DarrylS

Thought last week was interesting as it seemed as though the Pats were using a lot of different formations on the field.. Mike Reiss has a very interesting breakdown on # of snaps played.. it was effective.. why?
1. Road trip keeping guys fresh??
2. Keeping SF off balance, young qb??
3. Keeping future opponents off base, a lot of players and different combos were used??
4. In this meritocracy some players deserved more snaps??


Cannot caption all of this article, but here are a few from the middle.. looks as though the D line was getting plenty of rest or whatever.. no matter why it was effective..

Patriots blog - Reiss' Pieces - Boston.com

__________________
"Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.

Pats726

I agree...it was interesting..,and the D for the better part of the game was pretty effective. At the start they were not at all...,but after the first quarter they were pretty tough...a lot of stops on 3rd down. Not sure how that will pan out in this game..it worked there..pretty nicely.

JSn

This is the part I found most intriguing. Looks like the rookie crop is panning out nicely.

So much for old and slow at LB. I wonder if this weekend rolls out yet another new defensive package.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

PatsWickedPissah

Very interesting...

CB Deltha O'Neal -- 50 of 50

OLB Adalius Thomas -- 50 of 50

S Rodney Harrison -- 50 of 50

S James Sanders -- 49 of 50

CB Ellis Hobbs -- 48 of 50

OLB Mike Vrabel -- 43 of 50

DT/NT Mike Wright -- 16 of 50

CB Jonathan Wilhite -- 15 of 50

OLB Pierre Woods -- 12 of 50

CB Terrence Wheatley -- 10 of 50

The rook CBs # of plays, given that Hobbs and O'Neal played almost every down, indicates that we were in 5 DB coverage most of the game. The DL was subbed out heavily for a mostly LB DL with AD and Vrabes in on most plays. Obviously, this alignment was driven by what BB & Co. perceived as exploitable matchups vs SF. What's nice about this is that opposing coaches have to spend valuable time during the week preparing their squads for various unorthodox attacks by BB's D.

Fencer

A lot of it may be Mike Martz.

Against certain offenses, BB puts closer to the fastest 11 players on the field than the best 11. That's what he did, I think, in the famed Super Bowl vs. the Bills. It's very much what he did against Martz in the Super Bowl. And it's what he used to do against Peyton Manning, most dramatically by putting Vrabel at NT.

Fencer

Looking in more detail, the whole thing is consistent with the theory that some of the younger or lesser players are more up-to-speed on certain packages or uses than they are on the rest of the game.

There's a Wilhite vs. Wheatley quote in Reiss's blog directly to that effect, for instance.

ctpatsfan77

In fact, the average is about 5.3 DBs per play; without looking at the tape, the breakdown had to work out to something like 20% 3-4, 40% nickel, 40% dime. (At a minimum, it'd have to be at least 25% dime.)

__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Urgent

This has nothing to do with meritocracy, or keeping players fresh, or confusing future opponents.

Bill Belichick is a game-plan coach.

Some coaches emphasize a specific approach, and focus on it constantly to become very good with that approach. Think of the Tampa-Two defense, the Pittsburgh running attack, Air Coryell, etc. Recall last year against the Minnesota defense, they kept their base defense in against the Pats four-wide formation because, damnit, that's what they play.

Belichick is the opposite. The approach in one game will be very different from the next.

A great example comes from the 2004 post-season run. Against the Colts, the Pats played a conservative ball-control offense and dime defense. Late in the game, the Colts clued in and began rushing the ball effectively, but by then it was too late and the Pats were happy to surrender yardage for time. Against Pittsburgh, they played an entirely different game, going over the top of the tough Pittsburgh defense and choking the Pittsburgh short game. The Pats team that played the Colts looked 180 degrees different, on both offense and defense, from the Pats team that played the Steelers.

Now recall the 2001 Super Bowl defense, against the Greatest Show on Turf. The Pats again flooded the deep zones, and hit Marshall Faulk coming out of the backfield before he had the ball. They dared Martz to run the ball, and he never did, stubbornly going to the air as soon as the Pats had the lead following the Ty Law interception. The Pats kept that pass-oriented defense on the field, and squeaked out the win against a more talented team.

Also recall, several years ago, that Ted Johnson was inactive for the opening game. He was furious. However, the following game that year he played every snap. One game plan was coverage, and the next was run-stuffing. There are lots more examples under Belichick.

Against San Francisco, Belichick called for a defensive game plan somewhat similar to the 2001 Super Bowl, or the Eagles Super Bowl. Playing Guyton, for example, more than Seymour has nothing to do with resting Seymour or giving Guyton the snaps that he deserves. The Patriots apparently believe that Guyton is a very good coverage linebacker, akin to Roman Phifer. They trained him for this dropping coverage role during the Bye week, and played him in the dime defense. For that coverage role, he was better than Seymour.

They may play a totally different defense against San Diego.

__________________
"Your father was a truck driver, Ray?"
- Trombley

BradyManny

Mayo and Bruschi's snaps are pretty noteworthy - and Guyton's by extension.

On this note - one thing I noticed during the course of the game is Bruschi & Mayo pumping each other up an extraordinary amount - both on the field and on the sideline. I might be making too much of it - but I have a feeling these two guys didn't look so good when the Miami tape was played back and were probably called out on it, thus banded together in the ensuing game.

Mayo has really only struggled in coverage in one game, and that was the Miami game. The first two games, other than a couple plays in the Jets game, he did good enough to not get noticed. And in fact, he was good covering RBs out of the backfield in both games.

Bruschi has not been on the field for any package other than the Base D, so I guess his lack of snaps isn't a surprise.

ctpatsfan77

Excellent analysis.

At some point last season The Onion made a joke about the Pats lining up with two DBs wide on the LOS and having nine NTs roaming the secondary. While I don't think things will ever get quite that extreme, if BB felt that having, say, a 3-7-Moss as deep safety scheme made sense, he'd do it.

__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.