The situation of our Offense

aluminum seats said:

Since 2009, excluding the Buffalo game closing out last season, the Pats have lost 3 games total in the last six weeks of the season.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say they're not going .500 the rest of the way.

Click to expand...

I hope you're right about that.

4 of those remaining games are on the road. 3 of those road games are against teams fighting for their playoff lives.

They should get James White more involved Scott Chandler should be Inactive he adds NOTHING to the Offense.

My solution to the Offense (well best solution anyway)

#1 Hope Amendola is okay. If he is down for any length of time the Pats just don't have competent enough bodies.

#2 OL needs ti do better. I think they can and will. Last game was their worst game of the year IMO. No one was good. Vollmer should be better as he gets back in the swing. Flemming/Cannon should give you a competent tackle between them (I think Vollmer LT/Flemming RT is usually the best option). The interior was just bad which is odd cause that is a pretty healthy group right now. Overall they have been solid so i will look past 1 bad game for the unit. The OL is the one thing that should be the easiest short term fix as time goes on.

#3 Get White more involved. He was more involved this game than last. That trend needs to continue. White is no Dion Lewis but he has proven to be a sure handed 3rd down RB capable of making a few moves. The Patriots need to pass to him in the flat more. Frankly he should be up there with the team lead in targets.

#4 Stick to the run. Change it up and go all pass on occasion but you need to run probably 20 times a game at least. You just don't have the guys to pass 50 times a game anymore till Edelman gets back IMO.

#5 Harper/Martin - Both showed us a little something... Martin earlier and Harper in this game. We don't need a great effort but the Pats need someone who can make the catch that is there to make and pick up YAC. I think both have shown they have the potential to do that consistently.

KontradictioN said:

It was a shot he had to take

Click to expand...

Nah, disagree. You never "have" to make such a poor decision. Look to take shots down the field? Of course. But continue to be smart. That was a very foolish (first down!) hail mary. Bad bad bad. Babadook.

aluminum seats said:

Nah, disagree. You never "have" to make such a poor decision. Look to take shots down the field? Of course. But continue to be smart. That was a very foolish (first down!) hail mary. Bad bad bad. Babadook.

Click to expand...

You do if the running game isn't getting it done and nothing is open underneath because the defense hasn't been made to cover the deep part of the field. Again, this is something they've done before in a similar situation. The ball was underthrown which means the execution was lacking, but the overall decision to try was a good one.

KontradictioN said:

You do if the running game isn't getting it done and nothing is open underneath because the defense hasn't been made to cover the deep part of the field. Again, this is something they've done before in a similar situation. The ball was underthrown which means the execution was lacking, but the overall decision to try was a good one.

Click to expand...

The ball should never have been thrown. As you note, it's something Brady has done before. Even the GOAT has flaws.

Just because something is sound in theory (take the occasional deep shot) it doesn't excuse that kind of play, because it never had a chance.

aluminum seats said:

The ball should never have been thrown. As you note, it's something Brady has done before. Even the GOAT has flaws.

Just because something is sound in theory (take the occasional deep shot) it doesn't excuse that kind of play, because it never had a chance.

Click to expand...

You're missing the point. The throw, more than likely, wasn't made because there was a chance. The throw was made to make the Bills respect the possibility of the deep ball. The INT only happened because:

1. The ball was under thrown.

2. A very athletic play for the Bills happened after the deflection.

If the ball is over thrown, that's not an INT. But Brady didn't put enough on it. That's on execution, not the decision itself. And I think that's where your criticism ultimately lies. Finally, if you can give me a more effective way of being able to take the top off the defense and, thus, loosen things up underneath, then I'm all ears.

KontradictioN said:

You're missing the point. The throw, more than likely, wasn't made because there was a chance. The throw was made to make the Bills respect the possibility of the deep ball. The INT only happened because:

1. The ball was under thrown.

2. A very athletic play for the Bills happened after the deflection.

If the ball is over thrown, that's not an INT. But Brady didn't put enough on it. That's on execution, not the decision itself. And I think that's where your criticism ultimately lies. Finally, if you can give me a more effective way of being able to take the top off the defense and, thus, loosen things up underneath, then I'm all ears.

Click to expand...

No I'm not, but perhaps I'm not explaining my point clearly.

You are saying that Brady "had" to throw that pass. I'm saying, respectfully, that that's ****oo. You can say every play in a game is "on execution." If everything was always executed perfectly, every play would work, and we could all sing kumbaya. But obviously not every play is executed perfectly.

So what do you do? You consider the specifics of the situation--where you are in the game, what's the setting, who are the players you're dealing with, etc. etc. In that particular situation, the Patriots had scored 20 points in 3 quarters, putting them on pace to score 27, or about what they go into a game looking to score. They had a first down on the Bills side of the field. While the offense had been a grind all game, it wasn't wholly unsuccessful. You also have to remember that Brady's deep ball, that exact kind of pass, is not his strong suit.

In that situation, there was no reason to throw that pass. It's as simple as that. You're taking a very general proposition--that it's good to take deep shots to keep a defense honest--and using it to defend a really poor play.

aluminum seats said:

No I'm not, but perhaps I'm not explaining my point clearly.

You are saying that Brady "had" to throw that pass. I'm saying, respectfully, that that's ****oo. You can say every play in a game is "on execution." If everything was always executed perfectly, every play would work, and we could all sing kumbaya. But obviously not every play is executed perfectly.

So what do you do? You consider the specifics of the situation--where you are in the game, what's the setting, who are the players you're dealing with, etc. etc. In that particular situation, the Patriots had scored 20 points in 3 quarters, putting them on pace to score 27, or about what they go into a game looking to score. They had a first down on the Bills side of the field. While the offense had been a grind all game, it wasn't wholly unsuccessful. You also have to remember that Brady's deep ball, that exact kind of pass, is not his strong suit.

In that situation, there was no reason to throw that pass. It's as simple as that. You're taking a very general proposition--that it's good to take deep shots to keep a defense honest--and using it to defend a really poor play.

Click to expand...

So what's your solution? What other way should the Pats have gone to loosen up a defense that had a vice grip on routes being ran between the numbers? Again, I'm all ears.

It's simple, really: the O-line needs to get healthy. Without Edelman and Lewis, Brady lost his quick-strike and outlet pass binkies. Amendola does a solid 'poor mans' impersonation of Edelman but it's not quite the same, and they have NO ONE like Lewis on the squad. Taking one of them away was manageable, but both means the offense predictably slows down, Brady needs more time for plays to develop to find the open receiver. If the O-line doesn't give him that time (or the confidence that it'll be there) the offense stalls.

Add in a very good D front for the Bills and Ryan's predictably effective disguised blitzes and this was always gonna be a challenge. They eeked their way through it with a W, Denver will be another big test but as the O-line gets healthier this offense will start churning again, imo. Maybe not 'best offense ever' level, but enough that teams will have to beat the defense to win.

KontradictioN said:

So what's your solution? What other way should the Pats have gone to loosen up a defense that had a vice grip on routes being ran between the numbers? Again, I'm all ears.

Click to expand...

No magical "solution." Just keep grinding, playing smart. Again, at that point of the game the Pats were on target to score 27 points, which would have made the 4th quarter a relaxing one instead of what it was. And a game-in-hand 4th quarter against a motivated division rival is something you take every time.

aluminum seats said:

No magical "solution." Just keep grinding, playing smart. Again, at that point of the game the Pats were on target to score 27 points, which would have made the 4th quarter a relaxing one instead of what it was. And a game-in-hand 4th quarter against a motivated division rival is something you take every time.

Click to expand...

While that's all well and good, the object of the game was to keep scoring points. The Bills were routinely dropping 7-8 in coverage and were playing a lot of Cover-1 with the safety cheating close to the line of scrimmage, pre-snap. At that point, a deep shot is needed to move him back and maybe force them into more Cover-2, where Gronk can split the deep safeties for a big gain. Like I said, your issue is not with the call itself. It was a needed risk. Your issue is with the execution.

It was strategically advantageous to make a deep throw in order to make the defense respect the long pass possibility and so get them out of the box and that they would stop crowding the line of scrimmage to stop the run. But a better pass by TB12 or a different target might have saved the interception. So Tom wasn't wrong to throw that, but the throw could have been better.

KontradictioN said:

While that's all well and good, the object of the game was to keep scoring points. The Bills were routinely dropping 7-8 in coverage and were playing a lot of Cover-1 with the safety cheating close to the line of scrimmage, pre-snap. At that point, a deep shot is needed to move him back and maybe force them into more Cover-2, where Gronk can split the deep safeties for a big gain. Like I said, your issue is not with the call itself. It was a needed risk. Your issue is with the execution.

Click to expand...

No. But silly to keep repeating the same point.

In that setting, it was an awful call to make.

patchick said:

I think this was a hidden issue last night -- Gronk looked sick as a dog. If the team were closer to full strength, I wonder whether he even would have played.

Click to expand...

Gronk hitting the oxygen was an odd sight. He wasn't 100 percent. Probably not even close.

aluminum seats said:

No. But silly to keep repeating the same point.

In that setting, it was an awful call to make.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. I'll agree to disagree and move on.

14-2 is first seed, so I would take that.
Denver and Cincy are going to lose one more.

A healthy Gronk and Keshawn Martin on the field will make some of our worries go the way of the Russian jet.

Martin can make plays for us. I know I'm biased--he played at Michigan State--but I expect him to do well and surprise some people. Just not me.

p8ryts said:

OL will settle down as long as Vollmer can play and he will go back to LT and stay there. The Bills and Giants always play our offense the toughest. Denver and Miami are possible losses with Miami pretty definite, end of year in warm climate, probably meaningless game and Brady doesn't play a lot. Defense looks good with 3rd corner an issue without Coleman. Mayo playing better, Collins returning. I actually think CB is the biggest vulnerability because there is literally no depth there other than safeties. WR should be ok as long as OL holds up. Next receiver could be Jonathan Krause off somebody's practice squad ( I think PIT).
RELAX!!!!!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

It's not September anymore.

State of the offense?

1. The OL nearly got The Franchise killed last night. If the Pats are to achieve anything, Brady must remain upright. The OL must improve.

2. There is no legitimate threat in the running game. This makes defending the Pats easier, and allows DLs to tee off on the pass rush. There has to be a credible running game. LGB has shown that he can tiptoe to the line but will get nothing unless the OL has created a lane. The staff has shown essentially zero confidence in White or Bolden. I am not a fan of LGB because he offers neither speed nor power at the point of attack, but it looks like we live or die with him. Again the onus falls to the OL.

3. The passing game is a mess. Without Lewis, JE11 and now Amendola, there are few open targets and nobody gets open quickly. Martin showed some promise before taking 5 weeks off with a hammy. Dobson has been unable to make a difference and is injured again. LaFell has been inconsistent and was benched in favor Dobson. Harper is inexperienced playing behind all of the above and we are now leaning on him to be a factor. If DA isn't ready, It is possible we go into Denver with a WR crew of LaFell, Harper, Slater, and maybe Martin. Yikes. I don't expet a consistent passing game from these guys or anyone else they might sign off the street.

We leaned more on the TE group after the injuries last night but Gronk went AWOL. Gronk needs to show he can be effective without JE11, which is not asking a lot. Chandler is invisible and Williams is strictly a blocker. White and Bolden are only occasional targets and have been mostly confined to the backfield to intercept all the penetrating rushers (see #1).

Conclusion: Nothing happens without better play from the OL. The OL has survived and even thrived so far (until last night) despite rotations and injuries, so I'd like to think last night's debacle was an aberration. We can reasonably hope they can play better in every facet of the game moving forward. In the meantime, we need to win with defense until the coaches rebuild an offense with spare parts.