Pats D: How Bad Is It?
Copp
"This is how bad the Patriots pass defense is going to be this year.
Ryan Fitzpatrick -- who has completed 58 percent of his passes
historically -- went on a 14-of-18 streak for 178 yards to end
the game. And it wasn't in mopup time, either, as only four of
the passes came while the Bills were down by more than eight points.
The Patriots were able to turn two of Fitzpatrick's incompletions
into interceptions, but if Ryan Fitzpatrick and the Bills offensive
line can move the ball comfortably on you..."
Right now they are giving up 27.3 pts a game. To match last year's
17.8 pts/gm, they will have to give up an average of 15.6 pts/game
from here on out. Can they do it? Will they even get to a
mediocre 20 pts/game this season? Is there a better chance that
they will end up as the all time worst defense? Will we even be able to boil
their stinkitude down to a single number? Discuss.
MZ
> From the Boston Globe:
>
> "This is how bad the Patriots pass defense is going to be this year.
> Ryan Fitzpatrick -- who has completed 58 percent of his passes
> historically -- went on a 14-of-18 streak for 178 yards to end
> the game. And it wasn't in mopup time, either, as only four of
> the passes came while the Bills were down by more than eight points.
> The Patriots were able to turn two of Fitzpatrick's incompletions
> into interceptions, but if Ryan Fitzpatrick and the Bills offensive
> line can move the ball comfortably on you..."
>
>
> Right now they are giving up 27.3 pts a game.
No, I think it's 25 point something. Not a whole lot better. But it's
worth pointing out that their #1 ranked offense dominated two of their
three games, and the 2nd half prevent defense gave up some scores.
Maybe their prevent defense is a worry -- maybe one of these times a
team will actually be able to come back from a deficit (hasn't happened
yet). But so far, the reports of New England's D struggles are
overblown. If the officials hadn't given Buffalo a free TD last week,
then the Pats D would have given up a whopping 16 points. This is what
the Boston Globe is getting their panties in a twist about?
And why is this crossposted to the Jets NG??
Michael
the pats can still outscore 2/3 of the teams in the nfl. if they wan
to get back up to top five status, they need edge rushers and have to
fix the problems with the db's. injuries were costly there. still...
im beginning to think as are a lot of fans that bb feels he can throw
anything out there and still win with it no matter how inexperienced
or mediocre the talent.
MZ
I think he's also overrated as a defensive coach. He's a terrific
offensive mind, but there's not much evidence that he can produce
results on defense in today's NFL. Sure, once upon a time, in a land
far far away, he coached an excellent defense. He hasn't done anything
on defense in 20 years, unless we want to count what Romeo Crennel did
for him between '01 and '04. Surprise surprise, '05 (when Mangini took
over as DC) was the first year the Pats D became pedestrian. Mangini's
different -- he just doesn't know much about defense. How he's still an
NFL coach is mind boggling. Belichick does know about defense, but he
can't produce. He's incapable of molding his defensive philosophy to
fit the personnel he has.
Meanwhile, Crennel is coaching a defense that's currently presently
ranked in the top 3. Quick, name a Chiefs defensive player! Exactly.
Pats D will remain middle of the road. They won't become the debacle
that everyone's saying, but they also won't win games for the team
either. The question is, and always has been, whether or not Brady and
co. can dominate. With Faulk gone, I'm beginning to have my doubts.
mr dude@harvarduniversity.edu
>
> Pats D will remain middle of the road. They won't become the debacle
> that everyone's saying, but they also won't win games for the team
> either. The question is, and always has been, whether or not Brady and
> co. can dominate. With Faulk gone, I'm beginning to have my doubts.
Faulks gone. Maroney was traded.
Moss is as old as Blanda and is being a bitch begging for more money.
Mankins told Belichick to go fuck himself.
Brady won't throw a long pass because he is afraid it will mess up his
hair.
This is a team in turmoil.
Just like Belichick caused the Browns to move, the new Patriots will
be the L.A. Patriots!!!
mr dude (never wrong)
Harlan Lachman
MZ <ma...@nospam.void> wrote:
I agree with Burf and corrected the subject but yours is an intriguing
analysis. I hope you be right.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
dont they have two first round choices next year ??? two first round
picks can change a defense. especially if they draft a dominatig edge
rusher. look what peppers did last night... i think they went for the
long range build over time deal. they might have even held the fort
well enough until reinfocements made it if not for the injuries to the
db's and ty warren. they had some serious bad luck. im also
wondering about the offense. they had hard time against the jets in
the second half where miami passed all over them.
MZ
They're in very good shape as far as youth goes. 24 draft picks in the
past two drafts (many of them turned out to be pretty good) and well
positioned in the next draft. But that doesn't help them right now.
They've got a very young team, guys that show flashes of individual
effort at times, but don't seem to be able to play as a team. That
boils down to coaching, in my view.
I also think some of the decision-making has been bad. I'm still trying
to figure out, when Buffalo was running outside all day long because the
Pats OLBs couldn't set the edge...why was the Pats best run-stopping
outside linebacker (Banta-Cain) sitting on the bench? Because of his
late-hit penalty last week? Seriously? Belichick holds a grudge that
long? Despite the general view that Belichick makes cold calculated
decisions, sometimes I get the impression that he makes emotional
decisions. This might be where some of his coordinators in the past
held him in check. And yes, I think you're right that he's arrogantly
gotten the impression that he can plug any player into any position and
get them to perform -- he seems content with having a bunch of guys who
can "do their jobs" (as they're trained to say), but they don't make
plays. They just do their jobs.
As for the Pats problems with the Jets... well, the Jets made better
adjustments. Also, let's just say that Schott isn't the only OC in the
league drawing criticism. Even though the Pats hung 38 points on the
Bills D, the playcalling in that game was very questionable too. The
only reason they got anything done offensively is because Brady and his
receivers were clicking and the offensive line was opening up holes ...
oh, and the Bills D is unbelievably bad. You'll get to see that this
week. :)
Copp
MZ <ma...@nospam.void> wrote:
> > Right now they are giving up 27.3 pts a game.
>
> No, I think it's 25 point something.
Nope, they've given up 82 points. 82/3=27.3. Good
for 28th in the league.
John C TX
I will pat myself on the back after three games on this as I saw the
Chiefs success.
:)
They have Crennel coaching defense, Weis on offense and Muir coaching
the OL.
http://www.nfl.com/teams/coaches?coaType=assist&team=KC
I wonder if BB even considered bringing back Crennel & or Weis or of
the Pats are just too cheap?
>
> Pats D will remain middle of the road. They won't become the debacle
> that everyone's saying, but they also won't win games for the team
> either. The question is, and always has been, whether or not Brady and
> co. can dominate. With Faulk gone, I'm beginning to have my doubts.
Health is so critical to the offense at RB although it isn't like
there is a big difference in what they have except BJGE. You are
right he is just soft.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
Mark... Watch what the Pats defense does against the Fish. It is a
matter of styles. They have an ideal defensive system for the Fish
offense. I bet they hold them to less than half the passing yards the
Jets gave up. I have to say though... The Jets did what I said they
had to do against the wild cat. They did not abandon the gaps. They
did a great job of it. The defensive backfied was a disaster. Partly
a man problem issue and party a result of bad coverage scheme.
MZ
I think you're counting special teams TDs. We're talking about the defense.
Smithee
This is going to be a good defense. WHEN they become a good defense
is unknown. But right now, there are a bunch of fast, young, athletic
players making mistakes that young, inexperienced players make.
Unfortunately, I don't know when it will all come together and the
youngsters stop making the mistakes they're making now. I would not
be surprised if this defense gets very good come November and
December. I would also not be surprised if they are still struggling
throughout the season and don't come together until next year.
John C TX
> On 9/29/2010 9:04 AM, Copp wrote:
>
> > MZ<m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>
> >>> Right now they are giving up 27.3 pts a game.
>
> >> No, I think it's 25 point something.
>
> > Nope, they've given up 82 points. 82/3=27.3. Good
> > for 28th in the league.
>
> I think you're counting special teams TDs. We're talking about the defense.
Mark, good point. Neither Yahoo, Pro Football Reference or NFL.Com
sorts it that way.
MZ
I agree with you about youth. A lot of these young players are showing
flashes here and there. Spikes looks good one moment and then looks
like crap. The same thing goes for McCourty and Brace and Arrington.
Then you've got Butler, who was one of the top players on defense during
camp, who's now hit a rough patch. If they can all get it together at
the same time, they'll become a productive unit. Maybe Dean Pees wasn't
as bad a coach as many of us thought. Because Patricia/Belichick and
whoever else just ain't getting it done. The only player right now
who's consistently looked good every week is Pat Chung, who's making a
strong case for the pro bowl.
The Jets face similar issues in their secondary. Wilson has, for the
most part, looked like crap so far. But he also shows flashes of
brilliance which makes you remember why they drafted him. They've also
had some great play and then some bad play out of all their safeties.
Some teams are often slow out of the gate, or have particular units that
are slow out of the gate. The Pats and Jets are both exhibiting this
tendency right now.
Polarhound
http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com/2010/09/patriots-grade-well-on-one-side-patience-needed-on-other
"The Tuesday report cards are out, and as you might imagine, the
Patriots offense scored quite well, while their defensive teammates were
handed flunking grades for the most part – which they deserve for their
performance.
However, a problem I do have with this type of assessment involves
expectations. What are the expectations for this defense? For many
people it apparently is Super Bowl- caliber, which simply isn’t
realistic. This is a young group that is just learning to play in the
NFL, let alone function together as a cohesive unit. They’re being
graded on a scale of whether they are an elite defense. They’re not at
that level. They have a long way to go to just be good.
This, along with leadership takes time to develop. It’s not in fashion
for the media to point this out, as they seem ultra-focused on the
week-to-week view of things. An Albert Breer (
http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2010/09/defense_remains.html
)blog post yesterday is a perfect example. He starts out by basically
insisting that after three weeks, this defense should be so much more
developed by now. Three weeks! He moans that ”roughly one-fifth of the
season” is gone now. That’s 18.75% of the season! That’s ridiculous.
Does anyone remember the 1999 and 2000 Patriots? 8-8 and 5-11 records?
Who was on that defense? Ty Law, Tedy Bruschi, Ted Johnson, Willie
McGinest, Lawyer Milloy…all guys who would become stalwarts on Super
Bowl winners. At that point however, what was the view of those guys?
Underachievers? For the most part, yes. Were they viewed as potential
team leaders on a Super Bowl winner? I certainly don’t recall that being
the case, even though most of them had been to a Super Bowl under Bill
Parcells just a few seasons prior. Johnson and McGinest were perpetually
injured and making big bucks, and many people questioned whether Bruschi
was an every-down linebacker.
By the time 2001 came around, most of these guys had been playing
together for five or more seasons. I am NOT suggesting that the talent
level of the current Patriots defense is on the level of those guys, but
there is talent here. It’s going to need time to come together.
Expectations need to be lowered. This is not a Super Bowl caliber
defense, or even a good defense right now. No one is suggesting that,
least of all me. So rather that fully focusing on the stats (like Breer
does) perhaps its time to look at little closer at individual
performance to guage whether improvement is being made."
John C TX
> And now, a little common sense from Bruce Allen:
>
>
> "The Tuesday report cards are out, and as you might imagine, the
> Patriots offense scored quite well, while their defensive teammates were
> handed flunking grades for the most part – which they deserve for their
> performance.
>
> However, a problem I do have with this type of assessment involves
> expectations. What are the expectations for this defense? For many
> people it apparently is Super Bowl- caliber, which simply isn’t
> realistic. This is a young group that is just learning to play in the
> NFL, let alone function together as a cohesive unit. They’re being
> graded on a scale of whether they are an elite defense. They’re not at
> that level. They have a long way to go to just be good.
>
> This, along with leadership takes time to develop. It’s not in fashion
> for the media to point this out, as they seem ultra-focused on the
> )blog post yesterday is a perfect example. He starts out by basically
> insisting that after three weeks, this defense should be so much more
> developed by now. Three weeks! He moans that ”roughly one-fifth of the
> season” is gone now. That’s 18.75% of the season! That’s ridiculous.
>
> Does anyone remember the 1999 and 2000 Patriots? 8-8 and 5-11 records?
> Who was on that defense? Ty Law, Tedy Bruschi, Ted Johnson, Willie
> McGinest, Lawyer Milloy…all guys who would become stalwarts on Super
> Bowl winners. At that point however, what was the view of those guys?
> Underachievers? For the most part, yes. Were they viewed as potential
> team leaders on a Super Bowl winner? I certainly don’t recall that being
> the case, even though most of them had been to a Super Bowl under Bill
> Parcells just a few seasons prior. Johnson and McGinest were perpetually
> injured and making big bucks, and many people questioned whether Bruschi
> was an every-down linebacker.
Maybe my memory is hazy but I think everyone blamed Pete Carroll and
were starting to blame BB until Mo Lewis took out Bledsoe. What idiot
didn't like Law, Bruschi, & company?
>
> By the time 2001 came around, most of these guys had been playing
> together for five or more seasons. I am NOT suggesting that the talent
> level of the current Patriots defense is on the level of those guys, but
> there is talent here. It’s going to need time to come together.
> Expectations need to be lowered. This is not a Super Bowl caliber
> defense, or even a good defense right now. No one is suggesting that,
> least of all me. So rather that fully focusing on the stats (like Breer
> does) perhaps its time to look at little closer at individual
> performance to guage whether improvement is being made."
They are young players & could be the next group that is the core
defense for several Super Bowls. They also could be Kerry Rhodes.
MZ
Bruschi hadn't established himself yet. He was still miscast as an OLB
in a 4-3. There were also some people questioning whether or not Law
was overrated. He signed a contract and some accused him of being lazy.
He turned it around in '01 and never looked back. As Polarhound said,
Johnson and McGinest were constantly criticized for being injured all
the time. The rest of the team had guys like Bobby Hamilton, Otis
Smith, Bryan Cox, and Roman Phifer (all ex-Jets?) who Michael would have
called retreads, but who were all major contributors to that '01
defense. This was also Vrabel's first year with the Pats. The only
ones at the start of '01 who weren't criticized were Milloy (ironically
enough) and Seymour, who they just drafted.
Great scheme back then, btw. Crennel mixed up the 4-3 and 3-4
masterfully (they mostly operated out of the 4-3 that year) and they
didn't use the blitz a crazy amount but they knew WHEN to use it and
would often get a ton of pressure just by sending one guy from here or
there. Great example of coaching up a squad that was thin on depth and
didn't have outstanding edge rushers, but had good cover guys and tough
as nails linebackers. Reminiscent of last year's Jets D in those ways.
>>
>> By the time 2001 came around, most of these guys had been playing
>> together for five or more seasons. I am NOT suggesting that the talent
>> level of the current Patriots defense is on the level of those guys, but
>> there is talent here. It’s going to need time to come together.
>> Expectations need to be lowered. This is not a Super Bowl caliber
>> defense, or even a good defense right now. No one is suggesting that,
>> least of all me. So rather that fully focusing on the stats (like Breer
>> does) perhaps its time to look at little closer at individual
>> performance to guage whether improvement is being made."
>
> They are young players& could be the next group that is the core
> defense for several Super Bowls. They also could be Kerry Rhodes.
Exactly. Everyone always assumes that young players will get better.
Sometimes they peak in their first year. Mayo and Wilhite are two guys
that come to mind. Or Vilma with the Jets.
Michael
> On 9/29/2010 3:29 PM, John C TX wrote:
> The rest of the team had guys like Bobby Hamilton, Otis
> Smith, Bryan Cox, and Roman Phifer (all ex-Jets?) who Michael would have
> called retreads, but who were all major contributors to that '01
> defense.
i also remember katzenmoyer... what ever happened to him ??? i
remember big expectations and then a bad injury and then a come back
attempt and then he dissapeared
MZ
Neck injury. This was pre-'01 though. IIRC, he ended his career in '99
or '00.
John C TX
Michael
other pats defensive guys i remember from that era.. not sure if they
were there for 2001 thought... willy "big play" clay, jimmy hitchcock,
lawyer milloy, tebuckey jones... i think izzo was still there too...
and... although offense, our current rt was a patriot at the time if i
remember correctly
MZ
Yeah, Woody played center for the Pats for a long time. Made it to the
pro bowl. But he couldn't shotgun snap. So, strangely enough, in '01
they had Woody playing center but would swap him and Mike Compton at
LG/C in shotgun! Woody would move over to guard, Compton to center.
When the Pats drafted Koppen in I think '03, Koppen became full time
center and Woody was guard.
I was just thinking about this the other day. If Woody is struggling at
RT so far this year, and Slauson is struggling at guard, why not try
Woody at LG and Hunter at RT?
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
i watched the fish game replay last night and woody looked just
fine... check out my new post above "Slauson... Jets". Papa was
suggesting may be Slauson as RT. He did play T at Nebraska too, but
I'm not sure if Slauson would be better off there even if Woody was
still having problems...
MZ
> On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 15:39:36 -0400 MZ<ma...@nospam.void> wrote:
>
>> Everyone always assumes that young players will get better.
>> Sometimes they peak in their first year. Mayo and Wilhite are two guys
>> that come to mind. Or Vilma with the Jets.
>
> players on a Super Bowl winning team and has been to the Pro Bowl more
> than once. Not his fault that Mangini couldn't figure out how best to
> use him.
My point was that everyone expected him to be king of the world after
his rookie season. He never got better.
John C TX
That or how about Turner at LG?
I bet Ducasse ends up being a tackle or selling fishing tackle.
Polarhound
2001 actually.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/13/sports/ncaafootball/13osu.html
"It is indeed strange how things turned out for Katzenmoyer, the
can’t-miss prospect who did. He left the New England Patriots’ training
camp without permission in 2001 because of a neck injury, retired after
two injury-plagued seasons in the N.F.L., and proceeded to avoid the
public spotlight as if it were, well, a blitzing linebacker.
..
Drafted by the Patriots in the first round of the 1999 N.F.L. draft,
Katzenmoyer began his pro career under Pete Carroll, the current
Southern California coach. But a helmet-to-helmet collision with Buffalo
fullback Sam Gash in his rookie season caused a serious neck injury that
never got better.
After two operations that included fusing two disks, Katzenmoyer gave
football one last shot in 2001. After a day of full contact, he felt the
pain return and panicked. He quietly left training camp after breakfast
and had not been heard from since. "
Harlan Lachman
Copp
MZ <ma...@nospam.void> wrote:
> > Nope, they've given up 82 points. 82/3=27.3. Good
> > for 28th in the league.
> >
>
> I think you're counting special teams TDs. We're talking about the defense.
Well, unless you're going to subtract the points
given up by other teams special teams it won't be useful
for comparison. The point is: the Pats defense sucks.
They may get better, but right now they stink.
MZ
> In article<x_2dnQ8jgsQOzT7R...@giganews.com>
> MZ<ma...@nospam.void> wrote:
>>> Nope, they've given up 82 points. 82/3=27.3. Good
>>> for 28th in the league.
>>>
>>
>> I think you're counting special teams TDs. We're talking about the defense.
>
> Well, unless you're going to subtract the points
> given up by other teams special teams it won't be useful
> for comparison.
That doesn't make any sense at all.
> The point is: the Pats defense sucks.
> They may get better, but right now they stink.
They've got some problems, no question, but let's keep it in
perspective. The Pats D played one really bad game, one pretty good
game, and one somewhere in between. It'll be interesting to see where
they go from here.
Michael
> On 9/29/2010 7:49 PM, Copp wrote:
>
> > MZ<m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> >>> Nope, they've given up 82 points. 82/3=27.3. Good
> >>> for 28th in the league.
>
> >> I think you're counting special teams TDs. We're talking about the defense.
>
> > Well, unless you're going to subtract the points
> > given up by other teams special teams it won't be useful
> > for comparison.
>
> That doesn't make any sen
se at all.
>
> > The point is: the Pats defense sucks.
> > They may get better, but right now they stink.
>
> They've got some problems, no question, but let's keep it in
> perspective. The Pats D played one really bad game, one pretty good
> game, and one somewhere in between. It'll be interesting to see where
> they go from here.
again... they will do good against miami... at least better than the
jets d. did....
to introduce somthing new here regarding styles... i made my
predictions about the jets win/loss record this season in here not too
long ago. thus far, i'm correct on the first three... soon to be
four. i had them at 12-4 with losses to Ravens, GB, NE at home and
Pittsburg... I'm going to change my mind about GB... I think the Jets
will beat them. GB is too one dimentional on offense. Teams that do
not have a ballanced offense are going to lose to the Jets. I did not
know that GB had an absolute hollow running game, nor did I know that
their o-line was such a problem.
Here is my revised predictions:
1. Raves: L * (I knew rthey would not yet be ready to start the season
with an agressive offense)
2. Pats W* (i expected them to be up for this at home. superbowl II )
3. Fish: W *( sweeeep part I)
4. Buf: W* (no chance unless jets forget to show up)
5. Vikes: W (favre missing on all cylinders. no rice, vike o-line an
issue, some of the jets team wants to show favre up)
6: Denver: W (this could be a jet loss despite half the denver team
being in IR. Denver plays with ballance)
7.GB: W (im changing this. I had it as a L. they are to unbalanced
on offense. the jets d will have a qb feeding frenzy)
8:Det: W (they just not there yet.. suh is scarey... gotta make sure
he does not go one on one or we could have sanchez soup)
9.Clev:W (mangini wants this game badly and will make hiself known to
the team, but that wont be good enough. they just lacking in
manpower)
10.HOU:W (running game does not scare me)
11.CIN:W (if palmer wakes up, this could be a loss for the jets. as of
now, i cant call them ballanced with palmer playing the way he is)
12.NE: L (pats defense should improve by this time)
13.MIA: W. (it will only be harder for the Fish with the Jets at home
and their db's up and running)
14. Steelers; L (as much as I want this game, they are very well
ballanced on offense and great on d. This team is ideal to beat the
Jets. No to mention the Steeler Shill refs count for 14 points in
their favor)
15: Chicago: W (Martz vs Rex... Bears will need to find a ground
attack or else)
16.Buf: W
Final record (best case but possible) 13-3
*Note... Houston, Denver and Cin could all give them trouble.. I'm
going to say that they will probably fall to one or two of those
teams...
Final record (probable) 11-5
Injuries not withstanding
MZ
Looks pretty good to me. I had predicted 10-6 I think. I don't
remember. I think 10-6 or 11-5 looks likely to me. I can see a 3-way
tie in the division.
I don't think you can underestimate Minnesota. They've got a good
defense, and who the hell knows which Brett will show up. Peterson is
always a threat to take it to the house, and as good as the Jets D is,
I'm not yet convinced that they can keep the play in front of them all
the time. I'm also still not sure about Sanchez/Schott, despite their
being able to put points on the board the last two weeks.
MZ
> better.
Maybe. But a lot of people did. Just like how people just assumed that
Mayo would get better after being DROY two years ago. Sometimes it
happens, sometimes it doesn't. In Vilma's (and Mayo's) case, it didn't.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
agree with all of your points... also... one team on the list
including the jets may blow a few games or they may have some amazing
production that was unexpected. the mob of nfl public opinion and
bandwagoneers changes week to week. my worry with the jets has alwas
been schott. the ravens game seemed to prove it but then the past two
games blew my assessment out of the water. going into the season,
with cromartie and wilson added on, i figured the jets defensive backs
would be the pearl of the team... they would go from number one
against the pass to the sublime. and look what has been happening....
like jim mora said in one of his melt-downs...
"You don't know. You just don't know. You may think you know, but you
don't know. And you never will."
that about sums it up, but i still plan to keep at it :-)
John C TX
Michael, before the season started I thought 11-5 after opening with
two losses. This is the NFL where upsets are a part of life & we have
a young QB.
I am not that worried about Houston 3/4 DB's would not start on most
teams. They also have trouble picking up the pass rush vs. a good
3-4. Denver is tough at home
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
did you see the bears-packers game ??? what do you think about the
bears ??? they could give the jets trouble too. i like martz a
lot... even more than henning... i had a strong feeling he'd work out
with cutler. lets see how they do against the giants this weekend.
John C TX
I watched a little bit & remember what Cutler did to us a few years
ago. Granted, that was Mangini and they still had Shanahan.
Like I said this is the NFL.
John C TX
> when he was good.
You could put a German Shepherd in a helmet & he would be better than
Wilson. He is awful.
Copp
obvious mistakes, it's bad:
http://www.nfl.com/videos/new-england-patriots/09000d5d81af5d32/Playbook-Patriots-vs-Dolphins
MZ
They did a good job in that piece. Confirms that Spikes is having some
major difficulties early on. Although the second play they criticized
him on didn't make any sense (he was crashing the line -- it was
apparent that this was the play design, that wasn't a playaction bite).