Slater at the end of the road?

[mgteich]

At some point there will be hard cuts and at LEAST three players will make the team because of how well they play special teams. Personally, I think it is iomportant to list ST specialists as roster spots, rather than make believe that they are on the team because they are critical as the #6 corner or the #5 safety or the #9 linebacker.

We have NINE defensive back roster positions at most, four corners, three safeties, and two that depend on the players of that year. Only seven usually get many reps as position players. This year, the two were our devlopmental players Chung and Wheatley.

Making believe that Arrington, Lockett or Slater had any chance to make the 2009 (or 2010) team as the 10th defensive back makes no sense to me. Our defense needs 14 front seven players and 9 defensive backs. At times, we have had just these 23.

OFFENSE (22)
QB 2
RB 4
WR 5
OL 9
TE 2

DEFENSE (23)
DL 7
LB 7
DB 9

SPECIALISTS (3)
K 1
P 1
LS 1

SPECIAL TEAMERS AND DEVELOPMENTAL BACKUPS (5)
These guys better be important developmental players or be top special teamers. And, yes, there is always stiff competition for these positions. If Arrington and Lockett make the squad instead of Slater, it will because they are better gunners, better special team blockers or better special team tacklers, not because they are the best #10 defensive back.
================================
WHO TO CUT IF BODDEN RE-SIGNS (SINCE YOU ASKED)
The NINE position incumbants are known. If they cannot be beaten out, then they would will be our nine position players. Anyone else will have to compete with linebackers, wide receivers for special team roster spots or even with developmental players for non-position roster spots.

For the record, I like Aiken, Slater, Arrington, Lockett, Woods and Alexander as special teamers. One is likely to win a position roster spot, so all are in a sense the incumbants.

And since such decisions don't need to be made until the last cut, I think all these players will have a chance to show how good they are as special teamers.

No, I think everyone acknowledges that STers are important. The question is, who do you cut? Suppose Bodden re-signs. Depending on what happens with Bret Lockett we would have Meriweather, Chung, Sanders, McGowan, Lockett and Slater at safety (the latter 2 primarily ST) and Bodden, Butler, Wheatley, Wilhite, and Arrington at CB. That's 12 DBs. We can't carry neary that many. Do you prefer to cut McGowan, Wheatley or Wilhite? Despite the negative comments on Wheatley and Wilhite, they can actually play nickel and dime CB, which the other guys can't. Perhaps Arrington can step up to a dime CB role and take over Wilhite or Wheatley's spot, but it's a stretch right now.

At some point there will be some hard cuts. Slater's value as a STer will be have to weighed against other guy's value like Arrington and Lockett, and what each can bring as a backup. Given that Slater's KR ability has not been impressive, and he has essentially no positional value, it's a fair question as to whether his abilities as a gunner are enough to earn him a roster spot. Personally, I doubt it, but I also think it's pretty useful speculation 6 months away from when the issue will come to a head.

 

[RayClay]

At some point there will be hard cuts and at LEAST three players will make the team because of how well they play special teams. Personally, I think it is iomportant to list ST specialists as roster spots, rather than make believe that they are on the team because they are critical as the #6 corner or the #5 safety or the #9 linebacker.

We have NINE defensive back roster positions at most, four corners, three safeties, and two that depend on the players of that year. Only seven usually get many reps as position players. This year, the two were our devlopmental players Chung and Wheatley.

Making believe that Arrington, Lockett or Slater had any chance to make the 2009 (or 2010) team as the 10th defensive back makes no sense to me. Our defense needs 14 front seven players and 9 defensive backs. At times, we have had just these 23.

OFFENSE (22)
QB 2
RB 4
WR 5
OL 9
TE 2

DEFENSE (23)
DL 7
LB 7
DB 9

SPECIALISTS (3)
K 1
P 1
LS 1

SPECIAL TEAMERS AND DEVELOPMENTAL BACKUPS (5)
These guys better be important developmental players or be top special teamers. And, yes, there is always stiff competition for these positions. If Arrington and Lockett make the squad instead of Slater, it will because they are better gunners, better special team blockers or better special team tacklers, not because they are the best #10 defensive back.
================================
WHO TO CUT IF BODDEN RE-SIGNS (SINCE YOU ASKED)
The NINE position incumbants are known. If they cannot be beaten out, then they would will be our nine position players. Anyone else will have to compete with linebackers, wide receivers for special team roster spots or even with developmental players for non-position roster spots.

For the record, I like Aiken, Slater, Arrington, Lockett, Woods and Alexander as special teamers. One is likely to win a position roster spot, so all are in a sense the incumbants.

And since such decisions don't need to be made until the last cut, I think all these players will have a chance to show how good they are as special teamers.

The more I see it, the more i think it's a mistake to segregate Special teams only players. In the old days you had one special teams Captain, like Wigham or Izzo and the rest of the guys were busting their butts trying to impress the coach.

I remember watching Johnny Rembert as a terror on teams because he couldn't crack the lineup for a while. He later became all pro. Rod McSwain was a decent corner, nothing special, but he played teams for years to get his break.

I think Pierre woods is pretty much a special teamer who can back up LB, since I'm hoping we augment that position, and that's great. Better for the team.

Why the hell should Wilhite and Wheatley not play all teams once (I hope) Butler and Bodden take over as starters.

This punching the clock as specialists stuff is bull, in my opinion. The impetus for great special teams play was always to try to make the team on offense or defense, even if it was a pipe dream, and the effort showed it IMO.

For instance, why not pick up some raw linebacker that might develop into someone that can actually play linebacker? What is the magic Eric Alexander possesses? He made Monty Biesel look like a brute in his few stints "tackling" in the regular defense, preseason.

Steady check, run up and down the field a few times. Sorry, I don't see it.

 

[mayoclinic]

And since such decisions don't need to be made until the last cut, I think all these players will have a chance to show how good they are as special teamers.

Absolutely. There's no sense to make decisions before August. I think Slater has a tough job ahead of him making the team, but no more so then Woods, Alexander, Lockett, etc.

 

[mgteich]

I do indeed expect our devlopmental backup corners to be able to play special teams. In fact, this inability has greatly hurt Wheatley who has been inactive because of his relative lack of special team skills. It could cost him his roster spot this year to a free agent or even to Arrington.

I also expect all but the top six linebackers to play special teams.

The issue is how one populates the FIVE roster spots at the "end" of the roster.

My position is that top gunner should not a roster spot at the end of the roster. For years, the patriots have had two roster spots for players who were top special teamers and who were at best emergency players at a position.

Alexander and Slater were those players for the 2009 season. There was still plenty of room on the roster for developmental players like Wheatley, Arrington/Lockett and Brace.

I suppose we could reach the position where there were so many developmnental players that we couldn't afford two roster spots for special teamers, but I suspect that would be on a 6-10 team, not a 10-6 team. After all, we could have had Richard and Williams on the roster instead of Slater and Alexander. That accomplishes nothing since these raw players are as useful on the Practice Squad.

The more I see it, the more i think it's a mistake to segregate Special teams only players. In the old days you had one special teams Captain, like Wigham or Izzo and the rest of the guys were busting their butts trying to impress the coach.

I remember watching Johnny Rembert as a terror on teams because he couldn't crack the lineup for a while. He later became all pro. Rod McSwain was a decent corner, nothing special, but he played teams for years to get his break.

I think Pierre woods is pretty much a special teamer who can back up LB, since I'm hoping we augment that position, and that's great. Better for the team.

Why the hell should Wilhite and Wheatley not play all teams once (I hope) Butler and Bodden take over as starters.

This punching the clock as specialists stuff is bull, in my opinion. The impetus for great special teams play was always to try to make the team on offense or defense, even if it was a pipe dream, and the effort showed it IMO.

For instance, why not pick up some raw linebacker that might develop into someone that can actually play linebacker? What is the magic Eric Alexander possesses? He made Monty Biesel look like a brute in his few stints "tackling" in the regular defense, preseason.

Steady check, run up and down the field a few times. Sorry, I don't see it.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Slater end of the road?

Nothing. It's another Patsfan poster who gets defensive when you dare say anything negative about one of the players. Slater is terrible. The pats have had some hits in recent drafts, but have had just as many (if not more) misses.

I love how people like you show up out of the woodwork and make bogus claims..

Slater isn't terrible.. In fact, at one point this year he was the Pats best Kick Returner with more than 26 YPR. The reality is that the Pats didn't have a single returner with more than 13 returns.

As for Slater "always telling Wheatley to stay in the endzone" that's bogus too.. Wheatley was active for 5 games and didn't have a single Kick Return. While Slater LED the team with his 24.5 yard per return average. The bigger issue was the horrible blocking on Pats kick returns.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your slamming the guy.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Slater end of the road?

Let him come to camp and compete with the rest of the scrubs. Who cares? Whoever wants it more, let's have some major competition and participation.

I've got no problem taking a shot on potential but it mystify's me what we thought he had that dozens of cuts every year don't.



Ditto except for the draft pick part. Let's throw them out there and keep the hungriest.

Might be time to look for a special teams coach too. Anybody like the way teams looked this year?

The Pats just brought in a new Special Teams Coach this year in Scott O'Brien. The bigger problem was the amount of injuries and the amount of turnover on the kick return team in terms of blockers and kick returners...

When you use 5 different returners and numerous different blockers, plus the league changing the wedge rules, its going to cause growing pains for some teams... And it did for the Pats.. It should get better, though.

 

[DaBruinz]

He was an ego pick.
We stupidly traded up for him.....why?
Now he gets a roster spot to justify it. Was supposed to be a return artist...Nyet!
DW Toys

He wasn't an ego pick..

What all of you who are nay-saying slater fail to realize is that there are 6 DIFFERENT special teams packages. Punting, Field Goal Kicking, Kick Offs, Kick Returns, Punt Returns, and Opposing Field Goals. Slater plays on ALL 6 of those teams.. When he wasn't returning kicks, he was the lead blocker behind the 2 man wedge... On punt coverage, he was a gunner. On kick coverage, he was one of the first men down there. and if he didn't make the play, he turned the player towards Lockett or Arrington.

Those 6 different units are the reason that Belichick talks about Special teams being a full Third of the game that many fans simply overlook...

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Slater end of the road?

I fully understand that. But that's really all his value is right now, and there are other folks who can play gunner on ST. Is he really a good enough gunner to justify a roster spot for that alone?

He's more than just a gunner.. And yes, he is..IMHO

 

[DaBruinz]

I think he was a 3rd (or 4th) rounder drafted for special team. It's fair to say Indy had made better use fo their mid round picks (Garcon and Collie).

Slater was a 5th rounder. As for Garcon and Collie, They were elevated into the 2nd and 3rd receiver slots out of necessity, not because they earned it..

 

[RayClay]

Re: Slater end of the road?

The Pats just brought in a new Special Teams Coach this year in Scott O'Brien. The bigger problem was the amount of injuries and the amount of turnover on the kick return team in terms of blockers and kick returners...

When you use 5 different returners and numerous different blockers, plus the league changing the wedge rules, its going to cause growing pains for some teams... And it did for the Pats.. It should get better, though.

You can't fault the coach for not having a returner, I'll grant that. In that regard, they miss Hobbs. I hope it gets better, it seemed to be more sluggish as the year goes on. Fear of losing your job used to be a pretty good motivation for hustle, which was lacking at years end IMO.

 

[WelshPat]

Slater was a 5th rounder. As for Garcon and Collie, They were elevated into the 2nd and 3rd receiver slots out of necessity, not because they earned it..

Collie was a good wr in college, Slater was really just a st'er. Garcon was a project that they worked on.

I think they went in expecting Collie to play well in the slot, but I will agree that they didn't expect anything out of Garcon, because Gonzalez got hurt.