Vanilla - preseason defense

[cupofjoe1962]

Driving home from the game last night, I kept thinking about how bad our defense played.

That was a vanilla preseason defense we played last night. Zone defense, no blitzing, no scheming.

Did Belichick not want to tip his hand for how we will play in the Super Bowl?

I have seen a injury depleted defense filled with backups in prior year show more imagination.

Really strange to see such a simple vanilla defense.

 

[NG Pats Fan]

That's Matt Patricia

 

[Sciz]

I'm not sure why people only want to talk about the zone. There was man, and it wasn't really any better.

 

[mosi]

That's Matt Patricia

Really, I don't think he has much say, good or bad. This is Bills defense.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Im sure alot was held back. It was a big game from the fans perspective but if you look at the remaining schedule - a losable game in terms of seeding.

As we saw, it was still very winnable.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I'm not sure why people only want to talk about the zone. There was man, and it wasn't really any better.

LOL, there was so much confusion by the D last night that on the same down some of them played zone, the rest played man.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

In the past we've seen BB play these types of games like pulling starters in the last game of the season and getting a more favorable seeding. So maybe he was anticipating a matchup with Seattle in the super bowl. The problem is that Dallas is also really really good.

 

[Kontradiction]

No. Unfortunately that's just the scheme he trots out against mobile quarterbacks. That said, there were plays where the LB's were going downhill and the CB's were up in press man. That had mixed results too. It's going to be interesting to watch how Philly defenses them this weekend.

 

[RIpats88]

No. Unfortunately that's just the scheme he trots out against mobile quarterbacks. That said, there were plays where the LB's were going downhill and the CB's were up in press man. That had mixed results too. It's going to be interesting to watch how Philly defenses them this weekend.

pretty much. I mean when you rush 2...theres no even attempt to get to the QB

 

[Kontradiction]

pretty much. I mean when you rush 2...theres no even attempt to get to the QB

I just have no clue why the hell they even thought that would be remotely successful. You can't give ANY NFL quarterback that amount of time let alone Wilson.

 

[mihap]

I'm not sure why people only want to talk about the zone. There was man, and it wasn't really any better.

Ofcourse there was a man. But our cornerbacks got burned so bad that it looks like they were playing zone.

 

[pwes]

Im sure alot was held back. It was a big game from the fans perspective but if you look at the remaining schedule - a losable game in terms of seeding.

As we saw, it was still very winnable.

In the past we've seen BB play these types of games like pulling starters in the last game of the season and getting a more favorable seeding. So maybe he was anticipating a matchup with Seattle in the super bowl. The problem is that Dallas is also really really good.

I really wish people would stop saying this nonsense. You do not go into a game with a mediocre game plan because you think you may meet the teem again in 3 months. Stupid decisions like that is how you end up missing the playoffs (not likely in jeopardy for us) or loosing your seeding (a big possibility). I guarantee you they did not trot out that pathetic defensive game plan becasue they 'didnt want to show Seattle too much in case they met in the Superbowl'. Well you got to get there first and giving up games by not playing your best is monumentally idiotic.

 

[AzorianPats]

I thought the preseason defense showed alot of promise. They were getting pressure and creating turnovers.

 

[Geezer Butler]

Ofcourse there was a man. But our cornerbacks got burned so bad that it looks like they were playing zone.

Totally dead on. When watching the game in real time I thought they were always in zone because the Seahawks receivers didn't have a man anywhere near them. But after rewatching, some of those plays were man coverage but they were giving these guys a 10 yard cushion! It just looked like zone on tv because it was so bad.

I can't wait to see the all 22 on it. I have a feeling what we saw in that game had more to do with confusion than anything else. Hopefully its correctable.

 

[NG Pats Fan]

In the past we've seen BB play these types of games like pulling starters in the last game of the season and getting a more favorable seeding. So maybe he was anticipating a matchup with Seattle in the super bowl. The problem is that Dallas is also really really good.

 

[luuked]

I just have no clue why the hell they even thought that would be remotely successful. You can't give ANY NFL quarterback that amount of time let alone Wilson.

What is there so hard to understand ? It was the right ****ing call at that point.

Seattle only had 14 seconds without a damn timeout at the Patriots 20 yard line. At that point you gotta concede that fieldgoal and just play to prevent a touchdown. If this means rushing 3 (yes there were 3 rushers: Nink, Long and Flowers, check it yourself if you dont believe it) and dropping 8 then that's fine with me.

If the handoff between Ryan and Chung doesn't go horribly wrong Wilson has to throw the ball away as the time was going towards the magical 6 second mark.

Now if this was on the verge of fieldgoal range you go for pressure and try to sack them to maybe prevent the FG or make it a very difficult one.

I don't get what your exact criticism of that call in that specific situation is. Can you elaborate ?

 

[Kontradiction]

What is there so hard to understand ? It was the right ****ing call at that point.

Seattle only had 14 seconds without a damn timeout at the Patriots 20 yard line. At that point you gotta concede that fieldgoal and just play to prevent a touchdown. If this means rushing 3 (yes there were 3 rushers: Nink, Long and Flowers, check it yourself if you dont believe it) and dropping 8 then that's fine with me.

If the handoff between Ryan and Chung doesn't go horribly wrong Wilson has to throw the ball away as the time was going towards the magical 6 second mark.

Now if this was on the verge of fieldgoal range you go for pressure and try to sack them to maybe prevent the FG or make it a very difficult one.

I don't get what your exact criticism of that call in that specific situation is. Can you elaborate ?

You don't get a criticism of giving an upper echelon quarterback 7 seconds to stand there and throw? It was not the right call. Sorry, man. He had enough time to stand there and wait for a hole in the zone to ultimately open up. Quarter is a defense you want to play in that scenario with the opposing offense on their side of the field. There's a reason why you never see it that close to the goal line. If you have, feel free to cite specific games.

 

[luuked]

You don't get a criticism of giving an upper echelon quarterback 7 seconds to stand there and throw? It was not the right call. Sorry, man. He had enough time to stand there and wait for a hole in the zone to ultimately open up. Quarter is a defense you want to play in that scenario with the opposing offense on their side of the field. There's a reason why you never see it that close to the goal line. If you have, feel free to cite specific games.

But the only objective here is the endzone. You don't even have to play the receivers, because a completion outside the endzone doesn't help them.

The coaching tape just became available on gamepass and I will check it out but if Chung would have stayed in his zone instead of drifting to the underneath (for no reason at all) Wilson would have to throw the ball away to preserve the FG.

EDIT:

I watched it a couple of times now and will try to make a gif out of it, but I wouldn't be surprised if Chatham puts that play into his video review anyway. I don't see any issue with the play call except for how Ryan/Chung blew it.



Just look how Chung makes a few steps to the 10 yards marking just about at the same time when Ryan "handed" the Seattle player off. Everyone else is covered and Wilson has nowhere to go if it wasn't for that fatal error between the two.

I understand what you are saying about quarters but my point is that in this situation it doesn't matter because it's TD or bust.

 

[Kontradiction]

But the only objective here is the endzone. You don't even have to play the receivers, because a completion outside the endzone doesn't help them.

The coaching tape just became available on gamepass and I will check it out but if Chung would have stayed in his zone instead of drifting to the underneath (for no reason at all) Wilson would have to throw the ball away to preserve the FG.

EDIT:

I watched it a couple of times now and will try to make a gif out of it, but I wouldn't be surprised if Chatham puts that play into his video review anyway. I don't see any issue with the play call except for how Ryan/Chung blew it.



Just look how Chung makes a few steps to the 10 yards marking just about at the same time when Ryan "handed" the Seattle player off. Everyone else is covered and Wilson has nowhere to go if it wasn't for that fatal error between the two.

I understand what you are saying about quarters but my point is that in this situation it doesn't matter because it's TD or bust.

Quarter was a terrible call to make where they were. The team could have accomplished the same thing in the back end with your standard Cover-3 while still being able to send more than two rushers after Wilson to try to hurry the throw. Playing quarter was a turd of a call to make at that end of the field and it ultimately ended up costing them.

 

[luuked]

Quarter was a terrible call to make where they were. The team could have accomplished the same thing in the back end with your standard Cover-3 while still being able to send more than two rushers after Wilson to try to hurry the throw. Playing quarter was a turd of a call to make at that end of the field and it ultimately ended up costing them.

Because Cover 3 would have prevent miscommunications ? The scheme was not the issue but individual breakdowns.