Not really. There are times to be aggressive like we saw this weekend and that was really because the situation (wind, shitty o-line) called for it. But I don’t think you can have an all-the-time attacking defense and still be situational because there are more times when just playing sound coverage can get the job done.
It relates back to the talent level. Ideally any football team wants to generate pressure with their front four, but you need talent to do that. When you don’t have talent you have to get creative to generate pressure.
Then it just comes down to simple math. The more guys you send to attack, the more holes you open up in your defense. If your blitz doesn’t get to the quarterback in time, you’re going to give up a big play.
So Belichick is really more of a conservative coach. Content to give up first downs in the middle of the field as long as they’re only at a 4-6 yard clip. By forcing continued execution it often leads to turnovers.
The problems occur when the opposing offense doesn’t turn the ball over. Then the Pats lose.
But here’s the thing I could never resolve from all this. You have the Patriots bend-don’t-break, that would give up a lot of yards and usually stiffen in the red zone. On the flip side of the coin you had the 2010-2012 Patriots’ offense, that would pick up yards at a 4-6 yard clip consistently, but rarely attacked downfield.
So their defense’s job is to prevent explosive plays, but their offense lacked the ability to make explosive plays. Just an interesting dichotomy that makes me think Brady must’ve just shredded the Pats defense in practice from 2010-2012. Now it’s probably the other way around.
