This year's UDFA to make the team?

Sure they do. Sometimes they've carried 8.

pats1 said:

I'd probably put Andrews on over Santonio Thomas. The Pats usually don't carry 7 DLs.

Click to expand...

None of this logic seems relevant to whether any of the undrafted free agents will make the team, unless you're simply undervaluing special teams. Yes, a Ster, who happens to be a promising OLB could beat out Andrews. I have no reason to believe that player would be UDFA.

dryheat44 said:

The flaw in this line of thinking is setting up a number of slots per position based on history. Belichick will find a way to keep his best 53 players. We could keep six OLBs, at the expense of one ILB and one DB. There's no reason not to dump a DB who plays almost exclusively STs (Andrews, Mitchell, Ventrone) and replace him with a promising OLB who will play almost exclusively STs for now.

Click to expand...

This is the best thread going on now on the site IMO.
With the depth we appear to have on Defense it seems exciting.
We need to expect probably 2 guys get IRed prior to week 1.
Probably andrews saying goodbye.
Probably 1 or so guys traded away for conditional 2009 picks.
But the depth looks tremendous!

What do people think of Henry Smith? I'm intrigued by his write-up in Sporting news which twice references him as a good two-gap defensive tackle, and notes him as strong at the POA. A potential Wilfork backup?

BradyManny2344 said:

What do people think of Henry Smith? I'm intrigued by his write-up in Sporting news which twice references him as a good two-gap defensive tackle, and notes him as strong at the POA. A potential Wilfork backup?

Click to expand...

Here's SI.com's brief write-up on Mr. Smith:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2008/draft/players/3097.html

If you go to USAToday.com's Draft Database, NFLDraftScout ranks him #396 overall and "would be a great steal as a FA."

I'm glad that he was signed, but I'm not sure that he can beat out our other Mr. Smith. LeKevin was more productive at Nebraska than Henry was at A&M, and for a longer time. LeKevin also carried a draftable grade in '06. BTW, how much does the Widowmaker weigh, anyhoo? I've seen it listed anywhere from 305 - 320, and his height from 6'1" - 6'3".

Speaking of UDFAs, I cannot wait for the day when Alexander and Izzo are no longer on the 53 and handcuffing our depth, talent level, youth and versatility at LB. And Pierre Woods better spend less time acting as Chicken Legs Crable's personal tour guide, and more time with the Juggs machine before Vincent Redd takes (I hope) the 4th OLB spot.

Gary Guyton is a much better LB than Lil' Bo Peep Ruud, but his very less-than-mediocre strength must be improved by TC, if he has any hope of becoming one of the backup WILBs.

I don't expect either of the TE UDFAs to survive, because what this team needs from its 3rd TE is superior blocking, and neither Stupar nor DeVree are better blockers than Spach.

The interior of our OL needs upgrading (see: SB 42), but I don't know if Ryan Wendell can unseat either Hochstein or Yates as a backup C/G. But someone needs to, and that right soon.

Mike Dragosavich needs to bring his business suit to Foxborough, and leave his clown suit at home. The opportunity of a lifetime awaits.

The rest of the UDFAs = TC fodder, and nothing more.

I hope the Pats don't use the Justin Rodgers approach with Redd and

Guyton if they show promise.

Jimke said:

I hope the Pats don't use the Justin Rodgers approach with Redd and

Guyton if they show promise.

Click to expand...

Eggs-actly, Batman. If Redd and/or Guyton are worthy of further investment, then 1 or 2 of Izzo, Alexander and Woods should be released and placed on the shadow roster, if unclaimed.

If the team thought that Justin Rogers would contribute more (or even close to as much as) Alexander or Woods, then he would have been on the 53 man squad. If Redd or Guyton is close, then one of them will be on the 53. I just don't think that it will happen.

What will happen is that rookies that many on this board would have on the 53 will be cut, and veterans will be kept, as is always the case.

mgteich said:

If the team thought that Justin Rogers would contribute more (or even close to as much as) Alexander or Woods or f#%)(ing Chad Brown, then he would have been on the 53 man squad. If Redd or Guyton is close, then one of them will be on the 53. I just don't think that it will happen.

What will happen is that rookies that many on this board would have on the 53 will be cut, and veterans will be kept, as is always the case.

Click to expand...

I fixed your post for you.

tombonneau said:

I think I read one of the TEs in camp was long-snapping. I'd MUCH rather have a legit #4 TE as the longsnapper rather than use the roster spot for a specialist who can only snap.

Click to expand...

Much as we might like to think otherwise, apparently Paxton is so good at what he does that Belichick is willing to put up with the lack of flexibility there.

mgteich said:

If the team thought that Justin Rogers would contribute more (or even close to as much as) Alexander or Woods, then he would have been on the 53 man squad. If Redd or Guyton is close, then one of them will be on the 53. I just don't think that it will happen.

What will happen is that rookies that many on this board would have on the 53 will be cut, and veterans will be kept, as is always the case.

Click to expand...

I'm glad the Patriots didn't use your logic in 2000 when Tom Brady

was nowhere near as good as Bledsoe, Friesz, and Bishop.

mgteich said:

What will happen is that rookies that many on this board would have on the 53 will be cut, and veterans will be kept, as is always the case.

Click to expand...

And that would be a shame, esp. if those vets are Izzo and Alexander.

ctpatsfan77 said:

I fixed your post for you.

Click to expand...

And that's what pisses me off, is that a draft pick with some size and some promise was exposed to waivers so that Chad Effin Brown could be kept on the 53. Stupidly short-sighted by the FO. Same with Garrett Mills, in favor of Dave Thomas, who should've been PUP'ed to start the season.

ctpatsfan77 said:

Much as we might like to think otherwise, apparently Paxton is so good at what he does that Belichick is willing to put up with the lack of flexibility there.

Click to expand...

BB has supposedly said that if you can only do one thing, then you better do it very, very well. Paxton can long-snap very, very well; he's probably the NFL's best at it.

Would I like to have a long-snapper who can also serve as a legit #3/4 TE, or #2 FB, or #2/3 C? Heck yes; but until one is found who can do as well as Paxton does now, then that one piece of inflexibility will have to be made-up somewhere else, as it has been for the past 7 years.

Why is there an obsession to dump an UDFA OLB conversion in his third year with the team (Woods) in favor of an UDFA OLB conversion in his first year with the team? In two years you will be saying the same thing... because Redd will take time to develop as well.

captain stone said:

And that's what pisses me off, is that a draft pick with some size and some promise was exposed to waivers so that Chad Effin Brown could be kept on the 53. Stupidly short-sighted by the FO. Same with Garrett Mills, in favor of Dave Thomas, who should've been PUP'ed to start the season.

Click to expand...

I agree with you on the PUPping portion of that argument, but I don't think that they would have kept Mills on the 53-man roster in any case. [OTOH, it does speak to how highly BB thinks of Thomas that he was willing to hold a roster spot for him that way.]

On the flip side, Rogers is still slated to become an RFA in 2010. . . .

bradmahn said:

Why is there an obsession to dump an UDFA OLB conversion in his third year with the team (Woods) in favor of an UDFA OLB conversion in his first year with the team? In two years you will be saying the same thing... because Redd will take time to develop as well.

Click to expand...

Strange, isn't it? Not to mention all the complaining about giving up fresh young Justin Rogers in favor of old, washed-up 2nd-year man Woods.

patchick said:

Strange, isn't it? Not to mention all the complaining about giving up fresh young Justin Rogers in favor of old, washed-up 2nd-year man Woods.

Click to expand...

Patchick--at least outside this thread, I can't remember anyone making that argument; most people who are p#(%ed about it felt it was a decision to keep Chad Brown over Rogers.

ctpatsfan77 said:

Patchick--at least outside this thread, I can't remember anyone making that argument; most people who are p#(%ed about it felt it was a decision to keep Chad Brown over Rogers.

Click to expand...

True, the Chad Brown debacle was inexplicable. But it seems like people tend to use Chad Brown as the guy who took spots from Rogers, Mills, Elgin etc.

I indicated at the time that Bishop should have been cut. I certainly didn't want four QB's.

Jimke said:

I'm glad the Patriots didn't use your logic in 2000 when Tom Brady

was nowhere near as good as Bledsoe, Friesz, and Bishop.

Click to expand...