Jags big WRs could pose a problem....

[PatsRI]

if whatever QB starts has time to loft it up there. Hobbs has shown he can do a good job on bigger guys (Chambers in Miami) but I worry about Asante.

This is from todays Projo:

http://www.projo.com/patriots/content/projo_20060103_03pats.da583ef.html

Ernest Wilford is 6-4, Reggie Williams is 6-4 and rookie Matt Jones is 6-6. Those three combined for 112 catches and 12 touchdowns this year. The Jags go-to receiver, the venerable Jimmy Smith, is 6-1.

The Patriots don't have great size in their secondary as all of their secondary players are under six-feet tall. This could be a real issue to watch as the game progresses and especially in the red zone and on third down. Throw in 6-6, 278-pound tight end Kyle Brady, and the Pats are going to have to deal with some real size mismatches Saturday night.

---------------------------------------------

 

[bosfan]

Good way to start the playoffs for our secondary, if they play well against this receiving corps it could be a real confidence booster.

 

[pats1]

I could have sworn Hobbs was on Booker last weekend and repeatedly was out of position due to his height.

 

[Willie55]

The Pats need to pressure the QB by blitzing. They can't just let Leftwich/Garrand sit back there, survey the field and fire at will.

 

[BelichickFan]

Other than fades in the EZ I'm not real concerned about it. Sure it's a little big of a disadvantage but it takes a perfect pass to take advantage of height and there won't be many completions that are completions solely due to that.

Regarding the need for taller DBs, sure, but you usually lose quickness if you're 6'2" so it's a tradeoff unless you are able to get the perfect combination of physical traits. And in this era of defensive holding, that harder than ever.

 

[ilduce06410]

munchkins in the secondary

This has always been one of my concerns, and have made mention of it here, many times.

As Willie55 said, we need to compensate for that by an allout assault on their QB, regardless of which one it may be.....we need to pressure him into mistakes...and hope for a windy night at Foxboro, too.

The size of our DB's has always been one of my major concerns.

y'all will note that i have been complaining about tiny DBs for a year. Poole, Starks, Hobbs, even the drafting of safeties like scott and sanders. i kept waiting for them to draft the new rodney...
even rodney isn't that big by SS standards now.
like willie55 says, the most effective way to defend the pass is with the PASS RUSH. it's one of the basic rules of the football that was taught to me 40 years ago. maaybe that rule has changed, but from what i see it hasn't.
the only relief to give to that secondary is blitzes. a 4th guy shoule be coming every passing play. in addition you can put don davis back there, but the other 2-way guys, brown and childress, are both below 6 feet themselves.
BB will find a way.

 

[JR4]

Most of PATs DB's are around 5'10. You can find many top DBs in the league
around that height. There are some 6' + DBs but that doesn't make them
very good. I'll take speed, instinct, qucikness, ability to recover etc , over
height any day. If tall DBs were the way to handle big receivers I'm
quite sure BB would have brought those type of receivers on board. We've
all seen Hobbs break up a perfectly thrown fade pattern in the end zone
against a big WR.

If you see a Big WR get open for a pass against a smaller DB that does NOT
mean a taller DB would have prevented it. It might mean the WR is good at
getting separation. Now if it's a jump ball that might be different but there's
not going to be many of those situations unless the front 7 just can't get
to the QB.

 

[mgteich]

The question is not whether 5'10" corners can do the job most of the time. The question, for me, is why bb and pioli seem to prefer short corners and wide receivers, while other teams have more of a mix.

Sure, we can cover for this deficiency by blitzing more, and by having a great pass rush, as we have for five years. But the question is why we have the deficiency in the first place. Or perhaps bb believes that height really doesn't matter.

Obviously, a receiver isn't good just because he's tall, and he doesn't win matchups just because he's "tall". However, there are a lot of talented 6' and taller receivers and cornbers out there. And BTW, is 6' for receivers and defensive backs tall in the NFL or just on the patriots?

 

[khayos]

Personally, I think height is more of an issue if you have a pinpoint accurate passer and, for whatever reason, the pinpoint passers in the league tend to have smaller receivers (Pats, Colts, Jets when noodle arm is in, etc.). The bigness just seems to compensate for lack of a QB, but not much.

 

[Fanfrom1960]

if whatever QB starts has time to loft it up there. Hobbs has shown he can do a good job on bigger guys (Chambers in Miami) but I worry about Asante.

This is from todays Projo:

http://www.projo.com/patriots/content/projo_20060103_03pats.da583ef.html

Ernest Wilford is 6-4, Reggie Williams is 6-4 and rookie Matt Jones is 6-6. Those three combined for 112 catches and 12 touchdowns this year. The Jags go-to receiver, the venerable Jimmy Smith, is 6-1.

The Patriots don't have great size in their secondary as all of their secondary players are under six-feet tall. This could be a real issue to watch as the game progresses and especially in the red zone and on third down. Throw in 6-6, 278-pound tight end Kyle Brady, and the Pats are going to have to deal with some real size mismatches Saturday night.

---------------------------------------------

Thinking back, the Patriots had problems with tall receivers against Tennessee in the playoffs after the 2003 season. That was a tough, close game in the cold at Foxborough. Drew Bennett comes to mind, and he's not exactly a stellar career guy. Tennessee did have Steve McNair throwing the ball that game, maybe at his best in his career. Pats had Law then, too. You make a valid point here.

 

[ilduce06410]

seen it happen to sparks and hobbs

Most of PATs DB's are around 5'10. You can find many top DBs in the league
around that height. There are some 6' + DBs but that doesn't make them
very good. I'll take speed, instinct, qucikness, ability to recover etc , over
height any day. If tall DBs were the way to handle big receivers I'm
quite sure BB would have brought those type of receivers on board. We've
all seen Hobbs break up a perfectly thrown fade pattern in the end zone
against a big WR.
If you see a Big WR get open for a pass against a smaller DB that does NOT
mean a taller DB would have prevented it. It might mean the WR is good at
getting separation. Now if it's a jump ball that might be different but there's
not going to be many of those situations unless the front 7 just can't get
to the QB.

i'm really uncomfortable here. i usually smile when i hear someone say "too small". i have the same opinions you do. but these 5-8 and 5-10 guys are making me crazy. i was referring to jump ball situations, against the raiders, buccaneers, and against the panthers. that's what i can remember right now.
it's not just pass defence, it's also about supporting the run. nfl RBs are bigger. i can't remember a back we saw under 220 lbs this year. our DBs, who have a lot of heart, are knocking themselves out making first hits on these tanks (of course, a better miiddle 3 game woulda saved the DBs from so many first hits).
hobbs is going to be a fine DB. he does, and is, everything that BB likes. same with Mankins, Kaczur, Sanders for that matter. but to me a backfield made up exclusively of small guys is a liability.