The defense
 

Now I know most people on here scoff at anything that questions Pioli and Belis opinion, but a few things concern me.

We could have a very serious issue at the lb position if anyone gets hurt. Losing Colvin was a huge blow to this team. Chad Brown is not the answer.

Why does Beli constantly ignore this position of need?

What about Meriweather? 11 games in and this kid is yet to see any significant time on the field?I was hoping to see his speed on the d by week 12. Should we be concerned? because it seems to me his speed and athletic ability would be a great addition to the backfield. As good as we are, a few bad breaks and things could get dicey at best.

Whats the story with Woods and Alexander? Are they ready to step up? Who here thinks we can contain the colts and or Dallas with this D if there are a few bad breaks at the lb position.

Re: The defense
 

To be honest.. I don't know if this "D" can hang with Green Bay.. I was watching the superbowl DVD from the 2004 team yesterday, and watched the superbowl against the eagles... I was thinking Damm.. That "D" was nasty.. I'm talking physical, and head hunters.. Long time ago though..:snob:

Re: The defense
 

Subjective (non-quantitative) view gives me impression our D is weaker than in past years. Even if we are in top 10 for points allowed; they just feel weak.

I "think" that our defense is as much limited by differing nfl "points of emphasis" as it has by aging players (LBs & safeties) or high profile D players being overpaid and self-satisified (not as hungry), or by a lower athletic standard in the DBs.
Individually when you throw out the names - warren, seymour, wilfork, bruschi, harrison, asante - I think we have one of the most talented Ds out there. So why do I have the feeling they are weaker than in past SB years?

You looked at the tape; what did you see that we have gotten much weaker? Is it the players being not as good or is it a change in how the game can be played? What specific positions look like they are much weaker?

Re: The defense
 

I just think the lack of speed/depth at lb is going to hurt in the stretch.

Re: The defense
 

I agree. The d is good , dont get me wrong. But the lack of speed and bad tackling is a hole. Hopefully woods and Alexander can step up.

Re: The defense
 

2004 Points Against: 260
2007 Points Against (pace): 269 (currently 185)

a whole 1/2 point per game difference!

and given the offenses we have to face the rest of the way, I think there is a good chance we finish below 260

so far this year we have faced the #2, #3, #5, #6, #7, and #11 offensives in the league (DVOA Ratings).

Re: The defense
 

Thats true. The stats dont tell the WHOLE story though. You dont see concern with our lb / db depth? In 04 the d looked better the it does now.

Re: The defense
 

I don't know how anyone can really question the depth of a position ONCE INJURIES HAVE HAPPENED. "Depth" needs to be about how we went into this season, and we went into this season a bit OLD at linebacker, but with a good amount of depth.

We've lost an LB in Colvin, which sucks, but what are we supposed to do - our LB corps is VERY good, and we'll try to battle through. It's not like they were irresponsible with the position. You don't actually think that, do you? Maybe I'm just not reading it right.

Re: The defense
 

No I don't think that. I would think Beli and co would anticipate a injury to a key LB. It just seems like we are old at the position , when the NFL is now geared more towards speed / passing then smash mouth running football.

I want to know if Alexander and Woods can step in?

Re: The defense
 

The 2004 defensive backfield depth was way worse, sorry to break that to you. This year's defensive line is better than the 2004 defensive line, with Vince Wilfork and Ty Warren having matured greatly as players. Seymour has slowed down some, but the other two make up for that. Jarvis Green is still around and there is more depth after him than there was in '04. The LBs aren't as deep by any means, but the top four for this year's are not crap. It's hard to make a case that an '04 McGinnest and Vrabel is better than an '07 Vrabel and Thomas.

That 2004 defense is looked at with a lot of reverence on this board, but it was NOT as good as some remember it to be.

2003, on the other hand...