Bedard: Turning the Corner

[MoLewisrocks]

To repeat what I said earlier:





This assumption makes no sense at all, sorry. However, given the above, I think further discussion on this is just a waste of time.

When someone is so thoroughly entrenched in whatever absolutes they believe, discussion is always absolutely, unfortunately a waste of time.

Bill seems to be a guy who sees in a lot of shades of grey, unlike most of the fan base.

 

[Ring 6]

Fair enough. And maybe you're right. At the very least, you have forced me to re-think my assumptions.

I'd like to think a Hightower-Spikes-Mayo group, regardless of the front, allows this team to rush four, but that might just be wishful thinking on my part.

They are rushing 4 whether its a 34 or a 43.

 

[BradyManny]

They are rushing 4 whether its a 34 or a 43.

But in Deus' example, they aren't. His premise is that they need Ninko as an extra man in coverage given our base LBs' coverage skills.

EDIT: Jump in if I'm off base here Deus

 

[Deus Irae]

When someone is so thoroughly entrenched in whatever absolutes they believe, discussion is always absolutely, unfortunately a waste of time.

Bill seems to be a guy who sees in a lot of shades of grey, unlike most of the fan base.

I don't see this as black and white, and I don't think BradyManny does either. I think it may seem that way because I asked him to focus on the linebackers since that's where my issue about the subject is based, but the D-line is much less entrenched as a 3-4/4-3, IMO.

I think he and I have a fundamental difference of opinion about the current LB talent on the team, and I think that's where our differences lie and why we're not able to resolve this. He seemingly thinks more highly of the ability of the LBs to cover in the 4-3 than I do.

 

[BHSL2]

When someone is so thoroughly entrenched in whatever absolutes they believe, discussion is always absolutely, unfortunately a waste of time.

Bill seems to be a guy who sees in a lot of shades of grey, unlike most of the fan base.

You tell 'em Mo.

There is no way in all hell BB would play a 4-3 starting backer set of Hightower, Spikes, and Mayo. They would all get abused in coverage. Never mind the fact that they are all playmakers.

We definitely know the future.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

But the discussion is about the base defense, and its personell, not when it is used or who it is used against.
You are changing the discussion into something else.

Yeah, correct

That's kinda the point. What's the point of a "base" that's not really the "basis" for playing 16 games of football?

The coach was once known for finely tuned customized game plans. He's the antithesis of "do what we do".

As such, you two seem to actually not agree as to what to "base" the "base" defense on.

In the end, an NFL team will either play a run or pass first offense.

 

[BradyManny]

He seemingly thinks more highly of the ability of the LBs to cover in the 4-3 than I do.

Thanks for breaking it down much more cogently and succinctly than I have been able to. And being much kinder to me than necessary - were this a debate, you clearly won this round.

I'm not firm in my own beliefs on these guys' cover skills. The one guy I really have trouble evaluating is Mayo. My eyes would describe him as average, but the way Belichick has rewarded and treated him make me assume I'm missing something there.

Spikes, I just like more than most.

 

[BHSL2]

Thanks for breaking it down much more cogently and succinctly than I have been able to. And being much kinder to me than necessary - were this a debate, you clearly won this round.

I'm not firm in my own beliefs on these guys' cover skills. The one guy I really have trouble evaluating is Mayo. My eyes would describe him as average, but the way Belichick has rewarded and treated him make me assume I'm missing something there.

Spikes, I just like more than most.

Spikes is better in coverage than most people believe.

 

[BradyManny]

When someone is so thoroughly entrenched in whatever absolutes they believe, discussion is always absolutely, unfortunately a waste of time.

Bill seems to be a guy who sees in a lot of shades of grey, unlike most of the fan base.

Well, I've pretty much getting my a** handed to me debate-wise all day by Andy and Deus, so I wouldn't exactly put this thread on my Hall of Fame, but I'd like to think I see things in shades of grey. Whether or not that came across in my posts is a different story.

 

[Deus Irae]

Spikes is better in coverage than most people believe.

Tell that to Belichick. He pulls Spikes off the field and replaces him with the likes of Guyton.

 

[BHSL2]

Tell that to Belichick. He pulls Spikes off the field and replaces him with the likes of Guyton.

I should be more clear.

Spikes is by no means a world beater in coverage. However, he can be more than the "run thumping" MLB many fans make him out to be. He is definitely more capable than his stereo-type suggests. What he cannot cover with athleticism, he makes up for in instincts. Is he our best option? No. Does he have coverage strengths that can be coached up and be beneficial (+ factors) in base packages? Yes.

 

[goheels22002]

Please explain how this team is better suited to the 4-3 than the 3-4, focusing particularly on the linebackers, if you would.

They might be better off in a 4-3 base if they get significant contributions out of Jonathan Fanene, Chandler Jones and Jake Bequette. The interior is fine. Outside, Fanene brings veteran presence and inside pass rush from DE position on stunts, and both rookies add speed and athleticism on the outside that has been missing for some time.

The defensive line is the area I am most interested in watching evolve in camp. If the D-line becomes a major strength and can consistently apply pressure, the defensive backfield will be better. Last season, after the Fat Albert (and assorted other additions by subtraction) experiment ended, Carter and Anderson turned up the heat, the defense as a whole got better and the ppg and ypg allowed improved.

The young LB group will be athletic, fast and versatile. I don't think they are the reason why a 4-3 base will be the main approach. Their value and durability will be diminished if the D-line struggles and the D-backs will be exposed. You just can't give NFL QBs time to look around and pick you apart.

The Pats are better off in the 3-4 unless the new additions on the outside prove that they can bring pressure from the DE positions and contain in running/screen situations. Time will tell.

 

[Deus Irae]

I should be more clear.

Spikes is by no means a world beater in coverage. However, he can be more than the "run thumping" MLB many fans make him out to be. He is definitely more capable than his stereo-type suggests. What he cannot cover with athleticism, he makes up for in instincts. Is he our best option? No. Does he have coverage strengths that can be coached up and be beneficial (+ factors) in base packages? Yes.

Spikes is lousy in coverage, be it in the base or in a sub package. That's why they sub him out.

 

[BHSL2]

Spikes is lousy in coverage, be it in the base or in a sub package. That's why they sub him out.

Never said he was consistent in coverage. But when he is healthy he can and has the ability to make plays covering the field.

 

[shmessy]

Spikes is better in coverage than most people believe.

I remember two very clutch and well played interceptions by Spikes - - against the Jets in the regular season 2010 and against the Ravens in the AFCC last year.

Didnt look like a coverage liability there. In the meantime, he's our Ted Johnson, not our Ty Law. I dont get everyone's expectations on this matter.

 

[BHSL2]

I remember two very clutch and well played interceptions by Spikes - - against the Jets in the regular season 2010 and against the Ravens in the AFCC last year.

Didnt look like a coverage liability there. In the meantime, he's our Ted Johnson, not our Ty Law. I dont get everyone's expectations on this matter.

Funny, I was thinking of those two plays exactly.

He has the tools to make plays in coverage. Are there more athletic LBs? Yeah. For a LB of his type and stature, he can hold his own in coverage from time to time.

 

[Deus Irae]

I remember two very clutch and well played interceptions by Spikes - - against the Jets in the regular season 2010 and against the Ravens in the AFCC last year.

Didnt look like a coverage liability there. In the meantime, he's our Ted Johnson, not our Ty Law. I dont get everyone's expectations on this matter.

A couple of plays doesn't a full player make. I remember Guyton making a couple of plays. He's still gone.

 

[BHSL2]

A couple of plays doesn't a full player make. I remember Guyton making a couple of plays. He's still gone.

The Guyton point certainly keeps it in perspective. Overall though, I have more faith in Spikes than Guyton as a player.

 

[shmessy]

A couple of plays doesn't a full player make. I remember Guyton making a couple of plays. He's still gone.

Guyton was a coverage speed OLB who did an unexpectedly good job for a few months filling in for Mayo inside when he got hurt. Guyton is gone because, eventually, he couldnt tackle a teddy bear.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

 

[BananaRepublican]

The inclusion of Cunningham stood out to me, too.

That makes 50 of us.

I would have included Cunningham if we had had no draft, or if the draft went all offense. Then we would have had a headache if Cunningham didn't show up.

Didn't Bill praise him during OTAs? Didn't he say that he has shown a lot of improvement? Interesting. Maybe he'll take the competition factor up a notch.