PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Organized chaos


Status
Not open for further replies.
We used a similar D against San Fran last season if memory serves. I believe that was 1 DL.

I'm surprised BB hasn't brought it out against a better passing team - maybe that's a telling fact, in spite of the success it had yesterday. Still, it'd be great to see it implemented come January. It's been a while since Manning has had to face any pressure behind that O-Line...

Even if it didn't work all the time, it'd be nice to dust off every once in a while to force an offense to prepare for it.

It's similar to how some teams switch to a no-huddle attack mid-game for a drive or two just to try and catch them off-guard. By the time they adjust, you could switch back. Anything to keep the opposition on their toes.
 
I think Fitzpatrick got it right when he said the Pats were testing the communication of the OL. Especially when they were starting a player that was only on the team for 4 days. I dont expect them to try it again against a better team
 
You sure about that? Because in 2004 when BB had Law & Harrison switch positions, the goober couldn't get his act together and only put up 3 points.

We haven't had the personnel to F with Manning's head for a while. I think we do now with our versatile group of D-Backs and LB. It's not our most skilled defense, but its our most versatile in a while. And this year, we held him in check for 3 quarters until the meltdown.

well. you cant honestly say he is the same QB as 4-5 yrs ago. lot more experience ,lot more confidence. Iam sure once its on tape they will know how to handle it.Iam not saying it will not work @ all but not more than 1 or 2 plays ...its hard to compare the same bills o line and QB with the colts.
 
Bingo. The operative word in BB's philsophy is versatility. He has always put out various iterations of the confusion based versatility game. When they had the personnel to execute, players would go into three points out of two points and vice versa. DB's would switch positions at the snap, the Mike would always be disguised, and when pressure came, it would be extremely hard to read. There were zone blitzes, standard dog blitzes, standing stunts, and many mixed coverages. Diverse, versatile defense.

The reason the "Organized Chaos" concept is effective is because it exploits the design of the blocking. Typical offense is predicated upon finding the Mike and making a check for a slide. From there it is something along the lines of "RG: Peek at NT, read head-up backer, seal". If it is more evolved, the protection or blocking scheme is still reliant upon the vision of the offensive line. A lineman will sit in his stance (typically having better vision from a pass stance than a run stance) and read the defense. He will evaluate the potential moves the defense could make based upon alignment and blocking scheme. For example, a tackle will have to be aware of an end crashing across his face, pulling him inside to open the outside for a rushing backer. If the linemen cannot identify the alignment of the front, it significantly inhibits their ability to be alert to confusion. It takes the main advantage of the offense and puts it in the hands of the defense.

It's nice to see that the coaching again has the confidence in their personnel to play this style of defense. It's been a while since we saw BB get after it defensively, and this is an indicator of how good a defense they have. Fun stuff.

i dont know too much about techinical stuff but in the past when this look was given ..jaws and others said the best way is to call a Quick run play. someone like manning might change the snap count and call a quick run play or something else.
if this thing was as revolutionary like the 46 defense BB would use it more.Also the moving around at the line of scrimmage is fine but you have to get back in position before the ball is snapped.Against a good QB it wont be easy...
 
we call it the "11 guys milling around" defense. since the first time i saw it i liked it, but against manning, well, you better get to him.
 
i dont know too much about techinical stuff but in the past when this look was given ..jaws and others said the best way is to call a Quick run play. someone like manning might change the snap count and call a quick run play or something else.
if this thing was as revolutionary like the 46 defense BB would use it more.Also the moving around at the line of scrimmage is fine but you have to get back in position before the ball is snapped.Against a good QB it wont be easy...

I don't think anything's easy against a good QB, not to mention against someone like Manning. And the NFL adjusted to the 4-6 defense, too. But mixing it up a bit might not be a bad idea. He'll adjust to whatever you do, but if you keep mixing it up at least you're making him work more.
 
You sure about that? Because in 2004 when BB had Law & Harrison switch positions, the goober couldn't get his act together and only put up 3 points.

We haven't had the personnel to F with Manning's head for a while. I think we do now with our versatile group of D-Backs and LB. It's not our most skilled defense, but its our most versatile in a while. And this year, we held him in check for 3 quarters until the meltdown.

That was the 2003 AFCCG when Law had 3 picks. Law didn't play in the 21-3 game.
 
I don't think anything's easy against a good QB, not to mention against someone like Manning. And the NFL adjusted to the 4-6 defense, too. But mixing it up a bit might not be a bad idea. He'll adjust to whatever you do, but if you keep mixing it up at least you're making him work more.

sure and i think the pats have mixed it up with manning as much as they think they can.But unlike buffalo where we ran this defensive look so many times it cant be used that many times against the colts as someone suggested that they we should try this against the colts.
Most of the gameplans are matchups thats why we have certain packages against only certain teams and personnel. I remember after the 20-3 over the colts in the AFC div playoff game BB was asked if they need to play same kinda defense against the steelers. He bristled and said something like that "if we run the same defense against the steelers they will be running out the clock in the 3rd Quarter" or something like that.
easy to get excited about something working against buffalo but it was more the opponent and our limitation with the DLine other than anytthing else.
 
What AT should be calling the defense, when asked, is "no comment". When asked what the date is, he should answer "no comment". At this point in time and after what happened, he should keep media comments to himself and be ALL about doing his talking on the field....imho.
 
Heard Christian Fauria call this the "Playground defense"...
 
Why wait until this game to get creative on defense? That's been one of my biggest complaints about our defense. Since we don't have a dominant pass rusher (Is TBC that guy?), we can't be as predictable with where we're coming from.
 
If I remember correctly, also the Chargers used this defense in the Wild Card game last year. Against the Colts.
 
sure and i think the pats have mixed it up with manning as much as they think they can.But unlike buffalo where we ran this defensive look so many times it cant be used that many times against the colts as someone suggested that they we should try this against the colts.
Most of the gameplans are matchups thats why we have certain packages against only certain teams and personnel. I remember after the 20-3 over the colts in the AFC div playoff game BB was asked if they need to play same kinda defense against the steelers. He bristled and said something like that "if we run the same defense against the steelers they will be running out the clock in the 3rd Quarter" or something like that.
easy to get excited about something working against buffalo but it was more the opponent and our limitation with the DLine other than anytthing else.

That's a fair point, and certainly one that I defer judgement to BB or to many of the posters on this board more informed than me. However at it's essence, the 0-5-6- look against Buffalo was one of the first times in a while that I remember the Pats D forcing another O to respond to what they were doing. The Saints game this year was an extreme example of the Saints O and D forcing the Pats to adapt to them, and not the other way around. That's the reason that I (and I think others in this thread) are excited; the looks and personnel and packages might change for each opponent, but the D was forcing the other team's O to work harder and think more than we have in a while, even if it was against the Bills.
 
One other question I have is about BB's timing in unveiling certain looks or personnel or formations during the season. Does anyone here think that he intentionally goes vanilla early in the season, not just to soften the learning curve of his team, but more to limit the league's exposure to what he ultimately wants his team to be doing by season's end?
It seems to me that he does this sometimes and as a result might occasionally lose an earlier in the season game in exchange for getting in a groove and mixing in their more complicated formations and plays for the end of the season and the playoffs. I'd appreciate some insight or thoughts on this.
 
One other question I have is about BB's timing in unveiling certain looks or personnel or formations during the season. Does anyone here think that he intentionally goes vanilla early in the season, not just to soften the learning curve of his team, but more to limit the league's exposure to what he ultimately wants his team to be doing by season's end?
It seems to me that he does this sometimes and as a result might occasionally lose an earlier in the season game in exchange for getting in a groove and mixing in their more complicated formations and plays for the end of the season and the playoffs. I'd appreciate some insight or thoughts on this.

I have actually thought about that also... But why would he take that chance and maybe not make the playoffs... Granted we're almost there, but is that a chance he's willing to take...
 
I have actually thought about that also... But why would he take that chance and maybe not make the playoffs... Granted we're almost there, but is that a chance he's willing to take...

I'm not so sure that it is either, but I am curious about it. There do seem to be some teams that start fast and die, and others that usually seem to stumble then get it together. Some like the Chargers seem to be playing as individuals early in the season and then come together as the season goes on, while the Colts hardly ever seem to lose more than an occasional game or two before Thanksgiving. I'm not sure how much it has to do with implementing complex schemes at the start vs later in the season, but it could. It may have more to do with coach's abilities and individual player's personalities, but I don't know.

As far as not making the playoffs, maybe BB is willing to risk a fluke season like last year where we had early losses (I know some of that was adapting after TB's injury), but by the end had become a team that NOONE wanted to play but didn't make the playoffs. Some teams do always seem to peak too early, and maybe BB is always building towards the end of the season instead of starting out the season at a sprint.
 
I'm not so sure that it is either, but I am curious about it. There do seem to be some teams that start fast and die, and others that usually seem to stumble then get it together. Some like the Chargers seem to be playing as individuals early in the season and then come together as the season goes on, while the Colts hardly ever seem to lose more than an occasional game or two before Thanksgiving. I'm not sure how much it has to do with implementing complex schemes at the start vs later in the season, but it could. It may have more to do with coach's abilities and individual player's personalities, but I don't know.

As far as not making the playoffs, maybe BB is willing to risk a fluke season like last year where we had early losses (I know some of that was adapting after TB's injury), but by the end had become a team that NOONE wanted to play but didn't make the playoffs. Some teams do always seem to peak too early, and maybe BB is always building towards the end of the season instead of starting out the season at a sprint.

good point...
 
One other question I have is about BB's timing in unveiling certain looks or personnel or formations during the season. Does anyone here think that he intentionally goes vanilla early in the season, not just to soften the learning curve of his team, but more to limit the league's exposure to what he ultimately wants his team to be doing by season's end?
It seems to me that he does this sometimes and as a result might occasionally lose an earlier in the season game in exchange for getting in a groove and mixing in their more complicated formations and plays for the end of the season and the playoffs. I'd appreciate some insight or thoughts on this.

I don't necessarily think it's to intentionally deceive, but I think it's the way he prefers to develop his defense. Especially this year with so many new faces, I think he'd rather err on the side of conservatism early and then add wrinkles later, much like an individual will try to master his technique before adding in more exotic moves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/23: News and Notes
MORSE: Final 7 Round Patriots Mock Draft, Matthew Slater News
Bruschi’s Proudest Moment: Former LB Speaks to MusketFire’s Marshall in Recent Interview
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/22: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-21, Kraft-Belichick, A.J. Brown Trade?
MORSE: Patriots Draft Needs and Draft Related Info
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/19: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/18/24
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/18: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/17: News and Notes
Back
Top