mgteich

We really have no need for a 6th WR. We do have a need for a pass-catching Hback/FB.

I think the #5 WR is now for Bethel Johnson and Childress to fight over, with the winner expected to make the team based on returner abilities.

rookBoston

There's really no such thing at a #6 WR. You can only ever put 5 on the field at once, and even if you go 5-wide, one of them would probably be Watson anyway.

#6 is really a ST spot-- particularly in the kicking game Tim Dwight (2005), Kevin Kasper (2004)-- and a WR backfill solely in case of injury. 80% ST and only 20% (at most) O. Last year, we kept Bethel or Dwight (depending on how you count it) at our 6th receiver. But neither saw serious time as a true receiver.

My point: the #6 WR roster spot could also just as easily be #5 CB, #5 RB, #4 TE. #5 S... very easily exchangable depending on where the talent falls out on the roster.

I'm fairly certain that the 2001 roster didn't carry a 6th WR: Brown, Patten, Charles Johnson and Fred Coleman... was there even a 5th receiver on the team? Dane Looker, maybe? The kicking duties fell to our #1 WR at the time: Troy Brown.

The roster is far deeper in talent now than is was then.

To me, the question comes down to whether you'd rather keep Patrick Pass or Bethel Johnson. The roster can work either way.

In the kicking game, Bethel will have competition from Moroney, Andrews, Jackson and Hobbs. Pass will have competition from Moroney, Mills, Mitchell, Tebucky. Personally, I think Bethel is on the outside looking in. (Of course, I'm giving the #5 spot to Childress, which is no sure thing, either).

__________________
"We want to build a big, strong, tough, smart, fast, disciplined football team that will consistently compete for a championship."
-- Scott Pioli, from the Patriots scouting manual

primetime

Terry Glenn was on the roster, technically. And throughout the year, so too were Bert Emmanuel, Torrance Small, and Curtis Jackson. However, only 4 dressed for the Super Bowl. Faulk and Edwards were the 3rd and 4th leading receivers that year after Brown and Patten, followed by Wiggins I believe.

mgteich

rook,

To be more blunt, we only need THREE wide receivers active, plus a fourth, if one is a returner. I think the 5th receiver is a position for a returner or for a developmental player, because if he can't he return, he isn't active.

Yes, we usually have four active, because at least one is returning punts.

I think the PS is fine for developmental wide receivers.

bucky

You need 4 active WRs so you can still run your 3 WR sets if one of them gets hurt. So I think you're right on with what's been said in this thread - there have been times when we've carries 4 WRs on the 53 and the past couple of years we've been carrying 6. But 5 is probably the # we carry this year.

ilduce06410

not sure, but i think this decision about cuts AND about who to dress on sunday is generally driven by players' injury status. IMO any player who has made the team in those slots---6th WR, 9th DB, 8th LB, 5th RB, has shown to be a good ST player. so ST value isn't really an issue. return ability sure is, tho. hobbs looks like a flashy return guy, but will he ever be less fumble-scary on returns?
i seem to have seen a number of 4-WR sets in '05, but you're right teich--watson or fauria was usually in a slot on those formations. he!!, why not? looking for mismatches, right?
as for developmental WRs, what's the story on pk sam? or my favorite TC player from last year, ricky bryant?

patsfan13

IIRC Bryant is on the roster, PK was picked up by the Bengals last year.

Last year IIRC we carried 6 WR, 3 TE & 4 RB's out of TC, given the draft picks, that could change to 5 WR, 3 TE, 4 RB & Mills as a utility guy. I agree that players especially the backups have to establish a role for themselves on ST's. I wouldn't be shocked to see Childress make the team over B Johnson this year.

__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."

flutie2phelan

__________________

JoeSixPat

Seconding these opinions, the 6th WR is usually inactive on game day anyway, so the 6th spot is only used for rare circumstances where we have a developmental player that we want to protect from other teams, not willing to take the chance of putting them on the practice squad

That same roster spot can go to a coach's choice spot that could serve another purpose and depth elsewhere - a special teamer of some sort... a HB/FB as mgteich suggests

But at the end of the day the top 2 WRs will get the bulk of the receptions, with 3 & 4 doing their part along with the RBs & TEs.

#5 is the real backup - often intended to be the #3 WR of the future - and even he is often inactive on gameday

__________________

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

arrellbee

I think you have an interesting speculation. We have talked about in another thread that there might be a lot to be said for carrying 7 RB/TE. Dropping back the WR slots to 5 would provide that extra 7th RB/TE spot. And if the offense were to be shifted to emphasize the TE and FB passing game a little bit, that would take away a little of the need for WR.

It's always fascinating to try to anticipate and guess what Belichick might do. But on the other side of the roster slots coin. Belichick has carried 6 WR into the season pretty consistently. And experience shows that injuries are not uncommon at all in the receiving corps and you can quickly get down into the depth chart for a while.

Just for interest, here are the slots allocated in the final 53 man roster for the last couple years:

QB 3 . 3
RB 3 . 3
TE 3 . 3
WR 6 . 6

OL 9 . 8

CB 5 . 6
S . 4 . 4

LB 10 . 10
DL 7 . 7

K, P, LS