MoLewisrocks

Aside from Brady and the WR's, doesn't paint a very pretty picture. Seems to think that overthinking the offensive game plan remains a problem. Have to find a way to involve Gronkowski more. Gap control all around a big issue affecting overall defensive performance. Have to find a way to pressure better offenses and QB's via scheme because talent alone still isn't sufficient. That of course impacts back end so something's gotta give.

Patriot defense didn't look revamped in first test - Patriots - Boston.com

SVN

He also had a bunch of tweets last nite about pats CB play .

https://twitter.com/GregABedard/stat...86665088573440

BradyManny

Would the corner play have looked so bad if the refs don't continually extend Ravens drives that end up as TDs?

Somewhere in an alternate universe, the Patriots could've won this game 34-17 or something like that. That's basically what could've happened if not for those crucial, game-swigning, Ravens drive-extending* and Patriots drive-halting calls**.

*BS Mayo PI on a failed 3rd & 6 on a TD drive; blown OPI call on Smith costs us a TD; BS McCourty hold on an incomplete 2nd & 14 on a long TD drive; BS Spikes hold negating sack that would've ultimately prevented TD;
**BS Gronk hold and BS Edelman PI potentially cost us a TD

Deus Irae

He tried covering for McCourty, but then proceeded to point out more McCourty screwups. That sort of thing is what makes his analysis less helpful than it should be. It reeks of something that's either agenda or stubbornness.

__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius

BradyManny

As for the lack of pressure - I blame it on the fact Jones was being held all night.

Really, as I said before, and I don't mean to rehash the debate, but it's hard to evaluate play from that game.

Though I do think Brady & the passing offense looked vintage, which is another reason why it's disappointing they put up an L.

As for Gronkowski, there's a couple factors:
- being asked to block more
- being held all over the field by Ray Lewis

Rob0729

Bedard has been one of McCourty's sharpest critics this preseason. What agenda would you suggest he has? He is on a crusade to prove his preseason evaluations are a bunch of crap?

As for him trying to cover up and then point out his screw ups, he mentioned six plays he executed well (possibly seven if the "great play" of breaking up Smith on 3rd and 15 is separate plays he mentioned) vs. the two plays he said were bad. As he said on WEEI this morning, McCourty is the first DB to break up four passes in a game in forever.

Here is what he wrote:

Wrath Mania

Sorry, I think you guys are being way too lenient with (or hopeful about?) this defense. Yeah, some really bad calls put the defense in bad spots; the Ravens had at least a few 'bull' calls as well. The bottom line is they stopped the Patriots cold at the end (though this was perhaps as much to do with Patriots offense) whereas Flacco moved down the field with embarrassing ease- all he had to do was float balloons towards McCourty and that was that. I don't buy this idea that the Patriots lost cause of the refs; the secondary looked as suspect as last year, and all the Ravens had to do was start running the ball and that mighty front seven vanished. I don't get how anyone can say McCourty had a "decent" game when he dropped two interceptions and was responsible for the worst legit foul in the game. I don't get why we're all so in awe of Chandler Jones just cause he talked trash at the start of the game, when he veritably vanished after the first quarter. It's not just cause he got hold- it's ridiculous to explain everything away with bad officiating. I'm not saying the crappy calls weren't there, but we need to be dead honest about how this defense looked on its own Sunday night: bad.

Things can improve of course, and I hope they do, we can all make arguments that sound nice and are comforting. But 1-2 is 1-2. Thank god Revis is out and the Jets have no clue what they're doing.

JackBauer

No, it's pretty clear the Patriots lost because of the refs.

And the reason you didn't see Chandler Jones is because he was going hog tied by the OT the entire game.

Deus Irae

Actually, as far as agenda goes, he's now on a "How does BB not know his CB playing style isn't modern enough" kick. However, it could well just be stubbornness, as I pointed out. When Bedard gets an opinion, he is done. We've seen this before. That's fine in some arenas, but it's a problem for him given that he's supposed to be neutrally analyzing.

I know what he wrote. He went CHA and then admitted to more screwups even while trying to CHA there too, by essentially blaming Gregory for McCourty's crap effort on that tackle. Frankly, I found that to be a terrible bit of writing and analysis, and I expect that he'd love to have at least some of that back.


How many screw ups do we allow before we can say that a CB stunk without you homers pretending that it's all unicorns and rainbows?

__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius

Rob0729

Again, Bedard was the leading crusader of "If McCourty has reverted back to his rookie form, I haven't seen any sign of it" brigade during the preseason. If he is that stubborn, he would have joined Tom Curran, Ty Law, and a lot of other media people in the "McCourty Sucked" charge from this game.

Also, saying McCourty played well goes against his theory. If McCourty had a great game as he suggests, it tells us that talent and not scheme is the problems with breakdowns on defense for the most part.



First, he isn't the only one who feel it was mostly or all Gregory fault on that play. So it isn't like he is making this up. Gregory never makes contact with Pitta to slow his stride and it looks like McCourty's route was based on Gregory at least a little.

Second, I don't think he wants to take any of it back. He went toe to toe with Dennis and Callahan on this issue. If he regretted writing it, he wouldn't have argued as passionately. He said that when he analyzes a player in the game he doesn't put any more weight on the end of the game vs. the beginning of the game and that most of McCourty's critics are putting way too much weight on the final drive and not the rest of the game.

Third, I didn't have any problem with the writing. The difference is that I agree with him and you don't. I wonder if he wrote McCourty sucked and say "yeah, he had a few good plays, but mostly sucked" whether one or both of us would have a different view of the quality of his analysis.