Pats get Burgess...

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

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess... : im not criticizeing,just haveing fun.
    Posted by mosseffect43[/QUOTE]

    I know you are just having fun. I'm just saying that to fully explain everything, I'd need to make this a full time job, and probably endanger my real one. I only get paid for one job, unfortunately.

    Also, it doesn't get better, it gets worse. We get into real complicated stuff, giving multiple looks on same packages, and giving the same looks on different packages. This is where BB is nasty; he takes no prisoners. When they say this is a game of inches, they were not kidding.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess... :      You've been miserable since 2004 largely because the Patriot's defense has let you down. They will again this season, unless they improve their pass-rush.
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    I can say this, scoring at the goal line is an extremely underrated skill. The Steelers practically kept Bettis around for three extra seasons (IIRC) just because he knew how to work the line in short yardage, and yeah, Dillon could do that very well. Dillon just lost that extra gear in his last seasons here that made him a threat to break one open. Most RB's do at that age.

    I think you wrapped up the Burgess signing well. He adds a vet who can get after the QB from the left side, which something they lacked last season. Hopefully he can pick up the position well enough to be a three down guy. Otherwise, he is probably their third down type player, and will at least be very useful in 4-3 sets giving NE the 4-3 sub they have had in a while.

    I do hate the concept of packaging players, but Ne might have to this season. Which could be alright.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ricky1554atl. Show ricky1554atl's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    The addition of Burgess will help in our third down and red zone defense situations and we all know how bad we were in that area last year. We know he can rush the passer, no doubt about that, and that will help out our secondary greatly, as TexasPat has stated. We are a better team with him. Good pickup. Maybe the move that puts us over the top, time will tell.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonBobBlowhard. Show BostonBobBlowhard's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Pats get Burgess... : i was just reading it. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/08/06/patriots-acquire-derrick-burgess/
    Posted by mosseffect43[/QUOTE]

    Another old player with injury problems the past two years, joining to "fill a gap" in a 3-4 defense he has not played in before. A one-dimensional situational pass rusher whose best days were 3 years ago. And on a one year contract. This guy was simply the best Belicheat could do at the last minute, now that the franchise looks beyond the happy talk and sees there are glaring weaknesses on this defense. Also, a one year guy, so if he is good, he is gone next year anyway. All this for two "precious" draft choices...we paid more for him than the Jets paid for Jenkins and Shephard. Any of you who think Burgess will be a consummate OLB, covering as well as pass rushing need to stop drinking the kool aid.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonBobBlowhard. Show BostonBobBlowhard's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess... : Psycho - tell us in English.  Charts, definitions would be greatly appreciated.
    Posted by themightypatriots[/QUOTE]

    I guess when you throw terms like WIL, MIKE, 3 GAP, and all that out there, it makes you an expert. Truth is, Burgess has never played OLB at the NFL level, is a malcontent no other team was pursuing, and has been injured the last two, nonproductive, years. "The Patriot Way"?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonBobBlowhard. Show BostonBobBlowhard's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]Probably should just stop at this point.  Trust me when I say that compared next to a pro football coach, I know nothing. And compared to Bill Belichick, most pro football coaches knows nothing. You get the idea.
    Posted by patpscyho[/QUOTE]

    Compared to Belicheat, you know nothing about photography or video scamming, either.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    Whatever he is, he looks suspiciously like a "rental" to me.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonBobBlowhard. Show BostonBobBlowhard's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess... : Yeah I'd say this has a good shot. I can see a few things happening this year 1. Guyton/Lenon push Bruschi for playing time might end up being a 50/50 situation. 2. Chung gets more playing time and eventually takes over Sanders spot 3. There's going to be a good battle at the 2nd CB spot. I think Bodden will win the #1 CB then you have Butler, Springs, Willhite, Wheatley battling for the #2. Right now I'm liking Darius Butler.
    Posted by Wizardsjag[/QUOTE]

    This post basically defines why the Patriots defense is in huge trouble this year. I don't think the top ten league defenses are debating whether to start players like Guyton or Chung, nor are they shuffling out names of rookies and never-beens to star in a weak secondary.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonBobBlowhard. Show BostonBobBlowhard's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess... : We would never use that personnel in a 4-3.  The heaviest 4-3 we would use is:                 Green       Brace         Wilfork      Seymour Springs                                                                         Bodden                         Thomas      Mayo        Guyton                               Merriweather                                                       Sanders A more typical 4-3 would be:                   Burgess      Wilfork      Seymour      Green                     Springs                                                                       Bodden                         Thomas        Mayo          Guyton                                 Merriweather                                                            Sanders
    Posted by themightypatriots[/QUOTE]
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonBobBlowhard. Show BostonBobBlowhard's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    Rex Ryan, Tony Sporano, Mike Tomlin, and many other coaches are comparing their defenses to this mess with glee. The Pats better score 40+ a game this year if they hope to win. I hear McGinnis still wants to play.... I suppose he will be next to sign with a lot of fanfare.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from kebbe. Show kebbe's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

            When and if boston.com will be a pay site and many true fans must or choose to find an alternative site and forum I'm certain that many of us will not miss it because of the constant presence of those who constantly demean the team,and even the league,by citing the same old complaints specious or not.It and they have gotten desparately old and boring.If i coose to look elsewhere Iwill miss it,but not much.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from nykrb. Show nykrb's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]Hate to burst everyone's bubble, but ... 1.  A 3rd round pick for a guy with a one year contract?  The third round pick gives us a shot at a solid starter for 4 years after this season.  Even if Burgess turns out to be a stud, he is gone after this year.  Remember Corey Dillon?  Great for one year and then nothing.  [/QUOTE]

    I do remember Cory Dillon, in that one year he set the team rushing record and helped them win SB #3... worth every bit of that 2nd round pick they gave up for him.

    I believe Burgess will have the same revitalization that both Dillon and Moss had when they came here... I expect his season here to resemble his first with the Raiders... which means double-digit sacks and constant pressure on QBs.

    [QUOTE]   Um ... Burgess s*cks!  There I said it.  Now we've got a debate going.   [/QUOTE]

    I don't think we have any debate going, I think you are expressing a difference of opinion, one not justified by the facts, and the rest of us are going to remain happy about the pick despite your opinion.

    Burgess is a proven All-Pro talent, compared to what else was on the roster (Woods, TBC, Crable) he is an upgrade and can make an impact.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

         Have the once mighty Raiders become the Patriots' farm team? Heres' an article which poses that very question. Interesting to read the fan comments to the article, giving the perspective of Raider fans in reaction to the Burgess trade: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/07/SP0M19557P.DTL
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    I think the guy who was worried that Uncle Al might actually be of the undead and might never go away has a legitimate concern.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]I think the guy who was worried that Uncle Al might actually be of the undead and might never go away has a legitimate concern.
    Posted by prairiemike[/QUOTE]

         LOL!!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

         For those of you who question the Burgess trade, here are some cold, hard football facts to sober you up. CHFF states the following:

         NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS: Can BB recapture his defensive magic? The fate of the continuation of the Patriots dynasty depends upon it: 
        
         The formula in New England during the Tom Brady Era (2001-present) is simple: when the defense plays well, the Patriots play for Super Bowls. When the defense struggles, the Patriots don’t play for Super Bowls.

         The magic number is 300 points. The Patriots surrendered fewer than 300 points in 2001, 20003, 2004, 2006 and 2007 – they played in the AFC title game all five years and in the Super Bowl in four of those years. Only a miracle Colts comeback prevented the Patriots from a perfect five for five when their defense is solid.

         The Patriots surrendered more than 300 points in 2002, 2005 and 2008 – they missed the playoffs in two of those three years and won just a single wildcard playoff game in 2005.

         Belichick sees the correlation, too. He’s made an all-out assault on improving his defense, specifically his pathetic pass defense of 2008. Between the draft and free agency, New England’s defensive backfield will be completely unrecognizable from the punchless unit the team fielded last year. The offense under Brady, meanwhile, will almost certainly be Super Bowl caliber. So the success of his defensive remodeling job will be the difference between a good season for New England and a Super Bowl season for New England.
     
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from noncallcity. Show noncallcity's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    Can't argue with those stats. Because they added so much defensive talent--even rookies--I'd be hugely disappointed with anything less than an intimidating defense that creates turnovers. 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    More Guyton less Bruschi. I'd say Chung has a legitmate shot at being the starter by mid-season. Even Springs and Butler as part of the nickel or dime packages looks very good right now.  The defense has improved significantly and we did not have to trade a any one of our 3 2nds for that to happen.  Was it just a 3rd for Burgess or that and a 4th. Either this D looks better on paper than 2008.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Harleyroadking111. Show Harleyroadking111's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]I think the guy who was worried that Uncle Al might actually be of the undead and might never go away has a legitimate concern.
    Posted by prairiemike[/QUOTE]

    ZOMBIE! ZOMBIE! ZOMBIE! ALERT! KILLA!

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Harleyroadking111. Show Harleyroadking111's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]     Have the once mighty Raiders become the Patriots' farm team? Heres' an article which poses that very question. Interesting to read the fan comments to the article, giving the perspective of Raider fans in reaction to the Burgess trade: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/07/SP0M19557P.DTL
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    More BB genius, target good/great players on the worst teams. Dillon, Moss, Burgess, Welker these guys wanted out and want to win, giving up accumulated picks for these guys just shows that BB is well ahead of everyone else in team building.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    In Response to Re: Pats get Burgess...:
    [QUOTE]I think the guy who was worried that Uncle Al might actually be of the undead and might never go away has a legitimate concern.
    Posted by prairiemike[/QUOTE]

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK_v4I8Qa50&feature=related
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from patpscyho. Show patpscyho's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

    I watched Burgess in practice today (#49) and he was part of only a few basic rush packages, and without  giving out too much info (per request of people/reporters who attend training camp), he did some work in the 4-3. This being his first practice, he didn't participate in too much situational football.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Pats get Burgess...

         One last thing...for those of you who think that the Pats gave up too much for Burgess...the Eagles were also interested, and reportedly offered Uncle Al a 3rd round pick, plus a player. The Pats trumped that offer with the offer of a 3rd and a 4th rounder (which would drop to a 5th rounder, if the Pats, who currently do not own a 5th round pick, should acquire one through trade).

         Since the Pats are unlikely to part with their 4th rounder too, their sure to make a trade either prior to roster cut-downs, or prior to, or during, the 2010 draft. 
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share