260 replies to this topic

[ShaneTrot]

Right. If it was that simple, every team would indeed pass on every down.

But it's not binary. What worries me is what will happen when a team decides to run just enough to keep the Pats D honest and the safeties biting, but a lot more than the Jets and others have. If I was the Rams, I'd amp the ratio up to 80-20 or something like that.

The Rams offensive line blows. So let them become one dimensional. NE could have a >4 sack day on Sunday.

[Toe Nash]

Honestly, they're not adding anyone so we kind of have to hope one of the young guys steps up I think, or the front 7 does so well at getting to the passer that it masks their deficiencies (Maybe more blitzing would be a good risk to take as others have mentioned).

They were really bad last year and got better, and while yes, they couldn't stop Eli on the last drive they were (painfully) one offensive first down away from winning it all. Getting better in other phases of the game can make up for poor secondary play, and I think most would agree there is some room to grow there.

[GBrushTWood]

Radical idea that will probably never happen, but should:

Of course, there's always my improbable solution. With a bye coming up, Belichick could rescue his former pupil from television purgatory and get him back into coaching. Would Mangini do it? He should, even if being a secondary coach is below the coordinator status he seeks. When you've been stuck in a studio for two years, you should leap at the chance to leave.

More important, Mangini is a good secondary coach. Under his guidance from 2000 to 2005, the Patriots were generally middle of the pack (if not near the top) of the league in rankings against the pass. Even all these years and controversies later, Belichick privately speaks highly of Mangini's work with defensive backs – which did include Ty Law, Lawyer Milloy and Rodney Harrison at some point.

Jason Cole @ Yahoo

We talk about the shitty coaching a lot here, why not get the guy that managed to get Patriots secondaries playing well in the past? Hard to imagine this happening, but hey, stranger things have happened, no?

[Mystic Merlin]

He's not bringing back a guy he doesn't think he can trust. Even by the meaningless 'stranger things have happened' standard, this one has about a 0.00000001 percent chance of happening.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

He's not bringing back a guy he doesn't think he can trust. Even by the meaningless 'stranger things have happened' standard, this one has about a 0.00000001 percent chance of happening.

Not to mention our D wasn't very good in 2005, when Mangini was defensive coordinator. 17th in the league in points allowed, after being 2nd the year before. And the year after Mangini left, the Pats were 2nd in points allowed again.

[Seels]

Well that 05 team was the most injured team I can even remember including the last few Sox years. So ranking alone isn't really indicative of much.

But I remember the step down from Crennel to Mangini was a big one. Mangini had a pretty incredible amount of hate in his time as DC.

[Reverend]

Probably why Cole didn't say anything about him being DC but, rather, d-backs coach.

[Shelterdog]

Guys-problem solved.

Malcolm Williams is now on the 53.

[Mystic Merlin]

I won't feel comfortable until Earthwind Moreland and Ross Ventrone find their ways onto the 53-man.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Looks like Arrington getting hurt did the trick.

[tims4wins]

If Wilson can improve a little bit on the deep ball, I think that yesterday's lineup may give them the best chance to win - Wilson and DMC at Safety, and Denard / Moore / Cole at CB. I've seen enough of Kyle Arrington for this lifetime, and while I held the same hopes for Chung as everyone else, at this point he is just another JAG, another James Sanders - average player who doesn't make too many mistakes but also makes little impact.

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

If Wilson can improve a little bit on the deep ball, I think that yesterday's lineup may give them the best chance to win - Wilson and DMC at Safety, and Denard / Moore / Cole at CB. I've seen enough of Kyle Arrington for this lifetime, and while I held the same hopes for Chung as everyone else, at this point he is just another JAG, another James Sanders - average player who doesn't make too many mistakes but also makes little impact.

Wilson will have his chances to improve against double moves, he has given up to bombs recently to essentially the same action. OCs are going to (rightfully so) show that to him until he stops it.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Wilson will have his chances to improve against double moves, he has given up to bombs recently to essentially the same action. OCs are going to (rightfully so) show that to him until he stops it.

Would be interesting to see the All 22 and see if the Rams tried it again and how he adjusted if so.

[bakahump]

There was also...what do you call it when you send an extra rusher or 2? Oh yeah a "blitz".

Evidently when you judiciously use it in conjunction with your base defense you can cause even more confusion and occasionally tackle the QB for one them whatchmacallits.

[Super Nomario]

There was also...what do you call it when you send an extra rusher or 2? Oh yeah a "blitz".

Evidently when you judiciously use it in conjunction with your base defense you can cause even more confusion and occasionally tackle the QB for one them whatchmacallits.

I think the key yesterday was they got St. Louis in 3rd-and-longs where they could do different things and throw different looks at them without the risk of getting gashed by a big run. It seemed like they blitzed more yesterday, but I'd have to look at the tape to know if that's true. They may have just blitzed more effectively (and the Rams' offensive line sucks, and Bradford also seems to struggle at setting protections).

The other factor is that Bradford isn't as mobile as Sanchez or Russell Wilson. Against Wilson especially they seemed worried about letting him get outside the pocket, and they made things more vanilla to combat that.

[Mystic Merlin]

And they unfortunately DID let Wilson outside the pocket - look at his long passes downfield (which constituted pretty much the sum of the Seahawks offense that day): they often came on contain breakdowns.

[crystalline]

Would be interesting to see the All 22 and see if the Rams tried it again and how he adjusted if so.

I wonder if this is a change in strategy for Belichick or just Wilson's poor execution. In past years he seemed to do everything to prevent the long play.
Seems like they're playing a lot of two deep safeties this year with CBs taking a short sideline zone - is that last year's defense too?
On both those bombs against the Rams and Seattle, the CB passed off the receiver running hard to Wilson who didn't react fast enough, and the other safety got there too late.

[Super Nomario]

And they unfortunately DID let Wilson outside the pocket - look at his long passes downfield (which constituted pretty much the sum of the Seahawks offense that day): they often came on contain breakdowns.

The first long completion to Baldwin was (similar to the Rams' first TD this week), but I'm not sure any of the others were. The 51-yarder to Tate wasn't, and the final TD wasn't, but Wilson had all day because the Pats weren't pushing the pocket, probably afraid of him beating them with his legs.

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

I wonder if this is a change in strategy for Belichick or just Wilson's poor execution. In past years he seemed to do everything to prevent the long play.
Seems like they're playing a lot of two deep safeties this year with CBs taking a short sideline zone - is that last year's defense too?
On both those bombs against the Rams and Seattle, the CB passed off the receiver running hard to Wilson who didn't react fast enough, and the other safety got there too late.

I don't think so. I think both plays were just poor execution by Wilson. Both the Seattle Pass and the St. Louis TD were on double moves. Wilson bit hard on the first move in both examples, as soon as he did that the play was over. He was in no position to recover. It was a lack of experience and over aggressiveness. The second safety on each play is pretty irrelevant, if anything it's to McCourty's credit that he was able to get over there and get within a step or two of making a play.

[tims4wins]

The weird thing about the 50 yard play yesterday was that Wilson was there - he had great position. He then totally misjudged the throw and ended up being a yard or two short. It was bizarre.

http://www.nfl.com/v...s-50-yd-pass-TD

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

I think the key yesterday was they got St. Louis in 3rd-and-longs where they could do different things and throw different looks at them without the risk of getting gashed by a big run. It seemed like they blitzed more yesterday, but I'd have to look at the tape to know if that's true. They may have just blitzed more effectively (and the Rams' offensive line sucks, and Bradford also seems to struggle at setting protections).

The other factor is that Bradford isn't as mobile as Sanchez or Russell Wilson. Against Wilson especially they seemed worried about letting him get outside the pocket, and they made things more vanilla to combat that.

The two times I really remember the Pats blitzing were on 3rd-and 5 or 6. Knowing BB, I thought it was bizarre, but it was certainly good to see. Maybe BB figures "if we're going to give up the deep ball all the time anyway, might as well stop hedging my bets and send some fucking blitzes."

[Reverend]

The weird thing about the 50 yard play yesterday was that Wilson was there - he had great position. He then totally misjudged the throw and ended up being a yard or two short. It was bizarre.

http://www.nfl.com/v...s-50-yd-pass-TD

So much for turning your head to look for the ball.

[Super Nomario]

It looks like the Pats only blitzed a little more than usual (23.5% of the time) yesterday. It was their second-highest percentage on the season, behind 28.6% in the Seattle game. This article says St. Louis was 6 of 8 for 70 yards and a TD, but since the 1 TD was a 50-yarder, that means they were only 5 of 7 for 20 yards otherwise.

http://espn.go.com/b...t-blitz-numbers

[SteveF]

The thing that most confuses me about the way the Patriots played cover 2 on that TD is the depth of the safeties in combination with the lack of jams at the line of scrimmage. If you aren't going to jam the wide receivers, it seems strange to have your safeties sitting only 10 yards off the line at the snap of the ball. If you want your safeties that close to the line, you probably need to jam.

I think the bottom line on the Rams TD was the Patriots defense simply wasn't expecting pass given the formation, and that's why the safeties were so close to the line on that particular play. Spikes (I think it was Spikes, anyway) seemed to be intent on blowing up the run (rather than actually sacking the QB) and the D-line seemed to be trying to protect run gaps rather than get up field to the QB.

Edited by SteveF, 29 October 2012 - 05:46 PM.

[crystalline]

The thing that most confuses me about the way the Patriots played cover 2 on that TD is the depth of the safeties in combination with the lack of jams at the line of scrimmage. If you aren't going to jam the wide receivers, it seems strange to have your safeties sitting only 10 yards off the line at the snap of the ball. If you want your safeties that close to the line, you probably need to jam.

I think the bottom line on the Rams TD was the Patriots defense simply wasn't expecting pass given the formation, and that's why the safeties were so close to the line on that particular play. Spikes (I think it was Spikes, anyway) seemed to be intent on blowing up the run (rather than actually sacking the QB) and the D-line seemed to be trying to protect run gaps rather than get up field to the QB.

That's the kind of schematic change I was referring to. It feels like the 2007-2009 Belichick defenses would not have sold out so much for the run and kept the safeties deeper. But I have no actual idea esp. given the lack of the wide-field footage then. Could Belichick be getting more aggressive this year?

[Royal Reader]

Well that 05 team was the most injured team I can even remember including the last few Sox years. So ranking alone isn't really indicative of much.

But I remember the step down from Crennel to Mangini was a big one. Mangini had a pretty incredible amount of hate in his time as DC.

And Crennel may well be available after this season.

[j44thor]

Would be interesting to see the All 22 and see if the Rams tried it again and how he adjusted if so.

Well Givens got hurt on the play and didn't come back till much later so even if they did try it again they were trying it with less effective players.
Givens is the clear deep threat for STL with 4 consecutive games with a 50+yd catch. Losing him was definitely a big blow for STL. STL was not going to stop the pats but they might have been a bit more competitive if Givens didn't get hurt.

[Super Nomario]

Well Givens got hurt on the play and didn't come back till much later so even if they did try it again they were trying it with less effective players.
Givens is the clear deep threat for STL with 4 consecutive games with a 50+yd catch. Losing him was definitely a big blow for STL. STL was not going to stop the pats but they might have been a bit more competitive if Givens didn't get hurt.

Bradford only attempted two passes the rest of the day that were classified as "deep" in the PBP. One was a 22-yard completion to Gibson late in the 3rd, one was Dennard's pick. Clemens also completed a 39-yarder to Quick in garbage time. Givens' injury obviously hurt, but I think the Pats' pass rush and St. Louis' protection were bigger issues; in addition to the sacks, Bradford was harassed into check-downs in some 3rd-and-long situations.

[Super Nomario]

RE: McCoury at CB vs McCourty at S: the consensus has been that McCourty physically is a better match at CB than at S. But a recent interview with Mike Reiss got me thinking that mentally, maybe he makes more sense at S.

Playing corner I think is a lot of technique stuff, a lot of individual how you play things, and when you go back to safety you've got to kind of change your mindset and try to make sure everybody's aligned right. You've got to make different checks and get the defense together, and you know, you just see the field different. I think it's just more responsibility once you move back to safety.

This reminded me of something Belichick said about McCourty as a rookie, and how he was in the class of Ray Lewis and Lawyer Milloy at breaking down film:

He starts telling you what the nose is supposed to do on a particular stunt when he’s playing corner and stuff like that. Usually, you don’t get that.

It seems like McCourty has the mental attributes and knowledge of the defense the Pats need at the safety position.

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

RE: McCoury at CB vs McCourty at S: the consensus has been that McCourty physically is a better match at CB than at S. But a recent interview with Mike Reiss got me thinking that mentally, maybe he makes more sense at S.

This reminded me of something Belichick said about McCourty as a rookie, and how he was in the class of Ray Lewis and Lawyer Milloy at breaking down film:

It seems like McCourty has the mental attributes and knowledge of the defense the Pats need at the safety position.

Plus, in terms of pure coverage skills, he's clearly better as a zone defender than a man-to-man defender. And he's stout enough against the run not to be a liability in that respect at the safety position.

I've been skeptical about moving McCourty to safety simply because he remains our best CB, I don't really trust the other guys we have at that spot, and it seems self-defeating to solve the S problem by creating a CB problem. Viewed in a vacuum, however, I'm coming around to the idea that McCourty might be a better S than CB. I think he might be limited enough in man-to-man coverage that his upside as a CB is basically "decent starter, but not great and can be exploited." We haven't seen him play that much at safety, but he's done well enough back there and his skill set seems suited enough to the role that his upside might be closer to legitimate Pro Bowler. I remain kind of torn but the argument for a full-time move to safety seems to be getting stronger every week.

Edited by Morgan's Magic Snowplow, 30 October 2012 - 05:17 PM.

[Super Nomario]

The two times I really remember the Pats blitzing were on 3rd-and 5 or 6. Knowing BB, I thought it was bizarre, but it was certainly good to see. Maybe BB figures "if we're going to give up the deep ball all the time anyway, might as well stop hedging my bets and send some fucking blitzes."

I got a chance to break down the film from the St. Louis game, and I did writeups on a half-dozen of the blitzes the Pats used. Honestly, it seemed like they were fucking around in the second half. I think the blitzing was situational; the Rams kept committing offensive penalties and getting in long situations. Fun fact: the first 3 times the Rams punted, they had started the sequence on 1st-and-15+ (illegal touch, false start, offensive holding). The Pats were able to dial up blitzes with impunity. And the Rams' blocking / protection is awful.

http://davebreaksdow...s-st-louis.html

I now have every game except week 4 against Buffalo charted, and I should have that over the weekend, which will let me post first-half numbers.

[Super Nomario]

Numbers at the halfway point after breaking down film from the first 8 weeks:
http://davebreaksdow...way-report.html

Pats' Pass D Through 8 Weeks

Player	Games	Snaps	Targets	Catches	Success	Yards	TDs	INTs	Comp%	Succ%	Y/A	ANYPA	Rating	Yds/Snap
Cornerbacks
Devin McCourty	8	530	51	26	22	411	3	2	50.98%	43.14%	8.06	7.47	81.41	0.78
Kyle Arrington	8	436	37	28	25	432	4	0	75.68%	67.57%	11.68	13.84	149.83	0.99
Aqib Talib	4	294	30	20	18	368	1	1	66.67%	60.00%	12.27	11.43	105.97	1.25
Sterling Moore	8	233	23	19	12	302	1	0	82.61%	52.17%	13.13	14.00	133.24	1.30
Alfonzo Dennard	4	223	24	11	10	131	1	2	45.83%	41.67%	5.46	2.54	42.19	0.59
Ras-I Dowling	7	84	10	8	5	58	0	0	80.00%	50.00%	5.80	5.80	90.83	0.69
Marquice Cole	8	41	3	0	0	0	0	0	0.00%	0.00%	0.00	0.00	39.58	0.00
Safeties									#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
Tavon Wilson	8	369	30	20	11	184	4	3	66.67%	36.67%	6.13	4.30	83.19	0.50
Patrick Chung	6	360	23	12	10	217	2	0	52.17%	43.48%	9.43	11.17	113.86	0.60
Steve Gregory	4	229	12	8	8	141	2	1	66.67%	66.67%	11.75	11.33	111.46	0.62
Nate Ebner	8	34	2	2	1	43	1	0	100.00%	50.00%	21.50	31.50	158.33	1.26
Linebackers									#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
Jerod Mayo	8	528	38	33	24	279	1	1	86.84%	63.16%	7.34	6.68	95.07	0.53
*Rob Ninkovich	8	436	6	4	3	37	1	0	66.67%	50.00%	6.17	9.50	122.92	0.08
Brandon Spikes	8	419	33	23	18	273	1	0	69.70%	54.55%	8.27	8.88	104.73	0.65
Dont'a Hightower	6	217	19	15	7	101	0	0	78.95%	36.84%	5.32	5.32	88.82	0.47
Tracy White	5	14	1	0	0	0	0	0	0.00%	0.00%	0.00	0.00	39.58	0.00

[ragnarok725]

I got a chance to break down the film from the St. Louis game, and I did writeups on a half-dozen of the blitzes the Pats used. Honestly, it seemed like they were fucking around in the second half. I think the blitzing was situational; the Rams kept committing offensive penalties and getting in long situations. Fun fact: the first 3 times the Rams punted, they had started the sequence on 1st-and-15+ (illegal touch, false start, offensive holding). The Pats were able to dial up blitzes with impunity. And the Rams' blocking / protection is awful.

http://davebreaksdow...s-st-louis.html

I now have every game except week 4 against Buffalo charted, and I should have that over the weekend, which will let me post first-half numbers.

Really interesting stuff. Like you, I was hoping the performance of the pass rush could be seen as a good sign going into the second half, but it really does just look like the Rams have a horrible line and protection coaching. Bradford also seems to do a really bad job at getting his guys in the right protection.

Huge thanks to you for doing this blog. It's exactly the kind of thing I was hoping we'd see once the NFL released the all-22. Huge props and keep it coming!

[Reverend]

Really interesting stuff. Like you, I was hoping the performance of the pass rush could be seen as a good sign going into the second half, but it really does just look like the Rams have a horrible line and protection coaching. Bradford also seems to do a really bad job at getting his guys in the right protection.

Huge thanks to you for doing this blog. It's exactly the kind of thing I was hoping we'd see once the NFL released the all-22. Huge props and keep it coming!

Seconded--this is the future.

One thought--would it be possible to include some estimate of league average or points of reference for some of the stats? This would be especially useful in areas where it would be most difficult, I recognize (e.g. success rate), but some notion of how these numbers compare to other players in the league would, I think, make your posts more powerful by having the data in one place.

Like, you're looking at the Pats secondary because, well, they sorta suck, right? So we can see who within this group is getting hammered, but it could be helpful to know how other units and other players are doing--mean, median and good and bad outliers stuff--to situate them in a sense of where they really are.

But yeah, awesome stuff--keep it coming.

[phragle]

Great work Super Nomario.

Do you have a Twitter account to follow?

[Super Nomario]

Seconded--this is the future.

One thought--would it be possible to include some estimate of league average or points of reference for some of the stats? This would be especially useful in areas where it would be most difficult, I recognize (e.g. success rate), but some notion of how these numbers compare to other players in the league would, I think, make your posts more powerful by having the data in one place.

Like, you're looking at the Pats secondary because, well, they sorta suck, right? So we can see who within this group is getting hammered, but it could be helpful to know how other units and other players are doing--mean, median and good and bad outliers stuff--to situate them in a sense of where they really are.

But yeah, awesome stuff--keep it coming.

Thanks for the compliments.

I agree, I should put some averages on there as reference, but the hard part with the league-average reference points is that it varies by position. For instance, McCourty has a terrific completion rate against, 51% - even the Jets' passing attack, last in the league in completion rate, are 53%. But he's allowing 8 yards per attempt, which compared to league average (7.2) is terrible; only 5 offenses have a better Y/A. So is he having a terrible year or a great year? Then you look at the LB - Mayo and Hightower, for instance, are allowing much higher completion %s (87% and 79%) but lower Y/A (7.3 and 5.3). I'm guessing this is typical; teams complete a lot of passes when LB are in coverage, but they tend to be short. Against CB, they complete fewer passes, but they tend to be longer. So I'm not sure the league averages in and of themselves are terribly useful except as really rough reference points; what I really need is to know league-wide how these stack up. And of course, the league-wide numbers are going to be influenced by team strategies; a team that plays a Tampa-2 type defense will see shorter passes against the corners and longer ones against the MLB, for instance.

[Tyrone Biggums]

Stanford Routt was just cut, I'd love to see the Pats claim him and end the Kyle Arrington era...he can't possibly be worse, can he????

[Reverend]

Thanks for the compliments.

I agree, I should put some averages on there as reference, but the hard part with the league-average reference points is that it varies by position. For instance, McCourty has a terrific completion rate against, 51% - even the Jets' passing attack, last in the league in completion rate, are 53%. But he's allowing 8 yards per attempt, which compared to league average (7.2) is terrible; only 5 offenses have a better Y/A. So is he having a terrible year or a great year? Then you look at the LB - Mayo and Hightower, for instance, are allowing much higher completion %s (87% and 79%) but lower Y/A (7.3 and 5.3). I'm guessing this is typical; teams complete a lot of passes when LB are in coverage, but they tend to be short. Against CB, they complete fewer passes, but they tend to be longer. So I'm not sure the league averages in and of themselves are terribly useful except as really rough reference points; what I really need is to know league-wide how these stack up. And of course, the league-wide numbers are going to be influenced by team strategies; a team that plays a Tampa-2 type defense will see shorter passes against the corners and longer ones against the MLB, for instance.

This got me thinking about something I was thinking about before... given the way you like to go deep into the material rather than the breadth which is, I think, what ruins ruins national level analysis, what if you just, like, looked at a half dozen guys who are considered the best. Like, don't start with the presumption of science, just, like, ok, these are the guys everyone agrees is good--what do they look like?

See what the %s look like, the yards etc, see where they are similar, where different. It could be a really cool way to rethink baselines and brainstorm and see wht you find. Everyone's so afraid of not being instantly scientific, they're not being experimental which is where we got science in the first place, yeah?

Just thinking aloud, but when I was looking at the list, I was thinking, yeah, I can see why the league averages might not apply, but then it occurred to me, ok, well, what does Revis's profile look like (if he was injured), what does the best slot receiver look like... points of reference, right?

That could be cool. But yeah, one way or another, I'm enjoying the "lab" mentality you're bringing to this and I think others are too, so I know I'll give you slack to play with points of reference and base lines, yeah?

[phragle]

Stanford Routt was just cut, I'd love to see the Pats claim him and end the Kyle Arrington era...he can't possibly be worse, can he????

From the game thread: "A third press-man corner to pair with Aqib and Nard Dog? Keeps Arrington, Moore, Cole, and Gregory on the bench? He's not worth 18 million over 3 years, but I would definitely be interested if he gets though waivers."

[crystalline]

what if you just, like, looked at a half dozen guys who are considered the best. Like, don't start with the presumption of science, just, like, ok, these are the guys everyone agrees is good--what do they look like?

See what the %s look like, the yards etc, see where they are similar, where different. It could be a really cool way to rethink baselines and brainstorm and see wht you find.

That approach IS scientific, and probably more valid than aggregate statistics in football, given the small number of plays and large context dependence. Everyone's spoiled by baseball which is pretty much a statistician's paradise and the best place outside of flipped coins to get repeated trials. The real world like football is rarely so nice and it's why your eyes are often better than DVOA and why Cold Hard Football Facts are so frustrating.
Same way Tango's fan defense poll is useful-measuring baseball defense is hard and our eyes are often good.

Speaking of top DBs- is Asomugha still one of them? Saints are killing Philly's D right now, started on the ground but Nnamdi just got burned for a long completion. Let's see how he looks the rest of the game.

[Super Nomario]

This got me thinking about something I was thinking about before... given the way you like to go deep into the material rather than the breadth which is, I think, what ruins ruins national level analysis, what if you just, like, looked at a half dozen guys who are considered the best. Like, don't start with the presumption of science, just, like, ok, these are the guys everyone agrees is good--what do they look like?

See what the %s look like, the yards etc, see where they are similar, where different. It could be a really cool way to rethink baselines and brainstorm and see wht you find. Everyone's so afraid of not being instantly scientific, they're not being experimental which is where we got science in the first place, yeah?

Just thinking aloud, but when I was looking at the list, I was thinking, yeah, I can see why the league averages might not apply, but then it occurred to me, ok, well, what does Revis's profile look like (if he was injured), what does the best slot receiver look like... points of reference, right?

That could be cool. But yeah, one way or another, I'm enjoying the "lab" mentality you're bringing to this and I think others are too, so I know I'll give you slack to play with points of reference and base lines, yeah?

I really like this idea, and I want to branch out into some non-Pats stuff (especially with the bye week), so this would be cool to look at.

Who would folks want to see? I'm thinking:
- Revis
- Tillman (having the best year this year)
- Samuel (see if his "great player, but a gambler" rep is deserved)
- Asomugha (is he still a top guy?)
- Maybe Browner / Sherman from Seattle? Bailey? Haden? Cromartie?

I should maybe make this an on-going series, doing one or two guys at a time, since this kind of analysis is time-intensive.

[MarcSullivaFan]

Patrick Peterson perhaps? I join the chorus of gratitude -- nice work.

[phragle]

@FieldYates
Some have asked about potential Pats' interest in CB Stanford Routt. FWIW, he went unclaimed today, per a source, and is now a free agent.

[rodderick]

@FieldYates
Some have asked about potential Pats' interest in CB Stanford Routt. FWIW, he went unclaimed today, per a source, and is now a free agent.

I'd jump on that. Unless Romeo has really bad things to say about Routt, Bill has to explore the possibility of bumping Kyle Arrington even further down the depth chart.

[Shelterdog]

I'd jump on that. Unless Romeo has really bad things to say about Routt, Bill has to explore the possibility of bumping Kyle Arrington even further down the depth chart.

I haven't seen him play this year but I doubt he's got much left--good corners don't get cut by two teams in less than a year, salary notwithstanding.

[CaptainLaddie]

Stanford Routt was cut by the Chiefs -- would he be a good pickup?

Edited by CaptainLaddie, 07 November 2012 - 05:02 PM.

[Seels]

No. Even if he somehow plays better in a man to man system he's not an upgrade on Dennard and commits waaaaaaay to many penalties.

[Lose Remerswaal]

How many times yesterday did the Pats drop 8 into coverage and Fitzpatrick still managed to find open receivers?

Anyone have stats on what Fitzy did against 3 rushers, 4 rushers, and 5 or more rushers? I swear that he was 80% + completion against 3, and under 30% against 5 rushers.

Edited by Lose Remerswaal, 12 November 2012 - 07:51 AM.

[Eck'sSneakyCheese]

Can Gregory just get IR'd? He's terrible out there. He can't cover, he's constantly shying away from the hit and he looks lost out there. The secondary looks better without him and Arrington for that matter. Those two come back and the unit takes a giant step back. McCourty is a much better free safety.

Hopefully Talib gives them something out there next week and for the rest of the year. I'd like to see Talib and Cole at corner, McCourty and Wilson at safety, Dennard at the nickel and sub in the rest of the drek in different packages. If/when Chung ever comes back he plays over Wilson.

Next week is going to be a huge test for this group. Luck may be a rookie but he could easily throw for 500 yds against them if they continue to play like this.

[NickEsasky]

Gregory doesn't seem like he's shying away from contact to me. I think he went to the Brandon Meriweather school of tackling as he just launches himself at receivers and never wraps. I am not sure he can even lift his arms up, because I have never seen him try. Once he gets a masters from Meriweather University he'll start knocking out his own players too.

How long until Talib gets all the good coached right out of him?