Hate to bring up that linebacker thing.

[RayClay]

What makes you think TBC replaces Vrabel? I haven't gone to the tape yet, but my memory is Colvin's pressures came off the right side. This is pretty much what I expected would happen, TBC is going to take the majority of his snaps lined up next to Seymour and Colvin will be alongside Warren - odd isn't it, BB moves his OLB experience left to right, makes you think there is madness to his method.

As for TBC and run D, I get a kick out of people fretting over that. He is a converted 4-3 DE, his job at OLB vs. the run hasn't changed since he was converted to DE from LB in college - he is supposed to set the edge, nothing new for him,except that he gets to pay alongside Sey. BB has said it often enough to be an "it is what it is" remark, but the #1 transition for a DE converting to LB is pass defense. Watching TBC this year, I don't see any great weakness in his game, certainly no greater weakness than Colvin's ability to set the edge against Oakland last season (game 1 for the memory challenged), by this time last season Rosey was drawing double-teams playing LOLB with Vrabel inside. TBC actually looked better against the run than Rosey did to start last year, he's got a fighting chance to be fully tuned up by playoff time.

As for Vrabel being a run stuffer, he was just fine in the last third of last season playing alongside Tedy and behind Sey, Vince, and Ty. He and TBC both get to practice at game speed against such great teams as Detroit, Miami, Tennessee, Houston, and a Jacksonville club that isn't making the playoffs. So five non-playoff caliber tests, but pretty decent training opportunities.

We might complain that Chicago moved the ball in the second half, but if you buy the bogus PI theory, you can't say the Bears were overwhelming with their offense against the Vrabel/TBC defense. And if you don't buy it, you are left with speculation that those two passes would have been completed and the fact they would still not have been enough or a direct result of a sieve-like run game.

Bottom line, an offense that has had some success wasn't able to get much done against the Vrabel/TBC defense featuring two reserve Safeties - I don't see any team between now and the playoffs who can match the Bears' offense. Lets panic after we reach the playoffs and see if a playoff caliber offense can move the ball at will against the D.

No one's panicking, Box. Just stating the fact we are stretched thin at DB and LB.

We've had a ton of injuries at DB, but with only one injury at linebacker we are down to unproven UDFA's and 20 LB. underweight Special teamers as our only back ups.

If that's not true, I'll apologize.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

No one's panicking, Box. Just stating the fact we are stretched thin at DB and LB.

We've had a ton of injuries at DB, but with only one injury at linebacker we are down to unproven UDFA's and 20 LB. underweight Special teamers as our only back ups.

If that's not true, I'll apologize.

Woods isn't underweight.

Okay, you've stated a fact, the Pats have lost two LBs to IR and are down to the base package in the 4-3. But we also have 5 regular season games to go against losers, which allows some development time, so who knows what BB will be doing with that opportunity - do you think he could get Butkis out of retirement?

 

[RayClay]

Woods isn't underweight.

Okay, you've stated a fact, the Pats have lost two LBs to IR and are down to the base package in the 4-3. But we also have 5 regular season games to go against losers, which allows some development time, so who knows what BB will be doing with that opportunity - do you think he could get Butkis out of retirement?

Woods=rookie UDFA, who I like by the way.
Alexander=only fairly experienced UDFA
Davis=Smart veteran special teamer about 20 lbs. lighter than we like at LB.
Izzo=Smart veteran special teamer " " " " " " "

I wouldn't include Gardner as a proven veteran linebacker. He was pretty much an unknown quantity when injured. I had hopes, but we don't know he would have been more effective than Beisel.

I will agree he was not replaced.

 

[unoriginal]

What makes you think TBC replaces Vrabel? I haven't gone to the tape yet, but my memory is Colvin's pressures came off the right side. This is pretty much what I expected would happen, TBC is going to take the majority of his snaps lined up next to Seymour and Colvin will be alongside Warren - odd isn't it, BB moves his OLB experience left to right, makes you think there is madness to his method.

I will generally defer to your superior knowledge of the Belichick defense, but I wasn't being so specific as saying TBC was filling Vrabel's position, right or left, just that TBC was replacing Vrabel as an outside linebacker in the base 3-4. That may reveal a profound ignorance on my part of the vast differences in play mechanics on each side of the defense.

As for TBC and run D, I get a kick out of people fretting over that. He is a converted 4-3 DE, his job at OLB vs. the run hasn't changed since he was converted to DE from LB in college - he is supposed to set the edge, nothing new for him,except that he gets to pay alongside Sey.

Again, yes, you're right, TBC was a 4-3 DE at Cal, but I recall him more specifically called a rush end. What got him on the field at Cal, and what made him an NFL prospect, was not his ability to defend the run in college, but his pass rushing ability. PFW's draft profile for him mentions that he is a less than stellar run defender. I concede they might not know what they are talking about, but I do think that whatever pro-caliber run kung-fu he has learned has been learned at New England under the tuteledge of Pepper Johnson, and consequently his "job vs. the run" has changed since he was converted in college, in that now he is going to be asked to do it really well and all the time, whereas to this point more has been asked of him as a situational edge rusher. However, as you said...

BB has said it often enough to be an "it is what it is" remark, but the #1 transition for a DE converting to LB is pass defense. Watching TBC this year, I don't see any great weakness in his game, certainly no greater weakness than Colvin's ability to set the edge against Oakland last season (game 1 for the memory challenged), by this time last season Rosey was drawing double-teams playing LOLB with Vrabel inside. TBC actually looked better against the run than Rosey did to start last year, he's got a fighting chance to be fully tuned up by playoff time.

If you say he has played stingily against the run so far, I guess "it is what it is."

As for Vrabel being a run stuffer, he was just fine in the last third of last season playing alongside Tedy and behind Sey, Vince, and Ty. He and TBC both get to practice at game speed against such great teams as Detroit, Miami, Tennessee, Houston, and a Jacksonville club that isn't making the playoffs. So five non-playoff caliber tests, but pretty decent training opportunities.

I really hope I did not somehow imply that Vrabel will not be, at the very least, "just fine." Like you said, he proved himself last year in that role.

We might complain that Chicago moved the ball in the second half, but if you buy the bogus PI theory, you can't say the Bears were overwhelming with their offense against the Vrabel/TBC defense. And if you don't buy it, you are left with speculation that those two passes would have been completed and the fact they would still not have been enough or a direct result of a sieve-like run game.

Maybe I'm not parsing that correctly, but I left the passing game completely out of my original post, and when I talked about the Bears offense it was stickly ground game, in that they seemed to run disproportionally well after Seau walked off the field. Are you saying the PI calls opened up the run game? Could be the Pats played substantially more nickel post-Seau, though I remember Brown being on that field pretty much all game long.

Bottom line, an offense that has had some success wasn't able to get much done against the Vrabel/TBC defense featuring two reserve Safeties - I don't see any team between now and the playoffs who can match the Bears' offense. Lets panic after we reach the playoffs and see if a playoff caliber offense can move the ball at will against the D.

I didn't say panic. I said be afraid. Panic would be if Don Davis and Corey Mays were starting in the base 3-4. However, people should be afraid that Don Davis is one injury away from significant playing time. As for the Vrabel/TBC thing, my analysis (hopefully) only reached the level of a warning, or moderate concern. Do I think this D is going to fold against any of the regular season offenses still on the docket? At present, no. Will they maintain their impecible defensive statistics? Yeah, probably. Should the Pats be scared of the Ravens? No. Should the Pats be concerned about a re-jiggered linebacking corps facing off against the Chargers and Broncos? Yeah, I don't think thats so far-fetched.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Woods=rookie UDFA, who I like by the way.
Alexander=only fairly experienced UDFA
Davis=Smart veteran special teamer about 20 lbs. lighter than we like at LB.
Izzo=Smart veteran special teamer " " " " " " "

I wouldn't include Gardner as a proven veteran linebacker. He was pretty much an unknown quantity when injured. I had hopes, but we don't know he would have been more effective than Beisel.

I will agree he was not replaced.

Gardner was a proven, veteran linebacker, this is his 8th year...he just had been primarily used for STs in a 4-3 one gap system. For not having a lot of experience in a 3-4 (he did have two-gap experience in Philly) he wasn't looking too bad in pre-season. The off-season program will hopefully bulk him up to help take on guards better.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I will generally defer to your superior knowledge of the Belichick defense, but I wasn't being so specific as saying TBC was filling Vrabel's position, right or left, just that TBC was replacing Vrabel as an outside linebacker in the base 3-4. That may reveal a profound ignorance on my part of the vast differences in play mechanics on each side of the defense.



Again, yes, you're right, TBC was a 4-3 DE at Cal, but I recall him more specifically called a rush end. What got him on the field at Cal, and what made him an NFL prospect, was not his ability to defend the run in college, but his pass rushing ability. PFW's draft profile for him mentions that he is a less than stellar run defender. I concede they might not know what they are talking about, but I do think that whatever pro-caliber run kung-fu he has learned has been learned at New England under the tuteledge of Pepper Johnson, and consequently his "job vs. the run" has changed since he was converted in college, in that now he is going to be asked to do it really well and all the time, whereas to this point more has been asked of him as a situational edge rusher. However, as you said...



If you say he has played stingily against the run so far, I guess "it is what it is."



I really hope I did not somehow imply that Vrabel will not be, at the very least, "just fine." Like you said, he proved himself last year in that role.



Maybe I'm not parsing that correctly, but I left the passing game completely out of my original post, and when I talked about the Bears offense it was stickly ground game, in that they seemed to run disproportionally well after Seau walked off the field. Are you saying the PI calls opened up the run game? Could be the Pats played substantially more nickel post-Seau, though I remember Brown being on that field pretty much all game long.



I didn't say panic. I said be afraid. Panic would be if Don Davis and Corey Mays were starting in the base 3-4. However, people should be afraid that Don Davis is one injury away from significant playing time. As for the Vrabel/TBC thing, my analysis (hopefully) only reached the level of a warning, or moderate concern. Do I think this D is going to fold against any of the regular season offenses still on the docket? At present, no. Will they maintain their impecible defensive statistics? Yeah, probably. Should the Pats be scared of the Ravens? No. Should the Pats be concerned about a re-jiggered linebacking corps facing off against the Chargers and Broncos? Yeah, I don't think thats so far-fetched.

Fear is a downer regardless of degree, but I apologize for not making it clear the remark wasn't specifically aimed at you, not with all the other folks posting about LB.

As far as the second half running, the Bears racked up 93 yards in rushing in the second half - interestingly, Rex Grossman was 12 of 23 for 157 yds in the first half and finished the game 15 of 34 for 176 yds...I'd say the Pats made an adjustment in their game plan and run defense numbers wasn't necessarily a result of personnel changes.

Sure TBC's college role may have been to rush the passer, in the pass happy Pac-10 I'd say that would be a desirable talent. But 7th round selection or not, do you really believe BB would draft a one-dimensional player without a reasonable belief that he had the potential to play the run and cover as a LB?

While I understood your point about him playing in place of Vrabel at OLB, there has been an effort by BB to put his more experienced OLB on the right side next to Warren. We can speculate why, but Vrabel was moved over to replace Willie when we would have expected Rosey to be Willie's replacement. After TBC came in, he was playing alongside Seymour, I expect the run D to the left will be shakier initially, but I recall doing breakdowns in preseason and noting that TBC was being let down by Seymour when people were grumbling about Tully's run stopping. I'll stress again for folks, TBC will do fine as a run stopper, pass rusher, and pass defender.

Don and Cory would be a lot of fun to watch, perhaps more so for the other side, but if the club was that badly battered we'd be watching just to see what they could do and not bemoaning their opportunity. As it is, I'll put the current LB corps in against Denver or Indy and expect them to play their position well enough to allow the team to be competitive, the Belichick Pats have this history...:rocker:

 

[PATSNUTme]

Yes, our run D will be hurt by the loss of Junior. And TBC will have to go to the weak side and Colvin will have to move to the strong side.

But, both Rodney and Chad Scott will be back and that will help in run support if needed and in pass rush by blitzing them on occasion. We didn't have those two last year when Vrab moved inside.

 

[cstjohn17]

Will any of this cause Bruschi to shift at ILB? he mentioned last year that when Vrabel came in he switched to a new ILB position. My terminology may be wrong but does he have to switch from SILB to WILB? if so what impact will this have on the LB play?

It still seems crazy that one injury to a 37 year old LB (retired) causing us to switch 2 or 3 other LB positions. Having a backup MLB seems like it would have been more prudent. Lets hope the improved D line and cohesion helps, I see both Indy and San Diego being able to score against the Pats. With our offense improving this should make for some interesting playoffs games.

 

[Brownfan80]

I can't imagine there's much to pick up. I think we're actually OK with our starting four . . . but the depth is enough to keep me up at night. One more injury to a starter and we may have to shift to the 4-3

I have a feeling we're already going to see more of the 4-3 with Seau gone.

Who do you want to see more of:

TBC/Woods/Izzo/Davis or Jarvis/Wright?

My first thought is that TBC should be given a chance to hold up the fort with Vrabel inside. If that doesn't work, move Vrabel back outside, leave Bru alone in the middle with Colvin outside and have Jarvis/Wright rotate at DE while Seymour moves inside as a DT.

Who knows. The defense just got alot more 'interesting' with Seau on IR, though, that's for sure.

 

[Pat_Nasty]

Will any of this cause Bruschi to shift at ILB? he mentioned last year that when Vrabel came in he switched to a new ILB position. My terminology may be wrong but does he have to switch from SILB to WILB? if so what impact will this have on the LB play?

It still seems crazy that one injury to a 37 year old LB (retired) causing us to switch 2 or 3 other LB positions. Having a backup MLB seems like it would have been more prudent. Lets hope the improved D line and cohesion helps, I see both Indy and San Diego being able to score against the Pats. With our offense improving this should make for some interesting playoffs games.

Yes, Bruschi will likely be moving over from the weakside ILB spot to the strongside. Thus, Bruschi's role will shift a bit more toward run-stopping, w/ Vrabel dropping into coverage more... which is a shame, as I like Bruschi and his knack for the big play at weakside.

As for not having a backup ILB -- at one point in TC, we had Bruschi, Seau, Gardner and Beisel there. Beisel washed out, and Gardner broke his leg. The Pats looked at some street FAs at that point, but it's not like there was a ton of top shelf talent available then -- and there still isn't. With the Pats running a 3-4 that puts a premium on play recognition, finding players who can assimilate the system and get up to game speed quickly is difficult. This is what made Seau the best player available at the time we picked him up.

Otherwise, none of the other options were better than moving Vrabel back inside.

 

[RayClay]

For a system that supposedly requires 3 years experience, you'd think the Patriots would always have some apprentices in the pipeline.

3 years is a long time in football. Yet during the Belichick era, I only remember Katzenmoyer as a possible starter from draft picks.

Chatham and Maugaula Tuitele were backups at various times. Chatham lasted quite a while and it was obvious he wasn't being groomed to start.

Meanwhile, Bryan Cox, Phifer, TJ and bruschi have retired or suffered significant injuries.

Besides a relatively reasonable FA in Colvin and a flat out steal in Vrabel, where was/is the rainy day fund at LB?

 

[RayClay]

BTW, BB mentioned Colvin is the swing guy at OLB. Rather than change for each different personnel group, he changes to accommodate the other two.

 

[cstjohn17]

Thanks PN, I agree once Training Camp started they did very well to get someone like Seau especially after Gardner went down. I think the error in judgement came way before that. Assuming they wanted Vrabel and Colvin on the outside, they entered Training Camp with Beisel and/or Gardner as the starting ILB. They may be adequate 2nd or 3rd options but are not starters. More could have been done in the draft or FA to shore up an obvious weakness. It is spilled milk now, so lets see how it plays out.

Yes, Bruschi will likely be moving over from the weakside ILB spot to the strongside. Thus, Bruschi's role will shift a bit more toward run-stopping, w/ Vrabel dropping into coverage more... which is a shame, as I like Bruschi and his knack for the big play at weakside.

As for not having a backup ILB -- at one point in TC, we had Bruschi, Seau, Gardner and Beisel there. Beisel washed out, and Gardner broke his leg. The Pats looked at some street FAs at that point, but it's not like there was a ton of top shelf talent available then -- and there still isn't. With the Pats running a 3-4 that puts a premium on play recognition, finding players who can assimilate the system and get up to game speed quickly is difficult. This is what made Seau the best player available at the time we picked him up.

Otherwise, none of the other options were better than moving Vrabel back inside.

 

[Pat_Nasty]

Thanks PN, I agree once Training Camp started they did very well to get someone like Seau especially after Gardner went down. I think the error in judgement came way before that. Assuming they wanted Vrabel and Colvin on the outside, they entered Training Camp with Beisel and/or Gardner as the starting ILB. They may be adequate 2nd or 3rd options but are not starters. More could have been done in the draft or FA to shore up an obvious weakness. It is spilled milk now, so lets see how it plays out.

First of all, not everybody assumed that Beisel wouldn't work out as a decent starter. Belichick and Pepper Johnson both seemed convinced that he could be a serviceable player. While that does count as an error in judgement, it's a different, more forgiveable kind of error than the neglect that many Pats fan (mildly) accuse BB of.

As for more being done in the draft or FA to shore up our depth there, I think it's easy to overestimate how much of an opportunity there was to do so. Think back to the offseason before 2005. Bruschi's stroke posed a difficult problem, as everybody was confident that Tedy would be back at least by '06, so going out and spending on a big name FA wouldn't be prudent. The Pats brought in Beisel and Brown, hoping that between the two of them, they could fill Bru's shoes for a year.

Then Ted Johnson's eve-of-camp retirement caught us all flat-footed. Suddenly, we're scrambling to fill two starting spots, one of them permanently. Since then, ILB has been a pressing need -- but without much available in the way of a good solution. There wasn't anybody in FA who was a good enough fit and worth giving the kind of money people were getting in the post-CBA market, and you're unlikely to find a rookie in the draft who's a halfway decent bet to make the switch to the 3-4 and be able to make major contributions his rookie season. We've tried to pick up some developmental projects in middle/later rounds in recent years, like Ryan Claridge and Jeremy Mincey, but both were pretty much strike-outs.

Ultimately, I think fixing the issues at ILB have proven harder than simply wishing to address them.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Will any of this cause Bruschi to shift at ILB? he mentioned last year that when Vrabel came in he switched to a new ILB position. My terminology may be wrong but does he have to switch from SILB to WILB? if so what impact will this have on the LB play?

It still seems crazy that one injury to a 37 year old LB (retired) causing us to switch 2 or 3 other LB positions. Having a backup MLB seems like it would have been more prudent. Lets hope the improved D line and cohesion helps, I see both Indy and San Diego being able to score against the Pats. With our offense improving this should make for some interesting playoffs games.

We did have backup ILBs. Their names are spelled VRABLE and GARDNER. One is on IR; the other is now playing ILB as the depth promotee. What's the problem ?? Until the League lets teams carry 66 players, no team will have three players for each position.

I don't see why adjustments are not OK. The most experienced OLB goes to the strong side to handle the blocking from the TE. Besides putting TBC behind All-Pro Seymour makes his job easier, theoretically.

You could also look at as a case where TBC's speed allows him more coverage responsibilities. The slower OLB goes to the smaller area of pass coverage.

 

[RayClay]

First of all, not everybody assumed that Beisel wouldn't work out as a decent starter. Belichick and Pepper Johnson both seemed convinced that he could be a serviceable player. While that does count as an error in judgement, it's a different, more forgiveable kind of error than the neglect that many Pats fan (mildly) accuse BB of.

As for more being done in the draft or FA to shore up our depth there, I think it's easy to overestimate how much of an opportunity there was to do so. Think back to the offseason before 2005. Bruschi's stroke posed a difficult problem, as everybody was confident that Tedy would be back at least by '06, so going out and spending on a big name FA wouldn't be prudent. The Pats brought in Beisel and Brown, hoping that between the two of them, they could fill Bru's shoes for a year.

Then Ted Johnson's eve-of-camp retirement caught us all flat-footed. Suddenly, we're scrambling to fill two starting spots, one of them permanently. Since then, ILB has been a pressing need -- but without much available in the way of a good solution. There wasn't anybody in FA who was a good enough fit and worth giving the kind of money people were getting in the post-CBA market, and you're unlikely to find a rookie in the draft who's a halfway decent bet to make the switch to the 3-4 and be able to make major contributions his rookie season. We've tried to pick up some developmental projects in middle/later rounds in recent years, like Ryan Claridge and Jeremy Mincey, but both were pretty much strike-outs.

Ultimately, I think fixing the issues at ILB have proven harder than simply wishing to address them.

Though it was a surprise, who depended on Johnson's health or was really shocked by his retirement? His health was questionable for years.

I'll grant it caught us flat footed, but part of that was the failure to prepare for injuries or retirement at LB.

I already posted, but where were the future LBs since 2000?

 

[cstjohn17]

We did have backup ILBs. Their names are spelled VRABLE and GARDNER. One is on IR; the other is now playing ILB as the depth promotee. What's the problem ?? Until the League lets teams carry 66 players, no team will have three players for each position.

I don't see why adjustments are not OK. The most experienced OLB goes to the strong side to handle the blocking from the TE. Besides putting TBC behind All-Pro Seymour makes his job easier, theoretically.

You could also look at as a case where TBC's speed allows him more coverage responsibilities. The slower OLB goes to the smaller area of pass coverage.

I thought it was spelled Vrabel, but what do I know... TBC is JAG, if he was more he would be starting starting or signed to a longer term deal. He is a adequate backup at OLB but a big step down from Vrabel.

My point is that this situation was correctable if it had been planned for. Relying on a 37 year old retired veteran with an injury history who comes in half way through training camp or assuming that Beisel or Gardner are starting NFL MLB material was a high risk approach.

I give them a mulligan for 2005 becasue TJ's retirement was something that could not be planned for. But for 2006 it seems like better options were available.

 

[Pat_Nasty]

Though it was a surprise, who depended on Johnson's health or was really shocked by his retirement? His health was questionable for years.

I'll grant it caught us flat footed, but part of that was the failure to prepare for injuries or retirement at LB.

I already posted, but where were the future LBs since 2000?

Johnson was 32 when he retired, and though he did have a history of getting nicked up during the season, it really had little to do w/ what forced him out of the league. The concussion issue that ultimately led to his retirement was a surprise.

It wasn't folly for the Pats to figure they'd 13-15 games a year out of Johnson for at least a few more years.

As for where the "future LBs" since 2000 are -- well, let's not forget Rosevelt Colvin, whom we picked up in '03. And let's not forget that Monty Beisel was considered a potential Vrabel-like steal when we signed him.

As for youngsters, we've drafted T.J. Turner, TBC, Jeremy Mincey and Ryan Claridge since 2000, albeit all in later rounds.

Why no earlier picks for LBs? Well, for one, it's a tricky move projecting college LBs and DE into our 3-4 defense... but more importantly, LB has been a strongpoint of ours for a while, and we've had many areas that needed more improvement. Take our defensive line, for example, was not what it should be in 2000 -- now it's one of the best. Our oline is pretty much all-new since 2000.

It's pretty much impossible for a team to improve at every position every year. Before, we were thin at DL, OL and RB. Now we're thin at WR and LB. It's a cycle.

 

[Pat_Nasty]

I give them a mulligan for 2005 becasue TJ's retirement was something that could not be planned for. But for 2006 it seems like better options were available.

Ok, name them.

Should we have payed out the ***** for overrated guys like Julian Peterson or Lavar Arrington?

Should we have gone after Will Witherspoon, even though he's totally wrong for the 3-4?

Do any of these guys have iron forearms that wouldn't have broken the way Seau's did?

 

[arrellbee]

I thought it was spelled Vrabel, but what do I know... TBC is JAG, if he was more he would be starting starting or signed to a longer term deal. He is a adequate backup at OLB but a big step down from Vrabel.

I think there is a fair chance you are wrong. Patriots style LBs take time to develop. Prime case in point is Tedi Bruschi who grew into the postion in dynamite fashion. Banta-Cain has the physical tools and has shown some definite good plays in limited time. Of course, there is no way to predict if will develop the whole way - but it's too early to say that. That he would be 'starting' or 'signed to a long term deal' - that doesn't seem to reflect very well how the Patriots are demonstrated to operate.

My point is that this situation was correctable if it had been planned for. Relying on a 37 year old retired veteran with an injury history who comes in half way through training camp or assuming that Beisel or Gardner are starting NFL MLB material was a high risk approach.

So, as Pat_Nasty says, how would you have fixed this ? You can't manufacture the availability of a talent available on the FA market like a Vrabel. You can only pick from among the players who are actually on the market. And until further notice, the Patriots show NO sign of paying big dollars for much of any FA - and they have the credentials to support that approach, much as 'the sky is falling' is stated all the time by second-guessers. Likewise, they clearly state that they draft for the best player available - period - and until further notice, the Patriots show NO sign of drafting for need - and they have the credentials to support that approach, much as 'the sky is falling' is stated all the time by second-guessers. [/quote]

I give them a mulligan for 2005 becasue TJ's retirement was something that could not be planned for. But for 2006 it seems like better options were available.

As was said, tell us what option there were given the approach that the Patriots demonstrate that they are following. Not only that, but you have to ignore Pioli's board that has every player in the league with their assessment of players that have potential to play and contribute effectively in the Patriots system. I dont think they every overlook anybody.

The Pats aren't likely to change their approach and it's almost impossible to claim that there is a better approach. So, this is NOT intended to be mean or confrontational in the slightest, but if you don't agree with that, maybe you better shop for another team that does it like you think they should and sit back and count the superbowls.