Tom Brady Was the Most-Hit QB in the League, from 2006-2007

[captain stone]

I infer that and also that some other QBs may in fact get hit much more than Brady when everything is added together. What can you do, these guys are targets.

It is indeed true that the "Q" in QB is really a target painted on them. However, can it even be argued that Brady has taken more 7-step drops in his last 19 1/4 games than in any other 19 1/4-game stretch of his career? He is putting himself at greater risk, and more often at it. And keep in mind: the Omissioner has declared, by defending the non-call on Pollard, Open Season on Tom Brady as his way of helping his NYJest & Buffalo Billiards unseat his enemy Bill Belichick.

From now onwards, I would have Brady throw less often whenever possible.

 

[Deus Irae]

It is indeed true that the "Q" in QB is really a target painted on them. However, can it even be argued that Brady has taken more 7-step drops in his last 19 1/4 games than in any other 19 1/4-game stretch of his career? He is putting himself at greater risk, and more often at it. And keep in mind: the Omissioner has declared, by defending the non-call on Pollard, Open Season on Tom Brady as his way of helping his NYJest & Buffalo Billiards unseat his enemy Bill Belichick.

From now onwards, I would have Brady throw less often whenever possible.

They are throwing from the shotgun the vast majority of the time. Are you trying to say that they are starting from the shotgun and then dropping back another 7 steps?

 

[captain stone]

Kaczur, Koppen and Mankins are young players clearly in the getting better stage than the old near the end stage.
Light is going into his 9th year, hardly the end of the line for an OT.
None have been injury prone.

Neal is the only player who may have age or durability concerns, and he has only played about 5 seasons of football in his life.

You definitely are overblowing that issue.

Mankins - in the Getting Better, or at least Staying Good, stage.

Kaczur - Unpredictable & Undependable, esp. now that he's off the Oxy or whatever it was.

Koppen - certainly not Getting Better, and likely Getting Worse.

Light - 9th year not the end of the line? Maybe if he's Jackie Slater or Bruce Matthews. But he's not, by a long shot.

Neal - has only played 5 years, but prob. has the shoulders of someone who's played 15 years.

Am I overblowing the issue? Maybe; I hope I am, actually. But what if I'm not?

 

[captain stone]

They are throwing from the shotgun the vast majority of the time. Are you trying to say that they are starting from the shotgun and then dropping back another 7 steps?

No, but Under Center + 7 steps = Shotgun + 3 steps. Brady ends up at the same place; the defense knows that, and will direct its rush accordingly. The advantage of being under center sometimes is that the defense has to at least think a little bit about defending the run. The shotgun for the most part removes that thought process, even in short-yardage situations, which drives me nuts.

 

[Deus Irae]

No, but Under Center + 7 steps = Shotgun + 3 steps. Brady ends up at the same place; the defense knows that, and will direct its rush accordingly. The advantage of being under center sometimes is that the defense has to at least think a little bit about defending the run. The shotgun for the most part removes that thought process, even in short-yardage situations, which drives me nuts.

Given the running success of Kevin Faulk when running from the shotgun, this isn't a problem.

 

[Smith21]

Hits are not an OFFICIAL stat. Stats without perspective are meaningless.

That is what you fail to understand. That is what Maverick fails to understand.

For instance, your comment about Cassel running and being scared 75% of the time. I'd be willing to bet that the Patriots called more than 24 runs for him. Why? Because he has speed and it gave them another option to keep the opposing defenses off-guard.

Also, you are incorrect when you say that if you take away Cassel's rushing yardage that the Patriots would be outside the top 10. The Pats ran for 2278 yards last year. You take away Cassel's 270 yards and that leaves the Pats with 2008 yards on the season. And that would be good enough for 8th place.

So, you've failed to add anything to the conversation. Good job.

didnt do the math sorry.. FACT would of been 9th moron.. goodjob

 

[Smith21]

Neither is your ignorant one. Yet you've deigned to inflict it upon everyone.



Your first fact is wrong. Matt COMPLETED 63.4% of his passes. However, they did not result in a 7.2 yard average. That 7.2 yards is yards per ATTEMPT. Which is different than yards per completion.

nice job! way to catch me on another one !

Yes, Cassel ran 73 times. But as I pointed out in a previous reply, how do you offer up no context in which those runs were made. You just claim that 75% of them were because he was scared. Yet you have no proof of that.

he got sacked how many times??? he got hit how many times??? he Ran how many times 73.. Sacked 35..thats a stat im sure!
i also didnt look that stat up just going off of memory!

Are they a sign of him being harassed? Or are they a sign of Belichick recognizing that he has a more mobile QB and using that?

he ran the 40 in 4.9 Seconds.. thats wonderful!

Only an ignorant person looks at someone's post count and assumes that it means something other than the person has been on the board a long time.

ignorance can be summed up in a lot of ways... ive never heard the one about post counts so maybe im ignorant to your ways, but in no way am i ignorant to how a message board works..

Of course you don't. But then, you've not brought anything of value to the conversation to begin with.

hey im pretty sure ive brought up the facts for you to correct..!
without them your post number wouldn't go up for future posters to have ignorance against..

but hey we all need to get off topic every once in a while

 

[captain stone]

Given the running success of Kevin Faulk when running from the shotgun, this isn't a problem.

I don't have a problem with that, either. But whenever the offense goes to the shotgun with an Empty Backfield in short-yardage situations, then I have a problem. If Bill wants to call for a pass at that time, then he should use a 2-back set and use play-action. I am generally not a fan - at all - of the empty backfield. It leaves Brady too exposed and provides no help to pick up a blitzer. It also removes the doubt, and the hesitation borne from it - however slight - from the defense. And this OLine needs all the help it can get to sustain its blocks.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't have a problem with that, either. But whenever the offense goes to the shotgun with an Empty Backfield in short-yardage situations, then I have a problem. If Bill wants to call for a pass at that time, then he should use a 2-back set and use play-action. I am generally not a fan - at all - of the empty backfield. It leaves Brady too exposed and provides no help to pick up a blitzer. It also removes the doubt, and the hesitation borne from it - however slight - from the defense. And this OLine needs all the help it can get to sustain its blocks.

Brady's sack numbers for his last 4 full seasons:

2004: 26 (12th in attempts, 19th in sacks)
2005: 26 (4th in attempts, 14th in sacks)
2006: 26 (8th in attempts, 15th in sacks)
2007: 21 (2nd in attempts, t-18th in sacks with multiple other QBs, including P. Manning)

The arguments about hits taken, lack of running ability and poor offensive line are all just a bunch of nonsense, statistically speaking. What is interesting to note, though, is that Brady was taken down more often prior to 2004 than he has been since. It's just another statistical reality that undercuts the underlying assertions of both the O.P. and the author he was citing.

 

[BradyFTW!]

You know what this reminds me of? Remember how, when Dwight Freeney stopped actually sacking QBs, Colts fans adopted the mantra that "yeah, but he gets more pressures than any other DE"? And remember how irrelevant that point was, since pressures was a vague, uncertain stat that the Indy FO had decided to start quantifying, but nobody else had any idea a) what constituted a pressure, or b) whether or not it actually impacted the game? Pretty much the same problem exists with this whole hits argument.

 

[Ring 6]

Mankins - in the Getting Better, or at least Staying Good, stage.

Kaczur - Unpredictable & Undependable, esp. now that he's off the Oxy or whatever it was.

Koppen - certainly not Getting Better, and likely Getting Worse.

Light - 9th year not the end of the line? Maybe if he's Jackie Slater or Bruce Matthews. But he's not, by a long shot.

Neal - has only played 5 years, but prob. has the shoulders of someone who's played 15 years.

Am I overblowing the issue? Maybe; I hope I am, actually. But what if I'm not?

Kaczur was very good last year, and is a young player. Whether you like him or not does not have anything to do whether he is at a stage of his career where he is imrpoving or declining. Players with his level of experience are improving. Same for Koppen.
I dont think I accept your judgment of him, and this really isnt about my opinion vs your opinion its about whether our OL is old, decrepit and going downhill or young and improving, and the only argument there is what stage of their career they are at.
As for Light, check out all probowl LTs and see what their career length is, and at what age they continue to play at that level. Our probowl LT is far from the age where decline happens to top OTs.
I guess I wasn't in on the meeting with Neals doctors that you were. The way I understood it, he had a shoulder problem last year that took him out for the beginning of the year, but he played, and played well when he got back after it HEALED.

Your last sentence sounds like you think it is your job to make sure that BB doesnt have his head buried in the sand so far that he doesnt think OL in their late 20s and early 30s will all of sudden not be able to play.

 

[DaBruinz]

didnt do the math sorry.. FACT would of been 9th moron.. goodjob

Hmm.. I actually am going to take pity on you because you clearly are too stupid for your own good.

NFL Stats: by Team Category

Based on Total Rushing Yards, the Patriots were 6th with 2278. Now, we established that they would have only had 2008 rushing yards with Cassel's numbers taken out. So, the Pats would no longer be 6th. The Titans would move from 7th to 6th. The Redskins would move from 8th to 7th. And, well, the Pats would then be 8th because they'd have 4 more rushing yards than the Jets.

Now that you look like a complete and total jackarse, why don't you leave before we really open a can of whooparse on you.

 

[DaBruinz]

nice job! way to catch me on another one !

Yep. Its easy to show someone to be an idiot when he keeps making the same mistakes.

he got sacked how many times??? he got hit how many times??? he Ran how many times 73.. Sacked 35..thats a stat im sure!
i also didnt look that stat up just going off of memory!

Cassel got sacked 47 times. So what. What does that have to do with ANYTHING. Yes, he ran 73 times. Many of those were designed runs. Not because he was running scared as you proclaimed.

BTW, since you slammed on Satele, tell me how many sacks he gave up compared to Jake Grove? Oh, and while its semantics that Grove was signed as a free agent, the fact remains that Satele was good enough to start for 2 years on the Dolphins. So, you got Jake Grove and a 6th round pick for Satele and some ridiculous amount of money.

he ran the 40 in 4.9 Seconds.. thats wonderful!

Jerry Rice ran a 4.7. No one would say he was slow. What's your point? Again, you bring nothing to the topic. In fact, you are flailing around pitifully like a chicken with his head cut off.

ignorance can be summed up in a lot of ways... ive never heard the one about post counts so maybe im ignorant to your ways, but in no way am i ignorant to how a message board works..

Yes, I am pretty sure you are ignorant in how a message board works.. Either that or you are a troll who just enjoys spouting garbage.

hey im pretty sure ive brought up the facts for you to correct..!
without them your post numbers couldn't go up for future posters to have ignorance against..

but hey we all need to get off topic every once in a while

No, you haven't brought up facts to be corrected. You've brought you your BS that has had to be corrected because you don't know the facts and are just talking out your arse.

You are the one who went off topic. And have on several occasions. You are also the one who can't figure out that if you take the Patriots out of the 6th spot in rushing in the league that they would be inserted into the 8th spot since they would still have more rushing yards than the Jets.

 

[unoriginal]

You know what this reminds me of? Remember how, when Dwight Freeney stopped actually sacking QBs, Colts fans adopted the mantra that "yeah, but he gets more pressures than any other DE"? And remember how irrelevant that point was, since pressures was a vague, uncertain stat that the Indy FO had decided to start quantifying, but nobody else had any idea a) what constituted a pressure, or b) whether or not it actually impacted the game? Pretty much the same problem exists with this whole hits argument.

Actually, there was an interview with Belichick some time back where he indicated he also believed pressure was the most relevant statistic for a pass rusher, and that the Pats tracked that stat internally as a self-scouting tool.

But I agree, us fans, Pats and Colts, have nothing but thin air in regards to that stat.

 

[Ring 6]

I don't have a problem with that, either. But whenever the offense goes to the shotgun with an Empty Backfield in short-yardage situations, then I have a problem. If Bill wants to call for a pass at that time, then he should use a 2-back set and use play-action. I am generally not a fan - at all - of the empty backfield. It leaves Brady too exposed and provides no help to pick up a blitzer. It also removes the doubt, and the hesitation borne from it - however slight - from the defense. And this OLine needs all the help it can get to sustain its blocks.

I think you can't see the forest through the trees.
The point of the shotgun is to be able to counteract the pass rush. If I put Brady in a 2 back set, and use play action in short yardage, there are going to be defenders that ignore the run, and hit the qb because the play developed so slowly. Ontop of that your pass blocking will be weaker because the OL must fake run blocking first.
The way to stop the pass rush is not always to make them think you aren't passing. Many teams, the one gap teams, don't even have their pass rushers worry about the run.

Additionally, the empty backfield is also a means to counteract the pass rush.
If I spread the field, I spread the defense. The worst case situation I have is 6 rushers vs 5 OL, and each WR covered 1 on 1. I just need one of them to get position on a slant route, and the ball is out before the blitzer arrives. Going empty backfield, getting man coverage and RUNNING ROUTES TO EXPLOIT THAT protects the QB. Havent you noticed that when we are spread with an empty backfield we throw that quick WR screen whenever the db plays back? Why? Because if the dbs play off the play will develop too slow to protect the QB.

You are thinking that only conventional methods of protecting the QB exist, and that unconventional alignments make it impossible, but the reality is that the unconventional alignments have their own methods of accounting for the pass rush.

 

[Ring 6]

Actually, there was an interview with Belichick some time back where he indicated he also believed pressure was the most relevant statistic for a pass rusher, and that the Pats tracked that stat internally as a self-scouting tool.

But I agree, us fans, Pats and Colts, have nothing but thin air in regards to that stat.

I think that Belichicks point was that consistent, effective pass rushing is what matters, and whether that results in a sack because the QB held the ball or a throw away, Int etc because he didn't wasnt as relevant.
In other words you cannot judge the effectiveness of the pass rush based on what the qb chooses to do. Getting to Brady in 2.8 seconds and having him check down instead of completing a 50 yard pass to Moss is the same as getting to Trent Edwards in 2.8 and getting a sack.

 

[Ring 6]

Brady's sack numbers for his last 4 full seasons:

2004: 26 (12th in attempts, 19th in sacks)
2005: 26 (4th in attempts, 14th in sacks)
2006: 26 (8th in attempts, 15th in sacks)
2007: 21 (2nd in attempts, t-18th in sacks with multiple other QBs, including P. Manning)

The arguments about hits taken, lack of running ability and poor offensive line are all just a bunch of nonsense, statistically speaking. What is interesting to note, though, is that Brady was taken down more often prior to 2004 than he has been since. It's just another statistical reality that undercuts the underlying assertions of both the O.P. and the author he was citing.

The Giants hit Brady abuot 7,000,000 times in the SB, but other than that you just can't have watched the Patriots and conclude Brady gets hit a high amount of times compared to other NFL QBs unless you dont watch other games and cant see how often they get hit.
Its interesting to note though, that when I rewatched that SB, the sacks were IMO irrelevant to losing the game (or actually much less relevant than many other things) but the biggest issue in the game was how many times he was hit in his throwing motion that redirected the path of the throw. It was A LOT, and cost A LOT of points. There were a ton of plays where Brady was throwing to a wide open receiver and the contact in his throwing motion (to the arm, torso, etc) caused it to be a little or a lot off track. THAT was the primary reason we did not score a boatload of points in that game.

In that game the OP was right, but the issue isn't injury but effectiveness. QBs get hit many times in a season. Over all those seasons Brady was injured basically once. That doesnt mean we should stop playing football and making plays to keep the flujke injury from happening.
If you want to keep Brady healthy to keep the ball in his hands, how does taking the ball out of his hands to keep him healthy make sense?

 

[BradyFTW!]

Actually, there was an interview with Belichick some time back where he indicated he also believed pressure was the most relevant statistic for a pass rusher, and that the Pats tracked that stat internally as a self-scouting tool.

But I agree, us fans, Pats and Colts, have nothing but thin air in regards to that stat.

I'm not saying that pressuring the QB is not important. I'm saying that the stat has extraordinarily limited relevance, since we have no idea of what constitutes a pressure, when they're awarded, and whether or not they actually tracked them for everyone. And, whatever they chose to use, we have no clue if it's actually correlated to success in any meaningful way. It's just as likely that they slipped this info to justify the mammoth contract that they signed Freeney to, and Colts fans ran with it.

Likewise, we do know that you don't want your QB getting hit all the time. That said, these statistics don't have any real relevance until and unless we understand what constitutes a hit. Without knowing that, this is all meaningless.

 

[captain stone]

Brady's sack numbers for his last 4 full seasons:

2004: 26 (12th in attempts, 19th in sacks)
2005: 26 (4th in attempts, 14th in sacks)
2006: 26 (8th in attempts, 15th in sacks)
2007: 21 (2nd in attempts, t-18th in sacks with multiple other QBs, including P. Manning)

Are those sack rankings by highest # allowed or lowest # allowed?

 

[Deus Irae]

Are those sack rankings by highest # allowed or lowest # allowed?

The most passes and the most sacks allowed would both be #1. In other words, the Patriots, during that 4 year stretch, consistently allowed a lower 'ranking' of sacks than they finished with throws. In fact, 2007, which was one of the years being complained about, there was a 16 slot discrepancy. Only 1 QB threw more often, yet 17 QBs were victims of more sacks. The #1 QB, Brees, had an even more insane discrepancy. #1 in attempts and #27 in sacks. In fact, the sack numbers for about half of the top 10 in attempts were actually very good. The reason this happens makes sense if you think about it, but it runs counter to everything those with agendas have, so I won't bother pointing it out.