Let's Put An End To the Maroney Madness(X3 Merged)

[mdhprime]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

Brady went 18-38 versus Baltimore while fighting 30 mph winds. With no running game to lean on, the Pats were fortunate to leave town with the win. Having a running game does have value.

Of course it does but whenever you match up a good running team against a good run defense, the defense usually wins out. Look at the run defenses the Patriots have played in the past few weeks: Steelers, Ravens, and Eagles. The 2nd, 3rd, and 8th run defenses in the league. Belichick has made mention many times over the years of the uselessness of running up against a brick wall and the Patriots strategy bears this out.

 

[mdhprime]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

I don't generally get into name calling but some of you are straight up idiots. If we had a back that could grind out the clock in the 4th quarter they wouldn't be risking Brady's body by putting him into three step drops. Period. This isn't algebra. McDaniels doesn't trust Maroney to do anything but create 3rd down passing situations, so they shelf him for the most part, figuring that if you're going to have 3rd and 5 anyway, why not just pass on 1st and 2nd?

I'm not arguing this anymore, I'm done. You're morons.

And of course they're not going to draft McFadden. But god it would be nice.

So instead of passing and scoring at will, the Patriots should wear down their running backs. Interesting tactic.

 

[National Sports Advisors]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

So instead of passing and scoring at will, the Patriots should wear down their running backs. Interesting tactic.

You are missing the point. We have to pass all day because Maroney sucks. If we had LT, McGahee, or some other STUD, than we would be able to run more and our offense would be even tougher to defend. Nobody here even wants Maroney to touch the ball. I don't even want to see the bum on the field. He sucks. I'm glad we pass all game. I just want to get a running back next year so we can be even more harder to defend.

 

[Grizzafted]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

talking about "game plans" when the kid didn't even touch the rock against the f*cking bills. puhleaze. I want you all to be ready to eat your sh!t in the offseason and april when we upgrade our backfield.

 

[National Sports Advisors]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

talking about "game plans" when the kid didn't even touch the rock against the f*cking bills. puhleaze. I want you all to be ready to eat your sh!t in the offseason and april when we upgrade our backfield.

Exactly. The kid rode the pine against the friggen Bills and it had nothing to do with the fact that the kid sucks. LT, Peterson, LJ, McGahee, and many other feature backs would not have been absent from the gameplan against the Billls.

 

[A.C Vegas]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

LOL! A troublemaker? Because I don't like a MEDIOCRE running back that we wasted a 1st rd pick on? ROTFLMAO!!!!!!

Ok so you took time out to laugh at that but yet refused to take up my challange what does that say about you

 

[Armen Da Pats Fan]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

talking about "game plans" when the kid didn't even touch the rock against the f*cking bills. puhleaze. I want you all to be ready to eat your sh!t in the offseason and april when we upgrade our backfield.

And listen, I am not even saying s h i t can Maroney completely.

I am saying go after a true feature back and utilize Laurence in 3rd downs, ala Faulk.

Why is that so hard to swallow or comprehend? Why does that opinion bring out the nastiest and the worst in some of you, with the name calling and what not?

Has Maroney really impressed you THAT much?

I agree - if he does not absolutely shred - and I mean shred - the Fins & the Jets, then he is NOT the answer.

And if it is because he doesn't get enough carries, then that just proves the coaches do not have faith in him. Period.

Why would you NOT run against two of the worst run defenses in the NFL?

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

Sammy Morris.

He was running great and I firmly believe he would have taken the #1 spot before too long.

Based on WHAT? the fact that he got a whopping 11 carries a game behind Marony? Based on him getting 21 carries a game with Maroney out?

His loss hurt more than we thought.

Only in the minds of those who don't understand the game.

Granted, we're winning, so it's all good, but at some point, we're gonna need to be able to run the clock and grind out first downs on the ground.

Maroney gets 8 carries because he is ineffective.

No, Maroney got 8 carries because they were going up against a PREMIER run defense that was man-handling our O-line.

I can think of another 10-12 plays where I am sure they would have run if they had confidence in their back. Instead, they went to screens.

This is just absolute BS speculation on your part. They went to SCREENS because the Steelers are very vulnerable to the pass and the Pats are very adept at running them. You don't run the ball into a brick wall and hope to god that you gain a yard or two. That's just DUMB.

What amazes me about the Pats is that they can be effective in play action without having a running threat.

Or, maybe you can't put two and two together to get four. Clearly, their running game was effective enough to get the Steelers to fall for it and open up the play-action.

Think about that for a second.

That's pretty awesome!

YOU think about it for a second. If the running wasn't effective, then the Steelers wouldn't have fallen for the play-action pass OR the gimick play. Yet they did every time they ran it.

 

[ClevTrev]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

Bro, answer this question. Would our offense be better or worse if LT was on this team? The answer is obvious and it officially throws water on the Maroney PR team's claim that we don't use Maroney because we are a great pasing offense and there is no need for Maroney. Because you would have to be a FLAT OUT IDIOT to believe that if we had LT that he would not be getting the ball at least 18 times a game and that our offense would be even BETTER and TOUGHER for defenses to defend. The point being that a true STUD running back on this team that got 18 carries a game would not bring this offense back but it would make it BETTER! Only a MORON would argue that. Maroney is just not GOOD ENOUGH. Admit it people.

Did it ever occur to you that you're missing one helluva season while you and your posse whine about a perceived issue? The team is 13-0, and you have no idea what the overriding game strategy has been in regards to running vs. passing. You speculate about this every day. Must suck, huh? And you'll post some lame response saying you have the right to criticize team weaknesses all the while being sure that this is a team weakness when it is a suspect weakness at best.

On top of that, you obviously have no clue what it's like to root for a team that finished the season with a 2-12 record in 1970 or a 1-15 record like the Pats did in 1990 or a 2-14 record as in 1992 based on your posts. It's likely you weren't following the team during those seasons. No matter. You must understand that this is not a science and that the talent that BB has as a coach enables him to take a team of players and mold them into a unit that accentuates their strengths and overcomes or hides their weaknesses. Pioli will tell you that drafting one position will not always solve a perceived problem. Bottom line is you don't get it. That's it for me with these Maroney threads or the OL line sucks threads. It's just noise from a few who don't understand what it takes to build and coach a successful team.

 

[National Sports Advisors]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

Based on WHAT? the fact that he got a whopping 11 carries a game behind Marony? Based on him getting 21 carries a game with Maroney out?





Only in the minds of those who don't understand the game.



No, Maroney got 8 carries because they were going up against a PREMIER run defense that was man-handling our O-line.



This is just absolute BS speculation on your part. They went to SCREENS because the Steelers are very vulnerable to the pass and the Pats are very adept at running them. You don't run the ball into a brick wall and hope to god that you gain a yard or two. That's just DUMB.



Or, maybe you can't put two and two together to get four. Clearly, their running game was effective enough to get the Steelers to fall for it and open up the play-action.



YOU think about it for a second. If the running wasn't effective, then the Steelers wouldn't have fallen for the play-action pass OR the gimick play. Yet they did every time they ran it.

Excuses, excuses, excuses. Yawn.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

7.) First rounder....DECOY......I'm still laughing at this one

Laugh all you want. Shows how LITTLE you know about the game.

Moss has been a decoy on numerous occasions.

Every time ANY TEAM runs a Play-action pass, they are using their RB (many of whom are 1st rounders) as a decoy.

Please stop before you hurt yourself any further.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

Okay, but every week it's the same "How can we judge Laurence when he only got XX Carries?"

WELL, WHY DOESN'T LAURENCE GET CARRIES?

Because the game plan doesn't call for it and because you exploit your opponents weaknesses. You don't run HEAD LONG into their strengths and expect to be successful.

It's not like there weren't situaitons where we could have used a back getting us 4 yards a carry to convert first downs and run down the clock?

Pittsburgh's defense was tired late and still able to stop Maroney.

No, Pittsburgh's defense wasn't pretty tired of late. Why would they have been? They spent more time on the bench than their offense did. Maybe you should have watched the game.

Brady had to resort to attempt a pass to Stallworth on 3rd down because Maroney got zilch on 1st and 2nd down.

First off, Maroney got 2 yards on the 1st play and lost a yard on the second. Secondly, in BOTH situations, the Steelers Defense was prepared for the run. They ARE the best run defense in the league for a reason. But god forbid you actually give them any modicum of credit.

I don't know, I guess we're just of different opnions, but I say get through this season somehow without a true running game, and next year, starting with mini-camp, start moulding Maroney into a third-down, change of pace guy and get a TRUE every-down ball carrier.

I guess my mind could be changed, as it has in the past, but Maroney would really have to show me something for that to happen.

I guess that the fact that you've already made a decision speaks greater volumes of your lack of football knowledge than anything else.

 

[mdhprime]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

LOL! Can't answer it can you. Thought so. Don't worry, because "what if" we add Darren McFadden to this team in 2008. LOL! I love the Maroney PR team. It's ok to offer an "opinion"(that can't be proven) that Maroney doesn't get the ball more because we are a great passing offense and that it has nothing do with the fact that he flat out sucks, but it's not ok for an anti-maroney guy to offer an "opinion" that a true flat out STUD running back would be getting more carries in this offense and that our offense would be even more potent and tougher to defend because of it. I laugh. Maroney sucks and the Maroney PR team is grasping at straws to keep coming up with excuses for the putz.

It is interesting how facts continually put a damper on your argument (sorry, I mean rant.) You can What if? all you want, but the FACT is the Maroney is a second year running back who has been limited by injuries. You are forming a conclusion on a player who hasn't even had a chance to play much and comparing that player to some of the greatest backs to ever play. You are fixated on an idea that you have to run and be balanced to have a great offense. All things being equal, you'd be right, but you continue to ignore that this is not a usual offense and that none of the defenses in the league have stopped them.

The disdain you have for Maroney is obvious but also displays a lot of ignorance, particularly when you take into account that he hasn't even had the opportunity to show much. Compare him to LT, or Peterson or whoever else you want, but let's be real,; this a completely different type of team and all convetional comparisons go out the window. In the end he may not end up being a very good player. He may end up being great. The point is the there is no way to know right now and anyone who says otherwise is not being fair in my opinion. Time will tell.

 

[National Sports Advisors]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

Did it ever occur to you that you're missing one helluva season while you and your posse whine about a perceived issue? The team is 13-0, and you have no idea what the overriding game strategy has been in regards to running vs. passing. You speculate about this every day. Must suck, huh? And you'll post some lame response saying you have the right to criticize team weaknesses all the while being sure that this is a team weakness when it is a suspect weakness at best.

On top of that, you obviously have no clue what it's like to root for a team that finished the season with a 2-12 record in 1970 or a 1-15 record like the Pats did in 1990 or a 2-14 record as in 1992 based on your posts. It's likely you weren't following the team during those seasons. No matter. You must understand that this is not a science and that the talent that BB has as a coach enables him to take a team of players and mold them into a unit that accentuates their strengths and overcomes or hides their weaknesses. Pioli will tell you that drafting one position will not always solve a perceived problem. Bottom line is you don't get it. That's it for me with these Maroney threads or the OL line sucks threads. It's just noise from a few who don't understand what it takes to build and coach a successful team.

Puhleaze. So you mean to tell me BB would't add a better RB to this team if he could? I can't wait to see all the Maroney rumpswabs eating crow this offseason when we upgrade this sorry arse backfield.

 

[National Sports Advisors]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

It is interesting how facts continually put a damper on your argument (sorry, I mean rant.) You can What if? all you want, but the FACT is the Maroney is a second year running back who has been limited by injuries. You are forming a conclusion on a player who hasn't even had a chance to play much and comparing that player to some of the greatest backs to ever play. You are fixated on an idea that you have to run and be balanced to have a great offense. All things being equal, you'd be right, but you continue to ignore that this is not a usual offense and that none of the defenses in the league have stopped them.

The disdain you have for Maroney is obvious but also displays a lot of ignorance, particularly when you take into account that he hasn't even had the opportunity to show much. Compare him to LT, or Peterson or whoever else you want, but let's be real,; this a completely different type of team and all convetional comparisons go out the window. In the end he may not end up being a very good player. He may end up being great. The point is the there is no way to know right now and anyone who says otherwise is not being fair in my opinion. Time will tell.

Limited by injuries? The kid hasn't been on the injury report in almost 2 months. Puhleaze. The kid is healthy and still sucks.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

Brady went 18-38 versus Baltimore while fighting 30 mph winds. With no running game to lean on, the Pats were fortunate to leave town with the win. Having a running game does have value.

New England (3.8 ypc) ran the ball better against the Ravens than did:

Cincinnati (2.4)
Jets (2.6)
Browns (3.3)
49ers (2.6)
Rams (2.5)
Bills (3.1)
Steelers (2.3)
Bengals (2.1)
Browns (3.2)
Chargers (2.8)
Colts (2.2)

These teams ran it better than New England:
Cardinals (4.4) on 14 rushing plays

In other words, ONLY ONE TEAM HAS BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL RUNNING THE BALL AGAINST THE RAVENS THAN THE PATRIOTS ALL SEASON LONG, AND THAT TEAM ONLY RAN THE BALL 14 TIMES IN THAT GAME!

Would it kill you anti-Maroney clowns to do some research before spouting your unfounded inanities?

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

I'm not going to go over every response in this thread, but I think a lot of people don't seem to understand what is obvious to me.

Defenses have NO real ability to stop the passing game. Credit Brady & Moss, Moss's ability to draw double coverage, and Brady's ability to find the open receiver. THIS is why you see 30 straight passing plays in a game like last night's. Why wouldn't a team continue to pass when they have that many weapons and can't be stopped?

Defenses DO have an ability to stop the running game. That's not an indictment of Maroney - it's just the nature of any running game. Maroney can average 4 yards a carry or Brady can average 13 yards a pass like last night. No OC in his right mind is going to opt for a "good" running game over a "great" passing game.

It's not like giving the running game more reps is going to open up the passing game any more than it already is!

So let's not throw Maroney under the bus just because the passing game is outta this world incredible... and let's not overlook the fact that the OL is geared 90% to pass protection as opposed to run protection either.

 

[ClevTrev]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

Puhleaze. So you mean to tell me BB would't add a better RB to this team if he could? I can't wait to see all the Maroney rumpswabs eating crow this offseason when we upgrade this sorry arse backfield.

You might want to read the post first and take some time to understand it before you reply. Not sure what you're responding to, as you missed the point completely.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

Remember the early weeks of JR Redmond's career? How about Sedrick Shaw?

Neither of whom were a 1st round pick. Redmond was a 3rd rounder. Shaw was also a 3rd rounder. Neither of whom were scouted by the current administration. You seem to forget that Redmond was drafted based on the flawed Booby Grier draft information.

Maroney just has not proven it out over the long haul.

In the words of Ron Burgandy, "Agree to disagree."

He's 22. Read that again. OK... Now AGAIN.

He had 2 years less experience coming out of college than Addai and I believe 1 year less than Marshawn Lynch.

Also, please let me know which of the 2 offenses of the Bills and Colts are still in the course of implementing a new blocking scheme?

 

[Remix 6]

Re: Honestly, can we now all agree that Maroney is NOT the answer as an every down ba

again a panic button..after getting game ball verse "the best defense"..we play against another "best" defense and he doesnt do well.

look @ what RBs have done verse Steelers..those who commited to run or not.

jets, dolphins, giants came will be the games we see if he can run well