How would the "old D" do in the modern game ?

[farn]

I am actually wondering how you guys think the 03/04 defenses would do in 2011 considering the rules and the pass first mentality.

I know several people on this board have good knowledge of technique and specific rules, I'd be interested in your take. For example : would Ted Johnson's role be greatly diminished ? Would T Poole be in the same situation recent CBs have been in (roasted) ?

Thanks.

 

[randomk1]

talent is talent.

 

[fair catch fryar]

talent is talent.

Agree 100%. Bruschi, Harrison, McGinest, Law and Vrabel aren't walking through that door. Everyone of these guys seemed to come up with the big play when it was needed; something this current D really seems to lack.

 

[ausbacker]

The secondary would be called for holding, illegal contact, hitting defenseless receivers and pass interference almost every play. Ridiculous huh.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

The version we have now is sort of the "Polian Game." I remember one of those '04 or '05 games against the Colts, when one of the mediots wrote about "what Manning and Harrison can do against the Patriots, now that the handles have been taken off their uniforms."

Granted, it does get better and better for QBs... OMG! Peyton threw 49 TDs! OMG! Brady threw 50! OMG OMG, nobody use to even get CLOSE to that!

Um, how many will Rogers throw this year? I haven't been tracking it. But you get the idea.

That said, it is what it is. Score points and you fill seats. The League gets it... points have to cluster in the 20s and 30s per week, but not the single digits or the teens. Can't make points so cheap you lose track of a truly virtuoso performance -- we already have an Arena League. Short of that, the goal is to emphasize big plays, not slow trudges in the trenches.

One more thing... throughout the 01-04 SB years, I heard Pats fans complaining how it's all about the offense and we had a pretty crappy D... sure they make big plays now and then but the only one worth a damn is Seymour... etc. etc. etc. The only player in a Patriots secondary that was universally lauded was Rodney Harrison... every other one we've ever had was a "bum."

Maybe we need to understand that we have talent out there now... Hell, we might even have better talent now than at the start of the season, now that we have to rely on some of the "jag" talent, pending a few more results.

Point is in 10 years someone will be pointing a finger back at these guys and saying "why don't we have guys like that." They've stunk up the league thus far, but I guarantee you one or the other guy on that field will be fodder for some fan in 10 years saying "we don't have anybody out there anymore like _____. What we need is a guy like _________."

Just sayin'

 

[FCB02062]

Those defenses had playmakers all over the field, as has been said before. Every level of the defense (line, linebackers, secondary) had at least one big time playmaker in it - a guy who made significant game outcome changing plays throughout the course of the regular season and playoffs. Guys made plays all over the field on those teams. One of the biggest plays of that 01 season was a game sealing pick by Terrell Buckley against the NYJ as Testaverde was driving the NYJ for a go ahead fg very late in the game.
Those defenses would certainly be called for about 12 penalties a game at least.

 

[jmt57]

The majority of those players would adapt to the current style of play, and still be effective and productive players in this or any other era in my opinion.

 

[Kontradiction]

Polian neutered defensive backs before the 2004 season and the old defense still did pretty well for itself.

 

[randomk1]

One more thing... throughout the 01-04 SB years, I heard Pats fans complaining how it's all about the offense and we had a pretty crappy D... sure they make big plays now and then but the only one worth a damn is Seymour... etc. etc. etc. The only player in a Patriots secondary that was universally lauded was Rodney Harrison... every other one we've ever had was a "bum."

Maybe we need to understand that we have talent out there now... Hell, we might even have better talent now than at the start of the season, now that we have to rely on some of the "jag" talent, pending a few more results.

Point is in 10 years someone will be pointing a finger back at these guys and saying "why don't we have guys like that." They've stunk up the league thus far, but I guarantee you one or the other guy on that field will be fodder for some fan in 10 years saying "we don't have anybody out there anymore like _____. What we need is a guy like _________."

Just sayin'

Umm..those were one of the top D's in the league(03 1st in points allowed,04 2nd in points allowed) and regularly won games for us so i really don't know what you're going on about. That front 7 might have been the best in the NFL at one time or another. Not to mention guys like Law,Harrison,Milloy in the secondary. Most importantly of all...they won SBs so that's where the i wish we had X player mentality comes from.

Even if we do win the SB i think it will all come down to Brady carrying us and the D just doing enough.

 

[strngplyr]

The secondary would be called for holding, illegal contact, hitting defenseless receivers and pass interference almost every play. Ridiculous huh.

This. The old D was far too physical for todays game.

Edit: However, as stated, talent is talent. The old defense was more consistent and simply more talented.

 

[everlong]

The Wilson hit on Wayne and the Assante hit on Stokley from the 03 AFCCG both would have been hitting a defenseless receiver. Rodney's fine level was legendary back then, just imagine now. They would still be a damn good defense I'm just saying those things change games.

 

[PittPatriot]

The Wilson hit on Wayne and the Assante hit on Stokley from the 03 AFCCG both would have been hitting a defenseless receiver. Rodney's fine level was legendary back then, just imagine now. They would still be a damn good defense I'm just saying those things change games.

I just don't get the hitting a defenseless receiver thing. Is there no room to jar the ball loose anymore? Gronk got nailed in the midsection and upended on the TD catch vs NYJ and he was "defenseless" but that was not called?
Moore nailed his teammate (McCourty) and that was considered hitting a defenseless receiver.
Anybody know if the rule is just subjective "ooh that sounded bad so I better throw a flag" or is it clearly described?

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Hilarious. Maybe you weren't around Patsfans.com back then, but there was always someone saying how Vrabel and Bruschi were pretty good but never good enough.

Oh and the scoring D metric? We were always pulling it up back then. Know why? Because someone was complaining how we were only middle of the pack at this point or another, based on yards allowed.

One more thing: there have never, never been enough sacks for us to be happy with our D -- despite the fact that the idea was to get "enough" pressure rather than be a sack-happy D.

(You know... enough so that they didn't score a bunch of points.)

This D doesn't compare, at the moment -- and you can't take last week as the single touchstone, tonight they might just stink to high heaven. However, my point remains -- you don't compare what you are still arguing against the "good old days" on which you've reached consensus. The better comparison is between what you thought then, and what you think now.

As a fan-base, the answer has always been some variant of "The 86 Bears were better, the 2000 Ravens were better, Bruschi isn't Singletary or Ray Lewis, we suck."

 

[Patsfan1102]

The old D wouldnt be nearly as good as they were then now. The style of defense we played is not a D you can play with this new soft nfl.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Another nice game last night... and while it can all far too easily fall apart, especially when we finally play someone good again, I'm on the caveated bandwagon at this point.

(Wow what a fun bunch to watch! crossing fingers...)