Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.

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

    Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.

    Pat Kirwan, who to me is one of the best analysts ever, breaks down the most successful personnel grouping on offense and what you need to run it.  This explains what we did at TE QUITE A  BIT.  Very informative. 
    Its too much to copy and paste, see it here:

    Sounds like we are going to wail on people.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.

    Dave~

    First...good read.  But imo, at least in terms of HOW Kirwan breaks it down, I'd do it somewhat differently.  First off, I'm well aware that it ain't easy (or even sensible for that matter), to attempt to even TRY to roll all the Offensive personell groupings into merely 1 package of set players at fixed spots...BUT in terms of this, and for argument's sake alone, Pat Kirwan Defines and sets NE's personell for this "11 grouping" as follows (in terms of WRs/TEs):

    #1: A flex tight end who can line up next to a tackle on one play and in the slot or outside on the next play. Kirwan places here: NE's Hernandez.

    #2: An X receiver who forces teams to use some form of rolled coverage, or at least man and half coverage to this dangerous player.  Kirwan places here: NE's Moss.

    #3: A super-quick slot receiver (Y receiver).  Kirwan places here: NE's Welker (or Welker or Edelman, to be more complete).

    #4: A Z receiver, usually lining up wide on the same side as the tight end, that can open the field up with his speed and take the "top off the defense."  Kirwan places here: NE's Tate (or perhaps If you'd like, maybe Tate or Price, for completeness once again).


    BUT, See I'd look at it somewhat differently (again: for "generalizings" sake).  Try this... 

    #1 Flex TE = Hernandez...I'm totally agreed.

    #2 "X Receiver" (or whatever you wanna call this player).  Here, A BIG Difference for me = Gronkowski...subbed in WITH either of:  Namely, Tate (also, maybe Price) on spread formations, long yardage, and/or just mixing up the looks, and/or giving the package with Gronkowski a mere 'breather'.

    #3 "Y Receiver" = Welker (or Welker/Edelman)...I'm totally agreed here as well.

    #4 "Z Reciever" = Moss.  Here, Another BIG Difference for me = Moss (Moss-Z receiver, taking top-off the D, and many times aligned on same side as the "flex TE")...subbed in, With either of:  Namely, Price (also, maybe Tate).

    ~Now, Ya got the two TE's that can show a power formation with both on LOS to keep Defenders in the box guessing on a certain Running Play being drawn), 1 TE on each side, 2 TEs on 1 side-THEN 1 going in motion (Hernandez) OR being sent wide, to keep The Defense BOTH guessing on Running Play's side, OR esp- NOW suddenly, a Passing Play.  STILL need to account for Moss as deep threat, so HowTH do you place 7-8 men in the box?  Ya want a little more speed?  Yup-tate/Price can be interchanged with Gronk, BUT you lose that immediate Running threat...Heck, I might rather exchange Tate/Price in place of Welker/Edelman, to give a few looks of 2 intermediate-deep speedsters (Moss and Tate/Price), Gronkowski and Hernandez, with Morris/Taylor, or Faulk in the backfield...as Gronk and/or Faulk can run those short passing routes...  

    ~Point is, I trully believe the 2 TE benefits in terms of a Running Threat against a D, in order to keep more men nearer the LOS, actually supercedes greatly in terms of versatility, and play exploitation, This "11 grouping" spread offense (also in terms of NEs personell, too).    
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.

    Why would you want Gronkowski lined up as the X receiver?  He's too big and slow.  Tate or Price would be much better for tis.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.

    Nice read.  Thanks for the post.  Happy to see you back Laz.

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

    Re: Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.

    In Response to Re: Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.:
    [QUOTE]Why would you want Gronkowski lined up as the X receiver?  He's too big and slow.  Tate or Price would be much better for tis.
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]


    Apparently, Kirwan thought so too.  I actually thought the same as Laz except where they go.  Gronk at TE, he can line up and either block or run a route.  His height and vertical TOTALLY makes up for any speed issues, and I'm not sure he has speed issues.  He is scary up the seam.  That makes him a threat in the spread, because you cant just assume he is blocking.  I thought the 11 for us would be Moss, Gronk, Welker and Tate with Faulk in the backfield.  But really,  Hernandez would be fine at Z .  Or Hernandez can hit the slot with Gronk at TE and Edelman or Welker at the Z.  Moss stays X with Tate or Price subbing.  BAD COMBINATION TO COVER EITHER WAY.  This is why Revis Island isn't an issue, and I believe the BB rebuild from scratch of the TE position was due to our Jet Colt and Raven games last year.  I'm wicked psyched about our Offense this year, and I hope the D can hold up then rise up over the course of the year as well.  
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188. Show Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188's posts

    Re: Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.

    The tight ends are meant to be mismatch players, but only against 'tweeners.  A top-2 corner on an NFL team has the cover skills to disrupt the pass against a slower, less agile tight end.  Plus Gronk can't stretch the field as much from outside.  Hernandez is also a 'tweener mismatch.  Plus, I think it'd be a waste of the flipside of their mismatch capabilities to have them lined up outside the box when tight ends are better blockers than receivers.  The only reason to move either outside the box is a rare situation or a crack block.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.

    With Gronk and Hernandez both in you have a 12, not an 11.  A 12 set can be disruptive too, and the Pats will probably play it a lot, but it's different from Kirwan's 11.  The real difference is that with Gronk and Hernandez both in, you're losing one of your spread receivers (X,Y, or Z), since Gronk is likely lined up at the traditional TE position.  This means a less spread field, which may be a bit easier to defend in most cases.  At the same time, the personnel is as important as the formation.  Even if a TE lined up in the traditional position is generally easier for teams to defend, Gronk may not be easy to defend.  If Gronk is a beast, then the Pat's 12 set may be harder to defend than a typical 12 and may be just as good or even better than their 11.  So while Kirwan's formation analysis is spot on in general, you need to take into consideration the team's personnel too to determine which formation is going to be most difficult to defend for that particular team.

    What's nice with the Pats this year is they have a lot of options and will be able to use multiple sets, which means teams will have to prepare for a lot of different looks. This bodes well for our offense this year. 

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

    Re: Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.

    Good read, the interesting thing to me is that the Pats can essentially switch from a 11 to a 12 and vice versa without changing personnel.  I'd expect this to be in their bag of tricks during no huddle when the defense can't sub.  Using Hernandez and Gronk or Crumpler as TE's the defense could put a LBer to cover.  The Pats can then move Hernandez to reciever and take advantage of a LB'er covering a guy who is as much a reciever as TE. 

    If he sees coverage from a corner they can bring him in and use the TE set for a power run.  Either way making the defenders cover formations they are not great at.  Unless the defense has a really good coverage LB'er this is an easy way to create a mismatch.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.

    In Response to Re: Pat Kirwan breaks down the "11" grouping GREAT READ.:
    [QUOTE]The tight ends are meant to be mismatch players, but only against 'tweeners.  A top-2 corner on an NFL team has the cover skills to disrupt the pass against a slower, less agile tight end.  Plus Gronk can't stretch the field as much from outside.  Hernandez is also a 'tweener mismatch.  Plus, I think it'd be a waste of the flipside of their mismatch capabilities to have them lined up outside the box when tight ends are better blockers than receivers.  The only reason to move either outside the box is a rare situation or a crack block.
    Posted by Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188[/QUOTE]

    I see Gronk as the TE and Hernandez playing slot if they are on the field together.  Hernandez is close to being a receiver anyway.  I don't think a CB CAN cover Gronk effectively because of his size.  He is also not as slow as people say.  either way, we have all the parts to do it, and much much more.  there is size, speed, and shiftiness in spades on this offense.  Seems that they all have HANDS also.  An ingredient seemingly missing from last years team.

     

Share