Scooby Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 If your QB leads your team in rushing TD's (he and Morris, who is no longer on the roster, each have 3 Ru. TD's.) , can you win a Super Bowl without a running game? 1984 Dolphins come to mind. They beat the Bears in the regular season but could not make it to the Super Bowl. Does anyone see a parallel of this years Pats to the '84 Dolphins? You can say Maroney has been hurt, but that still counts as no performance. If Maroney comes back healthy in any way, do the Pat's change? Better or worse? I see the Cowboys playing them in the Super. The Boys will have Anthony Henry and Tank Johnson for this one, thus freeing up Roy Williams to blitz. Henry does lead the league in INT's on limited playing time. He will make a difference in many ways. That being said, I don't see Maroney running to a Super Bowl victory, can the Pats win the Super on Brady alone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinatown dragons Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 they are undefeated with a decent running game...yes, they wont put up 150 and 2 tds, but dont need to....Maroney is serviceable....Faulk is chipping in...Heath Evans can handle the goal line carries, and rumor has it that Dillon has been working out, and ready to rejoin the team...... They won a Super Bowl in the past with Antwoain Smth, so not too worried about them winning with Maroney and company.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Weaknesses get seriously exposed in the post season. I look at the DEN teams of the late 70s to mid 80s that didn't have a legit running game but plowed through the AFC before getting exposed in the SB, and at the early 90s Bills and early '00s Colts that didn't field legit Ds yet put up great regular season numbers but couldn't close the deal in the playoffs. I would expect NE not having a legit ground game and a very average defense will catch up with them despite their potent passing offense. I happen to think these are the reasons that NE can't be counted among one of the great teams in NFL history despite their success so far. I also know that these comments will really piss off the rabid NE posters here, so be ready for the firestorm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Pat!!! Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 If your QB leads your team in rushing TD's (he and Morris, who is no longer on the roster, each have 3 Ru. TD's.) , can you win a Super Bowl without a running game? 1984 Dolphins come to mind. They beat the Bears in the regular season but could not make it to the Super Bowl. Does anyone see a parallel of this years Pats to the '84 Dolphins? You can say Maroney has been hurt, but that still counts as no performance. If Maroney comes back healthy in any way, do the Pat's change? Better or worse? I see the Cowboys playing them in the Super. The Boys will have Anthony Henry and Tank Johnson for this one, thus freeing up Roy Williams to blitz. Henry does lead the league in INT's on limited playing time. He will make a difference in many ways. That being said, I don't see Maroney running to a Super Bowl victory, can the Pats win the Super on Brady alone? I'm really not sure where this idea came from that the Patriots don't have a legit running game. Just because they don't score rushing TDs? Who cares? Or because they don't have one primary back getting 80% of the carries? Again, who cares? Did people say there was something wrong with the running game of the Colts when Peyton was throwing 49 TDs? That year they ranked 15th and only scored 10 rushing TDs. The Patriots right now are 8th in rushing and have scored 8 TDs rushing. This was posted in another thread in response to Sarge's saying the Pats' couldn't run and only got their yards late, but it works here quite well. New England rushing attack: Ranked 8th, 132.3 yards/game, 4.1 yds/carry Breakdown by Half: 1st Half Rushing: 137 carries- 595 yards, 4.34 yds/carry 2nd Half Rushing: 150 carries- 596 yards, 3.97 yds/carry So, let's see what we just proved to be WRONG: NE cant run the ball. Period 8th in league in yards/game. They get the majority of their yards late 50/50 split as to when they get their yards. Any other theories you'd like to try ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby Posted November 7, 2007 Author Share Posted November 7, 2007 I'm really not sure where this idea came from that the Patriots don't have a legit running game. Just because they don't score rushing TDs? Who cares? Or because they don't have one primary back getting 80% of the carries? Again, who cares? Did people say there was something wrong with the running game of the Colts when Peyton was throwing 49 TDs? That year they ranked 15th and only scored 10 rushing TDs. The Patriots right now are 8th in rushing and have scored 8 TDs rushing. This was posted in another thread in response to Sarge's saying the Pats' couldn't run and only got their yards late, but it works here quite well. New England rushing attack: Ranked 8th, 132.3 yards/game, 4.1 yds/carry Breakdown by Half: 1st Half Rushing: 137 carries- 595 yards, 4.34 yds/carry 2nd Half Rushing: 150 carries- 596 yards, 3.97 yds/carry So, let's see what we just proved to be WRONG: NE cant run the ball. Period 8th in league in yards/game. They get the majority of their yards late 50/50 split as to when they get their yards. Any other theories you'd like to try ?? It is hard to guage their game with numbers b/c teams are either playing against the pass, or they simply do not need to run to score. Wade Phillips admitted to gameplanning to stop the Pats running attack, so he must see them to be a good running team, but as we saw, maybe he should have gameplanned to stop the pass and have made them run to beat them. I guess I should rephrase...If the Pat's passing game is beaten and they turn the ball over or if Brady is just off, can they run to win? If it is the last play of the game and they are on the 1and a half yard line needing to score to win, can they run it in against a good defense? Or do they chance it on a pass? How many times can you throw to Vrable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 (edited) I'm really not sure where this idea came from that the Patriots don't have a legit running game. Just because they don't score rushing TDs? Who cares? Or because they don't have one primary back getting 80% of the carries? Again, who cares? Did people say there was something wrong with the running game of the Colts when Peyton was throwing 49 TDs? That year they ranked 15th and only scored 10 rushing TDs. The Patriots right now are 8th in rushing and have scored 8 TDs rushing. This was posted in another thread in response to Sarge's saying the Pats' couldn't run and only got their yards late, but it works here quite well. New England rushing attack: Ranked 8th, 132.3 yards/game, 4.1 yds/carry Breakdown by Half: 1st Half Rushing: 137 carries- 595 yards, 4.34 yds/carry 2nd Half Rushing: 150 carries- 596 yards, 3.97 yds/carry So, let's see what we just proved to be WRONG: NE cant run the ball. Period 8th in league in yards/game. They get the majority of their yards late 50/50 split as to when they get their yards. Any other theories you'd like to try ?? NE is 15th in the NFL in ypc. Despite being 2nd in the NFL in rushing attempts, they are 8th in ypg - that's a significanty lagging stat. They are also tied for 27th in the league in number of 20+ yd long runs with 2, do not have a 40+ yd run. That leads one to recognize that they are 8th in the league in rushing ypg through sheer attrition - they have 20% more plays from scrimmage than the average NFL team and 8% more than the next closest team. One can also infer that those rushing numbers are probably skewed because teams have to play in Ds that install extra DBs and that LBs play further from the line of scrimmage, which should lead to better ypc numbers as well as more long runs because its easier for RBs to get to the 2nd level. Conclusion - NE is very mediocre at running the football. So what you think you proved to be WRONG is just you deluding yourself. Edited November 7, 2007 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby Posted November 7, 2007 Author Share Posted November 7, 2007 (edited) I'm really not sure where this idea came from that the Patriots don't have a legit running game. Just because they don't score rushing TDs? Who cares? Or because they don't have one primary back getting 80% of the carries? Again, who cares? Did people say there was something wrong with the running game of the Colts when Peyton was throwing 49 TDs? That year they ranked 15th and only scored 10 rushing TDs. The Patriots right now are 8th in rushing and have scored 8 TDs rushing. This was posted in another thread in response to Sarge's saying the Pats' couldn't run and only got their yards late, but it works here quite well. New England rushing attack: Ranked 8th, 132.3 yards/game, 4.1 yds/carry Breakdown by Half: 1st Half Rushing: 137 carries- 595 yards, 4.34 yds/carry 2nd Half Rushing: 150 carries- 596 yards, 3.97 yds/carry So, let's see what we just proved to be WRONG: NE cant run the ball. Period 8th in league in yards/game. AND the Colts did NOT win the Super Bowl the year Manning set the record. My question is about winning the Super Bowl They get the majority of their yards late 50/50 split as to when they get their yards. Any other theories you'd like to try ?? The Colts did NOT win the Super the year Manning set the record. The question is about winning the Super Bowl. Edited November 7, 2007 by Scooby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Pat!!! Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 NE is 15th in the NFL in ypc. Despite being 2nd in the NFL in rushing attempts, they are 8th in ypg - that's a significanty lagging stat. They are also tied for 27th in the league in number of 20+ yd long runs with 2, do not have a 40+ yd run. That leads one to recognize that they are 8th in the league in rushing ypg through sheer attrition - they have 20% more plays from scrimmage than the average NFL team and 8% more than the next closest team. One can also infer that those rushing numbers are probably skewed because teams have to play in Ds that install extra DBs and that LBs play further from the line of scrimmage, which should lead to better ypc numbers as well as more long runs because its easier for RBs to get to the 2nd level. Conclusion - NE is very mediocre at running the football. So what you think you proved to be WRONG is just you deluding yourself. So know it's how you do it. They do it with number of carries (showing a commitment to the run) and don't break tons of long runs. So? If they had four or five 80 yard runs mixed in, these same people would be the first ones to say, well if you take those long runs away their average per carry isn't very good. The facts are they move the ball on the ground some. They use a lot of carries to do it. They control the clock that way. If Brady is completely shut down, could they move the ball on the ground enough to score points? We don't really know that yet becasue nobody has shut him down long enough for the Pat's to have to try it. As for the formation they run from. Again, who cares? Teams are going to have to run a lot of Ds with extra DBs in the game against them for the rest of the year. They run lots of spread formations with 3 or 4 wides. Pick your poison. Play the spread passing game with extra DBs and get run on or play base packages to stop the run and get beat through the air. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fballfreak Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 NE is 15th in the NFL in ypc. Despite being 2nd in the NFL in rushing attempts, they are 8th in ypg - that's a significanty lagging stat. They are also tied for 27th in the league in number of 20+ yd long runs with 2, do not have a 40+ yd run. That leads one to recognize that they are 8th in the league in rushing ypg through sheer attrition - they have 20% more plays from scrimmage than the average NFL team and 8% more than the next closest team. One can also infer that those rushing numbers are probably skewed because teams have to play in Ds that install extra DBs and that LBs play further from the line of scrimmage, which should lead to better ypc numbers as well as more long runs because its easier for RBs to get to the 2nd level. Conclusion - NE is very mediocre at running the football. So what you think you proved to be WRONG is just you deluding yourself. They're also 9-0 and the running game has helped them get there along with the awesome passing game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilwiggum Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 I think this point means nothing if you are basing it on rushing TDs. It's not as if teams have been stopping the PATS from scoring in the red zone because of a lack of running game. They have kicked very few field goals in the red zone so I think they will be OK for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 (edited) They're also 9-0 and the running game has helped them get there along with the awesome passing game. No doubt, and I agree. But the running game isn't great and running the football as well as stopping the run is a recipe for winning football in the playoffs. As shown, NE is not a great running team. In fact, they're a shade better than average. That can be overlooked somewhat because their passing game is so over-the-top awesome. But on D, NE is a bit above average against both the pass & the run. Now, that passing D is probably a bit better than that because they are 7th in the league in ypa, which is a good marker for pass D, but they are probably a bit worse than average against the run, where their D ypc is 19th in the league and their numbers are affected by other teams passing so much to catch up until the very end of the game where teams may surrender. But this team does have some chinks in the armor in both its run O and its run D, and those are usually the places where you least want a weakness when the playoffs start. Edited November 7, 2007 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperCharger Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 No doubt, and I agree. But the running game isn't great and running the football as well as stopping the run is a recipe for winning football in the playoffs. As shown, NE is not a great running team. In fact, they're a shade better than average. That can be overlooked somewhat because their passing game is so over-the-top awesome. But on D, NE is a bit above average against both the pass & the run. Now, that passing D is probably a bit better than that because they are 7th in the league in ypa, which is a good marker for pass D, but they are probably a bit worse than average against the run, where their D ypc is 19th in the league and their numbers are affected by other teams passing so much to catch up until the very end of the game where teams may surrender. But this team does have some chinks in the armor in both its run O and its run D, and those are usually the places where you least want a weakness when the playoffs start. And that is exactly what makes them the most dangerous team in the league. Belicheck uses their weaknesses as motivation. As soon as a team thinks they are perfect and unbeatable is usually when they fall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitch Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 No doubt, and I agree. But the running game isn't great and running the football as well as stopping the run is a recipe for winning football in the playoffs. As shown, NE is not a great running team. In fact, they're a shade better than average. That can be overlooked somewhat because their passing game is so over-the-top awesome. But on D, NE is a bit above average against both the pass & the run. Now, that passing D is probably a bit better than that because they are 7th in the league in ypa, which is a good marker for pass D, but they are probably a bit worse than average against the run, where their D ypc is 19th in the league and their numbers are affected by other teams passing so much to catch up until the very end of the game where teams may surrender. But this team does have some chinks in the armor in both its run O and its run D, and those are usually the places where you least want a weakness when the playoffs start. Strong running game like that Denver running game? How's that workin' out over there? Look, we can sideshow the #s all we want. The fact is theyre 8th in the league in rushing yds, even higher in attempts/game, and thats typically with defensive fronts stacking the box in the 2nd half of virtually every game while the Patriots milk big leads. Which is why they throw a little more in the 2nd half then alot of teams with leads. Theyre 9-0. What do people want? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Strong running game like that Denver running game? How's that workin' out over there? First off, I would not call the DEN running game strong this year. Secondly, what in the Seven Hells does that have to do in any way, shape, or form with the discussion at hand here? Try to keep your focus, junior. Look, we can sideshow the #s all we want. The fact is theyre 8th in the league in rushing yds, even higher in attempts/game, and thats typically with defensive fronts stacking the box in the 2nd half of virtually every game while the Patriots milk big leads. stacking the box against the 2nd half run like against WAS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 The Pats already won a SB without a running game. And what they're able to do on the ground this year is significantly better than what they did in '03. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 If your QB leads your team in rushing TD's (he and Morris, who is no longer on the roster, each have 3 Ru. TD's.) , can you win a Super Bowl without a running game? 1984 Dolphins come to mind. They beat the Bears in the regular season but could not make it to the Super Bowl. Does anyone see a parallel of this years Pats to the '84 Dolphins? You can say Maroney has been hurt, but that still counts as no performance. If Maroney comes back healthy in any way, do the Pat's change? Better or worse? I see the Cowboys playing them in the Super. The Boys will have Anthony Henry and Tank Johnson for this one, thus freeing up Roy Williams to blitz. Henry does lead the league in INT's on limited playing time. He will make a difference in many ways. That being said, I don't see Maroney running to a Super Bowl victory, can the Pats win the Super on Brady alone? The Colts or Pats will slaughter whatever mediocre NFC team makes it to the super bowl. Hell, the Steelers are heads and shoulders better than the Cowboys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 The Colts or Pats will slaughter whatever mediocre NFC team makes it to the super bowl. Hell, the Steelers are heads and shoulders better than the Cowboys. Wasn't there similar conventional wisdom when the Pats beat the Rams in the SB? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilwiggum Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 The Colts or Pats will slaughter whatever mediocre NFC team makes it to the super bowl. Hell, the Steelers are heads and shoulders better than the Cowboys. That could be true, but as we all know we are one blown blitz pickup away from possibly seeing Matt Cassell or Jim Sorgi out there as starters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTed46 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 I see nothing wrong with a team scoring at will. Running or passing who cares? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitch Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 First off, I would not call the DEN running game strong this year. Secondly, what in the Seven Hells does that have to do in any way, shape, or form with the discussion at hand here? Try to keep your focus, junior. stacking the box against the 2nd half run like against WAS? Junior? Like a said, every knock on this team is nothing but a pointless sideshow. The point was Denver's had a prolific running game for years, and theyre not doing anything special lately. Im not isolating that comment to one year. These guys throw because they can. A luxury few other teams in the league have. Like that 150yds Brady threw for in the 4th quarter against the league's best pass defense. Oh, Im dialed in now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 FYI, the Patriots rushing numbers this season are virtually identical to their numbers for the 2004 season. They are significantly better than they were in 2001, and off the charts better than they were in 2003. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.