Excellent Analysis of Patriots D by Bedard

[shmessy]

THIS should be a must-read, folks:

http://mmqb.si.com/2014/09/11/packers-patriots-defense-problems/

"........In their openers, both the Packers and Patriots got off to lousy starts defensively that evoked bad memories of a year ago. They’ll both need to make tweaks to stave off a repeat. The Patriots have a better chance, and track record, of actually doing that."

 

[Archeryaddict12]

Pretty much what I thought, we need to switch to the 4-3 instead of the 3-4 if we want the most potential on d IMO.

 

[Mack Herron]

Thanks for that, much of which has appeared on these pages. I wonder what the Belichick fundamentalists will have to say about things like this:

Jones played one of his worst games as pro because the coaches did not put him in a position to be successful.

It will be interesting to see if and how much the defensive alignments change Sunday.

 

[Rob0729]

The switch to a 3-4 is weird to me. Putting Jones at DE was ever weirder (especially when he was so good in the third preseason game at OLB). I thought the coaching staff put so many players in position to fail.

One thing Bedard didn't mention was how they used Revis. I thought he was misused too. He played almost exclusively 5-10 yards off the line of scrimmage and played a lot of zone. This the same thing people criticized Tampa about (why get the best man press coverage CB and play him off zone coverage).

I really hope the Pats are not going to try to squeeze a square peg into a round hole and force the 3 man front alignments they did on Sunday all season. It isn't typically Belichick's style to do so. So I will chock it up to an one week experiment that failed until we see what happens on this Sunday.

 

[mayoclinic]

One of the common themes between the Pats and Packers that Bedard brings up is inconsistent drafting of personnel. Both teams have linemen better suited to a 4-3 and linebackers better suited to a 3-4. Every defensive lineman who the Pats looked at this offseason - from Will Smith to Dominique Easley and Zach Moore to Jerel Worthy and Kelcy Quarles - projects much better to a 4-3 than a 3-4. I don't think it's a coincidence that Dont'a Hightower had a great game on Sunday, perhaps his best in a Pats' uniform, and Chandler Jones had a terrible game. Hightower is much better suited to a 3-4 than a 4-3, Jones much better suited to a 4-3 than a 3-4. The mystery is why the Pats drafted them together, within a 4 pick range. I have never understood that.

The Seahawks have had a very consistent vision, and have tailored their personnel towards it. The results show. No man's land is generally not a good place to be.

 

[DefenseRules]

Honestly, I lay most of the blame for Sunday's loss on the coaching staff. The players didn't play well. But some of the schemes that were used didn't help.

 

[Sicilian]

It does feel like the defense lacks an identity right now. I have confidence that they will refine themselves as the season goes on (they almost always play better defense later in the year, last year being the exception due to injuries), but at the moment I feel like they're still mulling around what kind of defense they want to be.

 

[Rob0729]

One of the common themes between the Pats and Packers that Bedard brings up is inconsistent drafting of personnel. Both teams have linemen better suited to a 4-3 and linebackers better suited to a 3-4. Every defensive lineman who the Pats looked at this offseason - from Will Smith to Dominique Easley and Zach Moore to Jerel Worthy and Kelcy Quarles - projects much better to a 4-3 than a 3-4. I don't think it's a coincidence that Dont'a Hightower had a great game on Sunday, perhaps his best in a Pats' uniform, and Chandler Jones had a terrible game. Hightower is much better suited to a 3-4 than a 4-3, Jones much better suited to a 4-3 than a 3-4. The mystery is why the Pats drafted them together, within a 4 pick range. I have never understood that.

The Seahawks have had a very consistent vision, and have tailored their personnel towards it. The results show. No man's land is generally not a good place to be.

I think Hightower can perform in a 4-3 if used correctly as Bedard described. Play LB on base defense and rotate at DE on sub packages. He did play DE in college at times.

 

[mayoclinic]

It does feel like the defense lacks an identity right now. I have confidence that they will refine themselves as the season goes on (they almost always play better defense later in the year, last year being the exception due to injuries), but at the moment I feel like they're still mulling around what kind of defense they want to be.

They had an identity on Sunday; it was just a bad one.

 

[mayoclinic]

I think Hightower can perform in a 4-3 if used correctly as Bedard described. Play LB on base defense and rotate at DE on sub packages. He did play DE in college at times.

I agree that that is probably the best way to use Hightower in a predominant 4-3 defense (the other option is as a SAM in a 4-3 under, though I think Jamie Collins is better suited to that role). But I still think that it's not his strength, and that he isn't an ideal fit for such an approach.

 

[VrabelJr]

I think everyone gets way too caught up in the whole 3-4 vs 4-3 thing. It's not like it was 10 years ago when the two formations were drastically different. Most teams play a mix of both 30 and 40 fronts, which is what we did last Sunday.

When it comes to Hightower, if we're going to play a 40 front he has to be a DE because we're most likely going to be in the nickel, which means Mayo and Collins are the only LBs. The only time we could play Hightower at SAM is in 30 fronts or a 40 front "base" package.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Honestly, I'm not even all that worried about the defense. I think the main problem that submarined the D in the second half was fatigue, since the offense couldn't get a first down and give them more than a few minutes off the field. Any D will wear out under those circumstances (also, notice that the top Ds in the league are mostly accompanied by strong running games on offense that can sustain long, time-consuming drives).

Not to say that I'm not concerned at all; the run defense was terrible, and the secondary did not perform as billed. But on a list of concerns, the OL is way, way higher than any defensive concerns.

 

[Rob0729]

I think everyone gets way too caught up in the whole 3-4 vs 4-3 thing. It's not like it was 10 years ago when the two formations were drastically different. Most teams play a mix of both 30 and 40 fronts, which is what we did last Sunday.

When it comes to Hightower, if we're going to play a 40 front he has to be a DE because we're most likely going to be in the nickel, which means Mayo and Collins are the only LBs. The only time we could play Hightower at SAM is in 30 fronts or a 40 front "base" package.

Bedard is looking at the All-22s and going over film over and over again to break down his analysis and disagrees with you.

 

[VrabelJr]

Bedard is looking at the All-22s and going over film over and over again to break down his analysis and disagrees with you.

Tell him to look at other teams. The Jets, mostly considered a 3-4 play quite a bit of 4-3. The Panthers, mostly considered a 4-3, play quite a bit of 3-4. The difference between the two formations can literally come down to one person being in a 3 point stance or 2 point stance.

If the Patriots were literally any other team in the NFL and had the bad defensive showing on Sunday nobody would be dissecting their use of the 3-4 so much. But they are the Patriots and they were once known for a hallmark 3-4 defense over a decade ago (even though we won 2 of the 3 Super Bowls playing a 4-3), so hey, let's all talk about it until we're blue in the face.

Let me save you having to read any sports writing about the Patriots for the rest of BB and Brady's tenure:

- When we lose and it's our offense's fault, you will read countless stories about how we didn't use the Two TE offense enough
- When we lose and it's our defense's fault, you will read countless stories about how we used too much 3-4.

This is why my signature for over two years now has been "Don't fall in love with schemes."

 

[Rob0729]

Tell him to look at other teams. The Jets, mostly considered a 3-4 play quite a bit of 4-3. The Panthers, mostly considered a 4-3, play quite a bit of 3-4. The difference between the two formations can literally come down to one person being in a 3 point stance or 2 point stance.

If the Patriots were literally any other team in the NFL and had the bad defensive showing on Sunday nobody would be dissecting their use of the 3-4 so much. But they are the Patriots and they were once known for a hallmark 3-4 defense over a decade ago, so hey, let's all talk about it until we're blue in the face.

Whether they were playing 3-4 or 4-3, both Jones and Collins were playing out of position. Bedard points that out and someone showed pictures in the Chandler Jones thread of him playing inside the tackle.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

The pass defense was pretty good too.

 

[VrabelJr]

Whether they were playing 3-4 or 4-3, both Jones and Collins were playing out of position. Bedard points that out and someone showed pictures in the Chandler Jones thread of him playing inside the tackle.

Funny because they were both playing the same exact positions they would play in a 4-3. 3-4 ILBs are the exact same as the WILL and MIKE in a 4-3, which is where Mayo and Collins were playing. We've talked about this so much in the Chandler Jones thread. I'm done beating a dead horse.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Honestly, I lay most of the blame for Sunday's loss on the coaching staff. The players didn't play well. But some of the schemes that were used didn't help.

Coaching was god awful sunday.

 

[PatFanCraig]

One of the common themes between the Pats and Packers that Bedard brings up is inconsistent drafting of personnel. Both teams have linemen better suited to a 4-3 and linebackers better suited to a 3-4. Every defensive lineman who the Pats looked at this offseason - from Will Smith to Dominique Easley and Zach Moore to Jerel Worthy and Kelcy Quarles - projects much better to a 4-3 than a 3-4. I don't think it's a coincidence that Dont'a Hightower had a great game on Sunday, perhaps his best in a Pats' uniform, and Chandler Jones had a terrible game. Hightower is much better suited to a 3-4 than a 4-3, Jones much better suited to a 4-3 than a 3-4. The mystery is why the Pats drafted them together, within a 4 pick range. I have never understood that.

The Seahawks have had a very consistent vision, and have tailored their personnel towards it. The results show. No man's land is generally not a good place to be.

I couldn't agree more, I didn't like the High tower pick at all. Collins is an olb in a 3-4 or 4-3. I think as he fills out his frame he can be an explosive rush olb. Hightower is an inside thumper or edge setter as olb in a 3-4 or DE in 4-3. He can stop the run inside in either defense. Problem is he can't cover very well as a traditional LB anywhere in 4-3 or inside of 3-4. And teams throw often on first 2 downs in today's NFL which mean 2 down LBs are a liability. High tower isn't explosive enough to pressure the QB as a DE in 4-3 which makes him just an edge setter which everybody looks to replace if you have jut an edge setter starting. Nor is he explosive or athletic enough to beat a Tackle as a rush OLB in a 3-4. And really he lacks the nasty edge and instincts spikes has as an inside thumper. He is a player you have to try to find him a role.

 

[Jimke]

Since the Miami game, despite what our eyes beheld, Matt Patricia stated that Chandler Jones can play well in
the 3-4. Come hell and high water, this is probably their base defense for the year. I think will take a few ass
whippings to change management's mind.

Same thing on offense. Musical chairs is order of the day until Brady gets injured.