Defensive Front Seven In Fine Shape

[BradyFTW!]

Not really. We struggle to rush the passer all season long. No one on the entire DL was better than average, if even average as a pass rusher, other than Jones, for part of the season.

Armstead is a rookie who reportedly would have been a 3rd round pick, and we know what we got from Bequette, so I'm not holding my breath that he is a savior.
Pryor, really? How about Shawn Crable?
Forston is a UDFA who couldn't stick on the 53.
Fletcher hasn't shwon he can be a viable quality LB yet.

I don't feel better after your response.

I agree, for the most part. Even if you argue that Ninkovich was a 'plus' pass-rusher, the fact still remains that we need more than two, because injuries happen. While Scott and Cunningham weren't bad in their own right, the simple fact of the matter is that, once Jones was hurt, the Pats couldn't get anything resembling consistent pressure. That needs to be fixed, and relying on on Bequette to be that guy is pretty much the definition of "hope in absence of a plan". Maybe they can go for Andre Carter.

Also, even if Pryor and Fletcher had proved that they could be contributing football players (Fletcher hasn't), they most definitely *haven't* proven any ability to stay on the field. In my book, we're to the point where we have to assume that they won't be available for most of the season, even if they make the team. I put Edelman in pretty much the same category.

 

[tonyto3690]

Ninkovich and Love starting says hello.

Horrid depth at DT and LB say hello.

 

[Ring 6]

It seems that we should expect more from the kids in next year's AFCCG game. After all, Hightower, Francis and Bequette were rookies. Fletcher and Jones didn't play. We might even get production from Forston or Pryor.

I don't think hoping that Francis an UDFA who played less than 200 snaps, Bequette, not NFL ready to even be active, or Fletcher, UDFA who has shown nothing in 3 years will solve the problems is being in fine shape.
Forston is a UDFA, Pryor hasn't played football in a very long time, and the last time he did, it lasted 2 weeks.

You can wish to upgrade Deaderick, Love Or Ninkovich. I don't think that it is likely to happen.

Then we won't be in 'fine shape'. A front 7 that has Ninkovich and Love starting, and Deaderick players staters snaps needs upgrading. If we think that is good enough, we won't have a good front 7 anytime soon.

HOWEVER, I do hope that we would use one of our top 3 picks on a defensive lineman who can help this year or next. We should always be upgrading the defensive front seven.

I guess I'm confused then how if can be in fine shape, yet need upgrading.

 

[ausbacker]

I don't think hoping that Francis an UDFA who played less than 200 snaps, Bequette, not NFL ready to even be active, or Fletcher, UDFA who has shown nothing in 3 years will solve the problems is being in fine shape.
Forston is a UDFA, Pryor hasn't played football in a very long time, and the last time he did, it lasted 2 weeks.


Then we won't be in 'fine shape'. A front 7 that has Ninkovich and Love starting, and Deaderick players staters snaps needs upgrading. If we think that is good enough, we won't have a good front 7 anytime soon.


I guess I'm confused then how if can be in fine shape, yet need upgrading.

Good can become great Andy. Not that difficult.

 

[mgteich]

First, anyone not named Brady, Wilfork or Mayo can certainly be upgraded.

Our defensive front seven is a strength, but certainly can be upgraded.

I guess I'm confused then how if can be in fine shape, yet need upgrading.

 

[Ring 6]

First, anyone not named Brady, Wilfork or Mayo can certainly be upgraded.

Our defensive front seven is a strength, but certainly can be upgraded.

I don't actually think it is a strength.
I think it has some strengths, but overall could use help.

At DE we should be trying very hard to do better than Ninkovich.
At DT Wilfork is a major strength vs the run, but is average at best as a pass rusher. We have no one else at the position better than medicore.
I would agree the starting LBs are a strength, but the depth is a tremendous weakness.

 

[Ring 6]

Good can become great Andy. Not that difficult.

Huh? Good is debatable, great is NEVER happening without serious upgrades. A front 7 starting Ninkovoch and Love and not having a single DT who can rush the passer, or a single NFL caliber LB as a backup doesn't have greatness in it.
Greatness in a front 7 requires the ability to put heavy pressure on QBs every week, and this unit struggles to get heavy pressure in any week.

 

[ausbacker]

Huh? Good is debatable, great is NEVER happening without serious upgrades. A front 7 starting Ninkovoch and Love and not having a single DT who can rush the passer, or a single NFL caliber LB as a backup doesn't have greatness in it.
Greatness in a front 7 requires the ability to put heavy pressure on QBs every week, and this unit struggles to get heavy pressure in any week.

You asked how. You were told how. Why must you make everything a pissing contest?

 

[Ring 6]

You asked how. You were told how. Why must you make everything a pissing contest?

Wait, are you saying you think this front 7 is good and could be great, or that would be a scenario where you could be in fine shape and need upgrading?

I don't know about you and your pissing contest, but I am trying to have a discussion, and I interpretted your post to say you find the front 7 good and could become great. I disagree, so I explained why.

Either you didn't mean that, or you are complaining because I have an opinion.

 

[ausbacker]

Wait, are you saying you think this front 7 is good and could be great, or that would be a scenario where you could be in fine shape and need upgrading?

I don't know about you and your pissing contest, but I am trying to have a discussion, and I interpretted your post to say you find the front 7 good and could become great. I disagree, so I explained why.

Either you didn't mean that, or you are complaining because I have an opinion.

It's very simple Andy. A good front 7 can become a great front 7 given the many reasons that have already been listed in the thread. For some reason or another, you feel compelled to repeat comments that have already been made.

Wilfork, Mayo, Jones, Ninkovich, Spikes and Hightower are better starting points than most teams have in their front 7. They're not a great front 7 (6) but they are good. It's simple.

 

[Ring 6]

It's very simple Andy. A good front 7 can become a great front 7 given the many reasons that have already been listed in the thread. For some reason or another, you feel compelled to repeat comments that have already been made.

Wilfork, Mayo, Jones, Ninkovich, Spikes and Hightower are better starting points than most teams have in their front 7. They're not a great front 7 (6) but they are good. It's simple.

So how does that explain you answering a question that I asked someone else, who both said the front 7 is fine and needed upgrading?
I was asking HIM to explain how it is fine, implying leave it alone, but also needs to be upgraded.
You apparently felt the need to answer for him, weakly then start a fight.
Why bother?

 

[ausbacker]

So how does that explain you answering a question that I asked someone else, who both said the front 7 is fine and needed upgrading?
I was asking HIM to explain how it is fine, implying leave it alone, but also needs to be upgraded.
You apparently felt the need to answer for him, weakly then start a fight.
Why bother?

The issue had been covered several times over and explained at length. Why bother indeed.

 

[Ring 6]

The issue had been covered several times over and explained at length. Why bother indeed.

What are you talking about?
First, I was having a discussion with mgteich.
Second, if your attitude is 'why bother' then why did you answer a question that I asked to him, and cry when I responded?
Off the meds tonight?

 

[ausbacker]

What are you talking about?
First, I was having a discussion with mgteich.
Second, if your attitude is 'why bother' then why did you answer a question that I asked to him, and cry when I responded?
Off the meds tonight?

Have the last word Andy. You're an impossible fool at times.

 

[Ring 6]

Have the last word Andy. You're an impossible fool at times.

So, once again, you create a problem, then throw insults.
You answer a question not asked of you with a vague response, I respond and you cry that it's a pissing contest.
Don't but in, or don't make a post that you are offended gets responded to. That solves everything, then you don't have to call people names to save face for looking foolish.
There's my last word, hopefully that advice will do you well.

 

[mayoclinic]

It's very simple Andy. A good front 7 can become a great front 7 given the many reasons that have already been listed in the thread. For some reason or another, you feel compelled to repeat comments that have already been made.

Wilfork, Mayo, Jones, Ninkovich, Spikes and Hightower are better starting points than most teams have in their front 7. They're not a great front 7 (6) but they are good. It's simple.

It's a heck of a lot more talented looking front 7 than the motley crew the Pats fielded to start the 2001 season:

- 33 year old Anthony Pleasant picked up in the offseason
- 30 year old Bobby Hamilton in just his second season since being picked up from the Jets
- Rookie DT Richard Seymour
- Rookie Steeler's castoff Mike Vrabel
- An injured Willie McGinest who only started 5 games and only played in 11

As a starting point - a starting point, mind you, not an end point - I think we're in decent shape. Plenty of room to get better, but there are 5-7 potential playmakers (Wilfork, Jones, Mayo, Hightower and Spikes, with Ninkovich borderline, and Armstead having the potential to impact). Depth isn't ideal, but it's getting better. It's a work in progress, but I think it's making progress, despite Andy's pessimism.

 

[ausbacker]

It's a heck of a lot more talented looking front 7 than the motley crew the Pats fielded to start the 2001 season:

- 33 year old Anthony Pleasant picked up in the offseason
- 30 year old Bobby Hamilton in just his second season since being picked up from the Jets
- Rookie DT Richard Seymour
- Rookie Steeler's castoff Mike Vrabel
- An injured Willie McGinest who only started 5 games and only played in 11

As a starting point - a starting point, mind you, not an end point - I think we're in decent shape. Plenty of room to get better, but there are 5-7 potential playmakers (Wilfork, Jones, Mayo, Hightower and Spikes, with Ninkovich borderline, and Armstead having the potential to impact). Depth isn't ideal, but it's getting better. It's a work in progress, but I think it's making progress, despite Andy's pessimism.

Andy is an identified simpleton. For some reason or another, he isn't capable of understanding mg's reasonable starting point and the discussion that created.

In regards to your commentary, I completely agree. It's a good starting point that needs to be massaged somewhat to get it to a great front 7. It's not like this concept hasn't been explained at length and by multiple posters throughout the thread.

An addition here or there has the potential to help the front 7 tremendously. My hope is for once, just once, the Patriots will get a little bit of luck and field a preferred line up for some time. Injuries have had the greatest impact of all.

 

[Ring 6]

It's a heck of a lot more talented looking front 7 than the motley crew the Pats fielded to start the 2001 season:

- 33 year old Anthony Pleasant picked up in the offseason
- 30 year old Bobby Hamilton in just his second season since being picked up from the Jets
- Rookie DT Richard Seymour
- Rookie Steeler's castoff Mike Vrabel
- An injured Willie McGinest who only started 5 games and only played in 11

As a starting point - a starting point, mind you, not an end point - I think we're in decent shape. Plenty of room to get better, but there are 5-7 potential playmakers (Wilfork, Jones, Mayo, Hightower and Spikes, with Ninkovich borderline, and Armstead having the potential to impact). Depth isn't ideal, but it's getting better. It's a work in progress, but I think it's making progress, despite Andy's pessimism.

I'm bieing realistic, not pessimistic. This was not a great front 7 this year. We struggled to pressure the QB all season, with the exception of week 17.
To your point about 2001, its debatable that we are better than a unit that included Seymour, McGinest, Vrabel and Bruschi. Would you rather have them, all in their prime, or Wilfork, Jones, Hightower, and Mayo? I think thats an easy one.
Also, that team went on to acquire Ted Washington, Warren, Wilfork and Colvin in the next couple of years.

I agree its a work in progress, I am disagreeing with 'fine shape' or 'good turning great'.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy is an identified simpleton. For some reason or another, he isn't capable of understanding mg's reasonable starting point and the discussion that created.

Last word huh?
Why do you insist on being so childish and insulting anyone who disagrees with you?

Do you really not realize it makes you look bad when you 'settle' a disagreement by calling the other guy an idiot?

 

[Ring 6]

It's a heck of a lot more talented looking front 7 than the motley crew the Pats fielded to start the 2001 season:

- 33 year old Anthony Pleasant picked up in the offseason
- 30 year old Bobby Hamilton in just his second season since being picked up from the Jets
- Rookie DT Richard Seymour
- Rookie Steeler's castoff Mike Vrabel
- An injured Willie McGinest who only started 5 games and only played in 11

As a starting point - a starting point, mind you, not an end point - I think we're in decent shape. Plenty of room to get better, but there are 5-7 potential playmakers (Wilfork, Jones, Mayo, Hightower and Spikes, with Ninkovich borderline, and Armstead having the potential to impact). Depth isn't ideal, but it's getting better. It's a work in progress, but I think it's making progress, despite Andy's pessimism.

By the way would you disagree that the 2001 front 7 evolved into one that played much better from Thanksgiving on than the 2012 front 7?