Patriots have a Top 10 defense

[captain stone]

I don't care what the ppg average says. "Stats are for losers", anyway.

When TBC, God bless him, is your best pass-rusher, then your defense is simply not worthy of going to the SB.

 

[slash83]

I don't care what the ppg average says. "Stats are for losers", anyway.

When TBC, God bless him, is your best pass-rusher, then your defense is simply not worthy of going to the SB.

Your being sarcastic right?

 

[Disco Volante]

All of the top 5 scoring defenses control their own destiny or have already clinched a playoff spot.

 

[captain stone]

Your being sarcastic right?

Wrong.

Our pash-rush stinks because we do not have elite athletes on the edges.

No pass-rush = no chance for a championship.

 

[mayoclinic]

Wrong.

Our pash-rush stinks because we do not have elite athletes on the edges.

No pass-rush = no chance for a championship.

We haven't really ever had an "elite athlete" on the edge, unless you count McGinest, who was well in his 30's in the SB years. Vrabel, Colvin and AD have all been solid, but I wouldn't call any of them an "elite athlete" or even a top caliber pass rusher in the sense of a DeMarcus Ware, James Harrison, Terrell Suggs, etc.

Right now our defense is playing well. I'd rank us behind the Jets, Baltimore and Cincinnati, but not many other defenses are playing better. We held the Panthers to 10 points and they torched the Giants for 41. We held Jax to 7 points right after they put up 31 on the Colts.

Our defense is plenty good enough to give us a serious shot at the Super Bowl. It won't carry us to the Super Bowl, but if it plays at the caliber that it has been for the past few weeks it will give our offense a chance. Really, the only game this year in which the defense hasn't been good enough to give the offense a chance was the Saints game, and I think you have to allow one real stinker. Historically, even the truly elite defenses have usually had one bad game.

Our defense is good enough to keep us in the game. If we show up with the offense that played on Sunday, we can play with anyone - Colts, Chargers, Saints, you name it. If we revert to predictable spread offense with no RB and Brady always looking for Moss and Welker, then no, our defense won't be good enough for us to win the Super Bowl.

 

[makoute]

Defense (PPG)

1. New York Jets - 15.7
2. Baltimore Ravens - 16.5
3. New England Patriots - 16.7
4. Dallas Cowboys - 16.7
5. Cincinnati Bengals - 16.9
6. San Francisco 49ers - 18.3
7. Indianapolis Colts - 18.5
8. Denver Broncos - 18.7
9. Minnesota Vikings - 19.2
10. Green Bay Packers - 19.3

All these teams are in the playoff hunt other than the 49ers.... Defense wins games.

 

[captain stone]

We haven't really ever had an "elite athlete" on the edge, unless you count McGinest, who was well in his 30's in the SB years. Vrabel, Colvin and AD have all been solid, but I wouldn't call any of them an "elite athlete" or even a top caliber pass rusher in the sense of a DeMarcus Ware, James Harrison, Terrell Suggs, etc.

Right now our defense is playing well. I'd rank us behind the Jets, Baltimore and Cincinnati, but not many other defenses are playing better. We held the Panthers to 10 points and they torched the Giants for 41. We held Jax to 7 points right after they put up 31 on the Colts.

Our defense is plenty good enough to give us a serious shot at the Super Bowl. It won't carry us to the Super Bowl, but if it plays at the caliber that it has been for the past few weeks it will give our offense a chance. Really, the only game this year in which the defense hasn't been good enough to give the offense a chance was the Saints game, and I think you have to allow one real stinker. Historically, even the truly elite defenses have usually had one bad game.

Our defense is good enough to keep us in the game. If we show up with the offense that played on Sunday, we can play with anyone - Colts, Chargers, Saints, you name it. If we revert to predictable spread offense with no RB and Brady always looking for Moss and Welker, then no, our defense won't be good enough for us to win the Super Bowl.

You're right, of course, that if the defense plays & is coached at its best, and has zero meltdowns like at NO & Indy, and if the offense stays balanced & the OL plays at its best (which means Neal & Vollmer on the right side), then they have a chance to beat SD & Indy & the NFC winner.

While the defense during the Good Old Days (pre-2005) may not have had elite athletes such as those you mentioned, they did have Vrabel & Bruschi at their peaks, Colvin a full year 1/2 removed from his hip injury, and Willie, TJ & Phifer still effective. There was even TBC & Chatham to provide superior depth. And Seymour, Warren & Jarvis combined for 12.5 sacks.
Today's defense has only TBC, a hurting Warren & a declining Jarvis. Wright has replaced Seymour's sacks, but he doesn't command double-teams that allow others the opportunity to win 1-on-1 matchups. At least he has proven (not to me, because I already knew this) that he is much more effective at DE than NT. Adalius & Burgess are over-the-hill, lazy malcontents who are stealing money. And some people actually thought that Pierre Woods could be a capable starter for a playoff-caliber team. Some of us non-guzzlers knew better.

The FO dropped the ball by not attemting to see if athletes like Mark Anderson (5th round '06), Jacob Ford (6th '07), Cliff Avril (3rd '08) and Barwin/Sintim (instead of Brace) could transition to at least an adequate 3rd-down rusher in this defense. Instead, we are left with crap like Woods & Burgess, and a cancer like Adalius. Our secondary - or anybody's secondary - simply cannot cover well enough to compensate for the lack of pressure, esp. vs. Rivers & Manning.

 

[mayoclinic]

You're right, of course, that if the defense plays & is coached at its best, and has zero meltdowns like at NO & Indy, and if the offense stays balanced & the OL plays at its best (which means Neal & Vollmer on the right side), then they have a chance to beat SD & Indy & the NFC winner.

While the defense during the Good Old Days (pre-2005) may not have had elite athletes such as those you mentioned, they did have Vrabel & Bruschi at their peaks, Colvin a full year 1/2 removed from his hip injury, and Willie, TJ & Phifer still effective. There was even TBC & Chatham to provide superior depth. And Seymour, Warren & Jarvis combined for 12.5 sacks.
Today's defense has only TBC, a hurting Warren & a declining Jarvis. Wright has replaced Seymour's sacks, but he doesn't command double-teams that allow others the opportunity to win 1-on-1 matchups. At least he has proven (not to me, because I already knew this) that he is much more effective at DE than NT. Adalius & Burgess are over-the-hill, lazy malcontents who are stealing money. And some people actually thought that Pierre Woods could be a capable starter for a playoff-caliber team. Some of us non-guzzlers knew better.

The FO dropped the ball by not attemting to see if athletes like Mark Anderson (5th round '06), Jacob Ford (6th '07), Cliff Avril (3rd '08) and Barwin/Sintim (instead of Brace) could transition to at least an adequate 3rd-down rusher in this defense. Instead, we are left with crap like Woods & Burgess, and a cancer like Adalius. Our secondary - or anybody's secondary - simply cannot cover well enough to compensate for the lack of pressure, esp. vs. Rivers & Manning.

Your right, no secondary is good enough to cover Rivers, Brees, Brady or Manning without an effective pass rush. But our pass rush has improved somewhat over the first half of the season, and we're getting decent production from the LB position. TBC's 9.5 sacks so far are the highest total in the BB era for anyone other than Mike Vrabel. The LB's (including Burgess) have 21 of the team's 30 sacks so far this season. That's a big improvement over last year, when the LB's accounted for only 10 sacks.

I agree that the defense is not yet 03-04 caliber, though I think that it will be next year IF we add some necessary pieces. But it is good enough for us to make a serious run, and, in a down year for defensive dominance, there aren't many better ones out there. Someone's going to win the SB with a non-dominating defense, so there's no reason it couldn't be us.

 

[wistahpatsfan]

All these teams are in the playoff hunt other than the 49ers.... Defense wins games.

...and right now, the pats defense is not only top five, but it's improving. Last three games have given up 9 ppg and the display last week was best of the week, IMO, because the TD by Jax was meaningless.

Stats are not meaningless. Every game has one important stat and that's the final score. Like Madden says, whoever scores the most points and keeps the other team from scoring as much wins the game.

Is the Saints D better than the Bucs offense? WTF?

 

[mgteich]

I hope the it is not necessary for the defense to be as good as then 2004 defense to win the championship and Super Bowl.

If so, then Belichick has wasted a lot of money making the offense better. If the REQUIREMENT is that the defense be that good, much more resources should have been spent on the defense at the expense of the offense.

For me, the defense is plenty good enough to keep the game close against anyone. It is the OFFENSE that must be one of the best. The Front Office has paid for a top offense. We have a very, very talented offense. Arguably, the offense is close to the talent of 2007.
============
BOTTOM LINE

The 2009 defense is NOT as good as some of the offenses that we might face going forward this year. However, in each of those matchups, OUR offense is better than the corresponding defense.

Is it really too much to expect the OFFENSE to win some critical games? The defense has been decimated and has done well enough to get us this far.

Your right, no secondary is good enough to cover Rivers, Brees, Brady or Manning without an effective pass rush. But our pass rush has improved somewhat over the first half of the season, and we're getting decent production from the LB position. TBC's 9.5 sacks so far are the highest total in the BB era for anyone other than Mike Vrabel. The LB's (including Burgess) have 21 of the team's 30 sacks so far this season. That's a big improvement over last year, when the LB's accounted for only 10 sacks.

I agree that the defense is not yet 03-04 caliber, though I think that it will be next year IF we add some necessary pieces. But it is good enough for us to make a serious run, and, in a down year for defensive dominance, there aren't many better ones out there. Someone's going to win the SB with a non-dominating defense, so there's no reason it couldn't be us.

 

[Ryan]

I don't get the whole "stats are for losers" thing when it comes to the defense. If the average points allowed is low, which it is, that shows that the Pats aren't giving up too many points. It doesn't matter how the defense is preventing teams from scoring, only that they are preventing teams from scoring.

 

[captain stone]

Is it really too much to expect the OFFENSE to win some critical games? The defense has been decimated and has done well enough to get us this far.

I really agree with this point. Except for the Indy & NO meltdowns, I blame the other 3 losses (NYJ, Den, Mia) on the offense's inability to score game-clinching TDs instead of FGs (or, in some cases - incl. Indy - nothing at all) from red zone and even goal-to-go situations.

This very well-compensated offense needs to earn its money in the POs, because we will win zero 19-17 games.

 

[mayoclinic]

I really agree with this point. Except for the Indy & NO meltdowns, I blame the other 3 losses (NYJ, Den, Mia) on the offense's inability to score game-clinching TDs instead of FGs (or, in some cases - incl. Indy - nothing at all) from red zone and even goal-to-go situations.

This very well-compensated offense needs to earn its money in the POs, because we will win zero 19-17 games.

Two of our five losses, to Denver (20-17 in OT) and to Miami (22-21, with Miami scoring the last 12 points) could have been avoided if our offense had done anything in the second half of either game. 0 points against Denver, and 0 against Miami in the final 27 minutes. That included a Miami interception in the end zone and a missed Gostkowski 40 yard field go against Denver. Win those 2 games and we're 12-3 and tied with San Diego for 2nd best record in the AFC. We were in position to win both games, and our offense just didn't execute.

 

[crypto]

I don't get the whole "stats are for losers" thing when it comes to the defense. If the average points allowed is low, which it is, that shows that the Pats aren't giving up too many points. It doesn't matter how the defense is preventing teams from scoring, only that they are preventing teams from scoring.

This. Time of possession does play a role, but when all is said and done, 4th place in the league at 16.7 ppg is pretty f***ing good. Some people on this board (myself included at times) expect way too much given the circumstances of this season.

 

[Patspsycho]

Two of our five losses, to Denver (20-17 in OT) and to Miami (22-21, with Miami scoring the last 12 points) could have been avoided if our offense had done anything in the second half of either game. 0 points against Denver, and 0 against Miami in the final 27 minutes. That included a Miami interception in the end zone and a missed Gostkowski 40 yard field go against Denver. Win those 2 games and we're 12-3 and tied with San Diego for 2nd best record in the AFC. We were in position to win both games, and our offense just didn't execute.

Assuming we both win our last games, we would have gotten the #2 seeding because we'd have done better in our division (projected on the assumption we went 13-3) than the Chargers did in theirs.

 

[captain stone]

Assuming we both win our last games, we would have gotten the #2 seeding because we'd have done better in our division (projected on the assumption we went 13-3) than the Chargers did in theirs.

Is divisional record one of the tie-breakers when determining conference seeding?

 

[mgteich]

Divisional records only matter when there are ties between teams of the same division.

Is divisional record one of the tie-breakers when determining conference seeding?

 

[dhamz]

Two of our five losses, to Denver (20-17 in OT) and to Miami (22-21, with Miami scoring the last 12 points) could have been avoided if our offense had done anything in the second half of either game. 0 points against Denver, and 0 against Miami in the final 27 minutes. That included a Miami interception in the end zone and a missed Gostkowski 40 yard field go against Denver. Win those 2 games and we're 12-3 and tied with San Diego for 2nd best record in the AFC. We were in position to win both games, and our offense just didn't execute.

The offense is highly paid and talented and we should expect more from them than we do the defense. The offense should be faulted for not doing enough to win against the Jets, Denver, and Miami - faulted more than the defense if you are into that. Who would disagree with that?

That differs from the initial point of this thread which was the Pats have a really good defense and the stats prove it.

Can't you also say the Pats were also in position to win not only the Denver game (7 point lead until the defense gave up a 98 yd 4Q TD drive), the Miami game (2 pt lead with 4 to go before defense gave up a FG drive), and the Indy game (an blowout win until the defense gave up 21 points and over 200 yds in the 4th). A really good defense can be expected to make the plays needed to win in those spots.

 

[Disco Volante]

2009 regular season scoring defense (Final)

1. New York Jets - 14.8
2. Dallas Cowboys - 15.6
3. Baltimore Ravens - 16.3
4. San Francisco 49ers - 17.6
5. New England Patriots - 17.8
6. Cincinnati Bengals - 18.2
7. Green Bay Packers - 18.6
8. Indianapolis Colts - 19.2
9. Carolina Panthers - 19.2
10. Minnesota Vikings - 19.5

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

2009 regular season scoring defense (Final)

1. New York Jets - 14.8
2. Dallas Cowboys - 15.6
3. Baltimore Ravens - 16.3
4. San Francisco 49ers - 17.6
5. New England Patriots - 17.8
6. Cincinnati Bengals - 18.2
7. Green Bay Packers - 18.6
8. Indianapolis Colts - 19.2
9. Carolina Panthers - 19.2
10. Minnesota Vikings - 19.5

Is that total PA or just PA by the defense? Because I know the offense has given up at least 3 TD's. Not sure if that would or wouldn't push us above SF if this list is stricly PA.