The Pats defense against the run should be much more of an issue this year

[Ring 6]

Of course the defense had SOMETHING to do with it. But their ability to defend other teams became easier when those said teams became one-dimensional to try to keep up with our offense's scoring. So, uh, let me say this again: our offense carried us into the Super Bowl last year.

Our TEAM got to the SB in 01.03,04,07. None of the 4 did that on one side of the ball. Everything an offense does is helped or harmed by the defense and vice-versa.
More importantly, we are talking about the PHILOSOPHY which has remained consistent through all of that success.
You seem to want to abandon that philosophy, apparently because our offense was real good last year. I am content that PHILOSOPHICALLY the Patriots are equally as good as their record indicates and that record is the best any team has ever posted over an 8 year stretch, so I would be very against changing a conservative defensive philosophy to an aggressive one.

 

[bradmahn]

There is a big difference between being open minded and listening to the ideas of others, and abandoning everything you believe, hiring a failed HC and decent coordinator and handing over the decision on defensive philosophy fronm the defensive genius of our time to that guy.

Capers has a role here. But the insinuations that our defense is going to change dramatically to match Capers philosophy and deviarte from BBs philosophy is ludicrous.

Again, what is being suggested, in the most simplistic terms is:
BB is conservative, but now that he hired Capers, who is aggressive, Capers will take over the defnese and we will be aggressive and play the style of defense that Capers wants to and BB will sit around with his thumb up his @ss saying "Thank God I found someone who knows how to run a defense,so I can abandon everything Ive ever believed"

Your assumption that a change in coverage automatically means that Belichick has handed the keys to Capers is what is actually ludicrous here. One does not come at the expense of the other.

The huge cushion and prominence of zone coverages coincided with the emergence of Samuel in the starting line up. Since then they have drafted a rangy FS-type who excels in coverage and seem to target cornerbacks who are skilled in man-to-man (Hobbs, Wheatley, Wilhite).

Now I ask, why do you think the secondary schemes they played last year are the ones that Belichick even wants as the long-term defensive scheme?

If they've been targeting what looks to be athletes who are capable of playing more man-to-man (or facilitate more man-to-man) for several years now (Hobbs in '05, Meriweather in '07, W&W in '08) and now hired a secondary coach who has a reputation of being aggressive, why wouldn't that scream "change to a more aggressive secondary"?

And why wouldn't you assume that that is what Bill Belichick actually wants?

 

[Ring 6]

Your assumption that a change in coverage automatically means that Belichick has handed the keys to Capers is what is actually ludicrous here. One does not come at the expense of the other.

The huge cushion and prominence of zone coverages coincided with the emergence of Samuel in the starting line up. Since then they have drafted a rangy FS-type who excels in coverage and seem to target cornerbacks who are skilled in man-to-man (Hobbs, Wheatley, Wilhite).

Now I ask, why do you think the secondary schemes they played last year are the ones that Belichick even wants as the long-term defensive scheme?

If they've been targeting what looks to be athletes who are capable of playing more man-to-man (or facilitate more man-to-man) for several years now (Hobbs in '05, Meriweather in '07, W&W in '08) and now hired a secondary coach who has a reputation of being aggressive, why wouldn't that scream "change to a more aggressive secondary"?

And why wouldn't you assume that that is what Bill Belichick actually wants?

I think 30 years of evidence of what BB believes in for a defensive philosophy is strong than an assumption that you have insight into what his draft choices mean.
If BB believed in gambling man to man aggressive pass coverage, why hasnt he ever used that philosophy before?
The original comment I responded to was something along the lines of the defensive style changing with Capers bringing his schemes here. There could be nothing further from the truth than the BB went out and hired a failed HC who is a decent coordinator to coach DBs so that he could abandon his 30 year philosophy of decent and cede those decisions to Capers.
Fine though. You seem to want the identity of the Patriots determined by Dom Capers. I want it to be determined by Bill Belichick. Although it is very easy for fans on this board to find things to whine about, it is a fact, proven over and over again that Belichicks philopsophy has been tremendously more successful than Capers'. But thats fine, go ahead and root for our dynasty to morph into the Dom Capers show. After all, he did run 2 franchises into the ground while BB was here winning SBs.

 

[Ring 6]

Your assumption that a change in coverage automatically means that Belichick has handed the keys to Capers is what is actually ludicrous here. One does not come at the expense of the other.

The huge cushion and prominence of zone coverages coincided with the emergence of Samuel in the starting line up. Since then they have drafted a rangy FS-type who excels in coverage and seem to target cornerbacks who are skilled in man-to-man (Hobbs, Wheatley, Wilhite).

Now I ask, why do you think the secondary schemes they played last year are the ones that Belichick even wants as the long-term defensive scheme?

If they've been targeting what looks to be athletes who are capable of playing more man-to-man (or facilitate more man-to-man) for several years now (Hobbs in '05, Meriweather in '07, W&W in '08) and now hired a secondary coach who has a reputation of being aggressive, why wouldn't that scream "change to a more aggressive secondary"?

And why wouldn't you assume that that is what Bill Belichick actually wants?

How does one not come at the expense of the other? BB has NEVER, EVER coached his defense to play the way you want Capers to coach it. (I dont know how he does by the way, when he isnt even the coordinator)
If the Patriots this year play a 'Dom Capers' style' defense, they will do something BB has never done. It will directly conflict with his identified philosophy 30 years in the making.
There is no alternative but that Bill Belichick said everything I knew aobut defense was wrong and the only way I can win is to have Dom Capers come in here and make the decisions about how we play defense. Because it would be entirely different from anything he had ever done before. In other words, BB would be admitting he has been wron gall these years, and Dom Capers has a better plan. Somehow, i dont see that happening.

And by the way, it wont happen because it is wrong.
I am at a loss to understand why any fan would WANT us to abandon our defensive philosphy and why 'playing more man to man' would be a good thing.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think 30 years of evidence of what BB believes in for a defensive philosophy is strong than an assumption that you have insight into what his draft choices mean.
If BB believed in gambling man to man aggressive pass coverage, why hasnt he ever used that philosophy before?
The original comment I responded to was something along the lines of the defensive style changing with Capers bringing his schemes here. There could be nothing further from the truth than the BB went out and hired a failed HC who is a decent coordinator to coach DBs so that he could abandon his 30 year philosophy of decent and cede those decisions to Capers.
Fine though. You seem to want the identity of the Patriots determined by Dom Capers. I want it to be determined by Bill Belichick. Although it is very easy for fans on this board to find things to whine about, it is a fact, proven over and over again that Belichicks philopsophy has been tremendously more successful than Capers'. But thats fine, go ahead and root for our dynasty to morph into the Dom Capers show. After all, he did run 2 franchises into the ground while BB was here winning SBs.

I'm with you on this. I don't understand the whole notion of BB scrapping the entire defense of an 18-1 team just because Capers is going to be coaching DBs. Knowing BB's love of being versatile, and combining it with Capers' aggressive coaching tendencies, I expect we'll probably see a higher percentage of man coverage and outside blitzes if the new corners prove they can handle the load. That's a far cry from becoming Blitzburg Northeast, though.

 

[bradmahn]

How does one not come at the expense of the other? BB has NEVER, EVER coached his defense to play the way you want Capers to coach it. (I dont know how he does by the way, when he isnt even the coordinator)
If the Patriots this year play a 'Dom Capers' style' defense, they will do something BB has never done. It will directly conflict with his identified philosophy 30 years in the making.
There is no alternative but that Bill Belichick said everything I knew aobut defense was wrong and the only way I can win is to have Dom Capers come in here and make the decisions about how we play defense. Because it would be entirely different from anything he had ever done before. In other words, BB would be admitting he has been wron gall these years, and Dom Capers has a better plan. Somehow, i dont see that happening.

And by the way, it wont happen because it is wrong.
I am at a loss to understand why any fan would WANT us to abandon our defensive philosphy and why 'playing more man to man' would be a good thing.

Two posts?

Whoa. I'm worthy of two posts, everyone.

BB has made changes in defensive style during his stay as HC of NE, unless you want to argue that the way the secondary played with Poole and Law is the same way it has been played with Samuel and Hobbs. Belichick is willing to make changes to his defensive philosophy, I don't know why you aren't.

It all comes down to this one, undeniable fact: Capers was hired by Belichick to coach the DBs. Now, I don't think Belichick would have fired his old coach and proceeded to hire an assistant with experience at the highest of levels if he didn't want a change in the way things were done.

As for the rest, it is your prediction against mine and I'm not going to continue to argue this with you. It's foolish to argue the future with any level of vehemence.

 

[bradmahn]

I'm with you on this. I don't understand the whole notion of BB scrapping the entire defense of an 18-1 team just because Capers is going to be coaching DBs. Knowing BB's love of being versatile, and combining it with Capers' aggressive coaching tendencies, I expect we'll probably see a higher percentage of man coverage and outside blitzes if the new corners prove they can handle the load. That's a far cry from becoming Blitzburg Northeast, though.

The only person I can speak for is myself, but I have never said (nor would I wish for) this defense to become "Blitzburg Northeast" but I would love to see a "higher percentage of man coverage and outside blitzes," provided the corners show they are capable.

But here's the thing: those higher percentages do not mean a fundamental shift in defensive philosophy (and I think you'd agree with that, no?). They are changes made to an ever-evolving scheme.

 

[Leave No Doubt]

I just think it's interesting that personnel moves were the Pats' first offseason event, and included within those moves happens to be a new special asst /secondary coach from the Dolphins. The Dolphins defense has traditionally given us problems, and Dom brings what could prove to be an interesting blend to what we already have.

I doubt anyone's suggesting Capers is "replacing" BB defensively, or that our 07 defense was so terrible...geez. We have let players go, like Asante for one. Far from Capers taking the keys, BB's just got himself someone who can add something very interesting to our defense. At the time I remember Reiss wrote an analysis of this move and what it could mean for our schemes. He suggested that BB may combine his traditional 3-4 with Capers' more pressured 3-4 style. Either way, one thing BB's always done is run a defense that's capable of surprise and just maybe we'll get some of that this year.

I also don't see anything wrong with BB getting a little more freed up- last season he was very often seen kneeling in front of the defense with his clipboard drawing x's and o's.

 

[dhamz]

I also don't see anything wrong with BB getting a little more freed up- last season he was very often seen kneeling in front of the defense with his clipboard drawing x's and o's.

Which he has done every single year he was here but became a topic because the idiots announcing the Super Bowl made a big deal out of it.

When Mangini was the DC here, BB was reported to have virtually taken over game planning and play calling down the stretch but somehow last year is portrayed as him being more hands on.

 

[Leave No Doubt]

Which he has done every single year he was here but became a topic because the idiots announcing the Super Bowl made a big deal out of it.

When Mangini was the DC here, BB was reported to have virtually taken over game planning and play calling down the stretch but somehow last year is portrayed as him being more hands on.

Good point dhamz. There was definitely a lot of camera on BB coaching last season as I think about it, or if there was in years past, I really never paid attention to it.

 

[pao]

You mean the defense that was allowing the fewest points in the NFL thorugh 15 games had nothing to do with it? I think that the Jags and Chargers felt our defense had a lot to do with them not advancing in the playoffs too.

I think even the players on the Patriot's defense would admit that the fact that the Chargers were without their two biggest threats on offense helped them to a degree. I wouldn't base too much of my opinion of the Patriot defense on their game against the Chargers in the AFCCG.

sdfan

 

[otis p. driftwood]

I think even the players on the Patriot's defense would admit that the fact that the Chargers were without their two biggest threats on offense helped them to a degree. I wouldn't base too much of my opinion of the Patriot defense on their game against the Chargers in the AFCCG.

sdfan

And who were the two biggest threats that didn't play that would've changed the entire complexion of the game? Everyone played but Whiney, who sat on the bench with his helmet on.

 

[Deus Irae]

The only person I can speak for is myself, but I have never said (nor would I wish for) this defense to become "Blitzburg Northeast" but I would love to see a "higher percentage of man coverage and outside blitzes," provided the corners show they are capable.

But here's the thing: those higher percentages do not mean a fundamental shift in defensive philosophy (and I think you'd agree with that, no?). They are changes made to an ever-evolving scheme.

My response to Andy wasn't meant as a barb thrown your way, so I'm sorry if it came off that way. A lot of people are acting as if Capers is now the defensive coordinator and the team is going to suddenly scrap what's been working for 7 seasons, and I just don't see it that way. I personally see the move as taking advantage of a market that left a quality coach 'desperate' enough to accept a DB coach position.

I think that with the slowing of Rodney, the lack of real speed of Sanders and the preference for zone/soft man of Samuel, the team has become a bit passive in the defensive backfield over the past 2 seasons compared to what it used to be. This season, I expect more speed at safety from Meriweather and the cornerbacks, which should allow Pees to be slightly more aggressive with his playcalling. I don't see it as a sea change so much as a correction and move back towards the system used when Law was prowling the field and making Manning his B-i-tch.

 

[pao]

And who were the two biggest threats that didn't play that would've changed the entire complexion of the game? Everyone played but Whiney, who sat on the bench with his helmet on.

First I didn't say it would change the entire "complexion" of the game. I said that even your Patriots would admit that it helped that two of the best Chargers offensive players didn't play that game. You named one of them, LT. The other was Gates. Now I know he suited up, and was even in the game, but he wasn't able to play his game. He was no threat. Don't believe me? Of course not. But the fact is the Patriots were able to cover Gates with a linebacker. No team has been able to do that since Gates came into the league. And when they tried it, they got burnt. Second, my point was simply that I wouldn't use the Patriot Defense success against the Chargers in the AFCCG as a witness that they are going to be a good defense this year (which is what the poster I responded to was doing). The Chargers just weren't as good of an offense without LT and Gates. Everything else you try to read into my post is just looking for something that isn't there, something condemned all year here.

sdfan

 

[Deus Irae]

First I didn't say it would change the entire "complexion" of the game. I said that even your Patriots would admit that it helped that two of the best Chargers offensive players didn't play that game. You named one of them, LT. The other was Gates. Now I know he suited up, and was even in the game, but he wasn't able to play his game. He was no threat. Don't believe me? Of course not. But the fact is the Patriots were able to cover Gates with a linebacker. No team has been able to do that since Gates came into the league. And when they tried it, they got burnt. Second, my point was simply that I wouldn't use the Patriot Defense success against the Chargers in the AFCCG as a witness that they are going to be a good defense this year (which is what the poster I responded to was doing). The Chargers just weren't as good of an offense without LT and Gates. Everything else you try to read into my post is just looking for something that isn't there, something condemned all year here.

sdfan

The Patriots cover Gates with a Linebacker and/or Rodney every time the two teams play, to the best of my offseason recollection.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I think even the players on the Patriot's defense would admit that the fact that the Chargers were without their two biggest threats on offense helped them to a degree. I wouldn't base too much of my opinion of the Patriot defense on their game against the Chargers in the AFCCG.

sdfan

16-0 and your Chargers couldn't beat the Pats in the playoffs either. There's not much to say except that the Pats have dominated and owned the Chargers in recent years.

 

[pao]

The Patriots cover Gates with a Linebacker and/or Rodney every time the two teams play, to the best of my offseason recollection.

You may or may not believe it but if you asked your team's players they would tell you. It was a big advantage that Gates was playing on one foot. Did it change the game? I don't think so. Did it make it easier to win the game? Yes.

sdfan

 

[pao]

16-0 and your Chargers couldn't beat the Pats in the playoffs either. There's not much to say except that the Pats have dominated and owned the Chargers in recent years.

No argument from me on that one. I didn't say anything different or make excuses. All I said was that it would be a mistake to judge the Patriots defense based on what they did against the Chargers in the AFCCG. Come on guys, let's look at context.

sdfan

 

[spacecrime]

First I didn't say it would change the entire "complexion" of the game. I said that even your Patriots would admit that it helped that two of the best Chargers offensive players didn't play that game. You named one of them, LT. The other was Gates. Now I know he suited up, and was even in the game, but he wasn't able to play his game. He was no threat. Don't believe me? Of course not. But the fact is the Patriots were able to cover Gates with a linebacker. No team has been able to do that since Gates came into the league. And when they tried it, they got burnt. Second, my point was simply that I wouldn't use the Patriot Defense success against the Chargers in the AFCCG as a witness that they are going to be a good defense this year (which is what the poster I responded to was doing). The Chargers just weren't as good of an offense without LT and Gates. Everything else you try to read into my post is just looking for something that isn't there, something condemned all year here.

sdfan

Did Tomlinson and Gates play in week 2?

 

[Ring 6]

Two posts?

Whoa. I'm worthy of two posts, everyone.

BB has made changes in defensive style during his stay as HC of NE, unless you want to argue that the way the secondary played with Poole and Law is the same way it has been played with Samuel and Hobbs. Belichick is willing to make changes to his defensive philosophy, I don't know why you aren't.

It all comes down to this one, undeniable fact: Capers was hired by Belichick to coach the DBs. Now, I don't think Belichick would have fired his old coach and proceeded to hire an assistant with experience at the highest of levels if he didn't want a change in the way things were done.

As for the rest, it is your prediction against mine and I'm not going to continue to argue this with you. It's foolish to argue the future with any level of vehemence.

Is there a reason you are being a wisea$$?
BB has played the exact same defensive philosophy ever since he has come here.
That philosophy includes every possible variation of defensive football anyone is capable of concocting.
Yes, he will use SCHEME to accent or compensate for his personell. He plays man, zone, he blitzes, he plays 2 gap, 1 gap, he runs zone blitzes, he plays cover 2, he plays cover 3, he blitzes safeties, he blitzes corners, he will align the defense with zero down lineman.
That is SCHEME. And he uses everything possible. But his PHILOSOPHY is, at its most basic TEAM DEFENSE within a CONSERVATIVE approach. He will gamble, but he will do it sparingly, and at the right time.
BB ABSOLULTEY prefers to make teams go the length of the field in small chunks than to risk allowing big plays to get big plays. BB DOES NOT AGREE that playing a more aggressive defense that creates more big plays is worth the big plays it allows. THAT IS FACT. It is backed up by the evidence of his coaching career.

Dom Capers was hired to coach defensive backs. Dom Capers was not hired to make strategic decisions about the PHILOSOPHY of the Patriot defense. BB is not going to change his philosophy. Will Capers make us better in the situations where we are aggressive? Sure. But CAPERS MUST ADAPT TO BBs PHILOSOPHY not the other way around.

To suggest that BB hired Capers to 'change the way things are done' is exactly what I am saying is ridiculous. You honestly cannot think that BB hired Capers to teach him how to a better defensive mind.
BB hired Capers TO COACH THE DBS. His job is to COACH THE DBs.

I have no doubt that Capers has a lot to add, but teaching the DBs techniques, reads, and potential give them a mental edge. Capers was not hired to come in and tell BB how to run a defense. Its just ignorant to think that.

Your argument says BB saw Dom Capers was UNEMPLOYED after failing twice as a HC, and he said to himself, wow, Dom Capers, he can come in here and rewrite our defense. I think I've been wrong all these years, and I'm going to bring him in and let him decide if its smarter to play a lot of man defense, because, you know, he is better equipped to make that decision than me.