The official "We just can't win without Givens" thread

[PatsFanInVa]

... Makes about as much sense as some of the others floating around here.

Bonus points for the most creative explanation of why. I'll start.

Think about it: With little weaponry comes great responsibility. Brady has gone soft with Moss and Welker. The team in general is so soft that they throw away Joey Galloway like he's yesterday's news. Everybody has had it way too easy, proving that it is better to have an incredibly reliable quarterback making do with middling receiver talent than to have a premier quarterback growing to Favre-esque stature in the local fan-base's mind, because of the acquisition of a couple of statistical monsters.

Beyond that the old days of Givens and Troy Brown and the like epitomized a Patriots ethic that has unfortunately morphed into the Evil Empire. We use to be the Little Engine that Could, then we were the Little Engine that could again as long as we picked up Corey Dillon, then we became the Big Conrail Train Coming Your Way And There's Not a Damn Thing You Can Do About It. Brady got too used to driving that train. The coordinators got too used to playcalling from a position of power. Everything sucks because there's too little adversity, and we got stale, because (not in spite of) the acquisition of Moss and Welker.

The clear message is this: stop trying to pick up really good players, especially on offense. Regardless of the progressive re-re-re-liberalization of passing offense, you don't want to get stale and keep up with the league. What you want to do is innovatively mire yourself in a memory of 2003 or so.

You can just get so much more thrilled about a guy like Givens zooming straight from the bottom to the middle, than Randy occasionally disappointing by ever playing at such a high level. That's why we had that old "Brady Magic," it was really the old Givens Magic. I mean, how can you even say Randy Moss suited up if he doesn't score a TD in one game? With Givens, it would be like "we're looking at a 10-TD year folks, heck, that's just Givens alone!"

Now if you want to call for the return of McPhereson, well, that's another thread. I see none of Tony Eason's toughness in Brady, because he married a real hot chick... but again, that really doesn't establish that David Givens was the key, so let's not go there. I just want further evidence that the key to all the Lombardis is David Givens.

Annnnd, action!

 

[upstater1]

LOL, well done.

The idea that scoring 5-7 points a game more than we used to is a bad thing, well, it's a funny idea.

 

[RayClay]

... Makes about as much sense as some of the others floating around here.

Bonus points for the most creative explanation of why. I'll start.

Think about it: With little weaponry comes great responsibility. Brady has gone soft with Moss and Welker. The team in general is so soft that they throw away Joey Galloway like he's yesterday's news. Everybody has had it way too easy, proving that it is better to have an incredibly reliable quarterback making do with middling receiver talent than to have a premier quarterback growing to Favre-esque stature in the local fan-base's mind, because of the acquisition of a couple of statistical monsters.

Beyond that the old days of Givens and Troy Brown and the like epitomized a Patriots ethic that has unfortunately morphed into the Evil Empire. We use to be the Little Engine that Could, then we were the Little Engine that could again as long as we picked up Corey Dillon, then we became the Big Conrail Train Coming Your Way And There's Not a Damn Thing You Can Do About It. Brady got too used to driving that train. The coordinators got too used to playcalling from a position of power. Everything sucks because there's too little adversity, and we got stale, because (not in spite of) the acquisition of Moss and Welker.

The clear message is this: stop trying to pick up really good players, especially on offense. Regardless of the progressive re-re-re-liberalization of passing offense, you don't want to get stale and keep up with the league. What you want to do is innovatively mire yourself in a memory of 2003 or so.

You can just get so much more thrilled about a guy like Givens zooming straight from the bottom to the middle, than Randy occasionally disappointing by ever playing at such a high level. That's why we had that old "Brady Magic," it was really the old Givens Magic. I mean, how can you even say Randy Moss suited up if he doesn't score a TD in one game? With Givens, it would be like "we're looking at a 10-TD year folks, heck, that's just Givens alone!"

Now if you want to call for the return of McPhereson, well, that's another thread. I see none of Tony Eason's toughness in Brady, because he married a real hot chick... but again, that really doesn't establish that David Givens was the key, so let's not go there. I just want further evidence that the key to all the Lombardis is David Givens.

Annnnd, action!

Didn't read it all, but the discipline imposed on the offense by fewer weapons is sadly missing today IMO. How often do you see them patiently march up the field using all the runs, short passes, screens etc. to keep the defense just off balance enough?

I rarely see them get two first downs without throwing a 70 yard bomb.

So there is wisdom in your madness. You make that money last when it's tight, and make it rain when your loaded.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

...You make that money last when it's tight, and make it rain when your loaded.

Yeah but it's a little bit like lounging around your yacht and saying "You know the happiest I've ever been is when I was hooked on the junk and living in a cardboard box under an underpass. I didn't have much but I didn't need much." You conveniently forget that it got really cold and really wet out, and that all your friends from that time that shot up and stayed in carboard boxes died of pneumonia after one winter too many.

Missing a lack of receiver talent is like remembering when you had to walk 10 miles to school and back, uphill both ways, eat a spoonfull of cold poison for breakfast, and hand-copy textbooks at the library because you couldn't afford real ones, and claim that your straight As were due to your poverty. Uh yeah kinda, but there are other ways to get there

 

[maverick4]

.
The clear message is this: stop trying to pick up really good players, especially on offense.

Completely missed the point.

Having as many great players as you can accumulate under the cap is great, but over-relying on the same few players over and over is a mistake. This team can't win when it is stopped from executing its favorite plays.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Completely missed the point.

Having as many great players as you can accumulate under the cap is great, but over-relying on the same few players over and over is a mistake. This team can't win when it is stopped from executing its favorite plays.

The funny thing about all of this is that you've been saying it for 3 years that I can remember, and you were wrong right up until this year. It's like we finally hired an OC (O'Brien) who actually is what you wrongly thought McDaniels was. Subsequently, your criticisms, after being misguided at best for a couple of years, are just now becoming valid. Go figure...

If I believed in karma, I'd blame Bill "come out with 5 WR directly after scoring a TD on a power-running drive" O'Brien on you, and I'd hate you a little bit for it.

 

[maverick4]

The funny thing about all of this is that you've been saying it for 3 years that I can remember, and you were wrong right up until this year. It's like we finally hired an OC (O'Brien) who actually is what you wrongly thought McDaniels was. Subsequently, your criticisms, after being misguided at best for a couple of years, are just now becoming valid. Go figure...

Actually, I believe my criticisms from 05-08 are still right, that those offenses routinely choked when we needed key 1st downs due to predictability, but that the 2007 statistical explosion made McKid a lot of fans around here. Look up some old game threads, there was plenty of criticism of McKid's play calling each of the 4 seasons he was OC, not just by me but many others. I still think McKid benefitted greatly in 2007 from a Meyer-adapted offense no one saw before, amazing talent in Moss/Welker/Stallworth, and a super-motivated offense ticked off from the Video Witch Hunt.

 

[IcyPatriot]

If Chad Jackson ... if only Chad jackson had ... :ugh: he didn't did he ... :nono:

 

[BradyFTW!]

Actually, I believe my criticisms from 05-08 are still right, that those offenses routinely choked when we needed key 1st downs due to predictability, but that the 2007 statistical explosion made McKid a lot of fans around here. Look up some old game threads, there was plenty of criticism of McKid's play calling each of the 4 seasons he was OC, not just by me but many others. I still think McKid benefitted greatly in 2007 from a Meyer-adapted offense no one saw before, amazing talent in Moss/Welker/Stallworth, and a super-motivated offense ticked off from the Video Witch Hunt.

You're definitely right that a lot of people in the game threads were criticizing McDaniels' playcalling, but that doesn't really demonstrate anything. Game threads are pretty much a monument to ignorance, overreaction and hyperbole.

 

[maverick4]

You're definitely right that a lot of people in the game threads were criticizing McDaniels' playcalling, but that doesn't really demonstrate anything. Game threads are pretty much a monument to ignorance, overreaction and hyperbole.

Look at these 2 pages:

You have people now using stats to say that O'Brien is a good offensive coordinator:
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...6-how-many-more-wins-charlie-romeo-page7.html

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...ore-wins-charlie-romeo-page8.html#post1619755


It's the McKid argument all over again... except O'Brien takes predictability and banging your head against the wall to a whole new level.

 

[ausbacker]

Look at this thread.

You have people now using stats to say that O'Brien is a good offensive coordinator:
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...6-how-many-more-wins-charlie-romeo-page7.html

It's the McKid argument all over again... except O'Brien takes predictability and banging your head against the wall to a whole new level.

Talk about drawing poor inferences and inventing mistruths. Perhaps you should became a journalist for ESPN maverick. Your expression of your opinions are just as garbage.

 

[maverick4]

The funny thing about all of this is that you've been saying it for 3 years that I can remember,

If I believed in karma, I'd blame Bill "come out with 5 WR directly after scoring a TD on a power-running drive" O'Brien on you.

It's not a sick joke by Belichick with what we have here in O'Brien or McKid, it's what happens with rookie or stubborn coordinators. They only want to use their best chess pieces, but they use them way too much to the point where they can't win or know how to win if these pieces are stopped.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Look at these 2 pages:

You have people now using stats to say that O'Brien is a good offensive coordinator:
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...6-how-many-more-wins-charlie-romeo-page7.html

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...ore-wins-charlie-romeo-page8.html#post1619755


It's the McKid argument all over again... except O'Brien takes predictability and banging your head against the wall to a whole new level.

Well, those people are wrong. And it's only the same argument if you ignore the fact that it didn't used to be true and now it is.

FWIW, I do think that O'Brien might grow out of it as he learns to do his job better. I just don't get why we should have an OC learning on the job at this point in time. We have Brady in his prime for a couple more years, and we need to be making the most of them. Instead we're continually looking to a future that, once Brady is gone, will never be as bright as the present is.

 

[Satchboogie3]

Maverick, you seem to think that the Pat's offense never had trouble getting a 1st down in the Golden Years "When they really needed one". I'm sorry to bust your bubble, but that isn't exactly true. The Pats offense before '07 had it's moments when it couldn't get that 1st down to "end" the game, the difference was that those defenses weren't choke artists like they are today.

 

[RayClay]

Yeah but it's a little bit like lounging around your yacht and saying "You know the happiest I've ever been is when I was hooked on the junk and living in a cardboard box under an underpass. I didn't have much but I didn't need much." You conveniently forget that it got really cold and really wet out, and that all your friends from that time that shot up and stayed in carboard boxes died of pneumonia after one winter too many.

Missing a lack of receiver talent is like remembering when you had to walk 10 miles to school and back, uphill both ways, eat a spoonfull of cold poison for breakfast, and hand-copy textbooks at the library because you couldn't afford real ones, and claim that your straight As were due to your poverty. Uh yeah kinda, but there are other ways to get there

Nevertheless, we bit and scratched for 60 minutes and more and won three SBs.

I saw a team totally focused on every second of the game Monday, and it wasn't us.

Joke if you will - focus, discipline and hunger are often more important than talent, talent, and talent when it comes to winning the big one.

 

[Mack Herron]

Nevertheless, we bit and scratched for 60 minutes and more and won three SBs.

I saw a team totally focused on every second of the game Monday, and it wasn't us.

Joke if you will - focus, discipline and hunger are often more important than talent, talent, and talent when it comes to winning the big one.

Good point. The Pats were unprepared to play on offense and on defense. The schemes were miserable and the execution worse. They looked rudderless out there. I have no idea whether they have what it takes to step up, or what changes are required. I do not think they can simply keep doing what they have been doing and hope for a better result.

 

[RhodyPatriot]

Championship caliber teams win on the road. This is what Tom Brady and his "high powered" offensive toys have done in the 2nd half on the road this year.

0 pts against the Jets
0 pts against the Broncos
10 pts against rhe Colts
7 pts against the Saints
Even against the lowly Bucs in that faux road game in London this "high powered" O scored a whopping 14 pts in the 2nd half.

They not only are not scoring in the 2nd half of games to put those games away but they're not managing the clock to help out the D and theyre turning the ball over.
Only the kool-aid drinkers among us won't admit there are glaring problems with this offense, the strength of this team, which has literally cost them victories this year.

PS - Brady never had to babysit David Givens and force the ball to him to keep the pouts away. Hello Randy Moss.......

 

[pats1]

Crap, I wanted to start an official "We just can't win without Rabih Abdullah" thread.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

You're definitely right that a lot of people in the game threads were criticizing McDaniels' playcalling, but that doesn't really demonstrate anything. Game threads are pretty much a monument to ignorance, overreaction and hyperbole.

That could unfortunately be said about most of the threads started here in the last couple of seasons, mav's simply being a prime example. He now equates concensus within those as validation of his POV. NEM used to play that card, too...

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Well, those people are wrong. And it's only the same argument if you ignore the fact that it didn't used to be true and now it is.

FWIW, I do think that O'Brien might grow out of it as he learns to do his job better. I just don't get why we should have an OC learning on the job at this point in time. We have Brady in his prime for a couple more years, and we need to be making the most of them. Instead we're continually looking to a future that, once Brady is gone, will never be as bright as the present is.

We have OC's learning on the job now for the same reason we had one learning on the job following our third ring. BB promotes from within from a pool of candidates who have learned his system here and shown to his satisfaction they have a propensity for hard work and dedication to managing the task at hand. The NEMites always wanted Bill to go get some name OC they recognized from his failings elsewhere, like say Mike Martz. That desire is rooted in a total inability to recognize that this offense, like this defense, emanates from Bill. It is an offshoot of the Perkins/Ernhart offense run by the NYG. It has evolved dramatically based on Bill's fascination with Urban Meyer's use of the spread offense in Florida. Bill apparently believes as do most NFL coaches that this league has evolved into a passing or pass first or pass to run league, and since he is in possession of one of the top two or three QB's in a generation he proceeded accordingly as any sane individual would.

Heard an interesting comment on the Saints yesterday in the context of one of these spread the wealth arguments. If Sean Payton had Moss and Welker on his roster Drew Brees wouldn't be distributing the ball equally among three or four mid level wideouts.

The offense has had it's struggles. Most of those are related to protection and blocking insufficiencies and the unfortunate inability to populate the #3 WR slot with another reliable deep threat to help spread defenders and create additional space and opportunities for Moss and Welker. None of those are the perview of a named or un named OC, but rather just another thing he is left to deal with.

One of BB's favorite football adages is if you aren't getting better in this league you're getting worse. 2005 and 2006 underscored that. How quickly we forget. When he wasn't injured, teams were finding ways to stop both Branch and Givens as Dillon commenced his two season march in cement shoes to retirement. Foolishly BB undertook to upgrade those positions dramatically when opportunity knocked. Worked out smashingly for 18 of 19 weeks. Then Brady went down for the next 16. You'd be hard pressed to find another system within which that would result in an 11 win season. That season was a harbinger of what the deal has always been between Belichick and Kraft, build a consistent contender.

What the win now every season is a window crowd fails to grasp is Bill's mandate from Kraft. Build an organization that will survive individual losses or defections including even your own. That's job one here. Winning as many championships as possible within that context is job two. This is a business and that is it's model for continued success. The goal is when Belichick is done he will have trained and populated an organization that can carry on. The only outsiders who might be brought in thereafter will be guys who started out here to begin with. The model is designed to survive, thrive and above all else avoid a return to the unglorious days of Bill's last several predecessors.

Those of you who take offense at the lack of determination to win it now at all cost need to just find a different team to follow, annually.