Schefter: Belichick to devote more time to offense

[Kontradiction]

The whole Deion Branch fiasco, and Reche Caldwell becoming a starting WR, couldn't have helped. Corey Dillon was also banged up in 2005, yeah? IMO that probably had more to do with the dropoff than the coaching.

Keep in mind that I'm not saying that the offensive coaching was BAD because it was not. If anything, the offensive coaching was the reason we were winning games while our defensive players were dropping like flies earlier in the season so I commend BB and Co. for that. I'm just saying there was a dropoff. How much of that had to do with injuries (or one key injury), I'm not sure.

 

[mtbykr]

We have Moss and Welker....that's a big difference from 2005

 

[DaBruinz]

We may see a little bit of a dropoff here. According to pro-football-reference.com, the offense was ranked 4th in the NFL with Weis at the helm. In 2005, with BB sharing duties with McDaniels, the offense was ranked 10th. Still pretty good, but a noticeable dropoff from the year before. How much that had to do with injuries, I'm not sure. All I know is that McDaniels was pretty good at what he did, as evidenced by the way he helped groom Cassel this year. Let's hope O'Brien is a chip off the ol' block.

You can't compare where they were ranked in the league because that offers nothing of value.

How many passing plays did they run in 2004 compared to 2005? How many running plays? How many yards did each type get? Were there any extenuating circumstances in 2005 in comparison to 2004? Like numerous running backs being injured?

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

major reason why we kept choking in the playoffs ever since Charlie left.

You're not serious are you? The divisional loss to Denver wasnt because of predictable play calling. It was because no one on the team showed up to play. They were horrible in that game. The afccg against the colts was all on the defense, not predictable play calling. It was 21-6 at halftime. The offense wasnt the problem. The D just couldnt stop anyone in the second half.

I just REEEALLY hope BB spends more time with the defense, but that probably isnt possible now that JM is gone.

 

[DocE]

I am at least somewhat worried about this development. How worried I am depends on what additions we see to the coaching staff in the coming weeks. I still have visions of the Super Bowl where the D was struggling in the first half and Bill's back was turned to the offense most of the time, while he tried to fix the defense. It would be harder, if not impossible, for him to do that same thing next year without a true Offensive Coordinator. So far we have lost our Offensive Coordinator and two veteran position assistants who had been in Capers and Mangurian. I have all the belief in the world in BB and his system, but spreading himself too thin will minimize his impact. I realize Bill has taken more control of the Offense before when Weiss left, but I think the defense was much more solid then. In my opinion, the Patriots defense needs a major step up next year and the 3rd down and Red Zone defense in particular must be vastly improved. I think it's a ton to ask of anyone, even the great Bill Belichick, to both improve our defense and keep the offense at an elite level.

I know it's unlikely given his physical condition, but I'd love to see Romeo come back this year. That way Bill could take a lesser role on D, but have Romeo there to work with Dean Pees while Bill worked more extensively with O'Brien and the offense.

 

[BradyFTW!]

You're not serious are you? The divisional loss to Denver wasnt because of predictable play calling. It was because no one on the team showed up to play. They were horrible in that game. The afccg against the colts was all on the defense, not predictable play calling. It was 21-6 at halftime. The offense wasnt the problem. The D just couldnt stop anyone in the second half.

I just REEEALLY hope BB spends more time with the defense, but that probably isnt possible now that JM is gone.

Eh, just ignore maverick. He has some irrational hatred of JMD that's bizarre, inexplicable, and generally uninformed.

 

[DaBruinz]

The whole Deion Branch fiasco, and Reche Caldwell becoming a starting WR, couldn't have helped. Corey Dillon was also banged up in 2005, yeah? IMO that probably had more to do with the dropoff than the coaching.

The Branch/Caldwell situation was in 2006. Not 2005.

 

[Rob0729]

I like scoring points, but I hope O'Brien is a lot more adept at in-game adjustments and playing a more chameleon-like offense than McKid was. Our "everyone knows what we're doing and we dare you to stop it" offense was too Colts-like and a major reason why we kept choking in the playoffs ever since Charlie left.

You keep on arguing that, but the only game you can remotely blame the play calling is the Giants Super Bowl. I'm sorry, but Charlie was not going to stop a 35 point meltdown by the defense in the second half vs. Colts. Charlie wasn't going to stop three fumbles (two on special teams) and a very questionable pass interference call against Asante Samuel against Denver.

O'Brien seems to come from the McDaniels school of we are going to find you weakness and exploit it while you squirm because you know what is coming and can't stop it anyway. I loved that about McDaniels. There is nothing more demoralizing for a defense than to know what is coming and knowing you can't stop it.

You might as well get used to it because O'Brien seems to be a clone of McDaniels. And I think that is what Belichick wants.

 

[Rob0729]

Eh, just ignore maverick. He has some irrational hatred of JMD that's bizarre, inexplicable, and generally uninformed.

Probably the best advice. Maybe I should follow it too.

 

[mgteich]

The "failure" in 2005 was Dillon's fault??????????????????????

As I recall, we did get into the playoffs and lost in the divisional game. Denver was leading 24-6 and it was all but over as a result of four turnovers by Faulk (fumble), Hobbs (KR), Brady (interception to Bailey), and a muffed punt by Brown. This was one of the worst playoff performances ever by a patriot team.

Let's remember 2005 and see how Dillon "lost the season"
1) We had just lost Weiss and Crennel.
2) We had just lost Law, Patten, Phifer and Andruzzi.
3) Bruschi had a stroke.
4) Monty Beisel and Chad Brown were our ILB's.
5) Law was replaced by Starks.
6) We chose to go into the season with TWO running backs (four now seems essential): Dillon and Faulk. Pass was the ST/FB and backup RB, as Evans is today.

Blame the Front Office if you want for not responding quickly enough to the coaching losses, the free agent losses, and the situation at LB. Blame the Front Office for not giving Dillon any backups (my pet peeve then; Belichick has since changed his philosophy at staffing the RB position). Perhaps, we might even blame the players who embarrassed the franchise in the divisional game.

But in the end, the 2005 season was NOT a failure, except by the standard of some patriot fans for whom 31 teams are failures each year. We are not the best franchise in the decade just because of three SB victories. Playoffs, winning divisions and even wins in the regular season count also, at least for some.

 

[ScottieC]

Patriots will be fine. Better than that, they will be a force behind Brady.

Anyone worried about the new coordinators and stretching Bill thin, can find solace in these two words: Ernie Adams.

 

[CanadianPat'sFan]

Patriots will be fine. Better than that, they will be a force behind Brady.

Anyone worried about the new coordinators and stretching Bill thin, can find solace in these two words: Ernie Adams.

Absolutely, I think BB will be leaning on his old friend during this time.

 

[Rob0729]

The "failure" in 2005 was Dillon's fault??????????????????????

As I recall, we did get into the playoffs and lost in the divisional game. Denver was leading 24-6 and it was all but over as a result of four turnovers by Faulk (fumble), Hobbs (KR), Brady (interception to Bailey), and a muffed punt by Brown. This was one of the worst playoff performances ever by a patriot team.

Let's remember 2005 and see how Dillon "lost the season"
1) We had just lost Weiss and Crennel.
2) We had just lost Law, Patten, Phifer and Andruzzi.
3) Bruschi had a stroke.
4) Monty Beisel and Chad Brown were our ILB's.
5) Law was replaced by Starks.
6) We chose to go into the season with TWO running backs (four now seems essential): Dillon and Faulk. Pass was the ST/FB and backup RB, as Evans is today.

Blame the Front Office if you want for not responding quickly enough to the coaching losses, the free agent losses, and the situation at LB. Blame the Front Office for not giving Dillon any backups (my pet peeve then; Belichick has since changed his philosophy at staffing the RB position). Perhaps, we might even blame the players who embarrassed the franchise in the divisional game.

But in the end, the 2005 season was NOT a failure, except by the standard of some patriot fans for whom 31 teams are failures each year. We are not the best franchise in the decade just because of three SB victories. Playoffs, winning divisions and even wins in the regular season count also, at least for some.

I don't think anyone is blaming Dillon for the "failure" of 2005. People are saying a big reason there was a drop off in production on the offense in 2005 was the rapid decline of Dillon. That is a big difference.

But even with the decline of Dillon, the 2005 offense was better than the 2003 offense that won a Super Bowl. The 2005 offense scored more points (23.7 PPG in 2005 vs. 21.8 PPG in 2003 and the Pats had I think 6 non-offense TDs in 2003), had more yards (352.0 YPG vs. 314.9 YPG), a better 3rd down conversion rate (42% vs. 37%), and more first downs per game (20.9 vs. 18.4).

I personally feel the defense had far more to do with the failures of the 2005 season especially early in the year.

The offense has a lot to do with the blame of the playoff loss, but I don't know if it is the playcalling or Dillon's fault. Granted Dillon only getting 57 yards didn't help. Overall, I felt there were some major execution issues.

A few notes to your points (in no particular order):

1.) I don't blame the Pats for only going with Dillon, Faulk, and Pass (Pass did have some very good games that season). The phenomenon of having more than one starting quality RB is very recent and in 2005 only a small handful of teams had a back up RB who was anything more than a third down back.
2.) I don't blame the Pats for Beisel and Chad Brown. Look back at the free agent list for LBs back then, there really weren't anyone available. You can argue they should have been prepared to replace Phifer, but they couldn't have been expected to been prepared for Bruschi's stroke.
3.) The Pats won the Super Bowl the previous year without Law, the loss of Law and the addition of Starks shouldn't have made a difference eventhough Stark was a miserable failure.

 

[mgteich]

When you are behind 24-6, you run less. We were a passing team to start with. Is that the fault of playcalling? We both agree that this wasn't the issue. The special teams muffed a kick and a punt. Faulk fumbled and Brady though a long interception. Curiously, the defense that was so weak (Beisel, Brown and Starks) were utilimately NOT to blame. Belichick had done a fine job with several defensive holes. Of course, the defense was the problem early in the year with all the new personnel, but they got better, and the team went to the playoffs.

The phenomenon of having backups is not a new phenomenon in the league. Roster depth was supposed to be the strength of the patriots. To have three RB/FB instead of five was shortsighted. It was not a matter of having two top running backs. The backup could have been inactive.

I don't think anyone is blaming Dillon for the "failure" of 2005. People are saying a big reason there was a drop off in production on the offense in 2005 was the rapid decline of Dillon. That is a big difference.

But even with the decline of Dillon, the 2005 offense was better than the 2003 offense that won a Super Bowl. The 2005 offense scored more points (23.7 PPG in 2005 vs. 21.8 PPG in 2003 and the Pats had I think 6 non-offense TDs in 2003), had more yards (352.0 YPG vs. 314.9 YPG), a better 3rd down conversion rate (42% vs. 37%), and more first downs per game (20.9 vs. 18.4).

I personally feel the defense had far more to do with the failures of the 2005 season especially early in the year.

The offense has a lot to do with the blame of the playoff loss, but I don't know if it is the playcalling or Dillon's fault. Granted Dillon only getting 57 yards didn't help. Overall, I felt there were some major execution issues.

A few notes to your points (in no particular order):

1.) I don't blame the Pats for only going with Dillon, Faulk, and Pass (Pass did have some very good games that season). The phenomenon of having more than one starting quality RB is very recent and in 2005 only a small handful of teams had a back up RB who was anything more than a third down back.
2.) I don't blame the Pats for Beisel and Chad Brown. Look back at the free agent list for LBs back then, there really weren't anyone available. You can argue they should have been prepared to replace Phifer, but they couldn't have been expected to been prepared for Bruschi's stroke.
3.) The Pats won the Super Bowl the previous year without Law, the loss of Law and the addition of Starks shouldn't have made a difference eventhough Stark was a miserable failure.

 

[Rob0729]

When you are behind 24-6, you run less. We were a passing team to start with. Is that the fault of playcalling? We both agree that this wasn't the issue. The special teams muffed a kick and a punt. Faulk fumbled and Brady though a long interception. Curiously, the defense that was so weak (Beisel, Brown and Starks) were utilimately NOT to blame. Belichick had done a fine job with several defensive holes. Of course, the defense was the problem early in the year with all the new personnel, but they got better, and the team went to the playoffs.

The phenomenon of having backups is not a new phenomenon in the league. Roster depth was supposed to be the strength of the patriots. To have three RB/FB instead of five was shortsighted. It was not a matter of having two top running backs. The backup could have been inactive.

The Pats carried 4 to 5 RBs/FBs for almost all of the year. The Pats had Amos Zereoue, Heath Evans, and Mike Cloud on the roster at different times times during that year and they overlapped. Roster changing at the bottom of the RB depth chart is not an uncommon phenomenon.

I didn't think the defense was all that much of a problem late in the year. It failed in the Broncos playoff game, but fumbles and INTs (along with a very questionable PI call) put them in unwinable situations on many drives. You count that PI call and two of the Broncos' TD drives started on the Pats' 1 yard line.

Granted if the defense didn't suck early in the year, the Pats might have hosted that game or even faced another opponent and had a much different result in the post season.

 

[maverick4]

Belichick already pretty much proved over the past 8 years that he is the key piece. He took a 28 year old KID and made him offensive coordinator for 4 years over a powerhouse offense, and before that he took a 6th rd draft pick and made him one of the best QB's ever.

As for the stats obsessed poster who keeps posting offensive stats, please just join the Colts fanclub already, you sound just like one. Keep talking about miniscule differences in offensive stats, all the while explaining away why your OC genius McKid keeps getting outsmarted in the playoffs.

History has shown whether it be the late 90's Vikings, 2000 Rams, 01-04 Colts, or 05-08 Patriots, that the 'you know our blatant offense and likely can't stop it in the regular season' approach on offense gets STUFFED come playoff time.

 

[Rob0729]

Belichick already pretty much proved over the past 8 years that he is the key piece. He took a 28 year old KID and made him offensive coordinator for 4 years over a powerhouse offense, and before that he took a 6th rd draft pick and made him one of the best QB's ever.

As for the stats obsessed poster who keeps posting offensive stats, please just join the Colts fanclub already, you sound just like one. Keep talking about miniscule differences in offensive stats, all the while explaining away why your OC genius McKid keeps getting outsmarted in the playoffs.

History has shown whether it be the late 90's Vikings, 2000 Rams, 01-04 Colts, or 05-08 Patriots, that the 'you know our blatant offense and likely can't stop it in the regular season' approach on offense gets STUFFED come playoff time.

LOL! I tried to be civil with you. Didn't insult you or make digs. Of course, you cannot resist to act like a child.

BTW, I would appreciate it if you are going to insult me, at least come up with new material. Didn't the Colts fan crap get tired the fiftieth time you posted it? You are consistent. No matter who you insult whether it is me or McDaniels, you do not bring anything new to the table.

Funny, the only person who actually insulted you in this thread was not me. It is because everyone is onto your tired act.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

The defense was 31st in the red zone and 26th in 3rd down defense.

I was really hoping BB would spend MORE time with the defense. Brady is the coach on the field when the offense is out there. Let him call his own plays like the QB's of old.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

No matter who you insult whether it is me or McDaniels, you do not bring anything new to the table.

That's his problem. He doesnt bring any new info to the party. He just keeps blaming JM without any actual facts to back it up......BORING.

 

[maverick4]

\He just keeps blaming JM without any actual facts to back it up:

Except for this inconvenient truth:

2001->2004: 3 rings with worse offensive personnel that somehow came up HUGE every time we needed a big playoff drive
2005->2008: 0 rings with better offensive talent that chokes any time we need a big score in a playoff game

Can't blame it all on the defense. The 06-08 defense has been top 10 in the league.