Did BB make a mistake bypassing Dunlap for Cunningham last year...

[E Belichick Unum]

Except that when our defense was at it's best it was Seymour, not McGinest or Vrabel that was our best pass rusher. He was the guy commanding double teams and still beating them for a sack / hit / hurry. It was Seymour leaving our OLB as in 1 on 1 matchups that let them be sucessful.

My answer would be that Richard Seymour had 8 sacks in 2008 and 8 sacks in 2003, career highs.

My answer would be Seymour was the last time a team had to game plan for 1 specific Pats pass rusher. I agree that a dominant player makes the whole defense's job much easier. I just disagree that it has to come from OLB. It doesn't really matter who is the dominant rusher IMO just that you have one.

Now if you ask my preference of where I want my dominant player I'd say DL. It stops the offense from knowing where the 4th rusher is coming from. It's why I pray for Ngata in a Pats uni every night. But don't get me wrong I'd settle for DeMarcus Ware.

Seymour was a very good all around player, but he was not the outside guy that many here believe he was. He did a lot of things well and that made him somebody who had to be accounted for, but you didn't game plan for Seymour, other than to throw an occational double team at him on running plays.

 

[DaBruinz]

Seymour was a very good all around player, but he was not the outside guy that many here believe he was. He did a lot of things well and that made him somebody who had to be accounted for, but you didn't game plan for Seymour, other than to throw an occational double team at him on running plays.

This is silly.. Teams didn't gameplan for Seymour?? HUH? Seymour was the Pats BEST defensive player for years. His drawing double and sometimes Triple teams would leave the OLB either free or 1-on-1.

But, the fact remains that the Pats were MOST effective in the pass rush when they were rushing a LB from any one of the 4 LB spots. If you aren't sure where the rush is coming from, then you can't be sure you've called the correct protection. And with the way the Pats defense would audible (Thanks to Tedy Bruschi) it would create more confusion for the offense.

 

[BlueThunder]

I'm confused (as usual)...

I thought we were discussing Dunlap vs Cunningham....it seems Big Sey has snuck into the discussion...

Totally agree with posters who think BB chose Cunningham because of issues other than just measurables.....not sure what wonderlic scores were for both guys, but BB does whats best for TEAM...that includes leadership...locker room...work ethic....off field issues, etc...

I have no regrets with the Cunningham pick....let's see what he can do healthy with a year under his belt.. :rocker:

 

[borg]

Since the Pats were using sub defenses 56% of the time, the whole 3-4 4-3 arguement is less convincing. Info that would help would be how Cunningham was used in sub Ds, what downs was on the field for, etc. Going out on a limb, I'll take Cunningham on 1st and 2nd down......and Dunlap on 3rd down and Jets playoff games

 

[Professor Frink]

Since the Pats were using sub defenses 56% of the time, the whole 3-4 4-3 arguement is less convincing. Info that would help would be how Cunningham was used in sub Ds, what downs was on the field for, etc. Going out on a limb, I'll take Cunningham on 1st and 2nd down......and Dunlap on 3rd down and Jets playoff games

The problem is if you don't have a guy who can play 1st and 2nd down you won't see a lot of 3rd and longs. One of Cunningham's biggest contribution to the team last year was him consistently holding the edge on running plays to his side. It's why TBC played a lot less last year, and they were a better team for it.

Can anyone here provide any evidence that suggests Dunlap would have been as good as Cunningham in this respect? If he can't, then the defense continues to look soft on early downs and they start getting pushed around a lot more.

 

[JPPT1974]

Well Seymour isn't here in NE. As we shall see what kind of player Dunlap is now won't we?

 

[sbpatfan]

The problem is if you don't have a guy who can play 1st and 2nd down you won't see a lot of 3rd and longs. One of Cunningham's biggest contribution to the team last year was him consistently holding the edge on running plays to his side. It's why TBC played a lot less last year, and they were a better team for it.

Can anyone here provide any evidence that suggests Dunlap would have been as good as Cunningham in this respect? If he can't, then the defense continues to look soft on early downs and they start getting pushed around a lot more.

BUT DUNLApz HAD LEIK 9 SACKS MAN!!!!oneone111!!1

 

[ay-yo]

Seymour was a very good all around player, but he was not the outside guy that many here believe he was. He did a lot of things well and that made him somebody who had to be accounted for, but you didn't game plan for Seymour, other than to throw an occational double team at him on running plays.

So do you stand by the notion that an OLB must be the dominant pass rushing force? Or could it come from a DL in your opinion?

 

[Snake Eyes]

So do you stand by the notion that an OLB must be the dominant pass rushing force? Or could it come from a DL in your opinion?

While I cannot speak for him I’m going to take the D-lineman, he’s the first point of contact and therefore will likely have more impact. I’d prefer a magnificent D-lineman with an ok OLB over an ok D-lineman with a magnificent OLB.

 

[E Belichick Unum]

So do you stand by the notion that an OLB must be the dominant pass rushing force? Or could it come from a DL in your opinion?

In this scheme the outside pass rush id expected to come from the blindside OLB. That player is the only player on the field with no coverage or blocking responsibilities in passing situations.

 

[E Belichick Unum]

While I cannot speak for him I’m going to take the D-lineman, he’s the first point of contact and therefore will likely have more impact. I’d prefer a magnificent D-lineman with an ok OLB over an ok D-lineman with a magnificent OLB.

The scheme mandates that the end take on the tackle and push him into the backfield to cut off any running play, the nose is responsible for creating the need for a double team in the middle of the line, clogging up the running land. The ILB is responsible for making tackles at the line of scrimage. If a DE is getting sacks that is great, but he isn't doing what he is supposed to do and he is leaving the end open for a RB to get around it. They call it sealing the edge.

I would love a dominent DE, but that isn't how the defense is supposed to work

 

[Snake Eyes]

The scheme mandates that the end take on the tackle and push him into the backfield to cut off any running play, the nose is responsible for creating the need for a double team in the middle of the line, clogging up the running land. The ILB is responsible for making tackles at the line of scrimage. If a DE is getting sacks that is great, but he isn't doing what he is supposed to do and he is leaving the end open for a RB to get around it. They call it sealing the edge.

I would love a dominent DE, but that isn't how the defense is supposed to work

There's a difference between a DE "being dominant" and positioning himself to get sacks, I'm talking about a DE doing what he's supposed to do but doing it on a magnificent level.

 

[borg]

The scheme mandates that the end take on the tackle and push him into the backfield to cut off any running play, the nose is responsible for creating the need for a double team in the middle of the line, clogging up the running land. The ILB is responsible for making tackles at the line of scrimage. If a DE is getting sacks that is great, but he isn't doing what he is supposed to do and he is leaving the end open for a RB to get around it. They call it sealing the edge.

I would love a dominent DE, but that isn't how the defense is supposed to work

Scenario: 3rd down...empty backfield....statuelike QB.........contain is irrelevant.

 

[Sciz]

Scenario: 3rd down...empty backfield....statuelike QB.........contain is irrelevant.

Yeah, but you have to have guys to get the opposing offense into third and long first. This is about the only scenario that a hair-on-fire guy is good in the Pats' scheme, so Bill invests accordingly, with an UDFA last year (Fletcher) and a 6th round pick this year (Carter) as his situational guys.

 

[townes]

If they were running aq 4-3 Dunlap would have been the better choice but for this team Cunningham is a much better choice imo. Cunningham has all the tools to become a really good elephant OLB in this system he just needs the time and reps to get there. If Belichik is right about him then much of the fretting we do about their OLB's will be relieved.

 

[PatsFanStnfrd]

Gaspar has interesting comments on the need for Cunningham (among others) to raise his game a notch: Training camp is not a foregone conclusion for these five Patriots - Christopher Gasper's Blog - Boston sports news - Boston.com

It is noteworthy what Gaspar says about Cunningham's role irrespective of scheme:
"Regardless of what defensive alignment the Patriots use this season – 3-4 or 4-3 – the pressure is on Cunningham to bring more pressure this season. The one sack and four quarterback hits in 15 games he had as a rookie don't conjure up visions of a young Andre Tippett.

However, putting Cunningham in a 4-3 defense, which he played in during college, could allow him to play more instinctively and enable his natural pass-rush ability to manifest. It better." (emphasis provided)

After noting the success Dunlap has had with the Bengals in his rookie year, Gaspar goes on to emphasize:
"Rushing the passer in the NFL is an innate ability. The good ones usually display it early in their career if given ample opportunity. Willie McGinest had 11 sacks in his second season. " (emphasis provided)

Some here who have strongly-held views on the "kind of players" who "fit" or "don't fit" into the Patriots schemes. Thankfully, the great coach that he is, BB is both flexible and innovative. Kudos to him for always being willing to change/experiment -- witness the trade for Haynesworth.

 

[Synovia]

After noting the success Dunlap has had with the Bengals in his rookie year, Gaspar goes on to emphasize:
"Rushing the passer in the NFL is an innate ability. The good ones usually display it early in their career if given ample opportunity. Willie McGinest had 11 sacks in his second season. " (emphasis provided).

Willie McGinest was drafted 1st overall. He was supposed to produce immediately. James Harrison had 4 sacks through his first 44 games.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Gaspar has interesting comments on the need for Cunningham (among others) to raise his game a notch: Training camp is not a foregone conclusion for these five Patriots - Christopher Gasper's Blog - Boston sports news - Boston.com

It is noteworthy what Gaspar says about Cunningham's role irrespective of scheme:
"Regardless of what defensive alignment the Patriots use this season – 3-4 or 4-3 – the pressure is on Cunningham to bring more pressure this season. The one sack and four quarterback hits in 15 games he had as a rookie don't conjure up visions of a young Andre Tippett.

However, putting Cunningham in a 4-3 defense, which he played in during college, could allow him to play more instinctively and enable his natural pass-rush ability to manifest. It better." (emphasis provided)

After noting the success Dunlap has had with the Bengals in his rookie year, Gaspar goes on to emphasize:
"Rushing the passer in the NFL is an innate ability. The good ones usually display it early in their career if given ample opportunity. Willie McGinest had 11 sacks in his second season. " (emphasis provided)

Some here who have strongly-held views on the "kind of players" who "fit" or "don't fit" into the Patriots schemes. Thankfully, the great coach that he is, BB is both flexible and innovative. Kudos to him for always being willing to change/experiment -- witness the trade for Haynesworth.

If Gaspar realized that Cunningham's main responsibility in his limited playing time last year was stopping the run, and that he had a ton of hurries, he could have written something worth reading.

 

[PatsFanStnfrd]

Here is Mike Reiss's take on Cunningham's performance in camp as of August 9, 2011:

"Q. Mike, do you interpret the plethora of recent defensive line signings as a bit of a referendum on Jermaine Cunningham's ability to hold down the defensive end position? With the Pats' multiple look defensive approach, is there a chance they use him as an OLB in sub situations? -- Zack (Somerville, Mass.)

A. Zack, I wouldn't write Cunningham off just yet, but I do think he's had a slow start in camp. Specifically in one-on-ones in camp, I haven't seen much pass-rush diversity, but I think it's too early to dismiss his potential impact. Overall, I think Cunningham is an on-the-line player in this system, and when I think of an outside linebacker in sub packages, a player like Gary Guyton fits better in my view."
New England Patriots Mailbag -- Bill Belichick using camp as his petri dish - ESPN Boston

I know the season hasn't begun -- but this is a story worth following as the season unfolds. Hoping that Cunningham surprises.....

 

[MrNathanDrake]

After seeing Cunningham all of last year, and this pre-season...

I will come right out and say it. YES, BB made a huge mistake passing Dunlap for Cunningham.