Stupid Belichick! Run the Ball!

[DanTurksGhost]

That is ridiculous. They are in a dome, Brady's not a rookie, & the receivers are catching.

In Brady's third ever NFL start, he threw the ball 54 times. Again, that number is: 54.

Third start.

[JavaBuc]

Perhaps the worst attempt at an analogy ever.

No worse than some of the trivial stats you throw up.    The bottom line is that a team can win if they pass more than they run.   And we would have won as well with that same strategy if our receivers had caught passes right in their hands and we hadn't fumbled.

[keeponbucn]

No worse than some of the trivial stats you throw up. The bottom line is that a team can win if they pass more than they run. And we would have won as well with that same strategy if our receivers had caught passes right in their hands and we hadn't fumbled.

Yes, a team can win if they pass more than they run. That sort of a no $%^^ comment.

We had one TD pass dropped so we'd have been 17-10 and any other points are purely hypothetical on your part and given what the offense was doing I'd not bank on getting anything else but that's fine you bank on "pretend" points. What we do have is a proven outcome where we got no offensive TD's using the Gruden approach so the suggestion that there was perhaps another path shouldn't seem so outrageous. In fact, interestingly, the team that won took that "other" approach despite having a much better QB than us and they got 17 points.

pretty east to use a balanced attack when your average starting filed position is the opponents 47. Also when your up by two TD's, pretty easy to stay the course.

[JavaBuc]

No worse than some of the trivial stats you throw up. The bottom line is that a team can win if they pass more than they run. And we would have won as well with that same strategy if our receivers had caught passes right in their hands and we hadn't fumbled.

Yes, a team can win if they pass more than they run. That sort of a no $%^^ comment.

We had one TD pass dropped so we'd have been 17-10 and any other points are purely hypothetical on your part and given what the offense was doing I'd not bank on getting anything else but that's fine you bank on "pretend" points. What we do have is a proven outcome where we got no offensive TD's using the Gruden approach so the suggestion that there was perhaps another path shouldn't seem so outrageous. In fact, interestingly, the team that won took that "other" approach despite having a much better QB than us and they got 17 points.

Actually, they wouldn't have gotten 17 points if we didn't fumble.   But they did move the ball "slightly" better than us.   I don't think we were stuffing the run anywhere near as well as they were.   But we did stop them fairly well.

There are people saying that you MUST run the ball to win.   That's the only reason I pointed out that isn't really the case.

[DanTurksGhost]

In fact, interestingly, the team that won took that "other" approach despite having a much better QB than us and they got 17 points.

They have the league's leading rusher. And a WR who makes leaping one-handed grabs in the end zone, vs WR's who dropped and fumbled away HUGE opportunities. And despite your admonition, if you watched the game you know Galloway was behind the defense on the one grab and would have sailed into the end zone if he had caught the ball which was there, on time, in stride.

So far only about 10 runs and over 40 passes!   What a moron.  Run the ball Belichick!!!!    You can't win if you don't run more often than that.

Oh wait, he's kicking the hell out of the Vikings.  Never mind.

Brady is still slightly better than Grads, though. 

[original]

Brady is still slightly better than Grads, though. 

True, he is at this point.  Just yesterday I saw a thread saying Grads will never be a great QB because he was drafted in the 6th round.  Hmm, I wonder if any QB with 3 rings comes to mids who is pretty good?

So far only about 10 runs and over 40 passes!   What a moron.  Run the ball Belichick!!!!    You can't win if you don't run more often than that.

Oh wait, he's kicking the hell out of the Vikings.  Never mind.

Just outta curiousity, what was the point of this post?

[BTownBucFan]

DON'T EVER COMPARE GRUDEN TO MR. BILL.  HE DOESN'T EVEN SCRATCH THE SURFACE; HAVE YOU FORGOT ABOUT LAST YEAR?

stop yelling ... we can all hear you, but really don't care what you have to say.

OK, smart guys, how do the Pats keep doing it every year? No down years, salary cap excuses, young players, etc.

No McKay-- the Pats have lost talenbt and they reloaded with multiple high draft picks while McKay pissed ours away. Why do we have to keep explaining this to you when you claim to be a buc fan for so long. Do you not remember McKay giving two #1's for KJ, Giving 2 picks for Walk, Giving another away on Coleman. Wasting picks on Anthony and Green. The Glazers giving away 2 #1's and 2 #2's. While in those same years NE traded down to gather more picks or traded high priced players for top picks. And by trading such players also loosening their cap while folks like McKay gave Simeon a 40 mil contract while he was rumored to be looking for a 32 mil dollar deal. Or the Booger blockbuster deal coming off an injury year. Are you seeing the trend Karen or should I keep giving you examples.

Name one player on offense besides Alstott and Dunn that McKay or Dungy ever drafted here that turned out to be damn good players in 6 years here-- While you are searching just rember Wyche and his scouts briught in Lynch, Brooks, and Sapp.

Don't waste your time explaining, these  so-called "fans" don't understand.

[keeponbucn]

OK, smart guys, how do the Pats keep doing it every year? No down years, salary cap excuses, young players, etc.

the Pats haven't had cap issues. They just cut players instead of paying them..

[RedAlert]

True, he is at this point. Just yesterday I saw a thread saying Grads will never be a great QB because he was drafted in the 6th round. Hmm, I wonder if any QB with 3 rings comes to mids who is pretty good?

Unfortunately, 6th round picks like Brady are the exception, not the rule.

[BUCFAN4LIFE]

There are people saying that you MUST run the ball to win. That's the only reason I pointed out that isn't really the case.

...as a general rule you do. I think the long term trend with that are overwhelming that running the ball = winning. There are cases where that won't be true but overall you need to be able to run the ball and that importance grows with younger QB's and it showed last year for example. In any given game you might have to adapt to win - and what the Pats did was sheer brilliance in coaching since the Vikes weakness was pass defense whihc isn't the case for the NYG where run defense is their Achilles heel.

Same as stopping the run = winning (and it is why the Colts are hot on pace for another early out in the playoffs BTW)

Do you make this stuff up as you go-- the NYG achilles heel is their pass defense and not their run defense as you propose. Their run D is 9th while there pass D is 19. And against 8-9 man fronts that leaves your wideouts man to man- If our wideouts make those catches its a whole different ball game. Even conservative you say ten points -- say neither of Galloways catches go for scores in the redzone and Claytons fumble in FG range goes no where that still measn Brynat can put up 3 relatively easy FGs seeing as how that field psoition where those plays occurred was shorter than the 40 yarder he did put through-- thats 9 points and a 19-17 ball game- since when does that not change the landscape of a game?

[SCBUCFAN]

Their pass defense adjusted for their opponents is actually better than their run defense so no I don't make this stuff up. I see we drag the 8 men up excuse out again. Good news, all we're gonna see are 8 man fronts agaisnt a rookie so I guess it is time to toss the RB out. Plus, they were down 3 of their top 8 DL so that says a weaker spot just got a lot thinner and a spot that, if you work it, you might be able to wear out over the course of a game.

Simply put, and I love all this made up point trash from you guys, we got 3 points. I know that no other team drops passes so that is a huge factor that we have to make a big deal for our team- the NYG dropped 3 or 4 balls as well but no one is adding 14, 17, 21 points to their total are they?

Pretend points I guess we win but where it counts we got blanked from the end zone so what we did failed.

Well said Dalbuc.  I have never seen so many posters base their opinion on the team making every catch/never fumble and count points for touchdowns and field goals never scored as proof the game plan was successful.  And then they point to a team like the patriots and compare the bucs to them as proof passing on everydown works.  Hey I will give them another example of a team who passes a lot and wins how bout Peyton Manning and the Colts?  Do the the Patriots even run Grudens form of offense?nope  Were we playing the Vikings?nope I must be confusing something because I thought we played the Giants on the road in horrible weather with a rookie as our QB not Superbowl MVP Tom Brady nor Peyton Manning?  But I guess passing 48 times for 139 yards versus the Giants was working so why run when after 10 attempts we new that wasn't working.  This whole discussion is ridiculous most of these people who see no problem with passing 48 times, if asked before the game would have said we should run 25+ times to be successful.

[BUCFAN4LIFE]

Do you make this stuff up as you go-- the NYG achilles heel is their pass defense and not their run defense as you propose. Their run D is 9th while there pass D is 19. And against 8-9 man fronts that leaves your wideouts man to man- If our wideouts make those catches its a whole different ball game. Even conservative you say ten points -- say neither of Galloways catches go for scores in the redzone and Claytons fumble in FG range goes no where that still measn Brynat can put up 3 relatively easy FGs seeing as how that field psoition where those plays occurred was shorter than the 40 yarder he did put through-- thats 9 points and a 19-17 ball game- since when does that not change the landscape of a game?

Their pass defense adjusted for their opponents is actually better than their run defense so no I don't make this stuff up. I see we drag the 8 men up excuse out again. Good news, all we're gonna see are 8 man fronts agaisnt a rookie so I guess it is time to toss the RB out. Plus, they were down 3 of their top 8 DL so that says a weaker spot just got a lot thinner and a spot that, if you work it, you might be able to wear out over the course of a game.

Simply put, and I love all this made up point trash from you guys, we got 3 points. I know that no other team drops passes so that is a huge factor that we have to make a big deal for our team- the NYG dropped 3 or 4 balls as well but no one is adding 14, 17, 21 points to their total are they?

Pretend points I guess we win but where it counts we got blanked from the end zone so what we did failed.

Pass defense adjusted for opponents played -- now that is funny--- remember it was their run defense that held Alexander to 47 yards long before he injured his foot. Yet their pass defense has not contained anyone except ours . The fact their run D is 9 and pass D 19 says all that needs to be known about their D. Most teams have played pass on them and been successful.

Hey you got anything on our offense adjusted for playing the top opponents in each division and beating two of them. Thats got to be worth a few extra points huh?