Defense

[jeffbiologist]

OK, so you think that we can't get turnovers any more because Asante Samuel isnt here? How many turnovers do you expect will evaporate because of 1 player not being here?
Even if you think it is 4 plays that Samule made that no one else ever could, that is ONE TIME A MONTH that we are on the field longer. How can that have much of an impact on anything?

I think that just about every team we played last year tried to 'limit possessions'. Just pointing to the fact that a few times teams were successful and games were closer, doesn't mean teams will be any more successful.

Its like saying if we commit 3+ turnovers, we are more likely to lose, and using that as a reason we will lose more, by citing examples of games where we had 3 + turnovers in the past.

I dont have the numbers or the time now to look em up...but knowledge of the system and being better playmakers--Samuel, Colvin, Gay and Seau(combined for like 4 defensive TDs) add up to at least 8 more turnovers than the current roster. Now alot of turnovers come in garbage time, but some come in key situations. But I say that turnover difference is going to be noticable. The roster shuffling alone will cost us at least a game or 2(cohesion in the defensive backfield leading to more big plays), but I do expect progress and we should be in every game. But I will consider the D a work in progress til the 4th quarter of the playoffs.

 

[arrellbee]

I am going to be the first one to say this, and anyone who would like to can bookmark this and remind me of it whenever you want.
THE DEFENSE WILL BE BETTER THAN IT WAS LAST YEAR.
I also expect that we will break the team record for fewest points allowed, which we have hovered close to breaking in many of BBs years.

We have gotten faster, and younger. We have added Mayo, Wheatley, Sanders, ONeal, Wilhite, Crable.
What have we subracted?
Seau. In his prime thats a loss, at this stage of his career, it is not.
Samuel. OK, we lost a starter.
Colvin. Not really a loss since we didn't have him at the end, and were better with Thomas outside.
Gay. I do not believe that a player could make our roster who would perform worse than Randal Gay did in the SB.

I see improvement, I see more speed, I see a healthy Seymour, a better group of LBs including depth, I see Meriwhether upgrading speed and play at safety with a much larger role, and I see 2 strong rookies, PLUS 2 experienced vets to fill the role of Asante Samuel in playing TEAM DEFENSE.
If we think losing just one player can have the impact on this defense that it may have on another, then we have totally missed the point that BB builds an entire system around playing team defense, with less impact, good or bad, possible from any one player.

Thanks for a nice positive outlook with some substance !! Great to be a fan with the Patiots

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

If you are going to accuse me of something, you should have your facts straight. I have been completely consistent about Gay, from DURING the SB until now, and even BEFORE the SB. I would be saying the exact same thing whether he was still here or not.
Pretending about my motive does not make your argument stronger.
Randall Gay was the worst player on the field in the SB. I said it then, and have ever since. He was bad on virtually EVERY play. The Giants created a gameplan to exploit his lack of quickness and agility. They consistently had receivers run one direction, stop and run the other direction when Gay covered them, and Manning looked directly at them the entire play at least a dozen different times. He was INCAPABLE of covering anyone they put out there.
The OL had BAD PLAYS. They missed blocks. They were not INCAPABLE.

Also, the OL was basically the best in the NFL all year long. Gay was a weak link all year long, big difference.

Well you did not specify in your post that you did not like Gay's play all year long,you singled him out as a bad performance in the SB,I don't recall you saying Gay sucked in any post during last season when the team was winning 18 straight,only when they lose - typical over excessive NE ball washing - Link me to a post of yours that complained about Gay when the team was undefeated and only then will I apologize for being incorrect about this.

And you are WRONG about the OL which I agree was good enough all year long but it was boys out there against men when it came to the line in the SB -

Brady if you don't remember and if I am not mistaken was sacked 7 times in the biggest game of the year- Yeah,The OL played well until it REALLY counted so lets not give excuses for them like BAD PLAYS it was bad most of the game,Lets face it,in the biggest game of the year the OL were MANHANDLED and Brady as a result was on his back more times in that one night than my X-Wife ever was (and both my X and Tom got paid for it anyway)

The OL was the reason the game was lost not Gay,Mankins was Justin Tuck's playtoy in that game,I suggest you watch the game again if you can

- If Brady had more time in that pocket or if the OL had been able to open up running lanes for Maroney and Faulk and CO. then there would have been a different ending without a doubt,no matter what Gay was doing out there,remember the defense only gave up 17 points so it was not like Gay was giving up TDs all night

Whether you admit it or not, most of the members in here think a guy is pretty good until he is cut or traded- Then he becomes a guy that really was a waste and thats o.k. to say now because he is no longer on the team

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

I should not leave out that I truly hope you know what you are talking about with the defense being better

But Wheately and Hobbs as starting corners does make hair on my back stand up

 

[Ring 6]

Well you did not specify in your post that you did not like Gay's play all year long,you singled him out as a bad performance in the SB,I don't recall you saying Gay sucked in any post during last season when the team was winning 18 straight,only when they lose - typical over excessive NE ball washing - Link me to a post of yours that complained about Gay when the team was undefeated and only then will I apologize for being incorrect about this.

And you are WRONG about the OL which I agree was good enough all year long but it was boys out there against men when it came to the line in the SB -

Brady if you don't remember and if I am not mistaken was sacked 7 times in the biggest game of the year- Yeah,The OL played well until it REALLY counted so lets not give excuses for them like BAD PLAYS it was bad most of the game,Lets face it,in the biggest game of the year the OL were MANHANDLED and Brady as a result was on his back more times in that one night than my X-Wife ever was (and both my X and Tom got paid for it anyway)

The OL was the reason the game was lost not Gay,Mankins was Justin Tuck's playtoy in that game,I suggest you watch the game again if you can

- If Brady had more time in that pocket there would have been a different ending without a doubt,no matter what Gay was doing out there,remember the defense only gave up 17 points so it was not like Gay was giving up TDs all night

Even your facts are wrong, you can look at the box score, and I don't think you will see 7 sacks.
I have no interest in going back to old posts to show you that your ignorant statement that my opinion about Gay is different because he is no longer here. You are wrong, I am telling you so, because it is MY OPINION and that is not subject to you believing it or me proving it to you.
Your lack of substance in your opinion is only exceeded by your hyperbole.
"Mankins was Justin Tucks playtoy" is a foolish statement. That would mean Tuck physically owned him, which would mean he beat him on virtually every play, and Mankins was no more than a nuiscance. That should add up to about half a dozen sacks, and 20 tackles if it were accurate.

Tell you what, in the spirit of the new regualtions for posting that Ian has put up, let me just say that I basically disagree with your perspective on everything, so I won't be responding any longer.

 

[BradyManny]

I should not leave out that I truly hope you know what you are talking about with the defense being better

But Wheately and Hobbs as starting corners does make hair on my back stand up

You've hardly seen Wheatley play yet and what we have seen from him has been positive. Belichick had enough faith in Hobbs to make him the #1 corner.

 

[Ring 6]

I dont have the numbers or the time now to look em up...but knowledge of the system and being better playmakers--Samuel, Colvin, Gay and Seau(combined for like 4 defensive TDs) add up to at least 8 more turnovers than the current roster. Now alot of turnovers come in garbage time, but some come in key situations. But I say that turnover difference is going to be noticable. The roster shuffling alone will cost us at least a game or 2(cohesion in the defensive backfield leading to more big plays), but I do expect progress and we should be in every game. But I will consider the D a work in progress til the 4th quarter of the playoffs.

We are better with Thomas at OLB than Colvin. We are better with Mayon at ILB than Seau.
Gay was atrocious and certianly wasnt a 'big play guy'.

Really it boils down to Samuel getting Ints vs how many the guy who replaces him gets, and over the course of a season, it really doesn't add up to much.

Turnovers are not a huge factor in the overall quality of our D. What I mean is that the relatioship of our defenses overall play (ie which years were best/worse) is not directly correlated to which years we had the most or least turnovers.

 

[Ring 6]

We are better with Thomas at OLB than Colvin. We are better with Mayon at ILB than Seau.
Gay was atrocious and certianly wasnt a 'big play guy'.

Really it boils down to Samuel getting Ints vs how many the guy who replaces him gets, and over the course of a season, it really doesn't add up to much.

Turnovers are not a huge factor in the overall quality of our D. What I mean is that the relatioship of our defenses overall play (ie which years were best/worse) is not directly correlated to which years we had the most or least turnovers.

In fact Red Zone D is a much better correlation than turnovers, and the fact that we have improved speed, and more importantly agility to cover in that area is a big plus this year. Most of our red zone problems when we have them have been in the passing game, and due to speed/agility issues.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Even your facts are wrong, you can look at the box score, and I don't think you will see 7 sacks.
I have no interest in going back to old posts to show you that your ignorant statement that my opinion about Gay is different because he is no longer here. You are wrong, I am telling you so, because it is MY OPINION and that is not subject to you believing it or me proving it to you.
Your lack of substance in your opinion is only exceeded by your hyperbole.
"Mankins was Justin Tucks playtoy" is a foolish statement. That would mean Tuck physically owned him, which would mean he beat him on virtually every play, and Mankins was no more than a nuiscance. That should add up to about half a dozen sacks, and 20 tackles if it were accurate.

Tell you what, in the spirit of the new regualtions for posting that Ian has put up, let me just say that I basically disagree with your perspective on everything, so I won't be responding any longer.

O.K. Now I see it - If I do not say NE is 19-0 this year then I am pretty much wrong about everything - It sad,Truly sad

But as a fellow Patriot Nation resident I will make you happy though and here it is, NE is never going to lose another game as long as we live and the defense will shut out every opponent this year because they are a dynamic force to be reckoned with - Better even then the Bears of 1985 - Hope this makes your day - Peace out and have a nice one!

 

[Ring 6]

You've hardly seen Wheatley play yet and what we have seen from him has been positive. Belichick had enough faith in Hobbs to make him the #1 corner.

We also have 2 veteran corners in Sanders and ONeal.

 

[Ring 6]

We also have 2 veteran corners in Sanders and ONeal.

But most importantly, we play team defense and the names on the jerseys aren't as important as fans think. We are not assembling individuals to play defense we are putting together a unit that can play together as a team.
That is probably why a guy like Bryant gets cut and a guy like Sanders is here.
Individually Bryant is probably much more talented, but as part of the team defense, Sanders will make us a better team.

OR I could be totally wrong, and BB has just lost his mind.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

You've hardly seen Wheatley play yet and what we have seen from him has been positive. Belichick had enough faith in Hobbs to make him the #1 corner.

No one knows if Wheately will be the next Ty Law or Duane Starks on this team but I think he will progress with experience,A rookie that may start at Corner sohuld still make you quiver a bit though

Hobbs is the #1 corner like Cassel is the #2 QB - A lack of talent behind him and he is the best of the bunch so thats why he is #1 out there - its a no brainer.

 

[spacecrime]

2002 called. It says "WTF?" /

What does this mean?

 

[Ring 6]

O.K. Now I see it - If I do not say NE is 19-0 this year then I am pretty much wrong about everything - It sad,Truly sad

But as a fellow Patriot Nation resident I will make you happy though and here it is, NE is never going to lose another game as long as we live and the defense will shut out every opponent this year because they are a dynamic force to be reckoned with - Better even then the Bears of 1985 - Hope this makes your day - Peace out and have a nice one!

That is why there is no point having a discussion with you.
You want to be negative, thats fine. But to take a childish approach and pretend that anyone who disagrees with you is doing it out of some made up (by you) agenda, is a waste of everyone's time. Time and again, instead of discussing points, you pull this, and act as if anyone who isn't negative is blinded. That is simply making things up to not have to defend your point.

Basically, as I said, I tend to disagree with your perspective on most everything you post. See I did not make up a characteristic about you that I think is in your mind and attribute your entire thought process to it.
I do not think that there can be any fruitful discussion between you and I because we have an entirely different outlook. I believe in posting what I think, and defending it, you believe it making up a reason that anyone who disagrees with you is lying, or out of touch with realty.
Again, in keeping with Ians wishes, I will not respond beyond this explanation to your posts any longer because it will end up being contrary to what the owner of the forum wants the forum to be like.

 

[Kontradiction]

I've never been one to complain about the entire defense. It's just the secondary that worries me. Hobbs is overrated (at least on this board), Wheatley and Wilhite are unproven rookies, we don't know whether O'Neal will return to Pro Bowl form or not, and Rodney is aged and is a liability in coverage. While Hobbs may be overrated, he, Meriweather, and Harrison are the only three sure things in our secondary with BM being the only guy making me feel 100% comfortable. I'm sorry, but I just don't feel that Rodney should be used as an every down safety at this junction. Of course, Belichick would disagree with me and let's hope he's right.

 

[emoney_33]

No one knows if Wheately will be the next Ty Law or Duane Starks on this team but I think he will progress with experience,A rookie that may start at Corner sohuld still make you quiver a bit though

Hobbs is the #1 corner like Cassel is the #2 QB - A lack of talent behind him and he is the best of the bunch so thats why he is #1 out there - its a no brainer.

Then why was Hobbs always covering the opposing team's #1 receiver last year? If he's just the "best of a bad bunch". I hope all of you Hobbs doubters have a healthy appetite for the crow you'll be eating this season.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

I've never been one to complain about the entire defense. It's just the secondary that worries me. Hobbs is overrated (at least on this board), Wheatley and Wilhite are unproven rookies, we don't know whether O'Neal will return to Pro Bowl form or not, and Rodney is aged and is a liability in coverage. While Hobbs may be overrated, he, Meriweather, and Harrison are the only three sure things in our secondary with BM being the only guy making me feel 100% comfortable. I'm sorry, but I just don't feel that Rodney should be used as an every down safety at this junction. Of course, Belichick would disagree with me and let's hope he's right.

If Lynch comes back we may see a mix of Rodney and Lynch out there - I really think Lynch is back by next week,Signing with the Jets would be a mistake - And a big one at his age if he wants a shot at a championship,Not saying he will get one here for sure but he has NO chance in NY

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Then why was Hobbs always covering the opposing team's #1 receiver last year? If he's just the "best of a bad bunch". I hope all of you Hobbs doubters have a healthy appetite for the crow you'll be eating this season.

I hope I am wrong about ALL of my concerns that this team could have - Just like every other fan in here we want all of our bad thoughts to be proven wrong and the team to surprise us positively - We will see

Hobbs does need to slow down on the PI calls he routinely gets by being a bit too aggressive - I think we all see he is the leader of PI calls,even if he sometimes does not deserve the penalty called

 

[jeffbiologist]

We are better with Thomas at OLB than Colvin. We are better with Mayon at ILB than Seau.
Gay was atrocious and certianly wasnt a 'big play guy'.

Really it boils down to Samuel getting Ints vs how many the guy who replaces him gets, and over the course of a season, it really doesn't add up to much.

Turnovers are not a huge factor in the overall quality of our D. What I mean is that the relatioship of our defenses overall play (ie which years were best/worse) is not directly correlated to which years we had the most or least turnovers.

I agree Thomas is better than Colvin, but Colvin-Thomas-Bruschi-Vrabel(Seau coming off the bench) is better than Thomas-Mayo-Bruschi-Vrable right now. Alot of QB pressure is put on by our rotation of LBs, which in turn causes the turnovers. And you say turnovers LAST YEAR werent a overall quality of our D, and I am saying this year the lack of them will be noticable. Red zone D has to do with making stops, something we havent done in many years with 2 rookies on the field. Good arguement, I am not a doom and gloom guy. I go into the season with eyes open, not blinded by glitter or mudslinging.

 

[PatsFan37]

AJ, I appreciate the sentiment. Realism is what you do when you look back. Optimism is what you do when you look forward, unless you're an insurance company.

The one issue I would take is with injuries. Comparing last year's end-of-season roster (e.g. saying that Colvin doesn't count since he wasn't on the team at the end) against this year's season opening roster is apples and oranges. Each year should begin with a stronger roster on paper than the previous year, because everyone is either healthy or will be (Neal).

I'm optimistic that the Pats D will be among the best in the league. I'd have to be crazy to think no one will get hurt.

To that end, it's more accurate to compare beginning-of-the-year rosters. Colvin and a year-younger Vrabel may be roughly equivalent to Thomas/older Vrabel. Colvin was among the best at creating pressure.

Mayo/Bruschi vs. Thomas/Bruschi/Seau on the inside? I love Mayo, but comparing a top FA like Thomas to a rookie, even a great rookie isn't fair to Mayo. I'd have to give the edge to last year's ILBs.

OTOH, one of the biggest improvements will be Meriweather in his second year.