Next slot option: Riley McCarron

[Pats2000]

Sometimes teams end up having to cut a guy who they'd like to have kept and developed due to other, more pressing, roster issues. Can't really say that this hasn't happened to the Pats.

Rex Ryan, when he was with the Jets, cut an RB he really liked because he'd had three WRs injured in the previous game and had to make room on the roster in order to sign another one for insurance. Ryan even said, later, that he didn't think anyone else would be that interested, especially the Pats.

And that's how the Pats got Woodhead.

All I can think about when I hear Woodheads name is that Chargers game with the replacement refs where the Pats got robbed of his 30 yard scamper for a TD on a phantom holding call with almost no time on the clock in the 4th. Still angry that I ran out of the room thinking the Pats won, only to find out they lose...

 

[Pats2000]

This is why NFL rosters should be expanded to...say 75 players overall...and keep the game day actives to say..55.

When considering our WR corps...we have to account for Slater and Patterson...two guys who will see limited reps in our offense. Two of them plus 5 guys = 7 WR's....and we usually carry 6...meaning another position will be thin on depth.

We have too many specialists...but those guys help a lot in spots (Bolden, Develin, King, Ebner, Slater, Patterson, etc...)

I think that would hurt the Pats and help everyone else. The Pats make a living off other teams hard choices.

 

[BTTA]

There's also the possibility that at least one of the WR's is not quite physically ready, and the final decisions get pushed into October/November.

 

[Ring 6]

All I can think about when I hear Woodheads name is that Chargers game with the replacement refs where the Pats got robbed of his 30 yard scamper for a TD on a phantom holding call with almost no time on the clock in the 4th. Still angry that I ran out of the room thinking the Pats won, only to find out they lose...

Cardinals game

 

[Ring 6]

Either way...like Kraft says, "it is a high class problem"...

I said I WOULD NOT RULE OUT 7 WR's. Could be a secnario where we keep 7 at the final cut off in late August...and trade one WR for some help elsewhere.

Plus, there's always injuries in camp...and the Pats might have kept one extra WR last year if Edelman didn't get hurt or Hawkins didn't retire.

No. There is just no chance of that.

 

[Pats2000]

Cardinals game

Was it, I remember Blue jerseys for some reason

 

[Tunescribe]

If this guy IS AS ADVERTISED, why is he automatically assumed to be practice-squad material? It would be stupid to put him on the practice squad and let someone else claim him. Seems to me if he gets some reps with Brady and learns the offense he could at least be the fifth WR with his punt-return skills. For that matter, why didn't we hear from him last season?

 

[mgteich]

I like to start with a 53 man roster, and go from there.

Certainly, there are other configurations. We might have a 3rd QB. We might have 3 OT's or 5. We might have 4 WR. We might have 5 RB's. We could 4 TE's or 2. However, IMHO, it is useful to start with a base configuration. This way I can see my choices when considering adding (e.g. a 3rd QB).

IMHO, 6 WR is unreasonable. After all the #4, #5 AND #6 receivers on the team have rarely TOTALED 3 receptions per game. And yes, we could trade a WR before Game 2. [The "final" 53 is somewhat of a myth. Belichick has many changed after the final 53. Transactions slow down a bit after Game 2, although there is always churning at the bottom of the roster].

Any of the positions could be upgraded by new players (e.g. Tobin or Richards). Draftees, UDFA's and 2017 Practice Squad players will win some of the roster spots. This roster is simply a point in time , and IMHO, a pretty strong roster.

OFFENSE (24)
2 QB Brady, Hoyer
5 WR Edelman, Cooks, Hogan, Patterson, Mitchell/Dorsett/Britt/McCarron
4 RB Burkhead, White, Gillislie/Hill, Bolden
1 FB Develin
5 IOL Thuney, Andrews, Mason, Karras, Croston
4 OT Cannon, Waddle, Tobin, Garcia/Jelks
3 TE Gronkowski, Allan, Hollister/Tye

DEFENSE (23)
5 DT Brown, Shelton, Valentine, Guy, Butler
5 EDGE Flowers, Clayborne, Wise, Lee/Davis, Rivers
4 LB Hightower, Van Noy, Flowers, Roberts/Langi/Grisby
5 CB Gilmore, McCourty, J Jones, Rowe, C Jones
4 S McCourty, Chung, Harmon, Richards

SPECIAL TEAMS (6)
3 SPEC Gostkowski, Allan, Cardona
3 STO Slater, Ebner, King

 

[mgteich]

With regard to WR's, we can hope that two of those competing for the 5th WR spot (Britt, Dorsett, Mitchell and Mccarran) will be worthy of a roster spot. In this case, perhaps one would net a low draft choice. I suspect that we will choose one, and the others won't net us anything except a perhaps a conditional 7th.

 

[Ring 6]

If this guy IS AS ADVERTISED, why is he automatically assumed to be practice-squad material? It would be stupid to put him on the practice squad and let someone else claim him. Seems to me if he gets some reps with Brady and learns the offense he could at least be the fifth WR with his punt-return skills. For that matter, why didn't we hear from him last season?

Depends whose advertising you are buying.
He was a good college qb who needs a lot of coaching to become an nfl qb. He is a project. No one is claiming him or they would sign him now.
It’s a longshot. Bringing him in for any other reason means at some level you are relying on him and that needs time.

 

[maineman209]

If this guy IS AS ADVERTISED, why is he automatically assumed to be practice-squad material? It would be stupid to put him on the practice squad and let someone else claim him. Seems to me if he gets some reps with Brady and learns the offense he could at least be the fifth WR with his punt-return skills. For that matter, why didn't we hear from him last season?

Raw rookie last season. And with seemingly a new injury every week, he maybe didn't fit the Pats roster needs. If they'd brought him up, they might've needed to send him back and risk him on waivers. IIRC, he was one of the PS guys who got his salary raised (though not as much as Ryan Lewis did).

 

[Hyped]

I think that would hurt the Pats and help everyone else. The Pats make a living off other teams hard choices.

Interesting perspective. I still think expanded rosters would work for the Pats better as we would be able to coach up guys longer....

 

[Hyped]

No. There is just no chance of that.

So, we are talking 4 guys then...Cooks, Edelman, Hogan, and Mitchell. Patterson/Salter will be #5/#6 then.

Dorsett/Britt/McCarron/Hollister are only making the team if one of the above gets hurt then.

 

[maineman209]

So, we are talking 4 guys then...Cooks, Edelman, Hogan, and Mitchell. Patterson/Salter will be #5/#6 then.

Dorsett/Britt/McCarron/Hollister are only making the team if one of the above gets hurt then.

AFAIK, it's not written in stone anywhere that none of Dorsett, Britt, McCarron or Hollister can possibly surpass Hogan or Mitchell (or even Patterson) by the end of Camp. I understand that folks have some pretty firm opinions about the likelihood of that happening, but I prefer to remain neutral until I see it in Camp with my own eyes.

It's five months until the end of Camp when those decisions will be made by BB and the coaches based on what they have seen and expect.

 

[Ring 6]

So, we are talking 4 guys then...Cooks, Edelman, Hogan, and Mitchell. Patterson/Salter will be #5/#6 then.

Dorsett/Britt/McCarron/Hollister are only making the team if one of the above gets hurt then.

Cooks
Edelman
Hogan

Everyone else fighting for 2 spots.

Slater is not a wide receiver.

 

[Nunchucks]

So, we are talking 4 guys then...Cooks, Edelman, Hogan, and Mitchell. Patterson/Salter will be #5/#6 then.

Dorsett/Britt/McCarron/Hollister are only making the team if one of the above gets hurt then.

I really think that Patterson is behind Dorsett and Britt.

 

[Nunchucks]

Cooks
Edelman
Hogan

Everyone else fighting for 2 spots.

Slater is not a wide receiver.

If Mitchell is healthy, he is in. The guy can play, knows the offense, and Brady trusts him.

 

[mgteich]

I really think that Patterson is behind Dorsett and Britt.

Slater is behind them also.
Patterson has been a #3/#4/#5 receiver for several years, average 2-3 receptions a game, on the par with our #3, 4 and 5 receivers over the years (including Hogan BTW).

Patterson is our KR and will be active in each game, and our #5 receiver. As long as gronk and White are healthy, I would expect our top 3 WR's to be active, with our #4 WR being inactive.

 

[supafly]

If I understand correctly (and I very well may be brain-cramping here), you're proposing reducing the combined LB + DL-edge "head count" to 8?

If so, that would mean keeping ...

T. Flowers - Clayborn - Wise
Hightower - Van Noy - Rivers - ROOKIE

... and then keeping ONE of ...
- Davis/Lee ... or ...
- M. Flowers/Langi/Roberts
(but not restoring an STO like King).

Unless, Rivers can be that "crossover" edge-player, instead of a draftee. Then, you're selecting M. Flowers (for his special teams ability), plus one other from the list (or King from the STO list).

Nah, I’d prefer TFlowers-Clayborn-Wise-(rookie) for a total of four at the edge position, since we need to address the likelihood of Flowers leaving in the spring and could use some youth there. You also have the option of playing HT.

No reason to take another rookie at LB, since Rivers is basically filling that role anyway as a first year player. HT-KVN-Rivers-Flowers. Again, having a player on the PS is the difference if that option is available, although that’s going to be said for any of these first two lines of defense.

Ultimately, I’m not sure that it’s necessary to have 5 big bodies up front, especially if you’re going to keep a guy on the PS. Could they try and sneak Butler there? That could be your answer and still allow for an extra (9th) LB/edge player who would likely be another ST linebacker like Langi or someone like King.

 

[mgteich]

I'm fine with adding a DE instead of a LB. There is plenty of room for a new DE and a LB if the quality is there.

However, I expect Butler to be active, and certainly on the 53. He can provide solid inside pressure on the quarterback.

5 DT (Brown, Shelton,Valentine, Guy, Butler)
4 DE (Flowers, Wise, Claiborne, Lee/draftee
4 LB (Hightower, Van Noy, Flowers, Rivers)
#14 (Roberts/Langi/Grisby/draftee)

I believe that 14th front seven player is a LB whose specialty is the run. This player would start when we start in the 43, the old base defense. I'm not sure that Flowers or Rivers fits the bill. Also, such a player would allow Hightower to play outside more.

AS AN ASIDE
Belichick may think that Lee is a prospect worth keeping. Both Lee and Rivers could be considered to being groomed to play DE.

OPEN QUESTION
How many front seven players do we add, and when in the draft do we add them. It seems clear to me that the answer is 0-2, with "when" being wide open.

Nah, I’d prefer TFlowers-Clayborn-Wise-(rookie) for a total of four at the edge position, since we need to address the likelihood of Flowers leaving in the spring and could use some youth there. You also have the option of playing HT.

No reason to take another rookie at LB, since Rivers is basically filling that role anyway as a first year player. HT-KVN-Rivers-Flowers. Again, having a player on the PS is the difference if that option is available, although that’s going to be said for any of these first two lines of defense.

Ultimately, I’m not sure that it’s necessary to have 5 big bodies up front, especially if you’re going to keep a guy on the PS. Could they try and sneak Butler there? That could be your answer and still allow for an extra (9th) LB/edge player who would likely be another ST linebacker like Langi or someone like King.