Offensive Playcalling was Average to Atrocious

[JoeSixPat]

I'll re-quote an earlier post for clarification:

Gaffney had 5 catches which fit your standard, Welker had 2 and Watson had 2 to go along with the 4 by Stallworth and Moss' 11. Brady was 13-35 from 21-30 yards, 6-9 from 31-40 yards and 7-16 from 41+ yards. Total completions from those distances: 26-60 (Moss made up fewer than half of the 'deep' completions)

And I'll repeat for clarification.

4 catches in the entire season from Stallworth - who COULD have been used as a legitimate deep threat IS my point. He was NOT being used as a deep threat.

If your point is that you want to collectively add up every other reciever and assert that defenses were going to cover Welker (averaging about 10 ypc) deep and Gaffney (averaging 12 yards) deep etc then you've missed the whole point and you're just playing games with statistics.

No one here, aside from you, and no opposing defensive coordinator would ever assert that Gaffeny and Welker are deep threats - nor would they cover them that way. That's my point as well.

Why do you continue to insist that Welker or Gaffney are a deep threat? He wasn't any more of a deep threat than Stallworth was for us - can't you see that your statistics "prove" what we all know to be false!?

But Stallworth is a very different matter - especially given the way he was used by the Eagles. Now I'm not expecting him to replicate those numbers of catches here - but it is shocking to see he had only 4 catches longer than 20 yards.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Anybody want to volunteer time and money to set up a new website for disciples Joe and Mav??

I'd gladly donate for you to set up a new site for yourself. Frankly I think this board could do without people who openly advocate for longtime members be gone because they have a hard time accepting the opinions of others.

Seems like Deus' approach of calling people childish names and declaring their opinions as "untenable" is the new welcome way to go for some... so if you and he would like to start your own forum, I'll definitely be a sponsor.

 

[Deus Irae]

And I'll repeat for clarification.

4 catches in the entire season from Stallworth - who COULD have been used as a legitimate deep threat IS my point. He was NOT being used as a deep threat.

If your point is that you want to collectively add up every other reciever and assert that defenses were going to cover Welker (averaging about 10 ypc) deep and Gaffney (averaging 12 yards) deep etc then you've missed the whole point and you're just playing games with statistics.

No one here, aside from you, and no opposing defensive coordinator would ever assert that Gaffeny and Welker are deep threats - nor would they cover them that way. That's my point as well.

Why do you continue to insist that Welker or Gaffney are a deep threat? He wasn't any more of a deep threat than Stallworth was for us - can't you see that your statistics "prove" what we all know to be false!?

But Stallworth is a very different matter - especially given the way he was used by the Eagles. Now I'm not expecting him to replicate those numbers of catches here - but it is shocking to see he had only 4 catches longer than 20 yards.

Whether you like it or not, the statistics don't prove anything that "we all know to be false". The statistics simply prove that you are wrong.

 

[maverick4]

1.) Using your dates, and ignoring weather and other legitimate reasons for lower scores, the Patriots were #1 in the league in scoring in weeks 1-11 (game 10), and their scoring average of 29.7 ppg in the last 6 games of the season was STILL better than the Cowboys #2 scoring offense of 28.4 ppg

Those numbers, honestly, don't mean anything. Mike Martz was called a genius too, but he was blessed with Warner, FAULK, Bruce, Holt, and a stud O-line. But, when the championship was on the line, he totally choked because he refused to take what was given to him by the Patriots, he stubbornly kept trying to win his way. Norv Turner was also called an offensive genius before for the Cowboys, too, remember? I find it odd that on top of blame to the O-Line or Brady, a lot of you aren't looking at McDaniels as a factor for why the Patriots were sacked 5 times with 18 knockdowns in a single game.

Using your same logic of just listing stats, then you must think Doc Rivers is one of the best coaches in the NBA because the Celtics have such great stats. You would rank him higher as a better coach than Rudy Tomjanovich, who won 2 titles for the Rockets even though their regular season stats sucked, or were average, usually.

McDaniels is an above-average coach, but he's not as great as some of you think. He's like 90's Bledsoe, he's pretty good, but he has tons of apologists for his failures. You make it sound like NO ONE could have beaten the Giants D that day, and that no one could have done better than our horrible last Superbowl drive, where we had 3 full timeouts, and instead of using the middle of the field, decided to go deep multiple times.

 

[Rob0729]

Rob why the blind man love for McDaniels?
You guys keep making excuses for him, for YEARS.
First it was that he was brand new, then it was we didn't have enough talent on offense, and now it's 'the Giants D was unstoppable, no one could do better'. We were completely stacked on offense this year and held to our season low, Brady was sacked 5 times with 18 knockdowns, and our last Superbowl drive with all 3 timeouts was pathetic.

Which scenario is more likely, that McDaniels is a top-5 OC, OR:
- that he is blessed with ridiculously stacked offensive talent, especially with Tom Brady, who makes a lot of his average playcalls look good.
- that while we had a dynamite offense the first 10 weeks of the season, defenses adjusted after that, while we didn't adjust and stubbornly stuck with what we had.

And I don't think there's a coincidence that ever since 2004, Brady has absolutely taken beatings in our losses to Denver, Indy, and NY. First after Denver and Indy it was 'we have no offensive talent' to explain why Brady was getting destroyed so often, now after NY it's 'the Giants D-Line was composed of God and Satan, no one could stop them'.

Stop apologizing for every little thing like a 90's Bledsoe apologist.

It isn't blind love for McDaniels. It is that I realize he is a pretty good OC and both Belichick and Brady agree with that (and I am pretty sure they both would agree privately).

So McDaniels had a great year last year considering the talent, but that doesn't count because anyone could have done as well with this talent. That is a BS argument. There has been plenty of teams through the years that have had far more offensive talent than the Pats did this year and none of them ever did what the Pats did. You can argue that Brady and maybe Moss are the best ever at their positions, but you can't even remotely make that argument for any other player on the Pats' offense. Welker got more yards and TDs this year than he did his entire career prior.

Quit embarrassing yourself with the Denver and Indy losses. McDaniels was not the reason we lost those games. McDaniels did not get owned by Dallas Clark and give up 32 second half points vs. Indy. The OC isn't the guy who makes sure that there aren't 12 men in the huddle (a lower assistant is responsible for that). He wasn't responsible for Troy Brown causing a pass interference call on a big gain. He wasn't responsible for Caldwell dropping a pass. He wasn't responsible for Brady looking down Troy Brown at the end of the game to throw the INT.

In the Denver game, McDaniels was not responsible for 3 fumbles. You can argue he wasn't responsible for the Champ Bailey interception since that was a combination of a missed assignment on blocking and an illadvised throw by Brady. McDaniels wasn't responsible for the questionable pass interference. By the way, the Pats did have 420 yards of offense in this game with Brady passing for 341 yards.


I also don't think it is a coincidence that Brady has had his best years (other than 2004) under McDaniels. Three of his four best QB ratings came in the last three years even with little or no running games in them. I also don't think it is a coincidence that the Pats have made the playoff and won the division every year since Weis left eventhough we had real problems on defense. McDaniels is far better than you give him credit for.

This is nothing like Bledsoe. The Pats defense has declined since Crennel left. Every objective fan knows that our defense is a huge reason why we won the three Super Bowls. Yet, the defense is a shell of what it once was and everyone wants to lay the blame at McDaniels' feet.

Without this offense, we don't go to the Super Bowl. Without McDaniels' schemes vs. the Jags, we may not have gone to the Super Bowl. Without McDaniels' brilliant second half adjustments vs. the Chargers, we may not have gone to the Super Bowl. Even with whatever McDaniels did in the Super Bowl if Samuel or Meriweather hold onto their INTs, the Pats win the game and Brady had led the Pats to a last few minutes game winning drive in the Super Bowl.

I'm sorry, but McDaniels is a pretty good OC. Our offensive production since he took over the reins show that. And I am not even assigning him responsibility for what happens on defense and special teams like you want to do to argue he sucks.

 

[maverick4]

Thanks for confirming that you are just like a 90's Bledsoe apologist, never assigning any blame to him because you are a fantasy statwhore obsessed with Brady's QB rating, yardage, or offensive stats.

Do you think Doc Rivers (#1 record with KG, Ray, Pierce) is a better coach than Jerry Sloan, or Pat Riley?

 

[Rob0729]

This crap is getting even weaker and more pathetic than when it was NEM bashing Charlie when we lost or didn't win pretty enough or employ enough slants and crossing routes...

Anybody want to volunteer time and money to set up a new website for disciples Joe and Mav??

Logic and facts aren't going to carry the day with either of these two any more than it did with their predecessor. And when you shower attention on someone who has to bump his own threads or spam the same message into multiple threads he bumped on the same topic, you're just feeding an ego that can't be reasoned with.

I guess you are right. Brady could complete 100% of his passes next season for 7,000 yards, 80 TDs, and 0 INTs and they will argue that if Charlie was the OC, Brady would have completed 110% of his passes for 10,000, 150 TDs, and he would be forgive 10 INTs from previous seasons. Anyone arguing that McDaniels sucks after this season so vociferiously has some kind of ax to grind.

No OC has ever had the season McDaniels had. Yes, the talent had a lot to do with it, but a lot of bad OCs have made some very good talent look bad.

 

[maverick4]

No one is saying McDaniels is a below-average coach, I think he's pretty good, just like 90's Bledsoe. And with all your excuses, you sound like a Bledsoe apologist defending McDaniels ('if Desmond Howard doesn't return that TD, Bledsoe wins the superbowl yada yada yada', etc)

And I don't know why you keep bringing up Weiss, if you go back I never brought his name up once, seems like you're letting this completely cloud your judgement

 

[Rob0729]

Thanks for confirming that you are just like a 90's Bledsoe apologist, never assigning any blame to him because you are a fantasy statwhore obsessed with Brady's QB rating, yardage, or offensive stats.

Do you think Doc Rivers (#1 record with KG, Ray, Pierce) is a better coach than Jerry Sloan, or Pat Riley?

LOL! Who's not assigning blame. I already said he did not do a great job in this Super Bowl. But on the blame list, he falls well below the execution of the o-line.

Again, this was the best single season offense ever. McDaniels deserves a lot of credit for that. He clearly was not a significant reason for either of our playoff losses in 2005 or 2006 season. Your blind hatred of him has clouded your mind to ignore the facts in those cases. You have yet to come up with at least a halfway credible argument why McDaniels was the link for all of the Pats playoffs losses or how he was responsible for

You are no different than the stereotypical Bledsoe basher. You bash without support, make up facts like this mythical seven step drop theory when McDaniels is in love with the shotgun, an ignore arguments that blow your case out of the water like how McDaniels was "responsible" for the Pats giving up 32 points in the second half vs. the Colts, three forced fumbles against the Broncos with two of them on special teams, and a phantom PI call vs. Samuel (all significant or primary reasons why we lost playoff games in 2005 and 2006 seasons).

 

[Rob0729]

No one is saying McDaniels is a below-average coach, I think he's pretty good, just like 90's Bledsoe. And with all your excuses, you sound like a Bledsoe apologist defending McDaniels ('if Desmond Howard doesn't return that TD, Bledsoe wins the superbowl yada yada yada', etc)

And I don't know why you keep bringing up Weiss, if you go back I never brought his name up once, seems like you're letting this completely cloud your judgement

Well, thank God Belichick agrees with me and not you.

 

[unoriginal]

LOL! Who's not assigning blame. I already said he did not do a great job in this Super Bowl. But on the blame list, he falls well below the execution of the o-line.

Again, this was the best single season offense ever. McDaniels deserves a lot of credit for that. He clearly was not a significant reason for either of our playoff losses in 2005 or 2006 season. Your blind hatred of him has clouded your mind to ignore the facts in those cases. You have yet to come up with at least a halfway credible argument why McDaniels was the link for all of the Pats playoffs losses or how he was responsible for

You are no different than the stereotypical Bledsoe basher. You bash without support, make up facts like this mythical seven step drop theory when McDaniels is in love with the shotgun, an ignore arguments that blow your case out of the water like how McDaniels was "responsible" for the Pats giving up 32 points in the second half vs. the Colts, three forced fumbles against the Broncos with two of them on special teams, and a phantom PI call vs. Samuel (all significant or primary reasons why we lost playoff games in 2005 and 2006 seasons).

Well we have to point the finger at someone! If not Skippy the Kid, then who? Name names man! Then we can round up a posse and run them outlaws out of town.

 

[maverick4]

Well, thank God Belichick agrees with me and not you.

Just because McDaniels still has a job doesn't mean he agrees with me less than he does with you.

 

[maverick4]

Again, this was the best single season offense ever.

You are no different than the stereotypical Bledsoe basher.

You keep repeating the stats argument, as if it means something, when it doesn't mean squat. Brian Billick was the OC of the high scoring 98 Vikings, but as we've seen over the last 8 years with Baltimore, the guy is not a good offensive coach. I believe the same thing applies to McDaniels, he is blessed to be coaching Brady who makes him look better than he is.

As for the 'stereotypical Bledsoe basher', funny you bring it up because I used to be one of those stubborn Bledsoe apologists for *years* until I finally saw the light later on, so I can relate to some of you who keep coming up with all sorts of excuses or explanations in defense of McDaniels, and I really do think what you're doing now is very similar.

 

[Rob0729]

Just because McDaniels still has a job doesn't mean he agrees with me less than he does with you.

Yeah and I shouldn't read into the fact that when the offense is on the field, Belichick is usually with his back turned towards the bench working on strategy with the starting defense. Apparently, Belichick is so disgusted with McDaniels' work that he can't even bare to watch the offense when it is on the field. That is why he hired Dom Capers. Capers is a great defensive mind. Who else would you take to help out with the offense than a defensive player.

It is quite obvious to anyone other than the McDaniels bashers that if Belichick is upset with either of his coordinators, it is clearly Pees not McDaniels. All of Belichick's actions seem to push that he has the utmost confidence in McDaniels. In fact, he seems (at least from the limited exposure we see) to give him even more free range than he even gave Charlie Weis.

 

[maverick4]

Yeah and I shouldn't read into the fact that when the offense is on the field, Belichick is usually with his back turned towards the bench working on strategy with the starting defense.

OR, maybe it's because defense is Belichick's specialty?

Seriously, this is just you coming up with more warped and weak arguments to defend McDaniels.

And one of my biggest criticisms of Belichick IS that he is so hands off on the youngster, he shouldn't give McDaniels so much autonomy when this kid is going up against DC's with much more experience.

 

[BradyManny]

How about we all agree to disagree and agree to blame John Tomase?

Seriously though, I'm tired of thinking about this game, talking about this game and trying to rationalize this game. Time to really move on! If I click on this thread again - or any thread pertaining to the Super Bowl - and post in it again, I will give someone my address at work to show up some day and just slap me in the face.

 

[maverick4]

I blame NEM for making this kind of talk so taboo, because he did it so much with Weiss.

I don't think the three of us here criticizing McDaniels did that for Weiss as much as NEM did, and it's unfair to just automatically brush off these complaints just because NEM used to whine about the OC so much. It makes criticism of McDaniels so much harder to talk about, it shouldn't be such the polarizing issue it is, except we have history of OC-bashing here from past members.

 

[Rob0729]

You keep repeating the stats argument, as if it means something, when it doesn't mean squat. Brian Billick was the OC of the high scoring 98 Vikings, but as we've seen over the last 8 years with Baltimore, the guy is not a good offensive coach. I believe the same thing applies to McDaniels, he is blessed to be coaching Brady who makes him look better than he is.

As for the 'stereotypical Bledsoe basher', funny you bring it up because I used to be one of those stubborn Bledsoe apologists for *years* until I finally saw the light later on, so I can relate to some of you who keep coming up with all sorts of excuses or explanations in defense of McDaniels, and I really do think what you're doing now is very similar.

So just because Brian Billick appears to be a brilliant OC and not so much a brilliant HC, that supports your argument. Both Marvin Lewis and Romeo Crennel were brilliant DCs and neither have teams with good defenses and great offenses. Are you saying Romeo was a bad DC here? That is basically what you are implying.

I am not making excuses for McDaniels. I am using logic. Something apparently lost on you.

Since you choose to ignore the questions I pose to you that blow your incorrect theory of McDaniels being the link of all of our playoff losses I will ask you one last time. If you do not address them head on, you are a fraud:

How was McDaniels responsible for the Pats giving up 32 second half points vs. the Colts?

How was McDaniels responsible for 5 turnovers with three being fumbles (two on special teams) against Denver?

How was McDaniels responsible for the Pats not having an answer for Dallas Clark and to an extent Joseph Addai in the second half of the AFC Championship game?

How was McDaniels responsible for Samuel getting a phantom PI call that put the Broncos on the Pats' one yard line?

How was it McDaniels' fault that Caldwell dropped his passes (a favorite from last year why we lost the AFC Championships)?

How can you say that these things were the biggest contributors to the losses in the playoffs in the 2005 and 2006 season?

Go ahead and answer these questions. And don't use a bogus seven step drop theory.

 

[BradyManny]

I blame NEM for making this kind of talk so taboo, because he did it so much with Weiss.

I don't think the three of us here criticizing McDaniels did that for Weiss as much as NEM did, and it's unfair to just automatically brush off these complaints just because NEM used to whine about the OC so much. It makes criticism of McDaniels so much harder to talk about, it shouldn't be such the polarizing issue it is, except we have history of OC-bashing here from past members.

While I don't agree much with your specific complaints re: play-calling, I agree in general people are too sensitive about critique to McD, and I agree with the reason for it - NEM's rants. Let's face it, McD is more spiritedly defended around here than Tom Brady or Bill Belichick. And I do think McD gets blame for things he shouldn't, but I also wish Brady or BB would get the same rallying cries McD does.

 

[BradyManny]

OK, someone can come slap me in the face now.