Does McDaniels hold this team back?

[Deus Irae]

OK - good to know that 12.5 yards per catch makes him a deep threat.

Once again, you deliberately ignore the evidence against your argument.

1.) You argued that YPC didn't matter because you were talking about long passes in the air. You then cite to Gaffney and "12.5 yards per catch".

2.) In the second half of the season (November and December), when Gaffney was the #2 outside receiver, his YPC numbers were 14.6 and 14.7. Stallworth's YPC numbers in that time span were 13.8 and 14.9.

And I'm not asserting that 5 deep throws over a season makes him more of a deep threat than Stallworth was with 4... or Reche Caldwell with 4 for that matter.

I never claimed you were. You're the one who keeps ignoring all the facts and making things up as you go along. The facts are there: Gaffney caught more long passes (as determined by being in the air for more than 20 yards, which was your rubrick) than Stallworth did, despite starting in fewer games and having 10 fewer receptions.

Trust me - it would be news to a lot of Patriots fans and Defensive Coordinators to hear that you've proven that Reche Caldwell is much of a deep threat as Donte Stallworth (or Jabbar Gaffney for that matter). But indeed, you've got your facts to prove it

Trust you? Why, when you're proven only that you don't know what the hell you're talking about?

 

[Rob0729]

You don't even address my argument. I specifically refer to the Patriots NEXT-TO LAST drives in both games. Nothing I'm talking about has anything to do with the last drive of either game. My point is very specifically the defense wouldn't have been put in the postion that it was to be scored on in either game and the Patriots wouldn't have been worried about having to score to win in either game-if McDaniels had managed the clock better on offense. I believe he did this poorly in both games I referred to and that his inability to do so in these big games holds us back.

BS! Our inability to have an answer for Dallas Clark held us back in the AFCCG. If you score 34 points and your opponent scores 38 points and you are blaming the Offensive Coordinator, something is wrong with your analysis.

As for the next to last drives, in the AFCCG Heath Evans committed a holding penalty on the first play making it first and 20 with over 3 minutes left. The Colts still had all three of their time outs and a 2 minute warning. How would have running the ball in that situation helped the Patriots? Especially since the way things turned out, the Colts got the ball back with 2:17 left and only needed one time out to go 80 yards for a TD. If the Pats ran the ball on first and 20, odds are the outcome of the game would have been the same.

You are reaching majorly in this instance. We would have lost either way. if he ran the ball, people would have questioned why he ran when the Pats were in a 1st and 20. The guy can't win.

In the second to last drive against the Giants, the Pats got the ball with 7:54 and went 12 plays for 82 yards and at up 5:12 minutes of clock time. brady completed all but 3 passes. You do realize that the clock doesn't stop outside the 2 minute warning unless there is an incompletion don't you? So if the Pats pass outside the 2 minute warning, how is it different than running the ball if both achieve the same goal of a TD. A 12 play drive is a 12 play drive when you complete most of your passes. Maybe if the drive continued inside the two minute warning, you would have an arguement. McDaniels made mistakes in that game, but clock management on that drive was clearly not one of them. Another weak argument.

Only McDaniels would get slammed on poor clock management for eating up a third of the quarter on a single drive.

So I addressed your point and still shot it to hell. Anything else?

 

[JoeSixPat]

It was stated somewhere. Could have been by Mike Reiss that Gaffney supplanted Stallworth because his familiarity with the playbook. I am not making this up. Stallworth even alluded to it himself that he was slow to pick up the playbook in camp.

I've had this argument with you before. It isn't the OC's job to dumb down the playbook with one player. The Patriots had someone on the roster who knew the playbook better and was more than capable to contribute. Sorry, it is the player's responsibility to know the playbook and if he doesn't he doesn't play.

If this is the reason why Stallworth wasn't "properly utilized" and got demoted to #4 WR, it is totally 100% his own fault he wasn't properly utilized. Moss and Welker got the same exact playbook and didn't seem to struggle with it. There are no excuses for Stallworth assuming this is the case.

Sorry, this was the best offense ever. They set the record for most passing TDs, most total TDs, points scored, TDs by a WR, came close to breaking the passing yards record, etc. And the worst complaint you can levy on McDaniels is that he didn't utilize the # 3 WR well enough? A claim you seem to not have convinced at least several of us in this thread.

Well I guess we'll just have to disagree. I'm not of the opinion that sending a WR down the sideline to catch a deep pass is a complicated play - and that's how I contend McDaniels should have been using Stallworth. Its not rocket science.

I have no doubt there are plenty of complicated plays - I'm just saying that by not sending Stallworth long and deep down the sidelines, McDaniels erred and there were adverse consequences. That's not dumbing down the playbook. That's using a needed deep threat AS a deep threat.

I guess I was the only one who noticed increasing coverage on Moss as the season wore on - coverage that wasn't there earlier in the season when DC's assumed Stallworth might be looked to as a deep threat, and coverage that increased when McDaniels made clear he would not use Stallworth as the Eagles and Saints had.

I guess I was the only one who felt that adversely affected the team, and I guess I'm the only one who doesn't view Kevin Faulk, Jabbar Gaffney and Reche Caldwell as deep threats.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Once again, you deliberately ignore the evidence against your argument.

1.) You argued that YPC didn't matter because you were talking about long passes in the air. You then cite to Gaffney and "12.5 yards per catch".

2.) In the second half of the season (November and December), when Gaffney was the #2 outside receiver, his YPC numbers were 14.6 and 14.7. Stallworth's YPC numbers in that time span were 13.8 and 14.9.



I never claimed you were. You're the one who keeps ignoring all the facts and making things up as you go along. The facts are there: Gaffney caught more long passes (as determined by being in the air for more than 20 yards, which was your rubrick) than Stallworth did, despite starting in fewer games and having 10 fewer receptions.




Trust you? Why, when you're proven only that you don't know what the hell you're talking about?

OK guys - don't trust me - how many others here agree with Deus that Reche Caldwell was a major deep threat?

 

[mgteich]

You are correct, Josh has only one decade. This is his 10th year, 2 years for Saban and 8 for Belichick.

The ones who have many decades are the HC and assistant HC who continue to count on him as OC. And there's the best front office in the league evaluating players and coaches, headed by Pioli.

So Mickey D has decades of of dedication?

I seriously doubt that assumption.

 

[Deus Irae]

OK guys - don't trust me - how many others here agree with Deus that Reche Caldwell was a major deep threat?

And again you make lies and distortions. Where in this thread did I claim that Caldwell was a major deep threat?

 

[JoeSixPat]

And again you make lies and distortions. Where in this thread did I claim that Caldwell was a major deep threat?

When you claimed in this and other threads that Jabbar Gaffney was - with a whopping 5 passes caught of more than 20 yards, compared to Caldwell's 4 (and Stallworth's 4)

Seriously, tell us all with a straight face that you think Defensive coordinators live in fear of Jabbar Gaffney beating them deep.

No knock on the guy but that's just not how he's used or where he's dangerous - anymore than Reche Caldwell was.

Let's all admit - DONTE STALLWORTH WAS NOT USED BY MCDANIELS AS A DEEP THREAT.

Why is that so hard for you to admit? Do you just automatically have to disagree for the sake of disagreeing?

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

You are correct, Josh has only one decade. This is his 10th year, 2 years for Saban and 8 for Belichick.

The ones who have many decades are the HC and assistant HC who continue to count on him as OC. And there's the best front office in the league evaluating players and coaches, headed by Pioli.

I clearly understood what you were trying to say...

Sarcasm... simply sarcasm...

 

[Deus Irae]

When you claimed in this and other threads that Jabbar Gaffney was - with a whopping 5 passes caught of more than 20 yards, compared to Caldwell's 4 (and Stallworth's 4)

Seriously, tell us all with a straight face that you think Defensive coordinators live in fear of Jabbar Gaffney beating them deep.

No knock on the guy but that's just not how he's used or where he's dangerous - anymore than Reche Caldwell was.

Rounding to the nearest .5%:

Gaffney had 36 receptions, 5 of which were on balls thrown more than 20 yards downfield. That means that he was catching "long" (again, your rubrick) passes approximately 14% of the time.

Stallworth had 4 receptions on balls thrown more than 20 yards downfield, out of 46 catches overall. That means he was only catching "long" passes approximately 8.5% of the time.

Last season, Caldwell (by your claim) had 4 "long" receptions on 61 catches. That means he was only catching "long" passes on approximately 6.5% of his receptions.

No matter how you try to frame the argument, the numbers keep getting in the way of your false assertions. Gaffney caught more "long" passes, and did so as a higher percentage of his overall receptions, despite not starting as many games as Stallworth and getting off to a comparatively slow start. So, kindly explain how that happens if Stallworth is such a deep threat and Gaffney can't get the job done.

 

[Rob0729]

Well I guess we'll just have to disagree. I'm not of the opinion that sending a WR down the sideline to catch a deep pass is a complicated play - and that's how I contend McDaniels should have been using Stallworth. Its not rocket science.

I have no doubt there are plenty of complicated plays - I'm just saying that by not sending Stallworth long and deep down the sidelines, McDaniels erred and there were adverse consequences. That's not dumbing down the playbook. That's using a needed deep threat AS a deep threat.

I guess I was the only one who noticed increasing coverage on Moss as the season wore on - coverage that wasn't there earlier in the season when DC's assumed Stallworth might be looked to as a deep threat, and coverage that increased when McDaniels made clear he would not use Stallworth as the Eagles and Saints had.

I guess I was the only one who felt that adversely affected the team, and I guess I'm the only one who doesn't view Kevin Faulk, Jabbar Gaffney and Reche Caldwell as deep threats.

Running Stallworth down the sideline if he and Brady aren't on the same page does not help other than a decoy if you have a Gaffney that Brady can trust to get the ball to.

I think it had nothing to do with Stallworth and people not being afraid of him. I think it had everything to do with how the Eagles defended Moss by getting physical at the line of scrimmage. From pretty much a month in, teams were far more scared of Welker making plays than Stallworth especially since Stallworth had a slow start here. He had 4 catches the first three weeks for 66 yards and no TDs.

Stallworth was demoted to fourth string in the Ravens game (I went back and checked). Still Moss had 135 yards and 2 TDs against a good Pittsburgh defense the following week and 100 yards and 2 TDs vs. the Giants.

He had 5 catches for 50 yards and 2 TDs against Miami in December. That performance was arguably better than his performances vs. Cleveland (3 catches for 46 yards and no TDs), Washington (3 catches for 47 yards and a TD), Dallas (6 catches for 59 yards and a TD), and Philly (5 catches for 43 yards and no TDs). All those lesser performances happened before they domoted Stallworth and the Cleveland, Washington, and Dallas games happened relatively early in the season. Again, the facts do not support your assumptions.

As for whom I consider deep threats, you are being silly. I contend that the Pats don't need a lot of deep threats with Brady at the helm. Moss alone is fine in my book. I wouldn't have called Branch, Givens, Chad Johnson, Andre Davis, etc. great deep threats either, but they all played the roll before. Brady can pick apart a defense just as easy at 5-15 yards a time as he can with a 30-40 yard bomb. I don't know why you are so preoccupied with having someone other than Moss to get the deep ball. If teams shut down Moss, Brady will pick them apart with Welker and Gaffney. I don't see the problem.

Personally, I am not comfortable with us over-relying on the vertical passing game. Word is that they are going to use Moss with more slants and over the middle stuff and that is fine with me. We won three championships with a surgical offense and strong defense. Vertical offenses usually don't win Super Bowls. Even the Colts had to adapt more of Patriots (at least Patriots prior to this year) to get a ring.

 

[bigdgp]

BS! Our inability to have an answer for Dallas Clark held us back in the AFCCG. If you score 34 points and your opponent scores 38 points and you are blaming the Offensive Coordinator, something is wrong with your analysis.

As for the next to last drives, in the AFCCG Heath Evans committed a holding penalty on the first play making it first and 20 with over 3 minutes left. The Colts still had all three of their time outs and a 2 minute warning. How would have running the ball in that situation helped the Patriots? Especially since the way things turned out, the Colts got the ball back with 2:17 left and only needed one time out to go 80 yards for a TD. If the Pats ran the ball on first and 20, odds are the outcome of the game would have been the same.

You are reaching majorly in this instance. We would have lost either way. if he ran the ball, people would have questioned why he ran when the Pats were in a 1st and 20. The guy can't win.

In the second to last drive against the Giants, the Pats got the ball with 7:54 and went 12 plays for 82 yards and at up 5:12 minutes of clock time. brady completed all but 3 passes. You do realize that the clock doesn't stop outside the 2 minute warning unless there is an incompletion don't you? So if the Pats pass outside the 2 minute warning, how is it different than running the ball if both achieve the same goal of a TD. A 12 play drive is a 12 play drive when you complete most of your passes. Maybe if the drive continued inside the two minute warning, you would have an arguement. McDaniels made mistakes in that game, but clock management on that drive was clearly not one of them. Another weak argument.

Only McDaniels would get slammed on poor clock management for eating up a third of the quarter on a single drive.

So I addressed your point and still shot it to hell. Anything else?

The only thing you shot the hell would have been your own credibility if you had any left. You obviously haven't watched either of these games recently. Let me be more specific. With 2:55 left in the Superbowl it was Patriots ball 1st and goal on their 6. We threw two consecutive incomplete passes. In the AFCCG there was 2:30 left with the Pats on their own 46 3rd and 4 and we threw and incomplete pass to Troy Brown. When there is less than three minutes left in a game and you have or about to have the lead your OC should be taking as much time off the clock as possible to help protect your defense.

 

[nickw308810]

I've had this argument with you before. It isn't the OC's job to dumb down the playbook with one player. The Patriots had someone on the roster who knew the playbook better and was more than capable to contribute. Sorry, it is the player's responsibility to know the playbook and if he doesn't he doesn't play.

I completely disagree with this statement. As a coach, your job is to get the most out of your players.

If this is the reason why Stallworth wasn't "properly utilized" and got demoted to #4 WR, it is totally 100% his own fault he wasn't properly utilized. Moss and Welker got the same exact playbook and didn't seem to struggle with it. There are no excuses for Stallworth assuming this is the case.

All three play different positions and are asked to do different things. They had the same playbook, but different roles. Also, we don't know if either struggled with the playbook and plays were adjusted to help them.

Sorry, this was the best offense ever. They set the record for most passing TDs, most total TDs, points scored, TDs by a WR, came close to breaking the passing yards record, etc. And the worst complaint you can levy on McDaniels is that he didn't utilize the # 3 WR well enough? A claim you seem to not have convinced at least several of us in this thread.

I think that McDaniels is a good coach. He is young and will only get better, but at the end of the season we did not make adjustments well at all. During the season we had the greatest offense ever like you said, but I think you would agree with me that towards the end it could have been better.

I think the blame for the Super Bowl can be shared evenly between the offense and defense. The offense left with the lead, but all night struggled to sustain long drives, keeping out defense on the field far too much.

 

[Deus Irae]

The only thing you shot the hell would have been your own credibility if you had any left. You obviously haven't watched either of these games recently. Let me be more specific. With 2:55 left in the Superbowl it was Patriots ball 1st and goal on their 6. We threw two consecutive incomplete passes. In the AFCCG there was 2:30 left with the Pats on their own 46 3rd and 4 and we threw and incomplete pass to Troy Brown. When there is less than three minutes left in a game and you have or about to have the lead your OC should be taking as much time off the clock as possible to help protect your defense.

While I have made the same point about the 1st and goal situation in the Super Bowl that you are, I can't buy the 3rd and 4 argument. With more than 2 minutes left in the game and Peyton Manning on the other sideline, you get the first down any way you can and don't worry about running vs. passing.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Rounding to the nearest .5%:

Gaffney had 36 receptions, 5 of which were on balls thrown more than 20 yards downfield. That means that he was catching "long" (again, your rubrick) passes approximately 14% of the time.

Stallworth had 4 receptions on balls thrown more than 20 yards downfield, out of 46 catches overall. That means he was only catching "long" passes approximately 8.5% of the time.

Last season, Caldwell (by your claim) had 4 "long" receptions on 61 catches. That means he was only catching "long" passes on approximately 6.5% of his receptions.

No matter how you try to frame the argument, the numbers keep getting in the way of your false assertions. Gaffney caught more "long" passes, and did so as a higher percentage of his overall receptions, despite not starting as many games as Stallworth and getting off to a comparatively slow start. So, kindly explain how that happens if Stallworth is such a deep threat and Gaffney can't get the job done.

So you're saying that Defensive coordinators consider Gaffney to be a major deep threat at 14% but absolutely would not consider Stallworth to be a deep threat at 8.5%.

Look - you're WAY too hung up in statistics.

You've just proven that Gaffney was MORE of a deep threat than Randy Moss (98 catches, 13% in your terms). Congratulations.

Who do you think Defensive Coordinators are more concerned about beating them deep - Moss or Gaffney?

The answer of course is that DC's would never get hung up on

Defensive coordinators know what capabilities players have. They don't get overly hung up on stats. They know when to use their eyeballs.

I'll give them credit for that. Not everyone else does.

If Stallworth were used more as a deep threat it would have helped Moss and helped the team. Gaffney's 5 catches didn't alter Defensive schemes any more than Stallworth's 4 catches did or Caldwell's 4 catches did.

If your stats were compelling then Gaffney would supplant Moss - but you and I both know that's idiotic.

 

[nickw308810]

As for whom I consider deep threats, you are being silly. I contend that the Pats don't need a lot of deep threats with Brady at the helm. Moss alone is fine in my book. I wouldn't have called Branch, Givens, Chad Johnson, Andre Davis, etc. great deep threats either, but they all played the roll before. Brady can pick apart a defense just as easy at 5-15 yards a time as he can with a 30-40 yard bomb. I don't know why you are so preoccupied with having someone other than Moss to get the deep ball. If teams shut down Moss, Brady will pick them apart with Welker and Gaffney. I don't see the problem.

Personally, I am not comfortable with us over-relying on the vertical passing game. Word is that they are going to use Moss with more slants and over the middle stuff and that is fine with me. We won three championships with a surgical offense and strong defense. Vertical offenses usually don't win Super Bowls. Even the Colts had to adapt more of Patriots (at least Patriots prior to this year) to get a ring.

This is a great point, but I think it also helps make the point of McDaniels not making some necessary adjustments. Both Moss and Stallworth have the speed and ability to turn those 5-15 yard passes into much bigger gains.

 

[Deus Irae]

So you're saying that Defensive coordinators consider Gaffney to be a major deep threat at 14% but absolutely would not consider Stallworth to be a deep threat at 8.5%.

Again, I didn't say anything about defensive coordinators considering Gaffney to be a major deep threat.

You've just proven that Gaffney was MORE of a deep threat than Randy Moss (98 catches, 13% in your terms). Congratulations.

Except that I neither proved, nor tried to prove, any such thing. You are so wed to your theory that you have to lie and twist everything to try to make it fit. Moss, as you well know, was the team's primary deep threat. Gaffney was more successful, in terms of number of "long" passes caught, in taking advantage of opposing teams' preoccupation with Moss by getting deep downfield and catching the "long" pass than Stallworth was.

Who do you think Defensive Coordinators are more concerned about beating them deep - Moss or Gaffney?

Given that Moss was the best receiver in the NFL last season, and is probably peerless in the past 20 years when it comes to deep routes, I'd assume the answer would be Moss.

Defensive coordinators know what capabilities players have. They don't get overly hung up on stats. They know when to use their eyeballs.

I'll give them credit for that. Not everyone else does.

So do offensive coordinators, which is yet another thing you choose to overlook. Last season was the first time in Stallworth's career that he averaged more than 15 ypc and had more than 40 catches in a season (it was also his best YPC for any season in which he played a full 16 game schedule). However, his numbers dropped as the season wore on, while Gaffney's numbers improved dramatically. Both offensive and defensive coordinators are good enough to have seen this.

If Stallworth were used more as a deep threat it would have helped Moss and helped the team. Gaffney's 5 catches didn't alter Defensive schemes any more than Stallworth's 4 catches did or Caldwell's 4 catches did.

You keep making a baseless assertion about Stallworth. The numbers prove that you're wrong. The Eyeball test proved you were wrong. The "we're not bringing you back" test proved that you were wrong. In other words, your theory sucks.

If your stats were compelling then Gaffney would supplant Moss - but you and I both know that's idiotic.

No, my stats are quite compelling for what they're being used for. They're just not compelling when someone like you deliberately tries to misuse them. Your argument is wrong. The numbers show it.

 

[Deus Irae]

This is a great point, but I think it also helps make the point of McDaniels not making some necessary adjustments. Both Moss and Stallworth have the speed and ability to turn those 5-15 yard passes into much bigger gains.

Turning 5-15 yard passes into bigger gains is not what JoeSixPat is arguing about. His assertion has to do with what he considers "long" passes as he defines them. He defines "long" for his purposes as a pass that traveled more than 20 yards downfield in the air.

 

[Rob0729]

The only thing you shot the hell would have been your own credibility if you had any left. You obviously haven't watched either of these games recently. Let me be more specific. With 2:55 left in the Superbowl it was Patriots ball 1st and goal on their 6. We threw two consecutive incomplete passes. In the AFCCG there was 2:30 left with the Pats on their own 46 3rd and 4 and we threw and incomplete pass to Troy Brown. When there is less than three minutes left in a game and you have or about to have the lead your OC should be taking as much time off the clock as possible to help protect your defense.

You are complaining about throwing the ball on 3rd and 4 when the Pats already lost Faulk and Dillon for the game and Maroney was no all that effective (or do you call 8 carries for 13 yards a good game)? Apparently you forget that two of our three best running option were already out of the game in that situation.

Besides, you run the ball in that situation and you don't get it, the Colts would still get the ball back with over 2 minutes with three time outs left. If you think 30 seconds in that situation would have made the difference in the game, you don't know what you are talking about.

Weak argument. McDaniels made the right call there to throw in that case because the Pats didn't have a RB who was likely to get them 4 yards in that situation. On 3rd and 4 when your opponent has the two minute warning and three time outs left, you make the third down and then you worry about running out the clock.

As for 1st and goal when you are down by more than 3 and there is less than 3 minutes left, you go for a TD. What if the Pats got a holding penalty? Kicking the field goal and running down the clock wouldn't have helped now would it.

Again, the Giants also had the 2 minute warning and three time outs left in their arsenal. If the Pats ran the ball those two plays, the worst case scenario they would have been looking at would have been the ball with about 1:45 left on the clock and 3 time outs. Yes, it would have been a worse situation than they ended up having. But since they scored 2:07 in the last last drive, you are not talking about insurmountable odds here. It would have been impossible for the Pats offense to run down the clock enough not to give the Giants over a minute and a half to work with and at least 2 time outs.

If you really think that was the difference in those games, you are clueless. It might have made some difference in the Super Bowl, but not enough to stop the Giants from making a drive if they did it right. What are you going to argue next? The time on the 40 second clock when Brady snapped the ball. Sorry, your arguments are weak.

 

[Rob0729]

This is a great point, but I think it also helps make the point of McDaniels not making some necessary adjustments. Both Moss and Stallworth have the speed and ability to turn those 5-15 yard passes into much bigger gains.

I don't think I did though. I think he used both quite well actually especially Moss. They used Stallworth as a yard after the catch guy which was his strength. I think that is the right way to use him rather than to stretch the field especially since I don't think you should send two WRs down the field in 3 WRs sets very often because it takes away too many options if the rush comes too fast.

 

[Rob0729]

I completely disagree with this statement. As a coach, your job is to get the most out of your players.

So you make Brady and the rest of the offense less effective to accomodate Stallworth? Sorry, there are 53 men on the team and it is every man's responsibilities to learn the plays. There is only so much a coach can do. That is why Belichick runs tests on opponents and if you don't pass, you don't play. Belichick expects a lot out of his players. Besides, who said it was McDaniels' decision or at least his sole decision. Belichick could have made this decision to demote him in favor of Gaffney.

All three play different positions and are asked to do different things. They had the same playbook, but different roles. Also, we don't know if either struggled with the playbook and plays were adjusted to help them.

Sorry, everyone's playbooks have presnap adjustments. All the adjustments are intertwined with each other. You can't in many cases have one player change his route without every player changing his route.

I think that McDaniels is a good coach. He is young and will only get better, but at the end of the season we did not make adjustments well at all. During the season we had the greatest offense ever like you said, but I think you would agree with me that towards the end it could have been better.

I think the blame for the Super Bowl can be shared evenly between the offense and defense. The offense left with the lead, but all night struggled to sustain long drives, keeping out defense on the field far too much.

I disagree that McDaniels didn't make adjustments at all. You can argue he made the wrong adjustments, but he clearly made adjustments.