interesting look at roster projections

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Quagmire3. Show Quagmire3's posts

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

    dummy, I never said these were my roster selections (I dont agree with a dozen of them)...the new board does not allow linking so I C&P'd the article...it was meant a a conversation post

    you always come on the board and make snide remarks. I cant ever recall you saying anything of substance about the Pats? DO you have a thought? ARe you capable of a thought? Care to post a thought on the roster, or are you afraid you will show your ingnorance on the topic? numbnuts

    [/QUOTE]


    "dummy" you never gave credit to the original source of the info either, not that hard to do. And  before you try to attack me over a humurous comment, go back and read some of my threads or posts. I come here for all Pats stuff but dont live my life here like you and several others. Starting to think Rusty been right about you all along....

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

    Rkarp, I don't think you're a troll and think the orginal post was a good one, but you really should be more clear when you're posting an article that someone else wrote.  You did this with those JetsCap articles you were posting too . . . never clearly attributing the material to the source. It leads to a lot of confusion. 

    Everyone should follow this rule, actually.  When you take something from some other source, specifically state that you are doing so.  A link in the text isn't enough to make the attribution clear. 

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

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

    Agree. Rkarp should know this since he is supposedly a professional media guy. 

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Quagmire3. Show Quagmire3's posts

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Rkarp, I don't think you're a troll and think the orginal post was a good one, but you really should be more clear when you're posting an article that someone else wrote.  You did this with those JetsCap articles you were posting too . . . never clearly attributing the material to the source. It leads to a lot of confusion. 

    Everyone should follow this rule, actually.  When you take something from some other source, specifically state that you are doing so.  A link in the text isn't enough to make the attribution clear. 




    +1

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Quagmire3. Show Quagmire3's posts

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    obviously my mistake based on the comments..my bad for the past 15 years thinking a highlited link takes one to the source




    Sounds just like Borges when he got caught!

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

    Won't paste in the post, rkarp, but found it helpful in terms of understanding where you're coming from.  Appreciate jri37 posing the question as well.  Although I don't share your views in some areas, rkarp, I do respect the context in which they are formed.  As for me, I'm just a long time Pats fan who appreciates where the franchise stands and how competitive the team is now and has been since Robert Kraft became the owner.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

    RB: You have to cut either Blount or Bolden and add a TE (Hoo-Man), BB brought in Blount to compete with Bolden.

    OT - Cut one because Cannon will back up both OT and OG. 

    DT - Marcus Foston will be in a serious competition with both Kyle Love and Deadrick and Armstead will be competing for a spot as well. I can only see the Pats carrying 4 DTs, I seriously doubt they'll carry 5. 

    DE - Cunningham, Vega and Bequette are competing for a spot, but I doubt Bequette can beat out Cunningham. Cunningham isn't a great DE, but he gets the benefit of having played asnaps last season. He's the favorite to win the spot, but Abraham would make all this competition void. 

    LB - No way they cut Fletcher, if he can make an impact on the field as a cover LB, he'll stay. I still think they want to use Collins as a pass rusher more than a cover LB. We have a need at rush, we can find a cover LB in the draft. 

    CB - Logan Ryan is here for Ras-I's spot, Cole is making the team. He's a good ST player and BB won't cut him. He's like Slater, against a number 4 or 5 WR he can get the job done. Against Boldin? No. 

    S - Cut Steven Gregory, he has the same position as Tavon Wilson, but the Pats won't cut Tavon because it means admitting that he was a waste of a pick. Add Tarpinian or White, whichever comes cheapest in my opinion. 

     

    So....

     

    QB (2): Brady, Mallet

    RB (4): Ridley, Vereen, Blount*, Washington

    WR (6): Amendola, Dobson, Edelman, Jones, Boyce, Slater

    TE (4): Gronkowski, Hernandez, Ballard and Hoomanawanui

    OT (3): Solder, Vollmer, Svitek

    OG (3): Mankins, Connolly, Cannon

    C (2): Wendell, McDonald

    DT (5): Wilfork, Kelly, Love, Forston, Armstead*

    DE (5): Jones, Ninkovich, Francis, Cunningham*, Buchannon

    OLB (4): Mayo, Hightower, Tarpinian, Beauharnais 

    MLB (2): Spikes, Fletcher

    CB (5): Talib, Dennard, Arrington, Ryan, Cole

    S (4): McCourty, A. Wilson, T. Wilson, Harmon

    ST (3): Gostkowski, Mesko, Aiken

     

    The Ministry of Defense! Jerod MayoBrandon SpikesDont'a Hightower

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

    I have to add Collins and cut two more guys, gonna be a tough camp. 

     

    The Ministry of Defense! Jerod MayoBrandon SpikesDont'a Hightower

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

    Quarterback (2): Tom Brady, Ryan Mallett, Mike Kafka

    Running Back (4): Stevan Ridley, Shane Vereen, Leon Washington, Brandon Bolden, LeGarrette Blount

    Fullback (2): Aaron Hernandez, Michael Huey

    Wide Receiver (6): Aaron Dobson, Danny Amendola, Julian Edelman, Josh Boyce, TJ Moe, Matthew Slater, Michael Jenkins, Donald Jones

    Tight End (3): Rob Gronkowski, Jake Ballard, Daniel Fells

    Offensive Tackle (3): Nate Solder, Sebastian Vollmer, Markus Zusevics, Will SviteK

    Guard (3): Logan Mankins, Dan Connolly, Marcus Cannon, Josh Klein, Chris McDonald

    Center (2): Ryan Wendell, Nick McDonald, Matt Stankiewitch

    Defensive Line (6): Vince WilforkTommy Kelly, Armond Armstead, Kyle Love, Brandon Deaderick, Justin Francis, Marcus Forston

    Outside Linebacker (5): Chandler Jones, Rob Ninkovich, Jamie Collins, Jermaine Cunningham, Jake Bequette, Jason Vega, Michael Buchanan

    Inside Linebacker (4): Jerod Mayo, Brandon Spikes, Dont’a Hightower, Dane Fletcher, Steve Beauharnais, Jeff Tarpinian

    Cornerback (5): Aqib Talib, Alfonzo Dennard, Kyle Arrington, Ras Dowling, Logan Ryan, Marquice Cole

    Safety (5): Adrian Wilson, Devin McCourty, Tavon Wilson, Duron Harmon, Nate Ebner, Steve Gregory

    Specialist (3): Stephen Gostkowski, Zoltan Mesko, Danny Aiken, Ryan Allen

    Starters in blue, cuts in red, though I like the prospects of Michael Buchanan, Steve Beauharnais, Marcus Fortson, Josh Klein, Chris McDonald and Ryan Allen I think BB knows he can hide them on the practice squad.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:

    I have to add Collins and cut two more guys, gonna be a tough camp. 

     

    The Ministry of Defense! Jerod MayoBrandon SpikesDont'a Hightower



    Tougher later when other teams start cutting good, tempting talent too

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

    Re: interesting look at roster projections

     

    Wozzy,

    I am still nervous about that DL with Vince and Kelly up in age, and Lovie and Deadrick FA after this year. Do you think Lovie could be on the fence? He didnt start the end of last year, injury or poor play?

    [/QUOTE]

    Funny you ask that, the biggest struggle I had on my list was keeping Love.  I view him like Green-Ellis, decent but BB might think he can get more production from another UDFA or free agent.  I have to think if they sign Abraham that either he or Deaderick are goners.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts