For those of you who missed it...
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=53877
I'll copy my feeling from there:
What's with this negativity? Such would be expected if the Pats were planning on James replacing Samuel, but nothing could be further from the truth.
This is the type of low-risk, high-reward signing the Pats have thrived on. Nobody is asking James to come in and potentially replace Samuel as the leader of the defensive backfield. Hell, nobody is asking James to come in an inherit a starting spot. He won't get big money. There's no risk (unlike Starks, where a draft choice part of the payment).
James will come in as a durable veteran presence. I disagree with A.J. that he will be a back-end roster guy - which would essentially make him inactive every week. In fact, I see James, if signed, getting significant time in sub packages - possibly as more of a FS as some suggest. In many ways, he's on the same level as Chad Scott or Hawkins. A few years ago, he'd be clearly above them.
I also disagree with A.J. insofar as he's not starting caliber. It wouldn't be favorable, but it wouldn't be deplorable either to have Tory James as a starter. The chances of that, though, are slim. Asante or no Asante, the Pats willbe drafting a DB, probably in the 1st or 2nd (if they trade down). James will be in the mix with Scott, the pick (if Asante), and possibly Gay for those 3-5 spots on the depth chart at CB. Again, I'm not saying James will start or could start.
James shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Moreland, Spann, or Poteat. That's what matters.
