Ty Law: the Defense [Mod Edit for Accuracy] Still Has Major Holes In It.

[SHOWTIME15]

Ty Law was on NFLN this morning and mentioned that the Pats defense still has major holes in it. He said that there are coverage problems and that had they played a better QB and receivers last week they would have easily lost. He even went to say that if Sanchez played the jets would have won the game. i don't know, there are a lot of people here who feel the defense was stellar - I'm not sure if I am ready to label last week's performance as that. Does Law have a point?

 

[scout]

I think every pats fan took the last two games with a grain of salt. Playing against two rookie qb's is not a good measuring stick. However, those rookies both had the ability to run and did not, due to the defensive strategy. Each week we will see how good the defense plays. There will play a bad game and some fans will have a knee-jerk reaction. I wouldn't use a Ty Law remark as a barometer.

 

[Betterthanmost]

I think every pats fan took the last two games with a grain of salt. Playing against two rookie qb's is not a good measuring stick. However, those rookies both had the ability to run and did not, due to the defensive strategy. Each week we will see how good the defense plays. There will play a bad game and some fans will have a knee-jerk reaction. I wouldn't use a Ty Law remark as a barometer.

This is a whole new NFL to his days. Back in the day, you had QBs who were good at throwing and not at running, who were good at running and not great at throwing. Game planning for them were straight forward. Do your job and we will be alright. Now on defense, players have to react, they can't go there and just do their job. These new QBs can throw well, run well. Duel threat is the modern NFL. Yes, the defense can be better, but Ty Law's view on this is misguided imo. Look all over the NFL, defenses do well against Brady because they have over 12 years of film on the guy and he usually does not have enough weapons to throw to and he can't run to save this life.

 

[scout]

This is a whole new NFL to his days. Back in the day, you had QBs who were good at throwing and not at running, who were good at running and not great at throwing. Game planning for them were straight forward. Do your job and we will be alright. Now on defense, players have to react, they can't go there and just do their job. These new QBs can throw well, run well. Duel threat is the modern NFL. Yes, the defense can be better, but Ty Law's view on this is misguided imo. Look all over the NFL, defenses do well against Brady because they have over 12 years of film on the guy and he usually does not have enough weapons to throw to and he can't run to save this life.

In addition, the rules for contact have changed since Ty was a corner.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

This is a whole new NFL to his days. Back in the day, you had QBs who were good at throwing and not at running, who were good at running and not great at throwing. Game planning for them were straight forward. Do your job and we will be alright. Now on defense, players have to react, they can't go there and just do their job. These new QBs can throw well, run well. Duel threat is the modern NFL. Yes, the defense can be better, but Ty Law's view on this is misguided imo. Look all over the NFL, defenses do well against Brady because they have over 12 years of film on the guy and he usually does not have enough weapons to throw to and he can't run to save this life.

Um....What?

 

[borg]

Ty Law was on NFLN this morning and mentioned that the Pats defense still has major holes in it. He said that there are coverage problems and that had they played a better QB and receivers last week they would have easily lost. He even went to say that if Sanchez played the jets would have won the game. i don't know, there are a lot of people here who feel the defense was stellar - I'm not sure if I am ready to label last week's performance as that. Does Law have a point?

With a +4 turn over advantage, the Pats won by 3 points. Of course he has a point. Smith went from indecisive=sacked QB in Q3 to first read/chuck it in Q4 which resulted in under thrown piks.
I personally thought the CB/S played reasonably well and tightened up their coverage as the game progressed. I see the LB coverage though as very exploitable with Mayo and Hightower too often trailing their man and any competent QB would have exploited these mismatches.....and we are talking about the skill-challenged Jets. The NO game will be the real test for the D........Jimmy Graham/Sproles.....I fear the LBs will get exposed decisively.

 

[Wilfork#75]

I don't think we can say either way right now how good our defense is. Obviously the results have been good but a lot of that can be attributed to two rookie QBs. I still have concerns over the pass rush and I don't think it has been overly impressive in either game. Sure we got 4 sacks against the Jets but at least 3 of the 4 were coverage/rookie QB sacks and not a dominant pass rush. I was also concerned about the run defense against the Jets and I think if they had of committed to the run they may have even won the game. But we won't really know for sure until I think week 4 when we head to Atlanta to see how this defense will go against a quality offense. I think we certainly have the pieces, its just a matter of them coming together and performing now.

 

[Sfpat]

Of course, if the Jets had Rodgers, C. Johnson and Graham, they would have scored more points and probably win the game (then again, if Brady had Gronk, Vareen, et al the Pats probably also score more points). Unfortunately, you have to play who you gots and the Pats schemed specifically for these two dual threat QBs. I would guess that the scheme against Ryan and Brees will be different.

 

[buile]

Ty Law was on NFLN this morning and mentioned that the Pats defense still has major holes in it. ... Does Law have a point?

As much as i'm a homer, of course he has a point. The season is just started, and every team is in a race to fix their flaws, and close new holes throughout the season.

But, the 1st and 2nd week Patriots beat the 1st and 2nd week Bills/Jets. To Law's point, maybe a mid-season Sanchez would've won... we'll never know.

What I ~did~ like seeing was the D-Line able to turn up the pressure during key drives... more than what I remember from early-year teams the past handful of seasons. I feel it bodes well.

As much as Talib is getting love for his interceptions, I really hope his week 3, 4+ performance doesn't look like week 2.... I think he can do it.

Not much to say on Gregory, sure nice hits, but I'd rather see his coverage improve... Honestly, I'm not hopeful there, so I'd rather spend energy on the younger guys instead.

 

[Rob0729]

The defense clearly doesn't suck. They have given up 24 points in two games. Even against rookie QBs, that is pretty impressive especially when 7 of the points came off a offensive turnover that gave the other team a really short field. They are are also +3 with the football after two games after giving up the ball three times on offense in the first game.

Is there still concerns with the defense? Sure, but what team doesn't. Unfortunately none of us, including Law, know for sure really what they are and how big they are. The Pats did not play a real aggressive defense preferring to stay in nickel most of the game and only rushing four. I am sure that as the season goes along and they face better offenses, we will see this defense progress.

In other years, this defense would have let the Bills and Jets put up over 20 points on over 400 yards on offense. This defense didn't.

 

[Get it shawtaay]

In other years, this defense would have let the Bills and Jets put up over 20 points on over 400 yards on offense. This defense didn't.

^This^

It might not be championship caliber or anything, but this is absolutely improvement.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Have to agree with Ty, as long as he didn't say the defense "sucks" which I am led to believe that was the OP putting words in his mouth. IMO it's a middle of the road defense right now that clearly does have a few holes that a couple below average QB's were unable to take advantage of and will need to be better down the road if the team wants to do anything in the playoffs. But to it's credit, it has improved from previous years and has been opportunistic in the turnover department and taking advantage of those poor QB's.

 

[Fencer]

By the numbers, you'll rarely see a better defensive performance than the Patriots had. (Well, maybe if there'd also been a couple of defensive scores ...) Of course they aren't quite as good as the box score shows.

Most notably, Smith hit some big passes, and with more talent and all else being equal, the Jets would have hit more than they did.

 

[Bella*chick]

Don't the defenses always start slow and start to gel more mid-season-ish?

Trouble is, the offense has started even slower this year.

 

[scout]

Googled Ty Law and did not see anything regarding Patriots defense for this year. Keep in mind in the Jets game, our offense was pretty much 3 and out the whole game. Thus, the defense had to defend more then in past years. The consensus was the defensive strategy shifted in the fourth quarter giving the rookie more to think about. As someone mentioned, each game is going to bring different defensive schemes and strategies.

 

[mgteich]

And the emperor had no clothes. Seriously, someone had to point that the defense hasn't exactly been playing like the 85 Bears.

The defense is a work in progress. We starting the season with the weakest starting teams (and 2 rookie quarterbacks) in quite some time. The defense played well enough to keep with the Sisters Of the Poor.

I've watched lots of analysis of the jets game. Jets receivers were open early and often. They dropped passes. Geno threw poorly to open receivers. And Geno simply didn't see wide open receivers.

And Wilfork and Spikes were man-handled so badly that we are sure that both were ill.

Of course, we have played a very vanilla defense. We played the nickel with 3 rotational players (kudos to Buchanan and Vellano). The rest sat on the bench except for a couple of plays (Harmon was the minor exception with 8 reps on Thursday). There were no dime backs (certainly none against the bills) and no sophistication.

The question is why. Wasn't this an opportunity to work together on normal defense? Certainly, experienced offenses will shred such a defense. Long gone are the defense where all the defensive played stood up until the offense set, and then got into various schemes. This old system was very, very complicated. I recall even the veteran complaining about the complexity. It was difficult for veterans (other then 1st rounders) to learn the system. And, of course, it was very, very effective.

The test will come when we play real teams. Thankfully, that doesn't start next week. No one has started with 2 rookie quarterbacks for decades. We may get a third.

 

[SVN]

The D did its job but hard to say it was really impressive. They are not a aggressive dominant defense which is what I at least expect after the plethora of 1st rounders they have coming into the 2nd and 3rd yr. This defense really should be outstanding with the high picks and the coaching but it is not. It will do its job but can be had. This is a below average jets offense. Lets see how geno with those avg WRs does vs baltimore or even miami pass rush . BB's scheme of rushing only 4 and waiting back to sit and force mistakes hasnt worked on these players ever since Rodney and vrabel and co left.

 

[scout]

). The question is why. Wasn't this an opportunity to work together on normal defense? Certainly, experienced offenses will shred such a defense. Long gone are the defense where all the defensive played stood up until the offense set, and then got into various schemes. This old system was very, very complicated. I recall even the veteran complaining about the complexity. It was difficult for veterans (other then 1st rounders) to learn the system. And, of course, it was very, very effective.

The test will come when we play real teams. Thankfully, that doesn't start next week. No one has started with 2 rookie quarterbacks for decades. We may get a third.

Why give our opponents game film of different defensive packages.
Also, Freeman missed a game picture, have not read anything about him being injured. Though, they do play the Saints today.

 

[borg]

Time will tell if the D is for real or not....but for now...verses these anemic offenses...it is a great time time to retrain the players and the coaches.....forcing them all to abandon the "contain" philosophy that has infiltrated the defensive strategy since '07. Unfortunately, the lack of blitzing may be a sign that the coaches aren't comfortable enough taking the training wheels off yet. Hopefully they see enough positive signs that allow a more diverse pass rush moving forward. I keep thinking back to that Ravens playoff game when Flacco went untouched and hope the Pats can become more creative in the future.

 

[mgteich]

Why give our opponents game film of different defensive packages

Perhaps, because a better defensive game plan might not have given the jets so many opportunities.

The defensive players did well enough. They were out there a lot. But the schemes resembled the first pre-season game.