Attacking Baltimore thru the air...2 different strategies

[borg]

Verses Baltimore, SF chose to attack with a more vertical passing game than NE.

20+ yard completions......SF = 8.......NE = 3

# of players with 20+ yard completions......SF = 4......NE = 1

TE comparison......reception yards

Davis.......20,24,29,11,8,18,14
AHern......9,8,10,8,8,7,17,5,11

WR comparison

Crabtree.....19,6,29,31,24
Moss...........9,32

Lloyd..........8,13,16,3,6,12,12
Welker.......7,24,1,24,8,5,36,12

Deep balls completed (CBS Sportsline gave detailed description of yards via air and YAC for the SB.....But....in AFC Champioship game, only listed short and deep passes.....So I am taking liberty here)......

Deep balls completed(in air)....+20 yds....SF=4....NE=2
# of players catching deep balls (+20 yds in air).....SF=3......NE=1

So....it's pretty clear SF attacked down field while NE lived closer to the LOS.

NOW....here's the stat that blows my mind

Brady..........29/54=53%
Kaepernick...16/28=57%

Brady ............11.0 yds/completion
Kaepernick......18.8 yds/completion

Funny how the efficient high % NE passing offense was less accurate and much less productive/pass than SF

Comparing the SF and NE offenses is an apples to oranges exercise no doubt open to lots of interpretation.....but....

.......Can we agree that Baltimore was vulnerable to down field passes as demonstrated by SF, yet NE's only successful down field target was their diminutive slot receiver. Seeing the success SF had moving the ball against Baltimore demonstrates to me at least that NE has an offensive philosophy issue and a personnel issue. Both NE and SF both ended up losing to Balt., but one team scored 31 and the other scored 13. I'll take a 57% passing game averaging 18+ yds/ comp. over a 53% passing game averaging 11 yds/ comp every day.

Edit: Just want to add a little salt to the NE wound....the NE high % short passing game that underperformed with a 53% completion rate....Brady had 25 incompletions......In other words, the passing game had 25 plays of ZERO yards. Factoring in 3 runs of "no gain", 34% of NE's plays went for zero yds. (If including 3 NE turnovers, % rises to 38% of plays went for no gain or worse)

 

[Rob0729]

The Pats "decided" to attack the Ravens' defense without their best offensive weapon other than Brady. Considering the way Vernon Davis totally owned the Ravens' LBs, Gronk probably would have had a monster game if he was healthy two weeks ago.

If the Pats had Gronk, they game would have been different even without a deep threat. The Pats might not have won, but they definitely would have scored more points especially since they had little problem moving the ball down the field and stalled in the red zone. Five trips in the red zone with one TD. That is why the Pats lost that game on offense. Not the deep ball stuff.

Don't forget that Brady threw for 320 yards vs. Kapernick's 302. The Pats had no problem moving the ball. They had problem scoring points. That was because they had no red zone target where Gronk is one of the best. The Pats had 4 drives of 10 or more plays resulting in 10 points, one loss on downs, and an INT. They had two other drives of 7 or more plays which ended in a field goal and a punt.

Also the 49ers were aided by a 35 minute blackout because prior to the blackout, they were doing little on offense that worked and it seemed the blackout affected the Ravens more on both sides of the ball in a negative way.

 

[patsfaninpa]

Because SF completed 2 more passes in the air than us over 20 yards(4_2), we have a proven scientific study. Yikes.

As Rob mentioned, Gronk being out hindered us last year in the Super Bowl and this year in the AFCCG. I don't think AHern ever got healthy either.

Kaepernick was throwing against their base defense. They used their nickell the whole game against us. Sans 2-3 plays. We have to figure out how to run the ball against them and it will open up the passing game. That said. Their defense is going to take a hit in free agency now that they have to pay their qb more than 4.5m per year.

I wouldn't have a problem drafting a wr early. 1st or 2nd round. But, it ain't that simple.

 

[borg]

The Pats "decided" to attack the Ravens' defense without their best offensive weapon other than Brady. Considering the way Vernon Davis totally owned the Ravens' LBs, Gronk probably would have had a monster game if he was healthy two weeks ago.

If the Pats had Gronk, they game would have been different even without a deep threat. The Pats might not have won, but they definitely would have scored more points especially since they had little problem moving the ball down the field and stalled in the red zone. Five trips in the red zone with one TD. That is why the Pats lost that game on offense. Not the deep ball stuff.

Don't forget that Brady threw for 320 yards vs. Kapernick's 302. The Pats had no problem moving the ball. They had problem scoring points. That was because they had no red zone target where Gronk is one of the best. The Pats had 4 drives of 10 or more plays resulting in 10 points, one loss on downs, and an INT. They had two other drives of 7 or more plays which ended in a field goal and a punt.

Also the 49ers were aided by a 35 minute blackout because prior to the blackout, they were doing little on offense that worked and it seemed the blackout affected the Ravens more on both sides of the ball in a negative way.

Get the violins out for those poor suffering Patriots that averaged 34 points this year without Gronk but ****-the-bit playing small ball vs Balt. Why was Baltimore in base defense vs SF..... probably because SF doesn't have a one dimensional pocket passer that prefers the small ball game. Kaepernick was dropping balls in over the top on pattens NE doesn't have the personnel to pull off. NE did what they do best to the tune of 53% completion rate rarely challenging over the top which SF proved hugely vulnerable.
If you have a one dimensional passer with a one dimensional short game, is it really a surprise that Baltimore was able to squeeze NE in the red zone.
If you haven't noticed, the recent SB winners all can get the ball down the field....Balt, NYG, GB, NO. Maybe Bill might start to think that he should add such a component. The sub 20 point playoff losses are getting old.

 

[Rob0729]

Get the violins out for those poor suffering Patriots that averaged 34 points this year without Gronk but ****-the-bit playing small ball vs Balt. Why was Baltimore in base defense vs SF..... probably because SF doesn't have a one dimensional pocket passer that prefers the small ball game. Kaepernick was dropping balls in over the top on pattens NE doesn't have the personnel to pull off. NE did what they do best to the tune of 53% completion rate rarely challenging over the top which SF proved hugely vulnerable.
If you have a one dimensional passer with a one dimensional short game, is it really a surprise that Baltimore was able to squeeze NE in the red zone.
If you haven't noticed, the recent SB winners all can get the ball down the field....Balt, NYG, GB, NO. Maybe Bill might start to think that he should add such a component. The sub 20 point playoff losses are getting old.

Ok, let's just use your fool's logic. The 49ers' offense performed better than the Pats because they completed two more passes over 20 yards than the Pats vs. the Ravens. And the 49ers had to deal with the harsh weather conditions of the Superdome while all the Pats' had was a gentle 40 MPH breeze in Foxboro.

Seriously, you are just trying to any way to push your agenda of "we need to cut Lloyd and get a deep threat".

Sorry, but losing one of the best TEs of all time is a significant factor whether you want to admit it or not. Yes, the Pats' offense is good enough to overcome it against most teams, but losing him against a good defense does affect how they play.

 

[borg]

Ok, let's just use your fool's logic. The 49ers' offense performed better than the Pats because they completed two more passes over 20 yards than the Pats vs. the Ravens. And the 49ers had to deal with the harsh weather conditions of the Superdome while all the Pats' had was a gentle 40 MPH breeze in Foxboro.

Seriously, you are just trying to any way to push your agenda of "we need to cut Lloyd and get a deep threat".

Sorry, but losing one of the best TEs of all time is a significant factor whether you want to admit it or not. Yes, the Pats' offense is good enough to overcome it against most teams, but losing him against a good defense does affect how they play.

Start by learning to read........."20+ yard completions......SF = 8.......NE = 3"

I'll even rephrase this stat for you....50% of SF's completed passes went for 20+ yds vs Baltimore while only 10% of NE's completed passes went for 20+ yards. Think there may be some relationship between the deep passing game and points scored? Not yet?

Second, understand that 57% completion rate averaging 18 yds/catch is significantly better than 53% and 11 yds/catch. Small ball did get NE 13 points

Thirdly, realize NE had 31 plays of ZERO yds or worse on offense. Tough to score on the 6 yard pass with another 5 YAC when 38% of NE's snaps produced NOTHING

Guess it is difficult for you to digest that Baltimore was vulnerable to a deep passing game and NE failed to challenge Baltimore in this department and instead chose to do what they always do.....small ball at a 53% clip......scoring 13 points.
You keep leaning on the Gronk absence but never include the missing pieces by Baltimore...like their best DB. When Talib goes down, this board is quick to point out how the Pats can't overcome that loss. The Ravens......they don't get any praise for overcoming a huge loss by holding Brady to 53%.....Please......try a little independent thought for a change instead of pulling out the Gronk card when it suits you best. Every team faces depleted rosters this time of year and you go with what you got. It just so happens that Bill's plan B was inadequate with only 3 reliable pass catchers on the roster.

As far as Lloyd goes, I don't want to cut him, I want him as the #3 WR. Without any play making skills with the ball in his hand, he shouldn't be a 3 down player. His role should be limited to 3rd downs and three WR sets. Crabtree created 53 YAC vs Baltimore, Lloyd created 6 YAC in both playoff games combined.

And of course the excuse making wouldn't be complete without playing the weather card. In the AFC championship,Flacco was a 58% passer completing 20+ yard completions to 3 different receivers while Brady played his small ball game at a 53% clip. Flacco even managed 3 passing TDs with zero picks while the weather held Brady to 1 TD and 2 picks.
Keep the excuses coming...one might stick

 

[Rob0729]

Start by learning to read........."20+ yard completions......SF = 8.......NE = 3"

Second, understand that 57% completion rate averaging 18 yds/catch is significantly better than 53% and 11 yds/catch.

Thirdly, realize NE had 31 plays of ZERO yds or worse on offense.

Guess it is difficult for you to digest that Baltimore was vulnerable to a deep passing game and NE failed to challenge Baltimore in this department and instead chose to do what they always do.....small ball at a 53% clip......scoring 13 points.
You keep leaning on the Gronk absence but never inject missing pieces from Baltimore...like their best DB. Sorry....53% completion rate is horrific, especially when you factor in the minimal yds created.

I keep on talking about Gronk. Why would I? The best player on the Pats' offense not named Brady. It is quite clear Baltimore has no problem shutting down Vernon Davis to 6 catches for 104 yards. Seriously, you think the loss of Gronk had no or minimal effect when he did so well against them in the AFCCG last year before he got hurt and they game planned their entire defense to stop him in the regular season game this year?

Also, you do realize that they totally shutdown the 49ers' offense (6 points in the first half) until the power went out and they ended up being flat coming out of that break.

Also, one of their TD drives was a 20 yard drive because they got a TURNOVER (something the Pats failed to produce). It was their second TD drive of the game and that turnover and sequence of plays afterwards (not a single long pass on that drive). Yes, it was Kaepernick's deep ball passing that allowed the 49ers to strip Ray Rice on the Ravens' 20 where the Pats' defense couldn't cause a turnover.

BTW, the 49ers' long ball attack produced 6 points in the first half. It wasn't until an extra long half time followed by a 35 extra half time because of the blackout did the

I didn't bother to read your original post because I knew the agenda behind it. And I didn't look at the numbers. So I apologize for the lack of knowing the numbers.

Your analysis is without looking at what really happened in the entire game. The long ball attack wasn't working for the 49ers until the Ravens had over 60 minutes of break time to get cold on both sides of the ball. Up until the blackout, it showed the Ravens at being pretty good at stopping the long ball. They lost their edge after the blackout and it took until the fourth quarter to get it back.

 

[ALP]

I'll say philosophy is the first problem

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...3417-biggest-problem-pats-passing-attack.html

We will only know if its personnel as well after the philosophy changes

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

I keep on talking about Gronk. Why would I? The best player on the Pats' offense not named Brady. It is quite clear Baltimore has no problem shutting down Vernon Davis to 6 catches for 104 yards. Seriously, you think the loss of Gronk had no or minimal effect when he did so well against them in the AFCCG last year before he got hurt and they game planned their entire defense to stop him in the regular season game this year?

Also, you do realize that they totally shutdown the 49ers' offense (6 points in the first half) until the power went out and they ended up being flat coming out of that break.

Also, one of their TD drives was a 20 yard drive because they got a TURNOVER (something the Pats failed to produce). It was their second TD drive of the game and that turnover and sequence of plays afterwards (not a single long pass on that drive). Yes, it was Kaepernick's deep ball passing that allowed the 49ers to strip Ray Rice on the Ravens' 20 where the Pats' defense couldn't cause a turnover.

BTW, the 49ers' long ball attack produced 6 points in the first half. It wasn't until an extra long half time followed by a 35 extra half time because of the blackout did the

I didn't bother to read your original post because I knew the agenda behind it. And I didn't look at the numbers. So I apologize for the lack of knowing the numbers.

Your analysis is without looking at what really happened in the entire game. The long ball attack wasn't working for the 49ers until the Ravens had over 60 minutes of break time to get cold on both sides of the ball. Up until the blackout, it showed the Ravens at being pretty good at stopping the long ball. They lost their edge after the blackout and it took until the fourth quarter to get it back.

Another good post, Rob. I don't usually look at the name of the poster, but that's two in a row that I completely agree on.

I predicted before the game that the Niners would win because Vernon Davis is a complete matchup nightmare for the Ravens. The Niners lost, but Davis sure had his way with them and was a finger tip away from having perhaps the greatest game from a TE in Super Bowl history (I don't know for sure, but I'm thinking 150 yards has to be up there.)

I don't know why everyone is whining whenever someone brings up the Gronkowski injury as a critical reason for our offense's implosion against the Ravens. The Ravens have exactly the type of defense where a tight end like Davis or Gronkowski becomes their kryptonite. Very slow linebackers (hey, reminds me of another team I know) that can't cover. Gronk was money against the Ravens in week 3 this season and that was without Hernandez (so with a lot of double teams). In addition, a tight end like that allows you to disguise run versus pass better, and the Ravens are a team that will destroy you if they can make you one dimensional.

Not sure if the Patriots would have won with Gronkowski, just because the Ravens were really, really tough and clicking at the right time. But anyone who thinks because the Patriots averaged 34 ppg without him means his absence meant little, well, they are clueless about matchups and schemes.

I truly believe Gronkowski is the best non-quarterback in the NFL, but that's another argument. Brief summary, his yards per target over the last two years are the best in the league, his TD total is the best in the league despite missing five games, and that doesn't account for the run blocking and ability to playaction and open up the field for other players.

However, I do think the Patriots would benefit tremendously from an big, athletic outside threat. That doesn't mean that they should get one at all costs, as we are in the salary cap era, and every team has weaknesses and strategies to compensate.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

we missed gronk badly 2 weeks ago...

 

[Boomer B]

Pointing at not having Gronk is closing our eyes to the fact that this team (even when Gronk is playing) cannot stretch the field. To point at Vernon Davis as the nightmare TE matchup for the Ravens that could have been Gronk in our game makes me wonder why no one is bringing up Hernandez's name. Isn't he supposed to be a nightmare TE matchup also? Couldn't he of played the role of Vernon Davis in our game?

Gronk obviously has a huge impact on games, and no one can deny that, but this offense's kryptonite in the playoffs is D's that play tough (like ours used to) and clamp down on the short passing attack. The answer is to move Lloyd to 3rd WR were he can fall down after the catch all he likes, and get someone in his spot who can stretch the field. The Pats have to put multiple play drives together to score (and against lessor competition they do so with ease) but rarely can get a score on 1 big play. Look at the Ravens yesterday, they were a threat to score on any given play and the 49ers had to respect that.

 

[DocHoliday]

Pointing at not having Gronk is closing our eyes to the fact that this team (even when Gronk is playing) cannot stretch the field. To point at Vernon Davis as the nightmare TE matchup for the Ravens that could have been Gronk in our game makes me wonder why no one is bringing up Hernandez's name. Isn't he supposed to be a nightmare TE matchup also? Couldn't he of played the role of Vernon Davis in our game?

Gronk obviously has a huge impact on games, and no one can deny that, but this offense's kryptonite in the playoffs is D's that play tough (like ours used to) and clamp down on the short passing attack. The answer is to move Lloyd to 3rd WR were he can fall down after the catch all he likes, and get someone in his spot who can stretch the field. The Pats have to put multiple play drives together to score (and against lessor competition they do so with ease) but rarely can get a score on 1 big play. Look at the Ravens yesterday, they were a threat to score on any given play and the 49ers had to respect that.

I'd say with a healthy lineup of Welker + Edelman/Lloyd + Gronk + Hernandez + Ridley the offense doesn't need a deep threat.

The deep threat is only to make the 3WR formations we use when one of the TEs is out useful.

 

[Boomer B]

I'd say with a healthy lineup of Welker + Edelman/Lloyd + Gronk + Hernandez + Ridley the offense doesn't need a deep threat.

The deep threat is only to make the 3WR formations we use when one of the TEs is out useful.

This short ball offense has come up short badly in the playoffs for many years running. I don't see why people are so against having someone who can keep the safetys back and let NE attack the whole field. I don't think we need to blow the whole Offense up and start over, just move Lloyd to 3rd WR and put someone on the outside who beat 1 on 1 coverage and the safetys have to respect.

Lloyd was average this year, not bad but certainly not great. He was decent on the short/medium routes but couldn't get seperation deep. He doesn't bring enough to the offense to cement him as the number 1 outside option. The player they bring in doesn't have to be an all pro, just someone who can stretch the field.

 

[ay-yo]

Five trips in the red zone with one TD. That is why the Pats lost that game on offense. Not the deep ball stuff.

QFT. There shouldn't even be any more discussion about it.

I agree with the idea that we should address our weakness at passing deep but the analysis by Borg is terrible.

 

[Rob0729]

This short ball offense has come up short badly in the playoffs for many years running. I don't see why people are so against having someone who can keep the safetys back and let NE attack the whole field. I don't think we need to blow the whole Offense up and start over, just move Lloyd to 3rd WR and put someone on the outside who beat 1 on 1 coverage and the safetys have to respect.

Lloyd was average this year, not bad but certainly not great. He was decent on the short/medium routes but couldn't get seperation deep. He doesn't bring enough to the offense to cement him as the number 1 outside option. The player they bring in doesn't have to be an all pro, just someone who can stretch the field.

It was only three years ago when the Saints won the Super Bowl. They are a short ball offense. And the Pats were one dropped pass away from winning the Super Bowl last year with a hobbled Gronk. Let's not act like you cannot win the Super Bowl with the Pats' offense as constituted.

 

[Foxypats]

Everyone points out that the loss of Gronk was huge for this team. While that is certainly true, I hate the fact that this team has become so heavily relient on one player that if an injury occurs to said player than we crumble! Injuries are part of the game, there is no guarantee that it won't happen again so getting a WR that can stretch the field and that can pick up the load when Gronk is out is a top priority IMO. Wes is great but defenses can play it safe when Gronk is out and I don't think Wes can take over a game and win it for us. It hasn't happened till now so I don't see that happening in the future either!!

 

[Rob0729]

Everyone points out that the loss of Gronk was huge for this team. While that is certainly true, I hate the fact that this team has become so heavily relient on one player that if an injury occurs to said player than we crumble! Injuries are part of the game, there is no guarantee that it won't happen again so getting a WR that can stretch the field and that can pick up the load when Gronk is out is a top priority IMO. Wes is great but defenses can play it safe when Gronk is out and I don't think Wes can take over a game and win it for us. It hasn't happened till now so I don't see that happening in the future either!!

Name the offense that if they lose their HOF caliber receiver (TE or WR) that their offense doesn't take a hit. Do you think the Ravens would have won last night without Boldin? And he isn't the impact player Boldin is.

In the current NFL, you really cannot have all that many Pro Bowl caliber skill position players on either side of the ball. The Pats' have two. Most teams have zero.

In theory, it would be good to have another stud so that the Pats don't have to rely on Gronk. The reality they can't and this team is good enough to win 9 times out of 10 or better without him.

Also, the loss of Gronk alone wasn't the problem. His absence was the biggest problem on offense. But Hernandez not being 100%, too many dropped balls. Edelman being gone, questionable play calls and clock management, and penalties all played into the struggles on offense. If the Pats played smarter and were more focused, the loss of Gronk wouldn't have been as glaring.