Tight Ends

[Deus Irae]

Oh because if BB says it, then it must be true.

Given my criticism of Belichick over the course of last year, my refusal to buy into the "BB, therefore correct" mantra, and the resultant nonsense I've been subjected to by the rabid homers, I can only assume you're kidding with this response to me.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Given my criticism of Belichick over the course of last year, my refusal to buy into the "BB, therefore correct" mantra, and the resultant nonsense I've been subjected to by the rabid homers, I can only assume you're kidding with this response to me.

I know you question BB but it seems like you're sticking up for him on this one.

 

[Deus Irae]

I know you question BB but it seems like you're sticking up for him on this one.

There's nothing to stick up for.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

And therein lies my point. If you are proactive, you will be succesful. If you are reactionary you will fail. Check my man D's evidence, dude. The trend don't lie. If I want tips on how to find killer c*mshot avatars, I'll talk to you. If you wanna learn ball, come talk to me.

The Pats are a reactionary defense, so their screwed right? And Condon84's avatar is pretty disgusting.

 

[jays52]

Oh because if BB says it, then it must be true.

The Jets, what does that have to do with spread offense? Sometimes the defense wins against spread offenses (Giants super bowl 42) and sometimes they lose (Jets AFC Championship game).

We're not talking rings, bro, we're talking D. Especially in respect to building a team that can compete in future seasons. The reason why The Jets were so succesful defensively is that the Rex Ryan D was so great this year was that it was the perfect spread killer. Upfield and pursuit is what his phiosophy always has been. This is how to beat the spread. Spagnoloulo's design was exactly the same, but he had more horses. To beat the upfield scheme, you simply block it and reduce your routes. This really isn't deep thought process.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

There's nothing to stick up for.

I got nothing on this one. Maybe I misunderstood you.

 

[jays52]

The Pats are a reactionary defense, so their screwed right? And Condon84's avatar is pretty disgusting.

It's not that simple. Two gap is a run philosophy. It is by far the most effective run D. Pass defense is everybit as creative as offense. In the context of pass D, the upfield Patriots were the hallmark of the championship teams. The '05-'08 defenses played too much dual high with nothing underneath. Cover-2, cover-4, cover-6, cover-8, all were bad fits. In '09, we saw significantly more upfield D that resulted in 4th quarter leads. Peas got fired for the cover-4 I was so adamently against all season.

You draft rookies for the future design of the system, not immediate change.

 

[condon84]

And therein lies my point. If you are proactive, you will be succesful. If you are reactionary you will fail. Check my man D's evidence, dude. The trend don't lie. If I want tips on how to find killer c*mshot avatars, I'll talk to you. If you wanna learn ball, come talk to me.

I'm not following your argument. I'm saying that the spread attack is here to stay based on the fact that the rules have tipped in favor to pass happy teams. Proof is in the past two SB participants and winners.

But the Saints winning also makes your point?

 

[jays52]

I'm not following your argument. I'm saying that the spread attack is here to stay based on the fact that the rules have tipped in favor to pass happy teams. Proof is in the past two SB participants and winners.

But the Saints winning also makes your point?

My point is that current result is not a barometer of future success. First, you are looking at a sample that is flawed. Your main argument hinges upon the chuck rule. 99% of the spread is effective within the first five yards, thus negating the chuck rule. The 07 Patriots were effective because they seamlessly blended chuck rule advantages with spread concepts while having the best receiver in the NFL (83, not 81).

The spread is based on option routes. Option routes aredetermined in one step. The DB is mandated to play either inside or outside technique. In Themistocles basic example, the QB reads the unplayed shoulder which is where the WR cuts to. Press is important inetially in deflecting the route, but the decision is made inside of five yards. Fundamental downfield techniques such as grabbing jersey, hand chucks, and leg knocks have been negated but these are ancilary to scheme.

The spread is beaten by press, pursuit, and blitzing to disrupt timing. This is what Joe Gibbs identified in the 80's. He blocked the defense and had great success. Football is inherrently cyclical. Teams have been adjusting to the spread, and if one can remain in front of what is happening, they will be succesful. Instead of viewing past succes, find ways to negate it. From there find ways to beat the current trend. Don't be reactive, be proactive.

 

[condon84]

My point is that current result is not a barometer of future success. First, you are looking at a sample that is flawed. Your main argument hinges upon the chuck rule. 99% of the spread is effective within the first five yards, thus negating the chuck rule. The 07 Patriots were effective because they seamlessly blended chuck rule advantages with spread concepts while having the best receiver in the NFL (83, not 81).

The spread is based on option routes. Option routes aredetermined in one step. The DB is mandated to play either inside or outside technique. In Themistocles basic example, the QB reads the unplayed shoulder which is where the WR cuts to. Press is important inetially in deflecting the route, but the decision is made inside of five yards. Fundamental downfield techniques such as grabbing jersey, hand chucks, and leg knocks have been negated but these are ancilary to scheme.

The spread is beaten by press, pursuit, and blitzing to disrupt timing. This is what Joe Gibbs identified in the 80's. He blocked the defense and had great success. Football is inherrently cyclical. Teams have been adjusting to the spread, and if one can remain in front of what is happening, they will be succesful. Instead of viewing past succes, find ways to negate it. From there find ways to beat the current trend. Don't be reactive, be proactive.

That's a good post. But what's bolded is what I disagree with you simply because there's a different variable that's now in place that wasn't in place before, and those are all the rule changes.

Also, while you're theory that pressuring both receivers and QBs is the way to defend spread attacks, it only works when you have the personnel to do it. The reason why the Jets were successful was because they had a shutdown corner which negated the opposing offense's best WR. Plus, their other CBs were also solid, add to the fact that they had guys that knew how to blitz and were put in position (3rd and longs) to be successful.

Compare the Jets D to the Saints D. While both D's philosophy is to pressure opposing offenses, the Saints were far less successful compared to the Jets which again leads to the difference in personnel.

While I agree that more defenses will be prepared for spread attacks simply because a lot of teams are now successfully using the spread and forcing teams to adjust, I don't think you're going to see a lot of teams deviate from the pass heavy offenses that they've installed simply because defenses are now better prepared against the spread. The rules are just too skewed in favor of the passing offense. It's almost an annual occurance as of late for rules to change to keep pushing the league to be more pass heavy. It looks good on TV, and makes the NFL more money. I don't see this changing.

 

[Triumph]

You might want to explain that to Belichick, because he's getting a different reading from the tea leaves....



Quick hits from Belichick radio interview - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

You swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.

In the same interview, to paraphrase, Belichick also said that there was a group of Cbs that NE rated all the same. If the first one was taken, NE would then just choose another CB just like him.

But, prior this interview, BB told Bob Kraft he was never more sure that McCourty was the player he wanted. NE only traded down when they were sure none of the teams ahead of them were going to snag McCourty.

If BB really sees this new trend, why did he draft two more pass catching TEs? But, no RB or FB? Why another CB, when the NFL is seeing this new running trend?

And, shouldnt the Pats be changing the offense?

The NFL is a passing league and you pass to get ahead and run to win. Not, the other way around. Manning and the Colts ripped Fat Rex a new one spreading them out with multiple receiving targets and passing those Frauds to death. New Orleans, did what the Jets cannot do and passed the ball all over the Colts defense to win it all.

Belichick is never going to sit down and tell anybody what he actually thinks. He'll say just enough to confuse everyone.

 

[fair catch fryar]

In five years the spread will be dead. It will rest at the bottom of Lake Ichigumi with the K-Gun, the original shotty, the run and shoot, the wing-t, and certain west coast concepts. It's not difficult to anticipate this trend, and the league is already shifting. Spread is speed and space. Defenses adjust to disrupt the timing and get into quick pursuit angles. Offenses will eventually get beat by these upfield/penetration, and realize what Joe Gibbs did two decades ago. Block the defenders and they are at your mercy. So, like in anything else, the balance shifts back towards blocking and physical football. Not too difficult to grasp, and certainly nothing brilliant, but far too often
media is well behind the trend.

As Patchick pointed out, it's not a demand conversation but a supply conversation. Don't get me wrong- there are some great tight ends that are coming out. However, a guy like Gronkowski is much more of a true TE than Hernandez or Jimmy Graham. There will be excellent opportunities to utilize their skill sets, but the position and the game as a whole will always seek it's own level. Those who become enamored with the offense will be out thought, out strategized, and eventually become obsolete. Those that can take the concepts with validity each new trend brings can anticipate the shifts, and grow mentally.

They're getting tougher, more physical on offense. They recognize this trend. Now bring me my fullback!

Great post, but as long as Peyton and Na'Polian are in Indy they'll just keep changing the rules to suit their boy.

 

[Deus Irae]

You swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.

In the same interview, to paraphrase, Belichick also said that there was a group of Cbs that NE rated all the same. If the first one was taken, NE would then just choose another CB just like him.

But, prior this interview, BB told Bob Kraft he was never more sure that McCourty was the player he wanted. NE only traded down when they were sure none of the teams ahead of them were going to snag McCourty.

If BB really sees this new trend, why did he draft two more pass catching TEs? But, no RB or FB? Why another CB, when the NFL is seeing this new running trend?

And, shouldnt the Pats be changing the offense?

The NFL is a passing league and you pass to get ahead and run to win. Not, the other way around. Manning and the Colts ripped Fat Rex a new one spreading them out with multiple receiving targets and passing those Frauds to death. New Orleans, did what the Jets cannot do and passed the ball all over the Colts defense to win it all.

Belichick is never going to sit down and tell anybody what he actually thinks. He'll say just enough to confuse everyone.

1.) BB was talking about the trend. He didn't say that he was heading in that direction.

2.) The Patriots have Moss & Company for passing vs. Maroney & Company for running. It should come as no surprise that the team is still going to be pass first.

3.) The Patriots have essentially sacrificed part of the running game on 1st and 2nd downs by not using fullbacks. However, they use other personnel to fill the fullback role. The problem is that the personnel they've used has not been up to the job.

4.) Daniel Graham was a pass catching tight end. How'd that end up translating on the Patriots?

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

The Saints had the #25 defense last year and won the SB. The Colts, had the #18 defense and beat the #1 defense scoring 30 pts.

You've made some good points in this thread, but I have to disagree overall. 9 times out of 10, games are won in the trenches even despite the rule changes. You provided a good example of your side of the argument, but I can provide several examples of the other side post rule change. Just a few off the top of my head:

sb42 - not even going to get into that
2004 Colts-Pats divisional round Samuel(pre shutdown Asante)/Gay/Troy Brown vs. Harrison/Wayne/Stokely in their peak and we hold them to 3 points.
2008 Steelers - won the SB against Zona with great offense but their offense was subpar for a vast majority of the season, defense carried them.

I'm not saying the spread will go away, but I'd love to see alot less of it from our side. I'd prefer just using it in situations where we're in a total funk, or just using it here and there to throw teams off.

 

[Patspsycho]

Instead of viewing past success, find ways to negate it. From there find ways to beat the current trend. Don't be reactive, be proactive.

That's a good post. But what's bolded is what I disagree with you simply because there's a different variable that's now in place that wasn't in place before, and those are all the rule changes.

Condon, you're missing the point here. The game is always going to evolve, no matter what. That's the name of the game- you either evolve or get left behind in the dust. That's what it takes to stay at the top.

Polian is nothing new.. he's just the latest incarnation of the same thing that has existed since the day the NFL was born. Rule-bending or changing has always been part of the game.

Passing will always be part of the game, but the spread will eventually die, and then come back in a decade or so. It's just the law of evolution.

 

[patriot lifer]

i clicked on the last page of this thread thinking it was about TE's. Hah!

 

[condon84]

Condon, you're missing the point here. The game is always going to evolve, no matter what. That's the name of the game- you either evolve or get left behind in the dust. That's what it takes to stay at the top.

Polian is nothing new.. he's just the latest incarnation of the same thing that has existed since the day the NFL was born. Rule-bending or changing has always been part of the game.

Passing will always be part of the game, but the spread will eventually die, and then come back in a decade or so. It's just the law of evolution.

I understand the evolving, cyclical theory, but I just see the rule changes to have a permanent effect on how offenses are being played and will be played. I'm sure someone will take the basic concept of the spread attack that is used now and take it to a different direction where it's going to be something "new." The point I'm trying to make is that teams are built based on the rules of the game, which is now favoring passing offenses. It doesn't mean that some teams won't run a run-oriented offense (Jets last year) and some of those teams will probably be successful at it. You're also going to get teams that have a either a horrible QB, awful receivers or OLs that can't pass protect and they'll be forced to run the ball. Realistically, we're never going to see 32 good QBs all playing at the same time in the NFL so some teams will be forced to have a run heavy offense. But my point is that I just don't see the league as a whole go back to the mentality of run run run, then pass.

A prime example of how rules have completely changed a game is the "hand checking rule" in the NBA. More than ever, the NBA is now dominated by perimeter players because guys can't put their hands on a player when they're guarding them. It's impossible to guard someone like LeBron or Kobe. The back to the basket player is now almost gone (Dwight Howard is the last great player) and everyone wants to play facing the basket. And why not? Defenders can't put their hands on you. It's similar to the NFL chuck rule. After five yards, defenders can't touch receivers, and now, defenders can't even nail receivers as they go for catches. Not to mention the ever evolving rule changes they put in place to protect QBs.

So while I agree that offenses will continue to evolve, the evolution will be predicated on how the game is being officiated and if the rules continue to skew in favor of the pass, the league will continue to be pass heavy. Majority of the successful teams now are pass heavy offenses and even though teams are building their defense against the spread more and more, the rules are just too skewed.

I guess we'll see in a couple of years where this will all go. Maybe if the Jets win a SB with a run-first offense, majority of teams will copy that formula.:bricks:

 

[larryo]

i clicked on the last page of this thread thinking it was about TE's. Hah!

haha I know right. Did you know Aaron Hernandez has the same size hands as Dez Bryant? Well he does according to the combine numbers. That's all I got.

 

[Patspsycho]

A prime example of how rules have completely changed a game is the "hand checking rule" in the NBA. More than ever, the NBA is now dominated by perimeter players because guys can't put their hands on a player when they're guarding them. It's impossible to guard someone like LeBron or Kobe. The back to the basket player is now almost gone (Dwight Howard is the last great player) and everyone wants to play facing the basket.

Even in the NBA with all the rule changes, it still goes in cycles. The trigger-happy, showtime offenses of the 80's (think Doug Moe's run and gun offense in Denver) gave way to defense in the 90's after the Detroit bad boys came along and sold everyone on intimidating defense. Then you had that low point in '95 or so with the Knicks and Houston mauling each other in the finals. Then along comes the great Chicago run, then LA and things are fine and dandy.

 

[condon84]

Even in the NBA with all the rule changes, it still goes in cycles. The trigger-happy, showtime offenses of the 80's (think Doug Moe's run and gun offense in Denver) gave way to defense in the 90's after the Detroit bad boys came along and sold everyone on intimidating defense. Then you had that low point in '95 or so with the Knicks and Houston mauling each other in the finals. Then along comes the great Chicago run, then LA and things are fine and dandy.

The showtime offenses of the 80s got killed by the physical play of the Pistons' bad boy teams. Then Chicago came along with an unstoppable force in Jordan, took Detroit's physicality and still won anyways. Then the Riley Knicks came along and took the physical play to another level and just mugged teams. Chicago kept winning anyways because Jordan was Jordan. But when Jordan retired, the rough play the Knicks started stayed in the league and killed offenses and thus precipitated the hand-check rules, which really evolved the game to what it is now, a perimeter game dominated by Guards and Point Guards. So unless they change more rules to curve the perimeter players advantage and force teams/players to change the way they play, we're going to see perimeter players dominate.

Same thing in the NFL, unless they change rules to allow more physical play against receivers and QBs, I don't see why the league would go back to being run oriented.