My Thoughts on Monty Beisel: He is Still Horrible

[PATRIOTS-80]

"A consideration: you have made your views on Beisel clearly in many posts over the off-season. As an analyst, it is very difficult not to color our reports with our own perspective. If I have a favorite player they tend to be underdogs like Poteat and Klecko, so I may have a bias for Beisel as another underdog, perhaps Ring is right and the truth of Beisel is in the middle of our perspectives, but just as I must try to guard against playing the underdog up too much, I suggest you should consider how your feeling may be affecting your perspective."

The best quote. I agree.

IMHO, I don't think Beisel hates contact or anything like that, I just think that a BB defense is a complicated thing. It requires a lot.

BTW, thanks Box for doing the Atlanta breakdown. It is nice thread to read after the game because those plays happen so quickly!!!!

 

[arrellbee]

First, I have said this in several posts, and again let me make it as emphatically clear as I can - I have NO agenda or colored thinking about Beisel. As I have stated before, when the Pats signed Beisel I thought they had pulled off another coup like signing Vrabel. With the extreme need for ILBs, I would still be ultra-delighted if Beisel were to start showing even enough improvement so as to at least be solid depth.

I'm not sure if folks think I am shading things (which is fine to feel that way), how you avoid the simple overall results staring you in the face. Beisel, in about 2 quarters, was credited with 4 tackles. One was a 'gimmee' where he was not close enough to cover but simply arrived after the play was over and touched the receiver on the ground. One was a coverage where he was solely responsible for the TE who caught the ball 3 yards from the LOS. Beisel was 4 yards off of the receiver when he caught the ball so Beisel was in no position to defense the pass and could not rattle the teeth of the receiver as he caught the ball. IIRC, the TE pulled up to make the catch and gave Beisel time to close and Beisel still made a poor enough tackle to let the TE get another 2 yards after the catch. Maybe you would rate this higher than I did (very poor) but If you let TEs pick up 5 yards at a crack, it's going to be a long day. A third tackle came at 3rd - 12:55 - 1st and 10. Beisel took on the lead blocking FB and slid off to tackle the RB by the legs. I rated this "good" altho that may have been generous if you are concerned that an ILB gives up 5 yards working against a FB block. The fourth tackle I rated as 'really good' - that doesn't sound like some consistent bias. And it WAS really good. Beisel disengaged from a block on his side and dove across bodies to make the tackle on the RB coming thru the other ILBs gap. If he made plays like this more than once every few games, the discussion might be very different.

The other aspect which I, for the life of me, can't see how it can be ignored, is the simple results of runs through the gap that Beisel was responsible for.
2nd - 12:33 - 4 yard gain (he wan't in on tackle at all)
2nd - 11:21 - 21 yard gain (this was TOTALLY Beisel's gap to control. He got totally blocked out of his gap and with the coverage, there was no-one to compensate)
3rd - 12:55 - 5 yard gain (Beisel got an arm tackle on the RB. But it was still a 5 yard gain)
3rd - 12:12 - 8 yard gain (FB completely blocked Beisel out of his gap. Other folks can comment, but in my view an ILB is SUPPOSED to be able to fight off FB blocks almost all of the time - where the ILB gets some sympathy is when he has to take on offensive linemen.)
3rd - 8:44 - 9 yard gain (this is another case where the FB blocks Beisel completely out of the play)

How can that be anything but a disaster ??

Maybe it's the reality of "what it is" that is 'coloring' the evaluation ??

By the way, if anyone else has it recorded, it would be hugely welcome if you wanted to take a look at even one of the plays - another analysis can always shed some light that might change an evaluation of the play.

 

[DaBruinz]

TO the people that think Beisel can contribute to this team are kidding themselves.. Beisel doesn't have what it takes.
Here are some quick reasons:
1. He didn't start, two new players did - Thats not a great sign (banged up or not)

Hmm.. Tedy Bruschi, Richard Seymour, and numerous others didn't start. Is that a bad sign also?

2. He looked lost against scrubs.. Again not good

1st pre-season game. Do you think that guys like Cassel and Wilson, who didn't play well, are in trouble also?

3. He has had two full off seasons with the Pats, He should know where to go

According to Tedy Bruschi, it took him more than 2 FULL years of playing ILB before he felt he knew what to do every play. And that is after 2 years of playing OLB with BB as the HC.

4. The fact the pats worked out to ILB this week, shows he isn't making this team.

How many of those LBs were signed? None so far. If BB and Pioli felt they were better than what is on the current roster, they would be signed by now.

FYI, I been stayin this since the end of last season.. he stinks and will never be any good.. I even offered to wager on this but no one offered to take me up on it..

Will you still be saying this when he makes the team this year?

 

[DaBruinz]

Going through all of Beisel's plays in the Atlanta game, I had the following tally:

1 Really Good
1 Good
1 OK ??
4 Poor
1 Very Poor
1 Bad
8 Terrible

I think you have to read what he is doing to get an idea of whether there is any hope of him improving enough to start or even make the team. One thing is for sure - If the ratio of plays where he gets taken out of the play to plays where he does OK or Good doesn't change, I can't imagine how the team can get by with him playing ILB.

2nd - 12:33 - 1st and 10 - terrible
Run to Beisel's gap. He moves up DIRECTLY behind DE (Thomas) rather than rushing his gap. Thomas is double teamed by OLG and OLT so Beisel is effectively blocked by the same guys blocking Thomas. After the intial double team of Thomas, the OLG slides thru and picks Beisel off of Thomas' back and blocks him outside and back completely away from the runner. Beisel ends up 5 yards from the LOS on his back. The runner makes 4 yards thru the OLG gap.
2nd - 11:50 - 2nd and 6 - good
Run to Beisel's gap. He does a really good job of meeting the block and holding position so runner cuts outside of block. Thomas pursues quick !! Sullivan did a pretty decent job of sliding off of his block to get the legs of the runner.
2nd - 11:21 - 3rd and 1 - terrible
Run over ORG which is Beisel's gap. Meets block but let's it tie him up and move him outside away from gap rather than taking the block so he's on the gap side to get the RB or at least hold the block to clog the hole. This is totally Beisel's gap to seal. Result: 21 yard gain.
2nd - 10:42 - 1st and 10 - can't tell anything
2nd - 10:01 - 1st and 1 - can't tell anything (incomplete pass)
2nd - 9:56 - 2nd and 1 - can't evaluate
Beisel at LILB. Rushed up and took on block in gap. Run went to the other side of the line. Not really any way to tell what would have happened if the run had come thru Beisel's gap, but it looked like the way he was blocked it left his gap open - the way he was blocked looked eerily similar to the play where the run did go thru that gap and picked up 21 yards.
2nd - 9:10 - 1st and 10 - can't tell
Pass to TE who had come from the left TE position across the middle with Banta-Cain pursuing. Catch ended up on Beisel's side of field. I don't think he was Beisel's coverage altho Beisel might have had some underneath responsibility once he crossed to that side of the field. Beisel did end up dropping to that area but was maybe 5 yards from the TE when he made the reception.
2nd - 8:32 - 1st and 10 - bad
Beisel rushes forward but is met by blocker who blocks him straight back 5 yards from the line of scrimmage before Beisel gets off of the block.
2nd - 7:54 - 2nd and 8 - very poor
Quick pass to TE coming over the middle - Beisel's coverage. He was 4 yards off of TE, basically giving him the reception. Poor tackle - TE picked up 2 or 3 yards after the catch. 5 yard gain.
2nd - 7:10 - 3rd and 3 - don't think Beisel was in play - incomplete pass
2nd - 5:32 to 3:45 - Beisel not in
2nd - 2:19 to 0:36 - Beisel not in
------------------------------
3rd - 13:30 - 1st and 10 - poor
Run thru other ILB gap. Beisel steps up and stops 3 yards from the LOS waiting for blocker to come out. Runner comes thru about a yard from Beisel but he can't get up quick enough to try to tackle. Not Beisel's gap, but he didn't shed block to be able to come across and help. Result: 11 yard gain.
3rd - 12:55 - 1st and 10 - terrible
Run thru Beisel's gap. Beisel doesn't rush his gap, but pulls up 1 yard directly behind NT. Why does he do that ?? ?? ?? Then as FB comes thru gap, Beisel starts to slide toward gap but he's moving toward the gap and not set up in the gap so the RB just takes him on and shoves him back inside to the ground away from the runner coming thru. Result: 5 yard gain.
3rd - 12:12 - 2nd and 5 - terrible
Run thru Beisel's gap. Beisel doesn't rush his gap - AGAIN - but keeps sliding over and over staying DIRECTLY behind the DE. Why does he do this ?? ?? FB comes thru the gap and picks up Beisel still behind the DE. From this leverage it is simple for him to keep Beisel outside away from the gap. RB comes thru and picks up 8 yards.
3rd - 11:32 - 1st and 10 - no evaluation
Pass play to TE out in right flat. Pierre Woods pursued and made tackle but gave up 6 yard gain.
3rd - 11:07 - 1st and 10 - terrible
RB starts to Beisel's gap. OLT and OLG double team DE. Once again, I simply don't get it - Beisel rushes up DIRECTLY behind DE instead of rushing into his gap. Why does he do that ?? ?? So, by doing that, he basically lets the ORG do his double team on the DE AND then slip off and totally block Beisel away outside from the gap - which is left wide open. Why the RB doesn't go thru the gap, I don't know but he pulls up and cuts outside. Looks like he messed up the play. By the way, Mincey stood up the RB and fought him off to step up and stop the RB at the LOS. Kid could have potential.
3rd - 10:29 - OK ??
Pass - designed roll out. Pass intended for TE who has left other side of LOS and come across into Beisel's drop zone. Beisel is 5 yards off of the TE when the pass misses. TE is 15 yards from LOS so this could well be past Beisel's zone unless he's supposed to stay with the TE in man coverage. No way to tell
3rd - 8:50 - 1st and 10 - Poor ?
Pass. Pretty clear that Beisel had coverage on TE coming across the middle. When ball was thrown (not to his guy) he was about 3 yards off of his guy. He couldn't have defensed a pass to his guy - and if his guy had caught a ball in full stride I doubt that Beisel could have caught him for the tackle. The TE was only 11 yards from LOS. Isn't Beisel supposed to defense the pass in that zone ??
3rd - 8:44 - 2nd and 10 - terrible
Deja Vu all over again (as Yogi would say). Run to Beisel's gap. This time he doesn't move up directly behind the NT, But he does push up directly against the blocker who has blocked the NT toward the center of the LOS. Why doesn't he push up into the gap ?? ?? ?? This is exceedingly strange. Result is same as on several previous plays. The FB comes thru and since Beisel is still behind the other blocker, simply seals Beisel to the inside. Result: RB goes thru Beisel's gap for 9 yards.
3rd - 8:05 - 3rd and 1 - terrible
I have mentioned this in the past. Even with the 3-4 defense, the DL doesn't always line up in the 'conventional' manner of NT over OC and DEs over OT. In this play, the RDE lined up on ORG. So in this defense, the gap that Beisel is responsible for is between ORG and ORT or over ORT. Beisel rushes up to the ORT and takes him on. The ORT blocks him back and to the outside several yards clearing the hole. RB comes thru and makes 1st down.
3rd - 7:27 - 1st and 10 - terrible
Run to other ILB gap. Beisel again moves up DIRECTLY behind NT and sticks his hands out against NT and blocker. When he sees RB heading towards other gap, he bounces back and BACKPEDALS without anybody blocking him for 3 1/2 yards until he is 6 1/2 yards behind the LOS before he starts to cut back towards the RB. Needless to say, starting from that far back he is nowhere near the play.
3rd - 6:52 - 2nd and 10 - can't evaluate
pass play. no action in Beisel's area
3rd - 6:09 - 3rd and 1 - Poor
broken pass play. QB ends up scrambling thru LOS directly at Beisel. But before he gets to Beisel, Beisel gets pushed sideways to the ground and QB runs right thru where Beisel was. QB picks up 29 yards.
3rd - 5:32 - 1st and 10 - really good
This was a really good play. RB heading thru other ILB gap. Beisel pushes up to LOS and stands up blocker and then turns and dives across players on the ground to grab the runner. Best play I've ever seen him make. Textbook ILB play. 3 yard gain.
3rd - 4:54 - 2nd and 7 - You tell me
Quick pass play over the middle. Beisel had dropped back maybe one yard or so when the QB zipped the ball right at him. Who is it that does the drill with the LBs throwing balls right at them as hard as he can ? Scarnecchia ? Whoever - whatever practice Beisel had in that drill didn't seem to do him much good. By the way, the drive then went on to score a TD.
----------------------
Didn't see Beisel anymore after that play. Maybe just a coincidence.

I guess I have issues with your evaluations when they directly contradict what BB says. I am referring to the 3rd quater pass play at 8:50. BB, in his interview, gives tons of credit to Beisel for making the play because that TE wasn't his assignment.

On the plays where you say that Beisel ran to a spot directly behind another player, I will give you that, unless, of course, that is his assignment. But we don't know that. We also don't know who is calling out the plays. If someone else is calling out the plays and that is where he is supposed to go and the play call is wrong, then is it really Beisel's fault?

 

[maverick4]

I guess I have issues with your evaluations when they directly contradict what BB says. I am referring to the 3rd quater pass play at 8:50. BB, in his interview, gives tons of credit to Beisel for making the play because that TE wasn't his assignment.

DaBruinz, you read the interview wrong. Belichick was referring to Banta-Cain on that play for making the correct decision, not Beisel.

.

 

[DaBruinz]

To arrellbee nice JOB.. I have to agree with you on a lot of the plays.. Actually I might be a little kinder but I agree with your assessment..

Now to PATSWICKEDPISSah & ROUGHINGTHE PASSER:

1. Beisel has had two full offseasons now and should know where to be.. I'm sorry but he is way out of position to many times.. This shouldn't happen for a 2nd year player

Utter BS. It took Bruschi 2 years before he could play ILB as well as he days. And that is after having been in a Belichick system for several years.

2. He has actually gotten worse. Look at last years stats and you will notice that as the season went on, he played less.. He actually didn't suite up 4 games at the end.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235021/gamelogs/2005

Which 4 games did Beisel NOT suit up for? There was only 1 game he didn't suit up for. The others, he was playing on Special Teams because Vrabel was in at ILB.

3. ILB must shed blockers, he still can't do that while younger players like Mincy can..

Since when does AGE mean a damn thing. Also, why are you comparing OLB to ILB? Yes, Monty needs to be able to shed blockers. However, how are those blockers getting to him to begin with? You and arrellbee seem to be forgetting that the NT and DE are supposed to be eating up those blockers so that the ILB doesn't have to worry about it. Even Bruschi gets eaten up by guards. Not all the time, but he does.

4. When he does get into position he fails to make the tackles way to often. As Arrelbee pointed out, he missed a few.

Yep. And according to BB, Beisel made some plays that he shouldn't have had to make, but it was his reading the play that allowed him to do so. I will take BB's analysis over people on here.

5. I love the patriots but I'm not a homer.. The fact is the guy has never been a great player. He is was a project.> Well its year 2 of this project and he didn't even start the 1st preseason game.> YEs he was injured by he was well enough to play. And if he was well enough to play then he should have started.. So that excuse goes out the window..

You're basing all these opinions on the 1st pre-season game? WOW. You haven't learned anything from Belichick have you? After 6 years, you don't know by now that the 1st pre-season game means NOTHING?

Beisel didn't start because he'd been injured and didn't practice much. I seem to remember a certain ALL-PRO lineman who didn't start a game because he didn't practice with the team during the week. Last I looked, that player is still starting games.

6. I could continue if you like but the fact is the PATRIOTS are already looking at ILB on the waiver/streets.. So that doesn't bold well for your HERO

This is the standard M.O. for the Patriots. They have done this every year since BB and Pioli have taken over. Why you think that this is any different is beyond me. Especially since they haven't signed any of these guys. Claiborne, Sharper, and some others have been available since March and not been picked up.

Also, why are you so sure that it is Beisel they are seeking to replace and not someone like Gardner or Alexander? Seems to me that you are so against this guy that you refuse to see all the potential options available.

 

[arrellbee]

Box, unless I am misunderstanding something (which is very possible), you and I have a very fundamentally different views as to what the responsibilities of an ILB are.

To put it simply, I think the ILB's responsibility (on a run into the middle) is solely to tackle the runner. I think this idea of some responsibility for some particular block, per se, is a myth. Any idea of responsibility other than meeting the runner in the hole is a myth. It seems like your mention of Ray Lewis absolutely supports this - Ray Lewis wants to be able to tackle the runner without getting blocked. Not only that, but who would an ILB be 'protecting' or 'setting up' in a 7 in the box scheme ? NOBODY. There is nobody behind him. He's it - where the buck stops if you want to stop a run for short yardage.

When I say the 'gap' an ILB is 'responsible' for, I mean any hole that develops between the Center and the Tackle. Who else could be responsible for this hole ? NOBODY. There isn't anybody else. You can certainly have the other ILB or OLB pursue from their positions to backup the ILB, but unless these guys are VERY good, you're giving up over 4 yards by the time they get there - you can't succeed with a run defense like that. How could it be any different ?

One thing seems irrefutable. A runner cannot run thru a body. So if there is body there in the LOS (whether OL or DL), that is NOT a hole. It seems clear to me that an ILB plays to take advantage of those bodies and must put his effort solely into anyplace where there is not a body.

So, the bottom line to me is crudely simple. The ILB tries to avoid any blocks he possibly can if he can still get to the RB for short yardage while doing so.

OK. Now there is a case where the way the OL/DL blocking develops or is planned by the OL scheme, there is an OLman unblocked by a DLman (includes the case of a pulling OG). In this case, I think it rare to never that there is another hole besides what might develop over the OLman. Any disagreement ? So the 'gap' or 'hole' or responsibility of the ILB devolves to making sure the OLman can't create a hole for the runner to go through. To me, this is the 'tough' assignment for an ILB. Ted Johnson, Tedy Bruschi, and Mike Vrabel seem to be guys that can do this. There are other ILBs current and historical who are perceived as brutal at this. he evaluation of an ILB in this case is based on what yardage is given up. Anything less than 4 yards is probably good. Anything over 4 yards where the ILB significantly slows down the runner or tackles him is probably poor - after all, you can't operate an adequate run defense giving up over 4 yards per carry. If the ILB is blocked by the OLman so that he doesn't even get a piece of the runner, I frankly rate that as very poor or terrible - sorry about that, but it's his job. Remember, there isn't anybody behind the ILB until you get to the safeties or CBs coming up.

OK, what would be your criteria for ratings ?

Another case is where a hole develops without an OLman sitting in the middle of it but you have a FB or motion TE leading block. From my view, this should be pretty close to dead-even in terms of physical size matchup. A good play by the ILB should be to take on the blocker and tackle the runner for less than 3 yards. Anything more than that whould probably be poor in such a match-up. If the FB/TE blocker takes the ILB out of the play, that just has to be terrible.

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

If you read my descriptions or just look at the plays for yourself, you will see that Beisel many times rushes up directly by a DLman. How can this be anything but worthless ? There are already two huge bodies in front of him - many times three. There is never going to be an RB coming thru there ! It is a worthless position. I haven't seen any other ILB particulary doing it, but there might be some validity in moving up into the 'shadow' like that as long as the ILB was then able to slice sideways into the hole and get the RB coming thru. I don't think I or anybody would have a problem with that kind of technique if it was succesful. But Beisel NEVER does that as far as I have seen. In all of the plays like this in the Atlanta game, he simply never laid a hand on a runner.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Box, unless I am misunderstanding something (which is very possible), you and I have a very fundamentally different views as to what the responsibilities of an ILB are.

Yep, we do, I don't consider Wilfork, Warren, and Seymour blockers for Colvin, Vrabel, Beisel, and Bruschi.

BB wants his players to play a role in an orchestrated defense, each man has a role. If you choose to simplify the ILB role to be putting a body in a hole, you and I will interpret a player's performance differently.

 

[DaBruinz]

He couldn't make it on that POS 05 KC Defensive squad, and IIRC, was cut to make room for Kawika Mitchell out of that football factory...U of South Florida.

Now that is telling.

Not really since this is factually wrong. Beisel wasn't cut from the Chiefs. His contract expired and they hadn't gotten a contract extension done. Vermeil was very disappointed that the Chiefs weren't able to retain Beisel.

 

[mcsully]

Utter BS. It took Bruschi 2 years before he could play ILB as well as he days. And that is after having been in a Belichick system for several years.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235021/gamelogs/2005

Which 4 games did Beisel NOT suit up for? There was only 1 game he didn't suit up for. The others, he was playing on Special Teams because Vrabel was in at ILB.




Since when does AGE mean a damn thing. Also, why are you comparing OLB to ILB? Yes, Monty needs to be able to shed blockers. However, how are those blockers getting to him to begin with? You and arrellbee seem to be forgetting that the NT and DE are supposed to be eating up those blockers so that the ILB doesn't have to worry about it. Even Bruschi gets eaten up by guards. Not all the time, but he does.



Yep. And according to BB, Beisel made some plays that he shouldn't have had to make, but it was his reading the play that allowed him to do so. I will take BB's analysis over people on here.



You're basing all these opinions on the 1st pre-season game? WOW. You haven't learned anything from Belichick have you? After 6 years, you don't know by now that the 1st pre-season game means NOTHING?

Beisel didn't start because he'd been injured and didn't practice much. I seem to remember a certain ALL-PRO lineman who didn't start a game because he didn't practice with the team during the week. Last I looked, that player is still starting games.

This is the standard M.O. for the Patriots. They have done this every year since BB and Pioli have taken over. Why you think that this is any different is beyond me. Especially since they haven't signed any of these guys. Claiborne, Sharper, and some others have been available since March and not been picked up.

Also, why are you so sure that it is Beisel they are seeking to replace and not someone like Gardner or Alexander? Seems to me that you are so against this guy that you refuse to see all the potential options available.

DABRUINZ here is the link to the website I found that he didn't play in 4 games
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?statsId=5555
As you see, he didn't play in four games..

Your point about agruing with youth and it doesn't matter.. SURE DOES.. SOmeone with less experience in the same system (yet in different postions) shouldn't look better shedding blockers..

I'm not going to break down everything you said. That is crazy.. But if you think I am basing this on one game, then you haven't followed me at all. I've been saying this since last year.. He has REGRESSED!!! FYI my next post also will reflect how the national media is seeing it..

 

[mcsully]

Who’s Not: Monty Beisel – What in God’s name happened to Beisel? The projected starter by many at inside linebacker for the Patriots now finds himself lining up next to undrafted free agent Freddie Roach in the second half of a preseason game. Beisel did miss some practice time last week but he was obviously healthy enough to play in the game because he was on the field for a majority of the third and fourth quarters. One play, in particular, against the Falcons epitomizes Beisel’s performance in New England thus far. Falcons backup receiver Kevin Youngblood caught a pass across the middle and Beisel was in perfect position to stop him in his tracks. Instead of laying a good lick on him, Beisel reached up high and brought Youngblood down by the jersey. That allowed the receiver to fall ahead for three more yards. Tackling high was Beisel’s problem last year and it doesn’t appear that he’s broken the habit. Perhaps the Patriots coaching staff was just shuffling things around to get a look at some other players but this can’t bode well for Beisel.


http://www.patriots.com/news/index.cfm?ac=latestnewsdetail&pid=20466&pcid=44


790 the score had someone on from PROFOOTBALLWEEKLY (or another magazine) and basically said the same thing.. M.Beisel has looked poor and his not starting shows a hint of the coaches attitude towards him..

 

[All_Around_Brown]

Not really since this is factually wrong. Beisel wasn't cut from the Chiefs. His contract expired and they hadn't gotten a contract extension done. Vermeil was very disappointed that the Chiefs weren't able to retain Beisel.

I stand corrected. TY

 

[mcsully]

FYI to people that say its personal.. IF BEISEL was a good player I would be the first one standing up for him cheering him on.. I want the PATS to be AWESOME!! As a season tkt holder for 14 years, I love seeing the Defense dominate.. So its not personal.. Actually I'm afraid it will be like 03 again where teams ran all over us..

 

[mcsully]

Not really since this is factually wrong. Beisel wasn't cut from the Chiefs. His contract expired and they hadn't gotten a contract extension done. Vermeil was very disappointed that the Chiefs weren't able to retain Beisel.

Great point.. Looking at it differently.. When is the last time Vermeil had a good defense with some great players.. The experiement is leaning towards failure..

 

[DaBruinz]

DaBruinz, you read the interview wrong. Belichick was referring to Banta-Cain on that play for making the correct decision, not Beisel.

.

Then I stand corrected.

 

[DaBruinz]

DABRUINZ here is the link to the website I found that he didn't play in 4 games
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?statsId=5555
As you see, he didn't play in four games..

Hmm.. Funny thing about ESPN.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=2656

Same website and they say he played in 15 games. I've found that ESPN isn't always accurate and they make assumptions

Your point about agruing with youth and it doesn't matter.. SURE DOES.. SOmeone with less experience in the same system (yet in different postions) shouldn't look better shedding blockers..

No, actually it doesn't. If it did, you wouldn't have players like DeMarcus Ware and Lofa Tatupu being the impact players that they are. Jamie Sharper would have started the whole year there.

Players have different skill sets. Comparing Mincey, who was a 4-3 DE and spent a LOT of time working on the edge of plays and getting by blockers would have more preparation and experience than Beisel working on the inside. I would think that would be rather obvious.

I'm not going to break down everything you said. That is crazy.. But if you think I am basing this on one game, then you haven't followed me at all. I've been saying this since last year.. He has REGRESSED!!! FYI my next post also will reflect how the national media is seeing it..

I don't care WHAT you are basing it on. Your bias is obvious and your understanding of how hard it is to change position from 4-3 DE to 3-4 ILB seems to be missing facts.

As for the national media, who gives a flying **** what they think? Most of them are boobs who can't think beyond their local teams. Its stupid to be attempting to judge someone based on ONE PRE-SEASON game where they are running a vanilla defense and the guy is coming back from an injury.

And, since when did Tom Casale become "The National media"? He is a local journalist who works for the team. And he's wrong as often as he is right.

 

[DaBruinz]

Great point.. Looking at it differently.. When is the last time Vermeil had a good defense with some great players.. The experiement is leaning towards failure..

So, because you miss the point, which was just to correct AAB on how Beisel became a free agent, you think that this, some how, applies to your arguments?

The last time Vermeil had a good defense was with the Rams when they went to the SB. So he does have an idea of what a good defense consists of.

 

[DaBruinz]

FYI to people that say its personal.. IF BEISEL was a good player I would be the first one standing up for him cheering him on.. I want the PATS to be AWESOME!! As a season tkt holder for 14 years, I love seeing the Defense dominate.. So its not personal.. Actually I'm afraid it will be like 03 again where teams ran all over us..

McSully, The Pats had one of the best run defenses in 2003. I think you are referring to 2002 when the Pats run defense was one of the worst. However, the primary reason the 2002 run defense was BAD was because of the lack of a capable NT and the fact that the LBs weren't quick enough to get side-line to side-line the way they needed to be able to. That is what Belichick has said on several occasions.

 

[mcsully]

McSully, The Pats had one of the best run defenses in 2003. I think you are referring to 2002 when the Pats run defense was one of the worst. However, the primary reason the 2002 run defense was BAD was because of the lack of a capable NT and the fact that the LBs weren't quick enough to get side-line to side-line the way they needed to be able to. That is what Belichick has said on several occasions.

Yea, I was thinking 2003 SB that we weren't in.. I stand corrected on that point.. ANd Yes our NT was definitely bad that year, plus safeties.. But As I said, I'm afraid to see our defense fall victim to the power running games this year..

 

[mcsully]

So, because you miss the point, which was just to correct AAB on how Beisel became a free agent, you think that this, some how, applies to your arguments?

The last time Vermeil had a good defense was with the Rams when they went to the SB. So he does have an idea of what a good defense consists of.

No, just an added pointed to the comment..

Vermeil won because of offense, not defense..