hambone1818

18 guys on the field? I don't know...I really don't think they can be 'stopped'. Certainly a team might be able to slow this offense down, but outright stopping them just ain't gonna happen.

If it were me, I'd go conservative and try to just slow the offense down rather than stop it. Play a prevent-type defense the entire game, let them beat you with Maroney, and Welker and Watson across the middle. At least that way you're keeping some points off the board by just not allowing the offense as many possessions. Then maybe, just maybe, you get a pick or fumble recovery.

This strategy, of course, assumes that the team employing it also has a very good offense. It'd have to be a tit-for-tat game, and you'd be hoping for that one big break (turnover, return TD) that puts you over the top.

The problem I have with Madden's idea is that Brady is even more deadly under pressure. The numbers this season show that when defenses blitz he absolutely demolishes them, because he has such great vision and pocket presence that he unloads before you have a chance and then your secondary is left shortmanned against some very, very good receivers.

mosi

I would let the Pats run the ball. Rush 3 and have 8 defensive backs on the field.

Make the Pats run to ball to beat you.

On offense, spread the field and make the Pats run after you. Go no huddle and make the Pats front 7 run all over the field.

Pass_The_Rum

First off, I'd prefer Jacksonville or Pittsburgh as my Pats-fighting team. Someone physical and tough.

Preach 60 minutes to your team and defer the kick if you win. Let the Patriots have it first.

Defensively, I'd go with a 3-3-5 nickel package as my base defense. Blitz one to bring a 4 man rush. 5 in zone coverage and 2 going man-to-man to double up on Moss and either Welker or Stallworth depending on down-and-distance.

On offense I eat the clock right from the start, if possible. Be very, very dull, go for it on 4th and shorts from the start, but otherwise be fairly vanilla offensively in the first half. Try a trick play to open the second half, then get more aggressive. The idea here is to play the game 'backwards' - kill the clock in the first half to make it as short as possible and then run your 'real' offense after halftime in order to minimize Belicheck's ability to make adjustments.

I don't think it stands much chance, either, but I think it might do some good.

bakes781

I believe it was Ditka who suggested having the more physical safeties press the receivers & leave the cover corners back to play deep in coverage. This makes sense to me. But then I suppose you're leaving yourself vulnerable to long gains in the running game. Dare the Pats to run the ball I guess.

__________________

AndyJohnson

I would disguise everything. I'd take advantage of Bradys intelligence by showing a coverage that he will read properly but not play that coverage after the snap.
I would have a 'spy'. Not the spy to stop QB scrambles, but a designated DB on every play who begins coverage on oen receiver but breaks off, and undercuts another one. I'd be willing to give up the big play to get the big play.
I would rush from different places, with each of my 11 guys at different times.
I would overload my front 7 with 4-5 guys on one side of the ball all blitzing so there was no way to pick it up.
I'd hope for some good bounces.

danny88

Lame huh? Ok Einstein. Tell me what the pats do if faulk is hurt , maroney is banged up and its snowing like a bastard vs the colts?

If you dont think we have a slight concern with the run game you are to much of a homer to see why anyway. The pats running game is one injury away from being ultra thin. Maroney has proven to be inconsistant and injury prone this year. If faulk goes down there are issues.

richpats

You'd need a team that excels "in all 3 phases" has Belichick would say. The offense and defense would have to keep us off-balance, able to make big plays (deep ball, force turnovers) and their special teams would have to be AMAZING on returns (because we're good on coverage) and suffocating in coverage on our returns.

A healthy Colts squad would matchup the best, but their special teams coverage stinks and it shows. Things being as they are injury-wise, the Colts aren't much of a threat....especially in Foxboro

Jacksonville? Pittsburgh? Please. These teams haven't changed much over the years and we've beaten them with far less talented teams.

Dallas is as close as you can get to a challenge and will likely be our opponent in the Super Bowl.

The major advantage NE has over these teams is the "60-minute" mentality. The Colts challenged us for 51, Dallas for about 37. If a team can take NE for a full 60, then they've got a shot.

JR4

If a team has a good secondary with depth then
maybe 6 dbs on field all the time. Try to force the PATs
to run it. Dbs will have be quick enough to give run support
as needed. Didn't Colts do this to some extent?
Got to have good pass rushers as well.

If I could design a team to counter PATs it would be characterized by:
1. Execellent Secondary with depth.
2. Outstanding pass rushers.
3. Great Blitzing team.
4. A solid Dline that can't be muscled easily.
5. Great run game to keep drives going
6. Good enough pass game to keep PATs from stuffing the box.
7. A great Defensive Coordinator

Actually the Colts if healthy would be a close fit.
Add a little quality depth to their secondary and improve
the interior of their Dline and they would be close if Manning
gets his receivers back.

Without the right players and coaching I dont think a team can stop the PATs.
The best Scheme in the world can't do it without the right players.

Even Belichick couldn't stop the PATs without the right players.
If there is a Defense that could consistently stop the PATs it would one of
the best defenses ever.

bakes781

Yeah the Colts play very deep, but with their speed they can afford to.

__________________

PatsWickedPissah

Why not do what Brady said the Colts did that caused the Patriots offense lots of problems?

The Colts had a good pash rush. They committed to the rush. The other aspect of their D that caused Brady problems was that they played his wideouts close coming off the LOS, probably using OLBs as well. That strategy made the quick pass option less viable. As long as the pass rush was intense and the short passing attack somewhat covered, the plan works well. Once the passruch drops off, Brady has easy (for him) downfield targets.

One crit I have of Josh McD is that specificly in the Dallas game he did not start off using the big fat Brady as extra protection for the tall skinny Brady. At Dallas Tom Brady got hammered untill they beefed up the pass protection. I think but I'm not sure that he also didn't use Kyle Brady much at first in the Colts game as well. One less wideout should not be a problem given the wideouts we do have and Tom Brady at QB. (This comment does not mean never run the 17 wide formation that Brady executes so well.)

__________________
Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck." RAH