The Worst Defense in the History of the World...

[PatsFanInVa]

Welp, we all got to see what a "good day" looks like from this D. I love how the ESPN guys talk about how Tom Brady has all these weapons...

Deion Branch, Danny Woodhead, Wes Welker, Hernandez, Gronk, BJGE...

Anybody pick one of those guys in your fantasy league?

Meanwhile, Santonio Holmes, Braylon Edwards, the admittedly overrated Sanchize, Shonn Green, Ladanian Tomlinson, Dustin Keller - all of whom were supposed to be terrorizing the league in general, and the Pats in particular - were utterly silenced (and of course, the network was utterly silent about the "weapons" Sanchez has.)

Be that as it may, let's take a look at scoring against the Pat's D this season -

Bengals - W, 38-24. First-half stomping, soft D in second half.

Jets - L, 14-28. Legitimate suckage.

Bills - W, 38-30. You can salvage something by saying 1 TD was a special
teams fuggup and three didn't happen (field goals)... but yeah, another less than stellar performance.

Miami - W, 41-14. Think they did okay here.

Ravens - W, 23-20. Not an offensive powerhouse but held in check.

Chargers - W, 23-20. Groundhog's Day score. Top yardage offense in league. Held in check in the stat that matters - points.

Vikings - W, 28-18. Adrian Peterson. Brett Favre. 18 points. Okay Brett sucks now. But 18 doesn't get you sent to Defense jail, right?

Browns - L, 14-34. You can't stop Peyton Hillis, you can only hope to contain
him. Seriously, this game the D earned the rep it's presently got, which ain't good. Let-down after a pretty nice 4-game run.

Steelers - W, 39-26. What can I say, 3 excellent quarters, then 4 TDs in the fourth. The now familiar 4th-quarter meltdown. (to be fair, 3 TDs on the D, 1 interception return.) Letting the foot off the gas has been responsible for a ton of points this year.

Indy - W, 31-28. See above, for the most part. 2 TDs in the fourth after the big lead gets established. The rest of the game on D was good, by the standards of games against Indy, a legit elite offense even with a ding or two.

Lions - W, 45-24. Started slow, went into tit-for-tat mode for three quarters, shut them down in the 4th. Not much to brag about - these are the Lions, after all. But the 4th Q issue vs. Pitt and Indy didn't reappear.

Jest redux - W, 45-3. I don't think it needs elaboration. You could make the point that you can't mount the simulated respectable score with Sanchize in this situation as easily as with Manning. A lot of panic-help from the Jest, but that says more about them than this D.

Here's my takeaway from this history - early on, this D sucked. Throughout the season, for the most part, the team has played a lot of soft D w/big leads. Last night, it was more of a "leave no doubt" gameplan, perhaps influenced by the Steelers and Colts games.

Teams score a lot of ways. These "ways" happen to every D. But the score given up when you're trying to keep the action in front of you only happens when you have the big lead, and w/the Pats' offense, that has happened a lot lately. It did not happen last night, but we don't know whether last night was an outlier or the continuation of a trend (if you count the Lions, which is a somewhat dicey proposition.)

My take? Look at the games since Week 3. Cleveland is the lone game where the defense just plain got their buttocks handed to them. In 4 games the other team was limited to 20 or fewer points. The Colts and Steelers were both three quarters of "A" play and one quarter of "F". The Lions were a "C" game... and last night was an A+ effort from the opening kickoff to the end of the game.

If all goes well, we have seven more games to see what trend wins out in retrospect.

But I see a trend-line I like. If we can control the fourth-quarter meltdown tendency, we have only one outlier game to "explain away" since week 3... if the present trend continues.

Of course we're like most teams... one injury in the secondary away from being what they say we are on defense, etc. But if the Pats stay healthy, I don't see the huge liability on D most analysts have been conveying.

But of course, this could be post-asswhupping euphoria.

Thoughts?

 

[aluminum seats]

Good post. That's the thing about a young/improving defense--season long stats don't mean much. The question is, how are they developing/evolving?

Pretty well, looks like.

 

[jmt57]

You're talking about Rob Parker on espn this morning? For those that missed it Parker said the Pats were not going to the Super Bowl because they have 'the worst defense in the league, bar none', and that 'the numbers don't lie'. Why some people are still fixated on one and only one stat - yardage - is beyond me. If the entire season hasn't proven that the numbers do indeed lie, then last night's game should have caused Parker to reassess his position.

Perhaps Parker was pandering to his audience; he writes for espn New York.

 

[363839]

Good post, PFiVA.
To answer your question regarding taking Pats for FF...as matter of fact, I have Welker on my team and tried to get Deion, too but someone already snagged him on me. Our Rookie tight ends are also on some guys roster as well.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Good post, PFiVA.
To answer your question regarding taking Pats for FF...as matter of fact, I have Welker on my team and tried to get Deion, too but someone already snagged him on me. Our Rookie tight ends are also on some guys roster as well.

Whoops, I mean to say drafted those guys in your fantasy league... me, I'm sitting on Woodhead, Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez, in different leagues... all pickups except Welker. Oh yeah, and I still have Randy Moss in one league too... on my bench. You feel me?

 

[363839]

Whoops, I mean to say drafted those guys in your fantasy league... me, I'm sitting on Woodhead, Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez, in different leagues... all pickups except Welker. Oh yeah, and I still have Randy Moss in one league too... on my bench. You feel me?

Ahh...there's the missing qualifier.
Don't feel bad about Moss. Who ever thought he was going to pull his great disappearing act this year. He went early in the second round in my league and that guy has him riding the pine.

 

[ausbacker]

Watching the defense play and evolve is reminiscent of watching Belichick open the playbook to Cassel in 2008 as his QB growth progressed. and trust in him grew.

The Patriots are slowly but surely opening up the playbook to the D and they're delivering.

 

[PlainOldEd]

Whoops, I mean to say drafted those guys in your fantasy league... me, I'm sitting on Woodhead, Welker, Gronk, and Hernandez, in different leagues... all pickups except Welker. Oh yeah, and I still have Randy Moss in one league too... on my bench. You feel me?

I drafted Welker and Hernandez.

 

[The Boston Patriot]

Post-asswhupping euphoria.

 

[The Dynasty]

The one stat that I think needs to be improved on his 3rd down D, going into last night the Pats were last in the league. The Pats did have a solid night last night limiting the Jets to 3-12 on 3rd down. They have been getting bailed out by the turnovers in past games and I just feel like come playoff time its hard to depend on turnovers to consistently keep bailing you out.

 

[JMarr]

Great post. Maybe it's partly because I missed the CLE game, but I always thought this "32nd defense in the league" in almost every category sh!t was incredibly misleading. I wanted to scream when ESPN threw all those metrics up there at the beginning of the game, with Jaws and Chucky smugly pronouncing how difficult it was going to be for the Pats to stop the Jets' juggarnaut of an offense. For the thousandth time, it just goes to show you how misleading stats can be. Anyone with an iota of intelligence and familiarity with the Pats knew that this defense was nowhere near the bottom of the league. More like pretty close to the top right now.

 

[sly24]

Even with the worst ranked defense, we're 10-2. This team finds ways to win. But I honestly think a lot of the opponent's scores are late when the game is away so it makes the numbers lie. Wasn't it the 2006 colts that had the worst defense entering the playoffs or something like that? Yeah, they ended up winning the superbowl.

This defense is ranked number 1 in interceptions. I think they are getting way better as the season comes along.

 

[The Dynasty]

Even with the worst ranked defense, we're 10-2. This team finds ways to win. But I honestly think a lot of the opponent's scores are late when the game is away so it makes the numbers lie. Wasn't it the 2006 colts that had the worst defense entering the playoffs or something like that? Yeah, they ended up winning the superbowl.

This defense is ranked number 1 in interceptions. I think they are getting way better as the season comes along.

It is true, but come playoff time its tough to depend on turnovers to keep bailing you out. I am not saying the defense needs to be a top 5 defense, it just needs to get a little better and not depend on forcing turnovers every week.

 

[jmt57]

We've already had a ton of discussions on this defense and stats this season, but I'm going to throw a few things out there (again).


First, football cannot be broken down by stats as easily as other sports, such as baseball can be. This is true for both individual stats as well as team stats.

Yes, counting on forced turnovers is a risky proposition. But look at Monday's game; the Pats were not bailed out by turnovers. The only turnover that came with the outcome in any doubt was Spikes' interception - and that's debatable because the Pats were already leading 24-3 at that point. They didn't depend on forced turnovers against the Jets - they got the job done on critical third downs.

The Pats gave up 152 yards rushing yesterday. But if you didn't have that stat in front of you would anybody say the Jets had a good game running the ball, or the Pats run defense was bad Monday? I wouldn't.

I still say the season-long yardage stats are skewed quite a bit by games in which the Pats have had a comfortable lead. Case in point would be the Pittsburgh game; something like 44% of the Steelers' yards came in the last eight minutes of the game, when the outcome was not in doubt.

An analogy would be the correlation between rushing yards and winning a game. At first glance it would appear that you have to run the ball well in order to win based on the records of teams that run for 100 yards or 120 yards in a game. I think it's just the opposite; teams get a lead, and then run the ball. Winning is not a result of running the ball; running the ball is a result of winning.

Just saying, be careful when making assumptions of this defense based on statistical ranking. That's what happens to all these people who don't watch the Pats week in and week out and assume they are a fluke. Rather than looking at stats and coming to a conclusion about this team, opposing fans and the national media should watch them play before critiquing them.

 

[Ring 6]

We've already had a ton of discussions on this defense and stats this season, but I'm going to throw a few things out there (again).


First, football cannot be broken down by stats as easily as other sports, such as baseball can be. This is true for both individual stats as well as team stats.

Yes, counting on forced turnovers is a risky proposition. But look at Monday's game; the Pats were not bailed out by turnovers. The only turnover that came with the outcome in any doubt was Spikes' interception - and that's debatable because the Pats were already leading 24-3 at that point. They didn't depend on forced turnovers against the Jets - they got the job done on critical third downs.

The Pats gave up 152 yards rushing yesterday. But if you didn't have that stat in front of you would anybody say the Jets had a good game running the ball, or the Pats run defense was bad Monday? I wouldn't.

I still say the season-long yardage stats are skewed quite a bit by games in which the Pats have had a comfortable lead. Case in point would be the Pittsburgh game; something like 44% of the Steelers' yards came in the last eight minutes of the game, when the outcome was not in doubt.

An analogy would be the correlation between rushing yards and winning a game. At first glance it would appear that you have to run the ball well in order to win based on the records of teams that run for 100 yards or 120 yards in a game. I think it's just the opposite; teams get a lead, and then run the ball. Winning is not a result of running the ball; running the ball is a result of winning.

Just saying, be careful when making assumptions of this defense based on statistical ranking. That's what happens to all these people who don't watch the Pats week in and week out and assume they are a fluke. Rather than looking at stats and coming to a conclusion about this team, opposing fans and the national media should watch them play before critiquing them.

In 2001 I learned the lesson that while you have to make enough plays throghout the game to be in it, what separates winning teams is that they consistently play their best in the critical situations when the game is on the line.
That season it was almost uncanny that the following always happened:
If the O needed a score EITHER
a) they got it or
b) they failed but the D got it right back and they scored the next time
If the D needed a stop EITHER
a) they got it or
b) they failed but the O matched the score and the D made the stop the next time

JMT you posted some very insightful breakdowns about the D when the game was out of reach vs when it was not, and it illustrated that.
Sure, it would be great if the D stoned everyone on every drive, but ultimatley what it does when the game is actually or realistically out of reach is irrelevant (because they are playing not to lose and stats in those situations only apply to those) but stats of all situations get lumped together.
I am perfectly fine with a defense that requires the offense to at least be decent, and that lets the stats pile up in passive time as long as they are a good D when the game is on the line. So far, without any question, they have been

 

[Patspsycho]

In 2001 I learned the lesson that while you have to make enough plays throghout the game to be in it, what separates winning teams is that they consistently play their best in the critical situations when the game is on the line.
That season it was almost uncanny that the following always happened:
If the O needed a score EITHER
a) they got it or
b) they failed but the D got it right back and they scored the next time
If the D needed a stop EITHER
a) they got it or
b) they failed but the O matched the score and the D made the stop the next time

JMT you posted some very insightful breakdowns about the D when the game was out of reach vs when it was not, and it illustrated that.
Sure, it would be great if the D stoned everyone on every drive, but ultimatley what it does when the game is actually or realistically out of reach is irrelevant (because they are playing not to lose and stats in those situations only apply to those) but stats of all situations get lumped together.
I am perfectly fine with a defense that requires the offense to at least be decent, and that lets the stats pile up in passive time as long as they are a good D when the game is on the line. So far, without any question, they have been

I think that is the real mark of a winner- when a team is so good that it doesn't need to completely dominate to win. It only gets a stop when a stop is needed, and score when a score is needed. In that way, energy is conserved for the long run and you don't have a mental or physical letdown.

 

[sbpatfan]

Good post. That's the thing about a young/improving defense--season long stats don't mean much. The question is, how are they developing/evolving?

Pretty well, looks like.

NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS beat NEW YORK JETS!

REX RYAN: You know, it’s the biggest butt whipping I’ve taken as a coach, in my career.

NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS got first place in the division for winning!

What? NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS DEFENSE is evolving!

 

[RayClay]

The one stat that I think needs to be improved on his 3rd down D, going into last night the Pats were last in the league. The Pats did have a solid night last night limiting the Jets to 3-12 on 3rd down. They have been getting bailed out by the turnovers in past games and I just feel like come playoff time its hard to depend on turnovers to consistently keep bailing you out.

The Jets are a move the chains team. It's really more important to stop them on third down than it is Manning with a 2-3 touchdown lead. Despite the total "yards", Mannings longest pass was 28 yards (technically, one of his interceptions, 32 yards in the air, was). and his impatience led to three picks. Sanchez could be pressured into mistakes more, so we pressured more.

The defense plays to stop the opposition from scoring more than we do. For different teams, or different situations, (like early leads) they play differently.

 

[Ring 6]

The one stat that I think needs to be improved on his 3rd down D, going into last night the Pats were last in the league. The Pats did have a solid night last night limiting the Jets to 3-12 on 3rd down. They have been getting bailed out by the turnovers in past games and I just feel like come playoff time its hard to depend on turnovers to consistently keep bailing you out.

How is a turnover a bailout?
An Int is a better play than a 3rd down incompletion. This logic says our D is better if we drop the Int and get a 'legitimate stop'??????????

 

[The Dynasty]

The Jets are a move the chains team. It's really more important to stop them on third down than it is Manning with a 2-3 touchdown lead. Despite the total "yards", Mannings longest pass was 28 yards (technically, one of his interceptions, 32 yards in the air, was). and his impatience led to three picks. Sanchez could be pressured into mistakes more, so we pressured more.

The defense plays to stop the opposition from scoring more than we do. For different teams, or different situations, (like early leads) they play differently.

3rd downs on defense are equally as important regardless of the opponent or situation. You never want the offense to convert on 3rd down, especially on 3rd and long. This is the time to step up and make a stop and get the D off the field.

Allowing teams to covert on 3rd down keeps the D on the field longer and offenses to have longer drives against the Pats. Recently the Pats have been bailed out by forcing an INT. My point is in the playoffs it is very unlikely that the Pats will be able to force an INT and be bailed out by giving up 3rd down conversions.