An Independent Patriots Blog
There isn’t simply a “secondary issue,” as was yesterday’s popular narrative. It’s an issue of a team not executing a plan and playing complementary defense at all levels.
Dig deep for answers – BostonHerald.com
Great breakdown from Matt Chatham showing just how much more is going on than simply “not getting their heads around”.
https://www.patspropaganda.com/patriots-defense-secondary-2/
New England Patriots’ secondary becomes primary concern – ESPN Boston
The cornerbacks have shown they can do the job. But isolated performances of success aren’t enough. The unit needs a consistent, coherent effort from more than one player throughout the course of a game. The safeties must show they can do enough to piece the group together. That starts by limiting big plays. The deficiencies are what they are, but big plays are avoidable with discipline. The Patriots do not have a game-changer in the secondary; they don’t even have a bona fide playmaker. They do have a stout run defense in front of them that can make an opposing offense one-dimensional and a potent offense on their own side that can score points and play catch-up as well as anyone. The Patriots’ secondary doesn’t have to be elite; it just has to be good enough. Through six games, it hasn’t been.
The “Bend Don’t Break” has given way to the “Feast or Famine”.
https://www.patspropaganda.com/the-bend-dont-break-has-given-way-to-the-feast/
Secondary: What goes on back there? – Patriots – Boston.com
Time to officially bury the “bend don’t break”. Now I know everyone will be killing the secondary this week, heck, we were leading the charge on the whole deep ball thing two weeks ago, but really if the Patriots can fix this one thing it’s going to make them a lot better.
The formula for being moderately successful defensively is fairly simple: don’t give up big plays. It’s the mantra of coach Bill Belichick. The play calls by defensive coordinator Matt Patricia are almost always conservative, specifically to minimize risk for big plays that can swing a game. Yet the Patriots keep allowing them. And opponents know they are going to give them up if the Patriots don’t develop a consistent pass rush that can’t do more than spark up here or there.
Why does it seem like players always regress in the Patriots’ secondary? The list goes on and on: Brandon Meriweather, Terrence Wheatley, Darius Butler, Leigh Bodden, Chung, McCourty, and Ras-I Dowling. Where’s the ascension? Where’s the excellence? OK, how about we settle for a turn of the head and making a play on the ball when the receiver reacts to the ball being in the air? There is much to be disappointed about with the Patriots, especially in the secondary. Without a Giants-like pass rush, the Patriots are going to have to cover better in the back end to win games.
https://www.patspropaganda.com/patriots-defense-secondary-3/
Breaking Down the New England Patriots Safety Play, Big Plays a Team Effort | Bleacher Report
If you’re starting to get the feeling that we’re going to be focusing on the safety play more and more you’re dead on. Great work here from Frenz, illustrating some of the problems on the back end.
Though there is always a correlation between forcing turnovers and winning football games, the Patriots defense of the past two-plus seasons is an extreme example.
Since 2010 the Patriots are 32-9, including playoffs. Over that stretch the defense forces an average of 2.69 turnovers in their wins, and just .92 turnovers in their defeats.
Only twice over that time period did the Pats win a game where they didn’t get a turnover, against the Ravens in 2010 and the Jets in 2011. And of the other 30 wins there were just 8 times where they only forced a single turnover.
That means in 69% of the Patriots wins since 2010 they’ve forced multiple turnovers.
Of their 9 losses they failed to force a single turnover in 3 of them, which includes both the AFCDG loss to the Jets in 2010 and the Super Bowl loss to the Giants in 2011. Clearly the defense picked the wrong time to suddenly stop their ball hawking ways.
Just twice have they forced 2 turnovers and still lost, against Buffalo in 2011 and the Cardinals this year. Both of those games came down to a field goal kick as time expired to determine the Pats fate.
The Pats defensive formula for success is pretty simple. They’re going to give up yards, and especially long passes, but if they can just force 2 turnovers they’re probably going to win. They’re 22-2 when they get 2 turnovers or more.
So if opposing offenses can just keep the ball safe they’ll give their team a chance to win, regardless of how unstoppable the Pats offense can be at times.
Somehow the Pats defense needs to find a way to become less dependent on getting turnovers, because most of the time they require mistakes by the offense. Punts are something the defense should be able to do on their own simply by executing. Unfortunately that’s easier said than done.