Lack of pass rush...

I don't know what BB has seen in Ayers that he does not like anymore, but how is Chandler Jones any better with his suspect hips?

Doug Kyed has his weekly pass rushing stats and I have to say they look better than my eyes saw yesterday, particularly Chandler Jones. Ties in with what @DaBruinz has been saying about moving Flacco off his spot:

Check out this week’s charting pass-rush stats:
Chandler Jones: two QB hits, eight hurries, 10 pressures
Rob Ninkovich: four hurries
Jamie Collins: one QB hit, one hurry
Sealver Siliga: two hurries
Vince Wilfork: two hurries
Chris Jones: one hurry
Alan Branch: one hurry
Don’t Hightower: one hurry

Click to expand...

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2015/01/devin-mccourtys-playmaking-ability-among-takeaways-from-patriots-ravens/

The d line got absolutely dominated

Wild thought here. If we get a chance to sign Suh, will you do it if it means losing Revis? Suh will make our pass rush issue go away.

manxman2601 said:

Doug Kyed has his weekly pass rushing stats and I have to say they look better than my eyes saw yesterday, particularly Chandler Jones. Ties in with what @DaBruinz has been saying about moving Flacco off his spot:




Read more at: http://nesn.com/2015/01/devin-mccourtys-playmaking-ability-among-takeaways-from-patriots-ravens/

Click to expand...

So, on the 45 Flacco drop-backs, the Pats 20 hurries, 3 QB hits, and 10 pressures.. So, that is 33 out of 45 drop-backs..

Thanks for the info, Manx..

DaBruinz said:

So, on the 45 Flacco drop-backs, the Pats 20 hurries, 3 QB hits, and 10 pressures.. So, that is 33 out of 45 drop-backs..

Thanks for the info, Manx..

Click to expand...

Rewatching the game now and the pass rush wasn't really that bad. It was the coverage that was atrocious that didn't ever allow the rush to get there. The first play of the game Jones beats his man and hits Flacco. Would have been as sack if Flacco's 1st read wasn't wide open 19 yards down the field...

While I do believe the pass rush needs to be more consistent, I always judge "on a curve" when looking at games against guys like Flacco. I believe NE takes the approach that they will pick and choose their battles in favor of containing those guys in the pocket and not letting them get outside where the D can break down. Now, that happened some against Baltimore. They're a playoff team and Flacco can move more than people realize. All of the remaining QB's that NE will possibly face are extremely dangerous with their legs. We'll likely see the same game plan employed at times.

Just wait for the AFCCG against Luck, it will be a mush rush, keep him in the pocket game. As would Seattle and also GB depending on Rodgers leg.

We likely won't even try a real pass rush until next season.

BelichickFan said:

Just wait for the AFCCG against Luck, it will be a mush rush, keep him in the pocket game. As would Seattle and also GB depending on Rodgers leg.

We likely won't even try a real pass rush until next season.

Click to expand...

Oh man...

I really hope things improve. We should be able to dominate the Colts offensive line.

The NE defense is soooo much more successful using plays that incorporate some element of disrupting the QB. Basically they need just a wee bit more pressure than a basic 3 or 4 man rush to make the unit click. I don't know what anyone expects when rushing just 3 or 4. Not much pressure, that's what. Also BB isn't even letting them go full out. They need to cover their lanes, contain the QB and stop the run. Any playoff QB with 7 secs is gonna eventually find an opening. Its almost like child's play to these guys now the way the dance around in the pocket and practically go on autopilot scanning receivers down the line until one get open - after they play breaks down usually. Obviously the NE DBs have the skill, and BB the ability to confuse and cover in zone most of the time, but I don't see it as the most effective approach.

But stir in some designed pressure... a delayed blitz here, an overload there, etc, and it really seems to prime them to dominate.