"Tom Brady Face" (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

What do you think is the most effective way to measure and rank defenses?J

Maybe taking more than just 1 key category would be a nice place to start. Especially one that can be so easily effected by forces out of the D's control.

What do you think is the most effective way to measure and rank defenses?J

 

[jurb26]

What do you think is the most effective way to measure and rank defenses?J

Maybe taking more than just 1 key category would be a nice place to start. Especially one that can be so easily effected by forces out of the D's control.

What do you think is the most effective way to measure and rank defenses?J

I too like DVOA rankings that minimize the outside effects. I also like to emphasize the impact of TOs and sacks. Defensive big plays go a long way in measuring their true impact. The Chi/NO game just a few weeks ago is a prime example of this. Sure, Chi gave up a tom of yds in that game. What they created far surpassed that though. The pressure/sacks and TOs they forced set the tempo of the game. NO didn't seem to have any real chemistry in the game and had a few big plays that skewed the overall number IMO.

 

[Jagerbomber]

Some Patriots fans have zero sense of humor

As a Pats fan I thought it was pretty damn funny. Can't have them all folks.

 

[switz]

In 2005, you are correct on the Pats. Why not analyze the playoffs further, since this has evolved into a manning v brady comparison. The Pats D was ranked 17th to the Broncos 7th Ranked offense. Meanwhile, the Pats offense was ranked 10th.

Over to the Colts #2 ranked offense, who managed to score 18 aginst the Steelers #3 ranked Defense. The #2 ranked offense scored 4 more points against the #3 ranked offense than the #10 ranked offense did against the #4 ranked defense. Hmmm. Both lost, but undoubtably in the Colts case, it was the defense, but in the Patriots it was Brady.

So what was the difference between the #3D and the #4D? Was it a bigger gap than the difference between the #2O and the #10O? Just throwing out the numerical ranking in this type of comparison leaves an incomplete picture.Regardless, whether the Colts put up 40 points or 4 points more, the point is they still faced a tougher defense.

In 2004, (I'm getting my 2004 numbers here, http://profootballreference.com/years/tmstats2004.htm) I can't vouch for the accuracy, but I'll take their word that they're using actual data. In that Superbowl run the Pats beat the Colts (#19) You were right though, the Colts had beat the #10 ranked Broncos hadilly, but when they came up against the #2 ranked Patriots, it was too much, and their #1 ranked offensive unit was able to muster only 14 points, and they were out again. New England on the other hand went on to beat the #1 Defensive unit with 41 points, in Pittsburgh. By the way, NE was the #4 offensive unit, using your measure of choice, as you provided above. In the Superbowl, they faced the #3 Eagle Defensive Unit, and put 24 on them. So, to sum that up, not the #19 and #10 and #3 you claimed, but the #19 Colts, by also shutting down the #1 offense. Then they took the #4 offense on the road to take out the #1 and #3 defenses. Yeah, the road was alittle tough for Tom Brady and the Pats. IN fact, it couldn't get much tougher. Not to mention just to win the division, the Jets were the #4 unit, and the Bills #8. The 'Fins were all the way down at 20. Maybe facing those top notch units all year conditioned them for the playoff run?

Maybe the Pats did benefit from facing those tough defenses earlier in the season. You're still painting an incomplete picture, because we don't really know the gap between 1-2-3-4-...

The 2003 run, you did get it right. What you leave out is NE had the #12 offense. Pretty impressive run by the #12 offense. If the #12 offense can do that, I'd expect the #1, or #2 to step it up one year.

It depends on scheduling, in fact, if NE had a "tougher" schedule, maybe they actually had a better O than #12, but due to SOS they ranked at that spot.

The 2001 stands on it's own merits. You can whine about giving by the refs all you want. But, like the rest of this threat, the facts betray your claims. The road to raising the Lombardi is an elimination tourney. YOu can only play who is in front of you. You don't always get to knock off the #1, and #3 defense on the way. They did get to do it once, and you tried to even begrudge them the credit for it. Their runs have been there. They've shut down great offenses when needed. They've scored on great defenses when needed; largely on the play of Tom Brady. Conversely, you want to make excuses for Manning by saying he shouldn't have to score on great defenses, because after all, year in and out they are only the #1 or #2 ranked offense in the league. Year in and out, the Patriots are usually a better defense. They're also a worse offense, made to play better by the play of Tom Brady.

The bolded part is where we disagree. I simply don't see Brady being the main cog in those victories. Especially in '01 when Bledsoe won one of those playoff games. Yet people constantly say Brady is so much better than Bledsoe. Reality is, Bledsoe would probably be close to where Brady is, had he not lost his job to injury.

 

[Pat Patriot]

In 2005, you are correct on the Pats. Why not analyze the playoffs further, since this has evolved into a manning v brady comparison. The Pats D was ranked 17th to the Broncos 7th Ranked offense. Meanwhile, the Pats offense was ranked 10th.

Over to the Colts #2 ranked offense, who managed to score 18 aginst the Steelers #3 ranked Defense. The #2 ranked offense scored 4 more points against the #3 ranked offense than the #10 ranked offense did against the #4 ranked defense. Hmmm. Both lost, but undoubtably in the Colts case, it was the defense, but in the Patriots it was Brady.

So what was the difference between the #3D and the #4D? Was it a bigger gap than the difference between the #2O and the #10O? Just throwing out the numerical ranking in this type of comparison leaves an incomplete picture.Regardless, whether the Colts put up 40 points or 4 points more, the point is they still faced a tougher defense.

In 2004, (I'm getting my 2004 numbers here, http://profootballreference.com/years/tmstats2004.htm) I can't vouch for the accuracy, but I'll take their word that they're using actual data. In that Superbowl run the Pats beat the Colts (#19) You were right though, the Colts had beat the #10 ranked Broncos hadilly, but when they came up against the #2 ranked Patriots, it was too much, and their #1 ranked offensive unit was able to muster only 14 points, and they were out again. New England on the other hand went on to beat the #1 Defensive unit with 41 points, in Pittsburgh. By the way, NE was the #4 offensive unit, using your measure of choice, as you provided above. In the Superbowl, they faced the #3 Eagle Defensive Unit, and put 24 on them. So, to sum that up, not the #19 and #10 and #3 you claimed, but the #19 Colts, by also shutting down the #1 offense. Then they took the #4 offense on the road to take out the #1 and #3 defenses. Yeah, the road was alittle tough for Tom Brady and the Pats. IN fact, it couldn't get much tougher. Not to mention just to win the division, the Jets were the #4 unit, and the Bills #8. The 'Fins were all the way down at 20. Maybe facing those top notch units all year conditioned them for the playoff run?

Maybe the Pats did benefit from facing those tough defenses earlier in the season. You're still painting an incomplete picture, because we don't really know the gap between 1-2-3-4-...

The 2003 run, you did get it right. What you leave out is NE had the #12 offense. Pretty impressive run by the #12 offense. If the #12 offense can do that, I'd expect the #1, or #2 to step it up one year.

It depends on scheduling, in fact, if NE had a "tougher" schedule, maybe they actually had a better O than #12, but due to SOS they ranked at that spot.

The 2001 stands on it's own merits. You can whine about giving by the refs all you want. But, like the rest of this threat, the facts betray your claims. The road to raising the Lombardi is an elimination tourney. YOu can only play who is in front of you. You don't always get to knock off the #1, and #3 defense on the way. They did get to do it once, and you tried to even begrudge them the credit for it. Their runs have been there. They've shut down great offenses when needed. They've scored on great defenses when needed; largely on the play of Tom Brady. Conversely, you want to make excuses for Manning by saying he shouldn't have to score on great defenses, because after all, year in and out they are only the #1 or #2 ranked offense in the league. Year in and out, the Patriots are usually a better defense. They're also a worse offense, made to play better by the play of Tom Brady.

The bolded part is where we disagree. I simply don't see Brady being the main cog in those victories. Especially in '01 when Bledsoe won one of those playoff games. Yet people constantly say Brady is so much better than Bledsoe. Reality is, Bledsoe would probably be close to where Brady is, had he not lost his job to injury.

As a Patriots fan that has seen both QB's for there entire careers, you have NO idea what you are talking about. One of Brady's strengths that not many talk about is what they call pocket presence. He is on par with Marino in this regard. Brady and Marino are both really slow QB's that avoided sacks by the way they move in the pocket. I see this as being essential in the success of each (Marino's quick release gets talked to death but they way he moved in the pocket was equally important). The way they slide step or step up in the pocket is masterful. Bledsoe takes a TON of sacks that Brady eludes simply by moving in the pocket. Sacks are drive killers. Brady keeps the chains moving by avoiding sacks and getting the ball downfield.

 

[switz]

As a Patriots fan that has seen both QB's for there entire careers, you have NO idea what you are talking about. One of Brady's strengths that not many talk about is what they call pocket presence. He is on par with Marino in this regard. Brady and Marino are both really slow QB's that avoided sacks by the way they move in the pocket. I see this as being essential in the success of each (Marino's quick release gets talked to death but they way he moved in the pocket was equally important). The way they slide step or step up in the pocket is masterful. Bledsoe takes a TON of sacks that Brady eludes simply by moving in the pocket. Sacks are drive killers. Brady keeps the chains moving by avoiding sacks and getting the ball downfield.

Brady has a quicker release than Beldsoe. That is why he takes less sacks. However much of that also is the offensive scheme, a scheme Belichek built around Brady. Bledsoe didn't have the benefit of Belichek/Weiss building a scheme around him.Bledsoe was expected to make big plays, Tom was expected not to make mistakes. The handling of Tom Brady is the biggest evidence of how good a coach Belichek is, and Weiss is.

 

[PMENFAN]

As a Patriots fan that has seen both QB's for there entire careers, you have NO idea what you are talking about. One of Brady's strengths that not many talk about is what they call pocket presence. He is on par with Marino in this regard. Brady and Marino are both really slow QB's that avoided sacks by the way they move in the pocket. I see this as being essential in the success of each (Marino's quick release gets talked to death but they way he moved in the pocket was equally important). The way they slide step or step up in the pocket is masterful. Bledsoe takes a TON of sacks that Brady eludes simply by moving in the pocket. Sacks are drive killers. Brady keeps the chains moving by avoiding sacks and getting the ball downfield.

Brady has a quicker release than Beldsoe. That is why he takes less sacks. However much of that also is the offensive scheme, a scheme Belichek built around Brady. Bledsoe didn't have the benefit of Belichek/Weiss building a scheme around him.Bledsoe was expected to make big plays, Tom was expected not to make mistakes. The handling of Tom Brady is the biggest evidence of how good a coach Belichek is, and Weiss is.

When you're in a hole, stop digging. Have you ever seen Brady or Bledsoe play? The epitome of the difference between the two is the pocket presence. Bledsoe has a quick release, when he decides to get rid of the ball. He unfortunately drops back, gets confused by the defenses (happened more after a crushing backside hit from Ken Norton where he had a 3rd degree shoulder seperation) and can't decide. His mechanics are some of the best ever measured at the combine. It's why he was a #1 pick. He has all the measurables. Brady was a 6th rouder for just the opposite reason. He has the intangibles, but doesn't measure out well on what the scouts wanted. Brady slides better in the pocket better than just about any QB I've ever seen, creating the extra half second. IF we could go back to the Fantasy Advantage boards, that's the first thing that I loved about him. The first thing that distinguished him from Bledsoe. His ability to buy time in the pocket. His arm is weaker. His release slower. But, he's a better QB. He reads Defenses better. He progresses through his reads better. He knows the playbooks better. He prepares for games better. How do you measure that at the combine? You can't . For the record, the Pats were 0-2 and looked pathetic when Brady took over. They finished with a ring with Brady at the Helm. Yes, Bledsoe came in and finished up the second half, throwing a TD in the AFCC in Pittsburgh, EARNING his ring. I love Drew, but I recognize his shortcomings, and so does he. He's still better than half of the QB's in the league with them. To sum up the thread. We've moved around attacking Brady. It's all the kicker. Manning has played tough D's, and it's always been the Colts D that let them Down. We've proven that wrong, as the Colts D has never given up more than 24. Then it was that Brady was playing easier D's. We've proven that wrong. So, we're desperate, and now it's that Bledsoe is as good as Brady and it's right place right time in Weis' scheme. One last point. Brady led the league in passing yards the year AFTER Weis' departure. I love Charlie weis, and I do believe part of the success was a convergence of the two. But, give credit where it's due. Just like part of Mannigns success is working witht he same OC for his entire career, adn the same WR for his entire career. Part of Brady's success was weis. Imagine if he had him his entire career, and Marvin Harrison?

 

[switz]

To sum up the thread. We've moved around attacking Brady. It's all the kicker. Manning has played tough D's, and it's always been the Colts D that let them Down. We've proven that wrong, as the Colts D has never given up more than 24. Then it was that Brady was playing easier D's. We've proven that wrong. So, we're desperate, and now it's that Bledsoe is as good as Brady and it's right place right time in Weis' scheme.

I don't think you've proven anything you think you've proven. Sure you've thrown out posts in this thread, but nothing that proves anything.

 

[S.K.A.]

Patriot fans bite hard. They are the tiger muskie of message board fish.

 

[Raider Nation]

This thread has gotten about 104 more replies than I anticipated....

 

[pizzatyme]

So anyways, I thought the photo was funny.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

What do you think is the most effective way to measure and rank defenses?J

Maybe taking more than just 1 key category would be a nice place to start. Especially one that can be so easily effected by forces out of the D's control.

What do you think is the most effective way to measure and rank defenses?J

Switz crashed and burned miserably, but what about you J?You asked the above question twice and got answers both times and I don't think you replied back either time.If your own question is bounced back at you can you tell us what you think is the most effective way to measure and rank defenses?