I don't think Belichick is unhappy he passed on the USC trio. I'm not. There were issues will each of them. The board favorite (looking back) is Mauluaga who would have trouble understanding this post. Belichick can't have a DTD (dumber than dirt) linebacker running his defense. At the time, poster wanted Barwin, a project, but good value.
I am surprised that anyone is questioning the pick of Butler. Most of us would have picked him at 34 at the very latest.
However, your point is well taken. We had chances at 34 and 40/41 to choose a linebacker and did not. You have your three choices. Mine were Laurinitis and Sintim and even Brown.
In the end, Belichick was NOT desparate for a linebacker. He was fine with Banta-Cain, Thomas, Guyton, Mayo and Woods as the base five linebackers. He did draft McKenzie in the 3rd. He was injured and Ninkovitch ended up with his roster spot.
Belichick has been tryng to get a 3-4 runstopper to play next to Mayo. That is where Seau fits in.
And Belichick is probably right.
He needed four of the five top linebackers wo play reasonably well. Most importantly, he needed Woods or Banta-Cain to step up. Woods seems to be the weakest at the moment, but most of us knew that from the start.
===========
The BOTTOM line is that was much more concerned with the secondary and the defensive line. Even after signing Bodden and Springs and Tank Williams, we drafted Butler and Chung. And then we picked up McGowan.
As far as the defensive line, he drafted Brace at 40 and then Richard and Pryor late and then continued to look during camp, but Brace and Pryor looked fine in camp.
I would have drafted a linebacker early, but Belichick didn't see the value or the priority, so he decided to wait.
It does make you mad how we ended here:
trading away Vrable (and Cassell) for Patrick Chung, when we desperately need LB
Passing Maualuga/Cashing/Matthews (2 twice) and picking Chung/Butler/Brace, instead. Do not you think any of the USC trio be paying handsome dividends right now?