Welcome to PatsFans.com

Reiss: Jets Blitzed 16 of 29 passing plays

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Rob0729, Sep 11, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    30,649
    Likes Received:
    478
    Ratings:
    +1,386 / 13 / -5

    From Mike Reiss' blog:

    http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/

    I have read by some on this board and elsewhere that the reason why the o-line did so well was because the Jets dropped extra defenders to account for Moss, but the opposite seems to be true. Moss caught almost half of his catches (4) on all out blitzes. The Jets' strategy seemed to be a lot of pressure on Brady to force him to get rid of the ball quickly which failed miserably. With this information, the o-line, TEs, and RBs deserve even more credit than I actually thought.
     
  2. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,669
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    Jets fans will probably use this as proof that we knew what they were doing on defense.

    I wish Jets fans would stop whining and hope their team learns how to tackle a player through 108 yards of turf, or cover a receiver when triple covered.
     
  3. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,796
    Likes Received:
    180
    Ratings:
    +365 / 11 / -27

    Reiss did his homework, makes our O Line play even more impressive.. if I was the next couple of coaches might want to rethink this strategy.
     
  4. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,899
    Likes Received:
    49
    Ratings:
    +109 / 2 / -3

    The difference between last year and this year is that we can make teams pay dearly when they put extra pressure on the line.

    Last year they could do this without fear of retribution - as we had no deep threat, though many didn't feel that was a significant shortfall.

    This year, we can see what a difference a deep threat can make... and I dare say we haven't truly seen its full effect as it will open up the running game even more, as well as give the short to mid range receivers more room.
     
  5. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    23,679
    Likes Received:
    641
    Ratings:
    +1,715 / 19 / -12

    Disable Jersey

    I really like Reiss style factual football reporting. Sadly, I watched my man Steve Grogan last night on TV claim that the Jets did not blitz more than 3-4 times the entire game. Nothing like facts over subjectivity.
     
  6. LightsOut619

    LightsOut619 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2007
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Now we will see what happens this week when you face a team with a better pass rush than the jets like the Chargers. I have alredy seen new blitz packages this year for the chargers with new players being added into the mix.
     
  7. njpatsfan

    njpatsfan Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    816
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    This analysis is wrong - Brady completed 7/8 with three rushers and 4/4 with 7 rushes. It didn't matter what they did - Brady and the O-line handled it. Brady was 22/28 for christsake.

    A more interesting analysis would be what they did by drive - or what they did by down and distance - to see what their strategy was, and how it changed over time.

    R
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2007
  8. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    30,649
    Likes Received:
    478
    Ratings:
    +1,386 / 13 / -5

    How is it wrong? Reiss' breakdown shows that the Jets blitzed more than half the time and only rushed three defenders a quarter. That means the theory that the Pats o-line only did well because the Jets consistently dropped extra defenders to account for Moss is wrong. Based on Reiss' breakdown, it seems the overall strategy was to pressure Brady not drop extra men in coverage. How can you say otherwise, when they blitzed more than half the time? Your analysis is wrong, not mine.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2007
  9. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    30,649
    Likes Received:
    478
    Ratings:
    +1,386 / 13 / -5

    Well, if you just watch the game real time and don't look closely how many players they rushed, you would just assume they never blitzed.
     
  10. njpatsfan

    njpatsfan Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    816
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Nowadays, blitzing half the time is normal modus operandi against the Patriots. It's been perceived to be the strategy most likely to succeed. Or haven't you watched last 2 years of games ?

    Perhaps "wrong" is not the right term. It's just not the most relevant thing to take from the data. The only thing that you can say with certainty is that it really didnt matter if they brought 3 or 7. It didn't matter.

    The interesting thing to see would be to see what was done by down and distance to see the strategy. If they blitzed 9/10 on obvious passing downs, then you could say that was their strategy. You just can't say that from what we've been shown.

    R
     
  11. Garbanza

    Garbanza In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I have to say, Jest fans are the least knowledgable I've ever met. I was at the game, and beleive me, most of them were far more interested in the tailgate than the actual game.
     
  12. Fencer

    Fencer Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,871
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ratings:
    +132 / 2 / -15

    #12 Jersey

    The right number of rushers to send against Brady is one that doesn't give him all day, but also doesn't leave the receivers so uncovered as to make things super-easy. And guess what -- the only number the Jets had any success with at all seems to have been the middle figure of 5 rushers.

    As for Moss getting all the passes on all-out blitzes -- duh. When they send that many guys, Brady has to dump off to whoever gets open FAST. And Moss is seemingly always open.

    What this suggests is if you're going to sell out and bring the house, you should pick a down that Moss isn't in the game and see if Brady has his timing and coordination down yet with whoever else is out there.

    Patten used to be great at getting open for the megablitz passes. Ditto the fundamentally quick guys like Brown and Branch. It remains to be seen how the new crew (Moss excepted) will do.
     
  13. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    30,649
    Likes Received:
    478
    Ratings:
    +1,386 / 13 / -5

    My point was that there have been people on this board and other boards and in media who dismissed the o-line's accomplishments because the Jets "never blitzed" or "kept extra defenders in coverage to account for Moss". That can't be farther from the truth. That is my point.

    In fact, while I watched the game, I was shocked that Moss was consistently being single covered for much of the game. It seemed their strategy on a lot of the plays were to put pressure on Brady so he doesn't have time to get Moss down the field.
     
  14. njpatsfan

    njpatsfan Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    816
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Ahh ... I see the problem. You don't understand that rushing only three in 33% of the total snaps is a pretty high number. Normal rush is four - which they only did 4 times - you usually only see 3 in rather specialized circumstances. Rushing 3 9 times and rushing 4 only 4 times is an anomaly. So anyone who says they dropped back more often then usual is correct.

    Which is exactly my point - the Jets tried both extremes - they tried to pressure him quickly AND drop all but three in cover .... and both failed.

    The fact that they did only rush 3 so much shouldn't take much away from the OL performance, as when they DID rush, no one got even close.

    Reiss's numbers only confirm what my impression was at the game. Like I said, it would be of more interest if we knew what they did by down and distance. My thoughts were that in obvious passing downs, they did both - but I could be wrong,

    R
     
  15. jetheelz

    jetheelz Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I for one am not listening to any of these excuses, I guarantee you that.
    I said in another thread, even if the guy was taping the Jets' defensive signals, it still doesn't change the fact that they played horribly, and that is on all sides of the ball not just defense.
     
  16. jetheelz

    jetheelz Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    But you don't mind hanging out with us on JN do you? :)
     
  17. onegameatatime

    onegameatatime Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2005
    Messages:
    942
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    "5 rushers
    Amount: 7 of 29 dropbacks
    Results: 3 of 7 for 48 yards, TD"

    6 and 7 rushers did not work.

    Does the 3 of 7 mean that the magic number to beat Tom Brady is 5 rushers??

    We better keep this a secret ...
     
  18. njpatsfan

    njpatsfan Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    816
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    On th flip side of the coin - you can see the brillance of BB's approach with this defense, and how good our players are. BB's defense is built upon having a front three that can generate pressure ALL ON THEIR OWN. Thats why it's not surprising that used all those first round picks on our front 3.

    Case in point - the sack were Chad got injured. We only rushed 3, they kept 5, but we collapsed the pocket and got the sack. There are not too many teams that can do that.

    R
     
  19. njpatsfan

    njpatsfan Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    816
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Shh

    R

    0101010
     
  20. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    30,649
    Likes Received:
    478
    Ratings:
    +1,386 / 13 / -5

    I see your problem. You are confusing total snaps and total passing downs. Reiss's numbers only account for passing downs, not passing downs and rushing downs. Thirty-three percent of the time rushing 3 defenders in a 3-4 defense is not an overly high number on PASSING DOWNS. On most nickel or dime packages, teams only rush three or four defenders. Typically many 3rd downs are nickel or dime defensive packages unless it is third and short. The Pats had 9 third downs in the game. You seem to be confusing passing downs and overall downs. Thirty-three percent of all offensive downs would be a lot, but not passing downs.

    Blitzing over 50% of the time on passing downs is a much or more of an abnormality as rushing only three players in the 3-4 base defense 33% of the time on passing downs.

    The Jets did try a bunch of things on defense that failed when did I ever deny that? What my assertion is which you have done nothing to disprove is that the Pats o-line was success of keeping Brady upright was not because the Jets didn't send extra rushers because they kept extra defenders in coverage to account for Moss. That is not the truth.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2007
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>