Offensive Playcalling was Average to Atrocious

[maverick4]

(posted this in last night's temporary forum, I guess it wasn't migrated over to the main one):

I was very disappointed by the play-calling, and before you say it's because we lost, I have been calling out McDaniels' work a few times this season even when we were winning and scoring a bazillion points. The offensive calls were slow to adjust, and didn't take advantage of the Giants' going for the pass rush every single down. Where were the 3-step drops, no huddle, inside runs and traps and draws, the slants, the screens? When it was clear our O-Line couldn't handle the Giants' pass rush in the first quarter, we should have stopped going for the home run and all the slow-developing plays that we kept trying to do in the second half, especially in the final drive. There is no excuse for 5 sacks and 18 knockdowns of Brady in the game, the O-Line was outplayed but you also have to blame the playcalling for stats like that.

The final drive was, in one word, inexcusable. We had 30 seconds, all 3 timeouts, and we basically chuck it deep to Moss twice and also have a sack on *another* slow developing pass pattern?

Basically, I think Josh McDaniels is one of the luckest coaches in the NFL. The Pats are so stacked at offensive talent that this guy gets bailed out for average playcalling that is not just slow to adjust, but also becoming very predictable. Well, the Superbowl exposed his inexperience, it shows he doesn't know what to do against certain things, he may be a good worker but he isn't a strategy genius. And Belichick should be more hands-on with the offense instead of let such a young guy run the show.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

(posted this in last night's temporary forum, I guess it wasn't migrated over to the main one):

I was very disappointed by the play-calling, and before you say it's because we lost, I have been calling out McDaniels' work a few times this season even when we were winning and scoring a bazillion points. The offensive calls were slow to adjust, and didn't take advantage of the Giants' going for the pass rush every single down. Where were the 3-step drops, no huddle, inside runs and traps and draws, the slants, the screens? When it was clear our O-Line couldn't handle the Giants' pass rush in the first quarter, we should have stopped going for the home run and all the slow-developing plays that we kept trying to do in the second half, especially in the final drive. There is no excuse for 5 sacks and 18 knockdowns of Brady in the game, the O-Line was outplayed but you also have to blame the playcalling for stats like that.

The final drive was, in one word, inexcusable. We had 30 seconds, all 3 timeouts, and we basically chuck it deep to Moss twice and also have a sack on *another* slow developing pass pattern?

Basically, I think Josh McDaniels is one of the luckest coaches in the NFL. The Pats are so stacked at offensive talent that this guy gets bailed out for average playcalling that is not just slow to adjust, but also becoming very predictable. Well, the Superbowl exposed his inexperience, it shows he doesn't know what to do against certain things, he may be a good worker but he isn't a strategy genius. And Belichick should be more hands-on with the offense instead of let such a young guy run the show.

ummm, first off, i thought ole josh did much better this year with play calling, than last year(up till the playoffs). with that said, i COMPLETELY AGREE WITH EVERYTHING ELSE YOU SAID. no quick passes? screens, etc, would have helped greatly.

 

[MRBLAZE]

It was inexcusable. However, I don't think BB is wrong about McDaniels. I have a lot of faith in Bill, McDaniels is going to win Super Bowls as a head coach one day, it just sucks that his learning curve had to occur at the least opportune time. I'm still shocked adjustments weren't made sooner. And I don't give a damn what anyone says or that Stephen missed the 35yder against the Jags and shanked the kickoff, you take the 49yder in such a low-scoring defensive struggle. That was just insane.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

It was inexcusable. However, I don't think BB is wrong about McDaniels. I have a lot of faith in Bill, McDaniels is going to win Super Bowls as a head coach one day, it just sucks that his learning curve had to occur at the least opportune time. I'm still shocked adjustments weren't made sooner. And I don't give a damn what anyone says or that Stephen missed the 35yder against the Jags and shanked the kickoff, you take the 49yder in such a low-scoring defensive struggle. That was just insane.

has b.b. said anything about why he made that call?? it was bizzzzzare.

 

[maverick4]

Another thing I thought of, was I can't recall maybe more than 1 time we used shotgun... how do you not use shotgun, or more 3-step-drops, or many other strategies listed above, against a devastating pass rush?

 

[unoriginal]

Another thing I thought of, was I can't recall maybe more than 1 time we used shotgun... how do you not use shotgun, or more 3-step-drops, or many other strategies listed above, against a devastating pass rush?

I sincerely and completely question your recollection.

I also will politely ask if you know what a shotgun formation is.

I'm trying not to be rude here but either you (a) are confused about football terminology, (b) did not watch the same game the rest of us saw, or (c) are suffering from amnesiac shock.

 

[maverick4]

If this thread is true, I'm not surprised, it confirms what I thought already, that our gameplan sucked, and McDaniels refused to deviate or adjust to what the Giants were doing:

McDaniels to Brady: 'We are not changing a thing'
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=77229

 

[maverick4]

I read all the recent offensive threads, especially the one about the poster concerned that he/she isn't sure what happened this time won't happen again.

I think that a common demoninator for our struggles in the playoffs, ever since 2004, is McDaniels.
I'd say that for both of our crushing losses at Denver, at Indy, and against the Giants, there was talk about slow or failed adjustments on offense, and how the offense let us down, or simply 'didn't execute'.

When are people going to finally call this guy out?

 

[JoeSixPat]

I've been tough on McDaniels in the past as well - though its interesting to note the 180 degrees difference he's had in personnel and therefore 2 very different challenges.

In 2006 I fault him for completely giving up on a deep game - even though he didn't have the greatest talent I don't think you can EVER give up on trying to keep defenses honest.

He gave up and the team paid the consequences, with the OL deserving twice as much credit for a job well done in 2006 than in 2007.

In 2007 he had Moss - and while the Brady to Moss combination - that of course opened up Welker quite nicely - was unstoppable in the first half, teams began to adjust in the 2nd half and I never saw McDaniels adjust well. We certainly had some additional talent on the field and I don't feel like he utilized Stallworth all that well, or even Watson.

I hope that the lure of a record for Moss and Brady didn't affect his playcalling, but it remained far too Moss centered for my preference, especially when Moss was being double teamed consistently.

Most people won't look beyond the 16-0 mark and therefore wouldn't think of criticizing McDaniels, but he's far from perfect, and has learned, I hope, two polar opposite lessons on playcalling in the last 2 years.

 

[maverick4]

People keep apologizing for this guy like they apologized for Bledsoe.
First the excuse was the lack of offensive talent, but even with a stacked offense the guy falls apart when it comes to big time games against tough defenses. One great example is our last superbowl drive with 3 timeouts, what does the guy do, call multiple deep bombs and low developing plays to Moss, when he knows Brady has been sacked or knocked down 20+ times already in the game.

The past 3 straight years against Denver, Indy, and NY, this guy has been out-coached on the offensive side of the ball.
Can't blame the lack of talent anymore, at some point people have to start looking at the guy responsible for calling the plays, being the field strategist, and running the unit.

 

[DaBruinz]

(posted this in last night's temporary forum, I guess it wasn't migrated over to the main one):

I was very disappointed by the play-calling, and before you say it's because we lost, I have been calling out McDaniels' work a few times this season even when we were winning and scoring a bazillion points. The offensive calls were slow to adjust, and didn't take advantage of the Giants' going for the pass rush every single down. Where were the 3-step drops, no huddle, inside runs and traps and draws, the slants, the screens? When it was clear our O-Line couldn't handle the Giants' pass rush in the first quarter, we should have stopped going for the home run and all the slow-developing plays that we kept trying to do in the second half, especially in the final drive. There is no excuse for 5 sacks and 18 knockdowns of Brady in the game, the O-Line was outplayed but you also have to blame the playcalling for stats like that.

The final drive was, in one word, inexcusable. We had 30 seconds, all 3 timeouts, and we basically chuck it deep to Moss twice and also have a sack on *another* slow developing pass pattern?

Basically, I think Josh McDaniels is one of the luckest coaches in the NFL. The Pats are so stacked at offensive talent that this guy gets bailed out for average playcalling that is not just slow to adjust, but also becoming very predictable. Well, the Superbowl exposed his inexperience, it shows he doesn't know what to do against certain things, he may be a good worker but he isn't a strategy genius. And Belichick should be more hands-on with the offense instead of let such a young guy run the show.

You do realize that Brady has free reign to make audible calls at the line. So if you are going to slam McDaniels, you also have to slam Brady. You also have to remember that Brady is the one responsible for calling out the MIKE so that the O-line can make its blocking adjustments.

I am all for being critical about McDaniels and I have been critical of him in the past. Just remember that there are 2 other people who have input on the plays. One of them is Tom Brady.

 

[Deus Irae]

People keep apologizing for this guy like they apologized for Bledsoe.
First the excuse was the lack of offensive talent, but even with a stacked offense the guy falls apart when it comes to big time games against tough defenses. One great example is our last superbowl drive with 3 timeouts, what does the guy do, call multiple deep bombs and low developing plays to Moss, when he knows Brady has been sacked or knocked down 20+ times already in the game.

The past 3 straight years against Denver, Indy, and NY, this guy has been out-coached on the offensive side of the ball.
Can't blame the lack of talent anymore, at some point people have to start looking at the guy responsible for calling the plays, being the field strategist, and running the unit.

The offense was fine against the Colts and needs no apologists. In Denver, I'm pretty sure that it wasn't the O.C. that was playing catch with Bailey in the endzone, and it wasn't the O.C. that was making phantom pass interference calls.

Now, against the Giants, I'm sure that you could have found the plays that miraculously had Neal recover from injury, Mankins stop playing the worst game of his life, Light stop making false starts and Brady's ankle healing to 100% and sharpen his reads of the defense. However, nobody else in the world was going to find those magical plays.

 

[DaBruinz]

People keep apologizing for this guy like they apologized for Bledsoe.
First it was the lack of offensive talent, but even with a stacked offense the guy falls apart when it comes to big time games against tough defenses. One great example is our last superbowl drive with 3 timeouts, what does the guy do, call multiple deep bombs and low developing plays to Moss, when he knows Brady has been sacked or knocked down 20+ times already in the game.

The past 3 straight years against Denver, Indy, and NY, this guy has been out-coached on the offensive side of the ball.
Can't blame the lack of talent anymore, at some point people have to start looking at the guy responsible for calling the plays, being the field strategist, and running the unit.

Sorry, but I have to cal ll BS on you.

1) The offense didn't lose the Denver game. Unless you are going to include the fumble by Hobbs on a kick-off and a fumble by Troy Brown on a punt return against the offense as well. Also, I can remember PLENTY of people pointing out how pi$$ poor the officiating was that year.

2) The game against Indy was a TEAM loss, just like the SB was. If the Pats hadn't had 3 injured RBs, they could have run the ball late in the game and taken time off the clock, making it impossible for Manning to get down the field in the time that he had. With this past SB, I don't understand why the Pats didn't run the ball at least ONCE when it was 1st and goal from the 6 yard line with 2:55 on the clock. You run the ball once and the likelihood is that you get to the 2 minute warning or you force the Giants to use a time out. Either way, they don't have 4 stoppages if they get the ball back.

Also, as I said before, you can't JUST blame Josh McDaniels. You also have to blame Brady and Belichick. ALL 3 are involved in the game plan. Also, if Belichick really thought McDaniels was doing a bad job, he'd have over-ruled him and changed the plays being sent in. On top of that, Brady does have free reign to audible at the line.

Face facts. The O-LINE stunk it up. And it would have hardly mattered if the Pats were going with screens, slants or otherwise because the O-line wasn't keeping the Giants D-line at bay long enough for even the shorter passing routes to develop.

 

[LiveShot]

I find it interesting that all his career Belichick was a genius and in the last game he lost his credability and his genius label. McDaniels has Belichick's trust in his coaching ability so he deserves the benefit of the doubt and the benefit of his years. He's just a kid. Anyone who thinks McDaniels does anything without BB's approval is a fool.

 

[unoriginal]

Face facts. The O-LINE stunk it up. And it would have hardly mattered if the Pats were going with screens, slants or otherwise because the O-line wasn't keeping the Giants D-line at bay long enough for even the shorter passing routes to develop.

Well, lets not exaggerate the point. They were at least blocking long enough for that, but the Giants coverage was geared to stopping all the short stuff. They dared the Pats to beat them deep all game. Which is why McDaniels and Brady were taking their shots downfield.

 

[Rob0729]

People keep apologizing for this guy like they apologized for Bledsoe.
First the excuse was the lack of offensive talent, but even with a stacked offense the guy falls apart when it comes to big time games against tough defenses. One great example is our last superbowl drive with 3 timeouts, what does the guy do, call multiple deep bombs and low developing plays to Moss, when he knows Brady has been sacked or knocked down 20+ times already in the game.

The past 3 straight years against Denver, Indy, and NY, this guy has been out-coached on the offensive side of the ball.
Can't blame the lack of talent anymore, at some point people have to start looking at the guy responsible for calling the plays, being the field strategist, and running the unit.

LOL! Yeah, against the Colts we only score 27 points on offense. The fact we gave up 38 points on defense has nothing to do with that loss. If you can't overcome giving up 38 points to the opposing team, you have no reason to take the field.

Funny, wasn't the call last year that the Pats would have beaten the Colts if it wasn't for Caldwell dropping a sure TD? So last year it wasn't the playcalling it was the execution, but now that Caldwell is gone it is the playcalling. Maybe we should resign Caldwell then.

Against Denver, it was purely execution. You cannot overcome 5 turnovers alinged with some questionable penalties. I'm sorry you cannot scheme three fumbles especially when two were on special teams. It wasn't the scheme's fault that the o-line screwed up their blocking assignments and allowed Lynch to come into the backfield free. And it wasn't the scheme's fault that brady made the bad choice of trying to make the play while being chased backwards when the smart move was to take the sack or throw out of bounds since he was out of the pocket.

McDaniels has his flaws, but then again so did Charlie Weis. People want to blame him for everything. Belichick trusts the guy and the offense even in 2006 has been more productive under him than Weis. That is enough for me.

 

[DaBruinz]

Well, lets not exaggerate the point. They were at least blocking long enough for that, but the Giants coverage was geared to stopping all the short stuff. They dared the Pats to beat them deep all game. Which is why McDaniels and Brady were taking their shots downfield.

The Pats TRIED some screens and slants and the Giants sniffed them out and stopped them.

The Giants defense was geared to planting Brady in the ground. Nothing more. Nothing less. They went in with the mentality that they had to hit Brady. Period.

 

[Rob0729]

The Pats TRIED some screens and slants and the Giants sniffed them out and stopped them.

The Giants defense was geared to planting Brady in the ground. Nothing more. Nothing less. They went in with the mentality that they had to hit Brady. Period.

I remember one screen where Welker got hit the second he got the ball and was wrapped up for a loss. Another where Strahan got into the backfield so fast that he batted it down. The screen was tried and it failed on that day.

 

[JoeSixPat]

You do realize that Brady has free reign to make audible calls at the line. So if you are going to slam McDaniels, you also have to slam Brady. You also have to remember that Brady is the one responsible for calling out the MIKE so that the O-line can make its blocking adjustments.

I am all for being critical about McDaniels and I have been critical of him in the past. Just remember that there are 2 other people who have input on the plays. One of them is Tom Brady.

I definately do keep that in mind... and I'd generally attribute any potential desire to give Moss the TD record to a desire on Brady's part to make it happen.

What I WOULD expect however is that McDaniels would sit Brady down and explain that unless he worked more to involve other players when Moss was double teamed that such a reliance on Moss would come back to haunt them.

The offensive production began to fall off towards the end of the season and I think the desire to force it in to Moss even when he was double teamed was part of it. I have no way of knowing if McDaniels was asserting himself and getting this point across, but from what I saw, neither Brady nor McDaniels made a major adjustment away from that trend, and it gave the defenses the opportunity to know that double teaming Moss wasn't going to hurt them as bad as it could have.

If McDaniels bears some blame for that - and IMO he does - that would be the second straight season where a major strategic flaw cost the team dearly... 2006 for giving up on the deep game and 2007 for failing to take full advantage of Moss' double teams.

 

[Rob0729]

I definately do keep that in mind... and I'd generally attribute any potential desire to give Moss the TD record to a desire on Brady's part to make it happen.

What I WOULD expect however is that McDaniels would sit Brady down and explain that unless he worked more to involve other players when Moss was double teamed that such a reliance on Moss would come back to haunt them.

The offensive production began to fall off towards the end of the season and I think the desire to force it in to Moss even when he was double teamed was part of it. I have no way of knowing if McDaniels was asserting himself and getting this point across, but from what I saw, neither Brady nor McDaniels made a major adjustment away from that trend, and it gave the defenses the opportunity to know that double teaming Moss wasn't going to hurt them as bad as it could have.

If McDaniels bears some blame for that - and IMO he does - that would be the second straight season where a major strategic flaw cost the team dearly... 2006 for giving up on the deep game and 2007 for failing to take full advantage of Moss' double teams.

I still don't know how the Pats not passing deep in 2006 or the Pats trying to go deep to Moss in 2007 cost us.

Even with McDaniels trying to go deep constantly this year, the Pats won every regular season game. In the first two games in the playoffs, McDaniels adjusted the game strategy to have a near perfect offensive game against the Jags where they nearly never tried to go down field. Also a near perfect second half by utilizing the RB screen so much. Even in the Super Bowl, he tried a lot of short and intermediate passes, but nothing worked.

In 2006, who exactly was he going to go down field with? Chad Jackson was easily neutralized by sticking a hand in front of his face. Gaffney, Caldwell, and Troy are not burners. Gabriel was cut. We didn't have anyone who could get open deep. That is why the Pats got Stallworth and Moss in the offseason.

Besides, McDaniels' decision not to throw the deep ball was not the reason we gave up 32 second half points to the Colts in the AFC Championships last year. Even the regular season game vs. the Pats and the Colts that season which I do assign a lot of blame to McDaniels was because the Pats gave up on the short passing game that was eating appart the Colts' defense in the first half to try to take shots down the field.