Belichick's unexpected Bronco's gameplan

[Fencer]

The aspect that Vereen needs to work on the most is probably the fact that just about every game he seems to drop at least one pass. It seems like that as many great plays as he makes, he offsets a bit by continuing to drop balls. Some felt that it was due to his soft cast still being on at first, but that excuse hasn't held up in the past month or so once he had it removed.

Amen!

I agree with the favorable parts of your Vereen view as well.

 

[mgcolby]

Have you noticed any over using of the one word calls by us lately? I have at least a few times. I wonder why they don't change them up at the half or something? EDIT: I would imagine that this couldn't be an option due to having to practice for several days. Another option could be to have another one word call that replicates the play, however.

I suppose ultimately it doesn't matter (maybe), but I've wondered if it doesn't act as a tip off sometimes.

For what it's worth--I posted a link to a somewhat recent article that stated that we have approx. 5 or 6 one word calls implemented into the weekly gameplan per week. Those five or six one word calls give the assignments to all aspects of every one of the 11 players' various responsibilities, OL blocking assignments, snap counts, wide receiver blocking and specific routes, etc.

I remember Rachael being used two weeks in a row and was it Cody last week, had a few beers and was amped so not sure if I remember the name correctly, I know they used several times in the game.

But it could mean one thing one week and something else the next. Or it could mean something different from play to play, you could use an on off key as well an indicator, if you will, to use a Baseball term. Its hard to tell when they only catch the cadence on a handful of plays.

 

[Brady6]

Was running the plan all along is a question I ask myself a lot in recent weeks and they just wanted to keep it off the radar until later in the season so they focused on a more pass heavy offense earlier in the season, or did this just take on a momentum of its own.

The personnel since week 1-2 was built to run the football:

• Ridley
• Blount
• Vereen
• Bolden
• Develin
• Hooman
• Mulligan

All players that either play RB or are blockers. Week 16, 17 to get the machine running and then just drive through the playoffs.

 

[Brady6]

The aspect that Vereen needs to work on the most is probably the fact that just about every game he seems to drop at least one pass. It seems like that as many great plays as he makes, he offsets a bit by continuing to drop balls. Some felt that it was due to his soft cast still being on at first, but that excuse hasn't held up in the past month or so once he had it removed. I

I couldn’t agree more he had 7 drops in 8 games and a number of other miscues. He is very explosive and certainly a special player when he is on the football field but that role as the 3rd down back is one that requires a trustworthy sure handed back.

Vereen
2013 – 7 drops on 69 targets

Woodhead
2012 – 0 drops on 55 targets
2011 – 0 drops on 31 targets
2010 – 1 drop on 44 targets

Obviously it’s clear that Vereen is a bigger part of the passing game than Woodhead was in his time here but still Woodhead had 1 drop in 3 years. On a side note Woodhead had just 1 drop this season on 87 targets and he caught 76 of those targets for a reception rate of 87.4%, that is really incredible in my opinion.

 

[hwc]

Yes. I think Belichick's plan all along was to emphasize the run more heavily this year. Part of the reasoning was probably the personnel at receiver. Part of it was probably a recognition that running the ball is the best way to keep Brady upright. In fairness, though.... the Pats have been a strong running team for the last several years.

The biggest hint was the trade for LaGarrette Blount in the off-season. That was a strong indication that the Pats wanted to emphasize the run, especially the power running game.

Once Gronk tore his ACL, it had to be obvious to the Pats' coaches that they had to pound the rock. They just don't have the horses for Air Belichick right now.

 

[PATRlOT]

--- I'm worried we will try to use Blount too much. Take note that the Bills and Colts ranked 26th and 28th against the run. Not trying to take credit away from him. I still think he's capable of making some great plays but you gotta put things in perspective.

--- I'd like to see Vereen line up wide often. ESPECIALLY if Thompkins and/or Dobson are unavailable on Sunday.

--- We will definitely need Brady to game a great game passing, balanced with him handing it off in the run game. I can't see us winning this game mostly on the ground like the last 2.

 

[supafly]

--- I'm worried we will try to use Blount too much. Take note that the Bills and Colts ranked 26th and 28th against the run. Not trying to take credit away from him. I still think he's capable of making some great plays but you gotta put things in perspective.

--- I'd like to see Vereen line up wide often. ESPECIALLY if Thompkins and/or Dobson are unavailable on Sunday.

--- We will definitely need Brady to game a great game passing, balanced with him handing it off in the run game. I can't see us winning this game mostly on the ground like the last 2.

I think they've shown a nice ability to adjust on the fly, so if one thing isn't working as well, they can regroup and try something else. Of course the main concern about that is that it could be done too little, too late at times.

 

[supafly]

Yes. I think Belichick's plan all along was to emphasize the run more heavily this year. Part of the reasoning was probably the personnel at receiver. Part of it was probably a recognition that running the ball is the best way to keep Brady upright. In fairness, though.... the Pats have been a strong running team for the last several years.

The biggest hint was the trade for LaGarrette Blount in the off-season. That was a strong indication that the Pats wanted to emphasize the run, especially the power running game.

Once Gronk tore his ACL, it had to be obvious to the Pats' coaches that they had to pound the rock. They just don't have the horses for Air Belichick right now.

Yep...

Through the first 8 games, Brady had actually put the ball up more times than any other point of his career, so it didn't appear to be something that they necessarily went into the season with a plan to do--at least maybe until the colder month stretch run anyway.

I agree with you that once Gronk went down (along with the injuries to both Dobson and then Thompkins, although they didn't seem to overlap too much) they didn't seem to have as many options, and were forced to get the running game going a bit more.

It's also interesting to note that our lack of efficient running was one of the bigger gripes about the lack of postseason success lately, so maybe that could end up acting beneficial.

 

[BradyToAmendola]

One thing I took away from Belichick on WEEI this week was that running the ball just for the sake of running the ball is not good. If you're only getting 1 or 2 yards a carry, that is bad. "you can do a QB sneak and get that."

Made me think he was referencing SD's strategy against Denver and how they continued to run it even though it clearly was not working. So maybe we will pass this week more than people think. Or if we do run but can't do it effectively, then we will be quick to adjust, I believe.

 

[supafly]

Was running the plan all along is a question I ask myself a lot in recent weeks and they just wanted to keep it off the radar until later in the season so they focused on a more pass heavy offense earlier in the season, or did this just take on a momentum of its own.

The personnel since week 1-2 was built to run the football:

• Ridley
• Blount
• Vereen
• Bolden
• Develin
• Hooman
• Mulligan

All players that either play RB or are blockers. Week 16, 17 to get the machine running and then just drive through the playoffs.

The popular thought seems to be that they knew that they'd be missing the physicality of Gronk for the first month or so (as we know, it ended up being a bit longer), so they kept Devlin. As far as Hooman goes, he was here last year, and Mulligan was simply a need for TE when Gronk was gone and they decided to release Fells/Ballard. Last year they attempted to implement a FB into the scheme again, by bringing in 3 FB's during the summer--including Fiammetta. Unfortunately for them, it didn't really stick, but the idea was definitely there even with our heavy pass attack.

I don't know if this was really that much different than other seasons though, considering that we always carry 4-5 RB's. It's certainly something worth pondering though. The fact that Brady threw more times in the first 8 games than any other point in his career suggests to me that they simply wanted more balance, and didn't have many other options once Gronk, Dobson, and Thompkins became injured at various points in the last 4-5 games. I can appreciate it being a good question. I'm not sure if we'll ever really know.

 

[hwc]

Or if we do run but can't do it effectively, then we will be quick to adjust, I believe.

If the Pats can't run the ball effectively in any of the remaining games this season, they will lose the game. They can adjust all they want. They don't have the horses for Air Belichick, all-pass, all-the-time for more than maybe one desperation drive at the end of a game. Randy Moss isn't walking through the tunnel....

 

[supafly]

Randy Moss isn't walking through the tunnel....

He may be. I saw him tonight at Logan

 

[Triumph]

Are you serious? That was BB's gameplan.

Oh really?

So BB was calling the offensive run plays and coaching the defense. Parcells must have been back in the locker room. Thanks, didnt know that one.

 

[Triumph]

Was running the plan all along is a question I ask myself a lot in recent weeks and they just wanted to keep it off the radar until later in the season so they focused on a more pass heavy offense earlier in the season, or did this just take on a momentum of its own.

The personnel since week 1-2 was built to run the football:

• Ridley
• Blount
• Vereen
• Bolden
• Develin
• Hooman
• Mulligan

All players that either play RB or are blockers. Week 16, 17 to get the machine running and then just drive through the playoffs.

We have bingo.

By waiting until late season, you dont have reels film out there so a dozen or so teams can break down your formations and devise a defense that will have success against you. Sooner or later over the course of a season, some DC is going to come up with game plan to stop you that every other team tries to copy. Some more successfully than others.

Once you use it, that bell has been rung.

 

[RIpats88]

I think we just need to be the more physical team...which we have been as of late. when you look at this years broncos they kind of remind me of the old pass-first patriots.

but what was our undoing in the playoffs? teams who were able to be more physical with us like the ravens,giants, jets who disrupted our record offenses.

I think the Patriots are the more physical team than the broncos. we need to hit them hard on both offense/Defense

but, I also wouldnt be surprised if the pats come out first play with FB out there. then all of a sudden brady passes it for a nice gain.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I think we use 'balance' to attack weaknesses, break tendencies, expose the weakest areas of the D and take whatever they give us. I think that turns into throwing a lot early, and running a lot once we have a lead.
There are plenty of yards and points to be made in the passing game.
I do not want to pound the run stubbornly.
Outside of a 73 and a 30 yard run by Blount we were 44 rushes for 131 yards. Takeaways and timely success in the passing game allowed us to keep pounding but the run game was not consistently great, gaining 3 ypc plus the 2 long runs.
Turning our offense into a mediocre running game plus 2 long runs won't be good unless we are playing from ahead.

Great analysis.

I would only add that my own view is that the two most important things on Sunday will be:

a) Not falling behind early (certainly not by more than 7 points, but ideally getting out to a lead). I want the crowd out of the game and I want Fox and Manning panicking and NOT thinking about how to keep their foot on the Pats necks.

b) Not turning the ball over. The Pats cannot afford either to give Manning the ball more often than the normal back-and-forth would dictate or to give him Field Position for which he does not have to work yard by yard. This far outweighs, in my opinion, the importance of using the run to "hold onto the ball" at the beginning.

 

[PP2]

As an aside, didn't Eli used to shout "Omaha" before the snap?

Yes his use of it was relatively simple- the next word he said was the signal to snap.

 

[PP2]

No I'm talking about how Manning used it Sunday. The designation was that it meant go on next sound.
Later they changed it to not mean that and got the offsides penalties.
Its a fact.

We don't know that for sure. All we can do is speculate. That's the fun part for me.

Don't think the designation was go on next sound because his brother had already used that, as well as Brady.

 

[vyrago]

So far I haven't gotten the knot yet.

Nor have I. I'm still rather surprisingly relaxed. Check with me at 2 on Sunday.

 

[PP2]

Andy doesnt have a misconception. Cris Carter went through the whole thing earlier this weak.
It was intially snap on next sound. Then they changed it and that drew the Chargers offsides.

So your go to man is Cris Carter.. all of a sudden he knows something that not even Dungy does? That's a joke.

Contrast this with the revelation from Dallas Clark that Manning, in Indy, used Omaha as the signal to flip the hot call away from the side he perceived the blitz to be coming from.

It occurs to me that he could still be using that but use it in a context where players were led to believe that it was precursor to the snap keyword, which it clearly wasn't.

That sounds far fetched. Typically the key word is based only on the first letter, ie he could call Ohio and it would mean the same thing. Teams do in fact have a word that signifies the play call is on, and another that signifies when to snap. They change them. Omaha means different things at different times.

Your problem is with the writer who brought up that idea, not me. It was an interesting thought to me but doesn't mean that I buy it, because I think it adds a layer of unnecessary complexity. As much terminology as an offense typically has, it's generally a good idea to group or simplify, so as to reduce the chance of someone messing up on assignment or calls.

So in this regard, using omaha to mean one thing during one snap, and then something else during another snap is, for me, unrealistic because it adds more complexity than is necessary.

Something else was the live designator, not "omaha."