No offense here, but your own posts helped my case. The lack of a running game by the previous 2 SB winners helps my case. The Giants winning the Super Bowl with the #32 ranked running game in the NFL helps my case.
The Patriots lost the Super Bowl for the reasons I, and others, had been talking about all year long with that team. The inability to threaten the middle-deep portion of the field allowed defenses to get up short and tight on the Patriots offense (as an aside, that makes it more difficult for a running game to be effective). The inability to stop opposing quarterbacks allowed opposing teams to put up more points against the 2011 Patriots than had been put up against any other BB coached Patriots team except the 2002 squad. Both of those weaknesses were on display in the Super Bowl.
It would be great if the Patriots had an offense that could score at will with either the running game or the passing game. 32 teams in the NFL feel that same way. 32 teams in the NFL don't have that kind of offense, and that includes your Saints, whose running game is remarkably consistent and potent at home on the rug, and remarkably inconsistent on the road.
The Saints ran for over 100 yards in every home game. They were under 100 yards in 5 of 9 games on the road, and were held under 60 yards in 3 of those 5 games. All 4 of the Saints losses came when they were held to under 100 yards rushing. So, was the problem with the Saints that they needed a stronger running game? No, according to your own, earlier, argument:
Again, running games are becoming less and less important. Sure a team would like to have a strong running game, but it isn't as necessary as it once was. The Pats got to a Super Bowl without one. The year before the Packers won the Super Bowl with the league's 24th ranked running game.
Again, Forte and Sproles are not a good argument for your cause. The reason why both are dangerous are their ALL PURPOSE yards, not just their rushing yards. Sproles is a change of pace RB. What made him so dangerous was that he was a multiple threat. Defenses didn't know if he was going to run the ball or catch a pass in the flat when he was in the game. If he couldn't catch the ball, he would be a JAG. This has nothing to do with a strong running game, it was because Sproles made the Saints' offense more complicated because no one knew if he was a receiver or runner every play. The Pats have had success to a lesser extent with Danny Woodhead doing the same thing.
Yeah, you and Dues are right about a lot of things. I brought up this side....again lol, because I know that they are all purpose yards, and scat backs. Im bringing up Forte and Sproles because they are very similar. And what you are saying about defenses is kind of my overall point of thinking.
But I would say sproles just made the Saints more complicated because the same formula was there with Bush and PT in the lineup. PT is one of the best RB runners in the NFL, he just doesn't get the touches, and before that it was Duece. So we have always had a strong RB in the Backfield sense 2006.
... and like you said our offense just confuses defenses, and creates mismatches.
The RB/HB/Scat Back is the future of the NFL, and its a skill position.
But the need to have a true power runner in 3rd and 1 or red zone situations still exist, but rare your right.
So, by the patriots not addressing this new trend in the back field they make themselves one dimensional to defenses. I don't know if that hurts them, Saints are pass 1st team also. We just use all of our skill positions to make it more difficult for defense when players like sproles is in. So, I don't see why you would not want Forte.
.. and I would call that an upgrade.
Truthfully are OL might not even be that good, our skill positions elevate a lot of pressure from the QB, because the LB's are afraid to blitz. Drafting Ingram probably wouldn't have done much for the Patriots last year. But don't you think that if you had signed sproles instead of us, that would have made a noticeable difference in pass coverage, as double teaming becomes a problem , your blitz pickup because LB's have to risking a blitz, so usually don't . Instead of not worrying about it. 3rd and 1 when they don't know what you are going to do. Right know everyone knows your not running. I like Danny Woodhead, but why not upgrade to a woodhead/Forte type backfield ? Why not upgrade that spot. We know it works.
LOL, Bush proved that by not being near sproles ability. It was just the threat of Bush that kept the formula working.
It gives Tom more options, reduces pressure on the OL, give more time to the QB, probably better pocket control, and cleans up the coverage a bit. I think sometimes the coach just has to bite the bullet and fill the skill positions with High ranking NFL players , and the RB/HB/Scat back is one. ITs essential to keeping defenses honest.
The Ravens playoff comes to mind. Why would they be worried about blitzing you like crazy, like they did. Everyone knows your going to pass. A run team can just eat the clock, especially against your defense, but you don't have that option. You might need to look at becoming just a little more complex on offense. On defense I am at a lose. Hope I did better explaining myself this time thanks
