Welcome to PatsFans.com

Protecting Tom Brady

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by mgteich, Sep 24, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,600
    Likes Received:
    213
    Ratings:
    +643 / 51 / -21

    IMHO, Tom Brady will not last many games getting the kind of protection schemes that we had against the jets. Maybe the offensive line isn't good enough for the schemes that were used. In the end, that just doesn't matter. We need to use schemes that take advantage of the talent of the players we have. Everyone seemed to recognize that the patriots had/have the best offensive talent in the AFC.

    OBSERVATIONS
    1) Facing pressure is nothing new to Belichick and Dante.
    2) Facing a defensive line that is better than our offensive line is nothing new to Belichick and Dante.
    3) Facing top pass-rusher that can beat our OT's one on one is nothing new to Belichick and Dante.
    4) Depending on the Brady, and needing to defend him as a #1 priority is nothing new to Belichick and Dante.

    Other teams on Sunday (including the jets) seemed to know what measures to take their quarterbacks. The patriots used to understand these methods well, using 2 and 3 TE sets, using 3 RB's or having a running back in the backfield on pass situations to protect Brady and be available for dump offs and screens. As NFLN pointed out, the jets, when their offense was successful on Sunday, had 7 or even 8 players protecting the quarterback. They often had only two receivers in their patterns.

    I am not suggesting such an extreme attitude of quarterback protection for the patriots. But it seems there should be more recognition of the need to protect Brady, even if he were at 100%. Given the situation, I just don't understand the logic of using a gunslinger offense with little protection and little halftime adjustments to add protection.
     
  2. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,129
    Likes Received:
    318
    Ratings:
    +808 / 26 / -33

    Your choice of "gunslinger" is an interesting term, and one that had not associated with this team.. think of folks like David Klinger, not TB

    Part of the problem is Brady right now, he is obviously rusty and not picking up the "hot reads", not moving as well as he has in the past... if he was on, the way we know him to be on, then some of the schemes of the Jets would be less effective...

    IMO the penalties, the lack of opportunities(Thomas dropping the int) etc. made it a whole lot easier for the Jets.. on two drives they lost a total of 45 yards...
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2009
  3. mayoclinic

    mayoclinic PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    14,935
    Likes Received:
    1,315
    Ratings:
    +3,790 / 10 / -7

    But we are a bit of a gunslinger team these past 2 games, with 50 passes/game, and an offense that uses the shotgun so much.

    I agree with the OP. I expected to see lots of 2 TE formations against the Jets, Matthews as an extra blocker for Brady, possibly even a bit of Vollmer at TE. You can't just expect Brady to make every read when he's under intense pressure, especially with some of the disguised schemes being used.
     
  4. Triumph

    Triumph Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    6,862
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +455 / 64 / -35

    #32 Jersey

    What about putting Brady deeper in the shotgun?

    1. It would buy a few extra seconds.
    2. Its a few extra steps for the defense, but would hopefully add up over the course of the game. Kinda like a batter wearing out a pitcher by making him throw a full count.
    3. It would create more space for screens.

    Another idea that I have is to make an O lineman an eligible receiver virtually every play as an option when everyone is covered. If it picked up a couple of 1st downs, it would be 1 more person for the defense to account for.

    IMO, NE needs to get in more 3rd and 4 situations where they have the option to run or pass keeping the defense off balance. Too many time NE is in a 3rd and 7 and everyone knows Brady is going to pass. Too many times NE is in a 3rd and 2 and everyone knows that NE is going to run.
     
  5. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,662
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    This is the exact opposite adjustment that needs to be made.

    "Hey, teams know we abandon the run so they all TEE OFF on us with a great pass rush, sprinting full speed ahead every play not worrying about defending the run, so let's counter that by moving the shot gun even deeper"!!!

    Consider what you are saying. Imagine the opposite situation of a team that stubbornly runs every time with 3 tight ends and the D always stacks 10 guys in the box. Would your solution be to try to put in a 4th tight end or no receivers whatsoever, or would it be to take advantage of this defensive tendency with play action?
     
  6. Triumph

    Triumph Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    6,862
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +455 / 64 / -35

    #32 Jersey

    Think about what youre saying?

    Brady is already in the shotgun with an empty backfield. There is no threat of a run unless its Brady.

    NE is a passing team first and if this blitzing continues (and it will because its a copy cat league) then put Brady further away from the LOS to buy time.
     
  7. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,662
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    So yes, think about it. I'm NOT advocating more shot gun, I want Brady under center more, with more trap runs to take advantage of an uphill sprinting D-line which isn't doing a good job filling gaps against the run.

    If a team is keying in on the run completely, you don't add in more TE's or fullbacks, you punish them with play action or killing them over the middle where they left their area.

    If a team is keying on the pass completely (knowing you're not truly committed to run), you don't move Brady back 5 more yards in shot gun, you move him under center and pound the ball more at the areas the defensive linemen left because they sprinted upfield.

    If a team is completely keyed in on what you're doing, you don't keep banging your head against the wall, you take advantage of it. Entrenching your tendencies even more is why we won the 2001 Superbowl against stubborn Mike Martz.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2009
  8. jmt57

    jmt57 Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2005
    Messages:
    13,594
    Likes Received:
    266
    Ratings:
    +795 / 1 / -3

    Maverick does make a good point about going further back with the shotgun. The Pats do run out of the shotgun, and going further back takes that option away. More importantly pressure from the pass rush most often comes from the outside. Tackles try to push that DE/OLB to the outside, so that the he ends up running past the QB. As that DE/OLB gets close the QB steps up in to the pocket and delivers the throw. If the QB is too far back the DE/OLB doesn't have to be concerned with running past the QB; it could end up resulting in more hits and sacks.

    Also, I agree with the idea (above) about taking what the defense is giving you. If they're keying on stopping the run then pass the ball, and if they're keying on stopping the pass then run the ball.
     
  9. livinginthe past

    livinginthe past Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,258
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +71 / 0 / -2

    #12 Jersey

    2007 forced the hands of other teams across the league - and towards the end of that year they had begun to have some success.

    They made a choice to almost sell out on attacking Tom Brady - sending extra guys at every possible opportunity.

    It was the only way to slow down the offnesive juggernaut that was the Patriots.

    The Patriots and Brady were able to counter this with otherworldly execution - Brady was so in the zone it was untrue - every jump ball he threw up Moss came down with.

    In 2009 we don't have the luxury of a Brady that can do no wrong - at least not in the early going.

    Brady needs to get back under centre, we need to run our offense with balance so that the DE's aren't always thinking 'sack'.

    We have the horses to do it - this line put up some decent run stats with a far less talented RB corps last year.

    One other bonus, is that we get back one of Brady's prime assets - the play action fake.

    No QB does it better - at the minute teams aren't buying the run because we aren't selling it.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2009
  10. Patspsycho

    Patspsycho Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    9,925
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    This is a very good assessment. I think the last thing we should be doing is giving Brady more protection because then it makes us become an one dimension offense, and the more we try to do this, the more opponents will try harder to counter this.

    The key to a successful offense has always and will always be deception, keeping the other team guessing, keeping them off balance.
     
  11. luvbrain

    luvbrain Practice Squad Player

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2009
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    :agree::yeahthat:
     
  12. jbb9s

    jbb9s In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    2,160
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    I think a lot of the blame is on Galloway and Co. as they are not running the hot routes. How many times in the first two games to Brady, under pressure, throw to a spot and the wide out was still prancing along in some pre-designed scheme or just couldn't get there? At least a handful - and that, didn't happen with Branch/Givens or more recently Welker.

    Also, what most good teams do to combat an ineffective Oline is to runs screens, as it burns the aggresive DLine who are rushing the QB. Queue: Faulk in more 1st and 2nd downs.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2009
  13. Spiral

    Spiral PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +46 / 4 / -1

    Right now, the Patriots are a one-dimensional team, and BB will be the first to say that a one-dimensional offense is the easiest to defend. I think part of the answer is that the defacto offensive coordinator for the the team is not O'Brien--it's Tom Brady. I agree with the previous comments about Mike Martz. If a team is playing with 2 defensive linemen, get under center, line up in the "I" with the TE as a FB and run the ball. Stay in no-huddle to keep the defense from making any substitutions. That's may not be what a gunslinger QB would want to do, but it would work.
     
  14. captain stone

    captain stone Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    9,172
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +375 / 68 / -49

    No Jersey Selected

    Bring back the Dink & Dunk, and Clock Killin' Power Running.

    As it was in the Beginning, is Now, and ever shall be...Amen.
     
  15. Patspsycho

    Patspsycho Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    9,925
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    fixed it.. :D
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>