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!
I was going over the Patriots season stats so far and something really stood out to me.
We've all seen the dominant running game (save Denver) so it isn't that surprising when put into context.
TOTAL FIRST DOWNS: Pats - 91 Opponents - 64
by Rushing: Pats - 37 Opponents - 16
by Passing: Pats - 49 Opponents - 40
by Penalty: Pats - 5 Opponents - 8
The most impressive thing to me is not only our number in the Rushing column, but the discrepency that is being created by our defense in that regard.
So far this season we've managed a balanced attack overall and have been able to truly dominate on the ground. Opposing offenses are apparently being forced into a one dimensional approach towards moving the ball on us. This is a very good thing.
After looking back at the season I think it's clear that when we run the ball and stop the run we aren't going to lose many games. And I think that when we run the ball it helps our D stop the run because the guys get a longer rest.
The only game where we didn't run well has been Denver, and it's not shocking to hear that we didn't stop the run well in that game either. I think that the old axiom of 'run the ball well and stop the run' is our mantra of the season.
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
In the Denver game McDaniels tried to force the running game in the first half, INSTEAD of softening them up with the quick inside passing game and Denver was able to control the game with the scoreboard and forced us to attempt a passing comeback....into their hands. Instead, if McDaniels opened with a no huddle, inside passing game against Denver, it would have dropped their linebackers off the box and opend up lanes for the running game to succeed. We lost the game because of poor game planning and waiting far too long to make the changes.
I really would rather not continue your nuttery in this thread, but so be it.
We ran the ball against the Bengals without using a no-huddle spread wacky passing gameplan to soften up the defense. We ran it even when it wasn't busting loose, softened up their linebackers with COREY DILLON's running, which was missing in Denver, and then passed off of the running game, further opening holes.
The run keyed all.
In the Denver game we didn't have Dillon.
In the Bengal game we did.
In neither game did we run a no-huddle pass crazy offense.
Yet against the Bengals we ran well, and against Denver we did not.
Denver is better on defense. And we did not have Corey Dillon.
Running a crazy no-huddle against a team where we were only passing to one half of the field (the half without Bailey) would have done nothing to change that.
If we'd gone pass wacky against Denver then only one thing would have happened: More turnovers.
You can't go no huddle if you don't have rythm to base it on, especially when half the players are new and don't know the offense all the way, those guys NEED THE HUDDLE.
Further, your new revision on history wouldn't have changed the outcome of the Denver game at all. They have a better defense and we lost Corey Dillon and couldn't set up the pass off the run. Neither would have changed in your scenario.
Also, NEM, further proof that you're off base in both counts (Bengals revision and Broncos revision).
In the Bengals game Brady threw for 188 yards on 26 tries.
In the Broncos game Brady threw for 320 yards on 55 tries.
In the Bengals game the running game ran for 230+ yards.
In the Broncos game the running game ran for under 70.
If it is indeed the PASS that sets up the run, then WHY when Brady had his best game of the season did the running game not flourish??
Because, my friend, you are WRONG.
The running game sets up the pass for this team. It's a fact stated both by common sense, numbers and our own Headcoach (see Reiss's blog).
In your argument you actually contradict yourself. You point to the passing game setting up the run, but then point to playaction passes and their success as proof. Playaction is, by it's nature, a pass being set up by the defense having to respect the RUNNING GAME.
You have no legs to stand on during this argument, not anymore. You've argued even in the face of facts, but I don't see how you can spin this anymore. You may reply to this again and spin this further, but I'm done with trying to prove the obvious. If you insist on living in Lala Land, then let me wish you good luck with the neighbors.
Also, NEM, further proof that you're off base in both counts (Bengals revision and Broncos revision).
In the Bengals game Brady threw for 188 yards on 26 tries.
In the Broncos game Brady threw for 320 yards on 55 tries.
In the Bengals game the running game ran for 230+ yards.
In the Broncos game the running game ran for under 70.
If it is indeed the PASS that sets up the run, then WHY when Brady had his best game of the season did the running game not flourish??
Because, my friend, you are WRONG.
The running game sets up the pass for this team. It's a fact stated both by common sense, numbers and our own Headcoach (see Reiss's blog).
In your argument you actually contradict yourself. You point to the passing game setting up the run, but then point to playaction passes and their success as proof. Playaction is, by it's nature, a pass being set up by the defense having to respect the RUNNING GAME.
You have no legs to stand on during this argument, not anymore. You've argued even in the face of facts, but I don't see how you can spin this anymore. You may reply to this again and spin this further, but I'm done with trying to prove the obvious. If you insist on living in Lala Land, then let me wish you good luck with the neighbors.
In the Denver game McDaniels tried to force the running game in the first half, INSTEAD of softening them up with the quick inside passing game and Denver was able to control the game with the scoreboard and forced us to attempt a passing comeback....into their hands. Instead, if McDaniels opened with a no huddle, inside passing game against Denver, it would have dropped their linebackers off the box and opend up lanes for the running game to succeed. We lost the game because of poor game planning and waiting far too long to make the changes.
The relevant variable is the strength of the run defense we faced, NOT the playcalling.
One very impressive statistic. (Running game)
Linear Mode
