It's time to get back to being a strong defense with a run first rushing attack.

[Pneumonic]

Enough of this focus on passing prowess and porous defense crap that we've seen for too long now. While it's won us countless regular season games and gotten us into the playoffs, this plan hasn't won us a super bowl!

The last few years has seen a plethora of talented youngsters added on the defensive side of the ball. All that is needed is another offseason and another camp and these guys will be rockin it out there. Use the offseason to grab hold of a top pass rushing DE (opposite Jones), a pass rushing DT inside, and maybe a S (if Wilson isn't deemed the guy) and the youth movement will be complete. Sprinkle in some top notch veterans like Wilfork and Mayo and the nucleus is there to be a top D next year.

We have a talented group of running backs already in tow, some very large men on the OL and some excellent run blocking TE's (in Gronk, Hooman, Ballard). Couple this with some old wideouts and an even older QB and I think it's time to get back to what worked for Brady back in his SB winning years; run first and pass 2nd. Brady would be lethal in such a capacity and might extend his career some.

This is my offseason wish list - a change in mentality with smothering defense and rushing offense the new focuses of this team.

 

[dchester]

I think the defense improved this year, with Jones and Hightower. We could use another player or two in the secondary, and on offense, a true deep threat WR.

This team is very good. We're just a few players away. The 2003 - 4 teams were very special because they had so much depth that injuries did not effect them much. This team just does not have that type of depth yet. That's the main problem.

 

[Pneumonic]

The 2003 - 4 teams were very special because they had so much depth that injuries did not effect them much.

I don't recall depth being anything special back then. I think the key difference back then and now was the caliber of the star players, especially on defense with names such as McGinest, Bruschi, Vrabel, Johnson, Law, Samuel, Harrison, Seymour and Wilfork.

 

[carolinatony]

If we had Mr. Corey Dillon we would have won the game.
I miss him

 

[chevss454]

Swagger. Attitude.

We have a good enough running game. 5th in the league this year & 1st in some parameters.

Swagger. Attitude.

& 1 fearsome sumbitch WR.

 

[TITAN126]

Sorry, but this is a quarterback-driven league. Ask the Jets how a team with a strong defense and run-first philosophy works out. We have a balanced offense right now. It just didn't execute when it mattered yesterday.

 

[Pneumonic]

Sorry, but this is a quarterback-driven league. Ask the Jets how a team with a strong defense and run-first philosophy works out. We have a balanced offense right now. It just didn't execute when it mattered yesterday.

We have been a QB driven offense, setting records galore in the process, but our offense shits the bed when push comes to shove in big games. It hasn't worked for us doing it this way. Frankly, I'm tired of hearing that they failed to execute and are now out of the playoffs again.

Keep in mind that I'm not advocating that we get rid of Brady.

I want to see this team be known as a run first offense rather than a pass first offense.

I want to see this offense run to setup the pass, not the other way around.

I want to see this offense be able to run it down the throats of defenses even when they know it's coming. At home, on the road, on the turf, on grass, in the mud, in the snow, in the rain, when it's windy. Anytime, anyplace, baby. None of this finesse shit we now see out of this offense.

Then when the defense is focused on trying to stop the run we unleash Brady on them.

Then, when the defense is worn out, winded, deflated and defeated, we run again.

That's the kind of running offense I'm talking about.

We're almost there too. We have a gazillion RB's who are all young and who have fresh legs. We have excellent run blocking TE's. We have an experienced OL who are being coached up by the best in the biz. All that's needed is for the green light to make it happen.

Then management can focus their attention on getting the defense straightened out by adding a corner (Talib?), a pass rushing DE/DT and a top line SS who likes to smack the snot out of receivers who cross his path.

 

[blantyr]

Spoiled

I think the defense improved this year, with Jones and Hightower. We could use another player or two in the secondary, and on offense, a true deep threat WR.

This team is very good. We're just a few players away. The 2003 - 4 teams were very special because they had so much depth that injuries did not effect them much. This team just does not have that type of depth yet. That's the main problem.

I'd agree with the above.

In the Brady 6 video, they set the difference between a college QB and an elite NFL QB. The college QB can reliably hit a guy who is 10 yards open when he's protected. An NFL QB might be expected to hit a guy 1 yard open when he's about to be clobbered.

I think Brady is getting old. These days, he needs his guy to be 2 yards open. I don't feel a right to complain. I can wish for the old 2001 - 2005 Brady to return, but he isn't going to. At this point he needs several weapons, one of which on any given play able to get 2 yards open.

And Gronk doesn't seem to be as indestructible as he thinks he is. Two years in a row he ended the season hurt. That's one less guy able to get 2 yards open.

Nor is Wes Welker superman. A lot of times he can make an uber quick cut, get open, catch something vaguely uncatchable, then get clobbered by a guy much bigger than him. Can he do it over and over again while collecting bumps and bruises? By the end of the season Wes isn't quite what he was early in the season.

I am optimistic about the defense. We've got almost enough quality players. They are young. Another year will make the D better. Yes, we'll need to bring in a new lineman from time to time. I'm still believing defense wins championships. In the playoffs, somewhere along the line, one is apt to bump into a really great D that can shut down even Tom Brady with only 2 weapons. When that happens, you have to shut down their offense. Our D isn't there yet.

Yes. We're spoiled. The 49ers and Steelers had 4 Lombardi dynasties. I'd like one or two more. I'm greedy. It still seems plausible.

But even if it doesn't happen, we've had a fine fine run.

 

[anderson]

This team is going to have enormous trouble without help at CB and safety. Our front seven is fearsome enough.

 

[mooseontheloose]

I agree with the general thesis of the OP.

2007, 2010, 2011, 2012 playoff losses all showcased an underperforming elite offense and an overachieving/par defense.

The D is a problem yes, but it hasn't been our downfall in recent playoff losses.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[anderson]

Our defense did reasonably well, but there's no way an offense like the Ravens should hang 28 on us in Foxboro with incredibly weak starting field position most of the game.

Offensive issues aside, ofc.

 

[midgar8784]

I agree with the general thesis of the OP.

2007, 2010, 2011, 2012 playoff losses all showcased an underperforming elite offense and an overachieving/par defense.

The D is a problem yes, but it hasn't been our downfall in recent playoff losses.
Posted via Mobile Device

I guess if we do not expect much out of the defense and expect everything from the offense, then I suppose the problem can be on both places. There should not be a time when one player goes down and all of the sudden we cannot stop a team we shut down for a half....there should not be the same issue on the offense every year of not getting some bigger physical receivers in here that can make plays, how many times do we have to run Branch out there? I watched Bolden go up with a safety and a corner on him and make a play, who on this team can do that when gronk is down? So yes, like most teams in the league, we have some issues that need to be fixed, in fact 31 team failed this year, we were one of them.

 

[midgar8784]

Our defense did reasonably well, but there's no way an offense like the Ravens should hang 28 on us in Foxboro with incredibly weak starting field position most of the game.

Offensive issues aside, ofc.

Basically our defense is good if they can force turnovers, when they don't they are a liability, they could not even come close to forcing a turnover. Now for some reason the defense fell apart when one player went down, because BB flat out does not trust our secondary without him, so we went to a soft zone and they picked us apart. regardless of one game, that is the issue that has to be fixed....people need to stop pointing to one game and saying oh the offense is the entire issue, its never one thing, its several things, as it is with all teams.

 

[anderson]

I think that's the point I was making, good sir.

 

[mooseontheloose]

Our defense did reasonably well, but there's no way an offense like the Ravens should hang 28 on us in Foxboro with incredibly weak starting field position most of the game.

Offensive issues aside, ofc.

Well the Ravens only scored 7 points in the 1st half, partly because of said field position.

The numerous three and outs and eventual turnovers also contributed to the 21 2nd half points so I don't think the D gave up all 28 points. You don't think if the O hadn't come out and played so pathetically (sustaining some drives) that the Ravens probably would've scored a few less points?

 

[anderson]

Well the Ravens only scored 7 points in the 1st half, partly because of said field position.

The numerous three and outs and eventual turnovers also contributed to the 21 2nd half points so I don't think the D gave up all 28 points. You don't think if the O hadn't come out and played so pathetically (sustaining some drives) that the Ravens probably would've scored a few less points?

That's always going to be the case. But a great defense doesn't give up 28 points to the Ravens. They had bad field position almost all game.

The offense shares more of the blame than the defense yesterday, but it's embarrassing to say the least that we can't play defense because one corner gets injured. The regular season numbers back that up. Before Talib and after.

If we had adequate replacement for Talib (which means 3 decent corners, none of them truly elite), Baltimore doesn't score 28. There's no way.

 

[chevss454]

That's always going to be the case. But a great defense doesn't give up 28 points to the Ravens. They had bad field position almost all game.

The offense shares more of the blame than the defense yesterday, but it's embarrassing to say the least that we can't play defense because one corner gets injured. The regular season numbers back that up. Before Talib and after.

If we had adequate replacement for Talib (which means 3 decent corners, none of them truly elite), Baltimore doesn't score 28. There's no way.

Maybe 3 turnovers had a little something to do with the 28 points they scored along with our O's inability to be effective in the 2nd half combined with FGs rather than TDs in the first half. Maybe Love's injury had something to do with their ability to run the ball. Our D was tired, once again, in a big game b/c our O was ineffective when it mattered.

With the ball at their 35 and 4th & 2, I'm still puzzled by BB's decision to punt. I can only assume he thought at the time we were the dominant team and would go on to win. Perhaps w/out those 3 TO's we would have.

 

[midgar8784]

[/B]
Maybe 3 turnovers had a little something to do with the 28 points they scored along with our O's inability to be effective in the 2nd half combined with FGs rather than TDs in the first half. Maybe Love's injury had something to do with their ability to run the ball. Our D was tired, once again, in a big game b/c our O was ineffective when it mattered.

With the ball at their 35 and 4th & 2, I'm still puzzled by BB's decision to punt. I can only assume he thought at the time we were the dominant team and would go on to win. Perhaps w/out those 3 TO's we would have.

Actually 3 turnovers had zero to do with the 28 points...the fumble maybe, but the ints were late in the game and lead to nothing. The 28 was already scored by the time the int came, the last int came at the very end of the game, so not sure how you can make that statement. Our o played bad, our D did as well when Talib left, because BB does not trust them and we went back to a soft zone and they tore it apart.

 

[anderson]

Just look how many times Arrington was targeted and how many completions they had after Talib went out.

Yes, there were other reasons, but we punted to them and pinned them inside their own 15 often enough that they shouldn't have been able to hang 28 on us. Their run game played a part, certainly, but it wasn't really the reason.

And as middie points out, only one of the turnovers really led to anything for the Ravens.

 

[midgar8784]

Just look how many times Arrington was targeted and how many completions they had after Talib went out.

Yes, there were other reasons, but we punted to them and pinned them inside their own 15 often enough that they shouldn't have been able to hang 28 on us. Their run game played a part, certainly, but it wasn't really the reason.

And as middie points out, only one of the turnovers really led to anything for the Ravens.

For some reason, after losses, people can only point at one side of the field to blame....it has to be the offense or the defense and thats it....well its not like that. Yeah the offense got shut down, great job by the ravens to be physical with our wideouts and with gronk down, we did not really have an answer to stop that, they knocked people off routes, they held our running game pretty well, and there was not really a way at least that day that we could stop them from doing that. But as you said, when Arrington took over, he became option number 1. I did not even hear Boldins name until Talib went out.