Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had in this era.

[FloridaPatsFan]

Have you noticed Seau's facial expressions on the sidelines when they take him out on 3rd down?

He looks like he wants to kill the waterboy.

The dude is intense

 

[Oswlek]

Have you noticed Seau's facial expressions on the sidelines when they take him out on 3rd down?

He looks like he wants to kill the waterboy.

The dude is intense

For a week or two, I was worried because it seemed that other players were incorporating Seau's habit of overcelebrating plays.

I haven't really noticed much from that the past few weeks, though.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

If we had Willie of 2003-2004 instead of TBC, I might agree. But TBC has flashed exactly one good game and Holley is jumping to this conclusion.

I think it is safe to say that we have had good linebacking since 2001.

I'll wait until the year is over before grading this year's crew.

 

[shakadave]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

I agree with you. No love for Roman Phifer, eh? I always liked him.

Phifer was one of the five Patriots who made the Wheaties box after Super Bowl 36.

 

[shakadave]

I think it is safe to say that we have had good linebacking since 2001.

I'll wait until the year is over before grading this year's crew.

Yes. And I hope that by year's end we will have rightly elevated our appraisal of Seau's 2006 to "great".

 

[AzPatsFan]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

I'm not sure that I agree with this. 2004 was better than this group. Lined up:

2004 Tedy > 2006 Tedy
2004 Willie >> 2006 Colvin
2004 Vrabel = 2006 Vrabel
2004 Ted Johnson >>> 2006 Seau

and that group had better depth, as well as more complimentary depth with Colvin and (d%#*!@t, I forgot the other ILB. arrrrggggghh)

I disgree with the 2004 TJ Seau comparison.

TJ was fighting Concussions and other dings off and on throughout the season. In 2004 like 3006 the offside ILB was paltoon system TJ on running downs and Phife on passing plays. In 2006 its Seau in the TJ role and either TBC as a passrusher or a nickle formation with either Scott or Hawkin in as the extra DB. It is much more like:

2004 TJ + Phifer <<< 2006 Seau + TBC +(Scott/Hawkins)
and
2004 Chatham < 2006 TBC.

Finally the proof of the pudding is:
2004 Defense = 16 PPG
2006 Defense = 12.4 PPG

 

[Fanfrom1960]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

Phifer was one of the five Patriots who made the Wheaties box after Super Bowl 36.

Who were the other four?

 

[Fencer]

I don't think Colvin and Phifer contributed significantly the same season ever.

I don't agree with Ted Johnson over Seau at all. Seau is doing well against the pass and run alike.

But McGinest was such an awesome clutch player I can't agree with this assessment yet.

 

[brady et al fan]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

I disgree with the 2004 TJ Seau comparison.

TJ was fighting Concussions and other dings off and on throughout the season. In 2004 like 3006 the offside ILB was paltoon system TJ on running downs and Phife on passing plays. In 2006 its Seau in the TJ role and either TBC as a passrusher or a nickle formation with either Scott or Hawkin in as the extra DB. It is much more like:

2004 TJ + Phifer <<< 2006 Seau + TBC +(Scott/Hawkins)
and
2004 Chatham < 2006 TBC.

Finally the proof of the pudding is:
2004 Defense = 16 PPG
2006 Defense = 12.4 PPG

I have to agree with oswlek's analysis here with the most important being

2004 Tedy > 2006 Tedy

Just because the name is the same does not mean the production is the same. And the proof of the pudding numbers you show have as much to do with the 2006 DL > 2004 DL as anything else. Its not all about the LBs.

I'm also not getting the Seau love. I missed the last Buffalo game but prior to that Seau was getting blown off the ball and teams were running at him. He looked like a shell of his former self. I'll have to watch him more closely Sunday night. Maybe he's been Belicheck'd.

Of course I might be biased as I rarely, if ever agree with Holley, and think he just throws out whatever he thinks might stir up conversation at the time.

 

[patsox23]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

2004 Ted Johnson >>> 2006 Seau

I don't mean to overhype Seau - he's old, he's limited, we're happy with what we've seen so far, hope he keeps it up, etc... BUT - you are VASTLY overrating Ted Johnson here, IMO. He was limited for pretty much ALL of the BB era. A solid plugger, overrated tackler, guy who knew the system but...eh.

 

[Murphys95]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

Who were the other four?

I have that box packed away some where (used to have it on a bookcase for a couple of years). If I remember correctly it was Brady, Smith, Milloy, Brown, and Phifer.

 

[pats1]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

I'm not sure that I agree with this. 2004 was better than this group. Lined up:

2004 Tedy > 2006 Tedy
2004 Willie >> 2006 Colvin
2004 Vrabel = 2006 Vrabel
2004 Ted Johnson >>> 2006 Seau

and that group had better depth, as well as more complimentary depth with Colvin and (d%#*!@t, I forgot the other ILB. arrrrggggghh)

Are you kidding me?

2004 Ted Johnson doesn't ">>>" Seau by ANY stretch of your IMAGINATION.

2004 McGinest doesnt ">>" Colvin by ANY stretch of the imagination.

What's with this revisionist history on Ted Johnson and McGinest? They leave and all the sudden they're both Hall of Famers. Johnson was a 'good' play, but by no means great or amazing. Seau is the same.

In terms of TACKLES, Seau is on track to beat Johnson's 2004 number by about 15.

Johnson had 1 forced fumble and 1 sack in 2004. Seau has 0 of each this year, which isn't exactly a ">>>" difference.

 

[The Gr8est]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

Best or not, I'm damn happy with the group we have especially Seau.

Considering what we were looking like with Beisel, I don't see the bashing of Seau. He's 37 and runs around and hits people. More than "Monty" ever did.

I'm also hoping that as the season progresses we can also use "Let's get a ring for Junior" as a motivating idea.

 

[Oswlek]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

Are you kidding me?

2004 Ted Johnson doesn't ">>>" Seau by ANY stretch of your IMAGINATION.

2004 McGinest doesnt ">>" Colvin by ANY stretch of the imagination.

What's with this revisionist history on Ted Johnson and McGinest? They leave and all the sudden they're both Hall of Famers. Johnson was a 'good' play, but by no means great or amazing. Seau is the same.

I never said either of them were hall of famers, but I stand by what I said. If Colvin was still playing like he did at the end of last year, I would actually rank him above Willie from 2004, but I have not been very impressed with Rosie. He certainly hasn't had any of the big plays that we expected from McGinnest.

As far as Seau vs. Johnson, I was on the "Johnson is probably going to be waived bandwagon for 2002 and 2003, but he really impressed me in 2004. Considering both Seau and Johnson played on mostly running plays, I think Johnson was much better against the run than Seau. Yes, Seau has a play or two per game that he streaks in and drops a guy for a loss, but he isn't nearly as consistent as Ted was.

Of course Seau in his prime was far better than Johnson at his best, but that is not what I am comparing.

 

[pats1]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

I never said either of them were hall of famers, but I stand by what I said. If Colvin was still playing like he did at the end of last year, I would actually rank him above Willie from 2004, but I have not been very impressed with Rosie. He certainly hasn't had any of the big plays that we expected from McGinnest.

As far as Seau vs. Johnson, I was on the "Johnson is probably going to be waived bandwagon for 2002 and 2003, but he really impressed me in 2004. Considering both Seau and Johnson played on mostly running plays, I think Johnson was much better against the run than Seau. Yes, Seau has a play or two per game that he streaks in and drops a guy for a loss, but he isn't nearly as consistent as Ted was.

Of course Seau in his prime was far better than Johnson at his best, but that is not what I am comparing.

Seau is one of the few Patriot defenders consistently getting off his blocker and flocking to the ball.

Now, I don't have any 2004 tape on-hand, but it doesn't take too much of a memory to discount the ">>>" comparison.

From what I've seen on tape, Seau has been good if not great against the run this season.

 

[psychoPat]

Hadn't thought of it quite that way.
But an intriguing angle to consider.

.... if this is the best group yet and the D line is the best they've had then this could be one scary team come December and January.

Why wait until then?
Show us Sunday night !

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

I was never a Ted Johnson fan. Something about him just wasnt right.

Good ballplayer but, IMO, was over rated.

The injuries were always limiting whatever his potential was. He was ALWAYS getting injured for some reason.He was a good tackler, but... I will agree. Overrated.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: Holley: This is the best group of LBs the Pats have had.

Finally the proof of the pudding is:
2004 Defense = 16 PPG
2006 Defense = 12.4 PPG

If the Pats D can hold the Dolts to 17 or under (as they have every other team this season), I will consider them quite successful.

 

[rookBoston]

Have to disagree with Holley. Good, but not the best. The 2003 LB corp had six quality veterans at LB: McGinest, Vrabel and Colvin rotating on the outside, and Bruschi, TJ and Phifer on the inside. You could pick any comination of 4 players, and I was always 100% confident that they would execute the game plan.

The equivalent depth this year is Vrabel, Colvin and Banta Cain outside, and Bruschi, Seau and... Alexander?/Izzo? inside. Banta Cain still needs to prove to me that he can play pass coverage before I'm willing to stack him up against Phifer, who in his time could do it all. And just in terms of depth, this version just doesn't match up.

I've been really impressed by Seau. I'd be willing to agree he is playing better than TJ in 2003-4, and that after only a few months in the system. Just hugely impressed with the guy. I always feel like he's in the right place -- that he undestands what's going on around him. Chad Brown was a veteran FA, too, but never took the same step.

Our depth on the inside is really a question of moving Vrabel from the outside, and using TBC and Woods in his place. The problem isn't that Vrabel plays badly inside, but he's such a good player outside, we're not using his special talent to get to the QB and knock the ball loose.

When people criticize our 2006 LB corp, it's hasn't been a question of talent-- it's more a matter of age. It would be good having a few more rookies learning how to train, study and play the game from guys like Seau, McGinest, Vrabel, Bruschi.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Have to disagree with Holley. Good, but not the best. The 2003 LB corp had six quality veterans at LB: McGinest, Vrabel and Colvin rotating on the outside, and Bruschi, TJ and Phifer on the inside. You could pick any comination of 4 players, and I was always 100% confident that they would execute the game plan.

The equivalent depth this year is Vrabel, Colvin and Banta Cain outside, and Bruschi, Seau and... Alexander?/Izzo? inside. Banta Cain still needs to prove to me that he can play pass coverage before I'm willing to stack him up against Phifer, who in his time could do it all. And just in terms of depth, this version just doesn't match up.

I've been really impressed by Seau. I'd be willing to agree he is playing better than TJ in 2003-4, and that after only a few months in the system. Just hugely impressed with the guy. I always feel like he's in the right place -- that he undestands what's going on around him. Chad Brown was a veteran FA, too, but never took the same step.

Our depth on the inside is really a question of moving Vrabel from the outside, and using TBC and Woods in his place. The problem isn't that Vrabel plays badly inside, but he's such a good player outside, we're not using his special talent to get to the QB and knock the ball loose.

When people criticize our 2006 LB corp, it's hasn't been a question of talent-- it's more a matter of age. It would be good having a few more rookies learning how to train, study and play the game from guys like Seau, McGinest, Vrabel, Bruschi.

Colvin played 2 1/2 games that year. So five LBs and five LBs.. If you want to compare IR players then Colvin IR >> than Gardner IR, I'll concede that. But Pierre Woods is >>> better than I-don't-remember-what scrub-behind-Chatham.

As for "youth" Gardner is 29 and Woods 23. Gardener is a pretty good combo of ST LB and reserve ILB. Four years younger than Davis/Izzo and can actually play a regular snap or three...

as for "The equivalent depth this year is Vrabel, Colvin and Banta Cain outside, and Bruschi, Seau and... Alexander?/Izzo? ...The answer is Vrabel inside ... and Vrabel, Colvin, TBC, Seau and Bruschi, Woods outside...