Wright, D. Thomas, Baker declared out

[pats1]

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2007/09/pats_moves_14.html

September 8, 2007
Pats moves
By Mike Reiss, Globe Staff

The Patriots made a few roster moves today and had some changes to their injury report:

...

DL Mike Wright, S Rashad Baker and TE David Thomas were downgraded to out on the injury report.

...

Posted By: mreiss | Time: 09:00:51 PM

Please note that there is a separate thread for the moves that were mentioned in Reiss' post.

 

[RayClay]

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2007/09/pats_moves_14.html

Please note that there is a separate thread for the moves that were mentioned in Reiss' post.

I'm confused, Pats1. There's a thread about James being cut and Asante playing Sunday.

I'm wondering why they declare Thomas out and cut a TE at the same time.

Also, why Mays now? Santonio makes sense with Seymour out.

 

[pats1]

I'm confused, Pats1. There's a thread about James being cut and Asante playing Sunday.

I'm wondering why they declare Thomas out and cut a TE at the same time.

Also, why Mays now? Santonio makes sense with Seymour out.

At the time that thread was posted, the Rivers/Mays/Thomas transactions weren't out yet. So a new thread was created about that and they were merged.

But as a discussion on that, the Pats had 4 TEs coming into today. They obviously weren't going to keep that many, Thomas out or not. Since when have the Pats lined up with 3 TEs in a single set? It's been awhile. And when you have 5 starting-caliber receivers on your team, you don't need 3 TEs. The Pats' offense isn't incredibly TE-based. They'll do just fine. Just overreaction, I say.

Mays is purely for special teams. With James out (he wasn't going to play on the regular defense anyway with Meriweather and Gay or Samuel at nickel and dime), you need another special teams body.

 

[RayClay]

At the time that thread was posted, the Rivers/Mays/Thomas transactions weren't out yet. So a new thread was created about that and they were merged.

But as a discussion on that, the Pats had 4 TEs coming into today. They obviously weren't going to keep that many, Thomas out or not. Since when have the Pats lined up with 3 TEs in a single set? It's been awhile. And when you have 5 starting-caliber receivers on your team, you don't need 3 TEs. The Pats' offense isn't incredibly TE-based. They'll do just fine. Just overreaction, I say.

Mays is purely for special teams. With James out (he wasn't going to play on the regular defense anyway with Meriweather and Gay or Samuel at nickel and dime), you need another special teams body.

I thought it unusual they declared Thomas out and cut Rivers, that leaves two. I didn't expect Rivers to stick when Thomas was ready, but obviously he's not.

Maybe it's to avoid paying Rivers for the full season?

They do run a lot of 2 TE sets and an injury could botch those. Could very well be an indication the 2 TE isn't in the game plan much this week.

Mays is a special teams body, though a corner for corner replacement would have been more to my liking. We did lose Davis, so maybe they need a bigger player on STs. I really don't know diddly about how they fill those units.

 

[pats1]

I thought it unusual they declared Thomas out and cut Rivers, that leaves two. I didn't expect Rivers to stick when Thomas was ready, but obviously he's not.

Maybe it's to avoid paying Rivers for the full season?

Over ~$150,000? Doubt it.

They do run a lot of 2 TE sets and an injury could botch those. Could very well be an indication the 2 TE isn't in the game plan much this week.

Mays is a special teams body, though a corner for corner replacement would have been more to my liking. We did lose Davis, so maybe they need a bigger player on STs. I really don't know diddly about how they fill those units.

I don't see that. They'll still have 2 TE sets -- Brady and Watson. It's not like they need to have a third TE on the bench just to run a 2 TE set. And if one of Watson/Brady gets hurt, you simply run more 1 TE sets and take advantage of the firepower at WR.

 

[JR4]

Seems like inactives are half determined.

Wright, Baker, Thomas and Gutierrez

and a guess for last four:

Andrews, Herron, Yates and Britt.

 

[braveht]

. And if one of Watson/Brady gets hurt, you simply run more 1 TE sets and take advantage of the firepower at WR.

That's fine early. But if you want to run off time in the the 4th the 2 TE is better than extra WR. Vrabel and Hoch have played on short yardage, but I don't think they are good for multiple plays.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Seems like inactives are half determined.

Wright, Baker, Thomas and Gutierrez

and a guess for last four:

Andrews, Herron, Yates and Britt.

Not Andrews, unless he got dinged up getting on the airplane. I had Hochstein inactive with Yates being healthier coming out of preseason, but it is between those two at G. Britt is a good choice, though they have used him as a blocking TE so he may be kept active for that role with two TEs active. Gaffney was my guess in the earlier thread on guessing inactives since he had been the last WR dinged up in preseason...kind of a crap shoot at this point with Moss expected to play, but no clear idea how healthy he is. Washington could also be sat down since there isn't any great need for him on STs.

 

[Pats726]

Obviously it will be 2 OL...Britt and Hochstein/Yates...depends how injured Hoch is even though he's not on the injury report. He might be the guy. Herron might be out since they brought in Mays for ST and I also think a DL might be inactive 1 from Thomas, Smith and Brown...and maybe this will depend on if they are going to use more 4-3 or not...

 

[PatsFan37]

But as a discussion on that, the Pats had 4 TEs coming into today. They obviously weren't going to keep that many, Thomas out or not. Since when have the Pats lined up with 3 TEs in a single set? It's been awhile. And when you have 5 starting-caliber receivers on your team, you don't need 3 TEs. The Pats' offense isn't incredibly TE-based. They'll do just fine. Just overreaction, I say.

I thought in the Jets playoff game it was a 3-TE set that muscled in for one of the TDs -- it was their heavy set for short yardage (though in that case, I think it was more like a 5-yard run).

Last year, the Pats offense was strongly 2-TE based. Maybe we're seeing a shift in offensive philosophy, at least for now, to show more 3 and 4 WR sets, for 3 or 4 obvious reasons.

Letting go a TE may also have to do with the number of WR's on PUP and on the PS. Plenty of guys on tap who can catch the ball.

 

[pats1]

I thought in the Jets playoff game it was a 3-TE set that muscled in for one of the TDs -- it was their heavy set for short yardage (though in that case, I think it was more like a 5-yard run).

Last year, the Pats offense was strongly 2-TE based. Maybe we're seeing a shift in offensive philosophy, at least for now, to show more 3 and 4 WR sets, for 3 or 4 obvious reasons.

Letting go a TE may also have to do with the number of WR's on PUP and on the PS. Plenty of guys on tap who can catch the ball.

The thing is, short-yardage situations often have a RB going up the middle - so having 3 TEs on the outside really doesn't mean much. I think the Pats would rather have a WR split wide as a decoy. But with Caldwell last year, he obviously wasn't a viable enough option as one. Moss, Stallworth, or Welker would be.