Improve the pass defense quickly -- how?

[bucky]

It's not so much that it "generates" any "new" pass-rush, it's that it removes the main condition (offensive running threat/effective play-action, even on 3rd-and-relatively long) that stifled the pass rush capability we already have (which is not as weak as most people seem to think, IMHO).

With a 30-front that virtually eliminates any viable running threat on 3rd-and-long, pass-rushers don't lose whatever first-step advantage they might have by biting on play-action. LBs/safeties aren't late to coverage assignments by biting on play-action. More guys can be assigned exclusively to coverage without fear of getting beat by a run, thus leading to potentially more coverage-generated pressure (sacks or throwaways). And now, our pass rush might come from anywhere (like it once did when our defense was good) and the opposing QB has a less clear idea who is dropping into coverage or from what position.

IOW, we can go back to doing what was successful for us in 2001-2007.

I have to respectfully disagree with this assumption, especially if you are talking about 3rd and long defense. You cannot stop the run with 3 people. And you cannot take 3 people out of the pass defense and still expect to get to the QB (unless of course you are doing all kinds of fancy zone blitzes, which I don't think is what you're talking about). The only way you can stop both is by having players who are capable of doing both.

 

[cstjohn17]

Perhaps it's about how they stopped the run. Chung and McCourty made a LOT of tackles in run support because the OLBs couldn't consistently set the edge. An improvement in the run game would allow the secondary to focus more on pass coverage.

Butler seemed to be a bit better in coverage, but Arrington was way ahead in terms of physical play, especially in run support. Perhaps you can play Butler more when you're not depending on the secondary as much for run support.

Spikes also got fooled a bunch of times in play-action. Part of that is the rookie learning curve, but part of that may have been him having a lot of responsibilities in run defense.

I'm not saying improving the run defense is the only thing we need to do, but it could help in many ways.

Maybe, it could help but even in obvious passing situations the Patriots stunk. In most cases they play their Safeties deep, very deep and allowed the small underneath patterns. They did make a lot of plays on the ball but just gave up too many passes.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Maybe, it could help but even in obvious passing situations the Patriots stunk. In most cases they play their Safeties deep, very deep and allowed the small underneath patterns. They did make a lot of plays on the ball but just gave up too many passes.

I agree. I don't think it would solve everything, but I do feel it's part of the puzzle. By committing fewer resources to stopping the run, the pass D could benefit. Although that style of D is something we've done for a while. Just last year, we gave up far too many conversions on 3rd down.

I do think we need another OLB. I have a lot of faith in Cunningham, but they need someone to complement him. Maybe Ninko will take a huge leap this year. But I think we need to improve there somehow.

And if Ty Warren is healthy, that would also make a difference. Hopefully Wright is also 100%.

 

[MaineMan]

I have to respectfully disagree with this assumption, especially if you are talking about 3rd and long defense. You cannot stop the run with 3 people. And you cannot take 3 people out of the pass defense and still expect to get to the QB (unless of course you are doing all kinds of fancy zone blitzes, which I don't think is what you're talking about). The only way you can stop both is by having players who are capable of doing both.

Well, actually, the other side of that coin is that stopping the run with 3 people is exactly what the Jets did to US with BGE, unless we had at least one, if not two TEs in as extra blockers. In fact, when we went to more spread-like sets, the Jets only used TWO guys up front a lot of the time, knowing they could stop any runs, which left them a whole bunch of guys for coverage. Of course, if we had Crump and Gronk blocking for BGE, we could run, but then we only had two WRs in the set, thus making their coverage much easier.

It's not that our three guys up front have to "stop" every run cold, nor would I expect them to. All they have to do is render the other guys' running game (without extra blocking) ineffective and force them to spend significantly more offensive resources in order to run.

 

[MaineMan]

Maybe, it could help but even in obvious passing situations the Patriots stunk. In most cases they play their Safeties deep, very deep and allowed the small underneath patterns. They did make a lot of plays on the ball but just gave up too many passes.

But that's just the thing. Even in "obvious" passing situations, teams were still able to run the ball effectively against our D-line. If we dropped guys into coverage, a team could run and get decent yardage before the dropped guys could recover. If we kept guys up against the possibility of a run, they'd just run play-action and drop a pass in over the middle behind the LBs and Chung. Witout a D-line that could contain the run in those obvious passing situations, we were damned if we did, damned if we didn't.

 

[MaineMan]

I know everyone one else is saying this but we need a pass rusher. I say trade up for quinn or take kerrigan. Even though hes not a 3 down player now, I bet BB grooms him into one. Also your going to think im crazy but what about Bowers if he falls. Anyone thinking Willie McGinest II???

Willie averaged 6 sacks a year under BB.

 

[MaineMan]

I don't agree with this, it is clever to say that improving the run defense will improve the pass defense but it doesn't make any sense.

Although they weren't at the level of the Steelers or Ravens they did manage to stay in the top 10 in almost all run defense categories but were horrid against the pass. Maybe horrid is too nice of a term.

Even if the Patriots run defense was bad it wouldn't have matterd. Teams just game out throwing, hell why run when you can pass at will.

As far as improving the pass defense I think they will try to get someone who can help the interior rush (Bailey, Austin, Taylor, Jordan, Watt, Taylor, Wilkerson) and then a smaller speedier player (Ayers, Carter or Carter). Either that or take a 3 down player like Kerrigan, Smith, Quinn. Or take a 3-4 end like Heyward, Watt, Wilkerson.

You get the point, I have no idea how they fix it but they do need to fix it...

And they were only able to do that by devoting extra resources - LBs and safeties - to containing the run because the D-line couldn't. And that, in turn, took those resources away from coverage and pass-rush.

 

[bucky]

Well, actually, the other side of that coin is that stopping the run with 3 people is exactly what the Jets did to US with BGE, unless we had at least one, if not two TEs in as extra blockers. In fact, when we went to more spread-like sets, the Jets only used TWO guys up front a lot of the time, knowing they could stop any runs, which left them a whole bunch of guys for coverage. Of course, if we had Crump and Gronk blocking for BGE, we could run, but then we only had two WRs in the set, thus making their coverage much easier.

It's not that our three guys up front have to "stop" every run cold, nor would I expect them to. All they have to do is render the other guys' running game (without extra blocking) ineffective and force them to spend significantly more offensive resources in order to run.

Actually, there are many things worth bringing up from the Jets' game. But the one guy who made more of a difference than anyone else is Shaun Ellis. A lot of people are harping on Connelly for that game, but Ellis lined up all over the line. He's just a very good player and exactly the kind of guy I'm talking about - someone who can stop the run and rush the passer. If you take him out and put in 2 Mike DeVitos, the Jets are getting about as much pressure on Brady as NE did on Sanchez and it's a different game.

In terms of stopping the running game, let's not forget who led the Jets in tackles - it was Harris and the 2 safeties. The Pats didn't do a bad job running in that game. If they could have broken some a few tackles, the stats would have been much better.

 

[bucky]

But that's just the thing. Even in "obvious" passing situations, teams were still able to run the ball effectively against our D-line. If we dropped guys into coverage, a team could run and get decent yardage before the dropped guys could recover. If we kept guys up against the possibility of a run, they'd just run play-action and drop a pass in over the middle behind the LBs and Chung. Witout a D-line that could contain the run in those obvious passing situations, we were damned if we did, damned if we didn't.

That is kind of the whole point of 3rd and long. You rush the passer, let them run, and hope your LBs and DBs can stop the guy - which we didn't. The Pats started playing much better on 3rd and long when they replaced Wilhite and Guyton with Fletcher and Chung because the tackling got better. You're certainly right that they'd be better if the DL was better at stopping the run in that case. But on 3rd and long their primary job is rushing the passer.

 

[Off The Grid]

Willie averaged 6 sacks a year under BB.

As did Vrabel!! 6 Sacks a Year!! I LOVE this Urban Legend!!

I'll bet if you'd asked everyone here what those numbers were, 80% would've guessed about 10 each!!

 

[Off The Grid]

Willie averaged 6 sacks a year under BB.

As did Vrabel!! 6 Sacks a Year!! I LOVE this Urban Legend!!

I'll bet if you'd asked everyone here what those numbers were, 80% would've guessed about 10 each!!

o

 

[Fencer]

With a 30-front that virtually eliminates any viable running threat on 3rd-and-long, pass-rushers don't lose whatever first-step advantage they might have by biting on play-action. LBs/safeties aren't late to coverage assignments by biting on play-action. More guys can be assigned exclusively to coverage without fear of getting beat by a run, thus leading to potentially more coverage-generated pressure (sacks or throwaways). And now, our pass rush might come from anywhere (like it once did when our defense was good) and the opposing QB has a less clear idea who is dropping into coverage or from what position.

IOW, we can go back to doing what was successful for us in 2001-2007.

One of us is misremembering; it could well be me. Are you saying we DID use a 30-front in the nickle package in 2001-7? Green (when he was with the team), Seymour, and who else?

 

[cstjohn17]

But that's just the thing. Even in "obvious" passing situations, teams were still able to run the ball effectively against our D-line. If we dropped guys into coverage, a team could run and get decent yardage before the dropped guys could recover. If we kept guys up against the possibility of a run, they'd just run play-action and drop a pass in over the middle behind the LBs and Chung. Witout a D-line that could contain the run in those obvious passing situations, we were damned if we did, damned if we didn't.

I am not convinced, in general the Patrots were able to create a lot of 3rd and long situations but then couldn't prevent a conversion. I don't remember them being gashed for long runs in these situations or being so pre-occupied with the run that they were out of position for a pass.

Mostly they lined up with 5 DBs, 4 pass rushers and a couple of LBs floating around and couldn't get the job done. QBs weren't pressured and the DBs allowed too much seperation.

 

[MaineMan]

One of us is misremembering; it could well be me. Are you saying we DID use a 30-front in the nickle package in 2001-7? Green (when he was with the team), Seymour, and who else?

No. Well, maybe there were times when the starting 30 all stayed in on 3rd down with 5 DBs, IDK. I probably should have been clearer from the start that I didn't mean literally that the entire starting 30 would (or did) stay in for every down in every situation. The example I gave in my earlier response was merely one hypothetical package that might retain the entire 30-front.

My original point was primarily that a starting 30 that can contain the run as well as the personnel in our previous 30-fronts did creates advantageous 3rd-down situations more often, AND provides more tactical options in those 3rd-down situations even in sub-packages that may only use two of them - by making the run a far less viable option for the opposing offense, and thus making play-action a less legitimate threat.

Whatever the situation or the defensive package, with that run-stopping 30-front, you may be able to devote a lower percentage of your 11-man resource pool to defending against the run (or the potential for a run play), thus freeing the remaining resources for other tasks.

In a sense, it's almost like cheating to compare our previous 30-fronts to the 2010 D-line since the latter was such an extreme example of an ineffective D-line (certainly in BB's tenure) and its consequences. OTOH, because of that, if we can assemble, or re-assemble, a strong 30-front for 2011, I believe the difference in our opportunities to bring effective QB pressure may seem like night-and-day. I also believe that Ninko, Cunningham, Mayo, etc. and whoever our sub-rushers may be, have sufficient ability to exploit those opportunities effectively enough to make a big difference.

 

[Fencer]

No. Well, maybe there were times when the starting 30 all stayed in on 3rd down with 5 DBs, IDK. I probably should have been clearer from the start that I didn't mean literally that the entire starting 30 would (or did) stay in for every down in every situation. The example I gave in my earlier response was merely one hypothetical package that might retain the entire 30-front.

My original point was primarily that a starting 30 that can contain the run as well as the personnel in our previous 30-fronts did creates advantageous 3rd-down situations more often, AND provides more tactical options in those 3rd-down situations even in sub-packages that may only use two of them - by making the run a far less viable option for the opposing offense, and thus making play-action a less legitimate threat.

Whatever the situation or the defensive package, with that run-stopping 30-front, you may be able to devote a lower percentage of your 11-man resource pool to defending against the run (or the potential for a run play), thus freeing the remaining resources for other tasks.

In a sense, it's almost like cheating to compare our previous 30-fronts to the 2010 D-line since the latter was such an extreme example of an ineffective D-line (certainly in BB's tenure) and its consequences. OTOH, because of that, if we can assemble, or re-assemble, a strong 30-front for 2011, I believe the difference in our opportunities to bring effective QB pressure may seem like night-and-day. I also believe that Ninko, Cunningham, Mayo, etc. and whoever our sub-rushers may be, have sufficient ability to exploit those opportunities effectively enough to make a big difference.

My main thesis here is that a DE will be a significant upgrade for the defense ONLY if he is a significant contributor on passing downs, because:

• Passing downs where were most of the defensive problems were concentrated last year.
• Last year's base DL (with the Stroud/G. Warren change) PLUS injury returnees (especially T. Warren) PLUS young player development (especially Brace, but also perhaps Love, Deaderick ...) is not at all a bad group.

 

[Fencer]

Willie averaged 6 sacks a year under BB.

In fairness, I would guess that his playoff sack average was close to 1/game.

 

[MaineMan]

In fairness, I would guess that his playoff sack average was close to 1/game.

It was actually slightly more than that under BB, even though he was blanked in 2004 by IND, PIT and PHL.

 

[MaineMan]

My main thesis here is that a DE will be a significant upgrade for the defense ONLY if he is a significant contributor on passing downs, because:

• Passing downs where were most of the defensive problems were concentrated last year.
• Last year's base DL (with the Stroud/G. Warren change) PLUS injury returnees (especially T. Warren) PLUS young player development (especially Brace, but also perhaps Love, Deaderick ...) is not at all a bad group.

And, of course, my counterpoint is that, in 2010, what should have been pure "passing downs" far too often were NOT, because our D-line was so ineffective stopping the run, no matter which guys were put out there or how many of them.

I do agree that a line of Ty Warren (assuming health, etc.), Wilfork and Stroud/"new guy" SHOULD fix most of that issue, even with taking Wilfork out on "passing downs", since they SHOULD be better at run containment on their own, thus making it a less viable tactical option for the opposing offense. While I don't disagree that it would be extremely helpful if Stroud/"new guy" can get some pressure of their own, merely reducing the run threat to a significant extent and allowing the rest of the defense to actually focus on "pass" on those "passing downs" would be a huge contribution in itself.

Further development of Brace, Love or Deaderick into a guy who can contribute some interior QB pressure in certain sub-packages without losing run contain would certainly be a bonus (but, consider Mike Wright or TBC and their run-stopping abilities). But, from what I've seen of the three of them so far, it would be a surprise (a very NICE surprise) if any of them became a critical part of a base, starting 30-front anytime soon.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Other than Watt, it's hard to see how a DL choice would do too much for the pass defense, given that we already have Warren/Wilfork/Brace.

The difficulties in drafting a pass rusher have been much discussed. Yes, even Kerrigan.

Rightly, nobody is suggesting drafting an impact ILB.

Who exactly is going to help among DBs? Prince A? Sure, but he would be tough to get. Aaron Williams? Plausible, but he's raw. Could he be an upgrade at nickel CB as rookie?

Who/what am I missing?

Fixing the pass rush 3 theories:

1.) Scheme a pass rush. Blitz overload, bring more guys on one side than the offense can cover. Blitz disguise bring unlikely blitzers, ie: Arrington as BB did on occasion last year.

2.) Draft and develop guys physically able to beat the guy in front of him and get the the QB. Speed rushers and/or voilent hands-multiple moves rushers.

3.) Some combination of #1 and #2. In the past, when we had athletes at this position, it was the preferred method deplyed by BB. But since we have have been scaping the bottom of the bargain bin for players, (Crable, Burgess, TBC, Ninkovich, slow poke-near miss Cunningham, etc. etc. etc.) it is impossible to deploy this strategy any longer.

Three possible additions that could help immediately: Quinn, Kerrigan, Sheard.

 

[chevss454]

Fixing the pass rush 3 theories:

1.) Scheme a pass rush. Blitz overload, bring more guys on one side than the offense can cover. Blitz disguise bring unlikely blitzers, ie: Arrington as BB did on occasion last year.

2.) Draft and develop guys physically able to beat the guy in front of him and get the the QB. Speed rushers and/or voilent hands-multiple moves rushers.

3.) Some combination of #1 and #2. In the past, when we had athletes at this position, it was the preferred method deplyed by BB. But since we have have been scaping the bottom of the bargain bin for players, (Crable, Burgess, TBC, Ninkovich, slow poke-near miss Cunningham, etc. etc. etc.) it is impossible to deploy this strategy any longer.

Three possible additions that could help immediately: Quinn, Kerrigan, Sheard.

FWIW:

Football Outsiders Finally Has Its Sackseer Up for 2011 OLB types only. (So Watt, Jordan, etc. were not included)

Von Miller leads the way by a huge margin (36.4 over 5 years) with
Justin Houston 2nd (26) and
Ryan Kerrigan 3rd (24.7).

Bowers (20) was hurt considerably by his poor ProDay.
Aldon Smith (20) and Quinn (15.5). Quinn's number drops because of his lost year and mediocre combine numbers.

Brooks Reed (15) and Sheard (10.6) bring up the rear.

===================
FO's Sleeper is Dontay Moch and their Deep Sleeper is Marc Schiechl from the Colo. School of Mines. Schiechl's profile, they say, is similar to those of Robert Mathis and Jared Allen.

Moch, they contend, is an undersized workout warrior whose size and lack of production vs weak competition has a small chance to become an NFL sack warrior.

Interesting article and well worth your 5 minutes.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Hmm...We can't seem to find that