FloridaPatsFan
Third String But Playing on Special Teams
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2005
- Messages
- 941
- Reaction score
- 0
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.FloridaPatsFan said:Have you noticed Seau's facial expressions on the sidelines when they take him out on 3rd down?
He looks like he wants to kill the waterboy.
The dude is intense
Mike the Brit said:I agree with you. No love for Roman Phifer, eh? I always liked him.
5 Rings for Brady!! said:I think it is safe to say that we have had good linebacking since 2001.
I'll wait until the year is over before grading this year's crew.
Oswlek said:I'm not sure that I agree with this. 2004 was better than this group. Lined up:
2004 Tedy > 2006 Tedy
2004 Willie >> 2006 Colvin
2004 Vrabel = 2006 Vrabel
2004 Ted Johnson >>> 2006 Seau
and that group had better depth, as well as more complimentary depth with Colvin and (d%#*!@t, I forgot the other ILB. arrrrggggghh)
Who were the other four?shakadave said:Phifer was one of the five Patriots who made the Wheaties box after Super Bowl 36.
AzPatsFan said:I disgree with the 2004 TJ Seau comparison.
TJ was fighting Concussions and other dings off and on throughout the season. In 2004 like 3006 the offside ILB was paltoon system TJ on running downs and Phife on passing plays. In 2006 its Seau in the TJ role and either TBC as a passrusher or a nickle formation with either Scott or Hawkin in as the extra DB. It is much more like:
2004 TJ + Phifer <<< 2006 Seau + TBC +(Scott/Hawkins)
and
2004 Chatham < 2006 TBC.
Finally the proof of the pudding is:
2004 Defense = 16 PPG
2006 Defense = 12.4 PPG
Oswlek said:2004 Ted Johnson >>> 2006 Seau
Fanfrom1960 said:Who were the other four?
Oswlek said:I'm not sure that I agree with this. 2004 was better than this group. Lined up:
2004 Tedy > 2006 Tedy
2004 Willie >> 2006 Colvin
2004 Vrabel = 2006 Vrabel
2004 Ted Johnson >>> 2006 Seau
and that group had better depth, as well as more complimentary depth with Colvin and (d%#*!@t, I forgot the other ILB. arrrrggggghh)
RayClay said:Best or not, I'm damn happy with the group we have especially Seau.
Considering what we were looking like with Beisel, I don't see the bashing of Seau. He's 37 and runs around and hits people. More than "Monty" ever did.
pats1 said:Are you kidding me?
2004 Ted Johnson doesn't ">>>" Seau by ANY stretch of your IMAGINATION.
2004 McGinest doesnt ">>" Colvin by ANY stretch of the imagination.
What's with this revisionist history on Ted Johnson and McGinest? They leave and all the sudden they're both Hall of Famers. Johnson was a 'good' play, but by no means great or amazing. Seau is the same.
Oswlek said:I never said either of them were hall of famers, but I stand by what I said. If Colvin was still playing like he did at the end of last year, I would actually rank him above Willie from 2004, but I have not been very impressed with Rosie. He certainly hasn't had any of the big plays that we expected from McGinnest.
As far as Seau vs. Johnson, I was on the "Johnson is probably going to be waived bandwagon for 2002 and 2003, but he really impressed me in 2004. Considering both Seau and Johnson played on mostly running plays, I think Johnson was much better against the run than Seau. Yes, Seau has a play or two per game that he streaks in and drops a guy for a loss, but he isn't nearly as consistent as Ted was.
Of course Seau in his prime was far better than Johnson at his best, but that is not what I am comparing.
PatsRI said:.... if this is the best group yet and the D line is the best they've had then this could be one scary team come December and January.
The injuries were always limiting whatever his potential was. He was ALWAYS getting injured for some reason.He was a good tackler, but... I will agree. Overrated.NEM said:I was never a Ted Johnson fan. Something about him just wasnt right.
Good ballplayer but, IMO, was over rated.
AzPatsFan said:Finally the proof of the pudding is:
2004 Defense = 16 PPG
2006 Defense = 12.4 PPG
rookBoston said:Have to disagree with Holley. Good, but not the best. The 2003 LB corp had six quality veterans at LB: McGinest, Vrabel and Colvin rotating on the outside, and Bruschi, TJ and Phifer on the inside. You could pick any comination of 4 players, and I was always 100% confident that they would execute the game plan.
The equivalent depth this year is Vrabel, Colvin and Banta Cain outside, and Bruschi, Seau and... Alexander?/Izzo? inside. Banta Cain still needs to prove to me that he can play pass coverage before I'm willing to stack him up against Phifer, who in his time could do it all. And just in terms of depth, this version just doesn't match up.
I've been really impressed by Seau. I'd be willing to agree he is playing better than TJ in 2003-4, and that after only a few months in the system. Just hugely impressed with the guy. I always feel like he's in the right place -- that he undestands what's going on around him. Chad Brown was a veteran FA, too, but never took the same step.
Our depth on the inside is really a question of moving Vrabel from the outside, and using TBC and Woods in his place. The problem isn't that Vrabel plays badly inside, but he's such a good player outside, we're not using his special talent to get to the QB and knock the ball loose.
When people criticize our 2006 LB corp, it's hasn't been a question of talent-- it's more a matter of age. It would be good having a few more rookies learning how to train, study and play the game from guys like Seau, McGinest, Vrabel, Bruschi.