- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
- Messages
- 34,991
- Reaction score
- 15,547
My opinion is that a strong D - not elite, but strong - is close to a necessity at that level. You can overcome mediocre D, but as the OP said, you've always got a chance with TFB... but a chance isn't the same as a good chance. You really don't want to count on 25-point comebacks as a strategy.
Thought experiment: Let's say we're up 7, two minutes left, and we've just scored.
Will this be a year, by the end, where we can put our defense on the field and trust them to win it? The OP's post speaks to this possibility, and it's representative of most of our Hightower-free games this year.
"Everything got solved last week," for one week. No HT, and we could either be back to square 1 (especially thinking of the QB-of-the-defense/communications nexus)... or we could be playing disciplined defense. Start at "competent" and go from there, but deep in the playoffs I really don't think "competent/mediocre" is a very good bet. I mean, obviously.
We all remember those days where TFB has put the team on his back and came up just short, where some guy on the other defense is running around after the game-winning play just before the enemy QB takes a knee a couple of times. This isn't 2001-2004 anymore, where there was a script ending with a SB win... I think other teams even bought into that at some point.
So wtf is wrong with being up substantially, the 2006 AFCCG notwithstanding? Not to be spoiled or anything. To look at margins of victory in big games, you would look at this franchise and say "this must be a team that just always wants it more," you wouldn't say "This is a franchise that dominates." Those teams come and go, and they're one-year wonders (85 Bears, for example.) It's the Pats' culture and TB-12 that have been constants.
We've won 2 out of the last 3 again, but every game is on the line - awareness of that is how this team has always won. "Every game turns on a few big plays." That sort of thing.
Our D will never be dominant because we focus on preventing those big plays and buckling down where it counts... it would be beautiful to be able to play flawless D for a full game but the way they've jacked the rules around, you can't build a defense like that anymore. What you can do is build a D that minimizes the damage in terms of the score.
BTW, in both of the SBs we lost, we've had that kind of D. So that's not any guarantee either, after 18 games. But it beats the hell out of counting on TFB to singlehandedly overcome all sins on both sides of the ball. PS, that O line is another enormous piece that has to be in place. Everybody's scared shlitzless about running out of receivers, where we often have young players that can't get on the field. I mean, sure, if Larry Fitzgerald decides he wants to play cheap because he loooovvvvves the Patriots, no argument here. But most receivers are "meh" receivers. I could see bolstering the TE position, but I'm not sure that much production can be subbed in at the position given the bodies available.
So um, Ian doesn't pay me either. But no no no, it's not good to accept mediocre D, and it's certainly not bad to build up leads, where possible. Make life just a little bit easier on poor TFB.
