dane fletcher

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from jpez. Show jpez's posts

    dane fletcher

    Im not really a huge x and o type of guy( i'd love to be ), but the eye test is what i use most.  Am I crazy or was the loss of Dane Fletcher in the preseason vastly underrated.  Think about it, undrafted small school monster stats defensive end in college , who Bill converted to a linebacker (aka Bills science project.) Excellent coverage linebacker who covered for mayo's absense in the past. Played fairly well against the ravens.  A poor man's teddy bruschi.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Getzo. Show Getzo's posts

    Re: dane fletcher

    He can cover RB's and TE's better than anyother LBer on the team... at least that's how I remember him...

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: dane fletcher

    Good in coverage. Good sub player. The Pats have enough LBs who can stop the run (Mayo, Spikes, Hightower) and you always need players that can cover well in certain packages.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: dane fletcher

    I Like Dane, he has good instincts and also fills holes quickly.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: dane fletcher

    Personally based off his play two years ago I thought that he became totally lost as the year went on and eventually was benched during the Buffalo game late in the season. Spiller made a fool of him in coverage (as I'm sure he does to most linebackers), but still it wasn't the only time he was exposed that season. I can remember him early in the season looking like he was going to blitz, then thinking twice about it, then deciding not to, only to stand there and cover no one.

    I really think while it's nice to want to cheer these players on and hope for the best, sometimes it isn't warranted. This guy wasn't exactly big, fast or productive for us BEFORE the major knee injury...I don't think he makes the roster next year.

    The guy that I find myself pipe dreaming about right now is Armond Armstead.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: dane fletcher

    In response to RockScully's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    Personally based off his play two years ago I thought that he became totally lost as the year went on and eventually was benched during the Buffalo game late in the season. Spiller made a fool of him in coverage (as I'm sure he does to most linebackers), but still it wasn't the only time he was exposed that season. I can remember him early in the season looking like he was going to blitz, then thinking twice about it, then deciding not to, only to stand there and cover no one.

    I really think while it's nice to want to cheer these players on and hope for the best, sometimes it isn't warranted. This guy wasn't exactly big, fast or productive for us BEFORE the major knee injury...I don't think he makes the roster next year.

    The guy that I find myself pipe dreaming about right now is Armond Armstead.

     




    He's better as a sub role player than a starter. 

     


    Yeah maybe. If it weren't for the knee injury, I could see that.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: dane fletcher

    In response to RockScully's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    In response to RockScully's comment:

     

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    Personally based off his play two years ago I thought that he became totally lost as the year went on and eventually was benched during the Buffalo game late in the season. Spiller made a fool of him in coverage (as I'm sure he does to most linebackers), but still it wasn't the only time he was exposed that season. I can remember him early in the season looking like he was going to blitz, then thinking twice about it, then deciding not to, only to stand there and cover no one.

    I really think while it's nice to want to cheer these players on and hope for the best, sometimes it isn't warranted. This guy wasn't exactly big, fast or productive for us BEFORE the major knee injury...I don't think he makes the roster next year.

    The guy that I find myself pipe dreaming about right now is Armond Armstead.

     




    He's better as a sub role player than a starter. 

     

     


    Yeah maybe. If it weren't for the knee injury, I could see that.

     

     




    What does the knee injury have to do with the idea he's not a starter, but an effective 3rd down sub coverage LB?

    We have no idea how his recovery has been and how he'll look in 2013.

     

    You seem convinced the knee definitively has him doomed.




    Well what I did was factor in how the lack of available natural cloved garlic was affecting the global economy, then I apllied a frayer method to how many Italians would be directly affected by this. Then I immediatly thought that a guy named Dane Fletcher clearly is not Italian - therefore he has never had to deal with the garlic struggle...which obviously will not condition him for the disadvantage he now faces. I mean could it be any more clear?

    I'm just kidding silly! What I did was understand what he was before the injury (not very good), then I added a devastating knee injury into that equation. It came out like this...

    Not very good=Not very good

    Not very good+devastating knee injury=less than not very good

    ^^That help?

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from wmasschilly. Show wmasschilly's posts

    Re: dane fletcher

    Well what I did was factor in how the lack of available natural cloved garlic was affecting the global economy, then I apllied a frayer method to how many Italians would be directly affected by this. Then I immediatly thought that a guy named Dane Fletcher clearly is not Italian - therefore he has never had to deal with the garlic struggle...which obviously will not condition him for the disadvantage he now faces. I mean could it be any more clear?                                                                                                                                                                   

    for a second there I thought Laz was back        

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: dane fletcher

    In response to RockScully's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    In response to RockScully's comment:

     

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    In response to RockScully's comment:

     

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    Personally based off his play two years ago I thought that he became totally lost as the year went on and eventually was benched during the Buffalo game late in the season. Spiller made a fool of him in coverage (as I'm sure he does to most linebackers), but still it wasn't the only time he was exposed that season. I can remember him early in the season looking like he was going to blitz, then thinking twice about it, then deciding not to, only to stand there and cover no one.

    I really think while it's nice to want to cheer these players on and hope for the best, sometimes it isn't warranted. This guy wasn't exactly big, fast or productive for us BEFORE the major knee injury...I don't think he makes the roster next year.

    The guy that I find myself pipe dreaming about right now is Armond Armstead.

     




    He's better as a sub role player than a starter. 

     

     


    Yeah maybe. If it weren't for the knee injury, I could see that.

     

     




    What does the knee injury have to do with the idea he's not a starter, but an effective 3rd down sub coverage LB?

    We have no idea how his recovery has been and how he'll look in 2013.

     

    You seem convinced the knee definitively has him doomed.

     




    Well what I did was factor in how the lack of available natural cloved garlic was affecting the global economy, then I apllied a frayer method to how many Italians would be directly affected by this. Then I immediatly thought that a guy named Dane Fletcher clearly is not Italian - therefore he has never had to deal with the garlic struggle...which obviously will not condition him for the disadvantage he now faces. I mean could it be any more clear?

     

    I'm just kidding silly! What I did was understand what he was before the injury (not very good), then I added a devastating knee injury into that equation. It came out like this...

    Not very good=Not very good

    Not very good+devastating knee injury=less than not very good

    ^^That help?

     




    How is he "not very good" if you said "I could see that" in agreement with me as him being effective as a sub player as an LB?

     

    Sweet backpedal.

    For a minute there I could have sworn Mt Hurl was in his prime contradicting himself yet again, simply unable to get himself to saying anything remotely positive about any Pats defender.

     

     



    It's rather simple - no back pedal at all - I could see him as a sub player prior to his injury because he had some quickness and experience as a pass rusher, so I could see him potentially blitzing/rushing from the middle and possibly end. With his quickness I could maybe see that, without it I can't. I watched him play for a year at linebacker...he got himself stuffed on the bench for a reason, and being good in coverage was not one of them. If its negative, too bad, I just call it like I see it. There's a reason why we traded up in the draft to select two tweener type linebackers/defensive front seven players....it wasn't because Fletcher is anything special.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from mia76. Show mia76's posts

    Re: dane fletcher

    I thought Fletcher was a nice story and decent depth LB but I do not think he is the solution to the LB coverage problem that the Pats have. I like him and White, but saying they are the Pats best coverage linebackers is scary! I hoped they would find one in last years draft, and while I understand why they couldn't pass up on Hightower's talent, I thought from a team need they might have overpaid in terms of draft capital by selecting him. I am not sure who is out there as FA and I have no idea yet on draft possibilities but I hope a fast coverage LB is high on their list.

     
Sections
Shortcuts