This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

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

    This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

     . . .

    a dominant 30% on 3rd down.

    Allowing a paltry 14 pts a game.

    Allowing around 260 yards a game, and not once allowing 300 yards a game.

    And the revamped secondary has made complete no shows of T.O., Lee Evans and now Tony Gonzalez.

    There is a long, long way to go, but there is also a *lot* to like about the speed and ability of this young defense. I can't wait until they get their assignements down, and NE can start throwing some exotic fronts out there. 

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

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    well they still dont have the playmakers, but the speed sure looks good. and i think they have a chance to get a lot better during the season, once the young players develop and mayo comes back. pryor looked good today i thought, and guyton is playing really well. interesting that chung and brace cannot get on the field at all, espcially brace, with wilfork leaving and wright missing plays. i wonder whats going on there. if burgess could just find his game...
    but we cant have wilfork miss any time. he has been a beast this season, tossing aside centers and stuffing the middle. atlanta couldnt budge him till he went down...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    I hate the term playmaker. It is essentially meaningless outside of fingering one player with flashy statistics.

    A playmaker is a guy who makes the plays you need him to make.

    This defense has eleven playmakers. The cover well, and don't get gashed by the run at the same time. That is a championship 'D,' if they can keep it up.

    Where were the 'playmaker' on the 2001-2003-2004 defenses? They had no stars, and it irked the media, because they didn't know how to build them up.

    I will take this defense over any number of defenses with accomplished sack artists. Dallas, San Diego? They have 'playmakers' but they don't make the plays they need to win.

    I will take this defense over any number of defenses with the ace 'shutdown' corner, like Oakland or Carolina.

    The only stat I care about is how many points they surrender, and how many long drives they allow as a unit.

    They are excellent there, so give them credit.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    we'll see how it looks in crunch time with two minutes left in the game and if they can hold a lead.

    to their credit, they did look pretty good today
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    In Response to Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....:
    [QUOTE]I hate the term playmaker. It is essentially meaningless outside of fingering one player with flashy statistics. A playmaker is a guy who makes the plays you need him to make. This defense has eleven playmakers. The cover well, and don't get gashed by the run at the same time. That is a championship 'D,' if they can keep it up. Where were the 'playmaker' on the 2001-2003-2004 defenses? They had no stars, and it irked the media, because they didn't know how to build them up. I will take this defense over any number of defenses with accomplished sack artists. Dallas, San Diego? They have 'playmakers' but they don't make the plays they need to win. I will take this defense over any number of defenses with the ace 'shutdown' corner, like Oakland or Carolina. The only stat I care about is how many points they surrender, and how many long drives they allow as a unit. They are excellent there, so give them credit.
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]


    One of the few guys that post here who has a clue...
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from pyegian. Show pyegian's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    It's so refreshing to watch a corner who is right there when the ball arrives, and can tackle.  Bodden, in my opinion, has been tremendous.  

    Springs has been very good also.  Even Wheatley was better than I expected today (although my expectations were pretty low).

    The D-line was very good without Wilfork.  There were excellent against the run, and even though Ryan wasn't sacked, they forced him to rush some throws, and forced him out of the pocket a number of times.  

    With Mayo and Wilfork coming back soon, hopefully, I'm excited to see this defense the rest of the season.  Once the offense turns some field goals into touchdowns, and trust me, it WILL happen, this team will be hard to beat.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from brazilnut. Show brazilnut's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    Patriots are the number three overall defense going into today,so that may even improve.  Only Jets and Broncos are better.  This defense , IMHO, is going to get even better.  then, when the offense can get it together and score more TD's this team will look great.  They will be peaking at playoff time, and even if they don't have home field advantage, it will not matter.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Harleyroadking111. Show Harleyroadking111's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    Where were the 'playmaker' on the 2001-2003-2004 defenses? They had no stars, and it irked the media, because they didn't know how to build them up.

    Z, I usually agree with everything you post you're one of the smartest guys on here, but I can't agree here. Ty Law, Wille Mcginest, Seymore were all stars in those defenses.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from JDonalds75. Show JDonalds75's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    Bodden is very conservative, fast, and has great technique.  That form tackle he laid out today was text book.  He doesn't jump routes like our past corners and for that we may not get the INTs but we gain a lot in terms of reliability.

    Guyton's starting to get some swagger which I like too, he can mouth off to the other team and it doesn't bother me like Ellis used to.

    The INTs should hopefully start to come soon, and once that happens it will be look out for this D across the league.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SmokingJoe. Show SmokingJoe's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    I too am encouraged......

    They are not giving up any long passes on the outside of the field..... Occassionally a few long passes up the middle, but that will improve when Mayo returns....

    Would like to see a better pash rush, however, can't complain about the speed and tackling......


    Bodden and Springs have been MONEY.... As it turns out, perhaps the JETS and BILLS much better than folks give credit.....


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

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    Overreacting to the first three games of the season?  I'm disappointed, Z.  Let's wait and see how they're doing in November.  For now it's just 3 very solid defensive efforts.  I hope they do as well against Flacco and the Ravens.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pyegian. Show pyegian's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    Saying "Bodden and Springs" just has so much of a better ring to it than saying "Hobbs and O'Neal", doesn't it?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    Willie Mac was a good player, but not a 'star.' Those are the same rose colored glasses that had people jumping off the roof when they cut Vrabel to the Chiefs.

    In that rough six year span he averaged about 6.5 sacks a season.

    Ty Law had a lot of cred, and was a star. He averaged about 3.5 picks a season.

    And Seymour averaged about 5 sacks a season.

    I think as a trio of stars, from a production standpoint, Wilfork, Thomas, and Bodden can cover those digits over the course, with subs from Wright, et al, as they are going 'hybrid' again like in 2001.

    Of course, my point is (and stats bear this out) that NE has never had big stat players. They never rely on the sack or INT to win a game. And when  they got it, it was because they built a lead, and forced the offense to challenge their zones, or forced the QB to swallow the ball.

    Case in point. One blown play was when Thomas came up to Ryan and Ryan tossed the ball over his head for a 1st.

    A more vanilla aproach would have had Thomas stay back, cover his zone, and let Warren and Co move the pocket into the sidleine. That would have likely resulted in a throw away by Ryan. Not sexy. No.

    What would have been sexy would have been one less 3rd down conversion, and the Falcons' punting team.

    The formula is simple:

    If you can stop a good runner (Turner) wiith 3-4 guys, you can then drop seven into zone/man, and if they can stop 4-5 guys from making a first down, the opponent won't score many points.

    The last few years NE didn't have the backs to do this. Period. Asante is the classic 'playmaer' who doens't make plays. He can jump a route and rack up INT totals, but he wasn't a lock-down guy, couldn't play man on large WRs, coundn't tackle, couldn't bump and run.

    Three weeks of Bodden, and I take Bodden every single time without thinking about it.

    This defense can defend he pass against top quality (T.O., Evans, Gonzo) players.

    The formula works again.

    And once the new guys get their feet wet, you will see a few more aggressive fronts, in *situational* football moments, that will key that big play from someone  because the defense won't be expecting it.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Harleyroadking111. Show Harleyroadking111's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    The secondary has improved now we need Mayo and Fork healthy. A few more games of experience and BB will start feeding scheme and cover changes, adding different looks....this is a work in progress. 



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

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    In Response to Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....:
    [QUOTE]Overreacting to the first three games of the season?  I'm disappointed, Z.  Let's wait and see how they're doing in November.  For now it's just 3 very solid defensive efforts.  I hope they do as well against Flacco and the Ravens.
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]

    No. I was pretty clear about this:

    "There is a long, long way to go, but there is also a *lot* to like about the speed and ability of this young defense. I can't wait until they get their assignments down, and NE can start throwing some exotic fronts out there." 

    I expected this defense to be better. I mean any time you lose Hobbs, O'neal, and he player Vrabel had become, you are bound to improve.

    As it stands now, it looks like I was right.

    None of those players would start on this team, and I wouldn't be surprised if all three wouldn't have made the cut.

    Looking down the road, the early results, against this offensive competition, coupled with the fact that half of this defense is either new to the team, or a rookie, is very, very promising.

    And the major point of the thread is first celebrate a good start for a crew that was woeful last season, and counter negative threads about this defense, which are of course, based on nothing but impressions of how a defense could look if your were building a fantasy football team or if good old players actually stayed good forever.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tcal2.. Show Tcal2.'s posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    In Response to Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....:
    [QUOTE]Where were the 'playmaker' on the 2001-2003-2004 defenses? They had no stars, and it irked the media, because they didn't know how to build them up. Z, I usually agree with everything you post you're one of the smartest guys on here, but I can't agree here. Ty Law, Wille Mcginest, Seymore were all stars in those defenses.
    Posted by Harleyroadking111[/QUOTE]

    Bryon Cox / Ted Washington
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Harleyroadking111. Show Harleyroadking111's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    Your right Z, good start for a new defense....hope they build off this foundation.



     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Caesar1177. Show Caesar1177's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    Defense has been very 'sneaky good.' After this week, they should be the #1 defense overall - Jests gave up more yardage. Bodden has been tremendous. Their secondary has been better than it has since 2003. If the Pats offense can hit their synch, this team is very good.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    In Response to Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....:
    [QUOTE]The secondary has improved now we need Mayo and Fork healthy. A few more games of experience and BB will start feeding scheme and cover changes, adding different looks....this is a work in progress.

    posted by Harleyroadking111[/QUOTE]


    Exactly. I expect some more wrinkles to start to emerge mid-season, and by the time the playoffs come around they should have some very interesting coverages.

    NE was never a blitzing team, but I always liked the way they would alternate coverages in Zone to bait Qb's into throwing a rash interception.

    That stuff will arrive later.

    Right now, they are, for the vast majority of 12 quarters, playing their zones well, staying tight on man, getting 'enough' pressure from 3 and 4 man fronts, and manning their gaps well.

    No mental errors. They are back to forcing the opponent to beat them by not making mistakes.

    THAT is what characterized the defenses and offenses that BB won championships with.

    The occaisonal big play was good. But it wasn't how they won. And it isn't how BB is ever going to build a defensive team.

    Discipline is the first key word. I see that so far.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from jdawg. Show jdawg's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    I spoke of this d looking like the best we've had in a while, nice that everyone is coming along. About the superstars of years gone by, nope. During the 2001-2 season the story was always about how this team void of talent kept winning. But they had fire. 

    Anyone see the 49ers game? Now that's a team with fire! They lost today, but they might go far this year. I was walking back and forth between the pats and 49ers game the energy difference was palpable. 

    The pats won today. But the 49ers were hungry. I hope the pats get hungry.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Harleyroadking111. Show Harleyroadking111's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    jdawg, that old saying "teams are a reflection of their coach" rings true. Mike Singletary is a fiery hungry coach where BB is more stoic.







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

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    was Wilhite a healthy scratch???

    he was not on the injury report and he never saw the field...

    He must have done something wrong for wheatley to be thrusted into the starting poackage with springs and @ left corner in the nickle??
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    Come on Z, you titled the thread "This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons.... "  Based on three games?  Against the Jets, Falcons and the Bills?  The Bills?  Don't let all the hype fool you ... these teams s uck and always will.  In 2006 and 2007 our D was consistently good all season long.  I'm pretty sure in 2006 we started out giving up 17, 17, 17, 13 and never gave up more than 30 all season ('cept for the Championship).  2007 D was pretty similar.  Even by the end of 2005 our D really came together.  My point is, the D has played well, but it doesn't deserve to be called "the best in a few season."

    And you know I love reading your posts so don't take this as an insult, but I've noticed too many times where you say, "I was right" in posts.  You're a smart guy, you don't have to advertise. 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from artielang. Show artielang's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    Z, i do agree with your premise but the playmaker thing is still an issue. and thats exactly what law, willie mac, and bruschi were. when we absolutely needed pressure on the qb, or a tackle at or behind the line of scrimmage, you could often count on willie mac. remember the 3 runs stuffed at the goal line against the colts? and i'm still convinced that the hits he put on warner in the first super bowl had a lot to do with getting the win. and when there was a clutch play that needed to be made, more often than not tedy was in the middle of things (pre stroke). he was one of the most clutch defenders i've ever seen.

    so yes, i like the looks of this D so far. they play with discipline and dont miss a lot of tackles. but to be a great defense 2 or 3 players are going to have to stand out as "playmakers" who can be counted on to create the turnover, get the qb hit, intimidate the receivers, etc.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....

    In Response to Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons....:
    [QUOTE]Come on Z, you titled the thread " This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons.... "  Based on three games? 

    Yes. I did say that. Including the bit about three games, which isn't in quotes. It is early, but I like what I see. New guys, with good athleticism, showing good discpline. That is winning football. PLenty off disclaimers all the way through the thread. Top to bottom.

    Against the Jets, Falcons and the Bills?  The Bills ?  Don't let all the hype fool you ... these teams s uck and always will. 

    I would say don't dismiss your opponents. The Bills are going to score bunches of points this season. The Jets are three and zero, and have moved the ball well especially on the ground. And the Falcons are going to move the ball well.

    You are looking at two playoff teams there likely.

    Every team/player outside NE doesn't "s uck," that is for sure. And holding those three teams to such paltry performances, despite having an offense that isn't moving the ball as well as it should, is a very good thing this early in the going.


    In 2006 and 2007 our D was consistently good all season long. 

    In 2006 the defense was good, but still had issues.

    2007 the defense was OK. But they had trouble closing out drives and games. Much of their weakness was hidden by an offense that could get the lead and forced the other team to play in one dimension. This defense has played behind, has closed out a game, and is dominating on third down.

    I refer specifically to those two units from the last two seasons. 2007 that had its rather deep flaws hidden for most of the season. And the 2008 defense that was rather exposed when Ne stopped scoring 30 points a game.

    And yes, off of three games I take this unit over those two units and I don't have too many regrets.

    Why is that bit of praise, that in the early going it seems BB has fixed something that worked against Ne the last three seasons, so hard to swallow??? It is like you don't want them to suceed??? Or are being overly-critical for some reason?

    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share