BobDigital
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 16,350
- Reaction score
- 15,044
I know this post isn't going to get me a lot of likes. Probably a lot of dislikes if anything. So first let me say the following.
#1 Bill Belichick is the best coach in NFL history. There is no coach I'd rather have.
#2 Bill has had to build this team mostly picking at the bottom of the draft. That no doubt effects the quality of talent you can put out on the field.
#3 Bill probably builds his scheme with #2 in mind.
Okay, now lets move along. There is something about Bill Belichick teams coached defenses in recent years to me that just seems to miss the mark. When I look at other great defenses around the league there seems to always be one complaint that sticks out that we often here. Bill's Ds don't attack and that puts them on the back foot. If you are not attacking you are reacting. Such a scheme allows players like Blake Bortles and Nick Foles to have amazing games against you at times. On the upside it usually means you don't give up the big play often.
I want to focus on Bill's HC days in New England.
2000-2007 years - This to me and most people here was the golden age of the Patriots Defense. Particularly the dynasty years. So here is my question. Why can't this seem to be repeated? One of the reasons is no doubt the talent this team fielded on D as well dirt cheap probowl QB play allowed them to spend more on that side of the ball and other places. But I think there is something more too it.
One of the things that I theorize made this D better than the current ones is this: The key players in this group were not developed under Bill Belichick. Even the ones that were, such as Seymour, had a room full of vets they could look up to and learn from that weren't taught as a rookie to do it Bill's way. I think there's something to that.
Look as Bruschi's 2004 interview post 2004 AFCCG. "We play, that's what we do. We don't talk. We play. You come to Foxboro, its gonna be snowing, its gonna be cold. Come on in here! you wanna say all you want? You wanna change the rules? Change them! We still play, and we win."
Can you imagine ANY player coached under BB these days saying something like that? Nope. Why not? Cause they were taught from day 1 since being drafted to keep their trap shut to the media. Bruschi was told that too. The difference is he didn't hear it as a rookie. He learned to play under someone else and only later under BB's scheme and coaching was his full talent unleashed. But there was an attitude and swagger there.
This is the main issue BB has as a coach. He systematically beats the swagger and attitude out of his players from day one. He wants his guys to play the system. Do their job. Don't talk. Get back and don't do anything they aren't told.
There isn't anything wrong with that system. It has worked with varying success over a VERY LONG period of time. But the time when it works the best is when you have players who understand what you are telling them to do, but then see a play to be made and have the balls to try to go and make it. Who don't talk too much but aren't afraid to show attitude and punch someone else in the mouth. Who know its a bad idea to take a penalty but aren't afraid to lay the wood on someone, even if it means a free 15 yards.
Rodney Harrison is the best free agent BB ever brought in here on defense IMO and I think most would agree. Why that worked is so well is for a few reasons. Harrison understood what BB wanted to do. Harrison mostly did it. Harrison is a great player. The other reason it worked so well is because Harrison at times did things BB didn't preach. He talked trash. He set a tone. He hit hard and made offensive players scared to go near him. He played with a swagger and attitude that was instilled into him by his success of doing it his way and having it work for him before BB got him here.
This isn't to say he played outside the defensive system. But he wasn't afraid to trust his instincts, not do his assigned job and take a risk when he felt it was the right thing to do that play. And he was usually right to do it.
Lets take a look at the best defensive players BB ever developed.
Seymour - An all pro player but one whose job was mostly to take up 2 guys. This is a good player but not the guy who makes a game winning play often.
Wilfork - A great nose tackle who took up space and held/pushed the pocket well. This is a good player but not the guy who makes a game winning play often.
Vrabel - He player 4 years in Pitt but really came into his own here. He learned a lot under BB but also had mentors such as McGinest, Johnson and Bruschi. He did occasionally make game winning players but he was partly brought up in a different culture than the BB one due to his days in Pitt and having successful players that mentored him that weren't brought up in BB's culture.
McCourty - A very good safety (but failed CB) who plays back and tends to prevent big plays. He is more the guy who tries to prevent a play than make a play.
Hightower - A very good run stuffing LB who has shown some good pass rush at times. He has made game changing plays.
Jones - A very good DE but has had his best year with his new team.
Samuel - He is probably the best CB BB ever developed here. He also got a reputation as a risk taker and gambler which is something BB hates. One of the only players who could play within the system but not be afraid to take risk. BB let him go in 2008
May0 - A tackling machine but not a play maker.
Most of the best defensive players BB developed are not the guys you ask to make the big play in the big moment. They are more about holding the line and getting back to prevent a bigger play from being made.
We need to remember that this was not the norm in those early golden years. This was a D that often got after it, hit hard and set the tone. It played with a calculated aggressiveness. It played within the confines of what BB wanted them to do and they were smart enough to understand that. But at times they also just let it rip and played ball.
That is something almost all the players BB mentored from day 1 have lacked, and I don't think it is purely a talent issue. I think it come from BB getting to into a players head and making them robotic and reactive as opposed to proactive.
Now that the roster has completely turned over and all influence of those pre-BB players are gone we are seeing how this D looks. And it frankly hasn't been good enough.
in 2014 the Pats finally managed to break through after bring into Revis/Browner. Not to mention the heroics of Butler. Let's not forgot this game was won 28-24. To lose they would have had to give up 31 points to a young and fairly lackluster run first offense. And they almost did. They had 1 great play but giving up 31 points to that offense would have been considered a below average defensive performance.
In 2016 they won with a very improbably comeback. The 2016 D was the best D ever built by Belichick with mostly BB players. Giving up only 21 defensive points is a great feat here and that alone may shoot a massive hole into my argument. However a few things are worth pointing out. Matt Ryan the the Falcons offensive massively choked this game away. Time and again the let chances slip through their fingers to put points on the board. They played passively when they should have played aggressive and aggressive when they should have played passive. Also they didn't even run the clock down.
I am not trying to say they didn't earn those championships cause they did. But they weren't IMO so much amazing defensive performances as making 1 big defensive play each game and having things fall their way. I felt like a lot was left to be desired in those D performances.
The problem is I don't know what they can do to fix this. You don't let BB walk but I think it is one of the only holes he has a a coach. No one is perfect though.
#1 Bill Belichick is the best coach in NFL history. There is no coach I'd rather have.
#2 Bill has had to build this team mostly picking at the bottom of the draft. That no doubt effects the quality of talent you can put out on the field.
#3 Bill probably builds his scheme with #2 in mind.
Okay, now lets move along. There is something about Bill Belichick teams coached defenses in recent years to me that just seems to miss the mark. When I look at other great defenses around the league there seems to always be one complaint that sticks out that we often here. Bill's Ds don't attack and that puts them on the back foot. If you are not attacking you are reacting. Such a scheme allows players like Blake Bortles and Nick Foles to have amazing games against you at times. On the upside it usually means you don't give up the big play often.
I want to focus on Bill's HC days in New England.
2000-2007 years - This to me and most people here was the golden age of the Patriots Defense. Particularly the dynasty years. So here is my question. Why can't this seem to be repeated? One of the reasons is no doubt the talent this team fielded on D as well dirt cheap probowl QB play allowed them to spend more on that side of the ball and other places. But I think there is something more too it.
One of the things that I theorize made this D better than the current ones is this: The key players in this group were not developed under Bill Belichick. Even the ones that were, such as Seymour, had a room full of vets they could look up to and learn from that weren't taught as a rookie to do it Bill's way. I think there's something to that.
Look as Bruschi's 2004 interview post 2004 AFCCG. "We play, that's what we do. We don't talk. We play. You come to Foxboro, its gonna be snowing, its gonna be cold. Come on in here! you wanna say all you want? You wanna change the rules? Change them! We still play, and we win."
Can you imagine ANY player coached under BB these days saying something like that? Nope. Why not? Cause they were taught from day 1 since being drafted to keep their trap shut to the media. Bruschi was told that too. The difference is he didn't hear it as a rookie. He learned to play under someone else and only later under BB's scheme and coaching was his full talent unleashed. But there was an attitude and swagger there.
This is the main issue BB has as a coach. He systematically beats the swagger and attitude out of his players from day one. He wants his guys to play the system. Do their job. Don't talk. Get back and don't do anything they aren't told.
There isn't anything wrong with that system. It has worked with varying success over a VERY LONG period of time. But the time when it works the best is when you have players who understand what you are telling them to do, but then see a play to be made and have the balls to try to go and make it. Who don't talk too much but aren't afraid to show attitude and punch someone else in the mouth. Who know its a bad idea to take a penalty but aren't afraid to lay the wood on someone, even if it means a free 15 yards.
Rodney Harrison is the best free agent BB ever brought in here on defense IMO and I think most would agree. Why that worked is so well is for a few reasons. Harrison understood what BB wanted to do. Harrison mostly did it. Harrison is a great player. The other reason it worked so well is because Harrison at times did things BB didn't preach. He talked trash. He set a tone. He hit hard and made offensive players scared to go near him. He played with a swagger and attitude that was instilled into him by his success of doing it his way and having it work for him before BB got him here.
This isn't to say he played outside the defensive system. But he wasn't afraid to trust his instincts, not do his assigned job and take a risk when he felt it was the right thing to do that play. And he was usually right to do it.
Lets take a look at the best defensive players BB ever developed.
Seymour - An all pro player but one whose job was mostly to take up 2 guys. This is a good player but not the guy who makes a game winning play often.
Wilfork - A great nose tackle who took up space and held/pushed the pocket well. This is a good player but not the guy who makes a game winning play often.
Vrabel - He player 4 years in Pitt but really came into his own here. He learned a lot under BB but also had mentors such as McGinest, Johnson and Bruschi. He did occasionally make game winning players but he was partly brought up in a different culture than the BB one due to his days in Pitt and having successful players that mentored him that weren't brought up in BB's culture.
McCourty - A very good safety (but failed CB) who plays back and tends to prevent big plays. He is more the guy who tries to prevent a play than make a play.
Hightower - A very good run stuffing LB who has shown some good pass rush at times. He has made game changing plays.
Jones - A very good DE but has had his best year with his new team.
Samuel - He is probably the best CB BB ever developed here. He also got a reputation as a risk taker and gambler which is something BB hates. One of the only players who could play within the system but not be afraid to take risk. BB let him go in 2008
May0 - A tackling machine but not a play maker.
Most of the best defensive players BB developed are not the guys you ask to make the big play in the big moment. They are more about holding the line and getting back to prevent a bigger play from being made.
We need to remember that this was not the norm in those early golden years. This was a D that often got after it, hit hard and set the tone. It played with a calculated aggressiveness. It played within the confines of what BB wanted them to do and they were smart enough to understand that. But at times they also just let it rip and played ball.
That is something almost all the players BB mentored from day 1 have lacked, and I don't think it is purely a talent issue. I think it come from BB getting to into a players head and making them robotic and reactive as opposed to proactive.
Now that the roster has completely turned over and all influence of those pre-BB players are gone we are seeing how this D looks. And it frankly hasn't been good enough.
in 2014 the Pats finally managed to break through after bring into Revis/Browner. Not to mention the heroics of Butler. Let's not forgot this game was won 28-24. To lose they would have had to give up 31 points to a young and fairly lackluster run first offense. And they almost did. They had 1 great play but giving up 31 points to that offense would have been considered a below average defensive performance.
In 2016 they won with a very improbably comeback. The 2016 D was the best D ever built by Belichick with mostly BB players. Giving up only 21 defensive points is a great feat here and that alone may shoot a massive hole into my argument. However a few things are worth pointing out. Matt Ryan the the Falcons offensive massively choked this game away. Time and again the let chances slip through their fingers to put points on the board. They played passively when they should have played aggressive and aggressive when they should have played passive. Also they didn't even run the clock down.
I am not trying to say they didn't earn those championships cause they did. But they weren't IMO so much amazing defensive performances as making 1 big defensive play each game and having things fall their way. I felt like a lot was left to be desired in those D performances.
The problem is I don't know what they can do to fix this. You don't let BB walk but I think it is one of the only holes he has a a coach. No one is perfect though.
Last edited:
