Where Is The Pats Deep Threat At????

[Ring 6]

Rob you make justifications for everything just to try and prove YOUR POINT! Gronk is not the Deep threat we are talking about here. Yes he does damage over the middle and is a difficult match-up when healthy. But Gronk doesn't slove the NEED for a Big Play WR's who threathens the Entire Field. You and some others think that Lloyld was an all world outiside WR threat I and many others inlculding former players like Troy Brown and Ty Law and most recently the Ravens Defense beg to differ. I am on the boat that IF BB doesn't get a Big Play game changing WR in this Offense...we will NEVER sniff another SB. Good Defenses have caught up to the Wes Welker lead N.E. Patriots Offense.

So what you are saying is the Ravens just sat back and let us get 428 yards of offense, drive inside the 25 6 times, and convert 46% 3rd downs, even while having drops on 3, a penalty negating a 4th, and Brady running into a ref to prevent a 5th that would have made it 80% conversions, because they knew we didn't have a deep threat so that would make us screw up the plays we converted all season long all on our own when they were right there to be made?
Geez, why did we show up?

 

[Ring 6]

What good is a record breaking offense if it flounders in the playoffs? We used to laugh at the Colts for that exact thing.

No, we laughed at the Colts because people said they were a better team than us, and we beat them.
Laughing at a strong team because they don't win the SB every year is moronic.

 

[Snake Eyes]

So what you are saying is the Ravens just sat back and let us get 428 yards of offense, drive inside the 25 6 times, and convert 46% 3rd downs, even while having drops on 3, a penalty negating a 4th, and Brady running into a ref to prevent a 5th that would have made it 80% conversions, because they knew we didn't have a deep threat so that would make us screw up the plays we converted all season long all on our own when they were right there to be made?
Geez, why did we show up?

Didnt you say in last year, when people complained about the amount of yards the Pats D allowed, that the yards don't matter, only points?

 

[Ring 6]

They scored 13 points relying on the pass. Is that good enough?
They tried ZERO play actions on 15 3rd downs attempts.
They went to the shot gun on 14 of 15 3rd down attempts.
Zero catches by a traditional TE. And lets be honest, without Gronk, AHern is a traditional WR
Welker is the NE deep threat
Lloyd has zero play making skills after the catch
The 320 passing yards accumulated was between the 20s and then the Baltimore defense squeezed them effectively.

NE conceded they lost the LOS battle forcing them to shot gun a disproprtionate number of plays eliminating play action and any ability to fool the LBs. NE had no over the top potential, the sideline completions resulted in self tackling. The NE offense tried to live in the middle of the field yet didn't deploy TEs into patterns, RBs into the flats.
Yes, execution was poor, but lets not understate the fact that Baltimore owned the LOS forcing NE to become one dimensional on third down. Lousy coaching, failure to understand their own tendencies (hot gun shot gun shot gun), and inadequate personnel for the offense they had to run. Listen, I love the Welkers and Hernandez's and what they bring to the offense, but asking welker to be the only NE deep threat or Hernandez to be a traditional WR is asking them to be more than they are. Lloyd......he's a third down move the chains guy but doesn't deserve to be a 3 down WR, not with his lack of play making skills with the ball.

I'm just going to respond to the 3rd down portion of this debacle of a post.
We converted 7 of 15 (46%)
Lloyd was wide open on a slant and dropped an easy catch because he stumbled while the ball was in the air.
Brady ran into a ref.
We had 2 other drops by easily open receivers.
Solder was called for holding on a play we converted.
Those are plays that were right there to be made and that we make almost every time.
That would be 80% thrid down concersions.
You criticized the 3rd down package that converted at what would be a best in the league rate, and would have converted at least 80% by executing easy plays that they made all year long.
The rest of your post is of equal quality of thought.

 

[Ring 6]

Didnt you say in last year, when people complained about the amount of yards the Pats D allowed, that the yards don't matter, only points?

Which is why we lost the game.
That is a function of not converting a handful of plays they normally convert, not an intrinsic problem with the offense.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Which is why we lost the game.
That is a function of not converting a handful of plays they normally convert, not an intrinsic problem with the offense.

When they continuously put up very weak numbers in the playoffs I'd say it is intrinsic.

 

[Ring 6]

When they continuously put up very weak numbers in the playoffs I'd say it is intrinsic.

I thought we may have reached the point where this board was beyond "The end result wasn't good so I will use that as the reason that whatever I want to pick as the reason caused it". Apparently not.

 

[ivanvamp]

When they continuously put up very weak numbers in the playoffs I'd say it is intrinsic.

They've had 3 seasons with the Gronk/Hernandez TE combo. Let's just use the past 3 years as a reference point. Here are the 1st downs, yards, points, and turnovers the Pats have put up in their playoff games the past 3 seasons:

- 2010 vs. NYJ: 26 1st downs, 372 yds, 21 pts, 1 TO
- 2011 vs. Den: 31 1st downs, 509 yds, 45 pts, 2 TO
- 2011 vs. Bal: 25 1st downs, 330 yds, 23 pts, 3 TO
- 2011 vs. NYG: 21 1st downs, 349 yds, 17 pts, 1 TO
- 2012 vs. Hou: 24 1st downs, 457 yds, 41 pts, 0 TO
- 2012 vs. Bal: 28 1st downs, 428 yds, 13 pts, 3 TO

The averages of these numbers are:

25.8 1st downs, 407.5 yds, 26.7 pts, 1.7 TO

The biggest correlation with the offensive "problems" is the turnovers. Look:

- In 2010, the Pats turned it over 10 times all year. 0.6 per game
- In 2011, the Pats turned it over 17 times all year. 1.1 per game
- In 2012, the Pats turned it over 16 times all year. 1.0 per game

So over 48 regular season games the past 3 years, they had 43 total turnovers, for an average of 0.9 per game. But in the playoffs, they have averaged 1.7 per game. That's almost an additional turnover per game more than normal. Since turnovers are probably the biggest single change agent in a football game, what we can safely say is that these turnovers have probably been the biggest reason the Pats are just 3-3 in the playoffs the past 3 seasons.

Their regular numbers (1st downs and yards) are just fine. It's the points and turnovers that are killing them (and the turnovers are probably the biggest direct influencer of the points).

 

[DocHoliday]

I thought we may have reached the point where this board was beyond "The end result wasn't good so I will use that as the reason that whatever I want to pick as the reason caused it". Apparently not.

It's silly to deny that this team - without Gronk, and sometimes even with him - can be stopped by defenses that successfully employ the Jets 2010 playoff gameplan of taking away the short passing game and stopping the run in their nickel.

Jets 2010, Ravens 2011, Giants 2011, 49ers 2012, Cards 2012, Ravens 2012 x2... Really every time we lose it's because of this.

It's nonsense to say "we just didn't make the plays". We can't run against these nickel packages without Gronk and we can't pass against good press nickel coverage either.

We either need a Gronk backup for the run game or a deep threat for the passing game or we will suffer the same fate to these few teams over and over again.

You keep peddling the offensive yards stats when they're frankly meaningless. The Ravens shut us out of the red zone. They did it, we didn't just happen to fail at it.

Give them and their gameplan credit. It is the Achilles heal of this offense.

 

[coolguy]

It's silly to deny that this team - without Gronk, and sometimes even with him - can be stopped by defenses that successfully employ the Jets 2010 playoff gameplan of taking away the short passing game and stopping the run in their nickel.

Jets 2010, Ravens 2011, Giants 2011, 49ers 2012, Cards 2012, Ravens 2012 x2... Really every time we lose it's because of this.

It's nonsense to say "we just didn't make the plays". We can't run against these nickel packages without Gronk and we can't pass against good press nickel coverage either.

We either need a Gronk backup for the run game or a deep threat for the passing game or we will suffer the same fate to these few teams over and over again.

You keep peddling the offensive yards stats when they're frankly meaningless. The Ravens shut us out of the red zone. They did it, we didn't just happen to fail at it.

Give them and their gameplan credit. It is the Achilles heal of this offense.

Don't forget getting constant pressure on brady up the middle.

 

[Rob0729]

It's silly to deny that this team - without Gronk, and sometimes even with him - can be stopped by defenses that successfully employ the Jets 2010 playoff gameplan of taking away the short passing game and stopping the run in their nickel.

Jets 2010, Ravens 2011, Giants 2011, 49ers 2012, Cards 2012, Ravens 2012 x2... Really every time we lose it's because of this.

It's nonsense to say "we just didn't make the plays". We can't run against these nickel packages without Gronk and we can't pass against good press nickel coverage either.

We either need a Gronk backup for the run game or a deep threat for the passing game or we will suffer the same fate to these few teams over and over again.

You keep peddling the offensive yards stats when they're frankly meaningless. The Ravens shut us out of the red zone. They did it, we didn't just happen to fail at it.

Give them and their gameplan credit. It is the Achilles heal of this offense.

You are assuming Gronk will continue to miss time. Breaking bones are not typically part of what you would call an injury prone player especially when he breaks them on freak plays.

I think if the Pats had Edelman or another legitimate #3 WR (not Branch) or Ballard backing up Gronk and Hernandez like they will have next season, the Pats would have done a lot better on offense this past Sunday.

Also, none of those defenses you mentioned stopped the Pats offense with a healthy Gronk. Gronk wasn't himself earlier in the season because of his injury in the AFCCG last year. Only the Jets faced a healthy Gronk and he was a rookie. We do not know if a team could stop this offense with a healthy Gronk and Hernandez.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's silly to deny that this team - without Gronk, and sometimes even with him - can be stopped by defenses that successfully employ the Jets 2010 playoff gameplan of taking away the short passing game and stopping the run in their nickel.

Jets 2010, Ravens 2011, Giants 2011, 49ers 2012, Cards 2012, Ravens 2012 x2... Really every time we lose it's because of this.

It's nonsense to say "we just didn't make the plays". We can't run against these nickel packages without Gronk and we can't pass against good press nickel coverage either.

We either need a Gronk backup for the run game or a deep threat for the passing game or we will suffer the same fate to these few teams over and over again.

You keep peddling the offensive yards stats when they're frankly meaningless. The Ravens shut us out of the red zone. They did it, we didn't just happen to fail at it.

Give them and their gameplan credit. It is the Achilles heal of this offense.

The Patriots put up 30 against that same Ravens team, earlier in the season, when the Ravens were better and the Patriots were worse. In 2007, the Patriots put up 38 against the Giants earlier in the season. In 2009, the Patriots put up 27 against the Ravens earlier in the season. In 2010, the Patriots put up 14 and 45 against the Jets in the two earlier games during the regular season.

Yes, physical teams that get away with contact hamper the Patriots. That'll be true with every single offense in NFL history. However, what's also true is that a large part of the Patriots losses has come from injury/execution issues, and that another large part of those losses has been the turnover disparity and lack of forced turnovers by the Patriots in those games.

 

[DocHoliday]

The Patriots put up 30 against that same Ravens team, earlier in the season, when the Ravens were better and the Patriots were worse. In 2007, the Patriots put up 38 against the Giants earlier in the season. In 2009, the Patriots put up 27 against the Ravens earlier in the season. In 2010, the Patriots put up 14 and 45 against the Jets in the two earlier games during the regular season.

Yes, physical teams that get away with contact hamper the Patriots. That'll be true with every single offense in NFL history. However, what's also true is that a large part of the Patriots losses has come from injury/execution issues, and that another large part of those losses has been the turnover disparity and lack of forced turnovers by the Patriots in those games.

Which is why I mentioned we need backups for crucial pieces like Gronk or make their losses bearable by being good in 3WR.

Jets didn't implement that gameplan till the playoffs when Gronk was a rookie.

We had Gronk earlier in the season, which is why we had more success against them.

07/09 was a completely diff offense.

 

[Ring 6]

It's silly to deny that this team - without Gronk, and sometimes even with him - can be stopped by defenses that successfully employ the Jets 2010 playoff gameplan of taking away the short passing game and stopping the run in their nickel.

We have beaten that scheme so many times its silly that you even bring it up;

Jets 2010, Ravens 2011, Giants 2011, 49ers 2012, Cards 2012, Ravens 2012 x2... Really every time we lose it's because of this.

The Giants did not copy the Jets. The Ravens didn't either. The 49ers didn't come close to that, and we scored 35 points on them anyway.
You are just making things up now. We scored 30 on the Ravens in September. We put up 428 yards Sunday. You are so far off, I don't think you actually watched the games.

It's nonsense to say "we just didn't make the plays". We can't run against these nickel packages without Gronk and we can't pass against good press nickel coverage either.

Again, you can't be watching games.

We either need a Gronk backup for the run game or a deep threat for the passing game or we will suffer the same fate to these few teams over and over again.

How do you explain that 9 times out of 10 the offense is excellent, and the 10th it looks almost identical but f's up a few plays that are there to be made to keep points off the board?

You keep peddling the offensive yards stats when they're frankly meaningless. The Ravens shut us out of the red zone. They did it, we didn't just happen to fail at it.

They are not meaningless at all, because you are saying they shut down the offense. They didn't. We moved the ball consistently. We shot ourself in the foot uncharacteristically to kill drives inside the 25. We were 7/15 on 3rd down with 5 unforced errors. We absolutely did just fail at it.

Give them and their gameplan credit. It is the Achilles heal of this offense.

Simply not true.

 

[Ring 6]

Which is why I mentioned we need backups for crucial pieces like Gronk or make their losses bearable by being good in 3WR.

Jets didn't implement that gameplan till the playoffs when Gronk was a rookie.

We had Gronk earlier in the season, which is why we had more success against them.

07/09 was a completely diff offense.

So now its the Jets game and Sundays game and that is what teams consistently do? 2 games, and 2 games that were even using the same game plan are your proof that their is a blueprint? Nice work.

 

[DocHoliday]

We have beaten that scheme so many times its silly that you even bring it up;


The Giants did not copy the Jets. The Ravens didn't either. The 49ers didn't come close to that, and we scored 35 points on them anyway.
You are just making things up now. We scored 30 on the Ravens in September. We put up 428 yards Sunday. You are so far off, I don't think you actually watched the games.


Again, you can't be watching games.


How do you explain that 9 times out of 10 the offense is excellent, and the 10th it looks almost identical but f's up a few plays that are there to be made to keep points off the board?


They are not meaningless at all, because you are saying they shut down the offense. They didn't. We moved the ball consistently. We shot ourself in the foot uncharacteristically to kill drives inside the 25. We were 7/15 on 3rd down with 5 unforced errors. We absolutely did just fail at it.


Simply not true.

We beat them when they don't have the personnel to run it. Not everyone can do it. Jets could in 10, Ravens can, Giants can, etc.

Note that I *specifically* said we are vulnerable without Gronk, which is why we put up 30 on the Ravens earlier.

The 49ers stopped being able to contain the offense without Smith.., until they reestablished their pass rush against tired tackles.

We put up all the yards but couldnt get into the red zone, when nickel D becomes more effective against the pass with less field space. This is common sense.

This D stalls without the physical downfield receiver and/or running ability, which losing Gronk provides.

The nickel D stops the run and stops the pass without Gronk.

 

[DocHoliday]

So now its the Jets game and Sundays game and that is what teams consistently do? 2 games, and 2 games that were even using the same game plan are your proof that their is a blueprint? Nice work.

Giants 2011 weren't beating us with their nickel and daring us to run?

 

[Ring 6]

We beat them when they don't have the personnel to run it. Not everyone can do it. Jets could in 10, Ravens can, Giants can, etc.

But none of those teams used the same game plan. And we lost each of those games for different reasons.
You have decided what you think the problem is and then taken each loss and pretended it fit that reason. You are simply, flat out wrong.

Note that I *specifically* said we are vulnerable without Gronk, which is why we put up 30 on the Ravens earlier.

It is ridiculous to say we cannot beat a scheme, but thats only if we don't have Gronk. Besdies, we have Gronk so we should be all set.

The 49ers stopped being able to contain the offense without Smith.., until they reestablished their pass rush against tired tackles.

No, no, no. You can't weasel out of this with excuses why they didn't stop the offense, because you said they did. Would have is BS.

We put up all the yards but couldnt get into the red zone, when nickel D becomes more effective against the pass with less field space. This is common sense.

No it isn't because we are an excellent red zone team.
This wasn't scheme, it wasn't really even defense. It was our offense moving up and down the field and killing drives on unforced errors. And errors that they normally do not make.

This D stalls without the physical downfield receiver and/or running ability, which losing Gronk provides

.
It isn't as good without its best players, but it is still very good. You are unhappy with the result, and trying to grasp some intrinsic reason that isnt there. Really, we just didn't make plays that were there to be made, that we normally make. That really is just a fact, and if you watch the game with an open mind it is obvious.

The nickel D stops the run and stops the pass without Gronk.

We ran for over 100 yards, We were getting 5,6,7 yards a pop on first down for a big part of the game. We didn't break any long runs, so the ypc wasn't outstanding, but we ran well enough. We had 428 yards of offense. That is not stopping the run and stopping the pass.
You really should watch the game again.

 

[Deus Irae]

Which is why I mentioned we need backups for crucial pieces like Gronk or make their losses bearable by being good in 3WR.

Jets didn't implement that gameplan till the playoffs when Gronk was a rookie.

We had Gronk earlier in the season, which is why we had more success against them.

07/09 was a completely diff offense.

You're absolutely right that the ability of teams to compact their defense is a major part of this (and part of that happening in this last game falls on gameplan), but the Patriots could have won the game just by converting on their early drives. My point is that it's not just about physical teams, or just about limiting the middle or stopping the run. It's also about turnovers and Patriots miscues. All the depth in the world wasn't going to keep that tipped pass from being picked, and having another RB behind Ridley wasn't going to help Ridley avoid that knockout blow. It also wasn't a lack of depth that had things like Solder committing a stupid holding penalty, or that have had the starting WRs and TE dropping passes in the past two losses. The screw up before the half wasn't because of great Ravens play, either.

What I'm saying is that it's not been just one thing that's been the issue. It's been a combination of things. They need to limit the problems, as well as to add to the solutions.

 

[Ring 6]

Giants 2011 weren't beating us with their nickel and daring us to run?

The Giants did not play the scheme the Jets did in 2010. Thats what you said, and it is wrong.