OT: Bronco's defensive scheme

Submitted by massblue on

Bronco's defensive scheme clearly frustrated and confused Pat's offense, Brady and Josh (Mc)Daniels.  I found this article on ESPN very informative about what Bronco's did.  In particular, they came up with schemes that they had barely used during the season -- e.g., three man rush or spreading their DL very wide.  Very informative for a novice like me.

 

Link

CRISPed in the DIAG

January 25th, 2016 at 10:08 AM ^

Weird. I just made a throwaway comment in the Dwumfour thread.  

I'm still not linking to ESPN if I can help it, but I imagine the artcle describes Wade Phillips and Tom Coughlin as modern defensive masterminds for generating pressure with only four adown lineman, allowing them to drop the remainder of their team in pass coverage.  

If this is the article's narrative, it's pretty much the baseball equivalent of telling a pitcher to throw strikes on the corner of the plate.  Rest assured that plenty of teams have tried to beat the Pats with 6+ DB's. None of them had DL's like this year's Broncos or the Strahan-era Giants.

Yo_Blue

January 25th, 2016 at 10:10 AM ^

I thought the Pat's O Line did an exceptionally poor job of handling the 3 man rush.  I understand whiffing on the exotic stuff, but man that was brutal.  Brady had zero time in the pocket.  I don't think he has ever been hit or hurried that much.  That said, the running game should have been more available with the wide defensive splits.

bluebyyou

January 25th, 2016 at 11:08 AM ^

Somebody on Sam Webb's show made a point about one thing that makes a ton of sense in hindsight.  Because of the crowd noise, the Pats had to go with a silent snap count which the Broncos figured out and used to their advantage.  The fraction of a second in advantage gained getting off the line was enough to put just enough pressure on Brady to cause him to be errant on many of his passes.

Having home field advantage turned out to be  huge for Denver's defense. 

What seems to be missed in the discussion is in spite of everything Brady still threw for 310 yards (on a lot of passes) to Manning's 145.  Denver's total offense was a very inept 244 yards.

funkywolve

January 25th, 2016 at 11:14 AM ^

Around 70 of those yards came on Denver's first possession of the game.  

Homefield - agree.  Read some of the Boston Globe and Dan Shaughnessy made the point the Patriot's loss yesterday goes back to the regular season finale against the Dolphins.  If the Pats had beaten the Dolphins they had homefield, but the Patriots went out and laid a total egg in Miami.

True Blue Grit

January 25th, 2016 at 11:59 AM ^

I'd bet the farm that Patriots would have won.  So, even taking into account the injuries, they only have themselves to blame for not getting to the SB.  Still, even if they did, I believe the Panthers would have beat them.  They are running on all cylinders right now.  

LV Sports Bettor

January 25th, 2016 at 5:03 PM ^

Not defending's anyone here as I didn't care who won but at end of day both teams/qb's averaged 5.5 yards per attempt.

New England actually had less than 200 yards of offense with 10 minutes left in the game and didn't go past the Broncos until their were 4 minutes left in the game. Before that point of the game both offenses looked inept.

On a side note- you bring up a great point and is something I've always felt strongly about: Indoor stadium teams in the NFL (the Lions) should always try and build their defenses around having a real strong pass rush as opposing offenses are at a big disadvantage with the snap count inside these stadiums. 

Hail-Storm

January 25th, 2016 at 11:29 AM ^

how poor the Patriots run game was.  It never seemed like they broke past the line.  You'd expect at least some runs of 7-10 yards.

I loved to see Brady's run for the first down though.  It took me back to college and watching him run then. He rarely ran, but when he did, he somehow managed to pick up 10-15 yards in the most slow unathletic way possible. 

alum96

January 25th, 2016 at 10:13 AM ^

they came up with schemes that they had barely used during the season -- e.g., three man rush...

Like Durkin for OSU game?

Guess sometimes it works and sometimes its a fail whale.

umfan323

January 25th, 2016 at 10:16 AM ^

I'm not sure how many run plays the Pats had but clearly they needed to run more...I know Tom is great but him throwing the ball 50 times a game wasn't a good idea

Tex_Ind_Blue

January 25th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^

That's not the point. Pats have gone away from an established running back since... 2004? 

They have never thought abotu much continuity in that position, rather depending on plug-and-play options. It's frustating to see them become one-dimensional. One has to be able to run to keep the defense honest. Pats couldn't do it at all this year. 

LV Sports Bettor

January 25th, 2016 at 5:08 PM ^

it works. In the three games this season they had 15 team rushes or less: they were 3-0 and averaged 32 points per game.

dragonchild

January 25th, 2016 at 10:42 AM ^

Statistically, Denver has the best D in the NFL.

But New England is also a bad team built around a superstar.  It's the Colts' Manning all over again -- we're doing OK, so let's get complacent because our QB can paper over it.  Except the lack of a running game allowed Denver to rush 3, and they were already the #1 pass defense.  Also, the NFL has had it in for the Patriots for years now, so after a certain point the obstacles become insurmountable.

BursleyBaitsBus

January 25th, 2016 at 11:14 AM ^

Lets not act like Dion Lewis isn't important. He was critical to the Pats' first 10 games. Once he and Blount went out, it was slim pickings. 

The Oline and outside WRs on the other hand just suck.

 

Amazing that Belichick can find talent everywhere except for at the outside WR position specficially. 

UM Fan from Sydney

January 25th, 2016 at 10:19 AM ^

It's so annoying that the game did not go to OT simply because of a missed extra point. Now, there was still a chance that he could have missed the last extra point to not make it 20-20, but the likelihood of that happening was as slim as the first missed one.

El Jeffe

January 25th, 2016 at 10:57 AM ^

Yeah, I usually like Belichick's choices but that was puzzling. Not that things would have worked out this way, but they actually had 3 possessions in FG range in the final minutes, which would have won them the game without a TD or 2-pt. conversion.

In any event, Simms liked the call because he said that even if they made the FG they'd still have had to get the ball back and score a TD. That didn't make sense to me because

  1. they might have had to get the ball back even if they scored a TD after going for it on 4th down the first time, either because they would have missed the 2-pt. conversion or because Denver might have scored afterward, now having an incentive to score (with a tie game, unlike with an 8-point lead);
  2. If they had kicked the FG at first, then any subsequent TDs would have been for the win, not a tie; and
  3. As actually happened, that last TD would have required a 2 pt. conversion, which it would not have if they had kicked the FG.

Anyway, tl;dr, but I agree that I did not like Belichick's call there, is what I'm saying.

funkywolve

January 25th, 2016 at 11:58 AM ^

a 5 point lead doesn't give you as much comfort as an 8 pt lead.  When you're sitting on an 8 point, not only does the opponent have to score a TD they need a 2 point conversion, just to get to OT.  If NE kicks the FG, Denve knows one big play by NE and all of sudden the Broncos are losing.  

BigCat14

January 25th, 2016 at 1:48 PM ^

I like your dissenting opinion.  So many Brady colored eye glasses as well as drinking glasses filled with Peyton hate.  I am a literally a, lifelong Bronco fan who was not necessarily excited about Manning's arrival in my home city.  Mainly because I went to school in Tennessee at the end of '97 early '98 when Heisman and Natty were being won.  Tennessee fans were brutal and that spawned a hate for Manning that was unhealthy.  However, being a fan of the Broncos trumped that Manning would be the QB.  

Denver's D was absolutely awesome!  Brady and the excellent route running and work ethic is the only reason why the Pats were able to amass 300 passing yards.  Really out of desperation and throwing Gronk open, the late score should not have happened, imo.  Add to that Kubiak was conservative on O, relying on the D to finish, imo.  Denver deserved to win that game regardless of what Belicheck did or did not do, imo.  

 

Go Blue Go Broncos

Tex_Ind_Blue

January 25th, 2016 at 11:23 AM ^

Not necessarily. The ensuing kick-off could be returned to midfield giving Bronco's better field positions. Pats' didn't plan to keep the game close and then score on the last posession. It just worked out that way. When Pats failed their 4th down chances, they were able to keep the Broncos pinned close to their end zone. Knowing Kubiak and company (yes, we saw him call plays for Texans), that definitely affected the plays they called.