Originally Posted by GRONKED
Ok, took the time to read the whole article. Some good thoughts and valid points that I agree w.
Rule 1 , about not running at wilfork...obv agree. That said, author is oversimplifying a bit. Citing the two outside runs as evidence that you can just do that all day is weak. Once the pats establish that youre afraid to run up the middle, they can cheat a lil and make getting to the outside impossible. Weve faced several good rushers...rayrice and cj2k this year.. e.rarely get exploited there. Using the fact that graham wasn't there as an excuse as to why Houston only ran outside a couple times is a reach.
Rule 2 about using our own system against us...good ideas and will work sometimes...but sounded a little like hes reinventing the wheel. If you continually exploit a weakness in our defense, we will adjust.
Rule 3, same deal. Its not that easy. Fact is schaub wasn't seeing the whole field and making good decisions...and thats what has to change. Foster will not be wide open all game ..defense would quickly adjust. Those snapshots show me more of a problem than solution tbh. Schaub has to go thru his progressions.
All in all..how can you write an article so detailed and not touch on how youre gonna slow Brady down? If he had to, Brady coulda had us in the 50s or 60s...no offensive adjustments woulda changed the outcome then.
I believe that the article was written as "Ways that are possible to attack the Patriots" and less of a general overview of the whole game.