What defense shows up this Sunday against the Falcons?

[mayoclinic]

We're 1-1 with two decent defensive perfomances against 2 teams with average offenses. Our defense is average 16.5 PPG (if you take away the TD given up by the offense on an interception; tied for #8 in the league) and 265 YPG (#3 in the league). However, the defense has been criticized for not getting enough pressure on opposing QBs, for giving up too much short stuff and screen plays, and for failing to make some big stops.

This week we get a much better offense. Matt Ryan is a much better QB than either Edwards or Sanchez right now. Michael Turner is by far the best RB we have faced. Ryan has legitimate weapons at WR and at TE with Tony Gonzalez.

If we focus on shutting down Atlanta's running game, I see Ryan picking us apart, particularly with Gonzalez, and particularly if we don't get pressure on him. Ryan has 5 TDs and 1 INT so far this season, and a 108.5 quarterback rating. Who will be put on Gonzalez? Is our DL capable of stopping the run by itself?

I don't see BBDB being particularly effective here. Atlanta is more than capable of beating us either running or passing if we play a reactive defense. God forbid that we should actually attack Ryan and try to disrupt his rhythm, get physical with his receivers and make them pay for each catch, or throw different looks at their offense in order to confuse them. A nice, safe, vanilla "prevent" defense sounds just perfect.

Thoughts?

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Hopefully, an attacking style of defense, but I won't hold my breath. When are the Pats going to stop with this "bend but eventually break" type of defense. I can understand their scheme if they had an insane type of pass rush, but they don't. Time to bring pressure, Bill!

 

[Ricey]

The kind of defense we have been seeing since Crennel left will show up for the Falcons game, and by that I mean passive/zone/read and react. For all the upgrades we made in our secondary supposedly why can't we take advantage of it and BLITZ more! Then again if a team has to rely on TBC and Derrick Burgess as their main pass rushers......It's going to be a long season for our defense.

And yes we are just fans, we have no idea what goes on behind closed doors and Im sure there is a good reason they are running this type of Defense but could we blitz once? just once that's all i ask!

P.S I think we should blitz more. End Rant.

 

[borg]

there are 2 types of attacking defense:
1) The Patriots style: send LBs and safeties after the QB, which leaves a wide open option
or
2) The Jets style: send LBs and safeties after the QB, and still have in your face total coverage

I vote for #2

 

[tombonneau]

The Pats obviously look good on D when you simply go by yards & points; however, if I'm not mistaken, they have allowed Sanchez & Edwards to rack up 100+ ratings (might be wrong ...).

Pretty sure it was Cold Hard Football Facts (maybe Football Outsiders) that looked at success BB's Pats teams, and the key factor on good D vs. bad D (and concomitantly the team's Super Bowl success) was opposing passer rating. Good=Super Bowl. Bad=Early Exit.

 

[borg]

An INT would help. Though INTs are difficult when you don't blitz but still give a 10 yard cushion on 3rd and longs.

 

[upstater1]

Hopefully, an attacking style of defense, but I won't hold my breath. When are the Pats going to stop with this "bend but eventually break" type of defense. I can understand their scheme if they had an insane type of pass rush, but they don't. Time to bring pressure, Bill!

It's a good thing that Belichick doesn't panic and prefers instead to get his team up to speed, rather than taking a short cut that will make them less effective in the future. If Belichick believes his D is better off playing D the way he wants them to play it, then how can anyone possibly argue with it?

 

[mayoclinic]

The Pats obviously look good on D when you simply go by yards & points; however, if I'm not mistaken, they have allowed Sanchez & Edwards to rack up 100+ ratings (might be wrong ...).

Pretty sure it was Cold Hard Football Facts (maybe Football Outsiders) that looked at success BB's Pats teams, and the key factor on good D vs. bad D (and concomitantly the team's Super Bowl success) was opposing passer rating. Good=Super Bowl. Bad=Early Exit.

Trent Edwards had a 114.1 QB rating, Mark Sanchez 101.1. Matt Ryan has a 108.5 QB rating coming into the game.

 

[jcwfalcon]

If we focus on shutting down Atlanta's running game, I see Ryan picking us apart, particularly with Gonzalez, and particularly if we don't get pressure on him. Ryan has 5 TDs and 1 INT so far this season, and a 108.5 quarterback rating. Who will be put on Gonzalez? Is our DL capable of stopping the run by itself?

Just some thoughts from the enemy...

This is exactly what our first two opponents, Miami and Carolina, have done. They committed to stopping the run when Turner was in the game, stacking 8 or even 9 in the box sometimes, making Turner appear rather pedestrian, getting 2-4 yards on most carries. But thats really all you can ask for with that many guys in the run lanes, and Turner still got over 100 and a score last week. Snelling has been a VERY nice change of pace (with Norwood just being fragile in general)...but its because when hes in, Turner is on the sideline, and the defenses seem to go back to a more balanced, or even pass protection, scheme, leaving the running lanes to be huge.

Ryan has done a good job of beating teams who take this approach thus far. The Dolphins game SHOULD have been a bigger blowout. Ryan seemed off on his accuracy with the deep ball, and missed a few wide open receivers. He had been battling the flu early in that week, so many of us questioned if that had an effect. In week 2 vs the Panties, Ryan was very accurate (22-27) and found Gonzalez early and often. BTW, I have never seen a guy who consistently makes impossible catches look easy as Gonzalez. I had thought Alge Crumpler was a great pass catching TE (before he moved to Tennessee and discovered cheese and donuts)...but I had no idea what greatness is.

Smith will want to run first and pass when your defense dictates that is what we do.

Oh, and watch out for Harvey Dahl at RG. He is plain nasty. He has personal fouls in both of our games. Blaylock at LG has been a weak link. Outside of Blaylock, the O-line has played well.

Is your D looking to be lacking a lot with all the veteran losses? Or is the offense just rusty?

 

[upstater1]

he last few times I saw the Patriots blitz conjures visions of WRs one on one with our CBs. I don't think Bodden is to Revis' level of play.

 

[mayoclinic]

Just some thoughts from the enemy...

This is exactly what our first two opponents, Miami and Carolina, have done. They committed to stopping the run when Turner was in the game, stacking 8 or even 9 in the box sometimes, making Turner appear rather pedestrian, getting 2-4 yards on most carries. But thats really all you can ask for with that many guys in the run lanes, and Turner still got over 100 and a score last week. Snelling has been a VERY nice change of pace (with Norwood just being fragile in general)...but its because when hes in, Turner is on the sideline, and the defenses seem to go back to a more balanced, or even pass protection, scheme, leaving the running lanes to be huge.

Ryan has done a good job of beating teams who take this approach thus far. The Dolphins game SHOULD have been a bigger blowout. Ryan seemed off on his accuracy with the deep ball, and missed a few wide open receivers. He had been battling the flu early in that week, so many of us questioned if that had an effect. In week 2 vs the Panties, Ryan was very accurate (22-27) and found Gonzalez early and often. BTW, I have never seen a guy who consistently makes impossible catches look easy as Gonzalez. I had thought Alge Crumpler was a great pass catching TE (before he moved to Tennessee and discovered cheese and donuts)...but I had no idea what greatness is.

Smith will want to run first and pass when your defense dictates that is what we do.

Oh, and watch out for Harvey Dahl at RG. He is plain nasty. He has personal fouls in both of our games. Blaylock at LG has been a weak link. Outside of Blaylock, the O-line has played well.

Is your D looking to be lacking a lot with all the veteran losses? Or is the offense just rusty?

Thanks for the input.

Our offense has been rusty. Our defense is young and is missing some key people, but has played well both games. On both sides of the ball we have been one-dimensional and predictable in terms of our schemes. I think we are capable of much more, but we seem to be holding ourselves back.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

It's a good thing that Belichick doesn't panic and prefers instead to get his team up to speed, rather than taking a short cut that will make them less effective in the future. If Belichick believes his D is better off playing D the way he wants them to play it, then how can anyone possibly argue with it?

Because it lost them a chance for a super bowl in '06, they couldn't stop the Giants on the final drive of the super bowl in '08 and couldn't stop the Jets on a 3rd and 15 last season.

 

[jmt57]

I agree, we needed the 137th thread in the last 48 hours for fans to let everyone else know that the Pats need to blitz more often, preferably every down.

 

[mayoclinic]

I agree, we needed the 137th thread in the last 48 hours for fans to let everyone else know that the Pats need to blitz more often, preferably every down.

It's more than blitzing more often. It's changing up personnel and schemes to keep the opposing offense off balance, throwing different looks and formations, and being more physical with the WRs to make them pay for receptions.

 

[slash83]

It's more than blitzing more often. It's changing up personnel and schemes to keep the opposing offense off balance, throwing different looks and formations, and being more physical with the WRs to make them pay for receptions.

Exactly, it is hard to argue with the fact that opposing teams are only scoring about 17 points a game, but what was the point of getting faster on defense? If BB still wants to sit back and play vanilla bend but dont break defenses throughout the entire game than what was the point of getting rid of Vrabz, im only guessing they let Tedy go without a fight to keep him, same as Rodney too. Those players clearly have lost a step or two but whats the point of getting faster on defense when you refuse to unleash it. Those former players were all very smart and understood the scheme, since were not changing anything up we were probably better off still being old and slow but with great experience and knowledge of the system and the game of football.

 

[JSn]

Our offense has been rusty. Our defense is young and is missing some key people, but has played well both games. On both sides of the ball we have been one-dimensional and predictable in terms of our schemes. I think we are capable of much more, but we seem to be holding ourselves back.

I just gotta say, that line really jumped out at me.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

not sure if blitzing is the answer against the falcons.......their passing game consists of short passes

 

[patsfan-1982]

The kind of defense we have been seeing since Crennel left will show up for the Falcons game, and by that I mean passive/zone/read and react. For all the upgrades we made in our secondary supposedly why can't we take advantage of it and BLITZ more! Then again if a team has to rely on TBC and Derrick Burgess as their main pass rushers......It's going to be a long season for our defense.

And yes we are just fans, we have no idea what goes on behind closed doors and Im sure there is a good reason they are running this type of Defense but could we blitz once? just once that's all i ask!

P.S I think we should blitz more. End Rant.

after Crennel left ty law left williy mac got old tedy b got a stroke

if Crennel was that good of a DC he wold have made the browns D at lest ok but they where just bad

great player make coachs look good

i would like to see them blitz im with you on that one but im not sure the corners are that good to play one on one

Bodden is more of a FS a hard hiter who needs to keep the guys in front of him not a great cover guy

springs is to old

butler is not redy but i still think he will be starting by mid season

Wilhite right now is the best corner and i would love to see if he can play one on one

but we have to take in mind one of the reason for not blitzing is because the O has been so bad if the bills hit T.O or evens for one more TD that game was over if the jets got one more TD that game is over

they have to play safe until the O can win a game cause right not this D is not redy to win a game on it own

 

[mayoclinic]

I just gotta say, that line really jumped out at me.

Yeah, it does kind of hit you. But it's true. Only 4 out of 25 defensive players are over 30: Shawn Springs (34), Adalius Thomas (32), Derrick Burgess (31), and Jarvis Green (30). 8 out of our 9 DBs are 28 or younger, 7 of them 26 or younger. Our defensive captains are 23 and 27, the leader of our secondary is 25. We are a young defense.

Compare Pittsburgh with 34 year old James Farrior, 34 year old DeShea Townsend, 33 year old Aaron Smith, 32 year old Casey Hampton, 31 year old James Harrison, 31 year old Brett Keisel, and 30 year old Ryan Clark on defense. Or Baltimore with 34 year old Ray Lewis, 34 year old Trevor Price, 33 year old Samari Rolle, 33 year old Brendan Ayenbadejo, 32 year old Kelly Gregg, 31 year old Ed Reed, and 30 year old Justin Bannan. Or the Jets with 32 year old Shaun Ellis, 30 year old Kris Jenkins, 30 year old Sione Pouha, 30 year old Bryan Thomas and 30 year old Howard Green. Plus 29 year old Calvin Pace and Bart Scott.

Yet the media keeps referring to that "old and slow" NE defense. They haven't caught up yet. Maybe the coaching staff hasn't caught up, either.