Exactly. If you don't make it, you give CIN 3+ minutes of 4 down territory to dink and dunk from 50 yards away. Kick it all day there.
Patriots Strategery
- Thread starter BuellMiller
- Start date
Indeed, and it's not like CIN had huge success moving the ball most of the game, though they had found their way by Q4, 9 plays/90 yards for their only TD. He saw his defense had been the best unit on the field the entire day, put the game in their hands, and they delivered. And then the 2nd best unit (offensive run game) sealed it.
As corny as it sounds, players don't just want to collect paychecks. They want to know the men leading them know what they're doing, and inspire them to greater collective heights. That's their fellow players, and their coaches. We don't know if Mayo will be able to set all of his game plans to be as effective as this week's, but we do know he inspired the hell out of them.
It's easy to say that in retrospect but they did not move the ball well in the second half. It would have been nice to see more dynamic play calling, but I'm sure they'll open things up in time. Not sure how many games a team can win running more than passing in this era.
Pretty sure we're gonna find out. They'll try to go vertical at points this year because they will have to. There will be times that they're behind 10, 14 points and probably worse. And it will be good for them to whip that club out of the bag, but it will almost certainly be frightening. Sometimes shit will work, when the tackles guess right on outside moves or everything that AVP calls outsmart the defensive call, and some DBs miscommunicate on rub routes, etc. But lots of times it won't because this OL pass blocks like Luka Doncic trying to stop Jaylen Brown.
Tl;dr; any time that they can win a game this year by jamming it down the other team's throat, they'll take it and move on. No point in being cute.
I like the comparison.
Through week 1 it looks that way. But the unit--combining run and pass blocking--already performed better in one game than most fans thought they'd perform at any point during the season. I'm interested to see if Peters and AVP can mold the group into a decent pass blocking operation. The odds are against it, but there's a chance Peters becomes the next OL guru in NE.
Rookies like Wallace and Robinson and 2nd year players like Sow have plenty of room for organic improvement as the season goes on. Doesn't mean it will happen, but it's not out of the question that the OL could perform better than their ultra-low expectations when it comes to pass blocking as the season goes on. Being ranked around 20 would be much better than the 30th or 31st everyone was expecting.
Looking at Evan Lazar's "After Further Review" - Robinson gave up a few free rushers based on either mis-communication/bad read. Andrews would open to block left, and Robinson would block right, leaving the A Gap wide open (prom night... bah, who am I kidding, not even wedding night).
So I was curious about this so I checked:
Recent teams with more rushing attempts than passing attempts and records:
2023- BAL (13-4), CHI (7-10), SF (12-5)
2022- ATL (7-10), CHI (3-14), PHI (14-3), BAL (10-7), CAR (7-10), TEN (7-10)
2021- TEN (12-5), PHI (9-8), NO (9-8)
2020- BAL (11-5), TEN (11-5), NE (7-9)
2109- BAL (14-2), SF (13-3), MIN (10-6)
That's interesting. It seems like either a strength of a very good team or a crutch for teams with terrible QBs. I think a lot of teams would be happy to do this (SF's run-heavy 5 minute drive at the end of the 2Q last night was huge, even if it only ended in a FG). It takes discipline and game control, which we'll see if the Pats can maintain.
Why were teams able to run so much more effectively 10,20,30 years ago? Was it just about commitment to the run over the pass (which has flipped)? Is it strategic or tactical? Is it schematic or talent?
I would say these teams fall into one (or more) of three categories:
1. Good teams who play with the lead a lot
2. Teams with real running threat QBs
3. Teams with limited QBs
They weren't. 2023, 2013 and 2003... 4.2 YPC league average and similar total yards average. 1993... 3.8 YPC lower total yards.
Teams scored far less in the past because they didn't throw enough.
And the rules made it harder to throw.
Speaking of which, while they will obviously lean on Stevenson and the running game this season, the big storyline for week 2 should be wanting to see improvement from the receivers, none of whom had more than 3 catches or 6 targets. Osborn had a solid first game kind of establishing himself as the go to/Jacobi-type for Brissett. And Thornton wasn't invisible for once, which was great. But you really want to see more targets for everyone, including Polk, and hope Baker can get on the field/out of the doghouse as the season wears on.
I don't know that the lack of production from the WRs had anything to do with them. Watching the game and based on what people watching the All-22 are saying.... the lack of passing success probably had more to do with QB and line play (and gameplan) than the WRs/TEs. Jacoby did a nice job not turning it over and getting what he was offerred on the ground, but he was pretty bad at actually passing to my eye.
Agreed, maybe what I should have said was improvement in the passing game. Which I think we can expect as they get more familiar with one another.
Isn't that basically who Jacoby is? We may get some marginal improvement, but he's unlikely to go out there and start lighting it up throwing into tight windows. I'll take mistake free, don't beat ourselves, incremental progress for both him and the whole offense. Hopefully Maye soaks that up as the baseline and at some point can get in there to make a few more plays.
Yep, teams can still win with game managers. It just means more emphasis on ball control and defense. They don't usually win championships without the very best defense stopping gunslingers on the other side, but every so often (*cough XXXVI*), it happens.
I was shocked at how clean the special teams were. I love BB but special teams have been a train wreck the last few years. They did have the first penalty but after that it was a silky smooth operation including forcing a turnover on a punt.
Combing these two from different threads b/c they feel like solid predictions
A glass-half-full take away from week 1 is that our offensive line looks much better than a lot of the melodramatic rhetoric this summer might make you think. Starting with LG and going right we can play five lineman who look to be + run blockers (Sow, Andrews, young Layden, Onwenu, and young Caeden in the 'lineman as TE' slot). That's not nothing. Last Sunday the Pats repeatedly played power sets where our linemen and TEs effectively took out all the DL/LBs and then challenged DBs to bring down Rham close to the line of scrimmage. And on lots of plays Cincy failed that challenge. Obviously, we're going to see Seattle's reaction to this in a few days, since they're not going to want to let Rham go for 5-6 yards all afternoon.
A glass-half-empty take on week 1 is that LT was the predicted dumpster fire, our guards weren't nearly as good going backward as they were going forward, Brissett clearly didn't want to hold the ball for the amount of time it was taking some of our receivers (e.g. Polk) to get open, and Brissett's lack of arm strength/accuracy past the pilons meant that our deep routes weren't much of a threat even when guys were open.
Put that all together and I'd second Mooch's prediction about other teams increasingly stacking the box and sitting on short routes. After which I think we'll see AVP and Mayo start coming up with increasingly unusual and complicated ways to disguise what are basically 5-yard passes to our TEs and backs, to keep Rham from having to extend every drive himself.
The medium-term solution to a bunch of this is wearing a headset on the sideline. But I'd really like to see better pass-blocking from our line before he takes the headset off.
Last edited:
Well, the pressure rate against Brissett was 48%, which was the highest in the league...that needs to be cleaned up.
Great post.
I think that AVP et al. can come up with some stuff here and there to get the ball downfield. Sometimes it will work; sometimes it will be dismal. But a creative football mind, a QB who isn't scared, and an OL that is scary enough in run blocking as to be a front-of-mind concern to defenses...that can go a long way. Not "playoffs" long way, but enough that we likely squeeze out a couple more wins, especially if we're not giving games away with atrocious special teams and if the defense stays stout. I'm feeling good about 5-6 wins just based on what we saw Sunday and maybe a bit more wouldn't be altogether unsurprising.
Weird correlate was how BC's OL gashed the heck out of Florida State in week 1. They're still not a great team (BC or FSU for that matter), but being able to manhandle a peer defense at the point of attack is a fantastic thing to have.
That was big to me. Whether it was "not scared" or "decisive" doesn't really matter, as both lead to at least a little bit of fire with the damp wood of the offense.
Scared is a loaded work, so I probably should have used a different one. I mean a guy who isn't seeing ghosts back there. JB knows that he doesn't have much time, and he knows that he's gonna get hit. He seems ok with it and is grateful to be starting. That opens things up like naked bootlegs, rolling out more, etc. Keeps things on the table. I don't think that his arm is any better than Mac's, but you don't have to worry about him turtling.
As this is the strategy thread, there’s probably some value in a “big picture” sense of securing that first win for the new coaching staff’s rebuild that goes well beyond trying to install everything in Week 1.
Right—the mistakes in correlation between passing v. running in a game and why they occurred is basically the statistical basis of what prompted Aaron Schatz to start FootballOutsiders.
And just in the list you supplied, there’s some really interesting offenses that jump out, even if that’s only going to be a rough proxy for playing with a lead without going through the games. And I found it fascinating to see how much the game will apparently change in the distant future!
I think it made sense to punt the ball there since they had the lead and couldn't risk giving Cinci the ball closer to the end zone. It turned out great as Cinci punted it right back to us.
Most impressive was successfully running when that was the only sensible thing to do. They needed to stop our running game at the end and they couldn't do it.
Most impressive was successfully running when that was the only sensible thing to do. They needed to stop our running game at the end and they couldn't do it.
I think it's fine they decided to ease into an offensive game plan. They kept things simple and very conservative, and it worked for one game, but I also don't think we should confuse this with a strategy that will win a lot of games.
The problem with a a game plan that minimizes risk is that it also minimizes reward. Running the ball ad nauseam essentially guaranteed it would be a close game, which in turn guaranteed their opponent would have chances to win. The Bengals did have chances and they blew them. The Patriots deserve some credit in those instances, but not total credit.
Totally agree. I was merely saying that I could imagine them placing outsized importance on winning the first gams even if it’s not an overarching strategy they would otherwise approach the whole season with. And, if so, they might decide that a low variance strategy, albeit not one without risk (of course) was the way to go. Simply conjecture on my part, but I can see how that might be something they decided on.
Hard to say, it might be the strategy most likely to win a lot of games given the talent. The Patriots have a strong defense, they have an O-line that is much better at run blocking than pass protecting, they have a RB corps that likely falls higher on the league rankings than their WR/TE corps. They have one of the worse starting QBs in the league. Teams with that profile are most likely to win by running the ball and keeping it close. They aren't going to win 12 games using any strategy, but could they get 7 wins, maybe 8 or 9 if everything breaks their way... yeah it's possible for sure.
You gameplan to your personnel, and the current personnel has a much better chance to win by pounding the run game than anything else.
Exactly. They're not minimizing upside with a conservative game plan. The roster is minimizing the upside. They're likely maximizing win totals by riding the horse they came with.
That said, trying other stuff out, trying the kid QB, seeing what Polk et al. can do, etc. has long term benefit and will all be done to some degree, but that's for maximizing win totals in future years.
Completely
This is going to potentially sound like I'm talking outta both sides of my mouth (although I don't think I am), but week 1 was both close to the 95% percentile, in a good sense, of potential ways the game could have gone... ...and also changed nothing about my prediction in the other thread that we end up winning 5-6 games this year
Not disagreeing that running will be their strength. My point is they can't solely rely on that strength. A strong run game should also allow for a strong play action game, and some chances downfield. In this game, there were only 5 plays where they attempted 10+ yards. One of the few that was completed was on a play action to Thornton.
This offense is not going to be the Chiefs, but will be interested to they can get mix in more play action, and get Douglas/Thornton more involved to break off some larger yardage chunks.
Last edited:
The "After Further Review" by Evan Lazar shows that there were shot plays open - so hopefully after some film time they can start at least threatening the D with them.
https://www.patriots.com/news/after-further-review-breaking-down-jacoby-brissett-the-run-game-and-the-patriots-defense-in-win-over-bengals
At some point having the guy in there who can make those throws will make sense.
At some point for sure. One argument against it right now.... Brissett was the 2nd most pressured QB this week. He took no sacks, made no mistakes, made some good calls and indentifications, wouldn't expect that from a rookie (just look at how all the other rookies reacted to pressure).
Not to nitpick your point, but he threw an interception into the end zone that took a great play by Henry to break-up at the last second. It was nearly a costly mistake and would have likely caused the fanbase to get Mac deja vu. But, yeah, he was adequate.
Sure, but if you compare every QB to perfection no one looks good. If you compare him to every other QB having a throw or 2 every game they want back, he was fine.
The issue is not having 4 or 5 throws every game you want back.
FWIW, this is more or less why I think they gave Zappe so many reps during that first preseason game as well. Mayo took a ton of shit for that. But having a baseline of competence even with a low ceiling under center gives the other guys the ability to make plays and win matchups.
We're talking about how the run should open up the play action in a few threads, and I dunno if someone has made this point somewhere or I'd quote it
A few people have observed that the play-action takes a little longer to develop than a play based on a 5-step drop & release. I think the Pats coaching staff are generally comfortable with this, because we ran a bunch of plays in week 1 where Brissett took a 7-step drop and then held of a beat or two. So I think there's maybe some more risk tolerance among the O-coaches for pass plays that a little longer to develop than we might be thinking.
Given that, two thing about play-action that works in our favor is, of course, that (1) our linemen get to pick their blocking assignments, instead of reacting to a pass rush scheme, and (2) they're all blocking forward and not back. The first would help with some of the confusion that we saw in week 1 about who's taking which rusher. The second should help contain.
Put them together, it's not out of the question that Brissett might get another half-second or second to make a play in play-action than he would in a traditional drop. Now, can someone get open? We'll see when they start to roll it out.