47 Locks Or Close

mgteich said:

Yes, if Garcia shows that he is ready to play and protect the franchise, then Fleming is expendable. I won't hold my breath.

BTW, you can keep repeating that Fleming was cut. There may have been an agreement that he was coming back. In any case, the team believes that he is worth $1.8M a year, and is capable of backing up Solder. Of course, Garcia can show that he is ready. I don't think that anyone believed this going into the draft.

Click to expand...

IIRC, Fleming was cut the day after the final cut deadline in 2015, when practice squads were already being formed. Careful timing on that, and something the Pats have pulled before (though not always successfully).

I think what may keep Fleming around for 2017, despite his lack of upside, is his versatility. He's started and played full games for the Pats at every OL position but Center. Like I said, "Hochstein".

I doubt that Waddle could do that.

Given how quick some posters/others I've talked to are in dismissing the idea of Fleming making the roster, you would think that:

A) The Pats were loaded with versatility on the line
B) Completely stacked at C/G, thus limiting how many T's they carry
C) Destined to have the exact same unbelievable luck in terms of lack of injuries on the OL that they were last season

Brick27 said:

Given how quick some posters/others I've talked to are in dismissing the idea of Fleming making the roster

Click to expand...

No one is dismissing his chances of making it, just saying that he's not a virtual lock.

You can sing this thread this thread title to the tune of 99 Red Balloons.

Thanks for the earworm.

maineman209 said:

I don't think any of the active RBs will have a substantial, regular ST role aside from returning. Typically they don't, certainly not on coverage units. In 2013 and 2015, when Bolden was called upon to actively participate as an RB, his 15-20 ST snaps/game were reduced to a handful.

Click to expand...

Burkhead, Gillislee and White all got paid and I just dont see the 4th RB as a lock and paying White and not Lewis would suggest that Lewis is the 4th RB. I still think he will make the team but im not going to be floored if Bolden or someone else makes it over him because the 4th RB is either going to be inactive a lot of games or play ST.

meatface said:

Burkhead, Gillislee and White all got paid and I just dont see the 4th RB as a lock and paying White and not Lewis would suggest that Lewis is the 4th RB. I still think he will make the team but im not going to be floored if Bolden or someone else makes it over him because the 4th RB is either going to be inactive a lot of games or play ST.

Click to expand...

Some think that Burkhead can take over Bolden's spot on special teams thus making him expendable, but those are big shoes to fill in my opinion. We will see.

Some will have it one way, while others will have it another way, and I'm sure it's something we'll debate until Sept. The good news is that the competition has been improved, so that's the main point, for me.

meatface said:

Burkhead, Gillislee and White all got paid and I just dont see the 4th RB as a lock and paying White and not Lewis would suggest that Lewis is the 4th RB. I still think he will make the team but im not going to be floored if Bolden or someone else makes it over him because the 4th RB is either going to be inactive a lot of games or play ST.

Click to expand...

Could be that a 4th RB isn't a lock. However, the last time they carried only three was 2007.

In 2012 & 2013 they had 4 RBs including Bolden (UDFA). Those were Bolden's first two seasons and, although he was used extensively on ST, he was also used a fair amount at RB:
... 101/555 (4.9 ypa), 5 TDs rushing
... 23 catches on 31 tgts (74% catch rate) for 163 yards

His extensive use on ST as the 4th RB was likely possible because he's a relatively big guy. Sizes of the RBs on the current 90-man roster are ...

Burkhead, 5102/214
Gillislee, 5111/208
White, 5100/205
Foster, 6000/195
Lewis, 5080/195

Bolden, 5017/225
LeShun Daniels, 5107/225 (not quite as athletic as Bolden, but close in some ways).

The point being that - if either Lewis or Foster is the 4th RB, they very likely won't be playing the coverage snaps (blocking and tackling) that Bolden does. Burkhead obviously could, but $3.15M seems an awful lot for a 4th RB/special-teamer (3x what Bolden has been getting), so I have to guess that the Pats expectations for his participation as an RB are much higher, and they seemed fairly aggressive going after him. I suppose it could shake out that way, though ...

Gillislee
White
Lewis/Foster
Burkhead (4th RB/ST)

This would be similar to 2012 & 2013, and could allow the Pats to keep a 4th TE or a 6th WR (not including Slater, of course).

Or, it could end up ...

Gillislee + Burkhead sharing lead carries
White + Lewis or Foster as 3rd-down/receiving back
Bolden (or Daniels) as deep reserve RB/special teamer

In terms of salary cap ...
Burkhead - $3.15M hit, $1.1M dead money (if cut)
Lewis - $1.49M hit - $200k dead money
Bolden - $695k hit, $50k dead money
Foster - $540k hit - zero dead money
Daniels - $465k hit - zero dead money

Training Camp will ultimately tell the tale.

BelichickFan said:

We'll see, it's a matter of whether they keep an extra OT. Keeping both draftees and Fleming is one more than last year's Fleming and Waddle. We've cut Fleming once and he made it to the PS, not sure he's a guy they'll be too concerned about cutting.

Click to expand...

That was then, and this is now. He has continued to develop, and is much better in multiple roles as he develops. He may even be the prime backup on the interior, at Guard, and not Karras.

It's gonna be one HELL of a training camp. Competition EVERYWHERE.

Are you suggesting that Develin coming back doesn't affect this decision?

IMHO, Develin is here to stay. Bill and Josh really like what he brings.

We should look at the total of running backs, and all the roles:

1st down backs (Gillislie plus 1)
3rd down back (White)
fullback (Develin)
emergency back
special teams role

So, sure, we could go with 5, which could include Bolden and Develin. ;having only 3 RB's we actually want to have carrying the ball.

I understand that we could carry a FB INSTEAD of a 3rd TE, but I don't think that this is really an option.

One OPEN question is whether someone else can take Bolden's role on special teams (with no loss of talent), allowing us to keep both Bulkhead and Lewis. I don't think that we can carry 6 RB/FB's.

maineman209 said:

Could be that a 4th RB isn't a lock. However, the last time they carried only three was 2007.

In 2012 & 2013 they had 4 RBs including Bolden (UDFA). Those were Bolden's first two seasons and, although he was used extensively on ST, he was also used a fair amount at RB:
... 101/555 (4.9 ypa), 5 TDs rushing
... 23 catches on 31 tgts (74% catch rate) for 163 yards

His extensive use on ST as the 4th RB was likely possible because he's a relatively big guy. Sizes of the RBs on the current 90-man roster are ...

Burkhead, 5102/214
Gillislee, 5111/208
White, 5100/205
Foster, 6000/195
Lewis, 5080/195

Bolden, 5017/225
LeShun Daniels, 5107/225 (not quite as athletic as Bolden, but close in some ways).

The point being that - if either Lewis or Foster is the 4th RB, they very likely won't be playing the coverage snaps (blocking and tackling) that Bolden does. Burkhead obviously could, but $3.15M seems an awful lot for a 4th RB/special-teamer (3x what Bolden has been getting), so I have to guess that the Pats expectations for his participation as an RB are much higher, and they seemed fairly aggressive going after him. I suppose it could shake out that way, though ...

Gillislee
White
Lewis/Foster
Burkhead (4th RB/ST)

This would be similar to 2012 & 2013, and could allow the Pats to keep a 4th TE or a 6th WR (not including Slater, of course).

Or, it could end up ...

Gillislee + Burkhead sharing lead carries
White + Lewis or Foster as 3rd-down/receiving back
Bolden (or Daniels) as deep reserve RB/special teamer

In terms of salary cap ...
Burkhead - $3.15M hit, $1.1M dead money (if cut)
Lewis - $1.49M hit - $200k dead money
Bolden - $695k hit, $50k dead money
Foster - $540k hit - zero dead money
Daniels - $465k hit - zero dead money

Training Camp will ultimately tell the tale.

Click to expand...

mgteich said:

Are you suggesting that Develin coming back doesn't affect this decision?

IMHO, Develin is here to stay. Bill and Josh really like what he brings.

We should look at the total of running backs, and all the roles:

1st down backs (Gillislie plus 1)
3rd down back (White)
fullback (Develin)
emergency back
special teams role

So, sure, we could go with 5, which could include Bolden and Develin. ;having only 3 RB's we actually want to have carrying the ball.

I understand that we could carry a FB INSTEAD of a 3rd TE, but I don't think that this is really an option.

One OPEN question is whether someone else can take Bolden's role on special teams (with no loss of talent), allowing us to keep both Bulkhead and Lewis. I don't think that we can carry 6 RB/FB's.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that Develin probably factors less into the RB count than the TE count.

Last season, the Pats started with 3 RB + Bolden (Lewis on PUP), and 3 healthy TEs (+ Gronk on the bench) + Develin. So, total RBs, TEs & FB on the roster was 9.

Harbor was gone after Gronk got ~"full snaps" v BUF (WK-4)
Derby was traded after WK-6 (CIN)... down to 2 healthy TE + Develin
Lengel was signed after WK-8, going into the BYE. Gronk was still healthy at this point, so back up to 3 TE + Develin.
Lewis was activated off PUP for SEA (WK-10) and no RB was cut, so the roster was back up to ...
... 4 RB + Bolden + Develin + 3 TE = 9 total.

However, I think Gronk may have been injured during WK-10 (late in the game?).

Gronk sat WK-11 (@SFO) and tried to play WK-12 (@NYJ), but only got 7 snaps.
Lengel played WK-11, instead.
Develin saw a significant snap increase beginning in WK-12 and his first pass targets of the season, in effect becoming the 3rd TE the rest of the way.

Anyway, max total RB/FB/TE count on the roster might then be 9.

If O'Shaughnessy's ST skills are really that good (8 tackles in 2016), he could displace Bolden. That would result in ...
4 RB ("real" ones) + 4 TE (including O'Shaughnessy + possibly Lengel) + Develin ... 9 total.

NOTE: Develin also plays a fair amount on ST on blocking units (but not on coverage units as Bolden does).

maineman209 said:

It seems to me that Develin probably factors less into the RB count than the TE count.

Last season, the Pats started with 3 RB + Bolden (Lewis on PUP), and 3 healthy TEs (+ Gronk on the bench) + Develin. So, total RBs, TEs & FB on the roster was 9.

Harbor was gone after Gronk got ~"full snaps" v BUF (WK-4)
Derby was traded after WK-6 (CIN)... down to 2 healthy TE + Develin
Lengel was signed after WK-8, going into the BYE. Gronk was still healthy at this point, so back up to 3 TE + Develin.
Lewis was activated off PUP for SEA (WK-10) and no RB was cut, so the roster was back up to ...
... 4 RB + Bolden + Develin + 3 TE = 9 total.

However, I think Gronk may have been injured during WK-10 (late in the game?).

Gronk sat WK-11 (@SFO) and tried to play WK-12 (@NYJ), but only got 7 snaps.
Lengel played WK-11, instead.
Develin saw a significant snap increase beginning in WK-12 and his first pass targets of the season, in effect becoming the 3rd TE the rest of the way.

Anyway, max total RB/FB/TE count on the roster might then be 9.

If O'Shaughnessy's ST skills are really that good (8 tackles in 2016), he could displace Bolden. That would result in ...
4 RB ("real" ones) + 4 TE (including O'Shaughnessy + possibly Lengel) + Develin ... 9 total.

NOTE: Develin also plays a fair amount on ST on blocking units (but not on coverage units as Bolden does).

Click to expand...

I hear you. IMHO, NINE is one too many for these positions with 3 QB's, 6 WR's and 8-9 OL's. The total of 26-27 is simply too high. Do you disagree?

On defense, we could have 24-26. We seem to want to carry 14 front seven on defense (including a special teamer or two) and 11 defensive backs (including STers).
====
Obviously, now is not the time to decide the final roster allocation. We don'e even do that until at least Week 3 of the regular season.

BTW, I have no problem with adding O'Shaughnessy as one of 2 STers on offense (not counting returners).

I would note that we are able carry 6 WR's this year, because the number includes 2 punt returners plus a pro-bowl special teamer.

OFFENSE (25)
3 QB Brady, Garappolo, Brissett
5 WR (include PR) Cooks, Edelman, Hogan, Mitchell, Amendola
4 RB Gillislie, Burkhead, White, Lewis, Foster (on PS),
1 FB Develin
2 TE Gronkowski, Allen
4 OT Solder, Cannon, Garcia, McDermott/Fleming/Williams
1 C Andrews
3 OG Thuney, Mason, Karras/fa
2 ST Slater, O'Shaughnessy/Bolden

Personally, I'd rather go with 3 RB's on the 53 and add a TE or an OG/C. In any case, this is an OK place to start as a roster which includes 27 positions (the 25 list plus a TE and an OG/C.

AzPatsFan said:

That was then, and this is now. He has continued to develop, and is much better in multiple roles as he develops. He may even be the prime backup on the interior, at Guard, and not Karras.

Click to expand...

We had one Game Day backup for the THREE interior lineman, including CENTER. Fleming isn't backing up at center, or at RG (but that's another story).

mgteich said:

Are you suggesting that Develin coming back doesn't affect this decision?

IMHO, Develin is here to stay. Bill and Josh really like what he brings.

We should look at the total of running backs, and all the roles:

1st down backs (Gillislie plus 1)
3rd down back (White)
fullback (Develin)
emergency back
special teams role

So, sure, we could go with 5, which could include Bolden and Develin. ;having only 3 RB's we actually want to have carrying the ball.

I understand that we could carry a FB INSTEAD of a 3rd TE, but I don't think that this is really an option.

One OPEN question is whether someone else can take Bolden's role on special teams (with no loss of talent), allowing us to keep both Bulkhead and Lewis. I don't think that we can carry 6 RB/FB's.

Click to expand...

Rex Burkhead

www.patriots.com/team/players/roster/rex-burkhead

Biography

He also has 27 special teams tackles, including consecutive 10-plus tackle seasons with 11 in 2015 and 12 in 2016.

ATippett56 said:

Rex Burkhead

www.patriots.com/team/players/roster/rex-burkhead

Biography

He also has 27 special teams tackles, including consecutive 10-plus tackle seasons with 11 in 2015 and 12 in 2016.

Click to expand...

I understand that Bulkhead is a special teamer.

Are you suggesting that our highest paid RB since 2010 will be used primarily on special teams?

mgteich said:

I understand that Bulkhead is a special teamer.

Are you suggesting that our highest paid RB since 2010 will be used primarily on special teams?

Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that Brandon Bolden is not expendable?

mgteich said:

I understand that Bulkhead is a special teamer.

Are you suggesting that our highest paid RB since 2010 will be used primarily on special teams?

Click to expand...

Highest paid running back, huh?

James White
3 yr(s) - $12.0 million

www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-england-patriots/james-white-14541/

Mike Gillislee
2 yr(s) - $6.40 million

www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-england-patriots/mike-gillislee-12446/

Rex Burkhead
1 yr(s) - $3.15 million

www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-england-patriots/rex-burkhead-12472/

mgteich said:

OFFENSE (25)
3 QB Brady, Garappolo, Brissett
5 WR (include PR) Cooks, Edelman, Hogan, Mitchell, Amendola
4 RB Gillislie, Burkhead, White, Lewis, Foster (on PS),
1 FB Develin
2 TE Gronkowski, Allen
4 OT Solder, Cannon, Garcia, McDermott/Fleming/Williams
1 C Andrews
3 OG Thuney, Mason, Karras/fa
2 ST Slater, O'Shaughnessy/Bolden

Personally, I'd rather go with 3 RB's on the 53 and add a TE or an OG/C. In any case, this is an OK place to start as a roster which includes 27 positions (the 25 list plus a TE and an OG/C.

Click to expand...

Good stuff. This will be one of our most debatable subjects for the next 4 months (it will feel good to put Jimmy G on the shelf for awhile.)

I think (T) McDermott will be an excellent PS candidate, and at this point, I also would consider Mike Williams strictly a TE, not a tackle.

It's quite possible that Williams' main competition will come from Devlin, O'Shaughnessy, and even Bolden (ST only).

As it stands now, I'd have Solder, Cannon, Garcia, and Fleming as our 4 tackles. My one real concern with your 25 would be whether or not we may be one short at the IOL position. Other than that, I think you did a real nice job fitting everyone in.

I would too would be more comfortable with another IOL.

supafly said:

Good stuff. This will be one of our most debatable subjects for the next 4 months (it will feel good to put Jimmy G on the shelf for awhile.)

I think (T) McDermott will be an excellent PS candidate, and at this point, I also would consider Mike Williams strictly a TE, not a tackle.

It's quite possible that Williams' main competition will come from Devlin, O'Shaughnessy, and even Bolden (ST only).

As it stands now, I'd have Solder, Cannon, Garcia, and Fleming as our 4 tackles. My one real concern with your 25 would be whether or not we may be one short at the IOL position. Other than that, I think you did a real nice job fitting everyone in.

Click to expand...