Patrick Chung

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

    Re: Patrick Chung

    I think TexasPat is A Breer in disguise!!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mbeaulieu07. Show mbeaulieu07's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung : What SS in the NFL is asked to cover a WR? NONE! Chung will be asked to cover TEs or play zones. His cover skills don't really matter, even though I can't remember cursing Chung last season. And I remember cursing alot of secondary play, especially Wilhite. TexasPat, are you sure you don't have Chung confused with Wilhite? Chung wears 25, Wilhite wears 24. I can see how you can be confused.
    Posted by 49Patriots


    49P,
    The Patriots generally like their S to be interchangeable, while they may have a SS an FS by name, both are expected to be versatile with the abilities to play down in the box, be involved in blitz packages as well as cover the slot and their deep half in zone (depending on the scheme) which will involve some WR coverage.  It's also not a coincidence, IMO, that both of their high round S picks (Meriweather and Chung) have experience playing CB in college.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung : What SS in the NFL is asked to cover a WR? NONE!
     
    RESPONSE: In the Patriots' system, the SS often does help against the WRs...except where there's a great TE like a Dallas Clark...who needs constant attention. But...let me clear up any confusion...Chung is incapable of covering WRs, TEs, or RBs. The guy is slow to react, slow to recover, and has poor ball skills.

    Chung will be asked to cover TEs or play zones. His cover skills don't really matter, even though I can't remember cursing Chung last season.
     
    RESPONSE: Come on now...how many times did you see Rodney Harrison helping out in coverage of WRs? Furthermore, if Chung is so good, why were you cursing him??

    And I remember cursing alot of secondary play, especially Wilhite.
     
    RESPONSE: Secondary play continues to be a problem. If McCourty flops this year, changes must be made in the personnel department: http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_3204_Belichick_umpteen-uples_down_on_DBs_in_the_draft_.html 

    TexasPat, are you sure you don't have Chung confused with Wilhite? Chung wears 25, Wilhite wears 24. I can see how you can be confused.

    RESPONSE: No confusion. Chung didn't play much because he was a liability in coverage. Sorry...but I'm of the opinion that he's a bust. Hope I'm wrong.

    Posted by 49Patriots

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from FOWLER8196. Show FOWLER8196's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    texas: "check Chungs feeble stats"

    STATS TEND TO BE FEEBLE WHEN YOU ARE A ROOKIE SAFETY IN BBs SCHEME. HOW MANY TIMES HAS THIS BOARD ARGUED THAT STATS MEAN NOTHING..?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from matsuigoesMo. Show matsuigoesMo's posts

    Re: What is Becketts frame of mind?

    In Response to Re: What is Becketts frame of mind?:


    I have to believe that the HBP's were not intentional. But the camera froze on Beckett's face after he hit Cano and I swear I saw him smirk and give a "who cares" kind of grin. And that doesn't bode well for the Sox.

    Posted by jesseyeric



    Your eyes were working fine, Beckett didn't even attempt to hide his true intentions after successfully throwing at Cano's knees. You saw what we all saw, and as such, your belief that he was not throwing at people is just flat out wrong.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Patsfan038. Show Patsfan038's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung : RESPONSE: I really want to be wrong here...but, sorry. Based on what I've seen, Chung is a bust.     
    Posted by TexasPat3


    TexasPat,
    BB always bring the DB in very slowly. They are not thrown in the mix immediately. They do some nickle/dime duties and are very active in special teams. Brandon Merriweather, by far our best S we 21st overall. He had a total of 29 tackles (0 sacks, 0 int) in his first year. Was he considered a bust? NO! he has his problems, but 9 INT over the last two years proves that he has what it takes to be a good SS if not great. In contrast, Chung has 37 tackles, 2 sacks and 1 int. So why calling him a bust? Give him one more year!
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    TexasPat, I don't think many can argue that the Pats could have drafted better the last few years. But, I would not lump Chung in the category of drafted poorly.

    RESPONSE: How can you say that? What has he done to impact the team? Remember, we're talking about the 34th overall pick in the draft...not a 5th round draft choice.

    As a rookie, and given the amount of opportunity he had (when he was on the field), I think his numbers firmly support a pretty successful rookie year.
     
    RESPONSE: Again, how can you say that? Have you seen Chung's awful stats (see my post on that above)?

    Combine that with 13 special teams tackles and I would say the guy did quite well. To say he had "feeble stats" is not factual. He played roughly 150 snaps. 30 something combined tackles, 2 sacks and an interception...you call this feeble?
     
    RESPONSE: Absolutely!!!! The reason why he was only on the field for special teams and played only on 150 snaps is because he can't cover!! Furthermore, you are misrepresenting his stats in this manner...one-third of his tackles and his interception came during garbage time of blow-out wins against then winless Tennessee (59-0), and then winless Tampa Bay (35-7). That means that Chung only registered 25 tackles in the remaining 14 games. Sorry...but that succkks!!

    Your notion of interceptions not counting because it's garbage time is wrong too. If that is the case, lets pull all stats from all players when it is "garbage time" and write these off the books. The kid can't control when he plays, only how he plays.
     
    RESPONSE: Surely you jest! Are you really putting forth the argument that the quality and intensity of play is the same when the score is 59-0, as when its' 0-0?

    And given his opportunities to play, I woudl say he performed quite well. Stats support it.
     
    RESPONSE: No sir...the stats do not support your claim.

    This notion that he is slow and can't cover is nonsense. The kid runs a 4.45 or close to it. Plus, he is not being asked to match up man on man with WR's the same way CB's do.
     
    RESPONSE: Did you ever hear the saying that a guy is a better athlete than he is a football player...or that a guy who might run a 4.55 plays faster in pads? Whether its' lack of speed, lack of athleticism, lack of technique, or lack of instincts...Chung simply can't cover. If he could, with all the problems that the Pats have had in the secondary, don't you think that BB would be playing him more? 

    He clearly is better playing on the line or close to it, and I imagine his coverage skills will be much better this year with a year in the system.
     
    RESPONSE: Chung may be a tweener of sorts. Too small to play LB, yet not quick enough, fast enough, or athletic enough to cover.

    He has the speed and ability to be a good cover safety as well as one who plays on the line.

    RESPONSE: He may, on paper. But, he hasn't shown it on the field.

    Ok, what changes in the personnel department are you advocating? Dumping Chung, Maroney, Moss, etc.?

    RESPONSE: Negative!!! Chung, Maroney, and Moss are players!! I'm talking about deep changes in the scouting department. After all these poor drafts, the scouts who have recommended these awful draftees of recent years to BB must be held accountable. In fairness, part of the Pats' problem is that so many other teams have gone to the 3-4...meaning that they have started looking for the same type of players as the Pats. Nonetheless...the failure in the DB area must be addressed.

    Posted by PatsLifer

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from thejoshuatree28. Show thejoshuatree28's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    Just a question for Texas or anyone really put isnt the standard we give them three years before we decide to call a pick a bust or not, or has that changed when it comes to Chung. I understand that you wanted Chung to come in and be great, but most of the time, the only true blue chip prospects are top ten to fifteen, not into the second round. Give the guy more of a chance, last year was just a bad year overall. Give him two more years then you can call him a bust if he hasn't improved.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from FOWLER8196. Show FOWLER8196's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    texaspat is a bust
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BSII. Show BSII's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    I believe Chung will improve this year.  He appears to be a hard worker with decent athletic ability.  Surprised at the negative sentiment towards a rookie playing behind 2 veterans and a rising young player in Meriweather.  Sanders and McGowan are JAGS, solid veterans that the coaching staff was comfortable playing last year.  Chung appears to have more playmaking ability.  If he gets no time this year maybe he is a bust, we'll see.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung : You are either a very creative troll or have absolutely no clue about football.  It's fine to have an opinion, but to be this irrational, it's clear you have an agenda on this board. Ty Warren and Meriweather were busts as rookies, too, huh?
     
    RESPONSE: Where did I say that? Warren played e=right away. As for Meriweather, though he started slow, and is a poor tackler, showed me signs that he would develop into a player. Chung hasn't. 

    There is a difference between having an impact as a rookie or not and playing in spurts because VETERANS who know the system and therefore have an experience/production edge V.S. a rookie who is able to easily bounce a starter from the year before and produce.
     
    RESPONSE: Sorry...no sale. Again, we're talking about the 34th overall selection in the draft. At the time Meriweather was taken, the Pats had a veteran secondary, and could afford to bring him along more slowly. But, Meriweather showed signs he could cover. Poor tackling was, and remains, his problem. There were also good players ahead of Maeriweather. Not so with Chung. He was brought in to replace Rodney Harrison...but  was so bad in coverage, that he was generally relegated to play special teams, and in garbage time. Despite all the problems the Pats have in the secondary, BB still is not playing him. Why do you think that is?  

    The latter not happening doesn't mean the player is a bust.  A bust means you don't contribute.

    RESPONSE: What has the 34th overall pick done to contribute? Do I have to rehash his woeful stats yet again? Yeah...he contributes on special teams. So does Matthew Slater and Eric Alexander. Big deal!! 

    Did you expect Chung to bounce Sanders as a rookie?

    RESPONSE: Yes.

    If so, that's slightly irrational, especially in a 3-4 defense that has good Safety play.
     
    RESPONSE: The 34th overall pick should be an instant starter...particularly when theres' so many holes to fill in the secondary. Face it, the guy is a bust!

    If Chung had a spot waiting for him and he played horribly, you'd be logical making that conclusion. Guess what? A guy name Brandon McGowan had such a great camp across the board, he too, beat out Chung AND Sanders.
     
    RESPONSE: Nonsense. McGowan was up and down...like so many of the Pats' DBs. The Patriots pass defense was awful. McGowan was the best of a weak group.

    There is nothing wrong with a 2nd rd pick coming in for his 2nd year and progressing, hopefully being the starter.

    RESPONSE: Please tell me how Chung has progressed? If I'm not mistaken, didn't Meriweather start half the games in his rookie season? What did Chung do? Again, please view his stats above.

    If Chung does not win the job from Sanders, I'll be disappointed for sure, but if he can contribute in some kind of package and produce, I'll also be happy with that.

    RESPONSE: You shouldn't be. Thats' OK for a 5th rounder...but Chung was the 34th overall pick! The guy should be a starter no later than year two. Chung isn't even close.

    We shall see.  I am actually really excited to see young, now experience secondary with some continuity. Pray for health, because if they are, watch out.
     
    RESPONSE: Butler and Meriweather should continue to improve. McCourty has to produce!!

    Two kinds of Pats fans:  Rational, objective fans and irrational, spoiled fans. And then there are trolls who aren't fans.

    RESPONSE: Well...call me spoiled if you will. But, sorry...I'll never be a Cubs fan type...who accepts losing. I don't want to see the Pats settling for mediocrity! They currently have one of the greatest QBs of all-time...and they're wasting his years. That frustrates me!! Seeing the Indianapolis Colts surpass the Pats, and beat them, angers me!! I want to see the Pats institute whatever changes are necessary to rectify these situations immediately. Don't you??   

    Posted by russgriswold

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    I believe Chung will improve this year.  He appears to be a hard worker with decent athletic ability.  Surprised at the negative sentiment towards a rookie playing behind 2 veterans and a rising young player in Meriweather.  Sanders and McGowan are JAGS, solid veterans that the coaching staff was comfortable playing last year.  Chung appears to have more playmaking ability.  If he gets no time this year maybe he is a bust, we'll see.
    Posted by BSII


         BSII and All:

         Lets' look at the Chung controversy a bit differently. Suppose that the NY Jets had drafted Chung with the 34th overall pick to fill a hole left by  departing SS, Kerry Rhodes. Further, assume that Chung had the identical rookie season that he had with the Pats...and the identical impact.

         Now, suppose Leon started a thread here on Chung, extolling the same pro-Chung arguments that many of you are making. How would you respond?   


        
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from thejoshuatree28. Show thejoshuatree28's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung : $100 if the Pats had won SB 42, the irrational meter level by some fans would be reduced by 50%.
    Posted by russgriswold

    You see it with teams that have won a lot in the recent past, the Patriots haven't one a superbowl in 6 years but lets look at it this way, we could be the Browns, Jaguars or Lions, they have never been let alone won.  (I Don't count the texans because they haven't been around that long).
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    If I'm not mistaken, didn't Meriweather start half the games in his rookie season?

    MERIWEATHER
    16 games zero starts 27 tackles 3 PD 1FF

    POLAMALU 
    16 games zero starts 38 tackles 4 PD  1FF

    CHUNG
    16 games one start 37 tackles 1 PD 1 INT 2 sacks

    HARRISON
    15 games zero starts 0 tackles 0 PD 0 INT 0 sacks

    You are mistaken. And he had a very similar rookie season to a whole bunch of pro-bowl bust 34 safeties. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung :      BSII and All:      Lets' look at the Chung controversy a bit differently. Suppose that the NY Jets had drafted Chung with the 34th overall pick to fill a hole left by  departing SS, Kerry Rhodes. Further, assume that Chung had the identical rookie season that he had with the Pats...and the identical impact.      Now, suppose Leon started a thread here on Chung, extolling the same pro-Chung arguments that many of you are making. How would you respond?        
    Posted by TexasPat3


    Tex,

    I think this gets to the heart of the matter.  I think such a hypothetical thread as you describe above would get about one or two real responses (taking out the troll/flame stuff).  Why?  Because there is no body of work sufficient to label the guy either way, either a bust or a future HOFer.  There's just no basis for making such a call at this point.  He made some plays, he made some mistakes.  It's way too soon to make a judgment.

    Look at the numbers posted by zbellino and that I had posted earlier.  How can you make the leap to bust with that evidence?  It defies logic.  I understand you're unhappy with the Pats recent drafting, you've made that very clear.  I'm with you to a point.  But not on this guy.  At least not yet.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    [QUOTE]Your comments are way to irrational to even get deep into, but I'll respond to a couple of your horrendous "points".   And no, Meriweather did not start at Safety his rookie year.
     
    RESPONSE: You're right. Meriweather did not start as a rookie. But, he  played more, and in more meaningful minutes, than Chung.

    He saw time in nickel and was not very good at it. He was the #24 overall pick I believe so did you go berserk when Meriweather did not go to the Pro Bowl playing out of position and not bouncing Rodney Harrison and James Sanders from the lineup in 2007?
     
    RESPONSE: Talk about horrendous points...LOL!!! There's simply no comparison between what Meriweather showed and what Chung showed. Chung's play, save for one desperation start, was limited to play on special teams, and garbage time.

    And comparing the Chicago Cubs to the New England Patriots shows how irrational you are as a supposed Pats fan.

    RESPONSE: Talk about an horrendous point...this is what I said exactly, in response to the following statement:

    Two kinds of Pats fans:  Rational, objective fans and irrational, spoiled fans. And then there are trolls who aren't fans.

    RESPONSE: Well...call me spoiled if you will. But, sorry...I'll never be a Cubs fan type...who accepts losing. I don't want to see the Pats settling for mediocrity! They currently have one of the greatest QBs of all-time...and they're wasting his years. That frustrates me!! Seeing the Indianapolis Colts surpass the Pats, and beat them, angers me!! I want to see the Pats institute whatever changes are necessary to rectify these situations immediately. Don't you??   

    The comparison between a Patriots' fan, who don't accept losing, and the Cubs fans, who do, shows how irrational I am??? I contrasted the two...I did not equate them.     
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung : Tex, I think this gets to the heart of the matter.  I think such a hypothetical thread as you describe above would get about one or two real responses (taking out the troll/flame stuff).  Why?  Because there is no body of work sufficient to label the guy either way, either a bust or a future HOFer.  There's just no basis for making such a call at this point.  He made some plays, he made some mistakes.  It's way too soon to make a judgment. Look at the numbers posted by zbellino and that I had posted earlier.  How can you make the leap to bust with that evidence?  It defies logic.  I understand you're unhappy with the Pats recent drafting, you've made that very clear.  I'm with you to a point.  But not on this guy.  At least not yet.
    Posted by Muzwell


         Just by what I saw of the guy...and my observations as to how he was used by BB. I checked the stats again, and you-all are right...I was mistaken. I compared Chung's stats with Meriweather's stats for the 2009 season...not Meriweather's rookie year. 

         But, my opinion still stands. If you break down Chung's stats, a third of his tackles occurred in the two blow-out wins against the Titans and Bucs...in garbage time.
     
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    If I'm not mistaken, didn't Meriweather start half the games in his rookie season? MERIWEATHER 16 games zero starts 27 tackles 3 PD 1FF POLAMALU   16 games zero starts 38 tackles 4 PD  1FF CHUNG 16 games one start 37 tackles 1 PD 1 INT 2 sacks HARRISON 15 games zero starts 0 tackles 0 PD 0 INT 0 sacks You are mistaken. And he had a very similar rookie season to a whole bunch of pro-bowl bust 34 safeties. 
    Posted by zbellino


         You're right "Z". My mistake.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from HartLeeDykesEuguneChung. Show HartLeeDykesEuguneChung's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    I thought Chung flashed some signs of being a playmaker but as a rookie couldn't handle the coverage side of his responsibilities.  He actually was one of the few players that put some pressure on the opposing quarterback once in a while.  So if he can learn the coverages, I think Merriweather and Chung will be a good combo.  Chung did get some penalties during special teams for late hits and I believe hits to the head of the quarterback, he'll have to tone those down but I like his potential to be a playmaker, which our defense desperately needs.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ol44. Show Ol44's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    A first year safety's stat sheet, # of starts, and (lack of) playing time are not a very good indication of that player's future.
    "Z" posted first year stats from some great safeties that are similar to Chung's.
    To draw a conclusion that Chung is a bust and can't cover mainly from his stats,
    I believe is premature.
    I have a feeling Chung will improve with experience and become the leader of the Pats' defensive backfield. A tough tackler will inspire others. He has shown this in his limited playing time. In college he showed leadership in cover as well. We shall see if he can do both in the pros.
    The Pats will need it from him.
    I do not think Meriweather can provide leadership and stability back there.
    If the last defender blows coverage and misses critical tackles (not to mention
    being a clown at times), he needs help, support and guidance from those next to him. The pro bowl does not make you a leader.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    Calling Chung or any other rookie player BB didn't cut from the roster after training camp or one season is idiotic... period.  Mike Vrabel was a career backup for the Steelers and didn't start until he became a PAT...  boy talk about instant gratification and spoiled fans...  get some perspective please.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    Calling Chung or any other rookie player BB didn't cut from the roster after training camp or one season is idiotic... period.  Mike Vrabel was a career backup for the Steelers and didn't start until he became a PAT...  boy talk about instant gratification and spoiled fans...  get some perspective please.
    Posted by wozzy


         Oh really? Chad Jackson, David Thomas, Garrett Mills, Terrence Wheatly, Ron Brace, Shawn Crable...and numerous others have made the roster because they were relatively high draft choices. But, they had one thing in common...they all succkked!! 

         Mike Vrabel was a low 3rd round draft choice, chosen #91 overall, by the Pittsburgh Steelers. Because the Goths had a log-jam at LB, and because back then, few teams played a 3-4, the Pats were able to get him on the cheap as a free agent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Vrabel

         How does that apply to the Chung situation? Remember, Chung was the 34th overall pick in the 2009 draft...selected by the Pats. He was not some guy that the Pats were able to resurrect from the "B" class free agency pool. They scouted him, and deemed him worthy of the 34th overall pick.

         If you want to compare him with somebody...compare him with Chad Jackson...whom the Patriots scouted, and deemed worthy of the 36th overall pick. There have been too many Chad Jackson-like picks of late. And, in my opinion, Chung is one of them.

         That is my "perspective" and perception. Spoiled?? Nonsense!! The Colts keep winning...why can't the Pats? Poor drafting is killing the Patriots. They are wasting the years of one of the greatest QBs on all-time.

         You don't have to agree with me. In fact, I hope I'm wrong. But, based on what I've seen...Chung can't cover. The only argument that might hold some water on his behalf is that he was drafted as a junior eligible. But, such was also the case with disappointments Jackson, Ben Watson, and Laurence Maroney.

         The Patriots' scouting department must be over-hauled. Could BB be relying too heavily on his acquaintances in the college coaching ranks in his decision making process...where objective scouts might offer better opinions?      
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    A first year safety's stat sheet, # of starts, and (lack of) playing time are not a very good indication of that player's future. "Z" posted first year stats from some great safeties that are similar to Chung's. To draw a conclusion that Chung is a bust and can't cover mainly from his stats, I believe is premature.
     
    RESPONSE: I didn't reach a conclusion that Chung couldn't cover from his stats. I reached it from watching him play.

    I have a feeling Chung will improve with experience and become the leader of the Pats' defensive backfield. A tough tackler will inspire others. He has shown this in his limited playing time. In college he showed leadership in cover as well.
     
    RESPONSE: I hope you're right. But, I don't see it. His college teamate, Jarrius Byrd (the 42nd overall selection in the 2009 draft), had a great rookie year in Buffalo with 9 picks. But, Chung showed nothing. As far as Chung as a hitter, let me quote Muhammad Ali: "I don't worry about hittin' power. Hittin' power means nothin' when you can't find nothin' to hit! Chung didn't appear to be in on very many plays last year...causing me to question his instincts, and his ball skills as a DB.          

    We shall see if he can do both in the pros. The Pats will need it from him. I do not think Meriweather can provide leadership and stability back there. If the last defender blows coverage and misses critical tackles (not to mention being a clown at times), he needs help, support and guidance from those next to him. The pro bowl does not make you a leader.

    RESPONSE: I tend to agree. The Pats selected Chung to replace Rodney Harrison. Unfortunately, he has shown little of the Harrison-like skills thus far.

    Posted by Ol44

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    Just a question for Texas or anyone really put isnt the standard we give them three years before we decide to call a pick a bust or not, or has that changed when it comes to Chung.
     
    RESPONSE: That's what the "talking heads" say. But, you can usually tell pretty quick whether or not a guy has the potential to be a player. I just didn't see any of that from Chung.

    I understand that you wanted Chung to come in and be great, but most of the time, the only true blue chip prospects are top ten to fifteen, not into the second round. Give the guy more of a chance, last year was just a bad year overall. Give him two more years then you can call him a bust if he hasn't improved.

    RESPONSE: Hope you're right. Maybe I am getting a bit frustrated with all the poor drafts...losses to the Colts...and deterioration of the defense.

    Posted by thejoshuatree28

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Patrick Chung

    In Response to Re: Patrick Chung:
    If Brady doesn't get hurt in 2008, they go to the SB, not the Steelers.  We all know it.

    RESPONSE: I disagree. I felt that Brady, and the entire team were psychologically scarred by the loss of the SB, and perfection, to the NY Giants. 

    Brady has a "bad  year" by his standards last year, and it's his best statistical season next to 2007.

    RESPONSE: Brady would been better had his OL protected him better, and opened some holes for his RBs.

    3rd overall offene in the league and they can't score in the 2nd half of games because they didn't have the diversity with personnel to do it.

    RESPONSE: I disagree. With all due respect to BB, I feel that he tries to do too much. I disagree with the Patriots' philosophy on paying assistant coaches. The Pats were outcoached in the second half of far too many games last year...and their defensive weaknesses were exposed. The Dean Pees hire...and subsequent failure to fire, hurt the Pats.

    Teams loaded up on Moss and Welker and each of these 3 key figures still dominated statistically, so that should tell even a casual Pats fan a balanced attack makes everyone better.
     
    RESPONSE: Prior to training camp last year, I complained about the Joey Galloway signing, and the decision to let Jabbar Gaffney go. I stated that lack of a quality option playing opposite of Randy Moss would hurt the team...and it did. 

    It's ridiculous and arrogant to think Belichick presses a button and puts this team into a SB automatically every year. They had a lot of bumps last year (no balance on offense, more injuries than we knew, and a rebuilding, young D).
     
    RESPONSE: It's BB's job to press the right buttons. Unfortunately, he hasn't. Poor drafting, and some poor free agency decisions have hurt the team. On the other hand...check out the Colts. Bill Polian has found ways to replace such key players as WR Marvin Harrison, RB Edgerrin James, SS Bob Sanders, LT Tarik Glenn, LB David Thorton, LB Caito June, and CB Nick Harper...on the fly. 

    I have no idea why supposed Pats fans remove simple contexts from the equation. They must complain about everything in real life, it appears.
     
    RESPONSE: What are you talking about? Whose complaining about "real life"? What does that have to do with poor drafting, and poor free agency acquisitions?

    Too much ketchup on their burger at McDonald's must send them into a tizzy.

    RESPONSE: If your happy with seeing the once proud Patriots getting pushed around by the Indianapolis Colts, crushed at home by the Baltimore Ravens, and struggling against mediocre competition on the road, fine. I'm not...particularly when the team still has Tom Brady, and BB. Rather than sit back and accept mediocrity...I'd rather see positive changes made to turn things around. The Pats need better assistant coaches to help BB. But, most importantly, changes need to be made in the scouting department. Though the Pats yearly do a great job of accumulating draft choices, too many of those picks have been wasted on bad selections. Too many to  justify the status quo. 

    Posted by russgriswold

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share