Is Josh McDaniels any good?

[supafly]

So I wouldn’t be so fast to criticize what I did, because you’re basically guilty of the same offense pal..

I think it's just natural to question certain things, Brady 6. That said, there is probably a group-think session that is going on with all of Belichick, Brady, and McDaniels with regards to certain issues.

It's difficult for me to blame just one person. I can do it without issue for certain plays and scenarios, but when it's occurring in general I know it's time for me to step back.

 

[Deus Irae]

I just said it was an assumption, an assumption equates to a hunch, and you labeling what I said as a claim would equate to an assertion or affirmation those are two very different things. The fact is by you saying my post is a “claim I pulled from my ass” implies that what I wrote was invalid, so in retrospect you’re speaking in the same tone projecting fact but really you’re just doing the same thing you just ripped me for and stating your assumption that it did not happen because of McDaniel’s, an assumption that has not been validated anymore than my assumption was, actually the fact that Woodhead and Welker are not here reflects a likelihood that my position is closer to accurate than your position.

So I wouldn’t be so fast to criticize what I did, because you’re basically guilty of the same offense pal..

No.....

the biggest failure of McDaniel’s is that he did not see the value of Wes Welker and Danny Woodhead he thought that just anyone could slide into those roles and be successful.

That's not an assumption. That's you taking an assumption

But that is a McDaniel’s influenced decision as well

and then attacking McDaniels on the base of that assumption. In other words, you fabricated a claim based upon no evidence at all, and then you berated McDaniels about that claim you'd made up. Like I said, you pulled it out of your ass. Perhaps you'll one day be proven to have guessed 100% correctly, but you'll still just have pulled it out of your ass.

My response, on the other hand, was not made up, and was based entirely upon your post, which has evidence of existence right here in this thread. In other words, "because you’re basically guilty of the same offense pal" is completely untrue.

 

[Bartmac36]

But you are more wrong than I am. You made factually incorrect statements. I didn't. You claimed that the Patriots went 5-5 with the run after incompletes on first down against the Bengals. They didn't. You claimed that they ran the ball 6 straight times in the red zone in the Saints game. They didn't.



No, I've also pointed out your errors. You've got nothing factual and are relying on "But I called it!", when we both know that you're nowhere near 100% on that.

They were 5/5 on plays that were ran outside the two minute warning, that is factually correct. Dont even try to deny that. They also ran the ball six times against the Saints, seeing as how a pass attempt that gets called back doesnt count, that is also factually accurate.

And the fact that I can call plays and outcomes of plays isnt a game i play for fun, its a statement on Josh's playcalling. I would love to be wrong more often than I am. Maybe I am not 100% seeing as how I am not a magical genie (it really would take a rocket scientist to figure that one out, huh?) but i am right way more often than i am comfortable with. I dont say this to brag about my guessing skills, i say this because Im frustrated with the lack of creativity in a lot of these situations. Not to mention the lack of second half adjustments. Im not the only one that feels this way I am sure.

You can engulf yourself in the box scores all you please, but that doesnt paint the full picture.

 

[Deus Irae]

They were 5/5 on plays that were ran outside the two minute warning, that is factually correct. Dont even try to deny that.

That's not what you had claimed. You decided to play a rousing game of "moving the goalposts" after I'd already proven your initial claim to be false.

They also ran the ball six times against the Saints, seeing as how a pass attempt that gets called back doesnt count, that is also factually accurate.

That's not correct. A pass was called, and the play ended in a penalty. That is factually accurate. Your words:

And I dont have to go back and check the Saints or Jets game, I remember 6 straight run calls in the red zone vs the saints when we have a chance to put our foot on their throats

Furthermore, Brady clearly audibled at least twice in those 6 plays, so you can't even state definitively that the 6 rush attempts were McDaniels' idea.

And the fact that I can call plays and outcomes of plays isnt a game i play for fun, its a statement on Josh's playcalling. I would love to be wrong more often than I am. Maybe I am not 100% seeing as how I am not a magical genie (it really would take a rocket scientist to figure that one out, huh?) but i am right way more often than i am comfortable with. I dont say this to brag about my guessing skills, i say this because Im frustrated with the lack of creativity in a lot of these situations. Not to mention the lack of second half adjustments. Im not the only one that feels this way I am sure.

You can engulf yourself in the box scores all you please, but that doesnt paint the full picture.

I'm sure that you're wrong far more often than you admit, given that you can't even admit to the errors you made in this thread.

 

[crypto]

Umm.... did you notice that 2 of those were called back because of an offensive holding penalty? Ridley ran 13 times, but he was credited with only 11 in the game. I broke down the 11 legally credited plays. There's nothing misleading about that.

5, 7 (called back, holding penalty), 17, 1 (called back, holding penalty), 12, 8.

5, 17, 12, 8.

The first step to being taken seriously is learning to count to four.

No, I used 2 yards or less because that was how it broke down. There were no 3 yard carries. I used "more than 4 yards" because 4 ypc is pretty much a statistical norm when one looks at RBs, so being "more" than that would be above that norm (i.e. 5+). You might have noticed that I didn't use "four yards or less", either, instead keeping the 4 yard gain in its own category, had you not been so gung ho about trying to equate "Not how Crypto would do it in his attempt to smear the O.C." with "dishonest".

This isn't about whether or not 4 YPC is pretty much a statistical norm. It's about whether 4 YPC is a good run. It is.

Not surprisingly, since you aren't trying for objectivity or honesty, you've got the numbers wrong. Hell, you added in the >4 carry without adding it to the final attempts totals, and you completely ignore the additional <2 carry in the process.

I have no idea what any of this is referencing.

I don't give a rat's ass about Ivory, or his carries against a weak run defense front in comparison to carries against the #1 rushing defense in the NFL. They are a red herring, and I'm sure you realize that.

Great. Ridley averaged 4.5 yards per carry against the #1 rushing defense in the NFL and according to you he didn't deserve more than the 11 carries he got because ... what, six of them were for two yards or fewer? God forbid a defense stuff six out of an RB's first 11 carries while also giving up 4- 5-, 8-, 12-, and 17-yard gains to him.

That's the stupidest thing I've read all day, and I've been on this site a lot. BTW, Ivory took 34 carries to get to that 104 yards. He averaged just about 3 YPC, which is crap.

He averaged 3.06 overall and 3.3 in his last 23 runs after the first 11. The Jets totaled 177 yards on the ground. They held the ball for more than 65% of the game. This discussion isn't about Ivory's YPC. It's about the quality of offensive play calling and the value of sticking to the running game when you have a good running back. Ridley is a good running back. Holding the ball for more than 65% of the game is a sign of high-quality offensive play calling. And as far as I'm concerned there are very few exceptions to the rule that any time a running back has run for more than 100 yards in a game he's done a damn good job.

Use your head next time. By not doing so, you pretty much helped me to make my point about the nature of the anti-McDaniels posters.

My only gripe is that he doesn't stick to the running game as much as I think he should but whatever you say, bud.

 

[Brady6]

I think it's just natural to question certain things, Brady 6. That said, there is probably a group-think session that is going on with all of Belichick, Brady, and McDaniels with regards to certain issues.

It's difficult for me to blame just one person. I can do it without issue for certain plays and scenarios, but when it's occurring in general I know it's time for me to step back.

I get that SF but you know things can always slide either way in this type of context, the assumption that McDaniel’s is not the primary factor behind those decisions has not been anymore validated than my assumption that he was.

As far as McDaniel’s goes not finding fault in him shows a lack of accountability in my opinion, I don’t think anyone can sit here straight faced and say that if not for McDaniel’s players like Fells, Lloyd, Larsen, Salas, Hoomanawanui, and Amendola would have been signed, outside of Hoomanawanui what did any of those players do other than consume resources and then fall short of expectations?

Last season the team was 12-4 despite an improved defense over the previous 2 years and an easier schedule, the 2 years prior they were 14-2 and 13-3, when you look at the big picture with McDaniel’s leading the offense we’ve lost 1 more game through less than 1 and half season than the previous 2 seasons with Bill O’Brien running the offense, on top of that Brady’s numbers have declined in every single category and are big plays are few and far between. I could look past all of that but the lack of identity on offense is extremely concerning, McDaniel’s runs plays like my 8 year old nephew runs his madden offense when using the multi offense playbook.

 

[Bartmac36]

That's not what you had claimed. You decided to play a rousing game of "moving the goalposts" after I'd already proven your initial claim to be false.



That's not correct. A pass was called, and the play ended in a penalty. Furthermore, Brady clearly audibled at least twice in those 6 plays, so you can't even state definitively that the 6 rush attempts were McDaniels' idea.



I'm sure that you're wrong far more often than you admit, given that you can't even admit to the errors you made in this thread.

I am claiming right now, they were 5/5 on those plays outside the 2 minute warning. I didnt mention it before because I assumed people understood the situation is different under 2 minutes, a mistake on my part, but it has nothing to do with you schooling me or proving me wrong, you just gave me a reason to clarify my statement.

And you arent sure of anything. Basically, your whole argument is that you THINK i am wrong more offen than i claim? So YOU really think your a magical genie that can read minds, eh? Man, you have a level of arrogance to you that really just makes me laugh.

Are you the king of Patriot nation in your mind, too?

 

[Deus Irae]

5, 7 (called back, holding penalty), 17, 1 (called back, holding penalty), 12, 8....

Again, you got your numbers wrong. I proved that. Your quoted post here doesn't change that. All it does is reinforce my point.

It would'nt be X/11 if you were counting the plays called back by penalty, which is what you tried to claim. It would be X/13. That's above and beyond the obvious problem of counting yardage gained on run plays where holding penalties were called.

 

[Brady6]

No.....



That's not an assumption. That's you taking an assumption



and then attacking McDaniels on the base of that assumption. In other words, you fabricated a claim based upon no evidence at all, and then you berated McDaniels about that claim you'd made up. Like I said, you pulled it out of your ass. Perhaps you'll one day be proven to have guessed 100% correctly, but you'll still just have pulled it out of your ass.

My response, on the other hand, was not made up, and was based entirely upon your post, which has evidence of existence right here in this thread. In other words, "because you’re basically guilty of the same offense pal" is completely untrue.

Your response conveys a belief that you feel what I said to be untrue, and I am telling you that belief is no more validated than my belief point, blank, period. We can try and spin it however you want but when you stop spinning we will end up in the same spot, so I would suggest we just leave it alone and move on, so consider the ball bouncing into your court..

 

[Deus Irae]

I am claiming right now, they were 5/5 on those plays outside the 2 minute warning. I didnt mention it before because I assumed people understood the situation is different under 2 minutes, a mistake on my part, but it has nothing to do with you schooling me or proving me wrong, you just gave me a reason to clarify my statement.

And you arent sure of anything. Basically, your whole argument is that you THINK i am wrong more offen than i claim? So YOU really think your a magical genie that can read minds, eh? Man, you have a level of arrogance to you that really just makes me laugh.

Are you the king of Patriot nation in your mind, too?

You changed your argument because the actual facts don't fit your complaint. And trying to dismiss the 1:57/1:50 plays in the second quarter on the basis of it being under 2 minutes, when the ball was already on the Bengals 42 yard line and the Patriots had all 3 timeouts left, is ridiculous.

And my argument was that you were factually wrong in your claims, which you were. It's not just my opinion that the Patriots made throws on 2nd down, after incompletes on 1st down, against the Bengals, and it's not just my opinion that the Patriots called a pass play from inside the red zone against the Saints.

 

[Deus Irae]

Your response conveys a belief that you feel what I said to be untrue, and I am telling you that belief is no more validated than my belief point, blank, period. We can try and spin it however you want but when you stop spinning we will end up in the same spot, so I would suggest we just leave it alone and move on, so consider the ball bouncing into your court..

My response is pretty obvious. You made up your claim. You have no evidence to support it. The only one spinning is you, when you try to equate my position with yours. You made assertions based upon unfounded assumptions. I didn't.

 

[Bartmac36]

You changed your argument because the actual facts don't fit your complaint. And trying to dismiss the 1:57/1:50 plays in the second quarter on the basis of it being under 2 minutes, when the ball was already on the Bengals 42 yard line and the Patriots had all 3 timeouts left, is ridiculous.

And my argument was that you were factually wrong in your claims, which you were.

Do you have a show in Vegas for your mind reading skills? Man the fact that you are telling me my reasons for changing the argument, its just stubborn and immature. You cant take the fact that I admitted to a mistake and then used actual facts, so you are just gonna cling to "oh too late you already said it, that makes you dumb."

Grade school tactics..

 

[Brady6]

Re: Re: Is Josh McDaniels any good?

My response is pretty obvious. You made up your claim. You have no evidence to support it. The only one spinning is you, when you try to equate my position with yours. You made assertions based upon unfounded assumptions. I didn't.

Which is exactly what you're doing right now DI your are asserting that what I am saying is untrue and you have no evidence to support it.

Furthermore you clearly are overlooking my follow up post to Max in which I said I was making an assumption however my tone and presentation projected it as fact.

 

[crypto]

Again, you got your numbers wrong. I proved that. Your quoted post here doesn't change that. All it does is reinforce my point.

It would'nt be X/11 if you were counting the plays called back by penalty, which is what you tried to claim. It would be X/13. That's above and beyond the obvious problem of counting yardage gained on run plays where holding penalties were called.

I'm not sure how "above and beyond" fits into that sentence, but OK. You said that, out of the 11 carries that were not called back, three went for more than four yards.

The following carries went for more than four yards:

ONE: Stevan Ridley right guard for 5 yards (tackle by Sheldon Richardson)
TWO: Stevan Ridley right end for 17 yards, touchdown
THREE: Stevan Ridley left end for 12 yards (tackle by Dee Milliner)
FOUR: Stevan Ridley left tackle for 8 yards (tackle by Calvin Pace)

These four carries were among the 11 carries that were not called back on account of a penalty.

You were wrong.

Don't bother trying to explain away the apparent evidence that you can't count to four. I don't have time to keep fist-fighting you through the Internet.

 

[moejr]

I'm not sure how "above and beyond" fits into that sentence, but OK. You said that, out of the 11 carries that were not called back, three went for more than four yards.

The following carries went for more than four yards:

ONE: Stevan Ridley right guard for 5 yards (tackle by Sheldon Richardson)
TWO: Stevan Ridley right end for 17 yards, touchdown
THREE: Stevan Ridley left end for 12 yards (tackle by Dee Milliner)
FOUR: Stevan Ridley left tackle for 8 yards (tackle by Calvin Pace)

These four carries were among the 11 carries that were not called back on account of a penalty.

You were wrong.

Don't bother trying to explain away the apparent evidence that you can't count to four. I don't have time to keep fist-fighting you through the Internet.

Crypto don't even bother arguing with Deus as your're wasting your breath. In his eyes he is the only one that knows anything.

 

[varjao]

I'd rather have Patricia calling the offensive plays or even the gatorade guy than McDaniels. Seriously, 7 games showed enough for me.

I've never seen the Patriots not playing smart like this year. Not using the tools they have in hand to move the chains. It's not time to reinvent the wheel, do the basics, focus on the basics well done.

 

[Deus Irae]

I'm not sure how "above and beyond" fits into that sentence, but OK. You said that, out of the 11 carries that were not called back, three went for more than four yards.

The following carries went for more than four yards:

ONE: Stevan Ridley right guard for 5 yards (tackle by Sheldon Richardson)
TWO: Stevan Ridley right end for 17 yards, touchdown
THREE: Stevan Ridley left end for 12 yards (tackle by Dee Milliner)
FOUR: Stevan Ridley left tackle for 8 yards (tackle by Calvin Pace)

These four carries were among the 11 carries that were not called back on account of a penalty.

You were wrong.

Don't bother trying to explain away the apparent evidence that you can't count to four. I don't have time to keep fist-fighting you through the Internet.

You're right. It doesn't change my overall point about running against the #1 defense when you're racking up runs of 2 yards and less, but it was a big, needless mistake, and it's because of the sort of lazy reading that I bag on other people for, so I deserve the criticism. I missed one in the tally because I double counted the penalty the way I'd posted it, and I didn't properly double check it after you added it in, thinking that you'd just forgotten to add to the 1. All I needed to do was add 6+3+1, and I'd have seen that your point about the 4th run was correct, so that makes the mistake even worse.

Mea Culpa on that point.

 

[Deus Irae]

Crypto don't even bother arguing with Deus as your're wasting your breath. In his eyes he is the only one that knows anything.

:noidea:

I'm fully aware that I'm not perfect and that others here know their stuff. I have no problem calling out others for their mistakes, and I have no problem being called out for mine. Getting my facts correct (or corrected) is part of what I'm here for, after all.

 

[varjao]

I bet you that had the penalty call not made last night in OT, the Pats get the ball back, and score a FG to win the game, we wouldn't be having this conversation right now.

Emotions are running high. Mistakes were made, but let's put everything into perspective. It was a **** game plan and execution all around.

Not really, I've been postponing to create a thread like this for weeks.

 

[manxman2601]

I think we or at least most of us present assumptions in a statement that projects actuality, I could have said “in my opinion” but in my opinion if you’re posting in a forum unless something is accompanied with a link or source the majority of the time it is going to be someone expressing an opinion.

It is my opinion that McDaniel’s did not see the value in Wes Welker and Danny Woodhead that he should have because if he had they both were available at a responsible rate and they would have been resigned, of course Belichick and Kraft own some of that responsibility as well but I have to think that McDaniel’s expressed a belief that he could run a successful offense without either of them otherwise I do not think the decision would have been made.

It's fine that you have an opinion, I like debate, I just think it weakens a debating position to present opinion as fact. Anyway, said my piece.