I was only actually referring to the defensive players taken in rounds 2 or 3 over the last 5 years, but it is sort of comical that not one poster has even answered the OP question, which is what do you think the problem is that causes Belichick to miss on these 2nd and 3rd round defensive picks? I am not saying Belichick is a bad GM or for that matter I am not labeling him in anyway, I am asking fellow members if they have any reasoning for the poor picks in these rounds during this timeframe.
No. You were referring to the 2nd and 3rd round players taken over the past 6 drafts. Furthermore, your claims that they were all misses when some of them have just started their career leaves a humongous amount to be desired. Hell, you have written them off already because they aren't getting defensive snaps as rookies. And your CYA statement is a half-hearted attempt to claim otherwise.
I do have make 1 point in response to what I perceive to be you saying it is not a problem because we’ve gone to super bowls, which is we have Tom Brady the best QB in the history of the NFL he covers up a lot of mistakes so if it is a problem someone who determines things solely on super bowl appearances is likely not to notice whether it is a problem or not.
Furthermore we have not won a super bowl in nearly a decade, and the 2 we’ve gone to in the last 5 years were on the right shoulder of Tom Brady and were lost because of the play of the defense when it came time to step up, so yes it is a problem, it’s a huge problem because Brady is getting us places and giving us opportunities and we’re unable to make the most of them opportunities.
It's clear you are one of those people who demand a SB every year regardless of reality. You don't realize that the age of free agency and parity has all but guaranteed that teams don't repeat. The Patriots winning 3 in 4 years is something that probably won't ever happen again. Heck, when you look at it, the only reason that the Steelers and Giants have 2 SB rings each is because of poor officiating that favored them.
I have news for you. The Patriots lost each of their last 2 SB because of the TEAM, not the defense per your claim. Hell, the Giants only won the 1st time because Mike Carrey blew the call. He even said so after the game. He said he should have whistled Manning down but didn't because he couldn't believe the Pats didn't bring him down.
The other SB against the Giants, the Pats lost because Brady took the safety and the receivers couldn't hold onto the damn ball. Or did you miss Welker, Branch and Hernandez all dropping passes on the final 2 drives that could have won the game for the Pats?
It's clear that you think that you have figured out the Pats problems. And, in your opinion, it's that they have been investing too many assets (draft picks, money, trades) in the defense. There are a few HUGE flaws with that theory.
1) You disregard that other teams improve
2) You don't bother to look at the assets the Pats have spent on the offense, either in terms of draft picks, cash, or trades during your stated time frame.
3) You evaluation of why the Pats have lost their last two SB appearances is flawed. Particularly since one of said 2 was PRIOR to the time period of the draft selections you are referring to.
4) You don't take into consideration things that are out of control of the players and coaches. Such as injuries.
5) You've already written off Wilson, Ryan, Collins, and Harmon because of your flawed expectations.
6) When a comparison is made about one of the players you say is a bust (Spikes) to another player on the team who many see as playing exceptionally well (McCourty) you ignore it because it blows up part of your argument.