36.4

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    36.4

    If we score greater than that as an average over the remaining 5 games we will exceed the 2007 scoring level.

    We currently average 37 a game.

    We already have scored more points with 5 games left than all but 11 Pats' teams in history did for a full season.

    I don't think we will do it, and I don't care if we do it. I only care if we are at peak performance on both sides of the ball for the post-season.

    Just thought it was interesting.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from auchhhhhhhhhhh. Show auchhhhhhhhhhh's posts

    Re: 36.4

    we will be facing 2 very good defenses... it might not happen

    who knows we could kill JAX and MIA at the end of the year...

    i just want a bye... thats all !

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: 36.4

    Yep and if the D and ST keeps up the pace they've been on the last 2 games that's very possible. It's really on them right now. The O is going to get between 25-35 that's no question but if the D can cause a couple of turn overs, the ST's and D can create great field position, and either the ST's or D put up a couple scores then that's a very reasonable mark to hit all with a much improved and more balanced O that hasn't hurt the scoring in the least and has actually made us a bigger threat come playoffs since we aren't 1 dimensional anymore

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from harleyroadking12. Show harleyroadking12's posts

    Re: 36.4

    ......is leon's and jetnsfan combined IQ

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yep and if the D and ST keeps up the pace they've been on the last 2 games that's very possible. It's really on them right now. The O is going to get between 25-35 that's no question but if the D can cause a couple of turn overs, the ST's and D can create great field position, and either the ST's or D put up a couple scores then that's a very reasonable mark to hit all with a much improved and more balanced O that hasn't hurt the scoring in the least and has actually made us a bigger threat come playoffs since we aren't 1 dimensional anymore

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah. We have run the ball more effectively this year so we have done it a bit more as BB said he would.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yep and if the D and ST keeps up the pace they've been on the last 2 games that's very possible. It's really on them right now. The O is going to get between 25-35 that's no question but if the D can cause a couple of turn overs, the ST's and D can create great field position, and either the ST's or D put up a couple scores then that's a very reasonable mark to hit all with a much improved and more balanced O that hasn't hurt the scoring in the least and has actually made us a bigger threat come playoffs since we aren't 1 dimensional anymore

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah. We have run the ball more effectively this year so we have done it a bit more as BB said he would.

    [/QUOTE]

    It's more then that. We are running it more effectively because we are commiting to the run even if it doesn't produce immediate results and they are mixing up the play calling keeping the opponents on their heels. Heck last year a dead chipmunk could have predicted when the Pats were going to run and when they were going to pass. It was beyond predictable. Hard to run when the opponent knows you are going to run

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: 36.4

    That dead chipmunk has a name, BJGE

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yep and if the D and ST keeps up the pace they've been on the last 2 games that's very possible. It's really on them right now. The O is going to get between 25-35 that's no question but if the D can cause a couple of turn overs, the ST's and D can create great field position, and either the ST's or D put up a couple scores then that's a very reasonable mark to hit all with a much improved and more balanced O that hasn't hurt the scoring in the least and has actually made us a bigger threat come playoffs since we aren't 1 dimensional anymore

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah. We have run the ball more effectively this year so we have done it a bit more as BB said he would.

    [/QUOTE]

    It's more then that. We are running it more effectively because we are commiting to the run even if it doesn't produce immediate results and they are mixing up the play calling keeping the opponents on their heels. Heck last year a dead chipmunk could have predicted when the Pats were going to run and when they were going to pass. It was beyond predictable. Hard to run when the opponent knows you are going to run

    [/QUOTE]


    You're trying to sell us that 1 play in 20 of more run has made all the difference?

    Your contention Seems rather flimsy.

    I would say a nearly 25% increase in effectiveness from our lead back sounds more convincing.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: 36.4

    Patriots will score 38  vs the Texans and 28 vs the 49'ers.  Will certainly put up more then the average against the Dolphins twice and the Jags.  They will break the 07 record, amazingly!!

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yep and if the D and ST keeps up the pace they've been on the last 2 games that's very possible. It's really on them right now. The O is going to get between 25-35 that's no question but if the D can cause a couple of turn overs, the ST's and D can create great field position, and either the ST's or D put up a couple scores then that's a very reasonable mark to hit all with a much improved and more balanced O that hasn't hurt the scoring in the least and has actually made us a bigger threat come playoffs since we aren't 1 dimensional anymore

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah. We have run the ball more effectively this year so we have done it a bit more as BB said he would.

    [/QUOTE]

    It's more then that. We are running it more effectively because we are commiting to the run even if it doesn't produce immediate results and they are mixing up the play calling keeping the opponents on their heels. Heck last year a dead chipmunk could have predicted when the Pats were going to run and when they were going to pass. It was beyond predictable. Hard to run when the opponent knows you are going to run

    [/QUOTE]


    You're trying to sell us that 1 play in 20 of more run has made all the difference?

    Your contention Seems rather flimsy.

    I would say a nearly 25% increase in effectiveness from our lead back sounds more convincing.

    [/QUOTE]

    Did you not read the entire post, it's not just the 1 extra run but also how they use the runs that is making it more effective. If you run it when the other team knows you are going to run it, it then becomes less affective. If you run when the other team thinks you are going to pass it, it becomes more affective. Not that hard to understand. This year compared to last they are mixing it up much more so and adding to the balance. They are also running it an extra ~6 times a game. That might not seem like much but when that extra 1-2 carries a quarter mixing in with unpredictability can result in a very large gain.

    Additionally it helps setup the play action better. Maybe, you haven't noticed but doesn't it appear our play action is much more affective this year then last. Why do you think that is?

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    Did you not read the entire post, it's not just the 1 extra run but also how they use the runs that is making it more effective. If you run it when the other team knows you are going to run it, it then becomes less affective. If you run when the other team thinks you are going to pass it, it becomes more affective. Not that hard to understand.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You have zero factual evidence to support this. It's just unsubstantiated spin.

    But the facts DO show Ridley is a more effective runner than Benny.

    So, because Ridley is better, we have run the ball 5% more, or 1 in 20 plays.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Additionally it helps setup the play action better. Maybe, you haven't noticed but doesn't it appear our play action is much more affective this year then last. Why do you think that is?

    [/QUOTE]

    Because an above average back is a greater threat than a below average back. Pretty simple stuff.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: 36.4

    The Pats don't mix anything any different. 

    Oh wait, here is the difference. 

    2011

    1st down: BJGE - Rush 1 yard

    2nd down: Brady pass to Welker incomplete

    3rd down: Brady pass to Gronk 11 yards

    2012

    1st down: Ridley - Rush 4 yards

    2nd down: Brady - pass to Welker 4 yards

    3rd down: Ridley rush 6 yards

    When you rush is situational. More good rushes earn more rushes. 

    The number of 2nd and short and 3rd and shorts you get mean that that part of the playbook is open. 

    I mean, in their third down setup ... how many rushes do you have for BJGE on 3rd and 9?? None? One? 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from nyjoseph. Show nyjoseph's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In the first game against Tenn. Ridley had 5 runs of over 15 yards.  This was his first game as a starter.  According to Elias, no Patriot had accomplished such a feat in over 20 years

    The "it's when you run" argument has some merit, but it does not matter when you have a runner that can't go inside and outside, and is never a threat to break away.  When the defense is allowed to play within the hashes knowing that your back can't beat you to the edge you've lost.

    Talent trumps everything.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    Did you not read the entire post, it's not just the 1 extra run but also how they use the runs that is making it more effective. If you run it when the other team knows you are going to run it, it then becomes less affective. If you run when the other team thinks you are going to pass it, it becomes more affective. Not that hard to understand.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You have zero factual evidence to support this. It's just unsubstantiated spin.

    But the facts DO show Ridley is a more effective runner than Benny.

    So, because Ridley is better, we have run the ball 5% more, or 1 in 20 plays.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep zero evidence except the entire 2011 season

    http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/multimedia/patriots_play_predictor/

    Here's the breakdown:

    • 1st >10 - they passed
    • 1st 10 - 50/50
    • 1st 5->9 - they passed
    • 1st <5 - they ran
    • 2nd <4 - they ran
    • 2nd 5 - 50/50
    • 2nd >5 - they passed
    • 3rd <2 - they ran
    • 3rd >2 - they passed

    A blind monkey could figure that out. Basically other then the 1st down if they had over 5 yards to go they threw it a vast majority of the time. If they had under 5 yards they could run it unless it was 3rd down. That's no mixing it up in the least. Is every play collected into an easy to read play predictor factual enough for you?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: 36.4

    I love this...we ran it when the other team knew we were going to run it, and we didn't run it enough...we were too predictable. It makes me laugh. There's only two things you can do - run it or pass it. These defensive coaches for the most part have a very good idea of what you are going to do based off of down, distance, talent, strengths, weaknesses, etc. It's more a matter of, do you have the talent to run it in obvious sitiuations? Do you have a guy that could get you six yards when you need five? Because if you don't, why the hell would you end a drive sending an average running back up the middle, when you could let Brady throw it to Gronk for eight? This makes no sense what so ever.

    No one in their right mind is going to try to become "less predictable" with a running back like BJGE. Hell, the guy struggles with the predictable runs...you gonna let him run on 3rd and 5's? Why? You are just going to send your offense to the bench and put your below average defense on the field. Not a good stratedgy for winning - Belichick didn't think so and it's why the guy is gone and we are NOW more capable of running in "less predictable" stiuations.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    Did you not read the entire post, it's not just the 1 extra run but also how they use the runs that is making it more effective. If you run it when the other team knows you are going to run it, it then becomes less affective. If you run when the other team thinks you are going to pass it, it becomes more affective. Not that hard to understand.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You have zero factual evidence to support this. It's just unsubstantiated spin.

    But the facts DO show Ridley is a more effective runner than Benny.

    So, because Ridley is better, we have run the ball 5% more, or 1 in 20 plays.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep zero evidence except the entire 2011 season

    http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/multimedia/patriots_play_predictor/

    Here's the breakdown:

    • 1st >10 - they passed
    • 1st 10 - 50/50
    • 1st 5->9 - they passed
    • 1st <5 - they ran
    • 2nd <4 - they ran
    • 2nd 5 - 50/50
    • 2nd >5 - they passed
    • 3rd <2 - they ran
    • 3rd >2 - they passed

    A blind monkey could figure that out. Basically other then the 1st down if they had over 5 yards to go they threw it a vast majority of the time. If they had under 5 yards they could run it unless it was 3rd down. That's no mixing it up in the least. Is every play collected into an easy to read play predictor factual enough for you?

    [/QUOTE]


    You don't mix it up when you have a backup quality guy as your lead back. Simple, eh?

     

    And explain for us laymen how "when you run" has to do with overall "balance"?

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I love this...we ran it when the other team knew we were going to run it, and we didn't run it enough...we were too predictable. It makes me laugh. There's only two things you can do - run it or pass it. These defensive coaches for the most part have a very good idea of what you are going to do based off of down, distance, talent, strengths, weaknesses, etc. It's more a matter of, do you have the talent to run it in obvious sitiuations? Do you have a guy that could get you six yards when you need five? Because if you don't, why the hell would you end a drive sending an average running back up the middle, when you could let Brady throw it to Gronk for eight? This makes no sense what so ever.

    No one in their right mind is going to try to become "less predictable" with a running back like BJGE. Hell, the guy struggles with the predictable runs...you gonna let him run on 3rd and 5's? Why? You are just going to send your offense to the bench and put your below average defense on the field. Not a good stratedgy for winning - Belichick didn't think so and it's why the guy is gone and we are NOW more capable of running in "less predictable" stiuations.

    [/QUOTE]


    Exactly.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from mgraham. Show mgraham's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to nyjoseph's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In the first game against Tenn. Ridley had 5 runs of over 15 yards.  This was his first game as a starter.  According to Elias, no Patriot had accomplished such a feat in over 20 years

    The "it's when you run" argument has some merit, but it does not matter when you have a runner that can't go inside and outside, and is never a threat to break away.  When the defense is allowed to play within the hashes knowing that your back can't beat you to the edge you've lost.

    Talent trumps everything.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    was that Stephens ?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mgraham. Show mgraham's posts

    Re: 36.4

    Interesting data brought out here. However  with the SB teams , I know that they didn't approach the  36 pts average, but Pats did have RBs that could run , when they D expected it , ie. 4th quarter to control clock and close out the game. I think Ridley is better than Antwoin Smith, ...Corey Dillon????we dont know yet.

    I am still waiting to see that return again when they play formidable defenses ( read playoffs and SBs) when scoring doesnt come as easily.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to mgraham's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Interesting data brought out here. However  with the SB teams , I know that they didn't approach the  36 pts average, but Pats did have RBs that could run , when they D expected it , ie. 4th quarter to control clock and close out the game. I think Ridley is better than Antwoin Smith, ...Corey Dillon????we dont know yet.

    I am still waiting to see that return again when they play formidable defenses ( read playoffs and SBs) when scoring doesnt come as easily.

    [/QUOTE]

    You will see in the next 3 weeks when they play the # 7, 2 & 4 run D's in the league.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: 36.4

    Should be an interesting stretch of games coming up. We will know a lot more about the Patriots in a few weeks.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to Neal Page's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mgraham's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Interesting data brought out here. However  with the SB teams , I know that they didn't approach the  36 pts average, but Pats did have RBs that could run , when they D expected it , ie. 4th quarter to control clock and close out the game. I think Ridley is better than Antwoin Smith, ...Corey Dillon????we dont know yet.

    I am still waiting to see that return again when they play formidable defenses ( read playoffs and SBs) when scoring doesnt come as easily.

    [/QUOTE]

    You will see in the next 3 weeks when they play the # 7, 2 & 4 run D's in the league.

    [/QUOTE]


    The trick against those Ds is to not abandon the run.  That's the key. None of those teams have also faced an elite QB or offense barring SF's D.

    It seems counter-intuitive to run at a good Run D, but it's the key to pull away from them in the second half.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I think so too. They've been doing that a lot more this year and it's certainly been working. They had some kinks earlier in the season but have really come on of late.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: 36.4

    In response to Neal Page's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    It seems counter-intuitive to run at a good Run D, but it's the key to pull away from them in the second half.  

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Boy oh boy, I hope BB is reading this. Do you think he has figured out this nugget of wisdom about how to coach a team yet?

     

    Run against a good run D late... Brilliant! I bet that works every time.

     

Share