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

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

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

    Packers' stellar LT and his back-up are both injured, with other adjustments to their O-Line, as well. I don't think the Vikes' is dominant--Rodgers shredded them most of the game until it was out of hand and that endzone drop killed them. 

    The mix of vets and new blood on the Vikings' D reminds me of the Pats D. 

    Where's the damm pass rush from our All-pro backers?

    And I gotta mention how people were calling for Wright's head before the season ignoring all the plays he's made in the past. He's mean and has a crazy motor. That's what I see.

     
  2. 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....

    Man I love having underdog on the ignore list. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from K-LITE. Show K-LITE's posts

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

    the playmakers during the SB winning years were named : Bruschi, McGinnist, Law, Harrison, Phifer, Otis "my Man" Smith and most recently Samuel. 

    Hey, don't get me wrong, I really like what this D is doing right now! I know you said there's a long way to go but, there aren't 11 playmakers on this D and the term playmaker isn't a term for a player with "flashy stats". Quite the opposite actually, guys like Bruschi and Harrison didn't have the "flashy" numbers but they made the "Big Plays" when it counted. However, I wouldn't say that this team doesn't have any! This D is still searching for an Identity. I know , I know, they looked very good vs. BALT but they're gonna need to be consistent! Jurys' out, wait and see folks............. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from chrisakawoody. Show chrisakawoody'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]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.
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]

    Excellent post, but I too agree that Law, Seymour and Willie were all star playmakers.  It is not by accident that Willie holds the post season sack record.  He made countless critical plays. Same for Law. He wasn't just a guy making picks.  He could really lay the wood.  Seymour didn't have the gaudy stas becasue he was double-teamed most of the time, allowing other players to make plays.
     
  5. 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]In Response to Re: This defense looks like the best Pats "D" in a few seasons.... : Z - question on your post - how many PD's per game is considered good?  How many per defender, etc?
    Posted by underdogg[/QUOTE]

    If you use the NFL calculations, where PD= PD + INT (unless you are on the player card, where they would separate the two stats like I did above, which is weirdly inconsistent) then  6-7 per game. The Steelers had 110 PD's last season. The Ravens had 125.

    By their calculations, NE had 7 PDs that game. 6 broken passes and one INT.

    Per player, that is something like 1.5 per player per game, which translates to what the best guys in the NFL get per season. About 24 per year given a full 16 games. Of course surrounding talent plays a HUGE role there as well. I would subtract a few for SS's who play close to the line a lot. 16-20 over the course of 16 games seems like a reasonable number there. If I had to pick one from a hat.

    For a corner you want numbers at the higher end, except in special cases.

    Nnamdi Asomugha is the best pure cover corner in the NFL, but gets really short stats because there is absolutely no incentive to throw his way. But very few players are in a situation where there is a scouting concensus that shows people just flat out going away from them.

    And, as this game shows, these stats are always connected to the effectiveness of the pass rush in front of you. Rushed QB's throw silly passes that are more likely to get slapped down or snagged.

    And a host of other factors as well.

    Traditionally defenses that do well in these categories are 'attacking' defenses that rely on blitzers to set up the action.

    My point is that they played it very close, and they played a much more conservative defense last week, which didn't get monster stats, but got crazy 3 & outs.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

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

    Always felt that a PD on 3rd  and long was as good as an INT on a deep ball. Guyton looks like the real deal. When Mayo is healthy this D will be very good. I personally would like to see what Chung is capable of when he's not strictly on special teams, however, I might need some patience.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonnyCorlione. Show SonnyCorlione's posts

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

    Looks like a long thread for a relatively unknown product.  Not sure how you guys think there is enough of a sample to warrant such a lengthy discussion but my two cents;

    This D is essentially the Tampa-2 Belichick style.  I don't know if it's by design or not but it's essentially Belichick's big strong defensive linemen who can stop the run on their own up front with a bunch of super speedy guys in the secondary.  The reason I don't think it's by design is there are no linebackers and no pass rushers who deserve a double team but it does seem to be working.  If nothing else they're slowing down the game and wearing out linemen.
     
  8. 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]Looks like a long thread for a relatively unknown product.  Not sure how you guys think there is enough of a sample to warrant such a lengthy discussion but my two cents; This D is essentially the Tampa-2 Belichick style.  I don't know if it's by design or not but it's essentially Belichick's big strong defensive linemen who can stop the run on their own up front with a bunch of super speedy guys in the secondary.  The reason I don't think it's by design is there are no linebackers and no pass rushers who deserve a double team but it does seem to be working.  If nothing else they're slowing down the game and wearing out linemen.
    Posted by SonnyCorlione[/QUOTE]

    First, the point of the thread was exactly that, discussing the 'sample' we are looking at and speculating. And then, to continue the thread as an evolving argument. These type of threads are routine in the Sox forum.

    Second, yes, there is a little 'cover-2,'  but then last Sunday there was a LOT of Dick LeBeau in there too. If I know one thing, BB won't go with a 'system' like Dungy or Ryan, but instead will just use 4-3 and scheme to the different QBs and matchups.

    In some intances you can get enough pressure for the cover-2 using four down, they go for it. Sometimes you want to gamble and crank it up a notch, and they craft a boatload of zone blitzes. There is even some Ryan (not Rex but his Dad) in that they have give the 42 look at times as well, like a Big Nickel.

    I honestly think last week's game was so blitz oriented that they probably were motivated by the matchups and a desire to see how the new guys did with the blitzing.

    I also noticed that Bodden was removed from the game on one of the scoring drives. Did I mistake this, or did someone else notice it?
     

Share