What miami did ..according to brady..

[SVN]

for those who didnt listen to him yesterday on WEEI...read this on BSM today...
http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com/

Tom Brady sounded better than you would expect. He made an interesting point about what makes the Miami defense so tough. He said that they generally double the receivers and leave a safety back to guard against the deep pass. He said that that alignment usually means that the tight end or running back is going to be open. However, when you have to use the back or tight end to help in pass protection against Jason Taylor, it leaves only double-covered receivers to throw to.

even BB mentions it a bit..

http://www.allthingsbillbelichick.com/transcripts/2006/06dec11bigshow.htm

SD: Did they try to take away the quick hits from the receivers, the quick adjustments, the Miami defensive backs?

BB: They played a lot of split-safety coverage and kind of doubled up on the receivers, and then they mixed that in with some of the single safety coverage where they pressured. That's pretty much what they normally do. They have different combinations, but that's the basic strategy. And again, they do a good job mixing it up. They have good players.

Sounds like a great strategy if you have the right people to do it (like taylor)...maybe thats why BB is downplaying this a bit that not a whole lot of teams can apply pressure like the miami front 4 and double the receivers

 

[Peter Pat]

This makes me feel worse. Yes, I understand teams play to their strength, and Miami has Taylor who is such a great pass rusher, you have to leave the TEs and back into block, and underneath route is the best way to attack this defense.

But you would think that there is an offensive strategy to combat this. yes Taylor is great, but their are a lot of great pass rushers, merriman, Peppers etc. What are we suppose to do against those teams concede defeat.

Also I think Brady is just doing what a captain does and is taking the bullet. As I mentioned I was at the game, Miami was blitzing with ther safteties all game, sending 6 guys at Brady. It is not the double coverage of the WR, its the WR in ability to get off the line, and create space, Brady had no where to go all game.

But he cant just say,

"My WR can't get open on man coverage with no help, since the safteies are blitzing, even a competant WR gets open and if he makes the right move can go the distance. But since my WR are useless and can't get open, I have to hold the ball longer on these blitzes, and I am getting killed. "

He would never say that, but I can.

 

[SVN]

This makes me feel worse. Yes, I understand teams play to their strength, and Miami has Taylor who is such a great pass rusher, you have to leave the TEs and back into block, and underneath route is the best way to attack this defense.

But you would think that there is an offensive strategy to combat this. yes Taylor is great, but their are a lot of great pass rushers, merriman, Peppers etc. What are we suppose to do against those teams concede defeat.

Also I think Brady is just doing what a captain does and is taking the bullet. As I mentioned I was at the game, Miami was blitzing with ther safteties all game, sending 6 guys at Brady. It is not the double coverage of the WR, its the WR in ability to get off the line, and create space, Brady had no where to go all game.

But he cant just say,

"My WR can't get open on man coverage with no help, since the safteies are blitzing, even a competant WR gets open and if he makes the right move can go the distance. But since my WR are useless and can't get open, I have to hold the ball longer on these blitzes, and I am getting killed. "

He would never say that, but I can.

i dont think its just taylor but the whole D line with taylor which makes a diff along with scheme which saban/capers deserves credit for...
Iam not sure all the teams in the league have the resources or the scheme to do it ..maybe dallas this yr .
Iam now most interested to see how the fins D plays the colts in the last game hoping they have something to play for.
Pats have handled players like freeney and peppers in the past although with diff receivers but iam not sure how good we played against miami even with deion branch in the team.i think givens had better games against miami if i remember correctly.
not saying the pats played their best, but one or 2 early completions or some constant running game with field position wouldve forced miami to change up a bit but it never came and that defense snowballed on us.

 

[RayClay]

Sounds like about 13 players on defense.

We should be able to get about 8 yards a carry, I figure.

I would think double covering our receivers would give us an advantage, since we don't have a dominant pair right now.

 

[Michigan Dave]

But you would think that there is an offensive strategy to combat this..

There is. It's a situation where Maroney would've been useful. Utilizing his speed on wheel routes from the backfield or passes in the flat would force the defense to increase their splits and allow for better protection. Also, using the TEs by playing an offense's version of the "bump n' run", where they lineup down, give a quick shoulder to the lineman to buy a second, and run a quick 3-5 yard curl. The QB can throw to a spot, and you can move the ball that way. We could've pounded them on the ground, too. Dillon was running alright, and mixing it up with Faulk would've helped, too, in Maroney's absence. Ideally, these strategies will force the defense to cheat up, and open up those receivers. Our offense, however, was quite random, and didn't seem to be attacking any 1 aspect of the defense. It was as if the plays were called by randomly pointing at the chart. I know offensive charts are typically quite specific as to what plays they will run in certain d&d situations, and some of the plays I saw left me shaking my head in bewilderment.

 

[psychoPat]

Sounds like about 13 players on defense.

We should be able to get about 8 yards a carry, I figure.

I would think double covering our receivers would give us an advantage, since we don't have a dominant pair right now.

That sounds right to me, Ray.
So i s'pose Tom IS jumping on the live grenade in the foxhole, after all.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

There is. It's a situation where Maroney would've been useful. Utilizing his speed on wheel routes from the backfield or passes in the flat would force the defense to increase their splits and allow for better protection. Also, using the TEs by playing an offense's version of the "bump n' run", where they lineup down, give a quick shoulder to the lineman to buy a second, and run a quick 3-5 yard curl. The QB can throw to a spot, and you can move the ball that way. We could've pounded them on the ground, too. Dillon was running alright, and mixing it up with Faulk would've helped, too, in Maroney's absence. Ideally, these strategies will force the defense to cheat up, and open up those receivers. Our offense, however, was quite random, and didn't seem to be attacking any 1 aspect of the defense. It was as if the plays were called by randomly pointing at the chart. I know offensive charts are typically quite specific as to what plays they will run in certain d&d situations, and some of the plays I saw left me shaking my head in bewilderment.

The offense has seemed random all season long. I thought Reiss's breakdown of formations was interesting. They only ran that dreaded 2t,1fb,1rb, and 1wr formation once.

 

[Michigan Dave]

The offense has seemed random all season long. I thought Reiss's breakdown of formations was interesting. They only ran that dreaded 2t,1fb,1rb, and 1wr formation once.

It has. One of the interesting things I've noticed is the randomness. I'm usually pretty good at looking at offenses, picking up trends, and seeing where they are going with it (hell, I called Michigan of all teams running a flea-flicker against Texas in the 2005 Rose Bowl 2 series in advance). Typically you can watch the ebb and flow of a game, and see what the goal of an offense is, and why they are doing what they are doing. This offense has no identity. You have games like Cincinnati where we can run like crazy over teams, and then a Minnesota game where we air it out at will. Then there's games like Sunday where we do nothing. There is no common link between games. Very puzzling.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

It has. One of the interesting things I've noticed is the randomness. I'm usually pretty good at looking at offenses, picking up trends, and seeing where they are going with it (hell, I called Michigan of all teams running a flea-flicker against Texas in the 2005 Rose Bowl 2 series in advance). Typically you can watch the ebb and flow of a game, and see what the goal of an offense is, and why they are doing what they are doing. This offense has no identity. You have games like Cincinnati where we can run like crazy over teams, and then a Minnesota game where we air it out at will. Then there's games like Sunday where we do nothing. There is no common link between games. Very puzzling.

Which leads to an interesting question, if the offense morphs each week into a new monster, is that a bad thing (assuming they are scoring and giving the defense some rest)? Based on your comments about Miami, it would seem they were out of rythm in play callling, which leads to a second question, was that the game plan or an attempt to find something they could execute productively against that D?

 

[jaychamp]

As I mentioned I was at the game, Miami was blitzing with ther safteties all game, sending 6 guys at Brady. It is not the double coverage of the WR, its the WR in ability to get off the line, and create space, Brady had no where to go all game.

They only blitzed about 10 times the entire game as a whole. The rush was coming mostly from the Dline.

 

[Michigan Dave]

Which leads to an interesting question, if the offense morphs each week into a new monster, is that a bad thing (assuming they are scoring and giving the defense some rest)? Based on your comments about Miami, it would seem they were out of rythm in play callling, which leads to a second question, was that the game plan or an attempt to find something they could execute productively against that D?

Depends on how you do it. Early in the season, I would say it was a good thing. It's possible to be so well rounded, you can pick your poison, and attack a defense specifically with a well-designed game plan. For instance, I think we can all agree that the Minnesota game was our best offensive showing, and it was an atypical performance that caught the Vikings off-guard. We were left thinking that maybe this offense would be an unexpected asset.

However, if you are mixing things up just trying to find something that works, obviously that is not ideal. That we didn't try and exploit Indy's glaring weakness in that game concerns me. Our offense Sunday was gravely concerning, because there was no real continuity, no real direction. We didn't seem to be setting anything up, or working toward anything.

 

[NumberTwelve]

Well espnews was reporting that the Dolphins were using audio of Tom Brady's calls at the line;tapes they may have purchased proir to the game. Maybe they new every audible that Brady was calling as he called it. Eric Allen considered this to be cheating. Perhaps thats why the offense was so terrible
Zach Thomas was the player quoted as saying so

 

[Brownfan80]

Eric Allen considered this to be cheating.

It's funny, but, being that I've never been involved in football tape watching, I always just assumed there was audio on the tapes.

It's strange to me that there isn't. And being that there isn't, and if it's such a big advantage to hear those kinds of calls, if it really does give an unfair advantage.. Why don't they make it illegal and black ball it. Now won't every single team just buy the Pats audio tapes and ruin their gameplans?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

It's funny, but, being that I've never been involved in football tape watching, I always just assumed there was audio on the tapes.

It's strange to me that there isn't. And being that there isn't, and if it's such a big advantage to hear those kinds of calls, if it really does give an unfair advantage.. Why don't they make it illegal and black ball it. Now won't every single team just buy the Pats audio tapes and ruin their gameplans?

I seem to recall some defenders talking about their efforts to listen to QB cadence in the tape room. Seems Miami just did a better job of breaking down the tape.

 

[Michigan Dave]

It's funny, but, being that I've never been involved in football tape watching, I always just assumed there was audio on the tapes.

It's strange to me that there isn't. And being that there isn't, and if it's such a big advantage to hear those kinds of calls, if it really does give an unfair advantage.. Why don't they make it illegal and black ball it. Now won't every single team just buy the Pats audio tapes and ruin their gameplans?

Nope, no audio. Football taping is pretty sweet. Everything is digitized now. After practice, a coach can go straight to his office, sit at his computer, and go over the practice by drill, player, position, you name it. Basically, there are guys taping wide/tight angle of each TEAM (re: scrimmage) period. They also tape each individual drill. Practices are broken down into periods, and after each drill (which may take several 5 minute periods, or just 1), the tapes are switched, and thrown down to "runners" who literally run the tape to the video coordinator's office. He syncs them, and digitizes them straight to the team's computer system. So, a coach can look at a spliced tape of that day's 1 on 1 (DB v. WR) drill by searching for players, or can watch a tape of wide/tight angle by play from practice. Pretty cool stuff. When they get the film of the opponent, it's already digital. They have GAs who break it down and organize so you can watch by formation, personnel, whatever. They do the same for their footage, so Brady can go back this week and watch how the Texans played him in shotgun 2 wide split left on 3rd and 5-10 in the 2004 game. The football libraries are amazing.

Anyways, as for the audio question, there is none, and it really is no advantage. Players pretty much know the audibles from team to team, and many of the dummy calls are mixed in there. Hell, as a fan I know that "Omaha" is a dummy call for the Pats, for instance. There really isn't anything to be gained by knowing the line calls. It would be more advantageous for a QB to know a defense's calls, because the offense really isn't going to mask anything. Offensive "audibles" or adjustments in protection are mainly reactionary anyways.

The media likes to make a big play over "secrecy" and "espionage" in football. Personally, I wouldn't worry about it at all. I can tell you Ohio State's line adjustments, but that doesn't mean I can stop them.

 

[Patfandango]

There is. It's a situation where Maroney would've been useful. Utilizing his speed on wheel routes from the backfield or passes in the flat would force the defense to increase their splits and allow for better protection. Also, using the TEs by playing an offense's version of the "bump n' run", where they lineup down, give a quick shoulder to the lineman to buy a second, and run a quick 3-5 yard curl. The QB can throw to a spot, and you can move the ball that way. We could've pounded them on the ground, too. Dillon was running alright, and mixing it up with Faulk would've helped, too, in Maroney's absence. Ideally, these strategies will force the defense to cheat up, and open up those receivers. Our offense, however, was quite random, and didn't seem to be attacking any 1 aspect of the defense. It was as if the plays were called by randomly pointing at the chart. I know offensive charts are typically quite specific as to what plays they will run in certain d&d situations, and some of the plays I saw left me shaking my head in bewilderment.

.

It's post like this that make this such a great site! Excellent analysis, Michigan Dave. I always learn alot from your input. Thanks muchly.

 

[NYCPatsFan]

Nope, no audio. ...

The media likes to make a big play over "secrecy" and "espionage" in football. Personally, I wouldn't worry about it at all. I can tell you Ohio State's line adjustments, but that doesn't mean I can stop them.

That hurts! I was desperately hoping for some explanation why the offense collapsed so badly especially considering that the other teams (Packers for heavens sake!) scored well against the Fins playing at Miami.

I guess it might be better to temper the expectations and accept the very possible (and highly probable) scenario that the current team will not go beyond the first round in the playoffs, especially if Wilfork and Watson are hurt.

But wait, why am I looking at the playoffs?? What if we continue this trend and we lose to the Jags (very sure about this), the Titans and gulp, the Texans?? :bricks:

 

[IcyPatriot]

My post on 3-wide receivers was generally dismissed in the thread I wrote...they could have beaten the Dolphins going 3-wide with no problem ... still unresolved is why they didn't.

http://208.109.107.176/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=46045

 

[big mike]

Sounds like about 13 players on defense.

We should be able to get about 8 yards a carry, I figure.

Exactly. The way to attack that defense is to RUN THE BALL. Indy has somewhat of the same problem - their D-Line is entirely focused on rushing the QB. Miami uses its D-Line to pressure the passer, while the defensive backs focus almost entirely on the receivers. That should make them very vulnerable to the run.

It definitely hurt a lot not having Maroney, but Dillon and the others were still able to do quite well rushing the ball. I don't understand at all why we didn't focus more on the run, since it was working so well. Keep running the ball until their D-Line has to stop focusing on trying to get upfield to pressure Brady, and the safeties start coming in to try to stop the run - which makes them alter their coverage scheme. THEN pass.

That, and we should have focused a lot more on the RB and TE screens. Miami did a fair amount of blitzing - and teams that blitz and have their D-Line focus on rushing the QB are very vulnerable to screens. Yet, we hardly ran any. Very bad play-calling IMO. Not just that game, but much of the year. Our offensive schemes haven't really focused much on taking advantage of what the defense is doing (another example is against Indy, when we did wayyyy too much passing against a horrendous rush defense).

 

[DefenseRules]

Exactly. The way to attack that defense is to RUN THE BALL. Indy has somewhat of the same problem - their D-Line is entirely focused on rushing the QB. Miami uses its D-Line to pressure the passer, while the defensive backs focus almost entirely on the receivers. That should make them very vulnerable to the run.

It definitely hurt a lot not having Maroney, but Dillon and the others were still able to do quite well rushing the ball. I don't understand at all why we didn't focus more on the run, since it was working so well. Keep running the ball until their D-Line has to stop focusing on trying to get upfield to pressure Brady, and the safeties start coming in to try to stop the run - which makes them alter their coverage scheme. THEN pass.

That, and we should have focused a lot more on the RB and TE screens. Miami did a fair amount of blitzing - and teams that blitz and have their D-Line focus on rushing the QB are very vulnerable to screens. Yet, we hardly ran any. Very bad play-calling IMO. Not just that game, but much of the year. Our offensive schemes haven't really focused much on taking advantage of what the defense is doing (another example is against Indy, when we did wayyyy too much passing against a horrendous rush defense).

Mcdaniels ears would have been bleeding if he had been at my house the last two weeks. Loud chants and screams of "RUN THE F'N FOOTBALL!!" have become a common saying in my house. We have what 5 RBs on the roster? Why keep so many backs if you are not going to use them when it counts?