Defense? What defense!!!

[aluminum seats]

In January 2011, the Jets did not commit a turnover against the Patriots and won the game. The Patriots had one interception for a -1.0 takeaway ratio and lost the game. The team with the most takeaways won the game.

You're proving my point. The Pats' turnover ratio last year didn't illustrate the defense's strength, it masked the defense's inadequacies. Come playoff time, they were exposed.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Originally Posted by BradyManny
I agree with this - we know very well that Belichick does not, though.

The fact is, Brady is more likely to put up 7 then the other team, so I feel like getting the offense the ball back faster should be at a premium. If it comes at the expense of a big play or two, so be it.

Consider the 4th & 4 call. It was a no-brainer. Why? Because Belichick probably realized that San Diego would end up with the ball at that spot in the field sooner or later in their next drive. Did San Diego even have a drive that didn't get into Pats territory?

Thats what I thought too but BB said it was because of the injury to Mesko.

Half the arguing back and forth in this thread is either side basically saying the same thing, each side is just looking at it from a different angle, its like a bad marriage.
Most think the D needs to improve to get to the super bowl, theres only a few that think the teams either doomed or playing great, most fall in the middle.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

You're proving my point. The Pats' turnover ratio last year didn't illustrate the defense's strength, it masked the defense's inadequacies. Come playoff time, they were exposed.

A bigger problem is you don't understand why that game was lost.

 

[RodThePat]

Nobody has problems with posters being critical.

The problem here is the majority of it is dumb.

Excuse me if I got it wrong, but are you calling my concerns over this defense 'dumb'? You might disagree with my overall point, but I don't think there's anyway you can say the criticism isn't in the least bit valid.

 

[goheels22002]

You're proving my point. The Pats' turnover ratio last year didn't illustrate the defense's strength, it masked the defense's inadequacies. Come playoff time, they were exposed.

The only point is that takeaway ratio is a predictor of success. In 2010, the New England Patriots led the league in takeaway ratio at +1.6 more takeaways per game than their opponents. They ended the regular season at 14-2, the best record in the NFL.

That accomplishment was made by an offense that almost never turned the ball over and a defense that capitalized on opportunities to take the ball away from their opponents - a hallmark of a Bill Belichick defense.

 

[slash83]

What happened to that attacking D we witnessed almost all of preseason?

 

[aluminum seats]

A bigger problem is you don't understand why that game was lost.

For someone who posts as often as you do, it's amazing that you never make a rational, or even mildly interesting, point.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Excuse me if I got it wrong, but are you calling my concerns over this defense 'dumb'? You might disagree with my overall point, but I don't think there's anyway you can say the criticism isn't in the least bit valid.

Yeah, actually I can and did.

 

[BPF]

McCourty's making some basic mistakes, and they are killing him in coverage. The idea that nobody could have slowed down Jackson today is just not correct.

I think you're right, McCourty tried to jam him a few times and wiffed. If you get physical with him at LOS and break up timing you have a chance. You can't let him get free because then he's got you on his terms.

 

[RodThePat]

Yeah, actually I can and did.

Oh, ok then. I guess yesterday's defensive performance was pretty good, then. How dumb of me to even consider otherwise.

You know, I actually don't really have anything against arrogance. But you shouldn't be so bold when there other posters arguing your point better than you. Oh, and more respectfully too. To each their own, I guess.

 

[goheels22002]

A bigger problem is you don't understand why that game was lost.

Right. The Patriots defense was not the culprit in the loss to the Jets in last year's playoffs. The Jets were successful on only 6 of 13 3rd down opportunities. Sanchez played a solid, not great, game. He rang up a pedestrian 194 passing yards against the Patriots.

Tom Brady was sacked five times - five! - in that game and the Pats went 0-2 on 4th downs and just 5-14 on 3rd downs. The Patriots played flat on offense and committed 5 penalties that stalled progress. The offense looked confused for much of the game when the pinball machine offense did not light up.

Rex Ryan put together an excellent defensive game plan and the Patriots offense did not adjust. If the Patriots offense stayed on the field and converted more of their 3rd and 4th down opportunities, they would have won.

What we all must appreciate was just how rare and special those 2003 - 2004 teams were with elite offensive, defensive and special teams units at the same time. There is a reason why those teams set gawdy records for wins. What is amazing is how the Patriots completely rebuilt - only seven guys are on the roster who were in the 2007 Superbowl - and still had the best record last year and are favored this year.

 

[BPF]

Pats blitzed just four times, 3 QB pressures, and 1 INT (Brown) on those blitzes. 10 total QB pressures for game that SD kept extra protector in 51% of time (on dropbacks). Wilfork led with 3 QB pressures and Haynesworth was not good, if he wasn't on the ground he was handled easily by LG Dielman. Also Arrington not at fault for plays V.Jackson made in slot. This is all per Bedard twitter.

They should probably blitz more often.

 

[SEA_Pat]

I don't have the stats in front of me, but I saw at least 3 drives sustained by marginal/bad penalties, and several amazing pass/catch plays into good coverage by what is one of the best offenses in the NFL. The game plan was obviously to take away Gates first and foremost, and let Rivers beat them with high degree of difficulty throws to wide receivers or dump offs in the flat. The ol' "bend but don't break" of many years running now. Surely we should be used to this by now.

I loved the aggressive D of the pre-season too, and I am sure we'll see it eventually. But it obviously didn't suit the Chargers from BB's point of view so it wasn't used. Notice also that the Chargers came out very aggressive and blitzing on Brady, but after repeatedly getting burned, backed off on the pressure and played coverage. This worked quite well for them in the much of the second half. I thought we got several decent pressures on them given that we weren't blitzing so much.

Bottom line is they adopted a patient approach against a high powered team that is prone to dumb mistakes. They gave up a lot of yards, then that team made a lot of dumb mistakes. As usual. And they only gave up 21 points. I'll take it.

 

[aluminum seats]

Right. The Patriots defense was not the culprit in the loss to the Jets in last year's playoffs. The Jets were successful on only 6 of 13 3rd down opportunities. Sanchez played a solid, not great, game. He rang up a pedestrian 194 passing yards against the Patriots.

Tom Brady was sacked five times - five! - in that game and the Pats went 0-2 on 4th downs and just 5-14 on 3rd downs. The Patriots played flat on offense and committed 5 penalties that stalled progress. The offense looked confused for much of the game when the pinball machine offense did not light up.

Rex Ryan put together an excellent defensive game plan and the Patriots offense did not adjust. If the Patriots offense stayed on the field and converted more of their 3rd and 4th down opportunities, they would have won.

What we all must appreciate was just how rare and special those 2003 - 2004 teams were with elite offensive, defensive and special teams units at the same time. There is a reason why those teams set gawdy records for wins. What is amazing is how the Patriots completely rebuilt - only seven guys are on the roster who were in the 2007 Superbowl - and still had the best record last year and are favored this year.

Again, I think this actually reinforces my point. The genuinely good defense last year (the Jets) stepped up in the playoff game and won. The (relatively) fraudulent defense (the Pats), which had relied on turnovers and the offense to compile its gaudy record couldn't answer.

 

[BPF]

Again, I think this actually reinforces my point. The genuinely good defense last year (the Jets) stepped up in the playoff game and won. The (relatively) fraudulent defense (the Pats), which had relied on turnovers and the offense to compile its gaudy record couldn't answer.

A fraudulent D, by your definition, won the SB just two years ago in NO.

 

[Deus Irae]

Again, I think this actually reinforces my point. The genuinely good defense last year (the Jets) stepped up in the playoff game and won. The (relatively) fraudulent defense (the Pats), which had relied on turnovers and the offense to compile its gaudy record couldn't answer.

The Patriots put up fewer than 30 points only once after November 7th last season, and that's the game the team lost, but apparently there's absolutely no issue with that defense that Belichick revamped over the offseason. 14-2 teams usually make the sort of massive defensive changes the Patriots have, just to keep from getting bored.

 

[BelizePats]

I had a hard time watching parts of the game yesterday and am of two minds when I think about the game. I really like a tough physical style of defense and I did not see that yesterday. Or anything even closely resembling it. Same goes for the game against Miami last week. However, the D did force some key turnovers yesterday and you have to give them props for that.
What concerns me is that 80% of third downs that San Diego converted. This soft underbelly D will not get it done in the playoffs. At the same time, its clear that this is not the same NFL that I am used to. The league mandated emphasis on offensive football has changed the game, from how the refs call it to how the offensive coordinators around the league are adjusting and implementing the new rules. Part of me is saying "maybe my understanding of what works in the NFL is no longer applicable". Sort of in the same way that I used to think that a fullback was critical to a good runnig game. It's confusing right now.
I loved the win, loved the turnovers. But I'm not sure I love the "new" NFL where good defense is seemingly a thing of the past.
Lots to chew on today!!!!

 

[Patriot to the Core]

Will have to see how the defence get's on against a really good offence side, then judge it.

 

[Betterthanmost]

Will have to see how the defence get's on against a really good offence side, then judge it.

Really? Tell me the team. Green Bay? Who else is out there right now that is better offensively than Chargers?

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

I just hope they blitz more next week..didn't blitz enough against SD