Game Thoughts - Bangers and Mash Edition

[Rob0729]

Here we go:

• Interesting how little the secondary gets exposed when you pressure the QB. No this isn't the best mix of secondary players the Pats' have yesterday, but the fact they pressured Bradford consistently made it look like it. Excitement needs to be tempered since this is the Rams with a horrible o-line with their best WR out and second best one hobbled, but it is something to build on.
• A fact that may only interest me: Chandler Jones' sack was for a loss of more yards (17) than Stephen Jackson's biggest play (14 yards).
• This game reminds me of the KC game in 2002. At halftime in that game, the Pats scrapped their conservative, vanilla defense that they were running all year to mediocre effectiveness and dialed up the exotic looks and pressure and sparked the defense. We will see if this was game specific yesterday or Belichick and Patricia "unleashing Hell".
• This was the first game that Gronk looked healthy and like himself. Hopefully, the Season of Gronk has begun just a little late.
• Props to the o-line. Much maligned all season, they have been pretty solid this year. Solder has made us not miss Matt Light at all. He has been solid after a scary preseason. Even without Mankins, this line opened holes and kept Brady upright even against a pretty good d-line.
• Kudos to Lloyd. After a horrible game last week, he put in a solid effort yesterday. I never expected him to be the primary receiver or be Moss 2.0. He is was yesterday what I expected him to be: A secondary target that is capable of the big play and a guy who will force teams to give coverage to the outside and a safety deep.
• This offense is still best out of the spread. You gotta utilize the weapons to create mismatches and spread out the defense. This year unlike previous years, the Pats have been able to run effectively and consistently out of this formation. I know Belichick and McDaniels were experimenting with other formations to try to get this offense balanced, but you can do it in the spread.
• The Pats are exactly where they were after five games last year - 5-3. The AFC is wide open. No one, even the Texans IMHO, have proven they are an elite team. The Pats play like yesterday the rest of way and they can have HFA through the playoffs.

 

[Kontradiction]

IMO, the amount of blitzing the team did was more gameplan specific.

 

[Rob0729]

IMO, the amount of blitzing the team did was more gameplan specific.

It may be. Although if it was gameplan specific, I don't know why they didn't do it last week because the gameplan vs. Sanchez should always be dial up the pressure on him.

I think though that they will incorporate more exotic looks going forward though.

To that point, it wasn't just the blitz yesterday. Yesterday was the first time this season you saw a lot of presnap movement by the defense. Most games, the Pats defense would line up most of the game and show their hand before the snap. Yesterday, there was a lot of movement in the second and third levels of the defense. The Pats tend to do this to some extent each year where they are more vanilla early and more exotic towards the end of the year. That is why the defense got much better late in the season and in the playoffs last year.

 

[reflexblue]

IMO, the amount of blitzing the team did was more gameplan specific.

Its about time, it use to be the norm.

 

[PatsSox363804]

IMO, the amount of blitzing the team did was more gameplan specific.

Probably, but as has been said it should have been the gameplan against the Jets as well so hopefully they just decided to start letting the defense loose on occasion. No real reason to only rush 4 and drop everyone into coverage when you're getting killed through the air, maybe they are thinking that way now at least I hope so.

 

[DaBruinz]

Its about time, it use to be the norm.

Blitzing has never been the norm for the Pats. Quite the opposite. Especially under Crennel. He like to just bring different LBers on the Rush. That's what made his defenses so unpredictable.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

This game reminds me of the KC game in 2002. At halftime in that game, the Pats scrapped their conservative, vanilla defense that they were running all year to mediocre effectiveness and dialed up the exotic looks and pressure and sparked the defense. We will see if this was game specific yesterday or Belichick and Patricia "unleashing Hell".

I hope this is a sign that the rookies are finally getting the defense concepts and BB can install more agressive plans each week. I don't want to go bck to vanilla and I'd like to see more movement by the D (or ways to confuse) elite QBs they face.

This offense is still best out of the spread. You gotta utilize the weapons to create mismatches and spread out the defense. This year unlike previous years, the Pats have been able to run effectively and consistently out of this formation. I know Belichick and McDaniels were experimenting with other formations to try to get this offense balanced, but you can do it in the spread.

I agree that Brady is best when able to spread the field. Against aggressive D lines, I still want him to keep a RB back there for keeping those D's honest. For me, it's all about keeping the hits off Brady so he'll be strong/healthy going into the post season.

 

[PatsDeb]

IMO, the amount of blitzing the team did was more gameplan specific.

Well, hopefully it continues to be part of every game plan from here on out! Finally they did something to cover the weaknesses of the defense. Even if the Pats are playing a better QB with better receivers, so the risk of being burned is greater, we are getting burned anyway when they let the QB run around back there and wait for somebody to come open. Blitzing certainly made Bradford gunshy and inaccurate. Why not try unloading on others?

 

[Kontradiction]

Well, hopefully it continues to be part of every game plan from here on out! Finally they did something to cover the weaknesses of the defense. Even if the Pats are playing a better QB with better receivers, so the risk of being burned is greater, we are getting burned anyway when they let the QB run around back there and wait for somebody to come open. Blitzing certainly made Bradford gunshy and inaccurate. Why not try unloading on others?

Thing is, you're taking extreme chance against better O-Lines the way this secondary has been playing. If the blitz is stonewalled at the LOS, an already struggling secondary is left out to dry that much more. That's why blitzing more often isn't exactly the right route to go. It's also one of the primary reasons why the overload blitzes and A-Gap blitzes appeared to be more gameplan-specific.

 

[Deus Irae]

It may be. Although if it was gameplan specific, I don't know why they didn't do it last week because the gameplan vs. Sanchez should always be dial up the pressure on him...

I mentioned this elsewhere, but it works here. Sanchez and Bradford are different QBs, and the two O-lines offered different challenges/opportunities.

Bradford can pick you apart all day if you let him stay comfortable and read a defense. However, he folds under pressure, and the Rams have lousy tackles on both sides. Blitzing the Rams is very likely to get pressure on the QB, and that's where he's going to struggle.

Sanchez, on the other hand, will make crap throws whether you blitz him or not. Yes, he's worse under pressure and folds like an accordion if you get to him early, but he can also burn you if you blitz and he's got one of his 3 pet routes called on that play. Furthermore, Ferguson is weak in the run game, but he can pass block, so you're not going to get the consistent edge pressure. Additionally, Keller was back, and the Patriots LBs aren't good enough cover guys for him, so blitzing could have led to an even bigger day for the Jets TE. So, basically, with Sanchez it's a matter of waiting for the screw up, and Mr. Dennard was there when it happened.

If a review of the Rams game tape shows CBs that were consistently competitive in man-to-man single coverage, we could see a few more blitzes tossed into future game plans. I doubt it will go further than that in the near term.


Just my $.02

 

[ATippett56]

Picked-up pieces after 2nd-half review - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

10. A couple of thoughts to wrap-up the game: major kudos are in order for Patriots offensive tackles Nate Solder and Sebastian Vollmer. The two have stood toe-to-toe with some fearsome pass rush duos this season, but perhaps no effort was finer than Sunday's against Chris Long and Robert Quinn. For the first time this season, the Rams' duo was held without a sack, and quarterback Tom Brady faced minimal pressure throughout the afternoon. Solder and Vollmer continue to answer the bell when called upon in 2012.

 

[patfanken]

Blitzing has never been the norm for the Pats. Quite the opposite. Especially under Crennel. He like to just bring different LBers on the Rush. That's what made his defenses so unpredictable.

THAT's exactly what I found so frustrating about the defenses we've showed up until this last game. Their consistent SAMENESS and lack of unpredictability. I'm not a big believer of rushing 6 or 7 men with any regularity. However rushing 4 or 5 from different and constantly changing angles is something I am a big fan of.

Its not about coming with "the house" but looking like you are and not. Its the art of disguise. Its the art of rushing only 4 but making it seem likes its more to the QB and OL,

That's why the 3-4 slowly took over the league. Its still just another 7 man front, where everyone is covering one of the front 7. But, as we have seen these last 8 weeks, the beauty of the 3-4 was that you could add that 4 rusher from any of 4 different angles. You could bring 2 LB's and drop a DLman into a short zone, as **** Lebeau has been doing for 20 years with his zone blitzes

It was the flexibility you describe, DB that made the 3-4 so popular in the last decade. There are pluses and minuses of course. The 4-3 gives you 2 immediate inside pass rushers which is so important in the quick pass offenses of today's NFL. Harder to do that from a 3-4, so there are choices.

The point is DB, that we weren't doing either. We didn't seem to be blitzing OR stunting, or much more than rushing 4 guys into the outside shoulders of their offensive counterparts Hopefully, either through desperation, or player development, this will not longer be the case, and we will see a better balance of defensive, disguise, aggression, and maximum coverage