In response to Neal Page's comment:
In response to pezz4pats's comment:
In response to Neal Page's comment:
In response to pezz4pats's comment:
In response to coolade2's comment:
4th and 29.... pathetic.
Are you really laughing at SD?
Here's a sobering Fact fpr you.
The Pats D has given up more passes +20 than the following TWO teams Combined. (55)
More...... but you get the idea..
They have also given up 7 rushes over 20.
I know that everyone is estatic with the amount of TO's this team has, but the reality is; when you don't get them, this is what's left. (along with a 45% 3rd down completion, 31st)
There is a reason this team is rated 29th in pass D, people and it's not garbage time against bad teams. Good D's don't allow passes over 20 and 3rd down conversions in garbage time and certainly not to the tune of MORE than 2 teams combined.
It's a bend don't break D for the most part. No one cares about yards allowed. It's what they do in the red zone. How many times do you need to be told this?
How many times do you have to be told what a dope you are?
Where is the bend but don't break? Are the 43 and 47 yard TD passes a product of that? Isn't the whole idea of the BBDB D to prevent the big plays??? Why are they LAST in plays + 20?
This is a bend and break D, being bailed out by the O and it's massive leads.
No huge lead, no win.
How many times do you have to be told this?
By Andrew Mooney, Boston.com Correspondent
The PatriotsâÂÂÂÂÂÂ defense has extended the âÂÂÂÂÂÂbend-but-donâÂÂÂÂÂÂt-breakâÂÂÂÂÂÂ concept to its limit. Their mighty struggles to prevent opposing offenses from cruising up and down the field are well-documented, yet somehow they retain an average ranking (14th) in the one defensive category that truly counts: scoring defense. The bend-but-donâÂÂÂÂÂÂt-break defense is one thatâÂÂÂÂÂÂs been ascribed to Bill Belichick at various times over the years, but itâÂÂÂÂÂÂs not clear that itâÂÂÂÂÂÂs a sustainable strategy; after all, how could a defense thatâÂÂÂÂÂÂs bad on 80 percent of the field perform consistently better in the last one-fifth?
Over at Smart Football, analysis conducted by Chase Stuart may have uncovered the reasons for this discrepancy. Interestingly, the bend-but-don't-break defense might be best explained by another familiar cliché: "the best defense is a good offense."
Because of a great offense and a good punting unit, the Patriots defense is rarely placed in a bad situation. New England rarely turns the ball over (third fewest in the league) and gains so many yards (2nd most) that theyâÂÂÂÂÂÂre not giving the opponent the ball in a position to score. In fact, New EnglandâÂÂÂÂÂÂs opponents have the 2nd worst average starting drive position of any team in the league (#1 is San Francisco, a team that seems to have been teleported straight from the âÂÂÂÂÂÂ70s) âÂÂÂÂÂÂ the 24-yard-line.
The offenseâÂÂÂÂÂÂs influence on the DâÂÂÂÂÂÂs effectiveness is not limited to the ground they chew up, but also, just as valuable, the time. Opposing offenses donâÂÂÂÂÂÂt score as much as might be expected against the Pats in part because, with less clock with which to work, they simply get the ball fewer times.
Because New England goes on many long drives on offense and allows long drives on defense, New EnglandâÂÂÂÂÂÂs defense has faced the 6th fewest drives against this year (and the 4th fewest drives on offense). The Patriots have allowed 38 yards per drive (most in the league by over two yards) and 1.91 points per drive, 23rd best. Points per drive allowed excludes non-offensive touchdowns, so a 23rd-place ranking in points per drive allowed is a better measures of New EnglandâÂÂÂÂÂÂs defense than their 14th-place ranking in points allowed.
I covered recently that a defenseâÂÂÂÂÂÂs ability to force turnovers is essentially random, but this also implies that we would expect more to occur as the number of plays increases (larger sample size). And as the PatriotsâÂÂÂÂÂÂ defense has faced the fourth-most passing attempts this year âÂÂÂÂÂÂ due largely to Tom BradyâÂÂÂÂÂÂs ability to turn games into shootouts, while limiting his interceptions âÂÂÂÂÂÂ itâÂÂÂÂÂÂs no surprise the unit ranks 2nd in the league in interceptions forced.
New EnglandâÂÂÂÂÂÂs often playing with a lead, which forces their opponents into riskier tactics, which explains why the Pats are [3rd] in the league in turnovers forced despite not having much individual talent on defense. And, of course, every turnover forced is a drive that does not require any more defense, and the Patriots are 3rd in turnovers forced per drive.
But what about the most important aspect of the bend-but-donâÂÂÂÂÂÂt-break defense: the âÂÂÂÂÂÂdonâÂÂÂÂÂÂt break,âÂÂÂÂÂÂ or red zone defense? Is the PatriotsâÂÂÂÂÂÂ ability to stop teams before reaching the end zone a product of purposeful defensive scheming or the difficult starting positions in which they place opposing offenses?
As is usually the case, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. The PatriotsâÂÂÂÂÂÂ red zone efficiency on defense has remained remarkably consistent over the last five years; their percentage of touchdowns allowed per red zone trip has held relatively firm around 56 percent.
The regularity of this number leads me to believe their red zone efficiency is indeed the result of a repeatable defensive strategy. Play your safeties deep, and you wonâÂÂÂÂÂÂt get burned deep, but youâÂÂÂÂÂÂll allow a ton of yards âÂÂÂÂÂÂ until the red zone, that is, when those safeties get forced up by the goal line and involve themselves in the play.
The only problem is that the PatsâÂÂÂÂÂÂ red zone defense is not particularly good, consistently well below the league average. In reality, the Patriots are no better at âÂÂÂÂÂÂnot breakingâÂÂÂÂÂÂ than the majority of NFL teams. If the defense canâÂÂÂÂÂÂt take all the credit, then, itâÂÂÂÂÂÂs fair to acknowledge the PatsâÂÂÂÂÂÂ offense for helping to keep the opposition off the scoreboard. Bad field position, limited possessions, and a victory in the turnover battle can all make a defense appear much stiffer than it really is.
This blog is not written or edited by Boston.com or the Boston Globe.
No one is going to read what you just posted. I certainly didn't. Most of the investment on this team is for your virtual boyfriend, Brady, and the offense in an offensive era.
This is not debatable. This is factually correct and reality.
So, if the D is giving up chunks of yards in the air, like all Ds do in this league, some more than others, but BB's style of D works in the end game where it's mostly FGs allowed or minimial points over 4 qtrs, that's all that matters.
Garbage time points or yards are also very clearly irrelevant, which makes your argument even weaker. We have no idea what the D would be doing if BB kept them aggressive in scheme and stopped going vanilla/bend/don't break.
What you don't get is that the differential between being ranked, say "18th" and "27th" is a very small number. It's based on YARDS. An average of 15-20 yards separating 5-10 teams' rankings is the most irrelevant aspect of an argument, it's embarrassing to pretend it has a lot of credence.
Throw in the fact, points are more important as is red zone D and the fact NE is amazing at creating turnovers for the 3rd year in a row, and your argument is weaker.
Lastly, I care about where the team is trending at the end of the year, hopefully, when fully healty where all the parts can be seen working as one. I don't care about stats that come from Sept and October.
Keep thinking what you want crusto, but this is reality and has been for 5 years.
They are not that good of a red zone D.
They live off of turnovers but we all know what happens when they don't get them. (SB 42 & 46. )
This team would be last in EVERY catagory if not for the O. Bet the farm on that!
This team will not win, playing a more complete team that is effecient on both O & D.
(SB 42 & 46) Reason being, it is hard for even a prolific O to win against a more complete team. If they are playing a good D than they need their own D to step up and that rarely happens.
All teams have garbage time and play a prevent D. Not just the Pats. That does not even begin to excuse the last place ratings in 3rd downs and 20+ completions and yes, yards.
They have given up 1300 more yards than Pits. Take into account the time involved in giving up those 1300 (120 more a game) yards and you have an offense that is not on the field for that very same amount of time. If not for that you'd probably have a 36/24 TOP favoring the O, but this is not the case and it is the Biggest reason they lose games. YARDS TAKE TIME FROM THE O and in a close game, that spells disaster for an O.
But, you will never get this......... Too bad!
Oh, and please stop with all the money is spent on O. This is true for most teams. Take away the QB (the highest paid player on most teams) and it is even.
Most of the high draft picks in the past 5 are on D, not O.
Are you saying BB doesn't know how to distribute the wealth on his team?