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

[RayClay]

You are comparing this team to the 2001 team. While they play the same style and have the same head coach, it doesnt mean you can expect to get the same results especially when the '01 team was full of veterans and the '10 is full of mostly first and second year players and a few 3rds. There is a big gap between veterans/rookies in the playoffs. If you want to count on a bunch of young inexperienced players to force turnovers in the playoffs, be my guest, its pretty risky. In order for the '10 defense to succeed in the playoffs I believe that they will need to be able to stop teams without giving up the loads of yards and then counting on turnovers.

I am not comparing them to anyone, except that they have the same coach and are playing the same style of defense that has indeed been very successful in the past.

Instead of beating that dead horse anymore, let's go to what you propose. Bill Belichick has worked a style of offense whereby they keep the ball in front of them, selectively pressure the QB and try to force mistakes.

His defenses have been successful in the regular season, the playoffs, the super bowl, with veteran teams and now (10-2) with a very young team.

My approach is conservative. Keep playing the style of defense he is the master of, that has worked in the past and has worked this season with a very young surprising team (for the basis of any argument I make, worked = WINS, no other measure).

Now, you want to blow up the Belichick defense that has been tremendously successful, in favor of some unknown defense, I assume we will borrow from a less successful team.

What defense? More importantly, why?

 

[mgcolby]

My point is that the Pats of 2010 cannot expect win in the playoffs with the way that they are playing now, depending on causing turnovers. They have not proven that they can stop teams consistently without giving up chunks of yards and then making a play causing a turnover. There is nothing wrong with playing that way, its got them 10 wins, but sooner or later it will catch up to them if they continue to play like that. They are a very young and inexperienced defense, how can you depend on that trend to continue in the playoffs? The playoffs is an entirely different season, with elite teams and elite QBs. The Patriots most likely will not be able to sit back and play prevent defense most of the game because the likelihood that the Pats offense gives them a double digit lead is not as great as it is in the regular season. The defense is going to be forced to play an aggressive style the whole game, and they have not proven that they can play a solid aggressive style for a full 60 minutes and be successful. If they play like they have played in a tight game in the playoffs, it is probably not going to be enough to get the job done.

You are comparing this team to the 2001 team. While they play the same style and have the same head coach, it doesnt mean you can expect to get the same results especially when the '01 team was full of veterans and the '10 is full of mostly first and second year players and a few 3rds. There is a big gap between veterans/rookies in the playoffs. If you want to count on a bunch of young inexperienced players to force turnovers in the playoffs, be my guest, its pretty risky. In order for the '10 defense to succeed in the playoffs I believe that they will need to be able to stop teams without giving up the loads of yards and then counting on turnovers.

So you think that once the playoff starts they will stop being a ball hawking defense? Or suddenly change their style of play?

And I don't understand where you get this myth that in the Playoffs the QB's become infallible. And I'm not so sure we will face an onslaught of "Elite" QB's either.

Flacco is not elite, Sanchez is not elite, Cassel is not elite, Garrard is not elite.... The best QB, who at this point looks to be a lock for the playoffs that we could face is Big Ben and he hasn't been all that great against BB defenses. Other good/elite QB's with a shot at the playoffs in the AFC, I emphasize a shot are Manning and Rivers.

And once again the 2009 Saints in 3 games had 4 INT's (1 returned for a TD) and 4 fumble recoveries. So they continued to perform true to form, 9th in yards per game and 1st in takeaways.

The 2001 Pats were 6th in total yards and 3rd in takeaways 5 INT's and 2 fumble recoveries in the playoffs.

Teams are what they are by December and at some point you have to admit that they are forcing turnovers not just getting lucky.

It is what it is and this defense is a bend but don't break, ballhawking, opportunistic defense. That won't change come January. I worried about how this young team would react in the playoffs and Monday night was as close to a playoff game as you could get...it had the hype, the story lines, the rivalry, the weather, the "two best teams" etc... and I would say this "inexperienced" defense showed up kicked ass.

No one can predict what will happen in the playoffs or on Sunday for that matter. Who's to say that the top ranked offense doesn't go into the tank come January? Nothing is guaranteed, but after 12 games, teams have established their identities and that is all we as fans can expect to see when they take the field come January. Some teams will play as they did during the season and some won't.

 

[RayClay]

Also, if all things were equal (which they aren't) why would we want to play a much riskier defense with only three corners, all of them green?

 

[ausbacker]

Your opinion on this matter is unsubstantiated, cannot be supported, ill advised and you have definite reading comprehension problems with the counter-argument The Dynasty.

 

[The Dynasty]

I am not comparing them to anyone, except that they have the same coach and are playing the same style of defense that has indeed been very successful in the past.

Instead of beating that dead horse anymore, let's go to what you propose. Bill Belichick has worked a style of offense whereby they keep the ball in front of them, selectively pressure the QB and try to force mistakes.

His defenses have been successful in the regular season, the playoffs, the super bowl, with veteran teams and now (10-2) with a very young team.

My approach is conservative. Keep playing the style of defense he is the master of, that has worked in the past and has worked this season with a very young surprising team (for the basis of any argument I make, worked = WINS, no other measure).

Now, you want to blow up the Belichick defense that has been tremendously successful, in favor of some unknown defense, I assume we will borrow from a less successful team.

What defense? More importantly, why?

I see where you are coming from, and to an extent I agree. BB is a master at his style of defense, so it would make no sense for him to suddenly switch his philosophy on defense. I do not want the Pats to suddenly change the way they run a defense, and all of a sudden blitz every down or something completely different than what they do now. I agree with you on that.

The style of defense that the Pats play is not designed to give up chunks of yardage and then force a turnover. No defense wants teams to march down the field and then force a turnover. The style of D the Pats play can still force some 3 and outs, and doesnt always have to give up tons of yards on drives. The Pats are terrible on 3rd down, 31st in the league. The Pats style of D is not prohibiting them from making 3rd down stops. I said this earlier in the thread..sooner or later this will catch up to them. Keeping the opposing offense on the field longer will sooner or later catch up to them, like in the playoffs where the QBs that they might face will make them pay.

 

[The Dynasty]

So you think that once the playoff starts they will stop being a ball hawking defense? Or suddenly change their style of play?

And I don't understand where you get this myth that in the Playoffs the QB's become infallible. And I'm not so sure we will face an onslaught of "Elite" QB's either.

Flacco is not elite, Sanchez is not elite, Cassel is not elite, Garrard is not elite.... The best QB, who at this point looks to be a lock for the playoffs that we could face is Big Ben and he hasn't been all that great against BB defenses. Other good/elite QB's with a shot at the playoffs in the AFC, I emphasize a shot are Manning and Rivers.

And once again the 2009 Saints in 3 games had 4 INT's (1 returned for a TD) and 4 fumble recoveries. So they continued to perform true to form, 9th in yards per game and 1st in takeaways.

The 2001 Pats were 6th in total yards and 3rd in takeaways 5 INT's and 2 fumble recoveries in the playoffs.

Teams are what they are by December and at some point you have to admit that they are forcing turnovers not just getting lucky.

It is what it is and this defense is a bend but don't break, ballhawking, opportunistic defense. That won't change come January. I worried about how this young team would react in the playoffs and Monday night was as close to a playoff game as you could get...it had the hype, the story lines, the rivalry, the weather, the "two best teams" etc... and I would say this "inexperienced" defense showed up kicked ass.

No one can predict what will happen in the playoffs or on Sunday for that matter. Who's to say that the top ranked offense doesn't go into the tank come January? Nothing is guaranteed, but after 12 games, teams have established their identities and that is all we as fans can expect to see when they take the field come January. Some teams will play as they did during the season and some won't.

Again the Pats 2010 defense is not like the Saints D last year or the 2001 Pats. Both of those had veterans, unlike the Pats this year where the majority of their players are in their first or second years. You cannot expect or depend on these young guys to force turnovers in the playoffs, it could happen, but it isnt very likely.

The QBs that the Pats might face in the playoffs are very capable of taking advantage of the Pats defense. Manning and Rivers top that list. Cassel and Roethlisberger are capable as well. I guess elite wasnt the best word, but these are all very good, arguably top 10 QBs in the league.

I dont want the Pats to change their style, that would be stupid. I just want them to stop allowing so many yards and depending on the turnover. The Jets game Monday night was a very good start at that, they played very well, that would probably get the job done in the playoffs. But that is just one game, lets see them put another solid game like that together this week against a tough Bears team on the road. They have 4 more games to put it all together before the playoffs.

You are right about the playoffs, you dont know what trends are going to continue. The Pats offense could go into the tank in the playoffs, then what would happen? The defense would be screwed because they couldnt play their bend but dont break defense. It could very well hold true that the Pats defense continues to play well and win with the style that they are playing now, I just dont think it will with how young and experienced that they are.

 

[ausbacker]

Again the Pats 2010 defense is not like the Saints D last year or the 2001 Pats. Both of those had veterans, unlike the Pats this year where the majority of their players are in their first or second years. You cannot expect or depend on these young guys to force turnovers in the playoffs, it could happen, but it isnt very likely.

The QBs that the Pats might face in the playoffs are very capable of taking advantage of the Pats defense. Manning and Rivers top that list. Cassel and Roethlisberger are capable as well. I guess elite wasnt the best word, but these are all very good, arguably top 10 QBs in the league.

I dont want the Pats to change their style, that would be stupid. I just want them to stop allowing so many yards and depending on the turnover. The Jets game Monday night was a very good start at that, they played very well, that would probably get the job done in the playoffs. But that is just one game, lets see them put another solid game like that together this week against a tough Bears team on the road. They have 4 more games to put it all together before the playoffs.

You are right about the playoffs, you dont know what trends are going to continue. The Pats offense could go into the tank in the playoffs, then what would happen? The defense would be screwed because they couldnt play their bend but dont break defense. It could very well hold true that the Pats defense continues to play well and win with the style that they are playing now, I just dont think it will with how young and experienced that they are.

Vince Wilfork, Tully Banta-Cain, Mike Wright, Gerard Warren, James Sanders, Jerod Mayo, Rob Ninkovich are just a few of the veteran names on the defense. The bottom end is very young and nobody will deny that. What you continue to discount is the benefit of a defensive genius and arguably greatest head coach of all time coaching up the defense. He's been there, he's seen it all before and he preaches situational football. The irony in this is the Patriots despite the yards are playing good situational football. It's very much like beginning to look like the 2009 Saints defense and resembles the style of bygone Patriots defenses.

Start offering something new and supportable or simply stop commenting.

 

[The Dynasty]

Vince Wilfork, Tully Banta-Cain, Mike Wright, Gerard Warren, James Sanders, Jerod Mayo, Rob Ninkovich are just a few of the veteran names on the defense. The bottom end is very young and nobody will deny that. What you continue to discount is the benefit of a defensive genius and arguably greatest head coach of all time coaching up the defense. He's been there, he's seen it all before and he preaches situational football. The irony in this is the Patriots despite the yards are playing good situational football. It's very much like beginning to look like the 2009 Saints defense and resembles the style of bygone Patriots defenses.

Start offering something new and supportable or simply stop commenting.

CB Kyle Arrington-2nd season
LB Jerod Mayo-3rd season
S Brandon Meriweather-4th season
CB Devin McCourty-rookie
LB/DE Jermaine Cunningham-rookie
DL Vince Wilfork-7th season
DL Gerard Warren-10th season
CB Darius Butler- 2nd season
OLB/DE Tully Banta-Cain-8th season
LB Gary Guyton-3rd season
S James Sanders-6th year
S Jarrad Page-5th year
S Patrick Chung- 2nd year
DL Ron Brace-2nd year
LB Brandon Spikes-rookie
LB/DE Rob Ninkovich-5th year
DL Kyle Love-rookie
LB Dane Fletcher-rookie

Out of the 18 players that played in the Jets game Monday night 11 are in their 3rd year or fewer in the league. Mayo is not a veteran, hes in his 2nd full season (missed a few games last year) and has only played in 1 playoff game. Only Merriweather and Sanders are the veterans of the secondary, and that is where the majority of the defensive plays occur. I just dont think you can depend on these guys to continue their style of play in the playoffs. Just because you have a great head coach doesnt mean you can make the plays, BB can coach all he wants and teach all he wants but he isnt on the field making the plays, these young guys are. Depending on them to force turnovers is risky when trying to advance in the playoffs. Hopefully the D can show they dont just win games off of turnovers.

 

[ausbacker]

CB Kyle Arrington-2nd season
LB Jerod Mayo-3rd season
S Brandon Meriweather-4th season
CB Devin McCourty-rookie
LB/DE Jermaine Cunningham-rookie
DL Vince Wilfork-7th season
DL Gerard Warren-10th season
CB Darius Butler- 2nd season
OLB/DE Tully Banta-Cain-8th season
LB Gary Guyton-3rd season
S James Sanders-6th year
S Jarrad Page-5th year
S Patrick Chung- 2nd year
DL Ron Brace-2nd year
LB Brandon Spikes-rookie
LB/DE Rob Ninkovich-5th year
DL Kyle Love-rookie
LB Dane Fletcher-rookie

Out of the 18 players that played in the Jets game Monday night 11 are in their 3rd year or fewer in the league. Mayo is not a veteran, hes in his 2nd full season (missed a few games last year) and has only played in 1 playoff game. Only Merriweather and Sanders are the veterans of the secondary, and that is where the majority of the defensive plays occur. I just dont think you can depend on these guys to continue their style of play in the playoffs. Just because you have a great head coach doesnt mean you can make the plays, BB can coach all he wants and teach all he wants but he isnt on the field making the plays, these young guys are. Depending on them to force turnovers is risky when trying to advance in the playoffs. Hopefully the D can show they dont just win games off of turnovers.

So if I bold that correctly and use 4 seasons as veteran status then most of our starters are veterans and the rest of the squad are attaining veteran status or are 1st and 2nd year players.

To be frank, I really don't care what your personal opinion is when it comes to "I don't think they can be counted on" when what I am watching with my own two eyes directly contravenes your opinion. Furthermore when there's historical references to support similar arguments both Patriots and non-Patriots you have to wonder which side is presenting the stronger case and which side is arguing for the sake of it.

I don't care if the D makes a 3rd down stop or creates a turnover. The whole team has been firing on all cylinders since the Cleveland debacle. That isn't by chance.

Don't discount the enthusiasm of youth, the leadership in the Patriots club house, the coach and above all the players will to win.

 

[The Dynasty]

So if I bold that correctly and use 4 seasons as veteran status then most of our starters are veterans and the rest of the squad are attaining veteran status or are 1st and 2nd year players.

To be frank, I really don't care what your personal opinion is when it comes to "I don't think they can be counted on" when what I am watching with my own two eyes directly contravenes your opinion. Furthermore when there's historical references to support similar arguments both Patriots and not Patriots you have to wonder which side is presenting the stronger case and which side is arguing for the sake of it.

I don't care of the D makes a 3rd down stop or creates a turnover. The whole team has been firing on all cylinders since the Cleveland debacle. That isn't by chance.

Don't discount the enthusiasm of youth, the leadership in the Patriots club house, the coach and above all the players will to win.

Regular season is not the same as the playoffs, especially for younger guys who havent experienced it.

Give some credit to the offense, they have made it a whole lot easier for the defense. In all of the big games they have given the defense a double digit lead to work with, which makes it a helluva lot easier to play the bend but break defense.

 

[ausbacker]

Regular season is not the same as the playoffs, especially for younger guys who havent experienced it.

Give some credit to the offense, they have made it a whole lot easier for the defense. In all of the big games they have given the defense a double digit lead to work with, which makes it a helluva lot easier to play the bend but break defense.

I agree that it's a different beast all together. Lucky for the Patriots that the team is the sum of all parts then isn't it.

At the beginning of the season I was concerned about the defense. As the season has progressed I am becoming less and less concerned with the defense because they are evolving and improving as a unit together.

 

[RayClay]

The style of defense that the Pats play is not designed to give up chunks of yardage and then force a turnover.

Against Manning it is. Against the Jets, who have a move the chains offense, they play differently. that's why they were so much better at third downs against the Jets, because they defended what the jets do well.

They do not try to construct a body of work, a compilation of defensive statistics, they try to beat the team they are playing that week.

It just so happens, they are playing with only three green corners, and that effects how they play too.

 

[The Dynasty]

Against Manning it is. Against the Jets, who have a move the chains offense, they play differently. that's why they were so much better at third downs against the Jets, because they defended what the jets do well.

They do not try to construct a body of work, a compilation of defensive statistics, they try to beat the team they are playing that week.

It just so happens, they are playing with only three green corners, and that effects how they play too.

I dont think the plan against Manning was to give up chunks of yards and then hope for a turnover. The Pats had a 17 point lead in the 4th quarter against the Colts, so the Pats went to the prevent defense which was designed to keep the Colts from scoring quickly and taking time off the clock. I dont think the Sanders INT was necessarily designed, or expected to happen, the Pats just wanted to keep the Colts out of FG range.

I agree with what you are saying where the Pats just focus on getting a W every week and not really worrying about how they do it. Doesnt matter how pretty it is, as long as it is a W. I guess thats kind of what you have to go with, with such an inexperienced defense. Its worked so far.

I just have questions with the defense for when they get to the playoffs and it is a whole new season. In the past the Saints and the 2001 Pats have been successful with continuing to force turnovers and win the SB. The difference with those teams were they had many experienced and veteran guys that can make plays, the Pats are a very young team especially all of the play makers. That is my concern, that you cannot depend on young guys to continue to cause turnovers in the playoffs. I dont want the Pats to all of a sudden change their philosophy and scheme on defense, that would be stupid. I just hope that they can prove me wrong.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I dont think the plan against Manning was to give up chunks of yards and then hope for a turnover. The Pats had a 17 point lead in the 4th quarter against the Colts, so the Pats went to the prevent defense which was designed to keep the Colts from scoring quickly and taking time off the clock. I dont think the Sanders INT was necessarily designed, or expected to happen, the Pats just wanted to keep the Colts out of FG range.

I agree with what you are saying where the Pats just focus on getting a W every week and not really worrying about how they do it. Doesnt matter how pretty it is, as long as it is a W. I guess thats kind of what you have to go with, with such an inexperienced defense. Its worked so far.

I just have questions with the defense for when they get to the playoffs and it is a whole new season. In the past the Saints and the 2001 Pats have been successful with continuing to force turnovers and win the SB. The difference with those teams were they had many experienced and veteran guys that can make plays, the Pats are a very young team especially all of the play makers. That is my concern, that you cannot depend on young guys to continue to cause turnovers in the playoffs. I dont want the Pats to all of a sudden change their philosophy and scheme on defense, that would be stupid. I just hope that they can prove me wrong.

The one variable you forgot to include is the potential improvement by a young defense as they gain experience. Different players mature at different rates, so to assume this defense will be the same one in the play-offs is wrong.

There's also a difference between a bad defense and an inconsistent defense, and I don't think ours is bad. They've been dominant at times, lousy at other times. But if they can continue to stabilize and play with more consistency, it'll be an entirely different defense we see.

Again using the Saints as an example, they were 25th in yards allowed and 20th in points allowed. Yes, it was a much more veteran group, but don't forget they were also learning a new scheme under Gregg Williams and as the season progressed, they matured and got better. They held the explosive Cardinals to only 14 points, got off their game against Minnesota and gave up 28, but came back to hold Manning to only 17 in the Super Bowl.

Even better though, they came back this year with mostly the same cast of players and have improved to a top 10 defense in points and yards allowed now that they're more familiar with the scheme.

Obviously they're veterans, so they'll pick up things quicker. But don't discount youth so much. It just means our potential ceiling is much much higher.

 

[Ring 6]

My point is that the Pats of 2010 cannot expect win in the playoffs with the way that they are playing now, depending on causing turnovers. They have not proven that they can stop teams consistently without giving up chunks of yards and then making a play causing a turnover. There is nothing wrong with playing that way, its got them 10 wins, but sooner or later it will catch up to them if they continue to play like that.

What wont catch up with them? Getting a 3rd down incompletion instead of an interception? Is that somehow better?

They are a very young and inexperienced defense, how can you depend on that trend to continue in the playoffs?

Why do you keep saying 'depend on'? You sound like the defense is saying they dont care to stop anyone unless they get a turnover.
This team has not allowed a goahead or tying score in the 4th quarter all season. The perfornance in close games vs with big leads has been documented and it shows anything but a 'reliance' on turnovers.
The team averages less than 2 takeaways a game, so clearly they are stopping teams other ways.
They have 3 wins with 1 or less takeaways, 2 of them vs Bmore and Pitt.
They have 3 more wins with 2 tunrovers and frankly win those without turnovers anyway.
That leaves 4 wins with 3 or more turnovers.
The Jets, we would have won with zero.
Miami we blew out.
All that is left is Indy and SD.
So the sum total of your position here is that we cant win in the playoffs becuase we turned over Indy and SD, and you think thats a bad thing.

It seems like you are searching for a reason to doubt the team that has been clearly the best in the NFL so far.


The playoffs is an entirely different season, with elite teams and elite QBs. The Patriots most likely will not be able to sit back and play prevent defense most of the game because the likelihood that the Pats offense gives them a double digit lead is not as great as it is in the regular season. The defense is going to be forced to play an aggressive style the whole game, and they have not proven that they can play a solid aggressive style for a full 60 minutes and be successful. If they play like they have played in a tight game in the playoffs, it is probably not going to be enough to get the job done.

You are comparing this team to the 2001 team. While they play the same style and have the same head coach, it doesnt mean you can expect to get the same results especially when the '01 team was full of veterans and the '10 is full of mostly first and second year players and a few 3rds. There is a big gap between veterans/rookies in the playoffs. If you want to count on a bunch of young inexperienced players to force turnovers in the playoffs, be my guest, its pretty risky. In order for the '10 defense to succeed in the playoffs I believe that they will need to be able to stop teams without giving up the loads of yards and then counting on turnovers.[/quote]

 

[The Dynasty]

The one variable you forgot to include is the potential improvement by a young defense as they gain experience. Different players mature at different rates, so to assume this defense will be the same one in the play-offs is wrong.

There's also a difference between a bad defense and an inconsistent defense, and I don't think ours is bad. They've been dominant at times, lousy at other times. But if they can continue to stabilize and play with more consistency, it'll be an entirely different defense we see.

Again using the Saints as an example, they were 25th in yards allowed and 20th in points allowed. Yes, it was a much more veteran group, but don't forget they were also learning a new scheme under Gregg Williams and as the season progressed, they matured and got better. They held the explosive Cardinals to only 14 points, got off their game against Minnesota and gave up 28, but came back to hold Manning to only 17 in the Super Bowl.

Even better though, they came back this year with mostly the same cast of players and have improved to a top 10 defense in points and yards allowed now that they're more familiar with the scheme.

Obviously they're veterans, so they'll pick up things quicker. But don't discount youth so much. It just means our potential ceiling is much much higher.

I agree that the potential ceiling is extremely high with this group on defense, but when I dont think the will be reaching the ceiling this year. The next few years with this defense will be very fun to watch, they will be very very good. Scary good.

I am not saying the Pats defense is bad, I am just saying that they way they have been successful this season but not get the job done in the playoffs because of their youthfulness and inexperience.

 

[Ring 6]

I see where you are coming from, and to an extent I agree. BB is a master at his style of defense, so it would make no sense for him to suddenly switch his philosophy on defense. I do not want the Pats to suddenly change the way they run a defense, and all of a sudden blitz every down or something completely different than what they do now. I agree with you on that.

The style of defense that the Pats play is not designed to give up chunks of yardage and then force a turnover. No defense wants teams to march down the field and then force a turnover. The style of D the Pats play can still force some 3 and outs, and doesnt always have to give up tons of yards on drives. The Pats are terrible on 3rd down, 31st in the league. The Pats style of D is not prohibiting them from making 3rd down stops. I said this earlier in the thread..sooner or later this will catch up to them. Keeping the opposing offense on the field longer will sooner or later catch up to them, like in the playoffs where the QBs that they might face will make them pay.

Dont you feel this is a tremendous overstatement? The difference between the PAtriots on 3rd down and the league average is 1.5 3rd down conversions a game. Allowing a 3rd down conversion 1 or 2 times in a game is not a pattern of never getting off the field.
Seriously, you are acting as if we allow 6 straight conversions that other teams dont.
This is a unbelievably overrated statistic.,
Again, a team is a cumulation of their statistics. It is utter folly to pretned you can pick out one of those statistics and say it means more within the frameowrk of the way a team plays than the actual results they have put up.
Would it be nice if the PAts average 1.5 less conversions a game, sure? But that minor negative is being made up for in other areas, and the result so far, has been non-existant.

 

[The Dynasty]

Dont you feel this is a tremendous overstatement? The difference between the PAtriots on 3rd down and the league average is 1.5 3rd down conversions a game. Allowing a 3rd down conversion 1 or 2 times in a game is not a pattern of never getting off the field.
Seriously, you are acting as if we allow 6 straight conversions that other teams dont.
This is a unbelievably overrated statistic.,
Again, a team is a cumulation of their statistics. It is utter folly to pretned you can pick out one of those statistics and say it means more within the frameowrk of the way a team plays than the actual results they have put up.
Would it be nice if the PAts average 1.5 less conversions a game, sure? But that minor negative is being made up for in other areas, and the result so far, has been non-existant.

You keep bringing up the 3rd down statistic. It is not all about the poor play on third down, it is also about being very poor in total defense, yards given up. Even if the Pats got 1.5 more stops on 3rd down per game their overall defense would still be one of the worst in the league. What defensive statistic should I use? Turnovers? Is that the only statistic that matters?

My whole argument is that the Pats rely on creating turnovers too much, and in the playoffs they might not be able to create these turnovers and therefore their defense would not be effective. Getting more stops the conventional way, and forcing some 3 and outs would give me more confidence that they can succeed in the playoffs. We have analyzed this for all different angles, saying how the Saints were successful with this style last year, and the 2001 team did it too. This 2010 Pats team is not like those teams because of how young this Pats team is, their playmakers are all very young and the playoffs are a totally different season where usually young and inexperienced guys have more trouble adapting than the veterans. It is hard to count on a young and experienced defense to force turnovers and win games based on that.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I agree that the potential ceiling is extremely high with this group on defense, but when I dont think the will be reaching the ceiling this year. The next few years with this defense will be very fun to watch, they will be very very good. Scary good.

I am not saying the Pats defense is bad, I am just saying that they way they have been successful this season but not get the job done in the playoffs because of their youthfulness and inexperience.

I agree, I don't think they'll hit the ceiling this year either. At least they better not, or else it means it wasn't very high at all But they don't have to be at their best for us to win the Super Bowl.

The defense may not lead us to a Super Bowl win like with the Ravens, but if the offense is clicking and we've got home-field advantage, they might not have to play at a top-10 level throughout the play-offs. Relying on turnovers is a tricky thing, I agree, but they've shown flashes of improved play as well. Arrington and Butler look much, much better in coverage compared to the beginning of the year. Brace and Deaderick have helped stabilize the run defense. And McCourty has started to shut down his side of the field consistently.

Realistically, 31 teams won't have an offense or defense good enough to win the Super Bowl by the time all is said and done. That doesn't mean ours doesn't have a chance though.

 

[Ring 6]

You keep bringing up the 3rd down statistic.

Because you keep talking about it

It is not all about the poor play on third down, it is also about being very poor in total defense, yards given up. Even if the Pats got 1.5 more stops on 3rd down per game their overall defense would still be one of the worst in the league.

You leave out the key word STATISTICALLY. They are not even close to one of the worst defenses in the league, unless you want to judge a football team by statistics rather than results.
There are tons of factors, including numerous yards allowed with large leads that affect yardage stats, but yardage stats are not what wins or loses games.
As I have said numerous times, it is ridiculous to use stats garnered in large lead situaitons to predict what the defense will do in close games. It would be much more telling to look at what they do in close game situations to predict what they will do in close game situations. Lumping together cumulative stats, then trying to cull future meaning from them is folly.

What defensive statistic should I use? Turnovers? Is that the only statistic that matters?

I don't know, because it seems you are on a mission to prove that the defense blows, that turnovers are lucky, that they wont get any in the playoffs, and therefore will get killed, and there are no statistic that would address that.
Maybe use the stats cited on this board about how the D plays with less than a TD lead to see how they would play if they dont open a big lead with turnovers?

My whole argument is that the Pats rely on creating turnovers too much, and in the playoffs they might not be able to create these turnovers and therefore their defense would not be effective.

I know that, and I am saying its a poor argument.

Getting more stops the conventional way, and forcing some 3 and outs would give me more confidence that they can succeed in the playoffs.

Beating all the other playoff teams gives me confidence.

We have analyzed this for all different angles, saying how the Saints were successful with this style last year, and the 2001 team did it too.

Well you were arguing that the Saints didnt force turnovers a while ago.

This 2010 Pats team is not like those teams because of how young this Pats team is,

What does that have to do with anything? Old players keep getting turniovers into the playoffs but young ones dont? It is totally irrelevant.

their playmakers are all very young and the playoffs are a totally different season where usually young and inexperienced guys have more trouble adapting than the veterans. It is hard to count on a young and experienced defense to force turnovers and win games based on that.

I see zero evidence of that, other than you saying it is. Do you have some examples?