|
Post by pezz4pats on Oct 23, 2017 10:18:08 GMT -5
This was easily the best game the D has played all year. For the first time this year it felt like the Pats D was dictating the game and not the other way around. People can say that the D has been building up to this but this year the D has yet to really dictate what the other O did and no game up to know showed a hint of this. This game was like a light switch flip in how the D performed and it's not even close, part of that might be game planning. They played a completely different game than even last week. The first 6 weeks you could see signs of carrying game plans from one to the other but this one they felt aggressive, they played a lot of man early, and they weren't playing soft at the line. It almost felt like a completely different D and except in the end (with the 2 S deep coverage) it felt like they scrapped basically everything in the first 6 weeks and started from step one Disagree. The problems early were communication breakdowns. Those are getting ironed out as the players are getting more comfortable. They haven’t scrapped anything. That’s a cop-out from people who ripped the D earlier this year and said we didn’t have enough talent. Communication problems up until this week.. there was no obvious Improvement prior. They've been ripped because they sucked. No other way to put that. You cannot erase six putrid games because of one good one. Now they need to string a few of those together.
|
|
|
Post by portfolio1 on Oct 23, 2017 10:31:58 GMT -5
I agree. But there was one play where we saw the danger of having a problem inside. It was a run and Brown was out. Branch needed to make the play - at least to force the runner elsewhere. What happened was that he had to stretch to try to make the play and failed at an arm tackle. That was an inside run. If the DTs are breaking down inside they are likely not giving enough support as play moves outside and so weak inside support for the edge players. This puts the edge players more on an island and there the next set of problems start.... Its a little like having a problem with your foot and so you start to favor the other foot or try to otherwise compensate. Try running a race, sprint or distance... and you develop other problems stemming form the original. My point is not to lessen the import of other positions but only to shed some light on the criticality of the play of the DTs on the performance of the rest of the D. And on this team one lone big man will not cut it over the stretch of a season or a big game. I remeber the play. Branch tried to shed his block and seemed to attempt the tackle up a little to high, was a little late and couldn't wrap. Tough play but could have been made but I'll say this at least the effort was there. We wont have a problem with effort. If and when it will be whether we have the right people on the field. And health will dictate that. That is why getting Valentine back is important in my estimation. He himself adds value and he also adds time to refresh to the other two.
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Oct 23, 2017 11:04:56 GMT -5
14, 17, 7
you can argue the QB's stink you can argue the teams are not good teams
bottom line is that this is the NFL and there is no free lunch. every game you have to bring it as on any given Sunday anyone can beat anyone. That's 3 games in a row that the D has played very well. I think we start to see Gilmore, McClellin incorporated shortly, and Valentine and Rowe shortly after that.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Oct 23, 2017 11:13:07 GMT -5
This game may have been the coming out party for what could be a dominating D. Was there a better offense to showcase a dominating performance than against the Falcons? True, this is only one game, but, this is the third game in a row in which we saw improved defensive performance. I get what you are saying, but I would have rather had that stout defensive performance against an AFC team, preferably KC or Pittsburgh. It was a great defensive performance, and I have lots of questions around why now. Why with a depleted secondary? Why is Butler playing better now, over the past 2 games than with GIlmore/Rowe in the lineup? Why haven't we seen Harris before now? Harris looked pretty darn good last night. Not to take anything away from the Pats D...I hope this trend continues. But the Atlanta we saw last night was not the same dominant, high scoring offense of last year. Yes, they have the same personnel, but their OC has really changed the way that team plays. Would anyone guess that the Falcons offense would be scoreless for over 90 minutes of game time? No way. Good points and good questions.
|
|
|
Post by jri37 on Oct 23, 2017 12:56:37 GMT -5
14, 17, 7 you can argue the QB's stink you can argue the teams are not good teams bottom line is that this is the NFL and there is no free lunch. every game you have to bring it as on any given Sunday anyone can beat anyone. That's 3 games in a row that the D has played very well. I think we start to see Gilmore, McClellin incorporated shortly, and Valentine and Rowe shortly after that. Exactly!
|
|
jedediah10
On the Game Day Roster
Posts: 521
Likes: 252
|
Post by jedediah10 on Oct 23, 2017 13:42:42 GMT -5
14, 17, 7 We are 5-2. Every year we go through these early season growing pains. This year seemed a bit more consistently mediocre (and sometimes worse) than other years, where they started slow and might have laid a stinker here and there. I know I saw shades of those early 2010's where we had to listen to how the pats D was the worst (based on yards allowed) in the league. God, I hate yards allowed as the be all and end all of a defense. The steady improvement I have seen over the last three weeks has been pretty impressive. I would say this is backed up by those three numbers 14, 17, 7 - at the end of the day, the only meaningful measure, in my book, of a defense is wins. And allowing a team to score less than you adds up to wins.
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Oct 23, 2017 13:51:36 GMT -5
Disagree. The problems early were communication breakdowns. Those are getting ironed out as the players are getting more comfortable. They haven’t scrapped anything. That’s a cop-out from people who ripped the D earlier this year and said we didn’t have enough talent. The first 4 games they played almost all zone, the last 2 they played mostly man. They rushed on average 3-4 the first 6 weeks, this weeks they averaged 5 rush (before the 4th and they went into shell). They blitzed more than any other game. The game plan last night was drastically different than the previous 6 games, yes communication was an issue and it is being ironed out but they have switched gears on D scheme and last night they were much more aggressive and played more man up coverage than the 6 weeks previously. Call it a cop out I call it knowing the game I disagree. I was at the game, and was able to see most if not all of the field regardless of the mist/fog. for the most part the Pats played a cover 2 with Butler and Bademosi each taking a side. Sure, we did see some man, but for the most part it was cover 2. I think we have seen mostly cover 2 all season
|
|
|
Post by jri37 on Oct 23, 2017 13:56:56 GMT -5
The first 4 games they played almost all zone, the last 2 they played mostly man. They rushed on average 3-4 the first 6 weeks, this weeks they averaged 5 rush (before the 4th and they went into shell). They blitzed more than any other game. The game plan last night was drastically different than the previous 6 games, yes communication was an issue and it is being ironed out but they have switched gears on D scheme and last night they were much more aggressive and played more man up coverage than the 6 weeks previously. Call it a cop out I call it knowing the game I disagree. I was at the game, and was able to see most if not all of the field regardless of the mist/fog. for the most part the Pats played a cover 2 with Butler and Bademosi each taking a side. Sure, we did see some man, but for the most part it was cover 2. I think we have seen mostly cover 2 all seasonNot in the TB game. They pretty much played press man coverage with a single high safety shaded to the Mike Evans side of the field until the 4th Qtr.
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Oct 23, 2017 14:04:00 GMT -5
I disagree. I was at the game, and was able to see most if not all of the field regardless of the mist/fog. for the most part the Pats played a cover 2 with Butler and Bademosi each taking a side. Sure, we did see some man, but for the most part it was cover 2. I think we have seen mostly cover 2 all seasonNot in the TB game. They pretty much played press man coverage with a single high safety shaded to the Mike Evans side of the field until the 4th Qtr. harder to see on TV than at the game, and Tampa was an away game. I thought they played mostly 3 man rush 8 in the throwing lanes with 2 deep against Tampa. Now when Winston was on the move, which he was often, that zone shifts to man to man mid play. But for the most part, I was of the opinion that they have had 2 deep most every game
|
|
|
Post by thejuice on Oct 23, 2017 14:10:12 GMT -5
are we forgetting the missed plays that were really not due to anything the pats did? Yes the defense was outstanding in context. THy looked much faster and more organized. I suggest you read bill barnwells piece today to put the pats last 3 or 4 defensive games in perspective. that being said I'm not sure it matters a whole hell of a lot because even if they aren't as good as they looked yesterday ive been saying all along...even a functional, solid defense and this team is a contender. Exactly
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Oct 23, 2017 14:11:40 GMT -5
14, 17, 7 We are 5-2. Every year we go through these early season growing pains. This year seemed a bit more consistently mediocre (and sometimes worse) than other years, where they started slow and might have laid a stinker here and there. I know I saw shades of those early 2010's where we had to listen to how the pats D was the worst (based on yards allowed) in the league. God, I hate yards allowed as the be all and end all of a defense. The steady improvement I have seen over the last three weeks has been pretty impressive. I would say this is backed up by those three numbers 14, 17, 7 - at the end of the day, the only meaningful measure, in my book, of a defense is wins. And allowing a team to score less than you adds up to wins. jededian, please put your comments below (outside) of the quote box. It will make it easier for us to discern who said what if there is a string of replies and replies to replies, etc. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by coolade on Oct 23, 2017 14:20:37 GMT -5
are we forgetting the missed plays that were really not due to anything the pats did? Yes the defense was outstanding in context. THy looked much faster and more organized. I suggest you read bill barnwells piece today to put the pats last 3 or 4 defensive games in perspective. that being said I'm not sure it matters a whole hell of a lot because even if they aren't as good as they looked yesterday ive been saying all along...even a functional, solid defense and this team is a contender. Really... All the idiots can say what they want about what "good" means... You give up yards... It happens. You can have great plays made against you .. SO WHAT. ? The thing you need is compete level and good players. This team never "sucked " and I knew it and posted it. Team is coached and schemed a certain way that can look bad but only idiots call it bad. Now they look stupid . Fine with me.
|
|
|
Post by coolade on Oct 23, 2017 14:24:04 GMT -5
I get what you are saying, but I would have rather had that stout defensive performance against an AFC team, preferably KC or Pittsburgh. It was a great defensive performance, and I have lots of questions around why now. Why with a depleted secondary? Why is Butler playing better now, over the past 2 games than with GIlmore/Rowe in the lineup? Why haven't we seen Harris before now? Harris looked pretty darn good last night. Not to take anything away from the Pats D...I hope this trend continues. But the Atlanta we saw last night was not the same dominant, high scoring offense of last year. Yes, they have the same personnel, but their OC has really changed the way that team plays. Would anyone guess that the Falcons offense would be scoreless for over 90 minutes of game time? No way. Good points and good questions. Look at the posters blaming the falcons offense . Can't make this crap up. Priceless...
|
|
|
Post by patseng on Oct 23, 2017 14:31:44 GMT -5
The first 4 games they played almost all zone, the last 2 they played mostly man. They rushed on average 3-4 the first 6 weeks, this weeks they averaged 5 rush (before the 4th and they went into shell). They blitzed more than any other game. The game plan last night was drastically different than the previous 6 games, yes communication was an issue and it is being ironed out but they have switched gears on D scheme and last night they were much more aggressive and played more man up coverage than the 6 weeks previously. Call it a cop out I call it knowing the game I disagree. I was at the game, and was able to see most if not all of the field regardless of the mist/fog. for the most part the Pats played a cover 2 with Butler and Bademosi each taking a side. Sure, we did see some man, but for the most part it was cover 2. I think we have seen mostly cover 2 all season I really question if you watch these games. From the OL was good in game 2, to the secondary did it's job against the Jets are you watching the game out of a strip club? They had Jones and Butler playing man up. Harmon/Chung doubled up whoever have Julio. Bad played mainly underneath coverage in a man but had help over top from McCourty if Bad's man went further than 10yrds. It's very similar to the style they played last year with Ryan which was not a zone cover 2. It might look like a cover 2 from the stands because they look very similar but roles are completely different. The key give away is does the CB drop coverage on a cross field pattern or do they stick with their man? Almost all game on cross field routes the CBs stuck with their WR and Butler stayed downfield the entire way. Harmon/Chung only picked up Julio when he went deeper than 7yrds doubling up coverage and McCourty only picked up Bad's guy when he went 10yrds at that point Bad didn't drop back into a zone but stayed underneath coverage on his game trailing. This only changing going into the 4th where you saw a drop into zone in the 7-15yrd range with cover 2 deep to limit any plays over 15yrds per chunk
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Oct 23, 2017 14:31:46 GMT -5
are we forgetting the missed plays that were really not due to anything the pats did? Yes the defense was outstanding in context. THy looked much faster and more organized. I suggest you read bill barnwells piece today to put the pats last 3 or 4 defensive games in perspective. that being said I'm not sure it matters a whole hell of a lot because even if they aren't as good as they looked yesterday ive been saying all along...even a functional, solid defense and this team is a contender. Really... All the idiots can say what they want about what "good" means... You give up yards... It happens. You can have great plays made against you .. SO WHAT. ? The thing you need is compete level and good players. This team never "sucked " and I knew it and posted it. Team is coached and schemed a certain way that can look bad but only idiots call it bad. Now they look stupid . Fine with me. the Julio TD against Butler that he simply man handled the ball away from Butler is a prime example. Butler could not have played that pass any better than he did. sometimes, the other team makes plays too
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Oct 23, 2017 14:35:29 GMT -5
I disagree. I was at the game, and was able to see most if not all of the field regardless of the mist/fog. for the most part the Pats played a cover 2 with Butler and Bademosi each taking a side. Sure, we did see some man, but for the most part it was cover 2. I think we have seen mostly cover 2 all season I really question if you watch these games. From the OL was good in game 2, to the secondary did it's job against the Jets are you watching the game out of a strip club? They had Jones and Butler playing man up. Harmon/Chung doubled up whoever have Julio. Bad played mainly underneath coverage in a man but had help over top from McCourty if Bad's man went further than 10yrds. It's very similar to the style they played last year with Ryan which was not a zone cover 2. It might look like a cover 2 from the stands because they look very similar but roles are completely different. The key give away is does the CB drop coverage on a cross field pattern or do they stick with their man? Almost all game on cross field routes the CBs stuck with their WR and Butler stayed downfield the entire way. Harmon/Chung only picked up Julio when he went deeper than 7yrds doubling up coverage and McCourty only picked up Bad's guy when he went 10yrds at that point Bad didn't drop back into a zone but stayed underneath coverage on his game trailing. This only changing going into the 4th where you saw a drop into zone in the 7-15yrd range with cover 2 deep to limit any plays over 15yrds per chunk I did not say the played cover 2 exclusively. I said rthey played it the majority. When Ryan started to scramble/run, the D dictates that the defenders immediately switch to playing straight up man, so some plays they start out cover 2, and switch mid play to man you may have seen Jones playing man. but Jones played 19 of 57 defensive snaps...like I said, for the most part, they were in cover 2
|
|
|
Post by jri37 on Oct 23, 2017 14:37:41 GMT -5
Not in the TB game. They pretty much played press man coverage with a single high safety shaded to the Mike Evans side of the field until the 4th Qtr. harder to see on TV than at the game, and Tampa was an away game. I thought they played mostly 3 man rush 8 in the throwing lanes with 2 deep against Tampa. Now when Winston was on the move, which he was often, that zone shifts to man to man mid play. But for the most part, I was of the opinion that they have had 2 deep most every game I was at the Tampa game. For the most part of 3 Qtrs the Pats played man and changed up a little based on the situation. When Evans went in motion Gilmore went with him. When Tampa used the bunch formation Gilmore was with Evans regardless of whether Evans lined up inside or outside. Butler for the most part shadowed Jackson and Chung and McCourty were either on Humphries or Brate. Harmon was playing single high most of that game. There were instances when they changed up but those were the exceptions until the 4th Qtr when they were trying to protect the lead went back to cover 2 or something similar.
|
|
|
Post by coolade on Oct 23, 2017 14:43:00 GMT -5
Really... All the idiots can say what they want about what "good" means... You give up yards... It happens. You can have great plays made against you .. SO WHAT. ? The thing you need is compete level and good players. This team never "sucked " and I knew it and posted it. Team is coached and schemed a certain way that can look bad but only idiots call it bad. Now they look stupid . Fine with me. the Julio TD against Butler that he simply man handled the ball away from Butler is a prime example. Butler could not have played that pass any better than he did. sometimes, the other team makes plays too Right... You see enough games how do you miss that essential point? On the other side was Brady hitting gronk on the sideline tiptoe... That was 3rd and long and the biggest play of the game IMO. Offense had been running well then mcD goes pass happy on 1st and 2nd down fail. So Brady sidesteps a guy and throws perfect laser , great catch and it was like... You could almost hear Atlanta sideline going shit... We gotta compete with that greatness making that play. ? It was huge and gave the offense its mojo .
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Oct 23, 2017 14:45:59 GMT -5
Good points and good questions. Look at the posters blaming the falcons offense . Can't make this crap up. Priceless... Good grief dude, the Homerism runs deep in you. Please let me know what wasn't a valid point or question?
|
|
|
Post by jri37 on Oct 23, 2017 14:51:50 GMT -5
Look at the posters blaming the falcons offense . Can't make this crap up. Priceless... Good grief dude, the Homerism runs deep in you. Please let me know what wasn't a valid point or question? Is that a Yodaism. LOL
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Oct 23, 2017 16:10:53 GMT -5
harder to see on TV than at the game, and Tampa was an away game. I thought they played mostly 3 man rush 8 in the throwing lanes with 2 deep against Tampa. Now when Winston was on the move, which he was often, that zone shifts to man to man mid play. But for the most part, I was of the opinion that they have had 2 deep most every game I was at the Tampa game. For the most part of 3 Qtrs the Pats played man and changed up a little based on the situation. When Evans went in motion Gilmore went with him. When Tampa used the bunch formation Gilmore was with Evans regardless of whether Evans lined up inside or outside. Butler for the most part shadowed Jackson and Chung and McCourty were either on Humphries or Brate. Harmon was playing single high most of that game. There were instances when they changed up but those were the exceptions until the 4th Qtr when they were trying to protect the lead went back to cover 2 or something similar. I guess I could never be a football coach. I was at the Tampa game, but I was watching it as a fan. So, I could never tell you what formations they used, what switching they did, nor any of that. When their receiver would cross in the slot all I was doing was yelling "get him". Whether that was his assignment of not is beyond me. As a fan, I know they controlled the game for the most part, though it did get a bit scary at the end. That is enough for me. I never professed to have the depth of football knowledge that a player or coach has. I just love watching the game and have for fifty years. That is enough for me.
|
|
|
Post by jri37 on Oct 23, 2017 16:24:37 GMT -5
I was at the Tampa game. For the most part of 3 Qtrs the Pats played man and changed up a little based on the situation. When Evans went in motion Gilmore went with him. When Tampa used the bunch formation Gilmore was with Evans regardless of whether Evans lined up inside or outside. Butler for the most part shadowed Jackson and Chung and McCourty were either on Humphries or Brate. Harmon was playing single high most of that game. There were instances when they changed up but those were the exceptions until the 4th Qtr when they were trying to protect the lead went back to cover 2 or something similar. I guess I could never be a football coach. I was at the Tampa game, but I was watching it as a fan. So, I could never tell you what formations they used, what switching they did, nor any of that. When their receiver would cross in the slot all I was doing was yelling "get him". Whether that was his assignment of not is beyond me. As a fan, I know they controlled the game for the most part, though it did get a bit scary at the end. That is enough for me. I never professed to have the depth of football knowledge that a player or coach has. I just love watching the game and have for fifty years. That is enough for me. My brother is a little more in depth than me and as a TB fan he pointed it out early and asked why NE wasn't in cover 2 or in a matchup zone. I just kept tabs on the secondary as the game went along. That was just my observations after he pointed it out. Didn't notice every play but did notice every single time Evans went in motion Gilmore went with him and same with Butler and D. Jackson.
|
|
palookaski
On the Game Day Roster
Posts: 484
Likes: 275
|
Post by palookaski on Oct 23, 2017 16:32:48 GMT -5
I was at the Tampa game. For the most part of 3 Qtrs the Pats played man and changed up a little based on the situation. When Evans went in motion Gilmore went with him. When Tampa used the bunch formation Gilmore was with Evans regardless of whether Evans lined up inside or outside. Butler for the most part shadowed Jackson and Chung and McCourty were either on Humphries or Brate. Harmon was playing single high most of that game. There were instances when they changed up but those were the exceptions until the 4th Qtr when they were trying to protect the lead went back to cover 2 or something similar. I guess I could never be a football coach. I was at the Tampa game, but I was watching it as a fan. So, I could never tell you what formations they used, what switching they did, nor any of that. When their receiver would cross in the slot all I was doing was yelling "get him". Whether that was his assignment of not is beyond me. As a fan, I know they controlled the game for the most part, though it did get a bit scary at the end. That is enough for me. I never professed to have the depth of football knowledge that a player or coach has. I just love watching the game and have for fifty years. That is enough for me. Good post Sheldon. Your'e honest as most FB fans ((people,I)) feel the same way. True, we as fans aren't coaches. Keep up your good work(s). Each Game is different according to the Game plan.
|
|
|
Post by coolade on Oct 23, 2017 16:42:17 GMT -5
Look at the posters blaming the falcons offense . Can't make this crap up. Priceless... Good grief dude, the Homerism runs deep in you. Please let me know what wasn't a valid point or question? Sorry, you can't spin it other than excuse agenda backpedaling from previous jackass posts. ..lol
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Oct 24, 2017 0:43:38 GMT -5
Good grief dude, the Homerism runs deep in you. Please let me know what wasn't a valid point or question? Sorry, you can't spin it other than excuse agenda backpedaling from previous jackass posts. ..lol Your'e the biggest troll on here. One good game and you think the defense is fixed. I swear man, you need to go outside of this forum and watch and listen to some talk radio/tv that has some pretty good unbiased and objective professionals discussing this very topic. You're an embarrassment.. it's people like you that other fans bases make fun of and shake their heads about. You are a joke!
|
|