SB Nation - Mark LeVoir

Patriots changes by position: Offensive Line

MaPatsFan — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:54:12 -0000

Membership in "The Pig Pile" must require facial hair and biceps the size of a redwood. Don't let me forget tipping the scales at over 300 pounds. Yup, really big boys. Torn apart by a dominant Giants defense, they have been held accountable to some degree for the Super Bowl XLII loss. Not unwarranted, Brady was sacked five times. However, there's no place like the "Pig Pile" for tearing up a player and spitting him out, so I give them some leeway over what has been an incredibly long run without a break. Sure, there's five months between the end of the season and training camp, but after four or five years, injuries will take there toll, especially at a position of constant contact.

In 2008, Matt Cassel was sacked 47 times to Tom Brady's 21 in 2007. That, in my mind, was less an OL breakdown and more an inexperienced QB who needed time to develop a pocket sense. With a long stretch to rest and heal, our starters come back intact. This is a good thing. Matt Light, Logan Mankins, Dan Koppen, Stephen Neal, and Nick Kaczur comprise one of the best offensive lines in football. And with Brady under center, you can bet he'll be upright and launching. From a backup standpoint, Mark LeVoir, Dan Connolly, Russ Hochstein, Billy Yates, and Ryan O'Callaghan are all multi-year Patriots and have a great deal of experience in the system. Again, this is a very good thing. The only spot where we don't have a third option on the depth chart is left tackle, but it wouldn't be a stretch to move some of the other guys around to cover.

I'm very stoked about this year's offensive line. JohnHannahRules, PhD Pig Pile may have more to say and training camp will give us a plethora of information but for now, I see a lot of upside to the front five.

Poll

Is the offensive line ready to rock?

Yes

421 votes

No

45 votes

Too early to tell

140 votes

606 votes | Poll has closed

Divining the McDaniels Way, Part 3 - The Passing Game

Emmett Smith — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:30:08 -0000

This series is the outcome of a month-long collaboration between nycbroncosfan and broncobear. In general, NYC covered the stats and Doc handled most of the writing and analysis. We hope that it sheds light on some of the questions that have arisen as to just what, exactly, Josh McDaniels has been doing with the New England offense over the past four years. It also looks at Jay Cutler's time as the primary starter in Denver over the past two years to establish where the two Patriots and Broncos do and do not match up. We thoroughly enjoyed working on this project and hope that you will take just as much pleasure in reading it. Hopefully it will answer some of your questions about what to expect of the 2009 Broncos, and we look forward to your comments and critiques. Many thanks to our esteemed colleagues styg50 and hoosierteacher for their input, and to Zappa for his invaluable aid in managing the code and the templates.

Part 1 featured an overview of the Patriots' and Broncos' offenses, while Part 2 focused on the running game. Today, we look at the Passing Game. Of course, much has changed around here lately; as with the previous sections, Part 3 compares the Jay Cutler-led Broncos with the Josh McDaniels-led Patriots. Naturally, the importation of Kyle Orton may have some effect on what the Broncos' passing game is able to accomplish as compared with a Cutler-led offense. However, many issues continue to be relevant - the Broncos still have many of the same weapons and the O-Line remains intact. The purpose is still to see what has been for us as fans, to understand what McDaniels has been doing and to look to the future for whatever clues may be found. In the future, look for additional articles dealing with Chris Simms' background and tendencies as well as Kyle Orton's and some comparative issues between them.

A Short Analysis of NE Offense

There are certain overall patterns that emerged that we expect to see, in degree, from Josh McDaniels when the Broncos take the field in 2009. We've mentioned before that we consider the New England offensive approach to include "a willingness to use the running backs in committee to maximize production from the team, good tight ends that have a specific role in the scheme, and an attack based in three or more receivers, liberal use of the shotgun and passing first, including but not limited to the use of short running-back passes." Those beliefs were borne out by this experience.

We have also previously noted that New England tends to win because they emphasize preparation, knowledge, excellent execution of specific roles and intellect as well as physical ability. They tend to play smarter, but do not sacrifice the ability to play very physical football at the same time. This combination of scheme, flexibility, role-specific skill and execution as well as the importance of the team over the individual proved itself to effectively maximize the contribution of its players within their football system.

Because of that, it's impossible to get too specific about New England's tendencies without noting that they change greatly from game to game. It's one constant - the application of the unexpected - and I'd have to consider that a strength of their approach.

Continued inside...

Formations and Impressions

Wikipedia suggests that the Patriots run a variation of the classic Erhardt-Perkins offense. They installed it under Charlie Weis, changed it to suit personnel, gained input from Bill Belichick and also from Urban Meyer and adapted it still further under Josh McDaniels. While their offensive stratagem began as an Erhardt-Perkins approach, it is now several generations removed.

Secondly, and this is essential: As Doc has noted before, in one sense there is no single Patriots offense. Their designation of the Amoeba is a just description. Like all NFL teams, they vary formations and plays at need. New England just seems to do so at a very high level with great intention. That's one of the main facets of the Amoeba Offense. The games Doc saw gave him several specific examples.

Doc: For the game against Indy with the Patriots on the road, the general analysis was not surprising. New England used multiple formations and constantly varied them. While Mike Shanahan would run 10 different plays out of 1 formation. In their game, New England is at times the polar opposite - they never seemed to run the same formation twice in this game and instead frequently ran the same play out of many different formations.

They liked the shotgun in all games, using it anywhere between 45% and 68% of the time: that ratio varied as well. They generally aren't in the same formation on any two plays, and they may not run the same play in a single quarter or half. They use a fullback on about 1 play in 4 or 5, or as little as 1 in 10, depending on down and distance. The running back was most commonly in the I formation or standing next to the quarterback if he was in the shotgun. And, as we will discuss, how much they used certain formations varied greatly by which half it was and tb he score of the game.

New England used the 'spread formation' in which they spread the field both horizontally and vertically, most commonly against St. Louis and NY (Jets) Their variants on the spread (I am using this term somewhat loosely, although the Pats' tendency to use this formation both vertically and laterally was obvious) included using a tight end and/or a back as receivers and varying between 3 and 5 receivers on any given play. Anyone could be kept as a blocker - wide receiver, tight end or back. I did not count it as a spread formation with less than three wideouts unless the play specifically spread the field both horizontally and laterally. And, any and all receivers (WR, TE and/or RB/FB) could be on a particular route, with lots of routes out of the same formation(s). Again, in the Indy game, they rarely used a single formation with multiple variants, running a dizzying number of formations that stretched the Colts defense to the breaking point. In other games, running different plays out of the same formation was common, although in constantly varying degrees.

The complexity of New England's attack really stood out. Indianapolis, as a different example, uses a lot of routes that snarl the corners and safeties on one receiver while the other gets open: they employ lots of misdirection routes, and they do them better than anyone I've watched. The Pats, on the other hand, used a wide range of one- and two-tight end sets to counter, with from one to four other receivers, intermingling dominant shotgun formations with the quarterback taking snaps under center and different running-back sets. The tight ends were constantly on the move to create different looks, often with one tight end in motion. Even having a TE dropping back into a running back's stance was frequent.

While they like the 'spread' formations, against Indy they used them less than I expected. They do have a wide array of spread-type formations that they do employ, though, and I saw them most heavily against the Rams, particularly in the first half. When they do use a spread formation, even with an empty backfield, they are as likely to run a draw or an off-tackle run from a handoff as they are to pass. In some plays I watched, the RB can drop back from his 'receivers' position just behind the O line at the snap or Cassel might run, etc.

They also tried several wide-receiver screens and a couple of tight-end screens mixed in, off of spread formations. It's clear that as frequently as they use it, it's just a tool to them, rather than a dominating preference. It was clear that they wield the tools - the tools don't wield them, which is an important difference. However, since the weakness of their use of the spread - ignoring zone in favor of man coverage and blitzing far more often - has been exposed, I would expect McDaniels and New England separately to begin to change that tendency over 2009. They will probably change tools, in degree.

I saw a play using Welker that interested me against Miami. He started at the LOWR position, in a 2-up, 2-back receiver formation that New England likes to use. Just after the snap, Welker took off at a dead run to his right across the field, moving just above the line of scrimmage. By the time Welker reached the far side, Cassel was out of the pocket, rolling right; and while no one else was free, Welker had time for coffee. Easy throw and catch, 12 yards. Eddie Royal would be very tough to stop with that route, perhaps even impossible.

By the way, that's a common formation for New England. In it, they employ five down O-Linemen. There are two receivers - one a tight end (it varies as to which one), upright in a receiver stance behind the front 5 and on the outer edges of the O-Line. The second of those receivers might be a back, a tight end or a wideout. Two wide receivers are out wide. From this beginning, they run a wide array of routes and options, including bootleg, play action, the above-mentioned route and a nearly-endless set of other options. Miami uses the same formation, with the left inside receiver being a running back, to run one version of their Wildcat, a formation that had some initial success but seemed to sputter as the season went on.

The thing that struck me about the Patriots' style is that they are constantly probing, pushing, and looking for a weakness. You can watch it unfold, attacking one point after another, quickly, but in sequence. It's not as smash-mouth an approach as the original Erhardt-Perkins or, say, Miami or Pittsburgh would use. It's perhaps more like fencing than boxing.

Playing the Colts is probably a bit like being in a knife fight - they are constantly cutting at you until you are exhausted. New England seems slightly different - you can watch them constantly looking for the best adjustments. This probing side of the amoeba tendency alone will win its own certain share of close games. Making adjustments is a huge skill, the Broncos has often lacked in over the past years and Josh McDaniels does it very well.

The Patriots obviously like being unpredictable. Most teams do, of course, but in the film I watched, New England took it to the extreme. While there are statistical norms, in any single game there are no specific passing or rushing downs for the Pats. They will pass on short yardage, run (often a draw) on 3rd and long, 2nd and short or any other situation. Overall, it's hard to stop, and I suspect that it's nearly impossible to predict. Obviously, the matchups are a constant series of smaller battles, and those remain individual, but the overall tenor was partly based in avoiding normal responses to the given situations in order to confuse the opposing defense. As NYC's statistics showed, it works far more often that it fails.

Passing and the O-Lines

Performance of Pats and Broncos O-Lineman in 2008 and 2009 Season Age
	NE Starters	'09 Age	Starts	Sacks	Pen	Sks+Pen	DEN Starters	'09 Age	Starts	Sacks	Pen	Sks+Pen
LT	Light	31	16	7.5	1	8.5	Clady	23	16	0.5	3	3.5
LG	Mankins	27	16	5	2	7	Hamilton	32	16	2.5	6	8.5
C	Koppen	30	16	4.5	2	6.5	Wiegmann	36	16	1	3	4
RG	Neal(Yates)	33(29)	9(7)	2(6.25)	2(1)	4(7.25)	Kuper	27	16	0	4	4
RT	Kaczur(LeVoir)	30(27)	14(2)	4(2)	3(0)	7(2)	Harris	24	16	2.5	2	4.5
Tot/Avg		30.2	80	31.25	11	42.25		28.4	80	6.5	18	24.5

New England's O-Line was clearly at its weakest when being asked to pass-block. Cassel's sack percentage was 26th in the league, but the Patriots O-Line's pass protection was not merely sub-par. Its players are aging and the line's effectiveness is beginning to break down, although these may be separate issues. Matt Light and Nick Kaczur have been criticized by some writers as having lost a step, and their production as a line is certainly down. Four of their starters will be over age 30 during the upcoming season: Light (31), Dan Koppen (30), Stephen Neal (33) and Kaczur (30). Is it age?

That's one possible explanation, but they aren't doddering geriatrics, either. I wondered at whether the explanation was accurate, and after listening to hoosierteacher and styg50 I don't see it as that simple. The issues of decreased physical flexibility are probably legitimate, the injuries hampered them and the changes of personnel meant that players weren't used to each other. In both zone blocking and in gap blocking, the timing is key. In pass protection, you have to be able to trust the guy next to you, and that didn't always work out for the Pats. There were issues that came down to simply missing assignments

The injury bug hit the right side of the line, and Billy Yates was guilty of 6.25 sacks in 7 games before Steve Neal returned. Once Neal took over, he was a little better, being responsible for 2 sacks in 9 games. Backup RT Mark LeVoir was guilty of 2 sacks in two starts. 31-year old left tackle Matt Light was dunned with 7.5 over the season. Regardless of your opinion on the source of the problems, they will be looking for help in the draft or FA.

As noted, the Broncos were on the other extreme. Their linemen were charged with only 7.5 sacks over the course of the season, with rookie Kory Lichtensteiger being thrust in at RG for a few plays and giving up one. Rookie left tackle Ryan Clady was charged with but one half-sack and had only 3 penalties. RG Chris Kuper didn't give up a single sack in 16 games, but isn't even mentioned in Pro Bowl or All-Pro discussions. Casey Wiegmann gave up a single sack and made KC wonder why on earth they let him go (so do we). Ben Hamilton was the 'weak link', but while 6 penalties is too high, he give up only 2.5 sacks in 16 starts and seemed completely healed from his concussion.

What we can hope for...

TD and INT Rates
	TD%	INT%
DEN '07-'08	4.05%	2.91%
NE '05-'08	5.61%	2.13%

Better TD and INT rates - Perhaps these numbers have more to do with the player's decision-making ability than with coaching or scheme - but we can hope, right? Even if it's a decision-making issue, part of that is obviously coaching. The reality is that Cutler was prone to certain mistakes - not looking off the primary target and forcing throws were among them. At times the problems was with the receiver, but not often. Percentages like these tend to look small, but let's put them into perspective: Over a 500-pass attempt season (a modest number), those rates translate into a 20 TD/14.5 INT season versus a 28 TD/10.7 INT season. These are not small differences.

McDaniels did a remarkable job with Cassel, who hadn't previously started a game since high school. He molded the game to Cassel, increasing the complexity quickly over the season, and taught Cassel to take advantage of the game. The raw material that he will have to work with in Orton and Simms will at least be acceptable (in our opinion) and it could be tremendous, as we'll talk about in those later articles. As many among us have noted, Orton has a lot more potential than we would have believed prior to expanded analysis (and we have more on that to come), Chris Simms was a very good quarterback prior to his injury and there is no reason to believe that he won't be a very good one now. With either Orton or Simms, we look for the numbers to improve in overall touchdowns and to decrease in interceptions based upon what McDaniels accomplished in New England.

And, what we can expect in protection

Sacks and Yards Lost
	Sacks	Yds Lost	Sack%
DEN '07	32	175	5.85%
DEN '08	12	74	1.90%
DEN Avg	22	124.5	3.73%
NE '05	28	202	4.73%
NE '06	29	190	5.22%
NE '07	21	128	3.46%
NE '08	48	221	8.25%
NE Avg	31.5	185.3	5.39%

The same pass protection - at least we can hope for it. As noted, here's a category where the Broncos were far superior to the Patriots in 2008. As everyone here at MHR knows, Ryan Clady's arrival at left tackle and the ascension of Ryan Harris to the starting lineup at right tackle had quite a bit to do with that. Clady was charged with merely 0.5 sacks, while 2.5 sacks were attributed to Harris. Denver has the bookends for a happy and effective O-Line for many years to come. Of course, Casey Wiegmann's contribution cannot be overlooked - Wiegmann was only charged with 1.0 sack and made the Pro Bowl for the first time in his 13-year career, although as an alternate.

Cutler does have very good mobility, and the Broncos' love of the bootleg was a very effective tool over much of the season. Neither Orton nor Simms is quite as athletic, but with the increased levels of protection, either should be able to take advantage and get the throws off in time. The scheme and coaching of McDaniels' approach should be of benefit.

New England will have to do better than they did last season, but Josh won't be there to worry about it. Brady's faster release was part of the improvement in 2007 (as was a lightened injury bug), but Cassel didn't take sacks exclusively because of his pocket presence and throw mechanics. He was chased, hurried and harassed due to poor O line play. He became quick to pull it down and run or to throw the ball through enlightened self-interest - it kept him off the turf. The lines starters just weren't good in pass protection and their backups didn't play well. A lack of depth is a tough thing to overcome, as the Broncos are no doubt considering as the draft beckons.

Pass-Depth and -Direction Propensity - Broncos '07-'08 and Patriots '06-'08
	Short	Deep	Short Left	Short Middle	Short Right	Deep Left	Deep Middle	Deep Right
DEN '07-'08	81.0%	19.0%	31.2%	16.8%	33.0%	6.2%	5.4%	7.4%
NE '06-'08*	82.9%	17.1%	31.8%	20.7%	30.4%	6.7%	4.0%	6.4%

*Unfortunately these statistics are unavailable prior to the 2006 season, so in this instance we can only look at New England through a three-year window.

More short passes - These numbers don't exactly jump off the screen, as the differentials between the Broncos' and Patriots' tendencies are not as large as other examples. Not surprisingly, it looks like we can expect a very slightly-heavier reliance upon short passes, especially over the middle of the field. Cutler's accuracy will be a boon here. Over a 500-pass attempt season, the additional 3.9% of short-middle passes only translates to 20 balls going that way, but it's still a difference. The overall scheme is unlikely to change. In '07-'08, Cutler/Bates liked the deep passes on the right and middle substantially more often than did NE over the same period. That's likely to change.

This is another area where the incoming scheme and the current QB options seem ready-made for each other. Both Simms and Orton seem capable, based on past performance, of taking advantage of a NE-style scheme and staying, for the most part, with shorter, more accurate passes. Cutler's incredible velocity could even be a downside at times, leaving his receivers with bent and injured fingers and hands. A lighter ball, accurately thrown, can lead to better numbers in the short passing game.

The New England tendency has been to stretch the field both vertically and horizontally. Both Simms and Orton are capable of making some of the deep throws. Regarding Orton, TedB, in this week's Shallow Thoughts and Nearsighted Observations noted,

In this highlight package, you can see Orton hit on slants, deep outs, fades and crossing patterns, but what I was really impressed with was his touch on deep throws. This used to be his weakness, but he's vastly improved his skills in this area. He shows a lot of skill in dropping the ball over the top of the CB, and outside of the S against Cover-2 looks. That's something which neither of our last 2 QBs had much skill at. One of the keys to the McDaniels offense is challenging the deep outside, and I am confident that Orton has the skill set to do it.

That's good news. As we'll talk about in the future, Simms also has some skill in that area.

Pass Distribution

Pass Production by Position - Broncos '07-'08 and Patriots '05-'08
Pos	Rec	Yds	YPR	TD	% of Rec	Pos	Rec	Yds	YPR	TD	% of Rec
DEN RB	102	836	8.20	3	14.3%	NE RB	316	2,842	8.99	9	22.3%
DEN TE	164	2,009	12.25	16	23.0%	NE TE	218	2,539	11.65	31	15.3%
DEN WR	446	5,459	12.24	27	62.6%	NE WR	886	11,180	12.62	84	62.4%
DEN Tot	712	8,304	11.66	46	100%	NE Tot	1,420	16,561	11.66	124	100%

We took these numbers for the two years that Cutler started for the Broncos and the last 4 years for New England. What are striking are the similarities, if you look at overall averages.

As you can see, the Broncos and Patriots had very similar passing distributions in two areas - fullback and wide receiver. Fullback is a small consideration for each offense, and that may influence the used of certain players. Evans only received 3 passes his entire year (10 games). Morris subbed as a lead blocker at times.

Although stats showed the fullback passes over the 4 years notched a hefty 3.4% total for NE, that number is heavily skewed by 2005, where Patrick Pass (playing some RB due to injuries) caught 23 balls and Heath Evans 10. The following year, Pass only caught 2 and Evans 7. Over the next two years, with Pass gone, Evans only caught 4 balls in 2007 and then 3 in his 10 games of 2008. Clearly - as McDaniels ran the offense over time, the use of the fullback as a receiver declined to almost nothing.

If McDaniels isn't concerned with the fullback position as a rusher or receiver when he comes to training camp in Denver, he has precedent in his work with New England. Andrew Pinnock would be perfect in McDaniels' offense as it was run with the Pats. Not surprisingly, he survived the purge. For those of us who hope to see Spencer Larsen at linebacker and Hillis at running back/H-back, that's good news.

Both teams chose the WR option about 62.5% of the time, and it's safe to say that the WR pass was the primary approach of both passing attacks. The discrepancy that matters is between the TE and RB. Denver, under Shanahan and his coordinators relied on the tight end pass 23.0% of the time, but only threw to the RB 10.7%. McDaniels while at NE preferred to throw to his running backs 18.9% of the time, but went to the TE on 15.3% of the throws. This fact has been blown out of proportion, in our opinion.

Tight End Receiving Statistics - Broncos '07-'08 & Patriots '05-'08
Team/Year	Rec	Yds	YPR	TD	Lg	RPG	YPG
DEN '07	81	891	11.0	8	41	5.1	55.7
DEN '08	83	1,118	13.5	8	72	5.2	69.9
DEN Avg	82	1,004	12.25	8	56.5	5.2	62.8
NE '05	57	738	13.0	13	45	3.6	46.1
NE '06	81	1,037	12.8	6	40	5.1	64.8
NE '07	48	471	9.8	10	35	3.0	29.4
NE '08	31	302	9.7	2	29	1.9	18.9
NE Avg	54.25	637	11.7	7.75	37.25	3.4	39.8

Using the Tight Ends

The issue that many Broncos fans have is that this could mean that tight ends Graham et al (including Scheffler, who is training with the team and who they have said that they value) might be on the receiving end of less passes. In reality, we don't know anything of the sort. McDaniels has noted publicly that he likes the idea of using Scheffler's receiving skills. We only know two things - McDaniels was the offensive coordinator under Belichick, who utilized the running back pass 23% of the time. And, that style was inherited with some changes from Charlie Weis and it worked.

Notice that New England's passes to tight ends dropped from 81 in 2006, (the same number that Scheffler and Graham together caught in 2007), to 48 in 2007, to just 31 in 2008. Why? It might be because Randy Moss and Wes Welker, both far better targets, came to town, combined with the departure of Daniel Graham to Denver. Some have argued that New England isn't happy with tight end Ben Watson, but other than media speculation I haven't found specific evidence of that and there is some evidence to the contrary. The Patriots now have better receivers, so they get them the ball more. It's simple.

The Patriots' tight ends were very active in 2008, running a wide variety of sets with both 1 and 2 tight ends. However, they blocked, spread the field, created mismatches, chips and generally made life miserable for the opposing defense and caught only 8% less passes as a factor of the whole attack than did the ones in Denver, despite the fact that Watson was a disappointment to them in receiving and the other two were even worse in that department. Again, it's likely that McDaniels is just using what he has to best advantage. The second thing we do know is based in that McDaniels has been repeatedly on record as saying that his offense will be different from what he has done in that past.

If his offense will be so different, why do an extensive analysis? It's because every coach will make certain decisions and preferences based on what he has seen work. He will then make changes based on the things that his imagination tells him will work in the future. We can't know the second, but we can become more cognitive of the things that have been done, what has and hasn't worked, and what areas he might see as needs or options, as well as situation like the fullback receptions where there is a clear direction. That is what we will cover next, in our section on Down/Distance Play Propensities and Conclusions

Divining the McDaniels Way, Part 2 - The Running Game

Emmett Smith — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:30:09 -0000

Note: In light of Denver's trade of Jay Cutler to the Bears, we decided to push back the schedule of our series. Today we present Part 2, with Part 3 now scheduled for Friday, April 10th and Part 4 following on Tuesday, April 14th.

The Broncos Running Attack

In Part 1 of our look at The McDaniels Way, we provided a view of what new Broncos Head Coach Josh McDaniels may look to achieve on offense in 2009. Part 1 covered more of the general goals - higher efficiency of yards and point-scoring, better control of the game clock, and more success in red-zone and goal-to-go situations. Today, we will address the facet so many of us have/had strongly identified with Broncos football, especially with the noted successes of the recently-departed Mike Shanahan - the Denver running game.

As noted in NYC's The Fall of the Denver Rushing Attack, the Broncos' commitment to the run has waned significantly in recent years. After averaging 508 carries per season from 1995 to 2005, the 2008 Broncos only ran the ball 387 times. While they maintained a strong YPA (Yards Per Attempt) of 4.8, their relatively small number of carries led to fewer first downs via the ground game (103 versus an average of 125/year from 1995-2005) and poor clock control (28:43 in '08 versus 32:15 from '95-'08).

In terms of gross yardage, the falloff went from an average of 2,264 yards per season (1995-2005) to just 1,862 in 2008. The rushing attack also failed to produce big individual games, as the '08 Broncos only topped 175 rushing yards once, although that number was padded by a 71-yard carry by WR Eddie Royal on an end-around (in the crushing home loss to Buffalo, incidentally). Compare that to the Broncos of 1995-2005, who topped 175 yards in a game on an average of 4.6 times per season. Without the benefit of a strong running game, one which never even dominated a single game in 2008, the pressure was focused squarely upon Jay Cutler and the passing attack.

At first glance, the hiring of Josh McDaniels seemed only a continuation of Denver's move to a pass-dominant offense. This is certainly a natural and excusable assumption, as Tom Brady's 4,806 yards and 50 touchdown passes of 2007 quickly come to mind. However, it is important to consider that 2007 may have been an anomaly, a remarkable alignment of the stars which allowed for arguably the greatest offensive performance by a team in any one year. Even so, the '07 Pats ranked 9th in the NFL in rushing attempts with 451 and 5th in rushing touchdowns with 17; while not dominant rushing numbers, they certainly evidence a commitment to the run. The Patriots' 2006 and 2008 numbers show an even greater offensive balance, which we will share in a bit.

So, what can we expect of Josh McDaniels' Denver Broncos when it comes to running the football?

The O-Line

Performance of Pats and Broncos O-Lineman in 2008 and 2009 Season Age
	NE Starters	'09 Age	Starts	Sacks	Pen	Sks+Pen	DEN Starters	'09 Age	Starts	Sacks	Pen	Sks+Pen
LT	Light	31	16	7.5	1	8.5	Clady	23	16	0.5	3	3.5
LG	Mankins	27	16	5	2	7	Hamilton	32	16	2.5	6	8.5
C	Koppen	30	16	4.5	2	6.5	Wiegmann	36	16	1	3	4
RG	Neal(Yates)	33(29)	9(7)	2(6.25)	2(1)	4(7/25	Kuper	27	16	0	4	4
RT	Kaczur(LeVoir)	30(27)	14(2)	4(2)	3(0)	7(2)	Harris	24	16	2.5	2	4.5
Tot/Avg		30.2	80	31.25	11	42.25		28.4	80	6.5	18	24.5

The above chart is a position-by-position comparison of New England and Denver's starting offensive lines from 2008. Although it mostly deals with passing-down numbers, in some areas the chart gives us clues about rushing as well. Looking across the LT column, Matt Light will be 31 years old during the 2009 NFL season. He started 16 games in 2008, was charged with 7.5 sacks and 1 penalty was accepted and attributed to him. Continuing across are Ryan Clady's numbers. Looking below at the RG row, right guard Stephen Neal started only 9 games, while Billy Yates filled in for the other 7 games. Yates' stats follow Neal's in parentheses - the same goes for Mark LeVoir, who filled in for Nick Kaczur in 2 contests. The stats attributed to Yates and LeVoir are part of the Pats' total, in order to adequately compare the starting lines of both teams: 5 starters x 16 games = 80 starts per team. What also must be noted is that team sack totals do not match up with those sacks attributed to the offensive line. For example, many of us know the Broncos' quarterbacks were only sacked 12 times in 2008. However, only 6.5 of those were attributed to the starting linemen, while the balance were charged to backups, tight ends and to the quarterbacks themselves (coverage sacks).

The issue of injuries may explain some things that came up on video. After watching the six games of film, the only real surprise that Doc had was the uneven work of the Patriots' offensive line. He said,

"I was surprised at how poorly they played in certain areas. That made it hard to obtain or understand some of the info on tendencies. Often, the line wasn't effective enough in the run or, especially, in the passing game. And yet, that's hard to see if you look at the numbers - unless you look carefully.

I watched a lot of running plays that were blown up at or behind the line of scrimmage because the O-Line couldn't move the defenders. Often the runners managed to get small yards anyway, and that's more a tribute to the runners than anything else. The passing problems showed up more in the stats.

However, even after saying that I have to point out the other side: according to FootballOutsiders.com, NE had the 5th-best rate of being stuffed, at 21% (Denver was 1st at 17%). Denver had the #1 run-blocking efficiency - but NE was #2. Again - they are very efficient. But for the Pats, one reason that number is so good was that the RBs commonly broke tackles behind the line, fell forward and almost inevitably gained a couple of yards. They had a very tough group, and adding Jordan to the Broncos, knee surgery and all, is a great addition. They also had the best percentage of 1st downs per carry at 28.3% (Denver was second at 26.6%) even though they were fourth in the league for rushing attempts (513).

A lot of that was the scheme, and some of the rest could be attributed to simple effectiveness at carrying out assignments on the part of the RBs - and to Cassel, who ran often with 73 attempts and a total of 270 yards and a 3.7 average. In his two full seasons, Cutler averaged 50.5 rushes for only 202.5 yards, so the difference there is obvious.

You also have to look at where they run and run well, and where they don't. They weren't productive at left or right end, or at right tackle, although left tackle (except on pass pro) and the middle of the line plays were usually very good."

There are discrepancies between the New England offensive line's certain very good stats and their obvious failures. For example, they were 1st in the league for rushing 1st-downs with 145, but they were only ranked 19th-best in the league converting on 3rd-and-short via the run, a category that is telling for the line. The Patriots' offensive line was quite a mixed bag in 2008, and that showed on the film. We will talk about the passing side of their equation tomorrow but on the rushing side, Doc saw players who were missing assignments and who weren't getting to the second level consistently.

A brief look across the league shows that the Patriots' O-Line is older than the norm, and that the right side in particular saw a lot of injuries over the course of the season, which may be part of the reason that they weren't as good as expected. Their tackles are seven years older than the Broncos', on average. Even factoring in the advanced ages of Casey Wiegmann and Ben Hamilton, the New England line is two years older than the Broncos across the starting five. Their size/weight numbers are roughly comparable to the Broncos.

We asked styg50 about the issue of offensive linemen and aging. Was the gap scheme wearing on the players? Could age, at about 30, be the issue with their poor play, (especially on passing downs)? He said,

"My first thought, is that everybody is different, so some guys might not be affected while other guys are significantly affected. The main trait of the pulling guard(or center) is good footwork, and to a lesser extent the core strength to re-engage quickly on the move, which has "balance" as its primary indicator when watching them. It is reasonable to assume that as a player ages, his footwork might suffer and become "heavier" or slower, but I think this applies more to heavier linemen who stay heavy. O-Linemen are generally no stranger to heavy lifting and maintaining and increasing lean muscle mass, but as they age they need to be open to the idea of increasing flexibility and agility, which should always lean towards playing at lighter and lighter weights.

The plus side of aging as a pulling lineman, is that you have to be able to locate and line up your block, which becomes even more difficult if it is intended to occur at the second level, and that is more about experience than anything. Hamilton and Nalen were good examples of guys who could block out to the third level, which is exceptionally difficult for a lineman, and they could do it because of how quick they were/are and how savvy they are about lining up the block. Rookies and young players didn't stand a chance against them."

Regarding the Broncos, Styg added,

"As to zone-block increasing players' longevity, I think it has more to do with what players have been tapped for zone-block: smarter, lighter, more agile. The smarter could aid them in whole-body health, the lighter reduces Isaac Newton's effect on them, and the agile protects them in the game itself, helping them avoid contortion strains and the like. The zone-block seems as likely to me as any other system to expose players to abuse by virtue of the system itself, but HT can answer that question better than I can. What wears players out more than anything is going to the ground and having to get back up again (barring the occasional 79-yard fumble return, which is more about oxygen than anything) and that occurs a lot in zone-block."

HT (hoosierteacher) was kind enough to weigh in as well. His comments centered on two things - the abilities of the players in terms of balance and flexibility, and their abilities to work together:

"The Denver OLmen are culled from the masses because they have either the inherent ability or trained ability to use flexibility and agility from early on. Teams with less of a focus on pure zone-blocking will age less gracefully. "Big and strong" diminishes over time. Flexibility and agility, if maintained from an early age, can last much longer on the football field.

I hate to keep coming back to martial arts. I know you and Styg are experts in the field, while I'm just an amazed spectator. (lol). But you guys will appreciate the analogy. The old man who is a martial-arts master seems to have the advantage over younger men who are more physically fit. In MMA competitions, we never seem to see these old men. But I know that I've been to studios (dojos) where I've seen old (frankly ancient) guys who have techniques and experience to beat up on the younger guys present.

While football is a little different, there is a similarity. While age slows all of us, it is going to slow physical qualities (such as strength) quicker than skills that are harder to quantify (such as balance, agility, footwork). Teams that look for these types of players are going to have players with more longevity. They also get the boost of having players that play together longer, which is a key for any offensive line.

The only thing that really keeps too many teams from moving towards zone-blocking is the pool of players to draw from. When too many teams try to move towards zone-blocking, the pool decreases. The teams already established in ZB have enough players who have played together in the system, while newer teams will struggle because they have to get more players from the drafts. If enough teams could establish themselves, colleges (the suppliers) would feed the demand, but it would take several years. In the meantime, teams with successful zone-blocking linemen should hold onto what they have, needing only to pick up a player here and there."

Professor Barber, the master instructor who Doc had the privilege to train under in martial arts used to assure him that "old age and treachery will conquer youth and skill." Given that and the direction of our two resident experts, we suspect that the issues of injury to the lower body, combined with a need to frequently adjust to different combinations of players were at the heart of New England's woes along the offensive line.

On the other end of the offensive-line universe, Josh McDaniels has to salivate at the idea of installing his scheme behind what is arguably the best line in the NFL. They are mostly younger (and Casey Wiegmann still has great skills) with Ryan Clady entering only his second year and Ryan Harris just his third (second as a starter). Chris Kuper is looking at only his fourth season. Ben Hamilton is 31, and Wiegmann is pretty spry for an old man (Casey will turn 36 during training camp). Primary backup Kory Lichtensteiger is getting good early reviews in the middle, and Tyler Polumbus showed promise at tackle, even taking some reps at center..

Small wonder, then, that the Broncos' new coach kept Rick Dennison to coach the line and Bobby Turner to coach the running backs. Josh McDaniels is a very smart young man, and those decisions were probably not very difficult for him. The Broncos may need better depth, but the line is first-rate in its current incarnation. After watching this film, Doc appreciated it even more. So will McDaniels. You may not see another season where every Broncos lineman starts all sixteen games, but these guys are very, very good nevertheless.

Much has been made regarding Josh McDaniels' comments on instituting a higher level of 'gap' blocking as well as the zone-block scheme. It is important for the fan to recognize that Denver ran some solid gap-blocking last year, and that Hamilton and Kuper both excel in pulling; so the change should not be a concern. In fact, the reality is that no major changes are indicated. But McDaniels is sitting on something new in how the line and the running backs will function, and he so far isn't letting much slip. McDaniels only said,

"We did more gap schemes in New England, where we're going to pull a guard. The good thing about Denver is they've done those things, and they've got really good guards to be able to do that."

Watching the Broncos O-Line closely, both Hamilton and Kuper, light-footed as guards go, were pulling on several plays each game. The biggest difference Doc sees is that the Broncos were even better at it than New England was.

As an aside, a recent segment on NFL Total Access suggested that Ryan Clady will be the 'Surprise' player of 2009. We can only suggest that the hosts weren't watching much film, as Clady was arguably the great surprise player of 2008. The only shock that he could provide in 2009 is if he's not elevated from Second-Team to First-Team All-Pro.

Ryan Harris was nearly as good, and Denver's pair of tackles is equal or superior to any other set of bookends in the NFL. Kuper has turned into a fine young guard, and if Ben Hamilton is the Broncos' 'weak link' as some have stated, Denver has but some very small problems to deal with. Wiegmann's contract will likely be renegotiated to keep him in town for a couple of more years, and in that time the Broncos will have settled on their backups and groomed their new center. Lichtensteiger may be best at either center or guard, but Polumbus has taken snaps effectively at center as well as at tackle. The Broncos probably need one more good backup, and they have some options already on the practice squad. they will, if our member's drafts are any indication, take another in the draft.

The Running Backs

Rush/Pass Splits
	Rush %	Pass %
DEN '07	44%	56%
DEN '08	38%	62%
DEN Avg	39%	61%
NE '05	42.6%	57.4%
NE '06	47.3%	52.7%
NE '07	42.6%	57.4%
NE '08	46.8%	53.2%
NE Avg	43.1%	56.9%

In terms of total plays, New England ran the ball 46.8% of the time in 2008. Over the 4-year period of 2005-2008, the Patriots exhibited a 43.1% rush, 56.9% pass balance. Despite their pass-first reputed approach, they like a fairly balanced attack. Meanwhile, the Broncos were the second-most pass-reliant offense in the NFL, behind only Arizona and tied with New Orleans last season. Obviously, Denver's running back injuries and the elevation of Jeremy Bates to play-caller factored in. Bates' preference for passing was quickly obvious to even casual Broncos fans. That reliance on the pass placed a lot on Jay Cutler, but it also led to predictability in the passing game, which we will discuss in Part 3. Few fans will mind the fact that Bates won't be deciding if or when to run the ball in 2009.

However, it should be noted that New England also suffered several injuries to their offensive backfield; top backs Laurence Maroney, LaMont Jordan and Sammy Morris all missing significant time. This forced the Patriots to sign BenJarvus Green-Ellis from their practice squad and give him the bulk of carries for two games. Interestingly, their commitment to the run did not wane - with Green-Ellis as their primary ball carrier in weeks 9 and 10 versus the Colts and Bills, respectively, New England rushed 75 times and Matt Cassel dropped back to pass 70 times. This represents a 51.7% run/pass split. No, the Patriots' and Broncos' backfield situations were not identical, but New England's run commitment with a practice-squad running back may serve to lessen the excuse provided by Denver's injuries.

The acquisitions of running backs with a history of good receiving numbers (and comparatively low miles, despite the issues with Correll Buckhalter's or J.J. Arrington's respective knees) would tend to indicate that Denver will be moving to the New England-style of running back usage. Let's look at what that was last year:

The Patriots' top runner in 2008 was Sammy Morris, with 156 carries for 727 yards, for a 4.7-yard average (he also took some snaps at fullback). LaMont Jordan had 80 carries for 353 yards and a 4.5 average. Kevin Faulk had 507 yards on just 83 carries for an explosive average of 6.0 yards per carry. Meanwhile, 2006 1st-round draft choice Laurence Maroney had only 28 carries for 93 yards, and New England has made it known that they aren't pleased with the young back. Then you have little-known Ben-Jarvus Green-Ellis, who filled in brilliantly with 74 carries and 275 yards. They spread the ball around, and they ran to the tune of 513 carries last season. That's bad news for those Broncos fans that yearn for a 1st-round back pounding and dodging his way into Canton. It seems very unlikely to happen under McDaniels. But it's good news if you like a well-balanced attack.

New England has some great numbers. They are very efficient - They were 6th in the league in big runs (carries of 10 or more yards), with 55 such plays. They were only 10th in the league in yards per carry (4.7), but 4th in rushing touchdowns with 21 in 2008. They know how to score, and the Broncos will benefit from that knowledge. As you'd expect, they don't leave a running back in the game for long. Rotation is common and at times it is a constant. They are into ‘fresh legs'. Some describe an inability of the back to ‘get into a groove' when rotated. That's in opposition to the NE idea of doing a job perfectly in execution each time, regardless. Faulk was at times their first option, or Morris or even Maroney, but they ran a wide variety of plays for all the backs.

We should also look at the scheme that Denver employs. In his article Denver's Unique Running Back System, Doc noted that a Denver running back needs the following qualities:

They have to put the team before their own stats and ego.
They have to block, run routes, chip and receive well, in addition to their running skills and intelligence.
They need excellent field vision, defensive-scheme comprehension and the neuromuscular abilities to see and respond very quickly (advanced proprioception).
They have to put the coaches' knowledge before their own "I've done it this way my whole life" approach.
They have to be able to come in from the bench and do their jobs well immediately without needing to ‘get into a groove'.

SlowWhiteGuy wrote,

"I would add one quality that is essential for backs in the Turner/Dennison system. They must trust the system, more than their ability. There actually is nothing that unique about Denver’s zone-blocking system; lots of teams use ZB. What is unique is the way they combine it with the 1-cut system. Denver stresses that the back must wait to make his cut until the backside pursuit has been sealed off. Most backs want to cut into the hole as soon as it opens, but that’s not Denver’s way. In fact you will often hear complaints about runners being too slow to the hole.

One of the reasons that Denver selects back lower in the draft is that backs who are selected more highly tend to have depended on their athletic/physical skill set. They are reluctant to abandon what got them to the pros. Lower round backs tend to be less physically gifted and have made it through hard work honing their technique. They are used to succeeding through study and hard work. For them, trusting the system comes more naturally; it’s an extension of what got them to the pros."

Can the two systems mesh? Absolutely. Denver has gone out in the offseason and added running backs who they feel can integrate into the zone-block scheme, catch passes out of the backfield and block well. They may be running the draw, running up the middle, some to the sides, although less. They will be catching passes, blocking for the pass and creating mismatches. McDaniels said as much the day after the Cutler trade and we were predicting the same before he did. By the way, he was also praising Hillis. Doc feels better now.

Rushing TDs, First Downs, Fumbles
	Rush TDs	1st Dns	Fumbles/Lost
DEN '07	10	96	30/14
DEN '08	15	103	18/12
DEN Avg	12.5	99.5	24/13
NE '05	16	101	19/9
NE '06	20	121	27/15
NE '07	17	124	14/6
NE '08	21	145	17/10
NE Avg	18.5	122.75	19.25/10

More Rushing TDs - New England has certainly been considered a pass-first offense in recent years and rightfully so, but only to an extent. In the red zone, the Patriots went to their running attack to dominate their scoring. As mentioned earlier, they have shown more balance than Denver and have run for a lot more touchdowns than the Broncos in recent years. Remember all of those goal-to-go situations that resulted in the dreaded chip-shot field goals lately? Hopefully Coach McDaniels' new offense will put those memories to rest. We shall see.

The Patriots had an interesting stat as far as scoring touchdowns. The Patriots top 5 scorers broke down this way: Randy Moss led the team with his 11 trips to the end zone, while four running backs ranked behind him [Morris (7), Faulk (6), Green-Ellis (5) and Jordan(4)]. For Denver, the top five had Peyton Hillis and Brandon Marshall tied for the team lead with 6 total touchdowns, followed by Eddie Royal (5), Daniel Graham and Michael Pittman (4 each). Tony Scheffler and Brandon Stokley had 3 each. That should look very different at the end of the 2009 season - look for more touchdowns out of Denver's offensive backfield. When Tom Brady went down, the Patriots went from 17 rushing TDs in '07 to 21 in '08. As they always do, they adapted their game to the new QB and moved on, efficiently.

More Rushing First Downs - The 2008 numbers jump off the screen - The Patriots moved the chains 145 times via the ground game, while the Broncos only did so on 103 occasions. As NYC mentioned in his earlier piece, every Broncos team which made the playoffs under Mike Shanahan had at least 124 rushing first downs. Granted, that is a correlative statistic, but we can probably all agree that the Broncos need better balance on offense.

Given the number of yards that the Broncos rolled up in '08, you would expect at least an average number of rushing TDs. The lack of that, in our opinion, shows something other than the oft-mentioned 'injuries' excuse. The Broncos were rushing for 4.8 yards per carry. Failing to use the rushing attack was, in our opinion, more of a factor of the play-calling of Bates than any deficiency in the rushing game.

Making a more balanced use of the rushing attack will have the added benefits of eating more of the clock and resting the defense. We believe that McDaniels' greater experience as an offensive coordinator will benefit the Broncos in this area.

Fewer Fumbles - Even more so than interceptions, this statistic may be more about personnel than coaching, but New England has put the ball on the ground less than Denver, and hopefully things will change there as well.

Rush-Direction Propensity Broken Down by Gap - Broncos '07-'08 and Patriots '05-'08
	LE(5)	LT(3)	LG(1)	C(0)	RG(2)	RT(4)	RE(6)
DEN '07-'08	16.7%	13.8%	6.3%	30.2%	8.7%	11.8%	12.5%
NE '05-'08	11.5%	13.1%	12.9%	29.8%	14.1%	12.3%	6.3%

More inside running - Certainly this may be somewhat attributable to personnel, but scheme was the final determinant of where each team ran. Denver has run for the most part around and behind Ryan Clady, Tom Nalen/Casey Wiegmann and Ryan Harris/Daniel Graham. Meanwhile, New England has run behind their guards almost twice as often as the Broncos have. Of course the retention of offensive-line coach Rick Dennison and running-backs coach Bobby Turner will have a lot to say about the Broncos' running game, but look for McDaniels' single-back sets to get more use out of the 1- and 2-gaps than the Broncos have under Mike Shanahan's tutelage.

From the game films, the Patriots preferred in 2008 to use the draw play heavily and keep their running backs between the tackles. If a back went to the outside, they were usually going to receive, and when they ran there they weren't very productive. The screen pass was an effective weapon for NE and that's inline with their overall preference to keep passes shorter and completions high.

Using the Fullback

If McDaniels goes with the same ideas of a fullback in Denver that he used in New England, it is potentially a good role for Spencer Larsen, who noted that he was uncomfortable handling the ball: in this offense, he wouldn't need to worry. The Pats' fullback, Heath Evans, only had 11 carries for 23 yards over 16 games in 2008, or 0.7 carries per game. The rest of the time when Evans was used (about 1 play in 7), he blocked. The use of Evans in 2008 was basic and for the most part unoriginal, which struck Doc as odd given the range with which they used other weapons. For the most part, he was a blocker - period. While we would like to watch Larsen on the field more and would prefer him at LILB, we could see him being very effective in a Heath Evans-type of role.

Of course, if Coach McDaniels chooses to stay with the idea of a fullback who is essentially there to block, Andrew Pinnock may be the perfect choice, and that would free Larsen to do what we believe he does best - blow people up on special teams and play inside linebacker. Doc has been especially interested in watching this aspect, and he thinks that keeping Pinnock but letting some other backs go (Anthony Alridge, Alex Haynes and P.J. Pope) spoke volumes on McDaniels' part.

The use of Heath Evans is a good illustration of how the Patriots adapted their offense to the players available. Prior to picking up Evans in 2005 (one week after Evans was cut by Miami), the Pats were making use of a 5'10", 217-lb player, Patrick Pass, at fullback. Because of his size and skill set, Pass was greatly used as a receiver and had hauled in 23 receptions prior to being injured in November of 2005. Late in October, Pass was even used as a halfback due to multiple injuries to his backfield mates. However, the switch from the lighter Pass to the 250-pound, hard-blocking Evans eventually brought about a change of scheme.

Injuries to Corey Dillon, Kevin Faulk and Pass pushed Evans into an immediate starting role at halfback, and he excelled with 158 rushing yards on 33 carries in two games. He also was used effectively as a pass-catcher, very much as the Patriots had used Pass. Over the next three seasons, however, Evans got fewer and fewer touches, culminating in just 11 carries and 3 catches in 2008. From Patriots.com following the 2006 season,

"The 6-foot, 250-pounder has spent the majority of the season lining up as the fullback in the I-formation, where he has served as a lead blocker and short-yardage specialist, but has also expanded his role as a pass catcher, even lining up as a split end at times. He has been a big contributor on special teams and is also known as one of the friendliest players in the locker room."

McDaniels may not have liked him receiving, and may not have used him as a running back very much, but Evans was a versatile and effective contributor nonetheless. However, the limits of his use as a runner and receiver show a possible prejudice on McDaniels part, since Evans was a star running back in college, has run very well for New England and showed himself to be a good receiver in 2005. However, as time passed McDaniels' preference for using the fullback became clear - short yardage and lead blocking.

Many Broncos fans were disappointed that Hillis, when at fullback, was not used more as a receiver and in a Howard Griffith-type role before first becoming their star runner and then being injured. That was indicative of the change to Bates' system, such as it was. The modern fullback is being used less and less, both in NE and during this time frame in Denver. Eventually, we may see the change to a FB/H-back (for Denver, the pieces are there), but it isn't happening often or quickly, despite frequent comments about 'H-backs' in the media, a phrase that usually seems to simply mean a tight end who receives. That's not an H-back at all, but we understand what they are saying.

Still, change is the only constant. This year's draft is relatively deep in fullbacks. Andrew Pinnock, if he sticks, could get some competition in Denver, but it's not a priority. In 2008, the fullback slot went to Michael Pittman, then Hillis, then to Spencer Larsen, and to heck in a handcart by the time the season mercifully closed. Let's hope for greener pastures this year. Pinnock is just what McDaniels usually wants at the position - a strong blocker who is team oriented.

Balancing the Run and the Pass

When watching film on the Pats, the issue of run/pass balance came out in the difference between halves. New England was 26th league-wide in first-half runs called, 14th in the second half. These run/pass ratios are exactly the theories that went into building the West-Coast Offense, but despite a common misperception, the Patriots run a modern variant on the Erhardt-Perkins system. Their approach is less smash-mouth. It uses the pass more. However, since Erhardt is reputed to have said, "Pass to score, run to win", the McDaniels version of this approach (which was originally installed by Charlie Weis and has morphed and adapted to changes in personnel often since) uses the pass more in the first half and runs more in the second. A glance at their record also confirms that teams which have the lead in the second half will tend to run more.

But running the ball is often only half the battle on offense. Passing is the dominant attack for most teams, and both Denver and New England have exhibited that. On Friday, we will examine the passing game in Part 3 of our series.

Patriots Punching Up: Pittsburgh Steelers @ New England Patriots

JohnHannahRules — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 22:01:01 -0000

Every year since 1985, the best schoolboy footballers from Ohio battle their counterparts from Pennsylvania in an all-star game: The Big 33. Known to some as the Gridiron Breadbasket, the mill towns and river valleys of western Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio are the fertile soil that gave rise to American football in all its current glory. The AFC North bears this proud tradition; three of its four teams represent the NFL's motherland. (The other, Baltimore, is a cutting from the Cleveland tree.) According to The Big 33, every Super Bowl has featured fighting sons of the breadbasket, including six in last year's epic contest.

Like the cities they represent, some of these AFC giants have fallen on hard times. Not so for Pittsburgh. Following their city's revival of the late 1980's, the Rooneys and head coach Bill Cowher likewise revived that storied franchise during the 90's. Now boasting five Lombardi trophies, the team Mr. Rooney bought for $2,500 has become one of the NFL's icons. While Pittsburgh itself -- "Hell with the lid off" to the Carnegies -- has formed a new high-tech identity from the rusty hulk of the industrial age, the Steelers have succeeded by returning to their roots: a hard-nosed ground game and defense, punctuated by an opportunistic air attack.

When Mike Tomlin brings his boys to Foxborough on Sunday, the game will likely come down to two unit-level battles: The Patriots' defensive backfield against the Steelers' pasing attack, and Blitzburgh's front 7 against New England's offfensive line. For our New England Patriots to come away with a win on Sunday, they will have to neutralize Roethlisberger, and protect Cassel.

Air Cover

Plagued by a shoulder injury for much of the season, Big Ben Roethlisberger has had an up-and-down year. Over the last few weeks, however, he seems to have leveled off. This is due in part to the growing capacity of his linemen; last week against Cincinnatti he was unsacked. Few quarterbacks have taken as many hits as Roethlisberger has this year -- 32 so far. He also rushed for a first down and a touchdown last week. While no one will mistake him for Steve Young, he's efficient when he runs. He stands tall in the pocket and won't be rattled by contact.

The Steelers have never featured their passing game, but I'm pegging it as key this week against the Pats for two reasons: First of all, I believe we have one of the best fronts in the league right now against a ground attack. Though currently ranked only 13th against the run, they have come on over the past few weeks, allowing the Fish only 62 yards.

The Steelers, by contrast, have the 23rd ranked rushing attack. So I think we're in decent shape there.

No, what worries me is not the run. In spite of his pedestrian 80.5 QB rating, I'm worried about Big Ben. Well, actually I'm worried about his receiving corps matched up against our coverage. Santonio Holmes is expected to be in game-form by Sunday. He was rocked by Crocker last week -- a performance we'd like to duplicate (without, of course, injury). And who can forget Hines Ward? Hines is a favorite of mine for his toughness, his attitude, his great hands and the same kind of field awareness for which I'm constantly lauding our own #33.

The Stillers suffered from the dropsies early last week, but it's a talented group and I wouldn't expect a repeat performance. Roethlisberger flashed some improvizational flair as well, creating outside the pocket and finding tight end Heath Miller and Faulkback Mewelde Moore in seams and on circles. These two will be critical contributors: Coverage in the flats and seams often falls into the lap of linebackers. Jerod Mayo is on his way to all-world status, but he isn't there yet. One of the few holes in his game is a tendency to get a little lost on pass coverage.

He isn't alone. Gaping holes in the defensive backfield are becoming de rigueur for the Patriots. Particularly on critical third-and-long, when there is a finite but large "underneath" to be covered, our safties have been either late or absent. As should be clear by now, the Deltha O'Neal Experiment is a failure. No doubt a wily vet, like Fernando Bryant and John Lynch before him it is clear that he is no longer quick enough. Ellis Hobbs III is a fine II, but not a 1. This unit will have to tighten up and find some cohesion if the Patriots hope to compete for a playoff spot.

Guarding the Cassel

Like the men crouched behind hastily mounted earthworks at the top of Breed's Hill in 1775, the quarterback of their namesake Patriots will be standing behind his own critical redoubt this Sunday. I noted above that Roethlisberger has been sacked 32 times this year. That's a lot, but our own Matty C, with a back-breaking 34, leads the league. Things are not going to get easier this week.

Pittsburgh will storm into town with the AFC's best defense. Number one in the NFL against the run. Number one in the NFL against the pass. Between them, linebackers LaMarr Woodley and James Harrison have dropped opposing QBs 22.5 times. Altogether, Blitzburgh has accounted for 37 sacks this year, good enough for first in the AFC. The men up front are going to have to keep Matty upright for the Patriots to compete. It will be their sternest test of the season.

We have some weapons for slowing the rush, and the keys to the armory are now completely in Cassel's hands. This offense has taken off the training wheels, and just in time. But time is what we need. Even Randy Moss needs a couple of seconds to get down field. In the meantime, I expect we'll be breaking out the screens and draws -- harking back to the Charlie Weiss days of misdirection and trickery. If we do, however, don't forget that the Steelers will start defensive player of the year candidate Troy Polamalu, a run-force specialist with across-the-field speed. In the end, it will come down to the offensive line to provide the time and open the holes.

As of now there has been no word on whether Matt Light will be suspended from this week's game. If he is, that's a blow no matter what Bill Belichick says to the press. It has been a busy year in the infirmary and the injury bug hit the line hard and early. The offensive line we finally have in place is a better-than-average group, slowly regaining their synchronicity as the starters are all finally on the field. But if Light is out, we're probably looking at one of the following two scenarios: Mark LeVoir fills in for Light, or Nick Kaczur slides over to left tackle and Wesley Britt comes in on the right. Neither option fills me with much confidence, not against the Woodleys, Farriors and Harrisons of the world. The absence of Light would present additional limitations, as our tight ends and backs will be more likely committed to pass blocking than route running, limiting our capacity to pressure the coverage.

Regardless of who plays, the five men on the field will have to show the same aggression and passion that they brought against the Dolphins last week. I'll take a couple of unnecessary roughness flags if it means Mankins and Neal have their backs up. And I'd just as soon not have to wait for Matty Ice to churn through a pile to get the fellas fired up. We'll have to come out hard and fast, and not wait for an invitation.

The waters of the Allegheny and Monongahela join in Pittsburgh to form the Ohio. The watersheds they represent are also the cradle of our sport, and are filled with a rabid fanbase that still has something to cheer about. "City of Bridges" or "Three River City" are so much nicer than "Hell with the lid off" or "Old Smokey." But "Hell with the lid off" is what the Steelers defense will bring into Foxboro on Sunday. With 10 days of rest.

But New England is beginning to find its legs. A play or two the other way plus a coin flip, and this team is 9-2. And they're starting to know that. If the Patriots play tight, disciplined defense and turn back the "Blitzburgh," they have a good chance to walk out of Sunday at 8-4, keep the pressure on the Jets, and stay in strong contention for the playoffs.

How about them apples?

Bonus Coverage: The Gridiron Breadbasket Connection (actives only)

From the Patriots: Nick Kaczur (U of Toledo), Dan Koppen (hometown Whitehall, PA), Matt Light (hometown Greenville, PA), Ray Ventrone (hometown Pittsburgh), Mike Vrabel (OSU, hometown Akron), Pierre Woods (hometown Cleveland), Mike Wright (Cincinnati).

From the Steelers: Andre Frazier (U of Cincinnati), James Harrison (Kent State, hometown Akron), Santonio Holmes (OSU), Sean McHugh (PSU), Ben Roethlisberger (Miami OH, hometown Lima OH), Gary Russell (hometown Colombus), Nate Washington (Tiffin U, hometown Toledo).

Game Preview: How the Patriots will attack the Colts

MaPatsFan — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 16:47:30 -0000

cnn.com

As is customary, I do a game preview to run down the matchups and the things my Patriots need to do to win an upcoming game. This time will be no different. I know you're all used to #12 and #18 battling it out, but the wonkiness that is the 2008 season will not let that happen. Instead, backup QB Matt Cassel will march into The Lube, fresh off a couple of good wins, and attempt to silence the Colts faithful. My expectations for this season diminished a tad after Bernard Pollard ended Brady's season, starting RB Laurence Maroney and S Rodney Harrison were IR'd, RB Sammy Morris has been injured, and the O line as been a series of rotating 300 pounders. But that's no excuse. You take the cards you're dealt. On to the heavy lifting.

Offense

Backup QB Matt Cassel - Matt's gotten more comfortable in the pocket. Early in the season, he would get nervous when defenders were in his face and go sideways, sometimes causing a major league loss in yardage. There was a big change between Denver and St. Louis where Matt started going vertical and staying in the pocket longer. His pocket sense got better, giving his O line more of a chance.
Offensive Line - Billy Yates and Mark LeVoir have been doing a serviceable job on the right side, but not what we're used to. Luckily, that's not Cassel's blind side and he can see if any freight trains are coming at him.
Receivers - TE Ben Watson will be VERY busy trying to keep Colts' DE's out of the backfield, so I suspect he'll be out of the picture for most of the passing plays. In order to counteract the Colts' strong DE attack, I think NE will go with faster, higher percentage slants and options to WR Wes Welker, RB Kevin Faulk, and WR Randy Moss. Yes, you read that right. NE has been turning Moss inside quite a bit as of late. It scares the daylights out of me, especially since MLB Gary Brackett is such a strong mike, but what can you do. If Bobzilla is still out, they might just try a few long balls to Moss.
Running Backs - RB Sammy Morris is in the starting lineup, but shows up as doubtful on the injury report. I'm very suspect he'll play. A plus for the Patriots? RB LaMont Jordan is off the injury list. LaMont has been very productive for us and is usually brought in for the second half. At 5-10 230lbs, he's a bowling ball with legs and one of our strongest power runners. RB Kevin Faulk will see lots of duty as the primary back and is an obvious choice for options. Rookie BenJarvus Green-Ellis will be used to take some lumps when the older guys need a bit of rest.

Defense

Defensive Line - Anchored by NT Vince Wilfork (fined, but not suspended), DEs Ty Warren and Richard Seymour have been having good games. Seymour has been especially productive getting into the backfield. I think the matchup to watch here is C Jeff Saturday and Wilfork; always a good show.
Linebackers - OLBs Mike Vrabel and Adalius Thomas have had success getting into the backfield and rushing the QB, especially Thomas. MLBs Tedy Bruschi and solid rookie Jerod Mayo have been doing very well guarding the middle, but I believe they're slightly soft there. I suspect Colts' TE Dallas Clark could have some success here; he's coming off of a very hot game against the Titans when WRs Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne were all but shut down.
Cornerbacks - I've always felt Ellis Hobbs was serviceable, but simply doesn't have the swagger necessary to be in the upper echelon of this group. I can honestly say I miss Asante Samuel. Deltha O'Neal is starting on the other side and is capable, but is slowing down. Rookie Jonathan Wilhite will get rotated in which scares me; he was torched a few times against the Rams. When he's in, I would expect Dungy to target Wilhite with Wayne or Harrison.
Safeties - I know you guys are not fans of Rodney Harrison, but he was our on-the-field DB coach and a heck of a safety. Sure, he may have lost a step or 2, but this Pats homer believes he made up for it with his football IQ. Brandon Meriweather is taking over as SS with James Sanders as FS. Both have done ok, but we clearly miss the presence of Rodney.

Special Teams

Interestingly enough, CB Ellis Hobbs is our most dangerous return guy and 6th in the NFL with 636 yards and a return average of 30.3
K Stephen Gostkowski is ranked 7th and routinely spanks the ball into the endzone for touchbacks.
K Stephen Gostkowski is ranked 4th in field goals.

Winning at The Lube would be a real feather in the cap of Matt Cassel - the perennial backup, marching into enemy territory and getting it done. I suspect a loss is less devastating for NE than for Indy. For NE, it would mean a 5-3 record; not impossible to recover from given the softness of our schedule. Looking to turn the season around and begin a bid for a playoff spot, a 3-5 hole would be difficult for the Colts to climb out of and would mean the first sub .500 season since Peyton's rookie year, 1998.

This is a very tough game for NE. Indy is ALWAYS a huge challenge and this year, they have more of a reason to play as hard as possible. NE would love to add another W and cement Cassel as a legit starter. See ya in the game threads.

Random Ramsdom, 10/25: Rams ready to meet Patriots

VanRam — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 15:45:30 -0000

More evidence of a turnaround?

Mike Sando, ESPN's NFC West blogger has a look at the dreaded three-and-out possessions. Overall, the Rams have one of the highest percentages in the league of three-and-out possessions - 32%, tied with Seattle and Detroit, slightly better than only Cincinnati and Kansas City. The Rams had just one drive that saw the offense go three and out last week against Dallas. The week before, in their win over Washington, they went three and out five times out of twelve possessions.

Takin' and Givin'

The Rams now have a +3 turnover ratio for the season and +6 through the last two games. Against the Cowboys, the Rams had 4 takeaways (3 INTS, 1 fumble) and three against the Redskins (3 fumbles) while turning the ball over just once in that span. The Patriots have a +4 ratio, and turned the ball over just three times in their last three games.

Sad Sack

Rams quarterbacks have been sacked 20 time this season, one of just 5 teams that have allowed 20 or more sacks. The good new this week: the Patriots have allowed 26 sacks on the season. They'll also be without starting RT Nick Kaczur for the second week in a row, relying instead on former Rams fill-in Mark LeVoir. The Broncos sacked Pat's QB Matt Cassel 6 times last week...still losing 41-7. The Donkeys have a 7.3% adjusted sack rate, the Rams, 8.3%. Little, Long, et al will need to rack up a few more sacks this week to win.

Predictions

Three out of the five talking heads on ESPN NFL Sunday Countdown are predicting the Rams to win. Oddsmakers have the Rams as a 7.5 point underdog.

Linkage

Pats Pulpit previews the game.
One fantasy expert thinks Rams WR Donnie Avery makes a great play this week.
The Rams have the league's best pass defense on third down...but rank 28th against the run on third downs.
Madden NFL 2009 predicts a 23-17 Pats win, thanks to a fourth quarter comeback. Hey, don't they know the Rams are nails in the second half now? Boom.
The moment you've been waiting for...Steven Jackson's official web site, SJ39.com. It's a pretty cool site, and you can listen to the podcast version of his weekly radio show.