Why does everyone assume Browner starts over Dennard?

[PP2]

I've mentioned before that I believe Arrington is on the outside looking in, as far as the roster. I would not be surprised to see Dennard cover the slot if the matchup dictates it, with Browner on the outside or vice versa matchup-wise.

 

[Deus Irae]

I've mentioned before that I believe Arrington is on the outside looking in, as far as the roster. I would not be surprised to see Dennard cover the slot if the matchup dictates it, with Browner on the outside or vice versa matchup-wise.

Cutting Arrington in 2014 is a $1.25m additional cap hit and a $4.875 dead money hit.

 

[supafly]

I would then add a 4a. If Ryan stays at corner, who will move to safety after Game 4 or 5?

It would appear that McCourty and Harmon are in the lead for the starting safety positions, wouldn't it? They are the ones seeing starting reps with the ones, and Harmon obviously played there last year as a higher round pick. Some even believe that Patrick Chung will be the 3rd safety as well, with a STOP behind him like Ebner, etc.

Former DEN safety Mike Adams claimed today that he has been contacted by both the Pats and the Jets as well, not to mention the fact that Logan Ryan hasn't even been approached to change positions (according to his own words several days ago).

It would definitely appear to me that Bill Belichick hasn't made up anything of a decision to use L.Ryan at safety any more than the sporadic times that he did last season, yet you continue to insinuate this strong belief in many of your posts on the subject.

 

[mgteich]

If Belichick doesn't move any corners to safety, then so be it. IMHO, we would be back to safety being our weakest position. If this is indeed the case, I would look for us to add a safety.

Yes, Harmon is in the lead for a starting safety position. What is your point? I Harmon is practicing with the first team, does that really mean that Ryan is a corner, one who may end up competing for the dime back position?

It would appear that McCourty and Harmon are in the lead for the starting safety positions, wouldn't it? They are the ones seeing starting reps with the ones, and Harmon obviously played there last year as a higher round pick. Some even believe that Patrick Chung will be the 3rd safety as well, with a STOP behind him like Ebner, etc.

Former DEN safety Mike Adams claimed today that he has been contacted by both the Pats and the Jets as well, not to mention the fact that Logan Ryan hasn't even been approached to change positions (according to his own words several days ago).

It would definitely appear to me that Bill Belichick hasn't made up anything of a decision to use L.Ryan at safety any more than the sporadic times that he did last season, yet you continue to insinuate this strong belief in many of your posts on the subject.

 

[supafly]

If Belichick doesn't move any corners to safety, then so be it. IMHO, we would be back to safety being our weakest position. If this is indeed the case, I would look for us to add a safety.

Yes, Harmon is in the lead for a starting safety position. What is your point? I Harmon is practicing with the first team, does that really mean that Ryan is a corner, one who may end up competing for the dime back position?

This is why these kinds of debates are completely pointless in the late spring/early summer. There are things that can and probably will happen to make this whole debate futile, most notably injuries, competition, etc.

Strong CB play is a must, as some believe that it's the second most important positional grouping in the NFL aside from QB. We just had a season where L.Ryan showed glimpses of really being something, at least for a rookie. The only way to see if he's for real or not is to continue to allow him reps at that position, unless an emergency takes place, or he shows so much talent at safety that it warrants a permanent move for good.

We have questionable futures with just about all of our current CBs for one reason or another. We're crossing our fingers with Revis, even though we all know he'll be demanding top dollar and likely want something averaging in the mid teens per year, with crazy guarantees.We all hope it gets done, but it's nothing close to being anything close to a sure thing. There's a good chance that we won't know the answer to this question until Revis places other offers against what the Pats are offering in the early days of free agency.

Many are considering Arrington as having one foot out the door already, with the front office patiently waiting to correct their mistake when the season's over and a cap savings can be realized.

We're crossing our fingers that both of Browner and Dennard can not only stay out of trouble, but also remain injury free (not meaning to state that either is an injury problem, but it's a violent sport). And this all coming after a year when our 3rd round rookie pick in Ryan looked mediocre to good for a first year CB, our biggest competitor in Manning and DEN carved us up in the AFCCG, and the league has gone to a pass happy rules system? What is the obvious conclusion that one may draw from this?.....oh yeah, that he'll be our starting safety!!!!

The question that I am proposing to you is why do you continue to assume that Ryan will be a starting safety, per your comment of "needing a new safety in week 4 or 5?" You are insinuating that L.Ryan will not only be playing another position, but that he'll actually be starting? Why, due to the speculative media report? What matches up with Belichick:

1. Bringing in Patrick Chung
2. Reaching out to Mike Adams' agent
3. Not even bringing up a position change to Ryan himself
4. Using Harmon so far as the safety opposite of McCourty

It's one thing to give Ryan some different looks like we did last year at safety, but it's something altogether different to suggest that he's permanently moving there and that he won't be playing the position of CB. I'm just wondering why you continue to make this assumption, and what your thinking process is in doing so?

I'm not meaning to act like you're definitely wrong, because I have no idea. I'm just not understanding why you're so sure of things, that's all.

 

[supafly]

If Belichick doesn't move any corners to safety, then so be it. IMHO, we would be back to safety being our weakest position. If this is indeed the case, I would look for us to add a safety.

Our 3rd safety played in about 1/3 of the reps last season. With McCourty, Harmon, Chung, Wilson, and the assumed addition of a camp cut or free agent addition, it may be weak--but it may not be nearly as bad as some other years, particularly with the addition of a better CB unit too.

I'm all for bringing in another guy for competition, and I'm actually expecting it. In the meantime, I also wouldn't be that surprised if McCourty, Harmon, and the winner of the Chung/Wilson/new player added were the 3rd safety.

Yes, Harmon is in the lead for a starting safety position. What is your point? I Harmon is practicing with the first team, does that really mean that Ryan is a corner, one who may end up competing for the dime back position?

That dime back or 4th CB spot saw a total of 55% of the reps last season, with Ryan getting 697 out of 1276 total snaps, including the postseason. That's fairly significant in my opinion. Let's see what everyone thinks of the dime back in our 4 consecutive games vs DEN, IND, DET, and GB.

To take it one step further, Dennard has played in 23/32 games the past two years, while Browner has played in 20/32 games and will definitely be missed the first four of this year as well. The likelihood of us having 4 solid starters in front of Ryan is probably pretty low.

The thought that he'd be placed as our 3rd safety in order to see more snaps than our 4th CB did is nothing more than a big misconception, as it's 36 percent for the S3 vs. 55 percent for the CB4.

I would assume that even if he only saw 45-50 percent of the snaps this year, Belichick would be more than fine with continuing to see him develop on the cheap. Things could be quite different for 2015, and they likely will be. In the meantime, I believe that he'll be continued to be used in a few different roles including both inside/outside, with some sporadic use as a safety like last year depending upon certain situations such as opponent, situational football reps, injuries, and battles won in camp and practice.

 

[PP2]

Cutting Arrington in 2014 is a $1.25m additional cap hit and a $4.875 dead money hit.

Yes I'm aware of that. And I could be wrong, of course.

I would think that BB wants his best players on the field as much as possible, and I just don't see either Browner or Dennard sitting too much unless we play a lot of nickel.

 

[meatface]

Dennard is going to have a great shot to prove that he should be the #2 the first four games, I'm sure that BB wont take it away from him if Dennard plays exceptionally well but I also think that all the corners are going to get a lot of playing time either way. This quality depth at CB is something haven't really had the last few years and the Pats intend to use it.

 

[Nunchucks]

Dennard and Ryan will be battling out that number 2 CB spot for the first 4 games, should be a lot of fun. I think Arrington has the nickel spot locked up right now, but that could change over training campe. Definitely going to be lots of interesting DB positional battles, it is a great problem to have.

Browner is the guy who will probably cover those bigger number 2 receivers and TEs that are flexed out. I am not sure we want Browner to be covering a TE that has lined up on the line, cause then he could get lost in the wash. He is a CB, not a LB, he is not used to dealing with the mess that goes on around the LOS by the lines.

 

[patfanken]

Lots of interesting and thought provoking comments in this thread. I'm particularly interested in exploring the pluses and minuses of 2 defensive philosophies. One which moves DB's all over the field depending on the match ups and one which keeps them on the same side all the time.

There are legit arguments that can be made for both positions. I will look forward to going to camp and seeing which one the Pats will employ. Most think we will move Revis to the key match up each week regardless of where they line up. Its kind of interesting since the Pats don't flop their Safeties at all, that they will willingly flop their CB's. That's a curious dichotomy when you think about it.

Basically its just another good topic for discussion during these dog days before TC starts.

 

[mgteich]

We have spent a lot of time discussing the safety position. That is the key to this discussion. Yes, many want to be sure that our #5 CB is much better than Cole. That is a side issue. There was much speculation about moving a corner. We can now all back off if that isn't happening in camp and just go back to trying to understand our weak safety position.

CORNER - VERY STRONG
We have tried to understand what Belichick is doing. We were fine with the situation at corner before Browner was brought in. We were confident in Ryan and Dennard based on last year's performances. Most of think that Arrington is a fine nickel who could be replaced by one of the kids for 2015. Revis-Dennard-Ryan-Arrington is an extremely strong unit. Add Browner and at least one of our top players will spend lots of time on the bench. We have Ryan and Dennard competing for the starting spot for 4 weeks and then competing for the dime spot thereafter. You think that the dime back plays 55% of the time. NO, it is the backup position in case of injury that get the reps. We are NOT in dime coverage 55% of the time. But, as you say we'll see. In any case, the dime is NOT the 5th corner; he is the 4th corner (or the 3rd safety). Perhaps it is OK for Ryan to be the 5th corner and have few reps after Game 4 unless there are injuries. So, let the competition begin.

SAFETY
So, we are back to saying that Harmon had an OK rookie year, so he is ready to be our weakest starter on defense. If we had another choice, I think that few would consider Harmon a starter. He had and OK year. He should be our #3 safety and #2 safety if he steps up. A month or so ago, everyone was looking at Chung competing with Wilson for a roster spot and the #4 safety spot, and a player not likely to be a big part of the defense. Personally, I'm OK with Chung and Wilson battling it out with Harmon for #2 and #3 reps. However, I think few on this board are comfortable with this situation. Some think that Wilson COULD turn it around and make the team; but there is not much enthusiasm. So, we are really looking at McCourty-Harmon-Chung-Ebner, with Wilson as the camp injury backup. IMHO, in this passing league this is extremely weak.

THE EIGHTH AND NINTH DEFENSIVE BACK - THE #3 and #4 SAFETY
OK, the #10 DB, if there is one, is primarily a ST position, probably Ebner. I was roundly criticized a month ago when I thought that the #8 and #9 DB positions were important. After 4 weeks, we have 5 corners, 2 safeties and 1 special teamers; we have the 8 players that we usually activate. One of the corners will likely be inactive.

So, are we ready to depend on Chung for lots of reps? I expect that a new signee or draftee Thomas will take one of the roster spots.

BOTTOM LINE
For now, we can consider the move of a corner to safety as an illusion. If so, we should understand that consequence of that position is that Chung (or Wilson) is an INTEGRAL part of our defense, the #3 safety to be active in every game, and used in lots of situations.

You seem fine with this because we've started with worse safeties in the past. BE REAL! We are one injury away from being as bad as in the past. And we should be prepared for two injuries. Yes, the two injury contingency is probably to move a corner over, even if he didn't have many reps at safety before. I would note that our ONE injury contingency is to have Ebner play safety when we need a 3rd safety (we are probably not moving a corner to safety during a game). Are you ready for that?

IMHO, if all our corners remain as corners (which is fine), then our #1 free agent need at this point is to add a safety; some have suggested that we should re-sign Gregory.

This is why these kinds of debates are completely pointless in the late spring/early summer. There are things that can and probably will happen to make this whole debate futile, most notably injuries, competition, etc.

Strong CB play is a must, as some believe that it's the second most important positional grouping in the NFL aside from QB. We just had a season where L.Ryan showed glimpses of really being something, at least for a rookie. The only way to see if he's for real or not is to continue to allow him reps at that position, unless an emergency takes place, or he shows so much talent at safety that it warrants a permanent move for good.

We have questionable futures with just about all of our current CBs for one reason or another. We're crossing our fingers with Revis, even though we all know he'll be demanding top dollar and likely want something averaging in the mid teens per year, with crazy guarantees.We all hope it gets done, but it's nothing close to being anything close to a sure thing. There's a good chance that we won't know the answer to this question until Revis places other offers against what the Pats are offering in the early days of free agency.

Many are considering Arrington as having one foot out the door already, with the front office patiently waiting to correct their mistake when the season's over and a cap savings can be realized.

We're crossing our fingers that both of Browner and Dennard can not only stay out of trouble, but also remain injury free (not meaning to state that either is an injury problem, but it's a violent sport). And this all coming after a year when our 3rd round rookie pick in Ryan looked mediocre to good for a first year CB, our biggest competitor in Manning and DEN carved us up in the AFCCG, and the league has gone to a pass happy rules system? What is the obvious conclusion that one may draw from this?.....oh yeah, that he'll be our starting safety!!!!

The question that I am proposing to you is why do you continue to assume that Ryan will be a starting safety, per your comment of "needing a new safety in week 4 or 5?" You are insinuating that L.Ryan will not only be playing another position, but that he'll actually be starting? Why, due to the speculative media report? What matches up with Belichick:

1. Bringing in Patrick Chung
2. Reaching out to Mike Adams' agent
3. Not even bringing up a position change to Ryan himself
4. Using Harmon so far as the safety opposite of McCourty

It's one thing to give Ryan some different looks like we did last year at safety, but it's something altogether different to suggest that he's permanently moving there and that he won't be playing the position of CB. I'm just wondering why you continue to make this assumption, and what your thinking process is in doing so?

I'm not meaning to act like you're definitely wrong, because I have no idea. I'm just not understanding why you're so sure of things, that's all.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yes I'm aware of that. And I could be wrong, of course.

I would think that BB wants his best players on the field as much as possible, and I just don't see either Browner or Dennard sitting too much unless we play a lot of nickel.

I was just pointing it out as part of the discussion. While I don't think Arrington's going to get cut (he's also a STer), I do think that he was overpaid, and that makes him vulnerable.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

Camp outta be awesome when it comes to secondary battles. A slew of potential starters will be vying for jobs as they go head to head. I can't wait to see who wins out.

If we are doing predictions at this stage of the game ..... mark me down for Ryan ending up starting opposite Revis and Harmon opposite McCourty. Though this could easily end up being Dennard or Browner opposite Revis with Ryan in at safety. I'd be quite happy either way .... so long as Chung isn't seeing starters reps at safety.

 

[supafly]

So, are we ready to depend on Chung for lots of reps? I expect that a new signee or draftee Thomas will take one of the roster spots.

BOTTOM LINE
For now, we can consider the move of a corner to safety as an illusion. If so, we should understand that consequence of that position is that Chung (or Wilson) is an INTEGRAL part of our defense, the #3 safety to be active in every game, and used in lots of situations.

You seem fine with this because we've started with worse safeties in the past. BE REAL! We are one injury away from being as bad as in the past. And we should be prepared for two injuries. Yes, the two injury contingency is probably to move a corner over, even if he didn't have many reps at safety before. I would note that our ONE injury contingency is to have Ebner play safety when we need a 3rd safety (we are probably not moving a corner to safety during a game). Are you ready for that?

IMHO, if all our corners remain as corners (which is fine), then our #1 free agent need at this point is to add a safety; some have suggested that we should re-sign Gregory.

With all due respect mg, I just showed you that our 3rd safety last season received about 1/3 of the total reps---and that was due to having him start in a couple of games. Remember that Gregory only started in 11 games, and McCourty was banged up for another game or two as well, which forced Harmon to raise his rep percentage all the way up to a whopping 36%....

After that, Wilson was the 4th safety who saw about 2% of the snaps.

I agree with the thought of adding another safety like Gregory (for the depth role), or even a guy like Mike Adams as well. I highly disagree with the thought of "them being an INTEGRAL part of our defense." This idea of them "being used in lots of situations" is something that I think you've somehow created, and this could go back to your opinion that a dime back = a 3rd safety, which is very rare and hardly the case lately for use of big nickel situations. Most of the time it's a straight up 4th CB, or even a CB like Ryan seeing some limited snaps at safety like last season.

We have McCourty and Harmon right now, with Chung, Wilson, Thomas, and a safety to be named battling it out as a depth role. Just like any other season, we'll have a couple of positions that aren't as strong as others. One would hope that Belichick would explore an additional safety, and a guy like Gregory should be explored. He'd be an excellent S3-4.

There's also the thought that our improved DL, better coverage LB, and an improved CB corps will go a long way towards masking any weaknesses in our 3rd or 4th safety who are unlikely to see that many reps in the first place. Either way, I agree with you that a guy like Gregory or Adams would be fine competition with the rest for the 3rd/4th safety.

 

[Wheelman]

I hope Dennard can lineup against Alshon Jeffery against the Bears so we can see a rematch of the Capital One bowl.

 

[Deus Irae]

With all due respect mg, I just showed you that our 3rd safety last season received about 1/3 of the total reps---and that was due to having him start in a couple of games. Remember that Gregory only started in 11 games, and McCourty was banged up for another game or two as well, which forced Harmon to raise his rep percentage all the way up to a whopping 36%....

After that, Wilson was the 4th safety who saw about 2% of the snaps.

I agree with the thought of adding another safety like Gregory (for the depth role), or even a guy like Mike Adams as well. I highly disagree with the thought of "them being an INTEGRAL part of our defense." This idea of them "being used in lots of situations" is something that I think you've somehow created, and this could go back to your opinion that a dime back = a 3rd safety, which is very rare and hardly the case lately for use of big nickel situations. Most of the time it's a straight up 4th CB, or even a CB like Ryan seeing some limited snaps at safety like last season.

We have McCourty and Harmon right now, with Chung, Wilson, Thomas, and a safety to be named battling it out as a depth role. Just like any other season, we'll have a couple of positions that aren't as strong as others. One would hope that Belichick would explore an additional safety, and a guy like Gregory should be explored. He'd be an excellent S3-4.

There's also the thought that our improved DL, better coverage LB, and an improved CB corps will go a long way towards masking any weaknesses in our 3rd or 4th safety who are unlikely to see that many reps in the first place. Either way, I agree with you that a guy like Gregory or Adams would be fine competition with the rest for the 3rd/4th safety.

They still don't have a 2nd safety. This team has 1 safety worth a damn as of the end of last season.

 

[supafly]

They still don't have a 2nd safety. This team has 1 safety worth a damn as of the end of last season.

We have a bit of a difference of opinions as to how good/bad Harmon was last season. I believe that he was adequate enough/mediocre as a rookie to be given more opportunities, whereas you didn't see it the same way. Good or bad, he was a 3rd round draft pick, so it appears that's the guy we're going with. In that sense, the point about the starter opposite McCourty becomes a bit of a moot point, since it would appear that's who they've chosen.

The bottom line is that I personally don't much difference between our S3 from last year and this year no matter who it is, so that was my point. It wasn't great last year, it won't be great this year--but I don't believe it will be any worse, either.

If you're seeing that as a bit of a contradictory statement, I would suggest that 2014 Harmon will be better than 2013 Harmon, but that our S3 wasn't anything better than a rookie last year, so I don't see why we should be overly concerned at this point in June about it. It seems a bit of an overreaction in my opinion.

Now...I agree with you that we should be apprehensive of the S2 at this point, but that is going to happen with any rookie who is taking over a position. Only time will tell whether or not it works, but there's only one way to know, and that seems to be which way the decision is leaning at this point in time.

 

[supafly]

They still don't have a 2nd safety. This team has 1 safety worth a damn as of the end of last season.

In other words, while I, and many others would agree with you and your concern, the lack of addressing the position that much tends to lead me to believe that Belichick isn't quite as worried about it as we are. Not that it makes it any better, but there are always going to be positions of weakness on the team, and I think it will be masked and managed to the best of everyone's abilities. I don't foresee any major signings at this point in time, other than depth.

But that's a whole different spin off of the S3-S4 discussion that mgteich and I were having---not that we all don't share the same concerns with you.

 

[Joker]

Look, let's stop ****y footin' around. What we all want is a Kam Chancellor type at safety. A SS that BURIES Ray Rice at the 10 yard line, not bounce the eff off and let the little woman beater roll on into the end zone...and yes, I was there up close with Seacoast fan in 2012 and saw Rice run OVER Chung in the 2nd quarter...


1st and 10 at NE 15(No Huddle, Shotgun) R.Rice left guard to NE 7 for 8 yards (D.McCourty; K.Arrington).
2nd and 2 at NE 7(No Huddle) R.Rice right guard to NE 2 for 5 yards (B.Spikes).
1st and 2 at NE 2J.Flacco pass incomplete short left to D.Pitta.

2nd and 2 at NE 2R.Rice left end for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN. NE-P.Chung was injured during the play.

I do NOT want to see another Pats safety EVER bounce off a RB and get trampled on the way to a playoff TD. EVER AGAIN. Hit hit hit hit. Rice should have been nailed for a three yard loss for Chrissakes on the 1st and ten. When your RB blows away their SS your offense smells BLOOD. I want a SS that SMASHES a little bowling ball like Rice into the next time zone.

 

[supafly]

Look, let's stop ***** footin' around. What we all want is a Kam Chancellor type at safety. A SS that BURIES Ray Rice at the 10 yard line, not bounce the eff off and let the little woman beater roll on into the end zone...and yes, I was there up close with Seacoast fan in 2012 and saw Rice run OVER Chung in the 2nd quarter...

1st and 10 at NE 15(No Huddle, Shotgun) R.Rice left guard to NE 7 for 8 yards (D.McCourty; K.Arrington).
2nd and 2 at NE 7(No Huddle) R.Rice right guard to NE 2 for 5 yards (B.Spikes).
1st and 2 at NE 2J.Flacco pass incomplete short left to D.Pitta.

2nd and 2 at NE 2R.Rice left end for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN. NE-P.Chung was injured during the play.

I do NOT want to see another Pats safety EVER bounce off a RB and get trampled on the way to a playoff TD. EVER AGAIN. Hit hit hit hit. Rice should have been nailed for a three yard loss for Chrissakes on the 1st and ten. When your RB blows away their SS your offense smells BLOOD. I want a SS that SMASHES a little bowling ball like Rice into the next time zone.

I'm far from convinced that a guy like Pat Chung is even going to make the 53 man roster, Joker.

That said, I also see no problem with having Harmon as our starter opposite of McCourty. We all have concerns, which is reasonable, due to the fact that he looked mediocre, and was a rookie; but we see these kinds of moves made all the time where the rookie takes over. Only time will tell how well it works out or not.

I think that there's a good chance that Chung is nothing more than camp fodder who will be competing with Wilson, Thomas, Ebner, etc for the ST role of depth safety. My only point is that I think some overreaction is being made for various reasons, even if I fully understand and respect why that is occurring. As a whole, I feel much, much better about our secondary than in quite some time. I also expect an additional vet safety to be brought in sometime in the next month or so.