Gregory made defense worse

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Gregory made defense worse

    Coming off holding Rams to 7 points, while t.Wilson gets a pick, why do you insert this guy who made no plays of consequence ..?  IMO this move messed up the chemistry of the secondary when they had been building confidence and producing results...

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    this sounds like a bit of a reach here. You can never put it directly into a single players lap at any point because this D is so up and down it's like it's on extasy. Besides Wilson's blown a number of plays too (you mention the Rams game, well Wilson blew the only 7 points the Rams got). Actually in the perfect D I would hope that the DB's would get zero stats other then PD's. It shows they are doing their jobs if they aren't even mentioned. Typically players with higher stats are that way because the ball ends up in their direction consistently which means the QB is targetting them as the weak point. Now that said, Gregory just isn't any good and I much prefer McCourty back their at FS.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from jam757. Show jam757's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    The seconday is and has been a work in progress. There was a player in the Rams game playing great slot coverage but I believe he got hurt. I'm unsure how serious it was. We need to get Talib and Chung back in there as soon as possible. Chung has ability but just can't stay on the filed. Unfortunaely looking like a bust pick. Talib should provide an instant upgrade!

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    Even after Talib's arrival the average age of the Pats secondary will be under 25 years old.  That is a very young group.  Are they a shut down pass D?  Hardly, but they do make plays and they had their moments yesterday.  Of course I'd like to see improvement; what Pats fan wouldn't?  

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rodimus77. Show Rodimus77's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    Not sure if Talib is the ultimate answer to the defensive woes but I hope he contributes a whole lot. The defense can't get any worse with him on the field!

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Even after Talib's arrival the average age of the Pats secondary will be under 25 years old.  That is a very young group.  Are they a shut down pass D?  Hardly, but they do make plays and they had their moments yesterday.  Of course I'd like to see improvement; what Pats fan wouldn't?  

    [/QUOTE]

    This idea that the Patriots secondary is young and inexperience is simply not true. Arrington, McCourty and Chung are 26, 25, and 25 respectively and they are in their third year starting together. How long can it possibly take them to learn to play together. Gregory is 29 and Talib is 26 as well. These are guys who should be in their prime... not still learning to play.

    The Seahawks pass defense is a lot better than the Patriots and they are 28, 24, 24, and 23 (younger than the Patriots starters). The Texans have second year guy at CB (Jackson) and a third year guy at S (Quin) and while Jackson was taken seven picks ahead of McCourty, Quin was taken two rounds (and 78 picks) after Chung. 

    It is true that Dennard, Wilson and Ebner bring the "average" age of the Patriots DBs down, but the fact that three rookies made the team has more to do with how long this defensive backfield has been bad for...

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    Gregory might be better suited off the bench if Wilson is ready, Steve plays with a lot of heart but is lacking in the athleticism dept, Wilson while making rookie mistakes has played like a missle.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Even after Talib's arrival the average age of the Pats secondary will be under 25 years old.  That is a very young group.  Are they a shut down pass D?  Hardly, but they do make plays and they had their moments yesterday.  Of course I'd like to see improvement; what Pats fan wouldn't?  

    [/QUOTE]

    This idea that the Patriots secondary is young and inexperience is simply not true. Arrington, McCourty and Chung are 26, 25, and 25 respectively and they are in their third year starting together. How long can it possibly take them to learn to play together. Gregory is 29 and Talib is 26 as well. These are guys who should be in their prime... not still learning to play.

    The Seahawks pass defense is a lot better than the Patriots and they are 28, 24, 24, and 23 (younger than the Patriots starters). The Texans have second year guy at CB (Jackson) and a third year guy at S (Quin) and while Jackson was taken seven picks ahead of McCourty, Quin was taken two rounds (and 78 picks) after Chung. 

    It is true that Dennard, Wilson and Ebner bring the "average" age of the Patriots DBs down, but the fact that three rookies made the team has more to do with how long this defensive backfield has been bad for...

    [/QUOTE]

    Well, I'm afraid, sir, that it is your assertion that is not accurate.  I actually totalled the ages of every defensive back on the team, divided by the number of DBs and came up with 24.7.  If you care to disagree then may I suggest you do precisely what I did?    

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    Is Talib really going to be much of a help for this defense? I mean the guy would have to be Wolverine and just go around slashing people to bits for this defense to stop anybody (and who knows he just might do that). It's kind of scary that we're pinning our hopes on a guy that shot at someone last spring...this is what it comes down to?

    Hey maybe the guy will be a true big time shut down corner, but I've just lost all confidence that anyone can come into THIS secondary and not become immediately as bad as the rest of them. It's almost like a disease...first you get the sniffels, then you can't turn your head, then you lose space in zones, then you whiff at jamming receivers at the line, then you take bad angles in pursuit before missing tackles. Next thing you know you're in the hospital. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is Talib really going to be much of a help for this defense? I mean the guy would have to be Wolverine and just go around slashing people to bits for this defense to stop anybody (and who knows he just might do that). It's kind of scary that we're pinning our hopes on a guy that shot at someone last spring...this is what it comes down to?

    Hey maybe the guy will be a true big time shut down corner, but I've just lost all confidence that anyone can come into THIS secondary and not become immediately as bad as the rest of them. It's almost like a disease...first you get the sniffels, then you can't turn your head, then you lose space in zones, then you whiff at jamming receivers at the line, then you take bad angles in pursuit before missing tackles. Next thing you know you're in the hospital. 

    [/QUOTE]


    You know what that points to... that's right the mining school of poor zone protection coaching. I have a hard time believing it's not the coaching at this point. I'm hoping Talib is arrogent enough to blow off the coaches and do his thing. Seriously that's what the team needs right now, someone to not listen to the coaches (that's sad to say)

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Even after Talib's arrival the average age of the Pats secondary will be under 25 years old.  That is a very young group.  Are they a shut down pass D?  Hardly, but they do make plays and they had their moments yesterday.  Of course I'd like to see improvement; what Pats fan wouldn't?  

    [/QUOTE]

    This idea that the Patriots secondary is young and inexperience is simply not true. Arrington, McCourty and Chung are 26, 25, and 25 respectively and they are in their third year starting together. How long can it possibly take them to learn to play together. Gregory is 29 and Talib is 26 as well. These are guys who should be in their prime... not still learning to play.

    The Seahawks pass defense is a lot better than the Patriots and they are 28, 24, 24, and 23 (younger than the Patriots starters). The Texans have second year guy at CB (Jackson) and a third year guy at S (Quin) and while Jackson was taken seven picks ahead of McCourty, Quin was taken two rounds (and 78 picks) after Chung. 

    It is true that Dennard, Wilson and Ebner bring the "average" age of the Patriots DBs down, but the fact that three rookies made the team has more to do with how long this defensive backfield has been bad for...

    [/QUOTE]

    Well, I'm afraid, sir, that it is your assertion that is not accurate.  I actually totalled the ages of every defensive back on the team, divided by the number of DBs and came up with 24.7.  If you care to disagree then may I suggest you do precisely what I did?    

    [/QUOTE]

    I am not saying the secondary is not young, but the starters McCourty, Arrington, Chung and Gregory average out to 26.25 years old. Depending on who Talib replaces that will not change much (he is 26 as well). Seattle's starting DBs average out to 24.75 years old (and the old guy is 28, but only in his second NFL season). The next three guys are all rookies (Wilson, Ebner, Dennard), but why are they so young? Because the previous group of young guys did pan out. Why should Wilson, Ebner and Dennard be any different from Meriweather, Butler and Wheatley?

    My point is that while they are young, there are younger, better defensive backfields in the NFL.  

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is Talib really going to be much of a help for this defense? I mean the guy would have to be Wolverine and just go around slashing people to bits for this defense to stop anybody (and who knows he just might do that). It's kind of scary that we're pinning our hopes on a guy that shot at someone last spring...this is what it comes down to?

    Hey maybe the guy will be a true big time shut down corner, but I've just lost all confidence that anyone can come into THIS secondary and not become immediately as bad as the rest of them. It's almost like a disease...first you get the sniffels, then you can't turn your head, then you lose space in zones, then you whiff at jamming receivers at the line, then you take bad angles in pursuit before missing tackles. Next thing you know you're in the hospital. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Considering that Tampa Bay has actually allowed fewer yards passing without Talib (302 yards/game) than they did with him (345 yards/game), I do not expect him to make a huge impact on this defense. I think he is better than Arrington, Dennard and McCourty (at CB) so he is an upgrade.

    The fact that Tampa was willing to dump him mid-season when they still consider themselves to be in a playoff race should tell you something about him as well.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to FrnkBnhm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is Talib really going to be much of a help for this defense? I mean the guy would have to be Wolverine and just go around slashing people to bits for this defense to stop anybody (and who knows he just might do that). It's kind of scary that we're pinning our hopes on a guy that shot at someone last spring...this is what it comes down to?

    Hey maybe the guy will be a true big time shut down corner, but I've just lost all confidence that anyone can come into THIS secondary and not become immediately as bad as the rest of them. It's almost like a disease...first you get the sniffels, then you can't turn your head, then you lose space in zones, then you whiff at jamming receivers at the line, then you take bad angles in pursuit before missing tackles. Next thing you know you're in the hospital. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Considering that Tampa Bay has actually allowed fewer yards passing without Talib (302 yards/game) than they did with him (345 yards/game), I do not expect him to make a huge impact on this defense. I think he is better than Arrington, Dennard and McCourty (at CB) so he is an upgrade.

    The fact that Tampa was willing to dump him mid-season when they still consider themselves to be in a playoff race should tell you something about him as well.

    [/QUOTE]


    You're probably right - five years ago I would of thought a guy we brought in was going to work out big time - not anymore. It's probably just a rough stretch.

    You made a good point about the age of our secondary, it's young because the guys here before hand didn't work out either. Some of these young guys are in their 3rd and 4th seasons in this defense - you can't use youth as an excuse all the time. I'm getting tired of all the excuses honestly...we're young, they're hurt, it's a new position, it's a new scheme. All they are is excuse after excuse. Wilfork will be on the radio today (like every Monday) and for a half hour all you'll hear is excuse after glossed over excuse. He'll talk about how they're young and doing some things right...it'll be positive. It was the same last year, yet nothing changes.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    Of course there are better young defenses in the league than the Pats.  I'm not suggesting otherwise.  What I am suggesting is that this is a young defense secondary who, have not played together as a unit very often for a variety of reasons.  Gregory is new, Denon is a rookie, Arrington has been hurt, McCourtey has bounced back and forth between Safety and Corner, Chung has been hurt, Wilson is a rookie, Dowling is out for the year.  How does a secondary develop consistency with all of that going on.  And that's not an excuse for poor tackling, blown coverages or any other form of bad play.  What it is is reality.  

    Should the secondary be playing better?  Of course.  But to deny that they are young and haven't played much together as a unit is to deny reality.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Of course there are better young defenses in the league than the Pats.  I'm not suggesting otherwise.  What I am suggesting is that this is a young defense secondary who, have not played together as a unit very often for a variety of reasons.  Gregory is new, Denon is a rookie, Arrington has been hurt, McCourtey has bounced back and forth between Safety and Corner, Chung has been hurt, Wilson is a rookie, Dowling is out for the year.  How does a secondary develop consistency with all of that going on.  And that's not an excuse for poor tackling, blown coverages or any other form of bad play.  What it is is reality.  

    Should the secondary be playing better?  Of course.  But to deny that they are young and haven't played much together as a unit is to deny reality.

    [/QUOTE]


    thanks for elaborating on my point about chemistry ...   I think chemistry and communication are super important in the back end... And it has to be more difficult when this musical chairs is going on.

    #2.  Wilson is a rookie with an obvious upside... ( Did you see the move he made on that guy after his pick?). So why do you bench him at the exact moment that his confidence is at its highest point of the season?

    For  those people posting about how coaching might have stunted the development of draft picks.... Here is your example.

    Hopefully they come to their senses this week and we see the most effective if young , group playing next week.  IMO young is good.

    Wilson made same mistake twice . Coaches hate that. Ok now get over it.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Of course there are better young defenses in the league than the Pats.  I'm not suggesting otherwise.  What I am suggesting is that this is a young defense secondary who, have not played together as a unit very often for a variety of reasons.  Gregory is new, Denon is a rookie, Arrington has been hurt, McCourtey has bounced back and forth between Safety and Corner, Chung has been hurt, Wilson is a rookie, Dowling is out for the year.  How does a secondary develop consistency with all of that going on.  And that's not an excuse for poor tackling, blown coverages or any other form of bad play.  What it is is reality.  

    Should the secondary be playing better?  Of course.  But to deny that they are young and haven't played much together as a unit is to deny reality.

    [/QUOTE]


    thanks for elaborating on my point about chemistry ...   I think chemistry and communication are super important in the back end... And it has to be more difficult when this musical chairs is going on.

    #2.  Wilson is a rookie with an obvious upside... ( Did you see the move he made on that guy after his pick?). So why do you bench him at the exact moment that his confidence is at its highest point of the season?

    For  those people posting about how coaching might have stunted the development of draft picks.... Here is your example.

    Hopefully they come to their senses this week and we see the most effective if young , group playing next week.  IMO young is good.

    Wilson made same mistake twice . Coaches hate that. Ok now get over it. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I was a little surprised that Wilson didn't get on the field more as well.  The chemistry thing can't be understated nor can the coaching piece.  I am most reluctant to question any coaching staff with BB as the HC but you have to wonder if the coaching here isn't at least an element of the issue.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    I was a little surprised that Wilson didn't get on the field more as well.  The chemistry thing can't be understated nor can the coaching piece.  I am most reluctant to question any coaching staff with BB as the HC but you have to wonder if the coaching here isn't at least an element of the issue.

    [/QUOTE]


    I don't know why people are surprised really. Wilson has been horrible in coverage giving up a lot of deep plays. He plays well close to the line but in deep coverage (where the Pats like to play their S's) he has been less then stellar. Gregory before the injury was at least decent in deep coverage. He wasn't great but he gave more then Wilson did in deep coverage. This past game though Gregory looked really bad, but there was a reason Wilson was pulled halfway through the 1st in favor of Gregory, mainly because Wilson was blowing his assignments

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    I agree somewhat about Wilson but my thing is no matter who has been back there these safeties arent holding up their ends in cover 2 so instead of benching a player that can help because he cant execute the scheme,why not change the scheme? I mean cover 2 is desigend to play run support as well as provide deep help so I get why they would want that vs the BIlls who run n' pass well but cover 3 would be my choice. Its no coincidence that Fitzy was tartgeting the middle with Jones and Chandler so he knows to attack the middle in cover 2.

    I thought having 2 CBs back there at safety made it inviting as well as less intimidating in trying to corral the backs. They ran free like most backs would with 2 CBs at safety. So while I agree WIlson was not playing cover 2, does that mean he doesnt play anymore because BB loves cover 2 or should they try schemes more in line with their talent??  To me what they did last week vs the rams was a perfect example. !st drive wilson gives us TD on same cover 2 play. They scrapped it after that but Wilson STILL PLAYED and they gave up NOTHING after it. SO its not like Wilson just learned to play it, they scrapped it for man defense with blitzing and it worked!!! So why did we go back the DEFENSE THAT GIVES UP 400 plus yards and over 30 pts AGAIN after clearly being able to see what WOrked and what DIDNT in one game last week?  This coaching staff has got to be the hardest to figure out. They trust in their system Soooo much that they stick with it even when they KNOW its a recipe for failure??  yea, Whats not to love??? not!  I am smart enought to pass judgement on the coaches here as I watch all the other teams and its not even close... We are far away the worst coached defense in the league for no other reason than Stubborness!

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    Well I do expect to see more of Wilson against the Colts honestly. This being Gregory's first week back I doubt BB expected Gregory to look this rusty. With Wilson clearly having trouble it was worth a shot at tossing Gregory in and seeing what he could do. It wasn't much but he gave as much as Wilson gave and you need to give the guy a chance to knock the rust off otherwise you lost him for the season.

    I also agree on switching up the scheme however, the cover 2 was designed to help weaker CB's but giving a blanket overtop and letting the CB's work on a shorter zone field or in short man. With the weakness inherent in the CB's I almost cringe to think what would happen if you have a S in the box and the other S dbling up or playing a deep single zone. If you think we give up big plays now that would be a horrendous. Truth is the weaknesses are greater then the strengths in the secondary so you have to do anything you can to cover them up. The cover 2 is the perfect scheme to do that at this moment. One thing I think could drastically help though is stop with the 3-4 man rush on 80%+ plays. It just doesn't work. When they rush more we've seen it's very affective, but they don't use it often. Maybe that's by design but I think bumping that up to 35-40% bringing more the 4 would greatly help the secondary, esp on deep passes that take time to setup

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    I was surprised Wilson didn't get more playing time - not that Gregory got more than Wilson. And I don't disagree that Wilson has had his share of blown deep coverages.

    I'd like to see the numbers on how many times the Pats were in a 4-3 vs a 3-4.  My perception,  and yes I did say perception, is that they were in a 4-3 more often.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Well I do expect to see more of Wilson against the Colts honestly. This being Gregory's first week back I doubt BB expected Gregory to look this rusty. With Wilson clearly having trouble it was worth a shot at tossing Gregory in and seeing what he could do. It wasn't much but he gave as much as Wilson gave and you need to give the guy a chance to knock the rust off otherwise you lost him for the season.

    I also agree on switching up the scheme however, the cover 2 was designed to help weaker CB's but giving a blanket overtop and letting the CB's work on a shorter zone field or in short man. With the weakness inherent in the CB's I almost cringe to think what would happen if you have a S in the box and the other S dbling up or playing a deep single zone. If you think we give up big plays now that would be a horrendous. Truth is the weaknesses are greater then the strengths in the secondary so you have to do anything you can to cover them up. The cover 2 is the perfect scheme to do that at this moment. One thing I think could drastically help though is stop with the 3-4 man rush on 80%+ plays. It just doesn't work. When they rush more we've seen it's very affective, but they don't use it often. Maybe that's by design but I think bumping that up to 35-40% bringing more the 4 would greatly help the secondary, esp on deep passes that take time to setup

    [/QUOTE]


     

    I agree somewhat. I hear what you are saying in regards to the scheme but take for instance the Colts. They basically played 80% in cover 2 and therefore executed it flawlessly and also had little wrinkles where B.Sanders would be in the box too. Our problem is and has been for a while that we have NO Identity. I understand its because we are gameplan defense and all so we use diff. schemes for diff. teams but I disagree I guess on when they decide to do it. So far this year, they have sit back and let Fitzy, Sanchez and a few others pick them apart when I would actually pressure those guys and make them make mistakes. ONly the Elite QBs should scare us away from blitzing. I havent seen any of our safeties execute the cover 2 to perfection so while I get its supposed to be a CB friendly schemes its been anything but that and to me, CB friendly schemes are blitz packages that make the ball come out early and looking at last 2 games I think we have clear examples of how we play better in agressive schemes(rams, 7 pts) then passive(Bills, 31 pts)

     

    Now I understand division games are close most times and they are familiar but Brady should not be outplayed by Fitzy simply because we gave him everything he wanted. Bad schemes for  the talent we have, IMO  when you are young, you play fast and blitz so your not thinking as much and these guys look confused most plays.. I will admit there were a lot of times that coverage held up for 5 seconds but Fitzy still threw and completed and that CANT happen. YOu have to pressure the QB sometime and giving him 5 seconds is NEVER a good Scheme.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    Agree... Especially where they seem to get away from what was working against rams...

    Plus it's not like we don't have the personell to attack . This is the killer.  Talking about tailoring your scheme to your talents, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't our LB group like the fastest in the league...?  They close on that QB fast.  Bruschi would recognize a situation and jump a gap all the time ... 

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Gregory made defense worse

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    I was a little surprised that Wilson didn't get on the field more as well.  The chemistry thing can't be understated nor can the coaching piece.  I am most reluctant to question any coaching staff with BB as the HC but you have to wonder if the coaching here isn't at least an element of the issue.

    [/QUOTE]


    I don't know why people are surprised really. Wilson has been horrible in coverage giving up a lot of deep plays. He plays well close to the line but in deep coverage (where the Pats like to play their S's) he has been less then stellar. Gregory before the injury was at least decent in deep coverage. He wasn't great but he gave more then Wilson did in deep coverage. This past game though Gregory looked really bad, but there was a reason Wilson was pulled halfway through the 1st in favor of Gregory, mainly because Wilson was blowing his assignments

    [/QUOTE]

    My observation was that Gregory started in place of Wilson, not that they switched in the 1st quarter... It was Gregory the whole way. 

    Also wish they used ebner to shadow spiller on that last drive.  Watching Nink chasing spiller was painful and he looked like he might have pulled something on that play... 

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share