So, what was up with Josh McD's play calling?

[(P - shoulder)]

I've seen this come up a number of times in some of the other threads, so I thought I give it its own thread to keep it from getting lost amongst the (righteous) anger of those other threads.

Can someone explain what the problem was with the playcalling, because I don't see it. The Pats had long, sustained drives. They attack was very balanced, and the ability to pound the ball with Blount, and to a degree Ridley, was impressive. If not for the Ridley fumble, the O would have put up 27 points on the 2nd best D in the league. It seems McD takes heat for his playcalling regularly, but aside from trying to get way too cute on occasion (which he has done a lot less of this season, thank goodness), I just don't get it.

Not trying to troll over it, I genuinely would like to see this discussed/analyzed.

 

[chevss454]

the only play call I'd like back is the missed pass on 3rd and goal that led to the FG. I bet McD would like that one back, too. The problem with that one is that the play depended almost completely on Dobson getting a clean release from the LOS. We've seen Dobson not fight through press coverage before. Too much rode on that play to depend on Dobson in that position.

Otherwise, the offensive game plan and the play calling were refreshing.

 

[midgar8784]

I've seen this come up a number of times in some of the other threads, so I thought I give it its own thread to keep it from getting lost amongst the (righteous) anger of those other threads.

Can someone explain what the problem was with the playcalling, because I don't see it. The Pats had long, sustained drives. They attack was very balanced, and the ability to pound the ball with Blount, and to a degree Ridley, was impressive. If not for the Ridley fumble, the O would have put up 27 points on the 2nd best D in the league. It seems McD takes heat for his playcalling regularly, but aside from trying to get way too cute on occasion (which he has done a lot less of this season, thank goodness), I just don't get it.

Not trying to troll over it, I genuinely would like to see this discussed/analyzed.

The only one I question is the 3rd and 1, but for all I know Brady saw something and changed it at the line. The way we were running against them, we should have ran it twice, if we cannot make a yard on two tries then you tip your hat.

 

[anderson]

Thought we came out strong and had a good plan of power runs and power passes that put them on their heels a lot.

I don't generally have any criticism of yesterday's game plan. There were perhaps a few individual plays where I didn't agree, but overall I thought we had a very sound strategy and executed that strategy very well.

 

[anderson]

the only play call I'd like back is the missed pass on 3rd and goal that led to the FG. I bet McD would like that one back, too.

Otherwise, the offensive game plan and the play calling were refreshing.

I don't know. I looked at that play again and they were playing run/sneak all the way stacking way up. I am not sure if we can hammer the one yard out if we try there.

Plus to me it still looked like Dobson had separation and Tom more or less just threw it away because pressure was starting to build.

Thought maybe we should have gone for it on 4th and 1, though. Not the end of the world if we don't score 3 there.

 

[Annihilus]

the only play call I'd like back is the missed pass on 3rd and goal that led to the FG. I bet McD would like that one back, too. The problem with that one is that the play depended almost completely on Dobson getting a clean release from the LOS. We've seen Dobson not fight through press coverage before. Too much rode on that play to depend on Dobson in that position.

Otherwise, the offensive game plan and the play calling were refreshing.

I'm in agreement. I thought the playcalling, for the most part, was pretty good.

 

[Annihilus]

I don't know. I looked at that play again and they were playing run/sneak all the way stacking way up. I am not sure if we can hammer the one yard out if we try there.

Plus to me it still looked like Dobson had separation and Tom more or less just threw it away because pressure was starting to build.

Thought maybe we should have gone for it on 4th and 1, though. Not the end of the world if we don't score 3 there.

I was thinking the same thing there.

 

[grog]

I thought that game was one of Josh's best as far as play calling. Loved the run pass mix. Some plays weren't executed as well as they should have been and some plays were well defensed, but I have no issue in THIS game with the play calling.

 

[(P - shoulder)]

Agree about 4th and 1, should go for it. Of course, that's BB's decision, and it's a little puzzling that he's been going conservative in that situation all season.

 

[chevss454]

the only play call I'd like back is the missed pass on 3rd and goal that led to the FG. I bet McD would like that one back, too. The problem with that one is that the play depended almost completely on Dobson getting a clean release from the LOS. We've seen Dobson not fight through press coverage before. Too much rode on that play to depend on Dobson in that position.

Otherwise, the offensive game plan and the play calling were refreshing.

Imo, KT could have gotten open against press coverage. We've seen him do it a number of times. (to make matters worse, once Dobson finally fought through, he stood there for a second while Brady was in trouble then finally began to run wh/ is why he looked open momentarily. Too late.)

I don't know. I looked at that play again and they were playing run/sneak all the way stacking way up. I am not sure if we can hammer the one yard out if we try there.

Plus to me it still looked like Dobson had separation and Tom more or less just threw it away because pressure was starting to build.

Thought maybe we should have gone for it on 4th and 1, though. Not the end of the world if we don't score 3 there.

Agreed. I wondered if we would.

 

[SkiptoMyLou]

They playcalling was great given the circumstances. I also believe that the reason the playcalling wasn't up to par before was because not all the pieces of the puzzle were there. Now with Vereen back, the playbook is wide open and now it's a good time to exploit the mismatches that weren't there previously.

 

[chevss454]

Not to do with play calling but I'd have liked for KT to get more snaps. He performed well when he was targeted but he needed moar targets. McD and TB will learn to trust him. Give em time.

 

[anderson]

Not to do with play calling but I'd have liked for KT to get more snaps. He performed well when he was targeted but he needed moar targets. McD and TB will learn to trust him. Give em time.

I agree. He gives this team some added dynamism!

He could take some of Julian's snaps, or even Amendola's, IMO.

 

[Mr.Pink]

the only play call I'd like back is the missed pass on 3rd and goal that led to the FG. I bet McD would like that one back, too. The problem with that one is that the play depended almost completely on Dobson getting a clean release from the LOS. We've seen Dobson not fight through press coverage before. Too much rode on that play to depend on Dobson in that position.

Otherwise, the offensive game plan and the play calling were refreshing.

Without question this was probably the only bad play call that I kno of

 

[Ryan91]

I don't know. I looked at that play again and they were playing run/sneak all the way stacking way up. I am not sure if we can hammer the one yard out if we try there.

Plus to me it still looked like Dobson had separation and Tom more or less just threw it away because pressure was starting to build.

Thought maybe we should have gone for it on 4th and 1, though. Not the end of the world if we don't score 3 there.

Part of me thinks they should have gone for it, another part of me thinks they were right to go for 3.

If they do go for it and don't get it, you've still got the advantage of field position there, if you can get a turnover or force a 3 and out then you can take advantage of potentially good field position for your next offensive drive.

3rd downs were a bit of a problem last night because of Newton's ability to scramble, containment is something that the Pats really need to work on.

 

[Beaglebay]

I don't know. I looked at that play again and they were playing run/sneak all the way stacking way up. I am not sure if we can hammer the one yard out if we try there.

Plus to me it still looked like Dobson had separation and Tom more or less just threw it away because pressure was starting to build.

Thought maybe we should have gone for it on 4th and 1, though. Not the end of the world if we don't score 3 there.

Agree on the 4th and 1, and Blount would have been the back to get it. Why did they stop using him when he had been so effective?

 

[Annihilus]

Part of me thinks they should have gone for it, another part of me thinks they were right to go for 3.

If they do go for it and don't get it, you've still got the advantage of field position there, if you can get a turnover or force a 3 and out then you can take advantage of potentially good field position for your next offensive drive.

3rd downs were a bit of a problem last night because of Newton's ability to scramble, containment is something that the Pats really need to work on.

You're right there and I thought that was a bit odd for a BB coached team. He usually takes away the strength of the other team....in this case, Cam's scrambling ability. It was almost as if they completely disregarded that ability last night and didn't make much of an attempt to keep him from doing it. A head-scratcher for me.

 

[(P - shoulder)]

You're right there and I thought that was a bit odd for a BB coached team. He usually takes away the strength of the other team....in this case, Cam's scrambling ability. It was almost as if they completely disregarded that ability last night and didn't make much of an attempt to keep him from doing it. A head-scratcher for me.

I dunno, I feel like they did get outside contain on him, but when he scrambled he found a gap up the middle. I think the failure is about 2 things:

1) The ends raced around the edges to try to get to Cam, spreading the line out and leaving big holes for him to run through, rather than collapsing the pocket on him, which is what would have done the trick. Moar Wilfork might've helped here

2) Cam really is just that good of an athlete with his legs, he plain beat the guys sent after him. Once he's given space (see #1, above), he's too good of an athlete to effectively contain.

 

[midgar8784]

I dunno, I feel like they did get outside contain on him, but when he scrambled he found a gap up the middle. I think the failure is about 2 things:

1) The ends raced around the edges to try to get to Cam, spreading the line out and leaving big holes for him to run through, rather than collapsing the pocket on him, which is what would have done the trick. Moar Wilfork might've helped here

2) Cam really is just that good of an athlete with his legs, he plain beat the guys sent after him. Once he's given space (see #1, above), he's too good of an athlete to effectively contain.

We are missing a lot of bodies on Defense, they were playing a very depleted defense, if we had all of our guns, I think you see a different outcome from that stand point.

 

[anderson]

Someone posted a stat about Cam's numbers throwing from outside the pocket. He had an incredibly low percentage completing on one side of the pocket and an insanely high one on the other side.

In yesterday's game it seemed like we tried our hardest to force him to move out to his left over and over and over. It's just we didn't remember to contain his running lane in some damned key moments.