PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

That's great it starts with an earthquake

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah thats a good point. My main concerns are first that the Jets and Steelers are overrated on D, and second all three are fundamentally different defenses that all attacked the same thing in different ways and were successful. That's three succesful gameplans for whatever scheme preference you may have placed out there for all the other teams to see.

I'm expecting the Pats to blow the Giants out but should the Giants have success defensively that will definitely be cause for concern.
The Jets did not attack us successfully, and the Cowboys only had success due to turnovers, which we as fluky as they were schemed.
 
We have more holes than those years. No pass rush, LB learning on the job. We've never had a #2 safety this bad; #3 CB maybe but the years you're listing we often had Vrabel, Bruschi, McGinnest in their prime. Now we have a bad #2 safety and a bad #3 CB and LB learning on the job and a non existent pass rush.

We do have a better offense than those years. But we have tons more holes on defense.
Again there is some revisionist history there. We seem to remember all of those players in their prime together on all of those teams.
In 2001, we had Brandon Mitchell, Bobby Hamilton, Mike Vrabel is a 43 in his first year as a starter, Otis Smith, Tebucky Jones starting.
Seymour was a rookie. That leave Brushci in his first year as a 43 MLB, Willie McGinest, Ty Law and Lawyer Milloy. Not exactly the Patriots HOF out there.
In 03 we lost Colvin and had a rookie corner starting at safety along with a rookie playing most of the season at NT and Ted Johnson, far over the hill starting at ILB.
In 2004 by the playoffs Seymour and Law were injured, the secondary was decimated, Colvin was a shell of himself.
Sure we had good players, but we didnt have 11 stars in their prime together.
 
Good stuff, Jay. #1 and #3 are pretty much spot on. I'd argue that the problem with #2 is that they aren't good enough and experienced enough to let loose, and that the Patriots aren't actually a fast team, particularly in the front seven, but I can see what you're saying as well.



Always great to see you throwing out the thoughts and ideas. You should do it a lot more often.
 
Last edited:
Nice thread.

I'm hoping that BOB's recent comments re: Price indicate that the coaching staff is well aware of the issues you raised in #1. Hopefully he or Ocho (or both!) are up to the task.
 
You were a little extreme there in your soft/bad-ass comparison. That said, if we want to compare how tough guys play now vs. how tough guys played on the 2004 team, the current guys do lose almost every comparison. Wilfork vs. Washington? Older vs. younger Brady? Spikes vs. Ted Johnson? The guys you were being unfair to (and some of the ones you weren't) had even tougher guys in their roles back then.
 
Nice job on the self-scouting. Some good insights into what was happening in the Steeler game, and what other coaches might take away from it.

We can take some comfort that BB sees this as well, we hope.

-- FRITZ
 
Some gd points here...but Ocho ain't stretching the field out anymore. And you are right, all any d has to do is take welk and gronk out.....AND bump our receivers at LOS and you shut down our passing O. They need a deep threat...more passes to RB out of backfield.....OC creativity.....oh and a good running would help!

No it's not, Michael Stipe.

That said, it is pretty bad and if there are not some serious changes made it's going to get ugly in hurry on both sides of the ball. Some are correctable, some are not, and some can be patched up enough to get you them home. I see these problems broken down into three major categories.

1) They have a high school offense and teams have figured it out. Think about it. Their best players are between the hashes and no one is going to back the safeties off. I've been concerned for a while about the lack out outside receivers and we're beginning to see this turn from a concern to a legitimate problem. The ambiguity and matchup problems of the two TE set are caused only when there is a legitimate outside presence. Why? Because without one the defense has no need to defend the deeper part of the field nor the areas outside the hashes with the safeties. The safeties are then allowed to drop down and provide not only a better TE matchup but robust run support . Further, the less of the demand placed on the exterior, the more it enables the defenses to beat the current bread and butter of Welker and Hernandez. Simply place an I/O bracket or get physical and pass to chase zones. Not only does this work to hurt the passing routes, but it keeps players in tight where they can better disguise pressures and defend the run. Without an outside option (they currently don't have one at either the x or z) the entire design of the offense won't work.

Solution: Pray that Price can play or Ocho wakes up one morning and says "oooooohhh. Wow, it's all so simple now."


Problem 2) Bill, let them play. So much of the talk lately has been about the GM practices. Alright, there's some valid points there and I'd sure like to have James Sanders back there to stabilize things, but ultimately all that stuff is irrelevant. There's nothing that can be done to change it, your roster is your roster, and goddamnit they are football players. This continued reliance upon this passive, weak, sickening two high safety look is poisoning the defense. I understand that it's risk mitigation and ultimately field goals aren't going to kill you, but it's removing one of your best defensive assets from contributing. The dual high safety crap is keeping Chung 20 yards from the action instead of letting him loose in the intermediate areas his skillset is so clearly geared towards. Ihedigbo? Sure, great, stick his ass 40 yards away from anything so he won't get in the way, but you have to start utilizing Chung. They also don't have linebackers getting sufficient depth and spread in their cover-2 and 4. Why do you think Heath Miller had such a huge game? He was getting behind the linebackers level. Once they began to move Guyton into that area it helped things (ie the INT) but it's been a glaring weakness all season.

Solution: The zones were spread and exposed by the Steelers in a perfect reversal of what normally happens in that game. Your players are in the NFL for a reason. You don't have Cooper Manning at corner. Bring your playmakers into positions that will enable them to make plays. Trust McCourty to right the ship. He will. Let your long-armed, strong corners leverage their skill sets. Don't ask a linebacker who runs a 5.2 40 to be your Mike in a Tampa-2 where he has to get safety depth. Stop confusing first time starters by trying to execute cute morphing coverages that replace exchange zones. You cut Sanders and are now confusing everyone else. They're football players. Let them play football. Execute good, sound fundamental coverages and at least let your players just fly around. You've got a fast team. UTILIZE IT. Mix in some blitzing and if you get burnt on occasion you get burnt. At least your players will be able to play. Otherwise you'll continue to play prevent right until you're kicked out in the first round for the third consecutive year. I love the x's and o's but sometimes the smartest move is to simplify.

Problem 3) They're soft. Mankins, Gronk, Spikes, and Welker are the only guys that standout as badasses. Seven years ago that whole damn team was 22 badasses. They're unemotional and most importantly playing not to get beat. This team has paralysis by analysis and that's very scary.

Solution: Type how soft they are on messageboards in hopes it gives the coaching staff sufficient motivational collateral. Again, dedicate yourself to an aggressive scheme and let your players play fast and emotional. This team has been over-intellectualized and it shows.
 
This might sound crazy but I'm kinda surprised the D is getting so much heat when the Offense was really worse. The D held the Steelers to 23 and had a crucial turnover basically gift wrapping points. The rest of the game the vaunted offense only produced 10 points! Seems to me the Steelers essentially mimicked the Jets 2010 playoff game plan to perfection and the offense had no answers.

so, you're basically saying that its easy to beat the pats if you approach the game in a certain way......hell, you don't even need your starting LB's (harrison, farrior) or your starting WR (ward)
 
Yeah thats a good point. My main concerns are first that the Jets and Steelers are overrated on D

Maybe you should wake up and realize the Steelers have the best defense in football. I am all for the worrying if another team holds us under 20, but to pretend Pittsburgh is overrated, no way. They were missing a few LBs and still shut down several players on our offense.
 
Finally, I am shocked a guy with the insight you have would question the toughness of players from your easy chair.

I respect your football acumen, but you really mailed this one in.

Recently, your tone has turned aggressively defensive and defiantly optimistic, and ultimately, credibility is starting to suffer. You seem too often to stifle actual constructive discussion - as Jays52 puts forth here - with dismissals.


You are ignoring the results that this team has had recently in the games that matter, and against the highest competition in the league. There is a trend - in the types of games we lose - that dates back to February 2008 that is readily apparent, and we can't just brush that aside. It doesn't matter how successful we are outside of those games - if we want to win the Super Bowl, we have to win one of those hard-fought, low-scoring matchups against a team that is tougher and more physical than us, and that can be physical with our receivers.


I'm sure Belichick isn't sitting there twiddling his thumbs resting on his laurels, assuming this team is A-OK. An informed poster, and fan of the team, like Jays52 shouldn't either.
 
Last edited:
I would add Chung to that.



Or 6-1, we could easily have beaten Buffalo.

The concern for me on defense is there's no-one to upgrade right now. We have no MLB better than Spikes and if Mayo goes there we have no good WLB. We have no better SLB than Ninko. We have the three scrubs rotating at the safety spot other than Chung and none of them can play.

I like Carter, Wilfork, Mayo, Chung, McCourtey and Arrington. That's half a defense.


Those are the best D players! Agreed
 
This might sound crazy but I'm kinda surprised the D is getting so much heat when the Offense was really worse. The D held the Steelers to 23 and had a crucial turnover basically gift wrapping points. The rest of the game the vaunted offense only produced 10 points! Seems to me the Steelers essentially mimicked the Jets 2010 playoff game plan to perfection and the offense had no answers.

The offense was worse (from the limited time they were out there)-lol
I have to agree because I've been beating the D to death.
The offense blew.
 
Maybe you should wake up and realize the Steelers have the best defense in football. I am all for the worrying if another team holds us under 20, but to pretend Pittsburgh is overrated, no way. They were missing a few LBs and still shut down several players on our offense.
Exactly.
the Steelers were in the SB and AFC Champs last yr and practically shut us out.

This is a wake up call for our D to play tighter and harder!
 
In regards to the defense not working with zone (lately) or man to man (early) I would like to see them play more of a matchup zone and switch between cover 1, 2 and 3 depending on the situation. These guys get into their zones and just go to the hash mark their supposed to be on. If the TE releases don't just stand on the 35 because that's your assignment. Come up and take away that outlet.

You can still help the corners on the inside routes. I think letting Mccorty and Arrington play off and make adjustments plays to their strength. You can situationally use them like safeties in cover three and still bring Chung up to help take the middle away. The middle of this defense is the bigger issue. An example is against the Jets. No issues playing the corners off and forcing Sanchez to beat them over the top and taking away Keller and LT underneath.

If they give up a bomb to Holmes or Burress so be it. It's still better than death by a thousand paper cuts.
 
Wow. This kind of post typifies the week on this board - knee-jerk reactionary stuff that we see out here every time the Pats lose. Every time!

So, we're running a 'high school offense' (that's 3rd in the league right now), our defense is somehow both playing too deep (your poisonous cover 2) and not deep enough (glaring weakness of linebackers not being 30 yds downfield, apparently), and, of course, they're soft (always good to throw that in just to incite the masses).

All of your criticisms stem from *1* game, despite your attempts to color them as long term trends. The offense had a bad day against Pittsburgh; kudos to their D. Do you really think it'll be like that for the rest of the season? Did you learn anything from their followup to the Browns game last year? Did you learn anything from the 30 points and 400+ yards they put up on a Jets D that handled them last year? The O had a bad day against a good D, and you're ready to blow it up.

And that 'glaring weakness' we've had with tight end coverage all year? Funny you weren't out here pointing that out after the Jets game. Or the Chargers game.

But yeah, they're soft. They softly ran the ball down the throats of the Jets a few weeks ago too. And the Raiders before that. So soft. I believe Woodhead, Ridley, Vereen and BJGE are all banged up to some degree, along with Hernandez, Light, and Vollmer. Faulk is rusty after a year off. I'm sure the cumulative effect of all these 'minor' injuries is taking a toll right now. They'll bounce back.

The D got picked apart by a good QB, and things need to be tightened up. They're not that far away, but I understand that it's frustrating to watch them give up those 3rd down throws (yeah, I'm yelling at the TV too). They've shut down the deep ball, now they need to start shrinking those holes in the intermediate areas. I'm confident that will happen. Going to a press coverage where 'we'll get burned occasionally' isn't really a philosophy that BB would ever embrace I don't think. Especially against a team that is looking for just those types of throws.

I'm sure you meant well with your criticisms, but it comes off as a superficial over-reaction to a single bad game. I suppose we'll keep getting that out here until they win a playoff game again - those last few losses have put a lot of doubt into the previously-loyal fanbase. It's only game 7 of 16, and we have the best coach in the league working on the problems. Have some faith.
 
No it's not, Michael Stipe.

That said, it is pretty bad and if there are not some serious changes made it's going to get ugly in hurry on both sides of the ball. Some are correctable, some are not, and some can be patched up enough to get you them home. I see these problems broken down into three major categories.

1) They have a high school offense and teams have figured it out. Think about it. Their best players are between the hashes and no one is going to back the safeties off. I've been concerned for a while about the lack out outside receivers and we're beginning to see this turn from a concern to a legitimate problem. The ambiguity and matchup problems of the two TE set are caused only when there is a legitimate outside presence. Why? Because without one the defense has no need to defend the deeper part of the field nor the areas outside the hashes with the safeties. The safeties are then allowed to drop down and provide not only a better TE matchup but robust run support . Further, the less of the demand placed on the exterior, the more it enables the defenses to beat the current bread and butter of Welker and Hernandez. Simply place an I/O bracket or get physical and pass to chase zones. Not only does this work to hurt the passing routes, but it keeps players in tight where they can better disguise pressures and defend the run. Without an outside option (they currently don't have one at either the x or z) the entire design of the offense won't work.

Solution: Pray that Price can play or Ocho wakes up one morning and says "oooooohhh. Wow, it's all so simple now."


Problem 2) Bill, let them play. So much of the talk lately has been about the GM practices. Alright, there's some valid points there and I'd sure like to have James Sanders back there to stabilize things, but ultimately all that stuff is irrelevant. There's nothing that can be done to change it, your roster is your roster, and goddamnit they are football players. This continued reliance upon this passive, weak, sickening two high safety look is poisoning the defense. I understand that it's risk mitigation and ultimately field goals aren't going to kill you, but it's removing one of your best defensive assets from contributing. The dual high safety crap is keeping Chung 20 yards from the action instead of letting him loose in the intermediate areas his skillset is so clearly geared towards. Ihedigbo? Sure, great, stick his ass 40 yards away from anything so he won't get in the way, but you have to start utilizing Chung. They also don't have linebackers getting sufficient depth and spread in their cover-2 and 4. Why do you think Heath Miller had such a huge game? He was getting behind the linebackers level. Once they began to move Guyton into that area it helped things (ie the INT) but it's been a glaring weakness all season.

Solution: The zones were spread and exposed by the Steelers in a perfect reversal of what normally happens in that game. Your players are in the NFL for a reason. You don't have Cooper Manning at corner. Bring your playmakers into positions that will enable them to make plays. Trust McCourty to right the ship. He will. Let your long-armed, strong corners leverage their skill sets. Don't ask a linebacker who runs a 5.2 40 to be your Mike in a Tampa-2 where he has to get safety depth. Stop confusing first time starters by trying to execute cute morphing coverages that replace exchange zones. You cut Sanders and are now confusing everyone else. They're football players. Let them play football. Execute good, sound fundamental coverages and at least let your players just fly around. You've got a fast team. UTILIZE IT. Mix in some blitzing and if you get burnt on occasion you get burnt. At least your players will be able to play. Otherwise you'll continue to play prevent right until you're kicked out in the first round for the third consecutive year. I love the x's and o's but sometimes the smartest move is to simplify.

Problem 3) They're soft. Mankins, Gronk, Spikes, and Welker are the only guys that standout as badasses. Seven years ago that whole damn team was 22 badasses. They're unemotional and most importantly playing not to get beat. This team has paralysis by analysis and that's very scary.

Solution: Type how soft they are on messageboards in hopes it gives the coaching staff sufficient motivational collateral. Again, dedicate yourself to an aggressive scheme and let your players play fast and emotional. This team has been over-intellectualized and it shows.

A good analysis actually. This is the type of criticism I LIKE to see on this board, something that's backed up with some knowledge and actually proposes a feasible solution to the problem. Even if I don't agree with everything, this is 100 times better than simply complaining about the drafts or telling the "homers" to wake up and realize BB is a crazy old man who can't coach anymore. So thank you!

As to your points:

1) I think you're overstating the offensive problems. I think a deep threat/better outside presence would certainly help and would give this offense every perceivable option in the book. However, there is NO offense in the league that has every type of weapon at A+ level (with the exception of Green Bay, who looks to have all the bases covered right now). This offense will rebound, because we still have enough weapons to create mismatches against any scheme. The problem comes really when our OL doesn't play well (or possibly Brady doesn't call good protection schemes, it's impossible to know from watching TV), and the other team plays a near perfect defensive game.

2) I actually think you may be on to something here. The scheme does seem to be fairly conservative, which may be a product of our talent level, or could be some other weird brainchild of BB. I would also add that the energy level of the defense seems to be fairly low... I don't know if they're thinking too much instead of reacting, or if there's something else there, but in the Dallas game we saw a lot of movement pre-snap, quick first steps, and just generally higher energy than we saw against Pittsburgh.

One possible factor in that is the bye week. More so than other years I think the bye is killing momentum (teams are what? 4-10 after their bye?). Combine that with below average talent (or below average currently due to injury and lack of experience in the case of some players), and facing a good team on the road, and it's understandable that the defense would look horrible, not just statistically, but with the eye test. I take some encouragement in two things: One, that the red zone defense was still good, which gave us a chance at the end despite poor offensive execution. And two, we WERE trending upwards before the bye. How we do against the Giants will give us a much better idea of this defense's progress (or regression) than this Steelers game did I think.
 
Wow. This kind of post typifies the week on this board - knee-jerk reactionary stuff that we see out here every time the Pats lose. Every time!

So, we're running a 'high school offense' (that's 3rd in the league right now), our defense is somehow both playing too deep (your poisonous cover 2) and not deep enough (glaring weakness of linebackers not being 30 yds downfield, apparently), and, of course, they're soft (always good to throw that in just to incite the masses).

All of your criticisms stem from *1* game, despite your attempts to color them as long term trends. The offense had a bad day against Pittsburgh; kudos to their D. Do you really think it'll be like that for the rest of the season? Did you learn anything from their followup to the Browns game last year? Did you learn anything from the 30 points and 400+ yards they put up on a Jets D that handled them last year? The O had a bad day against a good D, and you're ready to blow it up.

And that 'glaring weakness' we've had with tight end coverage all year? Funny you weren't out here pointing that out after the Jets game. Or the Chargers game.

But yeah, they're soft. They softly ran the ball down the throats of the Jets a few weeks ago too. And the Raiders before that. So soft. I believe Woodhead, Ridley, Vereen and BJGE are all banged up to some degree, along with Hernandez, Light, and Vollmer. Faulk is rusty after a year off. I'm sure the cumulative effect of all these 'minor' injuries is taking a toll right now. They'll bounce back.

The D got picked apart by a good QB, and things need to be tightened up. They're not that far away, but I understand that it's frustrating to watch them give up those 3rd down throws (yeah, I'm yelling at the TV too). They've shut down the deep ball, now they need to start shrinking those holes in the intermediate areas. I'm confident that will happen. Going to a press coverage where 'we'll get burned occasionally' isn't really a philosophy that BB would ever embrace I don't think. Especially against a team that is looking for just those types of throws.

I'm sure you meant well with your criticisms, but it comes off as a superficial over-reaction to a single bad game. I suppose we'll keep getting that out here until they win a playoff game again - those last few losses have put a lot of doubt into the previously-loyal fanbase. It's only game 7 of 16, and we have the best coach in the league working on the problems. Have some faith.

Actually, his comments come off fine. They aren't based off of one game, as the entire season, and most of last year, can demonstrate.

Your post, on the other hand, is the sort of homer drivel that's becoming more of a joke with every posting. You're welcome to keep your head buried in the sand, along with the rest of the over-the-top homers who refuse to grasp the significance of yet another game of this sort. Just don't expect everyone else to be equally naive.

The team will have better games, probably beginning this weekend. It'll win most of its games down the stretch, going against a lot of weak teams, and people will be talking about how much the defense has improved. Then the playoffs will start, and the team will either get lucky with matchups or get bounced. When you're as badly flawed on defense as this team is, you need a ridiculous amount of luck to get anywhere in the post season.
 
Last edited:
Your post, on the other hand, is the sort of homer drivel that's becoming more of a joke with every posting. You're welcome to keep your head buried in the sand, along with the rest of the over-the-top homers who refuse to grasp the significance of yet another game of this sort. Just don't expect everyone else to be equally naive.

Right on.

And I consider myself a homer.

But we've lost this way too many times to ignore it.

The Pittsburgh game was frustrating b/c we've seen this before - and the fear that every sane Patriots fan has right now is that we'll see it again this January irregardless of whatever success we have in the coming months.

2006 AFCCG - gassed defense blows the lead with final drive
2007 SB - OL & WR overpowered + gassed defense blows the lead with 14 4th quarter points, the later 7 which were beyond improbable
2008 regular season - gassed defense blows it on 3rd & 15 vs Jets, ultimately costs us playoffs
2009 AFC Wild Card - porous D and an overpowered O
2010 AFCDG - offense stymied by a more physical D that gets pressure without sacrificing coverage; defense can't get stops when it matters

We can blow out teams all regular season - and we probably will. Brady could win another MVP (though he won't unless Rodgers falls off this pace). Welker could set records. Gronk could set records.

NONE OF IT WILL MATTER if this offense and defense can't play complimentary football against a tougher opponent in January or February.
 
Last edited:
Actually, his comments come off fine. They aren't based off of one game, as the entire season, and most of last year, can demonstrate.

So you're OK with 'high school offense'? And characterizing the whole team as 'soft'? Just wondering. The 5 wins this year were just luck??

Your post, on the other hand, is the sort of homer drivel that's becoming more of a joke with every posting. You're welcome to keep your head buried in the sand, along with the rest of the over-the-top homers who refuse to grasp the significance of yet another game of this sort. Just don't expect everyone else to be equally naive.

I suppose I deserve that, having labeled the OP a knee-jerk reactionary

The team will have better games, probably beginning this weekend.

And you'll refuse to give them any credit, and spend the next week focusing on the Gints 3rd down conversion rate, or their ypc. You aren't comfortable talking up the good points, only the negative stuff seems to catch your eye.

It'll win most of its games down the stretch, going against a lot of weak teams, and people will be talking about how much the defense has improved.

I see the 5-2 Giants, the 4-3 Jests, the 4-3 Chefs, and the 5-2 Bills on the upcoming schedule. If we do actually win some or all of those games, I'll be pretty pleased. You, of course, won't be unless we also shut them out.

Then the playoffs will start, and the team will either get lucky with matchups or get bounced.

There's that pessimism thing again. Those are the only 2 options? Maybe we might just outplay someone and win. It's possible. We have great personnel, especially on offense. We have a very young defense that played pretty well the previous 2 games, but not so much this past week. I think you tweak that - you and the OP want to blow it up. We'll just have to disagree on that, I guess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft 6 – A Week Before the Draft
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/13
Patriots News 04-12, What To Watch For In The NFL Draft
MORSE: Pre-Draft Patriots News and Notes
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft 5
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft 5
Mark Morse
1 week ago
Patriots Part Ways with Another Linebacker as Offseason Roster Shake-Up Continues
Patriots News 04-05, Mock Draft 2.0, Patriots Look For OL Depth
MORSE: 18 Game Schedule and Other Patriots Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Mike Vrabel Press Conference at the League Meetings 3/31
MORSE: Smokescreens and Misinformation Leading Up to Patriots Draft
Back
Top