I hope Mcdaniels sticks with the Run against the Texans

[lamafist]

I'm not sure if this has been brought up, but I think it's a mistake to take last Sunday's game against the Dolphins as an argument that the Pats should have been running more during the whole game.

Both Belichick and McDaniels said in interviews that the plan early was to use short quick passes to the outside to get the defensive line moving laterally to tire them out and keep them on their feet and ready to have to run toward the sideline.

Now, normally a team can accomplish the same goal by running to the outside, but this wasn't going to be a good option for the Pats on Sunday. Losing Gronk has a big negative effect on our strong-side running, and with Vollmer and Connoly both far from 100% going into the game, the right side of the line figured to be a problem. And it was.

McDaniels' game-plan helped take the pressure off our depleted run-blocking unit for much of the game and put them in position to succeed when the team would need it most down the stretch.

 

[Deus Irae]

...2011 Divisional game, Broncos: 34 passes, 30 rushes, 45 points...

Another classic example:

The score was 35-7 at the half, and the game was clearly over. What was the run/pass ratio at that time?

2/3
2/5
1/3
2/3
4/4
1/2
1/1
0/5

13:26

And that includes the runs where Hernandez took the ball as a RB.

Denver Broncos at New England Patriots - January 14th, 2012 - Pro-Football-Reference.com

 

[Snake Eyes]

We have the greatest QB in the history of the game I am comfortable with the ball in his hand an inordinate amount of the time thank you very much.

The issue isn't about whether TFB passes a lot, the issue is in telegraphing that it will be a pass.

 

[RodThePat]

In today's NFL anytime you see a team score 30+ points, it's incredibly rare that they accomplished that by running the football. when you see a huge point total and a similar number of running and passing plays, you can rest assured that most of those runs came to close the game and run the clock out. There were plenty of games in 2007 in which the Patriots ended up with a very balanced spread in run/pass, but that was because they were up 28 with 12 minutes to go, and so it was Kyle-Eckel-up-the-gut time.

 

[mayoclinic]

Here's a correlation for you:

- 2012 games in which TB has attempted 40 or more passes: Seattle (58), Arizona (46), first Jets game (42), Baltimore (41), Miami (40).
- Lowest scoring Pats games of 2012: Arizona (18), Seattle (23), Miami (23), 1st NY Jets game (29), Baltimore (30).

The 5 lowest scoring games are the 5 games in which we have attempted the most passes. Just a correlation, but hey.

Here's some other possible correlations for you (regular season only):

- Brady's regular season record: 133-38 (78%)
- Number of games in Brady's career in which he has thrown 40 or more pass attempts: 39
- Pats won-loss record in games in which Brady has attempted 40 or more pass attempts: 25-14 (64%)
- Number of games in Brady's career in which the Pats have scored 30 or more points: 76
- Pats won-loss record in games in Brady's career in which the Pats have scored 30 or more points: 73-3 (96%)
- Number of games in Brady's career in which the Pats have scored 30 or more points while he has attempted 40 or more passes: 17

Brady has an overall winning percentage of 78%, which increases to 96% if the Pats score 30 or more points but decreases to 64% if he attempts 40 or more throws. On only 22% of the games in which Brady and the Pats scored 30 or more points did he throw 40 or more times (17/76). On only 44% of the games in which Brady has attempted 40 or more throws have the Pats scored 30 or more points (17/39).

All meaningless correlation, I know. Brady should just spread it out and throw it as many times as possible against the Texans. After all, there's proof that that's what will work, right?

 

[Deus Irae]

Here's a correlation for you:

- 2012 games in which TB has attempted 40 or more passes: Seattle (58), Arizona (46), first Jets game (42), Baltimore (41), Miami (40).
- Lowest scoring Pats games of 2012: Arizona (18), Seattle (23), Miami (23), 1st NY Jets game (29), Baltimore (30).

The 5 lowest scoring games are the 5 games in which we have attempted the most passes. Just a correlation, but hey.

Here's some other possible correlations for you (regular season only):

- Brady's regular season record: 133-38 (78%)
- Number of games in Brady's career in which he has thrown 40 or more pass attempts: 39
- Pats won-loss record in games in which Brady has attempted 40 or more pass attempts: 25-14 (64%)
- Number of games in Brady's career in which the Pats have scored 30 or more points: 76
- Pats won-loss record in games in Brady's career in which the Pats have scored 30 or more points: 73-3 (96%)
- Number of games in Brady's career in which the Pats have scored 30 or more points while he has attempted 40 or more passes: 17

Brady has an overall winning percentage of 78%, which increases to 96% if the Pats score 30 or more points but decreases to 64% if he attempts 40 or more throws. On only 22% of the games in which Brady and the Pats scored 30 or more points did he throw 40 or more times (17/76). On only 44% of the games in which Brady has attempted 40 or more throws have the Pats scored 30 or more points (17/39).

All meaningless correlation, I know. Brady should just spread it out and throw it as many times as possible against the Texans. After all, there's proof that that's what will work, right?

Why do you keep ignoring the evidence that everyone else is putting forward, while still arguing something that's not even on point?

 

[mayoclinic]

Another classic example:

The score was 35-7 at the half, and the game was clearly over. What was the run/pass ratio at that time?

2/3
2/5
1/3
2/3
4/4
1/2
1/1
0/5

13:26

And that includes the runs where Hernandez took the ball as a RB.

Denver Broncos at New England Patriots - January 14th, 2012 - Pro-Football-Reference.com

I wasn't using that game as an example favoring even run-pass ratio. Andy had asked for the playoff breakdowns, so I gave it to him, unfiltered.

To be clear, I am NOT advocating the demise of the spread offense, or that we uniformly distribute the run/pass balance all the time. That makes no sense. There is clearly a time for situational scheming, time to take advantage of matchups, and lots of time to spread things out. We're a pass-first team, and we will always be that way. Brady is our greatest strength. I don't think anyone is advocating otherwise.

It's very hard to show "causation" in anything, and a lot is subjective. But my perception is that the Pats' offense has erred at times on the side of getting too unbalanced, too predictable, and too limited. Can I prove it? No. I doubt anyone can. Obviously, our offense and our team has been extraordinarily successful, and no one wants to negate that success.

I'm not advocating "ground and pound" against Houston, or in general. But I think that it would be a big mistake to ignore the running game and spread things out too much, and an even bigger mistake to limit our receiving options as much as we did against Miami.

 

[mayoclinic]

Why do you keep ignoring the evidence that everyone else is putting forward, while still arguing something that's not even on point?

What evidence? There's just your opinion, which you think is the word of God. Waste of time.

 

[Deus Irae]

I wasn't using that game as an example favoring even run-pass ratio. Andy had asked for the playoff breakdowns, so I gave it to him, unfiltered...

And I showed that game as a classic example of how the final run/pass ratio is often completely misreading. What ended up looking like a fairly "balanced" ratio was 2:1 pass when the game was in doubt.

 

[76Texan]

If I may add my two cents since we also discussed this over at the Texans board.

In the NFL nowadays, it's always about the pass.
Especially with teams running more out of the spread, you have more weapons to receive the ball; the number of passes attempts for those teams will be higher than teams that run more out of the 2 back offense simply because of personnel.

As a whole, you're not going to spend a ton of money on guys that can catch pass to have them blocking for the running game. The defense knows that but it's all about execution. You're going to do what you do best.

The Texans, for example, is thought of as a running team, but we actually pass more in the first half with Kubiak.

For a team like the Pats to come out throwing even more is nothing out of the ordinary.

There's a minus though if you either score or give up the ball too quickly, especially against a good team.

In Peyton's last year in Indy, for example, the Texans kept the ball for a long time, even after Manning had led his team to scores.

Basically, I had looked up teams that won SBs.
The majority of them have a good defense and a good running game.
Even if they have a good passing game, the run game can't be ignored.

It doesn't matter whether you set up the run with the pass or vice versa.
To win championship football, you have a better odd having both.

 

[Deus Irae]

What evidence? There's just your opinion, which you think is the word of God. Waste of time.

The Broncos game isn't "opinion". The Packers game isn't "opinion".

Meanwhile, you're changing your argument to "40 passes", knowing full well that you're including games where the Patriots [highlight]must[/highlight] pass because of the game situation (score/time). If you want to talk about a waste of time, you need look no further than your own arguments on this subject.

Let's stay focused. The Patriots are 36-8 in the past 2+ regular seasons. Which games have been lost because of the run/pass ratio?

 

[YearbookCurfew]

We should not only run the ball, but run up the score as well!

 

[76Texan]

Given GB and Detroit's success spreading them out I don't think we'll see Brady under center much. I hope that doesn't mean 5 wide however. You can keep Houston off balance by throwing in a draw, RB screen or reverse any time it looks like their line is getting up the field too fast for their own good. I will say though Watt and Smith both play with their heads up which makes them alert to gadget plays. I think this will be more of a game plan which we've seen VS the Steelers in the past. Spread them out and run selectively. I do hope Vereen sees more of a role. I think his size/speed ratio would play better VS the Texans than Woodhead and I do like splitting him out VS this defense a lot as you have pointed out.

The Texans let the GB out of hands due to silly mistakes.
We stopped them to force a couple of FGs, but one time we lined up in the neutral Zone, and the other time Barwin jumped over a guy during the FG try, giving them new sets of downs.

Otherwise, the game would still be even or within 3 points late in the third.
Rodgers had one of those good games where completed passes through tight windows and the receivers making some great catches.

He narrowly escaped the pass rushes a few times; it was one of those games even though his completion percentage was not up to par.
He played a whale of the game that day.

The Jags game, we had missed tackles from guys who are normally sure tacklers; we had guys bumping into each other converging on the receiver; we had two guys way faster than The receiver bracketing him and we let Blackmon slip away. They all turned into long scores.

Our pass rushes were tremendous in that game as well in the Lions game.
We just shouldn't have Alan Ball on Megatron in the first half.
His technique is not sound and that's why he's a journey man type that signed for a vet minimum. Most of our fans were astounded when he made the roster.
Personally, I only expect him as a standout on ST. Because he's a very good tackler with the Cowboys under Wade.

We never let Stafford have more than 3 secs in the pocket without pressure unless he had max-protect.

He was harrassed all day, but it was a credit to him that he didn't make any mistake. He made the most out of his chances with guys in his face; just another resilient performance by a pretty good QB.

 

[Ring 6]

Yes, it's going to be more difficult to score on a better defense but that doesnt mean some things don't work as well as others against those defenses. There will be a 'rate of attrition' against those good teams but those rates can vary depending on what the offense does.

That is a theory and there is nothing that says it applies to the Patriots or the topic being discussed.

 

[Ring 6]

Again what is our W-L record when the number of runs is more proportionate to the number of passes, as opposed to a high percentage of pass vs. runs? We're looking at the past few years, not just any random samples.

Why would that question matter?
Everyone accepts that more runs and more wins go together.
The debate is which is cause and which is effect.
To think you prove causation by saying runs are higher in wins, is to not understand the discussion.
The point being made, that you are trying to refute is:
We run more because we are winning, not we win more because we are running.

 

[Ring 6]

And yet the 2001-2006 teams scored better than their season average in the playoffs. As for the argument that playoff football is historically lower scoring, last year's playoffs featured scores such as 45-28, 36-32, 45-10, 37-20 and 31-10 and 29-23. Not particularly low-scoring games. The year before included scores such as 41-36, 48-21, 35-24, and 31-25.

Naming some highscoring games doesn't disprove the fact that playoff scoring is traditionally lower.

The Packers averaged over 30PPG in their 4 victories en route to the SB. The playoffs aren't that low scoring any more, even though our offense seems to have had trouble putting up points in the playoffs, with the exception of the Denver game.

We allow fewer points too. Playoff football, esp in cold weather cities is different, thats just a fact.

You can't possibly believe this

You cant really dispute it.
01 528p/473r
02 636/395
03 569/473
04 511/524
TOTAL 2244/1865 54.6% pass

07 607/451
08 582/513
09 610/466
10 532/454

TOTAL 2331/1884 55.3% pass

That is statistically insignificant difference (less than 1/2 pass per game)







.

The 2008 team, which didn't make the playoffs was balanced. 2007 had a decent rushing attack, but it certainly wasn't balanced. 2009? Belichick himself admitted that he had Moss, Welker and nothing else. 2010? The Jets dared the Pats to run the ball in the playoffs by putting 8 DBs on the field in the playoffs. 2011 - the worst rushing attack in years. Those were not balanced offenses. The Pats passed 45 times and rushed 28 in the loss to the Jets - and only because the Jets dared them to run. They passed 41 times and rushed 19 in the SB loss to the Giants last year. And they passed 48 times and rushed all of 16 in the 2007 SB loss to the Giants. BB compared the Texans' DL to the Giants this week in terms of their length and ability to deflect passes, and their ability to generate pressure. Going pass happy and trying to spread the Giants out didn't work too well in 2 SBs. I could see the Texans posing similar problems. Keeping them honest with the running game and play action will open up a lot of opportunities, and make the spread more effective too.

See above. The pass/run ratio has been remarkably consistent throughout the BB years, and always varies widely game to game. There is no point made by calling one game a philosophical change.

Of course not, and I never suggested that. I did, however, suggest that an over-reliance on the spread leads to a predictable offense that can be too easily shut down by good defenses. And I would like to see the Pats evolve towards a more balanced approach that uses all of their weapons - including a generous amount of the spread, which can be devestatingly effective - instead of situationally limiting themselves.

So your argument is 'do better'?

2011 SB, Giants: 41 passes, 19 rushes; 17 points
2011 AFCCG, Ravens: 36 passes, 31 rushes, 23 points
2011 Divisional game, Broncos: 34 passes, 30 rushes, 45 points
2010 Divisional game, Jets: 45 passes, 28 rushes, 21 points
2009 Divisional game, Ravens: 42 passes, 18 rushes, 14 points (though I tend to discount this a bit, as the Pats got behind early)
2007 SB, Giants: 48 passes, 16 rushes, 14 points
2007 AFCCG, Chargers: 33 passes, 31 rushes, 21 points
2007 Division game, Jaguars: 28 passes, 29 rushes, 31 points

Just a correlation, and the data are limited, but those data suggest that going pass happy (40 pass attempts or more) tends to result in fewer points produced. That's not factoring in the caliber of the defenses (2 games against the Giants, 1 against the Ravens, 1 against the Jets) vs. the other opponents.

First, 40 passes is arbitrary, and 40/14 is different than 40/30.
Again, though, the discussion here is whether running causes wins or wins cause running. You are trying to use data of run pass ratios over the course of a season when we often win half the games by more than 2 TDs to one single game where we are trailing, or struggling to run the ball, or just in a close game against a good defense.
Nothing you have written in this entire post provides any evidence that balance causes wins rather than wins cause more runs.

 

[Ring 6]

The Texans let the GB out of hands due to silly mistakes.
We stopped them to force a couple of FGs, but one time we lined up in the neutral Zone, and the other time Barwin jumped over a guy during the FG try, giving them new sets of downs.

Otherwise, the game would still be even or within 3 points late in the third.
Rodgers had one of those good games where completed passes through tight windows and the receivers making some great catches.

He narrowly escaped the pass rushes a few times; it was one of those games even though his completion percentage was not up to par.
He played a whale of the game that day.

The Jags game, we had missed tackles from guys who are normally sure tacklers; we had guys bumping into each other converging on the receiver; we had two guys way faster than The receiver bracketing him and we let Blackmon slip away. They all turned into long scores.

Our pass rushes were tremendous in that game as well in the Lions game.
We just shouldn't have Alan Ball on Megatron in the first half.
His technique is not sound and that's why he's a journey man type that signed for a vet minimum. Most of our fans were astounded when he made the roster.
Personally, I only expect him as a standout on ST. Because he's a very good tackler with the Cowboys under Wade.

We never let Stafford have more than 3 secs in the pocket without pressure unless he had max-protect.

He was harrassed all day, but it was a credit to him that he didn't make any mistake. He made the most out of his chances with guys in his face; just another resilient performance by a pretty good QB.

Wow, all this time I thought allowing 100 points in 3 games would mean a defense played poorly, and you just explained how they were the 85 Bears.

 

[PatriotSeven]

I don't think we have the type of run game where we can physically shove it down people's throats at will, irrelevant of run defense. We can't dictate to defenses that we will run the ball and let them try and stop us.

So I don't think this game plan will be any different than all the others. Brady and McDaniels will take whatever the defense gives them.

 

[whoartthou]

Why not replicate what rodgers and the packers did to the texans?

 

[mayoclinic]

With Houston 19th against the pass and 2nd against the run, I would assume that taking the ball out of Brady's hands would not be to our advantage! That being said, with Bolden back, a nice 55/45 would be nice once we get up by a few

Just as an aside, the Broncos are currently the 6th ranked rushing defense at 93 YPG. They had given up an average of just 87.5 YPG when we faced them week 5, about the same as the Texans' current average. That didn't stop the Pats from rushing for 250 yards. I know it doesn't mean much, but I don't think that the fact that a defense is ranked as having a low rushing average means that we should be afraid that we can't run the ball effectively.