Ron Brace at DE?

[BradyManny]

Teams don't pass on first and second down? Thats news to me.

It's not about downs, it's about personnel packages. The Pats are in a nickel/dime half the time and Big Vince is on the sidelines for more of that than Seymour.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Teams don't pass on first and second down? Thats news to me.

I didn't say that. I said that you can't argue that someone is a *consistent* force against the pass when he isn't even on the field on third down. You can't collapse the pocket from the sidelines, can you?

 

[Synovia]

I didn't say that. I said that you can't argue that someone is a *consistent* force against the pass when he isn't even on the field on third down.

So, you were arguing something that I wasn't saying. IE, a strawman?

 

[BradyFTW!]

So, you were arguing something that I wasn't saying. IE, a strawman?

No, I'm arguing exactly what you said. For the record, what you said about wilfork was: "hes great against both the run and the pass.". Now, sure, we could get into a debate about how the meaning of the word 'great' is inherently subjective, but I think it's pretty clear that you can't be great at stopping the pass when you're not even on the field on third down and you're not even in the personnel packages that are most effectively used against the pass. Once again: you can't stop the pass from the sidelines.

Wilfork is excellent against the run and as good as he needs to be against the pass. Calling him 'great' in the latter category is just ridiculous, though.

 

[Synovia]

No, I'm arguing exactly what you said. For the record, what you said about wilfork was: "hes great against both the run and the pass.". ... but I think it's pretty clear that you can't be great at stopping the pass when you're not even on the field on third down

So, he can't be great against the pass on 1st and 2nd down because hes not on the field on third?

 

[BradyFTW!]

So, he can't be great against the pass on 1st and 2nd down because hes not on the field on third?

No, he just can't be great against the pass overall. If you're great at stopping the pass, then you're on the field in the nickel package and on third down.

How is this confusing? If you're consistently subbed out of the game in passing situations, then how can you be great against the pass? The argument that you're trying to make is absurd.

 

[Synovia]

No, he just can't be great against the pass overall. If you're great at stopping the pass, then you're on the field in the nickel package and on third down.

Not if your contribution on first and second down is more important, and you play a position that is too arduous to play all 3 downs.


Wilfork is so good because he can apply pressure from a position that doesn't typically apply pressure. When a team goes to throw on 1st down, hes not a liability, like 90% of the NTs out there.

 

[BradyManny]

Wilfork is so good because he can apply pressure from a position that doesn't typically apply pressure. When a team goes to throw on 1st down, hes not a liability, like 90% of the NTs out there.

It's a good point, but again, does the production justify it? 7.5 sacks in 5 seasons says it doesn't. Yes, he collapses the pocket with his size, but he's not a great pass rusher like Seymour is. Would Brace be a downgrade in every phase of the NT's responsibility? Yes, of course. But to me, the drop-off from Seymour to Green would be greater.

 

[MVPatsfan13]

This is my take on things, which assumes Brace reasonably contributes/matures, which we dont even know yet, because I feel like the Pats think Brace is 1st Rnd quality. I dont think the Pats are drooling over Le Kevin Smith, so I have him as a rotational guy, but in the mix, though he might get beat out in camp. Also, keep in mind the Pats just extended Wright for 4 yrs and he already plays about 40% of the time...

If Wilfork is gone=
Brace & Wright committee approach to NT. Im thinking Brace will be the better run stuffer and Wright the better pocket collapser.
Brace in on base D, run D.
Wright in on pass d for NT position if wanted.
DE rotation stays the same, with Wright contributing if needed, as it was before.

starting front 3: Seymour,Brace/Wright, Warren
starting front 4: seymour, Brace, Wright, Warren
reserves= one of brace/wright, green, Smith, & whatever other DL they keep


If Seymour is gone=
Wilfork starting NT with Brace & Wright both subbing.
Im thinking Green and Wright would both equally contribute at RDE.
Assuming most teams still run to their right(D's left), I'd want Warren taking the D's left & Green/Wright on the D's right, so Green/Wright takes over for Seymour.
The DE rotation would actually stay pretty much the same, just Wright would have a much bigger role, maybe starting with Green still subbing
Starting front 3: Wright/Green, Wilfork, Warren
Starting front 4: Wright/Green, Wilfork, Brace/Wright, Warren
(Probably Wright, Wilfork, Brace, Warren for against the run and
Green, Wilfork, Wright, Warren for more pass rush
reserves=brace, wright, Smith & whatever other DL they keep

I like our front 3 & 4 better when wilfork is gone, but I like the reserves' situtation better with seymour gone.

 

[Pats726]

It's a good point, but again, does the production justify it? 7.5 sacks in 5 seasons says it doesn't. Yes, he collapses the pocket with his size, but he's not a great pass rusher like Seymour is. Would Brace be a downgrade in every phase of the NT's responsibility? Yes, of course. But to me, the drop-off from Seymour to Green would be greater.

Not sure it's all about numbers here..but it will be interesting to see what teh front office does..and how they go forward with both.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Richard Seymour is headed to the Hall of Fame on the first ballot. Vince Wilfork will have a few pro-bowls before he is done.

That's a very big difference.

Besides Haynesworth is only making Seymour money. So keeping him will not effect the future CAP much more than it already is effecting the present CAP. A routine extension in 2010. Wilfork will cost $ 4 million more than he is making. Tedy's retirement will pay more than half. :snob:

 

[AzPatsFan]

I disagree. Sure, Seymour was PUPed in 2007, but other than that? He came back, got healthy, and returned to his dominant form, showing no ill effects from the injury. Looking at them going forward, his injury prospects are no worse than Wilfork's. Maybe even better, when you consider that he's less prone to small injuries while playing his real position, and reportedly sustained his major injury while run-blocking (which he doesn't do anymore).

One major injury doesn't make a guy injury-prone. It makes him unlucky. Case in point: are we going to start calling Brady injury-prone now? Was Drew Bledsoe injury-prone because Mo Lewis almost killed him that one time?

FWIW, I agree with BradyManny. While Vince Wilforks don't grow on trees, at the end of the day you could replace a lot of his value with a guy like Ron Brace. You'd definitely lose quite a bit, talent-wise, but considering the money saved (versus what Wilfork is asking for), I wouldn't be surprised if the front office goes that route. With Seymour, you flat-out can't replace his versatility. He's a monster against the run and against the pass, and there is literally NO other 3-4 DE that can claim that to nearly the extent that he can.

As for the original question, no way Brace is a DE.

Succint, and true all the way.

 

[jczxohn1]

Besides the notion that Brace is ins. for losing Wilfork, which won't happen this yr., he should develop into a solid b/u, and play with much the same style as Vince, which no other sub has been able to do. Also, I really like the sound of Seymour, Wilfork, Brace and Warren down in a 4-3 in the red zone. Those 4 would occupy everyone on the o-line.With Thomas and Woods/Crable rushing, we're talking about a QB having less than 2 sec before impact.

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

I think he is slow... like me.

 

[BradyFTW!]

It's a good point, but again, does the production justify it? 7.5 sacks in 5 seasons says it doesn't. Yes, he collapses the pocket with his size, but he's not a great pass rusher like Seymour is. Would Brace be a downgrade in every phase of the NT's responsibility? Yes, of course. But to me, the drop-off from Seymour to Green would be greater.

Bingo. And back to Synovia's point- I'm not saying that Wilfork isn't capable of collapsing the pocket- we all know that he is. To say that he's excellent against the pass, however, is simply an overstatement. He's better than other NTs, sure, but that's just not what NTs do. Even a NT who is good against the pass, on the whole, isn't going to have a significant effect in that regard, which is why he isn't even on the field in obvious passing situations.

And this is fine, because that's not what he's out there to do. He's out there to free up defenders and make it impossible to run up the gut, and he does both of those things admirably.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Richard Seymour is headed to the Hall of Fame on the first ballot. Vince Wilfork will have a few pro-bowls before he is done.

That's a very big difference.

Never thought about it that way, but I pretty much agree, although I think you might be shorting Wilfork just a little bit. Wilfork is an excellent player who could go to a lot of pro bowls, and hell, it's not inconceivable that he could be a hall of famer. Seymour WILL be a hall of famer, first ballot, like you said.

And they both have a lot of good years left. I wouldn't be surprised if Seymour's around and playing at a high level longer than Wilfork is (and I wouldn't be surprised if he isn't, either. Hard to tell at this stage).

 

[Patjew]

Never thought about it that way, but I pretty much agree, although I think you might be shorting Wilfork just a little bit. Wilfork is an excellent player who could go to a lot of pro bowls, and hell, it's not inconceivable that he could be a hall of famer. Seymour WILL be a hall of famer, first ballot, like you said.

And they both have a lot of good years left. I wouldn't be surprised if Seymour's around and playing at a high level longer than Wilfork is (and I wouldn't be surprised if he isn't, either. Hard to tell at this stage).

Really? I figure he is a HOF'er, but is he really a no-doubt first ballot guy?

 

[RayClay]

It's not about downs, it's about personnel packages. The Pats are in a nickel/dime half the time and Big Vince is on the sidelines for more of that than Seymour.

I don't want to lose either, I leave it to the F O. Wilfork plays the more valuable position, Seymour is more versatile nad tops at his position.

I don't get this two down stuff, though. If Wilfork keeps teams stuck at third and long by stuffing or collapsing the middle, we win games.

That's all that counts, winning games.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Gentlemen,
It seems to me that ole BB simply picked up Brace because he's always wanted better depth at DT. Ole slick Billy also has stockpiled his picks for next year. This matters why? Boys, don't worry if Wilfork leaves. BB will simply draft this feller;

Terrence Cody
Terrence Cody - College Football

Personally, i think now that Saban has had a couple years there, Bill is gonna start drafting from there, and Cody is first on the list.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

I have a knee injury so I am slow too.