Which key to the season is the most impotant?

[Xzibit23]

I have to add that it is beyond belief to me that people are criticizing the play calling job by the OC of the highest scoring team in NFL history.
If the standard is 100% of every play call is perfect, there is a lot to criticize McDaniels about, but if the standard is calling plays COMPARED TO EVERYONE ELSE WHO CALLS PLAYS, it is idiotic to criticize what he did last year.
Same idea with OL criticism. Sure there are things to criticize, but compared to all of the other OLs in the NFL, its as good as any.
Just one of my pet peeves. OCs, OL, and corners (and QBs not named Brady) are ripped to shreds for everything that isnt perfect, even when, for example, a corner that gets beat 1/10 as often as a normal corner is still villfied every time he gets beaten.

I do agree that for the majority of the season, McDaniels did a terrific job, and that shouldn't be forgotten. He definetely deserves credit for the emergence of Maroney as a big time RB in the playoffs and taking advantage of the holes that were forming as a result of the Pats passing threat, that was a great adjustment in playcalling on McDaniels' part. Towards the end of the season, he got comfortable with the great tools at his disposal and understandbly picked up some bad habits.

My only real problem with him, and I posted on this at the time, was his misuse of Moss during the playoffs. When Moss was being double-teamed in the playoffs, Moss became a decoy, particularly in the divisional game against the Jags where Brady literally just stopped looking Moss is way after the 1st quarter. Because that game resulted in a W, McDaniels got comfortable with Moss as a decoy and didnt bother trying to get him involved, and it was lost on him and many on this site that the Ws weren't nearly as impressive as they could or should have been. Only when the Pats were staring down the barrel of the gun in the 2nd half of the SB, did he mix it up and use Moss in slants, which predictably got the team results and their only 2nd half TD.

HOWEVER, let it be said that many on this forum weren't calling McDaniels out but instead fell into the same trap of believing all Ws are created equal and until you get an L, what you're doing doesn't need many adjustments. So there is a little bit of Monday morning quarterback, although McDaniels definetely should be held to a higher standard than fans on a messageboard.

 

[dhamz]

I just wish he'd done something in the superbowl. We've all seen Brady pick apart defenses with short passes, dumpoffs and screens. So many times Brady made teams pay for blitzing. I'm not anti-Josh, I don't know enough, but I do know that we should have won that Giants game.

They ran screens (one was almost picked by a lineman), they threw dumpoffs (Welker had 11 catches), etc. As for Brady making teams pay for blitzing, that had no real relevance in the Super Bowl because the Giants rarely blitzed.

Simply, there is no play calling that is going to fix when your 5 or 6 blockers cannot block their 4 and sometimes only 3 rushers.

 

[Deus Irae]

They ran screens (one was almost picked by a lineman), they threw dumpoffs (Welker had 11 catches), etc. As for Brady making teams pay for blitzing, that had no real relevance in the Super Bowl because the Giants rarely blitzed.

Simply, there is no play calling that is going to fix when your 5 or 6 blockers cannot block their 4 and sometimes only 3 rushers.

Bingo...... although it should be said that a running quarterback can change that.

 

[Rob0729]

I do agree that for the majority of the season, McDaniels did a terrific job, and that shouldn't be forgotten. He definetely deserves credit for the emergence of Maroney as a big time RB in the playoffs and taking advantage of the holes that were forming as a result of the Pats passing threat, that was a great adjustment in playcalling on McDaniels' part. Towards the end of the season, he got comfortable with the great tools at his disposal and understandbly picked up some bad habits.

My only real problem with him, and I posted on this at the time, was his misuse of Moss during the playoffs. When Moss was being double-teamed in the playoffs, Moss became a decoy, particularly in the divisional game against the Jags where Brady literally just stopped looking Moss is way after the 1st quarter. Because that game resulted in a W, McDaniels got comfortable with Moss as a decoy and didnt bother trying to get him involved, and it was lost on him and many on this site that the Ws weren't nearly as impressive as they could or should have been. Only when the Pats were staring down the barrel of the gun in the 2nd half of the SB, did he mix it up and use Moss in slants, which predictably got the team results and their only 2nd half TD.

HOWEVER, let it be said that many on this forum weren't calling McDaniels out but instead fell into the same trap of believing all Ws are created equal and until you get an L, what you're doing doesn't need many adjustments. So there is a little bit of Monday morning quarterback, although McDaniels definetely should be held to a higher standard than fans on a messageboard.

Brady broke the completion percentage record in the Divisional round of the playoffs. The Patriots scored on every non-garbage drive except one in that game. How was that a bad thing.

In the Chargers game, Brady tried to go deep, but the Chargers plan of attack was to put pressure on Brady. To counter that, McDaniels made some brilliant second half adjustments and picked the Chargers apart. The Pats' offense was on the field in the fourth quarter for 12 of the 15 minutes on only two drives including a 9 minute, 13 second drive to seal the game. That drive didn't end in points, but only because the Pats didn't try to score.

Also, in the Super Bowl, Moss was wide open a lot. A whole heck of a lot. Whether he ran a deep ball or quick slants, if he didn't get in position in 2-3 seconds, Brady didn't get a chance to get the ball off for most of the game.

I'm sorry, but I had no problem with the lack of production of Moss in the first two playoff games. He really wasn't missed. And I don't mean it as a swipe at Moss. The offense did more than their job in both those games. Him being a decoy benefitted the Patriots in the first two playoff games.

The Super Bowl was another story, but I put that on a brilliant defensive gameplan by the Giants and breakdowns on the o-line more than I do McDaniels' coaching. Don't forget Tony Sparano is one of the fast rising coaching stars of the NFL and had the best defense pressuring the QB last year.

 

[Rob0729]

I have to add that it is beyond belief to me that people are criticizing the play calling job by the OC of the highest scoring team in NFL history.
If the standard is 100% of every play call is perfect, there is a lot to criticize McDaniels about, but if the standard is calling plays COMPARED TO EVERYONE ELSE WHO CALLS PLAYS, it is idiotic to criticize what he did last year.
Same idea with OL criticism. Sure there are things to criticize, but compared to all of the other OLs in the NFL, its as good as any.
Just one of my pet peeves. OCs, OL, and corners (and QBs not named Brady) are ripped to shreds for everything that isnt perfect, even when, for example, a corner that gets beat 1/10 as often as a normal corner is still villfied every time he gets beaten.

I don't get it either. People point to the lack of production of Moss in the playoffs, but as I pointed out in my last post, his lack of production in the first two playoff games didn't hurt the Pats at all.

I think it is part his age and part he lives in the shadow of the legend of Charlie Weis that has grown into mythical proportions over the years since he left since he wasn't nearly as popular when he was here.

The age is really irrelevant. John Madden was only 33 when he became the Raiders' head coach and he is in the Hall of Fame. Why can't a 31 year old OC be effective?

As for Charlie Weis, I have said this a number of times that people forget that he was criticized for many of the same things McDaniels was criticized for up until 2004. Weis' legecy is looked on more fondly because of the Super Bowl wins eventhough the defense carried the team at least two of the three years.

I don't buy that anyone could do what McDaniels did with the talent he had (another McDaniels bashers' argument). Other than Brady and Moss, how good is the offensive talent really? Stallworth seemed to struggle with the offense, but he was always immensly talented and an underachiever. Welker is a very good player, but do you really think he would be nearly as good on any other offense? The o-line has some talent, but other than Mankins none would be considered among the most talented at any of their positions. The running game was patchwork for most of the season because of injuries to Maroney and Morris. There have been far more talented offenses that never approached the milestones that the Pats' offense reached this past year. Brady and Moss has a lot to do with it, but so does McDaniels.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't get it either. People point to the lack of production of Moss in the playoffs, but as I pointed out in my last post, his lack of production in the first two playoff games didn't hurt the Pats at all.

I think it is part his age and part he lives in the shadow of the legend of Charlie Weis that has grown into mythical proportions over the years since he left since he wasn't nearly as popular when he was here.

The age is really irrelevant. John Madden was only 33 when he became the Raiders' head coach and he is in the Hall of Fame. Why can't a 31 year old OC be effective?

As for Charlie Weis, I have said this a number of times that people forget that he was criticized for many of the same things McDaniels was criticized for up until 2004. Weis' legecy is looked on more fondly because of the Super Bowl wins eventhough the defense carried the team at least two of the three years.

I don't buy that anyone could do what McDaniels did with the talent he had (another McDaniels bashers' argument). Other than Brady and Moss, how good is the offensive talent really? Stallworth seemed to struggle with the offense, but he was always immensly talented and an underachiever. Welker is a very good player, but do you really think he would be nearly as good on any other offense? The o-line has some talent, but other than Mankins none would be considered among the most talented at any of their positions. The running game was patchwork for most of the season because of injuries to Maroney and Morris. There have been far more talented offenses that never approached the milestones that the Pats' offense reached this past year. Brady and Moss has a lot to do with it, but so does McDaniels.

Welker caught 67 passes the year before he came to New England and Belichick made his opinion of his skills abundantly clear. Light and Koppen are among the best at their positions and Kevin Faulk is among the very best in the NFL as a 3rd down back. I don't attack McDaniels and I think that those who do usually do so from ignorance, but to belittle the talent he had available to him is unfair to the players.

 

[Rob0729]

Welker caught 67 passes the year before he came to New England and Belichick made his opinion of his skills abundantly clear. Light and Koppen are among the best at their positions and Kevin Faulk is among the very best in the NFL as a 3rd down back. I don't attack McDaniels and I think that those who do usually do so from ignorance, but to belittle the talent he had available to him is unfair to the players.

I said Welker is a very good slot receiver no matter where he plays, but I don't think he would have caught over 100 balls anywhere other than New England. Let's not forget that Welker did get more yards and TDs this past year than he had combined in his career before he became a Patriot. Even with 67 catches in 2006, he only had 687 yards and 1 TD. Many teams in NFL history have had an elite QB, a elite WR, and a better second receiving option than Welker and not done nearly as well (see the 2001 Rams, the Raiders of the early 2000s, the Cowboys teams of the early 90s, etc.). That isn't belittling Welker.

I have always been the biggest Matt Light defender/supporter, but he is above average, not elite. I would say Koppen is in the 5-10 range for his position.

I am not belittling the talent on this team. I am just saying compared to some of the best offenses of all time, this offense isn't nearly as talented as some of them other than Brady and Moss. If you think Welker is on par with Cris Carter, Tim Brown, Issac Bruce, etc., then there really isn't anything to talk about.

In the last decade, there have been more talented offenses than this Patriots offense and only the 2004 Colts and 1998 Vikes came close to what the Pats did last year. Yes, many of the team's QBs only were elite for a handful of years, but they were elite at the time.

 

[Deus Irae]

I said Welker is a very good slot receiver no matter where he plays, but I don't think he would have caught over 100 balls anywhere other than New England. Let's not forget that Welker did get more yards and TDs this past year than he had combined in his career before he became a Patriot. Even with 67 catches in 2006, he only had 687 yards and 1 TD. Many teams in NFL history have had an elite QB, a elite WR, and a better second receiving option than Welker and not done nearly as well (see the 2001 Rams, the Raiders of the early 2000s, the Cowboys teams of the early 90s, etc.). That isn't belittling Welker.

I have always been the biggest Matt Light defender/supporter, but he is above average, not elite. I would say Koppen is in the 5-10 range for his position.

I am not belittling the talent on this team. I am just saying compared to some of the best offenses of all time, this offense isn't nearly as talented as some of them other than Brady and Moss. If you think Welker is on par with Cris Carter, Tim Brown, Issac Bruce, etc., then there really isn't anything to talk about.

In the last decade, there have been more talented offenses than this Patriots offense and only the 2004 Colts and 1998 Vikes came close to what the Pats did last year. Yes, many of the team's QBs only were elite for a handful of years, but they were elite at the time.

Just taking Welker as an example:

He came into the league at 23 years old and was just a special teams player. The next season, he fought his way into the receiving lineup and caught 29 balls and averaged 15 yards per reception. The following season, at just 25 years of age, his receiving numbers jumped from 29 to 67. This past season, at age 26, his numbers took another major jump. Now, I'm sure that some of his improved statistics had to do with being on the team he was on, but that works both ways, and it's clear that his numbers were on an upswing before he came to New England. Without Welker being as great as he was, teams could have keyed more on other players, and their numbers would have suffered as a result.

As for Light, he's been to 2 Pro Bowls and been an All-Pro. Koppen was also a Pro Bowler. 3 of the 5 offensive lineman on this team are among the best in the league at their positions.

 

[PatsFan37]

They ran screens (one was almost picked by a lineman), they threw dumpoffs (Welker had 11 catches), etc. As for Brady making teams pay for blitzing, that had no real relevance in the Super Bowl because the Giants rarely blitzed.

Simply, there is no play calling that is going to fix when your 5 or 6 blockers cannot block their 4 and sometimes only 3 rushers.

Bingo...... although it should be said that a running quarterback can change that.

So is it any coincidence that all 3 backup QBs are fast, agile runners? They don't have Brady's pocket sense and quick release (and ability to move in the pocket when his ankle is sound), but they're all fast. Helps make up for other deficiencies, in the event they have to step in.

 

[PATSNUTme]

The one thing that could have negated the Giants pass rush was a moving pocket. But I think Brady's ankle was not healed enough for that to happen.

 

[Rob0729]

Just taking Welker as an example:

He came into the league at 23 years old and was just a special teams player. The next season, he fought his way into the receiving lineup and caught 29 balls and averaged 15 yards per reception. The following season, at just 25 years of age, his receiving numbers jumped from 29 to 67. This past season, at age 26, his numbers took another major jump. Now, I'm sure that some of his improved statistics had to do with being on the team he was on, but that works both ways, and it's clear that his numbers were on an upswing before he came to New England. Without Welker being as great as he was, teams could have keyed more on other players, and their numbers would have suffered as a result.

As for Light, he's been to 2 Pro Bowls and been an All-Pro. Koppen was also a Pro Bowler. 3 of the 5 offensive lineman on this team are among the best in the league at their positions.

Again, is Welker a better WR than Cris Carter, Isaac Bruce, or Tim Brown (all current, potential, or probable Hall of Famers)? I am not diminishing what Welker did. I am just comparing him to what he is vs. other #2 receiving options in all time great defenses. He stacks up very well against #2 WR options in today's NFL, but not in the greatest offenses of all time.

Light may have been to two Pro Bowls (one he got in because several guys in front of his bowed out) and an All Pro, but when did Pro Bowls really become the measuring stick for real production? It is a popularity contest or class superlative. Did the person who won most likely to succeed in your high school actually suceed more than anyone else from your class? I have always been a Matt Light fan and defender, but I wouldn't put him in the top 5 LTs in the league. I don't know if I would put him in the top 10 either. I don't even know if he is the best LT in the AFC East (Personally I would take Jason Peters). Besides, we again are comparing him to the top offenses of all time and I don't see him nearly as good as Orlando Pace, Todd Stuessie, Tarik Glenn, Erik Williams, or many of the other tackles from those teams.
I would probably put Light in the 10-12 range of LTs in the NFL. Again, most of the best offenses in NFL history had ELITE LTs. No matter how you argue it, Light is clearly not elite.

As for Koppen, I put him in the 5-7 range for centers. Very good, but still not elite.

You seem to be missing my point. Last year's Patriots offense was the most productive of all time. The talent of that offense does not stack up very well against the talent of the ALL TIME offenses except for Brady and Moss. In other words, if you were going to build an All Time Offensive team the only players from last year's Patriots offense that would even get a seconds worth of consideration would be Brady and Moss. You mentioned anyone else and you would get laughed at. Compared to today's talent, last year's Pats offense stacks up pretty well against other offenses in the league. It is very clear though that the 2007 Patriots offense was not the most talented of all time even if they were the most productive.

 

[Deus Irae]

You seem to be missing my point. Last year's Patriots offense was the most productive of all time. The talent of that offense does not stack up very well against the talent of the ALL TIME offenses except for Brady and Moss. In other words, if you were going to build an All Time Offensive team the only players from last year's Patriots offense that would even get a seconds worth of consideration would be Brady and Moss. You mentioned anyone else and you would get laughed at. Compared to today's talent, last year's Pats offense stacks up pretty well against other offenses in the league. It is very clear though that the 2007 Patriots offense was not the most talented of all time even if they were the most productive.

I'm not missing your point. I simply don't agree with it. You choose to underrate the offensive linemen. I do not.

 

[Krugman]

I'm a little late replying,but Metaphors makes some good points.Take what they give you,like Weis used to.It aint as sexy as the long throws to Moss,but it keeps the defence honest....

 

[mmasterkillah]

A good pass rush can make our secondary look sensational. We need somebody to make big plays defensively in the front seven.

 

[Halifax_Pats_Fan]

Never really read the whole thread - my two cents.

In order of importance....

1) Offensive lie, pass protection, backs and TE picking up the rush

2) Our Defense. We are gonna have to find a way to cover those tall receivers. We need a conditoned defense when the opponet is driving. Someone needs to make a play...

 

[JoeShmoe]

Never really read the whole thread - my two cents.

In order of importance....

1) Offensive lie, pass protection, backs and TE picking up the rush

2) Our Defense. We are gonna have to find a way to cover those tall receivers. We need a conditoned defense when the opponet is driving. Someone needs to make a play...

I agree. 4 main keys this year for me are

1. The OL. Everyone saw the SB and will think thats the way to beat the Pats. So we'll see blitzes and heavy pass rushing. Im worried about the right side of the line if Neal and Kazcur are out and i sincerely hope the whole group with Scranechhia(sp) analyzes that game and works on what went wrong

2. A more balanced offense. More running game and Brady back to killing teams with Dink and Dunk. This means more short routes for the WR's as well as leaving the deep threat. Jackson and Watson/Thomas hopefully can step up and be involved

3. The DL. So many times last year we get at the QB but missed him *think SB*, or didnt get there at all. Hopefully a fully fit Seymour can get back to his best as he then demands double teaming and Warren/Green get more penetration and get some pressure on

4. If Merriweather and Mayo start and how they improve the secondary coverage

 

[Full_Tilt_Full_Time]

I think the biggest key will be winning games. If they can do that they will be fine.