John Lynch visiting

MrBigglesWorth said:

why was he cut then? I thought he couldn't cover

Click to expand...

He can't ....

JSn said:

So, who was right? Finally, one of those "so and so got cut, let's grab him" threads gets at least a hint of street cred.

Click to expand...

Not this guy...

PatsWickedPissah said:

Just Say NO!

Mods - any way we can create a bot that will detect all "X is now available, should we sign him?" threads and post the above?

Click to expand...

Those posts are far more annoying than the threads that provoke them.

PATRIOTSFANINPA said:

I just wonder about the fact that Mike Shanahan let him go and if there is an equal when it comes to smart Head Coaches then Belichick has competition with Shanahan who is definately a very intelligent coach and overall is pretty successful as well.

Maybe Shanahan sees there is little left in the tank for Lynch

Click to expand...

Your concerns are valid, no question. But his role here would be smaller and he would be making less money. I think it's worth a shot.

RayClay said:

Denver plays a 4-3 defense. Could be is days as a starting safety are over, but he could extend himself with this hybrid ilb/s role in the 3-4. He's a smart guy and probably saw the handwriting on the wall.

Click to expand...

The 4-3/3-4 fronts don't make any difference in this.

There's nothing particularly exotic about package that replaced a LB w/ a safety -- it's called the big nickel, and it's been around for years. It's just seeing more use of late as a response to offenses using more 3 WR or 2 TE sets, and less FBs. And it can be done just as easily w/ a 4-3 as a 3-4.

Disco Volante said:

Those posts are far more annoying than the threads that provoke them.

Click to expand...

Very true. One stimulates discussion; the other stimulates arguments.

Any further word on Lynch? Has the physical that Denver Post reported been confirmed by any Boston media outlets?

This thread isn't about someone being cut, it's about someone coming here for a visit. Two different things. Lynch is a player the Pats have actually shown interest in, not just "someone got cut so should we, shouldn't we".

PATRIOTSFANINPA said:

I just wonder about the fact that Mike Shanahan let him go and if there is an equal when it comes to smart Head Coaches then Belichick has competition with Shanahan who is definately a very intelligent coach and overall is pretty successful as well.

Maybe Shanahan sees there is little left in the tank for Lynch

That being said, I would still like to see him at least play 1 game as a Patriot

Click to expand...

Mike Shannahan also just signed Tyrone Poole. What Shannahan did and how Lynch fit into that defense and how he will fit into the Pats defense are not the same thing and irrelevant when discussing whether or not to sign Lynch. I feel it would be a wise move to sign Lynch, as I said in the last thread about him: http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=945921#post945921. The most important thing it would do would give us with two QBs on D at all times if he and Rodney alternate at the same spot.

tombonneau said:

Very true. One stimulates discussion; the other stimulates arguments.

Any further word on Lynch? Has the physical that Denver Post reported been confirmed by any Boston media outlets?

Click to expand...

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2008/08/reiss_on_lynch.html

lamafist said:

The 4-3/3-4 fronts don't make any difference in this.

There's nothing particularly exotic about package that replaced a LB w/ a safety -- it's called the big nickel, and it's been around for years. It's just seeing more use of late as a response to offenses using more 3 WR or 2 TE sets, and less FBs. And it can be done just as easily w/ a 4-3 as a 3-4.

Click to expand...

Of course there's a difference. Every position in the front seven is different between a 4-3 and 3-4, to say that has no affect on the secondary is crazy. I'm no expert by any stretch, but my general understanding is that a lot of the 4-3 teams are playing Cover 2s these days and 3-4, at least Belichick's, seems to come w the Cover 3. The responsibilities for both CBs, the FS and SS are different in both coverage schemes.

BradyManny2344 said:

Of course there's a difference. Every position in the front seven is different between a 4-3 and 3-4, to say that has no affect on the secondary is crazy. I'm no expert by any stretch, but my general understanding is that a lot of the 4-3 teams are playing Cover 2s these days and 3-4, at least Belichick's, seems to come w the Cover 3. The responsibilities for both CBs, the FS and SS are different in both coverage schemes.

Click to expand...

I am not an expert either but the Patriots play a lot of cover 2 as well.

cstjohn17 said:

I am not an expert either but the Patriots play a lot of cover 2 as well.

Click to expand...

Yes but I believe they are in the cover 3 more often. Again, I'm no expert and this is just what I've gathered from others on the board. It would let Lynch move up into the box and play the typical Rodney & Tank (pre injury) role. Bottom line - the Pats are in a position to use his strengths and downplay his weaknesses, a position he wouldn't be in if he was playing in a cover 2 all the time and being asked to cover more of the deep part of the field. I don't know what coverage the Broncos employ.

BradyManny2344 said:

Yes but I believe they are in the cover 3 more often. Again, I'm no expert and this is just what I've gathered from others on the board. It would let Lynch move up into the box and play the typical Rodney & Tank (pre injury) role. Bottom line - the Pats are in a position to use his strengths and downplay his weaknesses, a position he wouldn't be in if he was playing in a cover 2 all the time and being asked to cover more of the deep part of the field. I don't know what coverage the Broncos employ.

Click to expand...

If he has anything left in the tank, it would be a great signing. Lynch has always been good hanging around the line of scrimmage and making plays. This really disrupted the Pats offense in the '05 playoff game in Denver. Although he isn't the best in coverage, he hits like a ton of bricks and would give this defense an extra spark. Like another poster said, it would be like having another "QB" playing on the defensive side of the ball. I hope the Pats sign him because they are very thin at safety.

BradyManny2344 said:

Of course there's a difference. Every position in the front seven is different between a 4-3 and 3-4, to say that has no affect on the secondary is crazy. I'm no expert by any stretch, but my general understanding is that a lot of the 4-3 teams are playing Cover 2s these days and 3-4, at least Belichick's, seems to come w the Cover 3. The responsibilities for both CBs, the FS and SS are different in both coverage schemes.

Click to expand...

All teams use cover 2 and cover 3 both, as well as cover 1 and 4, and there are many, many variations within each of these categories. A cover 3 can have 2 deep CBs and one safety partrolling the middle, or two safeties and a corner deep -- and the responsibilities of both the LBs and secondary will be very different just between these two cover 3s.

But all that's really neither here nor there. The comment I was responding to was suggesting that the Pats using a 3-4 and the Broncos a 4-3 would affect how much of a role Lynch might have as a nickel safety -- and in that regard, it makes no difference. Yes, there is a difference in the x's and o's and distribution of responsibility in nickel packages behind a 4-3 vs. a 3-4, but both defenses are more than capable of going into a big nickel, and have been doing so for years.

Really, ALL teams are going to be using that type of package a lot more this year -- it's just the natural evolution of defenses responding to the spread passing games more and more offenses are using.

Thus, the Pats aren't really promising any -more- of a roll to Lynch. Still, it's fair to say that the quality of his role in NE could be more attractive to Lynch even if there's no difference in quality.

He is going to have to pass a physical first, after that we shall see, if he is in to replace tank williams, im for it...

lamafist said:

All teams use cover 2 and cover 3 both, as well as cover 1 and 4, and there are many, many variations within each of these categories. A cover 3 can have 2 deep CBs and one safety partrolling the middle, or two safeties and a corner deep -- and the responsibilities of both the LBs and secondary will be very different just between these two cover 3s.

But all that's really neither here nor there. The comment I was responding to was suggesting that the Pats using a 3-4 and the Broncos a 4-3 would affect how much of a role Lynch might have as a nickel safety -- and in that regard, it makes no difference. Yes, there is a difference in the x's and o's and distribution of responsibility in nickel packages behind a 4-3 vs. a 3-4, but both defenses are more than capable of going into a big nickel, and have been doing so for years.

Really, ALL teams are going to be using that type of package a lot more this year -- it's just the natural evolution of defenses responding to the spread passing games more and more offenses are using.

Thus, the Pats aren't really promising any -more- of a roll to Lynch. Still, it's fair to say that the quality of his role in NE could be more attractive to Lynch even if there's no difference in quality.

Click to expand...

Good breakdown, welcome aboard. I should also mention another important criteria, his wife is very hot.

Zeke_Mowatt said:

In all seriousness, it's not like we looked at Tank and thought "blazing speed" so I'm not sure why some are unsure about bringing in a 1 year replacement while Tank rehabs for that hybrid role?

Click to expand...

We didn't think of Tank and "blazing speed?" I thought it was patchick who looked up Tank's 40 times when he came into the league and had him running a 4.4 or some such. Whatever it was he would have been the fastest Safety we had before Spann was moved back.

ESPN's John Clayton reports that the Patriots are interested in signing John Lynch as long as he passes a physical.
Lynch would likely play 10-20 plays per game in packages suited to his strengths. Clayton points out that coach Bill Belichick is "the best at figuring out ways to use veterans and not wear them out." Aug. 13 - 9:02 pm et
Source: ESPN.com

Click to expand...

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/pl...news.asp?sport=NFL&id=1921&line=119935&spln=1

BradyManny2344 said:

He's about the same size as Tank (6'2 220, Tank was 6'3 220+) and has the same reputation (good against the run, a little weak in coverage for a safety).

Click to expand...

Well, if I recall, when the Tank signing was first announced, some idiot had the audacity to contest Tank's poor coverage reputation in addition to numerous scouting postings from the experts confirming this reputation. That idiot actually said Tank could cover and covered guys like Fauria and Centers well in the past. Further, that same idiot resurrected the Lynch post once Tank went down and wanted the Pats to sign Lynch.

Given how they intended to use Tank, do you think if Lynch signs he'd fill Tanks void??

Click to expand...

I think the idiot would say yes.

Good move by the Pats Front Office. If this is true, and the deal is completed. This could allow BB and staff to be more free flowing in their play of Rodney with blitzes and what not. With the ossible insurance of Lynch, this certainly allows for more creative defensive packages.

lamafist said:

The 4-3/3-4 fronts don't make any difference in this.

There's nothing particularly exotic about package that replaced a LB w/ a safety -- it's called the big nickel, and it's been around for years. It's just seeing more use of late as a response to offenses using more 3 WR or 2 TE sets, and less FBs. And it can be done just as easily w/ a 4-3 as a 3-4.

Click to expand...

Correct me if I am wrong but I believe the Big Nickel actually replaced the Nickel corner with a Safety actually creating a bigger nickel package size wise. Replacing a LB with a safety is not quite the same as it actually makes a little smaller though it is probably the better option of the two because lets not forget the Nickel is a coverage formation and by replacing the corner you actually might hurt that a touch.

Basically I am saying that I think the big nickel kind of failed but BB was onto something and seems to have found a variation on it that works and the good thing about this is it kind of dares you to run even though the package is used during obvious passing downs.