Kontradiction
On my retirement tour.
PatsFans.com Supporter
2020 Weekly Picks Winner
2021 Weekly Picks Winner
2023 Weekly Picks Winner
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2006
- Messages
- 68,286
- Reaction score
- 76,690
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.I would like for us to have four ilbs on the roster, mckenzie, along with mayo guytonand spikes complete that four
I don't remember his measurables but I'm pretty sure he is smaller than spikes therefore I expect spikes to be alongside mayo on running downs and guyton with mayo on passing downs with Tyrone spelling mayo
We "need" four ILB's for our system? And who were they last year? Did we play even three in any game last year?
lol is right. Calling something our most glaring weakness because of a busted play with a couple missed tackles is pretty funny.Really? That run up the middle in the Ravens game might suggest otherwise. lol.
lol is right. Calling something our most glaring weakness because of a busted play with a couple missed tackles is pretty funny.
Why is everyone so hot about a statement that ILB was not our most glaring weakness? Which of you guys were frothing at the mouth pre-draft, saying forget DE and OLB and TE and WR, what we need most of all is an ILB?
Lats year it would have been Mayo, Guyton, and Seau......the year before you had Bru, Mayo, Guyton, and Seau....In other years you have had Bru, Johnson, Phifer, Cox.....I would say the Pats like to have at least three ILBs they feel they can count on and since OLB is probably a little light I think it is a good thing to have an extra ILB as you can use them in different situations to fill in on the outside.
...OLB is more of a question, but should still be improved from last year, with Cunningham added and Guyton probably moving outside.
Because he tried it here before, and sucked at it.I don't know why the idea of Guyton as an OLB doesn't get brought up more often.
I don't know why the idea of Guyton as an OLB doesn't get brought up more often. I agree with you- use Guyton as an OLB, unless we lose an ILB. At least Guyton has speed and has a full year of experience, albeit at ILB.
Whenever I saw South Florida play when he was there, he never stood out even amongst the lame Big East talent. When we picked him last year in the 3rd round, I was like "what the hell?" I hope he proves me wrong, but he's got "Gus Scott type career" written all over him.
Because he tried it here before, and sucked at it.
McKenzie 6'2" 243
Spikes 6'2" 249
gasp, a rookie UDFA sucked at OLB in the Patriots system
I'm not saying that he should play there but what happened his rookie year does not mean he would automatically suck at it forever.
lol is right. Calling something our most glaring weakness because of a busted play with a couple missed tackles is pretty funny.
Why is everyone so hot about a statement that ILB was not our most glaring weakness? Which of you guys were frothing at the mouth pre-draft, saying forget DE and OLB and TE and WR, what we need most of all is an ILB?
Our weakness last year was not at ILB.
I stated that "our weakness last year was not at ILB" I beliueve that our weaknesses were at CB, OLB and DE.
I did not state that we could not use an upgrade.
"Most glaring weakness" is not what was said:
Now, if you'd like to claim that ILB wasn't a weakness, you should feel free to do so. Perhaps the team's calling a 450 year old Junior Seau out of retirement was just ceremonial, despite the fact that he was receiving playing time. It should be noted again, however, that Belichick has drafted an ILB in the top 3 rounds in each of the past 3 seasons. That would seem to indicate that he sees a need in that area.
By your logic, it is as logical to say that QB is a glaring need.
Seau was signed three weeks AFTER Mayo was injured. McKenzie and Bruschi were already gone for the season.
Yes, we had a perceived weakness at backup ILB (perceived by posters). However, Belichick was fine with what he had. Obviously, he would have felt better with a hel;thy rookie prospect instead of the aged one. Seau played in 7 games, while Mayo recovered.
Belichick clearly was not fine with what he had. That's why he drafted McKenzie before the season, and Spikes in the recent draft. I'm not sure where the disconnect is here, but a simple review of the games makes it obvious that ILB was a problem, and it was not just with the backups.
Then again, only 4-5 spots on the defense were well played with any real degree of consistency:
Warren (DE)
Wilfork (NT)
Bodden (RCB)
Meriweather (S)
TBC (OLB)
Every other position struggled for one reason or another. That includes both ILB spots. Again, if BB was "fine with what he had", he wouldn't be picks in the top 3 rounds on ILBs for 3 straight years.
Also, using your logic, "Belichick was fine with what he had" at DE, too. You still listed that as a weakness.
As usual, the issue is communication. For you, we had problems at 20 defensive roster spots. We wanted to develop a future inside linebacker which meant that we had a current problem. And so we did by your definition of "problem".
As an analogy, I am fine with our offensive line where we add a player just about every year. I guess I should be aghast at this problem area since we add a new player each year, and this situation is never solved. Nonsense! We have a fine offensive line, and a fine approach to managing the unit.
TWO inside linebackers get almost all the reps. We usually have a third in the rotation, but this is not essential. Belichick drafted McKenzie as Bruschi's roster replacement, and had Seau in the wings in case of an emergency (which choice he used when Bruschi, Mayo and McKenzie were all unavailable).
You and I may disagree with Belichick's assessment of the ILB position, then and now. However, it is what it is, and what it was. How satisfied was Belichick with Mayo and Guyton? He had an apportunity to draft Laurinitis or Maluaga and decided that he didn't have a sufficient need for 2009 help to make the move. As I said, you and I disagree then and now with the choice of Chung over a linebacker. You and I believe that this choice was wrong is foresight and in hindsight.
That doesn't change the apparent reality that Belichick did not see the 2009 ILB unit as the problem of the defense. I do agree that if there are 20 problem roster spots, then ILB is indeed a problem.
As for the actual discussion, I think McKenzie will be a core special teams player. I think he may also see some time backing up the inside, but it really depends on how quickly Brandon Spikes adapts to the system.