There's no way Lonie Paxton makes this team

[pats1]

I've been saying since the draft that Paxton will be history.
It is all about versatility.
Why wouldn't we want a TE/WR/FB/ST/LS instead of just a LS?

Because the TE/WR/FB part of the player would be at the bottom of the depth chart and fairly useless when the pure LS is much better?

 

[shmessy]

And one botched snap from Mills will negate 10,000 yards of whatever you wish when the game's on the line.

I'll gladly take the "10,000 yards" for "one botched snap" anyday......and twice on Sunday. If you sit down and think about it, that's a lot of yards.

 

[pats1]

Let me get this straight. You are equating QB and long snapper as equally important? So what? Now you want to keep a Long snapper starter, a veteran longsnapper backup, and a young developmental longsnapper.

I know you are trying to be sarcastic, but trying to suggest treating QB and LS roster spots the same is just dumb.

Of course it's sarcasm. I'm taking it to the extreme to make a point.

 

[pats1]

I'll gladly take the "10,000 yards" for "one botched snap" anyday......and twice on Sunday. If you sit down and think about it, that's a lot of yards.

So by that reasoning, you'd be satisfied if say, by chance, Peyton puts up 48 touchdowns but chokes and sputters when it matters?

 

[shmessy]

I'm all for whoever does the job best job, getting the job. If Cassell beats out Brady, then grab some bench Tom - About the only snap I can recall Paxson muffing is when he hit the goalpost against Denver and BB told him to do that. I don't really recall, I can be corrected, seeing Lonie not hit the holder right where his hands were or making the punter have to move much, if at all, at all to catch the ball to punt. No one is irreplaceable. Lonie may be about the highest paid snapper-only LS in the league. There's no cap problems. I'd be surprised if he's replaced this year.

In fact, according to Miguel's cap page, he's the highest paid LS in the history of the NFL!:

"Lonie Paxton - On February 27 Mike Felger of the Boston Herald reported that "the Pats have made Lonie Paxton the highest-paid long snapper in the history of the NFL, signing the restricted free agent to a five-year deal worth more than $3 million." Mr. Snow Angel got a five-year deal at the minimum salaries (450, 535, 540, 545, 670), with a $305,000 signing bonus and standard workout bonuses ($5,600, $5,600, $6,160, $6,160 and $6,720, respectively)."

__________________________-

Look at those numbers! That's like being the world's tallest midget, or the smartest Texan!

 

[spacecrime]

But everyone knows the nature of the game: all it takes is one mistake at the wrong time to screw a season .

Not the game I know. No knowledgable fan will blame a season on one game, let alone one play.

And one play never won or lost a game. You take about sixty offensive and defensive snaps, and if you say only the last one counts you are missing the concept of the game.

You play for sixty minutes and every play matters. If you execute for the first 59 1/2 minutes, you don'thave to worry about the remaining 30 seconds. And if you don't execute properly for 59 1/2 minutes then you can hardly blame the loss on the remaining 30 seconds, now can you?

A roster spot for a long snapper is nice, especially if you have a bunch of JAGs at the bottom of the roster. But the Patriots have come long way since 2001 when BB's opening day roster only had 51 players because he said that was all the NFL-quality players he had. Times have changed, and for the better.

 

[scout]

Ok, I'll weigh in (besides I missed out on the last big one). After careful consideration in reading these thought provoking threads, I would say Lonnie makes the cut. I also remember Jimmy Johnson keeping a guy who's only job was to long snap on that Cowboy team. Got to be something to it, he stays.

 

[PatsSteve1]

In fact, according to Miguel's cap page, he's the highest paid LS in the history of the NFL!:

* And some people think the Patriots don't have a player who's the highest paid at his position - It tells me BB thinks Lonie has some importance to the success of the team. I don't think anyone's going to beat him out unless he's a better LS, even if he pays another position. If another guy is as good, or better, a LS AND plays another position then OK. Lonie wouldn't be the only guy on the team with just 1 position. Can you imagine Wilfork playing WR? -

 

[shmessy]

Not the game I know. No knowledgable fan will blame a season on one game, let alone one play.

And one play never won or lost a game. You take about sixty offensive and defensive snaps, and if you say only the last one counts you are missing the concept of the game.

You play for sixty minutes and every play matters. If you execute for the first 59 1/2 minutes, you don'thave to worry about the remaining 30 seconds. And if you don't execute properly for 59 1/2 minutes then you can hardly blame the loss on the remaining 30 seconds, now can you?

But this may be advnaced. First, do you understand yet that the punter and the QB is not the same as a long snapper? Do you understand that the starting left corner is not the same as the DB you use as a gunner?

A roster spot for a long snapper is nice, especially if you have a bunch of JAGs at the bottom of the roster. But the Patriots have come long way since 2001 when BB's opening day roster only had 51 players because he said that was all the NFL-quality players he had. Times have changed, and for the better.

Amen, Crime. The Lonie Fan Club reminds me of that old joke about Leonid Brezhnev the day after he won an "election" by the people of the Soviet Union. He was upset and pacing the hallways of the Kremlin muttering and cursing when his advisor came up to him and asked "But Comrade leader, you got 99.9% of the vote, what more could you want?" Brezhnev answered "The names and addresses of the .1"

They can't see the forest for the trees.

 

[T-ShirtDynasty]

Now, could you please tell me the position that Larry Izzo played last year other than Special teams? I don't remember seeing him out on the field other than that.

Izzo played LB on some goal-line packages. Don't you remember McGiness grabing Izzo by the face and shoving him in the playoffs in Denver? Just seconds before, he had missed sealing the edge on the goal-line play that ended up in a TD.

 

[wcda]

Isn't Miller the one that receives all of Paxton's snaps?

 

[shmessy]

Izzo played LB on some goal-line packages. Don't you remember McGiness grabing Izzo by the face and shoving him in the playoffs in Denver? Just seconds before, he had missed sealing the edge on the goal-line play that ended up in a TD.

Izzo plays 20-40 snaps per season at LB. I loved it when he intercepted at the end of the game to preserve the ironic 31-0 shutout of the Bills at the end of the 2003 season.

Izzo is not a good choice to compare with Lonie.

 

[DaBruinz]

Dabruinz wrote: "Shmessy -
Its amazing how you bring out the PRO-BOWL as a sign of who the best player is. The Pro-Bowl is a friggin popularity contest. Its not a true sign of who the best are. And 90% of the fans on this board recognize that. Also, to my knowledge, they don't even have a spot for long snappers to be elected. They have ONE special teams spot. That's it."

So Long Snapper doesn't get it's own spot (like a REAL positions). Hmmm, LS guys must be irreplaceable.......

Yes, they are replacable when they start FAILING. When they aren't failing, you don't change because you know what you are getting.

 

[shmessy]

Isn't Miller the one that receives all of Paxton's snaps?

Yeah, Lonie adds 3-4 yards per kick on all Miller's punts.

 

[spacecrime]

Of course it's sarcasm. I'm taking it to the extreme to make a point.

Well, the problem is that your analogy did not take anything to the extreme. Saying that not keeping a roster spot just for a long snapper is like not keeping a roster spot just for a QB doesn't do the job.

If you cannot support your position without sarcasm and/orridicule, you might consider that your position is pretty weak.

Such as, well, what if I reply: if you want a special roster spot for a long snapper for FGs, you must also want a longsnapper for punts. And a center for regular snaps and a center for shotgun. And a separate roster spot for eachof the four gunners, and separate roster spots for the four men that make up the wedge on kickoffs.

You see? You are not suggesting any of those. You only want a roster spot for a long snapper and my trying to use sarcasm to the take your position to the extreme to make my point only makes me look like a moron. That's why I try to justify my position with why I think it is right, and not just try to ridicule yours.

I do not think that a separate roster spot is necessary for a LS. For you to say that must mean I don't want a separate roster spot for a QB is just as bad. It doesn't make your point. Trust me.

 

[shmessy]

Yes, they are replacable when they start FAILING. When they aren't failing, you don't change because you know what you are getting.

If a Mills or Hochstein matches Paxton 95% of the time, snap for snap, I'd say thank you for everything (or that one thing) Lonie, best of luck.

If they can't, then I'd keep Paxton.

Simple as that.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Comfort level? What comfort level. AV is 1,000 miles away now. He's gone. The LS will be new to whomever the new kicker will be.

I agree, Lonie has the experience, but if it turns out through TC and pre-season that someone else on the team can do a reasonably good job, then I believe the team could gain more than it loses by having an extra position player available.

If the skill of the 53rd player on this roster (who has had limited LS experience in college) is perceived as more vital to this teams success than a reliable LS - we've got a problem. And FYI the LS has less direct impact on the PK than he does on the holder - who will remain Josh Miller. He's the one who has to field that snap for all his punts and get it down and set for FG and PAT. And I doubt BB would be anxious to have a backup TE/FB see too many snaps if he's also relying on him to be available to handle the LS.

This is a really frivolous thread. As Tedy just said in an interview on my TV a few minutes ago, all we know in the wake of the draft is the team got younger. Whether any of these players will actually pan out is something we won't know for quite a while.

 

[spacecrime]

I'll gladly take the "10,000 yards" for "one botched snap" anyday......and twice on Sunday. If you sit down and think about it, that's a lot of yards.

Yeah, I would say so. If you gain 10,000 yards in a game and you need a FG at the end to win, I'd think you might need to upgrade your defense a little

 

[wcda]

It seems to me that not only does the LS have to get the ball to the holder/punter but block as well.

 

[shmessy]

Yeah, I would say so. If you gain 10,000 yards in a game and you need a FG at the end to win, I'd think you might need to upgrade your defense a little

Indy Colts 2004!!!!!!!!! What a team.

Hey they had 2 roster spots for kickers!!!!!!!!