Why are people still trashing the defense?

[Kontradiction]

I'd say it's Wilfork then a toss up between either McCourty (the FS version) and Mayo. Jones is starting to come into play, though, and if he can continue getting into the opposing backfield like he has, he'll be in contention. I think everyone is forgetting what Wilfork is capable of, as the guy is obviously playing through an injury.

 

[coolguy]

Mayo is a great guy, wonderful teammate and a very good player. But he isn't the second best player on the defense this year, thankfully.

No doubt Mayo is a tackle machine, he just lacks play making abilities.

When it down to the WIRE: You're more like to get a jones sack than a interception, fumble, or great play from mayo.

 

[coolguy]

I think everyone is forgetting what Wilfork is capable of, as the guy is obviously playing through an injury.

Are you sure that's not age?

 

[Kontradiction]

Mayo is a tackle machine, he just lacks play making abilities.

When it down to the WIRE: You're more like to get a jones sack than a interception, fumble, or great play from mayo.

Mayo's improvement in coverage since last season has been a big reason for the turnaround of the pass defense thus far. He takes on the run and, along with Hightower, has responsible for covering TE's, RB's out of the backfield, and sometimes even slot WR's. The coverage in the LB corps has improved visibly over the last season even taking into account that another reason for that has been Spikes coming off the field on passing downs.

 

[Rob0729]

I don't think it's particularly outlandish.

It's not outlandish, but I don't personally believe it true. Mayo is a solid player, but at least so far this year he hasn't been the difference maker that Talib, Ninkovich, or Jones have been. Mayo is not typically a guy who makes big plays, but is solid player. The other three guys have been solid and made big plays. And although Mayo is better at coverage, he is not still where he needs to be.

 

[Kontradiction]

Are you sure that's not age?

I'm pretty sure. He looks like the defensive version of Mankins last season. If what was happening prior to Week 3 of the preseason, it's something with his leg. As a DT, a nagging injury in your leg will cause your ability to take on double teams to fall off, sometimes even dramatically.

 

[Oswlek]

I'd say it's Wilfork then a toss up between either McCourty (the FS version) and Mayo. Jones is starting to come into play, though, and if he can continue getting into the opposing backfield like he has, he'll be in contention. I think everyone is forgetting what Wilfork is capable of, as the guy is obviously playing through an injury.

Based solely on this season, I'd put Wilfork, McCourty and Talib comfortably out in front of Mayo, Jones ahead of him and then Jerod with guys like Nink and Kelly in the near vicinity.

 

[JackBauer]

Mayo's improvement in coverage since last season has been a big reason for the turnaround of the pass defense thus far. He takes on the run and, along with Hightower, has responsible for covering TE's, RB's out of the backfield, and sometimes even slot WR's. The coverage in the LB corps has improved visibly over the last season even taking into account that another reason for that has been Spikes coming off the field on passing downs.

Yeah, speaking of I've noticed Hightower seems to be playing a lot better in space. In fact, he's really elevated his game period. Definitely one of the most improved players from last year's team.

 

[Deus Irae]

No doubt Mayo is a tackle machine, he just lacks play making abilities.

When it down to the WIRE: You're more like to get a jones sack than a interception, fumble, or great play from mayo.

"Playmaking" is the most misused word in sports, and is abused like a redheaded stepchild by football fans. Tackling a guy short of a first down is making a play, and it's every bit as important as a sack.

 

[JackBauer]

Are you sure that's not age?

Elite big men typically can play pretty well into their mid-30s. See: Wilfork's predecessors Ted Washington and Keith Traylor.

 

[Kontradiction]

Based solely on this season, I'd put Wilfork, McCourty and Talib comfortably out in front of Mayo, Jones ahead of him and then Jerod with guys like Nink and Kelly in the near vicinity.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I like the improvement in pass coverage over the middle, and Mayo has been impressing there. As someone else said, he's also a tackling machine as well.

 

[Kontradiction]

Yeah, speaking of I've noticed Hightower seems to be playing a lot better in space. In fact, he's really elevated his game period. Definitely one of the most improved players from last year's team.

Both Hightower and Mayo have both improved over the last year when it comes to coverage on TE's and RB's.

 

[coolguy]

"Playmaking" is the most misused word in sports, and is abused like a redheaded stepchild by football fans. Tackling a guy short of a first down is making a play, and it's every bit as important as a sack.

playmakers wins championships.

case and point


the greatest play in patriot history


Tedy had all the abilities mayo has, and he made big plays when the team needed them.

 

[Deus Irae]

playmakers wins championships.

Good teams win championships. For all the "playmakers" that Patriots team had, how'd it do in 2002 when it didn't have a NT who could get the job done?

The best "playmaker" in the NFL, arguably, is Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson. Zero Championships. JJ Watt is the best defensive "playmaker" in the game today. How'd that work out for the Texans in the playoffs last year?

 

[coolguy]

Good teams win championships.

I'm not too sure about that anymore. The teams that get hot at the right time wins championships..................with their playmakers

 

[Deus Irae]

I'm not too sure about that anymore. The teams that get hot at the right moment wins championships..................with their playmakers

Name a bad team that's won the SB.

 

[coolguy]

Name a bad team that's won the SB.

The last 3 superbowl champions were mediocre to average during the regular season before they got hot.

 

[Ring 6]

The last 3 superbowl champions were mediocre to average during the regular season before they got hot.

The goal of a team is not to look pretty in the regular season.
The goal of each and every team is to win the SB.
It is ludicrous to say a team that achieved its ultimate goal was not good because they were not good at a lesser goal.

 

[Oswlek]

The goal of a team is not to look pretty in the regular season.
The goal of each and every team is to win the SB.
It is ludicrous to say a team that achieved its ultimate goal was not good because they were not good at a lesser goal.

Perhaps, but it is fair to wonder what it means when a team that was one of the worst in the entire NFL last December, as well as another the year before that had a negative point differential and wouldn't even had been a playoff squad in any other division, won championships.

You can't tell me that either of those were intentional, or that they in any way aided their ultimate goals.

That is one of the reasons why I'm not worried about this season. I'm reasonably confident that NE will be a playoff team even if they somehow lose the division to Miami, and the past few years have demonstrated that seeding isn't nearly as meaningful as it used to be.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

The last 3 superbowl champions were mediocre to average during the regular season before they got hot.

This is potentially an endless, circular argument/discussion in which our position depends on where we jump into the circle.

I really don't know the answer, but your comment got me thinking.

Can a team that "got hot" and won a series of tough Playoff games, including on the Road, against very good teams in order to win the Championship still be regarded as having been "mediocre to average" during the regular season, or was it indeed a team that never really was "mediocre to average" but whose record, for whatever reason, didn't reflect its quality?

Or should we just default to Bill Parcells' famous saying that "You are what your record says you are?" If your record says that you're a 4--4 team at the midpoint of the season, then you are, at that time, a 0.500 team; no qualifiers like "mediocre" or "under-performing" are needed, it's still just "a 0.500 team." But if that team goes on to win the very last game on the last Sunday of the NFL Season, then it's record will say that it was better than all the rest, no matter what preceded it.

Since the difference between a W and an L during the regular season in the NFL can be so slim and since the rhythms of an NFL season can be so unpredictable, can we really say that a 10--6 or even a 9--7 team that goes on to win a Championship was "mediocre?" Or should we just say that it had a statistically inferior record at one point in the season in comparison to other teams that many observes considered to have been better?

I honestly don't know.



[PS: none of the above suggests that we can't pass judgment on a team as "bad" or "very good" during the season, just that it's hard to look back on the SB champion and argue that they were "mediocre."]