BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan94. Show redsoxfan94's posts

    Re: BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

    In response to JintsFan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to JintsFan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pats-fan-2007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    2007 Super Bowl

    2:42 Left in the game, Brady led the Pats to a TD to take the lead.

    That, to me, says the offense was clutch in the 4th quarter.

    The Giants took the ball and proceeded to drive for the winning TD.

    To me that says the defense was not clutch.

    [/QUOTE]


    + 100

    [/QUOTE]


    scoring 14 and 17 points in two super bowls is not enough, espescially if you are considered one of the greatest QB's to play the game.....

    [/QUOTE]


    that might be more on ur O line

    [/QUOTE]

    this is true, but thats still not the defenses fault.....i thought the defense played very well in both super bowls.

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

    Re: BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

    In response to patsfan76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    patsfan76 - normally I agree except that the prevent D isn't doing what it's suppose to do. This year we lead the league in giving up 20+ yard players in the 2nd half. Additionally on average opponents are scoring quicker when we are in prevent then when we aren't. This has been an issue for a while now not just this year. When you have a 3 score lead it should not be acceptable to win by the skin of your teeth or to give up the lead. That's one thing the prevent has consistently done. Given up more point per series average then when they are not in prevent and more points per ToP then when they are not. That's not how prevent D's are meant to run.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    I mean that is fair, I agree its been happening for a while but with lesser qbs I feel more safe with the 3 score lead. Its not that I LIKE the prevent, but I think the bigger problem is personell and maybe coaching to a lesser degree from the position coaches. I mean I watch a lot of football and  our safety play is horrendous at times compared to others. We have to start being realistic and admit Chung has regressed since 2010 either due to durability issues or taking on too much. He just isnt a factor week in and out like I expected. This week we will see on of my favs. Etan Thomas. A guy who is smaller than Chung yet plays the run just as well, isnt injury prone and is a playmaker in the back end. A guy who doesnt go all game without their name being called. Gregory is looking like a f/a bust and What I thought before the season has already happend. B.B. sold himself short by ONLY getting Gregory in F/a when plenty other cheap guys were around. So I believe the prevent or something a bit more agressive is the way to go but u need players to execute simple schemes and we Cannot

    [/QUOTE]


    But, that's the thing. If the personal can't run an effective prevent and the personal coaches can't train them to run an effective prevent then why do you keep running a prevent? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome without changing the variables. One day I'm sure we'll have the right personal both in terms of players and coaches but right now we don't so that philosophy needs to be adjusted back towards the D's strength. I believe that's the point of the thread, that the philosophy needs to be adjusted to the personal and not to a philosophical defense that should work on paper.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Dennard is the next fan favorite to save the secondary.  A few years ago, it was Darius Butler--the best young corner out there who was only going to get better.  Then it was Ras-I Dowling who was surely a Hall of Famer if you judged by his two NFL starts. Then Sterling Moore was the flavor of the month because he knocked a ball out (nevermind the reason he had to knock the ball out was because he was beaten in coverage).  Now it's Dennard.

    There's a reason why Belichick continues to start McCourty and Arrington.  Are they perfect? No.  Are they the best we have?  As of now, definitely.  Maybe Dennard will prove to be a great corner, but I've seen far too many of these flashes in the pan to start thinking we've uncovered gold. 

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Voice of reason after all those posts Sunday night on the next coming of .....

    I agree Dennard looked pretty good , when I see consistency and playing on a regular basis can we determine how good this guy really is.

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

    Re: BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

    In response to JintsFan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BsLegion's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    eli was clutch, brady wasnt....end of story.

    [/QUOTE]


    This is an oversimplification imo.  In both losses to the G men our offensive line was dominated by their front 4.

    [/QUOTE]


    this is true.....but look at the play eli made to tyree....he was nearly sacked and managed to complete that pass....yes alot of it was luck....but it still happened....the pass rush wasnt the only reason the pats offense was stagnant in both of the super bowls....there was the maroney fumble, the welker drop, the brady safety, as well as brady overthrowing wide open receivers repeatedly....i thought he played well in this past year's super bowl, but he didnt close the deal.

    [/QUOTE]


    He would have been sacked if their o-line didn't hold.Let's not re-hash this.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    wrong as usual but ur right lets not rehash it

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Oh Mr Jints someone on Sunday told you well. Maybe Pats got away with one against the Raiders but your Giants got away with murder on that last drive and especially on the Tyree catch. 

    Giants won yes, not going to take it away ,  but IMO they were not the better team. They caught the breaks. Basta !

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

    Re: BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

    [/QUOTE]

    why not have a killer's instinct....on both sides of the ball, even when we're up by 3 TDs. Especially since we seem to be able to run and throw...

    [/QUOTE]

    That's exactly what happened to the offense on their last possesion before Manning drove them down the field to get their TD.  Pats had to score !!!!  and the rest is history.

    Now in 2007 you may have a point (of course along with what I'm saying on my previous post above)

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

    Re: BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

    When looking at the "prevent",  the situation of leading the game by 2 scores changes everything the defense does.  The flow of the game goes from offense to defense and the offense may need a rest, so does the defense give up yards on purpose...?  It uses up clock ,etc.  It doesn't  matter in the bottom line (winning the game) or does it?

    as a fan its annoying as hell .  What would make sense to me in these situations would be take advantage by using different personnel groupings ... Especially in the secondary.  Get reps for guys like moore and McCourty at safety, for instance.  If you know teams are going to take shots throwing , take some chances, change it up...

    we saw dennard in there making plays, so that's an example .  Find the playmakers .  Find the gamers. 

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

    Re: BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

      does the defense give up yards on purpose...?  It uses up clock ,etc.  It doesn't  matter in the bottom line (winning the game) or does it?

    as a fan its annoying...  Almost as annoying as double posts.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

    In response to patsfan76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsfan76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Anyone watch last nights game??? Case in point why you have to be careful. Steelers had the game in hand. Titans needed to score quick. What do you do? Blitz or sta y back in cover 2??

    Well the Steelers being who they are decided to stay agressive and blitzed and Hassleback burned them by finding J.Cook over the middle and there were no defenders around to stop him from running down the field and basically garaunteeing atleast a FG attempt and THIS is why I dont mind it. Like I said, its more to do with our inept secondary that cant execute simple schemes and believe me if we blitz with our cheap rushers we would just be exposed more in the back end by having less cover people so while its not ideal, TRUST ME< you dont want to see the other spectrum of us blitzing while the other WB gets easy chunks of yards. Maybe it happens already but it would be MUCH worse with less tacklers to get the guy down after the cacth like what happened last night.  Dam near EVERY game thats a blowout, the other teams usually comes back and makes it look close. Its the NFL, its called COMPETITION!

    [/QUOTE]


     

    I don't think it was the blitz that did them in. In my humble opinion it was the fact they left an old and slow James Harrison in single coverage against a young fast TE. Perhaps they should have had a safety in coverage instead of harrison.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    This may be true but my point wasnt who was covering him. It was that they could have held him to just the catch and had minimal damage had they not sent extra rushers and there would have been a defender around to make the tackle. We all know we need as many people back as possible and if blitzburg gets beat on a blitz by Hassleback well why is anyone asking our pourus secondary to have to go through it?

    [/QUOTE]


    I think his point was that it's about the right personal and not neccessarily the scheme. being aggressive or prevent can both succeed or fail depending on the personal and not the scheme.

    You cite Pitt giving up scores quick but I have seen the Pats give up the same quick scores to bottom rung QB's while in prevent. Yes on paper prevent seems like the ideal way to go when you are up by a couple of scores heading late into the game. You are forcing the opponent to basically bleed themselves out slower. However, what's the biggest weakness of the Pats right now? It's the secondary. a prevent D won't work with a weak secondary because no matter what QB you are facing if you give them 5-6s they will find the open receive. Tie in that our DB's aren't the surest tacklers in the world and you give up big plays on a consistent basis. Additionally because of lack of proper coaching our CB's don't know how to look for the ball which leads to a lot of PI penalties resulting in large gains and a stoppage of the clock. It's because of our personal that the prevent isn't working the way it should. Now the way to compensate for a weaker secondary is to provide pressure on the QB. However, when you are in prevent you see the Pats typically rushing 2-3 players which means 5 OL should have no trouble blocking for their QB almost indefinitly. Ideally we'd have the right personal and play prevent but since we don't the prevent scheme is just as dangerous as an aggressive scheme at giving up large plays. The difference is we know our prevent will give up a lot more points then when they play aggressive

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsfan76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsfan76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Anyone watch last nights game??? Case in point why you have to be careful. Steelers had the game in hand. Titans needed to score quick. What do you do? Blitz or sta y back in cover 2??

    Well the Steelers being who they are decided to stay agressive and blitzed and Hassleback burned them by finding J.Cook over the middle and there were no defenders around to stop him from running down the field and basically garaunteeing atleast a FG attempt and THIS is why I dont mind it. Like I said, its more to do with our inept secondary that cant execute simple schemes and believe me if we blitz with our cheap rushers we would just be exposed more in the back end by having less cover people so while its not ideal, TRUST ME< you dont want to see the other spectrum of us blitzing while the other WB gets easy chunks of yards. Maybe it happens already but it would be MUCH worse with less tacklers to get the guy down after the cacth like what happened last night.  Dam near EVERY game thats a blowout, the other teams usually comes back and makes it look close. Its the NFL, its called COMPETITION!

    [/QUOTE]


     

    I don't think it was the blitz that did them in. In my humble opinion it was the fact they left an old and slow James Harrison in single coverage against a young fast TE. Perhaps they should have had a safety in coverage instead of harrison.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    This may be true but my point wasnt who was covering him. It was that they could have held him to just the catch and had minimal damage had they not sent extra rushers and there would have been a defender around to make the tackle. We all know we need as many people back as possible and if blitzburg gets beat on a blitz by Hassleback well why is anyone asking our pourus secondary to have to go through it?

    [/QUOTE]


    I think his point was that it's about the right personal and not neccessarily the scheme. being aggressive or prevent can both succeed or fail depending on the personal and not the scheme.

    You cite Pitt giving up scores quick but I have seen the Pats give up the same quick scores to bottom rung QB's while in prevent. Yes on paper prevent seems like the ideal way to go when you are up by a couple of scores heading late into the game. You are forcing the opponent to basically bleed themselves out slower. However, what's the biggest weakness of the Pats right now? It's the secondary. a prevent D won't work with a weak secondary because no matter what QB you are facing if you give them 5-6s they will find the open receive. Tie in that our DB's aren't the surest tacklers in the world and you give up big plays on a consistent basis. Additionally because of lack of proper coaching our CB's don't know how to look for the ball which leads to a lot of PI penalties resulting in large gains and a stoppage of the clock. It's because of our personal that the prevent isn't working the way it should. Now the way to compensate for a weaker secondary is to provide pressure on the QB. However, when you are in prevent you see the Pats typically rushing 2-3 players which means 5 OL should have no trouble blocking for their QB almost indefinitly. Ideally we'd have the right personal and play prevent but since we don't the prevent scheme is just as dangerous as an aggressive scheme at giving up large plays. The difference is we know our prevent will give up a lot more points then when they play aggressive

    [/QUOTE]


    I don't know how much coaching can be connected to not looking back for the ball. Most likiely McCourty has had that beat into his brain since he arrived and he still fails to turn his head.

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

    Re: BB and his bend but don't break defense philosophy needs to change!

    In response to glenr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsfan76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsfan76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Anyone watch last nights game??? Case in point why you have to be careful. Steelers had the game in hand. Titans needed to score quick. What do you do? Blitz or sta y back in cover 2??

    Well the Steelers being who they are decided to stay agressive and blitzed and Hassleback burned them by finding J.Cook over the middle and there were no defenders around to stop him from running down the field and basically garaunteeing atleast a FG attempt and THIS is why I dont mind it. Like I said, its more to do with our inept secondary that cant execute simple schemes and believe me if we blitz with our cheap rushers we would just be exposed more in the back end by having less cover people so while its not ideal, TRUST ME< you dont want to see the other spectrum of us blitzing while the other WB gets easy chunks of yards. Maybe it happens already but it would be MUCH worse with less tacklers to get the guy down after the cacth like what happened last night.  Dam near EVERY game thats a blowout, the other teams usually comes back and makes it look close. Its the NFL, its called COMPETITION!

    [/QUOTE]


     

    I don't think it was the blitz that did them in. In my humble opinion it was the fact they left an old and slow James Harrison in single coverage against a young fast TE. Perhaps they should have had a safety in coverage instead of harrison.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    This may be true but my point wasnt who was covering him. It was that they could have held him to just the catch and had minimal damage had they not sent extra rushers and there would have been a defender around to make the tackle. We all know we need as many people back as possible and if blitzburg gets beat on a blitz by Hassleback well why is anyone asking our pourus secondary to have to go through it?

    [/QUOTE]


    I think his point was that it's about the right personal and not neccessarily the scheme. being aggressive or prevent can both succeed or fail depending on the personal and not the scheme.

    You cite Pitt giving up scores quick but I have seen the Pats give up the same quick scores to bottom rung QB's while in prevent. Yes on paper prevent seems like the ideal way to go when you are up by a couple of scores heading late into the game. You are forcing the opponent to basically bleed themselves out slower. However, what's the biggest weakness of the Pats right now? It's the secondary. a prevent D won't work with a weak secondary because no matter what QB you are facing if you give them 5-6s they will find the open receive. Tie in that our DB's aren't the surest tacklers in the world and you give up big plays on a consistent basis. Additionally because of lack of proper coaching our CB's don't know how to look for the ball which leads to a lot of PI penalties resulting in large gains and a stoppage of the clock. It's because of our personal that the prevent isn't working the way it should. Now the way to compensate for a weaker secondary is to provide pressure on the QB. However, when you are in prevent you see the Pats typically rushing 2-3 players which means 5 OL should have no trouble blocking for their QB almost indefinitly. Ideally we'd have the right personal and play prevent but since we don't the prevent scheme is just as dangerous as an aggressive scheme at giving up large plays. The difference is we know our prevent will give up a lot more points then when they play aggressive

    [/QUOTE]


    I don't know how much coaching can be connected to not looking back for the ball. Most likiely McCourty has had that beat into his brain since he arrived and he still fails to turn his head.

    [/QUOTE]


    Chung doesn't look back, Arrington doesn't look back, Moore doesn't look back, Mayo doesn't look back. If it was just McCourty I would agree but since it's a vast majority of people in coverage who haven't only played for the Pats in their careers I have to believe it's the coaching as I'm sure that most of them weren't taught not to look back in college

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share