In response to ccnsd's comment:
In response to TrueChamp's comment:
In response to ccnsd's comment:
In response to wozzy's comment:
In response to CHAMPSXLVIII's comment:
BB: There's always an element to if you can balance off your offense to try to balance it off and give the defense more things to work on that, again, in some of those games when a team is playing you more to throw the ball, then that gives you more opportunities to run it. If a team is playing you more to run the ball, then that gives you more opportunities to throw it. Again, I think the most important thing for us has always been moving the ball and scoring points. It's not about how many runs or how many passes or how many times we throw the ball to this guy or how many times that guy carries the ball. It's about trying to match up and attack our opponents and score points. I think that's really the measure of what you do offensively. Can you score points and score enough points to win? All the other stats you want to throw in there are relevant but they're not as important as scoring. On the flip side of it of course is the turnovers. If you can score points and not turn the ball over, you're probably going to win a lot of games in this league. If you're not scoring a lot of points and you're turning the ball over, then you're probably not wining very many games. To me, that's really what it comes down to. However that happens, whether you throw it 50 times or run it 50 times. Either one could be good as long as you're achieving your goal of moving the ball and scoring points and not turning it over.
BB knows that balance is important, he also knows that scoring points and stopping teams from scoring is more important than yards.
As far as what it takes to have great offense I would say that is not his specialty and he of all people is keenly aware of this which is why he leaves it to his offensive coaches and can always be found on gameday coaching the defense and special teams.
And the fact remains, the Pats are 9-0 when they run thirty times or more, I would add there is probably data that can support the notion that the more they have run the more they have won, at least that's what my eyes tell me and I have watched every game over the last decade. I would also add that running in the playoffs is substantially more important in the playoffs where snow and the elements play a factor.
All I know for sure is that from 2001-2004 the Patriots ran the ball in the playoffs more than almost every other team, we all know the result.
Let's look at this.
2001 Raiders Game 52 passes to 30 runs.
2001 Steelers Game 39 passes to 25 runs.
2001 Rams Game 27 passes to 25 runs.
So far you are 0 for 3 should I continue.
2003 Titans game 41 passes to 27 runs.
2003 Colts game 37 passes to 32 runs. (5 Colts turnovers)
2003 Panthers 48 passes to 35 runs.
Now you are 0 for 6, should I continue.
2004 Colts game 27 passes to 39 runs (Corey Dillon gets you one).
2004 Steelers game 21 passes to 32 runs (Corey Dillon gets you two).
2004 Eagles game 33 passes to 28 runs.
What does this prove. Your eyes were telling you wrong except for when Corey Dillon was on the team. The Pats won plenty of playoff games throwing 35+ passes. Since the Pats had good sized leads in several of these games the running stats were probably skewed a bit in your favor with 4th quarter runs (as Bill Belichick mentions in his quote). Especially in 2004 when Pats rather handily beat the Colts and Steelers. For example I count 14 runs against the Steelers in 2004 during the 4th quarter with a two score lead. Against the Colts with a two score lead in the 4th quarter I counted 12 runs. So while I agree a good running game is important it was not more important than the passing game during the super bowl years. If anything it was the defense that was key in most of these games.
Wait a minute. Those are good pass to run ratios. And by the way, I will borrow a line I hear often on this forum, those numbers were skewed in all 3 super bowl wins because in all 3 super bowls our vaunted dynasty defense gave up the lead in the 4rth quarter and forced the great one to put the team on his back in the last minute by throwing to win.
But let's look at how Antowian Smith pounded a dominate panthers d line for 28 carries at barely 3.5 yards per clip to wear that D down and open up our offense to score the most points they ever had in their super bowl history.
Or 2001 when we had 27 passes for 134 yards, and 25 rushes for 133 yards and won the game.
Or 2004 when we had 33 passes to 27 runs for 112 yards which lead to the 2nd most points scored in our super bowl history.
Now lets's take a look at the 2 super bowl losses. 90 passes to 33 rushes = 15.5 ppg scored...oh but it's the defense's fault.
You know why our defense in all 5 super bowl appearances couldn't stop the other team? Because the other team was 1 of 2 of the best teams in the league. They were going to score. Unfortunately for us, our open book offense with a 3-1 pass to run ratio could only score 14 and 17 points with the same game plans.After scoring the most points in NFL history in the regular season and averaging 35 ppg the 2nd game.
Yes Maroney was limited in 07 but only had 11 carries, How did Faulk do you ask? Well he only had 1 carry. BJGE ran for 4.5 ypc in 2011 but only received 10 of them, why? Because we wanted to go pass heavy against a weak run defense who, had the best pass rush in the NFL. So we gave Woodhead 7 carries for 18 yards. I guess the gints knew what we were doing....again.
Hey, I got 1 more for ya. All of those playoff games you listed we had more runs in all of them then our 2 power backs had combined in both super bowl losses. How did that work out?
Trying to sell us that we were not a more balanced offense in our dynasty years is as erroneous as the 4 horsemen trying to tell us BB doesn't know how to build a good football team, or rusty trying to say that Brady is some ego maniac who is only about his passing stats.
All 3 agendas are equally fallacious.
Talk about cherry picking. You complain when others put words in your mouth but you are more than happy to have preconceived notions of others. When did I say the Pats were unbalanced in the "glory" years. I never said anything bad about running the ball. I could have pointed out the pathetic YPC averages in the Raider game and the Steeler game in 2001 but I avoided it. The Stats prove that the Pats were pass first during the super bowl years in the playoffs except for maybe in 2004. In 2004 they got the big lead and then Dillon killed the clock. If a young Dillon had been on the 2011 Pats we would probably have seen a much diferrant game plan than we did. Don't complain to me about
the balance. They had one year with low balance and people act like the head coach forgot how to coach. What's funny is they lost the superbowl to a team even less balanced in 2011. You get mad when someone criticizes BB as a GM (which I very rarely do) yet you and Wozzy criticize him constantly as a head coach. You preface it by saying it's the coordinator's fault which is slightly better than Rusty who claims TB has been running some secret offensive cabal behind BB's back until two weeks ago. Either way, the Pats coaching staff does what the head coach wants or maybe BB has been getting way too much credit in these parts.
To make this clear. I could care less about balance. I want wins. If balance gets wins,like in 2004 great. If it produces losses like in 2010 against the Jets that's bad. In fact I will be surprised to see a lot of balance from here on out. I suspect the Pats are now a run team first. Their Oline's strength appears to be run blocking and the receiving core is below average while the running backs have been outstanding in recent weeks.
Oh, since all you care about is winning what did you think of the 90 pass to 33 runs we put up in both super bowl losses? All good?
Against the jets we ran our power back 9 times for 45 yards, but elected to once again go with woody for 14 carries at like 3 ypc out of a spread offense.Instead of throwing the interception on the 1st drive maybe we keep giving our power back the ball who was moving chains.
Same in the 2011 SB, run power back for 5, run power back for 7, then on 1st down against the best pass rush in football we run 30yard routes and throw an interception to a DE 40 yards down field. Was that BB's fault? No, because he was doing what he always does, coaching the defense.
And to be fair, balance got SB wins in 01, 03, and 04.
A one dimensional offense got 15.5 ppg and 2 losses in 07 and 11.