Patrick Chung? Expectations/Analysis

[PatsFanInVa]

Tell me about it. My flight across the Atlantic was delayed four hours and I missed my connection in Amsterdam just because Pat Chung's digestive system was out of order.

Pat Chung went fishing in the Gulf of Mexico last month and needed to take a dump. Unfortunately, he had eaten Mexican food for lunch...

 

[Kontradiction]

I expect Chung should make his jump this year. I would expect Sanders to start the season at SS next to Meriweather and Chung will eventually take his place in the starting line-up. I don't have anything to go on other than optimism when I say this, but Chung is still extremely young and seems to genuinely work hard on his craft. He was seeing a bigger amount of snaps as the season went on in 2009 so I really wouldn't be suprised to see my first two sentences actually happen in 2010.

 

[BostonPatriot]

Pat Chung went fishing in the Gulf of Mexico last month and needed to take a dump. Unfortunately, he had eaten Mexican food for lunch...

Not funny and really weird. Yikes.

 

[jah]

To all the people who say Chung will replace Sanders/McGowan: isn't Chung supposed to be a strong safety? Sanders plays free safety. Don't they have to cover well? According to some posters here, Chung can't cover. I was thinking that maybe Meriweather could switch from strong to free safety--is that what others are implying would happen?

 

[captain stone]

Pat Chung was our top pick last year. I would be really interested in the opinions, expectations and analysis of all the outstanding posters here of this kid. I was glad we drafted him, I just thought it was a little higher than he was expected to go. What do you all anticipate from him this year and beyond?

I too felt at the time that he was over-drafted by a half-round. I would've kept #47 to use on Chung, instead of trading it to Uncle Al just to draft the Couch Potato.

Nevertheless, I expect (hope) that Chung ass-umes the starting SS job from lil' Jimmy Sanders by Thanksgiving, at the latest. It's about time that our last line of defense comes with some size & intimidation, and solid tackling ability.

 

[mgteich]

Are you trying to confuse folks with facts?

For many Chung will take the step up this year to starter in place of Sanders who they dislike. The fact that Sanders is our best free safety, best coverage guy at safety, and by far our best signal caller in the secondary matters not. It also doesn't matter to them that he does not come close to Sanders in any of these aspects of the game.

To all the people who say Chung will replace Sanders/McGowan: isn't Chung supposed to be a strong safety? Sanders plays free safety. Don't they have to cover well? According to some posters here, Chung can't cover. I was thinking that maybe Meriweather could switch from strong to free safety--is that what others are implying would happen?

 

[RussFrancis]

My bet is Chung starts from day 1 this season. Sanders has been solid at best. And to be frank, that's just not good enough. Not good enough if we want our team eventually winning a Superbowl. To be frank again, noone has seen enough of Chung at this point to honestly think he's inferior to Sanders in any area other than experience. And not to de-value that, but Id rather bring Sanders in off the bench, and give the young guy with the playmaking ability the opportunity to prove himself and become a major part of this defense. Anyone arguing that James Sanders can be that is probably kidding themselves.

 

[captain stone]

Are you trying to confuse folks with facts?

For many Chung will take the step up this year to starter in place of Sanders who they dislike. The fact that Sanders is our best free safety, best coverage guy at safety, and by far our best signal caller in the secondary matters not. It also doesn't matter to them that he does not come close to Sanders in any of these aspects of the game.

The problem with Sanders is that he is built like a FS, runs like a SS, and tackles like a CB.

"Son, fat, drunk & stupid is no way to go through life."

 

[mgteich]

Solid stareters who call signals may be not enough for you. Belichick takes a much different view.

Starting players with no experience at covering or signal calling when a solid starter is the incumbant may be your idea of coaching,. It is not Belichick's way of operating the team.

Some may ignore the dropoff when Sanders didn't call signals in 2009, and the improvement when he was back in a starting role. Belichick does not ignore these things.

It is indeed quite POSSIBLE that Chung will starte opposite Meriweather. HOWEVER, there is absolutely no reason to believe that this will happen aother than blind hope for Chung and dislike of solid veterans. Chung will be given every opportunity in practices, TC and in the preseason to earn his game reps. We shall see what will happen.

Belichick does NOT experiment. For each game, he plays the very best he has at the moment, the players who give us the best chance of winning that game. I would not expect Chung to be that player for Game One ahead of Sanders.

If Chung is the better player by Game One, then the team will be upgraded and Chung will start. What Belichick will NOT do is to start Chung to give him experience in the hope that he will better than Sanders later in the year. That's just not how Belichick runs the team.

My bet is Chung starts from day 1 this season. Sanders has been solid at best. And to be frank, that's just not good enough. Not good enough if we want our team eventually winning a Superbowl. To be frank again, noone has seen enough of Chung at this point to honestly think he's inferior to Sanders in any area other than experience. And not to de-value that, but Id rather bring Sanders in off the bench, and give the young guy with the playmaking ability the opportunity to prove himself and become a major part of this defense. Anyone arguing that James Sanders can be that is probably kidding themselves.

 

[RussFrancis]

Like I said, I expect the playmaker to start from day 1. Not the safe pick that's not going to be our primary playcaller anyway. That duty had better fall on the shoulders of either Mayo or another 'backer, or this D will be in trouble anyway.

For the record, Im not speaking for Bill here. Im speaking for myself, and what I know of football players and talent. And James Sanders is a solid football player. But he's not a better than average safety. We should simply want better than that. He's a nice role player. Chung was drafted where he was drafted because the kid can play. We'll all find that out this season.

 

[RussFrancis]

Solid stareters who call signals may be not enough for you. Belichick takes a much different view.

Starting players with no experience at covering or signal calling when a solid starter is the incumbant may be your idea of coaching,. It is not Belichick's way of operating the team.

Some may ignore the dropoff when Sanders didn't call signals in 2009, and the improvement when he was back in a starting role. Belichick does not ignore these things.

It is indeed quite POSSIBLE that Chung will starte opposite Meriweather. HOWEVER, there is absolutely no reason to believe that this will happen aother than blind hope for Chung and dislike of solid veterans. Chung will be given every opportunity in practices, TC and in the preseason to earn his game reps. We shall see what will happen.

Belichick does NOT experiment. For each game, he plays the very best he has at the moment, the players who give us the best chance of winning that game. I would not expect Chung to be that player for Game One ahead of Sanders.

If Chung is the better player by Game One, then the team will be upgraded and Chung will start. What Belichick will NOT do is to start Chung to give him experience in the hope that he will better than Sanders later in the year. That's just not how Belichick runs the team.

I really needed to follow up on this because I think youre misrepresenting Bill Belichick here. He doesnt experiment?? How or why would you even suggest something like that? Of course he experiments. Last year was the perfect time to do so. None of us thought we had a championship caliber team with Brady coming off major knee surgery. You wouldnt call Vince Wifork playing right END an experiment? You think trading away Richard Seymour days before the start of a season with no starter in place, and no Green was not a starting caliber end, wasnt an experiment??
You dont think the whole Shawn Crable experiment was something this coaching staff was certain about? Taking a gamble on a playmaker with the legs of a stork? Big time experiment. 2 year experiment. And one that may end with zero results. The man is a mad scientist. Doesnt experiment. Cmon. I could go on and on with that. Is he conservative? Absolutely. Unwilling to gamble? Ellis Hobbs on Burress was one experiment I personally wish none of us would have to live with.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

The problem with Sanders is that he is built like a FS, runs like a SS, and tackles like a CB.

"Son, fat, drunk & stupid is no way to go through life."

Pretty good analysis.

I understand that there really isn't anything to talk about but isn't this like the 3rd or 4th thread asking the same question? Before you know it, there will be another thread asking a question about Crable. Once again, Chung is expected to start. Anything less is a monumental disappointment.

 

[mgteich]

It is great that we can arrgue with regard to which of our four starting quality safeties will get the starting nod in our first game!
==============

Let us just say that you use the word "experiment" differently than most.

Belichick is innovative. Bleichick takes gambles. Belichick makes trades that work and those that don't. Belichick signs and draft players who work out and those who don't.

To call Crable an "experiment" because you don't think the thinckness of his legs is ridiculous. Crable was a draft choice that looked great in his first preseason and has been injured twice since. He is being given another chance. I suppose some would call this an experiment. I would call it competition.

On the gien day, Belichick thought that Wilfork would be an upgrade playing some reps at DE. The fact is that he tried this often in practice and probably in one or two preseason games.

It is indeed sad that we could not score another TD in the last SB and couldn't defend once the Giants had the ball. Belichick did not experiment. He played with what he had. And in the end, Habbs wasn't up to covering Burress.

================================================

An experiment would be to start the season with a starting strong safety who has shown no ability to cover and ask him to do so, and in addition to call the plays for the secondary, even though he has shown no ability to do that in the past.

Belichick would be a mad scienitist indeed if he started Chung if Chung did not show a marked improvement of skills over 2009 in the areas of coverage and signal calling during TC and during the preseason.

I really needed to follow up on this because I think youre misrepresenting Bill Belichick here. He doesnt experiment?? How or why would you even suggest something like that? Of course he experiments. Last year was the perfect time to do so. None of us thought we had a championship caliber team with Brady coming off major knee surgery. You wouldnt call Vince Wifork playing right END an experiment? You think trading away Richard Seymour days before the start of a season with no starter in place, and no Green was not a starting caliber end, wasnt an experiment??
You dont think the whole Shawn Crable experiment was something this coaching staff was certain about? Taking a gamble on a playmaker with the legs of a stork? Big time experiment. 2 year experiment. And one that may end with zero results. The man is a mad scientist. Doesnt experiment. Cmon. I could go on and on with that. Is he conservative? Absolutely. Unwilling to gamble? Ellis Hobbs on Burress was one experiment I personally wish none of us would have to live with.

 

[RayClay]

Who starts is irrelevant. We have young safeties with different strengths and they will all be used. Hopefully, our defensive backfield will be awesome.

 

[JackBauer]

My bet is Chung starts from day 1 this season. Sanders has been solid at best. And to be frank, that's just not good enough. Not good enough if we want our team eventually winning a Superbowl. To be frank again, noone has seen enough of Chung at this point to honestly think he's inferior to Sanders in any area other than experience. And not to de-value that, but Id rather bring Sanders in off the bench, and give the young guy with the playmaking ability the opportunity to prove himself and become a major part of this defense. Anyone arguing that James Sanders can be that is probably kidding themselves.

It's not that I wouldn't like to see Chung take over the starting spot at FS, but the 2007 Giants pretty much disprove your assertion that Sanders wouldn't be good enough to start on a championship-caliber team.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Not funny and really weird. Yikes.

Do not question any expression of the Chung Supremacy.

 

[lillestroom]

The man hits like a freight train. Very few safties do that.

 

[jays52]

The man hits like a freight train. Very few safties do that.

Correction: Freight Trains hit like Pat Chung.

 

[lillestroom]

Correction: Freight Trains hit like Pat Chung.

Indeed. Would sleep soundly at night if we had to go with him as a starter and not James Saunders.

 

[RussFrancis]

It's not that I wouldn't like to see Chung take over the starting spot at FS, but the 2007 Giants pretty much disprove your assertion that Sanders wouldn't be good enough to start on a championship-caliber team.

My assertion would take into consideration the Giants' pass rush. And if our team had 3 heavy hitters like Strahan, Osi, and Tuck, we wouldnt need a serious playmaker at safety. Hell, we dont have ONE guy that can get after the QB like that, let alone 3. Sure, Sanders could have hid as a guy who doesnt really make plays on that team. He cant on this one. Not if we're trying to win a title.