Ken notes that "the bar has been set so low". But the reality is that the Pats' D over that 4 year stretch hasn't been horrific by any stretch - just not as good as we would like. But consider:
- PPG: the 2007 defense finished 4th at 17.1 PPG. In 2008 the Pats finished 8th at 19.3 PPG. In 2009 the team finished 5th at 17.8 PPG. In 2010 the team finished 8th at 19.6 PPG. Even in 2011, when the team finished 15th at 21.4 PPG, they were still less than 1 PPG away form being in the top 10.
- Sacks: the 2007 team had 47 sacks (2rd overall), often being able to rush from a position of a huge lead when opposing teams had to abandon the run. The 2011 team had a fairly respectable 40 sacks.
- Turnovers: the 2011 team led the AFC and tied for 3rd overall in the NFL with 34 turnovers. The 2010 team led the AFC and finished second overall in the NFL with 38 turnovers. The 2009
We know about the 3rd down conversion rates and the poor pass defense last year. There's certainly room for improvement. But the 2011 defense, for all its warts, still produced 40 sacks, 34 turnovers, and finished in the top half of the league in terms of points allowed. And over the stretch run it was arguably one of the better defenses in the league. If BB could produce respectable numbers with the defensive talent that he had from 2008-2011, he should be able to do better given what he has to work with this year, though it may take time for the unit to fully hit its stride.
You make a good point here Mayo. I know people get frustrated sometimes with BB's "bend but don't break" defensive philosophy. But the bottom line is that although it gives up a lot of yards, in the end it consistently produces results in the 2 most important areas of scoring and turn overs.
People sometimes forget that in the Pats first 2 superbowls the defense ranked in the mid 20's in total defense. It seems odd to say, but its not about the yards, its about the scoring. I understand that we'd all LIKE to see a shut down style defense, which creates a large amount of 3 and outs, but that's not necessary to have a "superbowl" defense.
The ultimate goal of a defense is to be in the top 5 in scoring.....period. Where you are in yards, sacks, 3rd down conversions, etc really doesn't matter (although it doesn't hurt if they are good too.) Scoring and stats related to scoring like red zone defense are the real numbers to watch.
We are used to saying that BB is the best coach in the league. But think about this. Since 2008, BB's teams have won 11, 10, 14, and 13 games in the regular season, while totally revamping his defense. Injuries, and some questionable personnel decisions, rendered last year's Pats defense one of the worst in league history in yards allowed. Yet it was good enough to get to the superbowl and THEN hold one of the top offenses in the league to just 21 points (and that's including the safety and the give up TD)
That's pretty amazing stuff. when you consider the Pats lost their 2 best inside rushers (Wright and Pryor) 2 of their top 4 CBs (Dowling and Boddin) Lost their top S (Chung) for more than half the season and their #2 safety (Barrett) for virtually the entire season. Those are incredibly severe losses for a defense that wasn't loaded with pro bowl talent to begin with. (and that doesn't count the multi game losses of Carter and Spikes)
When I think about who was playing S for the Pats for most of the season I am stunned they did as well as they did. Think about it. The Pats played the great majority of last season without a single legitimate starting Safety. Is it any wonder that the secondary looked soft when guys like Brown, Ihedigbu, Slater, and Edelman are patrolling the middle.
I guess when you come down to it, the point of this ramble was to state that BB's management of the rabble that made up the Pats defense last season could have been one of his best jobs of his career. Is it any wonder that with the addition of players from that draft and FA, plus the return to health of several returning player; that we are extremely optimistic about the state of the defense......to this point.
And when I say "extremely optimistic". I mean it in a very cautious and realistic manner