pats = same old problem - defense

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

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]I know I would take Superbowl wins over #1 scoring offense in the NFL anyday. Not sure about anybody else......To me high scoring offense's doesn't equate to winning in the playoffs. Balanced offense with good defense does. Tough to have a good defense when your offense goes 3 and out 3 out of 4 plays.
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]


    I don't know about that these days -- offenses need some balance, but really you need to pass well to win. The Saints, Colts, Packers, and even to a degree Steelers were all offensively talented teams that won by putting it in the air. People still haven't realized how much the Mungy rules may have changed the NFL for good. 

    Right now, I think the formula for winning is more likely: can you protect the passer, can you rush the passer, and lastly how good is the guy who is your passer? LOL.

    This isn't the 1930s with teams running the wishbone, where 3 yards and a cloud of dust will get it done. The everything is PI, even if the DB only sneezes on a WR rules just allow teams to score too easliy and too quickly to try and "sit" on a small lead. 
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from noahsark99. Show noahsark99's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense : " One thing that seems to be overlooked here is the effect of Brady's offensive efficiency on the defense. We could use one or two time consuming drives a game to give the D a chance to rest, regroup and get coached. I think the max drive time Sunday was around 5 1/2 minutes. " Agreed
    Posted by bredbru[/QUOTE]


    I think that's a good way of loooking at a real need! Kudos to you. I kept thinking about that during both of the games. Anyway it'll necessarily become that way as the weather worsens so I expect this to be implemented in time.  another view of the negative comments on the D comes from this post:

    Re: This defense better get better...

    posted at 9/20/2011 4:20 PM EDT
    www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=acf162101ded88ac0304f33d492d6228&plckUserId=acf162101ded88ac0304f33d492d6228">
    Posts: 2237
    First: 11/9/2009
    Last: 9/20/2011
    Yeah, there's certainly room for improvement but this subject has been beaten to death by now and there's probably been two dozen threads in the last 2 days about why the Pats won't win in the playoffs because of the secondary, the pass rush, the run game, the play calling, Ocho-Cinco, a big WR, a bigger CB, a new (old) safety named Sharper, or a full back.

    Tell you the truth I'd like to talk about something positive after the Patriots just beat one of the best teams in the AFC, sealed the win with a strip sack, had a goal line stop, created four turnovers, dropped 34 on one of the leagues top defenses, and are moving the offense with record efficiency in the pass and run. 

    This board is so unbearably negative after a big win that I can't imagine seeing it after a loss.
    After which I couldn't help ansering with this:

    Thanks for a good and well needed injection of good vibes. I can't beleive how negative and how many couch-potato fans we have posting here......Seem overly spoiled to med. Where I live in Sweden anyone that even knows about the NFL has the Pats as the prototype of higher achievment and "Football Excellence". So lets move on with what you suggested. A little positive analysis of the many things we're doing as well or better than nayone else.

    I see no reason to cut out the Shenanigans, do you???

    Noah in Stocholm
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense : I don't know about that these days -- offenses need some balance, but really you need to pass well to win. The Saints, Colts, Packers, and even to a degree Steelers were all offensively talented teams that won by putting it in the air. People still haven't realized how much the Mungy rules may have changed the NFL for good.  Right now, I think the formula for winning is more likely: can you protect the passer, can you rush the passer, and lastly how good is the guy who is your passer? LOL. This isn't the 1930s with teams running the wishbone, where 3 yards and a cloud of dust will get it done. The everything is PI, even if the DB only sneezes on a WR  rules just allow teams to score too easliy and too quickly to try and "sit" on a small lead. 
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]

    Z, I'm glad you brought this up. Each of the teams you mentioned were without a doubt throw first and throw often offense's, however when it came to playoff football you saw them do what the other teams did not expect(or at least what other defense's were forced to give them), by running the football.

    Examples:

    Packers last year beating the upstart Eagles with Vicks prolific offense. James Starks unknown commodity runs for 123 yards and a td at over 5.5 a clip.
    Eagles held Rodgers to 180 yards passing, although 3 tds. Ground game was HUGE in that victory.(T.O.P etc.)

    Colts in there Superbowl gift, Dominic Rhodes rushes for 113 yards at 5.4 a clip with a td.

    Even the Saints against Cardinal in 09 playoffs Saints had 3 different rb's rush for a whopping 160 yards 2 tds on 18 carries. What is that 8 ypc?

    When was the last time we had a big running game in any playoffs?(answer 2007 Pats Chargers AFC Championship when brady was held down and maroney ran for 100 something yards and a td at 5ypc)

    Now other games in these respective playoffs these teams also passed for big yardage but you need to be able to run the ball when you have to. We have not been able to do that in important games and it has cost us dearly.

    Playoff defense can minimize the effects of a great one dimensional offense. This to me is a fact! You need offensive balance come playoff time, even recent history has shown us this.

    I worry about 2007 all over again with our current offense. it is dominant now but will it be come playoff time?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jader. Show jader's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]Another troll exposed.   Good job, Evil.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense : Z, I'm glad you brought this up. Each of the teams you mentioned were without a doubt throw first and throw often offense's, however when it came to playoff football you saw them do what the other teams did not expect(or at least what other defense's were forced to give them), by running the football. Examples: Packers last year beating the upstart Eagles with Vicks prolific offense. James Starks unknown commodity runs for 123 yards and a td at over 5.5 a clip. Eagles held Rodgers to 180 yards passing, although 3 tds. Ground game was HUGE in that victory.(T.O.P etc.) Colts in there Superbowl gift, Dominic Rhodes rushes for 113 yards at 5.4 a clip with a td. Even the Saints against Cardinal in 09 playoffs Saints had 3 different rb's rush for a whopping 160 yards 2 tds on 18 carries. What is that 8 ypc? When was the last time we had a big running game in any playoffs?(answer 2007 Pats Chargers AFC Championship when brady was held down and maroney ran for 100 something yards and a td at 5ypc) Now other games in these respective playoffs these teams also passed for big yardage but you need to be able to run the ball when you have to. We have not been able to do that in important games and it has cost us dearly. Playoff defense can minimize the effects of a great one dimensional offense. This to me is a fact! You need offensive balance come playoff time, even recent history has shown us this. I worry about 2007 all over again with our current offense. it is dominant now but will it be come playoff time?
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    I get what you are saying, but I think you are misreading what I am saying. 

    First, I specifically said balance is important. Offenses need some balance. Even 20 years ago, though, it was almost impossible to win without having a running game that could move at will. Those teams game planned, and took what was given to them in one game against opponents that couldn't stop the run well. That is a whole lot different than trying to bang your head into a brick wall against a team like the Steelers or Jets, who are excellent run stopping teams, simply so you can meet an arbitrary 'balance.'

    Who said the Patriots don't have balance? They passed the ball 60% of the imte against the Chargers and ran it 40%. They needed almost every point they got, and I would rather they pass and get yardage and points than run and not. 

    Laslty, I don't think NE not being able to run the ball hurt them ... that is being overly directive. Not being able to stop the opponent has hurt them. You can't allow 24 points to many teams and expect to win. Even if your offense averages 30+. You need a defense that, on its own, without a footrace where they can attack the other team, to be able to hold an opponent around 17 ppg to win predictbly.

    NE lost in 2007 because the defense folded. They lost against the Ravens because the defense simply crumpled before the game even started. They lost last season, for a number of reasons... silly special teams turnovers being one of them ... but the fact that the defense just got lit up late in the game is the major reason.  

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

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense : I get what you are saying, but I think you are misreading what I am saying.  First, I specifically said balance is important. Offenses need some balance. Even 20 years ago, though, it was almost impossible to win without having a running game that could move at will. Those teams game planned, and took what was given to them in one game against opponents that couldn't stop the run well. That is a whole lot different than trying to bang your head into a brick wall against a team like the Steelers or Jets, who are excellent run stopping teams, simply so you can meet an arbitrary 'balance.' Who said the Patriots don't have balance? They passed the ball 60% of the imte against the Chargers and ran it 40%. They needed almost every point they got, and I would rather they pass and get yardage and points than run and not.  Laslty, I don't think NE not being able to run the ball hurt them ... that is being overly directive. Not being able to stop the opponent has hurt them. You can't allow 24 points to many teams and expect to win. Even if your offense averages 30+. You need a defense that, on its own, without a footrace where they can attack the other team, to be able to hold an opponent around 17 ppg to win predictbly. NE lost in 2007 because the defense folded. They lost against the Ravens because the defense simply crumpled before the game even started. They lost last season, for a number of reasons... silly special teams turnovers being one of them ... but the fact that the defense just got lit up late in the game is the major reason.  
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]

    I gotcha Z, and I'm not saying your wrong here, and I agree that there is a fundamental difference between running the ball just to say (we are balanced) and running the ball with purpose as in setting a defense up and keeping them guessing.   I just don't think we have tried either. I really wonder when is the last time we have run the ball 3 times in a row?

    I think that in the playoffs against a team like the Jets last year, we gave up running the ball before really even trying. We have seen it for the past few post seasons. If we get behind at all(and in most cases even if we are ahead) we abandon the run and the other team knows it. Most important part is that the other team absolutely knows what we will do on offense and I think it has been a bit egotistical on our parts to just come out and do it anyway.

    I also believe the ineptitude of our offense(post season) has played a role in hurting our defense. We take almost no time off the board when we run spread, have 2 in completions, and a run for 1 yard. Especially with a young D like we have had the past few years. We need to protect them, need to run even if it doesn't work sometimes just to give the D a break and let the other team know that at least we will try!

    On the 2007 SB I have to wholeheartedly disagree with you. I just cannot blame the defense for that loss. Talk about ramming your head into a brick wall that is what we tried to do with the spread against the Giants defense. They knew what we would do had not worked all game and more importantly they knew we were going to continue doing it anyway. I know Brady made magic happen on the 2nd to last drive but imo that was too little too late and our luck ran out defensively on a few plays where it could have been over!




     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    to me all the last three playoff losses were due to gross underperfornance on the part of the offense. people like bashing the d but you just have to look at the scores on those games.

    Offense:
    Against NYG in SB, scored 14 despite averaging 36 ppg in the regular season
    Against BAL in the 2009 playoffs, scored 21 despite averaging 26 in reg season
    Against NYJ last year, scored 21 despite averaging 26 in reg season (oh btw they scored 45 on the last meeting before that)

    Defense performed close to expectation:
    Against NYG they gave up 17 on a season they gave up an average of 17
    Against NYJ they gave up 21 on a season they gave up an avg of 19.6

    Even against BAL where they gave up 33 on a season they gave up an avg of 18, I blame the offense for not being able to sustain drives, leaving the d exposed all day. Sure they missed WW.

    Ultimately each one of those losses were due to failure of the offense.

    And yes, in each of those games, NWE came in with supposedly an unstoppable passing offense (similar to the greates show on turf and the Colts style of offense). Yet, all the opponent did was solve that dimension of their offense and they could not make the other team pay a penalty by running the ball. Bottomline is that you need a good running game, to keep the d honest and to bail out the passing attack when opponents solve the passing game.

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

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]It was.  I think the balance of the offense and Weis were better for the reasons I just stated. I could care less about stats. Move the chains, run the ball, convert on 3rd and don't turn it over.  That's the recipe.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]


    Big changes since those days for Os. Running the ball has been relegated to little more than a "keep them honest" ploy for most teams. BB has rightly evolved along with the rest of the smart coaches and taken advantage of the bonanza that the new contact rules have brought. Fortunately he has the ultimate weapon in the whole league to exploit this.

    Unfortunately, on D he is not so well positioned as he was when he could scheme away with a gritty bunch that worked in tandem to be greater than the sum of their parts. Now, big pass rushers and absolute cover corners are even more the premium, not intimidating hitters and run stuffers.

    I am hopeful his moves to snag some veterans for the D will infuse the pass rush part of our needs with some pizzaz. I'm also hoping McCourty is not regressing and will actually be even better this year. And hopefully Dowling will stay on the field and enhance some of the promise he has clearly shown so far. I'm getting a little concerned with Chung's durability as well.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]to me all the last three playoff losses were due to gross underperfornance on the part of the offense. people like bashing the d but you just have to look at the scores on those games. Offense: Against NYG in SB, scored 14 despite averaging 36 ppg in the regular season Against BAL in the 2009 playoffs, scored 21 despite averaging 26 in reg season Against NYJ last year, scored 21 despite averaging 26 in reg season (oh btw they scored 45 on the last meeting before that) Defense performed close to expectation: Against NYG they gave up 17 on a season they gave up an average of 17 Against NYJ they gave up 21 on a season they gave up an avg of 19.6 Even against BAL where they gave up 33 on a season they gave up an avg of 18, I blame the offense for not being able to sustain drives, leaving the d exposed all day. Sure they missed WW. Ultimately each one of those losses were due to failure of the offense. And yes, in each of those games, NWE came in with supposedly an unstoppable passing offense (similar to the greates show on turf and the Colts style of offense). Yet, all the opponent did was solve that dimension of their offense and they could not make the other team pay a penalty by running the ball. Bottomline is that you need a good running game, to keep the d honest and to bail out the passing attack when opponents solve the passing game.
    Posted by seattlepat70[/QUOTE]


    I absolutely agree SeattlePat. We were watching the same games here. Obviously the defense in the Baltimore game was horriffic, but with Brady coming off major knee surgery and WW out, Moss double teamed etc...we weren't winning a SB that year anyway.

    Bottom line is as you say, you need a good running game(or at least an honest threat of one) to win in the playoffs and especially in the AFC where defense's tend to be a little better!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

     The idea that pass happy offenses don't win superbowls has clearly been misproven recently. Since the Pats last won a superbowl the Colts, Saints and Packers have won superbowls. The Pats are clearly super bowl contenders with this offense and reverting to the 2001 + 2003 offense would be crazy. Those teams strengths were on the defensive side of the ball. The Colts problems over the years is not their offense but their defense was usually pathetic. The Colts with Edgarrin James had a great rushing attack but the defense was woeful.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense : I gotcha Z, and I'm not saying your wrong here, and I agree that there is a fundamental difference between running the ball just to say (we are balanced) and running the ball with purpose as in setting a defense up and keeping them guessing.   I just don't think we have tried either. 

    I disagree. NE did that last season. They did it in the regular season. They did it in the playoff loss to the Jets. 

    I really wonder when is the last time we have run the ball 3 times in a row? 

    Unless they snuck it by me this season, it was last season against the Jets, in the loss. They ran it three straight times twice. Once in the first half, once in the second ... both resulted in 3 and outs ... IIRC. The big one being right after the half. 

    I think that in the playoffs against a team like the Jets last year, we gave up running the ball before really even trying. We have seen it for the past few post seasons. If we get behind at all(and in most cases even if we are ahead) we abandon the run and the other team knows it. \

    That's the NFL. When you are down, like in the Ravens playoff game, by a ton of points, you don't have time to run the football. The Ravens would have let NE run the football all day long that game because the physics of football don't allow you to come back from 24 points running the football. A run heavy drive eats about 8-10 off the clock if it goes all the way. That leaves NE with what, three, maybe four drives for the rest of the game? OK. If their defense, which was getting gang-r@ped by the Ravens, is perfect then they maybe pull it out 28-24 ... that is if they are perfect, and each drive results in a TD and each Ravens drive is a three and out only consuming a couple minutes. In reality the Ravens would respond by running the football and NE would probably only be left with two drives. IF you are up 24-0 at the end of one quarter, and the other team offers you 11 minutes of clock for seven points, you take it. Essentially ... and this is the part that people overlook, if you plan on running the football a lot more than you pass it, your defense needs to be perfect, because even if you are successful, you are only going to have four to six drives for an entire game. 

    Against the Jets they ran it three straight times coming out of the half ... once to Woodhead, two more to BJGE ... they got zero yards and kicked the ball away. On the next drive Brady was sacked, and took a loss of like eleven yards. 

    On the following drive, they scored it in hurry up passing mostly with some runs mixed in.

    Now, keep in mind at this point the game is 14-11. The offense isn't going like a steam roller, but they aren't terrible either. The NYJ complete a 58 yard pass to Cotchery ... on a short pass that he just rips down the middle. A few plays later they are in the end zone. 21-11.

    By the fourth quarter NE DID run the football and were still stopped. The Jets let them run the football ... they took up 7:45 in time. The Jets thanked them. Then, guess what? 

    There is no time.

    Ne got a FG passing. 21-14 What are they going to do? Run the football some more with a few minutes left? Whatever ... the hurrry up actuall put points on the board. 

    At that point, there is 3:29 left. NE does an onside kick. Why? Because BB knows the defense cannot stop the Jets. Just like when he didn't punt it against the Colts. He doesn't have faith in the defense. He shouldn't have faith in the defense ... it simply has not earned that.

    So how does the defense respond, even when the Jets are running it, content to settle for a FG, leaving NE a few minutes to work with? They give up a TD!

    NE scored, but only passing after that. In those final two drives NE attempted 14 passes. Outside of those final two drives, and teh drive at the end of the half with 33 seconds on the clock where they tried two passes to woody, NE was 29 passes to 28 runs. They scored 11 points ... with almost picture perfect balance. 

    Here's the problem.... the Jets scored 28 points against NE's defense (not 21 as Seattlepat is saying).

    Yes. That is a defensive problem. NE scored enough points to win that game. The Jets had a top five defense, and bad offense. 21 should take it.

    The problem is that people take the offense for granted. The defense had been giving up that many points for most of the season last year, and it wasn't unitl the shutouts against some really bad teams later on that the defensive scoring was skewed. 

    NE ran the ball 28 to 29 passes outside the final five or six minutes of the game. 

    The thing that stood out to me after that game was not that NE needed to run the ball more. What do you want? 40 runs and 15 passes? NE would have been shut out playing football that way. What stood out was that they needed someone more credible than Tate (zero catches two drops) outside that could make a few plays against Cromartie, and that most overwhelmingly they need a defense that can stand on it's own and not use the offense and Tom Brady as its crutch. 

     "I also believe the ineptitude of our offense(post season) has played a role in hurting our defense. We take almost no time off the board when we run spread, have 2 in completions, and a run for 1 yard. Especially with a young D like we have had the past few years. We need to protect them, need to run even if it doesn't work sometimes just to give the D a break and let the other team know that at least we will try! On the 2007 SB I have to wholeheartedly disagree with you. I just cannot blame the defense for that loss. Talk about ramming your head into a brick wall that is what we tried to do with the spread against the Giants defense. They knew what we would do had not worked all game and more importantly they knew we were going to continue doing it anyway. "

    Yeah. That was a terrible game plan by McDaniels. One that he had been using all season long. By week 19 it was old. Let's not confuse them with the 2010-11 Patriots, who are a different team. That team threw the ball 492 times and ran it 454 ... which (again) is the very picture of balance at 52/48. The reason I (and others) blame the defense for that SB game is that the defense had not won a game for NE that season against a quality opponent. Asking them to man up right after the offense got the go ahead score isn't too much. Though, in practice... that was really a freak occurance on that pass by She-li. 

    But NE hasn't had a defense that could actually win a game since 2004. The rest is EPIC collapses like the game aganst the Colts in 2006. Failed clutch moments like in 2007. Complete beatdowns like the 33 point debacle against the Ravens offense, and a mixture of both against the Jets 28 point performance. 

    So let's summarize the last four Patriots playoff losses: opponents scoring about 30 ppg .... and people are telling me there has been an offensive problem, or that running the football fixes 30 ppg??? Really

    It seems pretty clear to me that NE simply hasn't had a playoff caliber defense in quite some time... despite what others might say.

    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense : Big changes since those days for Os. Running the ball has been relegated to little more than a "keep them honest" ploy for most teams. BB has rightly evolved along with the rest of the smart coaches and taken advantage of the bonanza that the new contact rules have brought. Fortunately he has the ultimate weapon in the whole league to exploit this. Unfortunately, on D he is not so well positioned as he was when he could scheme away with a gritty bunch that worked in tandem to be greater than the sum of their parts. Now, big pass rushers and absolute cover corners are even more the premium, not intimidating hitters and run stuffers. I am hopeful his moves to snag some veterans for the D will infuse the pass rush part of our needs with some pizzaz. I'm also hoping McCourty is not regressing and will actually be even better this year. And hopefully Dowling will stay on the field and enhance some of the promise he has clearly shown so far. I'm getting a little concerned with Chung's durability as well.
    Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]

         As unbelievable as this may seem, the New England Patriots have morphed into the Indianapolis Colts! The only real difference between the Pats of 2010 and 2011 and those high scoring Manning teams of the past is that Tom Brady runs the show for New England. Remember how BB set up his defensive schemes to stop Manning in the 2004 play-offs? Opposing teams are using similar tactics now, to stop Tom Brady.

         Unfortunately, as was the case with those Indy teams of the past, the Achilles heel of the current Patriots is their mediocre at best defense...which must play with a lead to be effective.  
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense :      As unbelievable as this may seem, the New England Patriots have morphed into the Indianapolis Colts! The only real difference between the Pats of 2010 and 2011 and those high scoring Manning teams of the past is that Tom Brady runs the show for New England. Remember how BB set up his defensive schemes to stop Manning in the 2004 play-offs? Opposing teams are using similar tactics now, to stop Tom Brady.      Unfortunately, as was the case with those Indy teams of the past, the Achilles heel of the current Patriots is their mediocre at best defense...which must play with a lead to be effective.  
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

     I agree with your opinion on this, but I don't believe that Pass happy offenses can't have good defenses though. I don't believe that there is anything inherent with the Pats style of offense that causes the Pats defense to underperform. I really believe that the pats just need a more consistent pass rush. The idea that the Pats defense is always tired because the Patriots offense scores too quickly seems backwards to me. If anything the Pats offense forces opponent's offenses to become much more one dimensional than they would prefer. This should be making our pass defense play better since they seem to know what's coming, but in general it hasn't. The Pats over the past few years have shown the ability to score touchdowns quickly when starting drives within their own 20 yard line. Being safe and cautious against the Pats (not going for TD's and settling for field goals and playing the field position game) is a recipe for disaster if you don't have a great defense. Unfortunately for us, in my opinion, in the last three playoff games the Pats offense underperformed for whatever reason while  the defense has not underperformed, it played shabbily just like it did through most of the regular season.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense :      As unbelievable as this may seem, the New England Patriots have morphed into the Indianapolis Colts! The only real difference between the Pats of 2010 and 2011 and those high scoring Manning teams of the past is that Tom Brady runs the show for New England. Remember how BB set up his defensive schemes to stop Manning in the 2004 play-offs? Opposing teams are using similar tactics now, to stop Tom Brady.      Unfortunately, as was the case with those Indy teams of the past, the Achilles heel of the current Patriots is their mediocre at best defense...which must play with a lead to be effective.  
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    One big difference between the Colts and Pats is that BB has thrown vast resources at fixing the D while the Colts always leaned toward keeping the O strong and the D was somewhat an afterthought. But, yeah, we are very Coltslike these days.


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

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]to me all the last three playoff losses were due to gross underperfornance on the part of the offense. people like bashing the d but you just have to look at the scores on those games. Offense: Against NYG in SB, scored 14 despite averaging 36 ppg in the regular season Against BAL in the 2009 playoffs, scored 21 despite averaging 26 in reg season Against NYJ last year, scored 21 despite averaging 26 in reg season (oh btw they scored 45 on the last meeting before that) Defense performed close to expectation: Against NYG they gave up 17 on a season they gave up an average of 17 Against NYJ they gave up 21 on a season they gave up an avg of 19.6 Even against BAL where they gave up 33 on a season they gave up an avg of 18, I blame the offense for not being able to sustain drives, leaving the d exposed all day. Sure they missed WW. Ultimately each one of those losses were due to failure of the offense. And yes, in each of those games, NWE came in with supposedly an unstoppable passing offense (similar to the greates show on turf and the Colts style of offense). Yet, all the opponent did was solve that dimension of their offense and they could not make the other team pay a penalty by running the ball. Bottomline is that you need a good running game, to keep the d honest and to bail out the passing attack when opponents solve the passing game.
    Posted by seattlepat70[/QUOTE]

    Do you really expect our offense to score as many points as they averaged against a mix of good and bad teams during the regular season against playoff caliber teams in the postseason?

    And you said, "(oh btw they scored 45 on the last meeting before that)", yeah, and the D allowed only 3 points in that game too. Allowing 14 points in the 4th quarter of a playoff game is BAD D.

    The Pats are considered to have the best offense in the NFL. The defense is considered anemic. That's reality.
     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    Sorry Z, the offense is to blame for our recent playoff losses.  Look at the characteristics of our Super Bowl wins:

     

    1.  Early offensive struggles but strong defensive stands.

    2.  Late defensive struggles but clutch offensive scoring.

    Look at SB42 and the Jets loss:

    1.  Early offensive struggles but strong defensive stands.

    2.  Late defensive struggles but not-clutch-enough offensive scoring.

    The Ravens loss?  1 fluke running play and 3 offensive turnovers in the 1st quarter setting up great field position.  Ravens were held without a touchdown the rest of the game but the offense couldn’t catch up.

    In short, it has nothing to do with the defense or running the ball – the offense simply wasn’t clutch.

    This is the year that changes.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: pats = same old problem - defense :
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]

    Z, good post and thanks for taking the time. I am in no way trying to defend the defense for the past few seasons and I think we all know it had been a re-building period as we had a defense made up up of 1st 2nd and 3rd year players(pre 2011)

    But when it comes to offensive play calling and pass verse run especially in post season I completely disagree with you. We can't use the Ravens game as an example because our defense was destroyed from the 1st play and we were behind with little offensive weaponry the whole game but.....

    Sounds like we both agree on SB 07. Bad plan to go spread by Mcdaniels as it was the entire post season..teams figured it out by then.

    Jets Pats to me was the same problem as 07 SB. You stated that the run to pass was balanced early but I don't see it that way.

    1st qtr BJGE has 4 runs(out of run formation) for 21 yards and 2 1st downs.

    2md qtr we didn't run BJGE once.WHY NOT?? He has 2 first downs and is going 5ypc???

    1st half we went 19-11 pass to run. Each of our drives finished with a Brady in-completion, a sack or and INT. (1FG)

    3rd qtr we do come out and go 3 straight runs(8 yards for Benny) it doesn't work then we go 9 passes to 2 runs the rest of the qtr.

    Then the 4rth qtr happens UGHH 7 Woodhead runs to only end up going 3 straight passes for a punt 8 minute drive. UGLY Why no Benny? Why no play action?

    Anyway I don't see how you see this game as balanced.

    1st half 19-11 pass to run (Benny 4 carries 21 yards)

    Game 45 -23pass to run( I dont count Brady and Tates 3 plays as runs)

    More importantly Woodhead gets 19 carries at 3.3 ypc when BJGE goes 9 for 43 at 4.8 ypc and 2 first downs????

    Just my opinion but if Benny gets 15-20 carries this game the outcome is different. Jets would have had to play the run and opened up the play action for Brady.

    You are right about the defense it can't let up that many points and win but the offense can do a better job of keeping the defense off the field and fresh by running the ball. It was working! I still think the Jets out coached us in this game and we played into there hands.

    Brady might not have gotten sacked 54 times and turned the ball over twice if some of his 45 pass attempts were BJGE carries. The man is going almost 5ypc and we only give him 9 carries?  I'll never understand that.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense

    Russ - I don't get your criticism of the offense this season.  9 drives - 4 touchdowns, 2 field goals and 3 4th downs is pretty f***ing good.  Against one of the league's top defenses.  Much better than anything Weiss accomplished.  Your expectation of offensive perfection is baffling. 
     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: pats = same old problem - defense


    I heard  Mark Schleritz(sp?) on M&M
    He said the only thing he saw when watching the tapes
    that the Pats did not have 1 Pass rusher an Oline would
    be afraid of - that going 1 on 1 blocking was ok

    But he still thought that with Brady the Pats were the class
    of the NFL

    In looking at the standings - tennessee . the jets and detroit
    were the lowest points allowed - and only detroit was up
    there in Offensive points.

    Tennesse is going no where and the Jets O is not that good
    When Detroit starts  beating the top teams they should go to
    the head of the power rankings

    I believe that our D will get better as we work our new people
    into the BB system - Right now I think:
            our run D is much better
            we do get pressure - but not enough
            we do have team speed
            we have not blitzed
            Our long term outlook is very positive
               BB and our managing of the Salary Cap
               keeps us in the hunt every year

    I think that both Henne and Rivers played extremely well
    The 1st SDC TD was came from 2 spectacular  throw and catches

    If we have a shut down defensive game this week will that mean we are ok?

    BTW - iN the SB/PO's our O underperformed and made mistakes

    We had the SB won until AS let a INT fo thru his hands
          would have changed what everyone talks about-
    - it was worse than bill buckner - but nothing is ever said.

    And the Jets - the worse pass that TB has ever thrown - if we score
    we are back to running them out of the stadiu, and then the fake punt.

    Lastly - we are now in "The Gunslinger Era" and the NFL rules make
    the O more like the NBA - Need good defense - but you cannot stop
    a shooter in his "Zone". So the D has to take the Qb out of the Zone
    and get turnovers - don't like to live that way - but....

     

     

Share