ESPN guys' roster projections

New England Patriots 53-man roster projection (v 2.0) - ESPN Boston

Answering 'Why?' on 53-man projection - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Consistent themes (at least 2 of the 3 reporters):

• Ihedigbo as the #4 safety of 5
• 5 CBs, probably Cole over Dennard
• Only 2 TEs, because the others aren't healthy
• No FB
• Stallworth over Branch
• Carpenter makes it
• Not Scott
• Not Koppen
• Not Warren
• Koutivides over White (health) or Tarpinian (general mediocrity)

Fencer said:

New England Patriots 53-man roster projection (v 2.0) - ESPN Boston

Answering 'Why?' on 53-man projection - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Consistent themes (at least 2 of the 3 reporters):

• Ihedigbo as the #4 safety of 5
• 5 CBs, probably Cole over Dennard
• Only 2 TEs, because the others aren't healthy
• No FB
• Stallworth over Branch
• Carpenter makes it
• Not Scott
• Not Koppen
• Not Warren
• Koutivides over White (health) or Tarpinian (general mediocrity)

Click to expand...

We don't need Barrett and Ihedigbo. Mccourty and Moore can both play FS so I see no reason to take another spot. I think we are fine with Gregory, Wilson, Chung and one of the others.

Why I keep seeing predictions with Deaderick not on the roster is surprising to me. He has great potential and plays hard. I view him as just about a lock.

I think we keep Wilfork, Fanene, Brace, Deaderick, and Warren. I say this because if we spend time in a 4-3 and 4-2 mostly we don't need a ton of depth at LB. I see need for no more then 5-6 true LB. I do think we will need the big bodies more and Fanene and Deaderick can both also kick out to DE.

BBass said:

Why I keep seeing predictions with Deaderick not on the roster is surprising to me. He has great potential and plays hard. I view him as just about a lock.

Click to expand...

I agree, and keeping Deaderick also leaves them with more flexibility to show old-time-Pats-style 3-4 looks on occasion. But...

I think we keep Wilfork, Fanene, Brace, Deaderick, and Warren.

Click to expand...

...did you just cut Kyle Love? Really? IMO Love is much more of a lock than Deaderick. In fact, inasmuch as there is any 7-man "base" for this defense, it's likely to feature Love in a 4-man line with Jones, Wilfork and Ninkovich.

BBass said:

We don't need Barrett and Ihedigbo. Mccourty and Moore can both play FS so I see no reason to take another spot. I think we are fine with Gregory, Wilson, Chung and one of the others.

Why I keep seeing predictions with Deaderick not on the roster is surprising to me. He has great potential and plays hard. I view him as just about a lock.

I think we keep Wilfork, Fanene, Brace, Deaderick, and Warren. I say this because if we spend time in a 4-3 and 4-2 mostly we don't need a ton of depth at LB. I see need for no more then 5-6 true LB. I do think we will need the big bodies more and Fanene and Deaderick can both also kick out to DE.

Click to expand...

I was very suprised that they didn't Deadrick on the team.

One other that leaps out at me: none of them keep a 4th OT. Give Vollmer's questionable durability, that's pretty scary.

patchick said:

One other that leaps out at me: none of them keep a 4th OT. Give Vollmer's questionable durability, that's pretty scary.

Click to expand...

Maybe they're thinking Nick McDonald can do OT.

Four centers seems seriously excessive.

Good points on the 3 OT/6 interior OL splits. They must be assuming somebody can kick outside.

Well, actually, Mankins can kick outside somewhat competently. I don't recall him being particularly good at it, however. But I'd hope he's at least a superior run blocker from the tackle position, in which case kicking him outside and putting a competent reserve at guard isn't crazy.

All this assumes, of course, that Mankins has 100% of his mobility back from his knee injury. Hmm ...

mgteich said:

Four centers seems seriously excessive.

Click to expand...

Most of them can also play other positions.

I'm old fashioned. I want 5 starters, 2 game game Day backups (one interior and one OT) and 2 inactives (one interior and one OT). Additionally, the Game Day 7 must include 2 centers.

I am flexible enough to have considered Gallery as the 4th OT "position". Now, for me, that spot should be filled. If Vollmer is out for a game, we need to have a Game Day backup who is ready to play.

For me, the answer is not to have centers play OG and think of moving OG's to OT. Our #3 OT is considering by many here to be a better RG and certainly not one to count on as a backup LT (I think that Belichick disagrees).

BOTTOM LINE
Personally, I think that we will be fine if we have 4 of our 5 OL starters going down the stretch. However, I could see us starting lots of OL combinations before then.

Fencer said:

Most of them can also play other positions.

Click to expand...

Cannon would be the #3 tackle

Just an observation:

Light's absence is being felt already, and the team hasn't even played an exhibition game yet.

Avenger said:

Cannon would be the #3 tackle

Click to expand...

Of course. But who, if it comes to that, is #4?

I think it actually is Mankins.

That, in turn, suggests that only 2 of the tackles are actually healthy enough to practice so far this August.

I agree.

I would note that it is not at all out of the realm of reasonable expectation (to be planned for) for Mankins and Vollmer to be both out for a game early in the season. I'm fine with starting Solder and Cannon. The question mark is the Game Day backup.

I would also note that as of now, we don't have a backup TE and we are likely to need to use a backup lineman to be our #3 blocking TE.

Fencer said:

Of course. But who, if it comes to that, is #4?

I think it actually is Mankins.

That, in turn, suggests that only 2 of the tackles are actually healthy enough to practice so far this August.

Click to expand...

Fencer said:

Of course. But who, if it comes to that, is #4?

I think it actually is Mankins.

That, in turn, suggests that only 2 of the tackles are actually healthy enough to practice so far this August.

Click to expand...

Mankins at LT?? I've never thought of that. Always thought he was strictly guard.

Joey007 said:

Mankins at LT?? I've never thought of that. Always thought he was strictly guard.

Click to expand...

He's played there before, I can't remember the game last year but it was when Light couldn't suit up. They kept Solder at RT and bumped Mankins to tackle. That's the game he got injured on too pretty quickly, at which point I think Solder went to LT and Cannon came in on the right,

Wasn't mankins playing tackle when he got hurt last year? I definitely remember seeing him at tackle, pretty sure it was lt, and the same game he got rolled up...

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

Avenger said:

Cannon would be the #3 tackle...

Click to expand...

...which is damn scary if you're a QB for the NEP.

Joey007 said:

Mankins at LT?? I've never thought of that. Always thought he was strictly guard.

Click to expand...

Mankins was LT in college I believe, he played LT against Miami which is where he suffered his injury. During that game we lost light to a pregame ankle injury and Mankins to a knee injury during the game which forced, probably, the worst first half of the entire season.

mgteich said:

I agree.

I would note that it is not at all out of the realm of reasonable expectation (to be planned for) for Mankins and Vollmer to be both out for a game early in the season. I'm fine with starting Solder and Cannon. The question mark is the Game Day backup.

I would also note that as of now, we don't have a backup TE and we are likely to need to use a backup lineman to be our #3 blocking TE.

Click to expand...

Yikes. The Pats sometimes like to put 5 OTs + TEs on the field at once, and currently only have 5 slated to make the roster, 1 of those on PUP.

Even if an FB might be a partial substitute, those guys aren't doing well roster-wise either.