Welcome to PatsFans.com

Balance of run vs pass

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by fumbrunner, Nov 6, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. fumbrunner

    fumbrunner Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,987
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    Like many on this board, I have been an advocate of running the ball more as the offense has become, in my opinion very predicable. Worse yet, defenses have seemed to figure out how to stop Brady and co. Jam at the line and throw off the timing of their routes.

    I had a chance to look at the balance between the pass and run in previous years to see if this year is any different. Interestingly, the Pats essentially threw between 48% of the time (2004) and 56% (predictably 2007). This year they are over 60%. Is it just me, or does it seem like they have completely abandoned any commitment to the run now that Brady has his new toys (gronk and hernandez). It has already cost the Pats one game (buf) where they had a big lead and should have gone into clock killing mode.

    The offense is becoming stale and predictable, and given the state of the defense, that is not a good thing.
  2. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,627
    Likes Received:
    153
    Ratings:
    +283 / 6 / -4

    I don't get why you'd draft 2 RBs and not use them.
  3. hlywoodjp

    hlywoodjp Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I just don't know if they are built for what you want. They tried to run the ball today in the first half. It didnt work. Take a look at their drives today. The less they ran the ball, the more success they had in scoring points.
  4. PATRIOTSFANINPA

    PATRIOTSFANINPA Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    15,719
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    Like the hundreds of draft picks we trade away for future usage,so are we doing it for the already drafted RBs on the roster. :rolleyes:

    Saving them 4 years down the road when we can use the running
    game more and ease Mallett into the lineup after Brady retires is the plan :bricks:
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2011
  5. letekro

    letekro Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,162
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +8 / 2 / -3

    It's not as simple as you're suggesting. First of all, if you don't trust defense, you can't commit to the run. You won't see many great running teams that also have bad defenses. You need to be able to stop people consistently to be able to commit to the run, and this defense isn't there yet (although they played a nice game today).

    Second, Brady seems to be more effective when he is in the gun slinging it around. It seems like he doesn't get into the same rhythm when we have a more balanced attack.

    Third, there is no big play potential in the run game as presently constituted.

    I'm all for establishing the run, but it just might not be practical right now.
  6. PATSYLICIOUS

    PATSYLICIOUS Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    11,013
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +40 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    So in 2004 we actually ran more than passed?

    I would love a close to 50-50 split even if it reduces our 30+ outbursts and makes it less flashy... balance is what wins in January and makes you harder to stop. And by more runs I'm not talking about spreading out and the stupid draw to Woodhead. POUND THE BALL with BJGE and Ridley for crying out loud.

    But it's never going to happen we may as well just accept it. If our idiotic playcalling hasn't learned from the last 3 playoff games they never will. Relying on the pass that freaking much will get you nowhere in the long run.
  7. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    I was more bugged by the fact that they weren't calling the right offense and taking what the defense was giving him. Brady was taking 7 step drops while the Giants had 8 and at times 9 men in the box.

    The Giants are a bad run defense team, but Coughlin was not respecting the Patriots passing game at all. The Giants were just blitzing, they weren't jamming and covering. And the Patriots had no quick throws. Brady was setting up way back there.

    I don't know if it's BB, or BOB, or Brady, but man, take what the defense gives you. The Giants were daring the Patriots to pass the ball. They were totally unthreatened by the Patriots receivers.
  8. Hardly Dykes

    Hardly Dykes Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2009
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It's the NFL - nobody with an elite QB runs the ball anymore. When you have a Brady, Rodgers, Brees, etc., you throw to win. It almost seems like putting an early emphasis on running the ball only disrupts the rhythm in the passing game more than anything.

    Vereen frustrates me more than anything as I really think a multi-dimensional back that can run outside, between the tackles, catch the ball and pick up blitzers would help rather than constantly rotating 3 specialists in all game. He seems like the guy that has that skill set but he just never gets a chance for whatever reason. I really want him to be good - maybe he just isn't!:confused:
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2011
  9. fumbrunner

    fumbrunner Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,987
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    The Pats have never been a team to "follow" NFL trends. Maybe it's time to go back to hard nosed football. I miss Charlie Weis
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>