Why the prevent is not good for this team

[Deus Irae]

I wasn't recommending that we send the heat at Manning and Brees with the personnel we have now...

Got it. I thought you were referring to the current group.


As an aside, the more I think of the 2003/2010 comparison, the less I like this year's defense in comparison. That defense was full of quality players in, or near, their primes. Without in any way griping about that defense, it would have great to see that team in the playoffs with a healthy Colvin helping out on the pass rush.

 

[lamafist]

You know, it's kind of funny that Bill Belichick has come right out and told Glen Ordway on the Big Show that the team didn't change up their defensive scheme in the fourth quarter, and people are still acting as if the team almost lost because of some "prevent defense" they were playing -- funny, because it shows that not only did they not believe the head coach, but they clearly didn't even bother to take five minutes to go back and check and see if maybe, just maybe, said head coach knew what he was talking about.

Maybe the problem is that if they don't even know what they're looking for the first time, seeing it a second time won't help any.

The Pats were playing the same coverage when they got burned for two touchdowns in the 2nd quarter that they were when they got burned for two touchdowns in the 4th. At no point in the 4th quarter did I see the Pats use 7 defensive backs, or drop 8 guys in coverage and rush only three. I don't think I saw the Pats go any smaller than their dime package, as Arrington was being used as a pass rusher. At no point did I see any safeties playing further back than usual -- in fact, I noticed on several occasions that Chung was playing closer to the line than he's probably used to, and being asked to turn and run with receivers like a nickelback.

So what do you want, exactly, for the Pats to play their base 3-4 when the Colts are lining up in shotgun, 4 wide (Tamme being split out)? Do you think that's likely to work? If the Pats' defense looked at all different in the 4th quarter, it's only because to match the Colts' offense, who'd gone hurry-up.

What I don't get, is why anyone would even start to think that the Pats would be playing "prevent" in this game. I mean, really, against the Colts, up 17, with 10 1/2 minutes left in the game? That's a lifetime for Indi. Do you think BB doesn't realize that the Colts can put points up as fast as any offense in the league? And after that, do you think that Belichick felt comfortable up only 10 with 7 minutes left, after having watched the Colts score quickly and then force a three and out? How stupid do you think he is? I don't know any coach that isn't trying 100% for a stop in that situation.

And of course the grand irony is that the only rationale I've seen for the assumption that the Pats were playing prevent is that the Colts scored two 4th quarter TDs against them -- ignoring, of course, that the Colts did the same exact thing in the 2nd quarter of the game! People are acting like the Pats' defense was somehow significantly worse in the 2nd half than the first.

In the first half, the Pats stopped the Colts' first two drives, with a forced punt and an interception, and then gave up touchdowns on the next two. In the 2nd half, the Pats also stopped the Colts' first two drives, also by forcing a punt and getting an interception -- and then got another INT to end the game.

But really, don't take my word for it, and heck, don't even take Belichick's -- but at least do us all the favor of going and watching a few replays instead of blindly persevering with a narrative in your head that doesn't even make sense.

 

[Kontradiction]

You know, it's kind of funny that Bill Belichick has come right out and told Glen Ordway on the Big Show that the team didn't change up their defensive scheme in the fourth quarter, and people are still acting as if the team almost lost because of some "prevent defense" they were playing -- funny, because it shows that not only did they not believe the head coach, but they clearly didn't even bother to take five minutes to go back and check and see if maybe, just maybe, said head coach knew what he was talking about.

Maybe the problem is that if they don't even know what they're looking for the first time, seeing it a second time won't help any.

The Pats were playing the same coverage when they got burned for two touchdowns in the 2nd quarter that they were when they got burned for two touchdowns in the 4th. At no point in the 4th quarter did I see the Pats use 7 defensive backs, or drop 8 guys in coverage and rush only three. I don't think I saw the Pats go any smaller than their dime package, as Arrington was being used as a pass rusher. At no point did I see any safeties playing further back than usual -- in fact, I noticed on several occasions that Chung was playing closer to the line than he's probably used to, and being asked to turn and run with receivers like a nickelback.

So what do you want, exactly, for the Pats to play their base 3-4 when the Colts are lining up in shotgun, 4 wide (Tamme being split out)? Do you think that's likely to work? If the Pats' defense looked at all different in the 4th quarter, it's only because to match the Colts' offense, who'd gone hurry-up.

What I don't get, is why anyone would even start to think that the Pats would be playing "prevent" in this game. I mean, really, against the Colts, up 17, with 10 1/2 minutes left in the game? That's a lifetime for Indi. Do you think BB doesn't realize that the Colts can put points up as fast as any offense in the league? And after that, do you think that Belichick felt comfortable up only 10 with 7 minutes left, after having watched the Colts score quickly and then force a three and out? How stupid do you think he is? I don't know any coach that isn't trying 100% for a stop in that situation.

And of course the grand irony is that the only rationale I've seen for the assumption that the Pats were playing prevent is that the Colts scored two 4th quarter TDs against them -- ignoring, of course, that the Colts did the same exact thing in the 2nd quarter of the game! People are acting like the Pats' defense was somehow significantly worse in the 2nd half than the first.

In the first half, the Pats stopped the Colts' first two drives, with a forced punt and an interception, and then gave up touchdowns on the next two. In the 2nd half, the Pats also stopped the Colts' first two drives, also by forcing a punt and getting an interception -- and then got another INT to end the game.

But really, don't take my word for it, and heck, don't even take Belichick's -- but at least do us all the favor of going and watching a few replays instead of blindly persevering with a narrative in your head that doesn't even make sense.

There's no doubting that the team didn't really change it's defensive scheme all game. There's no doubting that we were in the dime and the nickel for most of the game, as we usually have been against Manning. What most of us are talking about is the changing of the coverages within the dime defense. For instance, dropping the LB's back deeper in coverage and, at times, going into a three deep zone. For instance...

2. With a 17-point lead to begin the Colts’ first drive of the fourth quarter, the Patriots defense moved into a softer coverage look, with ILB Jerod Mayo in a deeper zone seen more often in a “Tampa 2” system. This opened up the middle of the field, but it still did not explain the 11-yard WR Reggie Wayne catch against CB Darius Butler to begin the drive. On the play, Butler bumped Wayne at the line but was three steps slow to chase him as he broke inside on a crossing route, and even then had trouble chasing Wayne across the field, making the tackle only after Wayne stuttered to avoid Mayo.

There's no doubting that the team used a LOT more four man rushes in the 4th quarter than they had all game. There's also no doubting that our LB's and safeties were playing further back in an attempt to stop the deep passes and quick strikes. So yes, the team played the same defense as they had all game. The dime and nickel. But the coverages were most definitely different. I also don't think I need to tell you that there's no really much that you can gleen from an average Bill Belichick press conference, either.

 

[SuperPatsFan]

I think someone else mentioned the two big plays the Colts had in the 4th quarter:

3rd and 4 at IND 44 (No Huddle, Shotgun) D.Brown left tackle pushed ob at NE 20 for 36 yards (D.McCourty).

3rd and 9 at 50 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass deep right to P.Garcon to NE 33 for 17 yards (P.Chung, D.McCourty). PENALTY on NE-T.Banta-Cain, Unnecessary Roughness, 15 yards, enforced at NE 33. [ Total of 32 yards.]

The Brown run was to the Pats' right side, with Arrington at DE and Wright at DT. Guyton was rushing the backside, so the play turned out to be a great call. Wright was turned and pushed out of his gaps easily -- why Mike? I guess big runs are one of the risks of using a CB as a DE/OLB. I don't know the reasoning behind using Arrington at that position.

Garcon made the catch while wearing McCourty. Tight coverage indeed. A 15-yard penalty in such a critical situation is egregious mistake the Patriots usually don't make. And Blair White getting a free release off the line against Chung in man is a major mismatch.

 

[ATippett56]

I think someone else mentioned the two big plays the Colts had in the 4th quarter were:

3rd and 4 at IND 44 (No Huddle, Shotgun) D.Brown left tackle pushed ob at NE 20 for 36 yards (D.McCourty).

3rd and 9 at 50 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass deep right to P.Garcon to NE 33 for 17 yards (P.Chung, D.McCourty). PENALTY on NE-T.Banta-Cain, Unnecessary Roughness, 15 yards, enforced at NE 33. [ Total of 32 yards.]

The Brown run was to the Pats' right side, with Arrington at DE and Wright at DT. Guyton was rushing the backside, so the play turned out to be a great call. Wright was turned and pushed out of his gaps easily -- why Mike? I guess big runs are one of the risks of using a CB as a DE/OLB.

Garcon made the catch while wearing McCourty. Tight coverage indeed. The penalty in such a critical situation was unforgivable. And Blair White getting a free release off the line against Chung in man is a major mismatch.

Penalties and poor tackling can extend any offensive drive. As for Arrington rushing the passer, I would rather rotate Banta-Cain, Cunningham, and Ninkovich.

 

[Kontradiction]

Penalties and poor tackling can extend any offensive drive. As for Arrington rushing the passer, I would rather rotate Banta-Cain, Cunningham, and Ninkovich.

Aye. The Colts would probably call one screen after another to Ninkovich's side, though.

 

[ATippett56]

Aye. The Colts would probably call one screen after another to Ninkovich's side, though.

Would you rather see Pierre Woods out there instead? Let's face it, the only players on the Patriots roster who play outside linebacker are Banta-Cain, Cunningham, Ninkovich, and Woods.

 

[Kontradiction]

Would you rather see Pierre Woods out there instead? Let's face it, the only players on the Patriots roster who play outside linebacker are Banta-Cain, Cunningham, Ninkovich, and Woods.

Woods is better at setting the edge than Ninkovich, but cannot rush the passer. And you're right, he would have bit just as hard on that screen that went for a TD. No doubt that Ninkovich bit pretty hard on that, though.

 

[Joker]

just look at the game on your DVR if you have one...the Pats 2 deep safety technique has them line up ten yards from the LOS..in the 4th quarter that was EXTENDED at least five yards....played without mistakes that defense is what you want to play, but it seems that extra cushion has these young DB's taking unfamiliar and bad angles on plays in front of them. Maybe it's their timing that's getting thrown off but when you suddenly see THREE DB's converge and the WR STILL gets by for a huge gain, there's a technique problem somewhere there.

 

[Joker]

I think someone else mentioned the two big plays the Colts had in the 4th quarter:

3rd and 4 at IND 44 (No Huddle, Shotgun) D.Brown left tackle pushed ob at NE 20 for 36 yards (D.McCourty).

3rd and 9 at 50 (No Huddle, Shotgun) P.Manning pass deep right to P.Garcon to NE 33 for 17 yards (P.Chung, D.McCourty). PENALTY on NE-T.Banta-Cain, Unnecessary Roughness, 15 yards, enforced at NE 33. [ Total of 32 yards.]

The Brown run was to the Pats' right side, with Arrington at DE and Wright at DT. Guyton was rushing the backside, so the play turned out to be a great call. Wright was turned and pushed out of his gaps easily -- why Mike? I guess big runs are one of the risks of using a CB as a DE/OLB. I don't know the reasoning behind using Arrington at that position.

Garcon made the catch while wearing McCourty. Tight coverage indeed. A 15-yard penalty in such a critical situation is egregious mistake the Patriots usually don't make. And Blair White getting a free release off the line against Chung in man is a major mismatch.

and Chung knew it too...youth comes with its own type of price

 

[Kontradiction]

just look at the game on your DVR if you have one...the Pats 2 deep safety technique has them line up ten yards from the LOS..in the 4th quarter that was EXTENDED at least five yards....played without mistakes that defense is what you want to play, but it seems that extra cushion has these young DB's taking unfamiliar and bad angles on plays in front of them. Maybe it's their timing that's getting thrown off but when you suddenly see THREE DB's converge and the WR STILL gets by for a huge gain, there's a technique problem somewhere there.

Yep. Like I said, BB isn't lying. We WERE playing the same defenses that we had been playing throughout the game. The coverages were undoubtedly different, though.

 

[JoeShmoe]

Chung didnt look fit to me, i'd be tempted to rest him against the lions.

The main issue for me is the 5 db's with the exception of Chung and McCourty dont seem to have the smarts and skills, add the coverage LB's into that (esp Spikes)

Merriweather runs around a lot but is always just off a play, Butler, Wilhite etc arent good enough imo

I think next year when we get Bodden back and maybe another CB in the first 3 rounds it all improves but cut it how you like our pass D is BAD right now

 

[convertedpatsfan]

On Arrington, he did actually get some pressure on Manning when he threw the pick to McCourty. Not saying he caused that as clearly Manning misread the play, but he didn't have his usual time to process things either. It was over-used throughout the 4th quarter, but not a bad change of pace. And BB touched on how he showed some natural blitz abilities in TC drills.

On Chung, it's clear he was a mismatch against White. But let's also not forget that Manning doesn't let you mix and match and make changes so easily. Part of the reason Spikes sat so much is that Manning keeps personnel on the field and exposes their weaknesses, so flexibility out of players is a must. Chung's coverage abilities were exposed and Manning took advantage of it. We probably should have called a time-out but when they're driving, it's hard to do that just to swap a guy in, and who would it be? Arrington, the guy you just benched? Not excusing it, just saying it's not as easy as throwing another body in there for Chung.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

Yes, the prevent is killing the Patriots. I was so pissed when they lost back to back games against the Steelers and Colts because of it....

oh wait......

 

[NYCPatsFan]

You know, it's kind of funny that Bill Belichick has come right out and told Glen Ordway on the Big Show that the team didn't change up their defensive scheme in the fourth quarter, and people are still acting as if the team almost lost because of some "prevent defense" they were playing -- funny, because it shows that not only did they not believe the head coach, but they clearly didn't even bother to take five minutes to go back and check and see if maybe, just maybe, said head coach knew what he was talking about.

Maybe the problem is that if they don't even know what they're looking for the first time, seeing it a second time won't help any.

What I don't get, is why anyone would even start to think that the Pats would be playing "prevent" in this game.

persevering with a narrative in your head that doesn't even make sense.

Great post!! Thanks.

I also believe that some of the more knowledgable posters suggested in other threads that (a) 4Q defense was "prevent D" (b) we won, and so (c) don't question it.

That train of thought does not sit well with those with questions because that meant to suggest that the D played well in the fourth quarter, which BB himself acknowledged didn't happen.

We wouldn't be having this discussion had our O stayed on the field without killing the drive.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Great post!! Thanks.

I also believe that some of the more knowledgable posters suggested in other threads that (a) 4Q defense was "prevent D" (b) we won, and so (c) don't question it.

That train of thought does not sit well with those with questions because that meant to suggest that the D played well in the fourth quarter, which BB himself acknowledged didn't happen.

We wouldn't be having this discussion had our O stayed on the field without killing the drive.

Considering our coach makes North Korea look open, why would anyone instantly believe an open, forthcoming Bill Belichick?

Besides, most of the technical aspects are based on what many posters see; not what anyone told them. If the world's best horse breeder tells you the white/black striped animal is a new breed; you instantly don't think it's a zebra?

This problem is approached from two angles

We play dominant defense for 3 quarters and have breakdowns when adjusting to playing with a lead.

Our defense sucks and we get lucky for 3 quarters until the opponent figures out our suckiness.

For example "Kontradiction" noted the coverages changed. If he observed this, it's his observation. How it "sits" is irrelavent.

I have yet to see anyone think the defense played "great". The tone is different if you believe the problem is playing with a lead is a weakness but we still can make plays in the end.

 

[lamafist]

There's no doubting that the team didn't really change it's defensive scheme all game. There's no doubting that we were in the dime and the nickel for most of the game, as we usually have been against Manning. What most of us are talking about is the changing of the coverages within the dime defense. For instance, dropping the LB's back deeper in coverage and, at times, going into a three deep zone. For instance...



There's no doubting that the team used a LOT more four man rushes in the 4th quarter than they had all game. There's also no doubting that our LB's and safeties were playing further back in an attempt to stop the deep passes and quick strikes. So yes, the team played the same defense as they had all game. The dime and nickel. But the coverages were most definitely different. I also don't think I need to tell you that there's no really much that you can gleen from an average Bill Belichick press conference, either.

Rubbish. Simply rubbish.

The Pats' rarely rushed more than 4 all game. The Pats were switching up and disguising their coverage schemes all game, as well -- this is what baited Manning into some of his INTs. If you actually watched the game, you'd see the Colts catching their passes with Patriots defenders often in pursuit, not catching stuff open underneath and being closed on by deep defenders.

If you think you can see something different in the 4th quarter than what we were doing on similar down and distance in the other quarters, please, by all means, give us an example.

Otherwise, I'm going to believe what I saw with my own eyes, which happens to correspond to what Belichick was saying in his weekly radio spot (not press conference) in which he flat out stated in answer to whether the Pats played any prevent defense "No. We played the way we played the whole game."

And your lame attempt at sophistry -- viz. "we used the same personnel package but different coverages" doesn't even make enough sense to be wrong in this situation. Prevent denotes both package and coverage.

So once again, please, if you can tell me how many more snaps the Pats rushed 5 or more in the first 3 quarters vs the last ones, I'd be interested in hearing it. If you can point to some specific examples of the Pats playing different coverages than the ones they were using in the first three quarters, please do so. If it happened, it's there for all to see.

 

[lamafist]

Incidentally, I still haven't heard any of these phantom-prevent-D proponents explain why the defense getting burned by the Cols for two TDs in the 4th quarter is evidence of a change in defensive scheme, when the same exact thing had happened in the 2nd quarter.

Were we in "prevent" in the first half?

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Incidentally, I still haven't heard any of these phantom-prevent-D proponents explain why the defense getting burned by the Cols for two TDs in the 4th quarter is evidence of a change in defensive scheme, when the same exact thing had happened in the 2nd quarter.

Were we in "prevent" in the first half?

So your logic is:

No "prevent"= shutdown defense
"Prevent"= TD after TD

Ummm the Colts do have a top rated offense, why exactly is it hard to believe they can actually like score a TD?

I truly hope you posted this comment as satire.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

So your logic is:

No "prevent"= shutdown defense
"Prevent"= TD after TD

Ummm the Colts do have a top rated offense, why exactly is it hard to believe they can actually like score a TD?

I truly hope you posted this comment as satire.

No just the opposite. Point.

The folks who are claiming the Patriots were in the prevent defense's only evidence that we were in the prevent was the Colts scored. So lama was pointing out that we were scored on at the end of the 2nd quarter so does that mean we were in prevent too?