Run/Pass Ratio

[Ring 6]

Good call. Somehow I forgot about the 43 yard run. Taking that away, the Pats were running at 5.5 a clip in that personnel grouping. So still not too shabby.

agreed

 

[luuked]

Not really. You can easily play Blount in 3 WR 1 TE offense.
What you are essentially doing compared to 2 WR 2 TE is replacing an TE lined up inside blocking on a S or LB with a WR lined up outside, blocking on a corner who is much farther from the ball.
We throw often with Blount on the field.

Ok let me do this on a slow, step-by-step level just so I can figure out what I am getting wrong..


My understanding was that going 12 with Gronk/Bennett often forced the opponents into nickel packages because both of our TE could release and were legit catching threats. This would eliminate a LB which meant a lighter box for Blount to run against.

Now, if we go 11 with Bennett out there.. why would the opponent still go nickel ? If I was a defensive coordinator against our current offense I'd stay in base whenever I see Blount on the field. He is not a receiving threat.. if he motions out wide you can easily put a LB on him without any real coverage concerns..

At least until Bennett proves that he is not too hobbled to be a legit threat I would just play base.

 

[Ring 6]

Ok let me do this on a slow, step-by-step level just so I can figure out what I am getting wrong..


My understanding was that going 12 with Gronk/Bennett often forced the opponents into nickel packages because both of our TE could release and were legit catching threats. This would eliminate a LB which meant a lighter box for Blount to run against.

Now, if we go 11 with Bennett out there.. why would the opponent still go nickel ? If I was a defensive coordinator against our current offense I'd stay in base whenever I see Blount on the field. He is not a receiving threat.. if he motions out wide you can easily put a LB on him without any real coverage concerns..

At least until Bennett proves that he is not too hobbled to be a legit threat I would just play base.

You would go nickel against 2 WR and 2 TEs but bring in an extra LB against 3 WR and 1 TE?

 

[Ring 6]

Ok let me do this on a slow, step-by-step level just so I can figure out what I am getting wrong..


My understanding was that going 12 with Gronk/Bennett often forced the opponents into nickel packages because both of our TE could release and were legit catching threats. This would eliminate a LB which meant a lighter box for Blount to run against.

Now, if we go 11 with Bennett out there.. why would the opponent still go nickel ? If I was a defensive coordinator against our current offense I'd stay in base whenever I see Blount on the field. He is not a receiving threat.. if he motions out wide you can easily put a LB on him without any real coverage concerns..

At least until Bennett proves that he is not too hobbled to be a legit threat I would just play base.

BTW, moving Blount out wide is only to have the D show their hand and lose a guy in coverage. We have done that with FBs over the years. They have to put someone on him, and that spreads the D further, and takes away a potential blitzer. Its different than when we put a Lewis out wide to isolate him.

 

[Kontradiction]

Ok let me do this on a slow, step-by-step level just so I can figure out what I am getting wrong..


My understanding was that going 12 with Gronk/Bennett often forced the opponents into nickel packages because both of our TE could release and were legit catching threats. This would eliminate a LB which meant a lighter box for Blount to run against.

Now, if we go 11 with Bennett out there.. why would the opponent still go nickel ? If I was a defensive coordinator against our current offense I'd stay in base whenever I see Blount on the field. He is not a receiving threat.. if he motions out wide you can easily put a LB on him without any real coverage concerns..

At least until Bennett proves that he is not too hobbled to be a legit threat I would just play base.

If you come out in base against that grouping, you'd better hope you can get to Brady because the Pats would go no huddle and tear you up in the quick passing game until you called timeout. Edelman would have a field day.

 

[luuked]

You would go nickel against 2 WR and 2 TEs but bring in an extra LB against 3 WR and 1 TE?

Until that TE shows me that he is over his shoulder/ankle injury, yes. I mean he has 40 yards in the last 3 games on 11 targets.

 

[luuked]

If you come out in base against that grouping, you'd better hope you can get to Brady because the Pats would go no huddle and tear you up in the quick passing game until you called timeout. Edelman would have a field day.

Which reminds me.. where the hell did our no huddle attack disappear to ?

 

[Ring 6]

Until that TE shows me that he is over his shoulder/ankle injury, yes. I mean he has 40 yards in the last 3 games on 11 targets.

I don't think you are getting it.

Lets say we have:

Bennett Edelman and Hogan on the field as 3 of the 4, plus a RB.

If you add Gronk, normally a defense would go big against 2 TEs and play base, say a 43.
But since Gronk and Bennett are mismatches, you would then go nickel.

You are saying if you add Mitchell instead of Gronk then the other team would be less likely to go to nickel and are going to cover Mitchell with a LB or S?

Lets hope you are right, we will throw for 500 yards.

 

[luuked]

I don't think you are getting it.

Lets say we have:

Bennett Edelman and Hogan on the field as 3 of the 4, plus a RB.

If you add Gronk, normally a defense would go big against 2 TEs and play base, say a 43.
But since Gronk and Bennett are mismatches, you would then go nickel.

You are saying if you add Mitchell instead of Gronk then the other team would be less likely to go to nickel and are going to cover Mitchell with a LB or S?

Lets hope you are right, we will throw for 500 yards.

I get the first part.

I think where I disagree is Bennett being a mismatch in his current state. I'd cover Bennett with a LB until he shows me that he is not just a blocking/formation decoy.

 

[Kontradiction]

Which reminds me.. where the hell did our no huddle attack disappear to ?

May have something to do with Mitchell's uptick in snaps.

 

[Ring 6]

I get the first part.

I think where I disagree is Bennett being a mismatch in his current state. I'd cover Bennett with a LB until he shows me that he is not just a blocking/formation decoy.

Then you would play base if Gronk was on the field too.

 

[supafly]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CzAGXnXXUAAazSe.jpg



Interestingly we're 5th in Run%. That may even move up with our 3 man rotation.

Unless they're getting lots of second half runs to bleed the clock, I doubt we see anything going up this week in terms of rushing attempts--or even next week for that matter.

I envision a heavy pass to run ratio this week, against Baltimore.

 

[supafly]

Until that TE shows me that he is over his shoulder/ankle injury, yes. I mean he has 40 yards in the last 3 games on 11 targets.

Two of which he was the showcased TE with Gronk not even dressed.

 

[Uptown]

Nice to see Shaq get some recognition as both a road grading run blocker AND (finally) pass protector! (Butler is on the list as well)...

Chris Simms' All-22 Team for NFL Week 13

 

[RobertWeathers]

Nice to see Shaq get some recognition as both a road grading run blocker AND (finally) pass protector! (Butler is on the list as well)...

Chris Simms' All-22 Team for NFL Week 13

Well if Chris Simms says so.....

 

[Tuck]

Ok let me do this on a slow, step-by-step level just so I can figure out what I am getting wrong..


My understanding was that going 12 with Gronk/Bennett often forced the opponents into nickel packages because both of our TE could release and were legit catching threats. This would eliminate a LB which meant a lighter box for Blount to run against.

Now, if we go 11 with Bennett out there.. why would the opponent still go nickel ? If I was a defensive coordinator against our current offense I'd stay in base whenever I see Blount on the field. He is not a receiving threat.. if he motions out wide you can easily put a LB on him without any real coverage concerns..

At least until Bennett proves that he is not too hobbled to be a legit threat I would just play base.

Exactly this. Having a healthy Bennet is absolutely critical for the stretch run because he gives Blount some running room. I was at the game Sunday and unfortunately Bennett did not look like himself at all. He's really favoring that right ankle especially when he's engaged by a defender and he was limping around after each play. Every team is dealing with injuries right now but I'm starting to wonder where the Pat's offense is going to come from over the next 4 games.