I hate to say i told you so

[Tony2046]

Interception is it you?

You'll know once he says "Denver is going to smoke this team"......

 

[Dorito Dink]

No team can ever say they feel confident giving up that amount but with 2014 team, there was a feel that they could get the job done.

What does this even mean? With all due respect, it doesn't matter what your "feel" was; the fact of the matter is that the 2014 defense did not play well in the playoffs. We won because of our offense. I've had this argument with pats*pimp several times but there really isn't much of an argument.

Some posters' revisionist history of the 2014 defense is so odd. They played well in the regular season and played subpar in the playoffs. This whole schtick of "if the defense doesn't improve we will not win this year" is pure garbage.

 

[Patjew]

1776! 1776! 1776!!!!!!

 

[fnordcircle]

I applaud the OP knowingly giving us all a thread that will be fun to bump on 2/6.

 

[Dorito Dink]

Numbers again.....

You didn't take into account teams played or how good their offenses are/were.

Argue that?

No problem; I did. See below for results:



Taking into account the team that was played and comparing the Pats performance versus their season average, looks like the 2014 D was about on par with giving up points to opposing offenses around their season average (-5 point differential). Meanwhile, the 2016 D has given up far less points (-35.6 point differential) to opposing offenses compared to their season average.

Spin as you will but I'll bet the ranch a combination of "eye ball test" and "Big Ben was injured" will be the excuse.


Edit: it should say 2016 avg in the 2016 section, obviously.

 

[Nikolai]

I applaud the OP knowingly giving us all a thread that will be fun to bump on 2/6.

I actually read every post of this thread to see if anyone referenced "I don't care, I can't stand it"

This is pretty much the 2016 version of that thread.

 

[Tony2046]

My "Eyes" tell me when looking at the statistical chart that although there is room for improvement the Pats D is good enough, in a complementary sense, to win a SB. That makes me "feel" good.

But that emotional index has to improve..

 

[TennisBallHead]

Aren't you one of the ones who always talk about the Patriots wasting Brady's years, and how he always has to carry them? Well, here is the highest rating in a playoff loss of recent SB winning QBs:

Rodgers 121.4
Wilson 110.6
Peyton 108.7
Brees 101.2
Flacco 95.4
Ben 94.3
Brady 93.9 (padded his stats in 4th quarter against DEN in'13)
Eli 85.6

I don't think the defense has been great, but Brady's never lost a playoff game where he's played great. Rodgers? 400+ yards passing, 4 touchdowns, 45 points, and a loss.

So if they do lose and score in the teens again (7 of Brady's playoff losses they scored under 20, and the Jets game was the softest 21 ever), give a little of the blame pie to the O.

 

[Ring 6]

No problem; I did. See below for results:



Taking into account the team that was played and comparing the Pats performance versus their season average, looks like the 2014 D was about on par with giving up points to opposing offenses around their season average (-5 point differential). Meanwhile, the 2016 D has given up far less points (-35.6 point differential) to opposing offenses compared to their season average.

Spin as you will but I'll bet the ranch a combination of "eye ball test" and "Big Ben was injured" will be the excuse.


Edit: it should say 2016 avg in the 2016 section, obviously.

When you have Tom Brady at QB and you allow less points than their season average to 8 of 10 opponents good things happen.

 

[Bruins29]

Aren't you one of the ones who always talk about the Patriots wasting Brady's years, and how he always has to carry them? Well, here is the highest rating in a playoff loss of recent SB winning QBs:

Wow! Another D sucks thread! At least the rational intelligent posters are once again explaining things to these guys.

BTW, to answer your question. YES! English Patriot is a major Tom Brady homer.

 

[BobDigital]

The D is not what we hoped it be but it is good enough to win a super bowl.

In the end it will all depend on how well the Pats play on that day. This is a team a lot of Pats fans hoped would show separation with the rest of the league but it hasn't. It is just the best of a few good teams and needs to play well to win.

The problem is playing well doesn't always happen.

Would I trade this D for a few others? Yes. But it is not like it is bad. Actually it is above average and we just forget sometimes what bad D looks like.

To me I have a 3 step solution to improve the D.

#1 Mix it up but with aggression not passivity. 3 man rush 2% of the time... just to show you will. 4 man rush 68% of the time 5 man rush 30% of the time and do it from all over the place. Anyone but Butler and McCourty should potentially rush. Also do some stunts and overloads. I want the D to get after it and when you play attacking as opposed to defending you just get in a better mind set and have more pop.

#2 Push WRs around. I want CBs at the LOS pushing WRs and knocking them off their route more. I want to see them taking chances. You don't do it every time but it is easier to defend a pass a WR can't get to cause you chipped him. Also it gives your D a physical swagger.

#3 Encourage players when they play back to anticipate more. I see too many times when the Pats are in zone and they wait for the ball to be thrown to react to an underneath pass. If you see a guy sitting for an option 5 yard pass he can turn up for a 7-8 yard catch you should tell your guys it is okay to abandon your zone to try to make a play and trust other guys will take take of it.

Basically it comes down to BB's best asset is a hindrance sometimes. He wants a fine oiled machine but it seems to me it comes at the expense of beating the instinct and aggression out of his players. The Pats best D was from 01-04 (02 not so much) cause they had good players who didn't come up in Bill's system but played within it later. They didn't have it hammered into them from day 1 and were willing to freelance and make a play when they thought they could. Sometimes it didn't always work but usually BB put them in the right spot and they know when to take over.

Look at Devin McCourty. The problem with him is he does what BB wants TOO MUCH. However that is what he preaches and he does it for good reason. Devin however now plays too far back and plays too safe. However he knows no other way cause that is all he has been told as a pro. Ed Reed who BB loves was an aggressive roaming FS and relied on his ability to look at a play and guess correctly which he did most of the time. Bill loved watching it but would he have encouraged it or asked to him play more like McCourty? Would that eventually have made him more passive and not rely on his instincts? I think possibly. Rodney Harrison came here late and had great success cause he got what BB was doing but also knew how to play the game and jump routes and IGNORE HIS ASSIGNMENT AND NOT DO HIS JOB. The problem is how will BB tell a player to do that? "Do your job except when you shouldn't?"

My 2 cents anyway.

 

[neuronet]

there is nothing wrong with the offense. They can run it, they can go short, they can go deep, they can go down the seam, basically wherever Tom wants to put it he can so long as the o-line continues to hold up.

Can get it in when it's first and goal against Seattle and the game is on the line?

 

[The Gr8est]

Hey mods!

See what happens when you close the game thread before everyone has their say?

 

[PatsFan92]

My "Eyes" tell me when looking at the statistical chart that although there is room for improvement the Pats D is good enough, in a complementary sense, to win a SB. That makes me "feel" good.

But that emotional index has to improve..

WOW, I think the defence is doing just fine. They are up there with Seattle and the Vikings defence which is pretty good. I know they can improve on third down and Logan Ryan but other than that, the defence is doing enough in my opinion. They have to be one of the best in the redzone too. Also, playing real good defense in this league nowadays is very tough because of the rules that favour the offense.

 

[Canuck]

The Patriots do use and care about analytics but they use in house ones run by Ernie Adams and they do not subscribe to analytic sites. Those sites are based on educated guesses.

When you say the Patriots Defense has to improve alot, you make it sound like they stink. They are a good defense but not a great defense. If you want to improve them alot, then you are talking about improving them to the standards of the 2003 and 2004 SB teams and that's just not going to happen. There is always room for improvement. Clearly BB thinks the defense needs to improve from their performance before the bye. With the trading of Collins and the benching of Sheard, BB is trying in his own way to improve the defense. He even has tried different CB opposite of Butler. If we are being honest, this is not as talented a team that we had in 2014 and 2015. Even two of our key defenders Ryan and Sheard are having their struggles this year and combine that with Collins and Jones being traded, that's alot to overcome. That being said, we can still win the SB with this defense and any improvement just increases the odds of the Patriots winning another SB. I think by the time playoffs start, this team will be as good or better then the 2014 SB team.

 

[IllegalContact]

all these burping and farting sounds

the pats will be fine........now go change your soiled undies and get over it

 

[chasa]

No problem; I did. See below for results:



Taking into account the team that was played and comparing the Pats performance versus their season average, looks like the 2014 D was about on par with giving up points to opposing offenses around their season average (-5 point differential). Meanwhile, the 2016 D has given up far less points (-35.6 point differential) to opposing offenses compared to their season average.

Spin as you will but I'll bet the ranch a combination of "eye ball test" and "Big Ben was injured" will be the excuse.


Edit: it should say 2016 avg in the 2016 section, obviously.

 

[Ring 6]

The D is not what we hoped it be but it is good enough to win a super bowl.

In the end it will all depend on how well the Pats play on that day. This is a team a lot of Pats fans hoped would show separation with the rest of the league but it hasn't. It is just the best of a few good teams and needs to play well to win.

The problem is playing well doesn't always happen.

Would I trade this D for a few others? Yes. But it is not like it is bad. Actually it is above average and we just forget sometimes what bad D looks like.

To me I have a 3 step solution to improve the D.

#1 Mix it up but with aggression not passivity. 3 man rush 2% of the time... just to show you will. 4 man rush 68% of the time 5 man rush 30% of the time and do it from all over the place. Anyone but Butler and McCourty should potentially rush. Also do some stunts and overloads. I want the D to get after it and when you play attacking as opposed to defending you just get in a better mind set and have more pop.

#2 Push WRs around. I want CBs at the LOS pushing WRs and knocking them off their route more. I want to see them taking chances. You don't do it every time but it is easier to defend a pass a WR can't get to cause you chipped him. Also it gives your D a physical swagger.

#3 Encourage players when they play back to anticipate more. I see too many times when the Pats are in zone and they wait for the ball to be thrown to react to an underneath pass. If you see a guy sitting for an option 5 yard pass he can turn up for a 7-8 yard catch you should tell your guys it is okay to abandon your zone to try to make a play and trust other guys will take take of it.

Basically it comes down to BB's best asset is a hindrance sometimes. He wants a fine oiled machine but it seems to me it comes at the expense of beating the instinct and aggression out of his players. The Pats best D was from 01-04 (02 not so much) cause they had good players who didn't come up in Bill's system but played within it later. They didn't have it hammered into them from day 1 and were willing to freelance and make a play when they thought they could. Sometimes it didn't always work but usually BB put them in the right spot and they know when to take over.

Look at Devin McCourty. The problem with him is he does what BB wants TOO MUCH. However that is what he preaches and he does it for good reason. Devin however now plays too far back and plays too safe. However he knows no other way cause that is all he has been told as a pro. Ed Reed who BB loves was an aggressive roaming FS and relied on his ability to look at a play and guess correctly which he did most of the time. Bill loved watching it but would he have encouraged it or asked to him play more like McCourty? Would that eventually have made him more passive and not rely on his instincts? I think possibly. Rodney Harrison came here late and had great success cause he got what BB was doing but also knew how to play the game and jump routes and IGNORE HIS ASSIGNMENT AND NOT DO HIS JOB. The problem is how will BB tell a player to do that? "Do your job except when you shouldn't?"

My 2 cents anyway.

The biggest problem is this team has the greatest HC of all time, who may also be the greatest defensive mind of all time, and the fan base hates his philosophy of defense.
I don't have to think too long to realize who is wrong in that dispute.

 

[mosslost]

I posted this just over a month ago:
For the 2016 Pats to be in/win SB 51 the D has to improve ALOT

And lo and behold since then NOTHING has changed, if anything they look WORSE on defense. People really, really, REALLY, need to stop looking at in depth analytics or metrics because it simply doesn't work in football. The EYE TEST tells you everything you need to know so please just forget about 'we're second in blah, blah, blah' or 'we give up blah amounts of blah' because none of it matters as football is a game of FEEL. So for those of you banging on about these meaningless stats let me ask: if our own coach (who is the GOAT) doesn't give a crap about these numbers then why do you?

What matters is come playoff time when the teams get REALLY good, based on what your EYES have seen can this team stop a potent offense? Can they make plays so Brady doesn't have to drive us 80 yards on every possession (because they don't get turnovers meaning our offense starts way, way back)

So i'm going to emphasise once again, for the 2016 Pats to be in/win SB 51 the D has to improve ALOT because there is nothing wrong with the offense. They can run it, they can go short, they can go deep, they can go down the seam, basically wherever Tom wants to put it he can so long as the o-line continues to hold up.

This OP is the epitome of absurd. They are 8-2. They were on the road in the rain without Gronk and Hogan, two of three top 3 leaders in pass yardage average in the NFL, and they won by 13. They are the best team in the AFC but it is football and anything can happend. They probably get to the Super Bowl. And bring up the eye test is kind of ridiculous. If a team wins at everything but they don't pass some fan's eye test that has no meaning.

The fact of the matter is this defense prioritizes not giving up the big play, in order to keep the other team from scoring too easily on big plays. They are not the most talented team on Defense as well, so it is even more remarkable that they actually for the most part get what they want done. The other team just does not score enough points. When you combine that with no big special teams screw ups and a Tom Brady offense, you win a lot of games. You told us something a month ago and they have mostly won ever since.

 

[Ring 6]

#3 Encourage players when they play back to anticipate more. I see too many times when the Pats are in zone and they wait for the ball to be thrown to react to an underneath pass. If you see a guy sitting for an option 5 yard pass he can turn up for a 7-8 yard catch you should tell your guys it is okay to abandon your zone to try to make a play and trust other guys will take take of it.

OK I had to respond to this paragraph.
So your idea is that you can educate Bill Belichick about zone concepts, and the answer is that players should leave their zone to go cover a guy in someone elses zone? And the reason you do this is because someone else will leave their zone to cover yours?
Seriously?