Ty Law: the Defense [Mod Edit for Accuracy] Still Has Major Holes In It.

[mb6592]

I knew that I shouldn't comment in this thread.

The patriots were awesome! We made the open receivers drop pass after pass after pass. Our pressure made Geno miss a half dozen open receivers that any third quarterback would have found.

All that matters is stats. We are 2-0. We certainly shouldn't bother do anything but congratulate ourselves.

As a final note, if I knew nothing about the patriots other than the last couple of games, I would give them a power rating in the bottom ten of teams, even though we are 2-0.

Truth will out. This team is in trouble, especially in the immediate future. The offense will go the way of Thompkins and Dobson (DA is injury prone his missing 20 of his last 32 games before the season will now become, most likley, 24-26 of his last 37-39 games) as teams focus on Gronk and JE. I said the offense will go the way of Thompkins and Dobson - yikes. And, I have more faith in this offense than this defense. I just don't see where this defense is any better than what we've seen the past 10 years now. Safeties, outside of McCourty, are atrocious. Denard and Talib are sound, but we are very thin on DL and I don't see where we'll be a stout defense against the run (mainly because we're extremely thin and I'm not as sold on Kelly as some of you). Bottom Line? Thompkins and/or Dobson will have to become special very soon. How likely is that?

 

[Archeryaddict12]

Truth will out. This team is in trouble, especially in the immediate future. The offense will go the way of Thompkins and Dobson (DA is injury prone his missing 20 of his last 32 games before the season will now become, most likley, 24-26 of his last 37-39 games) as teams focus on Gronk and JE. I said the offense will go the way of Thompkins and Dobson - yikes. And, I have more faith in this offense than this defense. I just don't see where this defense is any better than what we've seen the past 10 years now. Safeties, outside of McCourty, are atrocious. Denard and Talib are sound, but we are very thin on DL and I don't see where we'll be a stout defense against the run (mainly because we're extremely thin and I'm not as sold on Kelly as some of you). Bottom Line? Thompkins and/or Dobson will have to become special very soon. How likely is that?

Likely that the only issues they had were dropping passes. Running correct routes will come from studying.

 

[Don Kipines]

Truth will out. This team is in trouble, especially in the immediate future. The offense will go the way of Thompkins and Dobson (DA is injury prone his missing 20 of his last 32 games before the season will now become, most likley, 24-26 of his last 37-39 games) as teams focus on Gronk and JE. I said the offense will go the way of Thompkins and Dobson - yikes. And, I have more faith in this offense than this defense. I just don't see where this defense is any better than what we've seen the past 10 years now. Safeties, outside of McCourty, are atrocious. Denard and Talib are sound, but we are very thin on DL and I don't see where we'll be a stout defense against the run (mainly because we're extremely thin and I'm not as sold on Kelly as some of you). Bottom Line? Thompkins and/or Dobson will have to become special very soon. How likely is that?

Safeties outside of McCourty are atrocious, huh? You mean one of the two safeties on the field? And since Talib and Dennard are "sound" according to you, you mean one of four in the secondary -- right?

I can't repeat this enough: Boston fans are the most miserable on the planet. Nobody in the world has ever complained more about two wins. For all the amateur analysis of this team's weaknesses on defense and offense, you know what was most obviously this team's problem in the last five years? It wasn't tough. They were the pre-2006 Colts. They won a lot of pretty blowouts, but turtled in ugly games. They were front-runners who only rolled when Brady rolled. In the last two or three years, how many gutty, ugly wins did they have? Maybe that home win over Dallas, and the AFCCG against Baltimore two years ago. That's it.

This team has grinded out two ugly games in a row. They've shown toughness. The defense has carried them. They've made plays in the fourth quarter. I feel better about this team because of the overall toughness than I felt abut the teams from previous years, which were so Brady-dependent and almost never failed to crap their pants in the last quarter.

This experience, of having to play with a smaller margin of error, is going to come in handy later in the year. A true fan would realize this and look forward to the challenge. But all you people want to do is whine.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Let me make sure I understand this, a better offense would have scored more points? Noooooo. Next thing TY might profoundly state: "If the opposition had a better D, the Patriots would have scored less"

A lack of perspective here. As multiple other posters have pointed out, last year's D would probably have made Geno and EJ, stats wise, look like prime rookie of the year candidates. Also, this year's D had to, over and over and over, take the field in a tight game. Last year just about any QB takes their team in for the score with that many opportunities on that defense. This year we had to have the D make repeated stops and they largely did it. So the response is 'well they actually suck because the opposition wasn't that good'.

No one has said this D is the second coming of the 85 bears, no one. But an ongoing, continual problem area (the defense) so far has performed above that and it's only week 2, and they can't count on the O to pile up points, and they are seeing the field a lot more. For god's sake have some perspective and enjoy the fact that, so far, the D looks improved over years past. And if a better O will score more (an utterly profound statement!) then we'll cross that bridge when we get there.

 

[Rob0729]

So, let me understand better. The defense was ineffective agains the jets. The receivers were often open.

Is it your position that the defense would have been more effective if we were playing Atlanta?

The defense wasn't inefficient vs. the Jets. They gave up 10 point. They allowed them to convert 6 of 18 third downs (33.3%). They caused 4 turnovers. If that was inefficient, I'll take inefficient every week.

The Jets players were not open often. They were open more than we would like, but they were not open that often. Some of the times they were open, the Pats' front made Smith throw on the run or off-kilter.

We don't know how they will play against the Falcons, their strategy clearly won't be let Matt Ryan sit in the pocket as long as he doesn't scramble out. The Pats will have a totally different game plan. They also will have a full week of practice and not three days of walk throughs.

And let's not forget they basically shut down the Bills' offense that had a pretty good game today.

 

[PatsSox363804]

The defense wasn't inefficient vs. the Jets. They gave up 10 point. They allowed them to convert 6 of 18 third downs (33.3%). They caused 4 turnovers. If that was inefficient, I'll take inefficient every week.

The Jets players were not open often. They were open more than we would like, but they were not open that often. Some of the times they were open, the Pats' front made Smith throw on the run or off-kilter.

We don't know how they will play against the Falcons, their strategy clearly won't be let Matt Ryan sit in the pocket as long as he doesn't scramble out. The Pats will have a totally different game plan. They also will have a full week of practice and not three days of walk throughs.

And let's not forget they basically shut down the Bills' offense that had a pretty good game today.

BS, don't you know that was all because of Jets mistakes and had nothing to do with the Pats D?

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

BS, don't you know that was all because of Jets mistakes and had nothing to do with the Pats D?

It's one thing to be buoyed about the D's performance so far yet wonder if the D is good enough to hang in with the best offenses. But, as you point out, too many are intimating it was much much more about the opposition's offense. Two games in a row where the defense is obviously being asked to do way more than last year on the scoreboard (and they did), where they are on the field more without the benefit of knowing the offense will get it done, where they often wilted last year in similar situations, and you can't be happy with two games in a row that kept the opposition out of the endzone/FG when it counted? Ok.......

 

[RayClay]

I didn't hear Ty's remarks (did anyone, except the OP?) but I enjoy hearing Tedi, Willie and Ty tell it like it is rather than be cheerleaders.

If it's what I've heard before, it's Law comparing the defense to the ideal he, Rodney and the others set and I'm fine with that. We're playing pretty well on D, but we could be better.