Why The Pats Believe In Josh McDaniels, And You Should Too

[jmt57]

Why Pats believe in Josh McDaniels, and you should, too | WEEI.com | Mike Petraglia

It's often been said - and for good reason - that Brady is the offensive coordinator on the field. But it's McDaniels who puts all the pieces together. Will the Patriots run more? Will they stick with the passing game? How will they use Tim Tebow? All of those questions have to be answered by McDaniels in the next four weeks.

The Patriots have scored over 500 points in the last three seasons, a feat never before accomplished in NFL history. McDaniels and Brady were reunited for the 2011 playoffs and together, helped put 557 points on the board in 2012. They were together in 2007 when the Patriots set NFL records with 589 points and an average victory margin of 19.7 points.

No one is expecting that this season, certainly not at the start, not with all of the new faces in new places.


... ... ...


Another reason New England should believe in McDaniels is that he now, presumably, has a running game that is about to mature into something truly dynamic. Even without Woodhead, the Patriots feel they have star in the making in Stevan Ridley, entering his third season. In Shane Vereen, they have a lot of speed they think can replace Woodhead as a threat in the flat. In LeGarrette Blount, they have a 250-pound bruising back looking to prove people that he isn't washed up at 26. And in Leon Washington, they have a 30-year-old still capable of returning kicks and subbing in on third down.


​

 

[mgteich]

We are testing the proposition that a passing teams needs receivers in order to do well. We believe that one of the worst group of any passing team in the NFL is plenty because talent isn't relevant. It is enough that we have Belichick, McDaniels and Brady. Miracles happened in 2006, They can happen again.

BTW, the are several varieties of koolaid available by mail order from patriots.com.

 

[mgteich]

The direct answer is that I believe in Josh because Bill and Brady do. IMP, Josh is no Charlie Weiss, but he certainly is a fine coordinator.

Why Pats believe in Josh McDaniels, and you should, too | WEEI.com | Mike Petraglia

It's often been said - and for good reason - that Brady is the offensive coordinator on the field. But it's McDaniels who puts all the pieces together. Will the Patriots run more? Will they stick with the passing game? How will they use Tim Tebow? All of those questions have to be answered by McDaniels in the next four weeks.

The Patriots have scored over 500 points in the last three seasons, a feat never before accomplished in NFL history. McDaniels and Brady were reunited for the 2011 playoffs and together, helped put 557 points on the board in 2012. They were together in 2007 when the Patriots set NFL records with 589 points and an average victory margin of 19.7 points.

No one is expecting that this season, certainly not at the start, not with all of the new faces in new places.


... ... ...


Another reason New England should believe in McDaniels is that he now, presumably, has a running game that is about to mature into something truly dynamic. Even without Woodhead, the Patriots feel they have star in the making in Stevan Ridley, entering his third season. In Shane Vereen, they have a lot of speed they think can replace Woodhead as a threat in the flat. In LeGarrette Blount, they have a 250-pound bruising back looking to prove people that he isn't washed up at 26. And in Leon Washington, they have a 30-year-old still capable of returning kicks and subbing in on third down.


​

 

[DarrylS]

Right now McDaniels is a better O coordinator than and HC... have always had the feeling that he is taking BB lessons and might be the heir apparent to that throne..

 

[BSR]

We are testing the proposition that a passing teams needs receivers in order to do well. We believe that one of the worst group of any passing team in the NFL is plenty because talent isn't relevant. It is enough that we have Belichick, McDaniels and Brady. Miracles happened in 2006, They can happen again.

BTW, the are several varieties of koolaid available by mail order from patriots.com.

Except they aren't testing anything except people's hindsight. The team under Belichick frequently guts the receiving core with presumably players that are preceived to be unproven or washed up. Between 2000 and 2001 this team's receiving core was gutted except for Troy Brown who was at time thought of as a bit player. Terry Glenn was ostracized and the receiving core consisted of Brown. The process happened again between 2005 and 2006 with Troy being the only holdover. One year later it was redone bringing in an unknown Wes, a washed up Moss and Stallworth. In 2010 the WR were rebuilt on the fly during the season with only Wes being a holdover and Moss was jettisoned. A washed up Deion, a couple of rookie TEs and a cast off Jets scat back rebuilt the offense.

Now I have no idea if this years rebuild will be successful or not. Nobody does as its going to come down to if the players can learn the system or not. The notion however that they are talentless is as much nonsense now as it was every other time they have rebuilt the receiving core. Its not testing some new theory, its doing what they have done several times before.

 

[Rob0729]

I still think McDaniels is the best OC the Pats ever had (yes, even better than Charlie Weis). This is a guy who made Matt Cassel and Kyle Orton look like real NFL QBs. That alone makes him an offensive genius.

If anyone can make all these new pieces on offense work and be productive, I would say that McDaniels is the guy (or one of the guys) you would call first for the job.

I can sense NEM's and maverick04's heads are exploding somewhere just for the existence of this thread.

 

[letekro]

We are testing the proposition that a passing teams needs receivers in order to do well. We believe that one of the worst group of any passing team in the NFL is plenty because talent isn't relevant. It is enough that we have Belichick, McDaniels and Brady. Miracles happened in 2006, They can happen again.

BTW, the are several varieties of koolaid available by mail order from patriots.com.

You've been watching too much ESPN. How many teams have two studs in the receiving corps? The Patriots have Amendola and Gronkowski. That puts them above most of the league. Edelman is dynamic if healthy. Vereen is essentially a receiver out of the backfield. Then you've got the rookies. I don't think there is much dispute that they are talented and getting a lot of reps in practice. Ultimately, they are an unknown, but there is a lot of promise there. One thing I will say is that it is concerning that their top 3 guys are very injury prone.

 

[MassPats38]

We are testing the proposition that a passing teams needs receivers in order to do well. We believe that one of the worst group of any passing team in the NFL is plenty because talent isn't relevant.

I still don't fathom this "worst group" notion. You have a group with a bunch of untested rookies. In 2006, Doug Gabriel was a 5th round pick cut during the season, and Reche Caldwell was a free agent acquisition when the Chargers elected not to bring him back. Neither saw much success before or after the Pats. Troy Brown was great in his day for the Pats, but that was pretty much the end of his career. That year, you could certainly call that a "worst group" given those resumes. Anyone assessing 'talent' of rookies at this point should probably look to the stories of Chad Jackson (freakish combine display but complete bust - read the posts here in the draft on him), Troy Brown (8th round and cut preseason in his first year), Hines Ward (3rd round and offensive anchor for Steelers throughout his career), and Wes Welker (undrafted - same for Pats).

This group will either fit or it won't. It actually could be a significantly better group than last year, and ultimately better than most of the NFL. Anyone claiming to 'know' what this group can do either (1) better have been throwing passes to them in college and know their abilities and tendencies precisely or (2) should cite to assessments of the above cited cases in their respective drafts in which they correctly identified the potential of those receivers prior to their success/failure.

I don't claim to have a crystal ball telling how this story plays out for the Pats this season, but neither does anyone else in terms of what this group might do with Brady. Any effort to 'rank' this group at this point in terms of potential is foolish. If the ranking is based solely on accrued NFL career or season statistics rather than individual and group capabilities, and rookies have accrued no NFL statistics, then I can accept the Pats position on that ranking. I would also label that ranking pointless in terms of what to expect this season. Teams don't win games based on prior year statistics.

 

[Deus Irae]

I still don't fathom this "worst group" notion. You have a group with a bunch of untested rookies. In 2006, Doug Gabriel was a 5th round pick cut during the season, and Reche Caldwell was a free agent acquisition when the Chargers elected not to bring him back. Neither saw much success before or after the Pats. Troy Brown was great in his day for the Pats, but that was pretty much the end of his career. That year, you could certainly call that a "worst group" given those resumes. Anyone assessing 'talent' of rookies at this point should probably look to the stories of Chad Jackson (freakish combine display but complete bust - read the posts here in the draft on him), Troy Brown (8th round and cut preseason in his first year), Hines Ward (3rd round and offensive anchor for Steelers throughout his career), and Wes Welker (undrafted - same for Pats).

This group will either fit or it won't. It actually could be a significantly better group than last year, and ultimately better than most of the NFL. Anyone claiming to 'know' what this group can do either (1) better have been throwing passes to them in college and know their abilities and tendencies precisely or (2) should cite to assessments of the above cited cases in their respective drafts in which they correctly identified the potential of those receivers prior to their success/failure.

I don't claim to have a crystal ball telling how this story plays out for the Pats this season, but neither does anyone else in terms of what this group might do with Brady. Any effort to 'rank' this group at this point in terms of potential is foolish. If the ranking is based solely on accrued NFL career or season statistics rather than individual and group capabilities, and rookies have accrued no NFL statistics, then I can accept the Pats position on that ranking. I would also label that ranking pointless in terms of what to expect this season. Teams don't win games based on prior year statistics.

History tells us what rookies tend to do, which is "not much". Go list all the teams with a worse WR corps than the Patriots, discounting any and all rookies due to their "unknown" status. That's your starting point, and it should explain why people are saying what they are saying.

When it comes to the WR corps, the Patriots are relying on a lot of players to defy the odds/history this season.

 

[MassPats38]

History tells us what rookies tend to do, which is "not much". Go list all the teams with a worse WR corps than the Patriots, discounting any and all rookies due to their "unknown" status. That's your starting point, and it should explain why people are saying what they are saying.

When it comes to the WR corps, the Patriots are relying on a lot of players to defy the odds/history this season.

The point being how does one rate an unknown quantity? I understand that you can assume rookie failures, based on some generic rookie characterization without regard to he player, but that to me is the equivalent of a chemistry experiment in which you grab a handful of random chemicals and say randomly mixing those chemicals has previously resulted in a volatile reaction, so let's assume the outcome with the current random mix so this mixture will be volatile. That proposition, as a matter of science, would be ridiculous.

I understand you can base this assessment on the players who are not rookies. As such, regardless of draft position, core abilities, coaching and QB, assume the receivers will do no more than the veteran players might permit. Even if there is generic history on the performance of rookies, offered without regard to the caliber of coaching, QBs throwing the ball, and opportunities given the particular rookie in a given season, it would be so abstract as to be meaningless. I wonder where Tom Brady would be now if he was drafted by the Texans or Steelers, and was pounded 15 times per game behind porous offensive lines. The abstract quality of the assessment is what makes it meaningless for an individual team.

I will accept that the pundits will offer this ranking, and may do so based on abstract history. As to your last proposition, the Pats have made a career over the past decade of defying abstract history on what should happen in the NFL. I tend to credit the team's assessment over the pundits, who repeatedly fail in attempting to assess what this team might do in a given season. With that said, it will be an interesting ride to see if this group can form into something special, or whether the Pats start seeing starting appearances from retreads, as in 2006.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

In my opinion, Gronkowski's health cannot be overstated. Teams like the KC Chiefs used to get by just by Gonzalez, and the Gronkowski is arguably better. He makes the offense so much better by providing everything in one: secrecy about whether they will run or pass (and setting up the playaction), superb blocking, even better receiving, the ability to stretch the field down the middle, and one of the best red zone threats of all-time.

Losing Hernandez is tough, but if Vereen, Edelman, and co can capitalize on more playing time, it's not like Hernandez is a once-in-a-lifetime talent. Gronkowski, on the other hand, is absolutely invaluable.

When and if Gronk is healthy, the Patriots will be a top-5 offense in the NFL.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

Lost his last 16 games straight in Denver, then led the worst offense in the entire NFL at St Louis despite having Sam Bradford (rookie of the yr) and Steven Jackson.

This offense has a LOT of McDaniels' guys, so don't blame injuries as an excuse if the offense falters. We could have had Welker back for the same money given to Amendola. Welker called the Pats to match and he'd be back, but they chose to go with McDaniels' guy and other ex-Ram and ex-Bronco guys.

www.joshmcdanielssucks.com | Timeline Josh McDaniels Sucks

 

[JackBauer]

Lost his last 16 games straight in Denver, then led the worst offense in the entire NFL at St Louis despite having Sam Bradford (rookie of the yr) and Steven Jackson.

This offense has a LOT of McDaniels' guys, so don't blame injuries as an excuse if the offense falters. We could have had Welker back for the same money given to Amendola. Welker called the Pats to match and he'd be back, but they chose to go with McDaniels' guy and other ex-Ram and ex-Bronco guys.

www.joshmcdanielssucks.com | Timeline Josh McDaniels Sucks

This dude is definitely maverick04.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Lost his last 16 games straight in Denver, then led the worst offense in the entire NFL at St Louis despite having Sam Bradford (rookie of the yr) and Steven Jackson.

This offense has a LOT of McDaniels' guys, so don't blame injuries as an excuse if the offense falters. We could have had Welker back for the same money given to Amendola. Welker called the Pats to match and he'd be back, but they chose to go with McDaniels' guy and other ex-Ram and ex-Bronco guys.

www.joshmcdanielssucks.com | Timeline Josh McDaniels Sucks

Welcome back Maverick!

 

[TruthSeeker]

Right now McDaniels is a better O coordinator than and HC... have always had the feeling that he is taking BB lessons and might be the heir apparent to that throne..

I agree. McDaniels hopefully will take the throne some day. He has a brilliant football mind, all you have to do is read what he says in interviews, he has a lot of Belichick in him. Very well spoken, always seems to say the right thing, and is respectful of the players.

 

[Rob0729]

Lost his last 16 games straight in Denver, then led the worst offense in the entire NFL at St Louis despite having Sam Bradford (rookie of the yr) and Steven Jackson.

This offense has a LOT of McDaniels' guys, so don't blame injuries as an excuse if the offense falters. We could have had Welker back for the same money given to Amendola. Welker called the Pats to match and he'd be back, but they chose to go with McDaniels' guy and other ex-Ram and ex-Bronco guys.

www.joshmcdanielssucks.com | Timeline Josh McDaniels Sucks

And maverick04 checks in with his anti-McDaniels' rant.

Mav, do you get some kind of alarm whenever there is a Pro McDaniels thread formed. Is there some kind of APP for that?

BTW, you might want to get some of your facts straight. Bradford only played 10 games in 2011 (McDaniels' year in St. Louis) and was a shell of himself during much of the time he did actually play.

 

[Sicilian]

There seems to be a mentality among some fans that if a coach or player hasn't succeeded in every single situation they've ever been a part of, that it somehow denotes a fundamental flaw that will inevitably ruin the Patriots season.

In JM's case, he failed as a head coach (as many young coaches do their first time), and struggled in St. Louis with a young QB and minimal weapons. So yes, we know he's not a miracle worker who will take nothing and turn it into a top five offense.

Here's what we also know: He's responsible for two out of the three top scoring offenses in history, and aside from Welker he did it with two different sets of weapons. What that tells me is that when he has talent, he knows how to use it. The talent on this team has question marks, but there is athleticism and smarts in this receiving corp, and if they buy in and develop, McDaniels will put them in the right positions to succeed.

How much more do you actually expect from an OC?

 

[Rob0729]

This dude is definitely maverick04.

Yes, it is definitely him. He started his profile shortly after the time that maverick04 was perma-banned from the site. And he mostly only posts on McDaniels related threads or threads he can turn into a an Anti-McDaniels related rant.

 

[Oinko]

I think the one piece of glaring continuity in the Patriots success is BB. The fact that Josh was the first repeat-hire at OC by BB should be all we need to know.

 

[Salva135]

I still think McDaniels is the best OC the Pats ever had (yes, even better than Charlie Weis). This is a guy who made Matt Cassel and Kyle Orton look like real NFL QBs. That alone makes him an offensive genius.

If anyone can make all these new pieces on offense work and be productive, I would say that McDaniels is the guy (or one of the guys) you would call first for the job.

I can sense NEM's and maverick04's heads are exploding somewhere just for the existence of this thread.

I don't know how you could say this when Charlie Weis is the guy who basically installed the Pats' offensive system as we know it. McDaniels has tweaked it, but it started with Weis.