There's no way Lonie Paxton makes this team

[shmessy]

So now how many Pro Bowls a player goes to determines how good he is?

You said he's "the best at his position". Do you then feel he's been rooked the past 5 years for not getting chosen?

 

[Flying Fungi]

Hmm.. Lets see, I can remember, specifically, 2 missed field goals in the SB that year. Can you honestly say that neither was the fault of the long-snapper Brian Kinchen?

after what happened with the Giants, and then with NEP...I genuinely felt bad for that guy...(Kinchen)

 

[pats1]

You said he's "the best at his position". Do you then feel he's been rooked the past 5 years for not getting chosen?

One of the best. Remember, there's only one "need player" spot on the Pro Bowl roster. Furthermore, that spot has only been around for ONE YEAR. Schneck and Bartrum got it. It used to be just the "Special Teamer" spot, which usually went to an Izzo-type player (got it twice in the past 4 years or so).

 

[DaBruinz]

No, maybe they'll have Hochstein or someone else snap. Maybe it will be Mills. If everyone else fails, they'll have to settle for the fallback plan and keep Lonie. But you've gotta be kidding if you think BB wouldn't love a real player to step up and win that job to save the spot.

BTW, this "best long snapper in the NFL" stuff I keep seeing here - - Question: How many Pro Bowls has this "best at his position" player been to? After you give the answer, perhaps you should ask "why" the answer is what it is.

Shmessy -
Its amazing how you bring out the PRO-BOWL as a sign of who the best player is. The Pro-Bowl is a friggin popularity contest. Its not a true sign of who the best are. And 90% of the fans on this board recognize that. Also, to my knowledge, they don't even have a spot for long snappers to be elected. They have ONE special teams spot. That's it. (Note: I just read Pats1's note that they have since added a long snapper spot to the ProBowl)

So, while Paxton has never been to the Pro-Bowl, using the Pro-Bowl as your justification of whether or not a player is good is just laughable.

Now, could you please tell me the position that Larry Izzo played last year other than Special teams? I don't remember seeing him out on the field other than that. Even Don Davis played an occasional snap.

Now, as for how many snaps that Paxton is on the field for, you seem to have forgotten that Paxton also snaps on PUNTS. And, he is out there on every PAT. And, while I might be mistaken, I am pretty sure that Paxton is also out there on the kick coverage team.

Belichick has shown that he IS willing to spend a position on guys who only have ONE purpose when that player is one of the best.

 

[shmessy]

One of the best. Remember, there's only one "need player" spot on the Pro Bowl roster. Furthermore, that spot has only been around for ONE YEAR. Schneck and Bartrum got it. It used to be just the "Special Teamer" spot, which usually went to an Izzo-type player (got it twice in the past 4 years or so).

Oh, now it's changed to "ONE of the best". Heaven forbid, Bartrum and Schneck got it this year. Someone actually thought somebody else could do what we all know only Lonie has the capacity to do as well.

Impossible.

 

[pats1]

Oh, now it's changed to "ONE of the best". Heaven forbid, Bartrum and Schneck got it this year. Someone actually thought somebody else could do what we all know only Lonie has the capacity to do as well.

Impossible.

But why take the reduction in the quality of play at that position as well as the experience and comfort levels? What's that accomplishing?

 

[shmessy]

Dabruinz wrote: "Shmessy -
Its amazing how you bring out the PRO-BOWL as a sign of who the best player is. The Pro-Bowl is a friggin popularity contest. Its not a true sign of who the best are. And 90% of the fans on this board recognize that. Also, to my knowledge, they don't even have a spot for long snappers to be elected. They have ONE special teams spot. That's it."
_________________________

So Long Snapper doesn't get it's own spot (like a REAL position). That says alot. Must be some NFL conspiracy. Hmmm...... LS guys must be irreplaceable.......

 

[DaBruinz]

Oh, now it's changed to "ONE of the best". Heaven forbid, Bartrum and Schneck got it this year. Someone actually thought somebody else could do what we all know only Lonie has the capacity to do as well.

Impossible.

First off, you are coinfusing people. I am the one who said that Paxton was the Best. Pats1 did not.


Secondly, your sarcasm shows that you have admited defeat in the argument and you just can't admit it.

 

[pats1]

Dabruinz wrote: "Shmessy -
Its amazing how you bring out the PRO-BOWL as a sign of who the best player is. The Pro-Bowl is a friggin popularity contest. Its not a true sign of who the best are. And 90% of the fans on this board recognize that. Also, to my knowledge, they don't even have a spot for long snappers to be elected. They have ONE special teams spot. That's it."

So Long Snapper doesn't get it's own spot (like a REAL positions). Hmmm, LS guys must be irreplaceable.......

When did we say the position/player is irreplacable? It's the reduction in quality that matters. You're not going to get much return out of Mills in the offense, either. This is always the time of year when fans are so hyped up about these rookies and believe almost all 7 rounds worth are immediate starters who will perform at high levels. Many of these players MAY NEVER do that.

 

[shmessy]

But why take the reduction in the quality of play at that position as well as the experience and comfort levels? What's that accomplishing?

Comfort level? What comfort level. AV is 1,000 miles away now. He's gone. The LS will be new to whomever the new kicker will be.

I agree, Lonie has the experience, but if it turns out through TC and pre-season that someone else on the team can do a reasonably good job, then I believe the team could gain more than it loses by having an extra position player available.

 

[pats1]

Comfort level? What comfort level. AV is 1,000 miles away now. He's gone. The LS will be new to whomever the new kicker will be.

I agree, Lonie has the experience, but if it turns out through TC and pre-season that someone else on the team can do a reasonably good job, then I believe the team could gain more than it loses by having an extra position player available.

Who do you think would be more comfortable snapping in a snow storm, with the game or even season on the line and 68,000 screaming fans ready to rip you apart if you don't flawlessly succeed? Paxton or Mills?

You know you'll need a reliable long snapper on your team for EVERY GAME. You don't know if you'll need to utilize the 53rd player at some miniscule point in the season. You're walking a high-wire if asking for too much else.

 

[shmessy]

First off, you are coinfusing people. I am the one who said that Paxton was the Best. Pats1 did not.


Secondly, your sarcasm shows that you have admited defeat in the argument and you just can't admit it.

Admitting defeat? You mean like the fans leaving the Pats-Buffalo game early to get out of Gillette because the Pats were behind and they had to get to work?

That kind of admitting defeat?

 

[shmessy]

Who do you think would be more comfortable snapping in a snow storm, with the game or even season on the line and 68,000 screaming fans ready to rip you apart if you don't flawlessly succeed? Paxton or Mills?

Who says it has to be Mills? It could be Hochstein or anyone else who wants to give it a shot.

As I said, if no one else can win the "job" from Paxton in TC, then the fallback (not the optimal) plan is to accept that we have to keep Lonie. I'm not saying to get rid of him before someone else proves they can do it. But if a real player can do it at 90-95% of Paxton's perfection, then I hope it happens.

 

[pats1]

Who says it has to be Mills? It could be Hochstein or anyone else who wants to give it a shot.

As I said, if no one else can win the "job" from Paxton in TC, then the fallback (not the optimal) plan is to accept that we have to keep Lonie. I'm not saying to get rid of him before someone else proves they can do it. But if a real player can do it at 90-95% of Paxton's perfection, then I hope it happens.

So the worse, "tryout" player is the optimal plan while the proven, reliable, better player is the fallback plan, just because he isn't versatile enough to fill-in when half the friggin offense goes down with injury?

Paxton would be long gone to another team if cut. I doubt there would be enough time to even execute this "fallback" plan.

 

[shmessy]

When did we say the position/player is irreplacable? It's the reduction in quality that matters. You're not going to get much return out of Mills in the offense, either. This is always the time of year when fans are so hyped up about these rookies and believe almost all 7 rounds worth are immediate starters who will perform at high levels. Many of these players MAY NEVER do that.

If we get 1 reception out of Mills, then that's 1 recption more than we get from Lonie.

If we get 1 ST tackle out of Mills, then that's 1 more ST tackle than we get from Lonie.

If we get 1 yard of carry out of Mills, then that is 1 yard more of carry than we would get from Lonie.

If we get 1 LOS block out Mills that springs Dillon or Maroney for a big gain, then that is 1 bog gain block more than we would get out of Lonie.

..........

 

[spacecrime]

That is the opposite of versatile. It's unitile, or monotile or whatever.

Oh, thanks a bunch. I just blew Diet Dr Pepper out my nose when I read this

 

[jct]

I've been saying since the draft that Paxton will be history.
It is all about versatility.
Why wouldn't we want a TE/WR/FB/ST/LS instead of just a LS?

 

[pats1]

If we get 1 reception out of Mills, then that's 1 recption more than we get from Lonie.

If we get 1 ST tackle out of Mills, then that's 1 more ST tackle than we get from Lonie.

If we get 1 yard of carry out of Mills, then that is 1 yard more of carry than we would get from Lonie.

If we get 1 LOS block out Mills that springs Dillon or Maroney for a big gain, then that is 1 bog gain block more than we would get out of Lonie.

..........

And one botched snap from Mills will negate 10,000 yards of whatever you wish when the game's on the line.

 

[spacecrime]

Randel El can play wide receiver and quarterback! Let's just dump Brady, who can only play QB! He's wasting a roster spot! Get the Redskins on the phone! Anything to clear a roster spot for these deities ..er.. hyped rookies!

Let me get this straight. You are equating QB and long snapper as equally important? So what? Now you want to keep a Long snapper starter, a veteran longsnapper backup, and a young developmental longsnapper.

I know you are trying to be sarcastic, but trying to suggest treating QB and LS roster spots the same is just dumb.

 

[PatsSteve1]

I'm all for whoever does the job best job, getting the job. If Cassell beats out Brady, then grab some bench Tom - About the only snap I can recall Paxson muffing is when he hit the goalpost against Denver and BB told him to do that. I don't really recall, I can be corrected, seeing Lonie not hit the holder right where his hands were or making the punter have to move much, if at all, at all to catch the ball to punt. No one is irreplaceable. Lonie may be about the highest paid snapper-only LS in the league. There's no cap problems. I'd be surprised if he's replaced this year.