we could have pulled out a win against Houston if Faulk played even without Wilfork and Warren.

As far as the 8 receivers, Tommy Terrific has done ok with a rangy set of cast of characters in the past, We use to have such plays as a fullback screen and other oddities. It really is the diversity of plays, players used.

I think they have been outcoached,,

What are you talking about? Are you being serious?

200 yards rushing? That is way too much to hope for especially for the Patriots when we're not really known for running the ball. Faulk didnt play because we were thinking towards the playoffs and not really winning Sunday. I wouldnt really worry too much about what happened Sunday when we didnt really play to win.

The average WRs that we have had in the past do not even compare to what Brady is working with this year. Aiken and Stanback as your number 3 and 4 WRs isnt exactly much to work with. Dont get me wrong Aiken isnt a bad player, I think he is more of a special teams guy and Stanback is a QB. And full back screens? When is the last time you've seen the Pats run a full back screen?, yet any team in the NFL run a full back screen

sg14 · 01-07-2010, 10:24 PM

So tell me the difference between theses players from the first half of the game to the second half,,,

Those players can score in the first half but not the second,
over and over again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dynasty

What are you talking about? Are you being serious?

200 yards rushing? That is way too much to hope for especially for the Patriots when we're not really known for running the ball. Faulk didnt play because we were thinking towards the playoffs and not really winning Sunday. I wouldnt really worry too much about what happened Sunday when we didnt really play to win.

The average WRs that we have had in the past do not even compare to what Brady is working with this year. Aiken and Stanback as your number 3 and 4 WRs isnt exactly much to work with. Dont get me wrong Aiken isnt a bad player, I think he is more of a special teams guy and Stanback is a QB. And full back screens? When is the last time you've seen the Pats run a full back screen?, yet any team in the NFL run a full back screen

***ctpatsfan77*** · 01-07-2010, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dynasty

200 yards rushing? That is way too much to hope for especially for the Patriots when we're not really known for running the ball. Faulk didnt play because we were thinking towards the playoffs and not really winning Sunday. I wouldnt really worry too much about what happened Sunday when we didnt really play to win.

But obviously BB was adamant on trying to win the game, which is why he sent Hoyer out without Moss on that last drive. . . .

primetime · 01-07-2010, 11:41 PM

Marvin Harrison and Keyshawn Johnson better be on planes to Foxboro right now

The Dynasty · 01-07-2010, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sg14

So tell me the difference between theses players from the first half of the game to the second half,,,

Those players can score in the first half but not the second,
over and over again.

You're making a totally different argument, I dont see where this came from from what you and and what I responded with...

I agree that the lack of scoring in the 2nd half is an issue. I dont think this has to do with the players but more of the play calling when we have leads. Look at the 2nd to last series last Sunday, worst called 3 plays I've seen in awhile. We get way too conservative with leads and just have a bunch of 3 and outs and put way too much pressure on the defense

The Dynasty · 01-07-2010, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctpatsfan77

But obviously BB was adamant on trying to win the game, which is why he sent Hoyer out without Moss on that last drive. . . .

I am a little confused? Are you being sarcastic?

Yes, BB sent Hoyer out on the last drive without Moss, which meant BB was not really adamant on winning the game...