New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com  Patriots Fan Messageboard

New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard (http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/)
-   PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum (http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/patsfans-com-patriots-fan-forum.html)
-   -   One very impressive statistic. (Running game) (http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/42801-one-very-impressive-statistic-running-game.html)

Brownfan80 10-02-2006 08:41 AM

One very impressive statistic. (Running game)
 
I was going over the Patriots season stats so far and something really stood out to me.

We've all seen the dominant running game (save Denver) so it isn't that surprising when put into context.

TOTAL FIRST DOWNS: Pats - 91 Opponents - 64

by Rushing: Pats - 37 Opponents - 16

by Passing: Pats - 49 Opponents - 40

by Penalty: Pats - 5 Opponents - 8

The most impressive thing to me is not only our number in the Rushing column, but the discrepency that is being created by our defense in that regard.

So far this season we've managed a balanced attack overall and have been able to truly dominate on the ground. Opposing offenses are apparently being forced into a one dimensional approach towards moving the ball on us. This is a very good thing.

After looking back at the season I think it's clear that when we run the ball and stop the run we aren't going to lose many games. And I think that when we run the ball it helps our D stop the run because the guys get a longer rest.

The only game where we didn't run well has been Denver, and it's not shocking to hear that we didn't stop the run well in that game either. I think that the old axiom of 'run the ball well and stop the run' is our mantra of the season.

BelichickFan 10-02-2006 10:37 AM

Re: One very impressive statistic. (Running game)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brownfan80
TOTAL FIRST DOWNS:

by Rushing: Pats - 37 Opponents - 16

That is some kind of stat. They always say that you need to be able to run the ball and stop the run and this shows that we can do both when needed.

Brownfan80 10-02-2006 11:05 AM

Re: One very impressive statistic. (Running game)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by NEM
In the Denver game McDaniels tried to force the running game in the first half, INSTEAD of softening them up with the quick inside passing game and Denver was able to control the game with the scoreboard and forced us to attempt a passing comeback....into their hands. Instead, if McDaniels opened with a no huddle, inside passing game against Denver, it would have dropped their linebackers off the box and opend up lanes for the running game to succeed. We lost the game because of poor game planning and waiting far too long to make the changes.


I really would rather not continue your nuttery in this thread, but so be it.

We ran the ball against the Bengals without using a no-huddle spread wacky passing gameplan to soften up the defense. We ran it even when it wasn't busting loose, softened up their linebackers with COREY DILLON's running, which was missing in Denver, and then passed off of the running game, further opening holes.

The run keyed all.

In the Denver game we didn't have Dillon.
In the Bengal game we did.

In neither game did we run a no-huddle pass crazy offense.

Yet against the Bengals we ran well, and against Denver we did not.

Denver is better on defense. And we did not have Corey Dillon.

Running a crazy no-huddle against a team where we were only passing to one half of the field (the half without Bailey) would have done nothing to change that.

If we'd gone pass wacky against Denver then only one thing would have happened: More turnovers.

You can't go no huddle if you don't have rythm to base it on, especially when half the players are new and don't know the offense all the way, those guys NEED THE HUDDLE.

Further, your new revision on history wouldn't have changed the outcome of the Denver game at all. They have a better defense and we lost Corey Dillon and couldn't set up the pass off the run. Neither would have changed in your scenario.

Brownfan80 10-02-2006 11:13 AM

Re: One very impressive statistic. (Running game)
 
Also, NEM, further proof that you're off base in both counts (Bengals revision and Broncos revision).

In the Bengals game Brady threw for 188 yards on 26 tries.
In the Broncos game Brady threw for 320 yards on 55 tries.

In the Bengals game the running game ran for 230+ yards.
In the Broncos game the running game ran for under 70.

If it is indeed the PASS that sets up the run, then WHY when Brady had his best game of the season did the running game not flourish??

Because, my friend, you are WRONG.

The running game sets up the pass for this team. It's a fact stated both by common sense, numbers and our own Headcoach (see Reiss's blog).

In your argument you actually contradict yourself. You point to the passing game setting up the run, but then point to playaction passes and their success as proof. Playaction is, by it's nature, a pass being set up by the defense having to respect the RUNNING GAME.

You have no legs to stand on during this argument, not anymore. You've argued even in the face of facts, but I don't see how you can spin this anymore. You may reply to this again and spin this further, but I'm done with trying to prove the obvious. If you insist on living in Lala Land, then let me wish you good luck with the neighbors.

Ceresco 10-02-2006 11:23 AM

Re: One very impressive statistic. (Running game)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brownfan80
Also, NEM, further proof that you're off base in both counts (Bengals revision and Broncos revision).

In the Bengals game Brady threw for 188 yards on 26 tries.
In the Broncos game Brady threw for 320 yards on 55 tries.

In the Bengals game the running game ran for 230+ yards.
In the Broncos game the running game ran for under 70.

If it is indeed the PASS that sets up the run, then WHY when Brady had his best game of the season did the running game not flourish??

Because, my friend, you are WRONG.

The running game sets up the pass for this team. It's a fact stated both by common sense, numbers and our own Headcoach (see Reiss's blog).

In your argument you actually contradict yourself. You point to the passing game setting up the run, but then point to playaction passes and their success as proof. Playaction is, by it's nature, a pass being set up by the defense having to respect the RUNNING GAME.

You have no legs to stand on during this argument, not anymore. You've argued even in the face of facts, but I don't see how you can spin this anymore. You may reply to this again and spin this further, but I'm done with trying to prove the obvious. If you insist on living in Lala Land, then let me wish you good luck with the neighbors.

NEM wrong??? http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n.../bartnoway.gif :rolleyes:

letekro 10-02-2006 12:13 PM

Re: One very impressive statistic. (Running game)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by NEM
In the Denver game McDaniels tried to force the running game in the first half, INSTEAD of softening them up with the quick inside passing game and Denver was able to control the game with the scoreboard and forced us to attempt a passing comeback....into their hands. Instead, if McDaniels opened with a no huddle, inside passing game against Denver, it would have dropped their linebackers off the box and opend up lanes for the running game to succeed. We lost the game because of poor game planning and waiting far too long to make the changes.


The relevant variable is the strength of the run defense we faced, NOT the playcalling.

T-ShirtDynasty 10-02-2006 12:40 PM

Re: One very impressive statistic. (Running game)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by NEM
How many of those were on 3rd and 2, or 2nd and 1.....

You have to look at a lot more than just the numbers you mentioned.

Well in the Bengals game, 21 of them were on first down.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:25 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

© Copyright 2000-2012. PatsFans.com Is a Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.
The opinions posted in this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions of our staff at PatsFans.com or USA Today.
We are not affiliated with the New England Patriots™ or the NFL™. The Photo Used In the header was taken by Ian Logue.

This site is owned and operated by I&K Internet Design Enterprises, LLC


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563