soxhop411 said:
Oh shit we're doomed! Not pom-poms!
One of my favorite moments from the SBs earlier in the BB era was Branch telling a Pittsburgh fan, late in the AFCCG in 2005, that he left his towel behind.
Brady/Manning XV: AFC Championship Game
- Thread starter Dogman
- Start date
Oh shit we're doomed! Not pom-poms!
One of my favorite moments from the SBs earlier in the BB era was Branch telling a Pittsburgh fan, late in the AFCCG in 2005, that he left his towel behind.
MarcSullivaFan said:
Yup, He "waved the towel" after that 60 yard TD catch he had in the 1st quarter. Hilarious.
I'd like to see more of the Jamie Collins up the A gap blitz that he did on Luck (our only sack, IIRC). With Denver on a 3rd-string center, it seems that would be the weak link. That is a move (up-the-middle pressure) that the Pats haven't had since Mike Wright's heyday and he wasn't anything close to the athletic freak that Collins can be.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Don't forget the wave to the Pittsburgh D as he was scoring the TD on the end-around. He was a dick, but goddamnit, he was our dick and he was a successful one.
Blount was criticized in Tampa for his pass blocking, but I think he got lower and has done very well this year.
In fact, he, Vereen, and Ridley have no negative pass blocking game scores this year per PFF;not even Frank Gore,the gold standard, achieved that(Carolina).
So they can go 3-wide; but interestingly, in the 3rd quarter of the Wk 12 game they ran half their pass plays with 2 TE's--of course, one was Gronk.
I think they will mix up 2 TE's for play action with 3- wide to get the smaller defense.
In fact, he, Vereen, and Ridley have no negative pass blocking game scores this year per PFF;not even Frank Gore,the gold standard, achieved that(Carolina).
So they can go 3-wide; but interestingly, in the 3rd quarter of the Wk 12 game they ran half their pass plays with 2 TE's--of course, one was Gronk.
I think they will mix up 2 TE's for play action with 3- wide to get the smaller defense.
It seems like a big change on a percentage basis, but it's only 2 or 3 plays - not significant enough to suggest it represents a different approach.DrewDawg said:
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Plus the context of what our Bronco-knowledgeable posters have pointed out about the stark dichotomy between Denver's run stopping versus pass stopping personnel. Belichick said earlier this year that fewer plays where Brady can audible out are called than many think--less than a third, I think he said--but if the backs in Denver's run stopping defense really suck that much against the pass and they try to stack the box, that sounds like something the Patriots could take advantage of.
RedOctober3829 said:
Right, which has been posted before along with the rest of the discussion of the environmental conditions, as TeddysBonefish pointed out. Not a knock on you for being helpful, just suggesting that snark boy over here read what has been a pretty strong thread before knocking it for not having any analysis.
Saints Rest said:
I re-watched the week 12 game the other night and Collins did just that. It was the play that Manning fumbled, but wound up recovering himself.
in terms of tea leaf reading, from Reiss:
It seems that Allen should be fine given that even at the start of the week they weren't bringing in possible subs. As for Dobson, he sure sounds pretty hobbled. I may be putting too much on a kid who has shown flashes but wasn't exactly a stud even when healthy, but I really think having him as a viable non-Edelman/Amendola option is key. Sounds like he'll be out there and they we'll have to see if he can be effective.
It seems that Allen should be fine given that even at the start of the week they weren't bringing in possible subs. As for Dobson, he sure sounds pretty hobbled. I may be putting too much on a kid who has shown flashes but wasn't exactly a stud even when healthy, but I really think having him as a viable non-Edelman/Amendola option is key. Sounds like he'll be out there and they we'll have to see if he can be effective.
I am not trying to be debbie downer. I indeed hope that BB does try things (like putting Edelman in motion). But the point is....if they want to take Edelman and the running game away they can for the most part do so.
....and I am not as sure as some of you that Amendola and Vereen will run wild enough to carry the offense.
....and I am not as sure as some of you that Amendola and Vereen will run wild enough to carry the offense.
Saints Rest said:
Manny Ramirez (the 3rd string center) has been starting all year and playing really damn well.
That's not to say the O-line is impenetrable, but they have done a great job of holding the pocket all season long.
This is where Amendola/Dobson/KT/Collie will need to make some plays.Dogman2 said:
Especially with the injuries in the Denver secondary, the Pats should be able to exploit some mismatches.
Even more than usual I'm hoping the offensive line can give Brady time to go through the progressions and see which guys are beating their man.
So the Broncos are thin at defensive back and the Patriots have a huge, wrecking-ball of a running back. I know at least DRC consistently scores at the bottom for tackling efficiency and Champ probably doesn't want to play the run either. Even if Blount is average at pass-pro, running out of three wide receiver sets still seems like a winning strategy.
You are giving them way too much credit. They can't stop everything. NE cannot stop everything as well. We are supposed to be afraid of Paris Lenon stuffing the running game, he is 36 years old and was cut by the Pats in 2009.bakahump said:
ShaneTrot said:
I agree. It's like the Broncos D has all of a sudden became the 85 Bears the way people are talking lately.
Probably I am Shane Trot but thats half of what these threads are. Giving to much credit to some things and not enough to others. I dont think they need to stop everything though. If they can contain Edelman and the running game that may be enough.
Hell thats a Belichickian move "we are taking away X and Y.....they will have to beat us with Z,Q and S."
As I say I am not sure our 3rd 4th and 5th options will be enough. Hopefully as Dynomite says those guys step up....but still I am concerned.
It will be very interesting to see what strategy the Broncos employ and our adjustment.
Hell thats a Belichickian move "we are taking away X and Y.....they will have to beat us with Z,Q and S."
As I say I am not sure our 3rd 4th and 5th options will be enough. Hopefully as Dynomite says those guys step up....but still I am concerned.
It will be very interesting to see what strategy the Broncos employ and our adjustment.
How are they 'taking away' Edelman and 'the running game', schematically? Stacking the box and bracketing Edelman? That isn't feasible.
You can scheme all you want but you have to have the players to execute as well. The Broncos D is suspect to begin with and is without several of their key players. Obviously anything can happen but I'm much more worried about the defense's ability to cover the Denver receivers and get to Peyton than I am the offense's ability to move the ball and score.
I dont think its fair to say we are equating them to the 85 Bears. We /I am saying that in the past we have watched dozens if not hundreds of games (during the BB run) where he has said "X will NOT beat us" . Some where we have had a pretty crappy defense that is as bad or worse then the current Bronco D. While I agree that BB is a great coach....he isnt the only one who can come up with those types of schemes. If the Pats have pulled off a game plan like that....why couldnt the Broncos?
With the offense the Pats have it seems primed for one of those game plans. "Taking away" or even "slowing down" the Edelman/Running game combo would seriously impact this offense. This isnt like taking Welker and Gronk away and still have Woodhead, Hernandez and Ridley. We are short on offensive weapons. Slowing even 1 or 2 of those down is BAD news for the pats.
With the offense the Pats have it seems primed for one of those game plans. "Taking away" or even "slowing down" the Edelman/Running game combo would seriously impact this offense. This isnt like taking Welker and Gronk away and still have Woodhead, Hernandez and Ridley. We are short on offensive weapons. Slowing even 1 or 2 of those down is BAD news for the pats.
bakahump said:
I mean, on third and long they could likely take away Edelman if they wanted to make that the centerpiece of their strategy, but I dont get how they're going to stack the box against the run and double team Edelman on early downs. Run out of 3 WR set and use play action and Amendola will catch 15 passes.
NortheasternPJ said:
I think people are subconsciously displacing their concern about the Broncos O onto the Broncos D so they don't have to sort through the problem that stopping the Offense will be really, really, hard.
It's kind of like having a 20 page paper and a 5 page paper both due tomorrow, and spending all night editing the 5 page paper because thinking about the other one is just too demoralizing.
Sure, you can say "we'll take away x" and do it. But taking away the run AND taking away a receiving weapon is not the same thing as stopping one of them. If you stack 8 men in the box to stop the run, that gives you 3 guys to cover the wideouts. How are you consistently taking away Edelman with 1-on-1 coverage? If you move someone to help with him, then you're not stacking the box any more.
Exactly, Edleman on one side, Amendola and Dobson on the other side. They're either vulnerable to the deep ball that hit the Colts last week or they'd play pitch and catch on hook routes and square in/outs all day.Mystic Merlin said:
Unless you have Revis at corner, you can't really stack the box to stop the run and eliminate a specific WR from the play. There aren't enough guys on the field.
I think Denver will see what it can get away with early with run defense; i.e., I don't see them playing a safety within 10-12 yards, or perhaps even a third 'backer, on early downs, unless the Pats start logging 5-6 yards per carry in the first few drives.
Of course, if the Pats come out in 1 WR sets or something, that almost dictates that they play heavy. I do like the idea of 3 wide/1 TE/1 RB, as that would force Denver to make some decisions. Amendola/Edelman with Develin/Hooman doesn't, since the latter two are not receiving threats.
Of course, if the Pats come out in 1 WR sets or something, that almost dictates that they play heavy. I do like the idea of 3 wide/1 TE/1 RB, as that would force Denver to make some decisions. Amendola/Edelman with Develin/Hooman doesn't, since the latter two are not receiving threats.
Bumping Edelman at the line say with a LB on the inside shoulder and a CB/S on his outside shoulder could be enough to disrupt the timing. It would still allow the LB to slide back a step to the inside and cover the edge or to crash in on interior runs.
Mystic Merlin said:
Against Indy they ran two plays from this set, both with Ridley in the backfield. One was the big playaction to Amendola, the other was a 9 yard run from Ridley.
I get the joke, but honestly he's due to catch one of these sometime as he did against the Texans in the divisional round last year (and especially against one of the slower Denver LBs ).H78 said:
Vereen on an LB is a mismatch, one I hope we can exploit.
mascho said:
I think the problem, as you seem to imply, is that Blount isn't a trusted pass protector.
Mystic Merlin said:
That, and I think the 3 WR set lines up more with Ridley's skill set as a runner.
bakahump said:
So, what you're saying is that some team can just "take away" not only one of the better running games in the league this season but also a 100 catch WR?
It's not as easy as you make it sound. If it was that easy someone would have done it.
Yes--but now you are saying X and Y--the running game and Edelman.
Please explain, using numbers, how a team "stacks the box" and double teams a WR. Show your work. Stacking the box generally means 8 guys.
True.....and I specifically mentioned him lining up in the slot.
Of course SOMEONE is going to be in slot...be it him or Amendola. Andstopping interrupting that route has significant benefit against a Pats offense. Plus I think we can all agree that putting Edelman outside is a much more favorable situation for Denver then him in the slot.
Of course SOMEONE is going to be in slot...be it him or Amendola. And
You forgot to add that Vereen will be wide open with tons of green grass in front of him when he drops the wheel route.H78 said:
This idea does not require absolutes. "Taking away" in the same aspect that the Pats have traditionally taken away 1 or 2 of the opposing teams best options. "Disrupting" can be enough. Significantly reduced production from your 2 primary offensive options can be enough.
Enough posts I guess. As much as I hate to say it....I doubt they score more then 20. 34-20 Broncos.
I will happily come in here and do a mea culpa if they (Edit: The OFFENSE ) score 28 or more.
Enough posts I guess. As much as I hate to say it....I doubt they score more then 20. 34-20 Broncos.
I will happily come in here and do a mea culpa if they (Edit: The OFFENSE ) score 28 or more.
Which game did the Pats successfully choose to stop the run and take away a specific receiving option on early downs?
Why hasnt any team used this game plan for the last three weeks when the Pats scored like 39 points a game? What personnel does Denver have that will allow them to play differently?
Maybe the Pats will score 20, but it wont be because of some game plan that involves stacking the box and taking away Edelman simultaneously.
Why hasnt any team used this game plan for the last three weeks when the Pats scored like 39 points a game? What personnel does Denver have that will allow them to play differently?
Maybe the Pats will score 20, but it wont be because of some game plan that involves stacking the box and taking away Edelman simultaneously.
