Curran: Pats' reliance on the run may not be a good thing

[IllegalContact]

the pats running game showed plenty of life against the dolphins, browns and other teams.......at that point, the team is decidedly pass-first, and the games were typically all at risk

an increased dedication to the run has produced 3 games that have been relatively easy as compared to the most any game prior to that this season

+7 turnover differential...in 3 games
controlling the clock has helped the defense
brady as fresh as he has been going into an AFCC game in a very long time

displaying the capacity to run as well as a willingness to stick with it produces problems for opposing defenses....it used to be 'don't worry, during the game, the pats will eventually revert to most plays being passing plays'

doing things the way they are doing them the past 3 games has killed the will of the opponent to play in the 4th quarter.

 

[letekro]

Wait. You are saying our passing is not effective but the 49ers is?
Are you really saying that?

Only a fool would say otherwise. I'm surprised that any Pats fan would point to passing yards as conclusory evidence of a successful passing game. Any Pats fan should know that it is certainly not, as there have been plenty of occasions where the Pats give up 300 yards of passing in garbage time after shutting a team down all game when it counts. It is all about efficiency. Here are Brady's efficiency ratings in the games since Gronk went down:

85.7
87.3
68.4 (rain storm)
78.4

Here are Kap's in the last 4:

108.6
111.2
75.3 (-40 degrees w/ wind chill)
87.8

That's not even including Kap's ability to run when a play breaks down, which is part of
San Fran's passing game. This is not an insignificant point, as, besides the yards he gains, defenses have to prioritize lane integrity over pass rush against the 49ers.

Even if you want to look at the whole year (which I would advise against, because Kap was missing Crabtree for most of it and Brady had time with and without Gronk) (and we are doing a Gronkless comparison here), Kap's rating is 91.6, while Brady's was 87.3. Just eyeballing it, it looks like Kap's rating with Crabtree is over 100, while Brady's is below 80 without Gronk.

I'm not saying Kaepernick is better than Brady, but I am saying that the 49ers, with Boldin, Davis, and Crabtree finally healthy, have a better passing game than the Patriots. The numbers support that.

 

[TomPatriot]

Yeah, Tom, a 21 point win isn't a good thing. And you're right. BB and McD and TFB will forget that Denver watched their game and go into Denver with no game plan other than handing it off to LeGarrett Blount. We're doomed.

What a crock. How about making a more accurate title, such as, "Pats Roll Over the Colts Making the Most of the Personnel They Have (As Usual)."

The only thing I agree with is that it is maddening that our three rookie wide receivers continue to break down and have really contributed nothing this year other than an occasional good play. But, at this point, it is what it is.

It's going to be a tough game but the level of pessimism is crazy.

Denver is putting eight in the box on first down and whenever the Patriots are in some run formation tendency. Tom Brady doesn't need Rob Gronkowski when there are eight in the box, except in the red zone. It's not like you can man Edelman and Amendola easily with no help over the top.

If I am Jack Del Rio, I have a big problem. With Blount, the O line doesn't need to zone block, it can man block, zone block or run zone-trap/gap schemes or a combination of both. So he never knows what he's getting because it's almost never the same read.

Now imagine you have a 260 pound lead blocker and a 260 pound tailback and you're the smallish LB filling the hole. What fun. You saw this on Blount's 73 yard run in the Colts game when Hooman cleaned the DT(!) in the 3 hole, Connolly sealed the Mike, the Will was too wide and Blount broke free. And it's not like the D gets a break with Ridley in the game.

It's a 2014 version of Erhardt-Perkins, smashmouth football. And you still have to worry about Brady passing the football. It's a tough assignment.

 

[SVN]

Only a fool would say otherwise. I'm surprised that any Pats fan would point to passing yards as conclusory evidence of a successful passing game. Any Pats fan should know that it is certainly not, as there have been plenty of occasions where the Pats give up 300 yards of passing in garbage time after shutting a team down all game when it counts. It is all about efficiency. Here are Brady's efficiency ratings in the games since Gronk went down:

85.7
87.3
68.4 (rain storm)
78.4

Here are Kap's in the last 4:

108.6
111.2
75.3 (-40 degrees w/ wind chill)
87.8

That's not even including Kap's ability to run when a play breaks down, which is part of
San Fran's passing game. This is not an insignificant point, as, besides the yards he gains, defenses have to prioritize lane integrity over pass rush against the 49ers.

Even if you want to look at the whole year (which I would advise against, because Kap was missing Crabtree for most of it and Brady had time with and without Gronk) (and we are doing a Gronkless comparison here), Kap's rating is 91.6, while Brady's was 87.3. Just eyeballing it, it looks like Kap's rating with Crabtree is over 100, while Brady's is below 80 without Gronk.

I'm not saying Kaepernick is better than Brady, but I am saying that the 49ers, with Boldin, Davis, and Crabtree finally healthy, have a better passing game than the Patriots. The numbers support that.

I dont know what to say to this. I live here in the bay area and the one thing all media /fans/talk radio keep harping is how bad their pass offense is. So he didnt have crabtree. He had a great defense , boldin, gore. Even 49er fans and media here want an offense like the pats and never say they have a better passing offense than us. They have have a better WR core than us right now and maybe a better defense than us but you can throw all the numbers out of the window. Not to mention , the patriots passing game is way more complex and sophisticated than the 49ers so much harder to run with all the changing personel.
Look at the teams they played the last few weeks.Not exactly a murderers row of defenses. And they score 23 and 27 pts with all his passer ratings in the playoffs.

 

[Ring 6]

Only a fool would say otherwise.

Wow. Just wow.

I'm surprised that any Pats fan would point to passing yards as conclusory evidence of a successful passing game.

Another strawman? Where did I say that?
You are the one equating passing yards to effectiveness, unless it doesn't fit your argument then it is prevent defense in a game we won, or injuires.
YOU made the argument 'moving the ball'. Well, until that was proven wrong and you changed to something else.

Any Pats fan should know that it is certainly not, as there have been plenty of occasions where the Pats give up 300 yards of passing in garbage time after shutting a team down all game when it counts.

We aren't talking about garbage time, as neither team has played games where they lost big and piled up garbage time yards. You are stretching so far, your argument is changing with each post.

It is all about efficiency.

No it isn't at all. The discussion is about the effectiveness of the passing game, particularly if the running game fails and you must throw almost exclusively. Efficiency is an entirely different metric than ability to carry a team that can't run.

Here are Brady's efficiency ratings in the games since Gronk went down:

85.7
87.3
68.4 (rain storm)
78.4

Here are Kap's in the last 4:

108.6
111.2
75.3 (-40 degrees w/ wind chill)
87.8

Are you honestly trying to use passer rating to judge QB play?
Again, you bastardize the argument.

That's not even including Kap's ability to run when a play breaks down, which is part of
San Fran's passing game. This is not an insignificant point, as, besides the yards he gains, defenses have to prioritize lane integrity over pass rush against the 49ers.

The passing results are including that effect.
Thats like saying Brady is smart so his numbers are even better than they are because he makes the other team worry about how smart he is.

Even if you want to look at the whole year (which I would advise against, because Kap was missing Crabtree for most of it and Brady had time with and without Gronk) (and we are doing a Gronkless comparison here), Kap's rating is 91.6, while Brady's was 87.3. Just eyeballing it, it looks like Kap's rating with Crabtree is over 100, while Brady's is below 80 without Gronk.

QB Rating is a horrendous method of judging QB play. Always has been, always will be.

I'm not saying Kaepernick is better than Brady, but I am saying that the 49ers, with Boldin, Davis, and Crabtree finally healthy, have a better passing game than the Patriots. The numbers support that.

OK, the 49ers who have thrown for 250 yards or more 4 times all season in 18 games have a better passing game than the Patriots.

Its OK, you can go ahead and be Chicken Little if that makes you happy.
I am fine with my opinion, and the points you have brought up (and the ridiculousness of opinions such as this one) only strengthen my conviction to my opinion.

Since all of the times it happened this season and the passing offense was fine went on ignore for you, perhaps it will happen again this week so your opinion can be tested again.

 

[UK_Pat37]

Only a fool would say otherwise. I'm surprised that any Pats fan would point to passing yards as conclusory evidence of a successful passing game. Any Pats fan should know that it is certainly not, as there have been plenty of occasions where the Pats give up 300 yards of passing in garbage time after shutting a team down all game when it counts. It is all about efficiency. Here are Brady's efficiency ratings in the games since Gronk went down:

85.7
87.3
68.4 (rain storm)
78.4

Here are Kap's in the last 4:

108.6
111.2
75.3 (-40 degrees w/ wind chill)
87.8

That's not even including Kap's ability to run when a play breaks down, which is part of
San Fran's passing game. This is not an insignificant point, as, besides the yards he gains, defenses have to prioritize lane integrity over pass rush against the 49ers.

Even if you want to look at the whole year (which I would advise against, because Kap was missing Crabtree for most of it and Brady had time with and without Gronk) (and we are doing a Gronkless comparison here), Kap's rating is 91.6, while Brady's was 87.3. Just eyeballing it, it looks like Kap's rating with Crabtree is over 100, while Brady's is below 80 without Gronk.

I'm not saying Kaepernick is better than Brady, but I am saying that the 49ers, with Boldin, Davis, and Crabtree finally healthy, have a better passing game than the Patriots. The numbers support that.

Dude, Kap barely broke 3K in yardage...are you for real? Yardage is absolutely a measuring point. QB ratings can be skewed also.

You're starting to troll now, surely?

 

[letekro]

I dont know what to say to this. I live here in the bay area and the one thing all media /fans/talk radio keep harping is how bad their pass offense is. So he didnt have crabtree. He had a great defense , boldin, gore. Even 49er fans and media here want an offense like the pats and never say they have a better passing offense than us. They have have a better WR core than us right now and maybe a better defense than us but you can throw all the numbers out of the window. Not to mention , the patriots passing game is way more complex and sophisticated than the 49ers so much harder to run with all the changing personel.
Look at the teams they played the last few weeks.Not exactly a murderers row of defenses. And they score 23 and 27 pts with all his passer ratings in the playoffs.

At Carolina, a top 5 defense, they scored 23. Pats scored 20, with gronk. Gronk is an uncoverable, unstoppable force. He is no longer available

At Arizona, a top 5 defense, they scored 23, his rating was well over 100 and he had over 300 yards passing for those that find that to be important.

At Green bay, the game was 40 below, he still had decent numbers and Green Bay couldn't stop them with the game on the line.

We all heard the criticism of Kap earlier in the year. He was playing without his favorite receiver, and also without Vernon Davis for mmuch of that period. I don't think you will find any 9er fans complaining now.

 

[SVN]

At Carolina, a top 5 defense, they scored 23. Pats scored 20, with gronk. Gronk is an uncoverable, unstoppable force. He is no longer available

At Arizona, a top 5 defense, they scored 23, his rating was well over 100 and he had over 300 yards passing for those that find that to be important.

At Green bay, the game was 40 below, he still had decent numbers and Green Bay couldn't stop them with the game on the line.

We all heard the criticism of Kap earlier in the year. He was playing without his favorite receiver, and also without Vernon Davis for mmuch of that period. I don't think you will find any 9er fans complaining now.

top 5 defense, but a bad passing secondary. Pats missed a FG and ridley fumbled in the RZ. You think the pats had problems passing the ball vs carolina and Kap did better vs them by that much ?
Have you see green bay's defense ?

 

[Ring 6]

At Carolina, a top 5 defense, they scored 23. Pats scored 20, with gronk. Gronk is an uncoverable, unstoppable force. He is no longer available

So we will ignore the 9 they scored the first time? We will ignore that before the TD at the half, they had gone 17 drives vs that top 5 defense without a TD? That is now 2 in 21 btw.

At Arizona, a top 5 defense, they scored 23, his rating was well over 100 and he had over 300 yards passing for those that find that to be important.

Arizona allows 20.2 per game. 23 incuded a 56 yard FG.
Saints are a top 5 D and the Patriots scored 30 on them.

At Green bay, the game was 40 below, he still had decent numbers and Green Bay couldn't stop them with the game on the line.

It wasn't 40 below and you know that. GB stinks.

We all heard the criticism of Kap earlier in the year. He was playing without his favorite receiver, and also without Vernon Davis for mmuch of that period. I don't think you will find any 9er fans complaining now.

They aren't complaining because they are in the NFCCG. Ironically you are compliaing because we are.

 

[letekro]

Wow. Just wow.


Another strawman? Where did I say that?
You are the one equating passing yards to effectiveness, unless it doesn't fit your argument then it is prevent defense in a game we won, or injuires.
YOU made the argument 'moving the ball'. Well, until that was proven wrong and you changed to something else.



We aren't talking about garbage time, as neither team has played games where they lost big and piled up garbage time yards. You are stretching so far, your argument is changing with each post.



No it isn't at all. The discussion is about the effectiveness of the passing game, particularly if the running game fails and you must throw almost exclusively. Efficiency is an entirely different metric than ability to carry a team that can't run.



Are you honestly trying to use passer rating to judge QB play?
Again, you bastardize the argument.




The passing results are including that effect.
Thats like saying Brady is smart so his numbers are even better than they are because he makes the other team worry about how smart he is.


QB Rating is a horrendous method of judging QB play. Always has been, always will be.


OK, the 49ers who have thrown for 250 yards or more 4 times all season in 18 games have a better passing game than the Patriots.

Its OK, you can go ahead and be Chicken Little if that makes you happy.
I am fine with my opinion, and the points you have brought up (and the ridiculousness of opinions such as this one) only strengthen my conviction to my opinion.

Since all of the times it happened this season and the passing offense was fine went on ignore for you, perhaps it will happen again this week so your opinion can be tested again.

Since you probably don't understand the efficiency rating, it essentially means this: Each time Kap goes back to throw, he is more likely to gain more yards, more likely to throw a touchdown and less likely to throw an INT than Brady. No one statistic is perfect, but efficiency rating is a pretty good indicator of the effectiveness of a passing game. Again, if you enjoyed the passing game against CLE and MIA, then there is no use arguing. I thought it was a struggle. That's just a difference of opinion which we won't be able to reconcile.

Against Denver, I am hopeful we can keep the game low scoring and keep the running game in play. I also don't think their pass defense is even average without Harris. So, there is no chicken little here, I'm confident this week. That doesn't change the fact that Curran's concern is valid.

 

[Ring 6]

At Carolina, a top 5 defense, they scored 23. Pats scored 20, with gronk. Gronk is an uncoverable, unstoppable force. He is no longer available

The Patriots punted once against Carolina, at the end of a 9 play first drive. Then they went
14 plays 67 yards and fumbled.
Then 9/56 FG
Then 8/80 TD
Then 9/80 TD
Then 9/31 FG
Then 11/62 Int*

7 Possessions 20 points 28 first downs 390 yards 296 passing yards 73% complete. Yeah Kaepernicks 2 games of combined 32 points, 26-50-297 proves everything. Hey in 2 games combined he had 3 less completions and 1 more passing yard than Brady did in his one game.
Yup, the Panther test is a solid one.

 

[letekro]

top 5 defense, but a bad passing secondary. Pats missed a FG and ridley fumbled in the RZ. You think the pats had problems passing the ball vs carolina and Kap did better vs them by that much ?
Have you see green bay's defense ?

Carolina's D is legit. 49ers did nothing against them in the first game. With Crabtree and Davis healthy this time, the 49ers moved the ball through the air and got in the end zone twice. Again, I'll take Brady over Kap and I'll take the Pats passing game with Gronk WAY over the 49ers passing game. Without Gronk, I think the 9ers have the better unit, only because their skill players are miles better than ours.

Green Bay's D stinks, but the ball was a rock. Tough to score a ton in those conditions, but they did move the ball through the air and the go ahead and then winning score with the game on the line.

 

[goheels22002]

Fascinating argument above about the relative effectiveness of the Patriots passing attack.

The Patriots' passing game did its job in three consecutive blowouts (Ravens, Bills and Colts) that featured a defense that got turnovers, shortened the field for the offense, and a running game that 1) scored touchdowns, 2) ate clock, 3) did not turn the ball over, and 4) benefited from third down conversions when needed from the passing game.

I love the idea of the passing attack being responsible for keeping the chains moving in 2nd and 3rd down situations as a component of extended drives that keeps the opposing defense on the field, and QBs like Flacco, Luck and Manning on the sidelines.

Curran's piece read like a "let's stir the pot" piece. Nothing terribly wrong there, and quite successful in cranking up this thread. Curran assumes a shootout at Denver, I think. If the Patriots don't dig a whole like they did in the previous Broncos game, I don't see the AFCC turning into a shootout at all. There's enough on tape from the Chargers three games keeping the Broncos under 30 to keep this one close, especially with McCourty, Gregory, Talib and Bolden looking about as good and healthy as they've looked since early in the season.

The Patriots are doing much more than just "survive and move on" these past few weeks. They are blowing teams out in games they needed to get the bye and get to the AFCC game. I do not see the Broncos doing the same. 24-17 at home against a poorly conceived game plan by the Chargers was un-impressive, especially when the Chargers opened up their offense and mounted their 17 point comeback that was too little, too late.

The Patriots are in a great place offensively and defensively with the emergence of Collins, the DBs, and a running game that demands 7 or 8 in the box on every play. If DB Chris Harris is out for the Broncos, they'll have a tougher time matching up with the Patriots than the Patriots will have with their admittedly terrific receivers.

In a Josh McDaniels vs. Jack Del Rio game of wits, I like Josh McDaniels.

 

[Ring 6]

Since you probably don't understand the efficiency rating, it essentially means this: Each time Kap goes back to throw, he is more likely to gain more yards, more likely to throw a touchdown and less likely to throw an INT than Brady.

No, that is NOT what it means.

No one statistic is perfect, but efficiency rating is a pretty good indicator of the effectiveness of a passing game.

It is a HORRENDOUS indicator. It is an archaic formula that was horrible when it was created, and is simply a way for a novice who knows nothing about football to have SOME numbers associated with passes thrown put into a formula for them that tells very little.

Again, if you enjoyed the passing game against CLE and MIA, then there is no use arguing. I thought it was a struggle. That's just a difference of opinion which we won't be able to reconcile.

We put up almost 1000 yards. A struggle? What does that even mean? You want to put up 1000 yards and have it be "easy" or pretty and that makes a difference?
The fact is that when they had to throw they moved the ball almost at will. Isnt that the basis of this discussion?

Against Denver, I am hopeful we can keep the game low scoring and keep the running game in play. I also don't think their pass defense is even average without Harris. So, there is no chicken little here, I'm confident this week. That doesn't change the fact that Curran's concern is valid.

The fact that we haven't needed to throw the ball much in a month, could raise a 'valid concern' that if the running game is taken away and we must throw often, we will be moving away from what has produced tremendous results. Turning that into 'we can't throw the ball effectively if we have to' with all of the evidence in conflict with that opinion is indeed a Chicken Little venture.

 

[letekro]

At Carolina, a top 5 defense, they scored 23. Pats scored 20, with gronk. Gronk is an uncoverable, unstoppable force. He is no longer available

The Patriots punted once against Carolina, at the end of a 9 play first drive. Then they went
14 plays 67 yards and fumbled.
Then 9/56 FG
Then 8/80 TD
Then 9/80 TD
Then 9/31 FG
Then 11/62 Int*

7 Possessions 20 points 28 first downs 390 yards 296 passing yards 73% complete. Yeah Kaepernicks 2 games of combined 32 points, 26-50-297 proves everything. Hey in 2 games combined he had 3 less completions and 1 more passing yard than Brady did in his one game.
Yup, the Panther test is a solid one.

I've told you, give me the 49ers passing offense, as presently constituted, vs. the Pats passing offense, as presently constituted. I've provided some statistical evidence as to why I believe that (in addition to what I see on the field). Your appeals to statistics from when Gronkowski was playing aren't relevant here. I was just making the point that, even with Gronkowski, the 49ers (as presently constituted) scored more points against CAR than the Pats. Maybe too cute. My intention is to keep the comparison between the gronkless Pats and the current 49ers.

 

[Ring 6]

Fascinating argument above about the relative effectiveness of the Patriots passing attack.

The Patriots' passing game did its job in three consecutive blowouts (Ravens, Bills and Colts) that featured a defense that got turnovers, shortened the field for the offense, and a running game that 1) scored touchdowns, 2) ate clock, 3) did not turn the ball over, and 4) benefited from third down conversions when needed from the passing game.

I love the idea of the passing attack being responsible for keeping the chains moving in 2nd and 3rd down situations as a component of extended drives that keeps the opposing defense on the field, and QBs like Flacco, Luck and Manning on the sidelines.

Curran's piece read like a "let's stir the pot" piece. Nothing terribly wrong there, and quite successful in cranking up this thread. Curran assumes a shootout at Denver, I think. If the Patriots don't dig a whole like they did in the previous Broncos game, I don't see the AFCC turning into a shootout at all. There's enough on tape from the Chargers three games keeping the Broncos under 30 to keep this one close, especially with McCourty, Gregory, Talib and Bolden looking about as good and healthy as they've looked since early in the season.

The Patriots are doing much more than just "survive and move on" these past few weeks. They are blowing teams out in games they needed to get the bye and get to the AFCC game. I do not see the Broncos doing the same. 24-17 at home against a poorly conceived game plan by the Chargers was un-impressive, especially when the Chargers opened up their offense and mounted their 17 point comeback that was too little, too late.

The Patriots are in a great place offensively and defensively with the emergence of Collins, the DBs, and a running game that demands 7 or 8 in the box on every play. If DB Chris Harris is out for the Broncos, they'll have a tougher time matching up with the Patriots than the Patriots will have with their admittedly terrific receivers.

In a Josh McDaniels vs. Jack Del Rio game of wits, I like Josh McDaniels.

Good point about the blowouts. I think the team is peaking at the right time. I, for one, am thankful that we have established a beastly running game so that we can phyisically dominate teams (and it has been on BOTH sides of the ball that we have outphysicalled teams for a month).

 

[SebertJr]

reliance.....and luxury, two different animals......simple.
Let's not forget the weather the last couple games

 

[Ring 6]

At Carolina, a top 5 defense, they scored 23. Pats scored 20, with gronk. Gronk is an uncoverable, unstoppable force. He is no longer available



I've told you, give me the 49ers passing offense, as presently constituted, vs. the Pats passing offense, as presently constituted.

And I have told you that is idiotic.

I've provided some statistical evidence as to why I believe that (in addition to what I see on the field). Your appeals to statistics

I did not appeal to statistics. I used them in response to your argument that the games vs the Panthers are part of your reason. Clearly they support the opposite of your argument.

from when Gronkowski was playing aren't relevant here.

You are trying to slice and dice and end up with 3 plays all season to make your argument.
First, the passing game sucks.
Then, you can't count Cleveland because it was prevent defense
Then you can't count Miami because of an injury.
Then you can't count any games Gronk played in.
So sooner or later you find an excuse for every game that doesnt fit your mold.

I was just making the point that, even with Gronkowski, the 49ers (as presently constituted) scored more points against CAR than the Pats. Maybe too cute. My intention is to keep the comparison between the gronkless Pats and the current 49ers.

Your intention is to dodge reality, make excuses for what doesn't support your predetermined conclusion and dance around everything else.
There are zero games that support your conclusion.

 

[goheels22002]

I've told you, give me the 49ers passing offense, as presently constituted, vs. the Pats passing offense, as presently constituted. I've provided some statistical evidence as to why I believe that (in addition to what I see on the field). Your appeals to statistics from when Gronkowski was playing aren't relevant here. I was just making the point that, even with Gronkowski, the 49ers (as presently constituted) scored more points against CAR than the Pats. Maybe too cute. My intention is to keep the comparison between the gronkless Pats and the current 49ers.

Give me Anquan Boldin and keep the rest of the 49ers pass offense, if you ask me. He's the reason that Colin Kaepernick can move around and sling it. Boldin is a very special big, physical receiver with great hands who can out-muscle anybody for the ball in space. The Ravens would have won their division if they'd kept Boldin.

But you know what? None of this matters.

The Patriots have to game plan for the Broncos defense who will not have their best pass rusher and have a weak secondary, especially if Brady is looking at Quentin Jammer and Champ Bailey in their nickel defense.

Neither of those guys can risk pressing at the line of scrimmage lest they get burned deep, and neither one of those guys can stay with Amendola, Edelman, Vereen or KT in space. With the Patriots' running game the way it is, the Broncos will have a very hard time dropping anybody into coverage to help out.

I would anticipate a pretty "efficient" passing attack next week under the circumstances.

 

[letekro]

No, that is NOT what it means.




It is a HORRENDOUS indicator. It is an archaic formula that was horrible when it was created, and is simply a way for a novice who knows nothing about football to have SOME numbers associated with passes thrown put into a formula for them that tells very little.



We put up almost 1000 yards. A struggle? What does that even mean? You want to put up 1000 yards and have it be "easy" or pretty and that makes a difference?
The fact is that when they had to throw they moved the ball almost at will. Isnt that the basis of this discussion?


The fact that we haven't needed to throw the ball much in a month, could raise a 'valid concern' that if the running game is taken away and we must throw often, we will be moving away from what has produced tremendous results. Turning that into 'we can't throw the ball effectively if we have to' with all of the evidence in conflict with that opinion is indeed a Chicken Little venture.

My description of the passer efficiency rating is essentially correct. Do you prefer QBR, because Kapernick wins there too, 68-61. My suspicion is that your belief is that only statistics that back up your worldview are relevant, but hope springs eternal that you'll prove me wrong.

Most quarterbacks that throw it 50+ times in a game are going to finish with 300+ yards, so I'm not really persuaded by the yardage totals in the MIA and CLE games. Again, that was the best they've been through the air without gronk, and in my view, it wasn't very good. If you think it was very good, then we just have a difference of opinion.