Greg A. Bedard

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

    Greg A. Bedard

    Really got me in the Extra Points section this morning. It read Mark Anderson is released. Why not just lead off or headline, here is my 53 man roster projections as it stands right now - a few surprises - read on for more. Instead at first glance it looks like Anderson is cut and I'm thinking, wow..we release a young, cheap, super fast pass rusher that has done nothing but give offensive tackles fits from the first moment he got here? Why did we do that?

    I have to argue that Mark Anderson makes the team, he provides something that we didn't have the last few years...edge rush. Carter of course does the same thing, but I don't trust Moore or Cunningham yet and at the very least he's a young guy that can add depth. It's hard for me to envision our coaching staff not improving his game enough so he can be out there more.
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from pyegian. Show pyegian's posts

    Re: Greg A. Bedard

    I'd say in your scenario Jerod Mayo is a pretty tough cut.
     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Greg A. Bedard

    In Response to Re: Greg A. Bedard:
    [QUOTE]I saw it, too and thought it was poorly worded. In fact, I almost put the thread up here about it because it looked like he was reporting it, not updated his 53 man roster prediction. I'd say he is a bubble guy, but I hope they can keep him. The fact is, Wright hasn't practiced and you have Pryor, Love, etc, who are cheaper, younger and healthier versions than that. Love what Wright does, but he hasn't practiced.  Maybe it's by design for a PUP scenario, which is clearly possible, but I think they need more than 1 sub rusher in a 4-3. So, that leaves Cunningham or Moore as a subrusher option, but you aren't cutting Cunningham. And Moore shows way too much value as well, so to me it's Wright and Anderson as bubble guys.  Clearly, Wright is far more expensive than Moore or Anderson.  You could keep Anderson and Moore and still be well under what Wright costs. Hate to say it like that, but it's true. Eric Moore probably has a slight advantage over Anderson in that Moore played here last year and has some 3-4 system experience as well. I would keep 9 D Linemen. Ellis, Wilfork, Haynesworth, Carter, Pryor, Love, G. Warren, Eric Moore, Anderson 6 LBs Nink, Cunningham, Fletcher, Spikes, Guyton, Tracey White That's 2 less D Linemen than last year, PUP Wright, to see where you are in Week 7, and that's a heck of a rotation, even without Wright. And that's also 2 full spots under the DL/LB roster totals last year if I am not mistaken (11 D Linemen in 2010, same LB totals (6)). 17 in 2010, 15 in 2011.  That gives you that WR or RB room. Also, that makes people like G. Warren and even Ellis, assuming they're not starting and getting full reps, more valuable than they have been in years past. They're essentialy the same kind of player who can easily drop into a 3-4 DE spot right from that 4-3 DT spot. I liked Mike Reiss's list yesterday. I thought that was pretty much dead on. Overall, Bedard is miles better than that little whiny toad, Breer.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    I'd like to see what he does over the next pre season games. Is he going to disappear or get washed out during running plays? It's a possibility, I hope not, because he's got some length and just explodes off the line.

    Can Wright be placed on pup? He was practicing at the beginning of camp, wasn't he?
     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Greg A. Bedard

    In Response to Re: Greg A. Bedard:
    [QUOTE]Was he?    Maybe he was. It just seems like he wasn't because he hasn't in so long. I don't know.  Good news is, there is such great D Line depth now, it's ridiculous. They could try to put Weston, Richard, Deaderick and Cohen on the PS, even. Unlikely, but possible one of them clears waivers.   I even forgot Brace. To me, he's the obvious PUP guy.  Hasn't practiced, could be valuable later in the season, etc. As for Anderson, he's clearly not a run stopper, but nor is Freeney.    Teams are going to run at Anderson if they choose to run.   If it's 3rd and 7, what are the chances they run, though? Small.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]
    I agree. It's amazing to think that last year they were signing guys off the street to play line. Hide as many guys as we can - guys that play that position well don't grow on trees and injuries can wipe out a position. As for Anderson, if any guy can hide a player's weakness it's Belichick. You're right, if it's 3rd and seven...they going to run it? Let them, odds are they won't convert it anyways.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from patthepatriot666. Show patthepatriot666's posts

    Re: Greg A. Bedard

    all bedard wanted was mouse clicks with that headline
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmcintosh. Show andrewmcintosh's posts

    Re: Greg A. Bedard

    I agree the title was a bit annoying, but all in all Bedard has been a total breath of fresh air for the Globe....the only Pats writer here since Reiss who takes the time to put real football insight into his work, so an occasional misleading title gets a pass in my book.  Besides, don't you guys remember all the "TOM BRADY TRADED!!" threads back in 2008 from the board memebers here?  
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: Greg A. Bedard

    These roster cutdown predictions are about like the draft predictions, they never turn out accurate.  So why bother?  Since no one knows what BB is thinking anyway, how can you know who he likes in what situation?  He does what makes sense to him, and isn't publishing (or even publicly stating) his thoughts on the matter.  I'm pretty sure Tom Brady makes the team, but that's about it.  Well, I guess Mankins and Wilfork make it too.  That's all I'm sure of.  
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Greg A. Bedard

    In Response to Re: Greg A. Bedard:
    [QUOTE]I agree the title was a bit annoying, but all in all Bedard has been a total breath of fresh air for the Globe....the only Pats writer here since Reiss who takes the time to put real football insight into his work, so an occasional misleading title gets a pass in my book.  Besides, don't you guys remember all the "TOM BRADY TRADED!!" threads back in 2008 from the board memebers here?  
    Posted by andrewmcintosh[/QUOTE]

    That's why I didn't just bash the guy. He did do some nice training camp updates that were insightfull and he does a decent radio interview.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsfan93311. Show patsfan93311's posts

    Re: Greg A. Bedard

    I'd rather have Bedard reporting rather than Albert Breer. I think Breer thinks a bit too much of himself.

    Did you see the BB press conference with Breer questioning BB about Haynesworth's court case and absence from practice? He just wouldn't let it go. It went on for several minutes. Belichick looked annoyed but never went where Breer was hoping he'd go.

    You'd think Breer has been around long enough to know you're not going to get Belichick to take the bate.

    I don't think Bedard would be stupid enough to keep pushing Belichick the way Breer did.

    Here's the link for the press conference (Breer's questions start about 2:43 into it):
    http://www.patriots.com/media-center/videos/Bill-Belichick-Press-Conference---8252011/ba8ceb9e-f9db-40f7-8147-ddf3fa0e3832
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimmytantric. Show jimmytantric's posts

    Re: Greg A. Bedard

    I could be wrong but I believe Wright is PUP eligable. Would give us insurance down the road and protection from losing him, which I'm sure we would. The Jests would surely kick the tires on him as they do on many of our releases.    Go Pats!!!    In Response to Re: Greg A. Bedard:
    [QUOTE]I saw it, too and thought it was poorly worded. In fact, I almost put the thread up here about it because it looked like he was reporting it, not updated his 53 man roster prediction. I'd say he is a bubble guy, but I hope they can keep him. The fact is, Wright hasn't practiced and you have Pryor, Love, etc, who are cheaper, younger and healthier versions than that. Love what Wright does, but he hasn't practiced.  Maybe it's by design for a PUP scenario, which is clearly possible, but I think they need more than 1 sub rusher in a 4-3. So, that leaves Cunningham or Moore as a subrusher option, but you aren't cutting Cunningham. And Moore shows way too much value as well, so to me it's Wright and Anderson as bubble guys.  Clearly, Wright is far more expensive than Moore or Anderson.  You could keep Anderson and Moore and still be well under what Wright costs. Hate to say it like that, but it's true. Eric Moore probably has a slight advantage over Anderson in that Moore played here last year and has some 3-4 system experience as well. I would keep 9 D Linemen. Ellis, Wilfork, Haynesworth, Carter, Pryor, Love, G. Warren, Eric Moore, Anderson 7 LBs Nink, Cunningham, Mayo, Fletcher, Spikes, Guyton, Tracey White That's 2 less D Linemen than last year, PUP Wright, to see where you are in Week 7, and that's a heck of a rotation, even without Wright. And that's also 1 full spot under the DL/LB roster totals last year if I am not mistaken (11 D Linemen in 2010, same LB totals (7)). 17 in 2010, 16 in 2011.  That gives you that WR or RB room.  Also, that makes people like G. Warren and even Ellis, assuming they're not starting and getting full reps, more valuable than they have been in years past. They're essentialy the same kind of player who can easily drop into a 3-4 DE spot right from that 4-3 DT spot. So, maybe you start them slow and get them going later in the year when you scheme more in between each formation. I liked Mike Reiss's list yesterday. I thought that was pretty much dead on. Overall, Bedard is miles better than that little whiny toad, Breer.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Greg A. Bedard

    Maybe Wright goes on the PUP with Faulk and that would only require one player to be cut instead of two.For all we know the PUP list could be bigger than the cut list.
     

Share