Belichick addresses a Weakness...

[goheels22002]

It looks like you drew a conclusion then searched for some evidence to fill in.
I don't really see any of the points you made as convincing.
It seems to me that BB recognizes he has the GOAT QB and intends to put as much of the impact on winning as possible in his hands.
I also think he could care less about statistical rankings.

The part about the big fullbacks and RB Brandon Bolden out of Mississippi or wherever he's from is correct. I do not see that as a clock management thing, more as a preference of Josh McDaniels to block for Brady and have a big back to take on the very short yardage plays. Watching Brady get folded in two against the Broncos last season freaked me out. Why is your 34-year-old HOFer diving headfirst into the line?

Anyway, I think the two SB losses revealed the same issue - no stud blocking back to handle the pass rush when the OL is outnumbered or beaten was an issue in both games.

I believe that if the pinball macjhine offense is clicking, McDaniels won't give a whit about time of possession - let the track meet begin. But in grinding games, the Pats need backfield blockers which the new guys can supply.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

It goes both ways. The defense too needs to get off the field and can't allow as many time consuming drives as it does, keeping our most valuable weapon on the sideline.

People have gone back and forth blaming Welker, some blame the defense, some blame Gronk's injury or Brady's boneheaded safety. It was the collective effort of each phase that ultimately led to our demise last year. You can throw in ST's to the equation too which were thoroughly outplayed and probably cost us crucial points. IMO no 1 phase deserves to be called out for the SB loss.

Looking at the team overall, the biggest weakness has got to be that secondary

 

[goheels22002]

Looking at the team overall, the biggest weakness has got to be that secondary

The secondary improved dramatically down the stretch right after Fat Albert was released and Carter/Anderson took over on the pass rush. That secondary will be much better with the reinforcements up front that Belichick has brought in.

Defense is about all the parts working. The secondary got torched early as Belichick made the tough decisions to get rid of guys and Chung got hurt last season. The defensive line was not putting pressure on opposing quarterbacks as was anticipated when Haynesworth was signed. It was a mess.

When the D-Line settled in, started gettings sacks and pressures, and Chung retiurned, the picture changed. By that time the defense had already given up so much yardage the pundits pounded the "worst in the NFL drum" while the wins mounted and opposing production declined.

This year's secondary should be much better as it benefits from the rookies and the other help BB brought to the front seven.

 

[Ring 6]

The part about the big fullbacks and RB Brandon Bolden out of Mississippi or wherever he's from is correct.

We signed a bunch of guys to compete for one job as a FB after having one for a large part of last year. I don't see how that foreshadows a change in philosophy.

I do not see that as a clock management thing, more as a preference of Josh McDaniels to block for Brady and have a big back to take on the very short yardage plays. Watching Brady get folded in two against the Broncos last season freaked me out. Why is your 34-year-old HOFer diving headfirst into the line?

Again the point of debate is that the OP is arguing this indicates a change in philosophy to an offense that runs a significant amount more.

Anyway, I think the two SB losses revealed the same issue - no stud blocking back to handle the pass rush when the OL is outnumbered or beaten was an issue in both games.

Interesting take, however, I don't think the RB is to blame when the OL gets beaten one on one as in 07 and the pass rush wasn't one of the top reasons for the loss this year.

I believe that if the pinball macjhine offense is clicking, McDaniels won't give a whit about time of possession - let the track meet begin. But in grinding games, the Pats need backfield blockers which the new guys can supply.

Again, the argument is BB is changing his philosophy to focus on TOP. My original point was that none of these reason are convincing in that regard.

 

[Ring 6]

It goes both ways. The defense too needs to get off the field and can't allow as many time consuming drives as it does, keeping our most valuable weapon on the sideline.

People have gone back and forth blaming Welker, some blame the defense, some blame Gronk's injury or Brady's boneheaded safety. It was the collective effort of each phase that ultimately led to our demise last year. You can throw in ST's to the equation too which were thoroughly outplayed and probably cost us crucial points. IMO no 1 phase deserves to be called out for the SB loss.

Looking at the team overall, the biggest weakness has got to be that secondary

Until proven otherwise, you have to call the secondary the biggest weakness, but on the other hand, it has potential to be a strong unit.

 

[eom]

without checking stats, my dim recollection is that the 2007 mcdaniels offense had a pretty excellent ToP differential, and I use that year because it's probably what people think of as a 'pinball' passing offense.
I don't know that ToP necessarily equates to a ground and pound philosophy, although I understand why they get linked so often.

it's obviously about scoring points, but you also want to keep the other guy from scoring points, and eating ToP is one tool for doing that.
you don't have to just run the ball to do that, though --- on offense, it helps to keep long drives alive, which the 2007 team was excellent at, I believe.
you can do that by passing as well as running.

edit: and, as been mentioned by several posters already, defense has to do it's part by stopping long drives and creating turnovers.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

The secondary improved dramatically down the stretch right after Fat Albert was released and Carter/Anderson took over on the pass rush. That secondary will be much better with the reinforcements up front that Belichick has brought in.

Defense is about all the parts working. The secondary got torched early as Belichick made the tough decisions to get rid of guys and Chung got hurt last season. The defensive line was not putting pressure on opposing quarterbacks as was anticipated when Haynesworth was signed. It was a mess.

When the D-Line settled in, started gettings sacks and pressures, and Chung retiurned, the picture changed. By that time the defense had already given up so much yardage the pundits pounded the "worst in the NFL drum" while the wins mounted and opposing production declined.

This year's secondary should be much better as it benefits from the rookies and the other help BB brought to the front seven.

The secondary improved, but they did benefit from playing some abysmal QB's after our 3rd loss. When they finally faced a couple top 10 QB's in Flacco(borderline top 10) and Eli (borderline top 5) they went back to giving up 300 yards and 100 rating. We were very fortunate that Joe Flacco was the biggest challenge standing in our way to a SB last year.

I agree with you and Andy that our secondary could potentially be a strength this year, depending on Dowling/McCourty/the rookies and FA's which do look promising. It honestly has potential to be our best secondary since 2003. But right now Arrington and Chung are the only ones that have been reasonably dependable the last couple years, and Chung has missed a chunk of time.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

The secondary improved, but they did benefit from playing some abysmal QB's after our 3rd loss. When they finally faced a couple top 10 QB's in Flacco(borderline top 10) and Eli (borderline top 5) they went back to giving up 300 yards and 100 rating. We were very fortunate that Joe Flacco was the biggest challenge standing in our way to a SB last year.

I agree with you and Andy that our secondary could potentially be a strength this year, depending on Dowling/McCourty/the rookies and FA's which do look promising. It honestly has potential to be our best secondary since 2003. But right now Arrington and Chung are the only ones that have been reasonably dependable the last couple years, and Chung has missed a chunk of time.

"Benefit.......????????"

Things don't occur in a vacuum.

You do realize that the Giants were a top 10 offense that was limited to below their season average in yards AND 7 points below their season scoring average?

Maybe not

Also, the Ravens were the benficiary of poor Patriot QB play not some superior Flacco effort. The reality is they were plus 2 in turnovers......and lost. A collection of irrelavent stats doesn't change the huge debacle.

 

[mgteich]

1) IMHO, the secondary is our weakest unit. If you disagree, please state your choice for the weakest unit and why.

2) The secondary is likely to improve over 2011, a very low bar indeed. After all, we played without any safeties for much of the year, and a top CB prospect was injured.

3) There are many reasons to expect the secondary to improve,
a) return of injured players
b) player additions
c) improved system knowledge for newbies, given that we wil have a full offseason
d) likely improvement in the front 7
e) Belichick's (and Josh's) interest in increasing TOP, especially late in the game. Even a
a small improvement in the running game should increase TOP

 

[Spergon Wynn]

We signed a bunch of guys to compete for one job as a FB after having one for a large part of last year. I don't see how that foreshadows a change in philosophy.

Wasn't Polite signed before one of the last games of the season?

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

"Benefit.......????????"

Things don't occur in a vacuum.

You do realize that the Giants were a top 10 offense that was limited to below their season average in yards AND 7 points below their season scoring average?

Maybe not

Also, the Ravens were the benficiary of poor Patriot QB play not some superior Flacco effort. The reality is they were plus 2 in turnovers......and lost. A collection of irrelavent stats doesn't change the huge debacle.

Yes, we did benefit. Anytime you have a defense that was historically bad in pass defense you would be fortunate to reach the Super Bowl. We are fortunate that the QB's we faced en route to that game were Tim Tebow and Joe Flacco.

The Giants did what they wanted to do, and that was keep TB off the field. Again, I don't blame solely the defense for that, the offense had their share of short possessions and mistakes, but the defense needs to get off the field. I'll go as far to say that for how bad the defense was in the regular season, they played well enough to give our offense a chance in each game. But typically you want your defense to be more than that and not relying on the offense so much, especially when their possessions are limited. And when the game was on the line, they led Eli march right down the field. Defense was upgraded this offseason and multiple WR's were brought in to fix our lack of depth at that position. ST's I believe was mostly just bad luck or a poor outing as the Giants do not have strong ST's, though we could use a legit KR.

 

[goheels22002]

We signed a bunch of guys to compete for one job as a FB after having one for a large part of last year. I don't see how that foreshadows a change in philosophy.

The makeup of the backfield group heading into camp may very well foreshadow a change under Josh McDaniels. I think two or three backs weighing in at 220 or more make this team. McDaniels had that in Denver.

There are three fullbacks in camp now, and Brandon Bolden is a big running back. Ridley weighs 225 and is a thumper. Elsewhere there is a thread about Danny Woodhead's roster spot. The Patriots could go with just Vereen as a speed back to pair with a one of their big bruising backs who are there for the purpose of blocking and very short yardage carries.

In Denver, Josh had FB Spencer Larsen, big BR Corell Bucholter, big RB Lance Ball for blocking and short yardage. All those guys go 220-plus. This has the feel of the NY Giants backfield combined with talented receivers and an elite QB.

TE Daniel Fells is another addition worth watching as a big, heavy blocker at 6'4" 272.

Think about short yardage with Bolden or Ridlley with Larsen at RB in the backfield behind Gronk and Fells at TE with Lloyd and Welker outside. What, as a defensive coordinator, do you do?

You could run-blitz and risk getting burned deep, or stay home and hope your front seven can get penetration. You have to bring somebody up to defend Gronkowski, so you're left with one safety and single coverage on Welker and Lloyd.

Good luck with that.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Yes, we did benefit. Anytime you have a defense that was historically bad in pass defense you would be fortunate to reach the Super Bowl. We are fortunate that the QB's we faced en route to that game were Tim Tebow and Joe Flacco.

The Giants did what they wanted to do, and that was keep TB off the field. Again, I don't blame solely the defense for that, the offense had their share of short possessions and mistakes, but the defense needs to get off the field. I'll go as far to say that for how bad the defense was in the regular season, they played well enough to give our offense a chance in each game. But typically you want your defense to be more than that and not relying on the offense so much, especially when their possessions are limited. And when the game was on the line, they led Eli march right down the field. Defense was upgraded this offseason and multiple WR's were brought in to fix our lack of depth at that position. ST's I believe was mostly just bad luck or a poor outing as the Giants do not have strong ST's, though we could use a legit KR.

If the Giants "did what they wanted" then I guess they had a pre ordained game plan that said fall behind and never score untill the end so we can make it a magically exciting game.

What evidence is there that makes you state the Giants purposely decided not to score after the safety and then purposely settle for field goals until the final minute?

........because "they did what they wanted".

Here's reality.

TOP differential was driven by the safety. 1st quarter, one play and safety.

For whatever strange reason, it's simply hard to fathom why such a simple concept that a "hurry up" offenses does not hold the ball long can't be grasped.

Look the first Patriots TD. 90+ yards in about 3 minutes. In traditional football, that's 10-12 minutes. Until someone figures out how to string a 10-15 play special teams drive together, the reality is one offense will have the ball. If your offense is designed to score with minimal time, the other offense gets the ball more.

"Get off the field" is another one of these unicorn pooping Skittles concepts that for some ungodly reason receives unconditional devotion.

Watch the game, review the stats.

After the opeing drive in the second half, it's 17-9. The Giants get FG, FG off of int, and then punt. The balance of the second half and the outcome of the game was simply determined by the fact the offense simply refused to close out the game after the defense gave them chance after chance to do so.

Simple reality that you can't find looking for unicorns.

Besides, it's obvious the overriding weakness of the team was addressed in the first move in FA. Getting a compatible third TE for a two TE based offense was the most important step toward addressing failure to secure another Lombardi.

 

[goheels22002]

After the opeing drive in the second half, it's 17-9. The Giants get FG, FG off of int, and then punt. The balance of the second half and the outcome of the game was simply determined by the fact the offense simply refused to close out the game after the defense gave them chance after chance to do so.

Besides, it's obvious the overriding weakness of the team was addressed in the first move in FA. Getting a compatible third TE for a two TE based offense was the most important step toward addressing failure to secure another Lombardi.

On offense, Fells was an important pickup, but so, too were the two fullbacks and Brandon Bolden as an un-drafted rookie.

The "overriding weakness," for the whole season, not just the Super Bowl, was the defense, particularly improving the pass rush and adding some coverage skills to the secondary - which the Patriots also did.

All of us who screeched about the needs before the draft were rewarded this Spring with rookies and FAs that fit the bill.

I like the makeup of this Patriots team better than any since 2004-05, including the 2007 team. I also like that Belichick has a full-time Offensive Coordinator and a full-time Defensive Coordinator. That was also a feature of the three Super Bowl teams in the early 2000s.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

On offense, Fells was an important pickup, but so, too were the two fullbacks and Brandon Bolden as an un-drafted rookie.

The "overriding weakness," for the whole season, not just the Super Bowl, was the defense, particularly improving the pass rush and adding some coverage skills to the secondary - which the Patriots also did.

All of us who screeched about the needs before the draft were rewarded this Spring with rookies and FAs that fit the bill.

I like the makeup of this Patriots team better than any since 2004-05, including the 2007 team. I also like that Belichick has a full-time Offensive Coordinator and a full-time Defensive Coordinator. That was also a feature of the three Super Bowl teams in the early 2000s.

I do like the lime Skittles best.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

If the Giants "did what they wanted" then I guess they had a pre ordained game plan that said fall behind and never score untill the end so we can make it a magically exciting game.

What evidence is there that makes you state the Giants purposely decided not to score after the safety and then purposely settle for field goals until the final minute?

........because "they did what they wanted".

Here's reality.

TOP differential was driven by the safety. 1st quarter, one play and safety.

For whatever strange reason, it's simply hard to fathom why such a simple concept that a "hurry up" offenses does not hold the ball long can't be grasped.

Look the first Patriots TD. 90+ yards in about 3 minutes. In traditional football, that's 10-12 minutes. Until someone figures out how to string a 10-15 play special teams drive together, the reality is one offense will have the ball. If your offense is designed to score with minimal time, the other offense gets the ball more.

"Get off the field" is another one of these unicorn pooping Skittles concepts that for some ungodly reason receives unconditional devotion.

Watch the game, review the stats.

After the opeing drive in the second half, it's 17-9. The Giants get FG, FG off of int, and then punt. The balance of the second half and the outcome of the game was simply determined by the fact the offense simply refused to close out the game after the defense gave them chance after chance to do so.

Simple reality that you can't find looking for unicorns.

Besides, it's obvious the overriding weakness of the team was addressed in the first move in FA. Getting a compatible third TE for a two TE based offense was the most important step toward addressing failure to secure another Lombardi.

Nobody's saying they wanted to fall behind early. They sustained drives, kept Brady off the field for 37 minutes out of 60 and disrupted him just enough when he was on the field. Same principle they used in '07, despite being behind most of the game they were able to shorten the game and limit their chances. That's how you beat the juggernaut offense, you don't just try to outgun them. They were in position to win the game at the end, and they did. That doesn't mean they 'preferred' playing from behind.

There were multiple weaknesses in the team last year, just because the first move in FA was getting a TE doesn't prove whatsoever that was the biggest weakness. Do you honestly think Fells was the coveted FA and BB's #1 priority when assessing the team after last season? BB moved up twice in the 1st round and used all 4 1st and 2nd rounders on defense. He also put a good portion of the FA spendings into Fanene and other defensive additions.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Nobody's saying they wanted to fall behind early. They sustained drives, kept Brady off the field for 37 minutes out of 60 and disrupted him just enough when he was on the field. Same principle they used in '07, despite being behind most of the game they were able to shorten the game and limit their chances. That's how you beat the juggernaut offense, you don't just try to outgun them. They were in position to win the game at the end, and they did. That doesn't mean they 'preferred' playing from behind.

There were multiple weaknesses in the team last year, just because the first move in FA was getting a TE doesn't prove whatsoever that was the biggest weakness. Do you honestly think Fells was the coveted FA and BB's #1 priority when assessing the team after last season? BB moved up twice in the 1st round and used all 4 1st and 2nd rounders on defense. He also put a good portion of the FA spendings into Fanene and other defensive additions.

I'd reread your post.

PATSYLICIOUS not patsfaninpittsburgh said the Giants "did what they wanted". patsfaninpittsburgh assumes you post things you believe.

patsfaninpittsburgh posts things he knows to be correct.

For patsfaninpittsburgh to accept your deep seated belief..... patsfaninpittsburgh needs some verification.

Why do you think that patsfaninpittsburgh knew the very first move made in the offseason would be to sign a marginal TE?

patsfaninpittsburgh knows BB tried to sign Fells in 2010. Why?

What does patsfaninpittsburgh and BB know to be true? Are they both genius in that they understand a two TE based offense is not going to be as good with like..........one TE?

patsfaninpittsburgh isn't out hunting unicorns with "getting off the field" but was busy watching football in 2011. That simple exercise allowed patsfaninpittsburgh to make conclusions on things that were obviously obvious.

Looks like Bill Belichick did the exact same thing.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Ok I mean if you want to think that BB sat there after the season was over and said, "Daniel Fells is the leading answer to all our problems" I'm not going to sit here and try to convince you otherwise. Is he going to help? Hopefully and most likely yes. Do I agree with alot of your criticisms towards our offense? For sure, you're preaching to the choir on alot of that and I've been wanting a stronger commitment to running the ball and more efficient offense as opposed to a run n shoot style for some time now.

But the fact is that you can add Fells to that offense. Heck, you can add Mark Bavaro in his prime along with the '07 Moss and they're still going to have a very difficult time winning a Super Bowl with that defense. 9 times out of 10, they will not make it. Because as we saw in 2007, it doesn't matter if you have the greatest offense in history, in the playoffs there WILL come a time when you're going to have to rely on making consistent and clutch stops on defense. Our main concern is can we build a defense that we can count on to stop an Eli Manning, let alone a Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, or Drew Brees when the season's on the line.

 

[eom]

"My mind's telling me no.... but my bodyyyy, my BODYYYYY'S TELLIN ME YESSS!"

- R Kelly

also, the police are telling you no.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Ok I mean if you want to think that BB sat there after the season was over and said, "Daniel Fells is the leading answer to all our problems" I'm not going to sit here and try to convince you otherwise. Is he going to help? Hopefully and most likely yes. Do I agree with alot of your criticisms towards our offense? For sure, you're preaching to the choir on alot of that and I've been wanting a stronger commitment to running the ball and more efficient offense as opposed to a run n shoot style for some time now.

But the fact is that you can add Fells to that offense. Heck, you can add Mark Bavaro in his prime along with the '07 Moss and they're still going to have a very difficult time winning a Super Bowl with that defense. 9 times out of 10, they will not make it. Because as we saw in 2007, it doesn't matter if you have the greatest offense in history, in the playoffs there WILL come a time when you're going to have to rely on making consistent and clutch stops on defense. Our main concern is can we build a defense that we can count on to stop an Eli Manning, let alone a Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, or Drew Brees when the season's on the line.

Did you bother to watch the playoffs like patsfaninpittsburgh? or are you just so devoted and blinded by your opinion you refuse to accept the totality and reality of everything?

Consistent and clutch stops? LOL

Any concept of what that means? Apparently not because any balance shows in the second half the first three Giant drives with one off an INT were like really...truly, consistent and clutch stops. All that was required was one drive to close the game out.

never happened.

Why not actually watch the Baltimore game? Baltimore held to a FG after the Woodhead kickoff fumble and then.....nothing. Couple that with a Spikes INT that provided the offense with a gift chance to close the game out and......well......clutch.

Ofcourse, why is this suprising when it's so easy to dismiss Denver as Denver when the week before they put up 30 points on the "#1" Pittsburgh defense?

Only in the unicorn herd.

Would you prefer the 49er defense?

When given the chance to hold on a 3rd and 15, they allowed a 17 yard TD pass by Manning that allowed the game to go to OTand lose.

<choke>, <choke>, <choke>.....What does Harbaugh need to do to get a defense that can make a stop?