Patriots Safety Position, Team May Stand Pat With Duron Harmon

[PP2]

He didn't stay in the line-up because the team wasn't impressed enough with what they saw to put him in there instead of Gregory (who himself is ideally a 2nd stringer). That should tell you about all you need to know of Harmon's performance his rookie year. Harmon, at least IMO, is a back-up to McCourty and that's about it. The team needs a starter opposite McCourty that can instill some fear in the opposing offense's slot receivers and TE's. We haven't had that since the days of Rodney.

That's pure speculation on your part. I think I saw enough potential in Harmon as far as the talent he flashed. He seemed to be in the right place at the right time and showed that he could read intent from the QB.

Just because he has had limited reps isn't an indication of what the team thought of his talents. There are other factors involved, including how they feel about his grasp of the system, his technique, et al.

We'll see how it plays out this fall.

 

[Deus Irae]

He didn't stay in the line-up because the team wasn't impressed enough with what they saw to put him in there instead of Gregory (who himself is ideally a 2nd stringer). That should tell you about all you need to know of Harmon's performance his rookie year. Harmon, at least IMO, is a back-up to McCourty and that's about it. The team needs a starter opposite McCourty that can instill some fear in the opposing offense's slot receivers and TE's. We haven't had that since the days of Rodney.

Patsfans.com posters wildly overreacted to a couple of decent plays with Harmon and Ryan. This is the norm around here. Sudfeld, T. Wilson, Chung, etc., etc., etc....

They thought Last year's FA class was awesome, too, for a little while. :bricks:

 

[Kontradiction]

That's pure speculation on your part. I think I saw enough potential in Harmon as far as the talent he flashed. He seemed to be in the right place at the right time and showed that he could read intent from the QB.

Just because he has had limited reps isn't an indication of what the team thought of his talents. There are other factors involved, including how they feel about his grasp of the system, his technique, et al.

We'll see how it plays out this fall.

All the factors that you included are all factors of why I see him as a backup. So you might have just made my case for me. In any event, I'm not sure what else his lack of reps could have meant. He had every opportunity to surpass Gregory and ended the year actually losing reps to Tavon Wilson due to up and down play. It's not as if Belichick won't play rookies if he feels that they're starting material. They apparently didn't feel that way about Harmon.

 

[Kontradiction]

Patsfans.com posters wildly overreacted to a couple of decent plays with Harmon and Ryan. This is the norm around here. Sudfeld, T. Wilson, Chung, etc., etc., etc....

They thought Last year's FA class was awesome, too, for a little while. :bricks:

Also the same forum that defended Patrick Chung until he was shown the door.

 

[mgteich]

Tavon Wilson, Harmon and Ebner have a ways to go before they produce as much as Chung did in his four years here. I would be fine if they even approached the production of the two others that were "shown the door": Sanders and Meriweather,

Obviously, you and high have very different expectations from our draft choices. iMHO, if any of the three rookie did what Chung did, we would be much better off than we are. As it is, we should be looking to sign a starting SS, and will need to find a backup.

For me, the reality is that almost players are eventually shown the door. If Edelman isn't re-signed, I suppose that he too will have been shown the door.

Also the same forum that defended Patrick Chung until he was shown the door.

 

[strngplyr]

Tavon Wilson, Harmon and Ebner have a ways to go before they produce as much as Chung did in his four years here.

For which team?

 

[Deus Irae]

Tavon Wilson, Harmon and Ebner have a ways to go before they produce as much as Chung did in his four years here. I would be fine if they even approached the production of the two others that were "shown the door": Sanders and Meriweather,

Obviously, you and high have very different expectations from our draft choices. iMHO, if any of the three rookie did what Chung did, we would be much better off than we are. As it is, we should be looking to sign a starting SS, and will need to find a backup.

For me, the reality is that almost players are eventually shown the door. If Edelman isn't re-signed, I suppose that he too will have been shown the door.

Chung sucked. Stop with the nonsensical revisionist history.

 

[mgteich]

Chung played reasonably well in 2009 and 2010 for the patriots. Compare Tavon Wilson over his first two years.

As I said, message board folk have their own set of standards.

An outsider would surely think that we were 3rd or 4th in our division last year and outt of the playoffs for the past several years.

For which team?

 

[JPsPats]

Im not ready to give up on T. Wilson and Harmon. Wilson's biggest issue has been the out and up, and the post and up. He's better closer to the line, and as a SS thats where he should be. Let McCourty be the deep guy.

I can't really remember Tavon being out of position when tackling, it was just the deep routes where he was giving up plays.

As for Harmon, he looked good. What do you want from a rookie adjusting to the NFL. He was rarely out of position as well.

Not every player is going to be a superstar, and I think investing another early pick in a safety is a waste. Build the dline up because a dominant dline benefits the back end, hurried throws = interceptions or someone getting drilled.

 

[mgteich]

I agree with you comments. I think that we have two developmental prospects that can learn from our two starters: McCourty and whoever else we sign in free agency.

Im not ready to give up on T. Wilson and Harmon. Wilson's biggest issue has been the out and up, and the post and up. He's better closer to the line, and as a SS thats where he should be. Let McCourty be the deep guy.

I can't really remember Tavon being out of position when tackling, it was just the deep routes where he was giving up plays.

As for Harmon, he looked good. What do you want from a rookie adjusting to the NFL. He was rarely out of position as well.

Not every player is going to be a superstar, and I think investing another early pick in a safety is a waste. Build the dline up because a dominant dline benefits the back end, hurried throws = interceptions or someone getting drilled.

 

[Mack Herron]

I agree with you comments. I think that we have two developmental prospects that can learn from our two starters: McCourty and whoever else we sign in free agency.

I thought Harmon had a very promising season.*

*sparse data will be extrapolated based on a brew concocted of hopes and dreams supported by performance numbers obtained outside of football (e.g., combine), old coaching endorsements, and whatever other scraps seem supportive.

 

[Deus Irae]

Chung played reasonably well in 2009 and 2010 for the patriots. Compare Tavon Wilson over his first two years.

As I said, message board folk have their own set of standards.

An outsider would surely think that we were 3rd or 4th in our division last year and outt of the playoffs for the past several years.

Chung will likely need as much time as Meriweather to develop. I don't think that this is an unreasonable situation at all, especially since there is no pressure for Chung to start or cover any time soon.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/267607-mcgowan-chung-3rd-safety-page2.html#post1485949

QUICK TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
At this point is his NFL career, Chung does not have the skills and knowledge to cover my grandmother one on one. He won't be asked to do so any time soon.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/270540-seymour-trade-makes-belichick-accountable.html#post1498695

Yes, we have found out what happens when Wheatley and Chung cover folks one on one. Of course, there will be defensive schemes during real games that minimize when such a matchup exists.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/270540-seymour-trade-makes-belichick-accountable.html#post1498718

Why do you believe this? Meriweather took a long time to develop. Chung couldn't cover any of our grandmothers. Give him time. It is great that he is contributing on specail teams.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/267607-mcgowan-chung-3rd-safety-page3.html#post1514172

I would HOPE that when we played dime, we ALWAYS would have four players who can cover well. Personally, I would rather have Wheatley in the game against Manning than Chung.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/292766-protecting-qb-2-key-matchups.html#post1590483

We overpaid for Chung, but he is a reasonable special teamer.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/327314-idle-thoughts-setting-record-straight-page3.html#post1755876

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.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/340950-patrick-chung-expectations-analysis-page2.html#post1825919

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.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/340950-patrick-chung-expectations-analysis-page2.html#post1825989

That's you talking about Chung's rookie campaign. Again, we can stop with the revisionist history? Chung sucked.

 

[mgteich]

Thank you for the tour down memory lane. I believe that most did think that Chung didn't suck in 2010. But perhaps I am recalling poorly.

In any case, I have reason to want to see Harmon starting at SS and Tavon Wilson being tour #3 safety. Of course, Belichick may be counting on Adrian.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/267607-mcgowan-chung-3rd-safety-page2.html#post1485949



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/270540-seymour-trade-makes-belichick-accountable.html#post1498695



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/270540-seymour-trade-makes-belichick-accountable.html#post1498718



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/267607-mcgowan-chung-3rd-safety-page3.html#post1514172



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/292766-protecting-qb-2-key-matchups.html#post1590483



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/327314-idle-thoughts-setting-record-straight-page3.html#post1755876



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/340950-patrick-chung-expectations-analysis-page2.html#post1825919



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/340950-patrick-chung-expectations-analysis-page2.html#post1825989

That's you talking about Chung's rookie campaign. Again, we can stop with the revisionist history? Chung sucked.

 

[ATippett56]

Of course, Belichick may be counting on Adrian.

A 34 year old safety recovering from a torn Achilles Tendon?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[PP2]

All the factors that you included are all factors of why I see him as a backup. So you might have just made my case for me. In any event, I'm not sure what else his lack of reps could have meant. He had every opportunity to surpass Gregory and ended the year actually losing reps to Tavon Wilson due to up and down play. It's not as if Belichick won't play rookies if he feels that they're starting material. They apparently didn't feel that way about Harmon.

Just because the team didn't play him isn't necessarily a reflection of how good he is. Without knowing what schemes they ran or what technique on what play he was supposed, it's impossible to know what exactly the screwup was.

Hence what you say is speculation, anything else you're just deluding yourself.

Again, we'll see how things turn out this summer/fall. My educated guess is that he turns out fine and makes that second year leap because he flashed good instincts. That, you cannot teach.

 

[PP2]

I can't really remember Tavon being out of position when tackling, it was just the deep routes where he was giving up plays.

As for Harmon, he looked good. What do you want from a rookie adjusting to the NFL. He was rarely out of position as well.

Everyone in that backfield is held to the lofty standards established by Rodney Harrison who is a HOF-caliber player that comes once every generation, but you wouldn't know it according to some posters in this thread.

If they can't lay the lumber in their very first professional game or pass muster otherwise, they clearly suck.

 

[supafly]

He didn't stay in the line-up because the team wasn't impressed enough with what they saw to put him in there instead of Gregory (who himself is ideally a 2nd stringer). That should tell you about all you need to know of Harmon's performance his rookie year. Harmon, at least IMO, is a back-up to McCourty and that's about it. The team needs a starter opposite McCourty that can instill some fear in the opposing offense's slot receivers and TE's. We haven't had that since the days of Rodney.

I think there are a good number here who'd agree with you. I know I would.

That said, there's also the possibility that Harmon will be battling it out in training camp with whatever moves we make in terms of draft picks, etc. If he shows enough, he could win the job over a rookie.

As you said, hopefully we can put the issue to rest once and for all with an actual safety who is capable of being the physical and talented presence that we all hope for. Whether that could come from FA or the draft remains to be seen, but it's definitely an area of obvious weaknesses.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

No, it wasn't. It makes little difference whether the team replaces Gregory while he's on the roster or after he's been cut.

How did that work out in 2011 again?

 

[JackBauer]

How did that work out in 2011 again?

I wasn't discussing the merits of the move, simply noting the team's evaluation of Gregory and how it renders the sequencing of events moot.

 

[mgteich]

Perhaps it take awhile before we understand, but we should understand by now that we need to look to free agency for our safety or safeties. Belichick has spent lots and lots of draft resources drafting safeties, with almost nothing to show. The best was James Sanders.

It is time to look to free agency. After all, Belichick understands that certain positions are best filled in free agency, others in the draft.

Our situation at safety looking forward is really precarious. We have ONE fine starter who is probably looking forward to very bid payday in the new cap environment (he is in his contract year). And we have two developmental prospects: Harmon and T. Wilson.

As you said, hopefully we can put the issue to rest once and for all with an actual safety who is capable of being the physical and talented presence that we all hope for. Whether that could come from FA or the draft remains to be seen, but it's definitely an area of obvious weaknesses.