Who Else Do We NEED On Offense?

[Brady6]

I get it that you don't understand. You can't treat the Practice Squad as a source of depth unless you have NFL quality players, ready to play at the various positions. And we are NOT talking about UDFA's who may become good enough to play. If Connolly is injured, we need to have a backup center, NOW. And that backup center needs to be able to play at an NFL level.

I appreciate you being so understanding about my lack of intelligence :lol:

I think it's suiting that you posted on top of my thread since it feels like you're talking down to me.

I show you respect MG even when we don't agree on something, and I consistently hold you in high regard, I'd appreciate it if you didn't conclude what I can and cannot understand.

My point was nobody on the current roster outside of the 7 guys you've already picked have done anything to say that they'd provide more than a practice squad OL in terms of depth, so unless one of them steps up I see no reason to keep them on the active roster simply to reach some imaginary quota of 8-9 requires OL.

BTW, you have a TOTAL of 8 OL's. I would have 11 OL's, including the Practice Squad.

I haven't posted a mock offensive roster in weeks so I'm not sure where you have me down for 8 OL from. If you are referring to my statement of 1 additional OL on the practice squad, that was 1 additional on the practice squad than we generally have on it which is 2-3 so I would be keeping 3-4.

 

[Brady6]

undisclosed injury last I heard

Thanks for info brother!

 

[Brady6]

we need THIS guy...remember HIM???

When he is back try matching up against this as a defense.

6'7 Sudfeld
6'6 Gronkowski
6'6 Ballard
6'3 Dobson
6'1 Thompkins

 

[mgteich]

I questioned your understanding of the reality of OL play and OL roster needs. I did NOT question your intelligence.

When someone presents a totally novel idea, one should expect some flak.

If we do not currently have a 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th offensive lineman, then Belichick will add them in the coming weeks. I simply disagree with your total of 8 OL (7 roster and 1 on the PS). I believe that this is insufficient by THREE players. I expect us to carry 8-9 OL's on the 53 and 2-3 OL on the Practice Squad. I do recognize that this does not need to happen before the so-called final cuts. It can wait a week or so.

Consider if we were playing an in-season game tonight. Under the numbers you proposed, we would have all 5 of our healthy offensive linemen active this week, with ZERO backups available during the game in case of injury. The 3 injured players would be home or on the Practice Squad. I am NOT talking down at you. I simply STRONGLY disagree with your position.

Finally, I expect that Dante and Duboll consider at least some of our present players worthy of the Practice Squad. Zusavics and Stankovich come to mind.

I appreciate you being so understanding about my lack of intelligence :lol:

I think it's suiting that you posted on top of my thread since it feels like you're talking down to me.

I show you respect MG even when we don't agree on something, and I consistently hold you in high regard, I'd appreciate it if you didn't conclude what I can and cannot understand.

My point was nobody on the current roster outside of the 7 guys you've already picked have done anything to say that they'd provide more than a practice squad OL in terms of depth, so unless one of them steps up I see no reason to keep them on the active roster simply to reach some imaginary quota of 8-9 requires OL.




I haven't posted a mock offensive roster in weeks so I'm not sure where you have me down for 8 OL from. If you are referring to my statement of 1 additional OL on the practice squad, that was 1 additional on the practice squad than we generally have on it which is 2-3 so I would be keeping 3-4.

 

[Brady6]

I questioned your understanding of the reality of OL play and OL roster needs. I did NOT question your intelligence.

When someone presents a totally novel idea, one should expect some flak.

If we do not currently have a 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th offensive lineman, then Belichick will add them in the coming weeks. I simply disagree with your total of 8 OL (7 roster and 1 on the PS). I believe that this is insufficient by THREE players. I expect us to carry 8-9 OL's on the 53 and 2-3 OL on the Practice Squad. I do recognize that this does not need to happen before the so-called final cuts. It can wait a week or so.

Consider if we were playing an in-season game tonight. Under the numbers you proposed, we would have all 5 of our healthy offensive linemen active this week, with ZERO backups available during the game in case of injury. The 3 injured players would be home or on the Practice Squad. I am NOT talking down at you. I simply STRONGLY disagree with your position.

Finally, I expect that Dante and Duboll consider at least some of our present players worthy of the Practice Squad. Zusavics and Stankovich come to mind.

Fair enough I have no hard feelings obviously MG, nothing but respect and admiration, which is why I may of been a over sensitive to what you said.

My assertion is built around our 53 man roster having the 7 players you named all healthy, and if in the season we had an injury we'd have to make a roster move that week to promote one of the players from the practice squad. In theory it is no different than having the 7 guys active on the game day roster but instead of having a Zusavics on the active 53 as inactive undressed you have him on the practice squad. Which is why I said unless one of them steps up and merits a roster spot, when saying that I meant does enough to show that they'd end up being claimed or signed by another team if released, if they don't do that and we can just put them on the practice squad I don't really see the point in using a roster spot on them.

 

[captain stone]

Undisclosed injury last I heard.

If he doesn't play next week, Fells will be hearing a knock on his door the following week from Stevie Belichick.

 

[Bruins29]

If he doesn't play next week, Fells will be hearing a knock on his door the following week from Stevie Belichick.

I agree. I am starting to think Fells is not going to make it. Gronk is not going to reserve PUP. They are going to want to keep Ballard. If they are confident with Suds they could go with 3 and cut Hoo also but my gut says 4 TE.

 

[ivanvamp]

The offense seems even clearer than the defense. We have an open OL roster spot. Everyone has their favorite use for the least two roster spots. I have no strong opinions on what Belichick will do, other than that he likely will bring in an OL or two for tryouts. After all, one of the 23 spots is the open OL spot, now likely filled by Zusevics.

3rd QB
5th RB
4th TE
9th OL


23 MAN OFFENSE
QB (2) Brady, Mallett
RB (4) Ridley, Vereen, Washington, Blount
WR (6) Amendola, Thompkins, Dobson, Edelman, Boyce, Slater
TE (3) Gronkowski, Fells, Sudfeld
C (1) Wendell
G (4) Mankins, Connolly, Cannon, open
T (3) Vollmer, Solder, Svitek

I think the vast majority of us would agree that Tebow really has no business (as far as we can tell) making this roster. I wouldn't see anyone else picking him up either, so the Pats could, if they wanted to, probably keep him on speed dial should some disaster occur. Kind of shadow-roster him.

To your group above - all of which I agree with - I think there are three spots I want to see filled...but there really are only two spaces, right? Here are the three spots I want:

TE - Ballard
RB - Bolden
OL - ??

If you forced me to choose between these, for now I'd probably leave the extra OL off, because I think either Ballard or Bolden would be snapped up by another team if the Pats released them, but I think they can find a suitable sub O-lineman. And then adjust after a couple of weeks if injuries occur.