Welcome to PatsFans.com

Offense...Worse In The Brady Era

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by SCPatBoy, Dec 17, 2006.

  1. SCPatBoy

    SCPatBoy Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Messages:
    270
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I know some will start pointing out numbers and stats and such....but I look at more then that....I think it's important to look at situational performance.
    This offense gets shut down this year by any decent defense. They can look awful against good defenses.The Patriots in the past couldrely on there offense to put up points in most cases against good teams.

    Now what hurts the most is that we struggle against bad defenses also.Today was another example.

    1) The Texans aren't good and yet we had awesome field position all day and came away with way to many field goals. Against Playoff teams who have an offense this won't be a recipe to advance.

    2) Today the score looks great , but if you look at the numbers it is clear to see we didn't have a great offensive day. Pass Yards, Rush Yards etc.....

    3) I mean I truly can't understand why we will throw other Rookies the ball 7 or 8 times a game but CJ gets his typical 1 ball thrown his way a game. I don't care what anyone says CJ can be know worse then our #2 WR right now, so at least get the ball in the guys hands more then once a game and evaluate what he can do, see if we can build confidence and get him in better sync with Brady. I mean Gaffney( A veteran WR) dropped an easy TD pass today........

    4) And last but not least I hope Maroney will be 100% by the playoffs. Even then though teams like SD will be able to probably score 14 pts against us, but I don't think right now this team could score 14 points against a good defense like that.
  2. BradyManny

    BradyManny Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    9,696
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +32 / 0 / -0

    Good defenses neutralize great offenses, that's what happens in any sport, and that's why defense is always the most important thing. The best of offenses are going to struggle against top tier defenses. I think we have a very good offense, but if we are playing a very good defense, of course it may not look great on that given week.

    I do agree with you about Jackson, I don't know why they can't just throw a ball his way and see what he does with it. Nonetheless, I personally think the receiving corps is just fine, I think Reche is great, Gaffney is going to continue to get more involved and Kelvin Kight looks like he has some potential.

    But still, I do wish they'd make a concerted effort into incorporating Jackson into the game. He was only in on run packages. I think he played on 3 passing plays, two of which were screens. I don't understand why with a 30 point lead you don't let Reche or Troy rest and work on getting Jackson in sync with Brady - the game's the quickest way to do this, it's more effective than learning in practice.
  3. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,852
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +46 / 2 / -0

    I'm torn - it would have been nice to see Brady and the receivers stretch the field more against a team like the Texans... instead we got a lot of dink and dunk football... but then again, the situational footbal tactics didn't call for much more than that today, in large part, thanks to great field position.

    And when you build a lead like the Pats had, high risk/reward deep passes don't make a whole lot of sense.

    But still, take out Faulk's 43 yard catch/run and you are looking at some statistics that aren't exactly going to scare DC's into keeping their safeties back in coverage... they might as well put them right on the line of scrimmage, giving the OL a real tough day.

    Dave Thomas wound up being our most consistent "deep" threat of the day with an 8 yard per catch average on 3 passes. All other recievers chipped in with 3 and 4 yard passes.

    Again, I recognize that the situational ball didn't call for a lot of risks today - but against a good D they absolutley MUST stretch the field to keep pressure off Brady and the short/mid yardage receivers. Today's "scrimmage" might have been a good time to at least show DC's that Brady and his receivers are capable of some big plays, but alas, they were few and far between.
  4. edgecy

    edgecy Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I agree with most everything you've said... I'd just like to remind you of the key players that are not in the game today - Watson, LoMo, Wilfork, and Rodney. I think the yards from this game is misleading because the defense did a great job at forcing turnovers and thus giving the offense a short field to work with. While we settled for too many field goals but also keep in mind that Gaffney left an easy 6 on the field today. Despite that, I am very happy to see that Gaffney is getting more of the offense down pat.

    Overall, I am very pleased with today's outcome. Injury free, and most importantly, MISTAKE FREE.
  5. fgssand

    fgssand PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,770
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -1

    #17 Jersey

    For those that insist on being critical and negative today........STOP IT........

    We won in a blow out.

    We took control from the opening kick off and never looked back.

    We dominated a game in the NFL, never an easy thing to do.

    If you cannot savor this victory and enjoy the day - you will never be happy.

    One down, six to go.
  6. pats60

    pats60 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    Just got back from game.
    Boy our recievers really suck .
    Droped passes ,they have no seperation.
    When they did gaffney droped it
    Wish jackson played more seems like when he was in there they ran it
  7. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,852
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +46 / 2 / -0

    I know Gaffney had the TD - but I didn't see him do anything else... though I agree it does seem like he's been playing his role better - just that today's stats don't show it aside from 1 pass caught.

    Ultimately it's BB's call to play it safe today - I'll not spend too much time second guessing... its just that today's game did nothing to give good D's a second thought about applying a Miami-like defensive scheme with the Safties playing on the line instead of deep coverage.
  8. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,852
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +46 / 2 / -0


    OK - so if we win everything's rosy and if we lose its the end of the world?

    There shall be no game analysis just because they won?

    C'mon - get off your high horse of being a "fan's fan" who refuses to acknowledge reality simply because we won.

    This messageboard is for in-depth game analysis. That doesn't stop simply because we won.

    Beating a 4-10 team doesn't mean we're ready for the Super Bowl - there's much work to be done to improve the team before we are.

    If you don't want to talk about that, please don't - but don't fault others for doing so either.
  9. edgecy

    edgecy Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Yes, his 1-catch effort probably doesn't inspire a lot of confidence, but after a week of roller coaster ending with Gabriel's release, I think it's nice to see our other receiver stepping up. He could've had a 2-TD day but I am more than happy to take what he did today. He's probably not going to light the board on fire this last few games but it gives me comfort to know that we have more than Troy and Reche.
  10. SVN

    SVN Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    22,550
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +44 / 0 / -0

    maybe its just me but ..getting tired of this "involve jackson more " ideas...are BB and brady really that stupid that they would not throw him the ball more or involve him more if they think he would be effective ? Our offense has even when branch and givens were there was never built around throw X player more and let the player make plays...its always been the off unit doing what they are supposed to that is run the route as called and if you are open you will get the ball...
    we never had superstar off players and its everyone doing ther job to get the ball moving.
    also jackson has been injured most of the year,how much reps does he get to improve his route running or whatever ,now especially during the crunch of the season when we are trying to prepare for the next opponent ?
    Add to that the fact that BB is most cautious with injuries, as he said today in the press conf "there is nothing more important to us than the,health of the players"
    .so if jackson is not 100 % then putting him in more plays puts a risk of aggravating the injury...
    i wish he made more plays and will probably turn out to be good player for us but lets face it ..he is not 100 and hasnt been on the team week in week out. Mcdaniels etc have had questionable game plans some times but iam quite confident that BB and brady and co. would identify jackson and involve him if they thought he could.Fact that gaffeny is in the field after signing him mid season is a good indication.
    right now jackson can best do what he asked to which is get into the game , get used to game time situations and block during the running game and catch the ball if it gets thrown to him...he can contribute to improving our offense but i dont think he alone can make the diff...
    i apologize in advance if i offended anyone ..not a jackson hater but cant see him helping us this season much.
  11. TomBrady'sGoat

    TomBrady'sGoat Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,769
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    what the hell does the thread title mean? before the brady era was the bledsoe era and before that was 1992. so are you saying you preferred the bledsoe era?

    as for Chad, I'll trust BB's assessment of Chad over yours. You know, since he actually knows Chad and because he sees Chad practice. Oh yeah, and all those championship rings. nothing personal.
  12. Michael

    Michael Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,006
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    I can't believe minutes after a nice win this is the post someone would feel a need to start anyway. :p
  13. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,312
    Likes Received:
    118
    Ratings:
    +245 / 7 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    Looks like someone needs his girlfriend to help him out tonight, that'll take care of the bad mood. Jeez. We barely had any long fields to go. We scored 4 TD. We had no Watson, no Maroney - they're coming back. This offense is better than 2001 and 2002 for sure.
  14. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    :yeahthat: What he said. Superior breakdown and analysis is the foundation of this board, and of this team. Do you think the coaches are home with wifey right now, saying "we're ready for the Superbowl, honey!"? Nope. Nor should we be. It was a great win, and we all feel redeemed as fans, but as posters to this board, we have an obligation to break this game down a bit and see where there were still weaknesses. I guarantee that is what the coaches are doing now.
  15. BradfordPatsFan

    BradfordPatsFan Rookie

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,525
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    I'm thrilled with this win for the following reasons:

    1. No turnovers.

    2. The defense played a great game against a team that has beaten the Jags twice and held their own against the Colts once.

    3. No injuries.

    4. BB was able to get a win without Rodney, Vince, LoMo, and Watson.

    5. Many of the regulars were able to get some late rest.

    This game was eerily reminiscent of 2001. The defense and special teams were dominant and allowed the offense to play with a scaled back game plan. Screens, short passes, and pounding the ball. As Watson and LoMo get back, the offense will improve. LoMo is the catalyst, IMO.

    In 2001, the team did not stretch the field at all either, BTW.
  16. BionicPatriot

    BionicPatriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,542
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    You have a point. However, today they showed exactly what we've needed to see all year. I'll get back to this point.

    So 40 points is struggling? No. It's not, anyway you slice it, scoring that many points mean you did something right. So your telling me if the score was reversed, you'd say we played good today?

    We came away with field goals at the end of the game when all the coaches did was run. Are you surprised? The game was over going into the 4th, which is where alot of the red zone posessions came with a FG. The game was over, the Pats killed the clock.

    You folks needs to understand football. No offense, and hopefully I didn't sound like an ass by saying that. I just want to explain this to you. First off, rush yards. This is simple. Dillon by himself wont do a damn thing. This is why getting Maroney back is huge. Your right about the rush. Today it stunk because our main man was out. Good news, that can and WILL be fixed.

    Now about passing. Today, Houston clearly saw what Miami did and went after it. First off, this WR core is not good enough to have a big day passing. Instead, McDaniels for once showed good coaching. Instead of being an idiot like last week and going long or taking time on every pass play against a nasty rush, he neutralized it. How? He called screen plays which were KILLING the Texans. Why did Faulk rumble that whole way not being touched? Not because of blocking, but because the Texans called a blitz and McDaniels called the perfect play to counter it. Game. Set. Match. That was the stroy of the game. Looking at the stat sheet, we can sit here all we want and demand higher passing yardage. However, today McDaniels called the right calls which were short passes so Brady could get rid of the ball quickly, beating the defense, causing a blow out. Why was his yardage so low? That's why.

    3) I mean I truly can't understand why we will throw other Rookies the ball 7 or 8 times a game but CJ gets his typical 1 ball thrown his way a game. I don't care what anyone says CJ can be know worse then our #2 WR right now, so at least get the ball in the guys hands more then once a game and evaluate what he can do, see if we can build confidence and get him in better sync with Brady. I mean Gaffney( A veteran WR) dropped an easy TD pass today........

    Again, you'd be correct saying we need Maroney. However, I promise barring a collapse on gameday this O will put up 14 on SD. Their defense is their weakness, we can beat that.
  17. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,312
    Likes Received:
    118
    Ratings:
    +245 / 7 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    It's because it's BULLSH!T. BULLSH!T.

    Too many FG ? Maybe but what do you call 4 TDs ? 4 TDs, 4 FG, 50% in the Red Zone is GOOD.

    Yards ? How can we get YARDS when we start at the 50 all day ??? Huh ???

    Jackson ? Maybe the other guys are better right now and we didn't exactly have to throw downfield a lot. Why would the others be better ? Because Jackson has been hurt so much and rookie WR tend to struggle anyway.

    Here's the kicker . . . we can't score 14 against SD. OK fine. Going into today Chicago was allowing 13.7 and we scored 17. SD is allowing 19.8 per game. Figure it out.

    Don't talk about in-depth analysis and give credit to this bullsh!t slop.
  18. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    As for what I could hear on the radio (I missed most of the game via tv, I was on my 2plus hour daily jaunt to work), it seemed that Gaffney dropped at least two, and the second could have also been ruled a fumble. Troy also had a drop that could have been ruled a fumble and missed on a pass that was slightly behind him but catchable for a TD.
    Jackson wasn't in for many plays? and he was used for blocking on runs and screens mostly? Caldwell seemed to be Brady's go to guy among the wideouts, producing catches with good hands then promptly going down when defenders approached? Thats what it sounded like. How did it look? Since this is an offense thread I will not ask what happened to the D line in the second half. Kinda sounded like substitutions created holes in the middle that weren't there in the first half?

    To summarize what I heard, the offense played fairly mistake free football (2 false start penalties? and no turnovers), Dillon ran hard, and Brady was fairly efficient with his game management and ball placement. The game plan also seemed solid. Probably the best game plan of the season. Falk took advantage of the screens and touches he got. But the receivers still struggle, and Brady is still hanging onto the ball too long, waiting for someone to open up. Pretty close to how it looked?
  19. Kdo5

    Kdo5 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    6,264
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +12 / 5 / -1

    Ofcourse this offense isnt at all like the 2004 offense or something but you know I think I might be willing to say our offense this year is better than the offense last year. Better than the 2001 offense IMO.(2001, aside from O-Line, it was all Brady, Brown, Smith & some Patten.)

    The recieving core is only average, I think we all agree on that but I am pleased to see Caldwell's consistensy, and I am rather happy we didnt take a big chunk out of our cap space for Branch or Givens. Look where Givens is, Branch hasnt done anything near special in Seattle. But thats obviously our worst spot in the offense, not horrendous though. RB's are pretty good. Dillon and Maroney have had off games this year but at the same time, they have also had good games this year. The running game seemed to get shut down in some games...particularly against good defenses...also Faulk is vastly underrated. Our TE's IMO are the best we have ever had in the Brady era(well maybe...).
  20. richpats

    richpats Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    3,499
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    This game reminded me a lot of the Cleveland game in 2004 - offense didn't control the game, lot of help from defense and special teams - a pure domination. The 2004 squad was pretty good if I recall correctly :)

    Considering we had to comeback on the Lions 2 weeks ago this team has shown some vast improvement in its execution and ability to make plays. Good teams are supposed to dominate bad ones - we're still a good team folks :)

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>