TommyBrady12

Bringing Back Screen Pass Could Protect Tom Brady, Open Up Passing Game - New England Patriots - NESN.com

Could people comment on this article? I honestly thought the pats used the screen pass a lot since Weis left, but maybe I'm wrong. In any event, I do believe the play calling on offense has to be better.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"He’s the greatest quarterback to ever play the game. He goes from being a rookie that nobody is expecting anything from, to taking over with people saying he can’t do it, to winning three Super Bowls....It should already be obvious he’s the greatest quarterback to ever have played. "

- Steelers S Troy Polamalu on Tom Brady

ALP

weve defenetely still used it a lot, just not as effective b/c now everyone expects us to run it

__________________
Last time I lived in New England the Pats became a Dynasty

Then I moved away and they haven't won since

...now I'm moving back, and a Lombardi I predict

mgteich

1) We ran lots more screens under Charlie. After all, we often didn't have a running game (poor OL), and the screen was a way to get the ball in the running backs hands.

2) Even with a solid running back, Charlie liked the screen.

3) It helped to have a fullback on the squad.

4) Yes, our play-calling has gone downhill since Charlie left, although many here think that Josh did a great job.

5) In any case, our playcalling last year was NOT very good. Injuries limited the possibilities more than we let on, but still many of us believe that we could have done better, especially in the 4th quarter.

5) This year should be better with the addition of three tight ends, including one who can be our h-back.

Joker

the offensive playcalling in the playoff game had me murderous when I left the Razor last January. I realize now that Brady's passing hand was all gaffed up, so I can understand the poor throws.The playcalling, though, STILL rankles me today, I mean when you are sitting in the stands and you and everyone you're with KNOWS the next play is a delayed draw, there's something rotten in O.C.-ville. 2010 is a new beginning as far as I'm concerned.

Rob0729

That is not true. I went back and looked at his situational stats and here is what I found as the percentages of passes behind the line of scrimage:

2009 - 14.5% (82 of 565 passes)
2008 -Leaving out because it was Cassel and might skew the argument eventhough he threw 81 of 516 times behind the line or 15.7%
2007 -13.3% (77 of 578 passes)
2006 -16.4% (85 of 516 passes)
2005 -12.4% (66 of 530 passes)
2004 -13.2% (63 of 474 passes)
2003 -16.7% (88 of 527 passes)
2002 - 21.1% (127 of 601 passes)
2001 - I couldn't find that info I would assume it is in the 20+% range though

So other than Brady's first few years as a starter, he didn't throw much more screens with Weis than he did with McDaniels or O'Brien.


The numbers does not support that. Percentage-wise Weis had Brady throw screens less with Corey Dillon as his RB than Brady did this past season or any other season for that matter. And now people are complaining we don't throw enough screens.

I don't know about that. The FB is a dying position especially in the passing game. Faulk has taken over the screen pass responsibilties that guys like Larry Centers, Patrick Pass, and Marc Edwards used to have. I think they could have improved their TEs though and they probably did.

Josh did a great job. There is no denying it. Last year proved it.

Also, Charlies' job has been overrated. Take 2003 where the Pats had a ton of three and outs and the defense carried that team to the Super Bowl.

Agreed, but I thought it got much better as the year went along. With a rookie signal caller, the Pats already had a lot of growing pains (although some people refused to accept this as a possibility since they hated McDaniels and thought Brady could overcome everything). Add things like Galloway being a bust pickup and injuries only compounded it.

I agree. Also, with Brady and Moss returning healthy and O'Brien having a year under his belt and an offseason to review the tapes and see where he screwed up will help.

Rob0729

I don't know if that is true either. Last year, Brady completed 78% of his passes behind the line for 513 yards, 2 TDs, and 1 INTs. The Pats averaged 6.25 yards per attempt on screens last year.


What the Pats are really missing that were used quite a bit under Weis and McDaniels prior to 2007 is the quick slants and outs, not the screens. The Pats use the screen quite a bit.

Personally, I think that the writer of the original article is using his own perception vs. the reality of the situation. The numbers do not back up his claim except for the 2001 or 2002 years and we definitely don't want to go back to 2002. I do think much of the short passing game has changed, but that is because of depth and Welker was his only real option. I think Holt can play the Branch role and do a lot of those quick slants and outs that are really what the NESN writer should be talking about and not the screens which since 2002 has been fairly consistent in the percentage of time Brady times Brady throws the ball.

Wretch

This observation is only anecdotal but prior to Welker joining the Pats I think the pats threw more RB screen passes and now with Welker they use the slot receiver for screen passes more frequently. Based on your definition of a screen pass this may skew your perceptions.

Is a screen pass a pass behind or at the line of scrimmage to a RB or is a pass behind or at the line to any receiver?

PatsWickedPissah

What may be 'new' this season is screens to an H back/TE. I always wondered why so few screens to Maroney. Maybe it's just perception, but Maroney in = run. Mix it up occasionally this year.

__________________
"Would I rather have my phone records collected and inspected by the National Security Agency, or have my genitalia handled and scrutinized by the Transportation Security Administration? Why choose? In today’s America you can have both."

Dragda

I don't think this is something you can look up on a stat sheet. A pass behind the line of scrimmage is not always a screen. How many times have has Brady made the quick throw out wide when there is soft coverage? With Moss, people are playing off him more to not get beat. To keep the coverage honest, they hit him in the flat. It's not just when Moss is out there either.

We've changed the primary use of the screen to the running back behind a wall of OL to the bubble screen out in the flat behind a "wall" of one blocking WR. There may be reasons for that, personnel or philosophy, but we are not running as many screens as we once did.

The screen, when used as it was in the Weis days, is effective to slow down an opposing DL. They have to think, watch and react. It helps neutralize a defenders advantage. We could have used a healthy dose of it in Super Bowl 42.

Rob0729

95-99% of passes behind the line of scrimmage are screen passes. To claim otherwise is just not reality. The numbers might fluxuate a percentage point or so if you factor out the passes behind the line of scrimmage that aren't screens. So statistically, it is irrelevant.

Second of all, the only real change I have seen with the screen is that the Pats now use Faulk more in screens to the RB/FB than Weis did. Weis used Faulk about as much in the passing game, but he would use him in different ways. So did McDaniels for a number of years too. Both used the FB more in screens, but both also threw a lot of screens to WRs.

What really changed was the addition of Welker who might run the best screen pass routes for a WR in league history. The guy avoids the initial hit better than any WR I can remember. I think if Weis had a Welker at his disposal, he would run the WR screen just as much as McDaniels or O'Brien.

I still think the screen is just as used as Weis did and just as effective. What is missing is the short routes to other receivers other than Welker. Why that is missing, IMHO, is the personnel. In the Super Bowl years, the Pats had a lot of quick, but not fast WRs who could run short precise routes (Branch, Brown, Givens, Patten). The Pats haven't had a lot of depth with those skills since 2006. With Holt and the hopeful progression of Edelman and return of Welker and hopefully a TE or two who can catch consistently, the Pats may have a lot of that.