Prevent Defense

[TinhWoodhead]

I think fans would be pretty upset if someone got hurt late in a blowout

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

Its usually the opposite - you get hurt more playing half-assed

 

[PF_SU]

Its usually the opposite - you get hurt more playing half-assed

Since when does a softer defensive approach equal playing half-assed?

 

[JMC00]

felger jr bertrand already railing on the defense today. i'm sure he'll ignore the ticky tacky flags and missed facemask that aided the bills because it hurts his HOT TAKE.

 

[FourierSeries]

NE is 3rd in PPG allowed, even after allowing 25 points (most of which came after the game was well in hand.)

The sky is falling.

 

[Fencer]

"Prevent defense" often doesn't.

 

[JMC00]

NE is 3rd in PPG allowed, even after allowing 25 points (most of which came after the game was well in hand.)

The sky is falling.

Honestly i'm considering it only 17 points allowed yesterday. Absolute bogus call on Rowe in the end zone. Ref absolutely gave the bills the points there. Would have been 4th and 12 from the 30.

So really 15.5 ppg, which is #2.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

"Prevent defense" often doesn't.

"Prevent defense: it prevents you from winning"

 

[MainePatsFan26]

?!?!?

First, this isn't Madden on rookie mode where you spam the same D over and over and over again. There are elements of "prevent" defense played in all 4 quarters for various game situations, so I'm not even really sure what you mean when you say not playing prevent D.

Yes, there have been times the team has fallen flat or adjusted the D and gotten lit up. The Miami game jumps to my mind. But how much of that was our defensive change and how much of that was their offensive change? We often overlook that the opponent's strategy has also changed up. Less run, more pass, and more receivers to cover which exposes a bit of our CB depth more.

But of all the times to complain about this, why the hell is this coming up after the Buffalo game? Yes, on the surface, we gave up 10 points in the first half and 15 in the second. But when you really look at it, there's not much difference.

On the first drive of the game, the Bills took it all the way down to the goal line and had to settle for 3. If they had scored, we'd be talking 14 vs. 15 points. In all 4 quarters, the Bills scored one time. Mike Gillislie had 72 yards in the first half, 13 in the second. Tyrod Taylor had 100 yards passing in the first half, 83 in the second, and if you tack in the 35 from Manuel, that's 105 passing yards in the second half. Sure, it's slightly more, but nothing to get worked up about.

In the first half, they drove 70 yards and settled for 3. The D forced a few 3-and-0uts, but then here are their drive totals (yards gained) for the rest of the first half: 22, 36, 49.

In the second half, they drove 75 yards for a TD (aided by that ridiculously fortunate botched punt). The D didn't force any 3-and-outs, but here are the drive totals for the rest of the half: 31, 42, 37.

The difference was 58 yards in penalties on those last 3 drives, including some really touchy pass interference calls. But again, the situation dictated the Bills throw deep whether they wanted to or not, and the refs bailed them out a few times because they did. But that doesn't seem like a significant shift in how we played D.

So I don't know, bottle this common complaint up and save it for use in the future. It doesn't apply to yesterday's game.

Prevent in my discussion refers to sending the safeties deeper than usual and playing dime/nickel more often. Overall, I have been feeling like what the Patriots are doing early that works has been replaced by a version of conservative play calling that may come back to bite us. Sure, there is also a chance being more aggressive could backfire. I'd like the Patriots to keep playing the same defense which also includes the aggressive blitz from time to time. I am not talking about becoming a Rex Ryan defense by any stretch of the imagination, though.

 

[MainePatsFan26]

Raising this issue after yesterday's game is quite strange. The Patriots defense set a season-high for rushing five or more with 39% of all drop-backs. Against the Steelers the rate was 20% (they set a season-high for three-man rushes that game with 51%) and against the Bengals it was 17%.

How does that stat break down when comparing the 4th versus the other quarters? Were they still blitzing and I just missed it? Out of curiosity, where do you get such detailed stats? I'd like to read them to better understand exactly what I'm seeing in numerical terms.

 

[MainePatsFan26]

My view is that most of you are kind of making a distinction between our regular defense and what you call "prevent defense". I disagree.

If you listen to Belichick talk about his defense philosophy he has explained that the point of a defense is to stop the other team from scoring. There are various routes for the other team to score, they can throw deep balls and hit you with a big play, they can march down the field and go through the red zone and make a TD, they can score FGs etc. He was making the point that he believes that the most effective way to stop the other team from scoring points is usually to take away the "big play". The deep ball etc. He wants to force other defense to go through the Red Zone since Red Zone offense if much harder to execute than to get lucky on a deep ball. He also believes giving up FGs via this method (letting them march down to FG range) is ok since he sets up the offense to beat any team repeatedly kicking FGs.

In the context of the above, which would be categorized as our "regular" defensive philosophy or what most call "bend but don't break", the strategy when you have a big lead is even clearer. Just emphasize the same principles even more since if a team is deep in the hole, they will be even more desperate to get the "big play" since that's the only way for them to catch-up on points quickly. So what most call the "prevent defense" is really just the regular defense emphasizing its main concepts even more to prevent the "big play", which is always the core philosophy of "bend but don't break", and force the opposing team to march through the red zone to score and essentially ignore FGs.

So basically "prevent defense" is just a more extreme version of "bend but don't break" regular defense. It's nothing completely new scheme that we break into when we have 3 score leads.

Good points! My big concern about "bend but don't break" is that the Patriots have been breaking eventually against average offenses. If our offense makes a turnover against a good offensive team, I just hope we can stop them and not just slow down a potential touchdown six minutes later (since we delayed their scoring).

We've got a good to great defense with the exception of the pass rush. I am advocating more aggressive calls every so often so we keep offenses guessing. It just feels like there is more scoring late by Patriot opponents not just because it is "garbage time," but because the defense becomes far more predictable.

Anyway, thanks for the really detailed post and I hope our defense continues to progress and keeps opponent scoring at around 18-20 points per game.

 

[luuked]

I am advocating more aggressive calls every so often so we keep offenses guessing. I

Except this is exactly what is happening under Patricia. The same way the offense is setting up play action and other plays our defense is often setting up mixups in scheme or some trap coverages over 1-2 series'. I can't fault MP for how he is mixing up different concepts so far this season.

It just feels like there is more scoring late by Patriot opponents not just because it is "garbage time," but because the defense becomes far more predictable.

It's because if you have a 2-3 TD lead it is totally ok to exchange time for points. As has been said so often.. it doesnt matter if you win by 1 or by 30 you still only get a W. It's why I dont understand why some posters are still whining about the Bills scoring 25. Who gives a **** ? If this was a close competitive game then the playcalling on offense and defense would have been different making any comparisons pointless.

 

[PF_SU]

How does that stat break down when comparing the 4th versus the other quarters? Were they still blitzing and I just missed it? Out of curiosity, where do you get such detailed stats? I'd like to read them to better understand exactly what I'm seeing in numerical terms.

They were blitzing more in the second half in general. And where I got those numbers? Tracking them myself.

 

[MainePatsFan26]

Pressured Taylor on almost 50% of his drop-backs and probably should have had 3-4 more sacks than they did but credit to Taylor for those missed sacks. But they were example of why Belichick plays contain against mobile QBs.

It also goes to show the people that constantly complain have ZERO f**cking clue and here just to complain or troll. There were several posts about lack of pressure yesterday which not sure how getting pressure on a QB 43% of the time is "no pressure". Just fantasy/stat whores complaining because the defense didn't have 10 sacks

I wasn't complaining because of fantasy stats. I am genuinely concerned about teams amassing more total points in the latter portions of the game. I agree, however, after reading everyone's post that the Patriots are doing what it takes to win with the defense. I just hope they can win more 4th quarters head-to-head, since they are only 3-4-1 against opponents in the 4th.

 

[MainePatsFan26]

They were blitzing more in the second half in general. And where I got those numbers? Tracking them myself.

Ah, cool. I thought there might be a site keeping that data available for everyone.

 

[mihap]

I am not an expert but i dont like the way this D giving up plays.
Bills were without some key players and some didnt play some portion of the game and Pats were healthy.
Refs made some calls, but they gona do it every game so be prepared for 3 stupid refs calls.
And i am not buying this prevent D. A lot of people here were saying that PAts were playing PREVENT against Miami when Tannehill looked like HOF, but tehy were playing MAN. So i am not buying this prevent. You play prevent in the last minutes in the game not the whole game.
Something is not good on this D, maybe is coaching i dont know what is it, but if they let more than 14 points to Seattle than they ll have problem.

And as for Collins. Lombardi says he was freelancing. So you have a player on a team that is not doing what he should be doing and hurting team. So do you stash him on team in case of injury and then he will blow some plays in playoffs because he want cash in FA market. And you are out of SB because one selfish bastard. I am not saying that he dont deserve some money. But question is, are you really that good that you win SBs or are you are losing SBs.

And still not fan of David Andrews. Hope that i am wrong.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Prevent in my discussion refers to sending the safeties deeper than usual and playing dime/nickel more often. Overall, I have been feeling like what the Patriots are doing early that works has been replaced by a version of conservative play calling that may come back to bite us. Sure, there is also a chance being more aggressive could backfire. I'd like the Patriots to keep playing the same defense which also includes the aggressive blitz from time to time. I am not talking about becoming a Rex Ryan defense by any stretch of the imagination, though.

This is going from "What" to "WTF" real quickly...

Nickel and Dime are personnel packages. They don't dictate the play call. You can play prevent with your base defense, you can blitz out of dime. So to be clear, are you proposing that when the opponent sends out 3 WR/4 WR packages, we should stay in our base more often? We should match up their 3rd or 4th WR with a LB instead of a corner or safety? That's what it sounds like.

As for the safeties staying deeper, that was our entire game plan against the Texans so that by itself doesn't indicate prevent, unless you think we played prevent for an entire game. And we only gave up 105 yards passing in the entire second half, so I don't really understand what the hell you're talking about.

The offense also dictates what our defense will do. You can't just blindly ignore what the Bills are doing just to play more base. On the last 3 Bills drives where they trailed by a lot, they threw 78% of the time, compared to 60% overall for the game. And again, they gave up 105 yards passing in the 2nd half. Those deep safeties also helped discourage deep passes. Overall, Buffalo QBs were 3 of 10 for 80 yards throwing deep against the Patriots. They were more successful with drawing ticky tacky penalties, as those deep passes also generated 4 penalties for 82 yards. Basically, we had more yards in pass interference/illegal contact on deep passes than the Bills actually generated with their offense.

New England Patriots 2016 Defensive Splits | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Those are the defensive splits. There's obviously variance when you're watching a game, but overall, the season numbers between the first and second half are actually quite similar overall.

There were also plenty of blitzes, and lots of whiffs. Both sacks came in the second half, as well as a few near-sacks where Taylor spun out of them. Taylor had several scrambles as well as another sack wiped off the books by penalty in the second half. But mostly, there were a ton of short passes where it's almost impossible to get any type of pressure or rush. 12 of Taylor's 15 pass attempts in the second half were short passes.

So I don't really understand what you're talking about. But it sounds like you don't want us to play the safeties deep, play more base and put LBs on WRs, and blitz on short passes we can't get to anyways. Sounds like a winning formula for the #1 overall pick.

 

[MainePatsFan26]

This is going from "What" to "WTF" real quickly...

Nickel and Dime are personnel packages. They don't dictate the play call. You can play prevent with your base defense, you can blitz out of dime. So to be clear, are you proposing that when the opponent sends out 3 WR/4 WR packages, we should stay in our base more often? We should match up their 3rd or 4th WR with a LB instead of a corner or safety? That's what it sounds like.

As for the safeties staying deeper, that was our entire game plan against the Texans so that by itself doesn't indicate prevent, unless you think we played prevent for an entire game. And we only gave up 105 yards passing in the entire second half, so I don't really understand what the hell you're talking about.

The offense also dictates what our defense will do. You can't just blindly ignore what the Bills are doing just to play more base. On the last 3 Bills drives where they trailed by a lot, they threw 78% of the time, compared to 60% overall for the game. And again, they gave up 105 yards passing in the 2nd half. Those deep safeties also helped discourage deep passes. Overall, Buffalo QBs were 3 of 10 for 80 yards throwing deep against the Patriots. They were more successful with drawing ticky tacky penalties, as those deep passes also generated 4 penalties for 82 yards. Basically, we had more yards in pass interference/illegal contact on deep passes than the Bills actually generated with their offense.

New England Patriots 2016 Defensive Splits | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Those are the defensive splits. There's obviously variance when you're watching a game, but overall, the season numbers between the first and second half are actually quite similar overall.

There were also plenty of blitzes, and lots of whiffs. Both sacks came in the second half, as well as a few near-sacks where Taylor spun out of them. Taylor had several scrambles as well as another sack wiped off the books by penalty in the second half. But mostly, there were a ton of short passes where it's almost impossible to get any type of pressure or rush. 12 of Taylor's 15 pass attempts in the second half were short passes.

So I don't really understand what you're talking about. But it sounds like you don't want us to play the safeties deep, play more base and put LBs on WRs, and blitz on short passes we can't get to anyways. Sounds like a winning formula for the #1 overall pick.

I never said I don't want the safeties to play back whatsoever. I merely am suggesting that playing super conservative, which includes playing the safeties deep, may be causing us to give up too many points. The stats show us struggling near the end of games, as our opponents are scoring more in the 4th than us across eight games. I don't want us to play in base towards the end of games on the majority of plays, but I also don't want us to just give them 10-15 yards a play to prevent the long ball. We won't have 21-28 point leads every game to nurse with this approach and it would be nice for the defense to develop swagger and confidence as opposed to holding on for dear life to get a 2 point victory as many have said on here. A win is a win, but we're also trying to be confident for when we play a team like Seattle or Denver.

The Bills could have been patient and scored on mostly any drive with how soft we were playing. Instead, they were hit and miss with jabbing it down the field. Considering they scored touchdowns while inside the red zone at a decent clip, I wouldn't say we bent but didn't break towards the end.

I was merely making a point that people can agree/disagree with. There is no reason to be snide with "WTF?" to a basic matter of differing perspectives. You know which team is super aggressive on defense? Seattle. And they still manage to hold opponents to a lower per game than us. I'm not saying the Pats have the talent that Seattle does to manage that style, but to dismiss a basic perspective on defense is short-sighted. With our lack of pass rush, what do you think happens to our secondary when we play a quarterback with any sense of accuracy? I'm arguing for some blitzing towards the end to force the opposing qb to make a mistake. Last year we felt more opportunistic and I hope the Collins trade lights a fire under the d enough to make more of these splash plays. The offense is carrying this team right now and to suggest, like you do, that the defense is optimal the way it is doesn't explain why the Bills just scored 25 with no turnovers recovered and Watkins/McCoy -- their two best weapons -- out. Something doesn't add up with the "d" right now and I hope we can improve over the bye.

ps. pi and holding penalties on the deep ball are a reality of the game these days. Claiming that the Bills went 3 of 10 for 80 but got lucky on penalties -- if I take the gist of what you were implying -- doesn't really seem to factor in that the Bills were looking for those calls when throwing the deep ball.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

The Bills went down the field in three plays against the "prevent defense".

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I never said I don't want the safeties to play back whatsoever. I merely am suggesting that playing super conservative, which includes playing the safeties deep, may be causing us to give up too many points. The stats show us struggling near the end of games, as our opponents are scoring more in the 4th than us across eight games. I don't want us to play in base towards the end of games on the majority of plays, but I also don't want us to just give them 10-15 yards a play to prevent the long ball. We won't have 21-28 point leads every game to nurse with this approach and it would be nice for the defense to develop swagger and confidence as opposed to holding on for dear life to get a 2 point victory as many have said on here. A win is a win, but we're also trying to be confident for when we play a team like Seattle or Denver.

The Bills could have been patient and scored on mostly any drive with how soft we were playing. Instead, they were hit and miss with jabbing it down the field. Considering they scored touchdowns while inside the red zone at a decent clip, I wouldn't say we bent but didn't break towards the end.

I was merely making a point that people can agree/disagree with. There is no reason to be snide with "WTF?" to a basic matter of differing perspectives. You know which team is super aggressive on defense? Seattle. And they still manage to hold opponents to a lower per game than us. I'm not saying the Pats have the talent that Seattle does to manage that style, but to dismiss a basic perspective on defense is short-sighted. With our lack of pass rush, what do you think happens to our secondary when we play a quarterback with any sense of accuracy? I'm arguing for some blitzing towards the end to force the opposing qb to make a mistake. Last year we felt more opportunistic and I hope the Collins trade lights a fire under the d enough to make more of these splash plays. The offense is carrying this team right now and to suggest, like you do, that the defense is optimal the way it is doesn't explain why the Bills just scored 25 with no turnovers recovered and Watkins/McCoy -- their two best weapons -- out. Something doesn't add up with the "d" right now and I hope we can improve over the bye.

ps. pi and holding penalties on the deep ball are a reality of the game these days. Claiming that the Bills went 3 of 10 for 80 but got lucky on penalties -- if I take the gist of what you were implying -- doesn't really seem to factor in that the Bills were looking for those calls when throwing the deep ball.

You're not making a point, you're stating opinions based on no fact. They aren't the same thing.

So let me be clear: prevent defense is not a personnel package. Nickel or dime do NOT equal prevent. They're totally different things. Having extra cornerbacks on the field doesn't mean you're being conservative.

And I find some of your statements really bizarre. Maybe if you look at individual quarters or individual drives, but overall, they make no sense or don't seem based on any reality.

You talk about our struggles at the end of games. You're probably thinking about Miami. But overall, we have more sacks in the 4th quarter and allow fewer yards per pass attempt in the 4th quarter. The sacks don't necessarily correlate to passive vs. aggressive play calling, probably more to do with game situations as we've held big leads which have forced teams to abandon the run. So I'm not sure where you get this from, but feel free to actually show some evidence to this "point."

You talk about super aggressive defenses like the Seahawks, ignorant that the Seahawks are in the bottom half of blitzing over the past few years and have been. They have great corners and great DL and don't need to blitz. This article here talks about how they're "up" in blitzing this year, all the way up to 19th from 26th last season.

Blitz adds a new wrinkle to Seahawks' defensive attack

The Seahawks are not aggressive. They are successful though, picking their spots and being incredibly effective when they do blitz.

I've wasted enough time so not going to spend too much more on this. But the thing about the penalties bit needs more explanation. Yes, deep balls can generate penalties. But not consistently was my point. The Patriots have 18 defensive penalties accepted in 8 games. 7 of them came from the Bills game. In 3 games this season, they've had less than 10 defensive penalty yards. The 96 yards against the Bills was almost half their season total of 212 penalty yards on defense for the season. So I don't think that's the consistent factor you make it out to be. It is rare for us to get called for that many PIs.

Basically, you're repeating what you hear on TV from concussion cases like Dan Fouts because you think it's true, and you're not actually doing any research into whether it is true or not. When challenged on it, you just ignore all evidence and continue to make more **** up. And so yes, I'm going to call you on it.

Feel free to provide some links or some facts or some stats or something besides whatever regurgitated ******** you heard on TV. Because I mute that ******** for a reason.