Patriots have a Top 10 defense

[Jangles]

We could just as easily be 7-7, This is why our D is not as good as it seems
we shut out a terrible Tennessee team and gave up a combined 73 points in the biggest games we've played all year.

true but I think we're a lot closer to "almost" being 10-2 and "almost" being 7-7

One good long ball by Brady and we win 3 of those games.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

There are lies, damn lies, and then statistics. Anyone who saw that Saints game knows we don't have a top 10 defense.

But it's a good young unit with lots of potential. I think they're going to develop into a great group.

 

[Satchboogie3]

*violin playing*

Which one of those 10 defenses "you would take over the Pats" haven't given up a ton of points to 1 or 2 great offenses?
-Jets gave up 30+ points 3 times.
-Ravens gave up 33 to the Vikings, 27 to the Pats/Packers.
-Bengals gave up 30 points to the Vikings, 28 and 27 to the Texans and Chargers.
-Colts gave up 34 to Pats, 31 to Jags, 27 to Texans
-Cowboys gave up 33 and 31 to the Giants
-Broncos gave up 32 to Chargers, 30 to Ravens, 28,27,28 to Steelers, Redskins, Colts.
-Vikings gave up 31 to Ravens, 30 to Cards, 27,26,26 to Steelers, Packers, Panthers

And the list goes on. The 2003 Pats were the #1 defense in the league, yet they gave up 30+ points 3 times.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

without looking, besides manning and brees, name the QB's the pats faced this year......

the pats had 2 games against QB's with a rating of >90 (36.5ppg against)
the pats had 2 games against QB's with a rating of 80-90 (20.5ppg against)
the pats had 2 games against QB's with a rating of 70-80 (19.5ppg against)
the pats had 7 games against QB's with a rating of <70 (13.0ppg against)

just think what the pats defense would have looked like if they were playing better QB's.....got to skip rivers and rothlisberger this year

 

[Jangles]

without looking, besides manning and brees, name the QB's the pats faced this year......

the pats had 2 games against QB's with a rating of >90 (36.5ppg against)
the pats had 2 games against QB's with a rating of 80-90 (20.5ppg against)
the pats had 2 games against QB's with a rating of 70-80 (19.5ppg against)
the pats had 7 games against QB's with a rating of <70 (13.0ppg against)

just think what the pats defense would have looked like if they were playing better QB's.....got to skip rivers and rothlisberger this year

interesting way of showing the statistic

I like it

 

[mgteich]

If I understand this thread correctly, we are not a top 10 defense because we got beaten by the saints and the colts. Having been beaten by the top two offenses in the nfl means that 10 defenses are better than ours. Why?

Surely, there are nine defenses who would have shut down Brees and Manning. ????

 

[TriplecHamp]

If I understand this thread correctly, we are not a top 10 defense because we got beaten by the saints and the colts. Having been beaten by the top two offenses in the nfl means that 10 defenses are better than ours.

Surely thre are nine ten defenses who would ahve shut down Brees and Manning.

Stats are for losers, In playoff caliber games we haven't shown up. Now you can look at the Carolina game and the Tennessee game and the Atlanta game and even the Buffalo game and say yeah our D is top 10 but in a year with no dominating Defenses what does it really mean?

 

[mgteich]

If the question is whether the patriots have a dominating defense, the answer is "no".

Stats are for losers, In playoff caliber games we haven't shown up. Now you can look at the Carolina game and the Tennessee game and the Atlanta game and even the Buffalo game and say yeah our D is top 10 but in a year with no dominating Defenses what does it really mean?

 

[convertedpatsfan]

If I understand this thread correctly, we are not a top 10 defense because we got beaten by the saints and the colts. Having been beaten by the top two offenses in the nfl means that 10 defenses are better than ours.

Surely thre are nine ten defenses who would ahve shut down Brees and Manning.

Yeah, those two games really left a bad impression But a quick look at the entire season shows this defense has not fared well against decent offenses, let alone the elite ones.

The defense was adequate against Buffalo twice and the Jets twice, helped by Sanchez's gifts in the second game. They did a nice job against a Falcons team that won't make the playoffs, and they hammered two of the worst teams at the time in Tennessee and Tampa Bay. They also performed well against Carolina with Matt Moore (who?), and Chad Henne in one of his first starts for Miami.

Of course Henne would come back to torch us in the second match-up. And they were destroyed by the Saints, and collapsed against the Colts. The secondary was dissected by Kyle Orton (yes, THE Kyle Orton). Perhaps the best performance all year for the D was against Baltimore, a team that might make the playoffs, but we were really holding on at the end.

There's no shame in giving up 35 to Indy or 38 to New Orleans, though the way they gave it up was a bit sickening. But all of the great performances were against awful competition. Even against even a decent offense (like Miami or Denver), the defense has been quite vulnerable.

 

[mgteich]

I agree that a top 10 defense like ours is vulnerable. That's why it isn't one of the top 3 defenses which have fewer vulnerbilities.

Yeah, those two games really left a bad impression But a quick look at the entire season shows this defense has not fared well against decent offenses, let alone the elite ones.

The defense was adequate against Buffalo twice and the Jets twice, helped by Sanchez's gifts in the second game. They did a nice job against a Falcons team that won't make the playoffs, and they hammered two of the worst teams at the time in Tennessee and Tampa Bay. They also performed well against Carolina with Matt Moore (who?), and Chad Henne in one of his first starts for Miami.

Of course Henne would come back to torch us in the second match-up. And they were destroyed by the Saints, and collapsed against the Colts. The secondary was dissected by Kyle Orton (yes, THE Kyle Orton). Perhaps the best performance all year for the D was against Baltimore, a team that might make the playoffs, but we were really holding on at the end.

There's no shame in giving up 35 to Indy or 38 to New Orleans, though the way they gave it up was a bit sickening. But all of the great performances were against awful competition. Even against even a decent offense (like Miami or Denver), the defense has been quite vulnerable.

 

[Deus Irae]

I agree that a top 10 defense like ours is vulnerable. That's why it isn't one of the top 3 defenses which have fewer vulnerbilities.

This team's defensive ranking is a great example of why, as much as I love them, stats without context are often useless.

 

[mayoclinic]

I agree that a top 10 defense like ours is vulnerable. That's why it isn't one of the top 3 defenses which have fewer vulnerbilities.

There are no dominant defenses this year. You could make an argument that all of the top 10 defenses are just above-average, not exceptional. Washington has been playing solid defense, for example (7th in yardage, 10th in points) and has given up 45 points tonight to the Giants in just over 3 quarters of play. Green Bay had been playing as well as anyone, and got shredded by the Steelers for 37 points and over 500 total yards (over 500 passing yards alone). New Orleans' big play defense gave up over 430 yards to the Cowboys and produced 0 turnovers.

The 2008 Steelers defense averaged 13.9 PPG and 237 YPG, had 51 sacks . The 2008 Ravens defense averaged 15.2 PPG and 261 YPG. Both gave up about 80 YPG rushing on average (80.2 for Pittsburgh, 81.4 for Baltimore), ranking #2 and #3. They ranked #1 and #2 in pass defense, and allowed the lowest passer ratings (60.6 for the Ravens, 63.4 for Baltimore). Those were dominant defenses. No defense this year comes remotely close.

There isn't always a dominant defense. It's rare that there are 2 in one year. There was no dominant defense like those Steelers and Ravens defenses in 2007, or in 2004. Besides the Steelers (2001 and 2008) and Ravens (2000, 2006 and 2008), the only other teams that could come close to claiming to have dominant defenses this decade are the 2002 Tampa Bay team (12.2 PPG and 252.8 YPG), the 2003 Patriots (14.9 PPG and 291 YPG, with 29 interceptions and 29 forced fumbles) and the 2005 Bears (12.6 PPG and 281 YPG).

We're a top 10 defense in a sub-par defensive year. There just aren't any particularly good defenses this year. We can hold our own with Baltimore (lousy secondary), the Giants (lousy secondary, aging LBs, and problems with their pass rush), Pittsburgh (injuries), Indy, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Green Bay, San Diego, San Francisco and Minnesota. Cincinnati and the Jets seem to be better than we are, and perhaps Dallas right now. But no one is dominant.

We're a top 10 defense, and we're pretty average. This year, those two things are pretty much equivalent.

 

[tajapandu]

I think both sides have a tendency to exaggerate their point, as is the case in much of life it is a polarizing debate. Either its terrible or a top 10 defense, I believe the truth lies somewhere in the middle and they are an average defense, in the 14-16 area.

But because you asked for the reasoning behind those who believe the defense is bad (or not as good as you believe it is), I will present what I believe is their case:

The teams we have played and their Total Offense ranking:

Bills - 29th
Jets - 20th
Falcons - 16th
Ravens - 15th
Broncos - 17th
Titans - 13th
Bucs - 27th
Fins - 19th
Colts - 4th
Jets - 20th
Saints - 1st
Fins - 19th

Avg - 16.667

So besides the Saints and Colts games (in which the defense gave up 34 and 35 respectively) the defense has gone against offenses ranked 15th or lower every week except for the Titans, and the Titans ranking is a bit deceiving considering we played them pre-Vince Young when their total offense was much lower. There is certainly a case to be made that they have at least taken care of business versus the opponents they were given, but it is tough to say they are as good as those PPG statistics indicate. For what its worth, Football Outsiders and their opponent adjusted stats put the Pats as the 15th best defense.

I also believe another reason is the timing of the defense. It seems like the bigger the moment the worse the defense gets. This has a lasting impact on people as they are far more likely to remember the 4th quarter collapse vs the Colts than to think back to the shut-out against the Titans, even though statistically both count evenly as 1 game. Their inability to get it done when it matters is concerning. Certainly the offense hasn't done their job to close out games on that side of the ball, but the defense hasn't stepped up to the added responsibility and closed out games either. From the Ravens drive that was luckily saved due to a drop by Mason, to the OT drive by the Broncos, to the entire 4th quarter against the Colts, to the entire Saints game, to the game-winning drive by the Fins. Holding the Titans and Bucs to a combined 7 points is great and certainly a nice stat-booster, but what is the point if you can't stop teams when we need a game-winning stop or in high-pressure games (Saints)?

Hopefully this helps you understand where they are coming from.

wow, helluva post.

 

[Satchboogie3]

There are no dominant defenses this year. You could make an argument that all of the top 10 defenses are just above-average, not exceptional. Washington has been playing solid defense, for example (7th in yardage, 10th in points) and has given up 45 points tonight to the Giants in just over 3 quarters of play. Green Bay had been playing as well as anyone, and got shredded by the Steelers for 37 points and over 500 total yards (over 500 passing yards alone). New Orleans' big play defense gave up over 430 yards to the Cowboys and produced 0 turnovers.

The 2008 Steelers defense averaged 13.9 PPG and 237 YPG, had 51 sacks . The 2008 Ravens defense averaged 15.2 PPG and 261 YPG. Both gave up about 80 YPG rushing on average (80.2 for Pittsburgh, 81.4 for Baltimore), ranking #2 and #3. They ranked #1 and #2 in pass defense, and allowed the lowest passer ratings (60.6 for the Ravens, 63.4 for Baltimore). Those were dominant defenses. No defense this year comes remotely close.

There isn't always a dominant defense. It's rare that there are 2 in one year. There was no dominant defense like those Steelers and Ravens defenses in 2007, or in 2004. Besides the Steelers (2001 and 2008) and Ravens (2000, 2006 and 2008), the only other teams that could come close to claiming to have dominant defenses this decade are the 2002 Tampa Bay team (12.2 PPG and 252.8 YPG), the 2003 Patriots (14.9 PPG and 291 YPG, with 29 interceptions and 29 forced fumbles) and the 2005 Bears (12.6 PPG and 281 YPG).

We're a top 10 defense in a sub-par defensive year. There just aren't any particularly good defenses this year. We can hold our own with Baltimore (lousy secondary), the Giants (lousy secondary, aging LBs, and problems with their pass rush), Pittsburgh (injuries), Indy, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Green Bay, San Diego, San Francisco and Minnesota. Cincinnati and the Jets seem to be better than we are, and perhaps Dallas right now. But no one is dominant.

We're a top 10 defense, and we're pretty average. This year, those two things are pretty much equivalent.

The 2008 Steelers gave up 30 to Ten and the 2008 Ravens gave up 30+ to Indy and NYG. Heck, even the '85 Bears had a couple of bad games defensively.

Now I'm not suggesting that the Patriots have a dominant defense this year, but I think it's unfair to blast them just because of a couple bad games against 2 top offenses.

 

[mayoclinic]

The 2008 Steelers gave up 30 to Ten and the 2008 Ravens gave up 30+ to Indy and NYG. Heck, even the '85 Bears had a couple of bad games defensively.

Now I'm not suggesting that the Patriots have a dominant defense this year, but I think it's unfair to blast them just because of a couple bad games against 2 top offenses.

Very good point. As you say, even a dominant defense has trouble avoiding at least one 30 point game.

The 2008 Ravens were a fabulous defense, and Indy and the Giants both embarrassed them. The Giants ran for over 200 yards against a defense that averaged 81, and Manning and the Colts put up 31 in 3 quarters against them.

The great Parcells/Belichick Giants SB team of 1986 went 14-2 and averaged 14.5 PPG, but gave up 31 to the Cowboys. The 1990 SB team went 13-3 and averaged 13.2 PPG but gave up 31 to the Eagles. Even the 2000 SB champion Ravens, who went 12-4 and set a modern day record for fewest points allowed in a season (165, or 10.3 PPG), still gave up 36 to Jacksonville.

The Pats aren't a dominant defense by any stretch. They're not a top 5 defense. But they are legitimately one of the better defenses in the NFL this season, and in a season of relatively defensive parity, they can hold their own with almost anyone.

If our offense had performed the way people expected going into the season, no one would be saying a peep about our defense right now, and we would be 12-2 or better and looking at one of the top 2 seeds in the AFC.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

There are no dominant defenses this year. You could make an argument that all of the top 10 defenses are just above-average, not exceptional. Washington has been playing solid defense, for example (7th in yardage, 10th in points) and has given up 45 points tonight to the Giants in just over 3 quarters of play. Green Bay had been playing as well as anyone, and got shredded by the Steelers for 37 points and over 500 total yards (over 500 passing yards alone). New Orleans' big play defense gave up over 430 yards to the Cowboys and produced 0 turnovers.

The 2008 Steelers defense averaged 13.9 PPG and 237 YPG, had 51 sacks . The 2008 Ravens defense averaged 15.2 PPG and 261 YPG. Both gave up about 80 YPG rushing on average (80.2 for Pittsburgh, 81.4 for Baltimore), ranking #2 and #3. They ranked #1 and #2 in pass defense, and allowed the lowest passer ratings (60.6 for the Ravens, 63.4 for Baltimore). Those were dominant defenses. No defense this year comes remotely close.

There isn't always a dominant defense. It's rare that there are 2 in one year. There was no dominant defense like those Steelers and Ravens defenses in 2007, or in 2004. Besides the Steelers (2001 and 2008) and Ravens (2000, 2006 and 2008), the only other teams that could come close to claiming to have dominant defenses this decade are the 2002 Tampa Bay team (12.2 PPG and 252.8 YPG), the 2003 Patriots (14.9 PPG and 291 YPG, with 29 interceptions and 29 forced fumbles) and the 2005 Bears (12.6 PPG and 281 YPG).

We're a top 10 defense in a sub-par defensive year. There just aren't any particularly good defenses this year. We can hold our own with Baltimore (lousy secondary), the Giants (lousy secondary, aging LBs, and problems with their pass rush), Pittsburgh (injuries), Indy, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Green Bay, San Diego, San Francisco and Minnesota. Cincinnati and the Jets seem to be better than we are, and perhaps Dallas right now. But no one is dominant.

We're a top 10 defense, and we're pretty average. This year, those two things are pretty much equivalent.

Good post. This is why I agree that yeah maybe we're not the THIRD best defense, but comparatively we do have a solid defense. Obviously the poor performances against Saints/Indy are going to stick out to some people, but overall you can't tell me that this year you have fully witnessed more NFL defenses that are superior to us than are worse. It's like people see the Browns sack Roethlisberger 7 times one night and just assume based off that one game they have a better defense. No, most defenses will look brilliant some weeks and flat out porous another week... stats can be misleading but so can your eyes. Check around the league I doubt you'll find a defense that hasn't been victimized by at least one or two great offenses.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

The 2008 Steelers gave up 30 to Ten and the 2008 Ravens gave up 30+ to Indy and NYG. Heck, even the '85 Bears had a couple of bad games defensively.

Now I'm not suggesting that the Patriots have a dominant defense this year, but I think it's unfair to blast them just because of a couple bad games against 2 top offenses.

How about our best defense of the BB era in 2003 defense giving up 30+ multiple times in the regular season... and getting lit up by Jake Delhomme in the Super Bowl. I don't think too many people are going to complain about that defense.

And no, I'm not comparing this defense to 2003. Just saying that good teams can tag any great defense on the scoreboard on any given day.

 

[condon84]

I think both sides have a tendency to exaggerate their point, as is the case in much of life it is a polarizing debate. Either its terrible or a top 10 defense, I believe the truth lies somewhere in the middle and they are an average defense, in the 14-16 area.

But because you asked for the reasoning behind those who believe the defense is bad (or not as good as you believe it is), I will present what I believe is their case:

The teams we have played and their Total Offense ranking:

Bills - 29th
Jets - 20th
Falcons - 16th
Ravens - 15th
Broncos - 17th
Titans - 13th
Bucs - 27th
Fins - 19th
Colts - 4th
Jets - 20th
Saints - 1st
Fins - 19th

Avg - 16.667

So besides the Saints and Colts games (in which the defense gave up 34 and 35 respectively) the defense has gone against offenses ranked 15th or lower every week except for the Titans, and the Titans ranking is a bit deceiving considering we played them pre-Vince Young when their total offense was much lower. There is certainly a case to be made that they have at least taken care of business versus the opponents they were given, but it is tough to say they are as good as those PPG statistics indicate. For what its worth, Football Outsiders and their opponent adjusted stats put the Pats as the 15th best defense.

I also believe another reason is the timing of the defense. It seems like the bigger the moment the worse the defense gets. This has a lasting impact on people as they are far more likely to remember the 4th quarter collapse vs the Colts than to think back to the shut-out against the Titans, even though statistically both count evenly as 1 game. Their inability to get it done when it matters is concerning. Certainly the offense hasn't done their job to close out games on that side of the ball, but the defense hasn't stepped up to the added responsibility and closed out games either. From the Ravens drive that was luckily saved due to a drop by Mason, to the OT drive by the Broncos, to the entire 4th quarter against the Colts, to the entire Saints game, to the game-winning drive by the Fins. Holding the Titans and Bucs to a combined 7 points is great and certainly a nice stat-booster, but what is the point if you can't stop teams when we need a game-winning stop or in high-pressure games (Saints)?

Hopefully this helps you understand where they are coming from.

This has gotta be one of the best and most objective post I've read here in a long time.

 

[dhamz]

The 2003 Pats were the #1 defense in the league, yet they gave up 30+ points 3 times.

That defense also made the game winning plays in 2 of those 3 games - a goaline stand and a Ty Law pick 6. The other game was the opener against Buffalo. If this defense was making those type of game winning plays against Indy or Miami no one would be complaining about it.

 

[mgteich]

I agree with your comments.

With regard to the offense, it has been said that without our top two games, we are an average offense.

With regard to our defensem without our worst two performances, we ar a top 5 defense.

Good post. This is why I agree that yeah maybe we're not the THIRD best defense, but comparatively we do have a solid defense. Obviously the poor performances against Saints/Indy are going to stick out to some people, but overall you can't tell me that this year you have fully witnessed more NFL defenses that are superior to us than are worse. It's like people see the Browns sack Roethlisberger 7 times one night and just assume based off that one game they have a better defense. No, most defenses will look brilliant some weeks and flat out porous another week... stats can be misleading but so can your eyes. Check around the league I doubt you'll find a defense that hasn't been victimized by at least one or two great offenses.