Defense

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

To be clear, your analysis shows that Mayo is already better than At and Seau inside and the O'neal roplacing Samuel is no big deal.

Don't you get it mgteich?

The defense will be so much better than last year with all those rookies mixing in that we will not give up barely a point this season,last years defense holds nothing to this year and that secondary is overflowing and deep with pro bowl players

Look at that solid secondary with the all-pro Ellis Hobbs directing out there accompanied by the unproven rookie Wheately and of course O'Neal who is a castoff starter on one of the worst rated defenses in the NFL last year,How can you go wrong?

Come on now there is NOTHING to indicate this defense won't rival those Bears D of the 80s mgteich - How dare you think otherwise on this great Pats forum? - If you do think the other way then you are negative and are also wrong in every way.

In fact the way I take it from many fans is that all of our rookies will be in the pro bowl by next season if not this year - best draft ever and incredible as it is its amazing considering that they haven't even played a regular season down yet! - How about that!.

 

[willdeespats]

Steve is an excellent pulling Guard.

One of the best. I bet he would also make an ecellent blocking TE.

 

[willdeespats]

Andy, as I recall BB had Mayo and AD both in at ILB at the same time in TC. To me, with their speed, this seems like a great combination that could be used all 3 downs. Also, the 4/3 with Green in and Tedy out seems more formidible than the 3/4 with Tedy in. The key is best pass rush coupled with more LB speed. Any thoughts on this?

 

[BPF]

I am going to be the first one to say this, and anyone who would like to can bookmark this and remind me of it whenever you want.
THE DEFENSE WILL BE BETTER THAN IT WAS LAST YEAR.
I also expect that we will break the team record for fewest points allowed, which we have hovered close to breaking in many of BBs years.

We have gotten faster, and younger. We have added Mayo, Wheatley, Sanders, ONeal, Wilhite, Crable.
What have we subracted?
Seau. In his prime thats a loss, at this stage of his career, it is not.
Samuel. OK, we lost a starter.
Colvin. Not really a loss since we didn't have him at the end, and were better with Thomas outside.
Gay. I do not believe that a player could make our roster who would perform worse than Randal Gay did in the SB.

I see improvement, I see more speed, I see a healthy Seymour, a better group of LBs including depth, I see Meriwhether upgrading speed and play at safety with a much larger role, and I see 2 strong rookies, PLUS 2 experienced vets to fill the role of Asante Samuel in playing TEAM DEFENSE.
If we think losing just one player can have the impact on this defense that it may have on another, then we have totally missed the point that BB builds an entire system around playing team defense, with less impact, good or bad, possible from any one player.

I agree, I think most people are ignoring our draft when grading this team, especially on D. I believe that when the dust settles this will considered one of BB/Pioli's best draft classes. Reminds me of the 1986 49ers draft, where they picked CB's McKyer and Griffin, DE's Larry Roberts and Charles Haley, DT Kevin ***an, WR John Taylor and FB Tom Rathman, most people at that time called that 49ers class not very good but they were proven wrong. I see similar things for this current Patriots draft.

49ers draft class video clip:
http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80222fc0

 

[Patriotis]

I agree, I think most people are ignoring our draft when grading this team, especially on D. I believe that when the dust settles this will considered one of BB/Pioli's best draft classes. Reminds me of the 1986 49ers draft, where they picked CB's McKyer and Griffin, DE's Larry Roberts and Charles Haley, DT Kevin ***an, WR John Taylor and FB Tom Rathman, most people at that time called that 49ers class not very good but they were proven wrong. I see similar things for this current Patriots draft.

49ers draft class video clip:
http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80222fc0

I like the part in the video where Polian says that Bill Walsh was the best at drafting "the profile of his players" and the fact that the 49ers did not have any one glaring need-both kind of like the Patriots heading into this past draft.

 

[Ring 6]

Don't you get it mgteich?

The defense will be so much better than last year with all those rookies mixing in that we will not give up barely a point this season,last years defense holds nothing to this year and that secondary is overflowing and deep with pro bowl players

Look at that solid secondary with the all-pro Ellis Hobbs directing out there accompanied by the unproven rookie Wheately and of course O'Neal who is a castoff starter on one of the worst rated defenses in the NFL last year,How can you go wrong?

Come on now there is NOTHING to indicate this defense won't rival those Bears D of the 80s mgteich - How dare you think otherwise on this great Pats forum? - If you do think the other way then you are negative and are also wrong in every way.

In fact the way I take it from many fans is that all of our rookies will be in the pro bowl by next season if not this year - best draft ever and incredible as it is its amazing considering that they haven't even played a regular season down yet! - How about that!.

You should really try to grow up.

 

[Patslifer]

You should really try to grow up.

Why? The post may be laced in sarcasm, but it is 100 percent true. Saying the d will be better this year is a guess. A lot of guys are unproven, and we won't know what we really have until about game three of the season.

 

[Ring 6]

To be clear, your analysis shows that Mayo is already better than At and Seau inside and the O'neal roplacing Samuel is no big deal.

Well you know thats not what I mean.
And I did try to point out that I am not comparing player to player but overall unit to overall unit.

I consider Thomas at OLB better than Colvin and better than Thomas at ILB.
I consider Thomas at OLB and Mayo at ILB better than Colvin at OLB and Thomas at ILB.
I consider Mayo today better than Seau as he was last year at 39 years old, and actually dont think its even close.

I consider the improvement I expect in sub packages and 2 minute D to be more critical than the diminsihed play at the starting cornerback position.
I do not think that Asante Samuel did amazing things outside of the team defense that he played, and think that there is not a significant dropoff to a capable corner playing the system.
I think there is a tremendous room for improvement in sub and 2 minute D, and that we did not have a player grouping that was capable of excelling in that situation, but think that we now do. For example, rewatch the SB and tell me that Randall Gay has any chance whatsoever of staying with any wr in the NFL on a 3rd and 6 when the WR changes direction, and Gay has him man on man. You wouldnt ask Matt Light to play that position, and while Gay is a corner, he is so much less quick and agile than he needs to be for that role, he might as well be Light. (and the safety and LB positions werent quick enough either overall) I believe that this year we will be putting players on the field in those situaitons that are PHYSICALLY CAPABLE OF DOING THAT JOB, and last year we put players that were at best marginally capable, and physically limited.
That area of imporvement, assuming it happens, dwarves and deterioration I can envision.

I recognize that common perception is a starting corner is more important than the guys who come in for sub packages, but it is my strong opinion that for this team, the way it is currently put together, being better in sub and 2 minute D is more important than the play of one of the starting corners.
Perhaps that will prove to be wrong, but I can guarantee one thing:
We had a LOT more room for error in Asante Samuels play to GET TO the AFCC in 06 and the SB in 07, than we had for poor play in 2 minute or pass only D that cost us both of those games. Or in other words, there are an awful lot of corners we could have had in Samuels place and still been in position to win both of those games, and would have won both of those games if we werent horrendous at stopping the other team when they were in pass only situations.

 

[Ring 6]

Why? The post may be laced in sarcasm, but it is 100 percent true. Saying the d will be better this year is a guess. A lot of guys are unproven, and we won't know what we really have until about game three of the season.

The post is 100% true? The post totally exaggerates and misrepresents the other side of the discussion, the one he disagrees with.

If he said what you said he has a point. If he insists on overexxagerating and misrepresenting what other people say, he is being immature. Simple as that.

 

[mgteich]

You have set up a straw man. No one has said that the 2 minute defense wans't critical. It is you who hasn't demonstrated that Mayo will make it better. Replacing Samuel with O'Neal won't make it better.

Obviously, I have exagerrated your position some, but you are indeed strongly counting on Mayo, O'Neal and Wheatley. You are also counting on 4 linebackers staying healthy.

Well you know thats not what I mean.
And I did try to point out that I am not comparing player to player but overall unit to overall unit.

I consider Thomas at OLB better than Colvin and better than Thomas at ILB.
I consider Thomas at OLB and Mayo at ILB better than Colvin at OLB and Thomas at ILB.
I consider Mayo today better than Seau as he was last year at 39 years old, and actually dont think its even close.

I consider the improvement I expect in sub packages and 2 minute D to be more critical than the diminsihed play at the starting cornerback position.
I do not think that Asante Samuel did amazing things outside of the team defense that he played, and think that there is not a significant dropoff to a capable corner playing the system.
I think there is a tremendous room for improvement in sub and 2 minute D, and that we did not have a player grouping that was capable of excelling in that situation, but think that we now do. For example, rewatch the SB and tell me that Randall Gay has any chance whatsoever of staying with any wr in the NFL on a 3rd and 6 when the WR changes direction, and Gay has him man on man. You wouldnt ask Matt Light to play that position, and while Gay is a corner, he is so much less quick and agile than he needs to be for that role, he might as well be Light. (and the safety and LB positions werent quick enough either overall) I believe that this year we will be putting players on the field in those situaitons that are PHYSICALLY CAPABLE OF DOING THAT JOB, and last year we put players that were at best marginally capable, and physically limited.
That area of imporvement, assuming it happens, dwarves and deterioration I can envision.

I recognize that common perception is a starting corner is more important than the guys who come in for sub packages, but it is my strong opinion that for this team, the way it is currently put together, being better in sub and 2 minute D is more important than the play of one of the starting corners.
Perhaps that will prove to be wrong, but I can guarantee one thing:
We had a LOT more room for error in Asante Samuels play to GET TO the AFCC in 06 and the SB in 07, than we had for poor play in 2 minute or pass only D that cost us both of those games. Or in other words, there are an awful lot of corners we could have had in Samuels place and still been in position to win both of those games, and would have won both of those games if we werent horrendous at stopping the other team when they were in pass only situations.

 

[stcjones]

I'll go on record against this. What BBs defense predicates itself on is the "bend but dont break" style with playmakers making big plays(TURNOVERS!). Samuel is gone, and while we have replaced his body and we do have better team speed individual plays made by rookies will add up. We have fewer playmakers on D. Alot of our D last year was predicated by the offense getting a lead and making the opponent one dimensional. Closer games will lend a more balanced opponent and I think more yards and points. And seeing that the most important drive the D will face(again) is THE LAST ONE....getting the right balance on the field that leaves gas in the tank for that drive is what counts, not any type of totally dominant D. I dont think the 04 team will be topped anytime soon.

I agree with you in regards to our LB corps and secondary....the front defensive line looks strong and that is where it has to start....but anytime you are starting rooks and vets in the linebacker corps, there are going to be some problems.......I also am expecting our secondary to be a weakness and get torched often......Hope I am completely wrong on all counts and Andy is right

 

[stcjones]

Well you did not specify in your post that you did not like Gay's play all year long,you singled him out as a bad performance in the SB,I don't recall you saying Gay sucked in any post during last season when the team was winning 18 straight,only when they lose - typical over excessive NE ball washing - Link me to a post of yours that complained about Gay when the team was undefeated and only then will I apologize for being incorrect about this.

And you are WRONG about the OL which I agree was good enough all year long but it was boys out there against men when it came to the line in the SB -

Brady if you don't remember and if I am not mistaken was sacked 7 times in the biggest game of the year- Yeah,The OL played well until it REALLY counted so lets not give excuses for them like BAD PLAYS it was bad most of the game,Lets face it,in the biggest game of the year the OL were MANHANDLED and Brady as a result was on his back more times in that one night than my X-Wife ever was (and both my X and Tom got paid for it anyway)

The OL was the reason the game was lost not Gay,Mankins was Justin Tuck's playtoy in that game,I suggest you watch the game again if you can

- If Brady had more time in that pocket or if the OL had been able to open up running lanes for Maroney and Faulk and CO. then there would have been a different ending without a doubt,no matter what Gay was doing out there,remember the defense only gave up 17 points so it was not like Gay was giving up TDs all night

Whether you admit it or not, most of the members in here think a guy is pretty good until he is cut or traded- Then he becomes a guy that really was a waste and thats o.k. to say now because he is no longer on the team

Well you are certainly right about Mankins....He was Tuck's prison beeyatch the whole game.......

 

[BionicPatriot]

Why? The post may be laced in sarcasm, but it is 100 percent true. Saying the d will be better this year is a guess. A lot of guys are unproven, and we won't know what we really have until about game three of the season.

100 percent true? Wrong. Maybe if people were actually making those crazy claims, but they're not. No one is saying this secodnary is elite. We saw what a HEALTHY Hobbs is capable of doing in 06, solid play. Everyone is anticipating this front 7 to be better, that's at least what I've taken as the majority thought here. Just because no one is worried about that useless preseason nonsense doesn't make them a homer.

When the Pats are getting lit up when it counts a number of games into the season, than yes, anyone defending them is blind. Until then the pesimism here is so uncalled for.

 

[Ring 6]

You have set up a straw man. No one has said that the 2 minute defense wans't critical. It is you who hasn't demonstrated that Mayo will make it better. Replacing Samuel with O'Neal won't make it better.

Obviously, I have exagerrated your position some, but you are indeed strongly counting on Mayo, O'Neal and Wheatley. You are also counting on 4 linebackers staying healthy.

I wasnt arguing, I was stating my position.
Saying that I believe Mayo is better than Seau and Thomas/Mayo (OLB/ILB) is better than Colvin/Thomas or Thomas/Seau is clearly stating that I believe Mayo makes it better.

Again, I am counting on SANDERS, O'Neal or Wheatley being COMPETANT. As I have said I think competance at that position is enough considering all of the other factors. I don't know if expecting the 3 corners BB has chosen to potentially fill that role being COMPETANT is 'strongly counting on'.
I can only assess the players from the assumption of reasonable health. I think that we are as deep as ever at the backup LB position. The fact that one of the players isnt a 39 year old who was a pro-bowler in his prime doesn't concern me at all.

 

[spacecrime]

Let's go back to what Jeff said. Though he made several good points, he got hammered on this board. Let me go to his defense.

We lost Seau, Colvin, Samuel and Gay. What did they put up last year?

INT 13
Forced fumbles 4
Sacks 7.5
TDs 2

So the Pats forced 31 turnovers last year, and 17 of them are gone.

Of all the dumb things people post, saying we "lost" this many sacks or this many INTs is the absolute dumbest.

If you add up all the turnovers we "lost" by players leaving over the years, it would surely run into the hundreds per game. We never did recover from losing Ray Clayborne and Mike Haynes.

We will get out share of turnovers this year, as we do most years.

 

[spacecrime]

anytime you are starting rooks and vets in the linebacker corps, there are going to be some problems.......

Agreed. No rooks or vets as linebackers.

What do you call problems? If the LBs give up big plays, that is not a necessarily a problem. If you expect them to win every matchup every play every game, you are wildly irrational.

The offensive teams in the NFL earn their paychecks.

The key to winning in the NFL is to win more matchups than the other team, that's all.

 

[BPF]

Brady if you don't remember and if I am not mistaken was sacked 7 times in the biggest game of the year- Yeah,The OL played well until it REALLY counted so lets not give excuses for them like BAD PLAYS it was bad most of the game,Lets face it,in the biggest game of the year the OL were MANHANDLED and Brady as a result was on his back more times in that one night than my X-Wife ever was (and both my X and Tom got paid for it anyway)

The OL was the reason the game was lost not Gay,Mankins was Justin Tuck's playtoy in that game,I suggest you watch the game again if you can

- If Brady had more time in that pocket or if the OL had been able to open up running lanes for Maroney and Faulk and CO. then there would have been a different ending without a doubt,no matter what Gay was doing out there,remember the defense only gave up 17 points so it was not like Gay was giving up TDs all night

Whether you admit it or not, most of the members in here think a guy is pretty good until he is cut or traded- Then he becomes a guy that really was a waste and thats o.k. to say now because he is no longer on the team

You're correct in stating that Brady faced a lot of pressure in the SB, that goes without saying we all saw the game, but you should at least have some facts straight if you're going to make an argument. Brady was sacked 5 times, not 7 (2x by Tuck, 1 each from Mitchell, Strahan and Alford. Alford's came on the last drive when the Pats were in desperation mode chucking deep balls to Moss).

Now because it was the biggest game of the year and all the hype, whatever the case may be some facts have gotten distorted over time. It's funny how perceptions change because before the SB people were talking about how our O-line demoralized the Jaguars and Chargers D-lines and physically beat them up, now we have a bunch of stiffs playing there. Most NFL teams don't have 3 great pass rushers like the Giants did in XLII in Strahan, Umenyiora and Tuck and we played right into their hands by insisting on throwing deep patterns and by obviously not committing to running the football with only 16 rushing attempts. The Giants offense also played a part in this with ball control, especially in the 1st Qtr with a long drive of almost 10 mins to start the game and set the tone (9:59 was the longest drive in SB history). The key to their success on D was our inability to pick up their blitzes, this is where Brady's injury which contributed to his lack of mobility showed up. Yes, there was fault there by the O-line as well but it's tough to be perfect when facing extra rushers and they got no help from Kyle Brady who had a horrible performance that day. But you win as a team and lose as a team, so the O-line could have been better, the TE could have been better, Brady could have been more mobile and McDaniels could have adjusted his game plan, none of those things happened and thus the loss. So no I do not place blame squarely on the O-line for the SB XLII defeat.

It's a big what if game which made the loss even more devastating because the Pats were a better team. If we were able to pick up their blitzes we could have had a field day vs that secondary they put out there that day. We did a much better job in the Meadowlands and without an effective blitz, our line contained the Giants' fearsome D-line with those same players in Strahan, Umenyiora and Tuck long enough for our WR's to get open. That's why in that game they only sacked Brady once and he threw for 356 yards and 2 TD's. Again the O-line was not perfect in that game either but Brady's mobility helped and we scored a lot more than in the SB.

 

[PATRIOT64]

You're correct in stating that Brady faced a lot of pressure in the SB, that goes without saying we all saw the game, but you should at least have some facts straight if you're going to make an argument. Brady was sacked 5 times, not 7 (2x by Tuck, 1 each from Mitchell, Strahan and Alford. Alford's came on the last drive when the Pats were in desperation mode chucking deep balls to Moss).

Now because it was the biggest game of the year and all the hype, whatever the case may be some facts have gotten distorted over time. It's funny how perceptions change because before the SB people were talking about how our O-line demoralized the Jaguars and Chargers D-lines and physically beat them up, now we have a bunch of stiffs playing there. Most NFL teams don't have 3 great pass rushers like the Giants did in XLII in Strahan, Umenyiora and Tuck and we played right into their hands by insisting on throwing deep patterns and by obviously not committing to running the football with only 16 rushing attempts. The Giants offense also played a part in this with ball control, especially in the 1st Qtr with a long drive of almost 10 mins to start the game and set the tone (9:59 was the longest drive in SB history). The key to their success on D was our inability to pick up their blitzes, this is where Brady's injury which contributed to his lack of mobility showed up. Yes, there was fault there by the O-line as well but it's tough to be perfect when facing extra rushers and they got no help from Kyle Brady who had a horrible performance that day. But you win as a team and lose as a team, so the O-line could have been better, the TE could have been better, Brady could have been more mobile and McDaniels could have adjusted his game plan, none of those things happened and thus the loss. So no I do not place blame squarely on the O-line for the SB XLII defeat.

It's a big what if game which made the loss even more devastating because the Pats were a better team. If we were able to pick up their blitzes we could have had a field day vs that secondary they put out there that day. We did a much better job in the Meadowlands and without an effective blitz, our line contained the Giants' fearsome D-line with those same players in Strahan, Umenyiora and Tuck long enough for our WR's to get open. That's why in that game they only sacked Brady once and he threw for 356 yards and 2 TD's. Again the O-line was not perfect in that game either but Brady's mobility helped and we scored a lot more than in the SB.

I can't agree with the statement that the team should have ran more - The OL was totally dominated practically from the get go and there were NO holes for any running back to run to,especially our dancing in the backfield star Laurence Maroney so to think more rushing attempts would have helped is VERY unlikely

If the OL could not handle the pass rush much of that night they sure as hell could not open holes for the rushing attack especailly since some of those Giant LBs/DEs/DTs were in the backfield in milliseconds after the ball was snapped

Whether it was 16 carries or 160 carries - Maroney was going Nowhere against that front line that night and he will continue to go nowhere in situations like that till the dancing stops and also the OL learns how to provide gaps for him to run

 

[Ring 6]

I can't agree with the statement that the team should have ran more - The OL was totally dominated practically from the get go and there were NO holes for any running back to run to,especially our dancing in the backfield star Laurence Maroney so to think more rushing attempts would have helped is VERY unlikely

If the OL could not handle the pass rush much of that night they sure as hell could not open holes for the rushing attack especailly since some of those Giant LBs/DEs/DTs were in the backfield in milliseconds after the ball was snapped

Whether it was 16 carries or 160 carries - Maroney was going Nowhere against that front line that night and he will continue to go nowhere in situations like that till the dancing stops and also the OL learns how to provide gaps for him to run

Its too hard to draw that conclusion.
The Giants on many plays sold out to rush the QB. Its much easier to run block vs a guy selling out to rush the QB.
Also, even if the running game wasnt terribly effective, it would have forced the Giants to slow down the pass rush, and kept the rush off Brady.
The sacks werent really the issue, IMO, the issue was all of the times (easily double digits( that Brady was hit in the throwing motion, sending the pass off target. We had a lot of open receivers. There were 400 pasing yards out there if Brady had the split second extra to complete the throw before being hit instead of being in the motion when getting hit.
My watching the game again told me that we were about a half second of protection maybe 10 or 12 times from scoring 35 points in that game. I have to believe that running more to slow the rush could have helped that

 

[PATRIOT64]

This thread reeks

How is anyone including the OP going to go out and say a rookie will play better than anyone in that position did last year without admitting its pure guess,speculating and blind homerism

What have you seen besides the rooks playing sparingly and against many scrubs from the preseason opponents that are long gone cut and not even in the league anymore?

How is Seau's play last year going to be worse than Mayo's this year - Have we seen any regular season games yet to say its not even close?

Did I sleep and its early october already? - Seau's performance in 2007 will be far surpassed by Jarod based on the fact that Mayo looked decently good in preseason? - How do you know this? - and if you do know this for sure and can see that far away weeks from now then let me know what the lottery numbers are for tomorrow nights drawing,I can use a few million

This thread would have been more realistic if it was done after a few games and we saw the rookies play a bit otherwise its just guessing,hoping for the best and nothing but speculation from a fan - thats the fact and admit it- WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE ROOKIES CONTRIBUTIONS RIGHT NOW - some or all rookies all might suck,OR some of them or even all of them might play awesome this year and be future starters for a long time - who knows?.

I do know one thing - Before Chad Jackson even stepped on the field for the first time - I would say 95% in here thought he would be great immediately and possibly the second coming of Jerry Rice - Shows how much we know about rookies or first timers eh?

And to me a guy like Seau who played as hard as he could at 39 is disrespected when you already put a rookies performance ahead of his contributions during a season in which he helped the team to 18-0 -
I think all of us wished we had 10% of the strength,muscular fit and fierceness at 39 years old like Junior does
Out of sight,Out of mind I guess