Pats old D Philosophy vs New D Philosophy

[NEGoldenAge]

BB doesn't alter the entire scheme to fit the players. He finds players that fit the scheme he is running and tries not to ask them to do things that they can not do. When BB alters schemes, it is usually in response to changes in the game itself.

 

[wcpatsfan]

The 3-4 is best suited to stop the run. This is a passing league now. Hence the greater and greater emphasis on four-man fronts.

 

[Ring 6]

So I understand you are also a 2-gap true believer. Good coaches change their scheme to fit personnel. That's what the Orange Crush Broncos did. BB was on that staff too.

"Umm, that sounds nice if it were true."

BB has been influenced by the 4-3 and 3-4. That is a fact.

BB is more open to schematic change than Parcells. Also a fact.

BB has made personnel decisions that appear to indicate a schematic change. The whole point of this thread.

I believe in the 2gap system because it is what BB has used his entire career. Every season that it has been his choice to determine the scheme, it has been 2 gap. I believe in the tremendous amount of success BB has had.
All of your 'facts' are opinion.

I find it silly that people are lining up to jump on board the 'aggressive defense is better' bandwagon after watching the success we have had here with a conservative defensive philosophy.

I am a 'true believer' in what works.

 

[Ring 6]

The 3-4 is best suited to stop the run. This is a passing league now. Hence the greater and greater emphasis on four-man fronts.

Thats not really true. The 34 is a better pash rushing defense, and the coverage schemes are really no different.

 

[wcpatsfan]

Thats not really true. The 34 is a better pash rushing defense, and the coverage schemes are really no different.

I guess I shouldn't have made it sound like ALL 3-4 defenses are built to stop the run. But the 2-gap 3-4 the Pats employ is.

 

[Ring 6]

I guess I shouldn't have made it sound like ALL 3-4 defenses are built to stop the run. But the 2-gap 3-4 the Pats employ is.

Again, not really. 2 gap and 34 are not mutually exclusive.
A 34 provides pass rush advantages, and they are more important to have when you 2 gap.
A 34 2 gap isnt any more focussed on run stopping than a 43 2 gap.

 

[wcpatsfan]

Again, not really. 2 gap and 34 are not mutually exclusive.
A 34 provides pass rush advantages, and they are more important to have when you 2 gap.
A 34 2 gap isnt any more focussed on run stopping than a 43 2 gap.

Yes it is. In the 3-4 the outside linebackers' primary responsibility is to seal the edge in the running game. In a 4-3 that is primarily the DEs' job.

 

[ay-yo]

De

I've read that BB doesn't look for the typical lightweight, fly up the field DE in his 4-3. Bill looks for a player who is better against the run than your average DE. At the same time he isn't looking to put a Brace / Warren type player at DE either.

To me this screams Mike Wright. He was our best pass rusher before being injured last year. At a tad under 300 pounds he's better against the run than most 4-3 DE's. Yet from what I've read it's been Moore who has been taking snaps with the first string at DE (aside from Cunningham).

What am I missing? Is Wright too much of a tackle to play DE? Does he lack some physical ability necessary to play the position? Has Moore taken big strides? Have I simply missed (or miss read) some TC reports where Wright has been with the starters?

 

[PatsFanStnfrd]

Happy to see the old ball coach willing to experiment, innovate and change. Some changes are dictated by players' capabilities/skills; others by opponents schemes; yet others are manifestation of bigger changes in the game.

Looking forward to seeing a defense that is offensive in character, that will take calculated risks for outsized rewards and that will be a 'surprise' to opponents.

In this case BB may be one step ahead of his admirers on this board who believe they know him well enough to be interpreters of his thinking to the masses.

 

[Patspsycho]

Based on what I saw tonight, the Pats are not evolving to a 4-3. It's still the same system, and the only surprise was where they utilized Haynesworth. I will be writing up my report soon.

 

[Joker]

Hurry up...!!!

 

[EJ Blitz]

Based on what I saw tonight, the Pats are not evolving to a 4-3. It's still the same system, and the only surprise was where they utilized Haynesworth. I will be writing up my report soon.

I hope you're right. When I heard they're switching to a 4-3 defense it kind of depressed me. There was nothing wrong with their schemes last year so why the need for a big overhaul.

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

I believe in the 2gap system because it is what BB has used his entire career. Every season that it has been his choice to determine the scheme, it has been 2 gap. I believe in the tremendous amount of success BB has had.
All of your 'facts' are opinion.

I find it silly that people are lining up to jump on board the 'aggressive defense is better' bandwagon after watching the success we have had here with a conservative defensive philosophy.

I am a 'true believer' in what works.

Just curious on your opinion as to why BB has been going after more 4-3 types of 1-gap players like Haynesworth, Tommie Harris, Raheem Brock if he still swears by 2-gapping.

Guys like Harris or Brock would fit your bill of cheap interior sub rushers to help the pass rush on 3rd downs, but you don't bring in a guy like Haynesworth to just play on 3rd downs. He's the type of talent that you build a defense around -- and he's at his best when he's getting upfield, penetrating, blowing up plays in the backfield.

It would just seem a little odd to go out and get a guy like Haynesworth (with so many alleged chemistry/locker room risks) and not implement a scheme conducive to him being dominant.

I'm not saying BB completely abandons the 2-gap, but I do think he's going to be more willing to play some more 1-gap football this year. There is nothing wrong with being a conservative defense if you have a front 4 that can consistently create pressure, but the Pats haven't had that for quite a while now. Pass rushing, collapsing the pocket, and blitzing is becoming more and more important in the game with the way teams are slinging the ball around nowadays.

 

[supafly]

If I had to guess, I'd think that with the high 50%+ 4 man front in subpackages, Haynesworth fits in there--and also in run heavy formations, 3rd and 2's, goal line formations etc.

As far as the recent spottings/try-outs of Harris etc, they may be to take over the same role that guys like Pryor played, the interior DT--depending on his (Pryor's) future status, injury etc.

As far as any future with Raheem Brock--wasn't he a DE anyway?? Yes, he played in a 1-gap, but who's to say that he couldn't play DE in a 2-gap just the same? Maybe that's why he was just looked at, and didn't sign--because he didn't provide the versatility or intelligence that BB was looking for, in regards to being able to play a straight up DE here in most of our regular packages?

I still think it will be like any other yr in terms of the 3-4, but possibly with some more 4-3 looks meshed in than in the past. We all know that BB likes the ability to switch fronts depending on the opponent/game plan. When you take that into acct + the 4-2-5 subpackages, I think that's where the additional 4 man fronts will come from.

Like Andy and some others have said, I still think that we see a lot of 3-4 looks, if not the majority. The possibility lies that BB feels as though some additional use of 40 fronts will help to provide more pressure on the QB. That + some additional added talent, may be his way of helping to solve the lack of pressure. That'd be my guess anyway (FWIW).

 

[Gumby]

So can anyone clearly say are these personnel changes only indicative of a formation change (more 4-3 less 3-4) OR

is BB actually looking at a technique change (going away from 2-Gap)?

Personally what I thought I learned from AJ and others over the years was that BB is a 2-gap guy and that is what he does. But I admit novice status (even after all these years). Please enlighten me.

 

[patchick]

So can anyone clearly say are these personnel changes only indicative of a formation change (more 4-3 less 3-4) OR

is BB actually looking at a technique change (going away from 2-Gap)?

Nope, nobody can clearly say much at this point. That's what makes for a long and lively thread.

For all the talk of a change in the "base" defense, that represents a minority of snaps. Last year when the Pats' 2 best interior penetrators (Wright & Pryor) who weren't "base" guys were injured, the defense really suffered.

Perhaps what we're seeing with Haynesworth and the looks at Harris & Brock is a retooling of the roster to not over-emphasize the base 3-4, rather than a retooling of the defense per se?

 

[PatsFan37]

Nope, nobody can clearly say much at this point. That's what makes for a long and lively thread.

For all the talk of a change in the "base" defense, that represents a minority of snaps. Last year when the Pats' 2 best interior penetrators (Wright & Pryor) who weren't "base" guys were injured, the defense really suffered.

Perhaps what we're seeing with Haynesworth and the looks at Harris & Brock is a retooling of the roster to not over-emphasize the base 3-4, rather than a retooling of the defense per se?

That argument would work better for me if they'd kept Ty Warren, or for that matter, Gerard Warren, and if Brace was having a great camp, and if their other 3-4 DEs were all taking practice snaps.

We've heard all sorts of comments about how the 4-3 will line-up, and who will rotate as tackles and ends. But who plays the 3-4 besides Wilfork and when will they take the field? Is Wright at end? Maybe. Is Deaderick at end? Maybe. And if so, is that truly a better defense than playing those same guys in a 4-3.

I don't know the answers, but I'm not seeing indications on the field or in the roster that the base is a 3-4. I'm hearing strong 4-3 soundings from the media, including Bruschi. I think it's pointless to guess what BB's going to do based on his history. That might seem logical until you realize the success this board has (not!) had in predicting BB's draft picks based on his history.

 

[patchick]

Belichick weighs in on the issue, saying his customary nothing.

Belichick talks 4-3, 3-4 defense - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

 

[Shelterdog]

Belichick weighs in on the issue, saying his customary nothing.

Belichick talks 4-3, 3-4 defense - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

"This year when we have 2 300 pounds guys, 2 270 pound guys, and 3 245 pound guys is exactly the same as last year when we had 3 300 pound guys, 2 270 pound guys, and 2 245 pound guys."

 

[patfanken]

I wouldn't be too hyped up over the idea of radically changing the defense. It AIN'T gonna happen. Why because, although its frustrating, boring, and completely lacking any pizzazz, the fact is that it WORKS.

Lets take some stats stats from last season. CLEARLY there were problems with the defense and things we want to see improved like the fact we were 32nd in 3rd down efficiency. We were 25th in the league in yards given up. HOWEVER the ultimate stat that defines who you are on defense is how many points you give up. Last season, DESPITE all the obvious flaws, the Pats finished EIGHTH in scoring Defense

It should also be noted that in 2001 and 2003 the Pats ranked 26th and 24th respectively in total D, yet were in the top 5 in scoring defense.

So believe me, even with the Haynesworth acquisition BB ISN'T going to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Yes we will see 4 man fronts. Yes we will attack up the middle with Albert more than in the past, but BB is NOT going to radically alter the basic fundamentals of his defensive philosophy

He is going to play to the best skills of his players, but what he's done WORKS And you can see it in the defensive stat that counts the most......SCORING. Because its not about how many yds you give up. Its not about how many sacks you get. It is ALL about keeping the opponents points down.

BOTTOM LINE - Using his old philosophy he managed to do JUST that. A defense that was a disaster in almost every other stat, managed to be the 8th best D in the league in the only stat that counts. So I think all this talk about radically changing philosophies is BS, simply because the old one has proven it works. (even when your DL is ravished and you are relying so heavily on too many young players)

And I am anxiously looking forward to this season with all the healthy new additions to the roster, and ANOTHER year's experience for so many of the young kids on that side of the ball. VERY EXCITING