Did the defense in 2014 underachieve?

Back end was fantastic for once (sad it will prob be only a 1 year thing) the front 7 i thought could have done a bit better..but hey we won the SB with them

The problem was the lack of consistent pass rush and we could be ran on(see seattle and Ravens games)

I'd say they didn't underachieve..

I wouldn't say they underachieved. I think people are just forgetting how good that 2013 defense was.

It wasn't like Revis and Browner joined the 2011 Patriots. That 2013 defense was really good too, and history may have looked quite different if Welker hadn't taken out Talib in the play-offs.

Several people have mentioned the running woes this year, but we actually were significantly improved from last season, even moreso than the passing game.

For example, here are the differences in the numbers between the two seasons.

Stat: 2013/2014

Points Allowed: 338 (21.1 per game, 10th)/313 (19.6 per game, 8th)
Passing yards allowed: 3,824/3,837
Adjusted Passing YPA: 6.0/6.2
TDs allowed: 25/24
INTs: 17/16
Rushing yards allowed: 2,145/1,669
Rushing YPA: 4.5/4.0
Total yards allowed: 5,969/5,506

I think people remember the early problems in the run game, and some of those re-appeared during the play-offs. But overall, it wasn't great, wasn't bad, and we were ranked 12th in the league in run D. The attempts to run went down dramatically too, from 481 to 419.

The passing stats are eerily similar actually, and improved from our 2011/2012 seasons (although 2012 started to get better after the Talib deal).

And as others have mentioned, like most BB teams, they got better as the season progressed. Browner came back, Hightower adjusted to life without Mayo, Collins grew into his role, Chung re-established himself, Siliga got healthy, and we brought on Ayers and Branch.

There were improvements in certain areas, no doubt. 3rd down defense was better (42.2 to 40.2). And there will never be enough sacks to appease people, but the pass rush was effective enough to bother passes, if not always get home.

And FWIW, we finished tied for 13th in sacks in 2014, one sack away from tied for 9th. Only 1 of the top 7 teams in sacks made the play-offs (Baltimore), while 5 others were in that 8-13 range with us. So it's an important thing, but not THE most important thing. Due to our system and 2-gapping, we're not going to generate the most sacks, but we did quite well in that area in 2014.

So no, I don't think our defense underachieved. I think it continued to improve, a trend that started in 2012. And I think some expectations were just too unrealistic.

Seattle has a top defense and they had trouble with our offense.

It happens. There are good teams in the playoffs.

The defense played well even when the stats didn't show it. Take the Broncos game for instance. Manning racked up the yards but our defense (in my opinion) played great.

supafly said:

I still believe that we should've won by 10+, had it not been for that piss poor defense played to end the first half. In the end it all worked out, but to answer the question---yes, I believe that they underachieved.

Click to expand...

Like BB said, the Superbowl was like a microcosm of the 2014 Patriots season.

I thought the defense was a minor letdown in the postseason. The 7 points they gave up in half a minute to end the first half of the Super Bowl was mind-boggling bad. The offense had to shoulder more weight for the playoffs, but it did.

And Butler came through with the play that the 07 & 11 teams couldn't make.

On the whole, no, they did not underachieve. They have a lot of good players, and they collectively were a very good defense. In the playoffs, sample size shrinks and bad plays & fluke plays weigh too much.

I think underachieved is the wrong word as they won the super bowl and points given up after half time was historically good. Inconsistant is a much better term and that I would agree with. I think there were a lot of moving new pieces that needed to get used to working together and it was finally starting to really gel by the end of the season. I was excited to see what they could do with a 2nd full off-season to get creative being fully on the same page. Then the off-season happened and now they have to start over again. Welcome to NFL free agency I guess. On the offensive side though it's been awhile since Brady has all his top weapons and the same coodinator back so I hope the synergy that comes from playing with the same guys for years makes this year's o a terror for opposing teams.

Personally I was disappointed with how the defense looked in games. The results, as others have noted, were fine- the Pats won a Super Bowl. But I expected to see an elite defense, like the Ravens used to have and the Seahawks have, where visually when you watch you can tell opposing teams are having a really difficult time even moving the ball, much less scoring.

As with most things it was multifactorial, but the dominant factor I saw was the lack of a consistent pass rush. Chandler Jones and Mayo being injured didn't help, although I still think Chandler Jones is a little overrated. He's slightly above average to me.

rads2005 said:

Personally I was disappointed with how the defense looked in games. The results, as others have noted, were fine- the Pats won a Super Bowl. But I expected to see an elite defense, like the Ravens used to have and the Seahawks have, where visually when you watch you can tell opposing teams are having a really difficult time even moving the ball, much less scoring.

As with most things it was multifactorial, but the dominant factor I saw was the lack of a consistent pass rush. Chandler Jones and Mayo being injured didn't help, although I still think Chandler Jones is a little overrated. He's slightly above average to me.

Click to expand...

They were certainly elite with their in game adjustments. Better than the Ravens and Seahawks.

The relentless drive to turn the ultimate positive into a negative...

The D struggled at times but ultimately progressed and became a very solid unit enroute to doing what it was created to do, "help win the big one" which it did. So i'd say it was overall solid .

hwc said:

I thought the defense was a little disappointing. If I could put my finger on one thing they need to improve, it's not giving up brain dead cheapo scores before half time. There were too many games, including the SuperBowl, where the Pats were in position to control the game and gave up an int/score or a 30 second 89 yard TD drive.

Bad coaching, really. I suspect it will be a point of emphasis for 2015.

Click to expand...

I was going to write this but I guess there is no point in me retyping it.

It almost seems like they checked out for the last minute of those games (GB, Balt, Seattle), like they were mentally already heading to the locker room. In any of those quick drives, a little disruption would've been enough to prevent the score or near score. Those plays arguably cost the GB game and made the other two way too close for comfort.

BobDigital said:

Why is it people are turning this into "I think the D was bad". Opposed to what my opinion actually is "I think it could have been better"?.

Click to expand...

Because it's a messageboard.......it's far more fun to be a contrarian than to agree

the playoff D looked exactly like the playoff d of the last few years.

Roflstomped a chump team, let the ravens go hogwild.

The difference this year is Brady showed up.

Brady kept us in games during this post season, not the other way around.

chasa said:

The difference this year is Brady showed up.

Brady kept us in games during this post season, not the other way around.

Click to expand...

The difference this year is that, with 2-3 plays left on the 1-yard line, Carroll chose not to give the ball to Lynch.

Yes, Brady DID INDEED show up (and Gronk was healthy).

Our top defense help from the opposing coach.

I thought they played above expectations most of the year and finished the regular season strong but were a disappointment in the playoffs. Basically if Brady hadn't played out of his head there would be a lot more attention on the defense. In the end they made the plays but it was pretty much touch and go.

they were not good vs the run inconsistent pass rush still had big holes at DB and LB coverage but with a offense that scored 30 a game and a pro bowler at ever level on defense they were good a nuff to get by but IMO they were far from a good defense

I think that once Browner came back the Pats D led the league in 2nd half points. (if not #1, then very close to #1) nice for the offense to know that the D will close out games.

I've always felt that whatever shortcomings our defense has had in the past, we've somehow always managed to pull through, because when one side of the ball falls short, the other usually steps up (everyone knows how it's often been the case that Brady has had to bail out the defense... in fact, a cool article recently came out describing statistically how often this has happened)

As far as this past season goes, I think our defense had its ups and downs, and I would have liked to have seen it be more consistent throughout the playoffs. But if you look back, you'll see several times when the defense came through. Let's not forget, the defense kept Marshawn Lynch one yard from scoring game-winning TD in the final minute of SB 49, and it was a clutch defensive play by Malcolm Butler that sealed the game. Gotta give credit when it's deserved!!!