PatsBoy12

Excellent post. I also pointed ou the fact that during that span of LB dominance (apparently), Pittsburgh made a total of one SB appearance, in which that particular LB corp and the team were handled by Dallas.

HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

Your argument is terrible. Everybody in defense of BB says the same thing. First, he coached the Giants. I'm not talking about the Giants, I'm talking about the Patriots. Also, was BB in charge of drafting guys like Harry Carson, Carl Banks and Lawrence Taylor? If he wasn't, it makes your argument even worse. Second, "But he's won 3 super bowls with older unheralded LB's". Thanks for the great insight. Since 2005, their LB's have been regressing and BB has drafted 2 LB's in the first 3 rounds since. Mayo is a good start but Crable is a question mark. Even any moron on the street can tell you that the LB's are what makes the 3-4 go. For a team that has had the least amount of holes on their roster since 2004, it should've have been a cake walk to replace their LB's.

DaBruinz

Then what do you call a person who has no concept of how hard it is to find players that will fit the system? Because that is what you are. Personally, I consider them clueless and they always remind me of the line from Forrest Gump that goes something like this: "Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get." ALL sports drafts are the epitome of this phrase. The ONLY team that knows 100% who they are going to get is the #1 overall pick. And even then, they don't know how that person is going to perform on the field/rink/court.

Also, BB was heavily involved in the drafting of Carson, Carl Banks and Lawrence Taylor. Just like the coaches on the Pats are also heavily involved.

People go on and on about all these guys that they could have drafted, but very few stop to consider the following: How coachable is the player? How personable is the player? Can the player recognize the opposing team's plays prior to the snap? Does the player complete his assignment or does he free lance? If a player isn't coachable with Belichick's coaching style, how would he succeed here? If he's not personable, then how will he get along with other teammates? If he can't diagnose the play, then how does he know to react? If he can't complete his assignments, that leaves holes in the schemes. If he free lances, that leaves holes in the schemes..

There are a multitude of things that the Patriots look for. Its not just STATS or a particular height/weight combination. And too many people forget all these things. And they are things that we, as fans, can't know because we don't get to see behind the closed doors..

PatsBoy12

That's because everyone thinks they see everything when they watch a game on TV or when they watch highlights of the player on whatever sports channel or website. Nowadays, everyone is an expert. Few people stop to realize that these coaches spend hours watching a single play or game over and over from every angle possible to make their assessments. They don't stop to realize that sometimes these coaches actually go to watch these guys in person. I bet most people don't even know what to look for at certain positions in the first place. It's easy to throw out insults and criticisms when you have the incredible advantage of hindsight. To suggest that BB probably knows more about football than we do combined now draws the "defending BB tooth-and-nail" insults. I just don't get it.

Do some of you realize that it's his livelihood to evaluate players, manage a team and personnel, and all of the other things he does? Do you all realize that the man has compiled the second best winning percentage this decade and is the active leader among active NFL coaches in wins? Does all that mean the man is infallible or hasn't made mistakes? Of course it doesn't. What it does mean, however, is that he's pretty darn good at his job and he will one day be in Canton. All the people who are talking their nonsense have yet to propose what they would have done given the opportunity. If I thought I knew even half of what guys like BB, Dungy, Phil Jackson, and some of the other greats, I'd be turning in applications to every professional team out there. I wouldn't be on Patsfans.com talking smack and criticizing someone else's football knowledge.

Bruinz, I say just bow out of the argument because he's going to remain steadfast. In the end, people like you and me and others who acknowledge that BB probably knows more about football than the rest of us are just going to fall victim to he criticism that we're just blindly defending him and we think he's above making errors.

HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

Those are all great points, points that I can't argue with. My whole argument is that it took BB almost 10 years to draft a LB within the first three rounds of the draft. After their most recent super bowl win in 2004, LB has been their most glaring need. Each and every year, not only do the "NFL experts" acknowledge that LB is a glaring need, we acknowledge it's a glaring need as well. You don't exactly have to be an "NFL expert" to figure this out. The Pats struggled in 2005 because their LB's were dreadful. They lost the AFCCG because their LB's were exhausted and had a lack of depth. Finally, some can argue that the defense lost them the super bowl in 2007 and their defense as a whole sucked in 2008.

It's kind of odd that the consensus on this board states that the weakest link on this team is at LB. However, some people in this thread seem to think otherwise. So which one is it?

Deus Irae

Not precisely on point, but close enough:

The future of the Patriots 'D' and the 3-4 tipping point

__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius

HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

I agree that the Colvin injury in 2003 really jacked up the Pats plan for 3-4. In fact, I think Colvin could've been a sack machine like he was in Chicago. But ever since his injury, he really was never the same. Also, the random stroke to Teddy Bruschi hurt as well.

BB had his D-line complete when they drafted Wilfork in 2004. How many D-lineman for a 3-4 do you need? Again from 2005-2009, BB only drafted 2 LB's in the first 3 rounds. Also, the Pats have been so cheap with their money and so inflated with their ego that they actually thought they could make Monty Biesel a starting caliber LB. In addition, they thought they could revive the career of Chad Brown as well. It didn't take an "NFL expert" to figure out that these were questionable moves.

Deus Irae

1.) Had Wilfork gone down for any length of time, this team would have been up a certain creek without a paddle. Saying that the line was complete is just insane. The line is finally 'complete' now, if Brace pans out, and this 'complete' line may last only one season due to the contract situations of Wilfork and Seymour.

2.) Bruschi suffered his stroke in 2005, and Ted Johnson didn't retire until training camp of that same season. Guys like Beisel and Brown were forced into situations they weren't prepared for or capable of as a result.

3.) Adalius Thomas was signed, you may recall. Unfortunately, he's been Colvin-like in his struggles with injury.

4.) Why you people insist on arguing the same non-issues over and over is something that never fails to set me to wondering:

Mankins/Hobbs/Kaczur

Maroney/Jackson/Thomas

Meriweather

Mayo/Wheatley/Crable

Chung/Brace/Butler/Vollmer/Tate/McKenzie

That's all the top 3 round picks in the period you mention. The only player chosen in that group that didn't fill a 'need' is Tate.

5.) Now, about that DL argument, find the D-lineman drafted in the first 3 rounds post-Wilfork and prior to this draft.

__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius

patsfaninpittsburgh

I would add that the typical Steeler player isn't smart enough to play in a Belichick system.

apple strudel

Funny thing how it's the DL that makes the Patriots' 3-4 go, though.