uh-oh Dwayne Allen finds offense very hard to learn

[RobertWeathers]

He is a stupid troll ****y. Worred about complete nonsense. A few weeks ago it was the Patriots did something completely non-Patriot like and shelled out big money for Gilmore while using examples of Moss etc or previous big signings.

He had no clue who Adalius Thomas was and what that deal was etc etc.

Just laugh at him like everyone else does.

Ah. That explains it.

 

[TBR]

At least he's lasted longer than Reggie Wayne, our last ex-Dolt. He decided to retire because it was "too hard" and not fun here. Shocking coincidence. If Gronk goes down, it doesn't appear that there will be anyone close to Marty Bennett to replace him. I know James O'Shaughnessy and he's no Marty Bennett.

Per game, Bennett averaged 2.8 receptions and 29.5 yards for the rest of the season & post-season, after Gronk got injured vs Seattle.

I know he was injured last year, but that's what we saw.

 

[RobertWeathers]

i've been watching and im at 1:38 and they are talking about the vikings?

They changed the link. When he posted this in the am it was TB12 commenting on Allen and saying he was working hard, doing a good job, getting better every week, he knows he needs to perform and is confident he will on this team.

While it seems it, to me it was a notch above the standard jibber jabber vote of confidence for a teammate.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Per game, Bennett averaged 2.8 receptions and 29.5 yards for the rest of the season & post-season, after Gronk got injured vs Seattle.

I know he was injured last year, but that's what we saw.

Yep. His production from weeks 10-16 was exactly 1/2 of what is was through weeks 1-9.

Without question he was a hurtin unit.

 

[K. Dog]

You continue to prove why you are easily the stupidest poster here.

I hope you're right. This is a situation where I hope my analysis is as wrong-headed as everyone else seems to think.

 

[Bruins29]

I hope you're right. This is a situation where I hope my analysis is as wrong-headed as everyone else seems to think.

How are you coming to your conclusions that this team dosent have the cohesion or intelligence as last years team?

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

I already posted a thread in how Bennett's departure will hurt us. I continue to be profoundly pessimistic about this season, which is starting to remind me more and more of '02.

Bennett was always a one year rental. Zero chance he was ever going to offered a big contract.

 

[K. Dog]

Also I see you are AGAIN trying to claim that this 17 team does not have the cohesion or intelligence of last years team. How ... do you know?

From a combination of on-field performance, interviews, and mic'up shows.

On-field you saw extremely complex plays with multiple pinpoint presnap shifts being executed on offense and defense. No other team can do this. You also saw incredible timing plays with no-look passes that require masterful synchronization between receiver and QB that also no other offense does. You also saw a certain level of improvisation and adjustment to circumstance, to be able to do unexpected. E.g. just in SBLI there was the Butler tackle of Freeman and the Edelman catch. You saw very few mistakes - some, but way less than other teams. And you saw incredible selflessness, like all the Edelman blocks that announcers don't comment on and don't affect his stats but actually were critical.

From interviews certain players just have a wit and depth to them, like Bennett did say, or Edelman, that other teams' players can't aspire to. E.g. "let's go can be an adjective, verb or noun" among others. Butler's response to some of the questions about Brown were deft but devastating as well, albeit very subtly. You also consistently saw how the players stuck up for each other, took responsibility for their own mistakes and blamed others for their failures.

You saw it in statistics as well. You had a team that the sports media roundly denigrated - very few Pro Bowl or other honors - that still had 2 ints and the best D by some measures. What was the "it" factor the analysts couldn't see? It was this cohesion and adaptability.

Last year had special players, much more salary equity, and an external threat to build cohesion.

 

[Bruins29]

From a combination of on-field performance, interviews, and mic'up shows.

I dont even know where to start with you so I guess I will start here and I dont think I even know where to start here. First, you are telling everyone that you can tell a team's cohesion and intelligence from interviews? and Mic'ed up shows? And lets talk about on-field. You are talking about PS games? PS????!!!!

Second, you are comparing a team that spent a whole season together plus 3 playoff games to a team that has not even played a legit NFL snap yet??????

I am actually at a loss for words at this point.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Someone has forgotten that even HC BB has stated that he can't tell at this stage or even after the 1st few real games what kind of character team he has each season.

 

[K. Dog]

I dont even know where to start with you so I guess I will start here and I dont think I even know where to start here. First, you are telling everyone that you can tell a team's cohesion and intelligence from interviews? and Mic'ed up shows? And lets talk about on-field. You are talking about PS games? PS????!!!!

Second, you are comparing a team that spent a whole season together plus 3 playoff games to a team that has not even played a legit NFL snap yet??????

I am actually at a loss for words at this point.

That mischaracterizes in a number of ways the argument. From (a) on-field performance; (b) interviews; and (c) mic'd up games we can assess the 2016 team. From that analysis, I conclude (*) that the 2016 team is the most intelligent and cohesive NFL team I've ever seen. If that's accurate, we can assess

1. What factors likely caused these characteristics?
2. Are these factors present in 2017?

Now, if (*) is accurate, then by regression to the mean we would expect 2017 not to have these characteristics to that degree. By analysis of (1) we observe that most of the factors that caused (*) are (2) not present in the 2016 team (the list of characteristics was in the previous post inter alia), and moreover several features of the 2017 team would tend to decrease these characteristics compared to the 2016 team (external threat, salary issues, e.g.). By combining (1), (2), (*) and regression to the mean, I infer that the the 2017 team lacks these characteristics to the extent of the 2016 team.

It's true that the inferences here are inherently probabilistic. I won't know until after the season if then. But based on what's available, I'm pessimistic as to these two characteristics compared to the 2016 team. In conjunction with other factors, I'm pessimistic.

 

[WaterfallJumper]

Well, you're wrong. This team doesn't have the cohesion, intelligence, drive of '16 (which to be fair was unprecedented in those respects).

Between the OL, the DE situation, aging at a number of speed- and quickness-sensitive positions, the loss of the 4-game rest period, the loss of Long and Bennett (and Ryan, and Blount), the uncertain Gronk durability, the unknown effect on chemistry of the unprecedented Gilmore contract (probably already hampering the DE search) not to mention Gilmore himself. Not enough genius new players, or experienced vets, for the complicated schemes to work this year. Not just on offense, think of all those DL shifts and fake blitzes in say the Ravens game. And let's face it, 5 was about something more than a trophy, the players were playing for something greater than themselves.

I won't completely discount this take out of hand (you could be right, in the long run), but how in the world do you arrive at that conclusion halfway through the preseason? All we've seen and heard is how the talent level has increased, how the players are working hard and improving--which, to be fair, may be meaningless coachspeak--and how excited players are to prepare for the season.

Aging at sensitive positions? I don't even know where to begin with that assertion; we've gotten younger at almost every skill position.

Long played a yeomanlike role. We have plenty of bodies who can rotate in and replicate what he did. Bennett was flamboyant and played hurt, but once he was relied on as the top TE, he didn't exactly produce big numbers. Ryan is a gambler who showed up big in big games, but Gilmore is more talented and appears to be progressing nicely. He and Butler have said numerous times how much they enjoy working together, and that their goal is to be the best corner duo in the league this year. I'm not sure how that creates the impression that they're disgruntled.

We have plenty of veteran players, and hardworking newcomers; the idea that we can't implement a complicated scheme is incredibly premature at this stage. It just seems like unsubstantiated hand-wringing.

I've read through the rest of the thread, and I still see no evidence of your claim. All I see is conjuncture and worry, which seems misplaced for a championship team.

 

[Bruins29]

That mischaracterizes in a number of ways the argument. From (a) on-field performance; (b) interviews; and (c) mic'd up games we can assess the 2016 team. From that analysis, I conclude (*) that the 2016 team is the most intelligent and cohesive NFL team I've ever seen. If that's accurate, we can assess

1. What factors likely caused these characteristics?
2. Are these factors present in 2017?

Now, if (*) is accurate, then by regression to the mean we would expect 2017 not to have these characteristics to that degree. By analysis of (1) we observe that most of the factors that caused (*) are (2) not present in the 2016 team (the list of characteristics was in the previous post inter alia), and moreover several features of the 2017 team would tend to decrease these characteristics compared to the 2016 team (external threat, salary issues, e.g.). By combining (1), (2), (*) and regression to the mean, I infer that the the 2017 team lacks these characteristics to the extent of the 2016 team.

It's true that the inferences here are inherently probabilistic. I won't know until after the season if then. But based on what's available, I'm pessimistic as to these two characteristics compared to the 2016 team. In conjunction with other factors, I'm pessimistic.

This is an incredibly ignorant post. Laughable actually. You must be a lonely guy in dire need of attention to post garbage like this.

You don't have the first clue what is going on here do you? You claim the team is getting older when in fact its not. Also, for a guy with such strong intuition it is amazing to see you whiff on Adalius Thomas when discussing past big Pats contracts. If you miss something that obvious why would anyone want to take you seriously about anything?

I am embarrassed for you.

 

[Bruins29]

That mischaracterizes in a number of ways the argument. From (a) on-field performance; (b) interviews; and (c) mic'd up games we can assess the 2016 team. From that analysis, I conclude (*) that the 2016 team is the most intelligent and cohesive NFL team I've ever seen. If that's accurate, we can assess

1. What factors likely caused these characteristics?
2. Are these factors present in 2017?

Now, if (*) is accurate, then by regression to the mean we would expect 2017 not to have these characteristics to that degree. By analysis of (1) we observe that most of the factors that caused (*) are (2) not present in the 2016 team (the list of characteristics was in the previous post inter alia), and moreover several features of the 2017 team would tend to decrease these characteristics compared to the 2016 team (external threat, salary issues, e.g.). By combining (1), (2), (*) and regression to the mean, I infer that the the 2017 team lacks these characteristics to the extent of the 2016 team.

It's true that the inferences here are inherently probabilistic. I won't know until after the season if then. But based on what's available, I'm pessimistic as to these two characteristics compared to the 2016 team. In conjunction with other factors, I'm pessimistic.

You know what is even more glaringly obvious that you are a complete fraud. you preach and preach how important TEAM Chemistry and cohesion is....over and over. Yet, when you tried to bring up past large patriot contracts you completely forgot to mention not only the largest one ever given (Adalius Thomas) but the same player who was considered someone who created tension in the locker room. Everything you are against - There is no way you would forget Thomas.

It is absolutely certainly that someone so caught up in team chemistry - - who has claimed they have followed all of the pats teams in this regard - - would NEVER miss Thomas.

You are a fraud and a embarrassment to this forum and team.

 

[1960Pats]

I'm not saying that the Pats will win the SB this year, but if they did I'm fairly confident that they could do it with or without Dwayne Allen. I'm pulling for the kid though. He wants to be a Patriot.

 

[zydecochris]

Some of it can be a style preference by the coach as well. The (fittingly) over-simplified way I see it is, there are two general schools of thought when it comes to coaching in the NFL:

A) You have a complex system that requires a lot of differently responsibilities from each player, all of which have to identify that requirement in real time as situations evolve. This has the advantage of being more adaptable and harder to gameplan against, but also requires more cerebral players and can lead to more breakdowns.

B) You focus on a simpler scheme, and rely on superior athleticism as well as the idea that you can (theoretically) practice these simpler plays with more regularity and really perfect them. I see a team like Seattle on defense and think this way. They don't do a lot of exotic things on defense, they're just so well regimented in it and have such good talent at key positions that it's hard to beat.

Where I think Belichick succeeds more than others is he has been able to implemented "A" style systems, while still minimizing the catastrophic breakdowns. Brady helps this on the offensive side of course.

So, "Brady helps on the offensive side"? Really?

More seriously, although I dread the day, it will be interesting to see if the Patriots can maintain the same type of complex offensive game plans when they don't have perhaps the smartest player to ever play the game at QB. I wouldn't be surprised if with another QB the offense become more simplified and similar to that of other teams.

 

[Rob0729]

He does come from a literal chuck and duck offense with Andrew Luck. I never thought the Colts' offense was particularly complicated and relied on the gunslinger Luck to make plays. There isn't a lot of timing patterns, presnap reads, and advanced routes (at least compared to the Patriots) in that offense.

 

[zydecochris]

He does come from a literal chuck and duck offense with Andrew Luck. I never thought the Colts' offense was particularly complicated and relied on the gunslinger Luck to make plays. There isn't a lot of timing patterns, presnap reads, and advanced routes (at least compared to the Patriots) in that offense.

Luck: "Hut..Hut...RLH...RLH...TUP....Hike" (RLH - Run like Hell TUP - Throw up a Prayer)

 

[sean10mm]

Speak My Language

Here is what the problem with receivers learning the Patriots offense boils down to:

"This effectively makes the Coryell system sound a lot like current West Coast offense play calls,1 which have no organizing principle and have morphed into monstrosities like “Scatter-Two Bunch-Right-Zip-Fire 2 Jet Texas Right-F Flat X-Q.” The advantage of a play call like this is that it informs a player of his job better than other systems do. The disadvantage is that it’s excessively clunky, and plays that are conceptually the same can have wildly different calls."

vs.

"The backbone of the Erhardt-Perkins system is that plays — pass plays in particular — are not organized by a route tree or by calling a single receiver’s route, but by what coaches refer to as “concepts.” Each play has a name, and that name conjures up an image for both the quarterback and the other players on offense. And, most importantly, the concept can be called from almost any formation or set. Who does what changes, but the theory and tactics driving the play do not. "

In most offensive systems, the QB spoon-feeds the receivers what route to run on each play. In the Patriots system, the QB gives them the name of the play, and the receivers have to have already memorized the play to know what their role in the play is. The Patriots system has a bunch of advantages that the article gets into, but it demands more intelligence from anyone expected to catch a pass.

 

[Jackson 2]

Per game, Bennett averaged 2.8 receptions and 29.5 yards for the rest of the season & post-season, after Gronk got injured vs Seattle.

I know he was injured last year, but that's what we saw.

What we saw was 55 receptions, 701 yards, 12.7 avg yds per catch, 7 TDs, 31 first downs. And, he blocked his ass off. And, as you indicated, injured. The next time James O' Shaughnessy matches that I'll be the King of F###### England....