Bedard on Pats DB Coaching

[sevengables_2207]

Talented or no, he came into the game with less than 300 yards on the season, and was just behind Eddie Lacy with the 4th most receiving yards on the team. To be this far into the season with your #3 receiver competition battling around the 300 yard mark is middling production. Even more so when Aaron Rodgers is the QB.

I suppose you could make the case that Nelson and Cobb have been so productive that they haven't needed a 3rd option much, but there was no way anyone went into that game feeling like NE's secondary was going to allow 350+ yards passing if only 135 of it went to the top two. Certainly we can't play the, "what do you expect when they target NE's 3rd and 4th DBs?" card.

I don't think I am playing that card, but if you do, then we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Oswlek]

I don't think I am playing that card, but if you do, then we will just have to agree to disagree.

That wasn't necessarily in your direction, just a general statement.

 

[Ring 6]

I don't see where anyone said that......but feel free to be offended

Seems that is what he whole thread is about.

 

[sevengables_2207]

I have seen quite a few Packers games this year and can attest that the Patriots defended the Packers passing offense better than any opponent the past eleven weeks... by far.

The game-plan seemingly called for the elimination of Nelson and Cobb, with the onus on the Packers offense finding success within tight margins by targeting the lower tiered options in the passing game.

Because of Rodgers mobility (and his unrivaled precision throwing on the run), the pass rush looked nonexistent, but actually was quite effective by design because the front seven had to stay disciplined and maintain gap responsibility. If they constantly rushed upfield jailbreak style, Rodgers would have picked them apart with ease like he had been doing at home the previous several weeks.

Incidentally, one of the things I wanted to see more was for the edge rushers to set the edge to keep Rodgers in the pocket while providing pass rush up the middle via Hightower or Collins on delayed blitz. Thought I saw that they had some success doing this a couple of times.

This defensive game plan has worked wonderfully during the seven game winning streak against high powered passing offenses. Unfortunately, the Packers made quite a few of the subtle adjustments in-game that win close match-ups (such as getting needed production from players further down the depth chart), and to their credit that was how it played out at Lambeau.

I am curious to see why Bedard pins this on the defensive back coaching after one close loss. Is it because the Packers 3-4-5 receivers had success attacking 3-4-5 defensive backs of the Patriots, who happen to be home-grown players like Ryan, Dennard, Chung, etc.? However, if coaching were solely to blame, then wouldn't Revis and Browner also suffer as well?

 

[sevengables_2207]

That wasn't necessarily in your direction, just a general statement.

Gotcha.

 

[RayClay]

Again, the question doesn't seem to be being answered. What is it that Bedard is suggesting is being taught wrong by the Pats staff or being failed to BE taught by the staff.. The more I think about it the more disappointed in Bedard I become. I wonder just what is that magic illixar that once given will allow DB's to be able to cover receivers these days. For that matter what changed from the kudos he was handing out to the secondary just last week for the job they did on the Lions.

If you are going to make a criticism, you had better have not only the exact cause for your complaint, you'd better have the cure. I'm gonna take a wild guess here and expect Bedard to supply NEITHER.

They left their technique on the plane.

 

[RayClay]

The problem is that Ryan and Dennard showed flashes of starter ability in their rookie seasons only to look overmatched against the third receivers of a team with middling third receivers. NE was supposed to have a big advantage going into that game since GB didn't have much to offer after their top 2.

If that were the only data point, it could be easily dismissed, but it is true that since 2009, only two DBs - Dennard and Chung - didn't have a significant drop off in their second years (though neither's third looks all that hot). It happened to Butler, it happened to McCourty, it happened to Wilson and it appears to be happening to Harmon and Ryan. That is much harder to ignore.

Despite that, I have a hard time buying into the "Boyer Sucks!" crowd. Do you really think that Bill isn't completely aware of how his DBs are being coached? Do you think that, even in the unlikely event that Boyer is going against Bill's teachings, that it wouldn't be spotted on film? Boyer is just an easy target, if you are going to make that case, go straight to the top where the focus belongs.

Of course, even that could be overly simplistic. Maybe the players weren't as good as we hoped and their flaws were exposed on film. Maybe their roles were expanded or altered forcing them to do things they weren't as comfortable with. Maybe the coaching sucks. Maybe it is something else entirely or a combination thereof.

The subject is worth exploring, I'd just prefer it went beyond scapegoating.

I think that quarterback is pretty good, what's his name, Rodgers?

 

[RayClay]

and yet he's head and shoulders over the entire list of 2nd and 3rd rounders the pats have drafted......yeah, makes your point even worse

so are you saying it is unreasonable to expect the pats to have generated one starting corner out of all the 2nd and 3rd rounders they have used on the position for the last 6 years? this result is to be expected?

So we should predict which undrafted players will be much better years later after playing in a different country and draft them with our 2nd and 3rd round picks? Sounds good to me.

 

[RayClay]

I decided to look at the top 10 teams (hooray power-rankings) in the league's depth charts and chart where their top 2 CB's were drafted, if at all, to test your hypothesis (as I understand it, via the bolded language above):

Bonus - #1 Pass Defense (Yards Allowed) = Kansas City:
Parker UDFA ; Smith 2nd round

10. Miami:
Grimes Undrafted; Finnegan 7th round

9. Detroit
Mathis 2nd round; Slay 2nd round

8. Dallas
Carr 5th round; Scandrick 5th round

7. Arizona
Peterson 1st round; Cromartie 1st round

6. Indy
Davis 1st round; Toler 4th round

5. Seattle
Sherman 5th round; Maxwell 6th round

4. Philly
Williams 7th round; Fletcher 3rd round

3. Denver
Talib 1st round; Harris UDFA

2. New England
Browner UDFA ; Revis 1st round

1. Green Bay
Shields UDFA; Williams UDFA

Clearly, there's minimal, if any, correlation between playing winning football and relying on CB's drafted early. Looks to me like there are coaches out there who can take UDFA's and help them become starters for teams who will play in the playoffs and win Superbowls.

Obviously this isn't the end-all, most elaborate analysis of this topic possible, but I think it's enough to defeat the notion that the Patriots coaches' role shouldn't be questioned for not developing CB's since they didn't draft them high in the 1st round.

So you're saying we aren't playing winning football?

 

[rochrist]

Greg Bedard is now, and pretty much always has been, a solid football writer and observer. However, this recent phenomenon in which he's somehow been elevated to a near infallible analyst based upon his weekly gig on a radio clown act show is astounding to me. Just my take, but to use a currently popular phrase it's time to pump the brakes on Greg's sudden ascension.

A lot of that has to do with who he's up against in the radio clown car. At least for me.

 

[rochrist]

I decided to look at the top 10 teams (hooray power-rankings) in the league's depth charts and chart where their top 2 CB's were drafted, if at all, to test your hypothesis (as I understand it, via the bolded language above):

Bonus - #1 Pass Defense (Yards Allowed) = Kansas City:
Parker UDFA ; Smith 2nd round

10. Miami:
Grimes Undrafted; Finnegan 7th round

9. Detroit
Mathis 2nd round; Slay 2nd round

8. Dallas
Carr 5th round; Scandrick 5th round

7. Arizona
Peterson 1st round; Cromartie 1st round

6. Indy
Davis 1st round; Toler 4th round

5. Seattle
Sherman 5th round; Maxwell 6th round

4. Philly
Williams 7th round; Fletcher 3rd round

3. Denver
Talib 1st round; Harris UDFA

2. New England
Browner UDFA ; Revis 1st round

1. Green Bay
Shields UDFA; Williams UDFA

Clearly, there's minimal, if any, correlation between playing winning football and relying on CB's drafted early. Looks to me like there are coaches out there who can take UDFA's and help them become starters for teams who will play in the playoffs and win Superbowls.

Obviously this isn't the end-all, most elaborate analysis of this topic possible, but I think it's enough to defeat the notion that the Patriots coaches' role shouldn't be questioned for not developing CB's since they didn't draft them high in the 1st round.

The other part of this that's necessary to make a real analysis is how many of those DBs were actually drafted or signed straight out of college by the teams they're playing for. I'd be willing to be it's not all that many.

 

[IllegalContact]

Seems that is what he whole thread is about.

I was just giving my .02

they've figured out how to make it work.....to me it just seems like a bunch of wasted picks...it seems when drafting at DB, there's no dropoff from the 2nd to the 7th round and UDFAs

find guys like arrington and butler, and there's not much difference between them and the guys in the 2nd round.

 

[Ring 6]

I was just giving my .02

they've figured out how to make it work.....to me it just seems like a bunch of wasted picks...it seems when drafting at DB, there's no dropoff from the 2nd to the 7th round and UDFAs

find guys like arrington and butler, and there's not much difference between them and the guys in the 2nd round.

Eh, my opinion has always been that only a small piece of the equation of what a player becomes is the level of talent that resulted in his draft slot.
Almost no player drafted will amount to anything if they do not improve and adapt to the competition in the NFL. Ability to learn, willingness to learn, and work ethic, along with picking up more complex techniques, learning to play against guys who are just as good as you every snap, and things such as off-season workout regimen and commitment, diet and nutrition, the drive to succeed after hitting the big payday as well as quality of coach and student are variables that are hard to predict. There are 100s of players sitting on the sidelines or at home who have more talent than the guys who are the field succeeding, but failed in those other ways.
Good coaches win. Good coaches elevate players who are committed to being elevated. I would argue good coaches probably fail more often with talented players who lack drive, because they aren't worth their time.

 

[Brady6]

Does anybody else think that Ryan seems better suited for S?

Had we a full-strength Arrington in that game, I bet this thread goes away...

I do, I think he is security for McCourty if he was to leave rather than resign.

 

[Brady6]

I guess I'm confused about what this thread is about. Is it about our drafting? I thought it was about whether Josh Boyer is able to adequately develop CBs from a technique standpoint.

Boyer was the DB coach from 2009-2011, and the CB coach from 2012 to present. I doubt he had much influence on the drafting of Tavon Wilson or Duron Harmon, both safeties. Wheatley was drafted before he was a secondary coach. The CB coach obviously has some input on player drafting, but he's only one of several voices. Scouts and player personnel people are also heavily involved. I'm not sure one can lay the decision for drafting the players listed at his door. It's also not at all clear to me that McCourty, Ryan and Dennard are bad players for where they were drafted. Dowling didn't work out due to injuries and probably a lack of drive to success, not due to technical development. Chung was asked to do too much and regressed (injuries probably also played a role), but seems to be thriving in a more focused role and in a more talented secondary.

It seems to me that this thread has devolved into a "bash everything related to the secondary, and blame it on Boyer". Given that we probably have the best secondary in the NFL, and gave up 2 TDs to the hottest QB in the game on the road when he made a bunch of perfect throws, often with a lot of time to find the open man, seems a bit like piling on for no good reason.

My opinion has nothing to do with this past Sunday. I opened a thread in the first week of the season expressing my concern with the development of are DB from their rookie to sophomore seasons. As far as are secondary goes it is the best in the NFL in my opinion but that is attributed to having Revis the best CB in the NFL a and Browner one of the #2 CB in the NFL.

 

[RayClay]

I was just giving my .02

they've figured out how to make it work.....to me it just seems like a bunch of wasted picks...it seems when drafting at DB, there's no dropoff from the 2nd to the 7th round and UDFAs

find guys like arrington and butler, and there's not much difference between them and the guys in the 2nd round.

That's not far off. we haven't chosen to spend what it would take for a top 15 corner. You get into the second, low second, low third and they're all flawed.

Very few players have what it takes athletically to be a great corner. Some of them crap out for other reasons. I think it's the hardest position athletically, when you're talking the few Revis peers.

 

[goheels22002]

Greg Bedard is now, and pretty much always has been, a solid football writer and observer. However, this recent phenomenon in which he's somehow been elevated to a near infallible analyst based upon his weekly gig on a radio clown act show is astounding to me. Just my take, but to use a currently popular phrase it's time to pump the brakes on Greg's sudden ascension.

I hit the button on my radio this afternoon and heard Squeakie and Douche going over the litany of busts at WR drafted by Belichick because Aaron Dobson re-injured his foot. It was the least informed and most irrelevant 180 seconds of my week. Bedard sounds like Stephen Hawking talking with those clowns. What is he supposed to think?

 

[Jackson 2]

I hit the button on my radio this afternoon and heard Squeakie and Douche going over the litany of busts at WR drafted by Belichick because Aaron Dobson re-injured his foot. It was the least informed and most irrelevant 180 seconds of my week. Bedard sounds like Stephen Hawking talking with those clowns. What is he supposed to think?

It certainly is possible that weekly, extended exposure to Squeaky and the Douchebag could result in a severe case of Stockholm Syndrome...

 

[Kontradiction]

If this had any validity to it, we would see many more examples of CB's washing out here and going on to absolutely kill it elsewhere. So I'm not buying it.

 

[ForThoseAboutToRock]

The other part of this that's necessary to make a real analysis is how many of those DBs were actually drafted or signed straight out of college by the teams they're playing for. I'd be willing to be it's not all that many.

Yes, you're right. Many of those guys I listed are on their 2nd contract with a new team. The guy I responded to seemed to be saying that you have to spend high draft capital to get decent DB's, and that developing them is difficult or very unlikely. So, I showed that many of the top teams in the NFL currently have late round guys as their starters - good players come into the league every year via other means than the first 64 picks.