ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
I agree. The team needed to get faster and younger, and the best way to do that is to have a lot of starters be rookies.
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
2 could easily be addressed by also mentioning that the Belichick Pats have never drafted a LB who anywhere near Mayo's potential and talent coming right out of the gate. Rather than assuming the negative, you have to at least acknowledge the possibility that maybe Wheatley and Mayo are starting where rookies haven't in the past because they're far better, at this point, than any other rookie that we've had at their position has been.
As was opined by others here, it's probable that BB hired Hobson with the intent of starting him inside. It's possible that Mayo is starting based on the belief that a fast, inexperienced Mayo is better than a slow, experienced Seau. That's a tribute to Mayo, but I do feel better knowing that Seau is only a call away. The failure of Hobson cost me some comfort at the ILB position. At the time he looked like a good pickup.
As was opined by others here, it's probable that BB hired Hobson with the intent of starting him inside. It's possible that Mayo is starting based on the belief that a fast, inexperienced Mayo is better than a slow, experienced Seau. That's a tribute to Mayo, but I do feel better knowing that Seau is only a call away. The failure of Hobson cost me some comfort at the ILB position. At the time he looked like a good pickup.
For me the one wild card is Mayo, I really don't have a handle on how good he is.... I know everyone is saying he looks great and they like. I don't know, I have seen him give ground or get sealed inside while flowing to the ball, he has only seemed physical with the guards when he was mainlining it to the backfield. Now in fairness to him they have been playing deep off the ball, they must just be letting him get his eyes under him, so to speak.
I will now brace myself for the barage of criticism.....
I disagree on Wilfork, I think he played well as a rookie, and we won a SB that year.
Seymour started as a rookie and played, IMO, at a probowl level - agreed
Light started as a rookie, and played well (we won the SB) - agreed
Warren started in his rookie season at NT and played well. - Disagree - Warren backed up Hamilton at LE. Klecko backed up the NT and got pushed around
Wilson started as a rookie, and Samuel was the nickel, on a SB champ. - Agreed
Maroney equally shared time with Dillon and did not struggle. Disagree - Maroney was hardly effective his first year, reported to be in BB's doghouse
Branch did not struggle. Agreed. I think you can add Graham and Green from this draft class as well
Koppen started day 1 and did not struggle. Disagree - Koppen started as a backup and came in as an injury replacement
I am having a hard time finding the rookie BB put on the field that didnt play well.
Jackson, Dexter Reid, Lua didn't play well. Not to many rookies saw significant playing time and didn't contribute. I'm not sure how many were counted on in a starting role on day one however, outside of Seymour, Light, Mankins, and I guess Wilson although he started in week two.
Last edited by D-cleater; 09-04-2008 at 07:59 PM..
You sure? I recall that Koppen stepped in when the LG went down due to injury and Woody replaced him. Woody started at Center when Koppen was a rookie
I think Woody got hurt in week 1 and Koppen played from week 2 through the Super Bowl. So technically he wasn't the opening day starter but he did play significantly as a rookie 5th rounder and was certainly up to the task.
Interesting statistic: on the average 3% of rookies start game 1. Of the 704 starters this year 25 are rookies(yes, 3%). This doesnt include guys like DMF, Gholston, Stewart or guys that will get alot of reps,just full time guys. We are the only winning team starting more than 1, and 2/11 on D=18%---thats 6x higher than a "average" team...The only other starting CB is Flowers on KC, the only other LB is Lofton on ATL.
Last edited by jeffbiologist; 09-04-2008 at 10:24 PM..
Interesting statistic: on the average 3% of rookies start game 1. Of the 704 starters this year 25 are rookies(yes, 3%). This doesnt include guys like DMF, Gholston, Stewart or guys that will get alot of reps,just full time guys. We are the only winning team starting more than 1, and 2/11 on D=18%---thats 6x higher than a "average" team...The only other starting CB is Flowers on KC, the only other LB is Lofton on ATL.
Jeff, can you give a source for these stats? On the face of it they seem frankly nonsensical. For instance you say that 25 rookies are starting around the league, but that only 3% of rookies start. 25 = 10% of rookies, not 3%.
(And of course, that includes everybody down through 7th round comp picks. What percentage of 1st-round picks start? And the ones that don't, especially high picks, are doubtless giving their fans fits. Here we are complaining that our top two picks looked good enough from day 1 to beat out veterans! Talk about high-class problems. )
Re: Counting on Rookies
)
Linear Mode
