Which Offense Will Be More Productive in 2013? (1 Viewer)

[David Yudkin]

Many folks have said Welker is a huge upgrade for Denver and Amendola is a huge downgrade for New England.

Last year, the Pats compiled 480 more yards and 76 more points than the Broncos did.

Based on what we know about the teams so far this off-season (and a lot could still change), who will be more productive this season in those areas?

 

[ghostguy123]

Hmm, I see points similar with Patriot getting more yards. I think Denver will have more leads and need to comeback less often.

 

[moleculo]

Yeah, I vote for NE in both. 2 reasons: 1. Belichick likes to run it up, whereas Fox is allergic to stepping on proverbial throats. 2. Denver has better defense & special teams; Denver will be involved in fewer shootouts.

 

[Anarchy99]

I think the loss of Welker may sting initially but in terms of total production, I don't think it will have a huge impact on the Pats. They have already signed Amendola and Donald Jones. Brandon Lloyd is willing to tear up his contract to stay in NE. Edelman is likely to come back. And the Pats may end of wrestling Emmanuel Sanders away from the Steelers. Add in more time at WR for Hernandez and I think the WR options will be fine. I still see the Pats scoring 30-35 points per game.

 

[SSOG]

I think the Patriots are almost certainly going to get more yards. Worse defense and special teams plus a faster pace pretty much guarantees it even if both offenses are equally effective.

I think Denver and New England will be very close to even in points scored. Denver's going to have better starting field position and more TDs off of returns (both defensive and special teams) to help offset the fact that I think they'll have fewer offensive drives.

If I was betting on which offense would look better in one of the advanced stats that adjusts for pace and field position (DVOA, EPA, WPA, PFF grading, etc), I'd probably just call it a pick 'em.

 

[PatsFanCT]

What's also being overlooked is the fact they the Pats will have Jeff Demps playing the role of Kevin Faulk. Obviously he's an unknown commodity, but if he can ball, that could also be a big factor.

 

[David Yudkin]

What's also being overlooked is the fact they the Pats will have Jeff Demps playing the role of Kevin Faulk. Obviously he's an unknown commodity, but if he can ball, that could also be a big factor.

Maybe, maybe not. Demps said he wants to still do track at the same time. It remains to be seen if the Pats are ok with that. BB may not go along with that. Track conditioning and physique apparantly way different than football conditioning and physique. No one really knows what the deal is right now.

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

What's also being overlooked is the fact they the Pats will have Jeff Demps playing the role of Kevin Faulk. Obviously he's an unknown commodity, but if he can ball, that could also be a big factor.

Vereen is going to be their 3rd down back, Demps is a long shot to make the roster now that they signed Washington.

 

[SSOG]

What's also being overlooked is the fact they the Pats will have Jeff Demps playing the role of Kevin Faulk. Obviously he's an unknown commodity, but if he can ball, that could also be a big factor.

Vereen is going to be their 3rd down back, Demps is a long shot to make the roster now that they signed Washington.

Agreed. I think Demps' best hope was as a returner working his way into a larger role. With Washington on board, that looks like an awfully slim hope.