Seau Expected to Re-Sign With Patriots

[SeanBruschi54]

Told you.

Didnt get a chance to come online most of the day yesterday or will i today for that matter but i knew this was going to happen.

 

[drewdagreat]

Welcome back Junior!

 

[BionicPatriot]

Vrabel is 32. He has not "clearly" lost a step.

He certainly has. When he was in as an OLB, he just was not getting the same rush he always has. I don't know what else you want me to do, go back on forth about this all day?

Of course he won't rack up the same sack totals he did in 2003 or 2004. Why? If he goes back outside, he'd be in a rotation with friggin' Adalius Thomas and Rosevelt Colvin, who have been some of the best sack OLBs in the last few years.

I don't think AT is gonna be the sack monster he was. I think he'll be a good LB period for us. He'll rotate inside/out alot IMO. I don't see us having the same consistant pass rush we once had, again JMO.

You are sorely overestimating Vrabel's age.

32 IS old for a LB body ya know.

He's not going to be called upon to be a starter again! He was great with the Pats last year. There's nothing to suggest he's fallen off the face of the Earth since last November. As a situational run-stuffer, he should be excellent. If you're complaining about injuries to a situational player, that's not my problem.

I'm not complaining, I'm saying people are counting on a guy who has not suited up for a whole season for what, 5 seasons? If Seau goes down again, who spills Bruschi? IF Bruschi or Vrabel goes down, then we have to count on unproven guys like Woods or Alexander.

When have the Pats not had an old unit?

They never had a dinosaur unit. 04 was three years ago. Everyone was obviously younger back then. My point again is Bruschi and Vrabel are not the same guys they were, thats ALL I'm saying.

They are near-perfectly set right now. They have proven veterans as starters and a well-stocked shelf of developmental young players in-waiting. They DID not have that 3 or 4 years ago.

You don't know that. Didn't some think Chatam would be a developed player? You don't know what the coaching staff thinks. Maybe he IS high on them, maybe he is just going to pluck different guys later on. We simply don't know.

Don't you think the Pats passed on Harris for a reason? The fact that we as fans know a certain player and want our team to draft him means nothing.

I'm not bashing the draft, I said thats what I wanted. Clearly, I trust a 3 time world champion over myself. I just don't know if this LB core is as dominant as it once was. That is what I'm saying, now for the 3rd time in this post.

No crap! What do you think Seau will be next year? A ROLE PLAYER!

I know that, but the point is, Bruschi isn't even much better at this point. In 03/04 we had a stud LB infront of a role player. Now we have an average LB infront of one.

It's simple math, actually:

3 ILBs for 2 ILB spots. Last time I checked, that's a rotation. Last time I checked, players in rotations are role players.

If you think Seau will start full-time (barring unforeseen circumstances), you are sorely mistaken.

So who on this roster takes Phifer's place? We don't have another cover guy like that, period. Thats all I'm saying. You said this unit was deep/good enough as the 03/04 squad. All I said is they're not. Sorry, holy ****.

Oh, stop it. I'm sick of reading this. PATSNUTme can attest. He's written page-long posts on why calling someone a "homer" makes no sense.

Well, when someone thinks this LB core is as good as the older ones, I'll call them out. I hope I'm wrong, I just doubt I am.

I'm not comparing the two. Can you read? I'm saying that Colvin is NOT the same player he was(n't) in 2003 or 2004, when he was injured.

Colvin has had at least 7 sacks per season since being 100% recovered from his injury. McGinest has only eclipsed 7 sacks per season 4 times - 1995, 1996, 1999, and 2004. Your comparison would be true if the calendar still read 1997, but McGinest has been nowhere near the same player he was in his early years.

I still don't understand why Colvin is ignored by Patriots fans. He was 8th among NFL LBs in sacks last year. He was 8th among NFL LBs in sacks in 2005.

My point is, you said Colvin and AT will be monsters off the ouside. They'll be good. But as good as Vrabel and McGinest was for us? I don't know, I doubt that. Thats what I'M saying.

2003? Probably not. But he was only 1 sack shy of his 2004 performance in 2005 and 2006, and that was with significant time at ILB.

2003 Is my main point. I clearly can't argue with stats, but Vrabel is not as fast as he was. Thats what I said, you've blown it out of context.

Please answer this question for me:

If Colvin and Thomas play full-time at OLB (drool), and Vrabel plays full-time at ILB, and Bruschi and Seau play situationally at ILB, how is that any different from what you just described?

The only difference I can think of is the cover-guy. Thomas would be much more suited for that (hell, he's lined up as a CB against Chad Johnson). Against the Colts, Thomas could start at ILB with Seau or Bruschi, and then Colvin and Vrabel would be outside. That's a damn friggin' nice lineup, wouldn't you say?

My only point is, it takes away from the pass rush. Before we had the luxury of keeping our pash rushers in (Vrabel and McGinest) We now take one out and replace him with a slower one. It's a good lineup, my point is not as good as 03/04. again, thats ALL I'm saying.

How would one injury cause trouble? If it's at OLB, Vrabel moves back to his natural position. If it's at ILB, the 3rd man steps in full-time. That 3rd man would likely be Bruschi or Seau, who were both beyond adequate starting full-time last year.

Because if Thomas goes down (heaven forbid) we move Vrabel outside. Then Seau, who can't stay healthy, is depended on to play a full season for us. I'm not positive about that myself.

Thomas replaces McGinest, and then some. Vrabel being younger is moot. There hasn't been anything to suggest he's slowed down considerably - that's a figure of your imagination, and yours only. View other posts in this thread for confirmation.

Bruschi's difference is noticeable, but still not significant. And we still don't know anything about the rookies. What if, like Givens in 2002, Rogers or Lua step in and are able to contribute to that core 7?

First off, this is a Pats board. Some people will never look at things objectively. Ask anyone outside of Pats land, they too will tell you Vrabel is not what he WAS. Bruschi is ALOT different. First off, he's not close to the coverage stud he once was. Bruschi was a beast in covering over the middle in the 03/04 seasons. For a run stuffer, he was never a huge monster. But he never was getting run over like he was this season. The game that proved this to me was when Travis Henry ran him over a few times. It happens, but the Colts/Titans game kinda exposed Bruschi. But hey, if you think he's not far from what he was I dunno how else to convince you.

Do you think about what you say sometimes? Givens barely contriubted in 02. I suggest you look over this. He has 9 catches for 92 yards. If we're depending on production like that again were in trouble. I seriously doubt those raw LBs are ready to contribute, but I hope they do. I think your nuts if you think they could now.

It is by no means ridiculous. Personally, I think you are:

(A) Underestimating the impact of Thomas.

No, because I know he's a beast.

(B) Overestimating the demise of Vrabel

Never call for his demise, I said he lost a step.

(C) Overestimating the demise of Bruschi.
Ask Peyton Manning

(D) Overestimating the contributions of Phifer and Johnson.

Ask Jerome Bettis about Johnson, ask the Colts about Phifer.

(E) Completely underestimating Colvin.

By not considering him an all-pro?

(F) Ignoring Seau's likely role in 2007.

No, I just said if one of our starters goes down it could get bad,

Nobody is asking them to make any significant contributions to the 2007 New England Patriots.

But I can't believe how you are complaining about the age of the LBs in the same breath as you are complaining about the uncertainty of the young LBs.

I said we have a very old LB core. We have no certains for young LBs to contribute, am I lying? Or do you know for certain the FO is just quiet on their secret love affair with the young guys?[/QUOTE]

Look man, I'm not gonna go 10 pages because I don't have the time. But I guess if I don't expect this team to be perfect, I'm a pesimist. No, I doubt this team will have much problems, and I do expect the most impressive squad yet. With that said, I think on a message board I should be able to give my 2 cents without people jumping on me considering me a clueless negative person, but whatever.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

He's old as dirt, but he's still a warrior. This signing {if true} makes me happy.

 

[pats1]

He certainly has. When he was in as an OLB, he just was not getting the same rush he always has. I don't know what else you want me to do, go back on forth about this all day?

I don't think AT is gonna be the sack monster he was. I think he'll be a good LB period for us. He'll rotate inside/out alot IMO. I don't see us having the same consistant pass rush we once had, again JMO.

32 IS old for a LB body ya know.

I'm not complaining, I'm saying people are counting on a guy who has not suited up for a whole season for what, 5 seasons? If Seau goes down again, who spills Bruschi? IF Bruschi or Vrabel goes down, then we have to count on unproven guys like Woods or Alexander.

So let me get this straight:

1) You think Vrabel can't rush the passer anymore, even though he hasn't played OLB full-time since 2004.
2) You don't think Thomas will do what he's done consistently in the past.
3) You are worried about who is going to backup the backups when there's an injury.

What's next? Matt Cassel is a liability and the Patriots have to draft a QB in the first round because Brady is getting old?

They never had a dinosaur unit.

What?!?

McGinest was 33 in 2004 when he had 9.5 sacks.
Phifer was 36 in 2004.
Johnson was 32 in 2004.
Bruschi was 31 in 2004.

Your double-talk is unbearable.

On one hand, you're complaining about how the current unit is too old, and how its constituents aren't as good as those from 2004.

On the other hand, you're proclaiming how great McGinest, Phifer, and Johnson were in 2004, when they were in fact OLDER than most of the current unit.

Something's got to give.

04 was three years ago. Everyone was obviously younger back then.

Really? Never would have imagined that.

My point again is Bruschi and Vrabel are not the same guys they were, thats ALL I'm saying.

Bruschi is agreeable. Vrabel is much less, and I'll bet you anything most in this thread would agree.

Great. And so the Patriots essentially add Colvin (since he was still recovering in 2004), Thomas, and Seau since then. Those three are just as good, if not better - and younger - than the McGinest, Phifer, Johnson group of 2004.

You don't know that. Didn't some think Chatam would be a developed player? You don't know what the coaching staff thinks. Maybe he IS high on them, maybe he is just going to pluck different guys later on. We simply don't know.

Chatham was in his 5th year in 2004 and was clearly a special teams player.

Lua, Alexander, Woods, Rogers, and the rest are either rookies or 1st year players. That is a considerable difference from a 5th-year veteran.

I'm not bashing the draft, I said thats what I wanted. Clearly, I trust a 3 time world champion over myself. I just don't know if this LB core is as dominant as it once was. That is what I'm saying, now for the 3rd time in this post.

Your statement would have been true if Seau and especially Thomas didn't come along. One is a 12-time Pro Bowler who has proven he can still play at a high level, and the other is a 2-time Pro Bowler who has proven he will be going to some more in the future.

I know that, but the point is, Bruschi isn't even much better at this point. In 03/04 we had a stud LB infront of a role player. Now we have an average LB infront of one.

And that difference is off-set by the fact that Vrabel, the other ILB, is better than the other ILB was in 2004 (Johnson/Phifer).

Or, if you'd like to think about it this way, Vrabel is a slight downgrade from a 2003-4 Bruschi, while Bruschi/Seau are a slight upgrade from the 2004 Johnson/Phifer.

So who on this roster takes Phifer's place? We don't have another cover guy like that, period.

And haven't been paying attention, have you?

Adalius Thomas is a good coverage LB, and is younger (since that has become a fetish of yours) than Phifer was.

Thomas will be able to play ILB just as well as he will OLB. He'll be able to cover and blitz out of both positions. Vrabel will be playing whatever position Thomas isn't.

Thats all I'm saying. You said this unit was deep/good enough as the 03/04 squad. All I said is they're not. Sorry, holy ****.

You don't seem to have a problem with debating that.

Well, when someone thinks this LB core is as good as the older ones, I'll call them out. I hope I'm wrong, I just doubt I am.

My point is, you said Colvin and AT will be monsters off the ouside. They'll be good. But as good as Vrabel and McGinest was for us? I don't know, I doubt that. Thats what I'M saying.

There's been nothing in Colvin's or AD's careers to suggest they won't.

2003 Is my main point. I clearly can't argue with stats, but Vrabel is not as fast as he was. Thats what I said, you've blown it out of context.

I've blown it out of context? You turned Vrabel being slightly slower than he was in 2003 into the LB corps' armageddon.

My only point is, it takes away from the pass rush. Before we had the luxury of keeping our pash rushers in (Vrabel and McGinest) We now take one out and replace him with a slower one. It's a good lineup, my point is not as good as 03/04. again, thats ALL I'm saying.

What are you talking about? In 2003 (as it's your "main point"), the Pats had Vrabel and McGinest on the outside, and nothing more. Inside, they had Bruschi, Johnson, Phifer, and nothing more.

In 2007, the Patriots wil be "the luxury of keeping their pass rushers in" - Colvin and Thomas. Unlike 2003, if either go down or shift positions in a particular scheme, the Pats will have the luxury of moving Vrabel outside. You can argue that he'll be a liability (yeah, OK), but it's a plan B, and a better one than the Pats had in 2003 (Chatham). And even if Vrabel goes outside, Seau and Bruschi will still be inside. And last time I checked, they weren't too shabby last year there.

Because if Thomas goes down (heaven forbid) we move Vrabel outside. Then Seau, who can't stay healthy, is depended on to play a full season for us. I'm not positive about that myself.

Again, you're quibbling over plan B and plan C here. NO team in today's NFL will have the capability of having a dependable plan B or C. Even if they did, they would consolidate that area and use their opened resources to fill holes elsewhere. You can't tell me too many other teams in the NFL have more dependable depth than the Pats do currently at all positions.

First off, this is a Pats board. Some people will never look at things objectively. Ask anyone outside of Pats land, they too will tell you Vrabel is not what he WAS. Bruschi is ALOT different. First off, he's not close to the coverage stud he once was. Bruschi was a beast in covering over the middle in the 03/04 seasons. For a run stuffer, he was never a huge monster. But he never was getting run over like he was this season. The game that proved this to me was when Travis Henry ran him over a few times. It happens, but the Colts/Titans game kinda exposed Bruschi. But hey, if you think he's not far from what he was I dunno how else to convince you.

You're harping over things that have already been addressed by the Pats. You can go "as anyone outside of Pats land," and even they'll know that the Pats won't be calling upon Bruschi or Vrabel to do what they did before. That's why Thomas and Colvin are here.

Do you think about what you say sometimes? Givens barely contriubted in 02. I suggest you look over this. He has 9 catches for 92 yards. If we're depending on production like that again were in trouble. I seriously doubt those raw LBs are ready to contribute, but I hope they do. I think your nuts if you think they could now.

The Patriots didn't "depend" on Givens' production in 2002. You completely missed my point, which is that late-round draft picks aren't always practice squad or special teams fodder. They can make small, supplementary contributions to their units, as Givens did in 2002. His production quickly climbed and by 2006 he had himself a $25M contract.

I said we have a very old LB core. We have no certains for young LBs to contribute, am I lying? Or do you know for certain the FO is just quiet on their secret love affair with the young guys?

You're unbelievable. You first condemn the Patriots' "very old" starters, and then turn around and condemn the uncertainty of their young backups.

Are you that bitter about the Pats not drafting Harris?

Was there anyone harping over Seau's age when he was making one of his 70 tackles last season?

Was there anyone harping over Thomas' age when the Patriots signed him?

Has anyone harped over Colvin's age, period?

Has there been anyone else here who has considered Vrabel's age a serious factor in his (non)-declining play?

Has there been anyone here who has parlayed Bruschi's age into the demise of the New England Patriots, LLC?

Look man, I'm not gonna go 10 pages because I don't have the time. But I guess if I don't expect this team to be perfect, I'm a pesimist. No, I doubt this team will have much problems, and I do expect the most impressive squad yet. With that said, I think on a message board I should be able to give my 2 cents without people jumping on me considering me a clueless negative person, but whatever.

Are you seriously complaining about people disagreeing with you on a messageboard, of all things?

That would be like walking into the Razor and complaining about the noise.

 

[spacecrime]

I don't think AT is gonna be the sack monster he was.

You don't know that.

Your post consists of you giving an unsupported opinion on a number or things, and attacking anything others say as being unsupported.

Look in the mirror and say, "you don't know that" one thousand times.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

I'll give it six ( maybe seven) games before Seau is on IR. The good part of that is we get steady play from him for six or seven games. The negative is that there's absolutely no chance he gets through an entire season healthy.

 

[mgteich]

The linebackers taking 90%+ of the reps are equal this year to either the 2003 or the 2004 units. I think the unit is actually younger; certainly the total unit is younger. Colvin had 5 tackles in 2003 and 32 in the 2004 rehab campaign, and really wasn't much of a factor.

Vrabel will play where he is needed, probably primarily outside as he did in 2003 and 2004. Seau and Bruschi are fine inside, with occasional help from Vrabel are all we need inside. Obviously the iLB's are often pulled for defensive backs.

We have a five man unit. Most would expect the combination of Alexander and Woods to pick up some reps. Personally, I expect Alexander to be the #3 ILB, with Vrabel moving inside if there are any long-term injuries (a game or more), along with taking a few reps on a regular basis. The #3 ILB doesn't need to get many reps.

BOTTOM LINE FOR ME
OLB: Colvin, Thomas, Vrabel (occasionally inside)
ILB: Bruschi, Seau, Alexander
ST and developmental: Izzo, Woods, Mays/Lua/fa
Practice Squad: Mays/Lua, Rogers

This unit is plenty young. The question is whether an additional veteran will replace on of the kids.

Vrabel has "clearly" lost a step? I don't think that's true.

Most of us wanted Vrabel on the outside for this year. He is less suited to play inside.



Seau's broken arm was a freak injury. I wouldn't call him injury prone because of it.

Yes, they're old. What are the Pats supposed to do? Stock the roster with young players behind them? That's what they've done, and it won't help.



Phifer and Johnson weren't dinosaurs in their final years? McGinest hadn't lost a step by 2005? Give me a break.

Colvin is 10x as good the player he was injured in 2003 and 2x the player he was rehabbing in 2004.

I'll take the 2004 Bruschi over the 2007 Bruschi, sure. But the 2004 and the 2007 Vrabel are very even. The 2004 Colvin isn't anything like the 2007 Colvin. The 2007 Thomas will be better than the 2004 McGinest. The 2007 Seau is every bit as good as the 2004 Johnson or Phifer.

The 2004 unit was beyond deep. It was utterly dominant. But in 2003, does Matt Chatham starting ring a bell? There was NO depth on the outside. Johnson was sparsely used inside.

The 2004 unit's backups were a very raw Banta-Cain, Chatham, Izzo, Davis, and Alexander for a few weeks.

The 2007 unit's backups will be an improving Woods and Alexander, Izzo, Mays, Rogers, and probably Lua.

Those two units are very, very comparable. One is much younger than the other. And don't complain about that, because you just went on about how the Pats are too old there.

If you think the Patriots don't have depth at LB right now, I'm very curious to see what you think depth is. Who do you want the Pats to get? Spikes? Urlacher? Briggs?

 

[Pats726]

The negative is that there's absolutely no chance he gets through an entire season healthy.

No chance?? a certainty?? Hmmm and I am sure you may find some who would bet on that one..NO chamce..

 

[BionicPatriot]

Your post consists of you giving an unsupported opinion on a number or things, and attacking anything others say as being unsupported.

Look in the mirror and say, "you don't know that" one thousand times.

I never said because he's not good. Look, we got him because of his versatility. I think we're going to see him ROTATE in/out of the LB positions. Maybe you need to do more research before you look at his numbers and think he'll be same exact thing. He'll be a friggin stud no doubt, but he's getting used ALOT here, he's not focused on just one position I bet.

 

[BionicPatriot]

So let me get this straight:

1) You think Vrabel can't rush the passer anymore, even though he hasn't played OLB full-time since 2004.
2) You don't think Thomas will do what he's done consistently in the past.
3) You are worried about who is going to backup the backups when there's an injury.

What's next? Matt Cassel is a liability and the Patriots have to draft a QB in the first round because Brady is getting old?

I said he lost a ******* step. HE LOST A STEP! How many times are you going to take what I said out of context? I said he's not the same pass rusher, thats ALL I SAID!
2. No, I think he'll be one of the most versatile players we've ever seen in our D, don't even try to say I'm knocking him, I'm saying he's getting used ALL around.
3. No, I told you what would happen with an injury. But yeah, your right. We'd just chug right along. We'd be absolutely fine. There's no point in arguing with you. Everyone is still a beast in your eyes.

What?!?

McGinest was 33 in 2004 when he had 9.5 sacks.
Phifer was 36 in 2004.
Johnson was 32 in 2004.
Bruschi was 31 in 2004.

Your double-talk is unbearable.

On one hand, you're complaining about how the current unit is too old, and how its constituents aren't as good as those from 2004.

On the other hand, you're proclaiming how great McGinest, Phifer, and Johnson were in 2004, when they were in fact OLDER than most of the current unit.

Something's got to give.

Did I not say that was McGoo's last year? Jesus f'n christ.
Phifer was a role player, he was excellent depth, not someone we NEEDED.
Johnson was another role player.
Bruschi was three years younger. Bruschi did not suffer a stroke.

I said the LB core was better/more deeper then it is now, thats what I said. Right now I think we have two play makers. Rosie and AT. We had three back then.

Bruschi is agreeable. Vrabel is much less, and I'll bet you anything most in this thread would agree.

Thats great. Because alot of the people on this board also think this team is unbeatable, no holes, etc. I'm not knocking our team. But I guess I'm clueless if I have a ******* debate.

Great. And so the Patriots essentially add Colvin (since he was still recovering in 2004), Thomas, and Seau since then. Those three are just as good, if not better - and younger - than the McGinest, Phifer, Johnson group of 2004.

Lets compare AT to McGinest, Colvin to Vrabel, Seau to Bruschi. AT is better, no question. Vrabel was better then what Colvin is now. Vrabel could rush the passer and shut down the run, Colvin isn't AS good. Seau cannot stay healthy, I have odds to prove this, you do not. Back THEN Bruschi was healthy, and younger.

Chatham was in his 5th year in 2004 and was clearly a special teams player.

Lua, Alexander, Woods, Rogers, and the rest are either rookies or 1st year players. That is a considerable difference from a 5th-year veteran.

Chatam proved more too. Your assuming we have a solid core to take over the LB duties, but how do you know? You don't. Back then we atleast figured if Matt stepped in for awhile he could do. ONE, count em, ONE of our backups have starting experience. That's Alexander in the one game our D was terrible in. None of our backups have experience at all. Thats again, ALL I'm saying. But you continue to act as if I'm negative because I say this.

Your statement would have been true if Seau and especially Thomas didn't come along. One is a 12-time Pro Bowler who has proven he can still play at a high level, and the other is a 2-time Pro Bowler who has proven he will be going to some more in the future.

Your statement would be true if you didn't look at **** with glasses on. Whoopie! Seau went to pro bowls! Do you know in the last 5 seasons he has not finished one? Again, you act as if I'm knocking Thomas, idk why.

And that difference is off-set by the fact that Vrabel, the other ILB, is better than the other ILB was in 2004 (Johnson/Phifer).

Not in specific roles. No one on this roster stopped the run better then Ted did, and Vrabel damn sure does not cover like Phifer did. So no, he's not.

Or, if you'd like to think about it this way, Vrabel is a slight downgrade from a 2003-4 Bruschi, while Bruschi/Seau are a slight upgrade from the 2004 Johnson/Phifer.

My point is, you don't have versatile guys who are dominant in specific areas of the game like they were, fair enough?

And haven't been paying attention, have you?

Adalius Thomas is a good coverage LB, and is younger (since that has become a fetish of yours) than Phifer was.

Thomas will be able to play ILB just as well as he will OLB. He'll be able to cover and blitz out of both positions. Vrabel will be playing whatever position Thomas isn't.

Obviously you have not been paying attention. I covered that. I said by doing this, we lose AD's pass rush.

I've blown it out of context? You turned Vrabel being slightly slower than he was in 2003 into the LB corps' armageddon.

Uh no. I said the LB core isn't as good as it was back then. So much for the "armageddon"

What are you talking about? In 2003 (as it's your "main point"), the Pats had Vrabel and McGinest on the outside, and nothing more. Inside, they had Bruschi, Johnson, Phifer, and nothing more.

And that DEPTH INSIDE (my whole ****** argument) was better then it is now.

In 2007, the Patriots wil be "the luxury of keeping their pass rushers in" - Colvin and Thomas. Unlike 2003, if either go down or shift positions in a particular scheme, the Pats will have the luxury of moving Vrabel outside. You can argue that he'll be a liability (yeah, OK), but it's a plan B, and a better one than the Pats had in 2003 (Chatham). And even if Vrabel goes outside, Seau and Bruschi will still be inside. And last time I checked, they weren't too shabby last year there.

If you think Bruschi is the same ILB, I dunno what to tell you because he definantly aint as good. Seau I love, I think he's good. For the whole 6 games he plays.

Again, you're quibbling over plan B and plan C here. NO team in today's NFL will have the capability of having a dependable plan B or C. Even if they did, they would consolidate that area and use their opened resources to fill holes elsewhere. You can't tell me too many other teams in the NFL have more dependable depth than the Pats do currently at all positions.

Did I not say this? Holy christmas man. I said expecting to have depth at every position is expecting to much. Did I not say this? Thanks for repeating what I already said.

You're harping over things that have already been addressed by the Pats. You can go "as anyone outside of Pats land," and even they'll know that the Pats won't be calling upon Bruschi or Vrabel to do what they did before. That's why Thomas and Colvin are here.

Um, as long as Bruschi is a starter, he has to control the middle. So yes, he will have the same duties as before. Colvin and Thomas wont affect that.

The Patriots didn't "depend" on Givens' production in 2002. You completely missed my point, which is that late-round draft picks aren't always practice squad or special teams fodder. They can make small, supplementary contributions to their units, as Givens did in 2002. His production quickly climbed and by 2006 he had himself a $25M contract.

If you think 93 yards and 9 receptions is contribution your nuts. I'm not talking about what Givens did later. You brought up him contributing to the team, I brought up how he really didn't and I hope we dont expect that kind of contribution to help us.

You're unbelievable. You first condemn the Patriots' "very old" starters, and then turn around and condemn the uncertainty of their young backups.

No, you just don't get anything. I said we have an old LB core. I said our depth is inexperienced. Do you not understand this?

Are you that bitter about the Pats not drafting Harris?

Seeing as how I pretty much said they definantly know more then me, I don't know where you got this from.

Was there anyone harping over Seau's age when he was making one of his 70 tackles last season?

Everyone sure as hell was when he got hurt for the fifth straight season.

Was there anyone harping over Thomas' age when the Patriots signed him?

to bad I never knocked him.

Has anyone harped over Colvin's age, period?

When you see the average age of the CORE of LBs you will.

Has there been anyone else here who has considered Vrabel's age a serious factor in his (non)-declining play?

No, it's obvious. He's 32, hes played at a high level for a LB for awhile now. Eventually you slow down.

Has there been anyone here who has parlayed Bruschi's age into the demise of the New England Patriots, LLC?

Considering the fact everyone said the Patriots NEEDED LB help, many expected them to draft someone, um yes. If you think I'm the only one who thinks our LBs are old you need to get out of your cave.

Are you seriously complaining about people disagreeing with you on a messageboard, of all things?

Hell no, this is why I post. I just had the impression you were pissed because I disagreed with you. Sorry I mis took how you felt, just got that vibe.

That would be like walking into the Razor and complaining about the noise.

You mean our stadium makes noise? Lets not start another argument :-D

 

[pats1]

Before I respond, I just wanted to state a couple of observations based on what I've read from you:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showpost.php?p=425886&postcount=9

After two-a-days in TC

Observation: You think Seau is too old for a grueling camp and will choose to skip it. Could be true.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=416226#post416226

I doubt he ever does anything special. Maybe a goalline guy.

Observation: You are dissatisfied with the Patriots' annual choice not to pick a LB high.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=416119#post416119

Thats what I'm wondering? I'd love the kid, but he must have commited rape or something?

Observation: You are dissatisfied that the Patriots, like the rest of the NFL, did not pick Brandon Siler for the first six rounds.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=413796#post413796

It aint about instant impact. You draft for future need. It's not the end of the world, but when is skipping LBs and sticking with dead men in the LB core gonna stop? It cost us last year.

Observation: You believe the veterans-at-LB philosophy that the Patriots have used during the dynasty is wrong.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=413778#post413778

Harris a 6th round talent, lmao shut up. Thats beyond stupid.

We have 9 picks, in rounds where the odds of finding a diamond in the rough is little to none. I'm not gonna sit here and pile on all day, but you can't say we've done better than the Jets. You just cant. They found two impact players, we found one.

We traded our first for a first next year to a team on the up rise. How much you want to bet were picking in the same spot as this year? You watch.

Observation: The Jets, because they traded the majority of their picks for Go-...I mean David Harris, had a better draft than the Patriots.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=413762#post413762

Ok, I'll bite.

Will BB and co. ALWAYS be around? No.

Will Brady always be around? No.

He's getting up there, the whole team is hitting the prime time. The time to load up and move out is now. Also, TB is on his last leg. How do we groom a replacement now?

Observation: You falsely believe the Patriots operate a "window" philosophy.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=392318#post392318

How in the hell can you possibly say this? Temper tantrum? First off, I don't need to go to a draft forum when I'm discussing this topic. Your the one who called me a chicken little because I said I feel that we need to become more athletic at the LB position. But I'm the one who has a temper tantrum? I'm also not the one screaming "stupid" every little sentence that I can squeeze it into.

You call me clueless, say I have a temper tantrum because you disagree with me, wow. Take a look in the freaking mirror.

Observation: You don't feel the Patriots have done an adequate job drafting at LB, regardless of their philosophies at the position.

Observation: You take offense to people arguing with you, argue back, and then play the victim.

 

[BionicPatriot]

Before I respond, I just wanted to state a couple of observations based on what I've read from you:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showpost.php?p=425886&postcount=9



Observation: You think Seau is too old for a grueling camp and will choose to skip it. Could be true.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=416226#post416226



Observation: You are dissatisfied with the Patriots' annual choice not to pick a LB high.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=416119#post416119



Observation: You are dissatisfied that the Patriots, like the rest of the NFL, did not pick Brandon Siler for the first six rounds.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=413796#post413796



Observation: You believe the veterans-at-LB philosophy that the Patriots have used during the dynasty is wrong.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=413778#post413778



Observation: The Jets, because they traded the majority of their picks for Go-...I mean David Harris, had a better draft than the Patriots.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=413762#post413762



Observation: You falsely believe the Patriots operate a "window" philosophy.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?p=392318#post392318



Observation: You don't feel the Patriots have done an adequate job drafting at LB, regardless of their philosophies at the position.

Observation: You take offense to people arguing with you, argue back, and then play the victim.

I told you, that in the end even though I WANTED to groom some sort of LB core, I'll trust their decision over mine. what else do you want from me. I found one tidbit of your rant funny though.

Observation: You falsely believe the Patriots operate a "window" philosophy.

No, I just know this team aint exactly preparing for life after Brady.

 

[pats1]

I said he lost a ******* step. HE LOST A STEP! How many times are you going to take what I said out of context? I said he's not the same pass rusher, thats ALL I SAID!
2. No, I think he'll be one of the most versatile players we've ever seen in our D, don't even try to say I'm knocking him, I'm saying he's getting used ALL around.
3. No, I told you what would happen with an injury. But yeah, your right. We'd just chug right along. We'd be absolutely fine. There's no point in arguing with you. Everyone is still a beast in your eyes.

And everyone is a old, worn down skeleton who the Patriots are *gasp* keeping on their roster, and paying for.

Did I not say that was McGoo's last year? Jesus f'n christ.
Phifer was a role player, he was excellent depth, not someone we NEEDED.
Johnson was another role player.
Bruschi was three years younger. Bruschi did not suffer a stroke.

You're unbelievable. You say the Patriots haven't had a dinosaur unit like they "have" now. I said the Patriots were older at LB in 2004. You rebut with "Jesus f'in christ." Good job.

You say the Patriots' 2004 Patriots performed at a high level at LB, and that the current LBs are too old to do the same. I tell you the 2004 Patriots, who performed at a high level, are older than the current LBs, who have shown, at best, minimal signs of not being able to do so.

Can you not try to change the subject again?

I said the LB core was better/more deeper then it is now, thats what I said. Right now I think we have two play makers. Rosie and AT. We had three back then.

"Play makers?" Who, like Michael Vick? What the hell is a definition of a "play maker?" Do you think that word comes out of Belichick's or Pioli's mouth often? Do you think they hold Bruschi or Vrabel to a lower standard because they're "not playmakers anymore?"

Thats great. Because alot of the people on this board also think this team is unbeatable, no holes, etc. I'm not knocking our team. But I guess I'm clueless if I have a ******* debate.

I'm not the one who took offense to a debate! You've been playing victim all day because "I've taken your Vrabel comment out of context." Guess what? And now you're playing victim some more with the "he's calling me clueless" crap. Nobody wants to hear it. Just give it up. I'll never call someone clueless for having a different viewpoint. I will call someone clueless for directly contradicting themselves and ignoring basic facts.

Lets compare AT to McGinest, Colvin to Vrabel, Seau to Bruschi. AT is better, no question. Vrabel was better then what Colvin is now. Vrabel could rush the passer and shut down the run, Colvin isn't AS good. Seau cannot stay healthy, I have odds to prove this, you do not. Back THEN Bruschi was healthy, and younger.

First off, AD is his chosen nickname, not AT.

Secondly, you've conveniently warped our comparison to fit your own warped viewpoint. As far as post-2003 goes, the current Colvin is better as a pass-rusher than Vrabel was, and is damn good in run support too. And guess what? Vrabel is STILL WITH THE PATRIOTS. You've conveniently left that out of your argument.

In terms of the three phases of the LBs, the pass rush has been significantly upgraded - Colvin and Thomas are some of the best in the league from that standpoint. The run support is just as good - Seau was great in that capacity last year, Vrabel and Bruschi are very close to where they were in 2004, as speed isn't a major factor when you're taking on OGs. With Colvin and Thomas, the strength in pass-coverage is now on the outside. But in 2004, the Patriots' secondary was thin, leaving them to favor LB subs instead of DB subs. With Sanders and especially Meriweather, the Pats now have the sub DBs to match up against faster TEs, thus taking the burden off the of the LBs.

Chatam proved more too.

What the hell is your point? You're doing your side-stepping technique again. It's hilarious, actually.

I said the Patriots did not have a young crop of LBs in 2004 like they do now. You said they had Chatham. I said Chatham was not exactly young - a 5th-year player. You said Chatham "proved more." What planet are you living on? Are you deliberately not answering my questions?

Your assuming we have a solid core to take over the LB duties, but how do you know? You don't.

How is that relevant to anything? When did I say that?

What are you expecting from the Patriots? At most, they carry 6 "true" LBs. The rest are special teams-oriented, like Izzo and Alexander. That was the case back in 2004. Would you trust Banta-Cain, Izzo, Davis, Chatham, or Alexander to fill-in then? Would you trust Izzo, Alexander, Mays, Rogers, Lua to fill-in now?

Of course not! Do you not realize the NFL roster limit? What are you expecting? Dependable backups 2-deep at every position? That's never going to happen on any team.

Back then we atleast figured if Matt stepped in for awhile he could do. ONE, count em, ONE of our backups have starting experience. That's Alexander in the one game our D was terrible in. None of our backups have experience at all. Thats again, ALL I'm saying. But you continue to act as if I'm negative because I say this.

Please. PLEASE.

Are you trying to say having Matt friggin' CHATHAM would have made a difference over Alexander? Those 4 games Chatham started in 2003 for Vrabel were the only in his career. You're making it out like Chatham is by any stretch of the imagination a starting-quality player. He is not. Sorry. Next please.

Get a clue. You're getting worse and worse.

Your statement would be true if you didn't look at **** with glasses on. Whoopie! Seau went to pro bowls! Do you know in the last 5 seasons he has not finished one? Again, you act as if I'm knocking Thomas, idk why.

How, on a scale of 1-10, would you rate Seau's performance in 2006, pre-freak injury? How much tape have you studied to support this finding?

Not in specific roles. No one on this roster stopped the run better then Ted did, and Vrabel damn sure does not cover like Phifer did. So no, he's not.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Belichick knows what his players can do and what they can't. He's not going to say "Oh, because Bruschi and Seau are in the same positions as Phifer and Johnson were in 2004, they will be fulfilling the same roles in our defense in 2007." Unfortunately, things don't work like you seem to conjure them up to work. Belichick will use his stockpile of talented players in a way as to maximize their abilities. How has his tenure with the Patriots NOT support that statement?

My point is, you don't have versatile guys who are dominant in specific areas of the game like they were, fair enough?

Adalius Thomas, not versatile? Mike Vrabel, not versatile?

Johnson and Phifer were both one-trick ponies. Instead of having somebody like Johnson or Phifer out there and having them be a liability in their position of weakness, why not have a more well-rounded player out there - like Vrabel - who will be able stop the run and cover perhaps not as well as Johnson or Phifer, but will not give the offense a weakness to exploit, either?

 

[pats1]

Obviously you have not been paying attention. I covered that. I said by doing this, we lose AD's pass rush.

I'm not suggesting it's something the Patriots do full-time. Rather, it's something the offense will need to prepare considerably for. The Patriots, with Meriweather and more secondary depth (unlike the desolate 2004 secondary), will be able to use the sub packages more for slot and seam coverage support. In that case, AD will be able to use his pass rush. But when the Patriots are in base 3-4, the offense will have to pick their poison. If they move their TE away from Thomas, they'll open him up to rush the QB's ass. If they bait Thomas into coverage, then they'll likely lose that TE as a receiver and will have to look to the outside, all the while getting a considerable pass rush from Colvin and Vrabel.

Uh no. I said the LB core isn't as good as it was back then. So much for the "armageddon"

And since then you've blown it out of proportion. Don't try and neglect your statements past your original.

And that DEPTH INSIDE (my whole ****** argument) was better then it is now.

Bruschi, Johnson, Phifer vs. Bruschi, Vrabel, Seau?

If you think Bruschi is the same ILB, I dunno what to tell you because he definantly aint as good. Seau I love, I think he's good. For the whole 6 games he plays.

Right. That would be like saying you can't rely on Rodney to stay healthy because two separate receivers decided to dive into his knees.

Did I not say this? Holy christmas man. I said expecting to have depth at every position is expecting to much. Did I not say this? Thanks for repeating what I already said.

And then you continue on to tell about how Kyle Bissinger and Justin Warren aren't as reliable backups as Quinn Dorsey and Grant Steen, and use that as your argument as to why the 2004 LBs were deeper than 2007.

Um, as long as Bruschi is a starter, he has to control the middle. So yes, he will have the same duties as before. Colvin and Thomas wont affect that.

Vrabel will most likely be the full-time starter inside. Bruschi and Seau will most likely see reduced time as the 2nd ILB.

That has to be about the 12th time I've said that. Seriously, do you ever listen?

And if Thomas or Colvin weren't here, then Bruschi and Seau would be forced to play full-time, because Vrabel would be outside.

If you think 93 yards and 9 receptions is contribution your nuts. I'm not talking about what Givens did later. You brought up him contributing to the team, I brought up how he really didn't and I hope we dont expect that kind of contribution to help us.

I brought him up as a late-round draft pick who actually made the team and did a bit more than warm the bench. You seem to believe that's all Lua or Warren or Rogers will do this year, and I gave you an example of how they may not.

No, you just don't get anything. I said we have an old LB core. I said our depth is inexperienced. Do you not understand this?

Right. And how would the situation be different if the Pats draft your binkie Harris?

Harris would be inexperienced depth. Bruschi, Vrabel, and likely Seau would all be the "old starters."

Seeing as how I pretty much said they definantly know more then me, I don't know where you got this from.

Your post on how the Jets made a good move by drafting him might have tipped me off.

Everyone sure as hell was when he got hurt for the fifth straight season.

Freak injury. The same thing happened to Rodney, even after he was healthy for many years.

to bad I never knocked him.

You conveniently left him and Colvin out of any arguments over the LB corps' age.

When you see the average age of the CORE of LBs you will.

I'll be glad to play your game:

Top 5 LBs, 2004 (Bruschi, Vrabel, McGinest, Phifer, Johnson): Average Age: 32.2

Top 5 LBs, 2007 (Bruschi, Vrabel, Thomas, Colvin, Seau): Average Age:
32.8

No, it's obvious. He's 32, hes played at a high level for a LB for awhile now. Eventually you slow down.

Do you have scientific formula to show how much speed a player loses per month aged?

Give me a break. 32 to one LB may be the prime of his career. 32 to another may be retirement.

Considering the fact everyone said the Patriots NEEDED LB help, many expected them to draft someone, um yes. If you think I'm the only one who thinks our LBs are old you need to get out of your cave.

The Patriots addressed their immediate LB needs through free agency.

To the Patriots, the personnel experts of the league, this draft was not the one where they wanted to address their future LB needs.

However, there were still some fans (*cough*) out there who wanted the Patriots to draft a LB just for the hell of it, even though the talent pool wasn't, to many teams, strong this year.

Some fans wanted the Pats to rush the process out of fancy. The Patriots wanted to strike when the time was right.

I'll side with the Lombardi's, thank you very much.

Hell no, this is why I post. I just had the impression you were pissed because I disagreed with you. Sorry I mis took how you felt, just got that vibe.

You mean our stadium makes noise? Lets not start another argument :-D

Always the dissenter...

 

[pats1]

No, I just know this team aint exactly preparing for life after Brady.

Because that would be unrealistic right now. When the necessary time comes, they will address that. But they aren't scrambling right now to alter an event probably 8-10 years away.

 

[BionicPatriot]

Because that would be unrealistic right now. When the necessary time comes, they will address that. But they aren't scrambling right now to alter an event probably 8-10 years away.

Thats what I mean, so why wait? Damnit, now elt me go over your other psots I didn't wanna do all the quotes but aw well.

 

[zippo59]

Has it officially happened yet? I didn't think so but then I read on another board that someone said that they saw it on ESPN.

 

[Fantasic4x50x54x59x55]

No, I just know this team aint exactly preparing for life after Brady.

How do you figure that? I am sure when they drafted Tom Brady, you knew he was the future for when drew went down. Who is to say Cassel or that UDFA we got doesnt come in and exceed Tom...point is you dont, They (coaching staff) Do. You could be very well right and they might not have a plan for life after Brady (assuming they want to stick round) but man, do people really thing tom is nearing the end of his football career? The man brought last years league laughing stock of an offense (minus maroney/dillion) to the AFC Championship and Was a down away from probably winning the super bowl.

 

[BionicPatriot]

And everyone is a old, worn down skeleton who the Patriots are *gasp* keeping on their roster, and paying for.

Oh ok.

You're unbelievable. You say the Patriots haven't had a dinosaur unit like they "have" now. I said the Patriots were older at LB in 2004. You rebut with "Jesus f'in christ." Good job.

No, I gave your easons. Wanna see them again? Go read. Stop playing stupid, because I definantly gave you reasons.

You say the Patriots' 2004 Patriots performed at a high level at LB, and that the current LBs are too old to do the same. I tell you the 2004 Patriots, who performed at a high level, are older than the current LBs, who have shown, at best, minimal signs of not being able to do so.

I told YOU Bruschi and Vrabel were younger playmakers. I also said we had better depth. Minimal signs of not being able to do so? Thats why they couldn't stop LT, thats why Manning ripped us a new one everytime he passed over the middle, right? Its all due to athletic LBs.

"Play makers?" Who, like Michael Vick? What the hell is a definition of a "play maker?" Do you think that word comes out of Belichick's or Pioli's mouth often? Do you think they hold Bruschi or Vrabel to a lower standard because they're "not playmakers anymore?"

A playmaker is someone who gets an INT to beat the Dolphins. A playmaker is someone who comes back from a broken arm against the Browns in 03 and gets 3 sacks. Thats a playmaker. I wonder who did that?

I'm not the one who took offense to a debate! You've been playing victim all day because "I've taken your Vrabel comment out of context." Guess what? And now you're playing victim some more with the "he's calling me clueless" crap. Nobody wants to hear it. Just give it up. I'll never call someone clueless for having a different viewpoint. I will call someone clueless for directly contradicting themselves and ignoring basic facts.

No, you and alot of people on this board call out anyone who questions this perfect team. I say the LBs are not as good, you reply back with some bull**** saying Bruschi is still the same, and that Vrabel is still the beast he was. Victim my ass. You get your panties ina bunch and make this a posting war, well here you go.

First off, AD is his chosen nickname, not AT.

AT= Adalius Thomas. Shortening his name for ya.

Secondly, you've conveniently warped our comparison to fit your own warped viewpoint. As far as post-2003 goes, the current Colvin is better as a pass-rusher than Vrabel was, and is damn good in run support too. And guess what? Vrabel is STILL WITH THE PATRIOTS. You've conveniently left that out of your argument.

No, I told you Vrabel was more complete. He was a good apss rusher AND run stopper. Colvin is not as good in run support. Wow, Vrabel is also three years older. You still think he's the same? Oh wait, your the same guy who pimped up Seau's 12 pro bowls like they mean something now, I forgot.

In terms of the three phases of the LBs, the pass rush has been significantly upgraded - Colvin and Thomas are some of the best in the league from that standpoint. The run support is just as good - Seau was great in that capacity last year, Vrabel and Bruschi are very close to where they were in 2004, as speed isn't a major factor when you're taking on OGs. With Colvin and Thomas, the strength in pass-coverage is now on the outside. But in 2004, the Patriots' secondary was thin, leaving them to favor LB subs instead of DB subs. With Sanders and especially Meriweather, the Pats now have the sub DBs to match up against faster TEs, thus taking the burden off the of the LBs.

No doubt, our D looks good. But your missing my point. I SAID THE OTHER LB CORP WAS BETTER, THATS IT. It has nothing to do with the DL and DBs and ****. You crack me up, Bruschi is close to where he was? All you do is look at scores, I swear. You didn't see Bruschi getting ran over and passed on like I did.

What the hell is your point? You're doing your side-stepping technique again. It's hilarious, actually.

I said the Patriots did not have a young crop of LBs in 2004 like they do now. You said they had Chatham. I said Chatham was not exactly young - a 5th-year player. You said Chatham "proved more." What planet are you living on? Are you deliberately not answering my questions?

I said Chatam proved more because he stepped in and played for us. How the **** do you know we have a good young talent of LBs? You pull stuff from your ass I swear. More like what planet are you living on?

How is that relevant to anything? When did I say that?

Have you not said we have a good set of young LBs? What the hell else were you implying?

What are you expecting from the Patriots? At most, they carry 6 "true" LBs. The rest are special teams-oriented, like Izzo and Alexander. That was the case back in 2004. Would you trust Banta-Cain, Izzo, Davis, Chatham, or Alexander to fill-in then? Would you trust Izzo, Alexander, Mays, Rogers, Lua to fill-in now?

Of course not! Do you not realize the NFL roster limit? What are you expecting? Dependable backups 2-deep at every position? That's never going to happen on any team.

You really don't pay attention. I ******* SAID THIS. I SAID YOU CANT EXPECT TO BE DEEP AT EVERY POSITION. Good loooordy man. You make people repeat themselves time and time again. So can you please stop saying the same ****

Please. PLEASE.

Are you trying to say having Matt friggin' CHATHAM would have made a difference over Alexander? Those 4 games Chatham started in 2003 for Vrabel were the only in his career. You're making it out like Chatham is by any stretch of the imagination a starting-quality player. He is not. Sorry. Next please.

No, I think having someone as a cover specialist ala Phifer would have. We don't have that luxury anymore. I never said Chatham would've helped, but I give up on you. You just cant handle an argument.

Get a clue. You're getting worse and worse.

This is ******* hillarious. This is coming from someone who says the same damn thing again and again and refuses to except this team may have a weakness.

How, on a scale of 1-10, would you rate Seau's performance in 2006, pre-freak injury? How much tape have you studied to support this finding?

Easily a 9. My argument is not that he's bad, I SAID HE CAN'T STAY HEALTHY. I swear, you don't ever read what I say.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Belichick knows what his players can do and what they can't. He's not going to say "Oh, because Bruschi and Seau are in the same positions as Phifer and Johnson were in 2004, they will be fulfilling the same roles in our defense in 2007." Unfortunately, things don't work like you seem to conjure them up to work. Belichick will use his stockpile of talented players in a way as to maximize their abilities. How has his tenure with the Patriots NOT support that statement?

I never said Bruschi was a role player. I said he's not as good as a starter anymore. But again, you just make no sense.

Adalius Thomas, not versatile? Mike Vrabel, not versatile?

Holy christ man. Ok, you dont have VERSATILE DEPTH like they had. Fair enough? They have versatile starters, but it effects the starters. Look, let me explain yet again. When we played running teams, we had the luxury of TJ coming in. Against the Colts, we had Phifer coming in. Yes we have someone like Thomas, but before we were able to leave our best pass rushers AT THE TIME out there (Mcgoo and Vrabel) Byt putting AT inside, it takes awya from his pass rush. We don't have the versatile DEPTH we had, clear?

Johnson and Phifer were both one-trick ponies. Instead of having somebody like Johnson or Phifer out there and having them be a liability in their position of weakness, why not have a more well-rounded player out there - like Vrabel - who will be able stop the run and cover perhaps not as well as Johnson or Vrabel, but will not give the offense a weakness to exploit, either?

Um, what? You realize BB was able to switch Phifer and TJ out all he wanted right? It's not like he said sorry TY, your not playing today. No. He would use them more against specific teams. It was good because it always have our 2nd LB a blow. I'm sorry, but we don't have a pass specialist like we did. I'm not saying our LB core sucks if thats what you think, just saying we don't have the depth like that. We have a run specialist in Seau, but not exactly a pass specialist coming off the bench.