Men's Apparel Jerseys Hats Novelties Throwback Women's Youth
 
REGISTER FOR PATSFANS.COM

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. 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!


Go Back   New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard > PatsFans.com Forums > PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum
Forgot Password? Join PatsFans.com!
Register Blogs FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Mark Forums Read Chat Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-26-2009, 11:34 AM   #31
Third String But Playing on Special Teams
 
PatsBoy12's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 915
Default Re: Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaBruinz View Post
I always find it amusing when people mention the "greatness" of Pittsburgh's 3-4 defense. Why? Because its a different system than what BB runs. Pittsburgh runs a less complicated version, known as the 1 GAP. BB and the Pats run a 2 Gap system.

Now, I also find it kinda funny that you mention Lloyd, Kirkland, Porter, Bell, and Haggans... Considering you are talking about a 12 year period of time and that some of the players you mentioned replaced the other players.

Lets review them.
Bell - Yeah, he won DROY and played a total of a bit more than 3 years in Pittsburgh... Then was banished to KC.
Haggans - Spent 4 years on the Steelers before getting his 1st start. And during 2005, he spent as much time on the bench as he did on the field.
Lloyd -The last year he was in Pitt was 1997...
Kirkland - The last year he was in Pittsburgh was 2000
Porter - Mr. Loudmouth himself...

The Patriots have said that its a lot harder for them to draft linebackers because they expect so much from them.
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.

Last edited by PatsBoy12; 06-26-2009 at 11:38 AM.
PatsBoy12 is offline   Reply With Quote
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.

NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 188

Updated 10/31/09

Help Us Reach Our Goal!

Old 06-26-2009, 01:15 PM   #32
In the Starting Line-up
 
HEY BRO! WHAT UP?'s Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Posts: 3,003
Default Re: Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by maverick4 View Post
William Belichick made his mark coaching maybe the best 3-4 linebacking corps ever with the 1980's NY Giants teams. There were multiple HOF linebackers on those teams.

He then went on to win 3 Superbowl championships as a head coach, using mostly older or unheralded linebackers with the Patriots.

This past year, he selected the Defensive Rookie of the Year in Mayo.

Hey Bro = practice squad troll
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.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
HEY BRO! WHAT UP? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 01:22 PM   #33
Is Sizzlin
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Plano, TX (by way of Salem,NH)
Posts: 13,514
Default Re: Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by HEY BRO! WHAT UP? View Post
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.
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..
DaBruinz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 02:36 PM   #34
Third String But Playing on Special Teams
 
PatsBoy12's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 915
Default Re: Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaBruinz View Post
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..
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.

Last edited by PatsBoy12; 06-26-2009 at 02:40 PM.
PatsBoy12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 02:59 PM   #35
In the Starting Line-up
 
HEY BRO! WHAT UP?'s Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Posts: 3,003
Default Re: Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaBruinz View Post

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..
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?
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by HEY BRO! WHAT UP?; 06-26-2009 at 03:05 PM.
HEY BRO! WHAT UP? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 03:11 PM   #36
All Pro Poster
 
Deus Irae's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,024
Default Re: Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by HEY BRO! WHAT UP? View Post
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?
Not precisely on point, but close enough:

Quote:
Belichick has taken a different approach, and it's yielded 3 Super Bowl Victories, 4 Super Bowl appearances, 5 AFCCG appearances and a 16-0 regular season. What Belichick has done is draft just the opposite of Parcells: DL is the prime focus and linebackers are drafted in late rounds. The starters under BB have been veterans from around the league, and the low round draft picks (and UDFA) have filled out the roster depth. It's been an absolutely brilliant strategy, but it's had one problem: injuries. As I pointed out in another thread comparing the Patriots plan for linebackers with that of the Steelers, the Steelers have been amazingly fortunate with injuries. In his first year as a Patriot, Colvin missed just 2 games fewer than all the Steelers' starters have missed from that same season to the present. In fact, if you add up his 2003 and 2007 games missed due to injury, Colvin alone has missed more games than the entire starting linebacking corps of the Steelers since 2003.
The future of the Patriots 'D' and the 3-4 tipping point
__________________
When it comes to the Koolaid, take sips not chugs.

There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deus Irae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 03:25 PM   #37
In the Starting Line-up
 
HEY BRO! WHAT UP?'s Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Posts: 3,003
Default Re: Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deus Irae View Post
Not precisely on point, but close enough:



In his first year as a Patriot, Colvin missed just 2 games fewer than all the Steelers' starters have missed from that same season to the present. In fact, if you add up his 2003 and 2007 games missed due to injury, Colvin alone has missed more games than the entire starting linebacking corps of the Steelers since 2003.
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.

Quote:
What Belichick has done is draft just the opposite of Parcells: DL is the prime focus and linebackers are drafted in late rounds.
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.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by HEY BRO! WHAT UP?; 06-26-2009 at 03:29 PM.
HEY BRO! WHAT UP? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 03:46 PM   #38
All Pro Poster
 
Deus Irae's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,024
Default Re: Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by HEY BRO! WHAT UP? View Post
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.
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.
__________________
When it comes to the Koolaid, take sips not chugs.

There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deus Irae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 04:45 PM   #39
Third String But Playing on Special Teams
 

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 621
Default Re: Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PatsBoy12 View Post
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.
I would add that the typical Steeler player isn't smart enough to play in a Belichick system.
patsfaninpittsburgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 05:17 PM   #40
PatsFans.com Supporter
 
apple strudel's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,720
Default Re: Nice discussion of the rookies from Scout.com (public article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by HEY BRO! WHAT UP? View Post
Even any moron on the street can tell you that the LB's are what makes the 3-4 go.
Funny thing how it's the DL that makes the Patriots' 3-4 go, though.
apple strudel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
clay matthews, shawn crable

Sponsored Links


PATRIOTS MERCHANDISE

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0

© Copyright 2008 PatsFans.com - The opinions posted in this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions of PatsFans.com or our staff.
We are not affiliated with the New England Patriots™ or the NFL™. The Photo Used In the header was taken by Ian Logue.

This site is owned and operated by I&K Internet Design Enterprises, LLC


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426