Defensive rankings

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Patsman2. Show Patsman2's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    So take out the meaningless scores and yards and the D is ranked 29th? And outside SD, this was against Buffalo, Oakland, and Miami.  3 NON-play-off teams.  Was this suppose to make people feel better?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Dessalines. Show Dessalines's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    In Response to Re: Defensive rankings:
    [QUOTE]That may be true, but in every game I've watched they have not been able to stop anybody except inside the red zone, inflated 4th quarter numbers or not.  Last year's d was similar. They survived by somehow coming up with big plays and turnovers. The d wasn't consistent and gave up lemons when they couldn't pull in the big play. It killed them in the playoffs and it will kill them again in the playoffs if they don't start finding ways to shut down opposing teams without depending on a mistake.  It seems to take about 4 games for the D to come around and I expect they will be better over the next 5 games.
    Posted by Macrawn[/QUOTE]



    I think this is pretty accurate.  The problem is that this is fine until it isn't.  Sure, give up a ton of yardage but don't let 'em score.  But really, it would be much better when its third down and nine or eight or whatever, but long anyway and make the stop, instead of letting them convert and march on.  Sooner or later teams will find a way to score if you let 'em continually get down in the red zone.  Third down efficiency needs to improve, it is has been a key negative for the past tow years and I for one am tired of seeing other teams convert regularly in these situations.  I truly hope it get's better but with the injuries on defense, I have my doubts.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from sml1210. Show sml1210's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    In Response to Re: Defensive rankings:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Defensive rankings : There were a couple of long passes too.  We should not include the 60 yarder to Heyward-Bey or the 35 yarder to Bush.  Come to think of it, our D was dominant and if you forget about the penalties, we played a flawless game.
    Posted by HaverhillBob[/QUOTE]

    And while you're at it, let's forget about the garbage time at the end of the Bills game! The Pats are actually 4 and 0!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    You don't get points for yards...

    We're middle of the road for points given up...

    We need to get better on 3rd downs.

    We've lost one game, get a grip.

    Good post
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    In Response to Re: Defensive rankings:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Defensive rankings : I feel the same way about the useless yards they give up.  By no means do I think they are a great D... But they are better than they are being given credit for.  Only time will tell if they are good enough.  As of right now no one can tell where they will be in January in terms of there D.  If they don't improve then fine all the naysayers can come back and rub it in my face... But if they get better...You bet I'm gonna let you here "I told you so"!
    Posted by mar10[/QUOTE]


    who are you going to say i told you so to? noting our futility in yards does not mean im not hoping and thinking we can ansd should improve somewhat defensively.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    In Response to Re: Defensive rankings:
    [QUOTE]Aren't points allowed the only thing that really matter, we're tied for 20th at 24.5/game (take away the pick 6 and its 22.75/game)?  We play with a lead all the time, I think it's good coaching when we know how to kill clock on both sides of the ball.  The concern isn't total yardage, it's if they can come up with stops in close games.  They're getting so used to playing with the lead that half the time giving up points is no big deal as long as it takes 5+ mins off the clock.  At least they have come up with some timely turnovers and goal line/red zone stops.
    Posted by dirty-water[/QUOTE]


    " They're getting so used to playing with the lead that half the time giving up points is no big deal as long as it takes 5+ mins off the clock.  A"

    i dont believe that is any way to play football. you cannot just turn on not alllowing those clock eating drives when you are actually down and need the ball back to score.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    In Response to Re: Defensive rankings:
    [QUOTE]  We play with a lead all the time, I think it's good coaching when we know how to kill clock on both sides of the ball.
    Posted by dirty-water[/QUOTE]

    Actually, in all 4 games we weren't ahead more than 2 scores by the end of the 3rd quarter. That is hardly indicative of the D giving up points because they are playing "prevent". They are giving up points because they are a sieve.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from the17thpresident. Show the17thpresident's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    total yards is a horrible way to rank defenses. the teams that arent giving up yards arent  scoring as fast and often as the passing offenses. they are running the ball and shortening the game. so in return, less total yards are accomplished. when an offense scores every drive, and fast, there are more total drives. i am not by far big on this d, but why isnt anyone mentioning how the packers d is ranked 28th? point is...brady is the defense. just like in the bills game, mccourty was a dumb ars for tackling freddy jackson at the 1, and bill should have told his guys if they get inside the 30, just let them go and score. brady even said, "i wish fred got in the endzone" cause he knows...just like they all do...sometimes the best defense is a good offense....lets face it....if they win a bowl, its not gonna be on a sack returned for a fumble, but brady has a chance to do it on his own, with a bit of running.....this d doesnt scheme, and until they do, they wont dominate
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    So, what is the end game here?  Is it more important to have impressive defensive stats and play lights out on every opponents possession or keep them from getting to the end zone no matter how many yards it took for them to get into the red zone?  Granted, it is nerve wracking to see the other team easily move down the field against this D, but, other than the Bills' game, the end result for the team is a W.  I think the Bills' game is more of an aberration given how a couple of their scoring drives were aided by significant penalties and the INT for 6 which happened off a very high and unussually long pass deflection to the D-Back who didn't even have to make a play on the ball to catch it.  When all is said and done, if the Pats end the season with trophy # 4, we'll forget about this all! 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings


    For me it's all about points allowed. The Pats D is ranked 20th. not in the middle of the pack as that would be 16, but close enough.

    I'd like to see them level out and land somewhere around 12-8 range. With our offense, I think that would be a winning combination.

    2 problems here however. Injuries and lack of continuity are really hurting us. Every team struggles with it, but I think it is magnified for us specifically because we have so many new faces who have simply not played together or in our system, and with 2-3 guys out every week, this doesn't help. They need to put 3-4 games together with everyone D suiting up to find a rythm. If they can, I fully expect this D to turn it around a bit. Not top 10 maybe, but if they can even slightly improve with our Offense, I think that is a winning formula.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Evil2012. Show Evil2012's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    In Response to Re: Defensive rankings:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Defensive rankings : Actually, in all 4 games we weren't ahead more than 2 scores by the end of the 3rd quarter. That is hardly indicative of the D giving up points because they are playing "prevent". They are giving up points because they are a sieve.
    Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]

    You could become a Jets fan you know.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    In Response to Re: Defensive rankings:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Defensive rankings : In his first 3 weeks, McFadden had a MINIMUM of 140 yards rushing. We held him to 74 yards. Don't take the bait, ATJ. The D is never lights out to start the year, but we have improved in a few spots as compared to this time last year.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    That is just a complete lie. Buffalo held him to fewer rushing yards (72) on more carries (20) than the Patriots did. Do you even look these stats up before you post things to these boards?

    You do realize that your arguments are completely invalid when you clearly just make up stats to prove them, right?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Defensive rankings

    In Response to Re: Defensive rankings:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Defensive rankings : You could become a Jets fan you know.
    Posted by Evil2012[/QUOTE]

    No I couldn't, Evil.
     

Share