Shockt327

Disclaimer: This isn’t an argument against Seymour. I know there are gaps in the data, I welcome anyone to help fill in those gaps. I know this data isn’t fully accurate. Feel free to help out with any relevant data/stats/info.

With that being said, I’m attempting to find out what the team will be like without Seymour. I’ve found 3 major injuries in Seymour’s career. The first being in late 2004 where he sprained his MCL in a game against the Jets. The second being early in the 2005 season where he again sprained his MCL against the Chargers. Finally there was the first 7 games of the 2007 season where Seymour was on the PUP.

Where things get really murky is 2006. In that season I know Seymour suffered a major injury to his elbow in a game against BUF, but never actually missed a game; though Jarvis Green did get lots of playing time for him and Warren (who was also hurt). They did struggle during this time.

2004:
17 01/02 SF W 21-7
19 01/16 IND W 20-3
20 01/23 @ PIT W 41-27

2005:
5 10/09 @ ATL W 31-28
6 10/16 @ DEN L 20-28
7 Bye
8 10/30 BUF W 21-16
9 11/07 IND L 21-40

2007:
1 09/09 @ NYJ W 38-14
2 09/16 SD W 38-14
3 09/23 BUF W 38-7
4 10/01 @ CIN W 34-13
5 10/07 CLE W 34-17
6 10/14 @ DAL W 48-27
7 10/21 @ MIA W 49-28

Shockt327

It should also be noted that Jarvis Green – who in all likelyhood will replace Seymour especially in a 4-3 - had 7.5 sacks in ‘06, and 6.5 sacks in ‘07

Here are Green's numbers while filling in for Seymour during the games listed above:

44 tackles, 28 solo, 4.5 sacks in 14 games

PATSYLICIOUS

We've done well without him, most notably the 2004 AFC playoffs (shutting down one of the best offenses I have ever seen) and first half of 2007. But those defenses were different than the one we have this year.

All in all, I don't think BB would have let him go without confidence that the guys behind him can step up. Nice job on the research.

BradyFTW!

What was the PPG with Seymour? I believe that I read it was in the 13's somewhere, although comparing that directly with Jarvis' number wouldn't tell us much anyways.

It's an interesting breakdown, but the record statistic is somewhat misleading, since 7 of those games occurred at the beginning of 2007, when a historically good offense was absolutely dominating warm-weather games. The 7-0 record said very little about the defense.

Honestly, I don't think anyone's going to realistically replace Seymour. If we are transitioning over to a 4-3, then there won't be anyone directly comparable to him in the base defense. Which is good, because anyone who's asked to do all of the things that Seymour did will come up short- including Jarvis, who is far worse against the run than Seymour is. Jarvis is a good, versatile player, though, and I think he'll transition well to a 4-3 base, so I'm excited to see what's in store for him.

Given the 3-4 to 4-3 transition (at this point I'm assuming it's happening, but who knows? It might not...), I think it'll be interesting to see how Warren is used, which will give us at least some insight into how Seymour likely would have been used, had we kept him.

Shockt327

Which actually works in Jarvis Green's favor. Trying to fill in for Seymour in a 2 gap, 3-4 scheme was a tall order; though he did succeed.

But Green is well suited to play a 4-3, where he will not be asked to two-gap.

BradyFTW!

I'd argue that he didn't totally succeed, although that depends on the definition of success. He held his own, but the defense definitely took a step down with him in there (which is pretty much what you would expect from any good backup). Still, the point that you made before still stands: it works in everyone's favor if nobody is asked to directly replace Seymour, nobody would be able to (well, maybe Warren, but he's got his own job to do :P)

Shockt327

I agree, I'm not exactly sure how Warren fits into the 4-3. He's not a 4-3 DE. Yet, he's also not a 3-technique DT. Maybe both he a Wilfork will 2 gap. This is what the 2000 Ravens did with Siragusa and Sam Adams.

BelichickFan

We're never given up that few points but it would be a bad comparison because our best defenses were in 2003/2004 when not only Seymour was playing more but the Bruschis, Laws, McGinnests and Harrisons were in their prime. The PPG with him out is pretty good when you look at the years he was out and how mediocre the defenses were even with him.

BradyFTW!

Apparently you missed the second half of that sentence, where I said "although comparing that directly with Jarvis' number wouldn't tell us much anyways."

Seymour played a lot of 3-technique last year on passing downs, and that's where he got many of his sacks. If I had to guess how Warren will line up in the 4-3, in fact, that would probably be it.

BelichickFan

The first half was wrong so the second half, which I did read, wasn't useful.