Idle Thoughts: 2014 -1.0

[50-yard-line]

Page one thoughts generated by your first post in the thread (I'll get to the other later, but felt the need to get this while it stayed in my brain). and, it really is more questions than answers, but here goes.

On the perception of defenses, we know/feel that Seattle had a better defense than the Patriots. We also know that sacks don't tell the whole story, but also that PM doesn't get sacked too often and I don't think the Pats had one during the AFCCG (or many hurries/pressures either).

is there a quality to the sacks? In this I mean, when people play Seattle, they expect the defense to get there quickly and probably alter their game plan to have use more plays that get rid of the ball quicker than plays that take longer to develop.

Could it be that the Patriots had less respect in that category so the opposing teams playbook was more wide open? It'd be interesting to see the average number of seconds it took for the Patriots to register their sacks than Seattle. I would guess that Seattle probably got their quicker by half a second or more.

Also, Seattle's D just seemed to be all over the field, they really could swarm to the ball and their secondary always seemed to be looking back forthe ball. Rather than ours who would seem to be trailing and not always being able to turn to defend the ball.

One big difference: the AFCCG was in Denver. The stadium was quiet when Manning was Omaha'ing all over the place. Advantage offense. They know when he's going, but the defenders have to be careful.

Fast forward to the Superbowl, Denver was caught flat-footed by the volume. Witness their first possession. Peyton went to hand-signals, and Sherman said they were ready for it and picked them up early. When defenses know what's coming, they look like they have 15 players on the field.

Add to that the fact that Seattle's Defense really is elite and you see what you get. Pete Carroll out-coached Denver from the start.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

Fast forward to the Superbowl, Denver was caught flat-footed by the volume. Witness their first possession. Peyton went to hand-signals, and Sherman said they were ready for it and picked them up early. When defenses know what's coming, they look like they have 15 players on the field.

Add to that the fact that Seattle's Defense really is elite and you see what you get. Pete Carroll out-coached Denver from the start.

Good points, but i was thinking more season long rather than the playoffs when comparing the 2 Ds. It was bad coaching on Fox's part and something Manning, as a veteran, should have been aware of.

The first few plays should have been more scripted rather than adjusted because that team doesn't have a whole lot of playoff experience (not that the Seahawks were either, but that's why coaches get paid too).

 

[ivanvamp]

Manning completed 70 percent of his passes because they were all five yards down the field, and he got 300 yards because he threw it 50 times.

Exactly. It was the least productive 300 yard, 70% passing performance you could ever possibly have.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Exactly. It was the least productive 300 yard, 70% passing performance you could ever possibly have.

But the Manning stat record books will eat it up glossing over that unfortunate bit about the L

 

[doesntmatter1]

The Seahawks did something very crucial that we didn't: Stop the run. In both games, the Broncos ran on us at will, especially at Chris Jones. I'm hoping Chris and the other young dlinemen get much stronger this offseason.

Also, our offensive gameplan was so bad that it allowed Denver's offense to calmly find its groove without having to fear keeping up in a shootout. I didn't like it from the start when it seemed that Collie was our primary receiver. I like Collie, but he clearly shouldn't be the goto guy when Edelman, Amendola, and Vereen were all suited up for the game.

Lastly, I don't understand why Andre Carter was even on the team honestly. He offered no pass rush and I strongly suspect that even Bequette could've done better. So I conclude that we didn't go to the superbowl because of Jake Bequette lol.

 

[p8ryts]

Good Job.
Inside pressure is our #1 need, Kelly was providing that before he got hurt. If he can come back that would be big.

Definitely need to spell Ninko and Jones. They played 18 games at nearly 100% of the snaps.

Glad to see someone else thinks Boyce has potential. Looked very fast and shifty, didn't get as much opportunity as Dobson and Thompkins but I think he can be really good.

Definitely a DT at #1, I like Fedorwicz at #2 and don't think he would be available but Telvin Smith at #3 converted to SS.

 

[patsfan13]

DT is an interesting situation in that there are so many moving partss due to injury. In Silinga and Chris Jones we have 2 very good backups. If 2 of Armstead, Kelley & Wilfolk ready to go then the need at DE is much greater. I hope Buchanan will be ready to make the big jump but we still need another quality DE. I would like this so we can when needed move Chandler Jones inside in passing situations to push the pocket. The guy from MN would be instersting since he seems to be a player who could be either a DE or DT.



S is the biggest need on the D. We need a big hitter there, I wonder if they will ever be able to coach up Ebner since he is the sort of physical player we need there.

TE as pointed out is the other crying need. I like the approach Ken is proposing here.

 

[thenepatsrule]

c.This game couldn't have gone worse for Manning (which couldn't have thrilled me more, and infinitely added to my enjoyment of the game. BTW- Does that make me a bad person? ), but I couldn't help notice that against the top D in the game, Manning still managed to have a 70% completion rate and nearly 300 yds in passing. So in a game where Manning seemed totally out of sorts, his stat line seemed to tell a different story, and thus made me go hmmmmm.

The lesson here is that while stats are useful to use in our ongoing arguments about this and that, they can also lie, mislead, or in most cases require more information to truly explain the “real story”

You are right, the stats in this case lie , Most of his 279 yards came in garbage time.

 

[IllegalContact]

DT - BJ Raji on a 1 year self-redemption deal. A year ago, this guy turned down 8M/yr......he has not had a sack for 39 games. Sounds like a perfect opportunity to bring someone in for a couple of M to work for a new contract. puts off having to make any big decisions for a year and the pats can afford to see if any of the youngsters take the next step.

S - I'd be most interested in drafting Kevin Pierre-Louis and see if he can work at S....otherwise, there's not a whole lot out there that is impressive in any way

TE - I'd say niklas or fierdorowicsz and then hoskins later.

DT is an interesting situation in that there are so many moving partss due to injury. In Silinga and Chris Jones we have 2 very good backups. If 2 of Armstead, Kelley & Wilfolk ready to go then the need at DE is much greater. I hope Buchanan will be ready to make the big jump but we still need another quality DE. I would like this so we can when needed move Chandler Jones inside in passing situations to push the pocket. The guy from MN would be instersting since he seems to be a player who could be either a DE or DT.



S is the biggest need on the D. We need a big hitter there, I wonder if they will ever be able to coach up Ebner since he is the sort of physical player we need there.

TE as pointed out is the other crying need. I like the approach Ken is proposing here.

 

[patfanken]

$3,600,000 if Wilfork is not on the 53.

Thanks for the info, CT. That's bit higher than I hoped, but at worst creates about $8MM in cap space. Hopefully, Vince is able to come fully back, but we'd still need to do some sort of release/restructure that will take is cap number down to the $4-6MM range.

 

[JackBauer]

Definitely a DT at #1, I like Fedorwicz at #2 and don't think he would be available but Telvin Smith at #3 converted to SS.

There will almost certainly be much better prospects than Fedo available at #2.

 

[PP2]

One big difference: the AFCCG was in Denver. The stadium was quiet when Manning was Omaha'ing all over the place. Advantage offense. They know when he's going, but the defenders have to be careful.

Fast forward to the Superbowl, Denver was caught flat-footed by the volume. Witness their first possession. Peyton went to hand-signals, and Sherman said they were ready for it and picked them up early. When defenses know what's coming, they look like they have 15 players on the field.

Add to that the fact that Seattle's Defense really is elite and you see what you get. Pete Carroll out-coached Denver from the start.

What Sherman said is way overrated. The fact that both INT's by Manning were not off jumped routes but were a result of a collapsing pocket or pressure, shows that Seattle did, in fact, not know what was coming. What they did do was severely disrupt the timing of the routes with their holding and grappling, and as I've mentioned before, that big hit by Kam took the air out of the crossing routes which is a major component of Denver's offense and put the stress on verticals which played into the hands of Seattle's very physical corners.

Really more a case of having a stellar defense (yes, better than ours) than anything Denver could have done.

 

[patfanken]

It's talent, game plan and commitment to a scheme.

Starting with talent is there one healthy Patriot who would start on the Seattle defense? That eliminates Mayo and Talib who you can make a case for. Maybe you can make a case for Chandler Jones but Chris Clemons was far superior to him comparing the SB to the AFCCG.

Its really not fair to compare Clemons and Jones on just one game. The situations were completely different. Denver played the AFCCG with the advantages of being at home in 50 degree weather, where at the superbowl, the noise factor was AGAINST them, and it was much colder. That's just to start/.

Game plan Seattle forces you to earn every inch. Bill still wants a bend but don't break. I just don't think that works with the new rules. More often than not something will bail the offense out and continue drives. It's death by a million papercuts. I'm all for the Patriots moving to a pressure scheme and have been for a long time.

Everyone would agree with you, EV, from the players to the fans. However there is one thing that keeps me from espousing your position with total convictions. And that's the results we've seen over the last 13 years. BB's philosophy has brought a lot more wins than any of those so called "balls to the walls" aggressive D's.

True the DB talent Seattle has allows them to be more aggressive up front, but you'd be as surprised as I was when I learned that for the most part, Seattle was in a zone for most of that game.

Finally, I would caution again, that Pete designed a great game plan for that one game, and the Bronco's didn't adjust well. It was for ONE game. Who knows how successful it would be if they played again....in Denver.

All that being said, the Pats will be adding some much needed talent this off season that could make the comparisons more realistic next season.

Regarding scheme are the Patriots a 4-3 team or a 3-4 team? It's great to be multiple and Seattle is with their fronts but if you look at their personnel the DL are more 4-3 and the LBs more 3-4. To steal a line used in the draft forum discussions on this topic Seattle has better synergy in their philosophy and execution than the Patriots do.

Again, it sure looked like it for one game. Also I'd remind you that Seattle's success on defense has a history of about 2 years. That's how long their streak of winning seasons goes.

I think Bill was on the cutting edge moving to the 21 century offense but has had a hard time letting go of his trusted 20 century defense. I know I'll get killed by the usual suspects for saying it and no I don't know more than Bill does about football but I'm entitled to my opinion.

I shouldn't have to remind you, by this time, that BB's "20th Century defense" has provided us with a lot of success in the 21st Century.

That being said the Pats have a ways to go in order to start matching what Seattle accomplished this season. But they aren't as far away as some think. As I mentioned they need to get a 3rd DE, add an impact DT, and an impact SS. Lets just see how our defense looks with Mayo, Hightower, and Collins at LB. Lets see what the DL looks like with Armstead, Hageman, and Kelly at DT (let alone the possibility of a healthy Vince)

As I mentioned, getting back Mayo and a full season of Collins, will allow Patricia to be able to be much more aggressive. Have patience my friend

 

[patfanken]

I've reluctantly come to agree with those who rationally make the case for radical actions with Wilfork, one of my favorite players. No way that cap hit can stand. An emotional decision for this fanboy.

I disagree with standing pat at safety. I was not as negative out the gate on Wilson but he's shown nothing. Not a Gregory basher either but he's barely average at best. Need to do something here. Agree that most late round safety picks may just duplicate the lack of talent we have but I'd go for broke in the 5th or 6th for a SS with size where we should have taken our present guys anyway.

Agree that we re-sign Fletch and say bye to Spikes. We're decent at LB.

Like going for TE by round 2 and signing an FA as you propose.

As far a Vince goes, I'm expecting the worst and hoping for the best. Its the easiest way to deal with the possibility of a Patriots team without Vince Wilfolk.

Totally disagree with you on the safety issue. The fact is that there would be no one available in the draft after the 3rd round that would be close to as effective as what we already have. While it would be nice to have an all pro at every position, the fact is that Steve Gregory being average is a fairly effective player. I understand the desire to upgrade, but who is available at this time who might be better? Certainly no one in the draft.

Finally, I think we are going to be a lot more than decent at LB next season.

 

[patfanken]

Yeah and meanwhile the Pats secondary was sitting in off man or zone even with Talib in. Did a ****** come up with that game plan? And that's spoken by a guy that never usually bashes the coaching, but that was awful. Seattle, on the other hand, got physical, pressed those receivers, threw off the timing, and dominated.

They were much more physical than the Pats, but after Talib went down, who was out there who could become physical with them.

BTW- I was surprised myself when it was reported that for the most part, Seattle was playing a very tight 5 man zone underneath and NOT man to man. Very BB like of Pete.

 

[everlong]

"balls to the walls" aggressive D's.

Finally, I would caution again, that Pete designed a great game plan for that one game, and the Bronco's didn't adjust well. It was for ONE game. Who knows how successful it would be if they played again....in Denver.

As I mentioned, getting back Mayo and a full season of Collins, will allow Patricia to be able to be much more aggressive. Have patience my friend

It doesn't have to be balls to the walls. What it has to be is situationally able to bring the pressure and successfully get to the QB. The Steelers defenses in the 2000's didn't bring it every play. BUT the threat was always there so you had to respect it. Do you think anybody respects the Patriots pass rush? I know the sack numbers were good that year but I think people would find that most of those were coverage sacks. Which speaks to our secondary being better than most people would credit but there's no pass rush.

It wasn't one game. Their defense was game in game out dominant.

Mayo and Collins are part of the solution. I would like to see them add another fast LB and then move Hightower into the DE rotation. Speed.

 

[Kontradiction]

They were much more physical than the Pats, but after Talib went down, who was out there who could become physical with them.

BTW- I was surprised myself when it was reported that for the most part, Seattle was playing a very tight 5 man zone underneath and NOT man to man. Very BB like of Pete.

I read that Brooks article. The Seahawks employed a mixture of both but, even when they were playing zone, they were still jamming Denver's WR's at the LOS. The Pats played off almost the entire game and, against a timing offense without your best CB, that's a death sentence.

EDIT: As for the "physical" part of the post, my main complaint with the Pats back end is that they are way too soft. That's why Calvin Pryor is my binky. I hope against hope that he somehow falls. But hope in one hand, **** in the other and see which gets full first.

 

[patfanken]

Great stuff Ken. Here are some responses to your points:

- As Belichick always says, sacks are overrated. You odds of a big game changing play is far more likely if the QB actually lets go of the ball under pressure. That is why the Pats are usually high on the number of turnovers created by the defense year after year because he is more interested in QBs throwing under pressure rather than taking a sack.

I agree, do you have any stats that compared Seattle's pressures and QB hits to what the Pats racked up?

- Manning's stats in the Super Bowl are a mirage. The Broncos didn't have positive yards or a first down until the second quarter. Their first four drives were a safety, three and out, and back to back INTs. Their next three drives ended with a loss of downs, punt, and a Demariyus Thomas fumble. The Broncos didn't have a drive that went more than 49 yards or lead to points until the last three minutes of the third quarter when the Seahawks were already up 36-0.

I knew that when I wrote it, and I agree. I was just trying to be provocative

- The Pats desperately need a third man in the DE rotation. They overworked Jones and Nink too much. I wouldn't mind seeing a Jason Allen or another veteran pass rush specialist to rotate in a bit. Andre Carter didn't do a good enough of a job and Buchannon fell off after a promising start.

What do you think Allen would cost? And if you could only add one big money guy which would you take, Jared Allen or Alex Mack?

- I am also concerned about Wilfork, but I don't know if I would cut him. I would give him the option of a revised deal of some sort and use cutting him as a final option. I tend to doubt he will be anything more than a situational run stuffer when he comes back. He might be used as Ted Washington was in 2003 as a first and sometimes second down player.

I'm afraid we are likely going to be rooting for a Pats team that won't have Vince Wilfork next year....and I'm not looking forward to it.

- I also don't think resigning Edelman is a huge priority. Contrary to popular belief, the Pats got along just fine without Welker. It was the TE and outside receiver spots where they were lacking. I don't know if having Welker would have changed that. Edelman would have struggled outside like Collie and Amendola did because smaller guys who are quick, but not fast do when they are thrown out there other than in certain situations. I'd like to have him back, but if he prices himself out of the market I don't see it as a huge problem.

I guess I'm just much more optimistic about the current top 4 WR's we have on the roster right now. I expect a big 2nd year jump by all of them.

I also think that we really only have room for one more WR addition, because I think the Pats can only afford to keep 5 WR's (plus Slater) on the 53, especially given we are likely to have 4 TE's and 3 QB's on the roster this season. Who is your top choice? If you could only have one, would it be JE or Sanders. If those 2 were off the market, who would you suggest be the 5th man.