Five reasons to expect the Pats to favor a spread offense

[Fencer]

1. For most of Brady's career, he's been at his best in a spread offense.
2. The 2-TE set didn't seem to deliver on its promise. At least, it didn't show much consistency in delivering.
3. The team's best hybrid catching/blocking TE was allowed to walk.
4. The Pats have been collecting WRs like mad, with the biggest investment going into a "pure" slot receiver.
5. The RB signings were of good receivers.

This hardly amounts to proof that the Pats are going to go to, say, a base offense with 3 wides. But it's pretty suggestive in that general direction.

 

[captain stone]

If the pats go to a spread as its base, then Kyle Brady better be joined at the hip to "Pro Bowl" LT Matt Light; otherwise Tom Brady will finish the season on IR.

 

[richpats]

If the pats go to a spread as its base, then Kyle Brady better be joined at the hip to "Pro Bowl" LT Matt Light; otherwise Tom Brady will finish the season on IR.

From what I hear from some Jags fans, he is essentially another LT.

 

[patsox23]

The Patriots will mix it up, no matter what, like they always do, IMO.

 

[BelichickFan]

1. For most of Brady's career, he's been at his best in a spread offense.
2. The 2-TE set didn't seem to deliver on its promise. At least, it didn't show much consistency in delivering.
3. The team's best hybrid catching/blocking TE was allowed to walk.
4. The Pats have been collecting WRs like mad, with the biggest investment going into a "pure" slot receiver.
5. The RB signings were of good receivers.

This hardly amounts to proof that the Pats are going to go to, say, a base offense with 3 wides. But it's pretty suggestive in that general direction.

6 - Belichick's infatuation with Urban Meyer and his spread offense.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

The Patriots will mix it up, no matter what, like they always do, IMO.

I agree. I believe the Pats personnel on offense is structured to be as flexible as needed. As such I believe they'll design their offensive gameplan to exploit their opponent's weakness that particular game. Flip a coin as to what styled offense that entails.

 

[BelichickFan]

The Patriots will mix it up, no matter what, like they always do, IMO.

But they'll still have a base offense. Just like they have a base defense and mix it up from there. It does seem like they were more successful with the spread offense last year vs,. the 2 TE/2 WR offense and adding more quality WR should only add to that.

 

[Fencer]

6 - Belichick's infatuation with Urban Meyer and

Yep, that's one of the lesser reasons that didn't make my list.

Of course the Pats will mix it up heavily. Still, they definitely have seemed in recent years to have a default-choice set, that being 2-TE. What I'm suggesting is that the default might be changed.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

Of course the Pats will mix it up heavily. Still, they definitely have seemed in recent years to have a default-choice set, that being 2-TE. What I'm suggesting is that the default might be changed.

Sure it could change and probably largely depends on which of the new WR's or Thomas progresses the fastest.

I'm going to go with Thomas and I expect to see plenty of him and Watson out there in 2 TE sets. Toss in Stallworth, Welker and Maroney and we're very good to go.

 

[Snarf]

7 - New feature running back Maroney would operate far better in a spread offense where his speed and agility can be best put to use.

Totally agree with OP. Looks like we'll be seeing a LOT of spread next season.

This can be even more powerful if Brady and co work on hurry-up and no-huddle play calling.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Hmm - I think I can give more than 5 reasons come to think of it - 10' spretty easy:

1. Stallworth
2. Watson
3. Welker
4. Caldwell
5. Faulk
6. Gaffney
7. Thomas
8. Washington
9. Maroney
10. Vrabel (yes, Mike Vrabel, TD specialist)

 

[psychoPat]

Quite persuasive.
Especially the comparative "failure" of the 2-TE set.

 

[Metaphors]

1. For most of Brady's career, he's been at his best in a spread offense.
2. The 2-TE set didn't seem to deliver on its promise. At least, it didn't show much consistency in delivering.
3. The team's best hybrid catching/blocking TE was allowed to walk.
4. The Pats have been collecting WRs like mad, with the biggest investment going into a "pure" slot receiver.
5. The RB signings were of good receivers.

This hardly amounts to proof that the Pats are going to go to, say, a base offense with 3 wides. But it's pretty suggestive in that general direction.

1. The spread has worked well in changing the pace of a game, but limited evidence (Minnesota game) that it works consistently as a base.
2. The offense had consistency problems last year but I would hardly say that was a formation issue. On the whole, point production was just fine.
3. Investing 2 first day picks (Watson/Thomas), a 4th-round pick (Mills) and a FA signing (Brady) on the TE/H-back position indicates a significant interest in multiple TE sets...even with Graham allowed to walk.
4. The certain WR investment beyond this year is Welker and CJ (though Stallworth likely survives past this year). Not really Air Belichick...
5. The RBs are all pretty solid in the running game as well. Faulk is really the only one known for receiving over running/blocking/ST.

Your facts are fine and your conclusions are reasonable (I may even agree with you with some more thought on my part), but there is evidence that says the 2-TE base formation will continue. So the conclusion I would draw, and that others on this thread have drawn, is that BB wants the offense to be able to do anything depending on the opponent, game conditions, scoreboard or any other factors that may pop up.

 

[Fencer]

1. The spread has worked well in changing the pace of a game, but limited evidence (Minnesota game) that it works consistently as a base.

Fair enough.

But there's compelling evidence that it works as a change-of-pace.

And I don't know of any reasons why it would only work for a certain number of series per game or anything like that. I don't even think it gets Brady hit more often than other sets do, except to the extent there are more actual passing plays, which there wouldn't necessarily be.

 

[BradyManny]

Tom Brady would certainly be happy if he spread them out more often. He doesn't go a week on his Monday morning EEI talk without mentioning how much he loves it.

 

[Metaphors]

And I don't know of any reasons why it would only work for a certain number of series per game or anything like that.

Absolutely agree. I see it as dependent on the timing of the entire offense (blocking, crisp routes, quick draw plays, etc.). I could see that working for extended stretches of a game. It does make you more vulnerable to disruptive players on the opposing defense, particularly edge rushers and middle blitzes. It was clear that Minnesota didn't have anything there. Miami? That's another story...

 

[Fencer]

Tom Brady would certainly be happy if he spread them out more often.

There must be a potential Giselle joke in there somewhere ...

He doesn't go a week on his Monday morning EEI talk without mentioning how much he loves it.

That's the kind of thing that makes me view it as a good idea! :bricks:

 

[VJCPatriot]

This offense is going to be sick. Even better than 2006. I'm thinking we are going to threaten 30 ppg.

 

[BradyManny]

There must be a potential Giselle joke in there somewhere ...

LOL...I actually didn't think of that one. I was, however, going to make a 30 Rock reference and say "Brady loves ths spread offense so much, he wants to take it back behind the middle school, and get it pregnant". I decided that wouldn't be appropriate at this time.

That's the kind of thing that makes me view it as a good idea! :bricks:

I don't get why that would result in bricks...Am I missing the point of the bricks smiley?

 

[Fencer]

Am I missing the point of the bricks smiley?

I was using it as a proxy for a highly compelling point that is obvious when you think about it.