Bostondotcom: Welcome everyone to today's chat with Ron Borges. He will begin answering your questions shortly.
Chris: Ron -- With regards to game planning for Thomlinson: a lot of references have been made to employing a defense similar to that employed against Marshall Faulk in SBXXXVI. Belichick also had a similar task as Defensive Coordinator for the Giants containing Thurman Thomas in SBXXV. I think Thomlinson is closer in style to Thomas than Faulk (power back than can catch). Were both of these game plans similar or different? Do you see the Pats employing a variation of one or the other against San Diego?
Ron_Borges: Good question Chris. Faulk was primarily taken out of the passing game by Willie McGinest, who possessed unique size-speed ratios. They could perhaps do that with Rosevelt Colvin but it would take one of their best pass rushers out of the mix. Mike Vrabel would have been useful in that role but with him inside and Tully Banta-Cain at outside linebacker in limits what New england can do. I think they'll set their defensive ends wider than normal to protect the edge of their defense, where Banta-Cain is a liability in run defense and hope to funnel tomlinson inside the tackles. he can do damage there as well but not as much as when he gets to the edge of the defense.
Marty5and12: We all know LT will be tough to stop but what about Antonio Gates finding those pockets in the Zone D? Is this a pick your poison type of scenario?
Ron_Borges: You are exactly right. I spoke with a half dozen defensive coaches, head coaches and/or advance scouts this week who faced the Chargers this year and all spoke of the problems caused by Gates. None felt you could play eight men in the box to stop the run because it would leave you too vulnerable to being hit in the middle of the field by Gates. The good news is that even though he is San diego's leading receiver many coaches felt he was underused by their young quarterback, Philip Rivers. The Patriots would like to see that continue on Sunday but your point is well taken. It's a slow death or a quick one and neither is all that enjoyable to face.
Batesie52: What do you think of the Pats switching to the 4-3 in an attempt to briefly confuse SD? With the injuries to the linebackers, I think the greatest area of strength is the D-line. A defense of Wilfork, Wright, Seymour, and Warren with Green rotating in and Bruschi with Vrabel and Colvin playing their better respective sides with Banta Cain rotating in seems more imposing than their current 3-4 look. I think a switch may be ibn order like Stallone's hat in Over the Top.
Ron_Borges: Well, the 3-4 was created to stop a running team like the Chargers so you'd be going away from the strength of your defensive alignment in switching to the 4-3. You're right about having better linemen these days than linebackers but the 3-4 was created to contend with strong running games because it allows you to protect your flanks while at the same time being stronger in the middle if the nsoe tackle can hold his ground. That's why Vince Wilfork is a key player in this game. I think they'll stick with the 3-4 but flex their ends to the outside shoulder of the offensive tackles, thus forcing Tomlinson to run inside.
..... The rest available at :
http://www.boston.com/sports/footba...07/01/11/ron_borges_patriots_chat_transcript/
