AFC East at Midseason: Sizing Up the Competition

As the Patriots near the midpoint of the 2009 NFL season, it makes a good deal of sense to consider what we’ve learned about the rest of the division. Which teams will pose a threat to the team’s playoff chances? Which teams are playing for draft position?

In a league that changes as frequently as the NFL, it is necessary to constantly re-evaluate one’s conclusions.

Begin Slideshow

Malcolm Gladwell, Ted Johnson, and Why Football Isn’t Like Dogfighting

In his latest article in The New Yorker, Malcolm Gladwell writes about the toll professional football takes on the brains of former players—how the years of collisions eventually lead to serious mental problems down the line.

At issue is whether the sustained legal hits to the head—as opposed to illegal actions—cause the long-term damage many players suffer from later in life.

Gladwell even draws a parallel to football and dogfighting, suggesting the brutality of the two sports is similar, and pondering whether football as we know it can vanish over the coming years.

This issue is particularly near and dear to Patriots fans, who saw Ted Johnson’s career cut short because of numerous concussions. He has said he suffers from post-concussive syndrome and intends to donate his brain to a Boston University study after he dies.

I am normally an unabashed Gladwell fan, but I strongly disagree with the comparison between dogfighting and football. I feel to paint the two with the same brush is unnecessarily sensationalist.

Let me start with the obvious: football has many positive qualities not shared by dogfighting. In an increasingly sedentary world, football encourages physical activity in young adults. Football instills discipline, and reinforces the value of teamwork and effort.

However, I believe the comparison fails because it does not take into account what makes dogfighting so objectionable in the first place: the lack of choice on the part of the participants.

Gladwell says:

“Part of what makes dogfighting so repulsive is the understanding that violence and injury cannot be removed from the sport. It’s a feature of the sport that dogs almost always get hurt.”

I would argue that a much larger part of dogfighting’s repulsiveness is that the dogs are forcibly compelled to fight. They are simply not given an option.

Indeed, Gladwell later writes:

“In a fighting dog, the quality that is prized above all others is the willingness to persevere, even in the face of injury and pain. A dog that will not do that is labelled a ‘cur,’ and abandoned.”

However, on the matter of the player’s choice, he devotes but one sentence, claiming we cannot accept that the risk of football injury is a risk “freely assumed.” I think a serious discussion of this matter is a fairly large omission on the part of the article.

If the article is in fact an argument for banning the game (it seems to be so—he argues that hits to the head are an integral part of the game, and no amount of better equipment or harsher rules would change that), then the matter of choice is paramount. We must ask ourselves if people should be allowed to engage in activities that could harm them?

Personal responsibility has been under attack in our society for quite some time. Smoking bans have moved beyond public buildings and restaurants, and are now threatening to move outdoors. The government is now considering all kinds of legislation to punish fat people for, well, being fat.

Yet there have been quasi-reasonable justifications put forth for both. Smoking, they claim, may harm others as well as oneself. The obese have an disproportionate effect on health care costs (a justification I find specious, but that’s beside the point).

Banning or forcibly reforming football, though, would take that question to another level entirely. I believe it would represent an unwarranted infringement on the public’s right to self-determination.

Does the NFL need to do more in this area? Of course.

Should players be better informed of the risks of playing? Definitely.

Should we continue to refine protective equipment and the rules of the game? Without a doubt.

But does football, even with all its injury woes, resemble dogfighting? Not in the least.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

How to Beat the New England Patriots

With five games in the books so far in the season, the defining characteristics of this Patriots team have begun to emerge.

What we have seen is a decent team—a team that performs well in spurts, but lacks any kind of sustained excellence. Basically, a team like every other NFL team.

The Patriots are emerging from an era in which excellence was a given, an expected quantity in any given game. This year’s team, though, has several exploitable, well-defined weaknesses.

How does one beat the Patriots this year? The following are important factors:

 

Have an accurate, risk-averse quarterback

Denver had several long drives against the Pats basically centered around their short passing game. They did not really connect on any long plays of consequence, but Kyle Orton was able to target his receivers, make conversions, and keep the ball out of the hands of the Patriots offense.

The Jets put Mark Sanchez in positions where he didn’t have to take many chances. He completed high-percentage throws for solid completion numbers (14 of 22).

The common denominator? Neither quarterback took many risks, but they forced the New England defensive backfield to make plays. That leads us to our next point.

 

Have receivers who can either elude, or power through, first contact

After the ball has been placed in the receivers’ hands, it’s up to them to make plays.

Remember, the quarterbacks have been throwing short passes. If the receivers are tackled immediately, getting a first down becomes that much harder.

Brandon Marshall was able to muscle his way past Patriots defenders, and Eddie Royal was able to run around them. Both were instrumental to their team’s success.

 

Frustrate Tom Brady

Brady is the key to his team’s offense. Hence, if you are able to put him off his game, you are much more likely to win.

The Jets were able to accomplish this through a variety of exotic blitzes, overloading one side and forcing Brady to guess where the pressure would come from.

The Broncos were able to accomplish this largely by luck—when left tackle Matt Light was forced to leave the game because of an injury, Brady became noticeably skittish. He went from having a Pro Bowler protecting his blind side to a rookie.

Nonetheless, the result was the same. After Light left, the offense basically did nothing.

 

Match up Randy Moss with a shutdown corner

In both the Denver and New York games, Moss faced off against incredible corners. Darrelle Revis could be the best young cornerback in the league, and Brady has always hated to challenge Champ Bailey.

Moss was nearly shut out of both games.

Teams seem to be challenging Moss, preventing him from getting short passes. There have been times when Moss has run free in the secondary, but Brady has been unable to hit him with the deep pass.

Until Brady can prove he can connect deep, teams will likely focus on preventing quick completions to Moss.

 

Debut a new offensive package

The Patriots have seemed vulnerable in recent years to new offensive sets.

Last year, the Wildcat took this team completely by surprise. Denver’s “Wild Horses” offense, though not having the runaway success Miami did, put the Patriots’ defense on its heels in the beginning of the game, setting the stage for success on the team’s typical plays.

For some reason, the team seems to go into shock when it sees something new. Perhaps Bill Belichick’s emphasis on situational football loses its effectiveness when an opponent reacts to the situations in a different way.

This Patriots team is by no means done. They still have the talent and coaching to compete and be successful.

However, the coaching staff clearly has its work cut out for itself. If the team cannot address its problems, other teams will exploit them ruthlessly.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

The Maroney Conundrum: Solving the Patriots’ Running Back Enigma

Perhaps the most frustrating thing to see in professional sports is talent unrealized.

For years, running back Laurence Maroney has befuddled Patriots fans; he shows glimpses of the gifted back drafted in the first round, but then either gets injured or succumbs to indecision.

Maroney has caught a lot of flak for his between-the-tackles running (or lack thereof). He simply can’t seem to hit the holes in the line; he’s always caught a yard back, waiting for something better to develop.

Quite frankly, I believe Maroney will never develop into the kind of bruising, workhorse back that NFL teams value so greatly. This does not mean, however, that he is useless to the Patriots offense.

I think one of the most frustrating things about the Maroney saga is the coaching staff’s failure to adapt to him.

It’s somewhat ironic that Bill Belichick, given his history of putting his players in the best position for their talents, exhibits a kind of selective blindness when it comes to Maroney.

Belichick, it seems, goes into each game with the intention of using Maroney as a between-the-tackles running back.

Maroney then goes out and either fails to produce or gets injured, and his reputation as a bust grows with the fanbase. It’s the classic square-peg-in-a-round-hole problem.

The truth is, the team needs to adapt to Maroney’s talents. Maroney, for example, is extremely gifted when given the ball in space: he’s excellent with screens, and catches the ball out of the backfield very well. The Patriots should strive to put him in these positions whenever possible.

The Patriots, in fact, already have a back whose prototype Maroney could follow: Kevin Faulk. Faulk never became the 20-carry back the team once envisioned, but used his talents (receiving, returning kicks) to become one of the team’s most consistent producers.

The team and the fans, though, thus far seem unwilling to let Maroney inhabit this role.

With Fred Taylor’s absence, Maroney’s prominence in the offense is sure to increase. I feel it would be a mistake, though, to use him as they were using Taylor. Giving Maroney a big workload in a game is an almost sure route to further injuries, helping no one.

Maroney may never fulfill all the promise he showed in college. If used properly, though, he could still be a dangerous weapon in the Pats’ arsenal.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

Nosce Te Ipsum: Lessons For The Pats So Far

One of the most important—and difficult—traits to obtain is self-knowledge. Constant and honest re-evaluation of oneself is the key to success.

When individuals lack it, they are susceptible to neuroses and delusions.

When organizations lack it, they are susceptible to institutional dysfunction.

Football teams must constantly evaluate and re-evaluate players, coaches, and opponents. With the incredibly talent gap between any two professional teams, the correct read of a situation can mean the difference between victory and defeat.

With that in mind, it seems a reasonable time to examine the Patriots’ season thus far with clear, unbiased eyes. What has the team learned? What’s worked? What hasn’t?

 

The defense has been surprisingly good.

Let’s face it, the Pats defense, and especially the secondary, has been a sore spot for some time. They have been gashed by good players, unable to get off the field in third-down situations, and have failed to generate a consistent pass rush.

This year’s unit has improved dramatically. Their secondary has been able to keep up with good receivers. They have been able to stop teams on third downs with greater efficiency (though they did allow the Ravens a disappointing 64 percent conversion rate).

The team still has to develop a pass rush, and they have allowed teams to move the ball a bit too much. Still, given the lack of the incredibly talented Jerod Mayo, this has been a great performance by the defense.

 

Rumors of Tom Brady’s demise may have been exaggerated.

He still has some rust to shake off, but Brady has rebounded from a traumatic injury faster than one could’ve expected.

After some lackluster games to start the season, Brady looked like the player of old against a good-to-very-good Ravens defense. He has not regained the form of 2007 (and who knows if he ever can?), but the 2003 or 2004 Brady is certainly not a bad alternative.

 

Joey Galloway is probably on his way out.

Some experiments fail, and it certainly looks like the Galloway experiment is headed in that direction. Galloway has seemingly been unable to find his rhythm in the Pats offense. He had the opportunity to take a larger role with the absence of Wes Welker, and was unable to capitalize.

Galloway certainly has time to turn things around, but it looks like a difficult path.

 

Wes Welker looks like the second most important player on the offense.

Not to downplay the excellent job Randy Moss has done in Welker’s absence, but the offense seems much crisper whenever Welker is on the field. Welker inhabits Troy Brown’s old role as Brady’s consistent and sure target.

Moss is undeniably talented and Julian Edelman is starting to come into his own, but Brady seems to prefer Welker when he needs to convert a third down.

 

Laurence Maroney needs to start producing.

It’s been the habitual refrain of Patriots fans almost since the running back was drafted, but Maroney has to start living up to his billing.

So far, he seems to have done away with some of the indecision that’s plagued his career, but an injury sidelined him for most of the Falcons game (enabling a breakout performance by Fred Taylor) and ineffectiveness caused an early exit in the Ravens game (seven attempts, six yards and paving the way for the Sammy Morris re-emergence).

Sooner or later, Maroney will run out of chances.

 

This is but an incomplete look at the issues facing the Pats so far. It is a long season, and these things will continue to develop.

Continued vigilance is necessary to keep small problems from turning into large ones.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

How Tom Brady’s Passing Performance Against the Ravens May Define His Season

It’s only the fourth week of the season, but the Patriots may be facing their most important game of the year.

A win against the Ravens would once again cement the team’s place among the elite in the NFL. A loss would consign them to the tier of “good but not great” teams and prove a serious blow to the Pats’ championship hopes.

In short, the Patriots must win on Sunday. What’s more, they need to do it through the air.

Tom Brady continues to be the most scrutinized man in the NFL. Some think he has become trigger-shy, others believe his physical ailments (sore shoulder, knee) continue to hound him, and still more ask if the superstar’s days are numbered.

Still, this is a Brady team. He is its focal point, and it has been designed around him.

To take the ball out of his hands and into those of a running back, as some have suggested, would be giving up the season.

To be sure, the Patriots have some talented running backs, but these players are not the grinding, pound-it-out backs that running teams rely upon.

Fred Taylor and Laurence Maroney are much more renowned for their speed and elusiveness than their power running.

Sammy Morris has shown some toughness, but substantial injuries in the last few years mean the team’s offense cannot solely be based on him.

BenJarvus Green-Ellis, though exhibiting flashes of promise, has not yet proved he can provide consistent production.

What’s more, should the team fall behind in a game (as happens to all teams in the NFL), it would be difficult to rally back with a primarily running-based attack.

The point is, this is not a “Brett Favre with the Vikings” scenario—this team will live and die based on Brady’s performance.

Brady must be allowed to once again find his rhythm. Merely hiding him from a defense will do little to restore his confidence (or his mechanics, if his physical ailments are indeed behind his struggles).

True, Brady has had difficulty establishing a rapport with his new receivers, but not passing the ball will hardly remedy that fact.

This will be a difficult week to get on track, but, should Brady return to form against a tough defense, many questions about this team will be answered.

If not, Pats fans may be facing a long, lost season.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

Pats vs. Ravens: Is Feeding Fred Taylor the Ball the Key to Victory?

The Patriots face their toughest test of the season next week when they face a Ravens team that finally appears to have put it all together.

Tom Brady, to be frank, has not looked impressive over the past three weeks. He’s missed throws, been skittish in the pocket, and got visibly frustrated during last week’s win against the Falcons.

His receivers have been mediocre thus far. Joey Galloway has been a disaster. Randy Moss, despite some great catches, hasn’t caught a deep pass. Wes Welker’s been injured. Julian Edelman, despite doing a fair Welker impersonation, is inconsistent—he’ll make a beautiful move on a defender on one play, then drop the ball on the next.

The team’s running game, and Fred Taylor in particular, have looked rather good. Taylor rushed for over 100 yards against Atlanta, and is averaging 4.6 yards per carry this year. When Taylor was rushing well, the offense looked in sync.

Given all these facts, one would conclude that a winning strategy would be to base the offense around Taylor next week.

This conclusion, however, would be wrong.

Consider the matchups: Taylor’s performance against the Falcons was good, but not dominant. Atlanta’s defense is ranked 24th in the league against the run so far this year.

Too small a sample size? Look at last year, when they finished 25th against the run.

Defending the run has been an Achilles’ heel for this Falcons team, and the Patriots were able to take advantage of that.

The Ravens, meanwhile, rank first in the NFL against the run this year, but in the middle of the pack (17th) in terms of pass defense. To be fair, that number is likely skewed by the fact that the Ravens have won their first three games, meaning opponents were more likely to pass in order to catch up.

One thing is clear, though: To focus on the running game would be attacking the Ravens’ biggest strength—hardly a great strategic move.

I think, if Welker returns to the field next week, we’ll see a return to the passing mentality that has defined the past few years.

Brady, though his performance has been off, has missed big plays by a matter of inches (and receiver drops). He’s actually been less rusty than Patriots fans had any right to expect and, with his favorite target back, he may begin to reclaim his 2007 form.

Also consider that the Ravens run a scheme similar to the one the Jets used to beat the Patriots in Week Two. Given that it now appears that the Patriots must beat the Jets to win the AFC East, getting pass reps against the same defense seems like a good idea.

Yes, it will be important to at least try to establish a running game on Sunday. Passing every down is not a successful strategy, no matter what team is playing. Trying to change the Patriots to a run-first team against the Ravens, though, is not a recipe for success.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

The Deification of The “Tough Coach”

If there’s one thing that bothers me about the NFL community (media, fans, etc.), it’s the fetishism for “tough” or “no-nonsense” coaches.

I don’t know why we seem to have this pathological need to see grown men chewed out by some emotionally unstable jackass, but everywhere I look, I see paeans to these individuals.

Take this Sports Illustrated piece by John Lopez. His thesis: tough coaches are needed because of the prevalence of spoiled behavior on the part of star athletes. Fair enough—this is the type of thing one sees everywhere.

Look at his examples, though. Michael Crabtree? Nonsensical considering the entire article is basically set up to praise 49ers coach Mike Singletary.

OK, maybe one could argue that Crabtree hasn’t been around Singletary to sufficiently absorb his toughness (how does that happen, by the way? Osmosis?). But Tom Brady? Yeah, Bill Belichick is a real softy. After a tough Jets loss last week, he took his players out for ice cream and told them they were all winners.

Also, consider the NFL’s current poster boy for bad behavior, Plaxico Burress, and his coach, Tom Coughlin. I suppose Coughlin isn’t tough enough either – he should have been able to keep the bullet out of Burress’ leg through sheer force of will. Maybe if he started his meetings 10 minutes early instead of just five, Burress would still be on the team right now.

My point is, it appears that coach toughness and player misbehavior are completely independent of one another.

The hard part about disproving the “tough coach” issue is the fact that it, like it’s “player’s coach” sibling, is rewarded after the fact.

Mike Singletary and Bill Cowher are tough coaches. Nick Saban is simply a jerk.

Tony Dungy is soft-spoken. Herm Edwards is a player’s coach.

Jon Gruden was tough when he won a Super Bowl with the Buccaneers, but I guess became less tough over time. Maybe he took a yoga class?

In this NY Times Freakonomics blog post, Stephen Dubner writes about “survivor bias,” the fact that we only look at the tactics of the successful while completely ignoring all others. I think it applies with “tough coaches” as well—we admire Coughlin, while completely ignoring the angry guys who fail (again, paging Nick Saban).

Being tough is not necessary to be an NFL head coach, nor is it the surefire way to success—it just happens that many coaches have a controlling attitude. Coaches, therefore, shouldn’t be tough for toughness’ sake, but coach the way that works best for them.

I’d go on, but I’m only three minutes early for a meeting with Coughlin. God knows what he’ll do to me.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

The New England Patriots Have an Identity Crisis

With two games played, Patriots fans now face more questions than answers.

The team has been largely disappointing thus far, falling behind a lackluster Bills team (necessitating a near-miracle comeback) and putting up a hard-to-watch effort on Sunday against the Jets.

Tom Brady has not looked quite right in either game: it appears obvious he has not fully recovered from his traumatic knee injury. It could be mental, or there could still be problems with the knee, but the Brady of 2009 has looked hapless, harried and gun-shy.

The offensive line has seemingly done little to help him. After a 2007 season when it seemed Brady was hardly touched until the Super Bowl, this unit has been sorely lacking. To be fair, Matt Cassel’s inexperience caused a lot of sacks last year, but this year’s iteration has allowed an unacceptable number of free blitzers, especially with a still-healing quarterback.

The receiving corps also appears to be off its game. Brady has yet to develop anything close to a rapport with Joey Galloway. Randy Moss has yet to catch a deep pass.

Wes Welker looked good against the Bills, but, in a surprise move, was held out of Sunday’s game. If Welker’s condition is chronic, it would be a great blow to this already sputtering offense.

The running game has been maddeningly inconsistent—it appears to work well at times but then vanishes, leaving the Pats in obvious passing downs and exacerbating the issues with Brady.

The defense has been decent, considering the flak it’s been getting recently (and especially considering the loss of linebacker Jerod Mayo). It’s currently ranked third in the NFL in terms of yardage allowed and, taking away a Brady pick-six in the Bills game, has allowed 17 and 16 points in its first two games.

This is not a dominant defense by any means, but it is one that should keep the Pats in games.

The Patriots need to define themselves as a team, and quickly. Next week, they play a Falcons team that has shown no signs of a letdown after last year’s surprise playoff run. Starting the season 1-2 may mean staying home come playoff time.

The Pats have played the first two games as if they expected the 2007 Brady to magically appear. Now, they must find something else on which to rely.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

QB Protectionism Is Bad For The Game

To really understand the NFL, one must know that it is a quarterback-driven league.

Quarterbacks are the central focus of the offense; they control where the ball goes.

Quarterbacks dominate the league’s marketing.

Quarterbacks get the biggest contracts.

Quarterbacks are legion in the broadcast booth.

Even though football is less star-driven than many other sports, quarterbacks make up the most recognizable figures in the game today. The league recognizes this, and has taken steps to protect these athletes, to insulate them as much as possible from the harsh realities of this physical game.

Sometimes, though, the desire to protect quarterbacks can interfere with the game itself. This cannot be allowed to happen.

Monday night’s game provided prime examples of over-protection. Sacks by both linebacker Adalius Thomas and tackle Vince Wilfork drew roughing the passer penalties. In both cases, the penalties extended the Bills’ drives.

Had the Patriots not conjured some last-second heroics, the penalty on Thomas would have undoubtedly been a major point of contention Tuesday morning, and it’s never a good thing when the officials are the topic of conversation.

Thomas did swing Edwards to the turf, but it was not in an excessively violent manner; he was merely trying to make a definitive tackle.

The Patriots, indeed, have had the problem of not finishing tackles in recent years, and it has occasionally led to losses. Should Thomas have attempted a less forceful tackle, possibly allowing Edwards to break free? Of course not.

This was a situation where the Patriots played well (Thomas was in position to make the sack and made use of the opportunity) and were put at a disadvantage because of a questionable call.

After watching Tom Brady’s knee collapse last year, Patriots fans are certainly sensitive to the possibility of an injured quarterback. However, I think we can all agree that, when protecting a quarterback becomes too much of a concern, it can negatively impact the game itself.

Indeed, I would argue most serious injuries (to the quarterback or otherwise) are not the result of illegal hits. They are simply the result of the speed of the game; an awkward movement is more likely to land one on the injured reserve than a vindictive player.

It is the NFL’s duty to protect its players, but when it goes overboard, it threatens the legitimacy of the game.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

« Previous Page — Next Page »

NFL Sport Channel Latest

• Just How Far Would You Go?
• Sorry Rex, But It Isn’t Happening
• Super Bowl Predictions: Five Stat-Free Reasons Why the Eagles Will Reach The Super Bowl
• Seahawks Attempt to Turn Corner With Heavy Pursuit of Pete Carroll
• Bill Cowher Unlikely to Coach in 2010