SITE MENU
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.Really? McGinest left the biggest hole? Sorry, gotta disagree there. McGinest wouldn't have made a difference in the game against the Colts.
Actually, it was Charlie Weis.
at least he would have held his position better than Banta-Cain and Vrabel wouldve been better at ILB than Alexander.
Not saying a HUGE difference but Ghost replaced Adam just fine and overall Caldwell and Gaffney came through, even with the 2 Reche drops that didnt cost any points.
it was the defense that was our downfall.
Actually, it was Charlie Weis.
Actually, it was Charlie Weis.
Actually, it was Charlie Weis.
So, let me get this straight, you have the ability to see alternate time streams so you can say, with certainty, that McGinest would have held his position better than TBC.
Sorry, but reality doesn't jive with you and here's why.
Alexander, the quicker, better coverage LB, started the Colts game and was lining up across from the Colts TEs. Please re-read that sentence. OK. So, if Alexander started the game, that would mean that the Pats felt that Alexander was a better coverage LB than Vrabel or TBC. (following so far?) Alexander was the one getting BURNED by the TEs (also would mean that Vrabel and TBC would be getting burned as well). As was Bruschi, for that matter. So, if the Pats felt that Alexander was the better coverage TE, what would having McGinest on the field and moving Vrabel to ILB as the Coverage LB really do? Umm.... Nothing. It would actually be a down grade because Vrabel isn't as good a coverage LB as Alexander.
The Pats probably should have gone to a 3-3-5 system and brough in an extra CB/S (Chad Scott, anyone?) to cover the TE. That way you have someone on their atheletic TE (Clark) who can keep up with the player and probably defense the pass better.
I agree wholeheartedly.Actually, it was Charlie Weis.
The Pats probably should have gone to a 3-3-5 system and brough in an extra CB/S (Chad Scott, anyone?) to cover the TE. That way you have someone on their atheletic TE (Clark) who can keep up with the player and probably defense the pass better.
Actually, it was Charlie Weis.
I'm guessing this guy's post meant more that this defense lacked a true big-play guy that we have become accustomed to stepping up. I admit that Willie's name surfaced in my mind on the final drive. Is/was he the answer? No, prolly not. Yet, who is?
The question posed was who are we missing? The answer is the guy who saves the day. We have no one who did so. The point is that we are lacking someone on defense that, not only do we believe in, but has deserved our belief.