PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Reiss: Patriots most shotgun-heavy team in league


Status
Not open for further replies.
A completely different (but relevant) scenario.
Suppose you have a hall of fame running back.
Theoretically a 3-TE formation gives him more blockers and a more power formation.
What if 75% of all this team's runs were out of the 3-TE set, and over 86% of the time in the 3-TE set it was a run?

Of course it would affect the opposing defense and the blocking.

Replace 3-TE with shotgun and running back with QB, and you have what the Pats have right now.
 
Blocking is related to play calling though. Think about the posters here claiming that Maroney was getting poor run blocking because defense's figured out early this season that when Maroney is in the game, he is running.

Play calling and blocking are related if you are predictable.

===========


Also, about that fad article not the Walsh article: Wildcat is also increasing in usage around the league too, and just as with the shotgun spread, it doesn't mean anything about what it means for championship-style offensive football.

I will end with these thoughts prior to departing for the evening.

First, a team that executes a run block properly should get yards. Good running teams should advance the ball even if the other team knows the run is coming if the blocking is executed as it should be. If Maroney is getting hit behind the line, that is a failure of blockers in front of him. As a formation reflects an entire set of plays, the defense, even if it assumes run, does not know which hole. Also, passes are run when Maroney comes in the game (he has receptions this season), thus it is not 100% certain to be a run, nor is it certain to be a screen to him. Whether you are a slave to stats or not, the running game has been productive but not great.

Second, play calling can compensate for deficiencies in skill sets. An inferior line benefits from the shotgun formation. If you lack a line like the 1992 Dallas Cowboys that could throw any defense back 3 yards, you run quick passes or regular passes out of the shotgun in an effort to keep the QBs head attached to his neck. If your offensive line is not great at run blocking, you do not put the team in an obvious run formation and add personnel to help clear some room. You can also run spread formations to maintain a passing threat to avoid a defense committing to a run stopping posture. It may well be the formation reflects the strength of the personnel on the roster, in which case alternative formations would expose weaknesses.

Third, gimmicks and fads, as you call them, are novations. Some work, some don't. Parcells as coach of the Giants in the 1980s thought Walsh's offense was a fad and he disagreed with the approach (that was in The Blind Side). Walsh's offense is now omnipresent in the NFL. The fad of timing passes designed by Walsh became the norm. I have no idea if the Wildcat makes a similar run or dies on the vine at some point, but if you harbored this perception of fads in the 1980s you would dismiss Walsh's approach as not championship calber and a fad and overlook an approach that revolutionized offensive production in the NFL. The truth is the only measure of a championship offense is the one that wins championships - there is no true formula other than what gets the job done with the personnel available on the field. The 2002 Bucs were not a good running team and thus passed almost 60% of the time. The current Pats are at almost the exact same ratio as that Bucs team. Is it right? Ask me that question in February. At this point in the season there is simply no way to tell if an alternative approach is a better approach.
 
Last edited:
First, a team that executes a run block properly should get yards. Good running teams should advance the ball even if the other team knows the run is coming if the blocking is executed as it should be. If Maroney is getting hit behind the line, that is a failure of blockers in front of him.

Similarly a talented passing team will also usually get yards even if the D knows what is coming (like our offense). However, the blocking IS affected by the play calling, it isn't bad in a vacuum. A defense that knows it's a pass doesn't have to worry about run gaps, a defense that knows it's a run will hit their gaps hard and not have to watch the QB. This puts additional pressure on the O-line. Play calling affects blocking.

As a formation reflects an entire set of plays, the defense, even if it assumes run, does not know which hole. Also, passes are run when Maroney comes in the game (he has receptions this season), thus it is not 100% certain to be a run, nor is it certain to be a screen to him.

The scenario as it stands for the Patriots is that they are extremely predictable to pass when in shotgun. The threat of a draw or screen is so rare (14%) that opposition doesn't even worry about it. If a team is entirely predictable to run/pass, it is a HUGE advantage to the defense. If you know it's a run in a 3-TE formation, they won't even waste effort worrying about the pass. If you know it's a pass in shotgun, you don't even have to stay in your gaps, you can just wreak havoc in open space which is hard for any O-lineman to block.

Second, play calling can compensate for deficincies in skill sets.

The running backs and tight ends are not deficient on this team. We use shotgun because of a stubborn desire to use our best chess pieces over, and over, and over, and rely on the talent to out-execute. This team is so persistent on it, that it cannot manufacture a win if Welker is stopped.

Third, gimmicks and fads, as you call them, are novations. The truth is the only measure of a championship offense is the one that wins championships - there is no true formula other than what gets the job done with the personnel available on the field. The 2002 Bucs were not a good running team and thus passed almost 60% of the time. The current Pats are at almost the exact same ratio as that Bucs team. Is it right?

You're right, and no shotgun-happy team has won this decade yet, so the innovation isn't legit, it's a fad at this point just like the Wildcat. The 2002 Bucs beat a Raiders team that was even more unbalanced/one-dimensional.
 
Last edited:
Strangely enough, we are a pretty balanced team (444 pass vs. 312 rush) when you consider the weapons we have in the passing game and compare them to what we have in the running game. I can see what we would want to pass it. We have Brady, Moss, and Welker. The majority of the weapons that we have which will do the most damage are in the passing game. However, I would like to see us operate a little more out of the shotgun than we have. On offense, I don't think O'Brien is mixing it up as much as he could in the passing game. For instance, we used to be a deadly play action team. We still do attempt the PA a couple of times in a game, but not as much as we used to (based on what I'm seeing). I'd like to see more singleback, 3 to 4-Wide formations used once Edelman returns to the line-up. We with Edelman and Welker in the passing game along with Moss, we should be able to take advantage of the defense if they gear up against the run (this too assumes that the offensive line is healthy and able to give Brady more than .02 seconds to find the open man).
 
Strangely enough, we are a pretty balanced team (444 pass vs. 312 rush) when you consider the weapons we have in the passing game and compare them to what we have in the running game. I can see what we would want to pass it. We have Brady, Moss, and Welker. The majority of the weapons that we have which will do the most damage are in the passing game. However, I would like to see us operate a little more out of the shotgun than we have. On offense, I don't think O'Brien is mixing it up as much as he could in the passing game. For instance, we used to be a deadly play action team. We still do attempt the PA a couple of times in a game, but not as much as we used to (based on what I'm seeing). I'd like to see more singleback, 3 to 4-Wide formations used once Edelman returns to the line-up. We with Edelman and Welker in the passing game along with Moss, we should be able to take advantage of the defense if they gear up against the run (this too assumes that the offensive line is healthy and able to give Brady more than .02 seconds to find the open man).

Wait did you mean you want to run shotgun less or more?

I completely agree with what I think is the gist of your post. However, no team is going to 'gear up against the run' on this team yet, they know we aren't committed to it in any game.
 
Wait did you mean you want to run shotgun less or more?

I completely agree with what I think is the gist of your post. However, no team is going to 'gear up against the run' on this team yet, they know we aren't committed to it in any game.

I meant that I can understand WHY they run it, but I would like to see it run a little bit less. And yes, whenever we are in a singleback or I-Formation, defenses do gear up more against the run. We should be able to take advantage of that, but I can only remember a couple of times during this season that we have. One game that springs to mind immediately is the Tennessee game. Other than that, I would really have to rack my brain and since I'm at work and don't have a ton of time for that, it isn't going to happen.
 
What was our ranking in the Super Bowl years? I can't recall exactly how much but I do know we used Shotgun alot then too. But it seemed that in both the 03 and 04 playoffs we were able to run the ball even when it was just Antowain/Faulk.
 
Most teams do use shotgun, just not for 75% of all their passes.

The 01-04 teams could still win if Troy Brown was stopped. This current team is toast if Welker doesn't have a good day.
 
I liked our offense of 2001-2004. Brady was almost always under center. It was McDaniels who kept putting Brady in shotgun. Now O'Brien is just following what McDaniels did. The creativity on offense is non existent. Aren't we supposed to keep them guessing?
 
I liked our offense of 2001-2004. Brady was almost always under center. It was McDaniels who kept putting Brady in shotgun. Now O'Brien is just following what McDaniels did. The creativity on offense is non existent. Aren't we supposed to keep them guessing?

Given the constant injuries at running back and on the O-Line, my guess is that Brady will be under center more when Morris and Taylor return and the O-Line can play as a cohesive unit for more than two quarters without someone getting hurt.
 
Most teams do use shotgun, just not for 75% of all their passes.

The 01-04 teams could still win if Troy Brown was stopped. This current team is toast if Welker doesn't have a good day.

Where is the proof that this team can't win if Welker is stopped? You can't point to the Saints' game. Stopping Welker didn't cause the defense to allow Brees to score TDs like he was playing Madden football on beginner mode and not a real NFL game. Stopping Welker hurt the Pats, but it wasn't the reason the Pats lost. Against Baltimore he had 6 catches for 48 yards (same amount of catches as against the Saints for only 16 more yards) and the Pats won that game. The Pats beat Atlanta by 16 points without him on the field at all.
 
Last edited:
Given the constant injuries at running back and on the O-Line, my guess is that Brady will be under center more when Morris and Taylor return and the O-Line can play as a cohesive unit for more than two quarters without someone getting hurt.

Thats it in a nutshell. Teams simply do not respect the Patriot's running game enough to bring safeties, LBs closer to the LoS which obviously provides more room in the secondary for receivers to operate.

BBs arguement is, 'we play to our strength' which is of course Brady and the passing game. IMO, you do lose a little bit of an advantage when the opposing team expects a pass to go to Moss, Welker, etc.

My .02$
 
I liked our offense of 2001-2004. Brady was almost always under center. It was McDaniels who kept putting Brady in shotgun. Now O'Brien is just following what McDaniels did. The creativity on offense is non existent. Aren't we supposed to keep them guessing?

And Weis gave up on the run in the second half of games for every year except 2004. In 2003, the Pats were 15th in third down conversions (and the worst of the Brady era). They were also 12th in points scored which is the lowest a Brady lead team has ever been ranked since 2001. People still have built up the legend of Charlie Weis to unbelievable proportions.

And the objective is to keep the other team from stopping you to score. Unpredictability is one way of doing that, but it isn't the only way. Some of the best offenses have not been all that unpredictable, but they can exploit weaknesses in defenses and force the other team to stop them. Some times that is more crushing than an unpredictable offense because the defense knows what is coming at them and are helpless to stop it.

Also, the "predictability" of the the Pats' offense has been overstated. At least until this year where O'Brien has had problems with this at times. Just because you line up in a shotgun a lot doesn't mean you are predictable. They can still run a draw in what looks like an obvious passing play. Make it look like they are going to run a quick screen and throw a long bomb.
 
Thats it in a nutshell. Teams simply do not respect the Patriot's running game enough to bring safeties, LBs closer to the LoS which obviously provides more room in the secondary for receivers to operate.

BBs arguement is, 'we play to our strength' which is of course Brady and the passing game. IMO, you do lose a little bit of an advantage when the opposing team expects a pass to go to Moss, Welker, etc.

My .02$

Well, that goes to the GM side of Belichick. The only year we had this unpredictability and balance that everyone credits to Weis for his entire career was really only in 2004 when the Pats had Corey Dillon. That was the only year this team ran a lot of play action. It was the only year teams really weren't sure whether the Pats were going to run or pass.

In 2001, it was mostly dink and dunk passing. In 2002, it was more of the same where the phrase "the short pass is the Pats' running game" was termed. And 2003, was less passing, but not an offense that scared anyone. In 2004, the offense was balanced and most unpredictable. In 2005, it was the start of RB by committee and the endless RB injuries. In 2006, they got back to the run a little more because of the receivers and Maroney having a good year. In 2007, the Patriots were virtually unstoppable on offense and although were pass heavy, they ran the ball well with Morris and then Maroney at the end of the season and in the playoffs. In 2008, tried to rely on the run more to keep Cassell from being too much of a liability until he got his sea legs. This year has had good running at times, but has been inconsistent.
 
Going into the Saints game the Patriots already had 75% of all season passing attempts from shotgun. That figure went up after the game. Brady and Manning lead the league by far in shotgun attempts. Drew Brees isn't even in the top 12 QB's for shotgun attempts.

One thing I found amusing is that Kyle freaking Orton is 3rd in the league in shotgun attempts. This retrospectively shows how much McKid loves shotgun (even while with the Pats) regardless of the QB, and how the high use of shotgun isn't automatically all Belichick's direct decision.


Pats a heavy shotgun team - Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston


Also completely random but somewhat relevant: Maroney only played 3 total snaps in the Saints second half.
Maroney: Just 3 second-half snaps - Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

How does the fact that we are running more shotgun now than when McDaniels was here, coupled with the fact we run more shotgun than McDaniels does in Denver indicate that our use of the shotgun is more due to McDaniels choice than BB?
It actually indicates the exact opposite. Which is really the case because BB taught McDaniels 95% of what he knows.
 
Most teams do use shotgun, just not for 75% of all their passes.

The 01-04 teams could still win if Troy Brown was stopped. This current team is toast if Welker doesn't have a good day.

NFL average is 55% and that counts teams that rarely use it.
This is the problem with your thinking. You see it one sided.
There are pros and cons to the shotgun. More than half the passes in the NFL this season were from the shotgun, so your thinking that the only thing that matters is having the change to run, cannot be shared by NFL decision makers.
The negative is supposedly that you dont have to defend the run, but in reality we run quite a bit from the shotgun.
The positive is that you can get rid of the ball faster.
There is no real evience that pass rushers gain an advantage from a shot gun formation. If you ever played the game you would know that within about a milisecond of the snap the DL knows its a pass, because the OL steps backward to pass protect.
The advantages to the offense; you can get rid of the ball more quickly; the QB can see the field, the coverage and the play develop, really overwhelm the disadvantages, hence, it is used a lot.
 
Similarly a talented passing team will also usually get yards even if the D knows what is coming (like our offense). However, the blocking IS affected by the play calling, it isn't bad in a vacuum. A defense that knows it's a pass doesn't have to worry about run gaps, a defense that knows it's a run will hit their gaps hard and not have to watch the QB. This puts additional pressure on the O-line. Play calling affects blocking.

This is incorrect. A defensive lineman reads the offensive lineman to determine whether its run or pass. You dont slow a DL down by taking the snap from under center then having the OL step back to pass block. That is why play action slow a DL, because the OL execute run block fakes.

The scenario as it stands for the Patriots is that they are extremely predictable to pass when in shotgun. The threat of a draw or screen is so rare (14%) that opposition doesn't even worry about it. If a team is entirely predictable to run/pass, it is a HUGE advantage to the defense. If you know it's a run in a 3-TE formation, they won't even waste effort worrying about the pass. If you know it's a pass in shotgun, you don't even have to stay in your gaps, you can just wreak havoc in open space which is hard for any O-lineman to block.

How do you know whether the opposition worries about the run? Where are you getting that only 14% are draws or screens. What stat source tells you how many of the passes were screens? Again you are totally wrong that DL abandon their run responsiblity based upon formation. It is based upon the actions of the OL, which would be the same.

The running backs and tight ends are not deficient on this team. We use shotgun because of a stubborn desire to use our best chess pieces over, and over, and over, and rely on the talent to out-execute. This team is so persistent on it, that it cannot manufacture a win if Welker is stopped.

How is it stubbrn to throw to the open receiver. The point you are missing is that Brady has always thrown to the open reciever. The fact that his best 2 options are far, far better than ever before, simply means they are open more. If Deion Branch could have gotten open as often as Moss he would have been thrown to as often. You spread the ball to your checkdowns AFTER your primary receivers fail to get open. You seem to want to not throw it to the open guy, but predetermine distribution and tell Brady who to throw to when the play is called whether they are open or not. I dont understand that.

You're right, and no shotgun-happy team has won this decade yet, so the innovation isn't legit, it's a fad at this point just like the Wildcat. The 2002 Bucs beat a Raiders team that was even more unbalanced/one-dimensional.
The Patriots won 18 games in 2007. The Colts won a SB. The Steelers won last year with a pass first offense. The brainturst that you are trashing here won 3 of them, again you are incorrect.

You just seem to be backing into grasping at straws to support your bias.
 
A completely different (but relevant) scenario.
Suppose you have a hall of fame running back.
Theoretically a 3-TE formation gives him more blockers and a more power formation.
What if 75% of all this team's runs were out of the 3-TE set, and over 86% of the time in the 3-TE set it was a run?

Of course it would affect the opposing defense and the blocking.

Replace 3-TE with shotgun and running back with QB, and you have what the Pats have right now.

That is totally irrelevent.
A 3 TE formation allows you to defend differently because the offense has taking its passing threats off the field. That team cannot pass effectively, and they have shrunk the field.
A shotgun formation does not create that difference. You can run or pass, but more importantly you have the players on the field who can do those things, and by alignment you widen the field.
You can run from a spread shotgun offense because you've taken players out of the play by alignment.
You can't effectively throw consistently from a 3 TE offense because you don't have WRs to throw to and those TEs are in coverage mismatches.
 
Great thoughts, Rob. Lemme see if I can offer a few other key points to the discussion.

Well, that goes to the GM side of Belichick..
Yes and no. IMO A. Smith, Faulk, Morris and Maroney don't exactly scare defenses like a Stephen Jackson or Dillon when he was here, but the "threat" to run the ball and mix it into playcalling was always part of the Pats offense. You can certainly make a case that Weis tried to get too cute or outsmart himself some days.

The only year we had this unpredictability and balance that everyone credits to Weis for his entire career was really only in 2004 when the Pats had Corey Dillon. That was the only year this team ran a lot of play action. It was the only year teams really weren't sure whether the Pats were going to run or pass. ..

I guess I define balance as keeping the defense honest and that can happen at a couple of different levels with 2004 being the highest level where you had a tier 1 RB who could cause damage against a 4/5/6 man front and/or a running game that has just enough respect to keep the defense honest- see 2003. Pats ran the ball quite a bit that year (ave almost 30 carries a game) and in the playoffs ran it 26, 31 and 35 times.

This year IMO the problems are multiple- and it's not just the playcalling with execution, focus and fundementals being other contributing factors to this team's difficulties in the red zone.
 
Last edited:
If you ever played the game you would know that within about a milisecond of the snap the DL knows its a pass, because the OL steps backward to pass protect.

Not necessarily, here is an example of a RT who was careful not to reveal pass.

F.S. Lineman
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.


Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/16: News and Notes
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Not a First Round Pick? Hoge Doubles Down on Maye
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/11: News and Notes
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft #5 and Thoughts About Dugger Signing
Matthew Slater Set For New Role With Patriots
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/10: News and Notes
Back
Top