Would It Be Too Crazy?

[mgteich]

Would it be too crazy to protect our quarterback better with more than one 2 TE set during a game?

 

[denverpatsfan]

I would love it. 90's Patriots football at it's best. Seriously let's protect Tom while he works his way back!

 

[Patspsycho]

Would it be too crazy to protect our quarterback better with more than one 2 TE set during a game?

Why would that be something we ought to implement?

 

[patriotscpfc]

I'd be doing that against the Ravens. I think we're going to have to double team Ngata when that game comes up.

You know Lewis is going to want to lay a hit on TFB. And with Suggs there, they will be tough, even without big mouth Scott.

 

[BennyBledsoe]

Baker and Matthews would be nice to have in there blocking for the poor bastard.

 

[mgteich]

because it would protect the quarterback more and provide an additional blocker for the run gam

Many like 4 and 5 wide receiver sets. Of course, this is an illusion since there are only 5 wide receivers in those sets.

The question is whether to have three wide receivers on the field at all times instead of a 2nd TE or a 2nd RB/FB. I think it is fantasy to try to get the opponents to think that we are serious about running with three wides alwasys on the field.

Why would that be something we ought to implement?

 

[mayoclinic]

Would it be too crazy to protect our quarterback better with more than one 2 TE set during a game?

I suggested it prior to the Jets game, and particularly hoped to see Matthews in as an extra blocker. I was very disappointed that he wasn't active for the game.

After the 2007 SB and the Jets game, the book on TB and the Pats will be to bring lots of pressure with the rush. Not everyone has the horses. But until we learn to deal with it effectively we can expect to see more of it.

 

[jmt57]

For whatever reason, the Jets game was an anomaly. It's not as if the Pats have been going with same formation 99% of the time every game for years. I would be very surprised if they didn't get back to more variance in the personnel and formations this week and next.


Edit: I guess your feelings on the subject are strong enough that you felt you needed to start not one but two new threads on the subject? - http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/275701-protecting-tom-brady.html

 

[maverick4]

For whatever reason, the Jets game was an anomaly. It's not as if the Pats have been going with same formation 99% of the time every game for years. I would be very surprised if they didn't get back to more variance in the personnel and formations this week and next.

ACTUALLY... from 2006-2008 the Patriots ran shot gun over 55% of the time, passing over 85% of the time out of that formation. There have been threads on this. Ya think the opposing D may be playing pass D (and not at all run) when we do this?

O'Brien is more inexperienced and insecure so understandably wants to have his best player used the most, but as you can probably agree it's a mistake. He's become even more predictable and repetitive than the previous OC was.

Also, the Jets game isn't an anomaly. The Jets game was eerily similar to the 07 Giants game in how we couldn't handle the pressure. We haven't shown the league that we can beat a blitz-happy physical defense by repeatedly passing out of shot gun.

 

[NYCPatsFan]

... The Jets game was eerily similar to the 07 Giants game in how we couldn't handle the pressure. We haven't shown the league that we can beat a blitz-happy physical defense by repeatedly passing out of shot gun.

That is what I am also curious about. I understand that TB still is shaking off his rust, but knowing how the Ravens..err Jets D was going to be and how the Gints D beat us in 07, why are we not able to come up with better methods to handle such blitzes?

Guess Welker's presence is far more important than I thought.

Or is the team trying to lull everyone into thinking that way and will look good when it mattered? hmm...I will start believing in such outlandish theories when our O splutters again against the next blitz crazy D.

 

[maverick4]

That is what I am also curious about. I understand that TB still is shaking off his rust, but knowing how the Ravens..err Jets D was going to be and how the Gints D beat us in 07, why are we not able to come up with better methods to handle such blitzes?

Guess Welker's presence is far more important than I thought.

Or is the team trying to lull everyone into thinking that way and will look good when it mattered? hmm...I will start believing in such outlandish theories when our O splutters again against the next blitz crazy D.

It has nothing to do with Welker's absence. Welker was there in 2007 when we lost against the same blitz-happy D. Welker was there last week when we barely beat the Bills by pulling some miracles out of our arses.

This team needs to truly commit to the run more. They should just pound the ball right at areas where D-linemen are leaving their gaps and sprinting upfield, for 4 straight weeks. 4 straight weeks of 200+ rushing yards.

 

[WhiZa]

Adding TEs isnt that simple. The Jets usually send all their blitzers from the same side so even if you add a TE there will still be someone else who you won't be able to pick up. The only way to beat it is the know which side it's coming from which we didn't do a good job of last week.

 

[jmt57]

ACTUALLY... from 2006-2008 the Patriots ran shot gun over 55% of the time, passing over 85% of the time out of that formation. There have been threads on this. Ya think the opposing D may be playing pass D (and not at all run) when we do this?

I realize that. Just saying that going further back behind the line of scrimmage in the shotgun reduces the chance of running the ball from 15% to 0.0001%.

Also, the Jets game isn't an anomaly. The Jets game was eerily similar to the 07 Giants game in how we couldn't handle the pressure. We haven't shown the league that we can beat a blitz-happy physical defense by repeatedly passing out of shot gun.

No disagreement in terms of the way opponents are rushing the QB and disregarding the possibilty of a running play. My comment in regards to the Jets game being an anomaly was strictly in regards to the fact that the Pats used the same formation (1-RB, 3-WR, 1-TE) on all but just two snaps in that game. I wasn't referring to the use of the shotgun or pass/run ratio. I absolutely do agree that the Pats need to mix those two things up more and become less predictable, as you had mentioned before (pass when the opponent is expecting a run, run when the defense is expecting a pass.)

 

[maverick4]

Adding TEs isnt that simple. The Jets usually send all their blitzers from the same side so even if you add a TE there will still be someone else who you won't be able to pick up. The only way to beat it is the know which side it's coming from which we didn't do a good job of last week.

Here's an idea. Why not RUN right at the open gaping holes created by the opposing defensive players who just left that area and sprinted upfield, using trap runs? The few times we ran last game, we were getting what, 6 yards a pop?

Defensive players, especially on the line, have to defend run and pass very differently. It is a huge advantage for them to know if we are passing for sure. If they *think* they have to stop the run, they need to account for 1 or 2 different gaps, and can't move up the field as quickly.

 

[WhiZa]

Here's an idea. Why not RUN right at the open gaping holes created by the opposing defensive players who just left that area and sprinted upfield, using trap runs? The few times we ran last game, we were getting what, 6 yards a pop?

Defensive players, especially on the line, have to defend run and pass very differently. It is a huge advantage for them to know if we are passing for sure. If they *think* they have to stop the run, they need to account for 1 or 2 different gaps, and can't move up the field as quickly.

I agree, and as far as taking advantage of this in the passing game why not line up wekler and edleman on both sides of the slot, have them run a crossing pattern that always lands them in the gaping holes created by the opposing defensive players who just left that area. If they decided not to blitz and cover them instead, that will give Brady enough time to fine Moss, Galloway or your favorite RB out of the backfield.

 

[mgteich]

Yes, I think the effects of the offensive schemes that we have seen are far reaching. I do think that there are many aspects and therefore many threads (at least three by me including the one on short yardage) until this is addressed or we understand better why it is right to have an injured quarterback throw 50 times a game from a formation that affords little proptection for the quarterback and little support for the running game in general, and short yardage in particular.

For whatever reason, the Jets game was an anomaly. It's not as if the Pats have been going with same formation 99% of the time every game for years. I would be very surprised if they didn't get back to more variance in the personnel and formations this week and next.


Edit: I guess your feelings on the subject are strong enough that you felt you needed to start not one but two new threads on the subject? - http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/275701-protecting-tom-brady.html

 

[mgteich]

At minimum, both sides need protection for Brady. In the past, the team has even used a sixth lineman in the TE role. We did in the Buffalo game.

The 2 TE set has more advantages than quarterback and pass protection. It also helps in the running game.

Adding TEs isnt that simple. The Jets usually send all their blitzers from the same side so even if you add a TE there will still be someone else who you won't be able to pick up. The only way to beat it is the know which side it's coming from which we didn't do a good job of last week.

 

[Deus Irae]

The number of tight ends in use at one time isn't the problem. Poor play calling, coupled with poor execution is the problem.

 

[captain stone]

Would it be too crazy to protect our quarterback better with more than one 2 TE set during a game?

Now that's just crazy talk...

Next thing, you'll be suggesting having 2 RBs in the backfield...at the same time.

 

[BionicPatriot]

I'm really hoping we're passing this much to let Brady get the rust off. But we could mix it up more. Creating two threats is such a huge advantage for the offense and puts such a dual threat on the D. Add in the fact you have 3 guys to choose from who are capable of pounding you. We have the lambo, now lets drive it.