Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

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

    Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    ALL:

    I started several posts on other people's threads, but after ZERO power in my condo for a week coupled with numerous BDC Board problems as of late, I've just been quitting my posts halfway through and not sending them at all...  I'll try to be brief (for me).  We'll go from there.

    ~I've seen NUMEROUS threads & posts discussing certain areas around this issue (I'm about to explain):  Rusty's takes on Patriots Offense, and establishing a run game.  Russ's and several others notions which I HAVE also hit upon (AB-solutely correct notions btw)- detailing how the problems witth NE's Defense is less the specific play of NE's Cornerbacks, and far more- A larger issue with The Defensive Line's ability to pressure QB's, collapse the pocket, coupled with NE's total inexperience & lack of even average NFL quality skill/vet prescence at The greater Safety positions.  I ALSO just today, saw a thread soooo cllose on nailing down what I personally deem to be the crux issue, the worm at the core: A thread talking about how "THIS could be, or could have been, The 2011 Patriots Defense."  The broader notion here on this 1 (as well as those others), is absolutely correct, but it leaves off in defining the theory within the larger #1 Idea, imo. 

    Here's the issue in a nutshell (god grant me brevity for the 1st time in my life):

    Bill Belichick has largely created this problem, HIM-self (but as I've said, just looking at the boxscore today <although that's all />, BB appears to have seen some clarity here in what to do).   Ready?  Here goes, in its most simplistic terms:     
    />>For an NFL Coach (Belichick), whom has spent the greatest pasrt of his doctrine & sets his roster during his coaching career, under the regard of: "I do not play favorites," -More & more (and more...as time has worn on) Bill Belichick IS "playing favorites."  This IS, especially evident during this current 2011 NFL Patriots Season.  And this IS, the core problem.  Know this:  Doing so, has limited NE's scheme versatility & the very quality of executing with-IN a specific on-field scheme being run during a given time...

    Quickly let me explain, "Playing Favorites."  So many of us ALL- Well, we just hate the very notion OF "Favoritism."  It exemplifies ALL that we often despise, whether it be individual opportunities of "moving up the ladder" (which really, who gives a sh#t about this right here in this instance), BUT it ALSO exemplifies, choosing whatever individual/group or what-have-you, AS the chosen "participates", BASED not on production, quality and/or amount of production, But based or at the very least incorrectly "skewed/inclined" towards a million of the myriad of seperate factors, A-part from the greatest factor: Produceable Results.  O.k.?  
         But again, just as we totally despise being subject to (or subject of) the general definition in "Favoritism", ONCE that "favoritism" takes an actual specific shape, design, or=Specific real-life Individual's Name...staying clear & totally washing-your-hands- WITH such an anti-favorites mind-set, suddenly ain't as easy to do.

    Here goes the bombshell:

    The 2011 NE Patriots PreSeason illustrated to each And ALL, that: The '11 Patriots Team REALLY had something going...on BOTH sides of the ball...  And it was tangible & clearly evident (so long as BB wasn't simply playing back-ups later in games, and/or such total garbage preseason games <even FOR preseason-Game #3, late in game #2, very late in game #4 for instance).  Needless to say, The 2011 Patriots schemes, 2011 NE Patriots Players (nudge-nudge), often didn't simply LOOK decent...but they often looked almost dominant, scary.

    ...but not ALL of them looked good.

    ...AND (gulp): Once the Rosters were trimmed down, and after the rosters were set, and as the actual 2011 NFL Season began, and as it HAS continued, (Ready?!?)- Far too many Players whom looked good (i.e. B-E-T-T-E-R) than other Pats Players, Were NOT either: The same ones whom actually MADE the roster (vs. practice squad and vs. cut altogether and even vs. and under the notion of potentially being IR'ed just a bit too quickly), AND (if said players whom DID play better during preseaon DID trully MAKE the roster of 53)- These players, whom had actually performed BETER than other Pats Players, were NOT the same players more often taking the field...they were riding the pine, as it goes (reduced to smaller roles, and once in, they were coming off the bench cold).

    />>>Al-righty, here's the sickeningly, gut-wrenchingly tough part to come to personal terms with as long-time Pats Fans, and as long-time NFL Fans...  It's the "personal-part."  The actual personal, themself:

    <Here, I'll attempt to lessen the bl0w- />

    <As of: THIS, The 2011 NFL Season>
    Matt Slater is better than Chad Ochocinco.
    Gerrard Warren is better than Shaun Ellis.
    Darius Butler is better than Antwaun Molden.
    Tracy White is better than Mark Anderson.
    Dane Fletcher is better than Gary Guyton.
    Brandon Tate is better than Julian Edelman.
    Daryll Richard (/Kade Weston/Brandon Deadrick) is better than Albert Haynesworth.
    Landon Cohen (/Nick Koutovides) is better than Eric Moore.
    Will Yeatman is better than Dan Gronkowski.
    Richard Medlin is better than Kevin Faulk (yeh, I coulda used BJGE OR Woodhead <easily />-but let's just keep with the "wow factor").
    Brandon Meriweather showed significant imporovement on NE, AND overall Brandon Meriweather taking 1 or 2 bad angles on the ball, and/or going for the knockout hit, rather than the form-tackle <thus subsequently missing 1-2 tackles in a game />, AB-solutely beats having a replacement Safety whom isn't anywhere NEAR the played ball, as much as BM was.  
    James Sanders showed that although Sanders, Never (and I mean: NEVER)- was a big impact "playmaker", AB-solutely has subsequently shown that yes, indeed, Simply having his mistake-free Vet savy leadership as the last line of Defense on the field for NE, actually WAS worth paying such an extremely "NON-huge Impact play, playmaker" 4 and 1/2 MILLION Dollars this year alone.   

    ~Lmao.  Look, Do what'cha want & say what'cha want, But come back with stats.  Look back into PreSeason (BOTH Practice Reports as well as the 4 boxscores of those games <fyi-BDC's preseason stats don't show half the guys any longer, so check SI.com, ESPN.com, NFL.com />).  And yes, I went extreme in the parallels (but sadly, not too much so). 
          Some don't match-up in 100% iron-clad precise positional terms, comparison-wide...  Some decent players even GOT injured, OR were injured but came back...<so Belichick should get a pass, right? /> 
          Well, Here's an example:  Tough to knock on Kevin Faulk, considering he was injured during training camp/preseason/early on, And subsequently even though someone like Shane Vareen showed exceptional skills during preseason (practice/game), His injury issue was almost immediately present & factorable...  Well, RE: Vareen=Yes.  Faulk, though...hmmm?   By placing Kevin Faulk back into the lineup during the last Pittsburgh loss, and just cutting down BJGE down to something crazy like 6 or less carries, Woodhead down to 1 or 2, and Ridley down to 0...was the result Worth It?  Worth it, in terms of the EXTREMELY limited skill-set Faulk brings currently more than ever, to NE's Offensive Schematic Table.  At 1st glance Faulk's average was up, but looking back now, I see that Faulk acquired his 2 largest carries of the day, 17 yards in total, on a 2nd and just over 10 to go, and on a 3rd and 17.  Is it worth it...?  Worth absolutely hamstringing the success factor & threat factor of keeping Faulk in during NE's very best, O set-up's- i.e. the variability offered during 2 TE schemes.  1st down, Brady directly under center.  Power Run OR Pass with mismatched TE's???  Well, ya put Faulk in...suddenly that true 1st and 10 running threat, HAS been=Almost entirely negated.
      
    Look, as a final thought you NEED to come away thinking about this: 

    ~In 2011, on the NE Patriots Football Team=By playing either all-pros, SEVERAL YEAR all-pros, just double digit sum total numbers of guys with pro-bowl bids, and even by playing long-time Patriot Players...guys who've broken their backs and dropped blood for The Pats Franchise for 10 or more Seasons...

    ...NE Players & NFL Stars (long-time, or even briefly), such as: Shaun Ellis, Mark Anderson (see great Bears rookie year), Albert Haynesworth, Kevin Faulk, Chad Ochocinco, Andre Carter...

    DID YOU (adressed to Coach Belichick)- even just a little bit, Cut a player whom might have currently (2011) offered a chance for better results (ON New England...their scheme, their team, THIS very season), OR even offer less playing time to one of these guys (prior to THIS NY Giants Game, mind you), OR even already go in with some semblance that due to how they already HAD performed (or often "failed to" in some degree, large or small-see Sanders/Meri argument)- Did you, perhaps then, Decide to terminate their 2011 Pats Employment, a bit too hastily, weighed just a bit too much on past under-productions (and not preseason 2011 improvements on productions)?  Are the players you've given more field time towards, limiting schematic versatility, given their either- Lacking current skill-set, and/or VERY specialized 1-sided skill-set....?

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

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    Could you repeat that?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    Brevity is NOT your strong suit.  

    So, BB went "name"?  Is that the gist of it?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from djbosox2004. Show djbosox2004's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    Actually,even with power I have  better things to do with my time than read your 1/2 hour long dissertations.I did`nt bother to read this one either. Same old blah blah, yadda yadda, whine whine,etc etc. I mean seriously,do you really need to stretch one simple paragraph into a short novel? Good grief.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    Wonderfully written, it's just lacking in accurate technical content. One of the problems is you have this one is really better than that one. Well look at those names on there, are any of them really good to begin with. It's 6 in 1 - 7 in the other on a lot of these players you mentioned. I think the bigger fact is that they traded Seymore an haven't replaced him. They draft for "value" and the future and forget about right now. They missed on too many second round picks, it's down right ridiculous!! If they had just picked the guy in the first round and heavens to Betsy spent a little more in free agency - this isn't even being discussed and we are roaring right through the NFL with our QB and this coach.

    The mistakes are a plenty. Truth is none of these guys (Matt Slater, 
    Gerrard Warren,Shaun Ellis,
    Darius Butler ,Antwaun Molden
    Tracy White ,Mark Anderson,
    Dane Fletcher, Gary Guyton
    Brandon Tate,Julian Edelman,
    Daryll Richard ,Kade Weston,Brandon Deadrick,
    Landon Cohen Nick Koutovides, Eric Moore,
    Will Yeatman,Dan Gronkowski,
    Richard Medlin ) would make a difference if we just picked some of those first rounders we had and spent more, rather than worrying about the uncertain lockout situation. The scary part is, most of those players weren't even drafted above the 5th round or at all.
     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    In Response to Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it:
    [QUOTE]Brevity is NOT your strong suit.   So, BB went "name"?  Is that the gist of it?
    Posted by Davedsone[/QUOTE]

    Psh, tell me about it.  Even by imploring to god, I can't place even a moderate check-n-balance on my apparent ADD digressions...

    Yea, lmao-He went with "Name."  That pretty much sums it up (4 whole words too).  Even up until last week, with Faulk while the other RBs were offered to "find" their routine with 5 carries or less (or just 1 or none).  Subbing Andre Carter (or was it Anderson- the guy that doesn't really tackle ever during run downs-EVER).  Subbing certain guys in, and/or keeping them altogether, Guys who've shown in past NFL Seasons, often and even very prolonged (Ochocinco, Ellis, Haynesworth)- simply exceptional on-field abilities.   

    ABSOLUTELY, as of being on and playing within the O & D versions of this 2011 Pats Team, ARE imo very much limiting what I believe (and what we've even SENN firsthand), As potentially excellent schematic execution & even schematic designs, of Pats Offensive & Defensive Units:  OFFENSE=Namely equal versatility in the passing/running game for NE within the 2 TE set <offering VERY limited success potential of people like Kevin Faulk at RB and Ochocinco at wideout />).   DEFENSE=Namely countering the initially FAR more balanced BB 4-3
    Under Defensive Front (having a DE on the far side very much a running game liability), Offering DTs very much set more towards clogging the holes and simply eating up O-Linemen during running downs, YET much more single skill-set oriented TO-wards the run vs. collapsing the passing pocket (shooting gaps, More pass-rush AND equal run game skill oriented). And I mean this, even IF having players with a much more balanced approach playing, WILL work when used as a whole Defensive Unit, even WHEN single individuals won't be standouts in 1 specific area. THIS was Bill Belichick's 1 BIG mantra in the past: Versatility. In terms of the 3-4, it was different types of actual "look" versatility that'cha could throw at the Offense. BUT in the 4-3 Under, initially I saw BB had the same general notion simplified under the sum total of the collection of individual player units he placed on the field under this schematic.  Same meaning though: NO exploitable weak points. This scheme WILL work, above trying to tweek & twist secondary design & scheme, vast sub defensive schemes, all the time, subbing in vastly singular skill-set oriented guys.   
    4-3 Under-Here we are.  No stud pass-rushers, No immobile bohemoths in the run D, but totally devoid of pass-rush speed or skill.  Man-press CBs.  Smart very equally skill-oriented cognitive Safeties (James Sanders & Patrick Chung).  Here we are: NO big but limited 1 skill-alone-oriented players, BUT no big weaknesses.  Right up at the line and in your face as the Offense.  And up until this very game, whether it be swiatching (off and on, off and on) to press-man, bump and run, zone (back & forth, back & forth), then adding in more & more differing D-Line looks (and the very specific personell accompanying each 1)=Belichick appeared to simply be making the situation ever more confused, specialized, very limited, and very exploitable by most any decent NFL QB. 

    Initially, it was=THIS is what we're doing and showing.  Yes, we can still do alot of things OUT of this initial look thatt you're seeing (drop guys back, send the house, etc)...but THIS is what you'll always be seeing at the first onset of the play (i.e. becomes very hard to read).  Now?  Specifically skilled D Players (just like on Offense)- are resulting in much more specific & numerous schemes and looks (sub D's and sub players).            
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    Like mthurl says there is just an overall lack of talent especially on the defensive side of the ball.  All those spectacular draft day trade that aquire more future picks to only be traded again next year have severely weakened this team.  The constant high round DB whiffs don't help either.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    In Response to Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it:
    [QUOTE]I love how Mt. Hurl claims that is "wonderfully written". This Mt. Hurl character wouldn't know  the directions to a History 101 course if it was tatooed on his panties. I feel like Mt. Hurl never had a quality education. Ugh. I get Laz's premise without even reading his insanely convoluted post, but it doesn't change the fact that the offense is asleep at the wheel. All of our losses, to varying degrees, are rooted in the offense, not the defense.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    Guys are arguing, Rusty-Don'tcha see that it's BOTH O and D?  You ARE, 110% correct on Offense.  Gotta establish the run game.  But you gotta have a passing threat to keep a D wary.  NE's 2 TE set-up, first deployed en masse only last year, WAS and IS the answer:  You have a threat of BOTH in giving this look to a Defense.  THIS threat however, becomes WAY more singular & specialized in terms of where you will go & what you WILL do, once you're offering only a small 35 year old very slow & not nearly any longer as good at breaking tackles, but very good at pass-protection & the draw- scat-back in Kevin Faulk, as your RB of choice.  And the play's direction (where, what, to whom) gets even more limited with an unimaginably under-producing wideout who's no longer a threat.  And all the secondary factors become a fallout:  TOP gets destroyed, Opposing D isn't worn down (ever), Even when your Offense scores a TD, you've managed to eat 2 "whole" minutes off the game clock, so YOUR Defense is back on the field, totally exhausted. 

    Same thing on Defense, with the tinkering & over-tinkering, then changing the amount of times AND all the variables BB is no doing, TO: what we ALL saw was a very strong and above all else-SOUND, 4-3 Under Defensive look.  Same exact thing holds true:  By deploying very specifically skilled singular skill-set personell, BB has suddenly been forced to overcomplicate the entire D unit and their schemes & looks.  EVERY-where: Secondary coverage styles, Front formations (differing times now switching back and forth), blitzing numbers (and specific people), etc., etc., and etc.. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    I think development of rookies and young players is generally lacking. I don't think BB has ditched the meritocracy philosophy but I think it's a philosophy that leads to slow development. Many teams IMO will take their big draft pick and start him game 1, not necessarily because he looks better in camp than the guy who held that position, but because he is the guy they are counting on- and sink or swim they will let him play and breakout or bust. The Pats wait until they look better in practice which could really take a year or more because of how long it takes to get all the NFL plays mastered. I have no doubt that on another team Price, Ridley, Vereen, etc. would have been starters and we would see if they are any good. Sometimes I think the way the Pats sit these guys forever does more to regress them than anything. Like not using your car for a year, it should be in the same shape as when you left it, but when you finally go to use it- it will have all kinds of problems.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from chuchos. Show chuchos's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    How is BB attempting to 'fix' it?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    In Response to Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it:
    [QUOTE]How is BB attempting to 'fix' it?
    Posted by chuchos[/QUOTE]

    Yea, after finishing post 1 I sorta saw that I didn't really even adress that part.  I'm pretty tired now.  So Idk- I saw in the boxscore, that many of the single-set guys looked to have played less (Faulk, Ochoc, Ellis), while some other guys ah- I'm not even gonna open up a second web page for the names:  I think they played more.  This part of my argument isn't as sound as the 1st part- my ultimate conclusions to place a positive spin on things, are largely <solely /> based on missing the game, being without Pats news this entire week b/c I had no power, and then tabulating my "future-ray-of-light" in stamp, by scanning the boxscore for 'bout 25 seconds or so; quarter of it- scanned about a full 1/4 of it anyway.  Also, Belichick's smart, and so am I.  Example: We both came to the same conclusions RE: How NE's D unit got ran over, during 2010's Cleveland Game, b/c in him setting Wilfork to DE, he hadn't considered exactly how unbalanced the weakside middle of his interior run d, actually was <flopped SILB and WILB/further flipping CB's at the LOS>.  Anyway, so that's based on proven past experience between us=He got somethin' just as I did...same thing here, right?    
     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

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

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    In Response to Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it:
    [QUOTE]Laz and Rusty - I can only agree from what I'm reading.  It's BOTH sides of the ball.  You have a convert here in me. My other concern is not so much tactical, but "psychological" for lack of a better word.   It is very uncharacteristic of a BB/TB led squad to play this lousy 3 games in a row.  After a narow escape from the Cowboys, a by-week and an ugly loss in Pitt, you'd think they'd just get it done.  The D was fired up, but to put up ZERO points in the 1st half...... The O can't help the D when the D is playing well and vice-versa.  It's becoming the story of this season..... But, Laz, at this point in the season what are the solutions to righting this ship? The New Jersey Jests next week is as big a regular season game as they get.
    Posted by ipot[/QUOTE]

    First, thanx a ton mthurl (appreciated man).  

    And ipot, I'll try to hit this up tomorrow.  In all honesty, chances are that I won't; But it's important for me to know, that YOU trully know, That I'll try (we should actually be far more focused on this aspect).  I just- I haven't really been in-to real world situations lately...solving them, addressing them, F-acing themmm; almost forgot "facing them" #1.  I think it's got something to do with the government, although I can't exactly put my finger on it...  Either way though, I'm just gonna blame them regardless.  Really, even devoid of actual details, chances are that I AM right in pinnin' it on 'em.  Ugh, it's become so hard to care about addressing measures on how one might fix ANY issue, when I really don't have any control or say.  PERFECT Example:  My desk, my beautiful tempered black glass, computer desk...  Right this very second, It's rattling.  WhyTH's it rattling?!?  WhatInTH can I even DO about it?!?  The answer is, nothing.  The issue is greater than me, and I'm pretty comfortable just leaving it up to the folks in washington, to try to find a solution.  MUCH easier to deal with stuff when there isn't any problem whatsoever within said situation which I still have no say in; In which case I just go, "Well, Glad we got THIS situation up and runnin' pretty smoothly."        
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    In Response to Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it:

    re:Wonderfully written, it's just lacking in accurate technical content. One of the problems is you have this one is really better than that one. Well look at those names on there, are any of them really good to begin with. It's 6 in 1 - 7 in the other on a lot of these players you mentioned. I think the bigger fact is that they traded Seymore an haven't replaced him.

    point 1.

     They draft for "value" and the future and forget about right now.

    forgot every year. point 2


     They missed on too many second round picks, it's down right ridiculous!! If they had just picked the guy in the first round

    jesus someone who gets it! point 3.


     and heavens to Betsy spent a little more in free agency - this isn't even being discussed

    yes you me and a few ohers have mentioned
    point 4.


     and we are roaring right through the NFL with our QB and this coach.

    The mistakes are a plenty. Truth is none of these guys (Matt Slater, 
    Gerrard Warren,Shaun Ellis,
    Darius Butler ,Antwaun Molden
    Tracy White ,Mark Anderson,
    Dane Fletcher, Gary Guyton
    Brandon Tate,Julian Edelman,
    Daryll Richard ,Kade Weston,Brandon Deadrick, 
    Landon Cohen Nick Koutovides, Eric Moore,
    Will Yeatman,Dan Gronkowski,
    Richard Medlin ) would make a difference if we just picked some of those first rounders we had and spent more, rather than worrying about the uncertain lockout situation.

    point 5.



     nic list.

    ive done several partial lists
    and a complete overhaul last year right after the playoff loss on the forum here.

    thanks.


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

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    In Response to Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it:
    [QUOTE]ALL: I started several posts on other people's threads, but after ZERO power in my condo for a week coupled with numerous BDC Board problems as of late, I've just been quitting my posts halfway through and not sending them at all...  I'll try to be brief (for me).  We'll go from there. ~I've seen NUMEROUS threads & posts discussing certain areas around this issue (I'm about to explain):  Rusty's takes on Patriots Offense, and establishing a run game.  Russ's and several others notions which I HAVE also hit upon (AB-solutely correct notions btw)- detailing how the problems witth NE's Defense is less the specific play of NE's Cornerbacks, and far more- A larger issue with The Defensive Line's ability to pressure QB's, collapse the pocket, coupled with NE's total inexperience & lack of even average NFL quality skill/vet prescence at The greater Safety positions.  I ALSO just today, saw a thread soooo cllose on nailing down what I personally deem to be the crux issue, the worm at the core: A thread talking about how "THIS could be, or could have been , The 2011 Patriots Defense."  The broader notion here on this 1 (as well as those others), is absolutely correct, but it leaves off in defining the theory within the larger #1 Idea, imo.  Here's the issue in a nutshell (god grant me brevity for the 1st time in my life): Bill Belichick has largely created this problem, HIM-self (but as I've said, just looking at the boxscore today <although that's all />, BB appears to have seen some clarity here in what to do).   Ready?  Here goes, in its most simplistic terms:      /> />For an NFL Coach (Belichick), whom has spent the greatest pasrt of his doctrine & sets his roster during his coaching career, under the regard of: "I do not play favorites ," -More & more (and more...as time has worn on) Bill Belichick IS "playing favorites."  This IS, especially evident during this current 2011 NFL Patriots Season.  And this IS, the core problem.  Know this:  Doing so, has limited NE's scheme versatility & the very quality of executing with-IN a specific on-field scheme being run during a given time... Quickly let me explain, "Playing Favorites."  So many of us ALL- Well, we just hate the very notion OF  "Favoritism."  It exemplifies ALL that we often despise, whether it be individual opportunities of "moving up the ladder" (which really, who gives a sh#t about this right here in this instance), BUT it ALSO exemplifies, choosing whatever individual/group or what-have-you, AS the chosen "participates", BASED not on production, quality and/or amount of production, But based or at the very least incorrectly "skewed/inclined" towards a million of the myriad of seperate factors, A-part from the greatest factor: Produceable Results.  O.k.?        But again, just as we totally despise being subject to (or subject of) the general definition in "Favoritism", ONCE that "favoritism" takes an actual specific shape, design, or=Specific real-life Individual's Name...staying clear & totally washing-your-hands- WITH such an anti-favorites mind-set, suddenly ain't as easy to do. Here goes the bombshell: The 2011 NE Patriots PreSeason illustrated to each And ALL, that: The '11 Patriots Team REALLY had something going...on BOTH sides of the ball...  And it was tangible & clearly evident (so long as BB wasn't simply playing back-ups later in games, and/or such total garbage preseason games <even FOR preseason-Game #3, late in game #2, very late in game #4 for instance).  Needless to say, The 2011 Patriots schemes, 2011 NE Patriots Players (nudge-nudge), often didn't simply LOOK decent...but they often looked almost dominant, scary. ...but not ALL of them looked good. ...AND (gulp): Once the Rosters were trimmed down, and after the rosters were set, and as the actual 2011 NFL Season began, and as it HAS continued, (Ready?!?)- Far too many Players whom looked good (i.e. B-E-T-T-E-R) than other Pats Players, Were NOT either: The same ones whom actually MADE the roster (vs. practice squad and vs. cut altogether and even vs. and under the notion of potentially being IR'ed just a bit too quickly), AND (if said players whom DID play better during preseaon DID trully MAKE the roster of 53)- These players, whom had actually performed BETER than other Pats Players, were NOT the same players more often taking the field...they were riding the pine, as it goes (reduced to smaller roles, and once in, they were coming off the bench cold). />>>Al-righty, here's the sickeningly, gut-wrenchingly tough part to come to personal terms with as long-time Pats Fans, and as long-time NFL Fans...  It's the "personal-part."  The actual personal, themself: <Here, I'll attempt to lessen the bl0w- /> <As of: THIS, The 2011 NFL Season > Matt Slater is better than Chad Ochocinco. Gerrard Warren is better than Shaun Ellis. Darius Butler is better than Antwaun Molden. Tracy White is better than Mark Anderson. Dane Fletcher is better than Gary Guyton. Brandon Tate is better than Julian Edelman. Daryll Richard (/Kade Weston/Brandon Deadrick) is better than Albert Haynesworth. Landon Cohen (/Nick Koutovides) is better than Eric Moore. Will Yeatman is better than Dan Gronkowski. Richard Medlin is better than Kevin Faulk (yeh, I coulda used BJGE OR Woodhead <easily />-but let's just keep with the "wow factor"). Brandon Meriweather showed significant imporovement on NE, AND overall Brandon Meriweather taking 1 or 2 bad angles on the ball, and/or going for the knockout hit, rather than the form-tackle <thus subsequently missing 1-2 tackles in a game />, AB-solutely beats having a replacement Safety whom isn't anywhere NEAR the played ball, as much as BM was.   James Sanders showed that although Sanders, Never (and I mean: NEVER)- was a big impact "playmaker", AB-solutely has subsequently shown that yes, indeed, Simply having his mistake-free Vet savy leadership as the last line of Defense on the field for NE, actually WAS worth paying such an extremely "NON-huge Impact play, playmaker" 4 and 1/2 MILLION Dollars this year alone.    ~Lmao.  Look, Do what'cha want & say what'cha want, But come back with stats.  Look back into PreSeason (BOTH Practice Reports as well as the 4 boxscores of those games <fyi-BDC's preseason stats don't show half the guys any longer, so check SI.com, ESPN.com, NFL.com />).  And yes, I went extreme in the parallels (but sadly, not too much so).        Some don't match-up in 100% iron-clad precise positional terms, comparison-wide...  Some decent players even GOT injured, OR were injured but came back...<so Belichick should get a pass, right? />        Well, Here's an example:  Tough to knock on Kevin Faulk, considering he was injured during training camp/preseason/early on, And subsequently even though someone like Shane Vareen showed exceptional skills during preseason (practice/game), His injury issue was almost immediately present & factorable...  Well, RE: Vareen=Yes.  Faulk, though...hmmm?   By placing Kevin Faulk back into the lineup during the last Pittsburgh loss, and just cutting down BJGE down to something crazy like 6 or less carries, Woodhead down to 1 or 2, and Ridley down to 0...was the result Worth It?  Worth it, in terms of the EXTREMELY limited skill-set Faulk brings currently more than ever, to NE's Offensive Schematic Table.  At 1st glance Faulk's average was up, but looking back now, I see that Faulk acquired his 2 largest carries of the day, 17 yards in total, on a 2nd and just over 10 to go, and on a 3rd and 17.  Is it worth it...?  Worth absolutely hamstringing the success factor & threat factor of keeping Faulk in during NE's very best, O set-up's- i.e. the variability offered during 2 TE schemes.  1st down, Brady directly under center.  Power Run OR Pass with mismatched TE's???  Well, ya put Faulk in...suddenly that true 1st and 10 running threat, HAS been=Almost entirely negated.    Look, as a final thought you NEED to come away thinking about this:  ~In 2011, on the NE Patriots Football Team=By playing either all-pros, SEVERAL YEAR all-pros, just double digit sum total numbers of guys with pro-bowl bids, and even by playing long-time Patriot Players...guys who've broken their backs and dropped blood for The Pats Franchise for 10 or more Seasons... ...NE Players & NFL Stars (long-time, or even briefly), such as: Shaun Ellis, Mark Anderson (see great Bears rookie year), Albert Haynesworth, Kevin Faulk, Chad Ochocinco, Andre Carter... DID YOU (adressed to Coach Belichick)- even just a little bit, Cut a player whom might have currently (2011) offered a chance for better results (ON New England...their scheme, their team, THIS very season), OR even offer less playing time to one of these guys (prior to THIS NY Giants Game, mind you), OR even already go in with some semblance that due to how they already HAD performed (or often "failed to" in some degree, large or small-see Sanders/Meri argument)- Did you, perhaps then, Decide to terminate their 2011 Pats Employment, a bit too hastily, weighed just a bit too much on past under-productions (and not preseason 2011 improvements on productions)?  Are the players you've given more field time towards, limiting schematic versatility, given their either- Lacking current skill-set, and/or VERY specialized 1-sided skill-set....?  
    Posted by LazarusintheSanatorium[/QUOTE]


    in other words, bb has not been terribly smart about all this and now the pats success will have to continue paying for it.

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

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    Write less and more to the point.  Thanks.  Oh and I disagree.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from tompenny. Show tompenny's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    Lack of talent in the secondary and linebacking corps. Garbage wideouts can't beat man press coverage thus funneling everything to the middle of the field. Thats the the team weaknesses in a nutshell on both sides of the ball.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    A number of things need to be fixed imo

    1) Coaching - Players aren't being developed and BB is trying to do everything because no one under him can do anything. BB is best when he can focus on 1 or 2 things and coach up 1 or 2 aspects of the team. Problem being is other then Scar everyone in the coaching staff is failing.

    They need a strong experienced DC and OC who would question BB instead of just saying "please sir my I have some more say". To those who say it's just a title tell that to the guys who could make an impact in developing players and helping to develop plays on the field.

    2) All the JAGs - I don't know if it's ego or what but do we honestly need to grab everyone else's reclamation and throw away projects? I mean honestly, Kraft is willing to spend the money so why not give it a try and get an impact player?

    I'm tired of hearing players named: White, Adams, Barrett, Brown, Inhedigbo, Molden, Ellis, Anderson. Yes if you take 20 players you will find a good player eventually but the problem is you have a limited roster. When you fill half of 1 side of the ball with JAGs hoping one will become a solid starter then something is going to give. At most you should only have a handful of reclamation projects on the team, not taking up half of the D

    3) Drafting - drafting for value makes sense if you are in a rebuilding state, have a ton of holes to fill, or are already loaded and want to play the odds. The issue with drafting with value though is you most likely won't find a true impact player. You might find solid starters and good depth but you won't find impact players. Every so often you have to use picks or even, gasp, trade up and take a chance to get an impact player. The odds of you finding one with 4 2nd round picks is just as good as moving into the top 20 and getting one. The only difference is that top 20 pick have historically had better chances to be impact players while 2nd rounders have historically been nothing more then solid starters
     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    In Response to Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it:
    [QUOTE]Umm, Brady threw two INTs, had one fumble, we stopped running the ball and Edelman fumbled. We basically handed the game away on a silver platter. Brady is the main reason for this, so I don't get your post, PatsEng. When you turn it over 4 times, it has nothing to do with drafts or whatever other delfections you're choosing this week. NE lost the last two games due to an inept offense.  Everyone was raving about Gronk, Hernandez, re-signing Welker, BJGE's NFL leading TD streak, how Ridley can look, etc, and now it's drafts? Come on, dude. Give it a rest.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    Rusty it's a commentary on everything wrong with the Pats so far this season.

    You can't tell me that the coaching and player development have been great
    You can't tell me that the D  didn't bite the bit at the end of the game
    You can't tell me that Brady didn't force balls which lead to turn overs
    You can't tell me that all those JAGs and reclamation projects haven't affected the game play

    Those are all things they have lead up to this lose and the other loses. Face it, if Brady didn't feel he had to win the game himself do you think he'd be forcing the ball into places he shouldn't resulting in turnovers? And, if BB was comfortable with the D and the players on the D he would have kicked it away last week?

    It's not just 1 simple thing but a whole bunch of things built up on each other that's lead to this.

    Back in 01'-05' I had no doubt in my mind that with under 2 mins left of the clock the D would hold, yesterday I thought 1:38 is way to much time left on the clock. Also in those years that last drive with 3:00 left I would have no doubt that they'd use up almost every second and still score a TD. Yesterday there were times I was begging them to stay inbounds and just march down the field for first downs instead of going for deep plays.

    This team is much different from the SB teams. The only things that have changed are the coaches under BB, the player acquisition staff, the drafting philosophy, and the quality of the players themselves. So, it's logical to point to the coaches, the lack of player development, and the players they are signing and drafting as the root cause as to why there is such a huge gap between the 01-05 years and the 08-present years.  Notice how I left out 06 and 07. That happens to be the epicenter of where the older vets retired and a number of the former staff left. Not a coincidence imo
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from schwank. Show schwank's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    Good grief....it was turnovers and dumb penalties. 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Evil2012. Show Evil2012's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

     I was going to read all the posts in this thread but decided I'd read something shorter like the Encyclopedia Britannica
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it

    In Response to Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Patriots Lost, YET what I saw tells me Belichick has both defined the TRUE problem, and he's attempting to fix it : Rusty it's a commentary on everything wrong with the Pats so far this season. You can't tell me that the coaching and player development have been great You can't tell me that the D  didn't bite the bit at the end of the game You can't tell me that Brady didn't force balls which lead to turn overs You can't tell me that all those JAGs and reclamation projects haven't affected the game play Those are all things they have lead up to this lose and the other loses. Face it, if Brady didn't feel he had to win the game himself do you think he'd be forcing the ball into places he shouldn't resulting in turnovers? And, if BB was comfortable with the D and the players on the D he would have kicked it away last week? It's not just 1 simple thing but a whole bunch of things built up on each other that's lead to this. Back in 01'-05' I had no doubt in my mind that with under 2 mins left of the clock the D would hold, yesterday I thought 1:38 is way to much time left on the clock. Also in those years that last drive with 3:00 left I would have no doubt that they'd use up almost every second and still score a TD. Yesterday there were times I was begging them to stay inbounds and just march down the field for first downs instead of going for deep plays. This team is much different from the SB teams. The only things that have changed are the coaches under BB, the player acquisition staff, the drafting philosophy, and the quality of the players themselves. So, it's logical to point to the coaches, the lack of player development, and the players they are signing and drafting as the root cause as to why there is such a huge gap between the 01-05 years and the 08-present years.  Notice how I left out 06 and 07. That happens to be the epicenter of where the older vets retired and a number of the former staff left. Not a coincidence imo
    Posted by PatsEng[/QUOTE]

    "So, it's logical to point to the coaches, the lack of player development, and the players they are signing and drafting as the root cause "

    well said. couldnt have said it better myself.
    (more concise than my notation of the same thing).

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share