The defense actually performed better when the games where still close, giving up only 6.8 first-half points per game, by far best in the league.
Yes, you are. You cannot in any way prepare for miracle catches. You can't plan for them and you can't plan against them. Because they are miracles.
Cruz is a shell of his former self, Shepherd is decent, but the Giants can't run the ball...it's just a bad offense.
Their running game is especially bad. Jennings runs like he's in quicksand. And he's their best runner. Dion Lewis makes Jennings look like he's in junior high.
Watch Perkins.
Uh... bend but don't break D was what was beaten by those miracle catches. It's been the philosophy through the wins and losses.
I think the Pats play a lot of bend but don't break defense because their secondary is very good, they tackle well and BB believes most QBs will screw up before they march their team down the field. I also think its a by product of having OK not great edge rushers.
To add context, they were 8th in yards allowed this year, so still pretty good. That ranking jibes more with my subjective assessment of the team; closer to a fringe top-10 D than a real top-of-the-league elite unit. I'd take them over any of the Ds remaining in the playoffs though (especially over either NFC team).
In fact, there is - unsurprisingly - an anti-correlation between starting defensive LOS and defensive yards allowed. The Patriots were #1 in the NFL for def starting LOS, so their #8 ranking in yards allowed more impressive in that light.
Perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but isn't that the point? By playing the field position game, and playing a bend but don't break philosophy, you make teams make more plays/drive, which gives them more opportunities to make mistakes.
He's including back to 2001 and the Patriots did not have an elite offense until 2007. I don't think an offense that scores a lot of points is necessarily a requirement to the field position game. The Patriots have always been able to move the ball efficiently under Brady (he's always been at an elite level completion percentage), so they didn't necessarily score a lot of points early in his career, but they could move the ball.
Plus they've had good to elite ST's for some absurd amount of years in a row, like back to the Parcells era.
I thought about that but decided not pursue it, for a combination of reasons. Mostly because it complicates things a lot, and I like clean analysis.
But that's the whole point right? If you give up big plays, then you're breaking more than bending. A bend but don't break defense would have a very high percentage of it's points against scored in the red zone**, but also have a very high ranking of red zone efficiency.
Indeed, that would be an intriguing way to approach the question.
I mean on offense, but I'm not sure all the ways they may do that. Early in the season it was Gostkowski's kickoffs. I'm sure there are other ways. You mentioned the Patriots good starting defensive field position. Are they generally near the top in this? Would we think that's coincidence?
Gotcha. Maybe not "elite", but they've been top 10 in points scored every year since 2001 except 2003.
Yes, they have been elite at this, year after year.
Yep. It also helps that the Patriots are typically among the league's elite at not turning the ball over. Turnovers, on average, have a significant impact on field position.
They have also generally had some of the best starting field position on offense, too (they're third in 2016). I think all this stuff goes together. O produces and doesn't turn the ball over. They kickoff after a score or punt after a failed drive but generally have good coverage. The D has favorable field position to start, might give up a few yards, but then generally forces a punt (which is usually better than a kickoff for field position). The punt return team is good, so the O gets good field position to start ...
This is where I am. Every coach talks the talk about turnovers. BB seems to walk the walk as well; he takes steps to make sure his team is better at it. His roster decisions factor in ball protection (or lack thereof). Lewis pulls off the 3 TD post season trifecta and his first couple of sentences to the media is pre-emptively talking about his failure to protect the ball. In the wake of deflategate, fumbles were looked at and stories came out about wet football fumble drills, and the extent the Patriots go to practice protecting the ball. Everything about Brady's approach seems geared to not turning the ball over (2 INTs the last game be damned). Safer, surgical approach to going down field at the expense of flashy numbers - unless like the Texans - a team is able to force him to have to try to beat them in a more aggressive manner. Also, as noted by others, his allocation of roster spots and use of starters on special teams to create competitive advantages and contribute to field position.
Sorry, that came off the wrong way, I think. I meant in a hypothetical world where all you have to do is press an easy button and the answer is given to you. Not where you ask someone to do a shit-ton of work and don't volunteer to help at all. I didn't mean to degrade you or your effort at all.
