Why are people still trashing the defense?

[Nikolai]

It's hard to make a hard diagnosis about where the defense is until we've faced some serious competition, but I don't think it's at all unreasonable to say this defense has taken huge strides since the days of 2011-2012. Back then, the likes of Dan Orlovsky were torching the Pats for career days. Everyone had career days against those defenses.

 

[Oswlek]

I haven't looked at them playing the other 2 games so I cannot say, I only saw them play the Pats and I saw a lot of bad offensive play from our opponents. Good teams will not make those kinds of errors.

Of course they will, just not as many. And you can't just make a blanket statement like that if you aren't also willing to explain why NE is holding teams to their season low, unless you think that is just an early season fluke.

Most importantly, thus far NE has held all three opponents to two TDs or less. Even if we assume better players make less mistakes, there is plenty of room for that to happen with NE still holding them to a respectable 23 ppg. Why must it go from the current 10 ppg to "torched"?

I'm just calling it on what I saw. I am cautiously optimistic but the fact that we are triumphantly tooting the horns of our defense after beating down three not so good offenses is nowhere near making me feel confident. If they shut down Matt Ryan and his offense, I will feel a lot more optimistic.

The pass rush is definitely better but I'm not close to sold on the secondary. A legit QB or receivers who can actually catch would have made us pay dearly for the number of times our DBs have been beat or coverage fallen apart.

"Triumphantly tooting the horns"? You lost me there.

 

[manxman2601]

Why are people still trashing the defense?

Two words:

Joke Bequette

If the 4th DE was our only problem on the defense I'd be booking the SB party right now.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Of course they will, just not as many. And you can't just make a blanket statement like that if you aren't also willing to explain why NE is holding teams to their season low, unless you think that is just an early season fluke.

"Triumphantly tooting the horns"? You lost me there.

It's entirely possible that our defense is better than the other defenses and that you're looking at a small sample size.

 

[Oswlek]

It's entirely possible that our defense is better than the other defenses and that you're looking at a small sample size.

Not following you. Did you mean to say "isn't"?

 

[RhodyPatriot]

Nobody is trashing this defense. NOBODY.
What is being said is how this defense hasn't faced a quality QB/offense is 3 weeks and therefore it's impossible to judge just how improved they are.
What's so silly is how some of the mediots are playing the "stop blaming the Patriots for their schedule" game.
NOBODY is blaming anybody for their schedule. The ONLY thing being said is it's really hard to gauge where this defense is at, i.e. how strong a defense they truly are after they've played 3 of the worst QB's in the NFL.
Many fans are taking a wait and see attitude with this group and that's a wise thing to do. The next 3 games will give us a much better idea of the "real" strengths and weaknesses of this Patriots defense.

 

[ivanvamp]

The Patriots have faced the Bills, Bucs and Jets.

Which of those teams has an offense right now?

The Bucs *should* have an offense. They have two very good receivers in Jackson and Williams. They have a terrific lead RB in Martin. I wish those were the Patriots' top 2 WRs and RB. And Freeman has some talent. He was great in 2010, and solid in 2012, so he has ability. They have one of the best offensive lineman in the game in Carl Nicks. So there's talent there on offense. They should be better.

Put it this way: In years past, that offense would have put up nearly 400 yards and 20+ points on the Patriots. But not this year.

 

[Nunchucks]

Meh, I am happy as long as they shutdown the teams they are supposed to shutdown. Those high flying offenses like the Saints and the Broncos...if they can keep those teams under 30 points I would be happy.

Should be fun to watch the game on Sunday, Miami did a good job against the Falcons, wonder what the Patriots can do.

 

[ivanvamp]

Week one last season: 34-13 win against the Titans
Week two last seaosn: 20-18 loss against the Cardinals

While it's nice that you've at least come up to 24 points in two games rather than 20 points in 3 games, the numbers still are what they are.

2012:
-Wk1, at Ten (#21 pts, #29 yds): 13 pts allowed, 284 yds allowed
-Wk2, vs Ari (#31 pts, #32 yds): 20 pts allowed (7 came on a 2-yd score following a blocked punt), 242 yds allowed
-Wk3, at Bal (#10 pts, #16 yds): 31 pts allowed, 503 yds allowed
AVG: #20.7 pts, #25.7 yds: 21.3 pts allowed (19.0 if you don't count the 7 in the Arizona game against them), 343.0 yds allowed

2013:
-Wk1, at Buf (#20 pts, #14 yds): 21 pts allowed (7 were scored by the Bills' defense on a fumble recovery; so the D gave up 14 points), 286 yds allowed
-Wk2, vs NYJ (#28 pts, #30 yds): 10 pts allowed, 318 yds allowed
-Wk3, vs TB (#31 pts, #31 yds): 3 pts allowed, 323 yds allowed
AVG: #26.3 pts, #25 yds: 9.0 pts allowed, 309.0 yds allowed

The offenses they faced in the first three games of 2012 were a little better than what they've faced this year, but not a lot better. Somewhat better in pts scored ranking, but a little worse in yds gained ranking. But what the Pats' defense has done is significantly better than through three games in 2012.

So at this point, it's safe to say that the three-game sample in 2013 represents a much better performance than the first three games in 2012. Who knows what will happen from here on out. But so far, so good.

 

[JackBauer]

Why are people still trashing the defense?

Two words:

Joke Bequette

I've got nothing in particular for or against Bequette but man...this is why we need a dislike button on this board.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Bucs *should* have an offense. They have two very good receivers in Jackson and Williams. They have a terrific lead RB in Martin. I wish those were the Patriots' top 2 WRs and RB. And Freeman has some talent. He was great in 2010, and solid in 2012, so he has ability. They have one of the best offensive lineman in the game in Carl Nicks. So there's talent there on offense. They should be better.

Put it this way: In years past, that offense would have put up nearly 400 yards and 20+ points on the Patriots. But not this year.

The Bucs lost both of their top WRs at the start of the game so, in effect they didn't have the "two very good receivers". Before those receivers were injured, the Bucs were moving the ball against the Patriots defense, which is the point I was making earlier about this game.

And Freeman sucks.

 

[Deus Irae]

So at this point, it's safe to say that the three-game sample in 2013 represents a much better performance than the first three games in 2012. Who knows what will happen from here on out. But so far, so good.

No, it's not, and the numbers you posted are absolutely meaningless. Far too many factors are ignored.

 

[ivanvamp]

No, it's not, and the numbers you posted are absolutely meaningless. Far too many factors are ignored.

Why are they "absolutely meaningless"?

 

[Rob0729]

The Bucs lost both of their top WRs at the start of the game so, in effect they didn't have the "two very good receivers". Before those receivers were injured, the Bucs were moving the ball against the Patriots defense, which is the point I was making earlier about this game.

And Freeman sucks.

Jackson played the first half. In fact, Talib's interception at the end of the first half was a pass intended to Jackson. Williams got hurt near the beginning of the game, but played through the first half. Their offense isn't very good, but they also didn't lose their top receivers at the start of the game.

 

[Rob0729]

Why are they "absolutely meaningless"?

Because Lord and Master Deus deemed them so. Didn't you get the memo? He is board arbitrator of what facts are meaningful and what aren't. Just for a rule of thumb, you can go by the assumption that any facts that support his argument are relevant and in fact are indisputable proof his argument is right and anything that goes against his argument are irrelevant and you should be embarrassed to even have brought them into the argument.

If you follow these simple rules, you will have no problems.

 

[Deus Irae]

Why are they "absolutely meaningless"?

1.) You're trying to argue style points when the team's changed its style

2.) You ignore the impact of getting to face two rookies to start this season

3.) You can't quantify just how disjointed the Bucs were before, and after, the injuries to the WRs.

4.) etc...

 

[Oswlek]

Why are they "absolutely meaningless"?

They aren't, but there is still plenty of time for them to become a fond memory.

Hopefully it is a sign of legitimate improvement. I'm optimistic.

 

[Deus Irae]

Because Lord and Master Deus deemed them so. Didn't you get the memo? He is board arbitrator of what facts are meaningful and what aren't. Just for a rule of thumb, you can go by the assumption that any facts that support his argument are relevant and in fact are indisputable proof his argument is right and anything that goes against his argument are irrelevant and you should be embarrassed to even have brought them into the argument.

If you follow these simple rules, you will have no problems.

So much irony from one who magically finds attacks on WRs in posts about the defense. The comedy is great, though.

 

[Oswlek]

1.) You're trying to argue style points

2.) You ignore the impact of having the two rookies to start this season

3.) You can't quantify just how disjointed the Bucs were before, and after, the injuries to the WRs.

None of which makes them meaningless, just something that still needs time to fully play out.

 

[Deus Irae]

None of which makes them meaningless, just something that still needs time to fully play out.

The bolded is what makes them meaningless at the moment. The bolded is also pretty much exactly what I've pointed out about the defense. I've not bashed it. I've simply said that we don't know what it is yet.