Re: Wy cant D stop a 3rd and forever?
posted at 11/6/2013 4:36 PM EST
In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
In response to wozzy's comment:
In response to Muzwell's comment:
I didn't think Vince was playing well when he went down. Not by his standards at least. That said there's no denying he's missed as is TK. However, I don't think their DL is a glaring weakness as some folks seem to think. Of the 480 yards Pitt racked up, only 108 were rushing and 55 of those yards were on two runs. I don't have the breakdown, but I'd bet a decent amount of the total yards were gained when the game was decided.
It's just my observation that this defense plays noticeably better when Talib is in the lineup. When Arrington and Cole aren't asked to do things they may not be best suited for. My view is of all the missing pieces, he is the most missed. It's a passing league, most teams are built to pass including all the best AFC teams.
Sorry for the long delay in my reply Muzz, been away from the interweb due to work.
While I won't knock Talib because I think his presence in the backfield gives us a physicality we've sorely lacked for a long time, I will say that the addition at the same time of Dennard also had a similar impact on the backfield and it seemed like it was all Talib's doing. He is certainly our 1-A corner with Dennard entrenched at #2.
That being said, Wilfork and Kelly's absence creates a lot more problems then just rushing yards, the time opposing QB's have had to throw has also been adversely affected, you might say that Jones/Vellano have had a few more sacks but there is no measure of having your own guards and linemen pushed back into your face.
Our defensive tackles now are lighter and quicker but they don't collapse a pocket at all, we have to send multiple rushers now which opens up the liability of getting burned by the pass if they don't reach the QB, which I think is proven by the pass yards we're giving up.
We're worse on third downs now because we can't rush the passer with four guys and we're worse because we are susceptible to the run on third down, the defense is undoubtedly worse without Wilfork and substantially worse off without both Vince and Kelly.
One thing to add to this, Wozzy, is that Wilfork almost always commands a double team. He may not have success collapsing the pocket when he's double teamed, but he's not easily controlled even with a double team so he almost always frees up someone else to rush or cover. One of the big differences I'm seeing with Wilfork out is that the Pats are having to use Spikes more at the LOS. I know Spikes isn't the best coverage linebacker in the league, but with Wilfork in, he was often patrolling the short middle zone. Now, with Wilfork out, he's more likely to be attacking the LOS behind Jones and Vellano. That often forces an end like Nink back into coverage. So there's a big ripple effect across the defense. Of course, the Pats mix things up a lot, so it's not like you'll see Spikes attacking upfield on every play, but the consistent double team on Wilfork is not there anymore and often Vellano and Jones are getting single blockers, which means a third blocker is is free to pick up the remaining Pats' rushers.
On that particular play this would have been irrelevant.
The first issue it was very soft.
It was a dime formation. NE rushed with four, but they also had four deep. It started looking like regular zone coverage, but was disguising a really soft zone coverage. The players bailed fast into a quarters arrangement. With no one manning the middle of the field, NE basically conceded the first 15-20 yards to Pittsburgh.
The next issue is that the softness of the coverage is exacerbated by the fact that it was a screen pass. There were a couple "man" assignments underneath, and Fletcher who was presumtively responsible for Laveon Bell was washed out by the screen.
The next major issue is that when Duron Harmon whiffs on the open field tackle at the 45 you final line is exposed. This is when this type of incredibly soft "safe" 3rd and forever coverage fails. If one of the people in the deep region miss, the player is going to make it very close to the first down marker.
13 or so yards later McCourty slows Bell down enough so that Fletcher can finish his pursuit and stop him inches from a first down. Either way, it's now a makeable first down in PITT territory.
Here is a play where NE actually showed something agressive, and then gave PITT something soft. PITT ran a play designed to counter an aggressive defense, and still rattled off the yardage they needed.
I suppose we could get on Duron Harmon for another dissapointing open field miss, but the play is the bigger issue.
You spend this time thinking what if someone burns us for 30, and you decide to address that by spotting them the first 15.
I just don't get it, and every team does this.
If coaches treated defense like they do offense, daring to gamble, a lot or problematic outcomes like we see in that 1st quarter play would be eradicated.