Could Seymour have influenced a 4-3 change??

[Franchise12]

I know, I know. "theres no way belichick will change from a base 3-4" and some of you might call me an idiot for even thinking this. Its obvious that seymour has some serious pull in N.E. just look at his deal. is there any possibility that during his contract negotiations he demanded or asked that the team plays more of a 4-3 considering how talented and deep our d-line is . just a thought I had during this boring offseason.

 

[bucky]

How exactly is a 4-3 going to benefit Seymour? And when did Seymour become an Xs and Os guy?

 

[PATSNUTme]

Nope. Bring in Sullivan will not change that this year. We have no idea right if Sullivan will do the work to make the team. I do think tha BB and even RS hope that Sullivan will come around.

If he does do what he needs to do, he will be part of the rotation. when we do play 4-3, and we do play more 4-3 than people realize, he could be in the mix there.

The main thing right now is to see if the kid is willing to put down the fork and get himself in shape to play the game.

 

[patchick]

I know, I know. "theres no way belichick will change from a base 3-4" and some of you might call me an idiot for even thinking this. Its obvious that seymour has some serious pull in N.E. just look at his deal. is there any possibility that during his contract negotiations he demanded or asked that the team plays more of a 4-3 considering how talented and deep our d-line is . just a thought I had during this boring offseason.

Our d-line is incredibly deep and loaded...with players who would all play DT in a 4-3 defense. That's what puzzles me most about all the suggestions that Sullivan points toward the 4-3 -- he wouldn't be likely to see the field in that configuration either. In a four-man line wouldn't Vrabel and/or Colvin would play DE, leaving at most 3 spots for Seymour, Warren, Wilfork, Green and Sullivan?

 

[BelichickFan]

To answer your question : No.

I think it was a chance to get some upside on a player they liked 3 years ago and see what Belichick/Pees/Pepper think of him in a few months.

I do think they could need a little better depth at DL this year as it's entirely possible that a DL will get the DE pass rushing role McGinest had on passing situations (when we do play a 4-3, just with a LB as the 4th DL).

 

[spacecrime]

If BB was planning on a major change, you really believe it would hinge on obtaining Jonathan Sullivan?

I like the trade, but mostly because Bethel was likely to be cut anyway, and Sullivan has potential, and can be cut with no loss if the potential doesn't appear by September.

This is hardly the stuff that will drive a change of philosophy.

We picked up a lazy, out of shape guy. He may turn into something good. It is a no lose situation. It is not something to alter the way we play, which has always been a mix of 3-4 and 4-3, has it not?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

The main thing right now is to see if the kid is willing to put down the fork and get himself in shape to play the game.

Sullivan: "Hey, what's with this clause that says I have to eat all my meals on-site?"

 

[Pats726]

I agree...not a chance they will base a 4-3...doesn't make sense..Might they play more 4-3 at some points in a game?? Maybe..and more possible..but I agree...BJ was gone and getting a once blue chip player is a no lose situation. Better to receive a possible than zilch...THAT is why it's a great trade!! Maybe Sullivan can be a backup NT...if he can, it make sompetition even harder on the DL; a good thing!!

 

[TNPatsFan]

I'm keeping track of the number of "Will the Pats switch to a 4-3?" threads I'm seeing on various message boards. I think we're up to about 15 now.