Official eat your words on defense thread

[shirtsleeve]

Originally Posted by AndyJohnson

While at some level it may be excuse making for allowing plays vs shutting down teams, I think context is important.
While the defense has been generous in allowing points that reduced a lead, it has been very rare this season for the defense to allow go ahead scores. We never trailed against Pitt and Indy, and have rarely allowed go ahead 2nd half of 4th quarter scores.
I think its wrong to ignore situational football. I am sue that BB will never say play back and let them score. But when a lead is built and the clock suggests that there isnt enough time for methodical drives to get them back in the game, I am quite certain that BB will play a defense that invites methodical drives and that is not as well equipped at stopping them (obviously thats how you invite them).
Look at tonight. From the 10 minute mark when we went up 17 every single thing went exactly right for the Colts. They did as well as they could taking what we gave. Wehad no sacks, they were aided by a big 15 yard penalty and a surprising 38 yard run on a draw, more yards than they ran for all day. We were 3 and out and 4 and out on offense.
I cannot imagine a set of circumstances where they could have used less time against such a conservative style of D. Yet there we only 25 seconds left. One glitch and it would have been impossible.
I think we have to recognize that if we went up by 3 with 10 minutes left instead of 17, everything that followed would have happened differently. I think it is wrong to assume the Colts would have had the same success if we were up 3,7, 10 or 14 as if we were up 17, because we certainly would have played different defensive schemes.

Three thoughts. First, nice explanation of how the prevent works. Against most teams, mistakes will wither the attempted comeback, and although the score will get closer, the Pats would prevail.

B.) This Defensive unit did everything asked of them tonight with sparingly few mistakes, especially mentally. There were mistakes, but few, considering their age and experience.

3. This defense should never be called against Manning and the Colts. Never. That guy and that offense is too experienced and too good. They will pick it apart AND still save the clock. They did it last year and almost repeated it this year. Against the Steelers? sure. Just about any other team will drive themselves into a closer loss.

NOT THE COLTS AS LONG AS MANNING IS THEIR QB! YOU JUST CANT!

[AndyJohnson]

Originally Posted by Joker

Uh...I was THERE...I could have sworn Manning was in FG range and Vinitieri was ready to come in for the tie. Are you seriously suggesting that Manning throwing that INT was caused by the Pats prevent??? What did the prevent stop at 10 minutes? a two minute drive for a TD????and then two minutes later? another TD drive? THIS is good football strategy? I KNOW what the 2 deep safety shell SHOULD do when the team is up by 17 points...what I DO NOT agree with is that THIS defense as played by THIS current iteration of the Pats knows how to play it so that the clock is bled and the other team loses by attrition. I mean, you're telling me my eyes are lying to me and everyone else that was THERE watching this unfold and that the previous defensive calls that led to control of the game would have suddenly become ineffective with 10 minutes left???? as ineffective as what we witnessed???? I can't buy that....the Pats need a ton of work on this scheme as far as I'm concerned.

What does being there have to do with it? I saw the same game.
The point is that being conservative was the correct call. Everything went as bad as it possibly could on both sides of the ball from that point on, and they won the game.
An aggressive scheme could not have produced a better result. Same maybe, but not better, and certainly not under the qualifier that everything went wrong.
Could they execute the scheme better? Sure, but to call for a more aggressive approach under these circumstances is short sighted IMO.

[AndyJohnson]

Originally Posted by shirtsleeve

Three thoughts. First, nice explanation of how the prevent works. Against most teams, mistakes will wither the attempted comeback, and although the score will get closer, the Pats would prevail.

B.) This Defensive unit did everything asked of them tonight with sparingly few mistakes, especially mentally. There were mistakes, but few, considering their age and experience.

3. This defense should never be called against Manning and the Colts. Never. That guy and that offense is too experienced and too good. They will pick it apart AND still save the clock. They did it last year and almost repeated it this year. Against the Steelers? sure. Just about any other team will drive themselves into a closer loss.

NOT THE COLTS AS LONG AS MANNING IS THEIR QB! YOU JUST CANT!

It worked.
Bein more aggressive may not have.
Again if you sat down at the 10 minute mark and asked if we play prevent, what is the worst case? If they torch the prevent, and we do absolutely nothing on offense, what is the worst case.
The worst case if they could get into FG range to tie with 25 seconds left.
ANY coach would take that every day of the week, because the worst thing that could have happened with an aggressive approach was a lot worse than that.

[Joker]

Originally Posted by AndyJohnson

What does being there have to do with it? I saw the same game.
The point is that being conservative was the correct call. Everything went as bad as it possibly could on both sides of the ball from that point on, and they won the game.
An aggressive scheme could not have produced a better result. Same maybe, but not better, and certainly not under the qualifier that everything went wrong.
Could they execute the scheme better? Sure, but to call for a more aggressive approach under these circumstances is short sighted IMO.

you misunderstand me and I don't want to argue anyway...I respect your acumen...but what I would rather watch is the Patriots STAY in their standard defensive set, not a "more aggressive one", the one they were playing for 50 minutes of the game. What I SAW being there was the entire field and I'm watching the replay here at home now and you just don't see the bad angles taken by the two deep safeties that you see easily at the game. That defense is supposed to allow the pass in the middle, the safety comes up , makes the tackle and forces the offense to run another and another and another offering up opportunities for stops and bleeding the clock. There is no way Manning throws a five yard pass over his center and the WR turns that into a freaking 35 yard gain!!! Yet both safeties blew assignment after assignment and missed multiple tackles because of bad angles and flat out missed tackles.What's worse is as soon as Manning gets within the red zone, the corner and safety play looks like a damned jail break....I mean just how does the Colt WR beat Arrington AND Meriweather for that TD in the EZ?

My point is simple...if it ain't broke don't fix it and today it wasn't broke until 10 minutes left in the game

[KontradictioN]

Originally Posted by Joker

My point is simple...if it ain't broke don't fix it and today it wasn't broke until 10 minutes left in the game

I agree with your points about the prevent. I think it's a horrible coverage to call against a quarterback the caliber of Peyton Manning. However, this point is kind of off. Manning, midway through the second quarter, was finding the holes and soft spots in our zone coverage with alarming regularity. So, while the base defense wasn't "broken", it certainly wasn't solid either. I kept expecting the team to switch into man coverage, myself. But that didn't happen.

[mgteich]

Our defense "worked" because we won. Had the colts kicked a field goal with 9 seconds or less left on the clock, no one can know the final result. As it is, we have a defense that gave up 28 points and would have given up at least 31 had the other team chosen to take the 3.

You can give props to how great the defense played if you wish. You can choose to believe that we have a solid pass defense. You can ignore stats thinking that it is irrelevant that as of yesterday, some of the defensive stats were the worst in a decade. You can choose to believe that it is OK for the opposing quarterbacks to complete 70% of their passes against us. How many times did the colts punt?

In the end, the defense is a great offense if we win. Nothing else matters. However, if that is a reasonable position, then it is truly reasonable to come here after a loss and say we suck and after a win and say that we are great. Other analysis doesn't matter.

BOTTOM LINE
Congratulations to the defense for not giving up on the last play. Congrats on ONLY giving up 14 (and 3 more if the colts wanted them) at the end of the game. Congrats on a first half when the opposing team was almost unstoppable. )

We criticize the offense for no scoring more in the second half. Brady indicated this himself. And this is a reasponable position. As Brady said, the offense needed to give the defense more help in the 4th quarter. [after all a 17 point lead and 31 total points is not nearly enough to seal the deal with our defense; even with 24, the last play wins or loses the game with the colts reasonably close at the end].

Originally Posted by AndyJohnson

I dont know how you can fault the strategy when as you said everything went wrong and it still worked.
Had we been more aggressive if they scored they would have scored quickly.
Again if there are 2 minutes left, and I play a style that would cause you to take 2:05 to score, and you run out of time on my 1, I a a genius, and they guy who plays a style that has a 90% chance of stoning you and a 10% chance of giving you a score, he looks prettier in 9 games but loses one while the first guys looks ugly and wins 10.

Prevent defense is designed to win, not designed to not allow it to get close.

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Originally Posted by mgteich

Our defense "worked" because we won. Had the colts kicked a field goal with 9 seconds or less left on the clock, no one can know the final result. As it is, we have a defense that gave up 28 points and would have given up at least 31 had the other team chosen to take the 3.

You can give props to how great the defense played if you wish. You can choose to believe that we have a solid pass defense. You can ignore stats thinking that it is irrelevant that as of yesterday, some of the defensive stats were the worst in a decade. You can choose to believe that it is OK for the opposing quarterbacks to complete 70% of their passes against us. How many times did the colts punt?

In the end, the defense is a great offense if we win. Nothing else matters. However, if that is a reasonable position, then it is truly reasonable to come here after a loss and say we suck and after a win and say that we are great. Other analysis doesn't matter.

BOTTOM LINE
Congratulations to the defense for not giving up on the last play. Congrats on ONLY giving up 14 (and 3 more if the colts wanted them) at the end of the game. Congrats on a first half when the opposing team was almost unstoppable. )

We criticize the offense for no scoring more in the second half. Brady indicated this himself. And this is a reasponable position. As Brady said, the offense needed to give the defense more help in the 4th quarter. [after all a 17 point lead and 31 total points is not nearly enough to seal the deal with our defense; even with 24, the last play wins or loses the game with the colts reasonably close at the end].

Huh?

So they gave up 28 points. The Colts average 27 per game. Look at their four losses. Manning lead 4th qtr "comebacks" in all of them. They all fell short.

There is a reason we see this type of "prevent" defense. Perhaps BB wants them to learn to play with a lead. Whatever the reason, the simple fact remains that they are lights out in situational football.

For all whining, the fact remains that this defense dominated San Diego, Pittsburgh, and Indy for over 3 qtrs. Is "prevent" the last piece? Maybe.

I would much rather have the 3+ quarters of domination going to 60 minutes than the other way around.

Is Indy's defense "clutch"? How about San Diego, Pittsburgh, or Baltimore?

[West Philly Patriot]

Originally Posted by patsfaninpittsburgh

Huh?

So they gave up 28 points. The Colts average 27 per game. Look at their four losses. Manning lead 4th qtr "comebacks" in all of them. They all fell short.

There is a reason we see this type of "prevent" defense. Perhaps BB wants them to learn to play with a lead. Whatever the reason, the simple fact remains that they are lights out in situational football.

For all whining, the fact remains that this defense dominated San Diego, Pittsburgh, and Indy for over 3 qtrs. Is "prevent" the last piece? Maybe.

I would much rather have the 3+ quarters of domination going to 60 minutes than the other way around.

Is Indy's defense "clutch"? How about San Diego, Pittsburgh, or Baltimore?

Wait, So are you giving the D props for that 4th quarter performance? This win was more on peyton manning than on our D in my mind. He shredded us all the way up the field he had at the very least OT in his grasp. The D missed tackles, took bad angles and blew assignments.

If Manning isn't so afraid to get sacked or throws the ball away there the least they get is 3 and in OT anything goes. Manning is not a great in high pressure situations as pats fans we know this better than anyone.

I give BB props for continuing to stick with zone to disguise coverage and Jermaine Cunningham for getting a little pressure on that last play. Last but not least james sanders for making a tough interception with his finger tips. But besides that I see little the pats did right Defensively in the last 10 min.

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Originally Posted by West Philly Patriot

Wait, So are you giving the D props for that 4th quarter performance? This win was more on peyton manning than on our D in my mind. He shredded us all the way up the field he had at the very least OT in his grasp. The D missed tackles, took bad angles and blew assignments.

If Manning isn't so afraid to get sacked or throws the ball away there the least they get is 3 and in OT anything goes. Manning is not a great in high pressure situations as pats fans we know this better than anyone.

I give BB props for continuing to stick with zone to disguise coverage and Jermaine Cunningham for getting a little pressure on that last play. Last but not least james sanders for making a tough interception with his finger tips. But besides that I see little the pats did right Defensively in the last 10 min.

Well, why yes, I am giving the defense props. Last ime I looked the game was 4 quarters and 60 minutes. Seems a lil buffoonish to only look at the fourth quarter when it's only like one quarter of the game.

Why? well like we won the game because of a clutch INT with a few seconds left. It was in fact, one of three INT's.

Here's your problem:

For 3+ quarters, the defense was pretty dominating. The forced two turnovers and the Pats turned into points. Did the completely shut down Indy? Well no, but then again Indy never gets completely shutdown.

They give up two TD's late, a standard mode for Indy (review the four Indy losses this year) and obviously an area of concern for the defense. In the end reality struck and we won.

It's simply amazing how you can get so duped into the "shredded" nonsense. Maybe you are inherently fatalistic in your makeup. The fact remains, it was a pretty dominating performance turned interesting by two drives where a defense is showing vestiges of youth.

You exihibit all the problems with the fantasy league mentality dominating the sport. Look at this year's games. Big passing yards correlate to losses.

Sorry

For the past 10 years this franchise has been coached by a guy who many consider the GOAT. For ten years, this same coach has stressed "situational football". Yet so many in this fanbase can't seem to grasp this concept.

[Its_The_Patriots]

The defense made the most critical stop of the game yesterday, with a game ending INT.

Give them credit where credit is due.....