The Offense - 10 openings

[mgteich]

This is way early, but this type of analysis helps me understand which 20 or so players we need.

THE 2006 CORE (15)
Brady,Cassell,Dillon,Faulk,Pass,Koppen,Mankins,Hochstein,Light,Kaycur,Gorin,
Branch,Caldwell,Graham,Watson

THE OPEN POSITIONS (10)
1 QB
1-2 RB/FB
3-4 WR/KR/PR
1 TE
2 G/C
1 OT

Unlike previous years there is really no one to unseat for these positions. The biggest competitors on the roster are Bethel Johnson, Childress, Yates. Mruczkowski and Britt. We need to bring lots to fill these spots and be prepared for injuries.

 

[patsfan55]

i think bam bam will fill one of those wholes

 

[mgteich]

Since there are four potential WR/KR/PR spots, I agree that Childress is likely to get one of them.

i think bam bam will fill one of those wholes

 

[nickw308810]

I like both these posts you did on offense and defense. Great info. My one question is, do you think that it will be an even 25 on both sides of the ball? What do we usually go with? Looking at the players we have I tend to believe that we go with a couple more on defense. Like a 27-23 or 26-24 advantage.

 

[patsfan55]

I like both these posts you did on offense and defense. Great info. My one question is, do you think that it will be an even 25 on both sides of the ball? What do we usually go with? Looking at the players we have I tend to believe that we go with a couple more on defense. Like a 27-23 or 26-24 advantage.

special teams-3

defense-27
de-seymour, warren, green, hill (4)
dt-wilfork, wright,........ (3)
olb-colvin, ......., tbc,....... (4)
ilb-vrabel, bruschi, claridge, beisel, izzo, don davis (6)
(this shows we might move vrabel back to outside, unless we draft a manny lawson, but overall lb gets 10)
cb-samuel, hobbs, gay, poteat,....... (5)
s-rodney, geno, sanders, scott, hawkins (5)
(could end up a lil diff, but overall db gets 10)

offense-23
qb-brady, cassell, ....... (3)
rb-dillon, faulk, ........ (3)
fb-pass (1)
wr-branch, .........., caldwell, bethel?, bam bam (5)
te-watson, graham, ....... (3)
ot-light, ........., gorin (3)
og-mankins, kaczur(could be at g or t-depending), hochstein (3)
c-koppen, ........ (2)

i could be a lil off
but defense should have more
and itll prob look somewhat close to this

 

[Pats726]

This is way early, but this type of analysis helps me understand which 20 or so players we need.

THE 2006 CORE (15)
Brady,Cassell,Dillon,Faulk,Pass,Koppen,Mankins,Hochstein,Light,Kaycur,Gorin,
Branch,Caldwell,Graham,Watson

THE OPEN POSITIONS (10)
1 QB
1-2 RB/FB
3-4 WR/KR/PR
1 TE
2 G/C
1 OT

Unlike previous years there is really no one to unseat for these positions. The biggest competitors on the roster are Bethel Johnson, Childress, Yates. Mruczkowski and Britt. We need to bring lots to fill these spots and be prepared for injuries.

A nice breakdown...but I doubt we keep 9 lineman..possible but not automatic ...(more like the 1-2 RB/FB). I think this breakdown is a lot easier than the D...and you are correct, there really is not all that much competition (as of now..) Unseating..not at all. In competition?
Even injured RB NFLE Charles is more of a longshot here. They do need another 1 or 2 RBm whether that be more of a FB ala Evans...or a vet..the REAL need is a projected RB of the future--what Cobbs or Chapman were not.
A good draft pick could be what is needed. As for WRs..there are at this point 6 in the running, although I doubt more than 2 make the squad...besides Johnson and Childress, there are NFLE's ZSmith & Musinski, and Stone and McGrew. The latter could be a Practice Sqder at best. I do think the need is for a vet or two and some rooks to add to it all. On the OL,
there are some here as well for competition..Besides the ERFAs Yates & Mruczkowski, there's PSQder Britt, vet Tucker and NFLEs Roehl and Steitz. I think at least a vet tackle and a few others will be added into the mix of players in competition. Neal could return as well. It should be interesting to see who Dante likes in the long run of young and old on the line. The only vet
that I can see not making it would be Hochstein, but at this point, that is very slim. At QB, a vet will be added; Mortenson at this point is more in the Cassel territory and at TE, a vet like Weaver and or a draftee like be in competition for 3rd TE. The weak spot really is WR at this point, but Brady has never had studs to throw at; the only blue chip 1st rounder was Glenn.

 

[mgteich]

Posters often want to leave the offense with 23 or 24. The issue is whether we will have 9 OL and/or 6 WR as we have had. For example, one of you suggested only three OT's. I think that yhis is just isn't right. We always should hsve four at that critical position.

In the end, it will be injuries that decide who gets the final three spots.

Ten linebackers is a lot since you have carried 10 defensive backs, at least a couple of which need to be top speical teamers.

 

[patsfan55]

Posters often want to leave the offense with 23 or 24. The issue is whether we will have 9 OL and/or 6 WR as we have had. For example, one of you suggested only three OT's. I think that yhis is just isn't right. We always should hsve four at that critical position.

In the end, it will be injuries that decide who gets the final three spots.

Ten linebackers is a lot since you have carried 10 defensive backs, at least a couple of which need to be top speical teamers.

i kinda agree with the 10 lbs as too many
but it seems as though since izzo and don davis arent goin anywhere even though all they can really do is play st, and count against our depth chart at lb, they will have close to if not 10 lbs

 

[AzPatsFan]

MG,

I think you bent over backward to find 10 potential openings on Offense. But I'll conceed that, even if it seems to be an enormous set of problems.

From a perspective of starters, first depth and then good-to-haves, the picture is somewhat different.

I see the need for 1 starter @ #2 WR. Period. There is a need for 2 rotation starters (WR & big RB), third and fourth string O-linemen, and a PR candidate, and third string TE, RBs & WRs.

All the third and below openings are adequately filled, or maybe more precisely have candidates already available, with the exception of third TE.

There are really only one or two critical openings on Offense, #2 starting WR, and rotation/starting big RB, depending on whether Dillon returns to form.

Both those positions can be solved rather easily by signing a veteran FAs, trading for a vet, or via the draft. Bellichick does not like to depend on draftees and won't. The cost in terms of trade, for either a WR or RB, is mid round at worst # 3 through #5 round picks. Bellichick's MO is to do both sign a vet and draft a player as well.

I would argue that Belichick fears his Offense is actually too young, error prone, (see Denver game) and would prefer some veteran maturity there. Outside of those two positions, all the others will be filled with draftees or marginal vet minimum pickups. In short, there is little problem there, but I agree that work needs to be done.