livinginthe past

Its been mentioned in a number of other threads that Belichick is a big fan of football discipline - players who are able to play within pretty strict guidelines and who tend not to freelance.

This seemed the best way to go in the early part of this decade when the offense was steady rather than spectaular and we had many natural playmakers on the defensive side of the ball.

Ty Law, Tedi Bruschi, Mike Vrabel, Tyrone Poole, Rodney Harrison, Richard Seymour...the list goes on.

The last few years have seen a definite dilution of the raw talent on the defensive side of the ball and a massive influx of scoring ability on the offensive side of the ball.

Is it time the Belichick 'releases the hounds' a little more in 2009 with the potential of the offense set to rival the awesome production of the 2007 unit.

Sure, we might well give up a few more quick scores, but we'll surely get quite a few quick stops too.

But isn't this much, much better than the alterantive whereby very average offensive units were compiling multiple 6-7 minute drives and tiring out the defensive unit?

I can see the point of the conservative playcalling on defense when you have a defense that bends but doesn't break - unfortunately in recent times the unit has failed to deliver on the last half of that equation.

I expect the 2009 defensive unit to show marked improvement over the 2007 and 2008 incarnations (our DB platoon looks as strong as ever) but do you think it would be better if we took a few more risks - went a little more boom and bust?

Is Belichick over thinking things on the defensive playcalling side, is he too stubborn to change his outlook?

Thoughts?

Box_O_Rocks

No change in philosophy if the defensive players drafted are any indication.

__________________
"Avert thine eyes! You're not hot enough to be looking at me."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

PatsChowder

I don't think there has been much of a philosophy change on the defense. I just think they seem to be attacking free agency differently. It seems like they're the kid desperate to find a pass rusher in Madden.

__________________
Follow me on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
, and don't forget to check out
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Are you a Sox fan as well? Swing by
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for a new look at your team.

Sicilian

I Belichick is willing to give players a little leeway if they're intelligent enough. He does so with the offense and Brady, and I imagine Bruschi, Vrabel, and Harrison had the freedom to change something up if they saw something during their heydays.

Aside from that, I don't think any defense is truly successful by "releasing the hounds". All good defenses start with discipline, and only allow freelancing with certain aspects. For example, a blitzing OLB has the freedom to choose how he tries to get to the QB, but doesn't get to say, "What the hell, I'm gonna blitz on this play."

RayClay

There is no strategy whereby a defense that is making less plays and getting tired gets better by taking risks. You get better by improving the pass rush and coverage. This is accomplished by getting to the quarterback and by covering. Also by tackling.

The Colts take risks, that's why they pay Freeney. Having guys rush and blitz without getting to the QB and take gambles in coverage leads to easy TDs.

We have potential playmakers in Meriweather, some young corners and Crable, hopefully.

__________________

jmt57

I think perhaps we as fans over-estimate how 'bad' the Patriots defense was last year. While there surely was a need to improve at CB and the team's 3rd down stats (25th in 3rd down conversions allowed) were poor, I have to disagree with the notion that opponents were compiling one long drive after another against the Pats. If that was the case then how did the Pats defense end up finishing third in time of possession at 28:04 last year? And if other teams were constantly putting together long drives while the Pats also ranked very low in red zone defense, then how did the Pats finish 8th in points allowed?

That's not to say that I don't think the defensive game plan and philosophy should not or won't change. I think part of what we saw last year was designed to cover up deficiencies in the secondary, such as Deltha O'Neal. With Mayo, Meriweather and Guyton having a full year of playing time I would expect their duties to be expanded as BB will have more confidence in their abilities to handle different situations successfully.

'Releasing the hounds' - i.e., more blitzing - will certainly help improve the number of turnovers forced by the defense. Last year the Pats were one of just four teams that failed to score a defensive touchdown, and only seven defenses recovered fewer turnovers.

I think the additions in the secondary, the additional experience gained by the players mentioned above, and the return of a healthy Adalius Thomas will give the coaching staff the confidence to open up the defensive playbook.

I would disagree with the last comment by the OP. Belichick is anything but stubborn, despite his portrayal by some in the media. No NFL coach thinks more outside the box and is open to innovation than he is.

__________________

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

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

AndyJohnson

BB isnt going to change his philosophy. Your premise is incorrect to begin with, as if I read your post without knowing what team it was about, I would assume it was a team that had a losing record and ranked in the bottom 5 defensively.

AndyJohnson

We went 18-1, then lost the greatest QB of all time, replaced him with a guy who hadnt started a game since college, and went 11-5. (I think that was 2 games below the best record in the NFL?) That doesnt sound like a situation that requires a change in philosophy.

TheBaronPatriot

My take on this based around the secondary and pass rush.

Due our lack of pass rush, our CBs have been mostly playing off the WR and looking to prevent the big gain thus allowing the Offense to dink and dunk for long drives.

With a different defensive philosophy our CBs would play at the line of scrimmage and look to stop the dink and dunk yet be more susceptible to the long ball.

However, an improved pass rush usually negates this long ball threat since the WR need more time to get open given that the CB is sticking to them tightly.

mgteich

Sure, let's compare the phisospohy used when we had Law and Poole to that when we had O'Neal and Hobbs. Come one, be serious! Last year our corners were aweful. The solution has been recognized by Belichick, last year and this. GET BETTER TALENT AT CORNER BACK. Our pass rush and our 3rd down stats will be better when our talent gets better. Perhaps we will need to wait until Wheatly, Butler and Wilhite have a bit more experience. However, I don't think that we'll need to wait for improvement. Hobbs was traded because Belichick has faith in Bodden and Springs.