PatsCast Episode 24 (with Jay Shields)

[BradyFTW!]

Second, they have to cater to the masses in order to maximize ratings. That means they can't get as heavy into X's and O's or else they'll lose the majority of their audience - casual fans who don't know and don't care to learn what a term like Wham means in football terminology.

That's a great point, and pretty much exactly the philosophy that we're running off of. Makes it very easy to carve out a niche, so I for one am glad for it. It's why I really enjoy podcasts and small media in general, because big media is a slave to its own success for the reasons that you explained. If we can deliver valuable content to a few hundred people, then that works just fine. Not exactly a huge budget to support here; a couple mics, garage band, skype, and a case of beer per podcast pretty much gets it done.

If you don't mind some constructive criticism I'd just suggest to try and limit the "uhh" and "umm"s. Don't be afraid of a second or two of dead air while you check your notes.

I think that's a great point to bear in mind for pretty much anyone who's being recorded/speaking publicly, and I know I struggle a lot with it. Preparation definitely helps, as does forcing yourself to slow down (if I don't specifically keep in mind not to, I speed up without realizing it) but I think a lot of it is simply a function of repetition, to the point that you get comfortable with being recorded. I don't think any of us are there yet, nor will we be anytime soon, but that's definitely the goal. Thanks for the kind words!

 

[Oswlek]

I'm a fan of these podcasts and was glad to see another one. Everything rings true to me, with one exception: I'm not seeing why Baltimore is such a bad matchup for NE.

If the point was "which team left in the AFC presents the most matchup issues" I'll wholeheartedly agree with that (hard not to when I see Pitt and NY as teams NE was designed to exploit), but if you are saying Baltimore is just a bad matchup in general, I don't agree.

Baltimore, like NY, has had excellent success against the Moss Patriots, and this has caused many to read too much into that. I realize that the new(er) version faced Baltimore earlier this year, but that was Deion's first game with a not-yet-healthy Welker, no Mankins, a running game that hadn't found its groove yet and TE's who hadn't fully been integrated.

Baltimore does have an outstanding NT in Ngata - one of the key pieces that a defense needs to counter NE's offense - as well as Reed. But their CBs are liabilities and I think their LBs have bigger reputations than games.

I disagree even more on the other side of the ball. Baltimore is the antithesis of explosive and their running game has been ordinary all season. The cherry on top is that Flacco isn't nearly as good as people seem to think.

Baltimore does have a bevy of solid receivers, but NE's depth at safety and Butler's reemergence give them solid options to limit Baltimore's passing.

 

[jays52]

There's a major plotline here that I just realized I missed and was so obvious. I expect the Jets to simplify their defense. It is fundamentally a check-based upfield defense. When that kind of defense is personnel'd to death, it negates so many checks and forces paralysis by analysis. You could see that they were confused last time. Watch for simplified defense here.

If anyone wants elaboration, just ask.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I'm a fan of these podcasts and was glad to see another one. Everything rings true to me, with one exception: I'm not seeing why Baltimore is such a bad matchup for NE.

If the point was "which team left in the AFC presents the most matchup issues" I'll wholeheartedly agree with that (hard not to when I see Pitt and NY as teams NE was designed to exploit), but if you are saying Baltimore is just a bad matchup in general, I don't agree.

Baltimore, like NY, has had excellent success against the Moss Patriots, and this has caused many to read too much into that. I realize that the new(er) version faced Baltimore earlier this year, but that was Deion's first game with a not-yet-healthy Welker, no Mankins, a running game that hadn't found its groove yet and TE's who hadn't fully been integrated.

Baltimore does have an outstanding NT in Ngata - one of the key pieces that a defense needs to counter NE's offense - as well as Reed. But their CBs are liabilities and I think their LBs have bigger reputations than games.

I disagree even more on the other side of the ball. Baltimore is the antithesis of explosive and their running game has been ordinary all season. The cherry on top is that Flacco isn't nearly as good as people seem to think.

Baltimore does have a bevy of solid receivers, but NE's depth at safety and Butler's reemergence give them solid options to limit Baltimore's passing.

That seems fair, although I'm a lot more worried by Baltimore than you seem to be. The ground game has been hit or miss all season, admittedly, but Rice is the type of back who has been known to give the Pats trouble, especially if our DL injury problems continue. Add in that Ed Reed can shut down the middle of the field pretty effectively, which is where we do a lot of our damage, an imposing DL, and corners that IMO aren't as bad as people tend to think, and I could see us maybe having some trouble with running, stopping the run, and completing short/intermediate passes over the middle.

That said, I do agree that Flacco's severely overrated, and I like McCourty on Boldin. I think that we should beat the Ravens, certainly, and I think that Jay said something similar on the podcast. As you said, I think it speaks more to how little of a threat we perceive the Jets and Steelers to be.

 

[Sciz]

What would be the effect of a simplified defense?

 

[jays52]

What would be the effect of a simplified defense?

The simplified defense enables the guys to just lineup and play. Every player knows their keys, knows how to read, and that is the most fundamental part of football. Most reads are based off of a triangle field of vision. Let's use the linebacker for example. When an inside linebacker drops into his stance and has a basic, let's say hook to flat in three high coverage (anti-run), his first read is the formation. He reads a fullback above the tailback, a tight end, and two receivers. He remembers his film study and recalls that this is 79% run given the down and distance. He sees the right guard on his knuckles, and the left guard in his heels. He recognizes that the right guard is primed to explode out and reach him, while the left guard is primed to rip his body open with his arm and pull outside the formation. His key is his (left) guard viewed through the tailback. At the snap, he sees the guard open his hips and pull down the line. He sees the tailback take a jab-step to create the counter. Recognizing this, he understands that the playside guard is going to try to reach him. Recognizing this, he innately understands that he must reach the b gap away from him in two steps to take away a quick cut. He needs to prevent the playside guard from sealing him and scrape to eliminate any holes/be there in outside pursuit. It sounds complicated and like a lot to process in a fraction of a second, but it's engrained in every linebacker.

Ok, now let's add the complexity. The coaches tell that same linebacker that when they have a 60% or over tendency inside the 30, they run the inverse (play-action for example). Nice coaching point, but it clouds the mind. They go further to say that if the offense has three receivers stacked, check to "grapes" which is your bunch killer. This holds true unless they motion the z to the f, in which case you check out of the zone and go b-weak overload. I could go on, but you're beginning to see the complexity that personnel subs add to a check-based defense. It can at least rob a step from a player, and that is the difference between life and death on the field. You could see the hesitation in the Jets in the 45-3 game, and in a quick-developing offense that is lethal. They key is to eliminate the checks to answer the Pats and show a give nothing even coverage like 2,4,6, and 8. Enable your guys to get after it and remove the complication, which is the hardest balance in coaching. Enable your guys to pursue, which is what they need to do against NE, and stop slowing you guys down. That make any sense?

 

[Ron Sellers]

The simplified defense enables the guys to just lineup and play. Every player knows their keys, knows how to read, and that is the most fundamental part of football. Most reads are based off of a triangle field of vision. Let's use the linebacker for example. When an inside linebacker drops into his stance and has a basic, let's say hook to flat in three high coverage (anti-run), his first read is the formation. He reads a fullback above the tailback, a tight end, and two receivers. He remembers his film study and recalls that this is 79% run given the down and distance. He sees the right guard on his knuckles, and the left guard in his heels. He recognizes that the right guard is primed to explode out and reach him, while the left guard is primed to rip his body open with his arm and pull outside the formation. His key is his (left) guard viewed through the tailback. At the snap, he sees the guard open his hips and pull down the line. He sees the tailback take a jab-step to create the counter. Recognizing this, he understands that the playside guard is going to try to reach him. Recognizing this, he innately understands that he must reach the b gap away from him in two steps to take away a quick cut. He needs to prevent the playside guard from sealing him and scrape to eliminate any holes/be there in outside pursuit. It sounds complicated and like a lot to process in a fraction of a second, but it's engrained in every linebacker.

Ok, now let's add the complexity. The coaches tell that same linebacker that when they have a 60% or over tendency inside the 30, they run the inverse (play-action for example). Nice coaching point, but it clouds the mind. They go further to say that if the offense has three receivers stacked, check to "grapes" which is your bunch killer. This holds true unless they motion the z to the f, in which case you check out of the zone and go b-weak overload. I could go on, but you're beginning to see the complexity that personnel subs add to a check-based defense. It can at least rob a step from a player, and that is the difference between life and death on the field. You could see the hesitation in the Jets in the 45-3 game, and in a quick-developing offense that is lethal. They key is to eliminate the checks to answer the Pats and show a give nothing even coverage like 2,4,6, and 8. Enable your guys to get after it and remove the complication, which is the hardest balance in coaching. Enable your guys to pursue, which is what they need to do against NE, and stop slowing you guys down. That make any sense?

Great stuff.

Thing is if the Jets simplify too much, that's going to set up mismatches that the Pats should be able to easily exploit, correct? Or does Brady need to read something in the defense that he won't see with that simplified formation?

 

[Kontradiction]

It's definitely welcome- sorry the last podcast fell through, then we just kinda stopped doing them. If you're up for it, we'll definitely get you on one in the next week or two, though.

Always down. Just alert me a little bit ahead of time to scribble down some notes and whatnot on whatever it is I'm talking about.