Stephon Gilmore

[TheBostonStraggler]

Having lots of variables is a fair point that you can't immediately jump to conclusions, but I didn't see that many here pointing to Gilmore prior to this game.

The need to simplify the secondary scheme to the bare bones + communication issues with longtime seasoned veterans who have thrived in much more complex schemes tends to make people look at the new guy a little longer, at least in my opinion.

And I'm pretty sure that pic is pulsating.

Well ok sup, you have a point on the pic.....from one POV it is pulsing . But it is a still image jpeg not a gif. It's only how 'we see it' that the pulsing mirage is there.

Is McCourty playing at his 2016 level? Is Chung playing at his 2016 level? Is Butler playing at his 2016 level? Is the nickle and dome package personnel, including the LBs, playing the same as the 2016 level? So many factors and no one that I see has broke down the big plays through the 4 games to show Gilmore consistently out of place. If so I am willing to see this evidence.

I did some checking on last year regarding the Patriots' D as of the end of September. The Patriots had the 20th ranked D for opposition passing yards. They were 25th in completion % allowed and 26th in passing TD % complete (only 3 I checked).
This is not to say last year's D was in a bad position like this one. Memory and visual observation suggests it isn't. But I think we are all taking the totality of 2016's D and comparing it with the 4 games of 2017. Fair?
Yet if we take that snapshot comparison of Sept 2016 to Sept 2017, maybe it does dull the 2016 rose's bloom just a bit? And remember this, if right now we had 2016's O potency? We would probably be 3-1 if not 4-0, and we'd be sitting here saying 'the D needs some work but we are rolling!. No?

 

[supafly]

I believe each of the last 2 games were 2 20-29 and 2 30+

In the Saints game alone, there were at least 7-8 plays that went for 20+ yards. You can see completions of 20, 21, 25, 29, 33, 38, and 42, and that's if I didn't miss any.

The big play trend has certainly continued post-week one.

 

[PatriotsNumero1Fan]

In the Saints game alone, there were at least 7-8 plays that went for 20+ yards. You can see completions of 20, 21, 25, 29, 33, 38, and 42, and that's if I didn't miss any.

The big play trend has certainly continued post-week one.

Enough is enough unless they want to be in the record books. It starts in Tampa bay.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Gilmore could be the stupidest defensive back to ever play for the pats.

I am absolutely certain he probably can not read or write so how can bb expect this guy to learn a playbook,

Is there not a quiet corner of th bench we can send him to for the rest of the year?

 

[Ring 6]

In the Saints game alone, there were at least 7-8 plays that went for 20+ yards. You can see completions of 20, 21, 25, 29, 33, 38, and 42, and that's if I didn't miss any.

The big play trend has certainly continued post-week one.

That was 3 games ago and I thought the d played well in that game.
I was giving numbers from the last 2.

 

[supafly]

Well ok sup, you have a point on the pic.....from one POV it is pulsing . But it is a still image jpeg not a gif. It's only how 'we see it' that the pulsing mirage is there.

Is McCourty playing at his 2016 level? Is Chung playing at his 2016 level? Is Butler playing at his 2016 level? Is the nickle and dome package personnel, including the LBs, playing the same as the 2016 level? So many factors and no one that I see has broke down the big plays through the 4 games to show Gilmore consistently out of place. If so I am willing to see this evidence.

I did some checking on last year regarding the Patriots' D as of the end of September. The Patriots had the 20th ranked D for opposition passing yards. They were 25th in completion % allowed and 26th in passing TD % complete (only 3 I checked).
This is not to say last year's D was in a bad position like this one. Memory and visual observation suggests it isn't. But I think we are all taking the totality of 2016's D and comparing it with the 4 games of 2017. Fair?
Yet if we take that snapshot comparison of Sept 2016 to Sept 2017, maybe it does dull the 2016 rose's bloom just a bit? And remember this, if right now we had 2016's O potency? We would probably be 3-1 if not 4-0, and we'd be sitting here saying 'the D needs some work but we are rolling!. No?

Yeah, I get where you're coming from about different variables and trying not to jump to conclusions, but through week 4 of last season the defense was allowing 15.25 points per game.

The following three weeks (weeks 5-7) saw defensive totals of 13, 17, and 16, so that takes us through the first 7 games, or approx. half the season. I don't see much comparison at all between last year's defense and this one, but I get your point.

 

[Ring 6]

Gilmore could be the stupidest defensive back to ever play for the pats.

I am absolutely certain he probably can not read or write so how can bb expect this guy to learn a playbook,

Is there not a quiet corner of th bench we can send him to for the rest of the year?

Please delineated all the time you have spent with Gilmore and how you know him so well. Or just stfu.

 

[Ring 6]

Yeah, I get where you're coming from about different variables and trying not to jump to conclusions, but through week 4 of last season the defense was allowing 15.25 points per game.

The following three weeks (weeks 5-7) saw defensive totals of 13, 17, and 16, so that takes us through the first 7 games, or approx. half the season. I don't see much comparison at all between last year's defense and this one, but I get your point.

We also faced sone pretty crappy offenses at the beginning of last year.

 

[supafly]

We also faced sone pretty crappy offenses at the beginning of last year.

I'm simply responding to a poster who made a comparison about the 2016 vs 2017 defenses.

As far as the "crappy offense" argument goes, it was you who attempted to make fun of me when I pointed out the potential of the Saints skill position players: Coleman, Kamara, Fleener, Ginn, etc. You claimed they had as many JAGs and were as bad as the Jets, so no one was really fearing that offense, at least from your perspective. At the very least, we should be able to agree that those players should not have put up 8 plays of 20+ yards.

The next week saw the (then) hapless Houston Texans, who were at or near the bottom of the league in most offensive categories. They had their breakout game against this piss poor defense.

The next week saw the (then) hapless Carolina Panthers, who had the 29th ranked offense at the time and who had only scored three touchdowns in their first 33 possessions on the year.

I don't buy into the bad offense of 2016 theory as much as you suggest. Good defense is good defense.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm simply responding to a poster who made a comparison about the 2016 vs 2017 defenses.

As far as the "crappy offense" argument goes, it was you who attempted to make fun of me when I pointed out the potential of the Saints skill position players: Coleman, Kamara, Fleener, Ginn, etc. You claimed they had as many JAGs and were as bad as the Jets, so no one was really fearing that offense, at least from your perspective. At the very least, we should be able to agree that those players should not have put up 8 plays of 20+ yards.

Come on you know that's not what I said.

The next week saw the (then) hapless Houston Texans, who were at or near the bottom of the league in most offensive categories. They had their breakout game against this piss poor defense.

They score 57 last week.

The next week saw the (then) hapless Carolina Panthers, who had the 29th ranked offense at the time and who had only scored three touchdowns in their first 33 possessions on the year.

I don't buy into the bad offense of 2016 theory as much as you suggest. Good defense is good defense.

Oh there is no doubt that defense was playing better last year it's just that using ppg blindly isn't a complete analysis. I was simply adding that as a consideration.

 

[supafly]

Oh there is no doubt that defense was playing better last year it's just that using ppg blindly isn't a complete analysis. I was simply adding that as a consideration.

Okay, fine, fair enough, but the growing pain theory that I've seen several posters suggest did not apply to last year's defense, at least in terms of points allowed in the months of Sept and Oct. The 2016 version of early season growing pains saw them give up 21 and then 24 (garbage time with large lead) then improve to 0, 16, 13, 16, and 17 over the course of the next five games.

The two games where they allowed the most points (BUF 25, SEA 31) were actually sandwiched around the mid-season bye. As we know, they closed out the season strong, too.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Yeah, I get where you're coming from about different variables and trying not to jump to conclusions, but through week 4 of last season the defense was allowing 15.25 points per game.

The following three weeks (weeks 5-7) saw defensive totals of 13, 17, and 16, so that takes us through the first 7 games, or approx. half the season. I don't see much comparison at all between last year's defense and this one, but I get your point.

Correction to my last post Sup (memory is the first thing to go): Brady was out and the O was doing good until the week 4 Buffalo game. My bad
And let me make it clear, I am not saying the 2016 and 2017 D as of September's end were equivalent. The 2017 D is doing what you can! not! do! -- give up too many big plays. If that doesn't get fixed this is going to be uglier than 2011 (a season which still makes me think "how did we get to the SB and come so close to winning it"). With that said, if you look at 2016 you see that the D kicked it into extra high gear as of week 10. Points allowed in those games: 3, 3, 10, 10, 14, 17, 23. I think even the putrid 2011 pass defense got somewhat better by December(?). But again, to be clear, the 2017 D appears to have a bigger gaping hole than week 4, 2016 D.

I'm going for the abstract point that many will see the 2016 D in the context of the full season versus 4 games of 2017. That will skew reality to do some degree. Regardless, bottom line: I'd like to see the film breakdown of the big plays allowed over the first 4 games. Was Gilmore out of place repeatedly? Is the receiver/area he is covering giving up too numerous catches and yards? (I'm surprised no mediot or super fan has done that 4 game breakdown).

 

[Ring 6]

Okay, fine, fair enough, but the growing pain theory that I've seen several posters suggest did not apply to last year's defense, at least in terms of points allowed in the months of Sept and Oct. The 2016 version of early season growing pains saw them give up 21 and then 24 (garbage time with large lead) then improve to 0, 16, 13, 16, and 17 over the course of the next five games.

The two games where they allowed the most points (BUF 25, SEA 31) were actually sandwiched around the mid-season bye. As we know, they closed out the season strong, too.

Why would every season have to have growing pains for it to be valid in any season?
Frankly the Seattle game was really the only bad game the defense played last year (buff scored in garbage time to get to 25)
This years defense over the course of the season will not be as good as last years. (but the offense will be better bet). Who cares? What matters is where they are by December.

If Brady carries the team to 6-2 in the first half and the defense is near the bottom but making strides and then over the 2nd half they play just as well
as they did last year what are we worried about?
Relax and let BB do what he does.

 

[supafly]

Regardless, bottom line: I'd like to see the film breakdown of the big plays allowed over the first 4 games. Was Gilmore out of place repeatedly? Is the receiver/area he is covering giving up too numerous catches and yards? (I'm surprised no mediot or super fan has done that 4 game breakdown).

I'd like to see the film, as well, but we're starting to hear the mediots chime in with their takes and it's difficult to ignore the fact that Gilmore hasn't lived up to his hype and seems to be responsible for some of the miscommunication issues. While I agree with your suggestion that he seems to be an easy target, the truth will come out in the coming weeks/months.

In the meantime, WEEI's Hannable claims that "he's been involved in roughly 3/4 of the big plays," and that "he appears to have most of his issues when receivers go in motion (communication issue) and then against stacked formations (sounds like another example of a communication issue.)"

How much of that is true? I have no idea, but I think it's fair to keep a close eye on him moving forward. If, and it's a huge "if," he was benched yesterday and then forced to return due to Rowe's injury, that's a terrible sign. We'll find out more in the coming games. Here's hoping that he has a great bounce back performance on TNF so that they can go into their mini-bye 3-2 with some optimism towards ironing out their issues.

 

[Ring 6]

I'd like to see the film, as well, but we're starting to hear the mediots chime in with their takes and it's difficult to ignore the fact that Gilmore hasn't lived up to his hype and seems to be responsible for some of the miscommunication issues. While I agree with your suggestion that he seems to be an easy target, the truth will come out in the coming weeks/months.

In the meantime, WEEI's Hannable claims that "he's been involved in roughly 3/4 of the big plays," and that "he appears to have most of his issues when receivers go in motion (communication issue) and then against stacked formations (sounds like another example of a communication issue.)"

How much of that is true? I have no idea, but I think it's fair to keep a close eye on him moving forward. If, and it's a huge "if," he was benched yesterday and then forced to return due to Rowe's injury, that's a terrible sign. We'll find out more in the coming games. Here's hoping that he has a great bounce back performance on TNF so that they can go into their mini-bye 3-2 with some optimism towards ironing out their issues.

You know better than to trust "the mediots".

 

[supafly]

Why would every season have to have growing pains for it to be valid in any season?

Many posters have been parroting the idea that most/all Bill Belichick coached teams start out the season with many issues on defense, particularly during the earlier months of Sept/Oct. We've seen many comments like that, about how slow they always start out, etc.

I'm simply stating how that wasn't the case last season. Their version of needing to iron out issues was nowhere close to giving up 456 yards a game, or 32 ppg. That didn't happen, as their version of a "really bad game" in the beginning of last year came during week one when they gave up 21 points on the road to an NFCCG participant from the previous year.

 

[Ring 6]

Many posters have been parroting the idea that most/all Bill Belichick coached teams start out the season with many issues on defense, particularly during the earlier months of Sept/Oct. We've seen many comments like that, about how slow they always start out, etc.

I'm simply stating how that wasn't the case last season. Their version of needing to iron out issues was nowhere close to giving up 456 yards a game, or 32 ppg. That didn't happen, as their version of a "really bad game" in the beginning of last year came during week one when they gave up 21 points on the road to an NFCCG participant from the previous year.

No. really bad was letting Ryan tannehill turn 31-3 into 31-24 on 3 consecutive td drives leaving us only 7 points ahead with over 6 minutes to go.
Nonetheless why are we arguing about "what posters say"?

The reality is that belichick defenses consistently improve over the course of the season and often peak by the playoffs.

I think it's football and you can't fix a box to fit everything that happens into.
As I said relax and let BB do what he does.

 

[randomk1]

This guy just isn't Patriot material. Soft and dumb.

 

[supafly]

You know better than to trust "the mediots".

Common sense: Gilmore is the new player added to the secondary, so it would make sense that the communication issues would probably lie closer to him vs. proven seasoned vets who are familiar with the system and have excelled within it.

Patriots players: "we've simplified our system to the basics," (paraphrasing) and that "there are way too many communication issues."

Eye test: Gilmore's having issues on at least a moderate level. We now have 4 games to go on. The defense is sucking at a record setting pace, particularly in the secondary.

Other posters' takes: Gilmore's obviously having issues.

Media members: Gilmore's having issues, with some type of numeric breakdown to back that up.

--------

What are people supposed to think?

 

[supafly]

Nonetheless why are we arguing about "what posters say"?

You asked about the relevance of the (supposed) early season struggles from last year. I answered your question by pointing out that any early season struggles were very minor compared to this year, and as a matter of fact, probably didn't even exist in the first place, considering points allowed of 0, 16, 13, 17, and 16 in weeks 3-7.