Patriots Vs Chargers

[-JJ-]

From what the first two games looked like defensively, it seems as though the Pats are taking this approach. They will concede yards and plenty of first downs, while constantly looking at offensive patterns. By removing an option from the game entirely (Gates), they will monitor what the opposing offense will do without that option. Once they feel they see a pattern, they will pounce and try to take the ball away. This is a defense driven by turnovers. The terrible 3rd down conversion percentage is alarming, but I am not fussed about the strength of this defense. All game Rivers is checking down to open RBs because he can't throw to Gates, and those RBs are getting yards and first downs. Then, out of no where, Wilfork pounces on a pass and gets a turnover.

It is the football equivalent of a tennis player simply hitting the ball back to his/her opponent. This tactic won't get the player many winners, and therefore some might question the talent of the player. In the end, it won't matter how talented the player is, because the opponent will eventually beat themselves with costly mistakes and unforced errors.

And let's get one thing straight. Field goals WILL NOT beat this Patriots offense. So, the question I am asking to anyone worried about this defense is...What's the problem with an offense making it from their 20 to the Patriots' 20? It isn't their end zone, right? It isn't six points right? I think they will be just fine allowing 400+ to any QB in the league as long as they get some turnovers and stop them when it matters.

Pats defense so far.....

MIA: 2-14 3rd down efficiency. One interception. One fumble forced, but not recovered. 11 QB hits, 4 sacks, and 6 TFL. Oh, and MOST IMPORTANTLY 3 for 6 in the red zone.

SD: 10-12 3rd down. Two interceptions. Two fumbles forced and recovered. 4 QB hits, 2 sacks, 1 TFL. Oh, and MOST IMPORTANTLY 2 for 4 in the red zone.

So, by my count, they are 12-26 on third down, less than 50% efficiency for the offenses. 3 INT, 3 FFs with 2 recovered, 15 QB hits, 6 sacks, 7 TFL. Oh, and kinda importantly 5-10 in the red zone. Go ahead and make it to the 20. You'll only score half the time. Not worried.

thankyou. Better than I could have said it:)

take note gopats:)

[GoPats]

thankyou. Better than I could have said it:)

take note gopats:)

I hear ya, and like I said, there have been a couple of good things... namely red zone defense and turnovers.

It's a different league than it was even 10 years ago. I think the era of dominating defenses is kind of ending in some ways. A rookie QB just threw for 400+ yards on the defending Super Bowl champs.

I just don't believe it's sound to rely on turnovers and solid red zone play. If it works at your 20, why can't you stiffen up at their 40 and make them punt instead? And I don't think the Patriots' secondary is ready for the top passing attacks in the league yet. Hopefully we'll see some progress as the year goes on.

What you want to see out of a young and unproven defense like this, more than big plays IMO, is consistency.

Not trying to be chicken little here, but I'm definitely not as sold on the results yet as some are.

[UMLBB10]

I hate to sound like Felger but at some point the Pats are going to have to win a game 17-14 with their D and right now I'm not sure they can. and if they can't then what we have is the 07 SB and last years 1 and done against the Jets

[P-Money]

I hate to sound like Felger but at some point the Pats are going to have to win a game 17-14 with their D and right now I'm not sure they can. and if they can't then what we have is the 07 SB and last years 1 and done against the Jets

Totally agree. Depends on who the opponent is. But if they don't improve their secondary and this scenario plays out in the playoffs they're hosed. The Pats look like the Colts now. Except they have a better running game and o line

[12>18]

GoPats, to answer your inquiry as to why the Pats D cannot "stiffen up" at their 40 at will is because their defense, like all of BBs defenses over the course of his legendary career, is meant to operate based off of certain situations. It is situational football that drives this defense. So, if the situation you are waiting to exploit does not take place until it is second down with four to go on the 20 yard line in a two TE set, instead of second down and four to go on the 40 yard line with a two TE set, then you wait until they are on the 20. I am not saying I agree with it, just that I know BB loves his situations.

I'm not saying this defense is the sliced bread of the NFL this year, or marquis in any way. But for game 2 of a season without an offseason, I am unconcerned about their progress.

[-JJ-]

Also, and I never said marquis either, there is a lot of quality depth. You can't disregard that. Keeping a D fresh is the equivalent to talent also.

They ain't gonna shut anyone down. But if we can win games with them.... and they can adjust for BB.

[Yehoodi]

From what the first two games looked like defensively, it seems as though the Pats are taking this approach. They will concede yards and plenty of first downs, while constantly looking at offensive patterns. By removing an option from the game entirely (Gates), they will monitor what the opposing offense will do without that option. Once they feel they see a pattern, they will pounce and try to take the ball away. This is a defense driven by turnovers. The terrible 3rd down conversion percentage is alarming, but I am not fussed about the strength of this defense. All game Rivers is checking down to open RBs because he can't throw to Gates, and those RBs are getting yards and first downs. Then, out of no where, Wilfork pounces on a pass and gets a turnover.

It is the football equivalent of a tennis player simply hitting the ball back to his/her opponent. This tactic won't get the player many winners, and therefore some might question the talent of the player. In the end, it won't matter how talented the player is, because the opponent will eventually beat themselves with costly mistakes and unforced errors.

And let's get one thing straight. Field goals WILL NOT beat this Patriots offense. So, the question I am asking to anyone worried about this defense is...What's the problem with an offense making it from their 20 to the Patriots' 20? It isn't their end zone, right? It isn't six points right? I think they will be just fine allowing 400+ to any QB in the league as long as they get some turnovers and stop them when it matters.

Pats defense so far.....

MIA: 2-14 3rd down efficiency. One interception. One fumble forced, but not recovered. 11 QB hits, 4 sacks, and 6 TFL. Oh, and MOST IMPORTANTLY 3 for 6 in the red zone.

SD: 10-12 3rd down. Two interceptions. Two fumbles forced and recovered. 4 QB hits, 2 sacks, 1 TFL. Oh, and MOST IMPORTANTLY 2 for 4 in the red zone.

So, by my count, they are 12-26 on third down, less than 50% efficiency for the offenses. 3 INT, 3 FFs with 2 recovered, 15 QB hits, 6 sacks, 7 TFL. Oh, and kinda importantly 5-10 in the red zone. Go ahead and make it to the 20. You'll only score half the time. Not worried.

Excellent points 12>18 . . . and I was heartened by the TOs in the SD game . . . if they can keep that up then I am not worried, other than sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for that timely TO . . . but i do agree, so far, unlike the last few years, we are given up many yards BUT, as you indicated, have gotten a few key TOs and yes, who cares if we stop them on their 40 and they punt to our 15, or we get a TO in the red zone and return it to our 15, we still get the ball at our 15 either way . . .

I do agree with P-money, if we don't get the key TOs, and our D is still giving up yards, later in the season it is going to be tough to win games . . .

I do feel that the D will improve as each game goes by the players are getting to know each other better on the field, some now have been together for some 2-3 years . . .

[NYColt]

Games like this are why the Chargers will never be Superbowl contenders ..other than the Colts whom they own, the Chargers always make STUPID (just no other word for it) mistakes against top flight teams like the Patriots and the Steelers

Anyone remember the Chargers vs Patriots game last year? Unbelievable just how rediculously stupid that team is (anyone remember the "fumble" where the Charger caught it then just dropped it and walked off without being touched?). The Chargers collectively just exude a football IQ on-par with Vince Young's Wonderlic score

It frustrates me that the Chargers DESTROY us and yet play like apes against other teams

[jcdavey]

Games like this are why the Chargers will never be Superbowl contenders ..other than the Colts whom they own, the Chargers always make STUPID (just no other word for it) mistakes against top flight teams like the Patriots and the Steelers

Anyone remember the Chargers vs Patriots game last year? Unbelievable just how rediculously stupid that team is (anyone remember the "fumble" where the Charger caught it then just dropped it and walked off without being touched?). The Chargers collectively just exude a football IQ on-par with Vince Young's Wonderlic score

It frustrates me that the Chargers DESTROY us and yet play like apes against other teams

the chargers remind me of the pre sb winning indy colts

just always making stupid plays in the clutch

[-JJ-]

the chargers remind me of the pre sb winning indy colts

just always making stupid plays in the clutch

oww..whatta comeback

[NYColt]

the chargers remind me of the pre sb winning indy colts

just always making stupid plays in the clutch

Sadly, the same applies to the post-SB Indy Colts in the post-season

[Nordstrom]

Yesterday, Garay was fined $15K for hit on Brady. Today, Carter fined $15K for hit on Rivers.

[patsallday]

Yesterday, Garay was fined $15K for hit on Brady.

should have been more.

Today, Carter fined $15K for hit on Rivers.

should have been less.

[GoPats]

GoPats, to answer your inquiry as to why the Pats D cannot "stiffen up" at their 40 at will is because their defense, like all of BBs defenses over the course of his legendary career, is meant to operate based off of certain situations. It is situational football that drives this defense. So, if the situation you are waiting to exploit does not take place until it is second down with four to go on the 20 yard line in a two TE set, instead of second down and four to go on the 40 yard line with a two TE set, then you wait until they are on the 20. I am not saying I agree with it, just that I know BB loves his situations.

I'm not saying this defense is the sliced bread of the NFL this year, or marquis in any way. But for game 2 of a season without an offseason, I am unconcerned about their progress.

Good points all around. I do have high hopes for this group, but am keeping my fingers crossed that they can stay healthy and keep improving. I also hope Dowling's injury isn't bad. He's looked very sharp so far.

[GoPats]

should have been more.

should have been less.

Yes and yes.

I didn't think Carter's hit should have even been a penalty.

[patsallday]

Yes and yes.

I didn't think Carter's hit should have even been a penalty.

i've watched the carter replay at least a dozen times and i still can't see why it was called one

[Yehoodi]

i've watched the carter replay at least a dozen times and i still can't see why it was called one

if we are talking about Carter's hit on Rivers, where he drove forward, wrapped him up and landing on top of Rivers, I got no problem with the penalty and the fine . . . surely it may have been a "textbook" tackle circa 1997 and before, but we are not in '97 but 2011 and there are new rules . . . rules will always change things and sometimes, like this case, make what used to be a legal tackle into one that is presently sanctioned . . .

here, Carter clearly lead with the crown of his helmet, it was the leading body part of him that contacted Rivers, he wrapped up Rivers (and thus River's body could not slide out of the tackle and most importantly could not slide away from the brunt of the force when they both landed), and he followed through and landed on Rivers . . . interestingly, it was a text book tackle pre 1997, but now it is text book tackle of how NOT to tackle nowadays . . .

was there any ill will, certainly not . . . and yes i know what you are all saying, "let 'em play" yada yada yada, but the reality of the situation is that we have rules and we need to follow them, if you don't like it go get a Pepsi and watch tennis . . . just like the ole saying "if you can't say anything good, then don't say anyting" similarly, if you can't make a legal tackle, then don't make one . . . it is really not that complicated . . .if Carter does not have the right angle to make a legal tackle, change your angle . . .

Carter could of came at Rivers and instead of going straight at him, which is the shortest distanct between he and Rivers true, he could of changed his angle as he drove towards Rivers, bringing shoulder into contact with Rivers's chest and his head off to Rivers right or left side, yes this might of taken a whole 0.02 seconds, but would have allowed Carter's shoulder to contact Rivers' chest and as they both went down Carter could have slide off to the side of Rivers as opposed to on top of him . . . furthermore, Carter could have still wrapped up Rivers and release the pressure on the hold and they both landed on the ground thus allowing the two the separate and Rivers not feel the full blount of the landing . . .

the above is a very simple way to change one's tackle without a lot of effort, just turn your turso as you approach the QB . . . and it is not too much to ask . . ., the defender still gets to slam into the QB will all of the force, but is not allowed to have all the force be focus at one point (the leading edge/crown of helmet as opposed to be distributed along the shoulder pad and whatever the helmet contacts outside of the QB's turso) and also does not get the "benefit" of landing on a fixed object that can not move away/buffer against the entire force of the defender falling on him . . .

so the QB will still get his clock run, but is safe from a having a great deal of force in one spot delivered by a hard object (i.e. helmet) and avoids being landed on by a 280 lbs human . . . as far as football goes, NOTHING is gained or loss within elements of football if one eliminates people landed on each other or the crown of the helmet hitting one's chests, neither of which serve any football purpose . . .

my two cents . . .

[Yehoodi]

Yes and yes.

I didn't think Carter's hit should have even been a penalty.

please see my above post . . .

[Yehoodi]

should have been more.

if we are talking about the low hit on Brady that made my heart stop, yes it should have been more . . . true he was kind blocked/bumping into olinemen, but he had enough time/space not to dive low at TB's knees . . . but like i mention two posts above, if you can't make a legal hit, don't make one, in that case, he needed to stay upright and charge at Brady and dive for his waist, surely would of taken 0.2 seconds but it would of been a legal hit that he was capable of making, , , , it was not like he was knocked down, or rolling off a block and falling to the ground and boom there is TB's knee right in front of his eyes . . .

should have been less.

i go no problem with finding Carter . . .

[Girlzarefanstoo]

I have to say that whether or not it's against my team, I'm on the side of protecting QBs. They make all the difference in the world in the game - no player on either side of the ball is as exciting to watch.

So, I have no problem with either of the fines.

[jcdavey]

oww..whatta comeback

wasn't an insult, that's what they really remind me of

is vinatieri a free agent soon? lol

[jcdavey]

i also would have been fine with garay being fined more, his play was much more dangerous IMO

i like that both got fined though