Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by SVN, Mar 27, 2008.
Maybe he might have been able to contribute to the Pats if they'd kept him, maybe not. In any case, though, Mr. Tucker appears to have the ability, unlike many former NFL-players-turned-analysts (*cough* Faulk *cough* Barber *cough* Bettis *cough* Hoge) to express coherent, rational thoughts.
I, too, have noticed his columns lately and think he's a pretty darned good writer, who brings a unique perspective to his column. His recent column on O-lineman was a very good read, IMHO, as was his column a few weeks back about why a player (in particular marginal players who may not make the League otherwise) may make the choice to use steroids/HGH.
Here's hoping he keeps up the good work!
I think he could have taken his article a bit further. He says that the difference between himself and an "elite" player is 2 fewer sacks and 5 fewer pressures over 8 games. That's 4 less sacks and 10 less pressures over a 16 game season.
Now, extrapolate that out to a whole season and the entire line, and the difference of sacks/pressures becomes -20sacks/-50pressures. (Yikes!) Faneca's salary (I believe) is $8m/yr ($40m/5yr). A veteran minimum salary is (I believe) in the neighborhood of $1m.
Now, let's take a look. You have $7m to spend. If you spend that $7m on the OLine, you get +16 sacks instead of +20, and +40 pressures instead of +50. (Note: This is sacks/pressures compared to an all "elite" O-Line)
Suppose that instead you chose to spend the money somewhere else on offense. Perhaps, the reciever position. Chad Johnson, Randy Moss, and TO are all in the $7m/yr price range. Or you could have an average reciever.
Separate names with a comma.