Rushing D isn't getting it done

[Huckleberry1]

The question is who is out there and what options does New England have to help fix the run D? I can't imagine we're in a strong position to acquire anyone of note.

I don't think there is much they can do in terms of bringing players in to help the DL, it is going to have to come from the guys on the roster. Getting Kelly back and having Armstead come off the PUP and contribute are really the only additions I can see being of any help. Other than that they probably need to be a 3-4 team with both Spikes and Hightower inside to really shore it up. If Jones can play outside in a 3-4 it would really help i am just not sure if he is ready for that. Right now they are just going to have to make do with what they have.

 

[manxman2601]

The question is who is out there and what options does New England have to help fix the run D? I can't imagine we're in a strong position to acquire anyone of note.

Do people have an opinion on Pat Sims at Oakland? He's only on a one year contract there and isn't expensive and he's a specialist run-stopper.

 

[cstjohn17]

Rush D wasn't terrible they allowed 3.4 YPC. Take out Smith's runs and it was 3.1 YPC

You know what the league lead in least YPC allowed was coming into this week? 3.0 by the Jets.

Pats actually were under their average for the season in YPC allowed (4.2) today.

I agree, the offense was 1-12 on 3rd down which constantly puts the defense back on the field. They weren't great but in the majority of the blame pie should be directed towards the offense.

 

[Rob0729]

We should be fine against MIA and the run. Now the pass they have some decent WRs. Need Talib back this week...Kelly back next

I hope Kelly is back this week. The Dolphins' o-line sucks and Tannehill gets sacked a lot, I think Kelly paired up with the Jones boys on passing downs might cause some havoc.

 

[AzPatsFan]

What the hell do you expect man?!? The defenses heart has been ripped out and for some damn reason you expect them to not struggle? People being surprised by this irritates the crap out me.

This team not just this defense has been absolutely decimated by injuries and **** luck. Your seriously gonna ***** about bad run D?

Some people have no perspective, at all...

 

[Timbo717]

If I'm counting right (I'm probably not exact) by the play by play, about 45-50% of their carries (non-Geno) were for 3 yards or less and another 15ish% went for 4. That isn't terrible given the injuries and circumstances.

They rushed the ball alot and had the ball alot. Would like to cut down the 170 yards but to do that you need to control the ball more on offense.

 

[SVN]

they had the ball for 46 minutes. no defense can play and stay fresh for that long.

 

[sb1]

Disagree with most.

30 carries is considered a big workload for a running game, and if you can give your backs 30 carries it means the running game is working.

This was 52 carries. That speaks a lot louder than the yards per carry. 52 carries allowed means the other team is controlling the clock at will and wearing out the defense up front. That's one of the whole points of a good running game.

If you can't stop them from doing that then you are not playing good run D.

 

[Froob]

Disagree with most.

30 carries is considered a big workload for a running game, and if you can give your backs 30 carries it means the running game is working.

This was 52 carries. That speaks a lot louder than the yards per carry. 52 carries allowed means the other team is controlling the clock at will and wearing out the defense up front. That's one of the whole points of a good running game.

If you can't stop them from doing that then you are not playing good run D.

Could have something to do with the offense going 3 and out all day....

 

[cstjohn17]

Disagree with most.

30 carries is considered a big workload for a running game, and if you can give your backs 30 carries it means the running game is working.

This was 52 carries. That speaks a lot louder than the yards per carry. 52 carries allowed means the other team is controlling the clock at will and wearing out the defense up front. That's one of the whole points of a good running game.

If you can't stop them from doing that then you are not playing good run D.

Can it be both? The Patriots offense couldn't stay on the field at all, 1/12 on 3rd downs and the defense couldn't make key stops.

 

[mgteich]

Allowing a net 13 points (20 less the 7 they scored) in regulation is AWESOME, especially given how long they were on the field. And they were on the field because the offense took a quarter off and completed almost no 3rd down plays during the game.

The D definitely took a step back, but they still held the Jets to 20 despite the Pats O taking a whole quarter off.

 

[supafly]

The N.England defense is currently ranked 31st out of 32 teams in terms of yards per game given up on the ground.

They are averaging 127 yards per game now (31st), and it's actually way higher in the past few games with Vince Wilfork out. Let's hope that they improve on this, but with the loss of Mayo now they have their work cut out for them.

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

Allowing a net 13 points (20 less the 7 they scored) in regulation is AWESOME, especially given how long they were on the field. And they were on the field because the offense took a quarter off and completed almost no 3rd down plays during the game.

Not sure if disagreeing or just emphasizing. For the record I thought the defense played exceptionally well given its current state, but the 3rd down conversion rate and number of big plays allowed appeared to have taken a hit. I'm too lazy to check it now, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[supafly]

For the record I thought the defense played exceptionally well given its current state, but the 3rd down conversion rate and number of big plays allowed appeared to have taken a hit.

The Jets had a RB who topped 100 yards, and 2 receivers who had close to 100 yards themselves. They converted 6 straight first downs, and had scoring drives on 6/13 total drives in the game; all while having the ball for 46 minutes to our 23.

This came from an astonishing group of skill position players that included: Rookie Geno Smith, Jeff Cumberland, Bilall Powell, David Nelson, Chris Ivory, Jeremy Kerley, Stephen Hill, and Tommy Bohanon......

I really don't know if we will face a sorrier group of skill position players all year, or that we even did last year for that matter. If we're going to be smiling for the defensive performance from Sunday's game, then the bar has been brought down significantly lower from the first month--that's for sure.

On top of that we now have the 31st ranked rush defense in the entire league who are giving up 127 yds per game on the ground.

Not meaning to be a downer, but I think we're a long way off from what the defense looked like a few weeks ago, and that is extremely unfortunate.

 

[manxman2601]

The Jets had a RB who topped 100 yards, and 2 receivers who had close to 100 yards themselves. They converted 6 straight first downs, and had scoring drives on 6/13 total drives in the game; all while having the ball for 46 minutes to our 23.

This came from an astonishing group of skill position players that included: Rookie Geno Smith, Jeff Cumberland, Bilall Powell, David Nelson, Chris Ivory, Jeremy Kerley, Stephen Hill, and Tommy Bohanon......

I really don't know if we will face a sorrier group of skill position players all year, or that we even did last year for that matter. If we're going to be smiling for the defensive performance from Sunday's game, then the bar has been brought down significantly lower from the first month--that's for sure.

On top of that we now have the 31st ranked rush defense in the entire league who are giving up 127 yds per game on the ground.

Not meaning to be a downer, but I think we're a long way off from what the defense looked like a few weeks ago, and that is extremely unfortunate.

Yes because without playing us, the Jets would be winless. Oh but wait. This sorry assed team you're describing have a winning record and are only one game behind our good selves.

As for the performance of our D, the Jets ran 52 times against us for only 3.4 ypc (less if you take out Geno's runs). The last time a defense kept a team that ran that much to such a low average was 2003. Before that, 1998.

 

[supafly]

Yes because without playing us, the Jets would be winless. Oh but wait. This sorry assed team you're describing have a winning record and are only one game behind our good selves.

As for the performance of our D, the Jets ran 52 times against us for only 3.4 ypc (less if you take out Geno's runs). The last time a defense kept a team that ran that much to such a low average was 2003. Before that, 1998.

This defense WAS looking much better, the past couple of games since the loss of both players occurred is a much different story. We'll have to see where it lies moving forward, but let's try and call it like it is.

Yes--they "only" got 3.4 ypc, however they did exactly what they set out to do. We couldn't stop them. They controlled the clock with 46 min to 23 min, converted 6 straight third down attempts, made a plethora of bigger plays of 10+ yds, had a 100 yard rusher, and close to TWO 100 yard receivers. THIS is a "good" defensive performance these days?

Yet, you try and spin this as if it's something impressive against the most ridiculous group of offensive misfits that may be the worst group of skill position players that we've faced in years....

The fact remains that since Wilfork and Mayo have both been out, the defense has given up an average of 29 points per game, and over 150 yards on the ground. Let's try and call it like it was, but as pointed out by others I do respect your optimistic viewpoint. If you think that was acceptable Patriots football then I suppose it's a difference of opinions. I think it was mediocre at best.

 

[supafly]

Yes because without playing us, the Jets would be winless. Oh but wait. This sorry assed team you're describing have a winning record and are only one game behind our good selves.

As for the performance of our D, the Jets ran 52 times against us for only 3.4 ypc (less if you take out Geno's runs). The last time a defense kept a team that ran that much to such a low average was 2003. Before that, 1998.

If I had told you that we'd need 3 fourth quarter INT's to avoid getting swept by the hapless NYJ a month or two ago, and that both games would be decided by a FG with both teams scoring the exact same amount of points, you'd have laughed me out of the water and totally given up on the season---admit it.

The fact that guys like Tommy Bohanon, Jeff Cumberland, Bilall Powell, Chris Ivory, and a rookie QB who got his ass handed to him by the lowly 1-4 Steelers just a week prior speaks volumes, and you know it.

Let's knock off the spin doctor technique.

The defense DID look much better until the loss of some very key members, but the guys we have now are the players who will represent us moving forward throughout 2013; and we honestly have no idea whatsoever what they will look like. I agree that they should still be much improved from past years, but none of us know where that will lead us in the next 2 months.

Attempting to bring up "records" for a rush defense that gave up 177 yds is really showing some insane rose-colored glasses, and this is coming from someone who is normally a homer much more than a chicken little.

Your comments remind me about some thoughts after the shellacking of the Ravens playoff game at the end of the '09 season. "Yes, they gave up 240 yards on the ground, BUT....80 of those yards were on the first play of the game. If you take away that first run from Rice for 80 yards, the rush defense looked great....."

 

[Fencer]

The N.England defense is currently ranked 31st out of 32 teams in terms of yards per game given up on the ground.

They are averaging 127 yards per game now (31st), and it's actually way higher in the past few games with Vince Wilfork out. Let's hope that they improve on this, but with the loss of Mayo now they have their work cut out for them.

That could be construed as a compliment paid by opposing coaches to the Patriots secondary.

At least, it could if the Patriots are close to the league lead in defensive run/pass ratio, something I presume is the case but am too lazy at the moment to look up.

 

[supafly]

That could be construed as a compliment paid by opposing coaches to the Patriots secondary.

At least, it could if the Patriots are close to the league lead in defensive run/pass ratio, something I presume is the case but am too lazy at the moment to look up.

It could. That's a fine point. One could also argue your point that it's a compliment to our run defense in the past couple of years, as our pass numbers allowed were very high. The bottom line however, is that we all know they weren't getting the job done and it was an enormous weakness.

My concern is that the numbers have increased dramatically in the wrong direction since both Wilfork/Mayo have been out. I believe that we're giving up north of 150 yds per game on the ground since the unfortunate injuries.

In the end the only thing that matters is the points anyway, so let's hope that they can progress and can back to the first 4 games. I think they are continuing to look mediocre in the absence of some very important players, but the worry is that it's not good enough. I definitely don't see it as something worth bragging about as others have been doing, but we'll have to see where it heads. Hopefully they come out looking great on Sunday vs the very limited rushing attack of Lamar Miller and Daniel Thomas.

 

[mgteich]

It is what is it is. We give up 4.0 YPC about average for NFL teams (tied for 17-20). This isn't terrible. I agree that we need improvement. I'm not sure that we'll get it, other than playing poorer run offenses.

I'm much more worried about the 3rd down performance of the offense, among the very worst in the league.

IMHO, yards per game is not the appropriate stat. When your secondary is lights out, teams will run more.

It could. That's a fine point. One could also argue your point that it's a compliment to our run defense in the past couple of years, as our pass numbers allowed were very high. The bottom line however, is that we all know they weren't getting the job done and it was an enormous weakness.

My concern is that the numbers have increased dramatically in the wrong direction since both Wilfork/Mayo have been out. I believe that we're giving up north of 150 yds per game on the ground since the unfortunate injuries.

In the end the only thing that matters is the points anyway, so let's hope that they can progress and can back to the first 4 games. I think they are continuing to look mediocre in the absence of some very important players, but the worry is that it's not good enough. I definitely don't see it as something worth bragging about as others have been doing, but we'll have to see where it heads. Hopefully they come out looking great on Sunday vs the very limited rushing attack of Lamar Miller and Daniel Thomas.