Will our offense be better this season than last?

[Kontradiction]

How can people forget something that has never been the case in his career?

Yes, Mr. Literal. Notice that I said "WHEN HEALTHY". In his pro career, Jackson has never been healthy. But, I live in Florida and happen to be a Gator fan. The man was a big, physical, quick WR with deep threat speed. He was drafted for it in the NFL but hasn't been able to get on the field yet. By your post, you're labeling Jackson as a "bust" and I'm labeling him as an unproven commodity. Watch more Gator games.

 

[alvinnf]

Yes, Mr. Literal. Notice that I said "WHEN HEALTHY". In his pro career, Jackson has never been healthy. But, I live in Florida and happen to be a Gator fan. The man was a big, physical, quick WR with deep threat speed. He was drafted for it in the NFL but hasn't been able to get on the field yet. By your post, you're labeling Jackson as a "bust" and I'm labeling him as an unproven commodity. Watch more Gator games.

I think dissappointment might be better terminology then unproven commodoty. Even when "healthy" he seems a bit lost, when a guy is only coming in for reverses and blocking on obvious run downs, somethin aint clikn'. I hope I am wrong and he breaks out this year, IMO we need someone reliable on the backside in 2X1 set.

 

[DFWChargerFan]

IMO, whether your offense is better than last year will have a lot to do with your running game. Last year, Brady was able to throw at will with your explosive receiving core (Moss, Welker, Stallworth, Watson, etc) and put up big numbers. Towards the end of the season, it seemed as though opposing teams were able to come up with a defensive game plan to at least "slow down" your offense.

During the AFCCG against the Chargers, our defense was able to get a few picks, sack Brady a few times and it looked as though we had finally found a way to defeat the Pats offense. What was your response? Second half, hand the ball to Maroney who proceeded to run the ball down our throats and was virtually unstopable.

I think Maroney has a tremendous amount of talent, and he seemed to come into his own towards the end of the season. Will be interesting to see how he's used next year. You may not put up as many points as last year, but you will still be #1 or #2 offense overall, IMO.

 

[Ring 6]

although it's possible to go 16-0 again, I would think teams would have spent some time this offseason looking at how they could stop us. Namely, game film of the last 6 games. Still, it's all about execution, and if we do that to perfection, there will be no stopping us. Personally, I think the offense will be as good as last year, but won't put up the points they did last year. Now the defense is where I think we will be improved, and they were pretty good last year.

We will also spend a lot of time this off-season looking at how we can get better.

 

[fgssand]

We will also spend a lot of time this off-season looking at how we can get better.

Of course we will and at the very top of the list is knowing exactly what to do when defensive penetration is happening against our O line -be it up the middle or off the edge.

They better figure that out as top priority because it cost us a Superbowl.

Where was the quick release off of a quick count and varying drop back depths, where was the hurry up, where as the spread morphing into dink & dunk, where was more play action, where was any kind of adjustment in that damn SB 42. We figured out how to beat SD when they were controling the LOS against the pass. Why were we outcoached and outplayed in that 2nd half?? No excuse, d%#*!@t. Oversimplified by me, yes indeed - but it should not have been that difficult to adjust.

Sorry, I cannot get over that game and I won't...until we win our next Superbowl and let's all hope is is this year.

 

[patsox23]

To answer the OP's question succinctly - NOPE.

 

[Ring 6]

Of course we will and at the very top of the list is knowing exactly what to do when defensive penetration is happening against our O line -be it up the middle or off the edge.

They better figure that out as top priority because it cost us a Superbowl.

Where was the quick release off of a quick count and varying drop back depths, where was the hurry up, where was more play action, where was any kind of adjustment in that damn SB 42. We figured out how to beat SD when they were controling the LOS against the pass. Why were we outcoached and outplayed in that 2nd half?? No excuse, d%#*!@t.

Sorry, I cannot get over that game and I won't...until we win our next Superbowl and let's all hope is is this year.

Hey, Ive always been a "SB Championship or bust" kind of guy.
But I find it very hard tobe so negative toward the players, the coaching staff, and everyone else involved over one game after winning 18 in a row. I think that the 18 dictate that the 1 was an aberration. I disagree that they didnt adjust that they didn't address what the Giants were doing. (There was one long thread on this board saying why did we abandon the screen, and when I rewatched the game I saw at least 10 before I stopped counting) They just did not execute. Go back and watch the game, with ONE SIMPLE THING IN MIND. Take every pass that Brady threw when he was getting hit DURING HIS DELIVERY. Look at the receiver, and ask yourself if there is any way possible that Brady doesnt complete that pass if he isnt hit. (It wasnt the sacks, it was the disrupted passes that really caused the most damage) We easily score 35 points in that game if he was not hit during his throwing motion on numerous passes.
Now, where does the blame go for that. To me its very simple. Look at the pressure, where it came from, etc. Almost every time it was an OL getting beaten in an individual battle.
For 18 straight games they won those battles consistently in the 19th they did not.

 

[fgssand]

Hey, Ive always been a "SB Championship or bust" kind of guy.
But I find it very hard tobe so negative toward the players, the coaching staff, and everyone else involved over one game after winning 18 in a row. I think that the 18 dictate that the 1 was an aberration. I disagree that they didnt adjust that they didn't address what the Giants were doing. (There was one long thread on this board saying why did we abandon the screen, and when I rewatched the game I saw at least 10 before I stopped counting) They just did not execute. Go back and watch the game, with ONE SIMPLE THING IN MIND. Take every pass that Brady threw when he was getting hit DURING HIS DELIVERY. Look at the receiver, and ask yourself if there is any way possible that Brady doesnt complete that pass if he isnt hit. (It wasnt the sacks, it was the disrupted passes that really caused the most damage) We easily score 35 points in that game if he was not hit during his throwing motion on numerous passes.
Now, where does the blame go for that. To me its very simple. Look at the pressure, where it came from, etc. Almost every time it was an OL getting beaten in an individual battle.
For 18 straight games they won those battles consistently in the 19th they did not.

Oh I know, I did rewatch and did come away with the same feeling, my feeling was a healthy Brady slides away from some of those hits as we have seen so many times, a healthy Brady steps up and delivers the ball with his normal pinpoint accuracy, a healthy Brady see it and reacts - he just was not able to. ALL THE MORE reason to have adjusted to what they were bringing, where it was coming from and the health of Brady, changes were needed to be made and they just did not do it.

I am trying to not take anything away from the Giants because they did play an awesome game, they won the one on one battles, and that is why they won the game - yet, I still feel and I guess I will always feel that in spite of everything I witnessed (including the most bizarre final drive you'll ever see) we could have and should have won that game.

I respect this team, its owner, coaches and most of all the players - the core group of this team is simply amazing - we'll never see this again in sports, ever. I hope it eats away at the players as much as it does we fans - there is only way to make up for it though and that is to win a Superbowl...finish the job, close the sale, collect that ring. I want to see a focused, angry, highly motivated team this year.

 

[alvinnf]

They got outcoached and outplayed, former more than the ladder. Will they be better, no if better means more points. Yes if better means more methodical.

 

[The Great Fork]

yet, I still feel and I guess I will always feel that in spite of everything I witnessed (including the most bizarre final drive you'll ever see) we could have and should have won that game.

That is the only thing I can ever think about. Three bomb plays when they had enough time and timeouts to move the ball down the field. Terrible.

 

[Kontradiction]

That is the only thing I can ever think about. Three bomb plays when they had enough time and timeouts to move the ball down the field. Terrible.

You're so right. I mean, who the hell is this guy Belichick anyway? The guy can't coach to save his life. Never won a Super Bowl and never will. He doesn't even belong on an NFL field. I'm calling the Pats' front office and requesting to speak to Robert Kraft. When he answers the phone, I'm going to let him know that, from now on, The Great Fork takes over all coaching and personel decisions.

 

[hammer]

Not a chance.

 

[The Great Fork]

You're so right. I mean, who the hell is this guy Belichick anyway? The guy can't coach to save his life. Never won a Super Bowl and never will. He doesn't even belong on an NFL field. I'm calling the Pats' front office and requesting to speak to Robert Kraft. When he answers the phone, I'm going to let him know that, from now on, The Great Fork takes over all coaching and personel decisions.

Okay, all I was saying was that the last drive was bad. Why insult me? I was merely saying the last couple of called plays weren't great. You're awfully bitter.

 

[Kontradiction]

Okay, all I was saying was that the last drive was bad. Why insult me? I was merely saying the last couple of called plays weren't great. You're awfully bitter.

I insult you because I can.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I am not expecting our offense to be better, especially if McDaniels maintains the same approach from last year.

That's not to say that Moss won't have another big year - or that McDaniels should be fired - but by the end of the season defenses seemed to be doing a very good job of putting pressure on Brady, while maintaining double coverage on Moss, and keeping the offense production limited enough to keep the games competitive.

Most teams were willing to allow Welker to have big games but maintained a bend but don't break mentality. McDaniels never seemed interested in adjusting. Who knows - maybe he'll reassess in the offseason.

I think utilizing another deep threat on the opposite side would have been a big help and would have freed up Moss more often had they done so - or would have resulted in big plays to Stallworth. But whether you argue that Stallworth lost his deep WR skills he had with the Eagles at a 19 ypc average, or couldn't get his timing down with Brady - what's clear is that McDaniels just chose not to use him in that way.

So with Stallworth gone and many hoping Chad Jackson can be a complementary deep WR - I'm not so sure McDaniels has any interest in using him as a deep WR. Anything deep is going to go to Moss and only to Moss for the most part. If that continues to be the approach on offense I expect that at best we'll see a continuation of the late season offensive production.

 

[Deus Irae]

I am not expecting our offense to be better, especially if McDaniels maintains the same approach from last year.

That's not to say that Moss won't have another big year - or that McDaniels should be fired - but by the end of the season defenses seemed to be doing a very good job of putting pressure on Brady, while maintaining double coverage on Moss, and keeping the offense production limited enough to keep the games competitive.

Most teams were willing to allow Welker to have big games but maintained a bend but don't break mentality. McDaniels never seemed interested in adjusting. Who knows - maybe he'll reassess in the offseason.

I think utilizing another deep threat on the opposite side would have been a big help and would have freed up Moss more often had they done so - or would have resulted in big plays to Stallworth. But whether you argue that Stallworth lost his deep WR skills he had with the Eagles at a 19 ypc average, or couldn't get his timing down with Brady - what's clear is that McDaniels just chose not to use him in that way.

So with Stallworth gone and many hoping Chad Jackson can be a complementary deep WR - I'm not so sure McDaniels has any interest in using him as a deep WR. Anything deep is going to go to Moss and only to Moss for the most part. If that continues to be the approach on offense I expect that at best we'll see a continuation of the late season offensive production.

You're doing nothing but bringing up the same argument that was disproven in another thread. The numbers have already proven you wrong.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=77177

 

[JoeSixPat]

You're doing nothing but bringing up the same argument that was disproven in another thread. The numbers have already proven you wrong.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=77177

Stallworth was not used as a deep threat - the numbers prove me right.

Sending Gaffney deep a token few times a year isn't going to make defenses cover him like Randy Moss or any other legitimate deep threat. Same with Kevin Faulk. Same with Wes Welker.

This is an area where you and I simply disagree. Defenses cover those guys the way the probably should - as they are all 10-12 ypc receivers. They don't look at the collective stats of all our WRs and pull a guy off Moss because they are concerned about any of those guys beating them deep.

If you want to collectively add up all the times Faulk, Welker, Gaffney and other short yardage WRs were used as a deep threat and want to assert that makes DC's cover them like Randy Moss, go for it.

I still maintain that early in the season, DCs were calling schemes covering Stallworth like the 19 YPC receiver he was in Philly. That helped Moss greatly. And that helped our offense greatly as well.

But over time as it became McDaniels was rarely looking to Stallworth deep - and was using him as a short to mid WR they adjusted their coverage accordingly. I think that was a strategic mistake.

The debate as to whether Stallworth had no ability or timing to be a deep WR in our system is worth having - but I think he still had enough talent and timing that would have made him an excellent decoy at the very least had he been used more as a deep WR.

Given all of this, I'm not expecting McDaniels to use Chad Jackson as a deep threat more than Stallworth. Even if he wanted to Jackson hasn't yet proven he can get the job done.

So I'm fully expecting another season where Moss is the one and only deep threat. Many teams don't have the luxury of having another threat on the other side of the field (a fact that you attempt to use to prove your point). Last year we did have that luxury and didn't use it - this season I'm not sure we'll have that luxury period.

 

[signbabybrady]

Originally Posted by The Great Fork
That is the only thing I can ever think about. Three bomb plays when they had enough time and timeouts to move the ball down the field. Terrible.

Let me ask you this?

Lets say BB went with the plan you have. and he tried to dink and dunk his way into field goal range. When the clock ran out and he was just short would you not than be saying you have the best deep ball reciever in the league possibly ever why not just throw it up to him for a last ditch effort.

there were 30 seconds left on that last drive it would have been real tough to get into field goal range. With Hindsight it may have been a better attempt. But also using hindsight you have to look at one of those bombs and realize it was inches from being completed and him taking to the endzone, so you have to realize that it was not that bad of a plan.

 

[hammer]

I insult you because I can.

That's a relief. I thought it was because you were a prick!

 

[Kontradiction]

That's a relief. I thought it was because you were a prick!

Excellent insult. Very insightful stuff. This actually may very well be the greatest insult I've ever heard in my life. Where do you live so I can mail you a cookie?