Sums Up The Defense

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

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

    Lets not forget the biggest dagger of all which I hate to bring up because I love BB the coach...

     

    He told his defensive unit most of the game to cover Nicks and Cruz and leave Manningham singled and make him beat us. He stressed it again before the D took the field for the last time. When Eli dropped back and found Manningham streaking down the sideline and fit in a perfectly thrown ball between Moore and a late arriving P.Chung(back to reclaim his spot this year), I could only imagine the sick feeling that BB had in his gut. The Reason Chung was late because he was way over inside the hash looking in at Cruz as his coach instructed but Eli, being the smart QB he is, also always privy to Peytons advice from years of battle with BB spotted the mishap and knew where he wanted to go pre snap. Game Over! Another defensive collapse in the end game.

     

    "A lot of bookies are probably mad at us right now, but we don't give a damn, ... We're the champs!!"

    Ty Law after his team defeated the Rams in SB 36.



    Umm, that was a perfect throw and better catch to keep 2 feet down

    You clearly never played competitive sports.  Sometimes your opponent makes a.nice play and you have to tip your cap.  Iy would be nice if brady threw to his left accurately and did not play the binky game for us to lose super bowls.



    That was a perfectly executed throw and catch.  Right on the money.  If TB makes that kind of accurate throw to WW...game over.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

    Actually, I keep broadening my understanding of the game by analyzing the data in ever more depth.  You and Wozzy long ago settled on your opinions, which is why you sit there so puzzled when Bill Belichick, seven years in, continues to field "high flying passing offenses," despite what you know is right. You're like Rusty who keeps shouting that Brady is a problem . . . and yet has to endure Belichick trotting him out every year.  You and Wozzy keep complaining about the passing game and longing for more running, but Belichick keeps disappointing you. 

     

    I've found that the greatest pleasure in being a Pats fan is trying to understand why Belichick does what he does--and maybe more important, trying to understand why what Belichick does is the right thing to do, even if it seems to fly against the "wisdom" of fans like you and Wozzy.  I think Belichick is hardly ever wrong when it comes to strategy.  I think he's the best coach in the NFL today and maybe in the NFL's history.  I want to understand why he does what he does.  You and Wozzy just want to complain that he doesn't get football as well as you do.  

     

    Maybe someday he'll hear your complaints.  But for now, I'm pretty happy trying to understand exactly why he's chosen to go with high flying passing offenses and why, ultimately, that was the best choice even if it didn't produce a Super Bowl ring. 

     

     

     

     



    The last bastion of a lost argument on this forum, the "you think you know more than Belichick" defense.  This conversation has jumped the shark.  

     

     

    Talent isn't just for players, talented coaches make a head coach look brilliant.  Just because BB hires a coach doesn't mean they automatically know what he knows, they don't automatically fill the void left by a coach 20+ years his senior.  

     

    This is more likely the root cause of early exits from playoffs, later round draft picks, coaches less experienced that don't tell their head coach obvious weaknesses or flaws in the depth chart, coaches less experienced on game day.  

     

    I know coaching to you isn't relevant and you worship at the talent alter but lots of overly talented teams never win.  In fact it seems every year Daniel Snyder throws money at "talent" assembles another dream team only to watch them fail.

     

    The 49ers without Jim Harbaugh had the same talent as they do with him, what changed?

     

    Keep "broadening" one day you'll get to the point you can admit when you're wrong.  The offense hasn't been good in the post season; period.




    The coaches are good enough to win 14 games every season, and a bunch of playoff games too, but then they lose their ability in the last game of the season? Not buying it.  Sorry.  It's the same basic flaw in all your arguments.  You draw conclusions based on one game when dozens of other games show you something else.  You can't ignore the broader dataset. Doing so is the very essence of narrow minded thinking.

     

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

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:


    In response to TripleOG's comment:


    Lets not forget the biggest dagger of all which I hate to bring up because I love BB the coach...


     


    He told his defensive unit most of the game to cover Nicks and Cruz and leave Manningham singled and make him beat us. He stressed it again before the D took the field for the last time. When Eli dropped back and found Manningham streaking down the sideline and fit in a perfectly thrown ball between Moore and a late arriving P.Chung(back to reclaim his spot this year), I could only imagine the sick feeling that BB had in his gut. The Reason Chung was late because he was way over inside the hash looking in at Cruz as his coach instructed but Eli, being the smart QB he is, also always privy to Peytons advice from years of battle with BB spotted the mishap and knew where he wanted to go pre snap. Game Over! Another defensive collapse in the end game.


     


    "A lot of bookies are probably mad at us right now, but we don't give a damn, ... We're the champs!!"


    Ty Law after his team defeated the Rams in SB 36.




    With 3 good receivers, the pats had to pick their poison. I mean do you expect any one of our dBs that year to man up 1 on 1 with any of the giants receivers and shut them down? Sterling Moore and Patrick Chung shouldn't even have been starting for us. Sad to say the only db that played well was Arrington in the slot. Our secondary stunk and has been a thorn in our side for some time, combined of course with absolutely no pass rush in that game. I think bb has addressed that this year, we will see. 


    PI am not defending BB, but with limited talent on the defense in the last SB, and, Gronk out on offense, he had to come up with a fantastic gameplan just to stay in it. We did that and were a whisker away from winning. To me that is the brilliance of bb the coach. My dissatisfaction is with bb the GM. With massive draft capital over the past 7 years, I would have liked for him to sure up the secondary since Asantes departure, and add 2 strong pass rushers. I feel like the D has been drowning in mediocrity for the past 5-7 years...last year was a big step forward until injuries, this year looks even brighter.





    Exactly. I am not saying its easy to defend a guy like Eli BUT we can agree the talent on the Defense side of the ball was probably one of the worst in history. This is what we mean when we say BB the GM makes BB the coaches job harder than it needs to be. You almost have to ask does he handicap himself on purpose to create a challenge because for years we have went into the postseason with a good position, top seed only to miss a great opportunity because the overall TEAM lacked talent. What role did special teams play in either of the last SB's??  When was the last time we had a decent return man that could consistently get us to the 30 atleast??  Bethel Johnson?!?!  Thats Horrible?  How about giving Brady more than one option at WR besides the slow and short Wes Welker?!  How about fielding a safety that has starting experience on his resume?  How about having ONE legit pass rusher to speed up Eli progressions and force an INT??  How about an O line that gives Brady time to throw since you dont/cant/wont run it enough to keep the defense honest?? All this comes down to BB, whom I love but Ive been disappointing with his ideology of thinking its ok to put it ALL on your best player while ignoring other positions of importance for YEARS!  Its taken 10 years for us to feel confident about our D going in and now its gonna be even harder because of the opponents in the NFC now who are the most physical teams Ive seen in some time. B-more beat San Fran ONLY because they were nasty and physical enough to go toe to toe with them. Even if BB gets back to the SB, I don't have much confidence that we can beat Seattle or San Fran, two teams who love to beat up finesse offenses and have power run games to eat the clock. We have seen the ending to that story. Now we have to hope for health, luck and bounce of ball.


    We squandered opportunities to win in 2006, 2007, 2011 IMO as those were winnable end games we lost due to our D not holding in the end.  When you are hands down the best coach of your era and arguably all time, that should not happen that often if your team was built to win. How come BB figured he had to change his offense to try to outscore opponents in a passing league but for years did nothing to combat the other teams passing by addressing a pass rusher??!!   He tried to fix it with Tully Banta Cain, Derrick Burgess, S.Crables of the world!?!?


     


    Not good enough and even this year, I am not too excited about adding 33 y/o Will Smith and the current backups(Buchanan, Bequette) did ZILCH last year. Other teams are getting more out of their D line rotation by good drafting and PAYING for GOOD Free agents!  Not problem players like Fanene and Armstead who are longshots.


    ok, Rant Over

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from IrishMob7. Show IrishMob7's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to TripleOG's comment:


    Not good enough and even this year, I am not too excited about adding 33 y/o Will Smith and the current backups(Buchanan, Bequette) did ZILCH last year. Other teams are getting more out of their D line rotation by good drafting and PAYING for GOOD Free agents!  Not problem players like Fanene and Armstead who are longshots.


     


    ok, Rant Over




    They are getting back both Wilfork and Kelly with the addition of Easley.  Have some faith my man.  The DLine should be much improved this year

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

     

     Triple,  I agree with your basic point about the talent not being enough.  I wouldn't go so far in criticising BB as a GM though.  Winning teams are disadvantaged by the draft system and also by the salary cap that makes it hard to keep all your great talent.  The penalty for spygate also hurt as a key draft pick was lost.  So BB as GM has had to deal with some challenges.  But it's true he gambled on some players that disn't work out and had a really miserable secondary for years after letting Samuel leave.  The receivers have been weak since Moss left.  I think he hoped to build around the two TEs instead.  That was a good strategy, but the Hernandez character risk (which probably allowed BB to get that quality player so low in the draft) materialized, and Gronk has proven injury prone.  So back to square one on receiving targets.  

     

    Overall, I think BB has done a good job with talent.  But that doesn't mean the talent is good enough.  The barriers to keep talent levels high if you win a lot are significant, and not all of BB's riskier moves have paid off. 

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

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:


    The coaches are good enough to win 14 games every season, and a bunch of playoff games too, but then they lose their ability in the last game of the season? Not buying it.  Sorry.  It's the same basic flaw in all your arguments.  You draw conclusions based on one game when dozens of other games show you something else.  You can't ignore the broader dataset. Doing so is the very essence of narrow minded thinking.




    Teams are substantially better in the playoffs, teams are more evenly matched especially at the very end, the stakes are higher, pressure is cranked up; cooler heads prevail, experience matters.


    Moreover beyond just being better at creating mismatches and in-game adjustments, a more wizened, accomplished coach has already set himself up for success.  


    When the head coach asked him back in the off-season what he needed to succeed he said a big powerful running-back, he said some bigger tougher offensive guards, he said I need a fullback who can block like heck and catch the ball out of the flat.  I took Obie 4 years and the hiring of McDaniels to take his position to figure this out?^


    Not only is this experienced coach better at assessing his own unit, but he is also better at projecting and picking talent, as well as drawing that talent from the well so they don't end up underachieving.


    The idea that Tom Brady at 18-21 was just as good as he is now or four years ago is a joke.  


    The idea that a pimply faced Josh McDaniels or Obie are going to be as savvy as a ripe Charlie Weis is also a joke.


    If you thought Brady wasn't going to get better, that the league didn't make the rules easier for offenses and that those two things alone don't account for increased scoring then you're being willfully ignorant.


    You are what your record says you are. Weis has three rings with the Patriots and another as an offensive coach with the Giants prior.  What exactly has Obie done beyond getting bounced from the playoffs?


    Your argument that coaching is nothing in relation to talent fails at it's very inception, without good coaching, great talent will typically flame out, underachieve or simply become a "bust."  The favorite word of the BB can't draft disciples.  


    I think it has been much bigger picture loss of great assistant coaches who suggest to Bill who to take in the draft and free agency, as well as a better group of coaches to teach these young guys once they arrive.


    Or maybe someone can explain to me how the Patriots have become snake bit with injury but ONLY AFTER we lost Mike Woicik the strength and conditioning coach?


    You over value "talent" and under value coaching.  The reason you can't explain why Jim Harbaugh's 49ers are better with the same exact talent is because coaching is the only answer.


     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

     

     Actually, I've been saying all along that without BB's coaching, the team with the talent it has would be lucky to be 8 and 8.  So that blows your claim that I don't value coaching right out of the water.  I think it's the coaching that gets the team as far as it's gone.  The talent issues are just what keeps it from going over the hump.  

     

    You, on the other hand, think BB can't coach effectively or-- as you argue above--can't build a team effectively without Charlie Weis by his side.  Given the Pats remarkable record since Weis left, that's just laughable.

     

     

     

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

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     




    Exactly. I am not saying its easy to defend a guy like Eli BUT we can agree the talent on the Defense side of the ball was probably one of the worst in history. This is what we mean when we say BB the GM makes BB the coaches job harder than it needs to be. You almost have to ask does he handicap himself on purpose to create a challenge because for years we have went into the postseason with a good position, top seed only to miss a great opportunity because the overall TEAM lacked talent. What role did special teams play in either of the last SB's??  When was the last time we had a decent return man that could consistently get us to the 30 atleast??  Bethel Johnson?!?!  Thats Horrible?  How about giving Brady more than one option at WR besides the slow and short Wes Welker?!  How about fielding a safety that has starting experience on his resume?  How about having ONE legit pass rusher to speed up Eli progressions and force an INT??  How about an O line that gives Brady time to throw since you dont/cant/wont run it enough to keep the defense honest?? All this comes down to BB, whom I love but Ive been disappointing with his ideology of thinking its ok to put it ALL on your best player while ignoring other positions of importance for YEARS!  Its taken 10 years for us to feel confident about our D going in and now its gonna be even harder because of the opponents in the NFC now who are the most physical teams Ive seen in some time. B-more beat San Fran ONLY because they were nasty and physical enough to go toe to toe with them. Even if BB gets back to the SB, I don't have much confidence that we can beat Seattle or San Fran, two teams who love to beat up finesse offenses and have power run games to eat the clock. We have seen the ending to that story. Now we have to hope for health, luck and bounce of ball.

     

    We squandered opportunities to win in 2006, 2007, 2011 IMO as those were winnable end games we lost due to our D not holding in the end.  When you are hands down the best coach of your era and arguably all time, that should not happen that often if your team was built to win. How come BB figured he had to change his offense to try to outscore opponents in a passing league but for years did nothing to combat the other teams passing by addressing a pass rusher??!!   He tried to fix it with Tully Banta Cain, Derrick Burgess, S.Crables of the world!?!?

     

     

     

    Not good enough and even this year, I am not too excited about adding 33 y/o Will Smith and the current backups(Buchanan, Bequette) did ZILCH last year. Other teams are getting more out of their D line rotation by good drafting and PAYING for GOOD Free agents!  Not problem players like Fanene and Armstead who are longshots.

     

    ok, Rant Over



    Don't forget, it's BB the coach who is telling BB the GM who he wants BB the GM to draft and trade for.  I guess that puts a little tarnish on BB the coach.  Of course, if BB the GM had the cajones to stand-up to BB the coach then maybe BB the GM would draft more talented players.  But, then BB the coach would probably be all passive aggressive about it and purposefully choose not to work with the players that BB the GM selected against BB the coach's wishes, thereby resulting in turmoil and discord within the team.  If only there was BB the owner, he would show those two clowns who was in charge!

    Anybody else have a headache yet?

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

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     Actually, I've been saying all along that without BB's coaching, the team with the talent it has would be lucky to be 8 and 8.  So that blows your claim that I don't value coaching right out of the water.  I think it's the coaching that gets the team as far as it's gone.  The talent issues are just what keeps it from going over the hump.  

    You, on the other hand, think BB can't coach effectively or-- as you argue above--can't build a team effectively without Charlie Weis by his side.  Given the Pats remarkable record since Weis left, that's just laughable. 



    Not just Weis, the list is long.  

    I mention Weis because IMO he was a big loss, he understood football is won in the trenches with big, mean guys, I believe coaches since have relied solely on Brady when the reality is because of Brady, all you should be concerned about is everyone else.  

    BB is a defense guy, a defensive backs coach, I would almost guess he enjoys it more and so do I.  

    My position for over a decade has been that the Patriots should have hired a talented play caller in our system or kept Weis, paid him more, coaches don't count against the cap.

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

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     




    Exactly. I am not saying its easy to defend a guy like Eli BUT we can agree the talent on the Defense side of the ball was probably one of the worst in history. This is what we mean when we say BB the GM makes BB the coaches job harder than it needs to be. You almost have to ask does he handicap himself on purpose to create a challenge because for years we have went into the postseason with a good position, top seed only to miss a great opportunity because the overall TEAM lacked talent. What role did special teams play in either of the last SB's??  When was the last time we had a decent return man that could consistently get us to the 30 atleast??  Bethel Johnson?!?!  Thats Horrible?  How about giving Brady more than one option at WR besides the slow and short Wes Welker?!  How about fielding a safety that has starting experience on his resume?  How about having ONE legit pass rusher to speed up Eli progressions and force an INT??  How about an O line that gives Brady time to throw since you dont/cant/wont run it enough to keep the defense honest?? All this comes down to BB, whom I love but Ive been disappointing with his ideology of thinking its ok to put it ALL on your best player while ignoring other positions of importance for YEARS!  Its taken 10 years for us to feel confident about our D going in and now its gonna be even harder because of the opponents in the NFC now who are the most physical teams Ive seen in some time. B-more beat San Fran ONLY because they were nasty and physical enough to go toe to toe with them. Even if BB gets back to the SB, I don't have much confidence that we can beat Seattle or San Fran, two teams who love to beat up finesse offenses and have power run games to eat the clock. We have seen the ending to that story. Now we have to hope for health, luck and bounce of ball.

     

    We squandered opportunities to win in 2006, 2007, 2011 IMO as those were winnable end games we lost due to our D not holding in the end.  When you are hands down the best coach of your era and arguably all time, that should not happen that often if your team was built to win. How come BB figured he had to change his offense to try to outscore opponents in a passing league but for years did nothing to combat the other teams passing by addressing a pass rusher??!!   He tried to fix it with Tully Banta Cain, Derrick Burgess, S.Crables of the world!?!?

     

     

     

    Not good enough and even this year, I am not too excited about adding 33 y/o Will Smith and the current backups(Buchanan, Bequette) did ZILCH last year. Other teams are getting more out of their D line rotation by good drafting and PAYING for GOOD Free agents!  Not problem players like Fanene and Armstead who are longshots.

     

    ok, Rant Over



    Don't forget, it's BB the coach who is telling BB the GM who he wants BB the GM to draft and trade for.  I guess that puts a little tarnish on BB the coach.  Of course, if BB the GM had the cajones to stand-up to BB the coach then maybe BB the GM would draft more talented players.  But, then BB the coach would probably be all passive aggressive about it and purposefully choose not to work with the players that BB the GM selected against BB the coach's wishes, thereby resulting in turmoil and discord within the team.  If only there was BB the owner, he would show those two clowns who was in charge!

    Anybody else have a headache yet?



    LMAO!  Yep, pretty much! 

    All in all, we have different ways to look at it but the bottom line is the same. We are all craving that next Ring after 10 years of Almost, not enough, injuries,etc.

    Pro, I do agree thats it harder for BB to get players in the draft but not totally. You have to do research. What weve heard is sometimes BB makes his scouts useless by ignoring important red flags and after last offseason we should know this is true. So while I agree somewhat, Seattle just won a SB with a good deal of late round picks contributing,,,led by 5th rounder Sherman. I was the one who slapped Rusty when he said Seattle had all 1st round pics on D 2 years ago. They have E.Thomas, some great draft picks who play and produce and they SPENT MONEY in free agency.  Even if we throw out the draft, we have free agency, another team building resource which BB was horrible at the last couple years until this April when he landed Revis and some can even question the logic of paying one guy 12 million/year while BB goes to Building #19 for pass rushers.

    All in all, BB HAS squandered some oppty's, wether it be the GM/Coach whoever and Im hoping THIS year or next he puts it all together and we have something to show for it. This guy has every ounce of knowledge, info available yet makes head scratching decisions that make you wonder if Ego is an issue. Most notably, releasing McGowan, Meriweather and Sanders all in one offseason(none of them breaking the bank) to go into a season with Chung, S.Brown, Ihedebo, Ventrone as your core group of safeties! I mean what the h3ll was that about? 

    This is one reason why we lost the last SB. No one in the secondary to make a difference. Didnt help that McCourty was a turnstyle that season in his 2nd year. Do the math. No playmaker in the back end + NO PASS RUSH = loss most times. Having a H.O.F. Qb though almost masked it if not for Brady getting injured late in the game. I just want the team to NOT be so reliant on the QB going forward. I think we have addressed most needs although Im still concerned a bit with our SS and backup DE situation.

    I AM Excited about the season though and I understand you cant be all pro every position but your depth should PLAY when your starters are gassed...  Just gotta hope the presence of a shutdown CB will have this D on track again. Everyone else(on the D line) is either unproven or coming off an injury(Fork, Kelly, Easley, W.Smith) Be nice to have ONE solid guy on the line in his prime with clean bill of health. I guess that is Chandler Jones but his sack total was misleading last year. 4 of those were vs the Jets! And he only got 1 sack in the last 5 games(although that was due to not getting rest)

  •  
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    It is funny listening to the same old worn out arguments and rationalizations regarding not wining a SB from 2007 on. Here are some simple facts:

    1. Every year there are a short number of teams (3-5) built good enough to win the SB if they are healthy and don't choke.

    2. The SB winning team usually is healthier than their strongest playoff opponents or just that much better in spite of a slight injury differential.

    3. The Patriots were built with enough talent to get to the SB in each of those years

    4. The Patriots had enough injuries to make their playoff run an uphill battle

    5. In spite of those issues the Pats had the lead late in 2 SBs

    6. In spite of those issues the Pats were an inch away from making the one play to put both SBs away 

    You all talk as if the team were simply OUT OF IT. But the fact is that we were about as close to winning TWO SBs in that period as you can be! Frustrating yes. Flawed coaching adjustments sure. But STILL they had a VERY GOOD chance of winning LATE in the game, not just in August!

    And last year they get to the AFC championship game without THE most important player on EITHER team outside of the two QBs. Not to mention BOTH DTs, their BEST LB and then losing their best CB during the game. 

    You all talk as if they were just not good enough of a team. That is Horse S. Imperfect. Yes. But a SB contender is not only NOT a stretch but a healthy Pats team is absolutely as good as every playoff team we have seen. I would take our chances if we were as healthy as our opponents.

    The rest of you can whine about the team, the coaches, et al. And 10 years from now you probably still won't deserve the team you have been chearing for.

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to csylvia79's comment:

    Hey Pezz,

               Just wanted to say keep up the great analysis. I might not agree with every point but I always enjoy your take. Also just know some people never admit the D got man handled by the giants. Their offense dictated that game and the D did nothing to stop it.  No matter what anyone says the D job is to get the ball back for the offense. Even in what they called the bend but not break heyday they never let TOP get so skewed.  Not saying that the Offense was great by any means but just looking at the end score does not tell anything about how the D played.  If you tell any couch that their D will not get one three and out or turn over, let the other team control TOP almost 2 to 1 and score on 50%or more of drives how many would say they could win that game?



    But, TOP is not dictated by the D alone.  The O has to carry some of the responsibility.  In fact, I would say most of the responsibility.  I mean, after all, they have the ball.  In the first half of SB 46, the D held the Giants to 7 points, just one score.  The O spotted the Giants 2 points and then set them up with incredible field position.  The D shutout the Giants in the second quarter.

    In the second half, the Patriots jumped out to a 17 to 9 lead.  That was great, but suddenly they couldn't do anything right.  Wes should have caught the ball (granted, it wasn't TB's best pass) and TB should not have thrown such an awful interception.  The D, on the other hand, slowed down the Giants, but couldn't find a way to stop them entirely. 

    When you compare the performances of the O and the D you find that the D actually played to their season average -- 21 points against.  The O, however, was well below what they averaged for the season.  Both units suffered from misplays. 

    Another interesting fact is that the D's performance, in terms of points allowed in the second half, was the best of all the past five SB's the Patriots have been in.  That includes the three that they won.  In terms of the overall points scored against them, it was the team's third best performance.  Do you know which game came in second?  That would be Super Bowl 42.  So, their two losses rank in the top three, in terms of points scored against them.

    That doesn't mean that I don't wish that they could have done better.  I do.  However, I wish, even more, that the offense could have performed just a little bit closer to their seasonal average.




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Time of possession for the O, per possession was 2:42 which is a little better than average.

    Time of possession for the D was DOUBLE THAT.  Doubling the league average.

    Hmmm. one was perfectly acceptable, the other not so much.

    The O couldn't use more time without further diminishing possessions.  If they spent another half minute on O it would have reduced the possessions by 1 1/2 more.

    If the O used one half minute more, which by the way is high, it wouldn't have made the D suck less.

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from OnlyDaTruth. Show OnlyDaTruth's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to IrishMob7's comment:


    They are getting back both Wilfork and Kelly with the addition of Easley.  Have some faith my man.  The DLine should be much improved this year


     




    Wilfork, altho he has shown up in OTAs, is an x-factor. Noone really knows how he is coming along. Easley is a rookie and recovering from two knee injuries, and who knows how much Kelly has in the tank.  Yes, there is reason to be optimistic...but the verdict is not out.


    That being said.....I think this is the year the pass rush HAS to improve in order for our defense to win some games and get off the field in a more timely manner.  In addition the OL HAS to be able to protect the declining Brady DURING PLAYOFF games

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:


    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:


    In response to csylvia79's comment:


    Hey Pezz,


               Just wanted to say keep up the great analysis. I might not agree with every point but I always enjoy your take. Also just know some people never admit the D got man handled by the giants. Their offense dictated that game and the D did nothing to stop it.  No matter what anyone says the D job is to get the ball back for the offense. Even in what they called the bend but not break heyday they never let TOP get so skewed.  Not saying that the Offense was great by any means but just looking at the end score does not tell anything about how the D played.  If you tell any couch that their D will not get one three and out or turn over, let the other team control TOP almost 2 to 1 and score on 50%or more of drives how many would say they could win that game?




    But, TOP is not dictated by the D alone.  The O has to carry some of the responsibility.  In fact, I would say most of the responsibility.  I mean, after all, they have the ball.  In the first half of SB 46, the D held the Giants to 7 points, just one score.  The O spotted the Giants 2 points and then set them up with incredible field position.  The D shutout the Giants in the second quarter.


    In the second half, the Patriots jumped out to a 17 to 9 lead.  That was great, but suddenly they couldn't do anything right.  Wes should have caught the ball (granted, it wasn't TB's best pass) and TB should not have thrown such an awful interception.  The D, on the other hand, slowed down the Giants, but couldn't find a way to stop them entirely. 


    When you compare the performances of the O and the D you find that the D actually played to their season average -- 21 points against.  The O, however, was well below what they averaged for the season.  Both units suffered from misplays. 


    Another interesting fact is that the D's performance, in terms of points allowed in the second half, was the best of all the past five SB's the Patriots have been in.  That includes the three that they won.  In terms of the overall points scored against them, it was the team's third best performance.  Do you know which game came in second?  That would be Super Bowl 42.  So, their two losses rank in the top three, in terms of points scored against them.


    That doesn't mean that I don't wish that they could have done better.  I do.  However, I wish, even more, that the offense could have performed just a little bit closer to their seasonal average.





    [object HTMLDivElement]


    Time of possession for the O, per possession was 2:42 which is a little better than average.


    Time of possession for the D was DOUBLE THAT.  Doubling the league average.


    Hmmm. one was perfectly acceptable, the other not so much.


    The O couldn't use more time without further diminishing possessions.  If they spent another half minute on O it would have reduced the possessions by 1 1/2 more.


    If the O used one half minute more, which by the way is high, it wouldn't have made the D suck less.


     





    Yeah, overall TOP is the combined result of both the offense and the defense of both teams.  Basically, you can win TOP in one of four ways (or in some combination of those ways):



    • Your offense plays great and mounts many extended drives

    • Your offense plays just average, but your opponent's defense tanks

    • Your defense has a great game keeping the other team's drives short

    • Your defense plays just average, but the other team's offense is awful


    Because of this, TOP by itself isn't a very meaningful stat (and in fact has very poor correlation with wins). Average TOP per drive (for offense and defense separately) is a better stat, but even it doesn't quite clarify whether the TOP was long or short because of your unit's play or the opposing unit's play. 


     


    Wozzy credits the Giants' long drives to what he calls their "ball-control" offense and the fact that they ran more than the Patriots did.  I attribute it to poor pass coverage by our secondary and the Giants' efficient passing game (75% completion percentage on a whopping 40 passes) abetted by the poor Patriots pass defense. You can argue either way, but anytime a team passes 40 times, it's hard to say they were a run-first offense. 


     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from OnlyDaTruth. Show OnlyDaTruth's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    Pass defense was clearly a concern for BB. Otherwise, why did he acquire players like Talib, Revis, and Browner. Notice that the pass defense had a huge improvement when Talib played.....back to the bottom when he didn't. I don't think anyone can argue how important Talib was to the secondary. Certainly, it's not the only reason why the Patriots lost in recent playoff games....but a significant one.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to OnlyDaTruth's comment:

    Pass defense was clearly a concern for BB. Otherwise, why did he acquire players like Talib, Revis, and Browner. Notice that the pass defense had a huge improvement when Talib played.....back to the bottom when he didn't. I don't think anyone can argue how important Talib was to the secondary. Certainly, it's not the only reason why the Patriots lost in recent playoff games....but a significant one.

    Exactly.  The fluctuations in performance with Talib in and out (and with Gronk in and out on offense) are clear proof that talent is really important.  This doesn't mean coaching isn't very important (maybe even more important on the Patriots), but to win you need talent as well as great coaching.  Miss either one and you're in trouble. 


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

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to OnlyDaTruth's comment:

    Pass defense was clearly a concern for BB. Otherwise, why did he acquire players like Talib, Revis, and Browner. Notice that the pass defense had a huge improvement when Talib played.....back to the bottom when he didn't. I don't think anyone can argue how important Talib was to the secondary. Certainly, it's not the only reason why the Patriots lost in recent playoff games....but a significant one.



    This is it in a nut shell...Belichick would never of traded for a thug like Talib unless he HAD to. Those defenses we had needed a guy that could play because guys like Chung, Arrington and any one of the many undrafted free agents they rolled out there at corner, couldn't.

     
  • This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    This is it in a nut shell...Belichick would never of traded for a thug like Talib unless he HAD to. Those defenses we had needed a guy that could play because guys like Chung, Arrington and any one of the many undrafted free agents they rolled out there at corner, couldn't.



    BB acquired Talib because it was a value move, we got a Pro Bowl talent at rental prices.  It doesn't excuse the offense for stinking up the joint.  

    Again the defense was average, nobody is denying that, there are just a few here who are trying to tell us that less than half of the regular season scoring average, two touchdowns and two turnovers is great offensive output.  It's BS.  Bad is bad.

    NOBODY here is saying the defense was great, just that the defense wasn't solely to blame like this thread suggests.  The whole team had holes.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    This is it in a nut shell...Belichick would never of traded for a thug like Talib unless he HAD to. Those defenses we had needed a guy that could play because guys like Chung, Arrington and any one of the many undrafted free agents they rolled out there at corner, couldn't.



    BB acquired Talib because it was a value move, we got a Pro Bowl talent at rental prices.  It doesn't excuse the offense for stinking up the joint.  

    Again the defense was average, nobody is denying that, there are just a few here who are trying to tell us that less than half of the regular season scoring average, two touchdowns and two turnovers is great offensive output.  It's BS.  Bad is bad.

    NOBODY here is saying the defense was great, just that the defense wasn't solely to blame like this thread suggests.  The whole team had holes.




    This I agree with.  I've been saying it since the moment they lost Gronk in the Baltimore playoff game: the 2011 team had talent issues.  In fact, during the Baltimore game, when Gronk got hurt, I turned to my cousin who was at the game with me and said: "This is bad; without Gronk this offense really can't do anything."  And that defense was not one that was going to carry a team to a championship. After watching them get absolutely torched in November by Dan Orlovsky, I had no faith they could stop anyone. 

     

     

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to wozzy's comment:


    In response to mthurl's comment:


    This is it in a nut shell...Belichick would never of traded for a thug like Talib unless he HAD to. Those defenses we had needed a guy that could play because guys like Chung, Arrington and any one of the many undrafted free agents they rolled out there at corner, couldn't.




    BB acquired Talib because it was a value move, we got a Pro Bowl talent at rental prices.  It doesn't excuse the offense for stinking up the joint.  


    Again the defense was average, nobody is denying that, there are just a few here who are trying to tell us that less than half of the regular season scoring average, two touchdowns and two turnovers is great offensive output.  It's BS.  Bad is bad.


    NOBODY here is saying the defense was great, just that the defense wasn't solely to blame like this thread suggests.  The whole team had holes.





    [object HTMLDivElement]


     


    SB 36


    O scored 1.66 points per possession


    D gave up 1.416 points per possession


    SB 42


    O scored 2.125 points per possession


    D gave up 2.375 points per possession.


    The O increased their points per possession by 1/2 point  + (.47)


    The D gave up nearly 1 point MORE per possession (.96)


    Because possessions matter.........................................


    This is not MLB


     


    Any Questions?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from cyncalpatfan. Show cyncalpatfan's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

     

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    This is it in a nut shell...Belichick would never of traded for a thug like Talib unless he HAD to. Those defenses we had needed a guy that could play because guys like Chung, Arrington and any one of the many undrafted free agents they rolled out there at corner, couldn't.

     

     



    BB acquired Talib because it was a value move, we got a Pro Bowl talent at rental prices.  It doesn't excuse the offense for stinking up the joint.  

     

     

    Again the defense was average, nobody is denying that, there are just a few here who are trying to tell us that less than half of the regular season scoring average, two touchdowns and two turnovers is great offensive output.  It's BS.  Bad is bad.

     

    NOBODY here is saying the defense was great, just that the defense wasn't solely to blame like this thread suggests.  The whole team had holes.

     




    [object HTMLDivElement]

     

     

     

    SB 36

     

    O scored 1.66 points per possession

     

    D gave up 1.416 points per possession

     

    SB 42

     

    O scored 2.125 points per possession

     

    D gave up 2.375 points per possession.

     

    The O increased their points per possession by 1/2 point  + (.47)

     

    The D gave up nearly 1 point MORE per possession (.96)

     

    Because possessions matter.........................................

     

    This is not MLB

     

     

     

    Any Questions?



    I'm not sure what the point of your stats is, regarding SB 42, beyond pointing out the obvious.  The D gave up more points than the O scored.  No one is arguing that.  The better question would be...which unit did a better job at performing to its seasonal average?  The defense.  The offense fell flat.  Now, would it have been nice if the D could have put together an above average game?  I'm all for it.  However, I think it would have been even nicer if the offense could have come within even two touchdowns of their season average that year.  22 points would have gotten it done.

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

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

    The coaches are good enough to win 14 games every season, and a bunch of playoff games too, but then they lose their ability in the last game of the season? Not buying it.  Sorry.  It's the same basic flaw in all your arguments.  You draw conclusions based on one game when dozens of other games show you something else.  You can't ignore the broader dataset. Doing so is the very essence of narrow minded thinking.

     

     



    Teams are substantially better in the playoffs, teams are more evenly matched especially at the very end, the stakes are higher, pressure is cranked up; cooler heads prevail, experience matters.

     

     

    Moreover beyond just being better at creating mismatches and in-game adjustments, a more wizened, accomplished coach has already set himself up for success.  

     

    When the head coach asked him back in the off-season what he needed to succeed he said a big powerful running-back, he said some bigger tougher offensive guards, he said I need a fullback who can block like heck and catch the ball out of the flat.  I took Obie 4 years and the hiring of McDaniels to take his position to figure this out?^

     

    Not only is this experienced coach better at assessing his own unit, but he is also better at projecting and picking talent, as well as drawing that talent from the well so they don't end up underachieving.

     

    The idea that Tom Brady at 18-21 was just as good as he is now or four years ago is a joke.  

     

    The idea that a pimply faced Josh McDaniels or Obie are going to be as savvy as a ripe Charlie Weis is also a joke.

     

    If you thought Brady wasn't going to get better, that the league didn't make the rules easier for offenses and that those two things alone don't account for increased scoring then you're being willfully ignorant.

     

    You are what your record says you are. Weis has three rings with the Patriots and another as an offensive coach with the Giants prior.  What exactly has Obie done beyond getting bounced from the playoffs?

     

    Your argument that coaching is nothing in relation to talent fails at it's very inception, without good coaching, great talent will typically flame out, underachieve or simply become a "bust."  The favorite word of the BB can't draft disciples.  

     

    I think it has been much bigger picture loss of great assistant coaches who suggest to Bill who to take in the draft and free agency, as well as a better group of coaches to teach these young guys once they arrive.

     

    Or maybe someone can explain to me how the Patriots have become snake bit with injury but ONLY AFTER we lost Mike Woicik the strength and conditioning coach?

     

    You over value "talent" and under value coaching.  The reason you can't explain why Jim Harbaugh's 49ers are better with the same exact talent is because coaching is the only answer.

     

     




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    I will revert back to this post by wozzy in all future discussion of this topic.

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

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    H

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    It is funny listening to the same old worn out arguments and rationalizations regarding not wining a SB from 2007 on. Here are some simple facts:

    1. Every year there are a short number of teams (3-5) built good enough to win the SB if they are healthy and don't choke.

    2. The SB winning team usually is healthier than their strongest playoff opponents or just that much better in spite of a slight injury differential.

    3. The Patriots were built with enough talent to get to the SB in each of those years

    4. The Patriots had enough injuries to make their playoff run an uphill battle

    5. In spite of those issues the Pats had the lead late in 2 SBs

    6. In spite of those issues the Pats were an inch away from making the one play to put both SBs away 

    You all talk as if the team were simply OUT OF IT. But the fact is that we were about as close to winning TWO SBs in that period as you can be! Frustrating yes. Flawed coaching adjustments sure. But STILL they had a VERY GOOD chance of winning LATE in the game, not just in August!

    And last year they get to the AFC championship game without THE most important player on EITHER team outside of the two QBs. Not to mention BOTH DTs, their BEST LB and then losing their best CB during the game. 

    You all talk as if they were just not good enough of a team. That is Horse S. Imperfect. Yes. But a SB contender is not only NOT a stretch but a healthy Pats team is absolutely as good as every playoff team we have seen. I would take our chances if we were as healthy as our opponents.

    The rest of you can whine about the team, the coaches, et al. And 10 years from now you probably still won't deserve the team you have been chearing for.

     




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Another great post on this thread. I just hope portfolio realizes when prolate says champ or wozzy thinks BB is an idiot and can't coach, that prolate is the only one who's ever actually said that. We all know BB is a brilliant coach and the best in history or close to it,, but to deny the impact turning over an entire coaching staff can have on any man is foolish imo.

    This team has been GREAT for the majority of 13 years. We split hairs on why we didn't win 3 more titles in that time. We were 1 play short in 3 different games in 06, 07 and 2011 from hoisting SIX LOMBARDI'S in 13 seasons....but we have no talent and our players suck? Sure.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Sums Up The Defense

    In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

     

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    This is it in a nut shell...Belichick would never of traded for a thug like Talib unless he HAD to. Those defenses we had needed a guy that could play because guys like Chung, Arrington and any one of the many undrafted free agents they rolled out there at corner, couldn't.

     

     



    BB acquired Talib because it was a value move, we got a Pro Bowl talent at rental prices.  It doesn't excuse the offense for stinking up the joint.  

     

     

    Again the defense was average, nobody is denying that, there are just a few here who are trying to tell us that less than half of the regular season scoring average, two touchdowns and two turnovers is great offensive output.  It's BS.  Bad is bad.

     

    NOBODY here is saying the defense was great, just that the defense wasn't solely to blame like this thread suggests.  The whole team had holes.

     




    [object HTMLDivElement]

     

     

     

    SB 36

     

    O scored 1.66 points per possession

     

    D gave up 1.416 points per possession

     

    SB 42

     

    O scored 2.125 points per possession

     

    D gave up 2.375 points per possession.

     

    The O increased their points per possession by 1/2 point  + (.47)

     

    The D gave up nearly 1 point MORE per possession (.96)

     

    Because possessions matter.........................................

     

    This is not MLB

     

     

     

    Any Questions?



    I'm not sure what the point of your stats is, regarding SB 42, beyond pointing out the obvious.  The D gave up more points than the O scored.  No one is arguing that.  The better question would be...which unit did a better job at performing to its seasonal average?  The defense.  The offense fell flat.  Now, would it have been nice if the D could have put together an above average game?  I'm all for it.  However, I think it would have been even nicer if the offense could have come within even two touchdowns of their season average that year.  22 points would have gotten it done.




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    the point is that the O scored at a higher rate per possession and the D gave up points at a much higher rate per possession.     The point is if they had played a full 12 possessions,  the O would have scored close to their average and the  D would have given up far higher than their average.   I thought that was obvious   

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share