Possible Developmental Player 52 and/or 53

[mgteich]

It seems that we sometimes make room for a developmental player who expect to ride the bench for the year, probably never being active. My potential list includes
Chism
Baker
Polk
Dippre
Bryant
Gibbens
Larison (EDIT}

 

[DoubleDeluxe]

It seems that we sometimes make room for a developmental player who expect to ride the bench for the year, probably never being active. My potential list includes
Chism
Baker
Polk
Dippre
Bryant
GIbbens

I would add Larison on there. We could run with a FB this year, but that's not a guarantee

 

[Grogan14]

Baker and Polk will both be released.
Of course Chism will play at some point due to injury.
Dipper is TE 3 and will also play at some point when the inevitable Henry injury occurs.
Gibbens is going to start at LB multiple games.
RB's always get hurt so Larison will play.


Bryant is the only one who may ride the bench the whole season.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Chism, Larison, and Lampe are going to make the 53, as will almost all of their draft picks, that’s more than enough developmental players.

 

[n1997y]

It seems that we sometimes make room for a developmental player who expect to ride the bench for the year, probably never being active. My potential list includes
Chism
Baker
Polk
Dippre
Bryant
Gibbens
Larison (EDIT}

That usually is a prospect that’s too raw to play but too good to clear waivers and make it to the PS and too good to let go. Only a couple of your list fit that description.

Baker would make it to the PS, likely Dippre as well. Nobody will care whether Polk would make it to the PS. So those three will be cuts, possibly brought back on PS.

Gibbens and Chism will likely be playing this year.

Maybe Larison too, although with the depth at RB he might not get a lot of playing time. I think if he’s on the roster they’ll likely use him in a four RB rotation. And I expect he’ll be on the roster, he’s too good to cut even if he doesn’t get lots of touches.

Bryant might fit your description, but he’s also likely to see playing time if he’s on the roster IMO.

 

[DoubleDeluxe]

I would add Larison on there. We could run with a FB this year, but that's not a guarantee

Sorry, meant Lampe, but I would also include Larison on the list

Chism, Larison, and Lampe are going to make the 53, as will almost all of their draft picks, that’s more than enough developmental players.

Not sure all 3 will make the 53, but I think Larison and Chism are too good to clear waivers, so that may force the hand. Lampe not sure. Think he could clear waivers but if we are going to be employing a FB, one would think he will make it. If this comes to pass, Gibson would be sent packing I assume. We aren't going to have 5 backs on the 53.

 

[mgteich]

We aren't going to have 5 backs on the 53.

I'm @!00% fine with 3 active RB's (normal rotation), plus a FB plus an inactive backup RB.
2 QB
4 RB
1 FB
5 WR
======
2-3 TE
9-10 OL
================
1 ST (probably Hollins)
======
With regard to FB, I think that we will have one, either Lampe or a pickup from another team.

 

[rochrist]

fair enough

done

I'm @!00% fine with active 3 RB's (normal rotation), plus a FB plus an inactive backup RB.
2 QB
4 RB
1 FB
5 WR
======
2-3 TE
9-10 OL
================
1 ST (probably Hollins)

They're going to keep more than 5 WRs.

 

[mgteich]

They're going to keep more than 5 WRs.

Hollins is the 6th, or don't you think that he is good enough to be our #6 WR?

BTW, the number of yards for the #4, #5 and #6 WR is pretty small.

Absent injuries, I would expect 4 WR's to be active: Diggs, Pop, Williams and Hollins or another 4th WR). The 4th would get his normal 2-3 catches a game and the #5 and #6 would get nothing unless there is an injury and they are active to maybe get the 2-3 receptions a game. I expect Henry and one our RB's to be among the top 6 reception leaders (and among our top 6 targets in any game. The SEVENTH and EIGHTH targets are likely to be a 2nd RB and a 2nd TE.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Sorry, meant Lampe, but I would also include Larison on the list

Not sure all 3 will make the 53, but I think Larison and Chism are too good to clear waivers, so that may force the hand. Lampe not sure. Think he could clear waivers but if we are going to be employing a FB, one would think he will make it. If this comes to pass, Gibson would be sent packing I assume. We aren't going to have 5 backs on the 53.

I heard a report the other day that MacDaniels has always had a true FB as part of his offense.

 

[DoubleDeluxe]

I heard a report the other day that MacDaniels has always had a true FB as part of his offense.

Ya, I saw that as well. His offense will be similar, but not the exact same. Maye can do things Brady and other QBs Josh has had simply can't, so like any smart O-Coordinator he will tailor the O to what they do well. Not saying that they won't use a FB, I just wouldn't use history as a certainty for what this offense will be.

 

[n1997y]

I heard a report the other day that MacDaniels has always had a true FB as part of his offense.

Not sure if it was Josh, but I think I recall them using OL and DL players as FB occasionally. So nothing is a given.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Not sure if it was Josh, but I think I recall them using OL and DL players as FB occasionally. So nothing is a given.

The report I heard, I can’t remember if it was Bedard or Lazar, said that he always had a true FB on his offensive unit, not another positional player that they used to sub in as one.. I was surprised by it, as I knew he had used one regularly, but not every season.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Ya, I saw that as well. His offense will be similar, but not the exact same. Maye can do things Brady and other QBs Josh has had simply can't, so like any smart O-Coordinator he will tailor the O to what they do well. Not saying that they won't use a FB, I just wouldn't use history as a certainty for what this offense will be.

Actually, if the reporting that he is altering his offense to more of a power run game then I think it’s even more likely we will see a true FB on the roster. Especially given the fact that Vrabel wants to beat opponents up as much as possible. And if protecting the passer is their most critical need then having Lampe in the backfield would certainly help in achieving that goal.

 

[jdlboot14]

Baker and Polk will both be released.
Of course Chism will play at some point due to injury.
Dipper is TE 3 and will also play at some point when the inevitable Henry injury occurs.
Gibbens is going to start at LB multiple games.
RB's always get hurt so Larison will play.


Bryant is the only one who may ride the bench the whole season.

100% agree. I've been saying it since March, Henry & Hooper are old and due for at least a short term injury. We're going to need a TE that can play the prototype in-line position behind them. Maybe Bell has something to show, but Dippre or Westover need to be on PS to be ready for a few games.
And ditto for Pop - the way he's shaping up to be a real focal point of the offense, he's bound to get banged up, and Chism is the guy that should jump in.

 

[Wozzy]

Hard to predict, injury usually determines this. Some rookies are rushed into duty, some are destined to sit all season because the vets ahead of them stay healthy and keep producing. The important thing is to have talented depth behind the starters chomping at the bit for an opportunity.

 

[Family]

Nobody will care whether Polk would make it to the PS.

Polk has quite a Dead Cap hit VS what he would cost to keep on the roster.

If he's cut IMO it's the end. No PS. He would be done here.

Some team will give him another shot. At minimum Polk needs a change of scenery.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Not sure if it was Josh, but I think I recall them using OL and DL players as FB occasionally. So nothing is a given.

was it Chandler Jones who got inured while acting as a fullback?

 

[signbabybrady]

was it Chandler Jones who got inured while acting as a fullback?

I think it was Seymour.

They didn't do that sort of thing quite as much after that too.

Another Patriot down? Seymour might be out at Atlanta

The New England Patriots might be without three-time Pro Bowl defensive end Richard Seymour for Sunday's game in Atlanta.

www.espn.com

 

[Ring 6]

It seems that we sometimes make room for a developmental player who expect to ride the bench for the year, probably never being active. My potential list includes
Chism
Baker
Polk
Dippre
Bryant
Gibbens
Larison (EDIT}

Gibbens is going to play A LOT at LB. And special teams as well
He is a 3 year vet who has averaged about 40 defensive snaps and 16 ST snaps per game. He has 95 tackles in 14 games and 650 snaps in 2023.
He is not a developmental guy who will never be active, he is a key, and I expect him to be a starting Lb if he is 100% healthy.


I dint think we ever keep a guy on the 53 with the expectation to never play (other than at QB). There are too many injuries to expect you can get through a season with 51 guys.