2006 offense vs. 2013 offense right now: which is better?

[BradyFTW!]

This year's offense is better - the WRs are at least on par with 2006's, maybe better, and the running game is leaps and bounds better.

The 2006 defense was better than this year's, though. That Seymour-Warren-Wilfork line was crazy good.

The 2006 team is definitely the best comparable for this year, though. Talented team, decimated by injuries/unforeseen preseason crap (Branch/Hernandez), the WR corps lacked a standout weapon, to the point that the 3DRB was one of the most dangerous weapons in the passing game. Team got absolutely crushed by a late-season key injury (Gronkowski, Rodney Harrison). One proven veteran corner, with some promising young talent behind him on the depth chart. And I'll take Edelman/Amendola over Gaffney/Caldwell on account of their quickness, but they're somewhat similar in that all four are physically unimposing guys who rely a lot on route running and body control.

On the bright side, I do like our current linebackers better than the 2006 team's, and linebacker depth is what really murdered them in the AFCCG (I'll never forget the feeling of helplessness that came with watching Eric Alexander get picked apart by Manning).

What might be most important, though, is that if this really is 2006 redux and we're traveling to Peyton's house for the AFCCG, then this time it will be outdoors, and presumably half the team won't have the flu this time around.

 

[Deus Irae]

I'm not sure where people are getting the notion that this year's running game is way ahead of the 2006 game, because it's not. They're about even. You could give maybe a slight edge to this year, but that'd be basically because of Blount's last game.

 

[Kdo5]

I'm not sure where people are getting the notion that this year's running game is way ahead of the 2006 game, because it's not. They're about even. You could give maybe a slight edge to this year, but that'd be basically because of Blount's last game.

I did concede a better running game in 2013. But I did mention turnovers. I think Maroney and Dillon had a good season although I think the talent on the 2013 is better. Doesn't necessarily equate to a better running game though.

 

[Kdo5]

By the way the RBs carried 20 times for 92 yards, which is not an inability to run

It's play calling giving up on the run too quickly IMO. I do agree with captain stone on the play. Caldwell was uncovered, Brady realized it late. It went from an easy TD to a catch where he had to get the ball, and deke the defender for the TD. People like to pretend it was a catch and automatic TD which was not so. Not trying to totally condone the drop but it isn't some shocking screw up that he didn't get a TD. He thought about the run before the catch...a common mistake when receivers drop the ball.

 

[Deus Irae]

I did concede a better running game in 2013. But I did mention turnovers. I think Maroney and Dillon had a good season although I think the talent on the 2013 is better. Doesn't necessarily equate to a better running game though.

My post was a general one that wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, because the idea of 2013's running game being much better was put forth by more than one person. People forget that Maroney started off looking like a very good RB in 2006, played very well until he got hurt, and was even better in 2007. That 2006 duo had more yards than the Ridley/Blount duo, and they fumbled only 3 times between the two of them, as opposed to the 7 that Blount/Ridley tallied. They also had 37 catches, compared to the 12 of Ridley/Blount, and were markedly superior in pass protection.

 

[coolguy]

My post was a general one that wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, because the idea of 2013's running game being much better was put forth by more than one person. People forget that Maroney started off looking like a very good RB in 2006, played very well until he got hurt, and was even better in 2007. That 2006 duo had more yards than the Ridley/Blount duo, and they fumbled only 3 times between the two of them, as opposed to the 7 that Blount/Ridley tallied. They also had 37 catches, compared to the 12 of Ridley/Blount, and were markedly superior in pass protection.

It's unfair to call this unit a "duo". Blount climbed up the depth chart and took ridley's job away from him.


Blount would have the nfl leading rusher had he started every game from week one.

 

[Kdo5]

But

What if he's right? What if Priefer actually said that. Pretty disturbing comment if he did.

[QUOTE=coolguy;3705961]It's unfair to call this unit a "duo". Blount climbed up the depth chart and took ridley's job away from him.

Had blount had been the main back from week one he would have been the nfl leading rusher.[/QUOTE]

Disagree with this. I am not going to drag this into comparisons w/Ridley and Blount. However at the beginning/mid season, Blount was not running the same as the last few games. He was doing a good job but it was not the same at the beginning of the season. Bring up averages all you want, but he was not dragging defenders along or breaking tackles and turning them into huge plays. Productive? Yes. What we saw at the end of the season? No.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's unfair to call this unit a "duo". Blount climbed up the depth chart and took ridley's job away from him.


Blount would have the nfl leading rusher had he started every game from week one.

It's 2 running backs splitting carries. It's a duo. There's nothing unfair about calling it one.

 

[coolguy]

[QUOTE=coolguy;3705961]It's unfair to call this unit a "duo". Blount climbed up the depth chart and took ridley's job away from him.

Had blount had been the main back from week one he would have been the nfl leading rusher.

Disagree with this. I am not going to drag this into comparisons w/Ridley and Blount. However at the beginning/mid season, Blount was not running the same as the last few games. He was doing a good job but it was not the same at the beginning of the season. Bring up averages all you want, but he was not dragging defenders along or breaking tackles and turning them into huge plays. Productive? Yes. What we saw at the end of the season? No.

Okay, blount got hot towards the end of the season

 

[coolguy]

It's 2 running backs splitting carries. It's a duo. There's nothing unfair about calling it one.

It's a corp.

Blount is the starter now
ridley is his backup
vereen comes in on 3rd down and passing plays
bolden

 

[Deus Irae]

It's a corp.

Blount is the starter now
ridley is his backup
vereen comes in on 3rd down and passing plays
bolden

Are you really going to play this lame word game when there's nothing to be gained by it?


Dillon/Maroney = Ridley/Blount

They're the feature back duos


Vereen = Faulk

They're 3rd down backs.


Evans = Develin/Bolden

Fullbacks, depth RBs


Dillon/Maroney v. Ridley/Blount is basically a wash

Evans was the better depth back/FB

Faulk 2006 was the better runner. Vereen 2013 was the better receiver, when he actually caught the ball.

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Sadly the outcome is likely to be the same. Peyton will knock the Pats out in the championship game again, as Tom throws another game ending INT.

Sadly, this is how a Bronco fan has to troll. Get those shots in now, Bronco fan. That leaky sieve defense and the Picasso Of Choking are going to have their run come to a screeeeeeeeching halt soon, and Bronco fan knows this.

Thus, all of Bronco troll are have to do troll now.

 

[Brady6]

It's unfair to call this unit a "duo". Blount climbed up the depth chart and took ridley's job away from him.

I don't think that is true at all, in the last 2 games Blount has 40 carries and Ridley has 27. Ridley is not playing a backup role the team is just riding the hot hand which is Blount right now. I would consider them 1A and 1B.

Blount would have the nfl leading rusher had he started every game from week one.

Taking nothing away from Blount that is a very ambitious assertion you're making. Blount had 1 game that he rushed for 100 yards or more, it was a great game but it also took place in week 17 against a team that finished 6-10 and last in our division. His improvements came in the second half of the season he was not running the same way in the first 10 weeks of the year.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Wideouts:

2013: Edelman, Amendola, Dobson/KT
2006: Caldwell, Brown, Gabriel

RB's:

2013: Blount, Ridley, Vereen
2006: Dillon, Maroney, Faulk

TEs':

2013: Hoomanawanui, Mulligan
2006: Graham, Watson

QB:

2013: Brady now
2006: Brady then

Couldn't you make a strong argument that 2006's offense was better, except at the top WR position?

I'll give it a shot.

QB: 2013. Brady is a better QB now mentally as he has more experience, but physically he is not 29 years old anymore but obviously still playing at a high-level.

RBs: 2006 by and edge. I think he running game is a tough call. I prefer Blount over Dillion and Ridley is a better runner than LoMo, but 2006 had better ball security. However 2006 had better pass catchers and pass blockers than Blount and Ridley. I believe Faulk to be the better receiver and blocker than Vereen but Vereen has a bit more explosiveness. Evans is better than Develin although Develin has been playing pretty darn well.

TEs: 2006. Danny Graham was a devastating blocker and Watson had his best year. 2013 has Hooman and Mulligan Stew.

Receivers: 2013. 2006 didn't have a go-to guy like Edelman and Amendola would have been #1 on 2006. If Dobson and KT can get healthy and play to their capabilities I give 2013 the nod.

O-Line: 2006 but not by much. Light, Mankins, Koppen, Neal and Kazur vs Soldor, Mankins, Wendell, Connolly and Cannon.

However I guess I'd rather have 2013 because the WR passing game is better and Vereen is a very good threat out of the backfield. Brady is still dominant, the running game is still very good and the O-line is very good.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I'd take this year over 2006.

Brady's gotten smarter without losing physical ability beyond a decline in his already poor running.

McDaniels is more experienced and has stepped up his game

Those two things are enough to separate the groups, IMO.

They both are pretty miserable, I give the edge to 2006 because Brady was in his prime and Koppen, Light, Neal, Faulk were proven veterans.

Dillion was done but he did have a good game against Indy in the playoffs until he decided to sit on the bench for the 2nd half.

I think I'll always lean towards the better OL. Give Brady enough time and he'll make something good happen.

But the point about Brady playing in his prime - he no doubt hurts a bit more the day after a game at this point, but his physical skills do not seem to have declined and I think it's pretty indisputable that Brady's decision-making skills have improved.

Even with this unproven group he's remarkably efficient - perhaps the best of his career in minimizing mistakes.

Moving into the playoffs I think we win or lose games based on the play of the OL (no pressure guys!

Hey - at least they'll get the respect they deserve if they pull it off, and a lot of no-name players could secure a role on the team or elsewhere in the NFL simply by rising to the occasion to give Brady enough protection to win!

 

[Brady6]

Gronkandez: 87 receptions, 1109 yards, 16 TDs

Dobkins: 69 receptions, 975 yards, 8 TDs





Significant difference, and the issue of forcing the ball to the rookies was nowhere near as prevalent in 2010.

There is a variance of 18 receptions for 134 receiving yards which you pointed out as significant, but you're not putting all the cards on the table. Gronkowski played in 16 regular season games and Hernandez played in 14 regular season games. Dobson played in 12 regular season games and 2 of them he played less than a half of the game, Thompkins also played in 12 regular season games.

16 game projections:
Dobson - 49 receptions, 692 receiving yards, 5 touchdowns
Thompkins - 42 receptions, 621 receiving yards, 5 touchdowns
Boyce - 29 receptions, 387 receiving yards, 0 touchdowns

I agree forcing the ball was an issue but that was a necessary evil, also keep in mind that the incomplete passes weren't all worthless, deep passes even unconverted open things up for Edelman, Edelman and Vereen underneath, and Blount and Ridley in the running game.

One thing people seem to forget is Hernandez had a lot of gun powder residue built up on his hands because he dropped a lot of passes throughout his 3 seasons here.

2010 - 7
2011 - 4
2012 - 9

I'm not even adding in the bodies that the hoodrat dropped during that period.

 

[RobertWeathers]

One thing people seem to forget is Hernandez had a lot of gun powder residue built up on his hands because he dropped a lot of passes throughout his 3 seasons here.

2010 - 7
2011 - 4
2012 - 9

I'm not even adding in the bodies that the hoodrat dropped during that period.

Gun powder residue...Tragic, but funny.

The have missed AH but not as much as I thought they would.

 

[Brady6]

The have missed AH but not as much as I thought they would.

Personally I think Hernandez is not missed mainly because he was not that good last season when he was on the field. If his arrest came off the heals of 2011 his absences would have been felt a lot more.

The player we've missed is Gronkowski outside of that we've replaced the production of the others.

Edelman = Welker
Amendola = Hernandez
Dobson/Thompkinks = Lloyd

We missed Woodhead but Vereen is back now so that's not as big a factor.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Personally I think Hernandez is not missed mainly because he was not that good last season when he was on the field. If his arrest came off the heals of 2011 his absences would have been felt a lot more.

The player we've missed is Gronkowski outside of that we've replaced the production of the others.

Edelman = Welker
Amendola = Hernandez
Dobson/Thompkinks = Lloyd

We missed Woodhead but Vereen is back now so that's not as big a factor.

Yes and no.

With all the flux on the offensive side of the ball, if Brady had a 2011 AH to throw to this year , with all the injuries and flux he absolutely needed him a a productive, familiar target in this offense.

If Brady had Edelman, Amendola, Vereen and healthy Gronk, Dobson and KT, then I agree- not so much.

With that said, AH wasn't the healthiest players either so who knows what he would have given them in 2013...