Good post, thanks. I've always thought Brady functioned best with an empty backfield which he did a number of times last season.
I think the effective formula is to have a mix of empty, mid protection and use full protection sparsely. The unpredictability is far effective than any one formation.
Sure, but there are two problems w the spread, and the Pats have faced both of them: 1) when the spread becomes predictable, it is REALLY predictable. The pass rushers don't even have to contemplate defending the run. 2) more importantly, when a team's four man rush is beating a 5 man line (see SB42, 09 wild card game vs Ravens), you're just plain screwed.
Particularly when you're #3 option is Sam Aiken - a guy who, each training camp he has been here, has practiced as a special teamer before he has as a wide receiver. He had no business being on the field as much as he was last year. Its comforting that, as we enter another year, he's back to his ST role, and has been surpassed by Holt, Tate, Edelman, Price on the depth chart. He does not really seem to be in the mix for a WR position based on what we know from practices thus far.
Point being. Last year - we weren't creating a competitive advantage by placing our #3 wideout against their #3 CB last year. That has to change going forward.
I wish I could get the #s, but I remember Brady had insanely good #s out of play-action, and also I believe out of max-protect, in 2007. I would wager a guess it was similar in 2009. If we go max protect and run a play-action, you're going to give Moss a chance to get open, and when that happens, it often leads to 6.
There's no one way to skin a cat, at least not for a team with multiple options on offense. Best bet is to try and find matchups that work best. When we had 4 capable receiving options (2007), we could do no wrong. When we only had 2 capable receiving options (2009), the spread did not work for us against teams with any semblance of depth at CB or with any pass rush ability.