Curran: Pats' reliance on the run may not be a good thing

[supafly]

Of course our gameplanning was run heavy. The Colts had the 26th ranked rush defense in the entire league, not to mention the week long talk about the downpours and wind.

As noted yesterday, our record is now 5-0 against teams who rank in the bottom 10 in terms of rush defense. It's a bit different though vs teams who rank 1-22, which is to be expected, at 8-4 (still pretty good). It's common sense that we're going to struggle more against teams who are ranked higher in that category, especially being limited in the passing game.

Denver comes into next week's game as the 7th ranked rush defense in the league, so we'll be playing within the 8-4 category. It will be extremely important to have some success in the run game, preferably as early as possible; which will allow us to then hopefully have some success in the play action aspect.

 

[Ring 6]

Of course our gameplanning was run heavy. The Colts had the 26th ranked rush defense in the entire league, not to mention the week long talk about the downpours and wind.



As noted yesterday, our record is now 5-0 against teams who rank in the bottom 10 in terms of rush defense. It's a bit different though vs teams who rank 1-22, which is to be expected, at 8-4 (still pretty good). It's common sense that we're going to struggle more against teams who are ranked higher in that category, especially being limited in the passing game.



Denver comes into next week's game as the 7th ranked rush defense in the league, so we'll be playing within the 8-4 category. It will be extremely important to have some success in the run game, preferably as early as possible; which will allow us to then hopefully have some success in the play action aspect.

What is out record against bottom 5 pass defenses?

 

[letekro]

Not true that the only success was play action.
The article is weak. Saying running for 200+ yards is bad because the pass plays you didn't make because you were running it down their throats are proof you wouldn't have.
We threw for 200 yards on 25 attempts. We scored 6 Tds.

I would bet we threw for less than 100 yards and less than 50 percent on non-playaction. The previous 3 games were also not exactly aerial assaults. The concern is real. We NEED to run the ball well to score points, while in the past, the running game was a luxury. That is the point of the article. I happen to think we will be able to do enough on the ground to keep them off balance but I'm not blind to the fact that our passing game has really struggled without Gronk and an outside WR.

 

[Ring 6]

I would bet we threw for less than 100 yards and less than 50 percent on non-playaction. The previous 3 games were also not exactly aerial assaults. The concern is real. We NEED to run the ball well to score points, while in the past, the running game was a luxury. That is the point of the article. I happen to think we will be able to do enough on the ground to keep them off balance but I'm not blind to the fact that our passing game has really struggled without Gronk and an outside WR.

But you have it backwards. We ran because we could not because we had to. Your bets aside there is no evidence whatsoever how we would have done with a pass oriented gamelan other than if you can run it down their throats like we did it would have been stupid.
You can dismiss whatever you wish since your argument is a pretend one but thinking that what happens on pass attempts in pass only situations is what would happen with a pass oriented game plan is silly.


Which games did we need to throw and suck?

 

[supafly]

What is out record against bottom 5 pass defenses?

I don't know how the same criteria meshes with bottom 10 pass defenses, but obviously one would have to assume it's much of the same. My point was that it's a pretty obvious relationship, while including the fact that DEN does pose a bit of a different challenge as they do not fall into the bottom 10 rush defense category, and are actually much of the opposite.

We'll know soon enough if Edelman and Amendola are enough to get by in the passing game or not, but you have to respect the concerns that we are limited in that right just the same. Now if Dobson is able to finally go and he actually is effective, that could prove to be a key factor.

 

[supafly]

Which games did we need to throw and suck?

Obviously balance is the biggest factor, but in games in which we "need to throw" are marked by the famous "40" attempt factor, that does not bode well for us.

We all know Brady's ineffectiveness when having to throw 40 or more times, not that I think that's where you were going, but if we "need" to throw more than 10 times in a quarter, it probably wouldn't equate to anything too good, especially with our limited receiving options.

 

[Ring 6]

I don't know how the same criteria meshes with bottom 10 pass defenses, but obviously one would have to assume it's much of the same. My point was that it's a pretty obvious relationship, while including the fact that DEN does pose a bit of a different challenge as they do not fall into the bottom 10 rush defense category.



We'll know soon enough if Edelman and Amendola are enough to get by in the passing game or not, but you have to respect the concerns that we are limited in that right just the same. Now if Dobson is able to finally go and he actually is effective, that could prove to be a key factor.

My point is finding one stat and implying that determines how well we would do against an opponent is so far from causation it's pointless to cite.

 

[Ring 6]

Obviously balance is the biggest factor, but in games in which we "need to throw" are marked by the famous "40" attempt factor, that does not bode well for us.



We all know Brady's ineffectiveness when having to throw 40 or more times, not that I think that's where you were going, but if we "need" to throw more than 10 times in a quarter, it probably wouldn't equate to anything too good, especially with our limited receiving options.

Brady's ineffectiveness when throwing 40 times? Please explain.

You will see with every team every time more rushes = more wins because you run with a lead and throw when behind.
The premise of the article is if we don't run well we can't throw. Surely thee must be examples. Most if the ones alluded to in the article were wins and/or examples of good pass offense.

 

[Joker]

HOW the game is reffed in Denver will be a major determinant in the game's outcome
The ref assignments have been announced but NOT which contest yet.

Corrente, Steratore likely to head Conference Championship crews

Do NOT like Steratore for us in this game.

 

[SVN]

HOW the game is reffed in Denver will be a major determinant in the game's outcome
The ref assignments have been announced but NOT which contest yet.

Corrente, Steratore likely to head Conference Championship crews

Do NOT like Steratore for us in this game.

Didnt steratore officiate the previous pats/denver game .? They let the players play for the most part.

 

[letekro]

But you have it backwards. We ran because we could not because we had to. Your bets aside there is no evidence whatsoever how we would have done with a pass oriented gamelan other than if you can run it down their throats like we did it would have been stupid.
You can dismiss whatever you wish since your argument is a pretend one but thinking that what happens on pass attempts in pass only situations is what would happen with a pass oriented game plan is silly.


Which games did we need to throw and suck?

I have not been enamored with the Gronkless Pats passing game. I would say we sucked in each game since he has gotten hurt, and you can throw in SB 46 and the 2013 AFCCG as well. I know you think all is rosy, but the numbers evidence an ineffective unit.

 

[supafly]

Brady's ineffectiveness when throwing 40 times? Please explain.

You will see with every team every time more rushes = more wins because you run with a lead and throw when behind.
The premise of the article is if we don't run well we can't throw. Surely thee must be examples. Most if the ones alluded to in the article were wins and/or examples of good pass offense.

There's been a fair amount of talk about the magic number being 40, particularly in the past few yrs.

His average number of attempts throughout his career is 34, but once he goes over the 39 mark--things change for the worst.

Obviously, I am not suggesting that one factor is the reason for everything, because I agree with everything that you claim about many different variables, etc. I am just pointing out that the word "need" can be interpreted differently. I believe there is a "need" for balance, just the same as anyone else would. I simply thought that I'd point it out due to the recent postseason failures, a record that is much worse, and the fact that our pts drop by a TD or so when the "40" mark is hit.

Tom Brady?s Magic Number Is 40, And Patriots Are Better Off When He Avoids It | New England Patriots | NESN.com

 

[Fencer]

Would be kind of cool if all these injuries and turnover and whatever forced the Pats to rediscover an offensive strategy that wins championships.

I keep expecting to see more swing passes. Brady hasn't been as crisp on those in recent years as he was earlier in his career, I presume due to less practice. Edelman in particular would seem like a natural target for more of them.

I guess what's hard about them is that they need to be delivered ... well, they need to be thrown fast and hard. An INT on a swing pass would be an almost automatic pick-6.

 

[UK_Pat37]

Exactly on point. Big trouble next week if the Pats get behind.

Why is he 'on point'? He's talking like the Pats ran on Saturday because it's all they could do.

They ran, because they could. The Colts were a walkover, as we expected they would be. We knew we could pound it down their throats and we did just that.

It's called game planning for certain opponents.

Four of Brady's last six games were 300 yard passing games. In all four he threw two or more TDs.

Against the Ravens and Bills we ran it a lot. The Ravens have a great defence and it's no surprise they caused problems in our passing game. The Bills was weather related and, whilst we were running all over them, why the hell would you pass it other than on the odd occasion to make them respect it?

You wouldn't.

Curran is a fool. He always has been. I got the honour of being blocked when I ridiculed something he said. Probably the best thing to happen. He was close to an unfollow anyway. One of the least insightful beat guys out there.

 

[SVN]

Why is he 'on point'? He's talking like the Pats ran on Saturday because it's all they could do.

They ran, because they could. The Colts were a walkover, as we expected they would be. We knew we could pound it down their throats and we did just that.

It's called game planning for certain opponents.

Four of Brady's last six games were 300 yard passing games. In all four he threw two or more TDs.

Against the Ravens and Bills we ran it a lot. The Ravens have a great defence and it's no surprise they caused problems in our passing game. The Bills was weather related and, whilst we were running all over them, why the hell would you pass it other than on the odd occasion to make them respect it?

You wouldn't.

Curran is a fool. He always has been. I got the honour of being blocked when I ridiculed something he said. Probably the best thing to happen. He was close to an unfollow anyway. One of the least insightful beat guys out there.

Could be your opinion.I find him fairly balanced especially in the boston media. Sure the pats ran because they could. they could also run last yr but were primarly a throwing team. Even in 2007 they had a good running game but we throw it. Makes sense to put the ball in TB's hands when you can . Right now the depth and strength of this team are our RBs and our offensive line seems to have responded to it. Curran's point reflects more about the fact that in the past pats could/would throw 50 tmes from the first snap if they need to or run 40 times a game if need be but now they have to smartly lean on the RBs.
Look at our game thread, how many of the fans keep yelling run the ball even when the pats pass and its the right play. If people had that much faith with this depleted WR core there wouldnt be that much uproar.
I think we underestimate how badly hurt this team is because of the high expectations they have built over the yrs. The have 2 slot guys and 1 RB as your pass catchers. If the pats were playing an opponent like this we fans would be ridiculing that offense . They have played their hearts out within the limitations. Nothing -ve about that .At least thats my 2 cents.

 

[UK_Pat37]

Could be your opinion.I find him fairly balanced especially in the boston media. Sure the pats ran because they could. they could also run last yr but were primarly a throwing team. Even in 2007 they had a good running game but we throw it. Makes sense to put the ball in TB's hands when you can . Right now the depth and strength of this team are our RBs and our offensive line seems to have responded to it. Curran's point reflects more about the fact that in the past pats could/would throw 50 tmes from the first snap if they need to or run 40 times a game if need be but now they have to smartly lean on the RBs.
Look at our game thread, how many of the fans keep yelling run the ball even when the pats pass and its the right play. If people had that much faith with this depleted WR core there wouldnt be that much uproar.
I think we underestimate how badly hurt this team is because of the high expectations they have built over the yrs. The have 2 slot guys and 1 RB as your pass catchers. If the pats were playing an opponent like this we fans would be ridiculing that offense . They have played their hearts out within the limitations. Nothing -ve about that .At least thats my 2 cents.

I don't think we would be ridiculing it...or at least I wouldn't. We know Edelman and Amendola have the speed Welker never had. To not think of these guys as viable threats down field is silly. Granted you aren't going to able to throw a jump ball up to them, but they can get behind a defence with their speed. Amendola's injury has really impaired his ability to do so.

Dobson I think will be crucial to the continuation of this Super Bowl run. I think we can survive Denver without him, but I don't think we would survive a Seattle or San Fran defence without him. Thompkins adds a little extra I guess but Dobson's height is invaluable. The optimist in me says we deliberately didn't even contemplate playing him on Saturday given what the game plan was and that there may be a chance he could go this weekend. I'd save him for the Super Bowl personally.

I don't think we are leaning on the run however, and the statistics from the home stretch clearly demonstrate that. I think Curran is stumped for writing ideas!

There wasn't a reliance on the run game on Saturday...it was our sole intention based on the weaknesses of the team we were facing. We knew we could run it down their throats and we did...even when they knew it was coming. If we needed Brady to step upr, throw 40 passes and 300+ yards with multiple TDs, he was more than capable and our receiving corps is good enough.

Whether we could do it in the Super Bowl, given the possible opponents, without Dobson...well that's a different matter.

 

[SVN]

I don't think we would be ridiculing it...or at least I wouldn't. We know Edelman and Amendola have the speed Welker never had. To not think of these guys as viable threats down field is silly. Granted you aren't going to able to throw a jump ball up to them, but they can get behind a defence with their speed. Amendola's injury has really impaired his ability to do so.

Dobson I think will be crucial to the continuation of this Super Bowl run. I think we can survive Denver without him, but I don't think we would survive a Seattle or San Fran defence without him. Thompkins adds a little extra I guess but Dobson's height is invaluable. The optimist in me says we deliberately didn't even contemplate playing him on Saturday given what the game plan was and that there may be a chance he could go this weekend. I'd save him for the Super Bowl personally.

I don't think we are leaning on the run however, and the statistics from the home stretch clearly demonstrate that. I think Curran is stumped for writing ideas!

There wasn't a reliance on the run game on Saturday...it was our sole intention based on the weaknesses of the team we were facing. We knew we could run it down their throats and we did...even when they knew it was coming. If we needed Brady to step upr, throw 40 passes and 300+ yards with multiple TDs, he was more than capable and our receiving corps is good enough.

Whether we could do it in the Super Bowl, given the possible opponents, without Dobson...well that's a different matter.

Lets see . I wont be confident if brady has to throw 40 times WITHOUT a running game. We are overselling our WRs in my opinion. I love each one of them but they are not enough to spread 40 passes around.And we have zero TE passing game. Thats amazing. We threw in the miami game and that became a nail biter which we lost and miami is one of the bitter run stopping teams.
I think when solder got hurt , the team before baltimore decided to play it in tight formations and relied on the skill position with the most depth.
I hope dobson plays but guy has been out with an injury for a while so who knows how much the layoff is going to effect. Plus he is a rookie.

 

[letekro]

Why is he 'on point'? He's talking like the Pats ran on Saturday because it's all they could do.

They ran, because they could. The Colts were a walkover, as we expected they would be. We knew we could pound it down their throats and we did just that.

It's called game planning for certain opponents.

Four of Brady's last six games were 300 yard passing games. In all four he threw two or more TDs.

Against the Ravens and Bills we ran it a lot. The Ravens have a great defence and it's no surprise they caused problems in our passing game. The Bills was weather related and, whilst we were running all over them, why the hell would you pass it other than on the odd occasion to make them respect it?

You wouldn't.

Curran is a fool. He always has been. I got the honour of being blocked when I ridiculed something he said. Probably the best thing to happen. He was close to an unfollow anyway. One of the least insightful beat guys out there.

The point is: without Gronk they are not effective in the air. The relevant games are therefore: Mia, Balt, Buf, Ind. The pats had some success moving the ball gainst Mia, but the limitations of their passing game were apparent in the red zone. In the other 3 games, the Pats were ineffective through the air. They didn't throw it much against Buff or Ind, but when they did, the WRS were generally not open, except on playaction. The Gronkless results earlier in the year and in the last 2 playoffs don't inspire confidence that they will just be able to throw effectively whenever they want. In your other post, you seem to acknowledge as much, noting that edelman is the only viable downfield threat and stating that Dobson, who most likely is not going to play this year, is "crucial" to their success.

Edit: another thing. They actually were not moving the ball against Mia. It was only after the dolphins sustained multiple injuries to t secondary that things opened up.

 

[Ring 6]

I have not been enamored with the Gronkless Pats passing game. I would say we sucked in each game since he has gotten hurt, and you can throw in SB 46 and the 2013 AFCCG as well. I know you think all is rosy, but the numbers evidence an ineffective unit.

Can you put forth an argument without misrepresenting mine?

In the second half of the season the Patriots were the highest scoring offense in the NFL. Since Gronk went out, the Patriots have scored 20, 41,34,43 points. That does not indicate an ineffective unit.
In the games they have scored 41,34 and 43 they only needed to throw 26,24 and 25 times, because they ran for an average of 215 yards a game.
Prior to that in 4 games that Brady needed to throw, he threw for 1497 yards.
I know that you want to believe you see something here, but there is nothing on the football field to back it up.
There has not been a game since the very early season where we needed to throw and were ineffective. That includes after Gronk was injured.

 

[RhodyPatriot]

Curran is spot on. The Patriots are running so much because they have few weapons in the passing game. It's Julian Edelman and nobody else. If I'm the Broncos I double team Edelman all game long. Amendola gives them a couple of good receptions per game and that's about it. The pillow soft kiddies they drafted at WR can't be counted on for anything so forget them. The TE's?? What TE's??
If I'm the Broncos I bring my entire defense down within 10 yds of the line of scrimmage. You clog up that 10 yd zone and smother the Patriots.
Patriots need to keep this game close. If the Broncos get up by 10 to 14 it could get real ugly.