Revisiting Laron Landry

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

    Re: Revisiting Laron Landry

    In response to RockScully's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:


    In response to RockScully's comment:


    In response to jri37's comment:


    I think you may be reading to much into why he wasn't signed here. I think it was a simple as they thought he was to much of an injury risk based on the 2010 & 2011 seasons.


    And the fact he can't cover anyone past 7 yards or in the box.


    Shizzles loves the trendy, gimmick type things.  Give a player a cocktail of roids, some tattoos and a scary faceshield and as GM, Shizzles is all over it.  It's a bonus if he listens to gangsta rap. lmao




    Didnt I ask for only UNBIASED Opinion!??!?  We know you wont call it straight because he went to the Jets.  PLEASE PROVE THAT HE CANT COVER. The guy covers better than any safety on our team. Have u seen Gregory try to cover a TE??  A converted CB cant cover tight and u think Landry cant cover. LIke I said, NO INPUT from you as usual and nothing but LIES. It doesnt work on me because I watch the GAMES rusty. Nice try though



    He has limited range. I said this before he was even signed by the Jets. All his work is 10 yards and in from the line of scrimmage.  He's good sideline to sideline, but absolutely useless in space.

    I don't need to prove it. I saw him play in DC. Once he hurt his Achilles', he was at risk of being worse.

    We don't need an injury risk who can't cover in a passing league at Safety.  There's a reason why Bell and Landry couldn't cover back there.

    The other thing with Landry is may have been deemed to much of a freelancer, selfish type, where BB doesn't like that. There is a reason why only THREE teams kicked the tires on him and why he took the most money on the WORST one.   Get it? It's about LaRon.

    Enough with your obsessing over trying to deflect from Brady and a 13 point offense. Everyone sees what you're doing.  You start a different thread every day to try to steer people away from the 13 point factor.

    Even the TOP can't be argued that the 13 points was there.   LMAO

    If we didn't have 3 guys dinged up or hurt, we possibly keep the game closer on D. The lack of a pass rush really hurt the Pats D, not Safety coverage.


    Im glad you were expecting something from Chandler but he aint been right since he came back. One sack I believe. Nink makes timely plays but not really too many in the playoffs against mammoth tackles.. A completely Healthy Nink DOES not change the game,. but you know what. Pitta beat Gregory easily for A TD from 5 yards in where pass rush not a factor and everyone down the line jammed their man except Gregory while Pitta ran by him easily for a TD,. THIS HAS HAPPENED ALL YEAR to Gregory and thats why they bring a rookie in(wilson) when they can to avoid those mismatches. EVERY TE matched up with Gregory has ran by him while he sits in cement shoes. V.Davis too but he didnt the ball thnk god. This comment here shows you know NOTHING about the game esp. defense where u claim everyone is great and they really arent.  Wrong again Rusty


    LTG!  Im sure you know by now what those initials

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

    Re: Revisiting Laron Landry

    I thought Landry played very well against Gronk in that game aerlier this year...seemed to stay with him pretty well down the field. Now having said that, I know he is not a true center fielder and cannot be counted on to play like a free safety. The thing is we wouldn't need Landry to do that. We need a guy that can run with a tight end and match his size and strength...we've got no one that can do that now. We also need a safety that can play in the box - none of our safeties can do that either. The closest thing we have to a physical safety is Chung and let's not forget Chung may be the worse excuse for a safety I've seen in a while...he gets hurt upon contact, can't cover, is small, is stupid and has been questioned as a quiter on this team.

    If we had a guy like Landry it would go a long way to making our defense better. There is no way in hell a guy like Landry wouldn't of had his deficiencies hidden in our scheme by Belichick. Belichick has found ways to keep Spikes on the field during passing downs (although that didn't end well against Pitta).

  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Brad34. Show Brad34's posts

    Re: Revisiting Laron Landry

    He would have been better than Gregory. I don't know if he is the answer to the Pats defensive/softness problems but given the choice between those 2 I know which one I would rather have.  I think there is a real perception amongst NFL teams that the Pats are soft. Landry definetly would have helped toughen up the defensive backfield.