Do we need 6 wide receivers?

[BradyFTW!]

Playing time he is, just like McKenzie. Happily, it looks like both spent their seasons studying their playbooks and getting healthy.

No, he's still not. Slater played in 14 games last year, and 14 more the year before. McKenzie played in 0. He and McKenzie have nothing in common. Is Eric Alexander a rookie in your book too, because he also only plays ST?

 

[mgteich]

You may be right, but I was under the impression that you preferred the more balanced attack.

OK, let us ignore past positions and discuss the issue afresh.
==========================================

WHAT WOULD WE NEED TO HAVE AN OFFENSE AS EFFECTIVE AS 2007?
1) a healthy Brady CHECK
2) Moss, Welker plus two CHECK
(and we even have a backup for Welker in case he is injured)
3) a solid pass-oriented OL CHECK
4) an OL running game MAYBE (#12 last year is probably good enough
5) a couple of tight ends CHECK (and a vet blocker)
6) a blocking RB NOT YET
7) a short yardage RB I DON'T SEE IT
8) improved play calling WE'LL SEE
9) improved game plans WE'LL SEE

BOTTOM LINE
Even with this year's tough schedule, the offense could equal 2007 if we acquired a short yardage RB who can block. Perhaps belichick thinks he has these skiss in house.

Well, wouldn't you hope that the model is 2007, given that the team still has 2007-style personnel?

 

[mgteich]

Only FOUR teams allowed fewer points last year than the 2009 patriots. That is not a weak defense! Can we perform as well this year, even if the stats might be a bit worse beacuse of a tougher schedule?
============================================
A) One would think that we could be better than last year with the expected improvements from Butler and Chung.

B) A healthy Mayo has to help.

C) Did we do OK on replacements? I suspect that we did. I also expect an addition at OLB in the next month or so.

OUT Springs IN MCCOURTY
OUT Green IN WARREN, LEWIS
OUT Seau IN MCKENZIE
OUT Alexander IN SPIKES
OUT Thomas IN NINKOVICH (in much bigger role this year)
OUT Burgess IN CUNNINGHAM

I don't think our defense is as bad as you are suggesting. It is young and experienced and very very agressive and hungry. Belichick did the right thing in telling this team that they need to create their own dynasty...forget about the past... and I think these are the type of talented players that can do it.

 

[Ring 6]

Only FOUR teams allowed fewer points last year than the 2009 patriots. That is not a weak defense! Can we perform as well this year, even if the stats might be a bit worse beacuse of a tougher schedule?
============================================
A) One would think that we could be better than last year with the expected improvements from Butler and Chung.

B) A healthy Mayo has to help.

C) Did we do OK on replacements? I suspect that we did. I also expect an addition at OLB in the next month or so.

OUT Springs IN MCCOURTY
OUT Green IN WARREN, LEWIS
OUT Seau IN MCKENZIE
OUT Alexander IN SPIKES
OUT Thomas IN NINKOVICH (in much bigger role this year)
OUT Burgess IN CUNNINGHAM

I think it is equally, if not more important how the holdovers play compared to last season.
Warren was injured for much of last season and limited. More likely that he is better this year due to better health than worse due to worse health. Same on a lesser scale for Wilfork.
Same maybe on a much greater scale for Mayo who may have come back a number of weeks too soon.
Bodden figures to be more consistent after a year with the team and its schemes.
Butler improved throughout the season, and reports from camp say he is much more comfortable and decisive.
Chung is being described as looking like a different man this camp, and clearly elevates the talent level when he is on the field in place of Sanders or McGowan.
All of these changes will surely not be positive but there is a good reason to believe that enough of them will that the incumbants play better this year than last.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Because some would like many more running plays. We had 390 completions last year compared with 403 in 2007. Many here (including you as I recall) thought that we relied on the pass too much in 2007 and preferred a bit more balanced attack.

I apologize if I am wrong and that you are one of those who would like to see Brady with over 400 completions. Is the model really 2007?

2001 306
2002 374
2003 320
2004 293
2005 352
2006 326
2007 403
2008 339
2009 390
2010 ???

The weapons were hugely upgraded in 2007. So, using your breakdown:

2007: 403
2008: [NOT BRADY]
2009: 390

It looks like the 400+ neighborhood should be where this attack falls - if you think the quarterback and receivers are solely responsible for the number of completions.

Protection is more, not less, important than in 2007. Brady is not a scrambler, but he is a pocket-mover. You guys all know that he's not the Elway/statue model of quarterback, he shifts around to buy time. He doesn't make plays with his legs too often but he does make plays with his eyes, his brains, and his feet. You have to expect that a Brady that went down as he did in 08 and is 3 years older than in 07 will need either equivalent or upgraded talent on the O-line to procure equivalent or better outcomes.

Add to that the real blueprint provided by the Giants at the end of 07. As TFB said, "they think they're holding us to two touchdowns? Have they watched our offense this year?" Evidently they did. Evidently they solved it. Evidently our O-line then, which was better than our O-line today, could not stop them.

Was that the 1 time out of 10 the Gintz win that game? Meh. Who knows. I do know how they won that game, and I do know that if the Pats are having a strong year, that will always be the blueprint: get to Brady.

I see all this talk about the defense, which indeed seems to be finding its way out of the wilderness. I do think the Pats still have an above average line, but not a great one. You won't get 400 completions with "above average," except with checkdowns and screens. If the screens are working to keep defenses honest, he may get the time he needs - that's where the Welkers and Edelmans of the world come into play. That's one use of the Hernandezes of the world.

I think it's best to let go of 2007, and hope to get back the toughness of 01-04 (screw the magic. It was that those teams never gave up on a game or a season that got the Pats those rings.)

I see calls for an enhanced running game and I don't see it either. But I think sometimes we long for that because we don't think it's playing tough football to rely on a dominating pass attack. It absolutely is tough football, if you play it that way... but even at their peak our O-line was capable of losing that edge. Mankins was b1tch-slapped with the rest of them in the Super Bowl, but is an elite talent or near-elite talent at guard. You need five guys above the level of JAG playing very well as a unit to keep a jersey fairly clean. You need a couple of them to be at or near the elite level to make sure that the QB/WR hookups we're all salivating over happen instead of tipped passes, hurries, and sacks.

How's that gonna happen in '10?

 

[Deus Irae]

You may be right, but I was under the impression that you preferred the more balanced attack.

OK, let us ignore past positions and discuss the issue afresh.

You seem to have combined past posts of mine and come to the wrong conclusion with regards to this issue. My preference, as a general rule, is for a pounding style of offense. My preference, when applied to personnel, is to use what will work best. This team is designed for a wide open passing system.

WHAT WOULD WE NEED TO HAVE AN OFFENSE AS EFFECTIVE AS 2007?
1) a healthy Brady CHECK
2) Moss, Welker plus two CHECK
(and we even have a backup for Welker in case he is injured)
3) a solid pass-oriented OL CHECK
4) an OL running game MAYBE (#12 last year is probably good enough
5) a couple of tight ends CHECK (and a vet blocker)
6) a blocking RB NOT YET
7) a short yardage RB I DON'T SEE IT
8) improved play calling WE'LL SEE
9) improved game plans WE'LL SEE

BOTTOM LINE
Even with this year's tough schedule, the offense could equal 2007 if we acquired a short yardage RB who can block. Perhaps belichick thinks he has these skiss in house.

While I would love to see this team acquire/develop a monster fullback, this team's ability to compare to the 2007 offense will certainly not come down to a short yardage RB who can block.

 

[mgteich]

I see the need for a blocker primarily in the red zone and in short yardage situations. In some sense, being able to convert 3rd and 1 may be the missing piece to our offense.

You seem to have combined past posts of mine and come to the wrong conclusion with regards to this issue. My preference, as a general rule, is for a pounding style of offense. My preference, when applied to personnel, is to use what will work best. This team is designed for a wide open passing system.



While I would love to see this team acquire/develop a monster fullback, this team's ability to compare to the 2007 offense will certainly not come down to a short yardage RB who can block.

 

[Deus Irae]

I see the need for a blocker primarily in the red zone and in short yardage situations. In some sense, being able to convert 3rd and 1 may be the missing piece to our offense.

The Patriots "blocker" in 2007 was Heath Evans. Are you saying that the difference between this 2010 squad and the 2007 team, which is the highest scoring offense in the history of the game, is Heath Evans?

 

[mgteich]

The obvious difference is Mankins. But, yes I think Heath Evans type player would help this team a lot. I certainly thionk he helped a lot in 2007; don't you?

The Patriots "blocker" in 2007 was Heath Evans. Are you saying that the difference between this 2010 squad and the 2007 team, which is the highest scoring offense in the history of the game, is Heath Evans?

 

[Deus Irae]

The obvious difference is Mankins. But, yes I think Heath Evans type player would help this team a lot. I certainly thionk he helped a lot in 2007; don't you?

He was fine, although nothing spectacular. He's not the difference between the 2010 and 2007 versions of the Patriots, though, even if Mankins is back.

 

[mgteich]

What do you think is the difference between the OFFENSE of the 2010 offense and the OFFENSE of the 2007 patriots?

He was fine, although nothing spectacular. He's not the difference between the 2010 and 2007 versions of the Patriots, though, even if Mankins is back.

 

[Ring 6]

I see the need for a blocker primarily in the red zone and in short yardage situations. In some sense, being able to convert 3rd and 1 may be the missing piece to our offense.

Would you be surprised to know that our % of running plays on 3rd and less than 3 was the 4th HIGHEST in the NFL?
Unfortunately I can not find a sight that tells me what our success rate was on them.

 

[Ring 6]

What do you think is the difference between the OFFENSE of the 2010 offense and the OFFENSE of the 2007 patriots?

The fact that defenses have seen the 2007 schemes and are better prepared to defend them.
I think if our offensive roster today was the roster in 2007 you would have seen very similar results. I dont think the 07 team itself wouldn't repeat what it did after a year or more of defenses being able to figure out how to counter it.When you set records, a lot of film work gets done on you.

 

[mgteich]

1) Yes, I would be surprised.

2) The success rate would be interesting to know.

3) Are you concerned at all at regarding our 3rd and red zone efficiency in 2009?

4) Do you believe that a Heath Evans type blocker might be more effective than using Connolly?

The off-season is long. One of the priorities of this time of year is to assess which JAG's, late cuts and trades might help the team. I think that a short-yardage back that can block would help the team. Do you disagree? Or do you believe that we already have these skills in Morris?

Would you be surprised to know that our % of running plays on 3rd and less than 3 was the 4th HIGHEST in the NFL?
Unfortunately I can not find a sight that tells me what our success rate was on them.

 

[Ring 6]

1) Yes, I would be surprised.

2) The success rate would be interesting to know.

3) Are you concerned at all at regarding our 3rd and red zone efficiency in 2009?

4) Do you believe that a Heath Evans type blocker might be more effective than using Connolly?

The off-season is long. One of the priorities of this time of year is to assess which JAG's, late cuts and trades might help the team. I think that a short-yardage back that can block would help the team. Do you disagree? Or do you believe that we already have these skills in Morris?

1) 68% run.
2) Yeah splits used to have that but I cant find it anywhere.
3) I think Bradys year of inactivity had a big impact on that. I also think its hard to criticize play calling from a TV view, particulary what routes are called, but it seemed too many times that on 3rd and 6 or less Brady just had no one to go to and the play just kind of fizzled. I'm not sure what the red zone #s exactly were, but we were OK. We didnt execute as well as our talent level would suggest, but I think the above addresses some of that.
4) Morris is fine if he can stay healthy. I have abslutely no problem using an OL as a short yardage FB.
But I dont think that was where Evans made a difference. I think the times we ran I when it wasnt short yardage, especially outside the tackles was where he helped most. We temd to use a 2nd TE for that now, out of an Hback slot.
I would agree that a true FB would be helpful, but the minor difference may not be worth the roster spot.
Lastly,. Evans was only an average blocker as FBs go. He was a better all around FB than just a blocker, hell, we even split him out some times.
Are we better with one, sure, but do we give up more by using a roster, and game day spot for a guy who plays only a couple of plays, and probably wont help a lot on sts? Maybe.
The answer may be Thomas Williams. If he can earn a spot as a s'ter he apparently has lead blocker skills too.

 

[mgteich]

fullback

I agree that a fullback would need to play lots of special teams. And yes, Williams may win the fullback role on the 2010 roster. I don't think we need him as a #5 ILB. I also think that Slater, Alexander, Aiken, Arrington and Murrell are all better special teamers (maybe Lockett also). So if Williams makes the squad it will be as a fullback who plays special teams, not as a top special teamer who plays fullback.

4) Morris is fine if he can stay healthy. I have abslutely no problem using an OL as a short yardage FB.
But I dont think that was where Evans made a difference. I think the times we ran I when it wasnt short yardage, especially outside the tackles was where he helped most. We temd to use a 2nd TE for that now, out of an Hback slot.
I would agree that a true FB would be helpful, but the minor difference may not be worth the roster spot.
Lastly,. Evans was only an average blocker as FBs go. He was a better all around FB than just a blocker, hell, we even split him out some times.
Are we better with one, sure, but do we give up more by using a roster, and game day spot for a guy who plays only a couple of plays, and probably wont help a lot on sts? Maybe.
The answer may be Thomas Williams. If he can earn a spot as a s'ter he apparently has lead blocker skills too.

 

[Nunchucks]

Re: fullback

I agree that a fullback would need to play lots of special teams. And yes, Williams may win the fullback role on the 2010 roster. I don't think we need him as a #5 ILB. I also think that Slater, Alexander, Aiken, Arrington and Murrell are all better special teamers (maybe Lockett also). So if Williams makes the squad it will be as a fullback who plays special teams, not as a top special teamer who plays fullback.

We don't have room for a FB on the roster, I think if Williams stays it is as a ST player who can play FB. That means that somebody that plays ST has to go, IMO that person could be Aiken.

 

[mgteich]

Re: fullback

I agree that Williams would need to show himself more valuable than Aiken. He would also have to show himself to be more valuable than Slater, Lockett, Murrell, and Alexander.

Personally, I think Williams is a longshot. Morris and Connolly may be our fullbacks for 2010. Obviously, having a couple of blocking TE's reduces the need. Crumpler and Grankowski are impressive blockers.

We don't have room for a FB on the roster, I think if Williams stays it is as a ST player who can play FB. That means that somebody that plays ST has to go, IMO that person could be Aiken.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

The fact that defenses have seen the 2007 schemes and are better prepared to defend them.
I think if our offensive roster today was the roster in 2007 you would have seen very similar results. I dont think the 07 team itself wouldn't repeat what it did after a year or more of defenses being able to figure out how to counter it.When you set records, a lot of film work gets done on you.

Case in point, just look at the late season 2007 games vs early season. The well coached teams were much improved dealing with the offense. And I won't mention...

 

[Badger]

I like the mix of the veterans in Moss, Welker, Holt and the young guys in Edelman, Tate and Price. If Welker proves to be healthy, this might be our best group in years. Not to mention the 3 new tight ends and all of the possibilities there