idle thoughts - putting the pieces together

[spacecrime]

One major flaw with the idea of constantly rotating DL guys in & out is that teams will eventually just start going hurry up and that sort of thing, forcing you to keep the guys you have in.

It isn't like the Pats will contantly changing the DL every snap. Having each player play half the snaps can be accomplished by rotating after a series two, or after a possession. Besides, most teams already use a different set of personnel for running and passing downs, and change DLs and LBs between downs. If it were easy to run a hurry-up, you'd see a league-wide exposion in the use of hurry-up, and that isn't the case. Fact is, unless you have very versatile players, and design an offense to run a hurry up, hurry-up isn't all that good an idea. Right now only two teams can do hurryup over a 10+ play drive with high effectiveness (Pats/Colts), running a hurryup doesn't do a lot of good. Even with the Pats and Colts, penalties stop the clock, after a long incomplete pass it is possible to switch DL, and teams have been known to have a guy lay on the ground holding his gut like he had the wind knocked out of him or is woozy to stop the clock. Happens all the time. No team complains because they all do it.

Not only is this true, but the premise of having "no starters" just doesn't work. I'm all for depth, but if you're saying "everyone's going to get a lot of playing time" it really just means you don't have starting-caliber players. Not to mention lines play better when they get some chemistry going.

Offensive lines utilize chemistry. Defensive lines change personnel all the time depending on down and distance. I don't understand the part about not having any starting-caliber players if you spilt reps. Are you saying that Wilfork, Haynesworth, Ellis, Carter, and Cunningham aren't starting-caliber players? Do they lose a step and forget technique if they play 35 snaps instead of 45?

 

[Gwedd]

The way things are shaping up, I'm fine with opponents going to a "hurry up" offensive strategy.

With the new look defense, and the youth now on the team, it looks like the Patriots will have a "hurry up" defense.

 

[Urgent]

I agree with a lot of what Ken professes.

But I question the point about free agency vs. development to implement such a strategy.

One could make the very same point about wide receivers, or offensive linemen, or corners. Because there was a double-dip of free agents, there was a once-in-a-decade opportunity to bring in veterans across multiple positions, not just DL. One could further argue that last year, with Julius Peppers, Aaron Kampman, and a few others available in free agency in an uncapped system that the DL opportunity was even greater then.

And the overhaul we are seeing on the DL is not at all unprecedented. In 2007, following dissatisfaction with the receivers, the Patriots brought in Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Kelley Washington, and Kyle Brady (along with Adalius Thomas). That was an equally dramatic makeover at WR. In 2003, Ted Washington, Ty Warren, Dan Klecko, Rosevelt Colvin, and Tully Banta Cain were added to the front seven - along with Rodney Harrison, Tyrone Poole, Asante Samuel, Eugene Wilson, and Chris Akins at secondary - changing about half the defensive starters.

So what I question is:
If the Patriots need greater flexibility in the front seven, why not complement aging, once-great players with highly athletic versatile young players. Whether at 3-4 DE, 4-3 DE, or 3-4 OLB, the Patriots could develop players that could excel at these roles for several years. Ellis, Anderson, Carter, maybe Haynesworth are all one or two-year solutions.

A guy like Quinn, for example, offers just that 4-3 end/3-4 OLB flexibility we are arguing the Patriots are pursuing. The current solution is staffing the team with a number of one-dimensional players. Anderson and Carter cannot succeed at 3-4. Anderson cannot set the edge. Ninkovich rarely is effective rushing the passer; Cunningham had one sack.

Why not take a risk on one or two front seven players in the draft, and pick up a couple running backs (Reggie Bush, Brandon Jackson, Ronnie Brown, Ricky Williams, Darren Sproles) in free agency or trade? Or use #33 on one of those front seven, and use this historic once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to pick up a third corner in free agency or trade (Nnamdi Asomugha, Dominique Rogers-Cromartie, Carlos Rogers, Antonio Cromartie, Eric Wright, Josh Wilson)?

And what do the Patriots do when their plan is revealed, but a bunch of the new players finish their one-year deals?

I agree with Ken's theory on what the Patriots are doing.
I wonder if we are rationalizing how they are doing it.
I think there were other ways to achieve the same outcome, but with a different long-term outlook.

 

[The Scrizz]

Here's Reiss's calculation of defensive snap count last year. With the exception of Wilfork (69.8%) no defensive lineman was on the field for more than 50% of snaps. That suggests that there was already a lot of rotation.

2010 Patriots defensive snap count - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

This can't be true. Sexy Rexy is going to revolutionize DL play using substitutions and versatility. I read it on JI. It's never been done before!

 

[Mike the Brit]

This can't be true. Sexy Rexy is going to revolutionize DL play using substitutions and versatility. I read it on JI. It's never been done before!

Sorry -- must have missed that.

 

[Fencer]

If a DL guys gets double-teamed every play, it's not realistic to ask him to play every snap. That's always been a fundamental reason for rotating DL.

 

[ay-yo]

A guy like Quinn, for example, offers just that 4-3 end/3-4 OLB flexibility we are arguing the Patriots are pursuing. The current solution is staffing the team with a number of one-dimensional players. Anderson and Carter cannot succeed at 3-4. Anderson cannot set the edge. Ninkovich rarely is effective rushing the passer; Cunningham had one sack.

The current solution is not necessarily the ideal solution. We simply ran out of resources (cap room / draft picks). Sure we could have traded up for Quinn but his addition is the subtraction of Solder + another player. This opens up holes at other positions. In an ideal world we would have resources to add multi-dimensional players at all areas of need but it will never happen.

I'd say the FO has done very well this off-season. Yes we still need help at DE / OLB but areas of need have been addressed, the team has improved on paper, we are one of the Superbowl favorites and we have multiple picks in next years draft. What more can you ask?

 

[AzPatsFan]

Ken, I always enjoy your post draft rants...er...random thought analyses.

I think that you are quite correct in saying that BB has given himself a survival of the fittest camp, which coincidentally or not comes after a weird pre/post draft labor situation where many rookies did not benefit at all.

I agree that he gave us added depth/experience/competition--ALL of them very instrumental to making a deep run. That is brilliant in my opinion. I also believe that he is indeed giving the defense variability and versatility by being able to dictate multiple fronts/sets/packages. Therefore, a good amt of quality depth and physical bodies are needed.

I also agree with the secondary overhaul, although as you said--that's almost common sense in a pass happy league. It's a shame when Mark Sanchez picks you apart for 3 TD's and 0 INT's, and all you can do is watch...let alone when you consistently face the Mannings, Roethlisbergers, and Rivers' of the world every season. The team has adhered to the Belichickian philosophy of 'doing your job' in the secondary, and added talent, youth, and speed have been brought in. Couple that with a coaching change at the position, and (finally) a good pair of outside CB's after several misses in the draft, and you see why the great secondary play is so important. I will admit that I am somewhat miffed by seeing BOTH McGowan and Page leave in the safety position, not to mention the (hopefully unsubstantiated rumors) of Meriweather's departure also. That was what many of us viewed as one of the strongest overall positions on the team. It certainly won't be if Meriweather leaves, although again--they are rumors at best.

---------------THIS IS WHERE I DISAGREE---------------

I do not believe your theory of all of these DL guys playing 35 snaps a game, as opposed to 4 or 5 main guys getting the majority of the snaps. I believe that would be hard to develop cohesiveness, and consistency. I believe "it is what it is..." meaning that these moves were brought in to add versatility to our looks and sets, and to also add a survival of the fittest philosophy at the position. In other words, when the competition is better, the remaining players who make it to the 53 man roster are better too. But the main reason why I believe it was done is for DEPTH. As we all saw last yr, it was likely the Achilles heel of our playoff loss, possibly even a SB birth. We embarrassingly had to search the streets for a viable candidate at the DL position due to too many injuries, and it hurt tremendously. The run game was mud, there was zero pressure, and therefore it added to the passing game woes too. I think that these moves were brought it for depth and versatility...nothing more.

Other than that, I think that I agree with just about everything else, and enjoy your thoughts very much.

The Jets fans like to think that the Playoff victory completely discounts the previous 45-3 pounding. Others have said Rex took the top off the passing game.

I say nonsense. The Pats played their playoff game with only Wilfork and pickup street Free Agents from the previous two weeks. They couldn't stop the run; and it carried over to the point that they couldn't stop the Pass either. Yet they lost by less than a TD.

Furthermore BB has spent the past two years rebuilding his team grown old and slow, drafting lots of speedy mostly defensive talent and then allowing them to play to obtain some experience. They paid for the inexperience in the Playoffs. But with any ordinary Coach, their would have been a couple or more 5-11 rebuilding records. BB's coaching got them to winning records, and the speed and youth provided turnovers, but not too far into the Playoffs.

The speed and talent is proven by the exemplary turnover count. Now BB has addressed the pass rush in his inimitable way.

When guys grow old, they don't lose the ability to dominate or win a share of snaps. What the older players lose is the ability to do it repeatedly. But you can overcome that with lots of substitution, to give the older players a frequent blow. You have to have plenty of substitutes to do that, and just look at BB accumulate the numbers of talented, older pass rushers. He has accumulated a DL with 5 former, First rounders, and two Second rounders, plus lots of other talent. There are several players who had posted double digit sack years, in their careers.

It was all too visible that BB was satisfied with his rebuilt youth and speedy Line-backing and secondary Defense, when he turned his attention to his League-leading Offense in the Draft, when we all thought he would draft in the defensive front 7.

I would judge that BB believes that he has a Super Bowl club, with the requisite talent and experience to win it all; and he is Going for It.

 

[supafly]

The Jets fans like to think that the Playoff victory completely discounts the previous 45-3 pounding. Others have said Rex took the top off the passing game.

I say nonsense. The Pats played their playoff game with only Wilfork and pickup street Free Agents from the previous two weeks. They couldn't stop the run; and it carried over to the point that they couldn't stop the Pass either. Yet they lost by less than a TD.

Furthermore BB has spent the past two years rebuilding his team grown old and slow, drafting lots of speedy mostly defensive talent and then allowing them to play to obtain some experience. They paid for the inexperience in the Playoffs. But with any ordinary Coach, their would have been a couple or more 5-11 rebuilding records. BB's coaching got them to winning records, and the speed and youth provided turnovers, but not too far into the Playoffs.

The speed and talent is proven by the exemplary turnover count. Now BB has addressed the pass rush in his inimitable way.

When guys grow old, they don't lose the ability to dominate or win a share of snaps. What the older players lose is the ability to do it repeatedly. But you can overcome that with lots of substitution, to give the older players a frequent blow. You have to have plenty of substitutes to do that, and just look at BB accumulate the numbers of talented, older pass rushers. He has accumulated a DL with 5 former, First rounders, and two Second rounders, plus lots of other talent. There are several players who had posted double digit sack years, in their careers.

It was all too visible that BB was satisfied with his rebuilt youth and speedy Line-backing and secondary Defense, when he turned his attention to his League-leading Offense in the Draft, when we all thought he would draft in the defensive front 7.

I would judge that BB believes that he has a Super Bowl club, with the requisite talent and experience to win it all; and he is Going for It.

Great points AZ, love the aspects of reminding us that many would have been way more in 'rebuilding' mode. What this team gives us every yr is a complete gift, and that is the gift of being able to watch them compete--no matter what the circumstances. Just about every yr we are able to see them in heavy competition with any and every single team down the stretch, and that's about all anyone can ask for.

I do agree (absolutely) that Belichick has addressed some of the more visible weaknesses through the acquisition of some very wily vets on the Dline, and that should help to push us one step further--if not more--towards the ultimate goal come January.

Great post.

 

[jsull87]

I agree with a lot of what Ken professes.

A guy like Quinn, for example, offers just that 4-3 end/3-4 OLB flexibility we are arguing the Patriots are pursuing. The current solution is staffing the team with a number of one-dimensional players. Anderson and Carter cannot succeed at 3-4. Anderson cannot set the edge. Ninkovich rarely is effective rushing the passer; Cunningham had one sack.

Yes but you are looking at picking someone like Quinn in a vacuum of rolling this defense over. What if we couldn't resign light? Who is at LT? We picked Solder for a reason. So while it would have been nice to get Quinn... you have to have the opportunity (he went before 17) and be able to address your other holes too (LT who would you have signed).

P.S Cunningham had one Sack but had more pressures than Dunlap and was our Best OLB against the run.

Btw i will qualify this with during the draft did i want Quinn? Aldon Smith? Ingram? E.T.C of course I did. But i don't then have the consequence of having to deal with the holes in his team. I can't fault BB in this offseason in any way.

We wanted DL help and a WR in the draft... We got an ex defensive player of the year and chad johnson in FA. We also signed a plethora of guys who can "rush the passer".

We then go and shore up our Lina through signing our own light and mankins and drafting arguably the best pure LT in the draft in solder.

People were so so about our RB's and we only had Woodhead under contract... in come ridley (who has suprised people in camp) and Vareen.

We then go for value the rest of the draft... If you told me end of last year this was all going to play out like this i would have said thank you very much let's start the season... can't wait

 

[aluminum seats]

Offensive lines utilize chemistry. Defensive lines change personnel all the time depending on down and distance. I don't understand the part about not having any starting-caliber players if you spilt reps. Are you saying that Wilfork, Haynesworth, Ellis, Carter, and Cunningham aren't starting-caliber players? Do they lose a step and forget technique if they play 35 snaps instead of 45?

What I was taking issue with was the idea that "there wouldn't be any starting defensive linemen" and that everybody would just get lots and lots of reps. Of course there will be substitutions. But the fact is, if you have a top-notch lineman, you're going to want them in there on pretty much every play. Saying its all a hodgepodge suggests you have a bunch of JAGs (which, for example, Wilfork clearly is not.)

As to whether Haynesworth, Ellis, Carter, and Cunningham are "starting-caliber," I'd say the jury's still out.

 

[captain stone]

I agree with a lot of what Ken professes.

But I question the point about free agency vs. development to implement such a strategy.

One could make the very same point about wide receivers, or offensive linemen, or corners. Because there was a double-dip of free agents, there was a once-in-a-decade opportunity to bring in veterans across multiple positions, not just DL. One could further argue that last year, with Julius Peppers, Aaron Kampman, and a few others available in free agency in an uncapped system that the DL opportunity was even greater then.

And the overhaul we are seeing on the DL is not at all unprecedented. In 2007, following dissatisfaction with the receivers, the Patriots brought in Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Kelley Washington, and Kyle Brady (along with Adalius Thomas). That was an equally dramatic makeover at WR. In 2003, Ted Washington, Ty Warren, Dan Klecko, Rosevelt Colvin, and Tully Banta Cain were added to the front seven - along with Rodney Harrison, Tyrone Poole, Asante Samuel, Eugene Wilson, and Chris Akins at secondary - changing about half the defensive starters.

So what I question is:
If the Patriots need greater flexibility in the front seven, why not complement aging, once-great players with highly athletic versatile young players. Whether at 3-4 DE, 4-3 DE, or 3-4 OLB, the Patriots could develop players that could excel at these roles for several years. Ellis, Anderson, Carter, maybe Haynesworth are all one or two-year solutions.

A guy like Quinn, for example, offers just that 4-3 end/3-4 OLB flexibility we are arguing the Patriots are pursuing. The current solution is staffing the team with a number of one-dimensional players. Anderson and Carter cannot succeed at 3-4. Anderson cannot set the edge. Ninkovich rarely is effective rushing the passer; Cunningham had one sack.

Why not take a risk on one or two front seven players in the draft, and pick up a couple running backs (Reggie Bush, Brandon Jackson, Ronnie Brown, Ricky Williams, Darren Sproles) in free agency or trade? Or use #33 on one of those front seven, and use this historic once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to pick up a third corner in free agency or trade (Nnamdi Asomugha, Dominique Rogers-Cromartie, Carlos Rogers, Antonio Cromartie, Eric Wright, Josh Wilson)?

And what do the Patriots do when their plan is revealed, but a bunch of the new players finish their one-year deals?

I agree with Ken's theory on what the Patriots are doing.
I wonder if we are rationalizing how they are doing it.
I think there were other ways to achieve the same outcome, but with a different long-term outlook.

Except for the unattainability of Robert Quinn, I agree w/ the general idea of the post.

At the end of this season, when Fat Albert, Ellis, GWarren & Carter are one year older & one year slower,
will we be stuck in the same predicament in which we found ourselves at the end of last season?

Without a visible pipeline of young talent at OL & DE to backup/replace the older & slower vets,
I'm afraid the answer might be Yes.

RBs in today's NFL are a dime-a-dozen. Using both 56 & 73 at that position, at the expense of stocking the pipeline at OLB & DE, still seems to me needlessly short-sighted.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

I agree with a lot of what Ken professes.

But I question the point about free agency vs. development to implement such a strategy.

One could make the very same point about wide receivers, or offensive linemen, or corners. Because there was a double-dip of free agents, there was a once-in-a-decade opportunity to bring in veterans across multiple positions, not just DL. One could further argue that last year, with Julius Peppers, Aaron Kampman, and a few others available in free agency in an uncapped system that the DL opportunity was even greater then.

And the overhaul we are seeing on the DL is not at all unprecedented. In 2007, following dissatisfaction with the receivers, the Patriots brought in Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Kelley Washington, and Kyle Brady (along with Adalius Thomas). That was an equally dramatic makeover at WR. In 2003, Ted Washington, Ty Warren, Dan Klecko, Rosevelt Colvin, and Tully Banta Cain were added to the front seven - along with Rodney Harrison, Tyrone Poole, Asante Samuel, Eugene Wilson, and Chris Akins at secondary - changing about half the defensive starters.

So what I question is:
If the Patriots need greater flexibility in the front seven, why not complement aging, once-great players with highly athletic versatile young players. Whether at 3-4 DE, 4-3 DE, or 3-4 OLB, the Patriots could develop players that could excel at these roles for several years. Ellis, Anderson, Carter, maybe Haynesworth are all one or two-year solutions.

A guy like Quinn, for example, offers just that 4-3 end/3-4 OLB flexibility we are arguing the Patriots are pursuing. The current solution is staffing the team with a number of one-dimensional players. Anderson and Carter cannot succeed at 3-4. Anderson cannot set the edge. Ninkovich rarely is effective rushing the passer; Cunningham had one sack.

Why not take a risk on one or two front seven players in the draft, and pick up a couple running backs (Reggie Bush, Brandon Jackson, Ronnie Brown, Ricky Williams, Darren Sproles) in free agency or trade? Or use #33 on one of those front seven, and use this historic once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to pick up a third corner in free agency or trade (Nnamdi Asomugha, Dominique Rogers-Cromartie, Carlos Rogers, Antonio Cromartie, Eric Wright, Josh Wilson)?

And what do the Patriots do when their plan is revealed, but a bunch of the new players finish their one-year deals?

I agree with Ken's theory on what the Patriots are doing.
I wonder if we are rationalizing how they are doing it.
I think there were other ways to achieve the same outcome, but with a different long-term outlook.

It's easy to rationalize what the Patriots are doing because it makes perfect sense. You are having a hard time with it because you make zero sense. seriously, where do the "anti-homers" come up with this stuff?

1. What part of too young did you miss in 2010? There were games where the defense started 4 rookies/ 4 second year players. Let's forgo some experience for more youth to replace the non existant age.

2. Ever heard of the salary cap? DRC? You have a QB to trade? Carlos Rogers, what? Josh Wilson- never heard of him.....for good reason.

3. Quinn is a bust waiting to happen. Just like the 95% of the Robert Quinn's that have been drafted the past 10 years. Do you need names?

4. If such a stud was available @33 wouldn't he have like already have been drafted?

5. These guys "may" be only 1 or 2 year solutions? How about "maybe not"? Where did it come to light guys can't be resigned?

 

[reflexblue]

It's easy to rationalize what the Patriots are doing because it makes perfect sense. You are having a hard time with it because you make zero sense. seriously, where do the "anti-homers" come up with this stuff?

1. What part of too young did you miss in 2010? There were games where the defense started 4 rookies/ 4 second year players. Let's forgo some experience for more youth to replace the non existant age.

2. Ever heard of the salary cap? DRC? You have a QB to trade? Carlos Rogers, what? Josh Wilson- never heard of him.....for good reason.

3. Quinn is a bust waiting to happen. Just like the 95% of the Robert Quinn's that have been drafted the past 10 years. Do you need names?

4. If such a stud was available @33 wouldn't he have like already have been drafted?

5. These guys "may" be only 1 or 2 year solutions? How about "maybe not"? Where did it come to light guys can't be resigned?

Try to have a little objectivity, how many D backs have the pats taken over the last five years compared to OLB's in rounds 1-3 ?

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Try to have a little objectivity, how many D backs have the pats taken over the last five years compared to OLB's in rounds 1-3 ?

Who cares?

It's a QB driven, you can't have too many good CB league. If the guys don't work, draft more.

OLB's- Come November, you will once again be stupified when the Patriots lay a beating on the Steelers.

Name me one team where the OLB's are not a product of the secondary.

 

[patfanken]

Just to clear up a couple of misconceptions about my original post.

1, I'm not trying to claim that the Pats are going to be going nuts shifting defenses and players in a chaotic manner without much rhyme or reason. But someone made a comment on another thread about GWarren that I gave me some clarity. He was happy that Warren was back, but understood he was "no longer an every down player".

Well that's my point. THIS year, IMHO, the only people approaching the level of "every down player" in the front 7 will be Mayo and PERHAPS Vince. THAT'S it. Everyone else will be shuttling in and out depending on the down, distance, situation developed for THAT particular week.....or THAT ingame adjustment.

In other words all many combinations of substitutions that we have seen applied to the secondary, in recent years; is being applied in a similar manner to the front seven. And even this isn't entirely new. Teams routinely make situational changes now along the front 7, but I think that BB is creating a defensive roster that can take it to the NEXT level.

As people have pointed out, logistically it won't be easy. Situational substitutions require players AND coaches be very vigilant and prepared.

 

[Patriot Missile]

As people have pointed out, logistically it won't be easy. Situational substitutions require players AND coaches be very vigilant and prepared.

We saw a similiar type defense in the 45-3 thrashing of the Jets where the subbing was like a blur keeping the bodies fresh. By the time the playoffs came the injuries were such that he couldn't afford to do it again.

I think your right. He is fine tuning and tweaking this defense to resemble a more potent version of that gameplan where bodies are fresh from start to finish. That was the purpose in bringing in the personal that he did, you would hope.

It certainly will be difficult but I'm sure BB and coaches are anything but bored right now trying to get this project on wheels. I think he is looking forward to the challenge personally. So many captains mixed with young talent and experienced veterans should go a long way in making this a reality.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Just to clear up a couple of misconceptions about my original post.

1, I'm not trying to claim that the Pats are going to be going nuts shifting defenses and players in a chaotic manner without much rhyme or reason. But someone made a comment on another thread about GWarren that I gave me some clarity. He was happy that Warren was back, but understood he was "no longer an every down player".

Well that's my point. THIS year, IMHO, the only people approaching the level of "every down player" in the front 7 will be Mayo and PERHAPS Vince. THAT'S it. Everyone else will be shuttling in and out depending on the down, distance, situation developed for THAT particular week.....or THAT ingame adjustment.

In other words all many combinations of substitutions that we have seen applied to the secondary, in recent years; is being applied in a similar manner to the front seven. And even this isn't entirely new. Teams routinely make situational changes now along the front 7, but I think that BB is creating a defensive roster that can take it to the NEXT level.

As people have pointed out, logistically it won't be easy. Situational substitutions require players AND coaches be very vigilant and prepared.

ken

Your post was well thought out AND correct. No clarification should be required.

 

[Fencer]

Well that's my point. THIS year, IMHO, the only people approaching the level of "every down player" in the front 7 will be Mayo and PERHAPS Vince. THAT'S it. Everyone else will be shuttling in and out depending on the down, distance, situation developed for THAT particular week.....or THAT ingame adjustment.

What you're glossing over is the same role/different guy replacements that could be made from drive to drive just because of guys' stamina. Or do you think BB will slice the salami so finely that he tries to match guys to roles perfectly and keep shuttling them in and out?

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

What you're glossing over is the same role/different guy replacements that could be made from drive to drive just because of guys' stamina. Or do you think BB will slice the salami so finely that he tries to match guys to roles perfectly and keep shuttling them in and out?

It wasn't that long ago when our coach was noted for having individual, opponent specific game plans.

How you play a run, no pass team like the Raiders should be a lil different than how you would play the Colts. That's if you have the personnel.

Do you really think a game plan against Vick should be identical to a game plan against Manning?

It doesn't have be if you have the variation of personnel.