Last night's game made me long for the early Belichick years

[BelichickFan]

Getting rid of Brady when Brady was already the QB sets up a false conundrum.

If you want the early Belichick years, you don't get today's Brady. Sorry. You also don't get Moss. Keep Welker if you like.

 

[BradyManny]

I would also point out SB XLII was a great defensive battle that was decided by two late touchdowns.

Had "big play" Asante made the catch, history would be different, like the "tuck rule".

I agree completely. Things look so different if Asante makes that catch, or if we don't go for the 4th & 13, or Tyree doesn't trap the ball or Woods holds onto the fumble or Maroney converts the 3rd & 1 or Brady throws the bomb to Moss 2 inches further.

All the Pats needed to go 19-0 was for one single play in that game to go there way. And it never did. I don't know how that game can be an indictment of that team. The Sports Gods conspired against us that night. Maybe its the Seinfeld rule, it all evens out - we've had fortune in our favor in past Super Bowls and past playoff games - but you simply cannot win them all. At some point, the Any Given Sunday factor kicks in.

 

[tombonneau]

I'd say the same made me nostalgic for the 2003-2004 seasons only in the sense that I knew the Steelers were going to keep it close and do enough to win. I knew they would make one or two plays when they needed to, despite all their obvious deficiencies. Even after fumbling and the game headed into OT, did anyone really think the Titans were goin to win?

 

[Deus Irae]

If you want the early Belichick years, you don't get today's Brady. Sorry. You also don't get Moss. Keep Welker if you like.

It's a false conundrum, no matter how you frame it. Brady=Brady.

 

[BelichickFan]

It's a false conundrum, no matter how you frame it. Brady=Brady.

Great, you can have the McGinnest, Johnson, Law and Milloy of today. Enjoy.

 

[JMarr]

I disagree with your first paragraph for the very reason of the different personnel this year.

If they go more 4-3, that means more playmaking opportunities for the guy who, in his second year let's face it, is the best player on the D - - Mayo.

Add to that the better speed and younger personnel (less capable to "read and react") and you have both the positive (speed) and negative (less "reading experience) recipe for more PROACTIVE than REACTIVE strategy.

Look at the LBs. They got ride of two slower but great fundamental readers and edge-setters (reactive) in Vrabel and Bruschi and replaced them with guys who are NOT great in "setting the edge" but who specialize in being blitz attack dogs in TBC and Burgess.

I'm guessing Springs and Bodden were brought in to be "cool heads" in the secondary during times of Safety blitzes, etc.

You're right that Mayo is going to make a lot more big plays this year. I simply think that the Pats' D and the Steelers'/Titans' Ds are completely different animals and will continue to be so this season. And last night's offensive ineptitude (Pittsburgh's inability to run the ball was particularly pathetic) was a big reason both teams' defenses appeared to be more effective than they actually are. Obviously Polomalu and Pittsburgh's OLB's are huge in Pittsburgh's ability to be "proactive" but Brady and co. will make them look silly if we see them this year.

As for our defense, even in the 4-3, I don't think we'll be able to generate much more pressure on the QB than we were able to last season, given our personnell on the front line. To trot out a well-worn offseason theme we still don't have any pass-rushing mavens in the front seven (unlike the Steelers and Titans) to allow us much more improvisation than we were able to do last year. TBC and Burgess aren't in the same league as Woodley and Harrison.

Regardless of alignment, I still don't think our LBs or safetys will be bringing it alot this year.

 

[Kontradiction]

This team used to be ferocious down the middle. Bruschi, Johnson, Wilson, Harrison and Washington really set a tone for the whole defense. That sort of hard hitting and intimidating play has been missing for years. Belichick has gone with smaller safeties. He's filled that Johnson 'thumper' role with players who are more finish and athletics than ferocity and power, Bruschi's stroke and age changed his game, and Wilfork is not the menacing figure at the nose that Washington was.

This team has gone for faster, less punishing players, taking a page out of the Colts recruiting book. Whether this has been because of conscious choices, coincidence, or because the team hasn't been able to find the old type of players, I think the change is here for a while.

I'd go with "hasn't been able to find the old type of players" for $1200, Alex. Seriously, though, I think that's been the case. Wilfork is still a nasty NT, but he isn't as nasty as Washington was. For what it's worth though, I think that when BB has been able to find the nasty types of players like the ones we used to have, he has taken them. Examples are Jerod Mayo (who, from what I saw at Tennessee and at times last year, does have a vicious streak in him) and Pat Chung, who is known as a very hard hitter at the safety position. It's a shame that Chung is as young as he is and we're going to have to wait for him to mature to see him punish opposing receivers in the Pats' secondary. The good news is that Sanders is also known (around here at least) for his ability to lay the wood.

I was going to say that Meriweather has a vicious streak and point to his skull stomping efforts, but that would have been too tongue in cheek.

 

[Deus Irae]

Great, you can have the McGinnest, Johnson, Law and Milloy of today. Enjoy.

Again, and for the last time, false conundrum.

 

[Deus Irae]

I'd go with "hasn't been able to find the old type of players" for $1200, Alex. Seriously, though, I think that's been the case. Wilfork is still a nasty NT, but he isn't as nasty as Washington was. For what it's worth though, I think that when BB has been able to find the nasty types of players like the ones we used to have, he has taken them. Examples are Jerod Mayo (who, from what I saw at Tennessee and at times last year, does have a vicious streak in him) and Pat Chung, who is known as a very hard hitter at the safety position. It's a shame that Chung is as young as he is and we're going to have to wait for him to mature to see him punish opposing receivers in the Pats' secondary. The good news is that Sanders is also known (around here at least) for his ability to lay the wood.

I was going to say that Meriweather has a vicious streak and point to his skull stomping efforts, but that would have been too tongue in cheek.

Meriweather was a hitter in college. In the NFL, he's undersized and doesn't pack the same punch. Chung will likely be in that same mold. He'll either ease up on the hits or risk going down the Bob Sanders/Eugene Wilson road. It's not a fault of theirs, it's just a matter of size.

As for Mayo, I see a quality player who doesn't have the mentality of Bruschi and Johnson. I could be wrong on that, because I understand that he was somewhat handcuffed by both scheme and inexperience last season.

Regarding Vince.... again, it's not his fault that he's not Washington. Washington was a force of nature against a run in his direction. He was all but immovable. Wilfork is better moving from side to side than Washington, but Washington was amazing against direct assaults.

 

[Kontradiction]

Meriweather was a hitter in college. In the NFL, he's undersized and doesn't pack the same punch. Chung will likely be in that same mold. He'll either ease up on the hits or risk going down the Bob Sanders/Eugene Wilson road. It's not a fault of theirs, it's just a matter of size.

As for Mayo, I see a quality player who doesn't have the mentality of Bruschi and Johnson. I could be wrong on that, because I understand that he was somewhat handcuffed by both scheme and inexperience last season.

Regarding Vince.... again, it's not his fault that he's not Washington. Washington was a force of nature against a run in his direction. He was all but immovable. Wilfork is better moving from side to side than Washington, but Washington was amazing against direct assaults.

I think you'll see the side of Mayo this year that SEC fans saw of him in the past. As for Vince, he's good enough for me. I can't think of one NT in the league right now that I would have over Big Vince, and that's not the homer in me talking.

 

[shmessy]

To trot out a well-worn offseason theme we still don't have any pass-rushing mavens in the front seven (unlike the Steelers and Titans) to allow us much more improvisation than we were able to do last year. TBC and Burgess aren't in the same league as Woodley and Harrison.

I see what you're saying, but point out that you're also forgetting Jarvis Green will be seeing more playing time - - and no longer as much as a 3-4 DE, but as a "let 'em loose" 4-3 DE. That would be a major omission in your analysis.

Also, in a 4-3 Mayo's job is not so much to engage (and take up) an OL as much as it was in the 3-4 last year. He can now free-lance alot more and blitz more often, especially with a better secondary than last year's weak version.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

I'd say the same made me nostalgic for the 2003-2004 seasons only in the sense that I knew the Steelers were going to keep it close and do enough to win. I knew they would make one or two plays when they needed to, despite all their obvious deficiencies. Even after fumbling and the game headed into OT, did anyone really think the Titans were goin to win?

I'm also nostalgic for the '65 Packers and days when players only wore leather helmets and no chin guards.

It's foolish to wish to go back because the game has changed even since 2003.

We now have the "Ty Law" rule. "Pansy" Wilfork has gotten many personal foul penalties because they have put a skirt on the QB.

Also, Moss has been singled out for pushing off. A historical trait of his.

Also, the feature back is essentially dead.

Last night you saw a 3-4 zone blitz defense and a team that likes to get pressure with the front four.

If my conclusions are correct, we could be witnessing the next step in defense. BB seems to want to have the personnel for:

Big 3-4 (Brace, Wilfork,Warren)
Big 4-3 (Pryor, Wilfor, Brace, Warren)
Pressure Giants 4-3 (Green, Pryor,Burgess,Thomas)

Finally, it's all about situation football. 2006/7 happened because when we got the the "situation", we didn't make the play. An earlier post was correct, we would have 5 Lombardi's is we made two plays.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Watching to hard nose physical defenses battle it out made me miss the Super Bowl seasons for the Pats. People can complain about McDaniels and the finesse offense all they want, but I think what this team has been sorely missing for years is the physical defenses we had back in the day.

I am hoping the revamped defense brings back some of that. People have been calling for speed on defense for a while and now we got that, but I wonder if that is what was really missing. Back in 2003 and 2004, there wasn't a lot of speed on defense and they made up for it with smarts and toughness. The Colts always have a lot of speed, but not a lot of brains and toughness on defense and they usually suck. Hopefully, this revamped defense brings both.

If the Pats have close to a defense like the either team had last night (although the Titans' defense struggled at the end, but I would blame a lot of the play calling) combined with close to what they had on offense in 2007, this team will unstoppable. Maybe we can get close to that.

Personally, I would love to back to the days with a dominant defense and a ball control offense like we had in 2001, 2003, or 2004, but we have been forced to go to a high powered offense in recent years to cover the deficiencies on defense.

The Clots can only afford SMALL and FAST. This re-tooled Patriot's Defense is young, BIG and FAST. We shall soon see if it is talented too.

 

[Ring 6]

This team used to be ferocious down the middle. Bruschi, Johnson, Wilson, Harrison and Washington really set a tone for the whole defense. That sort of hard hitting and intimidating play has been missing for years. Belichick has gone with smaller safeties. He's filled that Johnson 'thumper' role with players who are more finish and athletics than ferocity and power, Bruschi's stroke and age changed his game, and Wilfork is not the menacing figure at the nose that Washington was.

This team has gone for faster, less punishing players, taking a page out of the Colts recruiting book. Whether this has been because of conscious choices, coincidence, or because the team hasn't been able to find the old type of players, I think the change is here for a while.

I would disagree that Bill Belichick took any pages from the Colts recruiting book in staffing his defense.
Maybe when we switch to a onegap 43 Tampa 2 I will reconsider.
Last I checked our DEs are 300lbs, not 260, and our LBs are 250-260 not 220.

 

[Deus Irae]

I would disagree that Bill Belichick took any pages from the Colts recruiting book in staffing his defense.
Maybe when we switch to a onegap 43 Tampa 2 I will reconsider.
Last I checked our DEs are 300lbs, not 260, and our LBs are 250-260 not 220.

Both safeties are smaller, Wilfork (and pretty much the rest of the planet) is smaller than Washington, etc....

The reference to the Colts was just about size, not scheme.

 

[rsd]

Both safeties are smaller, Wilfork (and pretty much the rest of the planet) is smaller than Washington, etc....

The reference to the Colts was just about size, not scheme.

Ted Washington was anomally. Other than Mount Cody, I don't think anyone in the near future will combine his size and ability anytime in the next several years.

Otherwise I can see why smaller safeties are in demand. Many more teams are employing multiple receiver sets, Tight Ends are used in the passing game more and more nowadays, teams use RBs out of the backfield instead of FBs, etc etc. There is a need for smaller safeties because they need to be able to cover all these new offensive threats. Few "big" safeties can cover well (See Roy Williams for example).

 

[Disco Volante]

I prefer being up by 3 scores at the start of the 4th quarter.

 

[Rob0729]

A few things:

First, I am talking about the defense. I prefer winning the way we did in 2003 and 2004 than 2007, but I would gladly take the 2007 offense if we got the 2003 or 2004 defense.

Second, relying on your offense to constently win games is dangerous especially in the playoffs. Offenses can be more inconsistent than defenses. As we saw in 2007 (actually January and February of 2008), a great WR like Moss can be shutdown in the playoffs. The Pats' offense struggled in the Super Bowl and the first half of the AFC Championship game.

Third, eventhough the rules have changed to help the offense, defenses still win championships. The only team since the rules change that has won the Super Bowl that had a great offense was the Colts. The Colts won by taking a page out of the Pats' playbooks and in the playoffs (except for the Pats game) went to more a ball control offense and a good defense to control the game.

Fourth, while on the ball control subject, ball control doesn't neccessarily mean low scoring. It means long drives that keeps your defense off the field. The 2007 offense could score in 2-4 plays at times.

 

[mb6592]

This team used to be ferocious down the middle. Bruschi, Johnson, Wilson, Harrison and Washington really set a tone for the whole defense. That sort of hard hitting and intimidating play has been missing for years. Belichick has gone with smaller safeties. He's filled that Johnson 'thumper' role with players who are more finish and athletics than ferocity and power, Bruschi's stroke and age changed his game, and Wilfork is not the menacing figure at the nose that Washington was.

This team has gone for faster, less punishing players, taking a page out of the Colts recruiting book. Whether this has been because of conscious choices, coincidence, or because the team hasn't been able to find the old type of players, I think the change is here for a while.

That's my recollection also, but no doubt some elder(s) will throw out some stats, then proceed to chastise you for relying on what you saw and experienced during those seasons. Although, since you have practiced this sort thing yourself, you have little room to complain.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Long for the early years, huh? I think you just saw two really bad offenses go at it last night.