Can every rushing attack be stopped?

[BradyManny]

In the past few days, I've heard a little of the "oh my god, Denver stopped our rushing game and made us pass! everyone else will do likewise! we're done for!" whether on the board, radio, even Reiss made a toned down version of the above statement.

I'm not sure why this is such a news flash. In the past few years in the NFL, it seems to me that if any above average defense is hellbent on stopping the rushing attack of another team - no matter how great that team's rushing attack is - they will be able to stop the run, of course, at the expense of leaving themselves vulnerable to the pass.

Which leads me to the question which has bothered me most since Sunday nites game - did our OL simply get dominated? Or did Denver simply decide "hey, we're shutting down the run at all costs" and stuff enough people in the box that even a great rushing attack (which we assume ours is) failed.

If it's the former, that would be troublesome, but if it's the latter, then at some point in the near future Brady and his receivers are going to get on the same page and we're going to make teams pay dearly for playing run on us, which will in turn open up the run attack, which in turn will...well you get the point.

 

[Remix 6]

easily. LT got shut down competely by Philly when he was destroying others

 

[Oswlek]

My thoughts:

Denver would *not* have shut down the run as easily had Dillon stayed in there. Denver's fast LBs matched up much better with the quick, indecisiveness of Maroney than they would have against the power of Dillon. Denver also felt comfortable using their safeties in the box because they have good cover CBs and they didn't fear NE's WRs. Not only that, but the safeties didn't feel that much pressure to protect against the TEs in the passing game because Denver's LBs are good in pass coverage. Sunday was just a perfect storm of the oppsing D having the perfect players to take away NE's strengths. Sub poor CBs or slow footed ILBs and all of a sudden the scheme has to change to cover those areas.

Obviously the a good DL is crucial to stopping the run, but if the other team has 7-8 guys going against 5-6 blockers without fear of getting burnt in the passing game, they will usually stop the run even with below average DLs.

Edited to add that the simple answer to the question is "Of course!". It is just not always easy to stop both the run and the pass simultaneously. I will be shocked if NE is shut down as easily by Cincy as they don't have good cover LBs, nor is their DL all that good. Their CBs are decent, so it won't be that surprising if NE's WRs have another slow day, but NE will put up at least 20 points next week.

 

[BradyManny]

My thoughts:

Denver would *not* have shut down the run as easily had Dillon stayed in there. Denver's fast LBs matched up much better with the quick, indecisiveness of Maroney than they would have against the power of Dillon.

That's a good point. I'd replace the word "indecisive" with "patient" in referring to Maroney. Maroney's style just didn't fit the bill that night I guess. If there was any room to run, Maroney would've found it and exploited it. But I agree Dillon would've fared better in the circumstances.

 

[hwc]

You could tell by the Pats playcalling (throwing the ball 30 yards downfield) that the Broncos were crowding the line of scrimmage.

 

[Oswlek]

You could tell by the Pats playcalling (throwing the ball 30 yards downfield) that the Broncos were crowding the line of scrimmage.

And Denver was actually quite lucky that NE didn't take advantage of them. Brown dropped the flea-flicker and Caldwell scorched his man on the play where the safety made a great play to get over in time to tip the ball. A few inches different and both plays are TDs.

 

[hwc]

And Denver was actually quite lucky that NE didn't take advantage of them. Brown dropped the flea-flicker and Caldwell scorched his man on the play where the safety made a great play to get over in time to tip the ball. A few inches different and both plays are TDs.

Yep. It was basically a defensive struggle. The difference in the ball game was that Denver hit a couple of big plays downfield and the Pats didn't.

If you think about it, that's pretty much par for the course between the Broncos and Pats. The Broncos shut down the Pats offense. The Pats shut down the Broncos offense. Whoever hits a two or three big plays wins.

I think there's also an element of Brady being mentally in 2005. Last year, with no run game, pretty much all of the Pats offense consisted of stalled drives alternating with a few big bombs downfield. Brady's play action was killer on Sunday. He had the Broncos gang tackling the "runner" on several occasions. But, instead of looking to move the chains with a 15 yarder, he was throwing 30 yard out patterns and 50 yard post patterns. It's great when you hit 'em, but otherwise the downfield throws are just noisy drive killers. I'd like to see the Pats be a little more patient on offense.

Be that as it may, I'm not headed for the Tobin Bridge like many on this forum. The Broncos have kicked our butts before and they probably will again (hopefully not in the playoffs this time).