Brandon Tate's future as a PATRIOT

[TheSolderKing]

Brandon Tate - WR - Patriots

NFL Films guru Greg Cosell believes the Patriots "don't think much of" Brandon Tate at this point in his career.
"He runs about three routes," says Cosell, "and the only time the ball comes to him is when a play is specifically called for him." The Patriots offense relies on receivers who excel at pre-snap reads and route running, which simply aren't strengths at this stage of Tate's career. The loss of OTAs hurts his chances of a bigger role in 2011.



we should go after that Notre Dame Receiver in the upcoming draft

we can give a 3

 

[supafly]

Brandon Tate - WR - Patriots

NFL Films guru Greg Cosell believes the Patriots "don't think much of" Brandon Tate at this point in his career.
"He runs about three routes," says Cosell, "and the only time the ball comes to him is when a play is specifically called for him." The Patriots offense relies on receivers who excel at pre-snap reads and route running, which simply aren't strengths at this stage of Tate's career. The loss of OTAs hurts his chances of a bigger role in 2011.



we should go after that Notre Dame Receiver in the upcoming draft

we can give a 3

If that is indeed true, I can't say that I'm shocked in the least, but in Tate's defense it's a bit early to pass too much judgment. As others have pointed out, sometimes (often times) it takes a couple-few yrs to fully understand and play to a higher level as a WR in this offense.

No, obviously he isn't making us too excited at the thought of being the next Larry Fitzgerald, but he has made some plays and provides good ST ability on the returns.

That all said, I wouldn't be surprised if it were Price who steps up this yr, as I am sure that he'll have the chance. There's even the chance (who knows?) that Price could show more, and maybe even slowly take over Tate's reps, although I would imagine that Tate would still be used on KO returns and specialty plays. Someone could get hurt, anything could happen. I think if Tate wants it bad enough, he has the potential to step up and make more of an impact--or he may be compared to a certain 2nd rd bust from '06 too. It will be interesting to see his work ethic and whether or not he can develop any kind of routine/chemistry with Brady.

If Tate doesn't show more this year, or God forbid--regresses, the fans and media will be calling for his head. Personally, I really think it's going to be an important year for him one way or another. The lack of OTA's/mini's + the possibility of no TC/shortened TC etc does not particularly bode 'well' for him, although it's hard to say how much it would hurt him too. He does at least have some knowledge and experience (albeit limited) within the system. Price is obviously in a similar situation. I am just hoping one of them can get it done. We'll definitely see soon enough.

 

[JoeSixPat]

My first gut reaction to this "rumor" was that it was started specifically to light a fire under
Tate. If they really think he's got no potential and are planning to cut him, then this rumor has no use.

But if they think he might be the deep threat WR that everyone seems to think they need, then a little rumor like this might prompt him to use his lockout time wisely to see if he can take it to the next level. He knows there's an opportunity there.

Heck - I've seen these same types of rumors popping up all around the league during the lockout. I'm pretty sure more than a few are contrived just to foster harder lockout workouts.

 

[Don Kipines]

Tate was obviously a very good kick returner and seems to me to be a decent bet to ease into the Donte Stallworth/Jabari Gaffney role as a third receiver/outside guy. He's at 24 catches and 432 yards now, with an 18.0 YPC; if they can get him 35-40 balls he'd be a pretty useful player. He's fast and dynamic with the ball in his hands, he's just not a very experienced receiver. Hopefully they can make a Jeremy Maclin-type role for him.

With Welker, Gronkowski, Hernandez, Branch, Woodhead and probably Vereen as well, the Pats have a lot of quality pass-catching options who all contribute something different. If Tate can be a viable occasional deep threat who also has to be accounted for on screens and reverses, he helps out for sure. He doesn't have to be Moss.

They still don't have that big, strong outside guy who can regularly challenge with deep outs and slants, but maybe Price is that guy.

 

[WaterfallJumper]

I don't believe that for a minute. What are your sources?

Let's try using our own eyes. It may prove beneficial to watch this video of Tate: YouTube - ‪No. 19 WR Brandon Tate 2010 Season‬‏

Reiss keeps quoting the 54% catch rate, but if you watch the video, he really only has three or so outright drops. The rest of the misfires are either poor throws or highly contested catches.

I'm extremely encouraged after watching the video. I think Tate has loads of potential. He really does a lot of things well. My biggest complaint is his lack of sharp suddenness when running the double move. He rounds off his cuts too much, and it allows the DB to undercut the route. Otherwise, I saw an excellent young player who looks like he's ready to take the next step. Good stuff.

 

[Metaphors]

we should go after that Notre Dame Receiver in the upcoming draft

we can give a 3

I think it is an excellent strategy to rid the roster of those pesky 23 year olds that only produce 5 TDs in their first season. Maybe the Pats should have drafted someone like AJ Green and see how much he can produce until he is 23 (he has another 7 weeks). Or maybe Edmund Gates, provided he comes with a time machine to get back to 2008.

Or is it possible that flushing talented players that can still legally be on their parents' health insurance policy is a bit rash? And maybe minimizing special teams production and not considering downfield blocking skills isn't the best way to build a complete team.

Then again, we still can replace Tate with Price. Price is 3 days younger.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think it is an excellent strategy to rid the roster of those pesky 23 year olds that only produce 5 TDs in their first season. Maybe the Pats should have drafted someone like AJ Green and see how much he can produce until he is 23 (he has another 7 weeks). Or maybe Edmund Gates, provided he comes with a time machine to get back to 2008.

Or is it possible that flushing talented players that can still legally be on their parents' health insurance policy is a bit rash? And maybe minimizing special teams production and not considering downfield blocking skills isn't the best way to build a complete team.

Then again, we still can replace Tate with Price. Price is 3 days younger.

Perhaps we could start by realizing that it wasn't Tate's first season. :confused2:

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Perhaps we could start by realizing that it wasn't Tate's first season. :confused2:

Two seasons, one of which was an injury washout.

 

[Gwedd]

I fully expect to see Tate wearing the laundry on opening day. he isn't going anywhere yet, as he has plenty if use as a kick returner and plenty of potential in the passing game.

I'd be happy to give him another year to see what he can produce.

 

[Deus Irae]

Two seasons, one of which was an injury washout.

Much of his senior season in college was lost to injury, as well. It's two seasons though, nonetheless.

I actually found Cosell's stuff very interesting, and reflective of some things many of us have been saying from early on, about Tate and the receiving corps in general. I think he was a bit dismissive of Welker, but that's really just a difference of opinion regarding top end play.

 

[RayClay]

Brandon Tate - WR - Patriots

NFL Films guru Greg Cosell believes the Patriots "don't think much of" Brandon Tate at this point in his career.
"He runs about three routes," says Cosell, "and the only time the ball comes to him is when a play is specifically called for him." The Patriots offense relies on receivers who excel at pre-snap reads and route running, which simply aren't strengths at this stage of Tate's career. The loss of OTAs hurts his chances of a bigger role in 2011.



we should go after that Notre Dame Receiver in the upcoming draft

we can give a 3

Is there a link to the article in there somewhere?

 

[Deus Irae]

Is there a link to the article in there somewhere?

Precision of Welker, Branch is where Patriots are unique

 

[HomerSchooled]

Tate made some big, even huge plays at the receiver position in his first healthy season back from a pair of major knee injuries. Plus, he's arguably a top 5 kick returner (6th in YPA, tied for 3rd in TDs). For such a young player, a third rounder from 2009 mind you, I don't think it's fair to ask much more. He sounds like he's working hard this off season, and there's zero reason to think his best ball isn't ahead of him. He's already proven himself 4-5 times the player Chad Jackson was, and at a much lower pick. I'm baffled by the demands people seem to place on him, and I don't think he deserves to be the scape goat some have made him.

Then again, I just realized Pittsburgh's Mike Wallace was drafted with the very next pick. That guy had 1200+ yds, 10 tds, and 21 YPC last season. So clearly Tate needs to pick it up.

 

[RayClay]

Precision of Welker, Branch is where Patriots are unique

Thanks, I managed to find it.

Very interesting interview, the guy knows his stuff. When we got Moss, our precision game went out the window because of his talent, but our real game is route running and adjustments. Tate will need to buckle down and so will his competition. Welker and Branch are naturals, but we've seen so many competent NFL receivers wash out because they couldn't adjust to our system.

Cosell cuts to the Catch-22 of the Patriots' wideout situation. There's a high level of institutional knowledge necessary to play well at wide receiver for the Patriots. So while Welker and Branch may be a lot closer to the end of their physical usefulness than the beginning, it's hard to push away from them. Once the season starts, it comes down to winning games. So the emphasis on developing guys like Edelman, Tate and Taylor Price goes out the window as the Patriots prepare for every Sunday's matchup. Meanwhile, because Tate is lacking as a vertical threat to be taken seriously on every play, the Patriots are a more horizontal passing offense since neither Branch nor Welker is going to burn past corners with regularity. The Patriots sacrifice explosiveness for precision and -- as the numbers show -- it works.

 

[Deus Irae]

Tate made some big, even huge plays at the receiver position in his first healthy season back from a pair of major knee injuries. Plus, he's arguably a top 5 kick returner (6th in YPA, tied for 3rd in TDs). For such a young player, a third rounder from 2009 mind you, I don't think it's fair to ask much more. He sounds like he's working hard this off season, and there's zero reason to think his best ball isn't ahead of him. He's already proven himself 4-5 times the player Chad Jackson was, and at a much lower pick. I'm baffled by the demands people seem to place on him, and I don't think he deserves to be the scape goat some have made him.

Then again, I just realized Pittsburgh's Mike Wallace was drafted with the very next pick. That guy had 1200+ yds, 10 tds, and 21 YPC last season. So clearly Tate needs to pick it up.

One can note the problems with Tate's game, and the impact that has on the team's offense, without making him a scapegoat. The vast majority of people who have issues with Tate have done just that. However, the reality is that Tate is the only deep route receiver the team had once it got rid of Moss, and his struggles were a large part of why the offense lost the vertical option once Moss was traded. That's not on Tate, since it wasn't his decision, but it's his play that becomes the focal point, whether you think that's fair or not.

 

[Metaphors]

Perhaps we could start by realizing that it wasn't Tate's first season. :confused2:

Absolutely correct. Those 10 practices, 6 quarters of game snaps and 2 pass targets (neither of which were accurate) in 2009 really make a huge difference. I'm shocked...shocked I tell you...that Tate couldn't build off those 3 magical weeks where he was with the team to have an All-Pro 2010 season.

I'm assuming that is your point because otherwise people might start calling you names that end with "-bag". Not me, but people. You know, those elite, educated types who would just take the obvious meaning that 2010 was Tate's first year of real NFL development.

 

[supafly]

He's already proven himself 4-5 times the player Chad Jackson was, and at a much lower pick.

I don't know about all of that. He may have already proven himself more than Jackson, but certainly not '4-5' times over. Actually their numbers are not that much different from each other, especially when you consider the fact that Tate started TEN (10) games last yr, while Jackson started ONE (1) here. Both played only one year of real play, as they were hurt for the entire other season, and had no numbers. Tate's season ending injury came in his FIRST yr, while he racked up 24 catches in his 2nd yr. Jackson, on the other hand had 13 catches as a natural rookie, and then got his season ending injury in his SECOND yr. The point is that both only played one 'real' yr here.

Tate--10 games started 24 Catches 3 TD's (had some knowledge of system)
Jackson--1 game started 13 Catches 3 TD's (as a natural 1st yr rookie)

The differences are that Tate had more yardage in those 11 extra catches, and had a much higher average than Jackson (18 ypc vs 12)---BUT he also had many, many more opportunities as he started 10 games vs Jackson's 1, and had a whole, entire yr of team meetings, playbook and system knowledge etc.

I am not really debating your comment as to whether or not he's 'better' than Chad Jackson, as you are probably correct, and I certainly agree--although we only have a small sample size. I am arguing that there's no way in the world that he is '4 to 5 times' proven himself way better than Jackson. They both had some things in which they were alike...but Tate has also had many more starting opportunities, and has proven at least early in the season before fading into return oblivion, that he can take it to the house.

As for the 'much lower pick comment,' :

Chad Jackson was a 2nd, while Tate was a 3rd---I don't know if that qualifies as a 'much lower pick,' but I do agree with pretty much of everything that you said, so I guess there's no reason to nit-pick too badly.

I am sure that Tate is better at the same point, but I don't agree with how much better. Only time will tell anyway, whether or not he can take a step forward or take a step backwards. I personally am pulling for him, and hope that he proves to be a great 3rd rd pick. There's no way I am even close to giving up on him, but if he doesn't improve this yr....there will be the CJ comparisons for sure.

 

[Deus Irae]

Absolutely correct. Those 10 practices, 6 quarters of game snaps and 2 pass targets (neither of which were accurate) in 2009 really make a huge difference. I'm shocked...shocked I tell you...that Tate couldn't build off those 3 magical weeks where he was with the team to have an All-Pro 2010 season.

I'm assuming that is your point because otherwise people might start calling you names that end with "-bag". Not me, but people. You know, those elite, educated types who would just take the obvious meaning that 2010 was Tate's first year of real NFL development.

Actually, it was you acting like the names that end with "bag", largely ignoring the piece that was being discussed in favor of an attack on people (and an absolutely idiotic attack, given that the one point about his youth and inexperience that you were putting forth is that such youth and inexperience is part of why Cosell's making the point about Tate needing the offseason) via the use of Tate's age and experience to compare with other players. My point was, really, that if you're going to act that way, you should get your facts straight. Given just how poorly your post was as a response, I should probably have added that you should also read the article involved.

Also, if 2010 was Tate's first year of real NFL development, he should be cut immediately, because he's too stupid and/or lazy to play the game at that level. Injury shortened rookie seasons aren't reasons to cut second year receivers who will take time to recover, and I defended Chad Jackson on that score. I've also defended Tate, noting that he was a rehab guy from the start and that his first year was something like a half-year. That doesn't mean that he shouldn't have been using his limited time and the ability to study film and the like, for his "real NFL development".

 

[NinjaZX6R]

Bennie's cousin!

Tate made some big, even huge plays at the receiver position in his first healthy season back from a pair of major knee injuries. Plus, he's arguably a top 5 kick returner (6th in YPA, tied for 3rd in TDs). For such a young player, a third rounder from 2009 mind you, I don't think it's fair to ask much more. He sounds like he's working hard this off season, and there's zero reason to think his best ball isn't ahead of him. He's already proven himself 4-5 times the player Chad Jackson was, and at a much lower pick. I'm baffled by the demands people seem to place on him, and I don't think he deserves to be the scape goat some have made him.

Then again, I just realized Pittsburgh's Mike Wallace was drafted with the very next pick. That guy had 1200+ yds, 10 tds, and 21 YPC last season. So clearly Tate needs to pick it up.

 

[supafly]

Bennie's cousin!

How's things in Columbus?? Not so good I hear. A sad day for fans like us. At least it didn't turn out that way for our coach here, with the whole 'great coach' resignation etc. I was worried about that with the whole Spygate nonsense in 2007.

Better days ahead my friend.

On another note, did you see the O|A|R show last week? (assuming that you live and go to school there)