Major Props for McDaniels by Reiss...

[DarrylS]

for all the naysayers who insist that McDaniels does not know what he is doing, does not utilize the players well, does not do slants over the middle etc. here is a nice article on McDaniels.. one thing that is said here, and has been repeated before, that #12 reviews the game plan prior to it being introduced to the team on Wed. This is something often overlooked, as the gameplan is a process with a lot of these folks coaches and players involved, it is not something boy wonder does at night while playing video games. BB is the overall architect, hard to criticize an 11-4 record.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2006/12/26/plan_was_well_received/

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- Shortly after the Patriots capped one of their finest offensive performances of the season, Josh McDaniels stood outside the locker room, having traded his sideline coaching attire for a crisply pressed suit jacket.

McDaniels had just enjoyed one of his most rewarding days on the job, the team's master plan coming to life in a 24-21 victory over the Jaguars. Assessing the precision of the offense, he chose to speak only about the men -- some older than he -- who made it happen.

"I'm proud of them," said the 30-year-old McDaniels, who called the plays for an offense that rang up 359 net yards against a defense that had been allowing an average of only 9.1 points per game at home. "It's been a tough year in terms of being able to have the same group of guys out there, so we've had to shuffle some guys in and out, and have some new players. But some of the core guys have done a good job of trying to stay consistent and bring the other guys along."....

Chief among them was the triggerman, who bought into the plan when it was presented to him early last week.

 

[Flying Fungi]

but this is presumptive that Mike Reiss is more knowledgeable than certain folks on this forum

can it be?

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

I thought it was awesome what they did with multiple wr sets.

Per Reiss:

The most significant change was going away from the base two-tight end/two-receiver set, and favoring positional groupings with three or more receivers. By unofficial count, the Patriots ran 54 of their 67 offensive snaps (not including three game-ending kneel-downs) with three or more receivers on the field, an unusually high percentage for a team not playing from behind. Of those 54 snaps, 30 had three receivers, 21 had four receivers, and three had five receivers.


Aalot of people have been saying this, b ut key to it was that the O-line was able to block everyone with little to no help. The O-line did a great job IMO, granted there were a couple breakdowns.

My concern is trying that gameplan against a team that has a speed rusher(Colts/Chargers) or blitzes heavily(Broncos/Jets)

 

[JR4]

.........

Aalot of people have been saying this, b ut key to it was that the O-line was able to block everyone with little to no help. The O-line did a great job IMO, granted there were a couple breakdowns.

My concern is trying that gameplan against a team that has a speed rusher(Colts/Chargers) or blitzes heavily(Broncos/Jets)

Yes. you are right the Oline was key to that plan. A speed rusher like
J.Taylor or a good blitzing team would be difficult if not impossible
agaisnt the Oline PATs now have. IMO
Again PATs seem to have the most problem with a good blitzing team.

The Jags had a good plan ... problem was PATs had Brady ... who
completed 71+% of his passes!
JAGs took away deep stuff and limited the run for the most part. They
hoped PATs would stall if they had a long field. If Brady wasn't so
accurate they probably would have been right.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Sometimes yes, sometimes, no. That's life, he's human.

This time, he's fairly correct.

McDaniels deserves praise for calling this game.

The spread offense, utilizing multiple receivers, often going no huddle was very effective in covering up the fact that we have little to no deep threat - and in fact allowed Thomas to get open and make a long catch on occasion.

THAT'S the type of playcalling I've been hoping for all season in often criticizing McDaniels (as well as the players for inconsistent play).

That's NOT the type of playcalling he's utilized in so many games, which has made things so frustratingly inconsistent this season.

And while some might think McDaniels deserves a lot of credit for getting them to the playoffs, its tough not to lament what one or two more wins would have meant in terms of a playoff bye and home field advantage... so give him "props" for that as well.

 

[JoeSixPat]

but this is presumptive that Mike Reiss is more knowledgeable than certain folks on this forum

can it be?

Again - Reiss said right up front that the offensive scheme that worked so well was one that was NOT used at other times during the season.

That's something for McDaniels to be proud of?

 

[zippo59]

As I was watching the game I could have sworn I was watching the 2003 offense.

 

[zippo59]

Again - Reiss said right up front that the offensive scheme that worked so well was one that was NOT used at other times during the season.

That's something for McDaniels to be proud of?

I don't think it would have worked against every team. For instance if they tried it against Miami I think they would have been killed even worse.

 

[spacecrime]

Again - Reiss said right up front that the offensive scheme that worked so well was one that was NOT used at other times during the season.

That's something for McDaniels to be proud of?

Yes, unlike some, MCD can recognize when things will work and when they won't.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I don't think it would have worked against every team. For instance if they tried it against Miami I think they would have been killed even worse.

not that you're wrong about it not working against every team - but against Miami, when both safeties were playing on the line, and the LBs blitzing all of who didn't seem to have any respect for the passing game having any one of 10 recievers available and a no huddle spread offense could have limited the effectiveness of the Miami D... giving them pause in pressuring Brady

I think they actually tried this on occasion but the execution was poor - but I still felt they should have used it more in that game.

 

[Deus Irae]

not that you're wrong about it not working against every team - but against Miami, when both safeties were playing on the line, and the LBs blitzing all of who didn't seem to have any respect for the passing game having any one of 10 recievers available and a no huddle spread offense could have limited the effectiveness of the Miami D... giving them pause in pressuring Brady

I think they actually tried this on occasion but the execution was poor - but I still felt they should have used it more in that game.

On a football field, it's 11 on 11. Now, take out the quarterback, who's got the ball, and it's 11 on 10. That means that every single play gives a situational advantage to the defense if they choose to use it. Now, if you put 4 wide out there and the opponent sends 7 men, your quarterback has about2 seconds to drop back, find an open receiver and get rid of the ball. New England's receivers aren't the type who break open that quickly against man coverage. Running a game plan the way you want against that Dolphins defense would achieve nothing but playing time for Cassel as he comes in for an injured Brady.

You, along with NEM and the rest of the people who clamor for changes of this sort, overlook simple reality: the receivers who've historically been good at this for the Patriots were Branch and Brown. Branch is gone and Brown, while still capable, is no longer able to do it as well as in the past and cannot be relied upon to be open every time as in the past. It's why the quick release portion of Weis' offense worked so well with little waterbug receivers but is nowhere near as effective with guys like Caldwell, Gaffney and Jackson.

 

[Rob0729]

McDaniels deserves praise for calling this game.

The spread offense, utilizing multiple receivers, often going no huddle was very effective in covering up the fact that we have little to no deep threat - and in fact allowed Thomas to get open and make a long catch on occasion.

THAT'S the type of playcalling I've been hoping for all season in often criticizing McDaniels (as well as the players for inconsistent play).

That's NOT the type of playcalling he's utilized in so many games, which has made things so frustratingly inconsistent this season.

And while some might think McDaniels deserves a lot of credit for getting them to the playoffs, its tough not to lament what one or two more wins would have meant in terms of a playoff bye and home field advantage... so give him "props" for that as well.

You cannot employ this offense on every team. You can on a cover 2 defense. This is the same gameplan we had vs. the Vikes. But this type of offense wouldn't have worked vs. Miami or the Jets. Their defenses a designed better to stop the a spread offense or multiple receiver sets.

The problem is this offense doesn't have the talent to stretch the field and that hurts McDaniels' play calling against certain teams. Both the Jets and Dolphins are capable of taking away the short passing game and dare you to throw deep. That is why we struggled against those defenses. That ain't all McDaniels' fault.

McDaniels doesn't change from game to game. Neither do the players. What does change is the defense. This team is designed to pick apart cover 2 defenses. It isn't designed to pick apart a team that will take away the short passing game and ask you to throw intermediate and deep passes a lot.

That is the cards that McDaniels has dealt. Hence why he looks good against cover 2 teams and confused against other teams. I think people put too much blame on him and not the talent he has to work with.

 

[BelichickFan]

I'm fairly sure in the back pages of this forum somewhere, NEM has stated he expects Josh to be replaced as OC next year. This would seem to suggest otherwise :

"McDaniels was as well, and it was hard to miss the embrace he received from coach Bill Belichick after the game."

Seriously, my bigger concern is that with Mangini's success as a young coach a year out from being a Patriots one year coordinator that we may only be a year or two from losing McDaniels to another team as a head coach. Seriously.

 

[JoeSixPat]

You cannot employ this offense on every team. You can on a cover 2 defense. This is the same gameplan we had vs. the Vikes. But this type of offense wouldn't have worked vs. Miami or the Jets. Their defenses a designed better to stop the a spread offense or multiple receiver sets.

The problem is this offense doesn't have the talent to stretch the field and that hurts McDaniels' play calling against certain teams. Both the Jets and Dolphins are capable of taking away the short passing game and dare you to throw deep. That is why we struggled against those defenses. That ain't all McDaniels' fault.

McDaniels doesn't change from game to game. Neither do the players. What does change is the defense. This team is designed to pick apart cover 2 defenses. It isn't designed to pick apart a team that will take away the short passing game and ask you to throw intermediate and deep passes a lot.

That is the cards that McDaniels has dealt. Hence why he looks good against cover 2 teams and confused against other teams. I think people put too much blame on him and not the talent he has to work with.

I know - which is why I said you can't employ that against every team.

But the fact is we don't have a deep game.

So you can't just say "well the Dolphins were challenging us to beat them deep." You're right - they absolutely were. They were daring us to do so and we couldn't. They were insulting us by bringing their safeties to the line of scrimmage and we still couldn't do anything.

Given the lack of time Brady had in that and the Jets game, a short quick pass, keeping the D off balance with a number of different recievers, keeping the LBs and Safeties out of Brady's face using a no huddle more often would have been a better option - but that's not the gameplan that was used.

Maybe they felt the gameplan they used for the Dolphins was better - but it clearly didn't work.

Yesterday's gameplan covered our deficiency in the long game - and it did it well by using the no huddle and about 10 different receivers - and it did eventually open the long game for Thomas.

 

[PatsFan37]

Seriously, my bigger concern is that with Mangini's success as a young coach a year out from being a Patriots one year coordinator that we may only be a year or two from losing McDaniels to another team as a head coach. Seriously.

My fondest hope is that Pees and McDaniels are so good that they're considered for coordinator positions every year and that our players are offered top dollar when they get to free agency. That is the necessary consequence of winning. Only by losing will the players and coaches be ignored.

 

[mgteich]

Yup, although in 2003 there were more screens.

As I was watching the game I could have sworn I was watching the 2003 offense.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I thought it was awesome what they did with multiple wr sets.

Per Reiss:

The most significant change was going away from the base two-tight end/two-receiver set, and favoring positional groupings with three or more receivers. By unofficial count, the Patriots ran 54 of their 67 offensive snaps (not including three game-ending kneel-downs) with three or more receivers on the field, an unusually high percentage for a team not playing from behind. Of those 54 snaps, 30 had three receivers, 21 had four receivers, and three had five receivers.


A lot of people have been saying this, b ut key to it was that the O-line was able to block everyone with little to no help. The O-line did a great job IMO, granted there were a couple breakdowns.

My concern is trying that game plan against a team that has a speed rusher(Colts/Chargers) or blitzes heavily(Broncos/Jets)

Bingo! you've got bingo!

The spread them out offense ONLY works occasionally. It could never be a mainline Offense like employed against Jax. The number one reason is that we don't have three or four Bradys on th roster and you'd need that many to get through the season.

Despite NEM's equal opportunity hatred for all play callers, today that means Offensive Coordinators everywhere; on the Pats, they are creatures of Head Coach Bill Belichick in his regime. They run the Offense that he wants them to run. Period.

To a degree they are puppets with their strings fundamentally pulled by Belichick. NEM is as misguided as the fellow who criticizes and argues with the wooden dummy, Charlie McCarthy without offering a comment at all to puppeteer/ventriloquist Edgar Bergen.

They know full well that they Will be lucky to have 40% of the teams cap allocated to their side of the ball. They MUST win substituting smarts and complexity, and execution for expensive athletic talent.

That restricts what it is possible to do, even if NEM and cohorts, don't think so. Belichick removed a considerable amount of pressure on Josh last year by making him the de facto OC but not he official de jure OC. Realizing he had a keeper, and a future coaching genius, he made it official this year and the NEMs of the world predictably circled like vultures.

McDaniels had a tough hand handed to him. The entire WR corps was renewed and in Branch's case it was unanticipated for 2006, but preparations had been made to accommodate a 2007 departure should that come to pass. He has persevered and prospered in spite of the obstacles.

Mangini may be gone but Belichick has added another star to the firmament of coaches who will become HCs in either major college or pro football. Its not too soon to predict success for the Josh McDaniels experiment. Saban, Mangini, RAC, Pat Hill, Kirk Ferentz and CharlieWeis will have another compatriot or two added to the coaching tree sooner or later, in McDaniels. Another is overlooked superlative job Rob Ryan is doing, amidst the disaster at Oakland.

Belichick is a very good judge of men; even if NEM would never agreee.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Folks who regret that the Pats didn't use the xtra wideout alignment against many earlier opponents forget the lesson of this game and the Minnesoter game. Both times the Pats faced what was correctly billed as an awesome run D. Every team has strengths and weaknesses. BB, Josh McD and Tom Brady made the wise gameplan decision to let the Jags run D emphasis work against the Jags. Featured multiple wides to frustrate the D and neutralize it's strength. This approach set up the Pats' runs beautifully.

It's a mystery to me why some fans are so self-obsessed with their own (flawed) visions of offense that they would miss the simple brilliance of refusing to play into the other team's game plan. Matchups ARE relevant. If you have the players to take advantage of a counter-strength strategy, do so.

 

[RayClay]

Bingo! you've got bingo!

The spread them out offense ONLY works occasionally. It could never be a mainline Offense like employed against Jax. The number one reason is that we don't have three or four Bradys on th roster and you'd need that many to get through the season.

Despite NEM's equal opportunity hatred for all play callers, today that means Offensive Coordinators everywhere; on the Pats, they are creatures of Head Coach Bill Belichick in his regime. They run the Offense that he wants them to run. Period.

To a degree they are puppets with their strings fundamentally pulled by Belichick. NEM is as misguided as the fellow who criticizes and argues with the wooden dummy, Charlie McCarthy without offering a comment at all to puppeteer/ventriloquist Edgar Bergen.

They know full well that they Will be lucky to have 40% of the teams cap allocated to their side of the ball. They MUST win substituting smarts and complexity, and execution for expensive athletic talent.

That restricts what it is possible to do, even if NEM and cohorts, don't think so. Belichick removed a considerable amount of pressure on Josh last year by making him the de facto OC but not he official de jure OC. Realizing he had a keeper, and a future coaching genius, he made it official this year and the NEMs of the world predictably circled like vultures.

McDaniels had a tough hand handed to him. The entire WR corps was renewed and in Branch's case it was unanticipated for 2006, but preparations had been made to accommodate a 2007 departure should that come to pass. He has persevered and prospered in spite of the obstacles.

Mangini may be gone but Belichick has added another star to the firmament of coaches who will become HCs in either major college or pro football. Its not too soon to predict success for the Josh McDaniels experiment. Saban, Mangini, RAC, Pat Hill, Kirk Ferentz and CharlieWeis will have another compatriot or two added to the coaching tree sooner or later, in McDaniels. Another is overlooked superlative job Rob Ryan is doing, amidst the disaster at Oakland.

Belichick is a very good judge of men; even if NEM would never agreee.

It is ridiculous to compare McDaniels to Mangini at this point.

 

[BelichickFan]

It is ridiculous to compare McDaniels to Mangini at this point.

Mangini certainly had more experience a year ago than McDaniels does now.

But . . .

McDaniels' offense has been as successful as Mangini's defense was last year. That's without a guru to lean on like Mangini had with Belichick by his side.

McDaniels has been a coordinator two years now, compared to Mangini's one. Yes, McDaniels has only one year as coordinator in name but two in reality.

McDaniels has had as much to deal with as Mangini did. The latter had the injuries to Bruschi and Harrison last year but McDaniels had the unexpected loss of Branch. Plus Mangini didn't have to deal with NEM's constant threats

McDaniels won't be a HC this offseason at 30 years old. But I bet he's one younger than Mangini was when he became a HC at age 35.