Yes, but look back on BB's comments about Maurice Jones-Drew, to paraphrase, 'the percentage of smaller players capable of making the transition to the pros is much smaller and more difficult to project, then the percentage of six footers capable of making the transition.' I think weight, based on position, is also applicable under that standard.

For LB, I like to use a semi-arbitrary weight of 240 for potential Pats LB candidates in the draft. Bruschi at 247 was my measure, assuming a 240 lb LB could bulk up to a similar weight as the off-season program added muscle. Sims and Ryan didn't make my board for that reason - they've done well in 4-3 defenses - we're watching to see how Vilma holds up for Mangini since he was another smaller LB who BB presumably liked.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Lord Favrequad" Stolen from Demolition Man
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

BOR,
What's interesting about Bruschi's listed height/weight is that he was measured at just 6'0'' coming out of Arizona, and seems to have "grown" on the Pats roster... I believe his real playing weight is 250+. I searched for a reference but can't find it, but I'm positive I heard this... I'm pretty sure Tedy, at least before the stroke, played closer to 255 than 247 FWIW. That's not unreasonable considering they have Dillon listed at 225, when this preseason he admitted being 231 lbs, 10 lbs lighter this year than last (i.e. he was playing at 240+ his 1st 2 years with the Pats). I think Harry Carson is BB's ideal ILB, a converted DE. I think it's about durability, a player being healthy for a playoff run season after season as much as it is about fighting off offensive guards. Players get slower as the season progresses... defenses that rely on speed and athleticism tend to wear down come December (Colts and Denver) due to bumps and bruises, defenses that rely on scheme, savvy, and power plod reliably through the winter months like Clydesdales. That being said, if Willis measures in at 6'2'', 240, his listed weight, or Timmons checks in at 6'3'' 240+ for the combine, then giddyup!!!

I think they really go for players that feel "football is important" and try hard to stay within their model of each position but will make exceptions for special players. The book "Patriot Reign" describes the rating system for college players, I don't have the book in front of me but they have a seperate category for players who are slightly smaller or slower than ideal but have exceptional ability.

That being said LB is one position where they try to stay within players in the 245-265 range. I don't expect a rookie LB to start and I don't think they will draft one in round 1, especially at ILB.

Agree. My Pats Prospects list doesn't usually include any LB under 240. I do keep the door open for 'special players' who may be too undersized for the Pats profile -- but possess intangibles that for one reason or another make them a possible candidate (by the coaches). This separate list of special (but undersized) prospects is usually only a handful of players, while the main list tends to focus on the OLB/DE conversion types like Banta-Cain, Claridge, and Mincey. Speaking of whom came out at 264, 254, and 259 respectively. So your point is accepted and respected.

BTW, one roster player made the undersized list a while back -- Eric Alexander. Knew he was a Saban-coached player (that's a plus). Was also a strong ST player (another plus). Undersized though at only 223. We signed him undrafted -- and he's now at 240. So I keep the door open for some...but agree wholeheartedly our standard for seeking out LBs ought to be in that 240+ range.

All 3 made my short list of possible but unlikely prospects.

One exception may have been Wilfork. Once considered a top 10 prospect, here's a player who was considered very mature...and had the attitude the Pats covet -- "football is important to him".

On another board (where I was born), the majority felt Vince wasn't a good fit regardless of his talent, for one reason -- he wasn't a 2-gapper. I clearly remember this debate...and admitted he only had 1-gap DT experience but because of his talent, maturity, etc. -- he may be coachable...so let's just "keep the door open" and allow the scouts and coaches make this decision.

And of course, Vince did struggle a bit with the 2-gap adjustment at first -- but he's O.K. now. Just one example...