DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from HRK103. Show HRK103's posts

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    In Response to Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?:
    I thinkif Crable show anything in preseason Burgess has a hard time making the team
    Posted by rkarp

    If Crable makes it through preseason unscathed we'll all be amazed.

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

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    as of today, he is the second best OLB on the team.  I don't think he's the answer to our problems but he should help and be a major contributor and possibley mentor atleast early in the season.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from NEforever. Show NEforever's posts

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    I can't wait to see Crable play this year! I hope he gets 10 sacks!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    training camp is where he'll need to step it up, if not he's out
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    Low risk move that gives you some depth. Went to a couple of games last year and was surprised at how much he was playing and how little he provided in terms of pressure. The burst was gone and he just looks small out there, but he did have five sacks and it's not like he's 36 years old. Banta Cain was the most impressive guy on defense in the 2 games I went to, he was always putting pressure on and would have had even more sacks if there was someone opposite him that could do something. I hope Cunningham is that guy.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Macrawn. Show Macrawn's posts

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    Considering the injuries they always seem to have with their promising olb, the Burgess signing makes sense. Hopefully someone will rise to the occasion and beat him out.

    He didn't play well for the first 3/4 of the year but I thought his play improved toward the end of the season. Hopefully that's due to learning the Patriot system better and the Pats get more out of him this year. 

    Overall I think this is an insurance signing. He's there if the other guys get hurt or don't pan out, or need more time to learn. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    Adds depth and versatility but Burgess was not dominant and may never be.  The biggest question for this team is who will play OLB and how good will they be? 

    Almost everyone will be on their first or second year with the Pats.  Crable and Cunningham may be too young to contribute consistently, most of the other guys may be too old. 

    It will be interesting, but I think someone will develop and be better than expected, I just don't know who.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBRULES23. Show BBRULES23's posts

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    Great signing! Pats had nobody else.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from croc. Show croc's posts

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    Burgess play improved as the season went along, in particular he played well when AD was out.  His presence also helped TBC. 


    This is a solid signing to add to the decent depth they had.


    What folks aren't getting is the Pats have improved the middle pass rush.  Incremental improvements, people increments.

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

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

      INTERESTING THAT OUT OF 72 VOTES (CURRENTLY ) NO ONE THOUGHT HIS RESIGNING WAS BAD / HORRIBLE .
    ( My guess is if I had posted this at the conclusion of '09 and asked " What did u think of the Burgess trade ? " - It might have been 72 votes for BAD / Horrible ... Obviously this time he didnt costs any picks )

     Just for the record Russgriswold:
      The Raiders stole a 3rd & 5th for Burgess' services
    ( I'm pretty sure it's unanimous that the talent level available in the 2010 3rd round far exceeded anything Burgess showed in '09 )
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Supernova13. Show Supernova13's posts

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    In Response to Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?:
    I can't wait to see Crable play this year! I hope he gets 10 sacks!
    Posted by NEforever


    Supposedly, Crable looked bigger and more importantly healthy, at Kevin Faulk's softball game. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rockdog1293000. Show Rockdog1293000's posts

    Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?

    Lol good one. Those calf injuries must be better after two years. Maybe this year he'll even play a down in the NFL!

    Sorry to be sarcastic, but I think 10 sacks is way too high for a player who has done nothing in 2 years. And please don't say it was injuries that held him back. When did he get hurt? What was injured? They said it was a calf. What could've happened to his calf to end his season? Nothing! Edelman broke his arm yet the pats didn't IR him. Crable was IR'd because he provided no value. I hope he's a beast this year too, but you have to remember everyone was excited last year and he did nothing. 

    In Response to Re: DERRICK BURGESS RESIGNING = GOOD / BAD?:
    I can't wait to see Crable play this year! I hope he gets 10 sacks!
    Posted by NEforever

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share