Welcome to PatsFans.com

Mike Reiss nigh on gives his 53 man squad...

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by lillestroom, Jul 8, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. lillestroom

    lillestroom Rookie

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Messages:
    243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    2010 Patriots Player Rankings

    http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nfl/columns/story?columnist=reiss_mike&id=5363317

    _________________________________________________________

    Reiss' rankings are primarily based on four factors:

    1. Talent.

    2. Importance in the short and long term (which projects development).

    3. Positional value.

    4. Economic value.

    -------------------------

    Jeez. Some of the players I have in my squad dont match who he has. And I certainly wouldn't have Mike Wright as my 20th most valuable player. (At least 15 positions too high IMHO). And Fred Taylor at 41 !!!! ???? !!!! Jeez. He's at least ten places higher on my list.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 9, 2010
  2. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,389
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +211 / 14 / -2

    A 60-man squad is appropriate at the moment. After all, there will be injuries. Welker and Mankins may or may not have roster spots gor Game One. I find his ratings of Wright, G. Warren and Taylor especially interesting.

    Some notes, nitpicks and surprises

    OFFENSE (25)
    If Welker and Mankins are back, I guess his roster is fine. He does have only 8 OL's and Larsen as the backup center. I would include Connolly, but I'm fine with Connolly at 54. A roster spot will open. If not (and we have Welker and Mankins), then we're fine in any case.
    I'm fine with Aiken and Slater as two special teamers (Reiss calls them wide receivers which is sort of silly).

    DEFENSE (25)
    I have only one problem with his list. I would keep another corner instead of Pryor. Green is gone and we've brought in Warren AND Lewis. I just don't see the need for Pryor. I'd rather cut Pryor and keep Wheatley or a street free agent as a 5th corner. Arrington is fine as a 6th corner, a special teamer.

    SPECIALISTS (3)
    Reiss keeps the obvious 3.

    FIRST TO THE PRACTICE SQUAD
    I guess that would be Welch and Crable. Deaderick didn't make Reiss' list, but I woiuld expect him to be on the Practice Squad.

    LAST CUTS
    Larsen sends Ohrnberger packing. I'm fine with that. I'm not as sure of Connolly. I would like to ahve him as a 9th OL.

    BOTTOM LINE
    I'm fine with the roster, although I expect to see Connolly on the 53 instead of Mankins, and would like to see Wheatley (or another corner) instead of Pryor. In the end, I think Reiss did a fime job.
  3. BradyFTW!

    BradyFTW! PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Messages:
    16,376
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +99 / 2 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    Very interesting, and thanks for the heads up. FYI, though, posting copyrighted content in full like this is a definite no-go, and can cause a lot of trouble for Ian. Especially with someone like Reiss, who we actually want to support with page hits. For details, check out the stickied thread in this forum.
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2010
  4. nashvillepatsfan

    nashvillepatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    3,213
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    If i may add, also please provide the link to the article.
  5. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    41,449
    Likes Received:
    286
    Ratings:
    +736 / 44 / -47

    Disable Jersey

    NFL: New England Patriots rankings from 1 to 82 - ESPN Boston

    I see some spots where I'd disagree pretty strongly with his rankings (Warren below TBC, seriously?), but it's an interesting time killer for the offseason.
  6. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,845
    Likes Received:
    90
    Ratings:
    +151 / 3 / -19

    I agree, but at best this is subjective.. not sure how this can be measured, the obvious.. Brady, Welker and Mayo but the rest is a crapshoot.

    interesting the pick of Butler over Bodden..
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2010
  7. Mike the Brit

    Mike the Brit Minuteman Target PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,590
    Likes Received:
    100
    Ratings:
    +193 / 2 / -0

    Disable Jersey

    Echo BradyFTW.

    And this is NOT MR's 53 but his ranking of players in order of importance to the team.

    Bit of a strange criterion but I have one quarrel: how can anyone possibly think that the back-up quarterback is only No. 40 in importance to the team? Let's hope it never happens again, but stuff happens ...
  8. pats1

    pats1 Moderator PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    13,261
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Some writers said Taylor looked old during minicamps and could be in danger of being cut.
  9. patriotscpfc

    patriotscpfc Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,034
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    You'd have Fred Taylor ahead of Mike Wright by at least 5 spots?

    Ridiculous.
  10. BadMoFo

    BadMoFo Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,763
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    If Mike Reiss has time to do this, we have really hit the slowest point in any recent offseason.
  11. HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

    HEY BRO! WHAT UP? Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2006
    Messages:
    4,370
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    This was a pretty pointless exercise by Reiss. Ranking players on their own team? Boring. A better article would've been ranking the Pats units with the rest of the league.
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2010
  12. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    23,004
    Likes Received:
    335
    Ratings:
    +717 / 8 / -9

    Disable Jersey

    I agree

    :eek: The apocalypse must be nigh
  13. BradyFTW!

    BradyFTW! PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Messages:
    16,376
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +99 / 2 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    Agreed: I took that to mean that he thinks Butler will eventually grow into more of a long-term role with the team, but I'm not sure that I'd agree with that either. Bodden's only 28, not like he's old or anything, and trying to project how good guys will be 5+ years down the line is foolish anyways. Even if you choose to ignore injury, you just don't know how young guys will develop, you don't know if they'll stay hungry, and you don't even know if they'll still be playing for the Pats down the line.

    Case in point: in 2003, I bet you most people would have ranked Eugene Wilson ahead of Rodney Harrison in terms of long-term importance, on the basis of Wilson being younger. Yet Harrison ended up giving us more productive years anyways. Sure, that was a kinda extreme example, but overall I think people tend to overvalue youth by assuming that it will reach (and maintain) its full potential.
  14. lillestroom

    lillestroom Rookie

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Messages:
    243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Didnt Reiss give his accounts on why he ranked the players as he did?
  15. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,389
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +211 / 14 / -2

    Are you suggesting that the roster should include anyone who is not one of the 53 most important players to the patriots? I suppose one could put of the 53 most important on the Practice Squad and HOPE that someone doens't pick him up.

  16. lillestroom

    lillestroom Rookie

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Messages:
    243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I cant see anyone outside the top 60 making the team.

    So he really is giving us a look-inside his head and what he thinks may happen. Remember injuries WILL arise. So that will shake things up a little
  17. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    22,115
    Likes Received:
    75
    Ratings:
    +252 / 13 / -8

    I dont think its implausable that a guy ranked lower than 53 woud beat out a guy ranked higher unless the point was to get to 53 considering them as a group. If he 53rd is a DE and the 54th is a LB and the first 52 leave you short a LB and you have one too many DEs then I would expect player 54 stays and 53 is cut.
    Also, Reiss included cost as a factor, so a better player costing more may be rated lower than a lesser player at a lower price and with no cap, the better player would stick.
  18. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    22,115
    Likes Received:
    75
    Ratings:
    +252 / 13 / -8

    I think a biger factor is their salaries, which is part of his stated criteria.
  19. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,389
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +211 / 14 / -2

    I believe that cost and position are already factored. But, I do agree that if our longsnapper were listed at 54, we still would have a long snapper on the 53. However, I would consider such a ranking a mistake on the part of Reiss.
    ===============

    I would think that, absent injury or holdout, Reiss would be surprised if any of his top 50 don't make the roster. The obvious current situations are Mankins and Welker. You and I have questions about Pryor and prehaps Slater, but that gives 48 who are very likely to make the roster, and the 5 roster spots at the bottom of the roster. Of course, more spots could open up because of injury/

    BOTTOM LINE
    This is a pretty solid 48. Of course, they aren't "locks". We have n't seen some of the players in live action yet.

    And 5 spots still to be decided seems a bit small; but, given injuries, more of the 51-70 will make it. I certainly think that wheatley, Bussey and Connolly have a solid shot at the roster.


  20. zoffle

    zoffle Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Can some one start a new thread for me, I only have 17 posts so I can't start a new thread.

    So I think it would be interesting to have the forum build a roster by positions first then adding the players to the designated positions.

    so it would start with what formations they run and what position/type of player they need , then you would have the number of positions needed, from there you can add how many rotational/backups you need for each position (i.e 1 rotational player for ILB for 3-4 set). Once we have the number of positions/roles we can add players to the roles (and any extra room on the roster).

    So I need help doing this because I'm relatively new to football and I thought it could be an interesting way to make a roster in the slow period.

    so it could look something like:
    Defense:

    3-4:
    2 DE (2-Gap)
    1 NT (2-gap)
    2 edge setting/pass rushing OLB's (or OLB/DE hybrids)
    1 WILB (faster, sideline to sideline player)
    1 SILB (thumper)
    2 CB
    2 S

    Etc
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>