You guys are being too hard on your defense

[Deus Irae]

Exactly, and that's the point. Those (in game & post game) threads are filled with kneejerk, not well thought out, frustrations (rather than actuals thoughts). In light of that, I stay away or don't let them bother me. But, when a thread is filled with mostly sane, legitimate, albeit, critical posts, it drives me nuts when the homers attack. You rarely see the opposite. The half empty faction rarely attacks the half filled one, why do you suppose that is? Do you suppose it's George Bush's fault?

Because the half empty faction is attacking the team/coach/player, which is often what triggered the knee-jerk reaction from the homer in the first place. Both sides are attacking, often without having thought about what they're posting.

 

[Afterlifemobile-86]

Honestly, I gave the defense a pass in the Colts game. They played well but our offense just decided to stop playing in the second half. It's nearly impossible to stop Peyton when your own offense can't keep you off the field.

 

[HarkDawg]

I keep reading across the nation and on here that your defense sucks. That you should have kept Seymour, Vrabel, etc. That this is the worst Pats team of the decade. etc.

I think you guys are overreacting based on one game against a great team, and not acknowledging the fact that the Saints are quite possibly the most balanced offense you faced this decade, and that they are a talented team with a great coaching staff. For example, the Saints have a power running game that the Colts never have had. And the Greatest Show on Turf didn't have the power running game the Saints have either.

That's something that hasn't been acknowledged. The Pats are able to play solely the pass against the Colts and the Greatest Show on Turf. A team that runs and passes very well is harder to defend. Once Pierre Thomas broke that long run due to Carl Nicks overpowering Wilfork, the floodgates opened bc the Pats had to worry about two dimensions.

So I have my doubts that even the Pats defense of 5 years ago would have held the Saints under 28 points. Look at what they have done in all of their home games this year, they've basically went right through every defense they faced besides Rex Ryan's blitzes.

As for your offense. We'll see if teams are smart enough to duplicate Gregg Williams' plan. It took 11 games before a coordinator was smart enough to come up with such a scheme. Based on watching coordinators across the league come up with lame schemes against the Colts and Pats every week, I have my doubts that other teams will be smart enough to do what Williams did.

I'm just pretty familiar with the Colts, Saints, and Pats; so felt I could give some perspective. I live in NO, so I've seen every Saints game. I have taped and rewatched both your games against the Colts and the Saints. So I think I'm pretty familiar with your personnel.

I still think the Pats have a solid young defense. Your DL is set if you keep Wilfork. Your CBs are adequate IMO if you re-sign Bodden. IMO Guyton is the definition of mediocrity and needs to be replaced. He's a JAG. If you add an ILB and OLB in the draft, you'll be set. If I'm BB, I find a way to make some trades and come out of the draft with a combination like Brandon Spikes at ILB and Eric Norwood at OLB. Norwood in particular would be a great pick.

I guess my point is, you won't face an offense like the Saints in the AFC. Or the Vikings, for that matter. The Chargers are the closest, but as good as Rivers is, he's not Brees. And the Chargers haven't shown they can run the ball as well as the Saints or Vikes.

Our D is not on PAR w/ the Vintage SB Dynasty Patriots of the past.

You cannot understand this b/c you only won the SB once....... and it was a refree gift at best.......... Lucky if you ask me..... thnx to refs and BS calls like Phantom PI's...... and yes I think the Pats D>Indy D . (even in 2009)

 

[mayoclinic]

Our D is not on PAR w/ the Vintage SB Dynasty Patriots of the past.

You cannot understand this b/c you only won the SB once....... and it was a refree gift at best.......... Lucky if you ask me..... thnx to refs and BS calls like Phantom PI's...... and yes I think the Pats D>Indy D . (even in 2009)

HarkDawg,

Coltfan's OP was sympathetic and very reasonable. Is that a good reason to insult him?

I don't think the OP ever suggested that our defense is currently on par with the 2003-2004 years. Merely that it wasn't as bad as all of the post-Saints reaction was suggesting. I would also assume that someone can be a reasonable judge of a defense regardless of how many SBs their team has won.

Please don't give Pats fans a bad name.

 

[Nikolai]

Personally, I still really like this defense and where it's going. Sure, they got manhandled last Monday, but these young guys have a good future, and I anticipate that this unit will become one of the most respected in the league within the next couple of years. There are some missing pieces to the puzzle, but with all the draft picks coming our way in the next couple of years, I really believe that this unit is going to be a complete unit soon.

Thanks for coming by coltsfan and providing some balance to the discussion.

I do think people put too much emphasis on the Saints game. I seem to recall that the 07 Pats made some pretty good defenses look silly that year: Pittsburgh and Washington come to mind. Let's face it, it's been increasingly difficult to play well against prolific passing offenses given some of the rule changes in the league, some of which came about after 2004.

 

[fair catch fryar]

It's going to happen sooner or later. I think the past 2 years have been some intricate plot started by the Packers to set the vikes back a decade

God, I hope so..... Can you imagine the thought of both Mannings and Favre having won Super Bowls in the years following the Pats titles. The one thought that comforts me is knowing the Jets WON'T be winning a title this year.

 

[RhodyPatriot]

Take away the Colts & Saints games, and the D has been very good. Those 2 games have tarnished the D in a lot of people's eyes. They're still one of the best scoring D's in the league though, even with those 2 games factored in. I just hope that once the playoffs roll around, they'll be able to hold the better offenses under control.

The D forced 7 punts and 2 picks against Manning and the Colts. Problem is the Colts were given 14 possessions and the offense didn't put the game away when they had the chance, coughing up 2 TO's in the red zone in the 2nd half and unable to get a 2 yds on 2 plays when needed late in the 4th quarter.
The Colt loss is on the offense.

 

[neuronet]

Our D is not on PAR w/ the Vintage SB Dynasty Patriots of the past.

You cannot understand this b/c you only won the SB once....... and it was a refree gift at best.......... Lucky if you ask me..... thnx to refs and BS calls like Phantom PI's...... and yes I think the Pats D>Indy D . (even in 2009)

People like you are why people like him hate people like us.

Grow up.

 

[brady et al fan]

I keep reading across the nation and on here that your defense sucks. That you should have kept Seymour, Vrabel, etc. That this is the worst Pats team of the decade. etc.

I think you guys are overreacting based on one game against a great team, and not acknowledging the fact that the Saints are quite possibly the most balanced offense you faced this decade, and that they are a talented team with a great coaching staff. For example, the Saints have a power running game that the Colts never have had. And the Greatest Show on Turf didn't have the power running game the Saints have either.

That's something that hasn't been acknowledged. The Pats are able to play solely the pass against the Colts and the Greatest Show on Turf. A team that runs and passes very well is harder to defend. Once Pierre Thomas broke that long run due to Carl Nicks overpowering Wilfork, the floodgates opened bc the Pats had to worry about two dimensions.

So I have my doubts that even the Pats defense of 5 years ago would have held the Saints under 28 points. Look at what they have done in all of their home games this year, they've basically went right through every defense they faced besides Rex Ryan's blitzes.

As for your offense. We'll see if teams are smart enough to duplicate Gregg Williams' plan. It took 11 games before a coordinator was smart enough to come up with such a scheme. Based on watching coordinators across the league come up with lame schemes against the Colts and Pats every week, I have my doubts that other teams will be smart enough to do what Williams did.

I'm just pretty familiar with the Colts, Saints, and Pats; so felt I could give some perspective. I live in NO, so I've seen every Saints game. I have taped and rewatched both your games against the Colts and the Saints. So I think I'm pretty familiar with your personnel.

I still think the Pats have a solid young defense. Your DL is set if you keep Wilfork. Your CBs are adequate IMO if you re-sign Bodden. IMO Guyton is the definition of mediocrity and needs to be replaced. He's a JAG. If you add an ILB and OLB in the draft, you'll be set. If I'm BB, I find a way to make some trades and come out of the draft with a combination like Brandon Spikes at ILB and Eric Norwood at OLB. Norwood in particular would be a great pick.

I guess my point is, you won't face an offense like the Saints in the AFC. Or the Vikings, for that matter. The Chargers are the closest, but as good as Rivers is, he's not Brees. And the Chargers haven't shown they can run the ball as well as the Saints or Vikes.

The 2001 defense that shut down the greatest show on turf would have fared much better against this Saints team. That team was unheralded but was loaded with playmakers with attitude. They shut down the Rams twice that year (well, I don't remember the score in reg season but the defense did not get stomped).

This defense is not very good. You can only do so much with the personnel you have and this group is capable of holding down middling teams like the Jets but against guys like Manning and Brees forget it. The DBs are inexperienced and the DL/LB corps does not generate enough pressure on the QB. The net result is the shredding your QB did to us in the 4th quarter and that Brees did for the entire game. I do think the Seymour trade is coming back to bite us and that BB wiffed on a few free agents this year. Lets just call it for what it is.

 

[RobertWeathers]

The 2001 defense that shut down the greatest show on turf would have fared much better against this Saints team. That team was unheralded but was loaded with playmakers with attitude. They shut down the Rams twice that year (well, I don't remember the score in reg season but the defense did not get stomped)..

In the Nov 01 game vs the Rams, they did let up 480 yds of offense, but yielded only 24 pts. Classic bend-don't-break. I do agree though, the 01 D would have done a little better.

This defense is not very good. You can only do so much with the personnel you have and this group is capable of holding down middling teams like the Jets but against guys like Manning and Brees forget it. The DBs are inexperienced and the DL/LB corps does not generate enough pressure on the QB. The net result is the shredding your QB did to us in the 4th quarter and that Brees did for the entire game. I do think the Seymour trade is coming back to bite us and that BB wiffed on a few free agents this year. Lets just call it for what it is.

Don't totally disagree, Brady et al fan but I do think patience needs to be excercised a little here. Very concerned about the lack of a pass rush and yes, not having a motivated Seymour isn't helping matters, but there are many good, young, fast, tough kids that need time to mature and gain experience playing with one another. They have shown flashes of being very good. They obviously need to develop some consistiency.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Some of us get defensive when faced with idiotic game to game assertations like this is the most talented defense ever or the more common of late this defense sucks. That's because we realize what this defense represents...the future. The 2004 defense hadn't been able to perform like itself since 2004. That's a sad fact. Time marches on, **** happens, call it what you will. Nothing lasts forever, and Bill tried to milk every last drop out of the core that was that team because in this system the core is paramount and not easily replaced. The core represents committment to the system, discipline within the scheme, and a level of predictability and playmaking a coaching staff can count on.

This season he pretty much totally moved on. Criticize him for waiting too long, or moving too fast - either side can make a case for their POV. But in the end he is rebuilding the defense and attempting to transition on the fly to a younger, faster defense that includes some very young players he hopes will emerge as core players and playmakers and leaders. None of them has much experience let alone within the system and they are essentially being taught the fine points on the field. They will make some boneheaded mistakes and learn some tough lessons and take time to develop. Tedy and Ty and Lawyer and company got to do that during the Pete Carroll years. Rodney got to do it in SanDiego. Asante had cover when he arrived and then went through his stone hands growing pains from 2005 well into 2006 before emerging as a ballhawk although not a core player. Richard also had cover and though he performed well when healthy he struggled with injury as well as the financial tenants of this system. All of them had played for losers. None of these kids have. It's easier to get ahead of yourself or make assumptions or lose focus when you don't have a broad basis or a solid foundation to draw on.

Bill was right that everything that happened on defense Monday night is correctable. He wasn't making excuses for them, they made mistakes, but good coaching uses those as teaching tools and corrects them over time. If we're repeatedly seeing blown coverages come January then personnel may have to be re-evaluated. In the meantime fans need to accept reality and realize that no defense wholesale transitions overnight and few teams manage a transition on either side of the ball while still winning double digit games and remaining in position for their fanbase to even worry about playoff seeding.

Rookie HC Payton's Saints were the post Katrina feel good story of the 2006 season as he took a talented albeit previously snake bit 3-13 team to a 10-6 record and the second round of the playoffs (only to be beat by Rex Grossman and the Bears...). Of course after struggling through back to back 7-9 and 8-8 seasons with the kind of offensive talent he'd acquired, due in part to playing lousy defense, he likely wouldn't have lasted into a 4th season absent one heck of a turnaround...What elevated his own profile as a HC was his determination to hire someone was only available because despite his defenses record behind a QB-less, mismanged at every turn team, Dan Snyder had fired him thereby making him available for Payton to tap. We don't face those kinds of luck of the draw situations here as much as some of us apparently yearn to...

Patsfans are simply spoiled. We've missed the playoffs by a division tiebreaker twice in nine seasons under BB. Despite walking away from talented players who had helped this team win but who simply didn't fit the underlying system and facing an almost annual talent drain on the coaching and scouting side of the equation because we were that good. And despite making some of the same drafting and FA mistakes every organization has to cope with because they all suffer them. You don't just snap your fingers and get younger and faster while remaining competitive, much as some here want to insist you should. And you don't remain competitive for a decade by stubbornly clinging to the past because some may persist in making the windows case that if you had just for one more season you'd have won it all and what else matters...

Bill knows after 35 seasons and 5 rings that come the second season everyone is 0-0 and there are too many variables to predict or project a favorable outcome. So he plays in the present while planning for a future where he doesn't have to pay the ultimate price for moving too fast or waiting too long. And there is no escaping the fact that if he played the windows game here and lost and this team EVER took a real step backwards to the 5-11 days of building, disappointed patsfans would be calling for more than his coordinators heads.

 

[mayoclinic]

This defense is not very good. You can only do so much with the personnel you have and this group is capable of holding down middling teams like the Jets but against guys like Manning and Brees forget it. The DBs are inexperienced and the DL/LB corps does not generate enough pressure on the QB. The net result is the shredding your QB did to us in the 4th quarter and that Brees did for the entire game. I do think the Seymour trade is coming back to bite us and that BB wiffed on a few free agents this year. Lets just call it for what it is.

I disagree.

The secondary is developing into the best we've had since 2003-2004. Would you rather have Hobbs and Deltha O'Neal? Or James Sanders and an injured and slow Rodney Harrison (not the 2003-2004 version)? Add Mayo and Guyton and we have more speed on defense than we've had in a long, long time.

What we lack are (1) experience, and (2) better playmaking on the front line, especially the pass rush. Brees and Manning will shred any defense if you give them enough time.

I would argue that we are still a top 10 defense, and a good to very good defense overall. It's not an elite or dominant defense. It could become one with some more experience and with some pressure up front.

Show me the defense this season that has shut down Manning and Brees.

 

[Keegs]

i think that when it's all said and done, the team that scores the most points on Sunday will bring home the "W".

We need some good fundamental Defense, a few great "football moves", and we need our players to keep their heads on a swivel. Maybe they can pin their ears back and "bring the pain".

 

[RobertWeathers]

I disagree.

The secondary is developing into the best we've had since 2003-2004. Would you rather have Hobbs and Deltha O'Neal? Or James Sanders and an injured and slow Rodney Harrison (not the 2003-2004 version)? Add Mayo and Guyton and we have more speed on defense than we've had in a long, long time.

What we lack are (1) experience, and (2) better playmaking on the front line, especially the pass rush. Brees and Manning will shred any defense if you give them enough time.

I would argue that we are still a top 10 defense, and a good to very good defense overall. It's not an elite or dominant defense. It could become one with some more experience and with some pressure up front.

Show me the defense this season that has shut down Manning and Brees.

Even in the games vs JAX, BAL, SF and HOU Manning still threw very well. Brees has been lights out the entire season...Just ridiculous.

There is no question in my mind that this is a maturing, good young defense. More playermakers need to be added/improve up-front but overall I am pleased with how they have come along so far this year. There have been some disappointments for sure, but overall I like the direction that they are heading in...

My .02$

 

[NYCPatsFan]

Our D is not on PAR w/ the Vintage SB Dynasty Patriots of the past.

You cannot understand this b/c you only won the SB once....... and it was a refree gift at best.......... Lucky if you ask me..... thnx to refs and BS calls like Phantom PI's...... and yes I think the Pats D>Indy D . (even in 2009)

Coltfan - apologies for this post made by one of our fans. Inspite of the smilies, the arrogant stance and immature reasoning reveals that he/she had little idea of what you are writing about.

 

[brady et al fan]

I disagree.

The secondary is developing into the best we've had since 2003-2004. Would you rather have Hobbs and Deltha O'Neal? Or James Sanders and an injured and slow Rodney Harrison (not the 2003-2004 version)? Add Mayo and Guyton and we have more speed on defense than we've had in a long, long time.

What we lack are (1) experience, and (2) better playmaking on the front line, especially the pass rush. Brees and Manning will shred any defense if you give them enough time.

I would argue that we are still a top 10 defense, and a good to very good defense overall. It's not an elite or dominant defense. It could become one with some more experience and with some pressure up front.

Show me the defense this season that has shut down Manning and Brees.

not sure what you disagree with since your points 1 and 2 are exactly what I said. So in your mind that makes a good defense? How about if we agree to call them a mediocre defense?

 

[MassPats38]

Good points all, Mo. People were wailing like banshees for not going younger on defense, then conveniently forget that the NFL defense does not simply "come to" a new player when he reports to training camp. If anyone can point to a defense that added this many new pieces in one season, an unfortunate necessity given age and injury status of former members, and suddenly looked like the 2000 Ravens, I would love to hear it. Continuity is huge, and lack of it leads to inconsistency on the field. All of the old guard had significant experience in the system, and that really clicked in 2003 and 2004. That tends to be taken for granted by many, that coordinated schemes are simply plug and play.

2005 was painful to watch with the Pats getting drubbed as badly as the team did Monday by both the Chargers and the Colts - and unlike Monday those teams pounded the Pats in front of the Pats' home crowd. Why? Major changes on defensive personnel prompted by Bruschi's stroke and Law's exit, in addition to a young and relatively inexperienced defensive line. That defense did start to click in the final games of the season, but it had plenty of growing pains prior to that.

Is the defense good right now? No. An inconsistent defense is not a good defense. Can it be? I expect it can if it becomes a cohesive unit and plays to its ability. The big question is can that defense find itself before the playoffs. I'll be cheering for it.

And to those harboring the misperception that the "attacking" group is either the optimists/homers or cynics/chicken littles, feel free to review the threads of the past week. There is a place for either, provided the assertions are supported by fact rather than pure conjecture. Any claim that "[fill in the blank] sucks" after a loss, or "[fill in the blank]" rocks after a win, based only one a one game performance and the outcome of a game, is not offering a factual proposition, with irrational declarations leading to less than cordial exhanges. It just seems over the past few year we have become a bipolar fan base, with absurdly high highs followed by bottom scraping lows. There is no middle ground. The Pats must be great or terrible, regardless of its record.

 

[mayoclinic]

not sure what you disagree with since your points 1 and 2 are exactly what I said. So in your mind that makes a good defense? How about if we agree to call them a mediocre defense?

Your opening statement was "this defense is not very good". I disagree.

I said we are a top 10 defense, and a good/very good but not elite/dominant defense. I would argue that there's a difference between that and "not very good".

Look at the 2003-2004 years. The 2003 defense was the best under BB, giving up a league low 14.9 PPG, leading the league in interceptions with 29, finishing 6th in YPG and sacks, and 4th in run defense. But it still gave up over 30 points 3 times in the regular season (a 31-0 loss to Buffalo in the opener, a 38-30 win over Tennessee, and a 38-34 win over Indy which we only won because we made a goal line stand and stopped the Colts 4 times from inside the 1 yard line). And we gave up 29 points to the Panthers in the Super Bowl, including 3 TDs in the 4th quarter when our elite defense couldn't stop the Panthers and gave up an 85 yard TD pass among other plays.

The 2004 defense finished second in PPG at 16.3, 6th in rushing YPG, 4th in forced fumbles, 7th in interceptions, and 3rd in sacks. But we gave up 34 points to the Steelers and and 29 points to the Dolphins in losses.

Despite giving up 38 points to the Saints and 35 to the Colts, the 2009 Pats defense through 11 games is ranked 7th in PPG at 18.4, 10th in passing YPG, 5th in interceptions and 3rd in forced fumbles. Not a great defense, but a respectable one. And that's with being in the bottom 5 in sacks, reflecting the lack of pressure we've been able to generate on opposing QBs.

This defense is good to very good right now. It should get better, as it is very young and inexperienced. It's not up to the 2003-2004 defenses, but it brings a lot of athleticism, speed and playmaking capability. It has really only looked bad once this season, in the NO game, when the defenders clearly got rattled and flustered.

I think they're better than mediocre. Significantly better.

 

[SeymourTrophies]

Saints have a decent shot of going 19-0. I have no problem getting lit up by that offense. The Colts and Vikings would get shredded by that team in that dome. Pats talent on defense is much better than last year's unit. However, the playcalling is too passive to be able to unveil the talent that exists.

The Colts would certainly have trouble (especially now that Freeney is a bit tender if he's on the field), but the Vikes D is fantastic. A lot of the time Brees got the ball out before anyone would have gotten there against us, but the Minn D wouldn't get run all over and would get to Brees if he holds onto the ball too long.

That's not to say Payton wouldn't make it interesting because he would, but I think Minn would beat NO. We ran well on NO before we committed entirely to the pass and didn't try to hide it. I can only imagine what the Vikes would do.

 

[Nikolai]

I'm glad I'm not the only one excited about and looking forward to where this defense is going. It's almost to the point now that I am enjoying seeing the defense take the field more than the offense. I really do believe that this could be a top-tier defense within a few years if we can hang on to some of the better talent.