Is the Pats pass defense as bad as everybody claims?

[ginachen]

For me, passing the eye test is the most important. In games like against the Steelers and the Colts, I saw our DBs mostly chasing the receivers, they're always a step behind, so that's bad. Against the Giants(first 55 mins) and the Jets, they were actually covering the receivers. Also most importantly the defense is a lot better in the redzone covering. So the conclusion is they're not as bad as the media made them out to be

 

[IllegalContact]

offenses win games, defenses win championships.

an old tired quote that still rings true

 

[TriplecHamp]

Why not? They held Philip Rivers (6th in passing yards), Tony Romo (7th in passing yards), Eli Manning (4th in passing yards right behind Rodgers), and Roethlisberger (9th in passing yards) to under 400 yards. In fact, the only two QBs who got 400 yards or more were Chad Henne and Vince Young and both of those games were blow outs and the they got most of their yards in garbage time.

It is possible that Rodgers could throw for 400 yards, but the only time the Pats allow a 400 yard passer is when the game is over early in the 4th quarter and the defense gets laxed.

There isn't a magical entity that has teams taking their foot off the gas in blow outs. It is a fairly common occurrence actually. The problem is that the Pats are consistently blowing out teams this year. It isn't a coincidence that the three highest scoring offenses are #32 (Patriots), #31 (Packers), and #27 (Saints) in yards allowed this year.

Lastly, the man-to-man stuff was experimentation this past weekend. It was the first time they used it more than a play here and there since about week #3.

If you were a betting man would you bet that the Patriots would be able to hold Rodgers and those weapons under 400 yards through the air? Taking your foot off the gas is one thing and it usually happens on the offensive side of the ball and it entails running which the pats did unsuccessfully. On the defensive side of the ball, they were simply getting burned in man coverage. There is no excuse for that and its not like it only happens in garbage time.

I agree that the three best offensives have poor defenses and part of that comes from being ahead but that didn't happen last sunday. They were beat for big plays and thats something that you want to avoid when up big and time winding down. I wouldn't be upset if the colts dinked and dunked there way up the field but they didn't, the ran a couple of go routes and scored quick. Lastly I don't know where you think the man-man stuff was experimentation because thats ludicrous. The Patriots played plenty of Man in the Steelers game, the Jets game as well as plenty of other games.

 

[Ring 6]

If you were a betting man would you bet that the Patriots would be able to hold Rodgers and those weapons under 400 yards through the air? Taking your foot off the gas is one thing and it usually happens on the offensive side of the ball and it entails running which the pats did unsuccessfully. On the defensive side of the ball, they were simply getting burned in man coverage. There is no excuse for that and its not like it only happens in garbage time.

I agree that the three best offensives have poor defenses and part of that comes from being ahead but that didn't happen last sunday. They were beat for big plays and thats something that you want to avoid when up big and time winding down. I wouldn't be upset if the colts dinked and dunked there way up the field but they didn't, the ran a couple of go routes and scored quick. Lastly I don't know where you think the man-man stuff was experimentation because thats ludicrous. The Patriots played plenty of Man in the Steelers game, the Jets game as well as plenty of other games.

The bold part really isnt true. There were 3 'long' passes. The TD to Garcon, the long pass before the last TD and a crossing route to Collie.
The DID dink and dunk for most of the half, but since the last 2 drive each had a 30 yarder to Garcon, peoples memories get screwed up.
Their first 2 scoring drives took 8:49 on 15 plays, 4:15 on 11 including the 30 yd TD (ie without that pass that he almost never got off that drive was going 6+ of dink and dunk, and the last one was 1:07, which revisionist history has now turned into what they did on every drive.

 

[Ring 6]

offenses win games, defenses win championships.

an old tired quote that still rings true

It really doesn't

 

[Ring 6]

because there is some magical entity that causes the Patriots to become lazy and un-inspired to cover their man when leading in the 4th quater...

You do realize that the objective is to win the game, not to not allow yards right?
With a 28 point lead and 19 minutes left on the clock, the Patriots played a style of defense that caused the Colts to use 8:49 to get within 3 TDs. Do you really think they play the same scheme if its a 6 point game?
After that, the Pats ran a whopping 1:27 off and gave the ball back with 8:57 to go, up 3 scores. They picked off the pass, then ran a whopping 44 seconds more off before giving it back with 6:27 to go. They played a defensive style with a 21 point lead and 6:27 left that caused the Colts to burn 4:09 to get to the 33, where the threw a 33 yard TD pass to be down 2 scores with 2:18 left.
Do you really think they play the same scheme if its a 6 point game?

Fans seem to want to pound their chest about 'situational football' when it serves their purpose but totally ignore it when they want to whine about something such as winning but apparently not with enough style points.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Hogwash.
Better drafting with regards to defensive personnel and possibly a shift in defensive strategy was what I was referring to.
With our numerous draft picks, we've wasted several on players (the secondary being a prime example) that were eventually waived.

-Jamman

Contrary to popular opinion, there are times that draft picks for other teams that don't pan out - just like what happens with the Patriots.

If the drafts were reversed this forum would be flooded with threads about the 2010 draft, where the first two rounds netted Sergio Kindle and Terrence Cody. And instead of never-ending comments referencing Chad Jackson and Greg Jennings, we would instead have never-ending comments referencing trading up to draft Kyle Boller, with the traded pick turning into Vince Wilfork.


Obviously there are several draft picks that the Pats wish they could have back, there's no disputing that. But nobody hits on every pick, and if you trade down then you're more likely to have a higher percentage and total number of misses simply because your team has a larger number of picks.

 

[Ring 6]

Contrary to popular opinion, there are times that draft picks for other teams that don't pan out - just like what happens with the Patriots.

If the drafts were reversed this forum would be flooded with threads about the 2010 draft, where the first two rounds netted Sergio Kindle and Terrence Cody. And instead of never-ending comments referencing Chad Jackson and Greg Jennings, we would instead have never-ending comments referencing trading up to draft Kyle Boller, with the traded pick turning into Vince Wilfork.


Obviously there are several draft picks that the Pats wish they could have back, there's no disputing that. But nobody hits on every pick, and if you trade down then you're more likely to have a higher percentage and total number of misses simply because your team has a larger number of picks.

The Ravens draft history for the last 5 years is not exactly awe inspiring, especially on D.

 

[randomk1]

It really doesn't

Umm why not? Steelers and Packers were one of the top defenses last year. Jets have made it into 2 AFC games purely thanks to their defense.

09 Saints had a very opportunistic D and that showed up in the playoffs with multiple big plays for the D. The Saints could've been champs sooner imo...the offense was great since 05. The D had been holding them back.

08 Steelers - carried mostly by D

07 Giants - need i say more?

06 Colts - it was as much about the D as the O. Manning actually sucked in the playoffs. Forced 5 turnovers in the SB.

05 - Steelers - refs

04 - Pats - balanced

03 - Pats - balanced.

02 - Bucs - all D

01 - Pats - D

00 - Ravens all D

 

[Ring 6]

Umm why not? Steelers and Packers were one of the top defenses last year. Jets have made it into 2 AFC games purely thanks to their defense.

Your argument is that back to back 6th seeds proves what it takes to win Championships?

09 Saints had a very opportunistic D and that showed up in the playoffs with multiple big plays for the D. The Saints could've been champs sooner imo...the offense was great since 05. The D had been holding them back.

08 Steelers - carried mostly by D

07 Giants - need i say more?

06 Colts - it was as much about the D as the O. Manning actually sucked in the playoffs. Forced 5 turnovers in the SB.

05 - Steelers - refs

04 - Pats - balanced

03 - Pats - balanced.

02 - Bucs - all D

01 - Pats - D

00 - Ravens all D

Its just too simplistic.
Why would offense win games but not Championships? Are Championship games different? Why would defense win Championships but not games?

Teams win games, teams win Championships, offense is half of the equation, defense is half of the equation (well st's have a share too, but you get my point)
That cliche is from a long time ago when the game was very different than it is now.

 

[randomk1]

Your argument is that back to back 6th seeds proves what it takes to win Championships?


Its just too simplistic.
Why would offense win games but not Championships? Are Championship games different? Why would defense win Championships but not games?

Teams win games, teams win Championships, offense is half of the equation, defense is half of the equation (well st's have a share too, but you get my point)
That cliche is from a long time ago when the game was very different than it is now.

I still think there is some truth to it. If not the Colts should've been the team of the decade.

And you're gonna have those games in the playoffs where you need to grind it out. Steelers are equipped for it. The 2010 Packers had that type of game in the NFC game vs the Bears...the D carried them through that game.

 

[Keyser Söze]

Yes, it's that bad. We still have a hard time getting to the QB, and we don't have the secondary that can stay with a WR more than 3/4 seconds.

 

[Deus Irae]

Anyone who argues we have a "good" pass defense is delusional.

However, they've played against good QB's this year and held their own for long stretches of the game (Manning in the 1st half, Roethlisberger in the 2nd half, Romo for the entire game). Other than those three, they haven't faced anyone of note this year. I don't think it's automatic at all that a good QB = loss for the Patriots. We were competitive in all three of those games.

Only time will tell if they can get it together in time for the playoffs. I don't think Bill playing musical chairs with the secondary has helped.

The Patriots weren't even close to competitive in the Steelers game.

The defense wet itself against both the Giants and the Bills.

Romo was gifting all his opponents at the time the Patriots faced the Cowboys.

 

[reflexblue]

It really doesn't

Yeah AJ, then give me the SB winners that won on offense alone.

 

[robbomango]

Statistically 36 Defensively dominate teams won a SB and 29 offensively dominate won a SB. Balanced teams win the majority, lopsided ones it's about even. Sleight edge to Defense but nothing to hang hopes on.

 

[reflexblue]

Statistically 36 Defensively dominate teams won a SB and 29 offensively dominate won a SB.

First where did you come up with these figures? I drove through Missouri one time so show me.
There has to be some semblance of a decent defense to win a SB, it can't be done on pure offense alone. The Pats as currently constructed don't have a SB winning defense.

 

[robbomango]

First where did you come up with these figures? I drove through Missouri one time so show me.
There has to be some semblance of a decent defense to win a SB, it can't be done on pure offense alone. The Pats as currently constructed don't have a SB winning defense.

This was a chart I did looking at the past 45 SB winners and there rankings, the 36, 29(figures), were from an article I read a few weeks a go addressing the "defense win championships" mantra. I'll find the link

also, the term dominate was inappropriate, It didn't mean lopsided, just weighted towards O or D.

 

[TriplecHamp]

You do realize that the objective is to win the game, not to not allow yards right?
With a 28 point lead and 19 minutes left on the clock, the Patriots played a style of defense that caused the Colts to use 8:49 to get within 3 TDs. Do you really think they play the same scheme if its a 6 point game?
After that, the Pats ran a whopping 1:27 off and gave the ball back with 8:57 to go, up 3 scores. They picked off the pass, then ran a whopping 44 seconds more off before giving it back with 6:27 to go. They played a defensive style with a 21 point lead and 6:27 left that caused the Colts to burn 4:09 to get to the 33, where the threw a 33 yard TD pass to be down 2 scores with 2:18 left.
Do you really think they play the same scheme if its a 6 point game?

Fans seem to want to pound their chest about 'situational football' when it serves their purpose but totally ignore it when they want to whine about something such as winning but apparently not with enough style points.

Only on Patsfans.com is 21 points to the joke that is the indianapolis Colts totally acceptable. What is this defensive style you speak of? Running the ball ineffectively(poor execution)? Getting beat in man coverage (which comes down to simple execution)? The colts had 4 or 5 plays for 15+ yards which I believe is considered a "big play" in the stat sheet. Again explain to me this radical scheme changes that caused the team to give up 21 points. Im sure BB isn't pleased with the execution down the stretch, I don't understand why fans aren't allowed to be either.

It seems like a few posters here are only concerned with the final score. As a fan who is trying to objectively look at how this team would fair against other teams in the playoffs, thats not good enough. The team didn't execute well down the stretch and if you want to point figures at everything but the execution, have fun. Don't be that guy who posts about getting disrespected when nobody picks the pats because of things like not playing 60 minutes or not being able to match up in man coverage with the faster teams in the league. The only time from here on out that I care about W/L is in january. Lets be real here this team should realistically close out the season strong but when we aren't playing the Indys and Washingtons of the league we better come to play for 60 minutes or well be in the same place as last season.

 

[TriplecHamp]

The Patriots weren't even close to competitive in the Steelers game.

The defense wet itself against both the Giants and the Bills.

Romo was gifting all his opponents at the time the Patriots faced the Cowboys.

Im going to disagree the Pats were thoroughly out played in the Steelers game but the were in it up until the end.

As far as the Giants and Bills games, poor execution and in my opinion poor talent (im talking about Tracey white and Sergio Brown) on the field and the wrong time cost us. Turnovers killed us in the Bills game but we couldn't stop a nosebleed either.

We could have easily lost the Cowboys game but it was a good effort by the D and some poor play calling by the boys along with Brady being Brady. But since it was a win were aren't allowed to critique any aspect of it.

 

[reflexblue]

This was a chart I did looking at the past 45 SB winners and there rankings, the 36, 29(figures), were from an article I read a few weeks a go addressing the "defense win championships" mantra. I'll find the link

also, the term dominate was inappropriate, It didn't mean lopsided, just weighted towards O or D.

Thats OK i'm falling asleep at my desk. But i don't see according to the chart you put up a team with the 30th ranked defense winning a SB, although the Colts come close.

If the other team can't score they can't win.