Shawn Springs: Pats D scheme not designed to be dominant

[Tunescribe]

Interesting interview with Shawn Springs on NFLN today. He didn't get into specifics about it, but said the Patriots will need to be averaging about 30 points per game offensively to have a successful season. His negative slant on the defense seemed to have more to do with scheme than personnel. FWIW from a guy who might have a small axe to grind and still wants to play football.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Someone should probably let him know that Pees isn't the DC anymore. Whoever's calling the shots this year (Belichick, Patricia), it's someone different from who he played under. Between that and him probably being mad that he couldn't crack the roster... yeah, I'm taking it with a grain of salt.

 

[Rob0729]

Maybe if Springs spent less time being a football analyst and more time trying to be a football player, he might have a job right now.

BBBBBYYYYEEE SHAAAAWN!

 

[Deus Irae]

The defense allowed fewer than 18 points per game last season, despite having significant personnel issues. I have to assume that Springs had something specific in mind, given that reality.

 

[Rob0729]

BTW, Springs seems to have more sour grapes than sharp analysis skills. The guy was dumped before the Pats probably even gave out this year's playbooks. He probably means now that he and his good friend Adalius Thomas are gone, that the Pats defense can't take the loss.

Sorry, but I trust Belichick's analysis of this year's defense than a guy who got more attention for making a stupid comment in Adalius Thomas' interview than he did on the field.

 

[Kontradiction]

Shawn must have missed it when the defensive scheme had the pieces it needed and went on to be dominant in the early 2000's.

 

[mgteich]

??????

You are talking about a different defense with much better personnel and better coaches. The defense of the 2003 and 2004 team were awesone. They were indeed designed to be dominant. They also had much more unpredictable game plans because of better personnel.

The 2007, 2008 and 2009 defenses simply had weaker personnel and weaker coaching. I think the schemes were somewhat limited by the weaker personnel.

Shawn must have missed it when the defensive scheme had the pieces it needed and went on to be dominant in the early 2000's.

 

[Kontradiction]

??????

You are talking about a different defense with much better personnel and better coaches. The defense of the 2003 and 2004 team were awesone. They were indeed designed to be dominant. They also had much more unpredictable game plans because of better personnel.

The 2007, 2008 and 2009 defenses simply had weaker personnel and weaker coaching. I think the schemes were somewhat limited by the weaker personnel.

Drunk? Maybe you should try reading my quote again...

 

[patfanken]

??????

You are talking about a different defense with much better personnel and better coaches. The defense of the 2003 and 2004 team were awesone. They were indeed designed to be dominant. They also had much more unpredictable game plans because of better personnel.

The 2007, 2008 and 2009 defenses simply had weaker personnel and weaker coaching. I think the schemes were somewhat limited by the weaker personnel.

No what are YOU talking about. The 2003 defense was ranked in the mid 20's IIRC, in just about everything but scoring D. The same could be said for the 2001 team. Again IIRC, only the 2004 team, and maybe the 2005 team ranked as a top 10 defense.

With all the talk about how bad the Pats defense was last season, all the mediots NEVER mention that they had the 5th best scoring defense in the LEAGUE. That's 5th best in the only real defensive stat that counts.

Now I am fully cognizant of the flaws and need for improvement in our defense, but I can't believe that when you get to the bottom line, which is can you allow fewer point than you score, the Pats so called scheme SEEMS to get the job done, and yet is never considered.

It sort of like selective accounting, wall street style.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

??????

You are talking about a different defense with much better personnel and better coaches. The defense of the 2003 and 2004 team were awesone. They were indeed designed to be dominant. They also had much more unpredictable game plans because of better personnel.

The 2007, 2008 and 2009 defenses simply had weaker personnel and weaker coaching. I think the schemes were somewhat limited by the weaker personnel.

That's kind of like what Kontradiction said. You misread him.

No what are YOU talking about. The 2003 defense was ranked in the mid 20's IIRC, in just about everything but scoring D. The same could be said for the 2001 team. Again IIRC, only the 2004 team, and maybe the 2005 team ranked as a top 10 defense.

Don't know what your talking about but the 2003 defense were ranked #7 in overall defense, 1st in INT's, 1st in passes defensed, 1st in defensive TD's, 6th in sacks, 7th in 3rd down percentage and 1st in points allowed.

With all the talk about how bad the Pats defense was last season, all the mediots NEVER mention that they had the 5th best scoring defense in the LEAGUE. That's 5th best in the only real defensive stat that counts.

No, anybody that compares the 2009 defense and points allowed with the 2003 defense needs to get their head checked. This is the exact reason why many people like myself can see how overrated of a stat points allowed is. The points allowed for their defense was inflated because of the season opener where the offense scored points for the Bills, Tennessee and Indy. Aside from those games and the super bowl, their defense was dominant and the best in Patriots history.

Now I am fully cognizant of the flaws and need for improvement in our defense, but I can't believe that when you get to the bottom line, which is can you allow fewer point than you score, the Pats so called scheme SEEMS to get the job done, and yet is never considered.

I seriously hope you are not talking about this season.

 

[mgteich]

Wait a minute! The 2003 team didn't have a top defense because the only stat they led in was scoring defense and the 2009 had a fine defense because they were 5th in scoring defense? Only the 2004 and 2005 teams ranked as a top defense? The 2005 defense?????????

OK, let us say that I accept your premise that points scored is the only stat that counts. Then we were 5th last year and 1st and 2nd in 2003 and 2004. The only Belichick teams that were not top 10 were 2000, 2002 and 2005which does makes some sense. All were a touch below average; all three teams were 17th in points allowed.

THE REALITY ABOUT 2009
We were indeed 5th in points scored against, but we couldn't hold a lead when it counted. There were several games where the defense caved in the 4th quarter. Of course, the offense caved even worse.

BOTTOM LINE
While I agree with your choosing points given up as the best defensive stat, I still think that the 2009 team was not a top 5 team but rather about 10-12.

As I have said many times, the defense is not the reason that we didn't go to the Super Bowl. A top 10 defense should have been enough for a Brady led top 3 passing offense.
We lacked a healthy Brady, a second long threat opposite Moss, production from the tight ends, and a decent red zone offense.

I do believe that the defense will be better this year.

No what are YOU talking about. The 2003 defense was ranked in the mid 20's IIRC, in just about everything but scoring D. The same could be said for the 2001 team. Again IIRC, only the 2004 team, and maybe the 2005 team ranked as a top 10 defense.

With all the talk about how bad the Pats defense was last season, all the mediots NEVER mention that they had the 5th best scoring defense in the LEAGUE. That's 5th best in the only real defensive stat that counts.

Now I am fully cognizant of the flaws and need for improvement in our defense, but I can't believe that when you get to the bottom line, which is can you allow fewer point than you score, the Pats so called scheme SEEMS to get the job done, and yet is never considered.

It sort of like selective accounting, wall street style.

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

I agree with Springs. It's not a defense that can dominate in today's NFL. Back in the early 2000s we had outstanding personnel, great coaches, and the running game was still relevant.

Now, the passing game is so much more prolific and the "dominant" defenses have become the aggressive/one-gapping schemes like Rex, LeBeau, the late Jim Johnson, etc. run.

I think Belichick's defense is based on percentages, banking on the fact that an opponent will make a mistake eventually before driving all the way down the field on you. The cliche is "bend but don't break defense" but that's exactly what it is. It's a conservative, more coverage based scheme that puts an emphasis in preventing the big play and gap control. Mayo and Guyton drop into coverage with the same amount of frequency that guys like Scott and Harris blitz. It made me sick to my stomach last year.

Personnel has played a part in it, but I've long thought it was the scheme.

 

[Kontradiction]

I agree with Springs. It's not a defense that can dominate in today's NFL. Back in the early 2000s we had outstanding personnel, great coaches, and the running game was still relevant.

Now, the passing game is so much more prolific and the "dominant" defenses have become the aggressive/one-gapping schemes like Rex, LeBeau, the late Jim Johnson, etc. run.

I think Belichick's defense is based on percentages, banking on the fact that an opponent will make a mistake eventually before driving all the way down the field on you. The cliche is "bend but don't break defense" but that's exactly what it is. It's a conservative, more coverage based scheme that puts an emphasis in preventing the big play and gap control. Mayo and Guyton drop into coverage with the same amount of frequency that guys like Scott and Harris blitz. It made me sick to my stomach last year.

Personnel has played a part in it, but I've long thought it was the scheme.

There's nothing wrong with the scheme. Give us the horses to run it and our pass rush is just as effective as a one gapping team.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

There's nothing wrong with the scheme. Give us the horses to run it and our pass rush is just as effective as a one gapping team.

I agree that their defense will work when they get the play-making players like they had in the early 2000's.

But I want to see BB bring back the exotic blitz schemes where you had no idea who was rushing the QB and brought delayed blitzes ala New York Jets in '99 and the 2003 Patriots defense. I had to remind myself the other day that BB's schemes aren't always so vanilla. Because of the lack of play-makers since '05, this defense has looked completely different and makes the one gap look bland. I think those blitzes will come back when the secondary can hold it's own.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

I agree that their defense will work when they get the play-making players like they had in the early 2000's.

But I want to see BB bring back the exotic blitz schemes where you had no idea who was rushing the QB and brought delayed blitzes ala New York Jets in '99 and the 2003 Patriots defense. I had to remind myself the other day that BB's schemes aren't always so vanilla. Because of the lack of play-makers since '05, this defense has looked completely different and makes the one gap look bland. I think those blitzes will come back when the secondary can hold it's own.

I agree.
I think BB will use more of those schemes now that he has the players. It'll just take time for it to all come together. Time for the youngins to learn what BB wants them to do. It may be ugly at first, but im feeling really good about what this defense can do by the time we're in the playoffs....yes, the playoffs. Im offended that anyone in the media could even think the Pats will miss it this year....plain stupidity

 

[patsfan-1982]

Shawn Springs, is a washed up over the hill CB that the pats should have never signed they would have been much better off keeping hobbs for one more season.



BB defense has won 2 SB's with the G man got the pats to 5 SB's and won 3 and even got the jets to the AFC championship game we know they can win with this defense.


but i won't sit here and lie by saying i love the pats scheme i would like to see them mix it up a lil play defense like the way the cowboys and steelers play D


only because it is so hard for rookies to learn this 2 gap system we seen it in the game vs the bills Ron Brace, was geting blown 5 yards off the ball on the first drive and when they went to a 1 gap it was takeing 3 guys to keep him out of the back field.



i think they need to mix it up a lil or even water it down so we can see guys like Shawn Crable, and Jermaine Cunningham, out there makeing plays just let them do what they been doing ther whole life playing football

 

[Deus Irae]

I agree with Springs. It's not a defense that can dominate in today's NFL. Back in the early 2000s we had outstanding personnel, great coaches, and the running game was still relevant.

Now, the passing game is so much more prolific and the "dominant" defenses have become the aggressive/one-gapping schemes like Rex, LeBeau, the late Jim Johnson, etc. run.

I think Belichick's defense is based on percentages, banking on the fact that an opponent will make a mistake eventually before driving all the way down the field on you. The cliche is "bend but don't break defense" but that's exactly what it is. It's a conservative, more coverage based scheme that puts an emphasis in preventing the big play and gap control. Mayo and Guyton drop into coverage with the same amount of frequency that guys like Scott and Harris blitz. It made me sick to my stomach last year.

Personnel has played a part in it, but I've long thought it was the scheme.

Again, the defense allowed fewer than 18 points per game last season, making it #5 in the NFL in points against. That was despite having a very weak linebacking corps, a huge hole at RDE and a defensive backfield that spent some time playing keystone cops. How that's a scheme that's not designed to be dominant is a question that only Springs can answer.

 

[sbpatfan]

If I were Shawn Springs, I'd be embarrassed that I was unable to play corner, or even make the team, for a defense that was designed not to be dominate. fBTW - who attempts to design a defense that isn't dominate? Maybe Shawn Springs should come on as our Defensive Coordinator, he seems to have a good idea of what's going on.

 

[shubert]

Sorrrrrrrrrrrrryyyy AD

 

[WelshPat]

I try not to act like a homer most of the time but....

Shawn Springs is a complete loser. He hurt this team last year, not help it. For a former number 2 pick in the draft, his career has been a flop.

Not designed to be dominant? Please. What coach schemes his defense to be average? I mean c'mon. Don't insult me.

The reason our D wasn't good last year was because of guys like Shawn Springs. Bums who think they were a lot better than they actually are.