Depth at LB is pretty good actually.

AzPatsFan said:

If we have superior TEs we will play them. If not, we won't.

The WR situation is much, much, better than last season. Edelman is a known commodity as is Amendola. The rooks are not raw rooks this season. La Fell provides a second big X receiver and slot move TE. So does the experiment with Harrison. Boyce provides a true speed, flanker. There are additional newcomers in Gallon etc.

Click to expand...

I agree completely. two TE's is talent dependent and as nice as it is to have a big time number 1 WR you can win without them as the early Patriot champs did and the Seahawks showed last season and Ravens the one before it. This WR situation is much better than last season's, and where they have an advantage is in the construction of it, as they don't rely on a big number 1 but have a number of guys who can get open quickly and help negate pressure while relying upon YAC to make their plays. And when you are playing teams like Seattle and SF the ability to make plays quickly trumps big play ability downfield as you generally aren't going to get the time to make those plays. I'm really looking forward to seeing how McDaniels puts this together because it isn't going to be like the offenses we have seen from him in the past but could be really creative and effective. Ultimately I expect a balanced attack with a quick hitting passing game that is very difficult to defend over the middle and underneath coverage, but it won't be as slot focused as the Welker team's were and will have more options both inside and out. They don't have anyone as good as Welker and Moss were but they have more good WR's than those teams did imo. I expect a great season out of Amendola and another really good one from Edelman, as well as significantly improved performances from Dobson and Boyce, I don't have as much hope for Thompkins but we will see? I agree that Lafell could end up playing some of the old Hernandez role and they could split up those plays designed for him between he and Vereen, who can run some of the routes they had Hernadez run inside and out of the backfield.

Ivan said:

I did have a friend once who managed to get two in one day, but he was an idiot.

Click to expand...

That recently happened here in Pittsburgh, as a guy got a DUI on the N.Side around lunchtime, then bailed out of jail and received another one on the S.Side at night. He was on the news and everything (must have been a slow news day).

While I definitely agree your friend is an idiot, you've got to admit that it takes a certain kind of alcoholic to pull something like that off. 2 DUIs in the same day is completely nuts. I bet he didn't even see any jail time--which is an enormous pet peeve of mine as a CJ major in both grad/undergrad.

AzPatsFan said:

So does the experiment with Harrison.

Click to expand...

mgteich said:

Please understand that Harrison as a TE experiment is the illusion of posters.

Click to expand...

Yes, there is no "experiment" with Harrison at TE, as Bill Belichick put these patfans.com (and Mike Reiss) rumors to rest once and for all over the draft weekend.

"We have no intent to do that" (in terms of moving him to TE) was Belichick's response.

I don't care for PFF's statistical analysis myself much like others here, due to their obvious flaws, but sometimes they can contribute on some level. This could be argued as one of those times, depending on your viewpoint.

It shows actual .gifs and pics as to how Collins was really shaky in the beginning, having issues getting off blocks, hitting the wrong hole, etc--and how much that improved throughout the year over the 2nd half.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/04/30/rookies-in-focus-jamie-collins/

Brady6 said:

4-3 Under
Sam LB-Ninkovich-Collins
5tech LE-Easley-Armstead
1tech NT-Wilfork-Kelly-Siliga
3tech DT-Kelly-Armstead-Jones (DT)
Leo RE-Jones (DE)-Smith-Buchanan-Moore

Mike LB-Hightower-Beauharnais
Will LB-Mayo-Collins

4-2-5 Nickel
LE-Ninkovich-Smith-Moore
DT-Easley-Armstead-Jones (DT)
DT-Jones (DE)-Smith-Moore
RE-Buchanan-Smith-Moore

SLB-Collins-Hightower-Beauharnais
WLB-Mayo-Hightower-Beauharnais

Click to expand...

This is the best lineup that I've seen proposed, so far. But a few comments...

I have heard Easley referred to as the quintessential 3-technique, but you've lined him up at the 5. I think that's a mistake. After watching BB for years, and how he brings his rookies on, I am 99% confident that Easley will play behind Kelly at the 3-technique, as a rotational guy Week One. If he starts turning heads, and showing consistency, he might get a start in Week Five or Six... but that would mean he's an epic prodigy. I have Ninkovich as the starting 5-technique, and Mayo as Sam. What this means is, we look good on the line, but... and thus to the question of the thread... dangerously thin at LB.

The fact that BB chose not to draft LB early is not a sign, to my mind, that he's satisfied with his depth chart. LB was famously shallow draft class this year.

And I don't take much consolation in the fact that Ninkovich played OLB in the 4-3 in 2011. That defense struggled, especially against the pass. Ninkovich was not at his best playing that spot. I am reminded that when Ty Warren was released, he was told that the Pats were "going in a different direction" with the defensive scheme; a guy like Ty wouldn't fit into the lighter, faster, pressure defense. A few draft years later, enter Dominique Easley as the heir apparent to that roster spot. 280# DT was not part of BB's draft profile in 2004; he was strictly looking for 310# DT. Very different scheme. Very different personnel.

Ninkovich, to his credit, has enough versatility that he can shift to a down lineman in the new scheme. That doesn't mean the intention is to go back to 2011 as the blueprint of the defense. Maybe as a one-week gimmick, a game plan against a team that wont be able to adjust... but not as the standard. He's better as a 4-3 DE than he was as a 3-4 OLB; can do a lot of things, but too easily exposed at LB in coverage.

DE: Ninkovich, Moore
NT: Wilfork, Siliga
DT: Kelly, Easley
DE: Jones, Smith

Sam: Mayo, (FA)
Mike: Hightower, (FA)
Will: Collins, Beauharnis

Any way I cut the roster, I still think we're short a couple of LBs to fill the spots formerly held by guys like Rivera and Fletcher. Is Josh Hull that guy? Maybe? Not convinced. I'm watching for FA signings.

rookBoston said:

DE: Ninkovich, Moore
NT: Wilfork, Siliga
DT: Kelly, Easley
DE: Jones, Smith

Sam: Mayo, (FA)
Mike: Hightower, (FA)
Will: Collins, Beauharnis

Any way I cut the roster, I still think we're short a couple of LBs to fill the spots formerly held by guys like Rivera and Fletcher. Is Josh Hull that guy? Maybe? Not convinced. I'm watching for FA signings.

Click to expand...

Some very good thoughts about schemes, but your LBs aren't lined-up right. You won't see Mayo at Sam. Coach Belichick was very clear about keeping Mayo inside the tackles, so he'll either stay at Will or, as some have suggested, move to MLB. Beauharnais is not a Will, unless he has come a huge way in coverage, because he looked lost at times last pre-season. He does, however, provide a potential backup at Mike and Sam, as he is quite strong against the run, making quick reads and tackling well.

rookBoston said:

This is the best lineup that I've seen proposed, so far. But a few comments...

I have heard Easley referred to as the quintessential 3-technique, but you've lined him up at the 5. I think that's a mistake. After watching BB for years, and how he brings his rookies on, I am 99% confident that Easley will play behind Kelly at the 3-technique, as a rotational guy Week One. If he starts turning heads, and showing consistency, he might get a start in Week Five or Six... but that would mean he's an epic prodigy. I have Ninkovich as the starting 5-technique, and Mayo as Sam. What this means is, we look good on the line, but... and thus to the question of the thread... dangerously thin at LB.

The fact that BB chose not to draft LB early is not a sign, to my mind, that he's satisfied with his depth chart. LB was famously shallow draft class this year.

And I don't take much consolation in the fact that Ninkovich played OLB in the 4-3 in 2011. That defense struggled, especially against the pass. Ninkovich was not at his best playing that spot. I am reminded that when Ty Warren was released, he was told that the Pats were "going in a different direction" with the defensive scheme; a guy like Ty wouldn't fit into the lighter, faster, pressure defense. A few draft years later, enter Dominique Easley as the heir apparent to that roster spot. 280# DT was not part of BB's draft profile in 2004; he was strictly looking for 310# DT. Very different scheme. Very different personnel.

Ninkovich, to his credit, has enough versatility that he can shift to a down lineman in the new scheme. That doesn't mean the intention is to go back to 2011 as the blueprint of the defense. Maybe as a one-week gimmick, a game plan against a team that wont be able to adjust... but not as the standard. He's better as a 4-3 DE than he was as a 3-4 OLB; can do a lot of things, but too easily exposed at LB in coverage.

DE: Ninkovich, Moore
NT: Wilfork, Siliga
DT: Kelly, Easley
DE: Jones, Smith

Sam: Mayo, (FA)
Mike: Hightower, (FA)
Will: Collins, Beauharnis

Any way I cut the roster, I still think we're short a couple of LBs to fill the spots formerly held by guys like Rivera and Fletcher. Is Josh Hull that guy? Maybe? Not convinced. I'm watching for FA signings.

Click to expand...

You have to remember that the base defense is becoming less-and-less relevant these days. According to Mike Reiss, last year they only ran 30.9 percent of their snaps in it, and I think it is more than fair to assume that this trend continues in 2014. So when Easley would hypothetically be playing the 5-tech we would only be talking about a portion of those 30.9 percent of snaps.

However, I do think you are missing the point of Brady's proposed change to a 4-3 under. It is trying to rectify two major issues: first, the Pats were ranked 30th in the league at stopping the run; and as you pointed out the linebacker depth is non-existent at the moment barring some unexpected rapid improvements made by Beauharnais or a guy like Cameron Gordon quickly adapting to the NFL.

So this would hypothetically fix both of those issues. The front becomes more stout when you add the 5-technique DE which I think it's fair to say at 260 lbs, Ninkovich would struggle with. And then by making the edge player on the strong side the outside linebacker, it allows you to only have two traditional linebackers on the field, which could keep the top 3 guys fresh and limit the snaps for a guy like Hull, Gordon or Beauharnais.

I agree that the quantum leap that those of us advocating for the 4-3 under are making is having Easley and/or Armstead playing that 5-tech, but I think if both come as advertised they are probably the players best equipped to pull it off. I don't think it would be fair to expect Easley to play it like we remember Seymour or Ty Warren playing it, but from the tape I've watched, when he was lined up at DE in college it was almost always on a running play, and he didn't look out of place. The NFL is a different animal, but I don't think it is an absurdity to think he could pull it off.

Jrik83 said:

You have to remember that the base defense is becoming less-and-less relevant these days. According to Mike Reiss, last year they only ran 30.9 percent of their snaps in it, and I think it is more than fair to assume that this trend continues in 2014. So when Easley would hypothetically be playing the 5-tech we would only be talking about a portion of those 30.9 percent of snaps.

Click to expand...

Yep, sub is the new base.

The base appears pretty straight forward and highlights some depth along the DLine but the lack of depth at LB.

BASE

RDE - Jones
DT - Wilfork, Easley, Armstead
DT - Kelly, Jones, Vellano
RDE - Ninko, Armstead, Easley

OLB - Hightower
MLB - Mayo
OLB - Collins

SUB - My guess is the only keep two LBs on the field, bring in another DB, this helps hide the lack of LB depth and plays to the strength at D Line and the Secondary

SUB 4-2-5
RDE - Jones
DT - Easley, Armstead
DT - Kelly, Jones
RDE - Ninko, Armstead, Easley

LBs - Mayo & Collins

supafly said:

I don't care for PFF's statistical analysis myself much like others here, due to their obvious flaws, but sometimes they can contribute on some level. This could be argued as one of those times, depending on your viewpoint.

It shows actual .gifs and pics as to how Collins was really shaky in the beginning, having issues getting off blocks, hitting the wrong hole, etc--and how much that improved throughout the year over the 2nd half.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/04/30/rookies-in-focus-jamie-collins/

Click to expand...

I hate PFF. Imo they represent everything that is wrong with the way fans look at the game with their make believe metrics and idiotic analysis, and it flat out amazes me that anyone would put any stock in anything they have to say. I have a great deal of respect for you Sup but i hate that site and the others like it, and i think that anytime someone uses them as a point of reference it negates their post or point entirely. They named Kareem Mackenzie the best player in football one season, Ryan Wendell the best center in football a couple of seasons ago, and Tom Brady the 32nd best player in football the year he was unanimous MVP, they are morons.

I really don't understand why so many have Armstead as a lock on this team, the guy has never played a snap in the NFL and imo has is as on the bubble as any player on the roster and a real longshot to make the team. I wouldn't be surprised if they cut him before camp even begins. I think Chris jones has a much much better chance of being on the final 53 than Armstead does.

Ivan said:

I really don't understand why so many have Armstead as a lock on this team, the guy has never played a snap in the NFL and imo has is as on the bubble as any player on the roster and a real longshot to make the team. I wouldn't be surprised if they cut him before camp even begins. I think Chris jones has a much much better chance of being on the final 53 than Armstead does.

Click to expand...

We tend to fall in love with the unknown around here

VrabelJr said:

We tend to fall in love with the unknown around here

Click to expand...

I agree, and i understand it and do it myself sometimes. I was happy they picked the guy up but questioned the claims that he was like another first rounder for them, however once he failed to see the field at all for them last year it put him in the bubble category until he actually wins a job through his play and shows he is good enough to contribute and keep it .Right now Jones, Siliga, and vellano are all well ahead of him imo. He could come out and play great and change all that and it would be a welcome sight but until he does that I will be skeptical.

Ivan said:

I really don't understand why so many have Armstead as a lock on this team, the guy has never played a snap in the NFL and imo has is as on the bubble as any player on the roster and a real longshot to make the team. I wouldn't be surprised if they cut him before camp even begins. I think Chris jones has a much much better chance of being on the final 53 than Armstead does.

Click to expand...

Many have Armstead and Chris Jones competing for a roster spot. We'll see in camp.

However, I agree that Armstead is hardly a lock. He is a rookie who spent his rookie year on IR ( I don't think that he even had a rep in camp). Who was the last patriot that was a major contributor after that start? Who were the patriots who made the team after spending their rookie year on IR?

mgteich said:

Many have Armstead and Chris Jones competing for a roster spot. We'll see in camp.

However, I agree that Armstead is hardly a lock. He is a rookie who spent his rookie year on IR ( I don't think that he even had a rep in camp). Who was the last patriot that was a major contributor after that start? Who were the patriots who made the team after spending their rookie year on IR?

Click to expand...

Yep, we always have hope for them but more often than not it is a sign of a lost career.

Armstead was impressive in OTA last offseason. He is very talented and offers a unique combination of size, length, strength, and athleticism. I will be very surprised if Armstead does not make the final roster.

Brady6 said:

Armstead was impressive in OTA last offseason. He is very talented and offers a unique combination of size, length, strength, and athleticism. I will be very surprised if Armstead does not make the final roster.

Click to expand...

You and I have disagreed with regard to the importance of experience vs. measurables for 2 years. You always have company this time of year as we have such grand hopes for UDFA's and 7th rounders. We will keep a some of the 20-30 we sign.

In any case, perhaps you can help our sense of perspective by providing a couple of examples of patriots who turned out to be serious contributors after spending their rookie years on IR.

mgteich said:

You and I have disagreed with regard to the importance of experience vs. measurables for 2 years. You always have company this time of year as we have such grand hopes for UDFA's and 7th rounders. We will keep a some of the 20-30 we sign.

In any case, perhaps you can help our sense of perspective by providing a couple of examples of patriots who turned out to be serious contributors after spending their rookie years on IR.

Click to expand...

I think that experience matters but if a player does not have any you look at the athletic metrics. Armstead is talented, he showed well during OTAs in 2013 and then he had the health issue. If healthy I think he can contribute, I would assume the team would have cut him if they didn't see the same possibility.

Brady6 said:

I think that experience matters but if a player does not have any you look at the athletic metrics. Armstead is talented, he showed well during OTAs in 2013 and then he had the health issue. If healthy I think he can contribute, I would assume the team would have cut him if they didn't see the same possibility.

Click to expand...

I agree that Belichick thinks he has the ability to potentially make the team and contribute. That's why he is on the 90 man roster and will certainly be given a shot. He is an inexpensive option that has a chance, along with the other 20 or UDFA's. That is not the same as thinking that he is likely to make the team. I don't want overstate, he will certainly be given a shot.

supafly said:

I don't care for PFF's statistical analysis myself much like others here, due to their obvious flaws, but sometimes they can contribute on some level. This could be argued as one of those times, depending on your viewpoint.

It shows actual .gifs and pics as to how Collins was really shaky in the beginning, having issues getting off blocks, hitting the wrong hole, etc--and how much that improved throughout the year over the 2nd half.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/04/30/rookies-in-focus-jamie-collins/

Click to expand...

Ivan said:

I hate PFF. Imo they represent everything that is wrong with the way fans look at the game with their make believe metrics and idiotic analysis, and it flat out amazes me that anyone would put any stock in anything they have to say. I have a great deal of respect for you Sup but i hate that site and the others like it, and i think that anytime someone uses them as a point of reference it negates their post or point entirely. They named Kareem Mackenzie the best player in football one season, Ryan Wendell the best center in football a couple of seasons ago, and Tom Brady the 32nd best player in football the year he was unanimous MVP, they are morons.

Click to expand...

I stated their obvious flaws in my opening words, so I am not advocating believing in their metrics or witchcraft systems, etc.

I also said that this could be argued as one of the rare times that they are helpful, which you'd probably agree with if you clicked on the link and saw their breakdown of .gifs in how Jamie Collins obviously improved over the 2nd half of the season.

Pictures and video do not generally lie. I stumbled across the link in an article that I had read about a month ago, and since I couldn't find the original article, I simply provided the link instead. Unfortunately, in this case it happens to be from PFF, but the video/.gif breakdowns are nice.

supafly said:

I stated their obvious flaws in my opening words, so I am not advocating believing in their metrics or witchcraft systems, etc.

I also said that this could be argued as one of the rare times that they are helpful, which you'd probably agree with if you clicked on the link and saw their breakdown of .gifs in how Jamie Collins obviously improved over the 2nd half of the season.

Pictures and video do not generally lie. I stumbled across the link in an article that I had read about a month ago, and since I couldn't find the original article, I simply provided the link instead. Unfortunately, in this case it happens to be from PFF, but the video/.gif breakdowns are nice.

Click to expand...

I know you did Sup and that was in no way intended as any shot at you and i hope i was clear enough on that. I just hate the fact that these guys can construct BS metrics and turn it into something that fantasy geeks embrace and it suddenly blossoms into a tool that is now being used routinely in football discussions. It may be that their metrics have some relevance to fantasy football but they have absolutely none to real football. And the end result is that analysis of real football gets lost in the made up metrics in much the same way that draft analysis has basically been turned into mass comparison of measureables instead of analyzing their actual play and production. Football isn't baseball, every play is interdependent and trying to measure players by those kinds of metrics completely removes the relevance of the context of every play they are involved in, whereas in baseball you have a series of individual match-ups as the basis for the metrics and analysis. These guys are just tryiong to create their own football version of sabermetrics imo and ther game is not conducive to that kind of analysis. I am not suggesting we ignore the numbers altogether but turning it purely into a discussion of numbers destroys a real understanding of the game and the players imo.