Will LB be a "need" in the off-season?

[patsfan209]

Huh? Repeat huh?

They went to the Super Bowl that year.

I really don't know what you're arguing sometimes.

OK Clay, I'll backtrack...

What did you mean by "He didn't seem to have a problem with using McGinest, Bruschi and T.J., did he?"

What kind of problem are you referring to here?

 

[patsfan209]

Working out players is indeed part of the "scouting" process. It lets you confirm with your own eyes a few things that it might be hard to judge with tape alone. That's pretty routine and accepted, I would think.

Yup. A team's GM, coaches, and their scouts have to see the player for themselves. No way do they rely on tape and take entirely the word on scouting reports.

 

[PatsSteve1]

First of all, who's saying I'm basing it on one game? I don't think he played particularly badly, either, by the way. There IS, however, plenty of evidence that he's just a JAG. Tons of it. An NFL career's worth.

What career? He played well in the preseason. His whole NFL career only includes 1 AFCC game except late game cleanup. It's only his 4th year and that he couldn't beat out the LB's ahead of him here, isn't real surprising. Any 1st day pick at LB may have had trouble doing that except the year we had to use Biesel and Chad Brown. Who else was he going to beat out?
Vrabel was a backup for 4 years before he came to the Patriots.

 

[satz]

One of the contraction of this thread is people accept we have great LB and also we had some great LB play before 05. so lets analyse a few of the key cogs of this argument.

Ted Johnson - performed good for last 4 yrs of his career ..
Phifer - another LB who was the force in the twilight of his career .
Vrabel - signed off as a under achieving LB from the steelers.
WillyMac - veteran 31+ before he stepped up.Again in the last few years of his contract.
Bru - again not till he hit 30 did he get it going.
Seau - He is limited and had 4 yrs of no play and suddenly he is bloosmed in this system.
AD - he did not shine till he was like 28 and now at 30 is a impact player.

IF you look at this above one thing is clear to play in this system a LB needs to be fully developed both physically and mentally to play.

as i mentioned i am not saying arookie cannot be in their but in our system LB do not succeed in early to mid 20`s.I do not know why its the same as we get good 4th -5th rd DB`s who play well in our system from the 3rd year of thier rookie contract.

so will LB be a need this off season .I think they might bring 1 or 2 of them but we have a few LB who might step up .eric alexander or woods [both are young and not in Patriots effective LB age ] . But the key is if they sign one of them to extension i think then they are going to step up.Lua s going to be effective next year i am sure.

 

[Snarf]

<< I've given up on figuring how the Pats intend to get younger at LB, (at least to make it another 4-5 years), but there's the draft or under 30 free agents. >>

Pretty simple. Attract veteran LBs to the team who have yet to win a superbowl, and want to come to the Pats on the cheap.

Raid the top talent from losing teams.

Rich get richer.

 

[Bostonian1962]

Quite honestly, I don't think we need LBs. There is not one on the team even approaching 50 yet. We're good.

 

[Patsmaniac]

This wont happen, but I would love to see Lance Briggs here instead of giving all that money to an unproven rookie. Sign Lance, and then trade out of the first completely. The league would go Ape Sh** if that happened. I for one, would laugh my a** off!!!!!!!!!!

 

[fgssand]

Vrabel, Colvin & Thomas are mainstays.

Seau & Bruschi will stay around for another year IMHO - why not, as old as they are, last time I checked, they still are playing at a very high level and most certainly are still bringing it. We do need inside help though, no question.


Lua, Woods & Alexander may stay and may be gone - we'll see how they progress / recover. I think Woods may be the best of this bunch.

Look for help from the usual places, a FA or two and help from the draft.

We're OK, but I do hope the old guys stay around for a while - we need them.

 

[RayClay]

OK Clay, I'll backtrack...

What did you mean by "He didn't seem to have a problem with using McGinest, Bruschi and T.J., did he?"

What kind of problem are you referring to here?

When I don't know what "you" (general you) are talking about, I sometimes quit.

When the argument has gotten so convoluted I don't remember what I'm talking about, I really need to quit.

Bottom line=They can't manufacture linebackers.

They either have to count on the perfect linebackers being available from other teams when needed...or...

They need to draft some.

Their inside linebackers are really old.

Their young starting linebackers are also old.

Their whole future linebacker corps, for a team that needs years to develop linebackers, rests on 2 undrafted free agents.

 

[RayClay]

OK Clay, I'll backtrack...

What did you mean by "He didn't seem to have a problem with using McGinest, Bruschi and T.J., did he?"

What kind of problem are you referring to here?

Plus I quoted you thinking you were Patsox, so everything might have made even a little less sense, but any idea of what any of the three of us were arguing has been lost to me by now anyway.

 

[shirtsleeve]

Cromartie? Give me a break. The guy was coming off a major injury.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showpost.php?p=60604&postcount=5


He was high on my radar then.

 

[DaBruinz]

Working out players is indeed part of the "scouting" process. It lets you confirm with your own eyes a few things that it might be hard to judge with tape alone. That's pretty routine and accepted, I would think.
Just because you have a guy on your draft board, doesn't meant that you are "targetting" that player.

For example in the 2008 draft if I'm the San Diego Chargers, I would have McFadden on my 1st round draft board, but since I have LT, that doesn't mean I am TARGETTING McFadden or even thinking about drafting a RB. See what I mean? Proof of a guy being on a team's "draft board" in a certain round is no proof at all that the team is even interested in drafting that player. It is only proof that the team considers that player talented enough to be on the board in such and such a round.

The Patriots obviously considered Vilma a 1st round talent. But they didn't draft him and as far as I know they didn't attempt to move up to draft him. That tells you something bit about their priorities and draft philosophy.
If the Patriots finally draft a 1st round linebacker, I'll be the first to congratulate you, because it doesn't fit the pattern of Piolichick's drafting so far at all.

The Pats didn't draft Vilma because he went much higher than expected when he went 12th overall. Many people thought that the Jets were going to take Wilfork in the draft and were suprised when they took Vilma at 12. How do you know the Pats didn't try and trade up? In fact, how do you know they didn't have something in place to move up to say, 16, if Vilma fell that far? You don't know that because Vilma went off the board at 12.

Its well known that the Pats wanted Vilma, but he was gone earlier than expected. Its also well know that the Pats wanted Stewart Bradley in the 3rd round. And that they had tried to trade up for him. They couldn't trade up for Bradley because they couldn't find a partner who was willing to make a deal for what the Pats were offering. And the Eagles ended up grabbing him.

People always seem to overlook the fact that the other team has a say in the deal. And there are various reasons why deals don't happen.

 

[DaBruinz]

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showpost.php?p=60604&postcount=5


He was high on my radar then.

Many people had him high.. until he got hurt..