IF 4-3 becomes the base defense, I like it

[ausbacker]

It would be 2-4-5 or 2-3-6.. Gotta add up to 11 there..

I realize that, fortunately I'm not attempting to win at the internet whilst I'm working.

 

[muslimman]

I can't believe no one has mentioned this yet... what does this possible change in defensive strategy explain about what happened in the draft? Pretty much everyone here was clamoring for front 7 players (Kerrigan, Heyward, Wilkerson) in the first round. And almost everyone was disappointed and confused when we passed on every single touted 3-4 DLineman and Linebacker.

IF we are moving away from the 3-4 (not saying were going to base 4-3) to whatever sub-package or hybrid formation or what have you... then it would make a lot of sense to draft the way we did. Of course there are many other things that could have effected the draft, but if (big if) this defensive scheme change proves to be true and effective then I think many here will be a lot more happy with the draft and how it played out.

 

[sevengables_2207]

i am not going to opine on what base defense the team should or should not use, because the coaching staff/personnel know more than any of us do about their players.

however, i have grown weary of seeing middling quarterbacks with tons of time to sit back in the pocket and throw 3rd down completion upon 3rd down completion on our defensive unit.

ergo, if a switch to a base 4-3 is the catalyst to improve our pass-rush and 3rd down defense, then i am all for it.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

I think allowing 250 rushing yards, and 24 1st quarter points, or whatever it was to Bmore, and 28 points and 2 4th quarter TDs to a terrible Jet offense is why people think the D was the problem.
The 2003, 2004 (and many other) Patriot defenses would have owned the 2 extremely weak offenses that put 61 points up against us in those 2 losses.
Blaming the offense when the D allows 33 and 28 is an interesting approach.

Andy

The Jets scored 28 points from 3 drives that started in our territory. 14 points were from drives that started deep in our territory. The 4 TD was from a rookie (Spikes) mistake.

In the Baltimore game, ya might have missed the three turnovers.

Here's a few concepts:

It's bad to let the opponent have very short fields.

The 81 yard Baltimore TD run sucked but a play isn't an offensive gameplan.

Turnovers that allow the opponent a short field doesn't help your chances of winning.

Broken clocks are correct only twice a day.

No! the rooster really doesn't make the sun come up.

 

[lamafist]

Am I the only one who thinks the talk about changes on defense is much ado about little?

To me, Warren's comments don't necessarily add up to much beyond acknowledgement of the (oft-cited) fact that the Pats only lined up in their 'base' formation 40% of the time last season. It took Warren a few seasons of hard work before Belichick would leave him out on the field on passing downs, and pass rush was never one of the stronger parts of his game. The Pats don't need to be making a full-on switch to a base 4-3 defense to explain Warren's diminishing value relative to DT's whose strengths lend themselves to sub package uses.

 

[Ring 6]

People also seem to be forgetting that the Pats primarily spent last pre-season in the 4-3 and still used the 3-4 as their base.. Wonder why that is????

Because it didnt happen?

 

[Urgent]

I can't believe no one has mentioned this yet... what does this possible change in defensive strategy explain about what happened in the draft? Pretty much everyone here was clamoring for front 7 players (Kerrigan, Heyward, Wilkerson) in the first round. And almost everyone was disappointed and confused when we passed on every single touted 3-4 DLineman and Linebacker.

IF we are moving away from the 3-4 (not saying were going to base 4-3) to whatever sub-package or hybrid formation or what have you... then it would make a lot of sense to draft the way we did. Of course there are many other things that could have effected the draft, but if (big if) this defensive scheme change proves to be true and effective then I think many here will be a lot more happy with the draft and how it played out.

It would have made perfect sense if we had several 4-3 DE's and 3-4 OLB's on the roster. Avoiding 3-4 OLB's doesn't necessarily mean a switch to the 4-3.

Given that the current Pats defense was constructed as a 3-4, the returning players are more suited for a 3-4. If the Patriots switch, they could find better 4-3 DE's and Cunningham and I guess Moore, and better OLB's than Guyton and Mayo. Or at the least more depth at those positions.

Or they could target young, athletic, versatile players who could play both roles.

 

[Deus Irae]

Holley's talking about this right now, saying that the tackles aren't 2 gapping.

 

[Rob0729]

FWIW, Michael Holley just said from watching practices, the Pats are not only going to a 4-3, but an one gap, penetrating 4-3. As Holley said, this is a huge philosophical shift for Belichick. In 2001, they were in a 4-3, but it was still more of a two gap read and react defense.

 

[DefenseRules]

Holley's talking about this right now, saying that the tackles aren't 2 gapping.

I heard that too. I guess this 4-3 thing might be a reality. He mentioned something about how the linebackers are lining up too. Did you catch that?

 

[Deus Irae]

I heard that too. I guess this 4-3 thing might be a reality. He mentioned something about how the linebackers are lining up too. Did you catch that?

Spikes in the middle. Mayo on the outside. He's guessing it might end up with Guyton as the 3rd one.




If this stays the way it is (Troy seems to think it will based upon how little time there is between now and the season), we may have to deal with some growing pains early on, particularly on plays that Spikes misreads.

Also, this means that the Patriots are pretty much screwed if Fat Albert decides not to play.

 

[DefenseRules]

FWIW, Michael Holley just said from watching practices, the Pats are not only going to a 4-3, but an one gap, penetrating 4-3. As Holley said, this is a huge philosophical shift for Belichick. In 2001, they were in a 4-3, but it was still more of a two gap read and react defense.

I heard that. I can't wait to see how this all comes together. They mentioned that they need another DL too.

 

[strngplyr]

This is pretty exciting. We fully intend on using Haynesworth to his potential, and if Bill didn't think he was on board mentally and physically ready for him to be the key cog I don't think we would even be bothering.

Vince isn't a penetrator himself but if he can take a double team and allow AH to get a one on one it will be pretty huge, I have to assume big Vince is a much better DT than anyone he played with in Ten.

I think we also pick up another DE soon.

 

[DefenseRules]

Spikes in the middle. Mayo on the outside. He's guessing it might end up with Guyton as the 3rd one.




If this stays the way it is (Troy seems to think it will based upon how little time there is between now and the season), we may have to deal with some growing pains early on, particularly on plays that Spikes misreads.

They sure could have used a minicamp this year with all this change. What position did Spikes play in college? What kind of defense?

 

[cavtroop]

FWIW, Michael Holley just said from watching practices, the Pats are not only going to a 4-3, but an one gap, penetrating 4-3. As Holley said, this is a huge philosophical shift for Belichick. In 2001, they were in a 4-3, but it was still more of a two gap read and react defense.

I mentioned this the other day, and got poo-pooed. I'd love to see this kind of a defense run here - one gap penetrating, get-after-the-qb and make-plays-in-the-backfield defense.

Of course, if it isn't performed well, it can also leave huge holes open for exploit.

Whatever D we're going with, or tweaks to the old one, it's going to be a hell of a ride this year!

 

[Big-T]

They sure could have used a minicamp this year with all this change. What position did Spikes play in college? What kind of defense?

MLB in a 4-3, Cunningham was DE in the same team.

 

[DefenseRules]

I mentioned this the other day, and got poo-pooed. I'd love to see this kind of a defense run here - one gap penetrating, get-after-the-qb and make-plays-in-the-backfield defense.

Let me be the fist to appologize. I know that I didn't believe it.

 

[Deus Irae]

They sure could have used a minicamp this year with all this change. What position did Spikes play in college? What kind of defense?

MLB in a 4-3, along with Cunningham at the DE.



I really prefer the 3-4, so I'll be on edge for weeks once the season starts, but it does make sense, given BB's total lack of ability to fix his OLB/DE issues in the 3-4 in recent seasons.

 

[NEPats1]

I've spent so long trying to figure out the ins/outs of a 2 gap 3-4 defense. The huge NT, the 5 techs, the OLBs who must drop back, set the edge, rush passer etc etc. (I still don't get most of it but I def have a better understanding than when I started)


And now BB wants to switch everything on me...CMON BB!!!

 

[italia44]

FWIW, Michael Holley just said from watching practices, the Pats are not only going to a 4-3, but an one gap, penetrating 4-3. As Holley said, this is a huge philosophical shift for Belichick. In 2001, they were in a 4-3, but it was still more of a two gap read and react defense.

Man.....Is BB going to take Holley to the woodshed or what?......He'll be reporting on the pats from a no-tell motel in Walpole:singing: