National media perspective

Donn Beach
Posts: 3637
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: National media perspective

Post by Donn Beach » Wed Sep 16, 2020 1:29 pm

and there is that bit of prophesy with the Rams...that is the essence of zone blocking isn't it
When I watched the Cowboys play this team they kept getting their wires crossed by the complementary nature of the Ram run and pass game and they ended up getting gashed. The “wide zone” or “outside zone” run blocking scheme is one in which OL get going laterally and look to reach play side defenders with their initial footwork, the defense is stretched laterally trying to maintain their gap fits and then the OL start shoving guys laterally and creating creases for the RB to hit on cutbacks. It’s a chemistry-intensive blocking scheme that works best with quicker OL and a RB who will do his job. The Shanahan Denver Broncos were famous for rolling in RB after RB with virtually no reputation and turning them into 1k-yard backs. McVay accomplished something similar with CJ Anderson, who the Rams picked up out of nowhere to essentially replace (injured?) Todd Gurley for the playoffs.

The Houston Texans had a good thing going with this scheme back in the day with Arian Foster, then they decided to prioritize paying him rather than the OL and it all fell apart. The Rams should pay attention and let Gurley walk.

Michael K.
Posts: 3316
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: National media perspective

Post by Michael K. » Wed Sep 16, 2020 2:04 pm

Bil522 wrote:
Wed Sep 16, 2020 5:11 am

It is only because every Super Bowl winner since the Packers(except last year and even then, the forty whiners should have won) have been a run first team, that controls the clock and plays defense. It is the formula that wins the most in the NFL
Not sure what your deal is lately, your issue with my criticism of Dak and the Cowboys was crazy. You obviously didn't watch the game if you think the Cowboys took advantage of their weapons. Zeke, Cooper, Gallop and Lamb, and they scored 17 points! I guess you ignored the national criticism after too...it was mostly about why they had zero explosiveness. It wasn't just big bad MK 2 that thought they stunk it up.

But let's dive into your most recent issue with anyone talking about a passing game.

It is interesting we are supposed to start after the Packers last win, because if you go back further you will see that after Big Ben beat us by basically doing nothing but pay an official...the QBs who won the Super Bowl were the Manning brothers, Big Ben again, Drew Brees and then Aaron Rodgers. So, I can see how you would want me to not look at those 5 seasons for your little experiment.

So, let's look at what you want us to look at.

Giants over Pats.
Good example for you, except for I am going to apply your rule in that the Pats should have won! :lol:

Ravens over 49ers
Pretty good example again. Baltimore was 15th in passing yards, 11th in rushing yards and 12th in defense. So, if by winning with rushing and defense you mean outside the top 10 in rushing offense and defense? Then you are correct. Oh, and the 49ers were top five in BOTH of your Super Bowl Winner categories! How can they lose?

Seattle over the Broncos
Everyone knows the answer to this one. The thing to remember is many felt like the Broncos were the heavy favorite. And that wasn't based on their defense and run game.

Pats over Seahawks
It was the Seahawks with the #1 Defense, the Pats were #8. Pats had the #9 passing offense and the Seahawks the # 27. Oh, Seattle was first in rushing offense while the Pats 18th. So, the better defense and run game lost the game. What?

Broncos over Panthers
We all know that Manning was broken and Vaughn Miller and the Defense carried the Broncos that year. That being said, the Panthers lead the league in rushing while the Broncos were 18th. The Panthers were 24th in throwing the ball while the Broncos were 14th. Wait? How can that be? How can the #1 rushing offense lose a Super Bowl two seasons in a row!? By the way Denver was 4th in Defense while the Panthers were 6th. Not a large discrepency anywhere but in the passing offenses. How strange when the only thing that matter is running and defense.

Pats over Falcons
Again, let's use your rule that the Falcons should have won...just because I still think it is funny. Pats were first in defense and the Falcons 27th. Wait, but they should have won!? The Falcons were 3rd in passing offense and the Pats 4th. Wait, both teams were in the top 5 in passing? That can't be, it's all about the ground game and defense!? Atlanta was 5th in rushing and the Pats 8th. So, let me get this straight....their offense was better passing then throwing and somehow they won? Can't be.

Eagles over Pats
The Pats were second in passing, the Eagles were 13th. The Pats were 10th in rushing and the Eagles 3rd. This might be the best example for you...except the Eagles were 4th in defense and the Pats were 5th...and the score of the game was 41 to 33 and the two teams combined for 878 passing yards. Not sure you theory really applies here either.

Pats over Rams
This should be the one right? The high flying Rams and their 20th ranked defense lose to the Pats and their 7th ranked defense? What is it Lee Corso says? Not so fast my friend? Well, while the Patriots had the 5th ranked rushing offense, the losing Rams were 3rd! And that is with Gurley resting to end the season! The Rams were 5th in passing and the Patriots 8th...so the losing team was actually better running the ball than throwing, and the winning team had Tom Brady.

Then you have Pat Mahomes.

So, even if I remove Manning and the Giants, four of the five Super Bowls won the year before you want us to look were by Hall of Fame QBs in their prime.

But, when we look at what you want us to look at?

We have the Giants beating the Pats. Great example of a defensive line dominating a high flying passing game. You win this point.
We have the Ravens over the 49ers. Ravens outside the top ten in rushing and defense and the 49ers 2nd in defense and 4th in Rushing. By your rules, how the hell did they lose?
Seahawks. Prove your rule.
Pats over Seahawks. Better defense and running game loses? That can't be!
Broncos over Panthers. Better defense and running game loses? Second year in a row that the #1 rushing offense loses the Super Bowl. Impossible!
Pats over Falcons. Maybe a half a point here, but Tom Brady is the reason they won...and the reason they got there.
Eagles over Pats. Maybe, but when you watched that Super Bowl did you think...yep, running game and defense all the way!
Pats over Rams. Better run game lost...Pats were 8th in passing, and, again, Tom Brady!
Chiefs! LOL, what ever.

So, even ignoring the Super Bowls prior, your rule has been proven about 2.5 times over the past 9 years. Even if I give you the Pats over the Rams, that is 3.5 over 9. Hell, I'll give you the half point and round up. 4 of the last 9 years. You want to rethink your absolute?

Bil522
Posts: 668
Joined: Fri May 03, 2019 12:52 am

Re: National media perspective

Post by Bil522 » Wed Sep 16, 2020 5:59 pm

Michael K. wrote:
Wed Sep 16, 2020 2:04 pm
Bil522 wrote:
Wed Sep 16, 2020 5:11 am

It is only because every Super Bowl winner since the Packers(except last year and even then, the forty whiners should have won) have been a run first team, that controls the clock and plays defense. It is the formula that wins the most in the NFL
Not sure what your deal is lately, your issue with my criticism of Dak and the Cowboys was crazy. You obviously didn't watch the game if you think the Cowboys took advantage of their weapons. Zeke, Cooper, Gallop and Lamb, and they scored 17 points! I guess you ignored the national criticism after too...it was mostly about why they had zero explosiveness. It wasn't just big bad MK 2 that thought they stunk it up.

But let's dive into your most recent issue with anyone talking about a passing game.

It is interesting we are supposed to start after the Packers last win, because if you go back further you will see that after Big Ben beat us by basically doing nothing but pay an official...the QBs who won the Super Bowl were the Manning brothers, Big Ben again, Drew Brees and then Aaron Rodgers. So, I can see how you would want me to not look at those 5 seasons for your little experiment.

So, let's look at what you want us to look at.

Giants over Pats.
Good example for you, except for I am going to apply your rule in that the Pats should have won! :lol:

Ravens over 49ers
Pretty good example again. Baltimore was 15th in passing yards, 11th in rushing yards and 12th in defense. So, if by winning with rushing and defense you mean outside the top 10 in rushing offense and defense? Then you are correct. Oh, and the 49ers were top five in BOTH of your Super Bowl Winner categories! How can they lose?

Seattle over the Broncos
Everyone knows the answer to this one. The thing to remember is many felt like the Broncos were the heavy favorite. And that wasn't based on their defense and run game.

Pats over Seahawks
It was the Seahawks with the #1 Defense, the Pats were #8. Pats had the #9 passing offense and the Seahawks the # 27. Oh, Seattle was first in rushing offense while the Pats 18th. So, the better defense and run game lost the game. What?

Broncos over Panthers
We all know that Manning was broken and Vaughn Miller and the Defense carried the Broncos that year. That being said, the Panthers lead the league in rushing while the Broncos were 18th. The Panthers were 24th in throwing the ball while the Broncos were 14th. Wait? How can that be? How can the #1 rushing offense lose a Super Bowl two seasons in a row!? By the way Denver was 4th in Defense while the Panthers were 6th. Not a large discrepency anywhere but in the passing offenses. How strange when the only thing that matter is running and defense.

Pats over Falcons
Again, let's use your rule that the Falcons should have won...just because I still think it is funny. Pats were first in defense and the Falcons 27th. Wait, but they should have won!? The Falcons were 3rd in passing offense and the Pats 4th. Wait, both teams were in the top 5 in passing? That can't be, it's all about the ground game and defense!? Atlanta was 5th in rushing and the Pats 8th. So, let me get this straight....their offense was better passing then throwing and somehow they won? Can't be.

Eagles over Pats
The Pats were second in passing, the Eagles were 13th. The Pats were 10th in rushing and the Eagles 3rd. This might be the best example for you...except the Eagles were 4th in defense and the Pats were 5th...and the score of the game was 41 to 33 and the two teams combined for 878 passing yards. Not sure you theory really applies here either.

Pats over Rams
This should be the one right? The high flying Rams and their 20th ranked defense lose to the Pats and their 7th ranked defense? What is it Lee Corso says? Not so fast my friend? Well, while the Patriots had the 5th ranked rushing offense, the losing Rams were 3rd! And that is with Gurley resting to end the season! The Rams were 5th in passing and the Patriots 8th...so the losing team was actually better running the ball than throwing, and the winning team had Tom Brady.

Then you have Pat Mahomes.

So, even if I remove Manning and the Giants, four of the five Super Bowls won the year before you want us to look were by Hall of Fame QBs in their prime.

But, when we look at what you want us to look at?

We have the Giants beating the Pats. Great example of a defensive line dominating a high flying passing game. You win this point.
We have the Ravens over the 49ers. Ravens outside the top ten in rushing and defense and the 49ers 2nd in defense and 4th in Rushing. By your rules, how the hell did they lose?
Seahawks. Prove your rule.
Pats over Seahawks. Better defense and running game loses? That can't be!
Broncos over Panthers. Better defense and running game loses? Second year in a row that the #1 rushing offense loses the Super Bowl. Impossible!
Pats over Falcons. Maybe a half a point here, but Tom Brady is the reason they won...and the reason they got there.
Eagles over Pats. Maybe, but when you watched that Super Bowl did you think...yep, running game and defense all the way!
Pats over Rams. Better run game lost...Pats were 8th in passing, and, again, Tom Brady!
Chiefs! LOL, what ever.

So, even ignoring the Super Bowls prior, your rule has been proven about 2.5 times over the past 9 years. Even if I give you the Pats over the Rams, that is 3.5 over 9. Hell, I'll give you the half point and round up. 4 of the last 9 years. You want to rethink your absolute?
I don't know what you mean about the me criticizing you over the Cowboys. All I said was the receivers aren't getting what they should. At that time there was a graphic posted on TV that there had been 4 catches by the receivers for like 20yds. It was an observation because of what the guys on TV were talking about that's it. I guess you could consider it an attack if you like your WR's to avg 5yds/catch.

So the PC/NFL formula that wins championships is (Run the ball= time of possession) + good defense= championship. Seasonal rankings mean nothing in winning the championship. So let's look at the Super Bowls

Last year KC 29-129 rushing the ball 33:13 time of possession (SF was up in time of possession until they were dominated in the 4thq)

NE with its no name RB's 32-154 and 33:10

Philly 27-164 and 34:04

NE 25-104 and 40:31

Den 28-90 and 27:13

NE 21-57 and 33:46

Sea 29-135 and 31:53

Bal 35-93 and 32:23

NYG 28-114 and 37:05

GB 13-50 and 26:35

Shockingly, I was proven right again. You need to run the ball to win time of possession + a good defense =win championships which is the exact same formula Pete follows. I just used the 2010 decade, but if you go back through the 2000's you will see the exact same trend. Oh sure, you can be one of the outliers, like GB, and not do it but the best chance for success is to follow the tried and true formula. I go back to if we had not lost Carson and Penny at the end of the season last year, we are playing in the Super Bowl instead of SF.

Michael K.
Posts: 3316
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: National media perspective

Post by Michael K. » Wed Sep 16, 2020 6:48 pm

Bil522 wrote:
Wed Sep 16, 2020 5:59 pm
I don't know what you mean about the me criticizing you over the Cowboys. All I said was the receivers aren't getting what they should. At that time there was a graphic posted on TV that there had been 4 catches by the receivers for like 20yds. It was an observation because of what the guys on TV were talking about that's it. I guess you could consider it an attack if you like your WR's to avg 5yds/catch.
Then I completely misread what you said. If so, I am sorry. That was exactly my point...the offense had zero explosion, and knowing that meant the Rams, our divisional opponent, where going to get a cheap win it pissed me off. I thought you were disagreeing with me that the WRs needed to be more involved.
Bil522 wrote:
Wed Sep 16, 2020 5:59 pm
So the PC/NFL formula that wins championships is (Run the ball= time of possession) + good defense= championship. Seasonal rankings mean nothing in winning the championship. So let's look at the Super Bowls

Last year KC 29-129 rushing the ball 33:13 time of possession (SF was up in time of possession until they were dominated in the 4thq)

NE with its no name RB's 32-154 and 33:10.

Philly 27-164 and 34:04

NE 25-104 and 40:31

Den 28-90 and 27:13

NE 21-57 and 33:46

Sea 29-135 and 31:53

Bal 35-93 and 32:23

NYG 28-114 and 37:05

GB 13-50 and 26:35

Shockingly, I was proven right again. You need to run the ball to win time of possession + a good defense =win championships which is the exact same formula Pete follows. I just used the 2010 decade, but if you go back through the 2000's you will see the exact same trend. Oh sure, you can be one of the outliers, like GB, and not do it but the best chance for success is to follow the tried and true formula. I go back to if we had not lost Carson and Penny at the end of the season last year, we are playing in the Super Bowl instead of SF.
I have always disagreed with that stat. Running wins games. The team that runs more, often times, gets an early lead. In all of the games above, the only team I would believe to have an inferior QB and still win would be Baltimore...and I never believed Kapernick's was the answer anyway.
IMO, saying they won the time of possession stat because of a dominating run game is short sighted. They ran the ball, often times, because they had a lead and could run the ball.

Second, you are focusing on just that game. I showed you season long stats for the teams that made the Super Bowl. You are talking about that one game, the Super Bowl. Do you find it odd that in two of those games in a row...the Seattle loss and the Carolina loss, the #1 ranked rushing team on the year lost the time of possession battle, and the game?

There is a very good reason that since the Steelers stole one, these are the Super Bowl winning QBs

Brady (3)
Eli Manning (2)
Peyton Manning (2)
Big Ben
Drew Brees
Aaron Rodgers
Russ
Joe Flacco
Nick Foles

As I said, Flacco beat a flawed system in SF, IMO. So, really? Foles beats Brady once, even though Brady threw for 500, and that somehow means you need a run game and a defense to win? If you want to hang your hat on the two Giants wins, fine....but that was some time ago. Hell, so was Flacco. It took the Ravens forever to get over being fooled and paying him.

Our offense hasn't looked this good in some time, and only you and Pete think that we should run it more. Oh, and on Sunday? Atlanta ran 75 plays to our 55, then even had one more all important rushing attempt than us. Time of possession was damn near even, with us having it about a minute longer. That game was an ass kicking. If we shoved it into Carson and Hyde's belly all game I doubt it would have been. For some reason that bothered Pete and I don't get it. I'd like to see another ring on Russ's finger, and if his fingers aren't on the ball more, I don't see that happening.

User avatar
Hanjag
Posts: 1357
Joined: Fri May 03, 2019 2:50 am
Location: Kennewick WA

Re: National media perspective

Post by Hanjag » Thu Sep 17, 2020 6:57 am

Michael K. wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:29 pm
Most everything I read and hear Nationally is about them being blown away that they finally let Russ Cook. IMO, the only people that didn't see it being an issue before were too close to the situation, like fans and local sports blow hards. Well, and Pete Carroll.

The biggest deal Nationally seem to be about how this is all because Russ went in and laid down the law. I was texting a buddy about that last night and his words were, "if true, good for Russ, he has certainly earned it!" I just don't understand why it had to come to that, if true. And then I read a comment from Pete, after a dominating offensive performance like that, and he is upset by the number of rush attempts? You just can't make this shit up. Dude, anyone that watched that offense should have been thrilled.

Imagine if we had won by that same score, in that same fashion. Jumped out to a big lead, most of why the game was close was garbage time for Atlanta, game never felt in doubt. Now, imagine if it was done by both Carson and Hyde rushing for over 100 yards and all of our TDs. Would Pete have come out and expressed concern over a lack of pass attempts by Russ!? Is he that averse to the way the game is played now that he can actually find a problem with the way the offense put points on the board yesterday?
I doubt it went down like that. In the offseason we had several good posts. One of the better ones was about how much of the time the Hawks trailed and the negative effect that fact had on the pass rush. So, if Russ was like hey guys we got the weapons T-Lock, DK, Dissly, Olsen, Moore, Carson, etc. Let's light em up like KC. This puts them in position to have success on D and late in the game play Ground-Chuck with running the play clock down and going run heavy and run equilevlant short passing game. I doubt Pete and John are so isolated in some run the ball to win group think cult that they don't know about leading and trailing stats better than we fans do. I have to dedicate a lot more time to my medical career than being a football fan and I expect they deploy every resource available.

Donn Beach
Posts: 3637
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: National media perspective

Post by Donn Beach » Thu Sep 17, 2020 7:08 am

I don't believe you beat the Patriots next week by trying to chuck the ball all over the field, that defense is tough, particularly the secondary. I think its going to be a more balanced attack and that will be a good thing, not a bad one

D-train
Posts: 16620
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Somerville, MA

Re: National media perspective

Post by D-train » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:20 pm

Donn Beach wrote:
Thu Sep 17, 2020 7:08 am
I don't believe you beat the Patriots next week by trying to chuck the ball all over the field, that defense is tough, particularly the secondary. I think its going to be a more balanced attack and that will be a good thing, not a bad one
Are ya sure about that? Maybe they just went against Fitzpatrick and the Dolphins.........
That includes today’s opt-outs of Dont'a Hightower and Patrick Chung, but even before we learned that Hightower and Chung won’t play this year, we knew the Patriots had suffered massive losses on defense. In fact, the Football Outsiders Almanac calculated that the Patriots had lost more production on defense from 2019 to 2020 than any team since at least 2002-2003 — and that calculation was done before Hightower and Chung opted out.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... ike%202019.
dt

Donn Beach
Posts: 3637
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: National media perspective

Post by Donn Beach » Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:57 pm

i am not sure of anything, but i am not going to underestimate a Pats defense, they lost a lot of talent, but that doesn't mean they don't have more talent. it was the Dophins, but it was also only 185 of passing and three interceptions. Yeah it features some young guys Kyle Dugger, Joejuan Williams, but i am not gonna underestimate Belichick's ability to roll out new talent


here is kind of an interesting look at it...the sort of things Belichick comes up with...I would not go into the game thinking you can just chuck the ball around against a Belichick secondary. I would prefer to have a balanced attack, but we shall see
It’s no surprise that top cornerbacks Stephon Gilmore and JC Jackson each picked off Fitzpatrick. Newcomer Adrian Phillips, who is helping to fill in for Chung, also intercepted a pass Sunday as the Patriots beat the Dolphins 21-11.

It wasn’t just Phillips who replaced Chung. The Patriots dressed 11 defensive backs Sunday and nine of them played at least 10 defensive snaps against the Dolphins. New England’s defense didn’t play a single down in its “base” defense and aligned in its goal line package only three times. They spent 43 snaps with at least six defensive backs on the field, and the Patriots were in a sub-package for 95 percent of snaps, which makes sense against a team like the Dolphins who have a smaller tight end in Mike Gesicki and undersized running backs like Myles Gaskin and Matt Breida.

The Patriots lost Dont’a Hightower, Kyle Van Noy, Jamie Collins, Elandon Roberts and Danny Shelton and essentially threw their hands up and said, “Fine, we’ll just put a bunch of safeties and cornerbacks on the field who can tackle.” And with inexperience at linebacker, if the Patriots’ goal is to put the best 11 defenders on the field, then the majority of them will be defensive backs.

The Seattle Seahawks are preparing to be swimming in defensive backs this Sunday.

“They pose a legitimate challenge,” Seahawks head coach Pete Carroll said Wednesday. “As long as they don’t have 13 guys on the field we’ve got to figure it out, but they’ve got enough DBs to flood you, kind of. They do a really nice job with their system and approach. It’s as well orchestrated and high tech as you can get. Bill has done a great job over the years consistently adapting and changing and staying at the cutting edge of what’s necessary and they’re continuing to do it. Seven DBs on the field this week. It’s just part of dealing with the opponent. Fortunately, we have a whole week to work on it.”
https://nesn.com/2020/09/patriots-secon ... ey-pieces/

D-train
Posts: 16620
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:33 am
Location: Somerville, MA

Re: National media perspective

Post by D-train » Thu Sep 17, 2020 2:10 pm

Donn Beach wrote:
Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:57 pm
i am not sure of anything, but i am not going to underestimate a Pats defense, they lost a lot of talent, but that doesn't mean they don't have more talent. it was the Dophins, but it was also only 185 of passing and three interceptions. Yeah it features some young guys Kyle Dugger, Joejuan Williams, but i am not gonna underestimate Belichick's ability to roll out new talent


here is kind of an interesting look at it...the sort of things Belichick comes up with...I would not go into the game thinking you can just chuck the ball around against a Belichick secondary. I would prefer to have a balanced attack, but we shall see
It’s no surprise that top cornerbacks Stephon Gilmore and JC Jackson each picked off Fitzpatrick. Newcomer Adrian Phillips, who is helping to fill in for Chung, also intercepted a pass Sunday as the Patriots beat the Dolphins 21-11.

It wasn’t just Phillips who replaced Chung. The Patriots dressed 11 defensive backs Sunday and nine of them played at least 10 defensive snaps against the Dolphins. New England’s defense didn’t play a single down in its “base” defense and aligned in its goal line package only three times. They spent 43 snaps with at least six defensive backs on the field, and the Patriots were in a sub-package for 95 percent of snaps, which makes sense against a team like the Dolphins who have a smaller tight end in Mike Gesicki and undersized running backs like Myles Gaskin and Matt Breida.

The Patriots lost Dont’a Hightower, Kyle Van Noy, Jamie Collins, Elandon Roberts and Danny Shelton and essentially threw their hands up and said, “Fine, we’ll just put a bunch of safeties and cornerbacks on the field who can tackle.” And with inexperience at linebacker, if the Patriots’ goal is to put the best 11 defenders on the field, then the majority of them will be defensive backs.

The Seattle Seahawks are preparing to be swimming in defensive backs this Sunday.

“They pose a legitimate challenge,” Seahawks head coach Pete Carroll said Wednesday. “As long as they don’t have 13 guys on the field we’ve got to figure it out, but they’ve got enough DBs to flood you, kind of. They do a really nice job with their system and approach. It’s as well orchestrated and high tech as you can get. Bill has done a great job over the years consistently adapting and changing and staying at the cutting edge of what’s necessary and they’re continuing to do it. Seven DBs on the field this week. It’s just part of dealing with the opponent. Fortunately, we have a whole week to work on it.”
https://nesn.com/2020/09/patriots-secon ... ey-pieces/
I don't think it matters if we are pass heavy, run heavy or exactly 50/50 split, we are going to knock the shit out of those fuckers and their clown car Metro sexual dressing cry baby QB. :)
dt

Donn Beach
Posts: 3637
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: National media perspective

Post by Donn Beach » Thu Sep 17, 2020 2:30 pm

Geez forgot where you are, better keep your head down. All I want is for them to use all the weapons they have to their best advantage...so you gonna put on your DK jersey and find the toughest bar in boston to watch the game in?

Post Reply