Pat's D

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from fourjays30. Show fourjays30's posts

    Pat's D

    Good read here. All though much work still needs to be done to get better it is still interesting to put reasons behind the numbers.

    http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/7066801/new-england-patriots-defense-not-bad-numbers-indicate
     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Pat's D

    The article points out what we already know because we have watched the games. The D is bad but has made some big plays in the red zone to lessen the impact of the long drives they give up. The concern for the Pats fan is that allowing those long drives will be devastating if the big plays dry up, as they did in the jets playoff loss last year.
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from hambonawilliams. Show hambonawilliams's posts

    Re: Pat's D

    This game against the Jets has set the Pats up to use ALL of their offense....they have shown that if you bring 7 or 8 in the box, they can get behind you in the secondary from both the TE and WR position when using play action.....their short passing game is one of the best in the league.....you have to be able to play a complete defensive game to stay with them, and few teams can...most every team, no matter how good, has a weakness on D that can be exploited and the Pats Offense ,now that they can run as well as pass, has the weapons to get it done against anyone...

    The D of the Pats has shown the past two weeks (Raiders and Jets) they can stop the run......Haynesworth is a key part to this because the Jets had a hard time running when he was in the game....The D Line rotation is really starting to have serious impact...the loss of Pryor will be offset by the two guys (Brace and Deadrick) getting off PUP next week, even if one of them goes on IR, or Wright goes. The D Backfield is getting better each week as their familiarity with each other and the new 4-3 grows......they'll be humming by the 12th week of the season, just in time for the playoffs.....will they be world beaters on D?...no, but they will NOT lose games for the team.....

    With the existing offense, and an improving D that has new parts improving (Haynesworth and the young DB's and LB's) and being increased (Brace and Deadrick) we should be an improving work in progress all year long, and will peak at the right time...

    Master Hoodie IS a genius.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Pat's D

    In Response to Re: Pat's D:
    [QUOTE]Or if we simply run the ball, which we didnt' do last year agains the Jets in January, when our offense or STs gave the Jets SHORT FIELDS, maybe it is totally overblown. Yup. Note how in these last two games where we ran it with BJGE and Ridley, our D essentially allows 14 points of their own doing. A last minute drive in prevent against Oakland or a TD from NY at our own 20 aren't really examples of our D giving up TDs. I also don't care about Henne throwing for a bunch of yards in a prevent while we are just helping them wind the clock down, keeping their receivers in bounds with a big lead. Totally irrelevant in the analysis. If we can't score more than 20 points per game with this offense, as absolutely loaded as it is, we have a system problem with O'Brien and Brady. End of story. Scoring is way up in the Polian/Goodell league, so this mean our loaded offense shouldn't be piddling out 17-14 type games anymore. Our team scored 3 points in the first half in the loss against the Jets.  There was a maximum 21 point swing between two offensive mishaps and Chung giving NY prime field position before half time. All 3 plays led to gifts to the Jets. Not our defense. Glad I could help explain reality, Babe.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]


    It's always interesting to try to decide which of the plethora of wrong points you make in each post to address first. I'll just take them in order.

    Or if we simply run the ball, which we didnt' do last year agains the Jets in January, when our offense or STs gave the Jets SHORT FIELDS, maybe it is totally overblown.

    Yup.

    We ran the ball 28 times against the jets wonderboy. We averaged 4 yards a carry - nothing to crow about. Meanwhile our D got zero turnovers which was the only thing they did really well that season. The O-line gave up 5 sacks. You're not making a very good case that running more was the magical elixir that would have overcome the D allowing 14 points in the 4th quarter here.


    Note how in these last two games where we ran it with BJGE and Ridley, our D essentially allows 14 points of their own doing.

    You just can't subtract points the D gives up because of the situation. If you do that you have to subtract the same kind of points from all the other Ds they are compared to. We all know the Raiders shot themselves in the foot a few times and the jets O has been struggling badly.


    A last minute drive in prevent against Oakland or a TD from NY at our own 20 aren't really examples of our D giving up TDs. I also don't care about Henne throwing for a bunch of yards in a prevent while we are just helping them wind the clock down, keeping their receivers in bounds with a big lead.

    Totally irrelevant in the analysis.

    See above. Since you want to subtract points for the D because of the situation, to be fair we should add points to the O if they are giving up scoring points to run out clock too, right?

    If we can't score more than 20 points per game with this offense, as absolutely loaded as it is, we have a system problem with O'Brien and Brady.

    We have scored at least 30 points in 5 of 5 tries wonderboy. That should be enough offense even for you.


    End of story. Scoring is way up in the Polian/Goodell league, so this mean our loaded offense shouldn't be piddling out 17-14 type games anymore.

    Scoring isn't "way up". The rate of scoring projects to be roughly in line with scoring for much of the last decade. When it gets cold and snowy scoring will likely slow down as well.

    Our team scored 3 points in the first half in the loss against the Jets.  There was a maximum 21 point swing between two offensive mishaps and Chung giving NY prime field position before half time.

    All 3 plays led to gifts to the Jets. Not our defense.

    Glad I could help explain reality, Babe.

    A Good D can stop the other guy when the field position sucks wonderboy. If you have to give them the whole field everytime they go out to expect good results you have a problem.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Pat's D

    Belichick's best defenses have been top 10 in PPG and YPG, including the Pats and Giants superbowl teams.  For as long as I can remember, the goal of a BB-coached team has been to give up few points on defense and to control and take care of the ball on offense. Oh yeah, and to hopefully win the +/- battle while you're at it, which is a function of an opportunistic defense and an offense where the QB and skill positions don't turn it over.

    This team clearly has the offense part figured out.  And they're middle of the pack in points allowed and rushing yards, which is promising despite the total yards they give up.  But like Pats teams of the previous few years it seems that they are relying on points differential and getting timely stops/causing turnovers to win games.  All well and good when you can play with a lead. 

    I like how this team is running the ball.  They have been moving away from the spread and have been pounding the ball more.  I think the more they do this, the more they win the time of possession battle.  They can force teams to play to their defensive strength (strength being a loose term), which is to make them work a lot of the time off the clock to get a score.  Maybe it's not pretty statistically, but as long as the Pats' offense can do its part they will win a good share of the games they play in. 

    I'm hoping a slightly revamped offense and a defense that can make teams work for points and create turnovers makes them a similar team to the '09 Saints.   
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Pat's D

    In Response to Re: Pat's D:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pat's D : I didn't even read your bumbled junk. Fact is, at the start of the 4th qtr, off a Bye week, at home, our offense scored 11 points. 11 points. That's unacceptable. We had a drive to nowhere that didn't even generate a FG.  Again, unacceptable. You lost this debate JUST like Tony Mazz, Felger and Gasper did. We lost that playoff game due to a long time failed offensive approach, which has proven TWICE the last 2 weeks. The Raiders and Jets have good defenses, generally speaking.  Some flaws, yes, but pretty good Ds. Each team treated those games like SBs. Oakland, for a measuring stick game at home and the Jets because they had to have it to avoid losing 3 in a row and proving last January's playoff wasn't a gift. FAIL
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    If your D lives or dies by generating turnovers and you get none, you die, unless the O bails them out with a huge scoring day. The O didn't bail them out that time.

    Allowing 14 points in the 4th quarter will kill most team's playoff hopes.
     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from fishers5. Show fishers5's posts

    Re: Pat's D

    Interesting topic.....but i know we all understand that the league has made the Defensive back position the hardest to play.....no touching (except Revis) no aggressive hits because only they know who was defensless,,and only the receiver can use hands at all.... IN addition.....The Line and linebackers cant even stand in front of a receiver or they will get called for pass interference or holding....

    I scream like everybody else....but its just the way it is.....Just hope pass rush improves.....( fantasy world) would like Detroits from 4) just imagine...
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Pat's D

    In Response to Re: Pat's D:
    [QUOTE]Interesting you mention Det's front 4, when their Run D is awful.  Great pass rush, obviously, but good offenses will blast that. GB's will hit them hard. Ours would.  NOs would. We have a good Run D and a steady overall D.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    Detoit's run defense is awful? I haven't looked up the statistics (but you think stats are for fools anyways, unless they favor your argument), but they stuffed Chicago on a 3rd and 1 and then on a 4th and 1. Chicago just never even had a chance. Any defense with Suh in there is not a defense that is going to be terrible at anything, the guy will disrupt things.

    Watching the game Sunday I thought we left a lot to be desired in our run defense. I will blame that on Mayo being out and Haynesworth just getting back, but I thought they got pushed back pretty regularly and gave up a decent running average to them. At the beggining of the season when Haynesworth was in there regualry I thought we were much stouter against the run. The problem with this is there is rumblings (radio today) that this guy just doesn't want to play anymore and if that is the case then our run defense will suffer in the long run, unless a Deadric, Brace or Warren step up. 
     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Pat's D

    In Response to Re: Pat's D:
    [QUOTE]Great in short yardage, as are we. But, overall, yes, they aren't very good.  Suh is a beast, yes.  Why are they allowing huge runs to Chicago? Focus on FOrte and you win the game. That game was way, way to close because they got gashed for 90 yards in the first half. So, yes, it's not very good. GB will smack them.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    Ok, that's good to know. They seem to be Crowned right now by the entire world as this great team and I've got to admit I've been impressed by what I've seen. Their quarterback has a history of breaking down physically, so I imagine they'll come down to earth when they face the GB's and New Orlean's of the world.
     

Share