One thing about all this tumult

[mayoclinic]

Nice post. I would give you a +1 if you did that on this board. A couple responsive thoughts.

1) The NE defense in 2001 was precisely why people here began to use the phrase "bend but don't break". In the SB, and then again vs Indy in 2003 they were far more passive than you remember. Lots of DBs, rarely rushing more than 4, the difference was that they did a better job of getting pressure with their base set. Frankly, how NE looked against the Jets was markedly similar to how they played in 2001.

2) I agree with you that NE hasn't been the same since 2004. Tedy's stroke, Rodney's injury and Johnson's suprise retirement virtually eradicated the middle strenght of this defense. While both Tedy and Rodney came back, neither were ever the same players they had been and NE definitely reacted a bit slowly to replace them. Then add in the aging process in the OLBs and you have an old slow defense that coaches were clearly hesitant to go too exotic with, since they couldn't be sure coverage would be adequate.

I personally view the major defensive overhaul as BB's admittal on this issue.

3) Both theory #1 and #2 have elements of truth to them. NE defenses have always been slow to show their hand early in the season. Even in the glory years it took time for their strength to come through because NE's defense is very reactive to their opponent. Unlike Pitt and NY that do what they do and force others to combat it, NE builds defensive schemes for each game. As game film become more available and useful, you will see the improvement. Other than 2007, this has been the same progession every year since BB took over.

And featuring Mayo is one of the reasons NE converted to 4-3. His absense clearly hamper things, despite Guyton stepping in admirably. Taking away NE two biggest playmakers in the back 7, both guys in the middle of the field where strength is most important for this defense, is going to impact things.

Lastly, I never said "all is well", I said all will be well. This team clearly has hurdles to clear and issues to address, but they had similar issues in week 2 of almost every season since BB took over.

1. Re 2001, I referred specifically to the SB against the Rams, where our secondary punished the Rams receivers and we pressured and rattled Warner, throwing the "greatest show on turf" off of their rhythm. Similarly, in 2003-2004 the Colts offense was considered unstoppable by many, and we physically beat them up, punished their receivers, and rattled Peyton. I don't see much similarity between our defensive play in the first 2 games and those performances. Admittedly, those performances came at the end of the season and not at the beginning, with a bunch of new players.

2. A lot of people have suggested that rule changes favoring the offense have made it difficult for us to play the kind of physical style that we played in 2003-2004. But the Giants and Steelers, who have won 3 out of the past 4 SBs, are exactly that kind of physical, aggressive, punishing defensive team. If anything, I think the rule changes require a more aggressive defensive approach as opposed to a BBDB approach.

I agree with you about injuries and unfamiliarity impacting the game plan. I am hopeful that "all will be well", but I'm not 100% sure that the coaching staff will adjust as quickly as the players will. I'd like to see a few more games before forming a judgment. I think the players have the capability to make this a special defense. Whether the coaches use them effectively is another matter.

 

[BradyManny]

2. A lot of people have suggested that rule changes favoring the offense have made it difficult for us to play the kind of physical style that we played in 2003-2004. But the Giants and Steelers, who have won 3 out of the past 4 SBs, are exactly that kind of physical, aggressive, punishing defensive team. If anything, I think the rule changes require a more aggressive defensive approach as opposed to a BBDB approach

This is a good point - for all the talk about the rule changes, we've seen Pats receivers get manhandled by Rex Ryan defenses twice now, and the refs just sit there and let them play. The Pats have two corners who like playing physical, Bodden & Springs, and they might be able to get away with some of the borderline stuff that teams have used against us in the past few years.

The truth is, even with the rules, the refs are much less likely to call illegal contact than they are a blatant PI downfield, even if the illegal contact changes the outcome of the play just as much. Heck, they probably could've called 1-3 illegal contacts on the Jets the other day per play if they wanted to. It seemed like their DBs were draped on our guys.

 

[captain stone]

Some will say that all we need to do is fine tune our execution. I don't agree. I agree with you that our issues go deeper than that. But I think the issues are mainly one of coaching philosophy rather than issues of player personnel. We have the horses to execute the schemes. We ran the ball well last year, no reason to believe we can't run it this year.

We have the athleticism on defense (particularly in the secondary, and with Burgess and AD off the edge) to be more attacking on defense, and to run less of a vanilla defense.

I agree with you that the philosophy likely comes form the top. Everything on this team starts and ends with BB. He's been pretty good so far, but I agree that we won't win any SBs by continuing what we are doing right now. If we are stubborn and refuse to adapt, it will be a long year. If we are willing to make some changes, there's no reason we can't still win it all this year. The talent is there.

There might be a couple of potential roadblocks, which did not appear last season, against our running game this season:
Firstly, we no longer have a full-time FB. Sammy Morris is first (and only) in line for that position, and try as I'm sure he has (and will), he's just not made to be the bowling ball behind which to run as I would prefer. I hear this Heath Evans for NO is doing pretty well so far this year; why can't we get guys like that?
Secondly, our schedule last season could not have been any easier. The NFCW & AFCW were the 2 worst divisions in football; we went 7-1 against them. We were done no favors this season, although Carolina, Tampa, Jax & prob. Houston should be solid victories.
Thirdly, can our HC, OC, QB & OL simply flip the switch and create - and maintain - a running mentality, knowing full well that Mr. Bundchen is ready, willing & able to sling it 4 dozen times a game if he has to?

While I admit that we appear to be more athletic on defense, esp. in the secondary, I still have grave doubts about our ability to apply consistent pressure from the edges. Derrick Burgess has thus far given me no reason whatsoever to hope that his 3-year downward spiral in sacks will suddenly reverse this year.
Think about this: our 2 primary pass-rushers are over 60 years old combined; our 2 primary (only?) Wide (not Slot) Receivers are over 65 years old. 2 of the 3 position groups that rely on speed/explosiveness more than any other group - CB being the 3rd - are fronted by players whose combined ages almost qualify them for Soc. Security benefits.

Is there talent here? Yes.
Is there enough talent here to win, in spite of the stubbornness of the HC? No.
Is there enough talent here to win, if the HC is willing to make whatever changes are neccessary to win? Maybe.

 

[captain stone]

That's a pretty pessimistic view of things. You seem to believe that left to his own devices, BB will hang himself. Are you implying that he needs Pioli/Weis/Crennel types around him to succeed? My sense is that BB is very diligent about putting smart people around him and soliciting their advice (Ernie Adams, Floyd Reese, etc.). Remember, it was BB who hired Pioli/Weis/Crennel to begin with so he's far from being stubbornly myopic.
I'm starting to wonder if Bill believes that what (almost) worked in 2007 should still work in 2009. Except for Dante, Pepper & Ivan Fears, there is nobody remaining in the organization to tell him differently. The choices he has made at OC & DC since Charlie & Romeo left have inspired Zero confidence in me. Mr. Peesbody, BOB, Skippy & ManJudas appear/ed to be barely more than faithful lackeys dutifully executing Bill's game plans, without an original thought in their own heads.

Even the best Hall of Fame coaches went through lean years, including losing seasons. It's the nature of the NFL. What the Patriots did last year without Brady was amazing, mostly BECAUSE of BB and his philosophies, not in spite of him. He's still the best coach with the best organization in the league.

Even more frustrating is the realization that if Bill had coached vs. the Dolts & Jest like the best in the business, he would've won those games last year, too. Bill had to adapt because he didn't have the crutch of Tom Brady on which to lean. He also had the advantage of a creampuff schedule, too. Unfortunately, now that Brady is back, so is the same old same old...but without the creampuff schedule.

 

[captain stone]

The Patriots turned over more than half of their starting defense, changed the philosophy and then lost the two players - Mayo and Meriweather - who the new style is designed to feature... and still are averaging less than 17 points allowed per game. Both teams NE faced scored significantly more offensive points in their other game than against NE.
The "bend but don't break" is a result of NE altering the DL and OLB responsibilites and then losing the two interior guys who were going to create the most havoc. It was clear from the preseason that they intended to use the middle of the field more creatively but have been held back because of Mayo's absence.
Fair points. Let's see how Bill uses Mayo when he returns. And please someone tell me that I did indeed see Meriweather on the field in the 4th quarter.

On offense, no one remembers this, but the exact same questions came up when Josh was the interim OC in 2005. There were even drive by Cleveland fans talking about how BB was when he performed playcalling duties way back when as their HC. "Predictible" and "uninspired" were two of the more common words tossed around to describe NE's early season play calling.
I look at it as little more than a guy getting his feet wet. I admit that he isn't quite as diverse or coordinated at JM or even Weis. That will take time and I'm sure BB is spending plenty of time with him going over each play and each situation, getting feedback as to what he was thinking, and then telling him what he should have been thinking and things that could have been done to set plays up later.
What's frustrating is that these are all the same plays from 2007. That's a huge amout of film for the opponent to analyze, and master. Nothing new, or old, has been added to the playbook that might give the opponent something else to consider, and worry about.

It takes time and we just need to be patient. Hell, even Weis had playcalling duties stripped from him by Parcells early in his career.
This is true.

The great irony in the drive by Clevelanders is that they chastised BB for running too much. Now you are doing precisely the opposite. Considering this team has run 4 completely different offenses in just the short time Brady has been here, I highly doubt that BB is too fixated in his ways too change. He will do what he thinks gives the team the best chance to win, and recent history suggests that it will be largely successful.
4 completely different offenses? I'm not aware of that.

I also find it funny how you lament the loss of NE's only FB when Evans played sparingly last year. NE ran successfully in the same manner then as they are now, with single back sets or with a surrogate FB (like Hoch) in heavy sets. Evans' absence has nothing whatsoever to do with NE's ability or inability to run this year.
I don't think that Evans' absence has nothing whatsoever to do with this year. He may have played sparingly - if at all - on 1st/2nd downs, but he made his presence felt on 3rd/4th & short. He also brought a FB's mentality to the huddle & the locker room. Last year, they wanted to run the ball more - they needed to run the ball more; and partly because of that need, they successfully ran the ball more.

This board is full of people who seemingly prefer this team looking bad than good.
I prefer that this team win.

They would rather be able to pretend they are smarter than the team than just trust and enjoy the ride.
Should we make that our slogan, then: Just Trust, Baby?

They fail to realize that NE's first two champions had at least 2 losses by the time the 4th week came around and suffer from a compete lack of perspective. For every one decision these geniouses are right about (and thus preen about like pretentious peacokcs), there are a dozen more that they would have been wrong.
I've been watching fooball for 40 years; I have plenty of perspective. Besides, past performance is no guarantee of future success.

This team will be very good by season's end. Of that I am sure.

But are you really, really, really sure?

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

You make a great argument and I was thinking the same thing. However, I don't know if this group of Pats players can pull the same thing they did in '03 and '04.