I understand the concept of the prevent defense, and the reality is, the last two games, the Pats have played it in the 4th quarter, and they've won the games. Since that's the objective, I guess one could justify its use. However, the concept, as we all know, is to make the opposing offense take a lot of time off the clock, gaining small chunks of yardage. You trade off yards and even some points for time; in the end, the opponent shouldn't have enough time left. But here are the 4th quarter drives by Pitt and Indy: Pit 7 plays, 71 yds, 2:09, TD 2 plays, 12 yds, 0:30, INT 5 plays, 53 yds, 1:48, TD 5 plays, 80 yds, 1:24, TD 7 plays, 47 yds, 1:47, time expired Indy 7 plays, 73 yds, 2:26, TD 7 plays, 73 yds, 2:18, TD 9 plays, 50 yds, 1:48, INT Ok, the INT's are obviously very nice. But both Pit and Indy absolutely *shredded* the prevent defense. If the concept was to make the other team take a lot of time off the clock, clearly, that objective was not met - not even close. Look at those drives. Not one of them took longer than 2:26. As soon as the Pats went into the soft defense, the other team just ripped down the field. If the philosophy of going to the soft prevent is to prevent the big plays from the other team, and to eat up the clock, this is not working. You may as well play your regular defense - you know, the one that kept both Indy and Pit under control for the first three quarters of those games. As soon as the Pats went soft, the other offenses went nuts. Moreover, going to the soft prevent seems, for some strange reason, to impact the entire attitude of the team, because the offense tends to play timid. Even as early as the Cincy game, we saw this kind of thing. Huge lead, offense played crisp early, but tended to really slow down in the 2nd half. Anyway, my two cents on this. BB knows more football than I could ever dream of, but it seems pretty obvious that the soft prevent is not doing what it's supposed to. May as well play normal defense.