Did the Patriots use a different defensive strategy too?

[slam]

Much has been made of the Falcons employing a different defensive strategy to stymie the Patriots for 2 1/2 quarters, but I just had the realization that maybe the Patriots did too. We're used to describing the Pats defensive strategy as "Band but don't break", but let's look at the Falcons drives during the game.

Drive Qtr Time LOS Plays Length Yds Result
1 1 13:37 ATL 8 4 3:09 32 Punt - Drive ended by Sack
2 1 05:08 ATL 12 5 3:32 24 Punt - Drive ended by Sack
3 2 14:08 ATL 29 5 1:53 71 Touchdown
4 2 10:37 ATL 38 5 1:49 62 Touchdown
5 2 00:02 0 0:02 0 End of Half
6 3 15:00 ATL 19 3 1:53 4 Punt - Drive ended by incomplete pass
7 3 12:45 ATL 15 8 4:14 85 Touchdown
8 3 02:06 NWE 41 3 2:15 -15 Punt Drive ended by Sack
9 4 09:44 ATL 27 3 1:20 -2 Fumble - Drive ended by Sack/Fumble
10 4 05:56 ATL 10 6 2:26 45 Punt - Drive ended by incomplete pass (Flowers sack to take out of FG range)
11 4 00:57 ATL 11 4 0:54 16 Punt - Drive ended by incomplete pass

10 real drives, five of them ended or compromised by a sack. Three of them end in touchdowns. Only one drive with more than six plays, and that only an 8 play drive. In contrast, the Patriots have SEVEN drives with 8 plays or more!

On the other hand, lots of bigger plays by the Falcons. Plays for 37, 19, 23, 24, 18, 19TD, 17, 35, 39, and 27. Those are bigger numbers than we're accustomed to seeing against the Pats.

So my question is: Was it by design that the Pats eschewed the "Keep everything in front of you", "Bend by don't break" defense this game in favor of a "Contest everything", "Boom or bust" gameplan? If any team had the weapons to take what a defense gives them and march down the field on a ten play drive, it's the Falcons. So did the Pats go the other way and give pass rushers more freedom and DBs the mandate to be aggressive knowing that it may lead to some big plays going the other way? Did they calculate that this would lead to a massive time of possession advantage? Or is this just the way it worked out unintentionally?

If this gameplan was designed to tip to time of possession and tire out the defense, then it's scary how much deeper Belichick thinks about the game than anyone else.

 

[pheenix11]

I'm no expert, but my perception was that they seemed a lot more aggressive than usual. Even early on when they weren't behind.

It's all a blur to me at this point, but has anyone analyzed it to see how often they blitzed? It seems like they were all over Matt Ryan.

 

[slam]

I don't know if it's blitzing per se. But sometimes we get frustrated by a slow contained rush where everyone has lane responsibility. Maybe this time they set guys loose with no responsibilities but get the QB on critical downs. And the DBs were asked to be more aggressive rather than keep it in front. Maybe draws and screens could've broken big.

 

[PatsBoy12]

The Pats seemed to run more stunts up front. They also moved Hightower a lot depending on how the backs were aligned. In the sack fumble, for example, he initially lined up inside and then snuck outside at the last second. Freeman just lost him and he thought he could release. But I don't know if that was a different strategy since we've seen it before. What I do think was different, however, was the personnel. We saw a lot more Roberts and less McClellin. Also, Malcolm Brown seemed to be out more than in, as the Pats seemed to favor the 3-3-5, which one of the analysts predicted before the game.

 

[bresna]

It seems to me that the Patriots really only go into the "Bend but don't break" defensive mode when they ahead by 2 or more scores. When they're behind, that would be a recipe for defeat.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

You guys act like they are picking the same Madden play over and over and over again for quarters at a time. Every NFL defense plays in zone and man and prevent and blitzes throughout the game, it's just a matter of how much and when.

You often hear someone complain about us playing prevent late, but we play some in all quarters too, depending on situation.

The defensive gameplan is always evolving. They have concepts of how to match up with certain personnel packages, but can and do switch that up throughout the game. If Matty Ice sees that in this package he's got a mismatch, he would keep going to it over and over and over. So the Patriots might show the same look but run man instead of zone like last time, or changes who lines up to add another thing to think about for Ryan.

This isn't unique to the Patriots either. Pretty much every team switches up their defense throughout a game.

 

[jah]

You guys act like they are picking the same Madden play over and over and over again for quarters at a time.

Funny you should mention that because Logan Ryan compared the late game defensive strategy to running "Engage Eight" over and over in Madden. I'm sure that's a crude oversimplification but still interesting.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Funny you should mention that because Logan Ryan compared the late game defensive strategy to running "Engage Eight" over and over in Madden. I'm sure that's a crude oversimplification but still interesting.

I'm not a Madden guru, but I think Ryan might be right. The media spent 2 weeks tongue-bathing Shanahan's supposed brilliance, but I didn't see much variance in the offense in the 4th quarter. It seemed like everything was a deep 7 step drop and throw down the field, which gave our guys chances to get sacks.

I'd have to look again, but I don't recall seeing a single screen all game. There weren't a lot of crossing routes. It's hard to tell from the camera angles of course, but it seemed like all they did was run down the field and chuck it deep and hope for a Julio miracle catch or a dump-off to one of the backs after the receivers cleared the middle of the field by running deep.

Combined with all the mental mistakes and lack of situational awareness, the 49ers should have considered taking back their offer to Shanny. It was a pretty poor gameplan, even if the execution was better.

 

[Ivan]

It seems to me that the Patriots really only go into the "Bend but don't break" defensive mode when they ahead by 2 or more scores. When they're behind, that would be a recipe for defeat.

Which is why there is so much complaining about it, as they weren't behind from the Jets game in November until the Super Bowl. They always play situational football, that's why they almost never lose when they are ahead. IIRC they have never lost a game at home with Hrady at QB when leading at the half. That's amazing.

 

[pheenix11]

Oddly enough, the Pats defense is most frustrating when they're ahead. Of course, they're trading yards for time but it really makes me nervous.

I love when they go balls to the wall when they're behind. Don't like the behind part, but the aggressiveness is great.