UnBelieveable PUP list - Jackson PUPed, Claridge OUT!

[Clonamery]

This won't be a big deal.

Belichick probably is having a tough time deciding who to get rid of for the preliminary cuts, so this way he can get more of those "borderline" players on the field for the first few days of camp to see what they do and who just doesn't have it. Most of these names should be back practicing soon.

Nobody asked you to try and give an semi-intelligent thought on this thread. This is the 'Unbelieveable' thread.....whatever that means.

But what you say makes some sense in the real world.

 

[pats1]

What makes you say this, pats1?

According to Miguel's FAQs, those on Active/PUP (that's the pre-season form of PUP) count against the cap, but he does not say anything about them counting against the roster. To me, it seems extremely unlikely -- what is the point of declaring a player on PUP in that case?

Miguel. Could you clear this up, please? (A point to clarify on the excellent FAQs?)

The point in placing them on the PUP is so that there's no question on who's practicing and who's not for that if a player needs to be put on the "real" PUP come September, everyone knows it.

 

[Clonamery]

The point in placing them on the PUP is so that there's no question on who's practicing and who's not .......everyone knows it.

Obviously, not.

 

[checkedout]

I don't like it at all!

 

[Burgess]

Actually the most interesting thing to me about the released PUP names is not who's on the list but who isn't. If the conditioning run was indeed yesterday as some report then having Corey Dillon's name not appear on that list (as it has in the past) could mean our running game is going to be more like 2004 than 2005.

Now what could have happened to get Mr Dillon in shape so early in camp this year??

 

[Miguel]

What makes you say this, pats1?

According to Miguel's FAQs, those on Active/PUP (that's the pre-season form of PUP) count against the cap, but he does not say anything about them counting against the roster. To me, it seems extremely unlikely -- what is the point of declaring a player on PUP in that case?

Miguel. Could you clear this up, please? (A point to clarify on the excellent FAQs?)

I think that players on active PUP count against the 80-man roster limit and players on reserve-pup do not. It will be interesting to find out if any of the 10 were placed on reserve-PUP. Players that land on reserve-PUP are ineligible to play or practice for the first six weeks of the regular season.

 

[Mike the Brit]

I think that players on active PUP count against the 80-man roster limit and players on reserve-pup do not. It will be interesting to find out if any of the 10 were placed on reserve-PUP. Players that land on reserve-PUP are ineligible to play or practice for the first six weeks of the regular season.

Thank you, Miguel, 726, Pats1 (see sig ).

 

[Pats726]

If the conditioning run was indeed yesterday as some report then having Corey Dillon's name not appear on that list (as it has in the past) could mean our running game is going to be more like 2004 than 2005.

Now what could have happened to get Mr Dillon in shape so early in camp this year??

Huh???? I think one has been dreaming WAY too much..TOTALLY wrong about that..Corey was not on PUP either in 04 or 05..
What writers have you been reading to get that garbage???

 

[Pats726]

Thank you, Miguel, 726, Pats1 (see sig ).

It is very confusing Mike...but after a few years..unless they change the rules, it's business as usual...

 

[14thDragon]

Well, if the conditioning run was yesterday, this fing heat could have caused a lot more failures. Hell, I was ready to pass out in it just going for a damn jog.

I will worry if these guys are on the pup at the begining of the season. Right now, it really is a shurg sorta thing.

 

[Displaced - Fan]

I don't think the conditioning test is until tomorrow. I don't ever remember seeing this many players going on PUP before training camp. Not just the Patriots, but call across the league.

According to the article, they reported yesterday for the conditioning test.

 

[Displaced - Fan]

The warning signs for Claridge had been out there. The whole not working out in NE thing. I know he's had some personal issues lately, but I began to have doubts about the guy when somebody reported he was staying in his home state for his re-hab.

Jackson's career is off to a rousing start. :sarcasm:

It's not unusual for first year players to fail the test the first. They are so nervous about the test because of the rumors of how difficult it is.

 

[Amnorix]

Why is everyone so worked up about this? It's nto like these guys are automatically missing the first 6 games.

 

[groundgame]

Obviously, this also gives Chad Brown a chance to make the roster as backup.(QUOTE]



After seeing Brown in action last year, it is hard to believe that Claridge, even after being IR'd, not being a big upgrade over Brown.

 

[onegameatatime]

This board continues to overrate anyone the Pats pick. If you heard that a 5th round LB who was IRed last year was cut by any of the 31 other teams, the reaction would be ho-hum, no surprise. Here, Claridge, along with Cedric Cobbs and many other mid-level picks, are all assumed to be on the road to greatness until the day they get cut.

About a month or two ago I said I would not at all be surprised to see Calridge cut. Also took some mild abuse from a frequent poster who said that BB had not cut anyone under identical circumstances (although there were plenty of similar circumstances). There's always a first time.

Don't get me wrong, I am as pumped as anyone about the prospects of Maroney and Jackson, and my stomach is full of Kool-Aid. But let's see some games first before being shocked by a cut or before anointing anyone the next Brady/Givens/Koppen surprise player. I don't know who, but it's almost guaranteed that there will be more "surprise" cuts.

 

[patchick]

This board continues to overrate anyone the Pats pick. If you heard that a 5th round LB who was IRed last year was cut by any of the 31 other teams, the reaction would be ho-hum, no surprise.

True enough. But to be cut before taking a snap in TC, when the roster is still swollen with UDFA types, is a major washout...especially at LB, where there's a clear opening for some young talent. And for this player in particular...

I had predicted that the Patriots would draft Claridge because he seemed like a perfect fit. Remember how he said his brother had predicted he would be chosed by the Patriots -- a year before the draft? Played the 3-4 in college, good combination of size and athleticism, and supposedly top-notch intangibles: team leader, film rat, son of a coach, future coach himself, etc. I can't help but wonder what happened to convince the team that he wasn't even worth a look in camp.

 

[Burgess]

Huh???? I think one has been dreaming WAY too much..TOTALLY wrong about that..Corey was not on PUP either in 04 or 05..
What writers have you been reading to get that garbage???

I researched and you were right (as much as it pains me to write that with the jackass way you jumped on me. You might want to brush up on your online personality. It is possible to point out someones mistakes without being a git about it). I was thinking of his predecessor Mr. Smith whom I seem to recall failing the run a time or two.

My bad.

 

[pats1]

Claridge's reaction:

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Jul-28-Fri-2006/sports/8746948.html

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

What makes you say this, pats1?

According to Miguel's FAQs, those on Active/PUP (that's the pre-season form of PUP) count against the cap, but he does not say anything about them counting against the roster. To me, it seems extremely unlikely -- what is the point of declaring a player on PUP in that case?

Miguel. Could you clear this up, please? (A point to clarify on the excellent FAQs?)

Because in the regular season players on PUP do NOT count against the roster. Thus you saw Bruschi last season and Harrison this season on PUP. Nothing is lost by declaring a not ready for contact player to be on PUP.