The Day the Offense Died

[Brownfan80]

Hey, get the hell off of my case, I have just about had it with your bullsh!t. Be careful and take that for what you want. GO BACK TO THE VERY FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD...It was NOT ME THAT BROUGHT UP THE NAME MCDANIELS AND BEGAN THE CRITICISM..SO GET YOU SH12T STAIGHT FOR A CHANGE AND GET THE HELL OFF OF MY CASE, DO YOU GET IT? I HAVE HAD IT WITH YOUR CRAP and FRIGGIN DISTORTIONS.

So again with the threats? You really think the threats are necessary? You really think that's warranted?
And I already stated that I knew the thread was started with the OC-bashing in mind and that it was no surprise that you showed up later in the thread. I stated it clearly in my response. So obviously I do have my "SH12T STAIGHT", but it might help if you did.

They are frickin ltroublemakers who have an agenda against me, and I will not take that crap anymore.

No one has an agenda against you. There is no conspiracy. There are just a large number of posters that have gotten wise to your ways and call you out on them. If you don't like that, then change your ways.

Be careful, Take that for wht youwant,. Be careful.

Yeah... you already made that threat, and I already stated that I didn't know what to make of it.

Should I drive more carefully? Should I make sure to wear oven mits so as not to burn my hands? Should I make sure to wear sunblock?

Please, be more specific about what I need to take such care with.

Be careful. Take it for what you want.

Again? Wow.

So the forum is above a democratic voting system because it'd encourage animosity, but yet you are spewing threats every other word? Which side of your mouth are you going to post from next?

 

[BradyManny]

I've kind of missed out on this thread and am playing catch up trying to get oriented, but let me just skip to the point and ask those who know a lot more about football a few Qs:

1) Tom Brady seems ridicolously lethal out of the shotgun/spread/no-huddle/2 minute business - is there a reason why we shouldn't run it more often?
2) Someone refresh my memory, when we decided to go pass-oriented in the 2nd half against the Colts, were we running the same O as we saw in the 2nd half of the Lions game, as in the aforementioned 2 minute offense?

The reason I ask these questions is because I'm beginning to think that this offense really doesn't need deception at all. Perhaps b/c I'm not more than a casual football fan, I find plays which deceive the offense (play action, draw play) exciting and they sound like they should work to me, but I'm noticing Tom is nearly unstoppable when we simply say "hello defense, we're passing the ball, good luck stopping it, f**k you." [roughly translated]

Whenever Tom is in the shotgun with 4 or so wide spread, he just looks absolutely vicious.

 

[Brownfan80]

WISE TO MY WAYS. THAT STATEMENT ALONE HAS A PERSONAL VENDETTA ATTACHED TO IT, ONE THAT IS EASY FOR THOSE NOT IN THE KNOW TO JUMP ON AND THINK IT HAS MERIT. BUT, OF COURSE, YOU DONT SEE THAT, DO YOU.

Considering the fact that you made a post nearly IDENTICAL about AJ, are you sure you want to keep down this road? My point about you is that people don't need to read my posts to form an opinion about you, all they have to do is read yours.

Well, let me tell you this, I wont allow your crap to be shoveing me up against a wall anymore.

I've never come near you with a shovel, or near you against a wall, so I'm not sure what to make of this.

What gives you the right to have a vote on anything in this forum? Its not your forum, is it.

Who in the world said that I'd be the one deciding anything? Where are you even coming from with this?

Maybe I should put up a vote to have your ass kicked out of here, not that I want to see ithappen...but its not my business to put up votes on anything, it is not my site to do so.

Put up a pole, I'd be amused at the way the vote goes.

 

[BradyManny]

And I,for one, have the philosophy of it is working and keep doing it till the opposition has figure dout how to stop it. And keep the no huddle going too, at the same time. That is what I call , going for the jugular , and taking control fo the game, from the get go.

Right, my only thought is that BB and McD must feel a team that can run the ball over you is much more dangerous than a team that passes first. I'm not sure, again I don't know all that much about these things, but being a run first offense does have plenty of good side effects like wearing down the D and keeping your own D off the field.

Still, it does seem like Brady just has his way with any D when he's back there in the shotgun with 4 wideouts spread. Maybe now that Reche has emerged and Tom and the wideouts are on the same page more, we will see more of this. Obviously, I've been hyping Chad Jackson for some time now, I'm still confident he will contribute this season.

 

[jczxohn1]

Today the offense died... all those carefully laid plans developed all offseason, the 2 TE sets and the power running, and visions of the Pittsburgh Steeler smash mouth style, and the sugar plum footballs dancing in BB's head, 5 yards and clouds of dust.

Josh McDaniel and his X and O theatrics melted away, unable to deal with the intense pressure and competition offered by the dreadful Detroit defense.

As the season winds down all the "coaching" has been unmasked as a naked emperor and the offense distilled into what it always has been since Tom took the reins: Brady taking the ball in crunch time and carrying these overrated coaching slobs to victory, figuring out how and what to do with the ball and making it happen enough to overcome the litany of errors this team has been overcoached into making.

It is what it is. Cut the crap, give Tom the ball, and tear up the BB-inspired McDaniels playbook. Go no huddle, spread, two minute and once you have the lead, then indulge the coaching staff's bloated ego with some mediocre power running bull$hi#.

There are alot of fingers in the pot, but only one person whose hand, and mind, are on the ball. Brady is carrying this coaching staff, and team, to the finish line. We know he's a team player, but I hope he is selfish enough to tell the naked emperors to get out of the way so he finish the job.

Sounds great but it's only good for so long.Tom's no-huddle is a lot more successful at the end of the half or the 4th qtr than it is at the beginning when defenses are fresh. Denver's style, in particular shuts Tom down pretty quick. Having a mix is important. Maroney is still learning to run between the tackles, and this O-line must improve their run-blocking. They're all signed long-term. I, for one, have been disappointed in their performance thus far.

 

[BradyManny]

Denver's style, in particular shuts Tom down pretty quick.

Maybe I'm too much of a Brady homer, but I don't think anybody can shut down Tom when he's on. Besides, if you look at the Denver playoff game last year, we moved the ball quite effectively, we just turned the ball over. We hold onto the ball, we win that game.

 

[jczxohn1]

Maybe I'm too much of a Brady homer, but I don't think anybody can shut down Tom when he's on. Besides, if you look at the Denver playoff game last year, we moved the ball quite effectively, we just turned the ball over. We hold onto the ball, we win that game.

Lynch beat Brady like a rented mule the whole game. Not a game plan to build a season on. Teams know the only way to defend Brady in the hurry-up is to hit him as often as possible. Bring one more than we can block. Force him into poor decisions, i.e., the Bailey interception.

 

[NYCPatsFan]

Whew! After reading all those posts on the failure of the offense and defense (and the personal attacks and responses by a few others), all I can hope is that the Pats regain their focus after last week's game and put up a good performance against the Fins.

Most of us are aware that the Pats play badly at Miami. So, this is a good chance for the Pats to exercise that demon and infuse enough confidence in many of us head-scratching fans that this team will go all the way and not flounder in the first game of the play-offs.

I strongly believe that the Pats will put up a very good performance this weekend.

Hopefully we win all our remaining games and adjust smoothly to the absence of those valuable players who have been placed on IR recently. (Oh, and also hope that Rodney joins the team in full strength in the next few weeks!)

Go Pats!

 

[Stokes]

I think we need to recognize that the specialization on defense has given a better opportunity for a no huddle offense. With all the subs that curently go on in the front 7 now between running downs and passing downs, an offense is at a clear advantage if they can keep subs from coming in. The best example of this that I've seen this year, even though they lost the game, was the Pats vs. the Broncos. When Denver had the opportunity to sub in on their D-line and LBs, they shut us down. It wasn't until the Pats went no huddle that we were able to make plays. I haven't seen it, but I heard the Jets have gone to a no huddle O the past few games with much better success as well. So, sorry for being longwinded, but the point is 2 fold: First, that the Pats O has functioned better out of passing sets not just because they're going 3-4-5 wide, but because they are running it out of a hurry up or semi hury up (don't huddle, but run the clock anyway) offense. Second, that the Pats are reaping the rewards of getting the front 7 tired by keeping the other team from bringing in fresh DL/LB. Oh one other thing that bothers me, please don't assume Brady is calling the plays in the hurry-up offense (although I think he could), he has a mike in his helmet to get plays radioed(sp?) in.

 

[Stokes]

What Brady is doing when he makes the hand gestures, etc. is, for the most part, adjusting blocking assignments, etc. not changing the play.

Right, we agree on this. That was one of the many things that the TV crew completely whiffed on last week. They thought he was changing the play, when you could clearly hear Brady saying something like "51 is Mike," pointing out the Mike LB to set the protection. I brought it up because I got the feeling others were thinking he was changing the play.

 

[Stokes]

I still am a very strong advocate of utilizing play action on first down when you get to around the opposing 10-15 yard line, or even in closer. McDaniels rarely,if ever, has done it...Other teams do it very succesfully, and now we have the runing bakcs that would cause opposing teams to buy into the play action fake...but we just dont use it.

I think the biggest problem with McDaniels is that he comes off, to me, as a stubborn little boy who has to prove that he is right, and the rest of the world is wrong. Sometimes little boy geniuses are not worth their weight in coal.

NEM, I got some stats about the offense this year vs. 2003/2004/2005 from NFL.com. It only went back to 2003:

2006: 6th in total offense, 8th in scoring offense (23.4 ppg)
2005: 7th in total offense, 10th in scoring offense (23.7 ppg)
2004: 7th in total offense, 4th in scoring offense (27.3 ppg)
2003; 17th in total offense, 12th in scoring offense (21.8 ppg)

The point here I think is obvious, the O hasn't fallen off a cliff with the departure of Charlie Weis, McDaniels is doing just as good a job at getting the team yards/points. As for your complaints about playcalling in the red zone, I found red zone efficiency numbers (ranked by TD percent) on profootballweekly.com:

2006: 2nd most efficient
2005: 3rd most efficient
2004: 7th most efficient
2003: 27th most efficient

If anything this points to McDaniels being BETTER than Weis at playcalling in the redzone.

We (well, you) can always nitpick about playcalling, but the facts are that overall McDaniels is doing his job well, contrary to what you believe.

 

[Brownfan80]

NEM, I got some stats about the offense this year vs. 2003/2004/2005 from NFL.com. It only went back to 2003:

2006: 6th in total offense, 8th in scoring offense (23.4 ppg)
2005: 7th in total offense, 10th in scoring offense (23.7 ppg)
2004: 7th in total offense, 4th in scoring offense (27.3 ppg)
2003; 17th in total offense, 12th in scoring offense (21.8 ppg)

The point here I think is obvious, the O hasn't fallen off a cliff with the departure of Charlie Weis, McDaniels is doing just as good a job at getting the team yards/points. As for your complaints about playcalling in the red zone, I found red zone efficiency numbers (ranked by TD percent) on profootballweekly.com:

2006: 2nd most efficient
2005: 3rd most efficient
2004: 7th most efficient
2003: 27th most efficient

If anything this points to McDaniels being BETTER than Weis at playcalling in the redzone.

We (well, you) can always nitpick about playcalling, but the facts are that overall McDaniels is doing his job well, contrary to what you believe.

Excellent use of facts, I applaud your research.

And to think, McDaniels has had to deal with 80% turnover at the WR position! And yet he's still that successful!

 

[Stokes]

Excellent use of facts, I applaud your research.

And to think, McDaniels has had to deal with 80% turnover at the WR position! And yet he's still that successful!

Thanks! I'm generally not a big numbers guy, but those directly refute claims of incompetence that are being suggested. Also, don't forget the 2005 numbers are similar to 2004 even though Corey Dillon was hurt most of the year, and, like you said, the numbers hold up this year even without the #1/#2 WR from 2004/5!

 

[PonyExpress]

One of the true measures of offensive efficiency is YARDS PER PLAY. The Pats average 5.18 yards per play, #14 in the league. The main reason the Pats rank higher in terms of overall YARDAGE is because of the quality of the Pats defense, which gives the Offense more opportunities. Furthermore, the Pats offense has turned the ball over 24 times (ranking #22 in the league) more than any other potential playoff team except Chicago with the awful Rex Grossman, and Seattle, who were missing their starting QB and RB for half the season. As a final note, look at the SCOREABILITY INDEX at http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=986&Category=2. The scoreability index measures yards per point scored as an indication of scoring efficiency. The Pats are ranked #11. When you have one of the great QBs in NFL history in his prime, and have the #14 offense in yardage efficiency, the #22 offense as far as holding onto the ball, and the #11 offense in scoring efficiency, there is ALOT of room for improvement.

Over the last 2 seasons, in big games against solid teams, the problems just outlined have usually been exaggerated. Some games against marginal competition have been saved only by going 2 minute/no huddle when the conventional offense has predictably failed. The base offense has often looked uninspired, unprepared, even confused. The same Turnover mistakes are made week after week, suggesting that the players are not responding to coaching. When the season was slipping away from the team against Detroit, it was Scarnecchia who rallied the O on the sideline, not the O coordinator. These are symptoms of a leadership void due to several potential factors: (1) lack of leadership from the coaching staff on the O side of the ball, probably due to inexperience (2) a faulty O philosophy that does not suit the current personnel (3) trouble adjusting when the initial plan does not work. In an earlier post on this thread I quoted Profootballweekly to underscore the fact that others around the league have noticed the Pats offensive inconsistency, which they attribute to new personnel, a substandard Wr corps, a simplified playbook, struggling RBs, an inability to adjust, and some injuries on the O-line.

The Pats need to acknowledge these problems and correct them before they can become SB champions.The SB is sitting right there in front of them. They have the heart the grit the defense and the Qb to sieze it. It would be a shame if needless offensive blunders cost this team a chance at immortality, as they did last year.

 

[Rob0729]

One of the true measures of offensive efficiency is YARDS PER PLAY. The Pats average 5.18 yards per play, #14 in the league. The main reason the Pats rank higher in terms of overall YARDAGE is because of the quality of the Pats defense, which gives the Offense more opportunities. Furthermore, the Pats offense has turned the ball over 24 times (ranking #22 in the league) more than any other potential playoff team except Chicago with the awful Rex Grossman, and Seattle, who were missing their starting QB and RB for half the season. As a final note, look at the SCOREABILITY INDEX at http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=986&Category=2. The scoreability index measures yards per point scored as an indication of scoring efficiency. The Pats are ranked #11. When you have one of the great QBs in NFL history in his prime, and have the #14 offense in yardage efficiency, the #22 offense as far as holding onto the ball, and the #11 offense in scoring efficiency, there is ALOT of room for improvement.

Over the last 2 seasons, in big games against solid teams, the problems just outlined have usually been exaggerated. Some games against marginal competition have been saved only by going 2 minute/no huddle when the conventional offense has predictably failed. The base offense has often looked uninspired, unprepared, even confused. The same Turnover mistakes are made week after week, suggesting that the players are not responding to coaching. When the season was slipping away from the team against Detroit, it was Scarnecchia who rallied the O on the sideline, not the O coordinator. These are symptoms of a leadership void due to several potential factors: (1) lack of leadership from the coaching staff on the O side of the ball, probably due to inexperience (2) a faulty O philosophy that does not suit the current personnel (3) trouble adjusting when the initial plan does not work. In an earlier post on this thread I quoted Profootballweekly to underscore the fact that others around the league have noticed the Pats offensive inconsistency, which they attribute to new personnel, a substandard Wr corps, a simplified playbook, struggling RBs, an inability to adjust, and some injuries on the O-line.

The Pats need to acknowledge these problems and correct them before they can become SB champions.The SB is sitting right there in front of them. They have the heart the grit the defense and the Qb to sieze it. It would be a shame if needless offensive blunders cost this team a chance at immortality.

Yards per play is a very misleading stat. Many teams don't try to get big yards per play because they want to play ball control offense. You can't have a 12 play 8 minute drive by passing by picking up ten yards a play. In 2001 and 2002 our offense was designed specifically to pick up short yardage on passing plays, but give us the efficiency to drive down the field and eat up clock time.

I find many yardage based stats to be very inaccurate. I look at scoring efficiency stats as the key to rating an offense. Yardage stats can be skewed by gameplans and field position. Teams who play vs. us get offensive yard stats skewed up because our defense this year is very much a bend and don't break defense. So offenses are getting a lot of yards vs us and a lot of yards per play, but they aren't scoring. So their offense gets inflated.

When measuring an offense it should be weighed heavily on points. Unfortunately, the NFL only looks at yards.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I don't believe in the theory keep doing it until the defense figures it out. I believe you need to change things up before the defense figures out what you are doing or it can be ten times worse. What made Weis so good is that he would constantly change up the offense and keep opposing teams guessing. That is what McDaniels is trying to do with lesser talent.

I'm sorry, but we had a 17 play scoring drive in the first quarter. Yes it was for a field goal, but I blame Kazcur's holding penalty on first and ten on the Lions' 11 for us not scoring the TD. Our our first drive of the second quarter, it was also stalled by a holding call making an 2nd and 18. Our second drive was stopped on a Pass turnover on a run on 2nd and 5 where he would have had a first down if he held onto the ball. The next drive was a 5 play TD drive. The drive after that was a field goal which was only kicked because there was only three seconds in the half. We kicked on third down on that drive on the Detroit 9. The first drive in the second half Brady was intercepted on a 2nd and eight. The drive after that, Dillon fumbled on a second and 11. The drive after that, we had a 9 play TD drive and a successful 2 point conversion. The drive after that, Watson fumbled on a first down after a nine yard pick up. The drive after that, we had seven play TD drive.

I listed basically all of offensive possessions of the game. You cannot say that any of the turnovers were because McDaniels put us in a position that we had to force a play because they all happened on first or second down. Penalties had more impact on stalled drives than McDaniels yesterday.

There have been games where McDaniels has been one of the bigger causes of our offensive problems. Yesterday wasn't one of them. He called as good of a game as anyone could expect especially with Maroney going down. It was execution that was the problem with our offense yesterday.

NEM's point is what I have been telling him when he used to criticize Weis's play calling. But as you pointed out, this criticism DOES NOT always apply. Yesterday was such a day. Your analysis shows that.

OTOH, there are some games or drives that are set up for failure. Running for a yard on second and ten or more, almost guarantees a third and very long. If there is an INT, or a pass defensed, or sack on third down; that is an example of the criticism that NEM is saying. It just didn't apply to yesterdays' game or any of its drives.

There are even situations where it is appropriate to run on second and long. For example, if you have good field position, want to maintain it, and are perfectly willing to punt it back deep to an ineffective offense and let the D look for a turnover close to the opponent's goaline.

NEM and I have discussed the necessity of "wasting" offensive plays, which he refuses to accept. Overall you want to keep the overall run/pass ratio such that it is difficult to predict in the future what the Pats will do. It is even more important for specific situations. If you always pass on second and long, the DCs will notice and then you can't do it in crunch time when it is imperative to do so. So you must occasionally "waste" plays to keep the opponents from being able to predict plays accurately.

Weis used to do this, and it drove NEM nuts. Weis would also purposely run plays with little chance of success, in effect 'wasting" a play to set up conditions for a later play with a much greater chance of success, but nevertheless looks like the failed play. lots of fans used to criticize these inexplicable calls without recognizing what was going on.

 

[Stokes]

One of the true measures of offensive efficiency is YARDS PER PLAY. The Pats average 5.18 yards per play, #14 in the league. The main reason the Pats rank higher in terms of overall YARDAGE is because of the quality of the Pats defense, which gives the Offense more opportunities. Furthermore, the Pats offense has turned the ball over 24 times (ranking #22 in the league) more than any other potential playoff team except Chicago with the awful Rex Grossman, and Seattle, who were missing their starting QB and RB for half the season. As a final note, look at the SCOREABILITY INDEX at http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=986&Category=2. The scoreability index measures yards per point scored as an indication of scoring efficiency. The Pats are ranked #11. When you have one of the great QBs in NFL history in his prime, and have the #14 offense in yardage efficiency, the #22 offense as far as holding onto the ball, and the #11 offense in scoring efficiency, there is ALOT of room for improvement.

Hmm, thanks for the info, more stuff to chew on. I'm not saying the offense is perfect this year, far from it. The point is that there's no evidence of the O being worse off with McDaniels than it was with Weis. I'm not sure I agree with your use of yards per play and "scoreability" ( I totally agree turnovers are a big problem this year but that is an execution problem rather than a game plan/coaching problem). So scoreability calculates points per yard gained, but that is not, as it says on the linked page, only a measure of offense. If you are consistently given bad field position your rank will be lower since you need longer drives to score. Lack of turnovers the first 9-10 weeks of the season, along with I think 2 points total from the D/return teams, will greatly skew this value down for the Pats. I mean, come on, you point out that Chicago's offense sucks, yet they rank #2 in scoreability! I would even go a step further and say the fact that the Pats are #11 in scoreability, yet #8 in scoring offense says the offense is scoring more points than they should be expected to. As for yards per play, that to me is just a reflection on the Pats not executing on the long pass plays. McDaniels calls a few a game, enough in my opinion, but how often does the offense complete them? Again, that's an execution thing, whether its a Brady over/underthrow, guys that stop running all the way through the route (I'm looking at you Chad Jackson!), guys just plain dropping the ball, or good coverage by the defense. Again though thanks for providing the info, I enjoy thinking about it even if in the end I disagree with the conclusion.

 

[Rob0729]

NEM, I got some stats about the offense this year vs. 2003/2004/2005 from NFL.com. It only went back to 2003:

2006: 6th in total offense, 8th in scoring offense (23.4 ppg)
2005: 7th in total offense, 10th in scoring offense (23.7 ppg)
2004: 7th in total offense, 4th in scoring offense (27.3 ppg)
2003; 17th in total offense, 12th in scoring offense (21.8 ppg)

The point here I think is obvious, the O hasn't fallen off a cliff with the departure of Charlie Weis, McDaniels is doing just as good a job at getting the team yards/points. As for your complaints about playcalling in the red zone, I found red zone efficiency numbers (ranked by TD percent) on profootballweekly.com:

2006: 2nd most efficient
2005: 3rd most efficient
2004: 7th most efficient
2003: 27th most efficient

If anything this points to McDaniels being BETTER than Weis at playcalling in the redzone.

We (well, you) can always nitpick about playcalling, but the facts are that overall McDaniels is doing his job well, contrary to what you believe.

Nice stats. I just don't get why people are trashing McDaniels so much. Yes, he does many of the same things that drove me crazy with Weis, but I feel he has done a pretty good job other than a game here and there. Except for 2004, this offense is scoring as well or better than any other offense under the Belichick era. Last time I checked, you win games by scoring more points than the opposing team. We are pretty good at scoring points this year.

McDaniels need to work on some things, but I don't think he is a bad OC.

 

[PonyExpress]

Yards per play is a very misleading stat. Many teams don't try to get big yards per play because they want to play ball control offense. You can't have a 12 play 8 minute drive by passing by picking up ten yards a play. In 2001 and 2002 our offense was designed specifically to pick up short yardage on passing plays, but give us the efficiency to drive down the field and eat up clock time.

I find many yardage based stats to be very inaccurate. I look at scoring efficiency stats as the key to rating an offense. Yardage stats can be skewed by gameplans and field position. Teams who play vs. us get offensive yard stats skewed up because our defense this year is very much a bend and don't break defense. So offenses are getting a lot of yards vs us and a lot of yards per play, but they aren't scoring. So their offense gets inflated.

When measuring an offense it should be weighed heavily on points. Unfortunately, the NFL only looks at yards.

You may not want to conceed the importance of yards per play as a factor of offensive efficiency, which is understandable, because it hurts you argument. That does not change the fact that in Give-aways, yardage efficiency, and scoring efficiency per yard, that Pats' offense is mediocre. The cumulative stats you cite are bloated because the Pats D has been the exact opposite of the offense: takeaways, yards per play and scoring defense per yard are all outstanding. This defensive efficiency has given the Pats O every advantage and helped them accumulate favorable statistics in an UNEFFICIENT manner, contrary to your argument.

 

[Stokes]

Thats just one example. There have been many instances where teams led the league, or their conference in points scored, for example, and never made the playoffs, or had the league leading passer, or rusher, and finished under .500.
So, in closing, you did a nice job in putting them together, but in reality they dont give a true picture.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mean for those numbers to be the be all/end all, but I thought they were the best indicators available for overall offensive production the last 4 years. I disagree that teams that roll up yardage/points don't make the playoffs, and will until you can back that up (at which point I will shut my mouth). Lastly, I guess I'm just not seeing the same things you are, with the offense sputtering when it matters. Sure they have trouble scoring against the better teams, but so does everyone else! The Indy game is a popular example of OC problems, but I'd be interested to know what the rushing yards per attempt were in the 2nd half when Indy was walking up Sanders every 1st/2nd down. Seemed like they gained a whole lot of nothing in the 2nd half, thus an aerial attack makes sense.