An offensive case study: 2003 AFC Championship

[pats1]

If you want to point the blame for the running issues, look no further than the OL. It always amuses me why it is so clear to everyone how much they impact Brady's abilities, but somehow RBs are supposed to do well no matter their performance.

Agreed, but I think we've seen enough of Maroney to draw a conclusion in that regard.

Besides, the OL now is very comparable to what it once was. Just substitute Mankins for Andruzzi and Kaczur for Ashworth/Gorin. That is, of course, assuming consistent ability and performance by the common traits - Light, Koppen, Neal. I'm not entirely convinced we've seen that.

 

[Oswlek]

I think Antowain vintage 2001 was better than any RB we have now. Certainly not the 2003 version. Maybe I'm nuts.

I don't know how much credence you put into it, but Smith had a negative DVOA in 2001 and a below 48% success rate according to football outsiders. Maroney was significantly better in every single measure they have in his lone healthy year, 2007.

Smith was able to stay healthier than LoMo, but he was not a better RB than Maroney is now.

 

[Oswlek]

Agreed, but I think we've seen enough of Maroney to draw a conclusion in that regard.

Besides, the OL now is very comparable to what it once was. Just substitute Mankins for Andruzzi and Kaczur for Ashworth/Gorin.

Comparable in roster, but somehow not comparable in playing. I said this before the draft this year that despite the overall talent level - which I think is high - NE's OL just doesn't play as consistently well as they used to. When they are on, they reach a point the 2001 team could only dream of, but that 2001 was far more consistent.

 

[pats1]

And your point is?

Oh, wait a minute, does this mean I can show all Brady's misfires from those two games as proof that he will suck all year?

You're right, this team needs a QB upgrade in a big way.

When did I say that the Pats would "suck all year?" I'm not part of that crowd; I'm only trying to make a case for a slight alteration in offensive philosophy. I believe the current approach is not working consistently enough and I'm looking to an approach that many would say did work as inspiration. And I'm not saying to suddenly change mindset and turn into the 2003 Pats, just to take some elements of what they did, especially on the creative side, and implement them into future gameplans. We'll leave entire offensive schemes for the offseason, when the team will have a chance to re-evaluate its personnel, which has been harvested over the last 4 years to fit a spread system.

In other words, BB didn't sit on the plane ride thinking how he could best replicate the offensive (and defensive) successes of the past; I'm sure he was simply thinking "what kind of things did we do that helped us win then that can help us win now?"

 

[David Deas]

If you want to point the blame for the running issues, look no further than the OL. It always amuses me why it is so clear to everyone how much they impact Brady's abilities, but somehow RBs are supposed to do well no matter their performance.

True.

But when an OL is used to being in pass blocking mode all game long, it can be hard for them to rapidly transition into run blocking mode. That transition becomes easier with a more balanced scheme.

 

[pats1]

I don't know how much credence you put into it, but Smith had a negative DVOA in 2001 and a below 48% success rate according to football outsiders. Maroney was significantly better in every single measure they have in his lone healthy year, 2007.

Smith was able to stay healthier than LoMo, but he was not a better RB than Maroney is now.

I think that's putting far too much stock in FO's figures. I doubt BB would ever agree with that statement, behind closed doors or not.

 

[Oswlek]

When did I say that the Pats would "suck all year?" I'm not part of that crowd; I'm only trying to make a case for a slight alteration in offensive philosophy. I believe the current approach is not working consistently enough and I'm looking to an approach that many would say did work as inspiration.

Sorry, my bad. I thought you were posting those two games as evidence that NE hasn't run well, and therefore can't.

Mea Culpa.

 

[Oswlek]

I think that's putting far too much stock in FO's figures. I doubt BB would ever agree with that statement, behind closed doors or not.

The other factor neither of us mentioned was the quality of the rest of the offense. That impacts each individual player's numbers as well.

That said, I think BB would take LoMo over Smith every day. LoMo is far more versatile in the passing game and a more dynamic runner. I watched his play very carefully in the Buffalo game and there is no way Smith gets a single yard Maroney didn't, and there were several that Smith could never have gotten.

 

[Oswlek]

True.

But when an OL is used to being in pass blocking mode all game long, it can be hard for them to rapidly transition into run blocking mode. That transition becomes easier with a more balanced scheme.

Agreed. I would like to see this team run more myself. And this week is the perfect week to start, considering Atlanta's lousy front and the loss of their 1st rounder.

 

[Patjew]

I don't know how much credence you put into it, but Smith had a negative DVOA in 2001 and a below 48% success rate according to football outsiders. Maroney was significantly better in every single measure they have in his lone healthy year, 2007.

Smith was able to stay healthier than LoMo, but he was not a better RB than Maroney is now.

I just go by my eyes and basic stats. I don't get all of those fancy statistics, although that's not to say they don't tell a more accurate story. I'd say LoMo has better ability but I thought Smith ran better and more consistently in 2001 than LoMo ever has minus a few games here and there.

 

[David Deas]

Agreed, but I think we've seen enough of Maroney to draw a conclusion in that regard.

Besides, the OL now is very comparable to what it once was. Just substitute Mankins for Andruzzi and Kaczur for Ashworth/Gorin. That is, of course, assuming consistent ability and performance by the common traits - Light, Koppen, Neal. I'm not entirely convinced we've seen that.

No it's not. This is not the same line that could swallow up Peppers, Buckner, Rucker, and Jenkins in the Super-Bowl. Nope. No way Jose. These days all you see is Matt Light getting smoked by anybody with even the slightest bit of foot speed.

 

[unoriginal]

This is a pass-first league and a pass-first offense. We do without the fullback and the blocking tight end because they are liabilities in the passing game and can be superseded by Faulk and Watson.

We want to run a zone-blocking scheme because it promises guaranteed yards but we don't have the blocking tight ends to collapse the corner or the fullback to lead on inside zone and erase the penetration on an outside stretch. So the running back has to step around a lunging body in the backfield or else backside pursuit runs faster than the offensive line can push through the box.

Our offensive line is actually pretty good all things considered so half the time we get holes created where a defensive lineman gets ridden out of the play. The other half of the time the running back looks like he's trying to run around a moving wall. So we get a running game that swings between 10 yard gains and 1 yard gains almost at random.

That's my general take on it.

 

[Oswlek]

I just go by my eyes and basic stats. I don't get all of those fancy statistics, although that's not to say they don't tell a more accurate story. I'd say LoMo has better ability but I thought Smith ran better and more consistently in 2001 than LoMo ever has minus a few games here and there.

The problem is health. When healthy, Maroney has been a dynamo. He took the lead back carries from Dillon just 9 weeks into his rookie season. he carried the offense when the passing unit bogged down a couple times later in 2007.

He just hasn't been healthy enough.

 

[pats1]

Sorry, my bad. I thought you were posting those two games as evidence that NE hasn't run well, and therefore can't.

Mea Culpa.

No, no, I really have two points:

1) NE hasn't run tremendously well to date, but by re-thinking their offensive philosophy and modifying their approach in future games, they can put the pressure back on defenses, become more unpredictable, and improve BOTH their running and passing games.

2) However, the offense that has failed them in the first two games is largely representative of the offense that has not performed up to *championship* caliber (which may not entail statistical dominance) on a general level from 2005-09, due to the loss of Weis and poor draft decisions (Maroney, Jackson, Watson). They can make changes in the short run (see #1) to rectify this, but I believe larger personnel and schematic decisions will have to take place after this season.

I believe this mostly holds true for the defense as well; I've only been taking a look at the offense these past two days. Replace the unbalanced offense problem with the conservative defense problem, and everything else is pretty much the same. Poor drafting (or lack of defensive drafting) has hurt them there, as has the loss of Crennel and his aggressive and creative schemes.

Someone said last year that we probably won't see the "end of the dynasty" coming, and it will probably come about in a succession of medicore seasons. I'm not saying we're in for one in 2009, but so far this season I think it's been easier to pick up on the general trends that MAY, within the next few seasons, produce mediocrity if they're not addressed. In order to get back to winning a Super Bowl (and it's been 4+ years), these things do need to be addressed at some point. That's all I'm trying to say, and I'm using 2003 as a benchmark.

I also think it's important to note that this thread is not a reaction to just the Jets game, but it's been something I've been reflecting on for upwards of a year now. I remember taking a look at this same game (or was it the Titans game?) last year and trying to pick up ideas from what the defense was doing then, from both a personnel and scheme perspective.

 

[pats1]

The problem is health. When healthy, Maroney has been a dynamo. He took the lead back carries from Dillon just 9 weeks into his rookie season. he carried the offense when the passing unit bogged down a couple times later in 2007.

He just hasn't been healthy enough.

Again, I think there are people out there who are liable to disagree with you. I might have shared your position a year ago, but that opinion is quickly fading. I doubt the Pats will have the same patience you will as the final two years of his contract play out.

 

[pats1]

No it's not. This is not the same line that could swallow up Peppers, Buckner, Rucker, and Jenkins in the Super-Bowl. Nope. No way Jose. These days all you see is Matt Light getting smoked by anybody with even the slightest bit of foot speed.

Again, I was approaching it from a roster level, "assuming consistent play from Light, Koppen, and Neal from 2003-2009."

 

[pats1]

This is a pass-first league and a pass-first offense. We do without the fullback and the blocking tight end because they are liabilities in the passing game and can be superseded by Faulk and Watson.

Which is why I'm interesting in charting out something from 2004 (Colts or Pats), when they only had Pass as a FB, and used him sparingly at that.

 

[Patspsycho]

I believe the loss of Heath Evans really hurts us in those 4th and one situation. He was such a dependable blocker.

I wonder to what extent the loss of a true fb affects our running game.

 

[unoriginal]

I believe the loss of Heath Evans really hurts us in those 4th and one situation. He was such a dependable blocker.

I wonder to what extent the loss of a true fb affects our running game.

Heath Evans is not what I would describe as a true FB. I can't recall many instances of them running iso with him, for example. Certainly none where he moved a linebacker out of the running lane.

 

[maverick4]

No it's not. This is not the same line that could swallow up Peppers, Buckner, Rucker, and Jenkins in the Super-Bowl. Nope. No way Jose. These days all you see is Matt Light getting smoked by anybody with even the slightest bit of foot speed.

What a difference a coordinator makes. A decent 2003 offense against a ferocious Carolina D-line shuts them down, but the highest ever scoring offense in 2007 can't beat a Giants D-line.

Those who keep claiming the Pats couldn't have done anything different to win in 2007, and that it was simply the Giants day and that their D was unstoppable, need to look at the 2003 game.