Roster Structure: TEN Special Positions

[mgteich]

The position of many posters, year after year is to reduce the number of special teamers to zero, certainly all the defensive special teamers. And somehow after we are a couple of games into the season, we see the familiar faces back on special teams.

A) We don't need more than 8 DL's, 5 LB's, 4 CB's and 4 S's to play defense. These 21 positions include backups and will likely get 95% of the defensive reps.

B) We don't want to see Beaharnais, Rivera, Koutouvides, or Tarpinian playing LB. We expect zero defensive reps out of the #5 safety and the #5 corner. Surely these 2-4 players can be listed on the roster as anything we want. For 2013, they are special teamers.
I've been wrong before, but I expect that we will have "normal" 3 positions: LB/ST, DB/DT, and DB/DT and perhaps a 4th, unless the team chooses a 5th developmental DE.


OFFENSE (25)
QB 2
WR 4
RB 4
Te 4
OL 8
ST 3 (Slater, Edelman, Washington)

DEFENSE (25)
DL 8
LB 5
CB 4
S 4
ST 4

SPECIALISTS (3)
ST 3 (Gostkowski, Aiken, Mesko)

 

[Brady6]

Re: Re: Roster Structure: TEN Special Positions

The position of many posters, year after year is to reduce the number of special teamers to zero, certainly all the defensive special teamers. And somehow after we are a couple of games into the season, we see the familiar faces back on special teams.

A) We don't need more than 8 DL's, 5 LB's, 4 CB's and 4 S's to play defense. These 21 positions include backups and will likely get 95% of the defensive reps.

B) We don't want to see Beaharnais, Rivera, Koutouvides, or Tarpinian playing LB. We expect zero defensive reps out of the #5 safety and the #5 corner. Surely these 2-4 players can be listed on the roster as anything we want. For 2013, they are special teamers.
I've been wrong before, but I expect that we will have "normal" 3 positions: LB/ST, DB/DT, and DB/DT and perhaps a 4th, unless the team chooses a 5th developmental DE.


OFFENSE (25)
QB 2
WR 4
RB 4
Te 4
OL 8
ST 3 (Slater, Edelman, Washington)

DEFENSE (25)
DL 8
LB 5
CB 4
S 4
ST 4

SPECIALISTS (3)
ST 3 (Gostkowski, Aiken, Mesko)

That's to many in my opinion, we need to have players capable of being core players on offense and defense while being contributors on special teams. Last season we carried far to many special teams only players for a group that finished middle of the pack.

I have no problem with your suggestion I just think our special teams needs to be in the top 5 to justify that level of a roster investment.

 

[Brady6]

Re: Re: Roster Structure: TEN Special Positions

Beaharnais

I actually think he'd be a solid 5th LB. He has looked solid in the preseason, I have him going to PS but giveb what you've pointed out here with special teams I would take him on the 53.

 

[Fencer]

I think you're being too extreme in labeling guys as pure STers. BB likes versatility. Even Izzo played in certain packages (goal line), apart from the times he was in as last backup available.

 

[mgteich]

Well, the four I current currently expect to win the positions certainly qualify for such minimal positional duties: Rivera (or Berharnais), Cole, and T Wilson.

It is only when deciding the infamous Player 53 do I go to a "epecial teams only" player: Ebner. Other folks would gave that position to Buchanan or Tebow.

I think you're being too extreme in labeling guys as pure STers. BB likes versatility. Even Izzo played in certain packages (goal line), apart from the times he was in as last backup available.

 

[Fencer]

I see the end of the roster guys as ideally being like Antwan Harris, who we basically remember for two plays, one on STs (the TD vs. Pitt) and one on defense (Ricky Proehl forced fumble).

 

[BTTA]

The OP is probably pretty close to how BB thinks. From everything he's said, the coach sees the 6 ST as having serious impact in the outcome of games and as being worth staffing. Hence the end of the roster needs to be highly focused on them.

 

[ay-yo]

I disagree that 4 CBs is enough. The Patriots' 3rd CB is a starter since we play more 6 man fronts than 7 man fronts (IIRC). That being the case 1 CB is not sufficient to back up 3 starters.

Now due to salary cap and available talent the 5th CB is normally a ST only player pretending to play CB (last year it was Cole). My hope is Dowling can stay healthy and play the 5th CB role. I'm not holding my breathe.

 

[mgteich]

Harris is a very good example. Each year, almost everyone has him as a cut and not on the 53. The rest had him on the bubble. I think that it was Reiss who wrote that Harris was not close to the bubble. He was one of our top STer and was going nowhere.

Of course, we didn't want Harris to actually play defense. When he ded, he wasn't very good. Finding a great play by him helps the memories.

I see the end of the roster guys as ideally being like Antwan Harris, who we basically remember for two plays, one on STs (the TD vs. Pitt) and one on defense (Ricky Proehl forced fumble).

 

[ATippett56]

It is only when deciding the infamous Player 53 do I go to a "epecial teams only" player: Ebner.

I disagree. With Duron Harmon and Tavon Wilson currently on the New England Patriots roster, both players have shown the ability in preseason to contribute on special teams. Also, it may be difficult to dress more than four safeties on the 46 man game day roster:

Adrian Wilson
Steve Gregory
Tavon Wilson/Duron Harmon
Devin McCourty

 

[pencilneckgeek]

I would expect four safeties on the roster every game and five, when we face pass-heavy teams. When we start with a big nickel and shift to dime, we're putting 3 safeties on the field on every down. One backup is not enough for that. Three CBs is standard, too, but McCourty could be the 2nd backup for them.

The LBs that have played primarily STs have mostly been smaller (White at 234# is the smallest and Rivera at 255# the biggest), so a big safety is much the same player, except for punt block/punt protection. There, you want guys good at fighting off blocks in the box, for which it helps to be a larger, closer-to-the-line player. However, I'd include AWilson in that group, as well as Fells, Hooman, Develin, and some of the hybrid DE/LB types that get more playing time, such as Ninkovich and Collins.

Each ST group gets a different set of players. There are some commonalities that are helpful in both coverage and returns, the ability to engage/break-off blocks, work well in space, and just plain run, but there are roles for guys who only do a couple of those things well - in the mini-wedge or in line on punts for the big guys or as a safety on a coverage team (or a specialist).

My point is that, as fans, we tend to come to the determination of the final roster spots backwards. We look at who is best on offense and defense and then figure out who can play special teams. However, the coaches look at who can play special teams and who can play offense/defense somewhat independently of one another, creating depth charts for each. At the end of the day, they may compare a CB depth chart that looks like this (forgetting that glass breaks for the sake of argument):

Talib
Arrington
Dennard
Dowling
Ryan
Cole

and a jammer depth chart that looks like this:

Talib
Arrington
Cole
Ryan
McCourty

and a gunner depth chart:

Slater
Cole
Arrington
Edelman

Knowing that you need 3 CBs, 2 jammers, 2 gunners, and a backup for each, the coaches continue to give Cole a roster spot as a game-day active player, even though he is not the guy we want in coverage in the Super Bowl, because he gets 15 snaps a game on STs. This same process goes for the guys who block for Mesko, bust wedges on the kickoff and have coverage responsibilities on the kickoff/punt coverage. We need to build a ST depth chart for this year, if we want to make sense of this, considering that if we spend more time in the big nickel, the Wilson Bros. or a RB/TE might fill one or more of those traditional LB roles.