ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutchmaster617
HOU made a lot of mistakes and at times looked mentally weak. We have always had these games and with a tougher execution from the opp we give up the usual 24+.
I like whats happening but would it shock me if JAC scores 30+ and throws all over us? No. We said the same thing in 2010 and 2011 and all it took was a well executed game from NY QBs to embarrass us. I want to see them hold a SB lead first.
There was a point last night in the 3rd quarter where the offense had just committed it's 4th punt in a row (3 of which were 3 + out) and the score was 21-0. I was worried. Talib was out (injury mid 2Q I believe). The Texans are easily prolific enough to overcome a 3 score deficit with ~28 minutes of clock left.
Then:
Foster runs left 3 yards (Ninko, Deadrick)
Foster runs up the middle -2 yards (Deadrick)
Schaub completes pass to A. Johnson for 8 yards (Dennard)
Punt on 4th & 1.
So, with the opportunity ripe for a drive to make it a 2 score game with TONS of clock left, Hou used it's best offensive players and the Pats forced a 3 and out! 2 runs for 1 yard in an important drive followed by a textbook tackle short of the 1st down is a defensive stand.
The next series was the bomb to Stallworth. Game over.
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutchmaster617
HOU made a lot of mistakes and at times looked mentally weak. We have always had these games and with a tougher execution from the opp we give up the usual 24+.
I like whats happening but would it shock me if JAC scores 30+ and throws all over us? No. We said the same thing in 2010 and 2011 and all it took was a well executed game from NY QBs to embarrass us. I want to see them hold a SB lead first.
Typical downer Pats fan.
The Giants offense put up all of 19 points on us in the Superbowl - you call that an embarrassment?
The problem in the SB was the offenses inability to acore more than 17.
__________________
"I gave George Allen an unlimited budget", Edward Bennett, the principal owner of the Redskins, said a few weeks after hiring Allen, "and he's already exceeded it."
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Not all of us. While I definitely thought we need improvement in the secondary, I believed we could win with last year's defense and they did not disappoint in the playoffs or Superbowl.
This D looks improved in some aspects, and are better than what proved to be a playoffs and Superbowl caliber defense last year.
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by manxman2601
Except it's not "this defense" anymore.
It's a completely reworked secondary, it's a team that blitzes much much more than it did, (based on impressions, haven't seen stats to back that up) and it's a team that challenges receivers much more aggressively than it did.
What I heard on Patriots Radio was that we blitzed 15% of the time before Talib and 30% of the time with Talib and the readjusted secondary.
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mayoclinic
Not everyone did. Some thought it was a matter of time, plus making a few key changes, which the coaching staff did. It's all gone as predicted:
- Move McCourty to FS and protect the deep part of the field
- Get Arrington away from the outside CB; he's been unexpectedly great in the slot
- Acquire Talib and pair him with Dennard outside and play aggressive press-man coverage
- Once your secondary can actually cover, start letting your talented front 7 play to its talent level, instead of holding them back
The defense is now unrecognizable from earlier in the year. And it should get better once Chandler Jones is fully recovered.
Postgame Wilfy said as much opining that finally BB had the talent to be able to move capable guys around to different positions in different packages
__________________
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
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocHoliday
... Talib is fine. Arrington came back on the field as well for a snap.
Dennard is the only person I am worried about - he has the dreaded Hamstring injury.
You're right. With Edelperson out the Pats absolutely cannot afford to lose yet another 7th round pick for a game.
__________________
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
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mayoclinic
It's semantics.
No one every thought that the team would win playing soft zone coverage and BBDB defense with no pressure. That just doesn't work. The problem was, without the defensive personnel to cover effectively, anything else just resulted in huge plays. So it was a choice between death by paper cut vs. getting decapitated.
Part of the problem was injury related, part of it was youth and inexperience, part of it was changing personnel weekly, part of it was playing people out of position, part of it was just not having enough talent at the right positions. The front 7 always had the talent, but it was effectively paralyzed by the problems on the back end. Those problems have been rectified. Call it a "whole new defense" if you like, or a "new scheme", or an "adjustment", or a "fix". It's all the same thing.
I suspect that BB has wanted to play like this for a long, long time, but he hasn't had the personnel. He had some of the back end personnel in 2009 (the secondary was quite good with that year) but didn't have the personnel up front. The secondary fell apart in 2010 and last year. He's finally got the horses up front and enough talent on the back end to get creative without fear of being torn apart.
Quote:
It's semantics.
Too suggest that significant changes have improved our defense? How is that "semantics"?
Quote:
No one every thought that the team would win playing soft zone coverage and BBDB defense with no pressure. That just doesn't work.
And yet that's exactly the way we played these last few years. It was only after we were giving up a record number of big plays earlier this year that a change was made.
Quote:
Those problems have been rectified. Call it a "whole new defense" if you like, or a "new scheme", or an "adjustment", or a "fix". It's all the same thing.
Well O.K. But that's like saying the Colts drafting Andrew Luck was an "adjustment" or a "fix". We completely changed the secondary, we traded for a player and we noticeably got more aggressive. It was a moved forced upon us because our defense was so bad. I don't see how that's debatable. credit to BB for making the move.
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by manxman2601
Too suggest that significant changes have improved our defense? How is that "semantics"?.
What you wrote is:
Quote:
Originally Posted by manxman2601
Except it's not "this defense" anymore.
That's semantics by definition. The Pats' defense is never the same at any 2 points in time. Personnel and scheme constantly change. Obviously, we're not playing Pat Chung as the deep cover safety anymore. You can call that a "new defense" or a "new scheme" or "significant" changes or whatever. What you call it is "semantics". It's obviously changed from earlier in the season. No one disagrees about that. No one is arguing that we could win win Arrington outside, Chung as the deep cover safety, soft zone coverage, and no pass rush. I'm not sure why you're making an argument out of it.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid
"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mayoclinic
What you wrote is:
That's semantics by definition. The Pats' defense is never the same at any 2 points in time. Personnel and scheme constantly change. Obviously, we're not playing Pat Chung as the deep cover safety anymore. You can call that a "new defense" or a "new scheme" or "significant" changes or whatever. What you call it is "semantics". It's obviously changed from earlier in the season. No one disagrees about that. No one is arguing that we could win win Arrington outside, Chung as the deep cover safety, soft zone coverage, and no pass rush. I'm not sure why you're making an argument out of it.
I really can't be bothered anymore.
If you don't think significantly changing the secondary and doubling the number of blitzes almost overnight are "significant changes" then fine. I'm not going to bother arguing the point.
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by manxman2601
I really can't be bothered anymore.
If you don't think significantly changing the secondary and doubling the number of blitzes almost overnight are "significant changes" then fine. I'm not going to bother arguing the point.
You're not even reading what I wrote. I never said it wasn't significant. We're obviously not communicating, which is a shame, since I think the world of you, so I suggest we just cool off.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid
"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi
65Likes
Re: Remember when we all thought 'We can't win with this defense"?
Linear Mode
