Can this team win a ring with Pees at coordinator?

[maverick4]

By aluminum seats:

In fact, the Pats 1st & 2nd half splits this year are pretty stark. They’ve been ahead at halftime every game this year except for opening day against the Bills. Conversely, their second half record is 5-4-1.

The quarter-by-quarter breakdown is as follows:

1st Quarter: Pats 71, Opponents 27
2nd Quarter: Pats 125, Opponents 52
3rd Quarter Pats 39, Opponents 37
4th Quarter Pats 55, Opponents 45

OK, so while the Pats aren’t losing any quarters, the second half is looking like a different game than the first half.

 

[Sicilian]

2. During the Jets game they showed that Belichick is 66-1 from 2001-2008 if he has the lead at half time, whereas they already lost 3 times this year with a half time lead.

And shockingly, Pees was the DC for 3 years that helped contribute to that 66-1 record. Yet, for some reason, it's his fault this year? Not the departure of a half dozen veterans and the addition of a lot of youth?

 

[BradyFTW!]

1. Belichick took over play calling in December, after pretty much giving Mangini a LONG leash of crappy play calling all season long. Pees isn't absurdly bad (so BB wouldn't step in), just bad enough that it is a point of discussion for winning a ring.

2. During the Jets game they showed that Belichick is 66-1 from 2001-2008 if he has the lead at half time, whereas they already lost 3 times this year with a half time lead.

If he was bad, Belichick would be calling the plays. He has in the past. You're drawing arbitrary distinctions between levels of bad, with no basis in reality for any of it. The only relevant point to this discussion is that Belichick has a proven willingness to take over for DCs who aren't performing well enough. Clearly, Pees is performing above that standard, and I really, really doubt that Belichick goes into the game thinking "gee, Pees sucks, and we'll never win a Super Bowl with him, but I just really don't want to hurt the guy's feelings."

If Belichick didn't think that we could win a SB with him, Belichick would be calling the plays. This is sorta his area of expertise, after all.

 

[BradyFTW!]

1. Belichick took over play calling in December, after pretty much giving Mangini a LONG leash of crappy play calling all season long. Pees isn't absurdly bad (so BB wouldn't step in), just bad enough that it is a point of discussion for winning a ring.

2. During the Jets game they showed that Belichick is 66-1 from 2001-2008 if he has the lead at half time, whereas they already lost 3 times this year with a half time lead.

2. I already talked about that. Pees was the DC for 3 of the good years too, so pointing at him as 'the reason' is stupid. There are a lot of things that changed between 2008 and 2009, most notably second half scoring and a huge defensive personnel overhaul. If you had any inclination at all to think rationally about this, you'd zero in on those points for why we've lost 3 times with a halftime lead. Instead, you just go back to blaming the coordinator for imaginary shortcomings, which has pretty much been your MO for three solid years.

 

[maverick4]

If he was bad, Belichick would be calling the plays. He has in the past. .

This is a gross simplification. For an entire season, even though it was blatantly obvious that Mangini was a terrible coordinator, he called his crappy plays all season long until only till the very end, when Belichick started calling the defense. Belichick is a defensive guru and still gave his crappy coordinator a long leash.

Pees isn't as bad as Mangini, but the precedent has been set that even for ridiculously poor performance that is clear to all, that Belichick won't step in until the end, even if it's his area of expertise.

 

[letekro]

This is a gross simplification. For an entire season, even though it was blatantly obvious that Mangini was a terrible coordinator, he called his crappy plays all season long until only till the very end, when Belichick started calling the defense. Belichick is a defensive guru and still gave his crappy coordinator a long leash.

Pees isn't as bad as Mangini, but the precedent has been set that even for ridiculously poor performance that is clear to all, that Belichick won't step in until the end, even if it's his area of expertise.

So, it is your position that BB is so concerned about not impinging on the autonomy of his coordinators that he will allow them to continually disobey his wishes to the detriment of the team? I'm sorry but I can't get on board of this crazy train. Other than a need to blame the faceless coordinator, rather than BB or the players, I can't figure out why you would put this on Pees. How about this for an alternate explanation: the bend but don't break style that BB favors relies on playmakers for the "don't break" part. We've had an exodus of playmakers. Until the new guys start regularly making plays, the defense will be inconsistent.

 

[amhunt2]

The answer is yes - because of BB. But Dean Pees is obviously important to BB, as he was appointed DC with confidence. The fact that we are still dealing without a true OC means a lack of confidence in B OBrien. Or simply a more specialized role for him, (i.e. QB coach)

But I'd be more worried about OC than DC, defense is doing their job holding good offenses to little points. But look what happened when McGenious called plays? Offense lit up...there's a whole lot of criticism of play-calling these days

 

[flyonthewall]

This is Pees' 4th year as DC. If the D continues to play well they have a very good shot at setting a new franchise record for fewest points allowed. The previous record of 14.8 ppg was set in 2006 (Pees first year as DC). Even if they don't break it this year, there is still a very good chance that they will take the number 2 spot. That would mean that in ONLY four years as the team DC he will own the #1 and #2 spots in franchise history for fewest points allowed. Furthermore, he will have done it with two almost completely different teams personnel wise. The sad part is that even if this happens, we will still have people making polls like this and calling for a new DC.

 

[Deus Irae]

This is Pees' 4th year as DC. If the D continues to play well they have a very good shot at setting a new franchise record for fewest points allowed. The previous record of 14.8 ppg was set in 2006 (Pees first year as DC). Even if they don't break it this year, there is still a very good chance that they will take the number 2 spot. That would mean that in ONLY four years as the team DC he will own the #1 and #2 spots in franchise history for fewest points allowed. Furthermore, he will have done it with two almost completely different teams personnel wise. The sad part is that even if this happens, we will still have people making polls like this and calling for a new DC.

2007 set the NFL scoring record. Many of the same people complained about McDaniels, even so.


Welcome to Patsfans.com!

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

I cheated. I voted "No" because I think Pees defaults to a passive D and it will take BB to override him to win a title. In that case BB is the coordinator, not Pees.

Regards,
Chris

 

[Seneschal2]

Can this team win a championship with Dean Pees calling the defensive plays?

Of course NE can. Especially when all three units can impact a game.

Didn't vote. Pees seems to be a good and capable DC...but hasn't earned any greatness label at this point.

Regarding the D. First off, this is BB's D. That said, how many new faces on the defense just this season? Now how many first and second year players on the D side (starters and sub-package players)?

There's something to be said for experience...and the mental side of the game.

From my observations, the overall D has been impressive this season -- although inconsistent in specific series of specific games. Are those poor series bad scheming... or lack of cohesiveness based on an inexperienced team D?

IMO, the talent (the on-paper defensive roster) is good enough at all positions except DE/OLB. We'll just have to play out the hand that's been dealt with an inconsistent pass rush from the edge -- for this season. TBC has been solid...but I highly doubt any opponent will be gameplanning toward him or the others.

Hopefully, the secondary will continue to make plays the rest of the season. That, coupled with any edge rush, makes life easier for any DC.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Yes, we can win a ring with Pees as coordinator. He's not great, he's not a hall of famer, but he's pretty good, and he's done a good job for us.

The secondary issues are hardly his fault. There was a serious talent deficiency, which is pretty obvious when Hobbs is your #1 corner (note to Hobbs fans, I'm not bashing him. He was just miscast in his role). The FO recognized this and made a serious effort to fix it this off-season, by signing Bodden and McGowan, and drafting Butler and Chung.

Pees isn't perfect. And that passive play calling drives me insane sometimes. But we've seen more aggressive gameplans the past few weeks, which makes me think he's adapting to his guys as they become more comfortable in the scheme. And they do a good job of taking away the other team's favourite thing, which BB loves to do.

Is he a perfect coordinator? No. But over the years, I think he's done a pretty good job with an old, aging defense. This year, he loses Seymour to a trade right before the start of the season, has to mix in a lot of rookies and some new parts, and overall, this defense has exceeded all of my expectations so far. I think they'll continue to get better, and they could be a great unit.

 

[maverick4]

Yes, we can win a ring with Pees as coordinator. He's not great, he's not a hall of famer, but he's pretty good, and he's done a good job for us.

The secondary issues are hardly his fault. There was a serious talent deficiency, which is pretty obvious when Hobbs is your #1 corner (note to Hobbs fans, I'm not bashing him. He was just miscast in his role). The FO recognized this and made a serious effort to fix it this off-season, by signing Bodden and McGowan, and drafting Butler and Chung.

Pees isn't perfect. And that passive play calling drives me insane sometimes. But we've seen more aggressive gameplans the past few weeks, which makes me think he's adapting to his guys as they become more comfortable in the scheme. And they do a good job of taking away the other team's favourite thing, which BB loves to do.

Is he a perfect coordinator? No. But over the years, I think he's done a pretty good job with an old, aging defense. This year, he loses Seymour to a trade right before the start of the season, has to mix in a lot of rookies and some new parts, and overall, this defense has exceeded all of my expectations so far. I think they'll continue to get better, and they could be a great unit.

The defense is currently #1 in points against this season. Do you think feel confident about this defense (especially the conservative play calls when we lead) if we need to protect a small lead in a big game? I think the D is certainly talented enough, it's the scheme I'm worried about.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Of course the Patriots can win as currently constructed. They could have won all 19 games the year before last with Pees as DC. Their defense is #2 in points allowed.

That doesn't mean that he can't be better.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The defense is currently #1 in points against this season. Do you think feel confident about this defense (especially the conservative play calls when we lead) if we need to protect a small lead in a big game? I think the D is certainly talented enough, it's the scheme I'm worried about.

If that is the case then you should start another poll asking if we can win a ring with this scheme...which has always incorporated conservative playcalls on D when we lead. Except for that time against the Giants when it didn't and we lost anyway...

 

[Sicilian]

If that is the case then you should start another poll asking if we can win a ring with this scheme...which has always incorporated conservative playcalls on D when we lead. Except for that time against the Giants when it didn't and we lost anyway...

That's something I'd really forgotten about (probably for obvious reasons). The best pressure we put on Eli that whole game came on the last drive, where I honestly can't remember a play that Adalius WASN'T right on Manning before he threw.

Fact is, though it took some circus plays, we still gave up the TD. There's no set formula, do this and win, don't do this and lose. Players need to make plays within the scheme, and if they do we're successful. That's why you can have a defense like the Colts (4-3, not much blitzing) win the SB, but also a defense like the Steelers (3-4, tons of blitzing).

 

[maverick4]

I think it's valid to say that 07 could have gone differently and it wasn't necessarily due to anything Pees did wrong in that last game. However, what about other games since 06, all just bad luck or fluke plays, or something more...

 

[BradyFTW!]

I think it's valid to say that 07 could have gone differently and it wasn't necessarily due to anything Pees did wrong in that last game. However, what about other games since 06, all just bad luck or fluke plays, or something more...

Ok, so you've granted that the SB wasn't his fault, and we won the other 18 games. Unless I'm missing something, doesn't that answer your question? Can we finally end this useless thread?

 

[maverick4]

Ok, so you've granted that the SB wasn't his fault, and we won the other 18 games. Unless I'm missing something, doesn't that answer your question?

Not sure if you have general issues with comprehension, but I said that even if you absolve him from the 07 game, he still has a history since 06 of his units not coming through, or Belichick not showing confidence in Pees' ability.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

The defense is currently #1 in points against this season. Do you think feel confident about this defense (especially the conservative play calls when we lead) if we need to protect a small lead in a big game? I think the D is certainly talented enough, it's the scheme I'm worried about.

I actually didn't believe we were that high I checked NFL.com and they've got us at 2nd behind the Colts, still quite high considering how many points we gave up against Indy, and a lot higher than I had assumed.

Having said that much, am I really confident in this defense? Not yet. But I haven't had faith in our defense in a long time. Statistically, they've been pretty good over the past few years. But core guys were getting older like Bruschi and Vrabel and Rodney. And Hobbs was our #1 corner for a while there. But statistically, they were much better than they should have been. And I give credit to Pees for that. This year's defense is evolving and getting better with each week, and I've gained a lot more confidence in them since week 1.

The conservative play calling at the end of games is sucky, no doubt about it. I'd definitely like to see some changes to the way the 4th quarter is being handled on both sides of the ball. But I do believe we can win a Super Bowl with Pees.