Pierre Woods as our starting OLB?

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

I assume you're being sarcastic, otherwise be careful BRO.

Mayo himself said in an interview last month that he was limited by the coaches till he could learn the defense.

I was partially sarcastic. I might have not understood his statement clearly. I thought he was saying Mayo's playing time was limited.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

I thought he was saying Mayo's playing time was limited.

Playing time, no. He was the only healthy one we had left

 

[apple strudel]

"Now I guess it's time for me to step up," said Woods.

I guess you'd be right, Pete. Patriots linebacker Woods has more than an outside shot - The Boston Globe

Commenting on his not-so-rigorous academic courseload at "the Harvard of the Midwest," Woods commented on taking fifteen credits of Ojibwe, an Indian dialect, with a "laid back" professor McCue, who "challenged you to remember the Ojibwe language."

You don't say, Pierre? Now don't make too much if he can't remember a single word.

Football responsibilities overrode Pierre Woods' other aspirations University of Michigan Academics and Athletics - MLive.com

A Teddy Bruschi this guy is not. He reminds me of Katzenmoyer who nearly flunked AIDS awareness at Ohio State.

You're going way too far with the implication here. BB has said that while he's been with the Pats Woods has been a model student and hard worker. If Belichick is telling Crable to emulate Woods, then the man has done everything BB needs him to do.

If anything, this is a problem with Michigan and the NCAA more than a problem with Woods.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Well apparently the position of the coaching has been, that he's not good enough to start.

No I would take the position that the Coaches believe the DE to OLB transition takes several years. It did for Vrabel, Phifer, Colvin and Willie. Pierre has paid his dues, worked hard, and made the transition. So he is now playing. Perhaps Crabel and Redd willl do likewise.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

It's not the statistic that lies, it's the interpreter of the statistic. If anything the number of LBs drafted indicate a combination of low perceived need and low perceived value. You'd be hard pressed to establish causation of drafted LBs to losses on game winning drives in any serious way.

That's your perception and I have mine.

If somebody makes a correct statement (not saying you're a troll, though I'm tempted), but not coolly, they lose the argument? No. Right is right, regardless of perceived panache.

Nobody is correct on this stuff. The only time you are correct is about common knowledge. For example, 2+2=4, the sky is blue and I live in the state of California to name a few. But when it comes to football, we all have our perceptions of who is good and who isn't. If I think a certain player isn't very good, am I wrong? When a person like Maverick4 gets upset and calls someone a "troll", they obviously can't make an argument. When you result into name calling, you lose the argument. Name calling is completely unnecessary. The only time someone should be called a "troll" is when someone deliberately comes on this board to say "Tom Brady cheats on his wife", "BB is a cheater", "Pierre Woods is a thug". Nobody like myself is a "troll" if they simply come on this board and think the Pats LB's are weak or whether BB should've drafted player X.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

I personally think if the roster stays as is we will see Crable start as I don't think Woods is starter capable but Crable showed signs of being pretty good although it was preseason.

You cant rule out a Burgess trade yet either when it comes to crazy Al anything can happen,You also can't rule out Willie Mac nor can you rule out any player that gets cut elsewhere that maybe might be what BB is looking for in starter material.

Some of you guys are way too jumpy in trying to figure out something in June that Belichick himself probably has no idea of who is best opposite Thomas at this EARLY stage.

 

[Urgent]

Obviously we don't know how the young OLB's will perform through training camp and Pre-Season.

What we know right now is that Woods is at the top of the depth chart for the second OLB, given the departure of Vrabel and the failure to land a veteran OLB.

Further, given his abilities, Woods is likely the 'starter' of the group of Woods-Crable-TBC-Redd anyway.

Woods has two things going for him:
1) Ability to set the edge: Woods is pretty good at setting the edge on the outside against the run. He plays with good technique and power.
2) Experience in the system: Like other OLB's before him, Woods has spent several years learning the system in the film room, in practice, in pre-season, and, once AD went down, in games.

Crable and Redd have much more limited experience.
TBC was a decent third-down player, but has never been successful as a starter.
Crable was known as a pass rusher in college but a weak anchor against the run. He'll have to develop that to be a starter in this defense.

Whether Woods plays the most snaps or makes the most plays is very open to debate. But he is likely the first & second-down player, and hence a 'starter.'

We can hope that Crable can carve out a role on defense like Welker did on offense his first season here, as a third-down star. Crable would seem to have more talent. But Woods has the early leg up.

 

[State]

We have "Paris" and "Pierre" playing together. Sound like a European soap opera?

 

[condon84]

Sure pal, my argument was BS and you and Apple Strudel really schooled me. According to you and people that defend Woods and BB think my opinions were unsupported by facts. Nobody is right or wrong in this argument and that goes for you who like to tell people they are wrong. Sorry but stats don't lie to me, 3 LB's drafted in the first three rounds in 9 years BB has been a head coach. The Pats defense are 0-2 since 2004 on game winning drives. Take that which ever way you choose.

To be fair, our 01 and 03 championship team defenses gave up late game-tying drives. Only differences with those years is that Brady had enough time to drive our team back to field goal range for the game winning kick. If only we had enough time in 07, I truly believe Brady would have led the team for a game-tying FG or a game-winning drive.

To add on to the Woods debate, although he didn't shine nor show he was a liability last year, I would prefer Crable to start because based on their college play, Crable looks like he's got higher upside. Based on what Crable showed in college, he's got something our team really needs, speed on the outside. That's something I did not see out of Woods, even though he played relatively well against the run.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

To be fair, our 01 and 03 championship team defenses gave up late game-tying drives. Only differences with those years is that Brady had enough time to drive our team back to field goal range for the game winning kick. If only we had enough time in 07, I truly believe Brady would have led the team for a game-tying FG or a game-winning drive.

You are absolutely right. However, my argument is that the Pats defense let the Colts and Giants actually take the lead. Lastly, I agree that Brady would have been able to at least tie the game with more time.

 

[Deus Irae]

You are absolutely right. However, my argument is that the Pats defense let the Colts and Giants actually take the lead. Lastly, I agree that Brady would have been able to at least tie the game with more time.

The Patriots lost the lead in their first 2 Super Bowls late in the 4th quarter. Whether it put them in a tie or behind, it's the same thing in terms of the defense holding or failing to hold. As a matter of fact, they gave up a late score against the Eagles, as well, but that just cut into the lead as opposed to eliminating it. In every single Super Bowl the Patriots have played in this decade, the defense has been scored upon with less than 5 minutes to play.

Also, as I've pointed out in multiple threads, the Steelers weren't focused on the linebackers in the draft until 2007. Futhermore, the biggest difference between the Patriots approach to linebackers and the Steelers approach to linebackers is that the Steelers have been fortunate enough to avoid injuries and the Patriots haven't.

 

[BradyFTW!]

That's your perception and I have mine.

Yeah, but yours is ill-conceived, unfounded and wrong. You're welcome to have your perception on the matter, but if you want it to be taken seriously you're going to have to actually support it.

Nobody is correct on this stuff. The only time you are correct is about common knowledge. For example, 2+2=4, the sky is blue and I live in the state of California to name a few. But when it comes to football, we all have our perceptions of who is good and who isn't. If I think a certain player isn't very good, am I wrong? When a person like Maverick4 gets upset and calls someone a "troll", they obviously can't make an argument. When you result into name calling, you lose the argument. Name calling is completely unnecessary. The only time someone should be called a "troll" is when someone deliberately comes on this board to say "Tom Brady cheats on his wife", "BB is a cheater", "Pierre Woods is a thug". Nobody like myself is a "troll" if they simply come on this board and think the Pats LB's are weak or whether BB should've drafted player X.

So if I say that Duane Starks is the best player in New England Patriots history, I'm not wrong? Since that's my perception and I'm entitled to it? Nope: that's just a wrong opinion. Nobody's claiming that there aren't shades of gray, but without a doubt there are absolutely wrong opinions and right opinions. When your opinion contradicts obvious and known facts, it's wrong. And your opinion does that.

 

[State]

The Steelers have been hemorrhaging premium linebacker talent since the mid 1990s, first with Kevin Greene I think in '95, then in '96 Chad Brown went to the Seahawks.

It's been a revolving door since, but they've almost always delivered quality talent. Even without Junior Seau. Can you believe that, hotshot?

 

[Deus Irae]

The Steelers have been hemorrhaging premium linebacker talent since the mid 1990s, first with Kevin Greene I think in '95, then in '96 Chad Brown went to the Seahawks.

It's been a revolving door since, but they've almost always delivered quality talent. Even without Junior Seau. Can you believe that, hotshot?

The Steelers didn't draft Greene.

 

[Ring 6]

Should we point out the even though we both align in a 3-4 our defense and the Steeler defenses are dramatically different inn philosophy and scheme, or just let this thread die?

 

[Deus Irae]

Should we point out the even though we both align in a 3-4 our defense and the Steeler defenses are dramatically different inn philosophy and scheme, or just let this thread die?

It'll just start up again elsewhere. This is not the first time this has come up this off season. Hell, this has already gotten its own spinoff.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Should we point out the even though we both align in a 3-4 our defense and the Steeler defenses are dramatically different inn philosophy and scheme, or just let this thread die?

I wonder if, over on the Steelers boards, they freak out about not consistently drafting premium defensive line talent like the Pats do? Probably not.

And you know what? The fact that we have only used one first-day draft pick on a quarterback since Belichick got here really shows that he's dropped the ball on drafting quarterbacks. And the one guy that we did draft still hasn't even proven that he can play in the NFL! You have teams like the Lions who are picking a new QB in the top 3 every 5 years or so, and supplementing that with talented guys like Jon Kitna, and it just makes you wonder why Belichick insists on *ignoring* the position. Hell, last year we had to start a former *7th round pick* for 15 games; that's barely better than undrafted. God, Bill Belichick is such an asshat.

 

[condon84]

Should we point out the even though we both align in a 3-4 our defense and the Steeler defenses are dramatically different inn philosophy and scheme, or just let this thread die?

This should absolutely be taken into consideration. Steeler's LB types are easier to find than NE's.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Yeah, but yours is ill-conceived, unfounded and wrong. You're welcome to have your perception on the matter, but if you want it to be taken seriously you're going to have to actually support it.

According to you and whoever else disagrees with me. Sorry to break to you, but there are other people on this board that actually see the same thing. I'm not the only one that thinks Pierre Woods isn't a starting caliber LB. Nothing that I say will convince you otherwise, that is why I've clearly tried to end this by saying Pierre Woods will prove himself this season.

So if I say that Duane Starks is the best player in New England Patriots history, I'm not wrong?Since that's my perception and I'm entitled to it? Nope: that's just a wrong opinion. Nobody's claiming that there aren't shades of gray, but without a doubt there are absolutely wrong opinions and right opinions. When your opinion contradicts obvious and known facts, it's wrong. And your opinion does that.

Who am I to say your wrong? You and other people obviously take the liberty to do that. I certainly wouldn't agree with it, but people like you could probably come up with an argument saying he is. Also, people would think you're nuts but there isn't a fact book saying who is the best Patriot in NFL history. So just to let you know, there is no such thing as a wrong opinion. And how is my opinion wrong on Pierre Woods? And what are the obvious and known facts about him? When it comes to whether Pierre Woods can play, your guess is as good as mine.

The problem is, you know just as much as I know about Pierre Woods. But you feel like you know everything so this is obviously going nowhere. Like I said before, Woods will get his chance and either suck, become a good player or become a great player. Why don't we just leave it at that?

 

[Deus Irae]

Just to let you know, there is no such thing as a wrong opinion.

Sure there is: by definition, really.

1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof:

1. That which is opined; a notion or conviction founded on probable evidence; belief stronger than impression, less strong than positive knowledge; settled judgment in regard to any point of knowledge or action.

Opinion is when the assent of the understanding is so far gained by evidence of probability, that it rather inclines to one persussion than to another, yet not without a mixture of incertainty or doubting. --Sir M. Hale.

I can not put off my opinion so easily. --Shak.

2. The judgment or sentiment which the mind forms of persons or things; estimation.

1 a : a belief stronger than impression and less strong than positive knowledge

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/opinion