We are wasting a roster spot on #5

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

    We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    I finally got around to watching a quick replay of the Eagles game.  I liked what I saw for the most part, considering it was the first pre-season game.  One thing I didn't like was that BB hasn't cut Tebow yet.  The guy is undescribebly bad and will not improve.  He has been working on his "throwing" for 5 years now, and it looks just as terrible as it always has.  He isn't going to ever get to where he needs to be to play as an NFL QB.  Can we please use his roster spot on a QB who can actually throw?

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to WazzuWheatfarmer's comment:

    I finally got around to watching a quick replay of the Eagles game.  I liked what I saw for the most part, considering it was the first pre-season game.  One thing I didn't like was that BB hasn't cut Tebow yet.  The guy is undescribebly bad and will not improve.  He has been working on his "throwing" for 5 years now, and it looks just as terrible as it always has.  He isn't going to ever get to where he needs to be to play as an NFL QB.  Can we please use his roster spot on a QB who can actually throw?



    they have 2 QB's that throw (very well)...they are figuring out if they can use a QB that can run. TT may be the Pats best power runner, maybe making a case between TT, Blount and Bolden with the Pats keeping only 2 of them

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    I'de take number #5 on the roster before #21.  At least #5 would be available to play, if needed.

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to Eldunker's comment:

    I'de take number #5 on the roster before #21.  At least #5 would be available to play, if needed.




    Hopefully he will never be needed.

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to Eldunker's comment:

    I'de take number #5 on the roster before #21.  At least #5 would be available to play, if needed.




    We could cut both of them today and it wouldn't bother me.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    I wonder if Jacksonville wishes they would have taken him?  The looked horrible on offense against the Phins, they need a backup...... badly!

     

    ---------------------------------------------

    "Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anybody else."  Text received by Tom Brady from Kurt Warner after Ravens loss.


    view my Patriots photoshops at patsfanfotoshop.tumblr.com





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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to rkarp's comment:


    TT may be the Pats best power runner, maybe making a case between TT, Blount and Bolden with the Pats keeping only 2 of them



    Can he be an effective runner from the RB position though?   Or are you suggesting they would actual take Brady off the field during goal line and short yardage situations?  Tebow might be a better runner than Blount or Bolden, but if using that running ability entails taking the HoF QB off the field I'm not sure he is worth the "upgrade".

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    It's week 2 of the preseason, there's plenty of time to cut people. If they cut him, they'd have to bring in another QB because there's too much work for two arms in camp at this point. If they didn't have him last week, Brady would have had to go back in the game with the 3s when Mallett got hurt.  Would you want that?

    If you're cutting your third QB and going with two, you do it at the end of camp, not now.

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    TT may be the Pats best power runner, maybe making a case between TT, Blount and Bolden with the Pats keeping only 2 of them

     



    Can he be an effective runner from the RB position though?   Or are you suggesting they would actual take Brady off the field during goal line and short yardage situations?  Tebow might be a better runner than Blount or Bolden, but if using that running ability entails taking the HoF QB off the field I'm not sure he is worth the "upgrade".

     

    [/QUOTE]

    no, he would run out of formation same as Devlin or Hooman have...TT at 250 lbs may be the biggest and fastest out of that FB spot

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     


    TT may be the Pats best power runner, maybe making a case between TT, Blount and Bolden with the Pats keeping only 2 of them

     



    Can he be an effective runner from the RB position though?   Or are you suggesting they would actual take Brady off the field during goal line and short yardage situations?  Tebow might be a better runner than Blount or Bolden, but if using that running ability entails taking the HoF QB off the field I'm not sure he is worth the "upgrade".

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't think he is suggesting that because anyone who knows better knows that TFB is not coming off that field!

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to rkarp's comment:



    no, he would run out of formation same as Devlin or Hooman have...TT at 250 lbs may be the biggest and fastest out of that FB spot



    Interesting thought although it isn't clear to me that Tebow would be equally effective running from that spot (has he ever done it before?).  Plus unless he is on the field for a lot of snaps it would be pretty obvious what they were doing with him since he hasn't shown much as a blocker.

    I will say that despite Brady's ridiculous conversion rate on QB sneaks it makes me nervous every time.

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    I never thought I could see a place for Tebow on this team, but during Friday's game I had an idea.  What is they put TT in the game in the 4th quarter with a 14 or 21 point lead.  Go heavy and run run run the ball and burn some clock.  If they know we are going to run anyway why not have another option than TB handing the ball off?

    Better than going 3 out!!!

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     


    TT may be the Pats best power runner, maybe making a case between TT, Blount and Bolden with the Pats keeping only 2 of them

     

     



    Can he be an effective runner from the RB position though?   Or are you suggesting they would actual take Brady off the field during goal line and short yardage situations?  Tebow might be a better runner than Blount or Bolden, but if using that running ability entails taking the HoF QB off the field I'm not sure he is worth the "upgrade".

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    no, he would run out of formation same as Devlin or Hooman have...TT at 250 lbs may be the biggest and fastest out of that FB spot

     

    [/QUOTE]

    He'd be effective taking a direct snap on goal line/2 pt. conversions, like Faulk used to do (and Brady would fake like the ball went over his head, which probably didn't do much...). Although that's maybe twice a year?

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from NoMorePensionLooting. Show NoMorePensionLooting's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    At this point in camp with near 100 players he worth seeing what you got. If what you got looks like it did Friday then at 53 he won't be here.

    I want to see Mallett with the first string guys. He had 3rd and 4th string guards in front of him and was under constant pressure.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    After all is said and done I dont see a meaningful role for TT on this team. As was noted earlier he has had 5 years or so to try to improve his mechanics or even just his results and he is just horrible. He can throw deep and so him running an option is always intriguing but you dont take a HOF out for a guy who cant even be a reasonable 3rd stringer.

    If they were trying him at RB or H bavk or something we could see whether he had the talents but they have not. And it is not something you would expect could just be picked up easily.

    I am surprised he is on the roster. So while I will be surprised if he sticks I was wrong in thinking he would not be here in the first place.

     

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    The super pro experts around here continue to make judgements after one pre-season  game. If that were the smart thing to do we would be booting Mallet as well.

     

     

     http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff6/babeparilli/gif_193x113_39ce6f_zps83b8ca29.gif?t=1373985234

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from neinmd. Show neinmd's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    I don't think any of us thought Tebow would end up on the Patriots. I personally don't think he has the skills to be an every-day NFL QB but the guy who has to make that call has forgotten more about football than I will ever learn. So I trust his judgment on making that call.

    But, to me, he looks like he could strengthen our overall rushing offense. He is fast, strong and tough to bring down. I was not a fan of his Tebowing antics, frankly, and felt it was a distraction for his team. Have not seen him do much of that in New England so maybe he has been told to cut it out and that God doesn't care if he scores a touchdown or not.

    So now that he is here, I would like to see him contribute and succeed. He is OK for a 3rd string QB and potentially a heck of a full-back.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from kansaspatriot. Show kansaspatriot's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    The super pro experts around here continue to make judgements after one pre-season  game. If that were the smart thing to do we would be booting Mallet as well.

     

     

     http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff6/babeparilli/gif_193x113_39ce6f_zps83b8ca29.gif?t=1373985234

     




    mallet would probably look better with the first team o-line, but he's slow, he'd probably take as many sacks a Tebow would.

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    I bet he makes the team, an BB uses in alot of versatile rolls, other than QB.

    maybe he could use him as the holder on FGs, and try a run or something to keep a drive going. who knows.




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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

    no, he would run out of formation same as Devlin or Hooman have...TT at 250 lbs may be the biggest and fastest out of that FB spot

     

     



    Interesting thought although it isn't clear to me that Tebow would be equally effective running from that spot (has he ever done it before?).  Plus unless he is on the field for a lot of snaps it would be pretty obvious what they were doing with him since he hasn't shown much as a blocker.

     

    I will say that despite Brady's ridiculous conversion rate on QB sneaks it makes me nervous every time.

    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly on TT.  I have to admit I get the same feeling when Brady sneaks.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from MoreRings. Show MoreRings's posts

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to Tomhab's comment:

    I never thought I could see a place for Tebow on this team, but during Friday's game I had an idea.  What is they put TT in the game in the 4th quarter with a 14 or 21 point lead.  Go heavy and run run run the ball and burn some clock.  If they know we are going to run anyway why not have another option than TB handing the ball off?

    Better than going 3 out!!!




    Sure better than 3 and out, but I hate the though of TT stealing reps from Mallet

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to kansaspatriot's comment:

    I bet he makes the team, an BB uses in alot of versatile rolls, other than QB.

    maybe he could use him as the holder on FGs, and try a run or something to keep a drive going. who knows.






    maybe he could use him as the holder on FGs, and try a run or something to keep a drive going. who knows.

     

    Is this worth a roster spot?

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to Tomhab's comment:

    I never thought I could see a place for Tebow on this team, but during Friday's game I had an idea.  What is they put TT in the game in the 4th quarter with a 14 or 21 point lead.  Go heavy and run run run the ball and burn some clock.  If they know we are going to run anyway why not have another option than TB handing the ball off?

    Better than going 3 out!!!



    Interesting...never thought of that before. I don't know if that's enough reason to keep him on the team, or if they would take Brady off the field for that much of a game, but it seems interesting to me. I could see that being effective and if you have a big enough lead, why risk Brady?

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to Tomhab's comment:

     

    I never thought I could see a place for Tebow on this team, but during Friday's game I had an idea.  What is they put TT in the game in the 4th quarter with a 14 or 21 point lead.  Go heavy and run run run the ball and burn some clock.  If they know we are going to run anyway why not have another option than TB handing the ball off?

    Better than going 3 out!!!

     



    Interesting...never thought of that before. I don't know if that's enough reason to keep him on the team, or if they would take Brady off the field for that much of a game, but it seems interesting to me. I could see that being effective and if you have a big enough lead, why risk Brady?

     



    Anyone curious as to why they'd design an offensive scheme that only fits Tebow if they were planning to cut him in three weeks?  Don't get me wrong I'd be happen to see him go but if he stays they have to have a better plan than him stepping in if TB goes down. 

    There is also a hole in my theroy because once they put him in as the 3rd QB they can't bring TB back in if needed.  So unless they plan to move Tebow up to number 2 or cut or trade Mallett...

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

    Re: We are wasting a roster spot on #5


    Cut or trade Mallet to keep TT. Wow.  Hopefully not.

     

Share