Patrick Chung? Expectations/Analysis - Page 9 - New England Patriots Forums

***AndyJohnson*** · 05-24-2010, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by italia44

Ridiculous assertion

........since when do the Pats play a Tampa 2 defense?....Does Meriweather play only on one side?........maybe in Indy.....not in any 3-4 defense,that I know of.

Also,you might want to change the nomenclature of the "free" safety to "enslaved"......However,I'm sticking with the terminology of "strong" or "tight"
Safety.........Why?........think......answer....Th e TE side of the formation.

What does Tampa 2 have to do with anything?
On every play there is a strong(tight) safety and a weak(free) safety.
However in our system we do not shift the safeties to the strength, they stay on the same side of the field regardless of strength therefore the formation determines which safety is strong or weak rather than them lining up on one side or another based on the formation.

***AndyJohnson*** · 05-24-2010, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mgteich

I agree that Belichick will mix up the coverages and does not play only two safeties throught the game in the nice clean positions of FS and SS.

However, one of the safeties on the field has the responsibility for calling the plays in the secondary. That has been Sanders.

Also, the safety playing with Meriweather (who plays almost always; 94% last year) need to have coverage skills.

Someone in the backfield need to be able to play centerfield when the other safety blitzes. Perhaps you want Meriweather to perform that function?

I dont think you get my point.
Our safeties are interchangable. We do not designate one to play the strong side and one to play the weak. All safeties need to have all skills.
Every safety in the NFL has to cover a deep 1/3 or 1/4 or 1/2 in certain defenses, the idea that some safeties can play 'centerfield' and others can't is off the mark.
Also, why would Meriwhether be the blitzing safety? And when do we ever blitz a safety when it isnt nickel or dime, which further complicates the matter. (In nickel/dime a db is reallt playing LB anyway)
Chung is more likely to be the blitzer than Meriwhether though.

***jmt57*** · 05-24-2010, 12:36 PM

One thing that came to mind from earlier in this thread was comments about Sanders calling the plays, and comparing Chung to Sanders (and Harrison also.) Then there were also assertions that if Chung isn't starting week one then he would be considered a bust. Well guess what, neither Sanders nor Harrison became a starter till each of their third seasons.

Hopefully Chung progresses in his ability to make proper pre and post snap reads, but it wouldn't be shocking at all if he is not a starter until 2011.

***Deus Irae*** · 05-24-2010, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt57

One thing that came to mind from earlier in this thread was comments about Sanders calling the plays, and comparing Chung to Sanders (and Harrison also.) Then there were also assertions that if Chung isn't starting week one then he would be considered a bust. Well guess what, neither Sanders nor Harrison became a starter till each of their third seasons.

Hopefully Chung progresses in his ability to make proper pre and post snap reads, but it wouldn't be shocking at all if he is not a starter until 2011.

Sanders took over the starting job in his second season, starting 8 of the team's last 10 games, including all 3 games in the playoffs.

***jmt57*** · 05-24-2010, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Irae

Sanders took over the starting job in his second season, starting 8 of the team's last 10 games, including all 3 games in the playoffs.

That's true, you are correct. I was looking at it from the perspective of who started the season as a starter as some here seem to be ready to consider Chung a bust if he is not starting in week one. I was also looking at who started the majority of games, (5 out of 16 regular season games and 8 out of 19 total.) Sanders was starting only due to Rodney Harrison's injury and would not have been starting if Harrison could have played at the end of that season; I consider Harrison and Hawkins to be the starting safeties in 2006.

Regardless, the point I was attempting to make is that whether or not Chung starts from day one this year, it's too early to pass judgement on him. The biggest thing for him is to progress on making pre and post snap reads so he can put himself in the right place on the field. Even if he doesn't start this year, he could still start next year and go on to have a fine career. Conversely, he could start this year but be constantly out of place, and out of football in a couple years. Whether or not he starts week one should not be a determining factor in passing judgement on him, his future, and that draft pick; it will still be too early for that.

Schmo · 05-24-2010, 02:25 PM

As many have said (including BB), once he bridles his talent through knowledge of the game, he will make as much difference on D as he did on ST in his first year. And that's a pretty significant difference. Although, if he's a complete moron, he will stick with the team as a life-long STer. Patience is key, but remember that even Meriweather made some big, inexcusable mistakes in his 3rd season (Saints' game).

PowerRunRevival · 05-24-2010, 04:11 PM

I think this year Chung shows flashes of being a pro bowler, but makes some stupid mistakes that plagued Meriweather earlier in his career. I think as the season goes on these mistakes lessen and he wrestles the starting role away from either Sanders or McGowan.

Feep50 · 05-24-2010, 08:45 PM

I have read and reread all the posts on this thread and I come to the following conclusion: When Pat Chung masters the mental side of the game he's gonna be a force at safety and that typically takes 2 to 3 seasons of dedication, hard work and enuff reps........

Most posters think he has all the physical talent necessary........ Sounds good to me!