NEGoldenAge

Arrington improved tremendously over the coarse of the season.... he's very coachable. Even though Butler was often in good position and had good coverage, he has zero ball skills and had a very hard time stopping the receiver after the catch was made. When Arrington first came in it was obvious that his job was to keep the receiver in front of him and make the tackle. At first, he gave receivers a huge cushion, but as his conifidence grew that cushion became smaller and smaller. By December, Arrington was a decent CB. The kid is a keeper.

SeanBruschi54

Guess what, all players have trouble with small fast guys. Even small fast guys have trouble against the opposition.

Ras I coach said that because he's sustained a good amount of injuires in college and doesnt have great recovery speed.

mgteich

OK, I like tall corners. However, the analysis makes little sense.

Are we really moving to TALL corners? Is that what McCourty is at 5" 10"? He seems the norm. Our other corners were Arrington at 5" 10", Butler at 5'10" and Wilhite.

let's look back. Ty Law was 5' 11". Otis Smith was 5' 11". Asante Samule was 5" 10".

The reality is that Bodden was an exception, and BTW wasn't a draftee. Dowling is a exceptionly tall defensive back for the patriots.

If Dowling is a change in philosphy from the failed philosophy of drafting corners like McCourty, then I don't like the change.


QUOTE=Uncle Rico;2544076]Reiss touched on this a bit today, how the Pats have been getting bigger at CB, a change in their philosophy from the Pioli days.

Changing face of Pats at corner - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

From a BB quote after Day 2:[/QUOTE]

patchick

I've never bought into the idea that the Patriots preferred smaller corners to begin with. I always assumed they preferred guys with elite quickness and change-of-direction skills, and those just tend to come in smaller packages. Put Butler's athletic measurables in a guy who stands 6'1" and you think BB would say "nah, too tall?"

The trick with Dowling is that we don't know those numbers -- or whether he's a long-term CB or S -- so it's hard to judge how he fits past tendencies.

lostjumper

I just want to add that at this time last year, everyone thought McCourtey was a special teamer only...just saying.

mgteich

only the delusional

Almost everyone had McCourty as a late first or early second round draft choice. When we drafted him in the first, almost all of us expected him to be at least our nickel or at worst dime back.

NEGoldenAge

It's true that few saw much in McCourty before the draft. Afterwards, however, is a much different story. In just about every measurable he was among the top in the draft... he just came from a small school. Many considered him a 4 down player, and would becomd a solid corner. It wouldn't have taken much effort to research that using just this board. Why post if you don't really know what you're talking about?

reamer

From his pro day: 4.37 40, 6.85 three-cone, 38 inch vertical, and 10'8 broad jump. Exceptional numbers at nearly 6'2 and 200 pounds. I'm excited to see how he performs for us.

Fencer

If Dowling is our big-receiver specialist, does that mean the days of the RCB/LCB strict distinction are over?

__________________
"To lose one parent may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness." -- Oscar Wilde

ausbacker

Quite possibly but I like the look of this depth chart.

1. McCourty
2. Bodden
3. Dowling
4. Arrington
5. Butler

If they can interchange roles and on players by position then that's excellent. I'd really like to see them get physical and abuse receivers. I'd love to see McCourty smack Wallace right in the mouth, cop a 15 yarder and set the tone for it being his field.

I'm assuming BB is working from the backfield first because he's accumulating some darn good defensive backs that includes some young, talented and aggressive safeties.