Patriots sign DL Alan Branch, and release LB Deontae Skinner

[Brady_to_Moss]

i hope we see a good amount of him after bye..i really want to see what he has

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

Branch was very good in Buffalo. If his head is on straight, and he's in game shape, he can be a very effective run defender inside or out.

 

[ripatsfan91]

How does he compare in terms of play style/ability to Tommy Kelly. I know they have similar builds

 

[PlainOldEd]

Jonathan Casillas was never viewed by Tampa Bay as a starter. As a matter of fact, backup linebacker Brandon Magee was active for more games than Jonathan Casillas, 4 to 3.

How was Mike Vrabel viewed by Pittsburgh? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this guy is destined to be Mike Vrabel, just that you shouldn't put too much weight into what another team thinks of a player.

 

[patsfan-1982]

How does he compare in terms of play style/ability to Tommy Kelly. I know they have similar builds

Kelly when he was at his best was a pretty good inside pass rusher Branch is not a pass rusher at all but when he is at his best his really good vs the run and that's what the pats need right now

 

[AzPatsFan]

How does he compare in terms of play style/ability to Tommy Kelly. I know they have similar builds

Think of him as a taller Vince, able to anchor against the Run, or maybe a Kyle Williams. Kelly is just a big all-around DT, like Ty Warren used to be.

 

[ausbacker]

How does he compare in terms of play style/ability to Tommy Kelly. I know they have similar builds

Opposite types. Kelly was more of a disruptive inside presence where Branch is your prototypical run stuffer. I hope the signing of Branch unleashes two players on the defensive line: Vince Wilfork and Dominique Easley. It's time to take off the shackles and let them disrupt opposing lines.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Opposite types. Kelly was more of a disruptive inside presence where Branch is your prototypical run stuffer. I hope the signing of Branch unleashes two players on the defensive line: Vince Wilfork and Dominique Easley. It's time to take off the shackles and let them disrupt opposing lines.

Envision:

A line of Easley, Branch, Wilfork, Silaga and NInkovitch would be a B!tch to run against.

A line of Chandler, Easley Jones and Ninkovitch along with Hightower/Collins blitzing, would be a B!tch to pass against.

 

[ausbacker]

Envision:

A line of Easley, Branch, Wilfork, Silaga and NInkovitch would be a B!tch to run against.

A line of Chandler, Easley Jones and Ninkovitch along with Hightower/Collins would be a B!tch to pass against.

The addition of Branch is why I was adamant the Patriots need more depth on the Defensive Line. It affords the Patriots the opportunity to switch between a 34 and 43 front without losing too much. Siliga - Wilfork - Branch playing an old school 2 gap with Chandler Jones and Akeem Ayers playing OLB rushing off the edge, in my mind is dead sexy. I'd love to see Jones playing Willie's old elephant position. It's something I think he could excel at.

If the reports of Casillas playing as a speedy edge rusher come to fruition, there's more pass rush. Further to the point, I haven't even addressed what a rising Easley may provide in a penetrating 43. Ninkovrabel is Ninkovrabel...

I feel a lot better about this Defensive Line rotation now than before the season began.

 

[Oswlek]

Envision:

A line of Easley, Branch, Wilfork, Silaga and NInkovitch would be a B!tch to run against.

A line of Chandler, Easley Jones and Ninkovitch along with Hightower/Collins would be a B!tch to pass against.

I'd much prefer a blend that offers competent rotation to keep everyone fresh. Those only seem useful in extreme situations like GL or 3rd and 19.

 

[AzPatsFan]

The addition of Branch is why I was adamant the Patriots need more depth on the Defensive Line. It affords the Patriots the opportunity to switch between a 34 and 43 front without losing too much. Siliga - Wilfork - Branch playing an old school 2 gap with Chandler Jones and Akeem Ayers playing OLB rushing off the edge, in my mind is dead sexy. I'd love to see Jones playing Willie's old elephant position. It's something I think he could excel at.

If the reports of Casillas playing as a speedy edge rusher come to fruition, there's more pass rush. Further to the point, I haven't even addressed what a rising Easley may provide in a penetrating 43. Ninkovrabel is Ninkovrabel...

I feel a lot better about this Defensive Line rotation now than before the season began.

Another example of the Patriots Rising thesis.

Jonathan Casillas did not land on the injury report until week 6. Jonathan Casillas did not lose a starting job due to injury.

Stop posting bull crap without the facts.

"Not only had Patriots coach Bill Belichick and his staff had an opportunity to watch Casillas play in games for the Saints (2009-12) and Buccaneers (2013-14) -- the Patriots played the Saints in 2009 and against the Bucs in 2013 -- but they also saw the 6-foot-1, 227-pounder practice for extended periods of time.

Before the 2012 and 2013 seasons the Patriots held joint training camp practices with New Orleans and Tampa Bay.

"We've known, watched Jonathan for a while," Belichick said Wednesday. "Athletic, smart guy. Has played defense -- four-down player -- played defense and in the kicking game. Been a productive player in New Orleans and Tampa. Played against him, practiced against him. I have a lot of respect for him, his experience, and his versatile skills."

Belichick also could have had the added benefit of Greg Schiano's input, but he wouldn't say if he had spoken to Schiano -- Tampa Bay's head coach last season -- about Casillas. "

What do you have to say now Tip? Are you going to buck Belichick's own words.

Let's just agree to cease this acrimonious nonsense. Please.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I'd much prefer a blend that offers competent rotation to keep everyone fresh. Those only seem useful in extreme situations like GL or 3rd and 19.

Mix and match to your heart's content.

 

[AzPatsFan]

The addition of Branch is why I was adamant the Patriots need more depth on the Defensive Line. It affords the Patriots the opportunity to switch between a 34 and 43 front without losing too much. Siliga - Wilfork - Branch playing an old school 2 gap with Chandler Jones and Akeem Ayers playing OLB rushing off the edge, in my mind is dead sexy. I'd love to see Jones playing Willie's old elephant position. It's something I think he could excel at.

If the reports of Casillas playing as a speedy edge rusher come to fruition, there's more pass rush. Further to the point, I haven't even addressed what a rising Easley may provide in a penetrating 43. Ninkovrabel is Ninkovrabel...

I feel a lot better about this Defensive Line rotation now than before the season began.

Can In Borrow that "Ninkovrabel" moniker? It fits very well.

 

[mgteich]

BB has publicly stated his high value of Collins on several occasions. The game is 70% played in sub. Truth may be truth, but your opinion isn't, and it's irrelevant. So is mine. The evidence shows that BB values Collins highly.

OK, I'm confused. The question was whether Collins is a good starter. DI said that he wasn't because he was limited against the run. No one has questioned whether Collins was good as a sub package linebacker. Someone needs to start in the base. If we have 3 solid starting LB's, then all three of the starters are good against the run. Otherwise you end up starting guys like Skinner in the base.

Your response is that Collins is a solid starter because we are in the sub package 70% of the time. As someone said recently, if you can't stop the run, you don't have to worry about stopping the pass.

The BOTTOM LINE is that a 3-down, starting LB needs to be able to be better than Collins against the run.
==========
So, my question is whether we have 3 LB's for the future who solid starters in the base package.

 

[ripatsfan91]

Another example of the Patriots Rising thesis.


"Not only had Patriots coach Bill Belichick and his staff had an opportunity to watch Casillas play in games for the Saints (2009-12) and Buccaneers (2013-14) -- the Patriots played the Saints in 2009 and against the Bucs in 2013 -- but they also saw the 6-foot-1, 227-pounder practice for extended periods of time.

Before the 2012 and 2013 seasons the Patriots held joint training camp practices with New Orleans and Tampa Bay.

"We've known, watched Jonathan for a while," Belichick said Wednesday. "Athletic, smart guy. Has played defense -- four-down player -- played defense and in the kicking game. Been a productive player in New Orleans and Tampa. Played against him, practiced against him. I have a lot of respect for him, his experience, and his versatile skills."

Belichick also could have had the added benefit of Greg Schiano's input, but he wouldn't say if he had spoken to Schiano -- Tampa Bay's head coach last season -- about Casillas. "

What do you have to say now Tip? Are you going to buck Belichick's own words.

Let's just agree to cease this acrimonious nonsense. Please.

Also pretty telling that Belichick could have traded the Bucs for Dane Fletcher instead to get a guy he was familiar with and had experience playing ILB in Belichick's defense.... noteworthy they chose Casillas

 

[AzPatsFan]

OK, I'm confused. The question was whether Collins is a good starter. DI said that he wasn't because he was limited against the run. No one has questioned whether Collins was good as a sub package linebacker. Someone needs to start in the base. If we have 3 solid starting LB's, then all three of the starters are good against the run. Otherwise you end up starting guys like Skinner in the base.

Your response is that Collins is a solid starter because we are in the sub package 70% of the time. As someone said recently, if you can't stop the run, you don't have to worry about stopping the pass.

The BOTTOM LINE is that a 3-down, starting LB needs to be able to be better than Collins against the run.
==========
So, my question is whether we have 3 LB's for the future who solid starters in the base package.

BB apparently believes he does now or will soon. Collins has only started for about 10 games, while he gains experience. Opinions proliferate, but like asses, everyone has one.

However only one opinion counts.

And we know what BB thinks. He believes he has, or will soon have, 3 good starters, a starting quality Ayers as #4, a shiftable NInkovrabel as #5, and a "4 down" #6 in Casillas.

Plus a cast of thousands as substitutes on the DL. at Safety, and the PS.

 

[mayoclinic]

OK, I'm confused. The question was whether Collins is a good starter. DI said that he wasn't because he was limited against the run. No one has questioned whether Collins was good as a sub package linebacker. Someone needs to start in the base. If we have 3 solid starting LB's, then all three of the starters are good against the run. Otherwise you end up starting guys like Skinner in the base.

Your response is that Collins is a solid starter because we are in the sub package 70% of the time. As someone said recently, if you can't stop the run, you don't have to worry about stopping the pass.

The BOTTOM LINE is that a 3-down, starting LB needs to be able to be better than Collins against the run.
==========
So, my question is whether we have 3 LB's for the future who solid starters in the base package.

I think you're getting confused over semantics.

The original post which triggered this whole mess was by AzPatsFan:

I view it differently. After several years of trying, Belichick had his three very good starters, but not much could be expected from his now proven limited reserves. Anderson was tried and found wanting, so BB loaded up with a new batch of PS types to see if one would blossom, and crossed his fingers, until the 2015 Draft.

I would argue (1) that BB sees Collins as a 3-down LB, and hence as a "starter", and (2) that Collins is "very good" given his experience and the roles that he has been required to play, despite some issues in run support. I don't equate being a "very good starter" with being "very good in run support" or being better in base than in sub.

I don't think that there's much question that Collins has been a 3 down LB this season. Consider Collins' defensive snap counts in the 7 games he's played:

Miami: 73 of 74
[missed Minnesota due to injury]
Oakland (coming off of a missed week due to injury): 20 of 60 (limited due to a thing injury; interestingly, played only in the base defense, not in sub)
Kansas City: 51 of 65 (Reiss notes that Collins came off the field in favor of Kyle Arrington in some sub packages)
Cincinnati: 55 of 55
Buffalo: 69 of 69
NY Jets: 87 of 87
Chicago: 53 of 70 (played every snap before giving way to Skinner in the 4th quarter, when the game was well in hand)

So except for the game in which he was coming off of an injury, and part of the 4th quarter of a game that was well in hand, Collins has been on the field almost all the time, and the few times that he has come off the field have been in sub, not in base. I don't think BB see's Collins as a "sub" LB; he sees him as a 3 down LB.

Deus argues that Collins is poor in run support, and you argue that "the BOTTOM LINE is that a 3-down, starting LB needs to be able to be better than Collins against the run". I don't think that there's any question that Collins' run support has had some issues, though I think that has been compounded by (1) injuries, (2) playing inside and having to learn the position on the fly, and (3) not getting very good run support up front. I also think there have been signs that it is improving. I still think that what he brings to the table far outweighs his liability in run support. BB has effectively thrown him into the fire by putting him inside behind a weak interior line, which exposes him. He will never be a Brandon Spikes kind of run stopper, but that doesn't mean that he can't be a very successful 3 down LB in this league, with a lot of versatility.

As BB noted after the Buffalo game, where Collins took over the defensive signal calling after Mayo was hurt:

"Jamie, he's been in that position before in practice and so forth," Belichick said. "But he stepped up and gave us a lot of leadership, handled the signal calls, calling the checks and so forth. Jamie did a good job. Thank God we had him today."

http://www.csnne.com/blog/patriots-talk/belichick-thank-god-we-had-collins-today

I think Collins is a work in progress and not a complete player by any means, but I think he is firmly entrenched for the long haul, and that he will continue to get better. I'm quite satisfied with where is his right now.

 

[mgteich]

I think you're getting confused over semantics.

The original post which triggered this whole mess was by AzPatsFan:



I would argue (1) that BB sees Collins as a 3-down LB, and hence as a "starter", and (2) that Collins is "very good" given his experience and the roles that he has been required to play, despite some issues in run support. I don't equate being a "very good starter" with being "very good in run support" or being better in base than in sub.

I don't think that there's much question that Collins has been a 3 down LB this season. Consider Collins' defensive snap counts in the 7 games he's played:

Miami: 73 of 74
[missed Minnesota due to injury]
Oakland (coming off of a missed week due to injury): 20 of 60 (limited due to a thing injury; interestingly, played only in the base defense, not in sub)
Kansas City: 51 of 65 (Reiss notes that Collins came off the field in favor of Kyle Arrington in some sub packages)
Cincinnati: 55 of 55
Buffalo: 69 of 69
NY Jets: 87 of 87
Chicago: 53 or 70 (played every snap before giving way to Skinner in the 4th quarter, when the game was well in hand)

So except for the game in which he was coming off of an injury, and part of the 4th quarter of a game that was well in hand, Collins has been on the field almost all the time, and the few times that he has come off the field have been in sub, not in base. I don't think BB see's Collins as a "sub" LB; he sees him as a 3 down LB.

Deus argues that Collins is poor in run support, and you argue that "the BOTTOM LINE is that a 3-down, starting LB needs to be able to be better than Collins against the run". I don't think that there's any question that Collins' run support has had some issues, though I think that has been compounded by (1) injuries, (2) playing inside and having to learn the position on the fly, and (3) not getting very good run support up front. I also think there have been signs that it is improving. I still think that what he brings to the table far outweighs his liability in run support. BB has effectively thrown him into the fire by putting him inside behind a weak interior line, which exposes him. He will never be a Brandon Spikes kind of run stopper, but that doesn't mean that he can't be a very successful 3 down LB in this league, with a lot of versatility.

As BB noted after the Buffalo game, where Collins took over the defensive signal calling after Mayo was hurt:



http://www.csnne.com/blog/patriots-talk/belichick-thank-god-we-had-collins-today

I think Collins is a work in progress and not a complete player by any means, but I think he is firmly entrenched for the long haul, and that he will continue to get better. I'm quite satisfied with where is his right now.

So, Collins is a 3-down LB and a good solid starter because he has started instead of guys like Skinner? So, yes, belichick considers Collins a starter. After all, Belichick started the season with Hightower, Collins and Mayo as starters.

I agree that Collins has indeed been expected to start.

So, all our starters are good, solid starters, because, well because they start?

Sorry, I think that the issue is more than semantics.

 

[mayoclinic]

So, Collins is a 3-down LB and a good solid starter because he has started instead of guys like Skinner? So, yes, belichick considers Collins a starter. After all, Belichick started the season with Hightower, Collins and Mayo as starters.

I agree that Collins has indeed been expected to start.

So, all our starters are good, solid starters, because, well because they start?

Sorry, I think that the issue is more than semantics.

No. I think BB considers Collins a very good player, and he's shown his trust in Collins by using him in a variety of ways. I don't equate needing to improve in an area with being a bad player. Mayo got bashed on this board for years, despite BB obviously valuing him very highly.

I have no problem with you, Deus, or anyone else disagreeing with that assessment. In the end, none of our opinions matters, only what BB thinks of Collins. The only issue I had was with Deus' attitude that his opinion was "the truth".

 

[mgteich]

No. I think BB considers Collins a very good player, and he's shown his trust in Collins by using him in a variety of ways. I don't equate needing to improve in an area with being a bad player. Mayo got bashed on this board for years, despite BB obviously valuing him very highly.

I have no problem with you, Deus, or anyone else disagreeing with that assessment. In the end, none of our opinions matters, only what BB thinks of Collins. The only issue I had was with Deus' attitude that his opinion was "the truth".

fair enough

Personally, I believe that Collins is very good sub LB that needs improvement as a run defending starter. I certainly was somewhat shocked that Belichick thought that Mayo, Collins and Hightower were so good (and invincible) that no backups were needed. Thankfully, that situation has been corrected, albeit with players only signed for this year.