Thought last week was interesting as it seemed as though the Pats were using a lot of different formations on the field.. Mike Reiss has a very interesting breakdown on # of snaps played.. it was effective.. why?
1. Road trip keeping guys fresh??
2. Keeping SF off balance, young qb??
3. Keeping future opponents off base, a lot of players and different combos were used??
4. In this meritocracy some players deserved more snaps??
This has nothing to do with meritocracy, or keeping players fresh, or confusing future opponents.
Bill Belichick is a game-plan coach.
Some coaches emphasize a specific approach, and focus on it constantly to become very good with that approach. Think of the Tampa-Two defense, the Pittsburgh running attack, Air Coryell, etc. Recall last year against the Minnesota defense, they kept their base defense in against the Pats four-wide formation because, damnit, that's what they play.
Belichick is the opposite. The approach in one game will be very different from the next.
A great example comes from the 2004 post-season run. Against the Colts, the Pats played a conservative ball-control offense and dime defense. Late in the game, the Colts clued in and began rushing the ball effectively, but by then it was too late and the Pats were happy to surrender yardage for time. Against Pittsburgh, they played an entirely different game, going over the top of the tough Pittsburgh defense and choking the Pittsburgh short game. The Pats team that played the Colts looked 180 degrees different, on both offense and defense, from the Pats team that played the Steelers.
Now recall the 2001 Super Bowl defense, against the Greatest Show on Turf. The Pats again flooded the deep zones, and hit Marshall Faulk coming out of the backfield before he had the ball. They dared Martz to run the ball, and he never did, stubbornly going to the air as soon as the Pats had the lead following the Ty Law interception. The Pats kept that pass-oriented defense on the field, and squeaked out the win against a more talented team.
Also recall, several years ago, that Ted Johnson was inactive for the opening game. He was furious. However, the following game that year he played every snap. One game plan was coverage, and the next was run-stuffing. There are lots more examples under Belichick.
Against San Francisco, Belichick called for a defensive game plan somewhat similar to the 2001 Super Bowl, or the Eagles Super Bowl. Playing Guyton, for example, more than Seymour has nothing to do with resting Seymour or giving Guyton the snaps that he deserves. The Patriots apparently believe that Guyton is a very good coverage linebacker, akin to Roman Phifer. They trained him for this dropping coverage role during the Bye week, and played him in the dime defense. For that coverage role, he was better than Seymour.
They may play a totally different defense against San Diego.
