PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

My Blueprint for the Offense


From the OP:

2. Better protection is the best weapon for Brady.

Brady has plenty of weapons. What he needs is adequate protection to use them - especially protection up the middle. The interior OL was terrible in 2013, and Brady was under pressure far too often. Ryan Wendell was a sieve in pass protection, and the rest of the interior line may have suffered trying to compensate for him. Give a QB of Brady's caliber time to go through his reads and find the open guy and the offense will be close to unstoppable.

So far all the Pats have done has been to re-sign Wendell, the "sieve in pass protection". Richard Hill paints a pessimistic picture of what to expect form the interior OL:

To expect this unit to venture into the realm of mediocrity sounds like a disappointment, yet would be a tremendous improvement. I don't believe we can expect it to happen. The list of 32 year old guards who play at an elite level is far smaller than you would imagine.

With two-thirds of the interior playing at a sub-par level, the Patriots offense's greatest weakness (interior pressure) is magnified. We have to hope the Patriots buck their historical trend to address the center or the right guard position before the fifth round, if not for the immediate improvement, then for the sake of Brady's remaining future.

Patriots Offensive Line Are Under Pressure - Pats Pulpit

Unless the Pats have some hidden gems in Josh Kline, Braxton Cave and Chris Barker, it's hard not to see this being a major priority.
 
There was a play late in the game we lost at Miami. 3rd AND 8 right before the inc. pass on 4th down that ended the game. Wendell passes off the guy lined up over him to the left and has nobody there to help. Brady ducks out of the way. There's another guy 2 steps behind him and he inexplicably watches him run right past him too. I'm hoping Zach Martin falls to 29 and we take a center later.
 
From the OP:

So far all the Pats have done has been to re-sign Wendell, the "sieve in pass protection". Richard Hill paints a pessimistic picture of what to expect form the interior OL:

Patriots Offensive Line Are Under Pressure - Pats Pulpit

Unless the Pats have some hidden gems in Josh Kline, Braxton Cave and Chris Barker, it's hard not to see this being a major priority.

As has been discussed in another thread, Brandon Thomas' ACL injury creates a nice opportunity to double up on interior OL in the draft:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...ears-acl-could-he-value-now-later-draft.html

The Pats could conceivably get someone like Trai Turner, Dakota Dozier or Travis Swanson at 93 or 130, and then add Brandon Thomas at 140 and red shirt him for a year. That would allow them to really bolster the talent level at the interior OL for the next 4-5 years at fairly low cost.
 
I'm fine using the extra 4th round pick we received on a gamble like this.

With our first 4 picks I expected BB to hit at least 3 starters though. Or 2 starters and 2 players giving some amount of contribution on the rotation acquiring field experience at the same time.
 
I'm fine using the extra 4th round pick we received on a gamble like this.

With our first 4 picks I expected BB to hit at least 3 starters though. Or 2 starters and 2 players giving some amount of contribution on the rotation acquiring field experience at the same time.

I think that trying to think in terms of "starters" is misleading, but I agree that the goal is to get players who can contribute significantly.

Greg Bedard had a nice read on Les Snead and the Rams in this week's MMQB. Of particular interest was Snead's comments on addressing "needs" in the draft after having rebuilt the roster in the past 2 years:

The Rams themselves have an interesting dilemma. After two consecutive 7-9 seasons, including last season when Bradford missed the final nine games (ACL), the Rams are knocking on the playoff door. A trade down from either draft spot might keep the team stocked in the draft for years to come, but how will that play if the Rams don’t post a winning season in Year 3 of Fisher and Snead?

I think the way to get it right is you make the right decision for the organization, and I like to say you make the best decision long term because the short term is by definition short—it won’t last as long,” Snead said. “But because this draft is really good, it’s a good chance for us to take some shots with picks in this draft to improve the team. Not only tomorrow and opening day, but also four and five years down the road.

The Rams have rebuilt their roster, which won 15 games in the five seasons before Fisher and Snead arrived, to the point where no player save Watkins might play right away at his targeted position. St. Louis has a star end in Robert Quinn, and a very good one in Chris Long, which would put Clowney or Mack in a reserve role, at least initially. The Rams have Jake Long, Joe Barksdale and Rodger Safford as capable offensive tackles, meaning Robinson or Matthews would likely play elsewhere along the line as rookies.

Snead doesn’t mind. He points to when the Ravens took future Hall of Fame left tackle Jonathan Ogden fourth overall and played him at left guard for a year before Tony Jones was traded.

“They made a long-term decision and they made it work short term,” Snead said of those Ravens. “At the end of the day, that may have been something that helped Jonathan because you get to go in and get your feet at maybe a less vulnerable position. And in going from tackle to guard, you have to think quicker sometimes so that can make moving to tackle a smoother transition.

“I’ve said this and sometimes people have taken it out of context and they think we have arrived. What I’ve said is we’re pretty much returning everybody at each position who started for us last year. And the only [potential opening] is one of the guard positions. That gives us a chance to say we don’t have to pick someone just to start. So now we can weigh our options moving back [or] staying, taking really, really good football players. A lot of these guys can help anybody, and the more we have the better.”

The Secrets In St. Louis | The MMQB with Peter King

I think that's the right general philosophy. You draft for the long term, and to improve the overall talent level of the team, not to plug holes for find immediate starters, which just leads teams to reach for inferior talent.
 
From the OP:



So far all the Pats have done has been to re-sign Wendell, the "sieve in pass protection". Richard Hill paints a pessimistic picture of what to expect form the interior OL:



Patriots Offensive Line Are Under Pressure - Pats Pulpit

Unless the Pats have some hidden gems in Josh Kline, Braxton Cave and Chris Barker, it's hard not to see this being a major priority.

I still don't understand why Bill hasn't addressed our top 4 needs - DE, TE, C/G & DT -
with any FA signings whatsoever. Zero. Zip. Zilch.

And Weak-Ass Wendy does NOT count.
 
I think that trying to think in terms of "starters" is misleading, but I agree that the goal is to get players who can contribute significantly.

Greg Bedard had a nice read on Les Snead and the Rams in this week's MMQB. Of particular interest was Snead's comments on addressing "needs" in the draft after having rebuilt the roster in the past 2 years:



The Secrets In St. Louis | The MMQB with Peter King

I think that's the right general philosophy. You draft for the long term, and to improve the overall talent level of the team, not to plug holes for find immediate starters, which just leads teams to reach for inferior talent.

But one possibility does not exclude the other, if you plug a starter in a position of need, certainly he will improve the overall talent in the long term, well maybe that's not entirely true if you look at our safety corps for example, pluging someone over Steve Gregory, Chung or Wilson is not that difficult, you don't need a A+ player for that.

But taking into consideration how cautious BB is with rookies, when a rookie gets to be a starter from day one, certainly is a player who will very likely contribute on the long term.

I didn't read the article, I'll read it later, but I take anything from the Rams front office with a grain of salt, I mean, a Kilogram of salt. They are in the top 10 of the draft year in year out and that team is still a crap. They've got a ton of picks from the RG3 trade and still didn't perform the expected jump. I understand they had a lot of bad luck too, and the other opponents of that division did the jump, but still I look at their position in the draft over the years and I can only compare with teams like the Browns, Jaguars and Raiders.
 
But one possibility does not exclude the other, if you plug a starter in a position of need, certainly he will improve the overall talent in the long term, well maybe that's not entirely true if you look at our safety corps for example, pluging someone over Steve Gregory, Chung or Wilson is not that difficult, you don't need a A+ player for that.

But taking into consideration how cautious BB is with rookies, when a rookie gets to be a starter from day one, certainly is a player who will very likely contribute on the long term.

There's a difference between drafting talent and having them win jobs, and drafting to fill holes.

I didn't read the article, I'll read it later, but I take anything from the Rams front office with a grain of salt, I mean, a Kilogram of salt. They are in the top 10 of the draft year in year out and that team is still a crap. They've got a ton of picks from the RG3 trade and still didn't perform the expected jump. I understand they had a lot of bad luck too, and the other opponents of that division did the jump, but still I look at their position in the draft over the years and I can only compare with teams like the Browns, Jaguars and Raiders.

I don't buy that comparison at all. The Rams have built a strong talent base in the past 2-3 years, and are competitive in the brutal NFC West. They're a few pieces away form being a very competitive team.
 
There's a difference between drafting talent and having them win jobs, and drafting to fill holes.



I don't buy that comparison at all. The Rams have built a strong talent base in the past 2-3 years, and are competitive in the brutal NFC West. They're a few pieces away form being a very competitive team.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with this. A lot of their picks have underwhelmed. I think they're getting Donald this year if they don't get Clowney however. Upside is right up Fisher's street.
 
I still don't understand why Bill hasn't addressed our top 4 needs - DE, TE, C/G & DT -
with any FA signings whatsoever. Zero. Zip. Zilch.

And Weak-Ass Wendy does NOT count.

Could it be because they are not his opinion of weaknesses, Or could it be he intends to draft those positions. I agree his MO is to double dip; but only for starters. For reserves he may merely want another alternative,

For example his KNOWLEDGEABLE opinion of reserve DEs might include a blosoming Buchanon, a full season of Andre Carter, and/or the lost one from the SEC, may be finding himself?

Who knows what the real situation is at DT? Wilfork and Kelly; may be back, Armstead may be a star aborning; and how good are Silver Siliga, Chris Jones and/or Vellone likely to become.
 
Revisiting some of the thoughts from the OP after yesterday's debacle:

2. Better protection is the best weapon for Brady.

Brady has plenty of weapons. What he needs is adequate protection to use them - especially protection up the middle. The interior OL was terrible in 2013, and Brady was under pressure far too often. Ryan Wendell was a sieve in pass protection, and the rest of the interior line may have suffered trying to compensate for him. Give a QB of Brady's caliber time to go through his reads and find the open guy and the offense will be close to unstoppable.

Umm ... yeah. That one doesn't seem to be a finished product right now, to put it mildly.

Revisiting some of the thoughts from the OP after yesterday's debacle:

3. Invest in "queens on the chessboard" and integrate the run and passing games.

The Pats used a power running game to great effect in 2013, and I hope that continues. But what I'd really like to see is better integration of the run and pass offenses. That requires players - in particular, TEs and RBs - who can both block and catch the ball, and who can line up in different ways. Those players become what Mike Smith once referred to as "queens on the chessboard": multidimensional threats who allow the offense to move in different directions. An unpredictable offense is always much harder to defend than a predictable one. “Flexbacks” are more valuable than base running backs, TEs are more valuable than WRs. “H-backs” have tremendous value.

The Pats lost their most versatile "queen on the chessboard" in 2013 with the Aaron Hernandez situation. Their other two top weapons in this regard - Rob Gronkowski and Shane Vereen - spent half the season or more injured. They need better depth behind both players, and someone who can provide at least part of what Hernandez did.

4. Too many weapons to cover is more effective than having a few great weapons.

The New Orleans Saints’ offense has always been my model: too many weapons to cover, no single “elite” weapon (certainly before Jimmy Graham emerged), and use of the RBs in the passing attack. Protect the QB and give him time to find the open receivers. Be able to run or pass with the same personnel. It’s far too easy in the NFL for good offenses to neutralize 1 or 2 “elite” guys - BB has been doing that for years to other teams. I want the exact opposite of what we had in 2009, when Moss and Welker were the only effective offensive options.

I like the Pats' offensive skill players, and I think that Tim Wright will be a nice addition, but the inability to effectively stretch the field is still an issue with Aaron Dobson inactive.

Given these basic areas of focus, some of the potential moves I'd like to see the Patriots make in the remaining FA and the draft include:

- Say goodbye to Ryan Wendell. Much as I’d like to see Alex Mack at the pivot, that’s not happening. Move Dan Connolly to center for now with Marcus Cannon at guard, and draft some quality depth to push them. Brandon Thomas, Joel Bitonio, Marcus Martin, Weston Richburg, Travis Swanson, Russell Bodine, Trai Turner, Billy Turner, Dakota Dozier, Cameron Fleming, Tyler Larsen, Bryan Stork, Spencer Long. You don’t have to use a top 50 pick to get starting caliber talent in a draft this deep.

Cannon at guard seems promising. He wasn't the glaring problem yesterday. Brandon Thompson would have been a great pick to have in the pipeline, but unfortunately that ship has sailed. What we need is for one of Stork or Fleming to develop quickly enough to move into the starting lineup, and for the coaching staff to settle on a consistent starting rotation.

- Sign Knowshon Moreno over LeGarrette Blount if the price is reasonable. Blount is a fine base RB who can pound opposing defenses. Moreno is a flexback who can be a 3 down weapon in the mold of Doug Martin or Matt Forte. Along with Shane Vereen he would give the Pats tremendous integration of the running and passing games.

Moreno looked pretty darn good yesterday. I think this is one that the Pats screwed up. Imagine if we had signed Moreno as a UDFA and then used the #130 pick on Kevin Pierre-Louis.

- Add TEs and H-Backs. Maybe day 2 if the value is there for guys like ASJ, Amaro and Niklas, but definitely day 3. At least 2 in the draft. Jake Murphy, Richard Rodgers, Gator Hoskins, Trey Millard, Crockett Gillmore. Maybe Larry Webster or Logan Thomas as a TE conversion. I don’t see Colt Lyerla or AC Leonard as likely options, but they should be at least considered from the 6th round on. Some UDFAs like Blake Annen and Ted Bolser. Possibly move Mark Harrison to a hybrid WR/move TE role.

- Add 1 or more UDFA flexbacks to compete with Brandon Bolden. Guys like Zach Bauman, Ben Malena, Henry Josey, Lorenzo Taliaferro. The more the merrier. These guys are plentiful, cheap, and productive.

I wasn't a big fan of the James White pick (Devonta Freeman would have been another story), but the Pats need to get him involved in the offense. Again, Tim Wright seems like a move in the right direction.
 
Revisiting some of the thoughts from the OP after yesterday's debacle:

[Orginal quote not posted but concerned the interior OL.]

Umm ... yeah. That one doesn't seem to be a finished product right now, to put it mildly...

There was already worry about the IOL before Mankins was even traded.
 
Jeff Howe's breakdown of where the pressures came form don't tell the tale of the problems coming just from the interior OL:

Solder: 2 sacks allowed, plus 1 hit. Cannon: 4 hits (3 to the ground). Connolly: 1 hit (1 ground) plus 2 hurries. Wendell: 1 hit...


Devey: 2 hits (1 ground) plus 4 hurries. Vollmer: 1 sack, plus 4 hits (3 ground) plus 1 hurry. Hooman: 1 sack
Now I haven't spent anytime in the main forum so I don't know whether he's being questioned there, but when are we going to get worried about Nate Solder? To me mind he hasn't really lived up to the perceived upside he came with, in fact, as a pass blocker, I feel he may have even regressed. He's due a big pay day in 2016, the question is, will he be worth it or do we consider looking for a replacement now?
 
I haven't spent anytime in the main forum so I don't know whether he's being questioned there, but when are we going to get worried about Nate Solder? To me mind he hasn't really lived up to the perceived upside he came with, in fact, as a pass blocker, I feel he may have even regressed. He's due a big pay day in 2016, the question is, will he be worth it or do we consider looking for a replacement now?

For one of the best pieces of analysis on this board in a long, long time, I would highly recommend the following:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...ne-analysis-thread-week-1-miami-2014.1111872/
 
The OL obviously performed somewhat better at Minny than they did at Miami. Still prefer Cannon as a RG instead of LG because of his lack of lateral agility. Vollmer & Solder were better, but Solder still making mental/physical errors. I wouldn't even consider re-signing him until the end of the season at the earliest. An OT with the ability to play both spots should be another off-season priority besides a true LG.

As long as Minitron remains healthy, he should be signed to an extension in the offseason and the redundant ToughGlass released and replaced with a WR with the size & speed to keep the opposing
Safeties honest & away from the underneath greatness of Gronk & Edelman.

And I know that not everyone can be active on game day, but is James White so bad (hated the pick
at the time) that he isn't worthy of even dressing, never mind getting touches? What's happened to
the 2-Back Attack to which we were looking forward?
 
The Saints got Darren Sproles for a 5th round pick that they acquired from the Pats for Isaac Sapoaga. Sproles would be a very nice addition to our offense right now.
 
Right now my first second and third round picks would be DL, OT, LB. The DL could either be a Big DT or a Strong-side DE depending on who is there when they pick.

I could even see a trade up year like Jones & HT, as there are few positions that need help, assuming reasonable success in re-signings.
 
Right now my first second and third round picks would be DL, OT, LB. The DL could either be a Big DT or a Strong-side DE depending on who is there when they pick.

I could even see a trade up year like Jones & HT, as there are few positions that need help, assuming reasonable success in re-signings.

On the offensive side of the ball, looking towards 2015, based on what we've seen so far I would like:

1. Two lineman to upgrade the OL, with Cannon and Connolly hopefully extended, Stork, Devey and Fleming hopefully developing, and Wendell and Kline hopefully gone. Need to build around the line, and the 2015 draft looks strong in this area.

2. An upgrade to Hooman at TE2. Hopefully Wright will develop and stick as the "move TE".

3. Probably a split end to replace Danny Amendola on the roster - right now it doesn't seem like Amendola will do enough to earn a 3rd year on his deal, though it is still early.

4. Depth at RB. I'm guessing one of Vereen/Ridley won't be extended. Gaffney and White are in the pipeline.

I agree about DL and LB, but that's for another thread.
 
One of the main stories regarding the offense through 2 weeks has been the use of jumbo and unbalanced OL sets, with Cam Fleming lining up as a 6th lineman/2nd TE. Stanford (where Fleming payed in college) in particular has featured these kind of sets, as has been well described:

http://www.si.com/college-football/2013/12/31/stanford-cardinal-offensive-line

http://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2013/9/23/4763728/stanford-cardinal-football-offensive-linemen

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ll-stanford-cardinal-offensive-line/14979515/

BB talked today about some of his ancient history, and used it to segue into a discussion of jumbo and unbalanced line sets. It's fascinating stuff:

1975 was the year Belichick entered the NFL with the Baltimore Colts. The modern-day Colts used an unbalanced line often against the Eagles on Monday night while the Patriots – featuring Cameron Fleming – have used it frequently in their first two games as they look to bolster the protection in front of Tom Brady while also strengthening the running game.

That’s all the daylight Belichick needed to begin his lecture.

I’€™d say the main issue you get into would just be the commitment you make to it,” Belichick began. “Putting an offensive lineman in for a tight end, I would say you’€™re going to get less of a defensive adjustment, normally. I would say you’€™d get less of a defensive adjustment because the spacing is still the same, it’€™s just who is that guy? It’€™s a lineman instead of a tight end, but if it was a blocking tight end or lineman, how much difference is there? I’€™d say there’€™s a smaller degree of grade of adjustment for the defense.


Once you flip a lineman over, now you’€™ve totally changed the defensive spacing. What was a three-man surface is now a four-man surface. What was now a three-man surface is now a two-man surface. That creates some fundamental blocking angles potentially for the offense. I’€™d say that there’€™s a lot more involved in that. The issues you get into offensively are things like protections where, here’€™s our rule on protections but now we’€™re in a different look so how do those rules change, how do our assignments change?

I’€™d say normally you’€™d have to simplify your protections quite a bit rather than try to run them all from an unbalanced line. I’€™m not saying you couldn’€™t do it, but it would take a lot of work, I would think. The same thing defensively, once they unbalance, then you have to decide how you want to handle the ‘€“ normally, say you have three guys to one side of the center and two guys to the other side, but the two guys to the other side are ineligible. Now you put a guard and tight end on the two-man surface and then you get three offensive linemen on the three-man side, it changes your passing strength. It changes the surface that you have to defend defensively and it changes the location.

“Normally that two-man side is ineligible so now you’€™ve kind of flipped that around so there are some things you have to handle defensively. But I think it certainly limits you some offensively. Some of your weakside runs that you were running behind a tackle, now you’€™re running behind a tight end, so you have to know where there defense is going to be when you call some of those plays, which gets again, a little bit more involved. I think it’€™s hard to be in an unbalanced line and just run one or two plays because you don’€™t know if the defense is going to move over or not move over, rotate away from the formation passing strength, rotate to it.

You know, there’€™s too much uncertainty. But, if you have a number of plays then no matter what they do then theoretically, just like everything else in your offense, you can, ‘€˜If they do this, we do that. If they do that, we do this.’€™ So, you need some kind of volume to be able to handle that unless you just want to run one or two things as a changeup just to kind of make the defense work on it. I don’€™t want to say it’€™s a whole different offense but it definitely presents some different problems for you. In order to be good at it, you would have to commit a decent amount of time and scheme to it so that if the defense does this, we have that advantage. If they don’€™t, rather than if we go over and, ‘€˜Here’€™s what we think they’€™re going to do but, oh, they didn’€™t do it, now we’€™re stuck.’€™ When you’€™re in that kind of situation it’€™s kind of not worth it.”

Does Belichick feel the unbalanced line is primarily used in option football?

“Again, in the running game it’€™s much easier to handle in the running game, particularly if you check the play. So if they move over, then we can come back here. If they don’€™t move over, then we have the advantage to the overload side and we can go that way. I’€™d say that’€™s a lot easier. Once you get into the passing game and a lot of protections and ‘€˜Who is the linebacker?’€™ when you’€™re on the two-man side, you’€™re not thinking usually about a secondary player being over there. I’€™m not saying he couldn’€™t, but that’€™s infrequent.

“The secondary player is usually over on the three-man side where the tight end is. Now you’€™ve got him on the backside, now who’€™s got him, what’€™s the quarterback’€™s read? There are some things you have to handle. If you’€™re running away from them, then great, it doesn’€™t matter. I think when you get into the read-option game or the triple-option game or that type of, then that’€™s kind of a different ballgame.

“But it’€™s certainly an interesting aspect going all the way back to the single-wing days. That was the whole single-wing offense was the balanced single-wing, then the overloaded single-wing then the box shift back to the weakside. It was all overload blocking angles trying to create. I don’€™t think the plays were checked back then. You were just trying to show power over here, now you’€™ve got power over there and show power over here and run counter back the other way and all that. That’€™s really what football was in the ‘€˜40s; ‘€˜30s and the ‘€˜40s. That was a huge part of the game. It’€™s interesting to see how all that, how they tried to handle those different things, both offensively and what they tried to create and defensively what the answers were to them.”

http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports...his-youth-and-how-it-influenced-his-coaching/

My take on this is that BB believes:

1. It's inherently easier to adjust to substituting an OT for a TE without unbalancing the line, for both the offense and the opposing defense.

2. It's inherently easier for the offense to implement an unbalanced line with a jumbo package for the running game than for the passing game.

3. It's possible, and potentially effective at times, to implement an unbalanced line for the passing game and the entire offense, but complexity and practice time are probably limiting factors.

4. Because of the above, this is likely to be used situationally and with a simplified subset of the offensive playbook. It's not impossible that a team could run an up-tempo offense out of this set, but it's pretty unlikely that they would devote as much time to it as would be needed to do so smoothly.

It would't shock me, however, to see teams do this with increasing frequency, and not just in goal line and short yardage situations. It seems like a good way to throw opposing defenses off their rhythm and create potential breakdowns. If offenses are limited by practice time to get this kind of thing down, defenses will be even more limited in the time they can devote to defend against it.

Something to think about for the future.
 


Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Not a First Round Pick? Hoge Doubles Down on Maye
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/11: News and Notes
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft #5 and Thoughts About Dugger Signing
Matthew Slater Set For New Role With Patriots
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/10: News and Notes
Patriots Draft Rumors: Teams Facing ‘Historic’ Price For Club to Trade Down
Back
Top