BB and AD - New England Patriots Forums

***BlitzFritz*** · 10-20-2009, 08:24 AM

I am not totally buying the theory that AD has underperformed and has been benched for performance. It could be partly that, but also could be that he wanted to "try new things" and "play other players that week".

If I'm not mistaken, NEP totally remade the D this year, with passrushing duties being shofted from our OLBs like AD to "rush ends" like TBC and Burgess. AD hasnt rushed anywhere near the same number of times as last year. So grading him on sack production is a mistake in my view.

I just think its possible that BB picks a game to give other players more playing time -- Butler, Chung, Wilhite, TBC, Burgess. Burgess was playing standing up for the time this year, for example. Ninkovitz got more playing time than normal in the first half too.

What do you think? could the media be whipping this up, when its just BB taking a long term eye to the season?

-- FRITZ

It might help to

***Patriot_in_NY*** · 10-20-2009, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlitzFritz

I am not totally buying the theory that AD has underperformed and has been benched for performance. It could be partly that, but also could be that he wanted to "try new things" and "play other players that week".

If I'm not mistaken, NEP totally remade the D this year, with passrushing duties being shofted from our OLBs like AD to "rush ends" like TBC and Burgess. AD hasnt rushed anywhere near the same number of times as last year. So grading him on sack production is a mistake in my view.

I just think its possible that BB picks a game to give other players more playing time -- Butler, Chung, Wilhite, TBC, Burgess. Burgess was playing standing up for the time this year, for example. Ninkovitz got more playing time than normal in the first half too.

What do you think? could the media be whipping this up, when its just BB taking a long term eye to the season?

-- FRITZ

It might help to

Nope, not buying your "not buying it" scenerio. If he'd have been just riding the pine and chillen on the sideline, I might buy it. At least he'd have been available in a pinch. A healthy scratch was either to 1) Send him a MAJOR message, or 2) keep him from injury for trade purposes. (even possibly a #3 too - An as yet undisclosed personal issue that arose).

Lockdown06 · 10-20-2009, 08:31 AM

yeah, I'm not buying the "benching to give others a chance to play" argument - BB is almost fanatical about making sure the 45 players who give him a best chance to win are on the field - if thomas wasn't out there, he wasnt one of the best 45 in BB's opinion.

Also, for your argument, if BB just wanted to give other people a chance to play, I think he would have sat Seau, the guy who signed with the team like 5 days ago, as opposed to Thomas, who is supposed to be one of our cogs at lb.

***Mogamedogz*** · 10-20-2009, 08:42 AM

Deactivating him is much different than benching him. The fact that he didnt even let him dress is an embarassment (or should be) to Thomas.

He is the highest paid FA of the BB era... and outside of a few bright spots here and there, he has pretty much played like a turd. I love it that coach is finally laying the smack down.

Synovia · 10-20-2009, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patriot_in_NY

A healthy scratch was either to 1) Send him a MAJOR message,

Send a message? What are these, 5 year old kids that you need to punish?

AD was on the bench for 1 of 2 reasons:

1) They think they're more likely to win that game with someone else

2) The scheme they are running for that game doesn't fit him well.

These are professionals we're talking about.

RayClay · 10-20-2009, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synovia

Send a message? What are these, 5 year old kids that you need to punish?

AD was on the bench for 1 of 2 reasons:

1) They think they're more likely to win that game with someone else

2) The scheme they are running for that game doesn't fit him well.

These are professionals we're talking about.

Ha ha, that's funny.

***crowell33*** · 10-20-2009, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mogamedogz

Deactivating him is much different than benching him. The fact that he didnt even let him dress is an embarassment (or should be) to Thomas.

He is the highest paid FA of the BB era... and outside of a few bright spots here and there, he has pretty much played like a turd. I love it that coach is finally laying the smack down.

Nice Post. Completely agree.

Captain Cliche · 10-20-2009, 10:00 AM

According to Deon Sanders (NFL) network, Thomas was not happy with his benching and will work things out with BB.

***robertweathers*** · 10-20-2009, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Cliche

According to Deon Sanders (NFL) network, Thomas was not happy with his benching and will work things out with BB.

BB should enlist Spiccoli and trash ADs car and blame the AFC.. That'll get him motivated...

***WhiZa*** · 10-20-2009, 01:31 PM

Not that I want to see this happen, but could the deactivation be a message to the league that he is on the trading block? He's the highest paid defensive player on the team and is not the pro-bowl caliber LB we've seen when he was with Baltimore. Don't get me wrong, I want him on the team, but BB has been known to be thinking two step ahead of everyone else.