Does McDaniels hold this team back?

[Deus Irae]

McDaniels is a mediocre OC at best. His play calling is awful at times. That the team puts up points is to be expected. They've got talented players. The true measure of a coaches worth is how he/she handles pressure situations. The adjustements. Needless to say I'm not his biggest fan.

2007: #1 scoring offense in history.

Now, you'll argue that is was because the players were so good. Ok....

2006: #7 offense in the NFL.

Now, where's the argument about the talent, given that one of the team's top two receivers at the beginning of the season was cut midseason and the other top receivers were Gaffney and Caldwell?

 

[patsox23]

2007: #1 scoring offense in history.

Now, you'll argue that is was because the players were so good. Ok....

2006: #7 offense in the NFL.

Now, where's the argument about the talent, given that one of the team's top two receivers at the beginning of the season was cut midseason and the other top receivers were Gaffney and Caldwell?

Um...uh....STAMMER, STAMMER.... Way to silence the idiots, Deus. Thanks for introducing some sanity to this thread.

 

[blackglass3]

2007: #1 scoring offense in history.

Now, you'll argue that is was because the players were so good. Ok....

2006: #7 offense in the NFL.

Now, where's the argument about the talent, given that one of the team's top two receivers at the beginning of the season was cut midseason and the other top receivers were Gaffney and Caldwell?

I'd give you an applause smilie if we had one. Instead pretend this one is clapping. :robot:

 

[Rob0729]

2007: #1 scoring offense in history.

Now, you'll argue that is was because the players were so good. Ok....

2006: #7 offense in the NFL.

Now, where's the argument about the talent, given that one of the team's top two receivers at the beginning of the season was cut midseason and the other top receivers were Gaffney and Caldwell?

Sorry, logic isn't allowed when discussing McDaniels. I guess you didn't get the memo.

 

[wpdougie2180]

Um...uh....STAMMER, STAMMER.... Way to silence the idiots, Deus. Thanks for introducing some sanity to this thread.

2007: #1 scoring offense in history.

Now, you'll argue that is was because the players were so good. Ok....

2006: #7 offense in the NFL.

Now, where's the argument about the talent, given that one of the team's top two receivers at the beginning of the season was cut midseason and the other top receivers were Gaffney and Caldwell?

Did these stats help in the Super Bowl? Let me answer that for you NO. I don't put all the blame on him but come on. Why are you calling bubble screens to Welker when Stallworth get more yards every time, or how about waiting till the last drive to send Moss on slant routes, or how about two consecutive Off Tackle runs on 2nd & 1 and 3rd & 1 to lose yards on both. Saying that they had great statistics does not excuse him from the mistakes he made throughout the season (although there wasn't many) and the ones he made during the Super Bowl. As the Patriots players have said themselves what you did yesterday doesn't effect today.

 

[Rob0729]

I agree that Stallworth was underutilized. And I don't buy that he didn't learn the playbook argument. Yeah the Patriots had the best offense ever but did that help in the Super Bowl. In 3 of the bigger games of the year who made the play big play to either put the game away or set-up the play to put the game away, Stallworth, IN the Dallas game who was sent deep Stallworth, In the Indy game Stallworth set up to the game winning TD, and in the Jacksonville game. In my opinion the offense became to predictable. It was either go to Moss deep or Welker on 3rd down. On the goal line it was always the same play either Moss jumpball or send Moss across the back of the endzone and have Welker do a quick out they even tried it in the Super Bowl a couple of times but the Giants were ready for it. The only time they used Stallworth was when it was 3rd & long and they would try a bubble WR screen to him like they did in the Super Bowl when it was 3rd & 18 and he pick it up to set up the first touchdown. But instead of going back to this in the game they throw it to Welker about 4 times who avgs. about 4 to 5 yds. on it. Now if thats not bad coaching I don't know what is? On one hand you have one guy who gets 15 yds per catch on the bubble screen and another who avgs. 5 on the bubble screen. Even if he is your leading receiver those plays should have been to Stallworth. If you don't believe me watch the games and see what the Patriots call in 3rd & long?

Now you are overstating Stallworth's importance. In the Jacksonville game, the Pats scored 31 points and had over 400 yards of offense and Stallworth had one great play and not much else. The Pats won by 11 points and on every drive but two. How was he under utilized there? How did the offense get too predictable?

Stallworth played his role well at a time. He was a number 3 WR. Apparently McDaniels is a bad OC because he did what every OC has done for years, get his best players the ball. What an idiot McDaniels was trying to get Moss or Welker the ball in critical situations when he should have been benching them for Stallworth, Gaffney, and Washington.

This is stupid. People would have been killing McDaniels if he went for anyone other than Moss or Welker in those situations and the play didn't work out. But eventhough they did work out most of the time for going for Moss or Welker (the Pats converted just about 50% of their 3rd downs in the season which was first in the league and may have set the record for TD ratio per drive), he is still wrong to do it.

Maybe the playbook argument not be the reason he was demoted. Maybe he just played himself out of a position or maybe Gaffney took the position from him. One thing is clear to any objective observer is that it is that he was inconsistent and sometime he was on and other times he wasn't.

 

[Rob0729]

Did these stats help in the Super Bowl? Let me answer that for you NO. I don't put all the blame on him but come on. Why are you calling bubble screens to Welker when Stallworth get more yards every time, or how about waiting till the last drive to send Moss on slant routes, or how about two consecutive Off Tackle runs on 2nd & 1 and 3rd & 1 to lose yards on both. Saying that they had great statistics does not excuse him from the mistakes he made throughout the season (although there wasn't many) and the ones he made during the Super Bowl. As the Patriots players have said themselves what you did yesterday doesn't effect today.

Welker set the Patriots reception record. He was only the third receiver in the Brady era to get over 100 yards with Moss being the second. He has been Brady's go to man in short passing situations. He tied the Super Bowl reception record. Why wouldn't you go with him in a screen situation?

McDaniels called far from a perfect game in the Super Bowl, but that is a long way from him holding this team back or that he is responsible for Stallworth losing his job to Gaffney.

 

[Deus Irae]

Did these stats help in the Super Bowl? Let me answer that for you NO. I don't put all the blame on him but come on. Why are you calling bubble screens to Welker when Stallworth get more yards every time, or how about waiting till the last drive to send Moss on slant routes, or how about two consecutive Off Tackle runs on 2nd & 1 and 3rd & 1 to lose yards on both. Saying that they had great statistics does not excuse him from the mistakes he made throughout the season (although there wasn't many) and the ones he made during the Super Bowl. As the Patriots players have said themselves what you did yesterday doesn't effect today.

Why are you calling bubble screens to Welker when Stallworth get more yards every time

Are you serious? SB numbers

Stallworth:
3 catches for 34 yards. Longest catch 18 yards. Average of his other catches: 8 yards.

Welker:
11 catches for 103 yards. Longest catch 19 yards. Average of his other catches: 8.4 yards.


In other words, Welker had a better YPC AND had the longest reception in the comparison.

 

[richpats]

25 of the last 28 participants in the Super Bowl scored more than 14 points in the big game.

What do they all have in common?

They did not have the OC of the highest-scoring offense in league history.

Stammer away boys.

 

[Rob0729]

I'm not opposed to a "complicated" offense in theory - but that doesn't mean every play needs to be complicated - nor does it mean that an OC can't consider the talent, skills and capabilities of the weapons at his disposal.

Three questions for you:

1. Do you consider having a WR run a deep sideline route "complicated"?

2. Do you think there's room in an offensive playbook to run such a play at least a few times a game?

3. Do you think it would have helped the offense to have a deep threat WR on the opposite side of Moss for defenses to contend with?

My answers to those questions are No, Yes, and Yes.

I'm not sure if McDaniels feels the same way.

I'm not asking him to "dumb down" the entire offense - just to use a simple, standard play that many teams use. In Stallworth's case we had a WR who most DC's respected as a deep threat - at least until McDaniels stopped using him as such.

Next season we're probably looking at Jackson in that role - and unfortunately he's not one who DC's respect - and its in the team's interest to try to establish him as at least a moderate deep threat. And yes, that will probably mean some "dumb" simple, deep, sideline routes.

And that's a bad thing to do, why?

That's not "dumbing down" the offense IMO. But indeed, sometimes an OC does have to make concessions, just like Weis did in simplifying the playcalling when Brady first came in for an injured Bledsoe. Was that a bad thing in 2001? Not judging by the outcome.

Again, Stallworth was demoted to the #4 WR with a month left in the season for some reason. It isn't McDaniels responsibility to accomodate a person who gets outplayed for his job. Sorry, but I don't buy your argument.

There were only 4 games all season and post season that we scored less than 27 points and you can blame the Jets game on the weather. There are teams that don't score 27 points in a game all season. Other than the Super Bowl (which I have conceeded was not a good game for McDaniels) and the affore mentioned Jets game, the Pats scored three TDs or more in every game. You make it sound like not using Stallworth correctly made our offense stall which isn't the case. If McDaniels mismanaging the offense means that we have to have to settle for only two or three game where we have to score less 27 points as long as it isn't in the playoff, I am more than happy with the guy's performance.

If the Pats offense struggled more than a handful of games, maybe you would have a strong point. But late in the season we scored 38 points vs. the Giants, we blew out the Dolphins in the first half making the second half an opportunity for the Pats to abandon all game plans to try to get Brady and Moss the record in front of the home crowd, and have brady throw 4 TDs and one yard shy of 400 yards vs. the Steelers. Not to mention the Pats scoring 31 points on offense and Brady breaking the single game completion record against Jags in the playoffs. All these things happened after Stallworth was demoted to 4th WR.

 

[wpdougie2180]

Now you are overstating Stallworth's importance. In the Jacksonville game, the Pats scored 31 points and had over 400 yards of offense and Stallworth had one great play and not much else. The Pats won by 11 points and on every drive but two. How was he under utilized there? How did the offense get too predictable?

Stallworth played his role well at a time. He was a number 3 WR. Apparently McDaniels is a bad OC because he did what every OC has done for years, get his best players the ball. What an idiot McDaniels was trying to get Moss or Welker the ball in critical situations when he should have been benching them for Stallworth, Gaffney, and Washington.

This is stupid. People would have been killing McDaniels if he went for anyone other than Moss or Welker in those situations and the play didn't work out. But eventhough they did work out most of the time for going for Moss or Welker (the Pats converted just about 50% of their 3rd downs in the season which was first in the league and may have set the record for TD ratio per drive), he is still wrong to do it.

Maybe the playbook argument not be the reason he was demoted. Maybe he just played himself out of a position or maybe Gaffney took the position from him. One thing is clear to any objective observer is that it is that he was inconsistent and sometime he was on and other times he wasn't.

I don't think you remember the Jacksonville game to well Stallworth the two biggest plays of the game. His deep catch over Mathis and his sideline catch where he pushed Mathis down and dove for the first down. And I don't buy the argument that people would be killing McDaniels if they went to anyone else especially considering Moss had all of 2 catches going in to the Super Bowl in the playoffs. I don't argue he's a better option than Moss or Welker but when you have a guy that when you call a specific play for him he gains huge yards, why are you only calling it when you need huge yards? In every game this year when they needed a 3rd & long they called Stallworth's number, this was even pointed out on NFL Playbook on NFLN using the Cowboys, Redskins and Colts games as an example, so are you going to say that it's only good to call that play in third and long for Stallworth but every other time call it for Welker for 5 to 10 yard. And just because they were the best offense of all times doesn't mean they couldn't have been even better. As even Brady said.

 

[Deus Irae]

25 of the last 28 participants in the Super Bowl scored more than 14 points in the big game.

What do they all have in common?

They did not have the OC of the highest-scoring offense in league history.

Stammer away boys.

#1 scoring offenses the past 10 seasons:

2007 Patriots
2006 Chargers
2005 Seahawks
2004 Colts
2003 Chiefs
2002 Chiefs
2001 Rams
2000 Rams
1999 Rams
1998 Vikings

So.... out of 10 seasons, the #1 scoring offense didn't even reach the Super Bowl a majority of the time, and only won the Super Bowl once. In fact, the Vikings didn't even make the Super Bowl in the season when they scored in the top 3 all time, and neither did the Rams.

 

[Rob0729]

I don't think you remember the Jacksonville game to well Stallworth the two biggest plays of the game. His deep catch over Mathis and his sideline catch where he pushed Mathis down and dove for the first down. And I don't buy the argument that people would be killing McDaniels if they went to anyone else especially considering Moss had all of 2 catches going in to the Super Bowl in the playoffs. I don't argue he's a better option than Moss or Welker but when you have a guy that when you call a specific play for him he gains huge yards, why are you only calling it when you need huge yards? In every game this year when they needed a 3rd & long they called Stallworth's number, this was even pointed out on NFL Playbook on NFLN using the Cowboys, Redskins and Colts games as an example, so are you going to say that it's only good to call that play in third and long for Stallworth but every other time call it for Welker for 5 to 10 yard. And just because they were the best offense of all times doesn't mean they couldn't have been even better. As even Brady said.

So what you are saying is that McDaniels found a role to use Stallworth effectively? And I already laid out that the offense worked just fine after Stallworth got demoted in the regular season. The only clunker the offense had in the first five games after Stallworth was demoted was the Jets game and that is easily blamed on the weather.

Just because Stallworth was effective for a handful of plays doesn't mean he would be better in an increased role. All you have to do is go back a few years and look at Andre Davis. He towards the end of the season was good for one big play and that was about it.

Stallworth was too inconsistent. He would disapear for long stretches. Yes, he could be a big component at times, but he was not a consistent threat. I blame the player when he isn't performing.

 

[wpdougie2180]

Now you are overstating Stallworth's importance. In the Jacksonville game, the Pats scored 31 points and had over 400 yards of offense and Stallworth had one great play and not much else. The Pats won by 11 points and on every drive but two. How was he under utilized there? How did the offense get too predictable?

Stallworth played his role well at a time. He was a number 3 WR. Apparently McDaniels is a bad OC because he did what every OC has done for years, get his best players the ball. What an idiot McDaniels was trying to get Moss or Welker the ball in critical situations when he should have been benching them for Stallworth, Gaffney, and Washington.

This is stupid. People would have been killing McDaniels if he went for anyone other than Moss or Welker in those situations and the play didn't work out. But eventhough they did work out most of the time for going for Moss or Welker (the Pats converted just about 50% of their 3rd downs in the season which was first in the league and may have set the record for TD ratio per drive), he is still wrong to do it.

Maybe the playbook argument not be the reason he was demoted. Maybe he just played himself out of a position or maybe Gaffney took the position from him. One thing is clear to any objective observer is that it is that he was inconsistent and sometime he was on and other times he wasn't.

Are you serious? SB numbers

Stallworth:
3 catches for 34 yards. Longest catch 18 yards. Average of his other catches: 8 yards.

Welker:
11 catches for 103 yards. Longest catch 19 yards. Average of his other catches: 8.4 yards.


In other words, Welker had a better YPC AND had the longest reception in the comparison.

Go and check when Stallworth's 18 yard catch was and what play was called and the down and distance. And then check how many of the same play was called to Welker and the yardage. Stallworth's 18 yard reception was on a 3rd & 18 on a bubble screen on the first TD drive. While I'm not trying to take anything away from Welker it's called catering to a strength if Stallworth gained 18 yards the first time why would you not at least call the play one more time when your struggling to move the ball instead of calling the play to someone else. Although that someone else is Wes Welker it can't be argued that he was better at that particular play then Stallworth. And for the record I think Welker is better than Stallworth but if a guy has a strength why not cater to it like sending Stallworth deep and doing more bubble screens to him.

 

[richpats]

#1 scoring offenses the past 10 seasons:

2007 Patriots
2006 Chargers
2005 Seahawks
2004 Colts
2003 Chiefs
2002 Chiefs
2001 Rams
2000 Rams
1999 Rams
1998 Vikings

So.... out of 10 seasons, the #1 scoring offense didn't even reach the Super Bowl a majority of the time, and only won the Super Bowl once. In fact, the Vikings didn't even make the Super Bowl in the season when they scored in the top 3 all time, and neither did the Rams.

Ok, how does this support McDaniels again? If you're saying that most top offenses choke in the playoffs then it doesn't make him look any better.

 

[Rob0729]

25 of the last 28 participants in the Super Bowl scored more than 14 points in the big game.

What do they all have in common?

They did not have the OC of the highest-scoring offense in league history.

Stammer away boys.

Wouldn't that just justify the saying - Defense, not offense wins championships?

Remember a little team with a superior defensive gameplan beat an unstoppable offense called the Greatest Show on Turf a few years back. That little team only scored 13 points on offense and won the Super Bowl.

Remember when the high powered offense of the Raiders were grounded by the Bucs in Super Bowl a year later? The Raiders had 9 points through three quarters that game and basically scored two garbage TDs in the fourth quarter (the Bucs were up 33-9 going into the fourth quarter).

If this is the case, then doesn't that mean we should have had a more balanced team? I know that at least two of our three Super Bowls were won on defense. The Carolina game was the only game we won on offense.

 

[Deus Irae]

Go and check when Stallworth's 18 yard catch was and what play was called and the down and distance. And then check how many of the same play was called to Welker and the yardage. Stallworth's 18 yard reception was on a 3rd & 18 on a bubble screen on the first TD drive. While I'm not trying to take anything away from Welker it's called catering to a strength if Stallworth gained 18 yards the first time why would you not at least call the play one more time when your struggling to move the ball instead of calling the play to someone else. Although that someone else is Wes Welker it can't be argued that he was better at that particular play then Stallworth. And for the record I think Welker is better than Stallworth but if a guy has a strength why not cater to it like sending Stallworth deep and doing more bubble screens to him.

1.) You are clearly trying to "take anything away from Welker"

2.) You were wrong. The facts are conclusive on that. Now you're just trying to move the goalposts.

 

[wpdougie2180]

So what you are saying is that McDaniels found a role to use Stallworth effectively? And I already laid out that the offense worked just fine after Stallworth got demoted in the regular season. The only clunker the offense had in the first five games after Stallworth was demoted was the Jets game and that is easily blamed on the weather.

Just because Stallworth was effective for a handful of plays doesn't mean he would be better in an increased role. All you have to do is go back a few years and look at Andre Davis. He towards the end of the season was good for one big play and that was about it.

Stallworth was too inconsistent. He would disapear for long stretches. Yes, he could be a big component at times, but he was not a consistent threat. I blame the player when he isn't performing.

The offense did work fine but did it work like it did before he got "demoted"? The answer is NO. And he didn't disappear for long stretches Brady just refused to look his way. I saw clear incidents in the Giants, Jets, Dolphins, and Ravens games where he was open and Brady went elsewhere some for completions some not but since the had the best offense ever and went undefeated no one comment on this but he was open on numerous occasions and didn't get the ball.

 

[richpats]

If this is the case, then doesn't that mean we should have had a more balanced team? I know that at least two of our three Super Bowls were won on defense. The Carolina game was the only game we won on offense.

It means that in a Super Bowl, odds are a team can score more than 14 points. Only 1 team in history has won a SB with 14 points (the '72 Dolphins). And only 5 teams in Super Bowl history have held their opponent to 17-under and NOT won the Super Bowl (the Pats were the first since 1974).

If the Pats absolutely have to hold opponents to 13-under in future Super Bowls then I am worried.

Just one question - how did it feel to look at the screen and see the Pats only have 7 points with 3 minutes to go?

 

[Zeke_Mowatt]

Sorry, logic isn't allowed when discussing McDaniels. I guess you didn't get the memo.

Wouldn't that just justify the saying - Defense, not offense wins championships?

Remember a little team with a superior defensive gameplan beat an unstoppable offense called the Greatest Show on Turf a few years back. That little team only scored 13 points on offense and won the Super Bowl.

Remember when the high powered offense of the Raiders were grounded by the Bucs in Super Bowl a year later? The Raiders had 9 points through three quarters that game and basically scored two garbage TDs in the fourth quarter (the Bucs were up 33-9 going into the fourth quarter).

If this is the case, then doesn't that mean we should have had a more balanced team? I know that at least two of our three Super Bowls were won on defense. The Carolina game was the only game we won on offense.

Hey hey hey, what have you been told about rationality and logic in this thread? Pipe down hot stuff, this is a thread about how the most potent offense in history should be revised and the OC put to pasture, not some raving rant about how a balanced and defensively strong team is the basis for a good superbowl performance!