Worry Wart – Preseason Game Three vs. Rams

[PatriotsDaily.com]

Preseason games usually lack much significance, but 2010’s friendly contests mean more than before. With two dozen draft picks over the past two years and countless new players (and by countless, I mean like six), fans are watching these games with the attentiveness of an overcaffeinated Where’s Waldo? addict.

Last Thursday’s outscoring of Atlanta kept our tempered optimism moving. Going into Scrimmage Three (Thursday vs. the Rams), or what has traditionally been the last sighting of starters during the preseason, the Patriots still have a few things to get straight before the games count.

Worry Wart – Preseason Game Three vs. Rams

 

[mgteich]

The only thing that matters is not getting injured.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Since their head coach was the architect of the defeat in the Game That Shall Not Be Named, it will be interesting to see how the OL performs.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Much Ado about Nothing.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The unintended starting debut of the $50M man-child... Oy ve.

 

[Keyser Söze]

Since their head coach was the architect of the defeat in the Game That Shall Not Be Named, it will be interesting to see how the OL performs.

I honestly cant name one player on their defense. It doesnt concern me the slightest, when he has no talent to work with.

 

[jsull87]

I honestly cant name one player on their defense. It doesnt concern me the slightest, when he has no talent to work with.

you can't name lauranitis, chris long & otogwe?

 

[Keyser Söze]

you can't name lauranitis, chris long & otogwe?

Oh my God! what was I thinking

 

[patsox23]

The only thing that matters is not getting injured.

Not that I don't agree with the concept above, but my sense from the rest of the thread is that people are posting without any sense of what this thread is actually about.

Please actually READ the article. It's a weekly feature, and a great one, which is called "Worry Wart." It doesn't mean that he's ACTUALLY worried. It's been around for a long time. Let's use our brains.

 

[jmt57]

As far as the next game goes, here is a preview from the perspective of a Rams fan. This person registered here and posted a thread elsewhere that few saw since it was not in the main forum; figured I'd link his column here. Aside from a couple of oversights (Paschall), it's an interesting to read what the opposing side thinks of this team.

STL Sport Blog: Rams vs. Patriots Preview

 

[Defsoul]

Oh my God! what was I thinking

You need to play some fantasy football. Laurinaitis is an IDP stud.

 

[Mike the Brit]

As far as the next game goes, here is a preview from the perspective of a Rams fan. This person registered here and posted a thread elsewhere that few saw since it was not in the main forum; figured I'd link his column here. Aside from a couple of oversights (Paschall), it's an interesting to read what the opposing side thinks of this team.

STL Sport Blog: Rams vs. Patriots Preview

Really good, well-informed article. Thanks for the link and congratulations to Steven G. I guess you can't be an ignorant homer and a Rams fan.

 

[Kontradiction]

Since their head coach was the architect of the defeat in the Game That Shall Not Be Named, it will be interesting to see how the OL performs.

Eh, I'm not sure that will be a good indication. The Giants' D-Line in '07 was leagues ahead of where this Rams D-Line is right now. With how terrible the Rams are, I'm not sure this is going to be an indication of much of anything for us. Maybe the run defense, but Steven Jackson isn't what he used to be.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Eh, I'm not sure that will be a good indication. The Giants' D-Line in '07 was leagues ahead of where this Rams D-Line is right now. With how terrible the Rams are, I'm not sure this is going to be an indication of much of anything for us. Maybe the run defense, but Steven Jackson isn't what he used to be.

I was thinking more about scheme. Obviously, the Rams DL is not as good as the Giants was. But even the Giants were better than themselves in that game because of the scheme. With a brilliant scheme even an average DL could have a good game, but since the Rams had one of the worst (if not the worst) DLs in the league last year it looks like Sam Bradford is going to get plenty of rest.

 

[Kontradiction]

I was thinking more about scheme. Obviously, the Rams DL is not as good as the Giants was. But even the Giants were better than themselves in that game because of the scheme. With a brilliant scheme even an average DL could have a good game, but since the Rams had one of the worst (if not the worst) DLs in the league last year it looks like Sam Bradford is going to get plenty of rest.

The Giants led the league in sacks that season. The scheme was only effective because the line was effective in what it did. It's what made them the worst match-up we could possibly get in the Super Bowl. They could generate one helluva pass rush with their front four and drop everybody else into coverage to eliminate the screen and deep throws. Even then, Neal had to leave the game in order for that pass rush to go from "tough" to "deadly".

The Rams scheme is the same, but don't expect the same test from them because they don't have quite as effective of a D-Line as the Giants did.

 

[The Brandon Five]

The Giants led the league in sacks that season. The scheme was only effective because the line was effective in what it did. It's what made them the worst match-up we could possibly get in the Super Bowl. They could generate one helluva pass rush with their front four and drop everybody else into coverage to eliminate the screen and deep throws. Even then, Neal had to leave the game in order for that pass rush to go from "tough" to "deadly".

The Rams scheme is the same, but don't expect the same test from them because they don't have quite as effective of a D-Line as the Giants did.

Well, one quarter of those sacks came in one game against the Eagles, and they had sacks totals of one, two and zero in the previous playoff games. Neal and Kaczur were out for the regular season game against the Giants and Brady was sacked just once. I think we need to give Spagnuolo credit. The Giants were 6th in sacks in 2008 and 18th in 2009. Granted, they lost a future Hall of Famer in Strahan, but I think the loss of Spagnuolo was as big for their defense.

In any event, it doesn't really matter for tonight's game because (as you pointed out) the Rams line doesn't have the talent to be able to effectively execute a scheme like that.

I can't decide if I want to see a competitive game since the results don't count (for entertainment value) or a Titans-esque beatdown.

 

[Kontradiction]

Well, one quarter of those sacks came in one game against the Eagles, and they had sacks totals of one, two and zero in the previous playoff games. Neal and Kaczur were out for the regular season game against the Giants and Brady was sacked just once. I think we need to give Spagnuolo credit. The Giants were 6th in sacks in 2008 and 18th in 2009. Granted, they lost a future Hall of Famer in Strahan, but I think the loss of Spagnuolo was as big for their defense.

It's not at all uncommon for teams or players to rack up a large percentage of their sacks in one contest. I'll take your word on that though since I'm at work right now and can't really check the stats.

As for Neal and Kaczur being out in the first contest, you are right. They were. But, as you remember, Brady was getting hit a bit in that game as well. It was one of the reasons why the Giants were able to get out to a lead against us. I'm not sure why the protection was better in the second half. Whatever it was, it didn't happen in the Super Bowl. The protection was clearly worse after Neal left the game.

I can't decide if I want to see a competitive game since the results don't count (for entertainment value) or a Titans-esque beatdown.

I'm hoping for a beatdown. I have to get up extremely early tomorrow and I don't want to stay up late watching a close game.

 

[Oswlek]

The Giants led the league in sacks that season. The scheme was only effective because the line was effective in what it did. It's what made them the worst match-up we could possibly get in the Super Bowl. They could generate one helluva pass rush with their front four and drop everybody else into coverage to eliminate the screen and deep throws. Even then, Neal had to leave the game in order for that pass rush to go from "tough" to "deadly".

The Rams scheme is the same, but don't expect the same test from them because they don't have quite as effective of a D-Line as the Giants did.

I agree with your premise, but the specifics are wrong. They took advantage of the DL matchup by playing press, not dropping guys back to stop the deep ball. They were perfectly willing to give up the long ball knowing that NE likely wouldn't have the time to throw one.

And you have to add K. Brady and Faulk in with Neal. It really is remarkable how perfectly everything fell for that Giant team.

 

[Kontradiction]

I agree with your premise, but the specifics are wrong. They took advantage of the DL matchup by playing press, not dropping guys back to stop the deep ball. They were perfectly willing to give up the long ball knowing that NE likely wouldn't have the time to throw one.

And you have to add K. Brady and Faulk in with Neal. It really is remarkable how perfectly everything fell for that Giant team.

I should have made it more clear. They were leaving the safeties back in two deep coverage most of the time to prevent the deep ball. Not that it would have mattered. Like you said, we didn't have time to uncork one until later in the game.