I want to talk real football! I think I'm more confident (or at least more hopeful) in the pass rush this year than you are. Based on the signing of Sheard and the draftees, it seems as though this will be a focus of the defense this season.
It's sure shaping up that way. It's gone through my mind more than once that before his Patriots SB rings, BB's first experience with an ultimate game-changer was with Lawrence Taylor, and that defense is - or once
was - "home" for Belichick.
When it comes to "making the meal and shopping for the groceries," the flavors we're looking at are coverage and pressure, in very broad terms. It's really clear that most of the attention has gone to the front 7.
It's odd that BB had
zero hesitation about turning over pretty much the whole defensive backfield. This would worry the frack out of me if it weren't BB. It's almost like he went overboard on purpose getting rid of D-backs, even relatively affordable ones. He's either got something weird planned re: the defensive backfield, or he's written it off in favor of pressure - which makes no sense, really. I mean, no matter HOW good the pressure is, the QB will be able to pass SOMETIMES. The belief appears to be that what we've got -- or that, plus what we're still targeting before the season starts -- will do it for the D-backs.
I'm curious and horrified all at the same time.
I think the plan is to get ahead of other teams with power running and high percentage passes to tight ends, and be up a fair amount in both score and time of possession 2/3 of the way into the game, forcing the opponent to go pass-heavy, which allows the D to hammer with the pass rush and put more DBs on the field to mitigate any deficiencies there.
As good an explanation as I've seen - that the plan is to be ahead and defend the pass when there's little run threat (i.e., getting optimal pressure from fewer in the "front 7," turning the front 7 to the front 6 or 5 or 4, and beat the passing game with pure numbers without regard to the quality of a given d-back.)
That's got a moneyball allure - while the league struggles to pay cornerbacks like they're quarterbacks, the Pats go the other route, and maximize value.
It just leaves one big yawning chasm of a question: What happens when the game is 0-0, and 7-7, and 14-7, etc. -- when we have not yet made the other team one-dimensional? I mean, it's the obvious question in this scenario... per the below...
Of course, if that doesn't work and the Pats get behind, it'll be harder, but Brady can still pull it off. It seems like this is a team better suited to play with a lead.
I also need to point out that Brady is still the best in the game, but he's the best in the game (now) at death by 1,000 cuts. As for quick strikes, there's some weaponry on the field, but nothing like the Moss/Welker days. (The question here isn't whether Edelman is as dangerous as Welker... it's whether he's as dangerous as Moss, and you know... no.) And Brady's more capable of the long ball than we often read but we're miles down the road from his peak performance in that regard (although he's not throwing Manning ducks).
So the offense is built to grind it out with more balance, on the ground or through the air, and the D is built to play from a lead.
Like I said, horrified and curious at the same time.