Taking a quick peek at 2010

[pats1]

Now that we're in November, and with a number of NFL teams' seasons long since over, it's always good to see where things stand as they relate to the beginning of the offseason in January/February.

These projections assume that 2010 will be an uncapped season; as a result, Gostkowski, Mankins, and Woods are considered as RFAs, not UFAs. It is also important to note that if 2010 is uncapped, the "final eight" rule will be in place, hindering the ability of the top eight teams from signing free agents.

Defense

This is the true focus of this post. The 2009 defense, which will become the 2010 defense, is better set for the future than any other in the Belichick era. Why? The 2009 draft continues to prove to be one of the best, if not the best, of the Belichick era. The quantity and quality of the picks, especially of the defensive side of the ball, brought into this defense will ensure its success in the next 3-4 years. Add this to the emergence of 2007 and 2008 top picks Mayo and Meriweather, and the makings of a young, fast, and talented defense take shape.

Players under contract for 2010:

DL - (I'm going to group these all together because almost every member along this line has some level of versatility) - Warren, Wright, Pryor, Brace, (Richard), (Adams) ... Even without Wilfork and Green, who are free agents, this line still lacks any obvious holes. If both Wilfork and Green return, we will again see a very deep unit. The wildcard here is Brace; with Green currently out for the foreseeable future, Brace will almost certainly be given the chance he has been waiting for this season. If he begins to show his potential as a second round pick, the Pats could be in good shape with Warren, Brace, Pryor, and Wright all anchoring the line, 3-4 or 4-3. Youth is abundant.

OLB - Thomas, Woods (RFA), Banta-Cain, Crable, Ninkovich (RFA) - This would seem to be the unit where the Pats will devote the most draft attention. At this point, Crable will be guaranteed nothing and will be fighting for a roster spot - as a reserve - in the summer. Banta-Cain, fresh off his extension, will continue to provide situational pass rush support, but does not figure to be a top option as a 3-4 OLB. Thomas' base salary jumps by almost $3M in 2010, giving him a cap hit of nearly $10M. Still, cutting him lose (in an uncapped year) would accelerate ~$6M in bonus money, more than offsetting the $4.9M salary that would be cleared. In other words, it would cost the Pats more to cut him than to keep him. If, after 2010, the Pats felt that Thomas was still not worth the money, they could cut him before his $10.4M cap hit takes effect and clear about half of that off their books for 2011. Woods will be in his fifth season and at this point I think it's clear he's not the solution as a 3-4 starter (or 4-3 starter) in this system; he will remain a viable backup option. Therefore, the Pats could very well target a high OLB pick who will solidify the starting position once Thomas is gone.

ILB - Mayo, Guyton, McKenzie, Alexander - This position, pending on McKenzie's health in the spring/summer, is yet another where the Pats have successfully infused some youth. We might still see another Clint Kriewaldt-type backup ILB to solidify the depth, especially if 3-4 is in the plans, but otherwise they are all set here, especially for the future.

CB - Wilhite, Butler, Springs, Wheatley - It is likely that we see Wheatley displace either Springs or Bodden. If Bodden can be brought back at the right price, he would continue to add another solid presence to the CB rotation. Springs' cap hit will be about $3.2M but the Pats may be willing to swallow that if they can keep him around as insurance and a Chad Scott-type sub package presence. But as long as Wilhite and Butler continue to show promise, this position is well set for the future.

S - Meriweather, McGowan, Sanders, Chung, Lockett, Slater - What a difference a year makes. The depth at this position is now extremely solid, with Chung, the Pats' top pick in 2009, sitting fourth down on the depth chart. Sanders will have about a $3M cap hit in 2010, which is reasonable even though ideally Sanders will be surpassed by Chung at some point. Meriweather and McGowan, assuming he continues to surpass anyone's wildest dreams of his performance, seem to be set as part of the Patriots' safety rotation in the next 3-4 years. If all goes well, Chung will join that group (a la Meriweather in 2007-08) and Sanders will be phased out, even though he is a decent player who will find more playing time elsewhere.

Offense

QB - Brady, Hoyer, (Stanback) - Could things have gone much better for this position in 2009? Even though Brady hasn't been perfect, he has looked fairly sharp in the first half of the season and has talked about how well he is feeling physically. Hoyer has impressed in his limited work and looks to hold down the fort as the #2 option. The #3 option might not even exist again.

RB - Maroney, Taylor, Morris, Green-Ellis - There is a level of uncertainty with this position. However, I question whether the Pats would invest a high draft pick, at least in 2010 (even though they have the Titans' and Jags' 2nds) on a RB. This position is not the focus of the offense, and an elite (read: expensive) player is not a necessity. Rather, look for the Patriots to continue to pick up LaMont Jordan-types who can be squeezed of ~400 yds. and tossed aside. Interchangeable parts, really. Taylor and Morris fall into that category, and if they're healthy will continue to pump out yards in 2010. At this point, Maroney maybe transition from being a hopeful feature back to just another one of those interchangeable parts in the last year of his contract. Faulk is close to a lock to being brought back at a veteran contract; he remains, even at his age, one of the top third down options in the league.

TE - Baker - While Baker is a lock as one of the team's top two options at TE in 2010, they still need another. I believe they will wait and see with Watson as to whether his first half resurgence will continue and he can be brought back at a reasonable price for 2010. Either way, it's likely the Pats invest a mid-round draft pick in this position; they've done that before with Thomas and Mills, but this time around it figures that such a pick will get more of a chance to work into the 2 TE sets come 2011-12.

WR - Moss, Welker, Tate, Edelman, Aiken, (Nunn) - as long as Moss and Welker remain among the league's best at their position, the Pats are in good shape. However, this will not be the case forever and new options must be found at some point as this has proven to be a vital position in the Pats' offense (see 2006). Still, I doubt the Pats invest a high draft pick at this position at the time being, as Tate and Edelman (again, the 2009 draft) already look promising as 3rd and 4th options in 2010. Therefore, despite all the fuss about a 3rd WR, I actually envision the Pats doing very little here in the offseason.

OT - Light (option), Kaczur, Vollmer, LeVoir, Bussey - Both Kaczur and LeVoir were extended in the offseason, and it's unlikely that the Pats will pay LeVoir almost $1M to be an inactive 4th OT. Vollmer has progressed nicely (again, the 2009 draft), which leads to think Light is expendable. Working in the Pats' favor is that fact that Light's 2010 features no bonus money as it was an option year exercised in 2005, and so the Pats would take on no dead money if they were to cut him in the offseason. I do not see the Patriots investing a draft pick at this position.

OG/C - Koppen, Mankins (RFA), Ohrnberger, Wendell, Connolly (RFA), Simmons - The free agent here is Neal, who at his age may not be brought back. Still, this remains one of the more intriguing positions on the team. Ohrnberger has been inactive just about all of 2009, so it is unlikely that the Pats would hand him the starting RG job out of the gate. Some have speculated that the Pats could keep Light and move either him or Kaczur to RG; I am not sure either could be relied upon to pick up their position (again) and be part of a cohesive OL. Simmons is a complete mystery; he signed a 3-year contract with base salaries of $755k in 2010 and $900k in 2011, along with a $280k signing bonus. Yet, he's been inactive for most of 2009 thus far. Could he be the RG-in-waiting? As far as Connolly and Wendell go, I'd say they are competing for the Hochstein-type backup role.

Special Teams

ST - Gostkowski, Ingram - The cap situation will likely leave Gostkowski as a RFA, and the Pats would probably be able to slip him by with a 1st & 3rd tender at $3M, but as a proven elite kicker, it would still be somewhat of a gamble. Ingram is set in the LS position. Hanson is a FA, and this seems like one where the Pats will wait-and-see; punters are always on a short leash, anyway. Given the Pats' draft history, I doubt they invest a draft pick at this position unless they believe it would be a reliable upgrade to their special teams.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

OLB - Thomas, Woods (RFA), Banta-Cain, Crable, Ninkovich (RFA) - This would seem to be the unit where the Pats will devote the most draft attention. At this point, Crable will be guaranteed nothing and will be fighting for a roster spot - as a reserve - in the summer. Banta-Cain, fresh off his extension, will continue to provide situational pass rush support, but does not figure to be a top option as a 3-4 OLB. Thomas' base salary jumps by almost $3M in 2010, giving him a cap hit of nearly $10M. Still, cutting him lose (in an uncapped year) would accelerate ~$6M in bonus money, more than offsetting the $4.9M salary that would be cleared. In other words, it would cost the Pats more to cut him than to keep him. If, after 2010, the Pats felt that Thomas was still not worth the money, they could cut him before his $10.4M cap hit takes effect and clear about half of that off their books for 2011.

If there's no salary cap to worry about in 2010, what's the downside to cutting him if he costs too much?

RB - Faulk is close to a lock to being brought back at a veteran contract; he remains, even at his age, one of the top third down options in the league.

Faulk is worth much more than minimum to the Patriots. Maybe not $5M, but a lot more than $700K. I could easily see them offering $2M+.

ST - The cap situation will likely leave Gostkowski as a RFA, and the Pats would probably be able to slip him by with a 1st & 3rd tender at $3M, but as a proven elite kicker, it would still be somewhat of a gamble.

Look at the derision thrown at the JEST when they drafted Mike Nugent in the second round. Why would anyone cough up a 1 and a 3 for Gostkowski? Even the Colts, I think, wouldn't be that desperate.

 

[pats1]

If there's no salary cap to worry about in 2010, what's the downside to cutting him if he costs too much?

It's still money that someone is still paying.

Faulk is worth much more than minimum to the Patriots. Maybe not $5M, but a lot more than $700K. I could easily see them offering $2M+.

Hmm, I didn't really mean the veteran minimum. I meant just a "minimum" contract, i.e. something in the range of $1.5-2.5M.

Look at the derision thrown at the JEST when they drafted Mike Nugent in the second round. Why would anyone cough up a 1 and a 3 for Gostkowski? Even the Colts, I think, wouldn't be that desperate.

Nugent did come to mind. However, Gostkowski is one of the top kickers in the game and and a team with a low-end first-round pick may consider him to be more valuable than whoever is projected to be available at that point in the draft. It's a stretch, yes, but the Pats would left in an uncomfortable position if some team was to make that gamble.

 

[Number 2]

what do you mean when you say 1st and 3rd tender about Gostoski?

edit: question was answere while I was writting my post.

Thanks

 

[unoriginal]

Gostkowski would probably be a 2nd round tender, ~$1.5 million.

 

[pats1]

Gostkowski would probably be a 2nd round tender, ~$1.5 million.

I can see a team giving up a 2nd for Gostkowski, especially a team that has a pick lower in the round.

(And for the Patriots, Gostkowski is more valuable than a 2nd round pick)

 

[unoriginal]

I can see a team giving up a 2nd for Gostkowski, especially a team that has a pick lower in the round.

(And for the Patriots, Gostkowski is more valuable than a 2nd round pick)

And I can see the Patriots taking that pick, and then locking up a cheap kicker with an early Day 2 pick for another 4 years. Any good prospects in the 2010 class?

If there aren't, maybe they use the 1st round tender at ~$2.2 million. But I doubt they pay more for that position.

 

[Metaphors]

You pretty much put together a championship-caliber active 45 (minus a punter) even considering:

a) All key UFAs are lost (still hopeful on Wilfork)
b) No key UFAs are signed (that may actually happen)
c) 4 top 64 players in what should be a historically deep draft will be added to the mix...meaning they should be active and in a rotation

So as impressive as that roster may seem, a handful of those players almost certainly won't be on the roster next year and the spots will be filled with top-notch young talent. Not bad. Not bad at all.

 

[Patspsycho]

For once, I wish they'd invest in a top notch RB.. this stingy "get them off the scrap heap and squeeze them" philosophy is exasperating me to no end.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

It's still money that someone is still paying.

"Thomas' base salary jumps by almost $3M in 2010, giving him a cap hit of nearly $10M. Still, cutting him lose (in an uncapped year) would accelerate ~$6M in bonus money, more than offsetting the $4.9M salary that would be cleared."

The $4.9M is money that's going to be paid, but the $6M in bonus money was paid back in 2007.

Nugent did come to mind. However, Gostkowski is one of the top kickers in the game and and a team with a low-end first-round pick may consider him to be more valuable than whoever is projected to be available at that point in the draft. It's a stretch, yes, but the Pats would left in an uncomfortable position if some team was to make that gamble.

OTOH, every team already has a kicker, and most good teams have good kickers. So the question isn't "Is Gostkowski worth [insert draft picks + contract amount here]?" It's "Is the difference between Gostkowski and the kicker we already have worth [insert draft picks + contract amount here]?" And don't forget that those teams that might be willing to trade for such a kicker might also be stuck in the "Final Eight Plan" boat, too, and have to decide if it's worth trading those picks away.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

"It is likely that we see Wheatley displace either Springs or Bodden."

Likely is not the word I'd use. So far, Wheatley has not shown that he can play on this level. I'm not saying he can't but there is nothing likely about him displacing a vet starter, excepting via attrition.

Wheatley, Tate and Brace are the young players with the bigest unknowns in their NFL capabilities. The other kids have shown they're NFL worthy.

 

[pats1]

"Thomas' base salary jumps by almost $3M in 2010, giving him a cap hit of nearly $10M. Still, cutting him lose (in an uncapped year) would accelerate ~$6M in bonus money, more than offsetting the $4.9M salary that would be cleared."

The $4.9M is money that's going to be paid, but the $6M in bonus money was paid back in 2007.

I'm not sure if we're on the same page here. I thought you were referring to Light. In his case, it's all base salary.

As far as Thomas goes, I don't think we're in disagreement there. The fact remains the same: Thomas' signing bonus and option bonus allocations for 2011 would accelerate into 2010 if he was cut.

OTOH, every team already has a kicker, and most good teams have good kickers. So the question isn't "Is Gostkowski worth [insert draft picks + contract amount here]?" It's "Is the difference between Gostkowski and the kicker we already have worth [insert draft picks + contract amount here]?" And don't forget that those teams that might be willing to trade for such a kicker might also be stuck in the "Final Eight Plan" boat, too, and have to decide if it's worth trading those picks away.

 

[pats1]

"It is likely that we see Wheatley displace either Springs or Bodden."

Likely is not the word I'd use. So far, Wheatley has not shown that he can play on this level. I'm not saying he can't but there is nothing likely about him displacing a vet starter, excepting via attrition.

Wheatley, Tate and Brace are the young players with the bigest unknowns in their NFL capabilities. The other kids have shown they're NFL worthy.

See, I wouldn't consider Springs to be a vet starter. In fact, he's the fourth cornerback at this point. Bodden is, and so by saying that I meant that it's unlikely that we see *both* Springs and Bodden return to the Top 4 at CB, and instead we see Wheatley worked into that mix.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Defense
Players under contract for 2010:
OLB - Thomas, Woods (RFA), Banta-Cain, Crable, Ninkovich (RFA) This would seem to be the unit where the Pats will devote the most draft attention.

I seriously hope so. Crable is as good as done and I'd be shocked to see anything out of McKenzie next season. The Pats need LB's extremely bad.

Woods will be in his fifth season and at this point I think it's clear he's not the solution as a 3-4 starter (or 4-3 starter) in this system; he will remain a viable backup option.

It's about time somebody is starting to admit that Woods isn't the solution. In fact, other people that have argued with me in the past about Woods (and you know who you are) need to step up and admit they were wrong. As usual, Woods has shown absolutely nothing. He's okay against the run, terrible against the pass and rarely rushes the passer.

ILB McKenzie

Again, I don't expect much out of him. It takes at least a year, if ever, to regain his normal form. The Pats need to address this position.

CB - Wilhite, Butler, Springs, Wheatley It is likely that we see Wheatley displace either Springs or Bodden.

Really? Wheatley should thank his lucky stars if he makes the team next season. All that guy has done is get injured and get beat when he's on the field.

S - Meriweather, McGowan, Sanders, Chung, Lockett, Slater

McGowan was a great addition and will help make the transition for Chung a lot easier. Safeties look pretty good for next season.

Offense
RB - Maroney, Taylor, Morris, Green-Ellis

Many teams in the NFL are proving that unless Adrian Peterson is available, you don't need to invest a high draft pick in a RB.

WR - Moss, Welker, Tate, Edelman, Aiken, (Nunn)

Pats need WR's. Wouldn't surprise me if they took one in the early rounds of next year's draft.

OG/C - Koppen, Mankins (RFA), Ohrnberger, Wendell, Connolly (RFA),

The Pats need a RG and should consider replacing Koppen. Their run blocking needs to improve.

 

[pats1]

I seriously hope so. Crable is as good as done and I'd be shocked to see anything out of McKenzie next season. The Pats need LB's extremely bad.

So Pryor, Vollmer, Butler, Chung, Tate, and Ingram can all contribute right away as rookies yet you don't expect to see anything out of McKenzie in his first season? Huh?

It's about time somebody is starting to admit that Woods isn't the solution. In fact, other people that have argued with me in the past about Woods (and you know who you are) need to step up and admit they were wrong. As usual, Woods has shown absolutely nothing. He's okay against the run, terrible against the pass and rarely rushes the passer.

Agreed, but he's still cheap depth.

Again, I don't expect much out of him. It takes at least a year, if ever, to regain his normal form. The Pats need to address this position.

McKenzie injured himself in May 2009. I'd expect him to be fine by July 2010. He would have to be a complete bust for the Pats to have to seriously address this position; Mayo, Guyton, and McKenzie are all young, solid options going forward. Where would your pick/signing play?

Really? Wheatley should thank his lucky stars if he makes the team next season. All that guy has done is get injured and get beat when he's on the field.

Wheatley has been injured once. The only reason he's been inactive so much this season has been the guys playing in front of him. Sure, he didn't look all that great in the preseason, but he had some decent games in 2008.

McGowan was a great addition and will help make the transition for Chung a lot easier. Safeties look pretty good for next season.

They will likely play together for the foreseeable future; I don't think one will replace the other.

Many teams in the NFL are proving that unless Adrian Peterson is available, you don't need to invest a high draft pick in a RB.

Pats need WR's. Wouldn't surprise me if they took one in the early rounds of next year's draft.

Only for the post-Moss/Welker era. Otherwise, Tate and Edelman aren't going anywhere, and Aiken remains a solid #5/ST option. Where would your "high pick" play?

The Pats need a RG and should consider replacing Koppen. Their run blocking needs to improve.

Koppen is signed through 2011.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I'm not sure if we're on the same page here. I thought you were referring to Light. In his case, it's all base salary.

As far as Thomas goes, I don't think we're in disagreement there. The fact remains the same: Thomas' signing bonus and option bonus allocations for 2011 would accelerate into 2010 if he was cut.

I'm not going to argue semantics on this, but the point I've been trying to make is that if 2010 is uncapped, as you assume, there is no disincentive to cutting Thomas next year, if they choose to do so. [I'm not advocating any particular action here.]

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

So Pryor, Vollmer, Butler, Chung, Tate, and Ingram can all contribute right away as rookies yet you don't expect to see anything out of McKenzie in his first season? Huh?

It's extremely difficult to recover from an ACL injury. In fact, Shawne Merriman is a prime example. He's really struggled this season. Who knows whether Merriman will regain his prior form?

Agreed, but he's still cheap depth.

I agree

McKenzie injured himself in May 2009. I'd expect him to be fine by July 2010. He would have to be a complete bust for the Pats to have to seriously address this position; Mayo, Guyton, and McKenzie are all young, solid options going forward. Where would your pick/signing play?

Only for the post-Moss/Welker era. Otherwise, Tate and Edelman aren't going anywhere, and Aiken remains a solid #5/ST option. Where would your "high pick" play?

I can't give you an answer at this time because I don't know which players are entering the draft and where the Pats are going to pick. However, as of right now, I believe the Pats area of priority are: LB (or pass rusher), WR, DE (Although Pryor could take that role in a 3-4), CB, G/C, T, RB, QB, P

Wheatley has been injured once. The only reason he's been inactive so much this season has been the guys playing in front of him. Sure, he didn't look all that great in the preseason, but he had some decent games in 2008.

The time that he has played this season, he's looked really bad. Wouldn't surprise me if BB cuts Crable and Wheatley like he did Chad Jackson and O'Connel. The Pats don't have time to wait around for stuff like this.

Koppen is signed through 2011.

I never said cut him. However, it doesn't hurt to draft someone.

 

[mgteich]

ASSUMPTIONS
1) Uncapped year
2) All RFA's are signed and kept.
3) All UFA's are lost except Faulk.

I agree that we are in fine shape. I see weaknesses at TE, on the DL and at OLB.

DL
I do see a weakness if we lose Wilfork. I don't see how anyone can be comfortable with anyone else at NT at this point. We will see in the next month whether Green's production can easily be replaced.
OLB
This is a weakness, but what's new. I suspect that Thomas is gone in an uncapped year.
ILB
All set
CB
The top three are all set. Wheatley or a someone new is the #4,
S
All set, except Slater has never played safety for us is a game.

QB
all set
RB
I don't understand all the concern. We should add a youngster, but all our five running backs should be back. Faulk is worth way more than vet minimum to the patriots.
TE
an obvious need
WR
all set
OT
all set, even without Light
G/C
If Neal isn't re-signed, we have four to compete for the starting position (not counting Kaczur and Vollmer). We have six players competing for five spots. If Neal isn'r re-signed, I expect to draft another guard/center.

Special Teams
We need a punter a gain; no big deal.

Defense
DL - (I'm going to group these all together because almost every member along this line has some level of versatility) - Warren, Wright, Pryor, Brace, (Richard), (Adams) ... Even without Wilfork and Green, who are free agents, this line still lacks any obvious holes.
OLB - Thomas, Woods (RFA), Banta-Cain, Crable, Ninkovich (RFA)
ILB - Mayo, Guyton, McKenzie, Alexander
CB - Wilhite, Butler, Springs, Wheatley
S - Meriweather, McGowan, Sanders, Chung, Lockett, Slater.

Offense
QB - Brady, Hoyer, (Stanback).
RB - Maroney, Taylor, Morris, Green-Ellis - There is a level of uncertainty with this position.
TE - Baker
WR - Moss, Welker, Tate, Edelman, Aiken, (Nunn).
OT - Light (option), Kaczur, Vollmer, LeVoir, Bussey.
OG/C - Koppen, Mankins (RFA), Ohrnberger, Wendell, Connolly (RFA), Simmons .

Special Teams
ST - Gostkowski, Ingram.

 

[mgteich]

I also think that Wheatley will get the roster spot of the veteran that ends up leaving, probably Bodden. He still will be the #4 or #5 corner going into camp, depending on who else we pick up or draft.

With regard to question marks, I would list Wheatley, Crable and Brace. They have shown very, very little so far.

While I am not sure what Edelman and Tate will produce, I think that we have some information on both of them. At least one has a role as a receiver and/or returner. Both have already been judged worthy of being on the active roster and of filling those roles at least on an occasional basis.

"It is likely that we see Wheatley displace either Springs or Bodden."

Likely is not the word I'd use. So far, Wheatley has not shown that he can play on this level. I'm not saying he can't but there is nothing likely about him displacing a vet starter, excepting via attrition.

Wheatley, Tate and Brace are the young players with the bigest unknowns in their NFL capabilities. The other kids have shown they're NFL worthy.

 

[pats1]

ASSUMPTIONS
1) Uncapped year
2) All RFA's are signed and kept.
3) All UFA's are lost except Faulk.

I agree that we are in fine shape. I see weaknesses at TE, on the DL and at OLB.

DL
I do see a weakness if we lose Wilfork. I don't see how anyone can be comfortable with anyone else at NT at this point. We will see in the next month whether Green's production can easily be replaced.
OLB
This is a weakness, but what's new. I suspect that Thomas is gone in an uncapped year.
ILB
All set
CB
The top three are all set. Wheatley or a someone new is the #4,
S
All set, except Slater has never played safety for us is a game.

QB
all set
RB
I don't understand all the concern. We should add a youngster, but all our five running backs should be back. Faulk is worth way more than vet minimum to the patriots.
TE
an obvious need
WR
all set
OT
all set, even without Light
G/C
If Neal isn't re-signed, we have four to compete for the starting position (not counting Kaczur and Vollmer). We have six players competing for five spots. If Neal isn'r re-signed, I expect to draft another guard/center.

Special Teams
We need a punter a gain; no big deal.

I had to list Slater somewhere. IIRC, Reiss' stats had Slater playing a handful of snaps at safety and a handful at receiver last season.

Again, I didn't mean Faulk would be signed to a vet minimum contract. Just that he would be re-signed to something reasonable for a player his age.

The NT issue an interesting one. Pryor and Brace both have the size to play the position, but perhaps not the build. I wouldn't be comfortable relying on them in a Wilfork-less situation, but down the road I could see one or the other replacing him.