How solid are we at OLB/DE and ILB/MLB

[mgteich]

Hasn't the standard been 8 plus 1-2 special teamers?

It seems that we used to keep 15 from seven players and 10 defensive backs (almost always including a developmental project).

I'm not sure if 10 DE/OLB and LBs are necessarily NEEDED or if its that we have so much talent there we need 10 to not cut someone we would like them to keep....
4 ILB and 4 OLB in the 34 (OLB and RDE in the 43) has always been the basic standard, talent issues aside.

 

[Ring 6]

Hasn't the standard been 8 plus 1-2 special teamers?

It seems that we used to keep 15 from seven players and 10 defensive backs (almost always including a developmental project).

Sometimes it has been + STs and sometimes it hasn't.
We have had only 3 true ILBs in a number of seasons, and rarely od we have more than 4 OLBs.
The STers sometimes are and sometimes are not LBs, and some of them are viable defenders while others are not.
Using the basic 34 definitions I think there are few if any seasons where we kept 10 LBers

 

[Ring 6]

Most of your ST'ers come from the back-half of your defense. Guys who are 4th-6th on the CB depth chart and 4-5th on the Safety depth chart all play very prominent roles and make up 3/4's of your ST's unit.

This is also a defense that plays sub-packages over 65% of the time. that means, at times, 4-5 CB's on the field at once. Sometimes 3-4 safeties even. You need an extreme amount of depth at DB to successfully play in sub-packages as much as we do. Look at last year....we always had at least 3/4 healthy safeties on the team at one time or another and at least 4 CB's (that i can recall), but even so....we had to play Slater, Ventrone, etc. The amount of DB bodies our defense calls for is a lot greater then most teams.

So i guess that was my long-way of saying that I fully expect this team to keep at least 6 CB's and 4 Safeties...maybe even 7 CB's. BB once said "CB's are a lot like Pitchers in baseball...you can never have too many of them".

You quote BB and then predict him to do something directly in conflict with what he has done in the past. I know we have never kept 7 conrers. I'm not sure if we ever kept 6 but if so, it was a rarity.

 

[mayoclinic]

Considering that 5 DB's are on the field for roughly 50% of the game I see us keeping 10 DB's

It's possible. But 10 DBs means likely only 15 DL and LBs, and that's going to squeeze hard somewhere else. Carrying more than 25 players on defense is going to squeeze the offense, which is already going to be hard to get down to 25 players.

I'm guessing 9 DBs for now, with 10 possible but not a given. I think that BB is going to partially compensate for numbers with versatility. CBs who can play safety (McCourty, Moore and possibly others) and safeties who can play CB (Gregory and Wilson) provide additional depth that may help. Coverage LBs that can drop into coverage may also be used.

 

[Urgent]

Looking at distribution of opening day roster by position on defense the past several years:

DT:
2008: 2
2009: 3
2010: 4
2011: 5

DE:
2008: 4
2009: 3
2010: 3
2011: 3

OLB:
2008: 4
2009: 5
2010: 5
2011: 4

ILB:
2008: 5
2009: 3
2010: 4
2011: 5

CB:
2008: 5
2009: 5
2010: 5
2011: 5

S:
2008: 4
2009: 5 (including Slater)
2010: 5 (including Slater)
2011: 4 (not including Slater - WR)

 

[Urgent]

So front seven has varied between 14 and 17, while secondary has consistently carried 9 or 10. Normally one 'safety' that is primarily a special teams player, like Ventrone, Slater, or Brown.

The one consistency has been 5 CB's each year 2008-2011.

 

[jah]

Looking at distribution of opening day roster by position on defense the past several years:

DT:
2008: 2
2009: 3
2010: 4
2011: 5

DE:
2008: 4
2009: 3
2010: 3
2011: 3

OLB:
2008: 4
2009: 5
2010: 5
2011: 4

ILB:
2008: 5
2009: 3
2010: 4
2011: 5

CB:
2008: 5
2009: 5
2010: 5
2011: 5

S:
2008: 4
2009: 5 (including Slater)
2010: 5 (including Slater)
2011: 4 (not including Slater - WR)

1. Why does Slater only count sometimes? I wouldn't count him for any year.
2. I think it would be better to group the front 7 positions as DL, DL/LB, and LB to accommodate the switch to a 4-3. It would probably come out more evenly with those groupings over the years.

Edit: This is what I got with my position groupings. Keep in mind that I wasn't too sure about which OLBs were actually DE/OLBs, especially in 2008. Did Thomas, Vrabel, and Woods ever play DE?

2008:
DL 6
DL/LB 1
LB 8 (counting Thomas, Vrabel, and Woods as LBs)

2009:
DL 5
DL/LB 3
LB 5

2010:
DL 7
DL/LB 3
LB 6

2011:
DL 6
DL/LB 3
LB 7

Also counted Ninkovich as a LB for all applicable years, even though he looks to be playing more DE this season.

 

[mgteich]

SECONDARY
I would say that for the past four years we have carried 5 corners and 4 safeties. The only "exception" is twice when a pure special teamer was labeled a safety. As was noted, sometimes Slater has been labeled a WR. IMHO, it seems easier to label his a special teamer.

So front seven has varied between 14 and 17, while secondary has consistently carried 9 or 10. Normally one 'safety' that is primarily a special teams player, like Ventrone, Slater, or Brown.

The one consistency has been 5 CB's each year 2008-2011.

 

[BlueThunder]

SECONDARY
I would say that for the past four years we have carried 5 corners and 4 safeties. The only "exception" is twice when a pure special teamer was labeled a safety. As was noted, sometimes Slater has been labeled a WR. IMHO, it seems easier to label his a special teamer.

9 in the DB is going to make for a tough decision come final 53 time.

McCourty,Dowling,Arrington, Chung, Gregory and Wilson should be locks.

Cole,Allen,Moore,Barrett,Dennard, and Brown vying for 3 spots....

Cole is an excellent ST gunner as well as a dime back.

Allen is a savy vet who might slide over to safety.

Dennard won't make it to PS.

Sterling Moore is a big ????...will he continue to develop ?

Brown is probably on the outside looking in.

Barrett can't stay healthy but has good size.

 

[Fencer]

I'd slide Dennard onto PS and hope he clears waivers.

Probably he's too boom/bust for that. Either he gets cut outright, or you don't seriously think he'd make it to the PS.

Meanwhile, Bequette is indeed a lock for the 53. But he's far from a lock to be among game-day actives.

 

[Marqui]

Probably he's too boom/bust for that. Either he gets cut outright, or you don't seriously think he'd make it to the PS.

Yea, I don't know why some people talk about him like he's a "developmental" prospect. He's a high level talent with a few big red flags. Unless he's completely awful in TC or does something really stupid, he'll make the team because that will be the only way to keep him around. He won't make it to the PS.

 

[Guimond3434]

Yea, I don't know why some people talk about him like he's a "developmental" prospect. He's a high level talent with a few big red flags. Unless he's completely awful in TC or does something really stupid, he'll make the team because that will be the only way to keep him around. He won't make it to the PS.

Yep, Dennard will make this squad. There is already talk that he's probably the 3rd best CB on this team already and he hasn't even taken a snap yet. There seems to be quite a lot of hype surrounding him, not only from the Patriots standpoint but around the league. He'll be on this team, and he'll more then likely play a very important role for us IMO.

 

[mgteich]

You indicate that thre will be competition among corners for the last roster spots. I think that this is a good thing.

1) Part of the issue is labeling. We usually have 1-3 ST specialists, who may or may not be very valuable at a position. These players are usually labelled as SLB's or DB's on most rosters.

We NEED 6 DL's, 8 LB's (DE/OLB and LB) and 8 DB's (4 C and 4 S). Obviously, many of the backups need to play special teams.

Some say that we don't 4 safeties or call one of the corners a safety. IMHO, we need a 4th safety even if some label him as a corner.
==============================
2) The last THREE defensive roster spots are totally up for grabs.

1-3 of these roster spots could be filled ST specialists (from among White, Koutovides, Tarpinian, Cole and Brown).

Any of these roster spots could be used for backups or developmental players.

9 in the DB is going to make for a tough decision come final 53 time.

McCourty,Dowling,Arrington, Chung, Gregory and Wilson should be locks.

Cole,Allen,Moore,Barrett,Dennard, and Brown vying for 3 spots....

Cole is an excellent ST gunner as well as a dime back.

Allen is a savy vet who might slide over to safety.

Dennard won't make it to PS.

Sterling Moore is a big ????...will he continue to develop ?

Brown is probably on the outside looking in.

Barrett can't stay healthy but has good size.

 

[mgteich]

As Andy has said, the defense really doesn't NEED more 6 DL's, 4 DE/OLB's and 4 ILB's. We have carried even fewer at times. This number of 14 provides sufficient depth.

IMHO, the base need is 4 CB and 4 S, although the 4th safety could also primarily be a dime back or a special teamer.

As we both said in other posts, that makes 22.
===============================

IMHO, there is no crunch NEED in any unit on defense (except on special teams) with the total of 22 players.
====================================================

We might explore the arguments for how each of the candidates for other positions will most help the team. I believe that we have a lot of players we like. We need 22 defensive players, and 2-3 STers. Let the competition begin. (And yes I understand that we can use a spot for a devlopmental player)

BTW, if Dennard is all that you guys say, he will have no problem beating out Moore for the 4th CB spot.

But 10 DBs means likely only 15 DL and LBs, and that's going to squeeze hard somewhere else. Carrying more than 25 players on defense is going to squeeze the offense, which is ..

 

[BlueThunder]

With 14 front end defensemen..it looks like the 8 in the back end could be a battle between Dennard,Cole,Allen,Barrett,Moore for 2 spots. I am assuming that Brown can't beat any of them out for a spot.

Given those players, I would stick with Cole for his ST value as well as dime pkg DB and Dennard for his upside. This assumes that Dennard doesn't stink it up in camp and pre season.

 

[captain stone]

While we are discussing OLB/DEs & ILB/MLBs, and CBs & Safeties, I would like to mention...Widebodies.

These are the defenders who would play NT & DE in a 3-4 line, and/or DTs in a 4-3 line.
In this category I include the less-heavy but squat Pryor & Fortson, but not the taller Fanene,
who I feel can play 4-3 DE in 1st-down & SY/GL situations.

The depth chart as I see it looks like:
Wilfork - Love
Deaderick - Warren
Brace - Pryor
Harrison - Fortson

Barring multiple injuries to the DE/OLB & ILB/MLB positions, I don't believe that there is any reason
whatsoever to keep more than 4 of the above.
Wilfork's a lock, and Love & Deaderick are close to locks; therefore, the final Widebody spot
could come down to Warren, Brace or Pryor.
(Harrison has no chance, and Fortson might be a PUP candidate.)
Warren is experienced, but old (w/ the accompanying slowness & non-athleticism);
Brace is young, but invisibly non-productive (due to lack of instincts, motivation, or ?);
Pryor, strictly a 4-3 passing-down DT, is active & disruptive, but also fragile & unreliable.

I wouldn't be surprised to see either one of these 3 make the final roster, but would be disappointed
if more than one of these three made the final roster.

 

[mgteich]

OK, now Fanene has his own category. We have been discussing DL's DE/OLB's, ILB/MLB's.

Most of us have concluded that we need 8 DL's. If we separate DT's and DL/DE, I would say that we need 4 DT's and 2 DE/DL's.

DE/DL
I agree than one of the DE's is FANENE, but not in the sub-package since those are DE/OLB.
If this is a separate position, which some include in their charts, then we need a backup or 2nd roster position.

DT
I agree that we need four and that 3 are WILFORK, LOVE and DEADERICK and that we need a 4th DT.

BOTTOM LINE
I believe that Brace, Warren and Pryor are competing for 2 positions, the DT position you mention and a last DL position which must have as one its roles to backup Fenene. Pryor has been suggested as best, but the other two are certainly possible competitors.

While we are discussing OLB/DEs & ILB/MLBs, and CBs & Safeties, I would like to mention...Widebodies.

These are the defenders who would play NT & DE in a 3-4 line, and/or DTs in a 4-3 line.
In this category I include the less-heavy but squat Pryor & Fortson, but not the taller Fanene,
who I feel can play 4-3 DE in 1st-down & SY/GL situations.

The depth chart as I see it looks like:
Wilfork - Love
Deaderick - Warren
Brace - Pryor
Harrison - Fortson

Barring multiple injuries to the DE/OLB & ILB/MLB positions, I don't believe that there is any reason
whatsoever to keep more than 4 of the above.
Wilfork's a lock, and Love & Deaderick are close to locks; therefore, the final Widebody spot
could come down to Warren, Brace or Pryor.
(Harrison has no chance, and Fortson might be a PUP candidate.)
Warren is experienced, but old (w/ the accompanying slowness & non-athleticism);
Brace is young, but invisibly non-productive (due to lack of instincts, motivation, or ?);
Pryor, strictly a 4-3 passing-down DT, is active & disruptive, but also fragile & unreliable.

I wouldn't be surprised to see either one of these 3 make the final roster, but would be disappointed
if more than one of these three made the final roster.

 

[captain stone]

After reading today that Fanene did not practice at all, I just hope that he's healthy enough
to play any position.

 

[Ring 6]

OK, now Fanene has his own category. We have been discussing DL's DE/OLB's, ILB/MLB's.

Most of us have concluded that we need 8 DL's. If we separate DT's and DL/DE, I would say that we need 4 DT's and 2 DE/DL's.

DE/DL
I agree than one of the DE's is FANENE, but not in the sub-package since those are DE/OLB.
If this is a separate position, which some include in their charts, then we need a backup or 2nd roster position.

DT
I agree that we need four and that 3 are WILFORK, LOVE and DEADERICK and that we need a 4th DT.

BOTTOM LINE
I believe that Brace, Warren and Pryor are competing for 2 positions, the DT position you mention and a last DL position which must have as one its roles to backup Fenene. Pryor has been suggested as best, but the other two are certainly possible competitors.

Actually Deaderick is not a DT. In the 34 he is a DE, in the 43 a LDE. IMO, Fanene is the same.
Wilfork and Love are DTs in the 43 and primarily NT in the 34, but can play DE.
Brace is a 34 DE, 43 DT
Warren can play all spots in the 34, and DT in the 43.
Pryor, IMO, is a LDE in the 43, but some feel he is a DT. In the 34 he is a DE. He usually has only played in the sub package when he has actually played.

I think we need 2 guys at each spot:
34 DE
34 DE
34 NT
43 LDE
43 DT
43 DT

Of course there is overlap, but there is no real consistent 34 vs 43 positions.
If we assume Fanene, Wilfork, Deaderick and Love are locks, then we need 2 more 34 DEs, and 2 more 43 DTs, which may or may not be the same 2 players.

 

[MrNathanDrake]

Mayo, Spikes, Hightower... we are set at MLB