Would It Be Too Crazy?

[BionicPatriot]

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

True here. If you watch a lot of tape, our OTs are KILLING us. Every other play if it's not Kazcur it's Light chasing their man. I mean, I'm not saying I'm a psychic but if those clowns hold onto more of their damn blocks I'm sure we'd be singing at least a different tune about the offense.

 

[Mr. Pollard]

That's not the Urban Meyer way, that's why.

 

[Deus Irae]

That's not the Urban Meyer way, that's why.

Urban Meyer's not walking through that door.....

 

[Bostonian1962]

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

I don't think that would be too crazy.

 

[Synovia]

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

Protection isn't the problem. You can't stop all the rushers in most blitzes, the key is for the QB to get the ball to the open guy before the rush gets there. Brady isn't doing that.


Footwork is the problem here, and its behind center. Its not the line.


Going 2TE to protect Brady more just takes targets away, and his footwork issues become even more important.

 

[mgteich]

So the OT's are can't cover a top speed rusher (Buffalo game) or two rushers (jets game). So the obviously solution is to blame the OT's and tell them to play better.

Yes, a lot of teams have the attitude of developing game plans that seem to ignore the strengths and weaknesses of their players and halftime is about telling the players to suck it up and play better. IMHO, this strategy is not what has made Belichick great.

Belichick-coached teams (or rather ones where he has actual OC's) understand that some OT's are not able to be effective in one on one protection or in one on two protection. In the past the OT has had help from the TE, the RB, the WR and the playcalling in such situations. And at halftime the strategy and play-calling often changed what was ineffective in the first half. But perhaps, like the running game, that attitude is from a different era.

True here. If you watch a lot of tape, our OTs are KILLING us. Every other play if it's not Kazcur it's Light chasing their man. I mean, I'm not saying I'm a psychic but if those clowns hold onto more of their damn blocks I'm sure we'd be singing at least a different tune about the offense.

 

[BradyManny]

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

No, it would make sense and I'm sure we'll see it soon. It doesn't take much looking back at 2007 to see that Brady & Moss did their most damage not out of the spread, but in instances where Brady had ample protection in front of him, and Moss had time to get behind the defense. I don't know if football outsiders has a stat for it, but I bet they were lethal out of max-protection.

 

[mgteich]

Given how good Moss is now over the middle and in shorter routes, I would think Moss, Welker, 2 TE's and faulk would be very effective. Silly me, I thought we picked up Baker for more than to alternate with Watson.

No, it would make sense and I'm sure we'll see it soon. It doesn't take much looking back at 2007 to see that Brady & Moss did their most damage not out of the spread, but in instances where Brady had ample protection in front of him, and Moss had time to get behind the defense. I don't know if football outsiders has a stat for it, but I bet they were lethal out of max-protection.

 

[Deus Irae]

Given how good Moss is now over the middle and in shorter routes, I would think Moss, Welker, 2 TE's and faulk would be very effective. Silly me, I thought we picked up Baker for more than to alternate with Watson.

I looked at Baker as the replacement backup for Thomas. The only time I thought it might be otherwise was when Thomas started playing fullback.

Personally, I think that the fans and the media like to assign their thoughts and feelings to Belichick & Co. People here don't like Watson, so BB must not like Watson, and the same goes for other players in the fan doghouse. Maroney and Watson weren't going to play another snap for this team, for example.

The team will use more 2 TE sets over the course of the season, and I expect that they'll also devote more of the game to running the ball. However, this is a 3 WR/1TE/1RB team, and it has been since at least 2007, when Moss and Welker arrived on the scene.

 

[mgteich]

I am 100% fine with Moss and Welker being the best 1-2 punch in the league. It does not follow that Moss and Welker cannot be as effective in 2 TE sets. We struggle to find our best #3 to be on the field so that he can be on the field almost 100% of the time. I think that we might be at least as effective with a 2 TE set or even with 2 RB's in the backfield.

Yes, we have discussed the post 2006 offense a bit. Personally, I think that Brady can pass 50 times out of the 2 TE set or the 1 TE 1FB set, if that is how we choose to take the ball down the field. Curiously, I suspect that Brady's pass-effectiveness would increase in such formations.

I looked at Baker as the replacement backup for Thomas. The only time I thought it might be otherwise was when Thomas started playing fullback.

Personally, I think that the fans and the media like to assign their thoughts and feelings to Belichick & Co. People here don't like Watson, so BB must not like Watson, and the same goes for other players in the fan doghouse. Maroney and Watson weren't going to play another snap for this team, for example.

The team will use more 2 TE sets over the course of the season, and I expect that they'll also devote more of the game to running the ball. However, this is a 3 WR/1TE/1RB team, and it has been since at least 2007, when Moss and Welker arrived on the scene.

 

[BradyManny]

Given how good Moss is now over the middle and in shorter routes, I would think Moss, Welker, 2 TE's and faulk would be very effective. Silly me, I thought we picked up Baker for more than to alternate with Watson.

I concur. In another thread, I stated I too would really love to see a 2TE 2 WR set.

 

[mayoclinic]

I am 100% fine with Moss and Welker being the best 1-2 punch in the league. It does not follow that Moss and Welker cannot be as effective in 2 TE sets. We struggle to find our best #3 to be on the field so that he can be on the field almost 100% of the time. I think that we might be at least as effective with a 2 TE set or even with 2 RB's in the backfield.

Yes, we have discussed the post 2006 offense a bit. Personally, I think that Brady can pass 50 times out of the 2 TE set or the 1 TE 1FB set, if that is how we choose to take the ball down the field. Curiously, I suspect that Brady's pass-effectiveness would increase in such formations.

I very much agree with this. We used a lot of 2 TE sets prior to 2007, then we went more to 3 WR sets. Particularly with Ben Watson's ability to stretch the field and function almost as a 3rd WR (especially if he can catch the ball the way he did against Buffalo in the 4th quarter). I don't see why we can't be effective using 2 TEs, giving us the option of having both act as additional blockers.

 

[Deus Irae]

I am 100% fine with Moss and Welker being the best 1-2 punch in the league. It does not follow that Moss and Welker cannot be as effective in 2 TE sets. We struggle to find our best #3 to be on the field so that he can be on the field almost 100% of the time. I think that we might be at least as effective with a 2 TE set or even with 2 RB's in the backfield.

Yes, we have discussed the post 2006 offense a bit. Personally, I think that Brady can pass 50 times out of the 2 TE set or the 1 TE 1FB set, if that is how we choose to take the ball down the field. Curiously, I suspect that Brady's pass-effectiveness would increase in such formations.

I'm fine with the 3rd receiver out there as the base offense. That said, I believe in what they like to call 'situational football'. There are 53 players on a roster, so there's clearly room for a blocking FB, and there are certainly times when a 1WR/2TE/2RB formation can be useful.

I do think that the offensive line looks as if it has lost its nastiness in run blocking. There's really no excuse for a line as capable as this one to be allowing multiple players in the backfield on runs as often as it has over the past couple of seasons.

 

[bucky]

We went with 2 TEs most of the Buffalo game. The reason was went away from it in the Jets game was specifically due to the way the Jets play defense.

BB even touched on it on WEEI. When the Jets blitz, they play man to man behind the blitz. And if the RB/TE stays in to block, the guy who's supposed to cover him also blitzes. So what you're in effect doing is decreasing the number of available WRs without improving your numbers in protection.

 

[JSn]

Regarding TE's, I hope we'll see Matthews out there this week - as in, I hope he's ready for some game-action.

 

[rabthepat]

Two TE formations would force Bill to run the ball more. Bill don't want to run the ball more. He wants Tom to make 800 pass attempts this year.:banned: