all 22 film shows Brady is not utilizing all of his weapons

KontradictioN said:

No, it doesn't. You can feel free to look this up yourself, but by half of the Miami game, Brady had hit five different receivers. If that hadn't happened, Edelman's target percentage would naturally be higher. This is actually very simple to understand so I have to think you're intentionally choosing to ignore it. Either that, or you're under the impression that I'm somehow blaming Brady for the the lopsided target percentage.

Click to expand...

Edelman was targeted 7 times in the half, that is a lot of targets, why do you feel he would have been targeted any more than that, when in the next 3 half’s he did not come close to that? You are making an assumption but it is meritless, Brady hit Gronkowski, Develin, Hooman, Dobson and Vereen in the Vikings game. Brady is spreads the ball around, it is just not to Amendola or LaFell so people are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Edelman and Gronk have had 32 of the targets while the next five receiving options in Brady's arsenal have totalled 29 altogether. Again, on a team where no one guy has established himself as a #1 caliber wideout (hopefully that will change with Dobson), that's a problem. I still think the reason for it is Brady's general distrust in his pass protection, particularly up the A and B gaps. It would explain the amount of 2WR sets from last week and the percentage of throws that were coming out in less than 2 seconds. What I'm thinking is that this issue through the first two games will sort itself out eventually.

Click to expand...

Edelman was 1 of 5 WRs last season to have 100+ catches and 1000+ yards, he is on pace for 96 catches and 1408 yards this season, how is that not establishing himself as a #1 WR?

This is troubling to me. He actually has looked slower than he did last year, with the torn groin.

Click to expand...

Amendola was never a first round talent so if he lost 5% of his speed and agility due to that groin injury it is possible that he is not going to be able to overcome it. It is not a coincidence that Amendola has been involved in both the offensive pass interference calls this season and no other WR has been, it is because he really cannot get separation unless the Patriots pick his DB.

These two statements, combined with my expectation for pass protection to improve, are the reasons why I think the Pats will have a more multi-dimensional passing game going forward.

Click to expand...

I agree, I just think it is going to be a players like Dobson, Wright and maybe LaFell.

JoeSixPat said:

I quote you because you seem focused on saying "the offense is just fine" - and while you can find stats to backup your opinion, you need to be more open minded to those who point out that this "fine" offense needs to develop and diversify to become championship caliber

Click to expand...

If you quote me you should really read what I say.
I didn't say the offense was 'fine' I said this is being blown out of proportion because it has been fine in 3 out of 4 halves, so looking at cumulative targets is wrong, and mostly that the analysis by Balistreiri is awful and ignorant.
I did not use stats to back up my opinion, I stated that Brady was 10/11 in the first half, so I'd like someone to explain how that happens when he is making worse decisions that some guy on a computer would.

Case in point - the 2007 was much MORE "fine" than this one. In fact it was one of the most prolific in the history of the game. And as the season went on it became more and more predictable - culminating with the Super Bowl.

Click to expand...

Again, we should take anything that we want to disagree with and say thats why we were only 18-1 and lost a SB? A good offense having a bad game does not prove that the issue you are harping on is the reason.

You can say the 2007 Super Bowl team was "fine" - but I look at it and wish it was much more diverse. If it had been I have a feeling we'd be talking about the Patriots as the slam dunk unquestioned greatest team of all time.

Click to expand...

Again, making up a reason to turn around and use it as proof of an argument you are making up.

But some Patsfans will take some solace in viewing that Moss/Welker focused offense as "fine" - just not me.

Click to expand...

Please explain to me what offenses are 'just fine' by your yardstick.

SEPatsFan said:

Everyone may get some insight from reading AllWorldTE's posts in this thread LINK. Starts with post #35

I didn't see anything suggesting that posting links to another forum was verboten, and I think the content would be interesting to everyone reading this.

SSDD

Click to expand...

Spot on. AWTE is one of the best breakdown artists on any board. Always a great read. As good or better than any of the reporters.

Brady6 said:

Edelman was targeted 7 times in the half, that is a lot of targets, why do you feel he would have been targeted any more than that, when in the next 3 half’s he did not come close to that? You are making an assumption but it is meritless, Brady hit Gronkowski, Develin, Hooman, Dobson and Vereen in the Vikings game. Brady is spreads the ball around, it is just not to Amendola or LaFell so people are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Click to expand...

It's not meritless at all. Common sense should tell you that if Brady hadn't hit five different receivers in the Miami game that Edelman and/or Gronk would have gotten even more targets. This actually should be very easy for you to understand.

Edelman was 1 of 5 WRs last season to have 100+ catches and 1000+ yards, he is on pace for 96 catches and 1408 yards this season, how is that not establishing himself as a #1 WR?

Click to expand...

You're stretching here. Edelman's stats look like that because he's being thrust into a role. Last season it was because he was the only guy with experience in the system in that WR corps. This year it's for a multitude of reasons. But the bottom line is that he's not a #1 wideout in this league. Compared to guys like Jones or A.J. Green or Calvin Johnson (which is who you would be comparing him to if you call him a #1 wideout), his route tree is rather limited. Edelman works best as a WR2/3. Dobson has potential to be a #1 wideout. It will be interesting to see if he develops into that once he gets his sea legs under him.

This whole argument of how edelman isnt a #1 reminds me of the same arguments we heard about welker Not being a true #1 when he was putting up those stats

This system is built to feature the slot receivers. Look at guys like troy brown

But I do think we are missing that big play down the field receiver. I would much rather have brady throwing those deep sideline passes to 6:3 dobson rather than 5:10 edelman.

But maybe we should also take into account that the last game was essentially dobsons 2nd pre season game and he should get better with time

Bruins29 said:

All good points. Did BB just think TB would be able to get it done with just any WRs? At the time some of the washouts seemed like they could be good choices.

I am not saying its TB and not them but there must be something. I just dont recall a problem with WRs really until 2009. And it seems every year or so it either gets more difficult to find compatible guys. Or BB is getting more senile.

I dont know. But something is up with this. Perhaps the O is just rusty at this point and has not found itself and a lot of this is just overblown.

Is signing a Wallce type guy (when they had a chance) the solution? Spending the money and hoping he gets it?

Click to expand...

When Wallace was a FA one year ago last Spring, I would've been more than happy with signing
Brandon Gibson instead of ToughGlass or even Wallace considering the disparity in the sizes of
their respective contracts. The terms were smaller, he was younger, bigger, and like Amendola
& Brandon Lloyd he also played under McDaniels in St Louis.

AndyJohnson said:

If you quote me you should really read what I say.
I didn't say the offense was 'fine' I said this is being blown out of proportion because it has been fine in 3 out of 4 halves, so looking at cumulative targets is wrong, and mostly that the analysis by Balistreiri is awful and ignorant.
I did not use stats to back up my opinion, I stated that Brady was 10/11 in the first half, so I'd like someone to explain how that happens when he is making worse decisions that some guy on a computer would.


Again, we should take anything that we want to disagree with and say thats why we were only 18-1 and lost a SB? A good offense having a bad game does not prove that the issue you are harping on is the reason.


Again, making up a reason to turn around and use it as proof of an argument you are making up.


Please explain to me what offenses are 'just fine' by your yardstick.

Click to expand...

I sense someone is a little bit sensitive? OK - so you said the offense was "fine" for 3 out of 4 halves - not that it was "fine."

You've said that Brady was 10/11 in the first half - which probably is "fine" by you as well (but I don't want to put words in your mouth)

The issue of concern - that you apparently don't share - which itself is "fine" though you just need to stop taking offense at the opinion of others - is that some feel its NOT fine to continue to have such a predictable offense that is overly focused on one or two targets

What is "fine" by my yardstick? That can vary but what I value is diversity in the offense - an offense that is difficult to defend, even if the offense itself isn't ranked #1 or we don't have a fantasy-football-esque WR who puts up huge numbers like Welker and Edelman did

A "fine" offense to me is one that is measured by that one "must have" 1st down or catch when the game is on the line. That's something that doesn't show up in a season of stats - or even in one game or half - but it results in a W - the only stat that really matters to me.

So a "fine" offense to me would be the ones that won the 2003-2004 Super Bowls

Tell me - how many receivers did we have those seasons that caught over 100 passes? 90 passes? 80 passes? 70 passes? 60 passes?

Conversely how many receivers did we have those seasons that had over 20 passes caught?

I'm not expecting you to understand my point here - it's been made clear enough. What I value is an offense that is difficult, if not impossible to defend when that one "make or break" play is needed - which in my opinion helps win championships.

Others value impressive stats and rankings a la Welker, Moss, and Edleman - and they seem "fine" with that even if that doesn't result in a Championship.

To each his own.

I'll take the 2003 & 2004 offense over the 2007 offense any day - and I'd much prefer to see the 2014 offense emulate the Super Bowl winning offenses than even the eye popping stats of 2007 which, when push came to shove and we needed just that one more first down, the predictable offense was stopped.

JoeSixPat said:

I sense someone is a little bit sensitive?

Click to expand...

Not sensitive. Tired of the incredibly stupid arguments raised against that 2007 team.

Deus Irae said:

Not sensitive. Tired of the incredibly stupid arguments raised against that 2007 team.

Click to expand...

I'm not opposed to that team's offense. But if they'd not become so Welker/Moss focused as the season progressed the outcome might have been different.

Do you think the Giants were shocked or surprised to see that key pass go to Welker?

I can't speak for all Patsfans but personally, I'd take the diverse 2003/2004 offenses over the 2007 offense even though we lacked players like Moss and Welker who between just the two of them totaled over 200 catches.

JoeSixPat said:

I'm not opposed to that team's offense. But if they'd not become so Welker/Moss focused as the season progressed the outcome might have been different.

Click to expand...

This is an example of what I mean by incredibly stupid arguments.

There was a play on first down in the third quarter where Brady threw the ball behind Vereen about 15 yards downfield (incomplete). Meanwhile, Edelman was wide open crossing about 5 yards past the LOS. Would've been an easy throw and an easy gain if Brady had seen him. Does that mean Brady isn't using Edelman enough, or isn't seeing his receivers? If I wanted to, I could easily take a screenshot and make that claim. Watch:



See how Brady never even looks at Edelman. WTF is his problem? Clearly he's locking onto Vereen because Vereen is his favorite and he doesn't trust Edelman, right? Ten-years-ago Brady would never do that because he cared about spreading the ball around.

And here's the thing: I would be stupid to make any of those claims. Because on any play where multiple guys get open, no matter what you do there will be someone who's open that you don't throw to. If you're not the first option and the first option gets open, you're pretty much not getting the ball, and that was just as true in 2003 as it is now. That's why this entire exercise is stupid.

JoeSixPat said:

I sense someone is a little bit sensitive? OK - so you said the offense was "fine" for 3 out of 4 halves - not that it was "fine."

Click to expand...

So its 'sensitive' to point out you are arguing as if I said something I never did?
Nope. Just straightening you out.

You've said that Brady was 10/11 in the first half - which probably is "fine" by you as well (but I don't want to put words in your mouth)

The issue of concern - that you apparently don't share - which itself is "fine" though you just need to stop taking offense at the opinion of others - is that some feel its NOT fine to continue to have such a predictable offense that is overly focused on one or two targets

Click to expand...

Where did I take offense to your opinion? I clarified that you misrepresent mine, and pointed out the errors in yours.

What is "fine" by my yardstick? That can vary but what I value is diversity in the offense - an offense that is difficult to defend, even if the offense itself isn't ranked #1 or we don't have a fantasy-football-esque WR who puts up huge numbers like Welker and Edelman did

Click to expand...

The Patriots historically are a very diverse offense. You are arguing they are not what they are.

A "fine" offense to me is one that is measured by that one "must have" 1st down or catch when the game is on the line. That's something that doesn't show up in a season of stats - or even in one game or half - but it results in a W - the only stat that really matters to me.

So a "fine" offense to me would be the ones that won the 2003-2004 Super Bowls

Click to expand...

Many other Patriot offenses would have won SBs with the 03 or 04 defense alongside it.
When the offense improves and the defense takes a step back that doesn't mean the offense is worse.

Tell me - how many receivers did we have those seasons that caught over 100 passes? 90 passes? 80 passes? 70 passes? 60 passes?

Click to expand...

There is no causation there.
By your argument we were better in 2006 than 2007.

Conversely how many receivers did we have those seasons that had over 20 passes caught?

I'm not expecting you to understand my point here - it's been made clear enough. What I value is an offense that is difficult, if not impossible to defend when that one "make or break" play is needed - which in my opinion helps win championships.

Click to expand...

A child could understand your point. The issue isn't comprehending what you say, its agreeing with it.

Others value impressive stats and rankings a la Welker, Moss, and Edleman - and they seem "fine" with that even if that doesn't result in a Championship.

Click to expand...

Its not about statistics, its about production, its about scoring points and winning games.
There is really no causation or correlation to pass distribution among receivers. In fact, the numbers say Brady actually is spreading the ball, compared to the norm.

To each his own.

I'll take the 2003 & 2004 offense over the 2007 offense any day - and I'd much prefer to see the 2014 offense emulate the Super Bowl winning offenses than even the eye popping stats of 2007 which, when push came to shove and we needed just that one more first down, the predictable offense was stopped.

Click to expand...

So what you are saying is one play by the defense in 03 and 04 vs one play not made by the defense in 07 makes the 03 and 04 offenses better than the 07.
OK, that is your opinion, I will simply say I completely disagree.
Now lets argue about how this team needs to get Matt Chatam back because he is the only reason we win SBs.

KontradictioN said:

It's not meritless at all. Common sense should tell you that if Brady hadn't hit five different receivers in the Miami game that Edelman and/or Gronk would have gotten even more targets. This actually should be very easy for you to understand.



You're stretching here. Edelman's stats look like that because he's being thrust into a role. Last season it was because he was the only guy with experience in the system in that WR corps. This year it's for a multitude of reasons. But the bottom line is that he's not a #1 wideout in this league. Compared to guys like Jones or A.J. Green or Calvin Johnson (which is who you would be comparing him to if you call him a #1 wideout), his route tree is rather limited. Edelman works best as a WR2/3. Dobson has potential to be a #1 wideout. It will be interesting to see if he develops into that once he gets his sea legs under him.

Click to expand...

I mostly agree with your point, but how about this: instead of comparing him to AJ Green and Megatron, compare him to Antonio Brown. Do you think Brown is a #1 WR? Because I know I've been beating this drum a lot lately, and maybe a little too hard, but I see a lot of him in Edelman, and physically they're very similar. Edelman isn't as good--he doesn't get open downfield as well as Brown does--but as a middle-class man's Brown (who is a legit #1 WR IMO), Edelman has established himself as a genuinely good #2 and an underwhelming-but-maybe-serviceable #1. Which is way more than I ever thought he would be two years ago.

AndyJohnson said:

A child could understand your point.

Click to expand...

In my experience, once individuals resort to taunts and name calling, they are pretty much admitting that they've lost a debate

Thanks!

Again - give me a choice between a diverse offense and one that is exceptionally and heavilly reliant on one or two receivers, and I'll take diversity every time... along with the Super Bowls that have come with it!

You are welcome to the Fantasy Football Patriots. I prefer Super Bowl Champions.

Brady6 said:

So Tom Brady is the problem? He is the common denominator.

I think it's more likely that outside of Edelman, Gronkowski, and Vereen we have receivers who are not doing their jobs either due to inexperience in the offense, returning for an injury, or they are just not good enough to be productive in the offense.

Dobson is rehabbing, Amendola cannot get separation, LaFell doesn't have a good grasp of the offense, and Thompkins is just a JAG. Those things are actualities. Branch and Givens were significantly better than Amendola and LaFell. Dobson is an unknown in terms of how good he could be compared to them.

Click to expand...

Givens was a JAG. Branch was only a bit over JAG . He certainly wasn't Demarius Thomas.

JoeSixPat said:

In my experience, once individuals resort to taunts and name calling, they are pretty much admitting that they've lost a debate

Thanks!

Again - give me a choice between a diverse offense and one that is exceptionally and heavilly reliant on one or two receivers, and I'll take diversity every time... along with the Super Bowls that have come with it!

You are welcome to the Fantasy Football Patriots. I prefer Super Bowl Champions.

Click to expand...

SB catch numbers:
2001 - 6 of 16 completions were to Brown, 3 for Redmon, 7 receivers with at least one catch (16 for 27 passing)
2003 - 10 of 32 completions were to Branch, 8 for Brown, 5 for Givens, 6 receivers with at least one catch (32 for 48 passing)
2004 - 11 of 23 completions were to Branch, no other receiver have more than 3, 7 had a catch (23 for 33 passing)
2007 - 11 of 29 to Welker, 5 to Moss, 7 to Faulk, 6 receivers with at least one catch (29 for 48 passing)

Your "heavy reliance" theory doesn't hold water.

rochrist said:

Givens was a JAG. Branch was only a bit over JAG . He certainly wasn't Demarius Thomas.

Click to expand...

I agree that Givens was no great receiver, but I disagree that he was nothing more than a JAG.

After all, Givens commanded a 5/25 contract over 8 years ago, when it was considered to be a pretty nice signing for a WR. Hell, it's still a pretty nice deal when you look at guys like Amendola now, and that contract from 8 years ago is much better than Julian Edelman got this past spring with a much bigger cap.

Obviously, you can't take what one team decides to do as the proof of 32 NFL teams in free agency, but Givens had some pretty nice offers from multiple teams that year; including TEN, CLE, and NE. It's unfortunate that he became injured as there isn't much of a definitive end to his story one way or another.

supafly said:

I agree that Givens was no great receiver, but I disagree that he was nothing more than a JAG.

After all, Givens commanded a 5/25 contract over 8 years ago, when it was considered to be a pretty nice signing for a WR. Hell, it's still a pretty nice deal when you look at guys like Amendola now, and that contract from 8 years ago is much better than Julian Edelman got this past spring with a much bigger cap.

Obviously, you can't take what one team decides to do as the proof of 32 NFL teams in free agency, but Givens had some pretty nice offers from multiple teams that year; including TEN, CLE, and NE. It's unfortunate that he became injured as there isn't much of a definitive end to his story one way or another.

Click to expand...

I agree, Givens was a strong possession receiver and reliable on third downs and in the red zone. The Patriots were right not to pay him what he wanted but he was still a good player and not just a JAG.

Deus Irae said:

SB catch numbers:
2001 - 6 of 16 completions were to Brown, 3 for Redmon, 7 receivers with at least one catch (16 for 27 passing)
2003 - 10 of 32 completions were to Branch, 8 for Brown, 5 for Givens, 6 receivers with at least one catch (32 for 48 passing)
2004 - 11 of 23 completions were to Branch, no other receiver have more than 3, 7 had a catch (23 for 33 passing)
2007 - 11 of 29 to Welker, 5 to Moss, 7 to Faulk, 6 receivers with at least one catch (29 for 48 passing)

Your "heavy reliance" theory doesn't hold water.

Click to expand...

*Sigh*

Didn't this thread include your suggestion that the offense needs to improve?

Even when someone agrees with you, you seem to feel a need to pick a fight!

Seriously, is there something wrong with you?

And by the way - your stats actually partially make my point, which went went beyond cherry picking Super Bowl stats (though your stats do illustrate how heavily Welker oriented the 2007 SB was)

As I'm sure you know (and ignored) my point was that the Patriots had developed a pretty diverse array of pass options in 2003/2004 - and much less so in the 2007 season which saw over 50% of the receptions go to Welker and Moss.

And when push came to shove, Defenses were, shall we say, less than surprised when so many of those Super Bowl passes - including those "must catch" plays - went to Welker (and we all know the end result)

Deus Irae said:

Your "heavy reliance" theory doesn't hold water.

Click to expand...

I don't want to spoil the surprise for you, but since you are so "stat" oriented why don't you look up the offensive stats from 2003, 2004 and 2007 and see what percentage of receptions were made by our top two receivers

I'll give you a hint. In two out of those three seasons the top two receivers accounted for about 1/3rd of all receptions (meaning 2/3rd of the time the ball went elsewhere)

In one of those seasons the top two receivers accounted for over 50% of all receptions.

That's a significant difference. Care to guess which one of those three seasons we failed to win the Super Bowl?

And do you think Defensive Coordinators wouldn't have made note of those stats and adapted?

Or let me ask another way. Do you think there may have been a reason why Welker had a 77% pass completion rate during the regular season but only HALF as much in the Super Bowl at 38%? (as shown by YOUR OWN stats?)