The official "our defense is horrible" thread

[mgcolby]

And no, I didn't hack your "images" folder on your computer, and then paint over your science fair entry.

Of course I'm aware that there have only been three games played. That's why I took the stats through Week 3 and posted them. Through Week 3, this is statistically one of the worst defenses in the NFL in pretty much every single solitary category.

Frankly, as a Pats fan, I'm not really sure how you can defend this defense having seen what a good Belichick defense actually looks like in the early to late 2000's.



That's cool. That changes the fact that our defense clearly has issues how again?



Good defenses can play keep away from the deep pass and still shut their opponents down in the short game. But tell me, pfip, where you rank our defense statistically?



Yeah, it's a wonderful thing. That's where I got the current stats on our defense.



The Saints had a good turnover ratio in 2009 that fueled their defense. I've said time and time again that their defense is our defense's ceiling for this season. The Patriots, thus far, haven't been nearly as successful as the Saints were at forcing turnovers.



No, I understood your weak attempt at a point/red herring just fine. Personally, it sounds to me like you're just trying to make excuses for the defense. As a whole, you haven't offered one convincing argument as to why this defense is anything more than a below average defense.



I understand that defenses have been more and more neutered since Bill Polian changed the rules. However, that doesn't excuse the fact that we just allowed the following to the worst offense in the NFL...

1. 381 yards of total offense.
2. Two passing TD's to the worst offense's back-up quarterback.
3. 19 first downs.
4. Almost 30 minutes TOP.

Should I go into what the Jets did to us last week, or would that be rubbing sand in an old wound? Let me guess, you consider that a stout defensive performance as well? :ugh:



The red zone defense was the only thing from yesterday that looked good for our defense. However, in order to look at that, you would also have to take into account the 37 yard TD pass that Fitzgerald threw as well. The turnovers weren't exactly forced, but I do commend our DB's for being able to catch a ball.

But keep it coming, pfip. If you'll excuse me, I'll hold our defense to higher standards while also expecting them to improve. I know Belichick is doing the same. You can continue being happy with where the defense is now. I'll look forward to your continued attempts at excusing their performance in the last couple of weeks by throwing out one red herring after another about how other defenses not named the New England Patriots are also performing.

I knew this was coming....

opcorn:

 

[Pessimistic Pete]

Bills drives...

FG
Punt
FG
TD
FG
FG (missed)
INT (Absolutely horrible pass by Fitzpatrick)
TD
INT (Not as horrible, but still bad pass by Fitzpatrick)

The Bills were in the position to score or in the red-zone for 7/9 drives.

Thank god for two horrible Fitzpatrick throws...

 

[JackBauer]

Bills drives...

FG
Punt
FG
TD
FG
FG (missed)
INT (Absolutely horrible pass by Fitzpatrick)
TD
INT (Not as horrible, but still bad pass by Fitzpatrick)

The Bills were in the position to score or in the red-zone for 7/9 drives.

Thank god for two horrible Fitzpatrick throws...

And how about the two drives after the Tate fumble and the series of penalties followed by a poor punt giving the Bills possession on our side of the field?

 

[mgcolby]

I'm definitely not writing this defense off. So I don't agree at all with where Pete is coming from. However, I have no idea why people are making excuses for them either. If you're going to beat your chest about the red zone accomplishments, which look good at first glance, you should take into account the 37 yard TD they allowed as well.

Like I said before, as Pats fans, we should know what a good defense looks like... and this isn't it. There's a LOT of room to improve. However, with that said, they're young and there's nowhere to go but up. But it's going to take some work.

I would be more worried if the mistakes were due to a lack of talent. But that 37 yard TD was clearly a mental error on Chung's part. That type of mistake is correctable. In comparison to seasons past, IMO Sanders being late and missing open field tackles are example of what is not correctable. He has the mental capacity, but he simply lacks the speed.

 

[Kontradiction]

I knew this was coming....

opcorn:

It gets pretty annoying when you have to keep having the same argument with the same person over and over and over again and all it accomplishes is the same result every single time. I think I've had this same debate 10+ times in the offseason, only to be told of how stout the defense actually was and how much of a chicken little I was.

 

[mgcolby]

Bills drives...

FG
Punt
FG
TD
FG
FG (missed)
INT (Absolutely horrible pass by Fitzpatrick)
TD
INT (Not as horrible, but still bad pass by Fitzpatrick)

The Bills were in the position to score or in the red-zone for 7/9 drives.

Thank god for two horrible Fitzpatrick throws...

One TD is on the ST's. And the other was set up by a fumble on NE's 40. Again context is needed.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Sure I can "have it both ways", as you put it. It's folly to think otherwise. Your argument goes to the quality of the evidence, which is a legitimate, if unpersuasive, counter. It doesn't negate the evidence, however, as you well know.

Not if you want to maintain an ounce of consistency or credibility. Either count ST points or don't; as long as you do it consistently, it's at least defensible. To pick and choose, though, just shows that your analysis is agenda-based.

 

[Rob0729]

Sure I can "have it both ways", as you put it. It's folly to think otherwise. Your argument goes to the quality of the evidence, which is a legitimate, if unpersuasive, counter. It doesn't negate the evidence, however, as you well know.



One game could skew the stats, if there were an outlier. For the Patriots, there hasn't been any such outlier. Furthermore, one could argue that any 'skewing' was done in the defense's favor, with the first half of the Bengals game.



Your argument makes no sense. We're talking about the state of the defense right nowThe defense is clearly one of the worst defenses in the NFL right now. We've already seen starters at DE, OLB, CB and S get benched or demoted. The team is 28th in points against, and it's yet to face an explosive offense. Again, it's alright to admit to the obvious. The team and players have, and it's still early enough in the season that improvement can happen.

Ok, you have established stats only matter when you think they are valid. Which means this discussion is over since you clearly refuse to ever accept any evidence that goes against anything you argue.

I can only blame myself for getting into these arguments with you. I know your MO and yet I get suckered into it. There is never any way to win a debate with you because you don't debate. You dictate your opinion and refuse to acknowledge points on the other side.

 

[Sicilian]

Bills drives...

FG
Punt
FG
TD
FG
FG (missed)
INT (Absolutely horrible pass by Fitzpatrick)
TD
INT (Not as horrible, but still bad pass by Fitzpatrick)

The Bills were in the position to score or in the red-zone for 7/9 drives.

Thank god for two horrible Fitzpatrick throws...

The first pick was caused by pressure from Cunningham. Fitz couldn't step into the throw so it sailed on him and Chung took advantage. But god forbid we give any defensive player credit for a good play. It's always a mistake by the offense, right?

 

[Kontradiction]

I would be more worried if the mistakes were due to a lack of talent. But that 37 yard TD was clearly a mental error on Chung's part. That type of mistake is correctable. In comparison to seasons past, IMO Sanders being late and missing open field tackles are example of what is not correctable. He has the mental capacity, but he simply lacks the speed.

I'll agree to a point. The mistakes being pointed out are definitely age and experience related. No doubt. And many of us expected these growing pains going into the season. However, there are also, clearly, a few question marks at several positions on this team that could easily be upgraded. At least one DE position, OLB, CB, and possibly safety now. On top of that, one of our top players on defense, Mayo, who is a stud in pretty much every other area of his game, is still having trouble getting off of blocks. All these things are being compounded with inexperience right now which is the formula for where our defense is currently at.

 

[BradyFTW!]

One TD is on the ST's. And the other was set up by a fumble on NE's 40. Again context is needed.

He already accounted for the ST touchdown. Hence why that summary only accounts for 23 points.

 

[Deus Irae]

Not if you want to maintain an ounce of consistency or credibility. Either count ST points or don't. Otherwise your analysis is agenda-backed and useless.

I'm not sure where you got this notion. Generally speaking, people who use stats understand that offenses will have a few points added, and defenses will have a few points added, as a result of their special teams plays. I don't notice people belittling the Patriots offense because the special teams has been playing well and getting scores and good position, after all.

However, if YOU want to go back and break down all 32 teams by removing ST points and get back to me, go for it. To be fair, note all FGs and TDs that are the result of field position while you're at it.

 

[Deus Irae]

Ok, you have established stats only matter when you think they are valid. Which means this discussion is over since you clearly refuse to ever accept any evidence that goes against anything you argue.

I didn't "establish" anything of the kind. Neither did I claim anything of the kind. You're now pulling your typical cut and run maneuver. It will be followed by the retreat with a potshot or two.

I can only blame myself for getting into these arguments with you. I know your MO and yet I get suckered into it. There is never any way to win a debate with you because you don't debate. You dictate your opinion and refuse to acknowledge points on the other side.

And there it is.

 

[Rhodey]

What is to keep NE from pulling an Indy? Remember when their young defense came together for the last 5-6 games of the year; won it all? And, they held their own against a mighty NE offense, as well.

IMO, it's about making the mistakes; making adjustments. There is no reason why this (defensive) group cannot bond; make some serious 2010 goals for themselves. If they are clicking by November, count the Pats in.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I'm not sure where you got this notion. Generally speaking, people who use stats understand that offenses will have a few points added, and defenses will have a few points added, as a result of their special teams plays. I don't notice people belittling the Patriots offense because the special teams has been playing well and getting scores and good position, after all.

However, if YOU want to go back and break down all 32 teams by removing ST points and get back to me, go for it. To be fair, note all FGs and TDs that are the result of field position while you're at it.

Not at all. I'm saying you can use ST points or you can choose not to. As long as you apply your standard uniformly, it's defensible. To use ST points when it suits your case and ignore them when it doesn't, though, kills your credibility.

After all, the Pats are 2-0 in games where they scored more points than their opponent. They're undefeated!

 

[Kontradiction]

What is to keep NE from pulling an Indy? Remember when their young defense came together for the last 5-6 games of the year; won it all? And, they held their own against a mighty NE offense, as well.

IMO, it's about making the mistakes; making adjustments. There is no reason why this (defensive) group cannot bond; make some serious 2010 goals for themselves. If they are clicking by November, count the Pats in.

1. Our floor - 2004 Colts; all offense, little to no defense.
2. Our ceiling - 2009 Saints; great offense, defense just good enough.

That's the two ways I see our defense potentially working out this season. It could really go either way.

 

[Rob0729]

I didn't "establish" anything of the kind. Neither did I claim anything of the kind. You're now pulling your typical cut and run maneuver. It will be followed by the retreat with a potshot or two.



And there it is.

I try to engage you in an intelligent conversation. I treat you like a child and send you to bed without supper when you misbehave like ignoring facts that go against your argument because they aren't valid. It isn't cut and run, it is good parenting skills. You need a time out.

It is my fault for not realizing that you cannot play well with others and choose to decide to dictate the rules of a conversation and determine what stats are valid for discussions and what aren't. That isn't really debating, it is forcing your opinions down other people's throats. I have no desire to play these games anymore.

 

[Rob0729]

1. Our floor - 2004 Colts; all offense, little to no defense.
2. Our ceiling - 2009 Saints; great offense, defense just good enough.

That's the two ways I see our defense potentially working out this season. It could really go either way.

I think the ceiling for the defense is the 2001 Pats (although I doubt they will get there or close to it). That defense was mediocre to start the season, but Belichick and Crennel changed things up (including switching to a 4-3 base) and it was arguably the best defense down the stretch and in the playoffs. That defense had a lot of veterans on it. So it might be setting the sights way too high.

 

[mgcolby]

It gets pretty annoying when you have to keep having the same argument with the same person over and over and over again and all it accomplishes is the same result every single time. I think I've had this same debate 10+ times in the offseason, only to be told of how stout the defense actually was and how much of a chicken little I was.

Understood. The defense is far from stout. But their speed and athleticism will help them recover from mistakes. And the flashes they have shown is promising for the future. Its neither here nor there but I would really love to see what this defense would be with Warren and Bodden.

With that said many are completely ignoring the fact that in many cases (the 2nd half of the Jets game and throughout yesterdays game) the offense and ST's have not helped out this young defense by putting them in advantageous field position. I also think as the season progresses so will the multi turnover games. Chung nearly had a pick that I am sure would have crushed Sanchez's confidence in his deep ball, Merriweather had a pick that should have been challenged against the Bengals and Spikes had a ball go right through his hands.

The plays are there to be had and in time as the game slows down for the rookies/1st year starters, they will be made.

Cunningham seems to be progressing well after his setback. Brace has looked much better than I thought he would. Spikes is what I thought he would be, Chung is running around like a wild man which is great, McCourtey is very good and his willingness to put his face in there in the running game is awesome.

Outside of Merriweather and Butler I am very pleased with the progress of the young guys.

They will be fine as long as the offense scores what they are capable of each week, but more importantly doesn't go backwards when they get the ball at mid field. I am starting to get concerned with our kick coverage though.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

While on the subject of horrible defense

Our former JAG Eric Alexander is now a REAL JAG!!

Signed with the Jaguars today....