Thanks, Captain. Appreciate it. I'm not a fan of the read and react, especially in this pass-happy NFL.
I understand what you are saying, but even when the Pats play a "base nickel" vs the Colts, they still use a lot of 2 gap principles on early downs. That's why you see the Colts go shotgun with 3 WR, 1 TE, and 1 RB quite often. Even when they are in the shotgun, they like to have that RB back there to fake the HB draw, which forces the Pats defense to engage their blocker, make sure that they make the correct read (run or pass), and then react to it.
By playing 2 gap in situations like these, it really slows down your pass rush, as you admitted, especially against a guy like Manning, who is going to throw most of the time anyway and who gets rid of the ball so quickly.
I know that you do not play 2 gap technique in your sub pass defense on third downs and more than a few. My problem is with the early down techniques that NE likes to play. I understand that playing 2 gap on 1st and 2nd downs is a "safer, less risky" approach that protects against the big play, and that playing 1 gap on early downs is a "higher risk, higher reward" type of defense. BB has always been about playing it safe, not beating yourself, playing the percentages that you're not going to be able to put a successful drive together everytime down the field -- you will eventually make a mistake.
But I think playing so much 2 gap on early downs, even in the base defense, is a little outdated. There are not many teams left who run the ball very consistently on 1st and 2nd downs. Even the Jets with Sanchez, when they should be running on 1st and 10 or 2nd and 5, get too caught up in trying to pass sometimes. Teams are much more apt to throw the ball on early downs now with the new rules. In 2009 there were like 10 QB's that threw for over 4,000 yards -- that's insane.
To play 2 gap on early downs when more and more teams are slinging the ball around just doesn't seem that logical. It inhibits your ability to generate a pass rush by its nature.
I guess it's just a matter of personal preference. I've always preferred 1-gap schemes. Yes, you may get gashed for a run every now and then, but you also will get a big sack/tackle for loss every now and then too. I know you prefer the 2-gap because it is safer and prevents the big play, limiting the damage, but I think in this NFL you have to be willing to take more chances and go for the negative play. If you sit back and read and react to everything, you're going to get eaten alive. The rules are different now and the QB's are too precise/good now, IMO.
We could debate this one forever. Frankly, I favor the conservative approach for this team, at this time, because it is what BB has always employed, and I am happy with the results. I think you judge philosophy long term and rosters short term.
Also, when you state 'sit back and read and react' you kind of misrepresent the 2 gap.
Imagine you at a DL. In a 2gap, if it is a run, you come off the ball driving toward a gap, and are met by a blocker (unless someone misses an assignment) you are trying to drive through the gap, then find the ball, which may be long gone.
In a 2 gap you are driving INTO the blocker, and trying to control him to make the play on the gap on either side of him. You aren't sitting around waiting for the play to develop, you are establishing control of your territory.
If it is a pass play, the 1gapped has already shot his gap, and as the pass blocker takes his drop, he shifts left or right.
A 2gapped is not going to engage an OL if it is a pass. His first movement is toward the OL, but the OL is backing up to pass block. The DL reads that move and goes into pass rush mode.
The only difference is the 2gapper is head up and the 1gapper is not, so the OL must slide a bit. Not as dramatic as it is made to seem.
I don't think we will see BB get away from the 2-gap either, but I personally hope he does go more towards a 1-gap defense.
I think asking Albert to play a 2-gap defense takes away his greatest strength -- shooting gaps as a penetrating 3-technique and blowing plays up in the backfield before they even start.
I disagree here. I dont think that is his greatest strength at all. He is more huge and powerful than enormously quick. A one gap player wins on quickness a 2 gap player on strength. I think Haynesworths biggest strength is dominating the man across from him, and that fits the 2 gap.
The issue with Haynesworth in Washington wasn't that he is a better player as a 1 gapper, its that a 2gap requires discipline and staying home, and Albert felt the defense should be about him, and he should be able to do whatever he felt he wanted to on any play. No doubt he could make more big plays by freelancing because 2 good guesses a game accomplishes that, but it isnt helping your defense. I will take solid, 'you can't run from outside the G to inside the TE all day run defense over whatever tackles in the backfield, and the expense of that, you get in a 1 gap.
Yes, I do agree that Haynesworth could be dominant in a 2-gap like Seymour was and I do agree that dominating in a 2-gap is not the same as dominating in a 1-gap defense. That's why I never understood why so many fans got on Seymour for his lack of sacks, forced fumbles, TFL's, etc. But do you really think Haynesworth is the same type of guy as Seymour? I can't see Haynesworth being satisfied with playing a similar role that Seymour played. He will get disinterested, he will get frustrated, and he will probably quit/dog it if he's asked to do something like that.
But we play sub package over 50% of the time. If Haymesworths job is to control his part of the field in the base, and 'kill the QB' in the sub, I don't know why that is an issue.
Essentially we are saying if we are in a base, and its a run, he must control those 2 gaps first before chasing the ball. Is that something to make him give up?
I think the issue in Wash wasn't really the 2gap, but that he was the highest paid D player ever, and he thought it was disrespectful to him to not build the defense around him.
Haynesworth is a guy that likes the attention, likes the stats.
Thats the perception, but do you really think BB would have him here and on the field if that is (or at least still is) the reality?
He wants to be penetrating, he wants to be making plays, he wants to be sacking the QB -- he doesn't want to be lauded by BB for tying up blockers and allowing Mayo to make a tackle on RB.
Our defense does not ask him to tie up blockers so Mayo can make a tackle
That's why despite him having the talent to be successful in a 2-gap, I can't see him being all that happy with it. From afar, we will be lauding him for a job well done, but he's not going to be a happy camper.
I frankly cannot think of a worse argument for changing philosophy than the guy who flamed out and gave up somewhere else thinks we should change philiosophy and we better do it to keep him happy.
Take a step back. Do you really think Bill Belichick would be held hostage by what some guy he traded a 2013 5th rounder for thinks the defense should be?
If Haynesworth truly felt he only wanted to play if the defense was changed to what he wants it to be, that would have come out in their first discussion and he would be cut already.
Our coach is Bill Belichick not Herman Edwards.