Will We Get Any Production From Branch, Allen or Harris?

[aluminum seats]

The fact that you specify highly paid players is exactly stating they are.

Incorrect.

 

[aluminum seats]

Go to a gym. Lift 180 lbs, then lift 370. Big difference?

Irrelevant to the point (effort) being discussed.

 

[aluminum seats]

Not sure any player says that. Do you really think they do?

That's precisely what you suggested and of course there are varying degrees of effort and commitment.

 

[aluminum seats]

Harris' role is a backup LB who doesn't play right now because we are healthy.

If you want to replace him with someone who plays you would have to replace a different role.
You would be cutting the LB depth to get a guy who plays some at a different position.

I'm saying it certainly isn't an unreasonable question to ask whether a guy who plays a snap or two a game might be replaced by someone who would contribute more than that.

 

[RayClay]

FWIW, I wouldn't doubt Branch is contemplating retirement. When you're that size and can't get it done anymore, it's not going to get better. Hope that isn't the case.

 

[RayClay]

That's precisely what you suggested and of course there are varying degrees of effort and commitment.

There's a quote function.

 

[Ring 6]

Incorrect.

Then why specify?

 

[aluminum seats]

There's a quote function.

Yes there is.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm saying it certainly isn't an unreasonable question to ask whether a guy who plays a snap or two a game might be replaced by someone who would contribute more than that.

And that discussion lead to an understanding that the role he is in the team due had not been needed yet.

Again if you suggest getting rid of him then you are suggesting something changed in the needs of them team, i.e. That role is not as important any more or a different one needs to be filled.
A player not playing in a role that BB felt he needed to fill has not changed anything about his value to the team. Harris had done what he was kept in the roster to do.
It's like saying we should trade garoppolo because he isn't contributing in his role.

 

[aluminum seats]

Then why specify?

I made a relevant point. You decided to make a very similar one for some reason.

 

[aluminum seats]

It's like saying we should trade garoppolo because he isn't contributing in his role.

It's not remotely like that.

 

[Ring 6]

It's not remotely like that.

Of course it is.
Both are backups who are not going to play unless there are injuries.
You are just choosing to make that a negative about one and not the other.
We could include karras as another example.
Should we put karras in the same discussion as Harris?

 

[aluminum seats]

Both are backups who are not going to play unless there are injuries.

Backup quarterbacks are expected not to play.

If your position is that the Patriots signed David Harris with the expectation that he would never play, we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Ring 6]

Backup quarterbacks are expected not to play.

If your position is that the Patriots signed David Harris with the expectation that he would never play, we will have to agree to disagree.

They signed him because they felt he could compete for a job.

He made the team to be a backup ilb who wouldn't see the field much or at all if vannoy and Roberts were healthy.
None of that has changed.

He is the garoppolo of the LB unit just as karras (and Croston for that matter) are the garropolo of the ol.

Are we cutting karras and croston?

 

[mgteich]

Andy is right here. If Patricia believes that Harris is OK to play a significant role if there is an injury, then there really should be no issue. Harris has a role in the 2017 team. The same is true for Branch. Branch is valuable, even if he is last NT/DT on the depth chart, and is can be counted on if there is an injury.

It is somewhat irrelevant if we are disappointed because Harris couldn't earn more reps, and in fact couldn't even move past Roberts in the depth chart.

My question is whether the team has any faith at all in these players.

They signed him because they felt he could compete for a job.

He made the team to be a backup ilb who wouldn't see the field much or at all if vannoy and Roberts were healthy.
None of that has changed.

He is the garoppolo of the LB unit just as karras (and Croston for that matter) are the garropolo of the ol.

Are we cutting karras and croston?

 

[aluminum seats]

They signed him because they felt he could compete for a job.

He made the team to be a backup ilb who wouldn't see the field much or at all if vannoy and Roberts were healthy.
None of that has changed.

He is the garoppolo of the LB unit just as karras (and Croston for that matter) are the garropolo of the ol.

Are we cutting karras and croston?

If your position is that the Patriots signed David Harris with the expectation that he would never play, we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy is right here. If Patricia believes that Harris is OK to play a significant role if there is an injury, then there really should be no issue. Harris has a role in the 2017 team. The same is true for Branch. Branch is valuable, even if he is last NT/DT on the depth chart, and is can be counted on if there is an injury.

It is somewhat irrelevant if we are disappointed because Harris couldn't earn more reps, and in fact couldn't even move past Roberts in the depth chart.

My question is whether the team has any faith at all in these players.

My point is simply Harris had a spot on the depth chart where he doesn't play but a player is needed to fill that spot for depth.
If you tell me there is someone better who could beat out vannoy or Roberts bring him on. I don't see him out there.
If you tell me screw it we have other needs that force is to go paper thin at LB I would wonder what they are and who you are bringing in. I'd also wonder why they don't replace the player they supplant on the field in the roster as well.
Harris may, at this point be a luxury item and he could be that guy that gets cut when we have so many injuries at one position that aren't going on ir we need to add a player until we get healthier.
It's entirely possible that Harris will be gone if a d when mcclellin is ready, in fact it seems likely.
But this weekly posting as if something has changed with Harris (evidently because a poster decided to think about him this week) so suddenly he should be cut reminds me of that gif of Abe Simpson walking in and turning around and walking out the door because he can't remember why he came in.

 

[Ring 6]

If your position is that the Patriots signed David Harris with the expectation that he would never play, we will have to agree to disagree.

You are repeating the statement I have already answered.
Should we cut karras and croston too?
If not, why not?

 

[Jackson 2]

No. according to many posters the one would be #10.

LOL, not "many." Some.

 

[1960Pats]

What's so complicated?

This is the depth chart
A/B/C/D/E

The HC sees a player that HE feels is a better player than C, call that player B+

The new depth chart is
A/B/B+/C/D

And E is gone.