Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Clay73. Show Clay73's posts

    Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

    Just thinking a little ahead, as most of us think this draft has some very good potential and most of us think that the Mankins contract deal should be made and the Brady contract deal will be made, I think some veteran cuts will have to take place.  Will it be Light, Kaczur, Neal, Morris, Faulk or one or more of the LBs in that log Jam?  And there are typically one or two acquisitions prior to the start of the season so their will be some more veteran cuts made this year. Who??
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from kebbe. Show kebbe's posts

    Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

        Any and all veteran cuts rest solely on the performance of the Patriots rookies,second year players and third year players and who,among the resrves, best serve the interests of the special teams.It has has always been this way.A good example this season rests at the LB'er and WR'er positions.The development of Cunningham,McKenzie and perhaps 1-2 others at the linebacker position is a huge factor in structuring this years LB'er corps and the same same with tate and Price at wide receiver.I feel the competition at these positions(and you could easily include the DB's as a very competitive situation as well)will be much tougher than it has been the last couple of seasons.This is a good thing!
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

    Without knowing all the players I'm guessing BB doesn't cut anymore players until the rookies sign. As for Mankins he's not a given, however Brady surely will be with the Patriots for as long as he wants to be one.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronk1. Show ronk1's posts

    Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

    I don't think it is too much of a reach to assume that:
    -just because a player was resigned he is safely on the roster. 
    -Pats love the development shown by numerous young OL meaning Koppen and Neal are on the fence. Imo Light and Kaczur are held in higher esteem by the Pats brain trust than most of the posters on this website
    -BJGE's 53rd man title looks in jeopardy as the Pats try to juggle and addtl OL and DB on the roster. 5 RB's is one man too many in IMO 
    -I think Tate's roster spot depends on his return game. IF...repeat IF, Welker is on the active list opening day one has to assume Moss, Welker and Edelman are locks. That leaves Holt, Patten, Aiken, Price and Tate fighting for 3 spots. Assuming that Aiken is a lock due to ST play, as a reciever ready to play day 1, Holt, Patten and Price are all more ready than Tate. It would not surprise me to see Holt/Tate with Price on the practice squad, but to me Tate is 100% on the fence.
    -Would it be a surprise to say that Brace and Crable are on the fence? Clearly not. But I think if Crable and Ninko show some 3rd down burst, and can set the edge against the run, Burgess and Woods c/b in trouble, with Woods holding an edge on Burgess due to ST play.
    -I think that Warren is similiar to Burgess with regards to the DL. Warren is fairley solid. He won't embarass himself, but he won't make any plays either. If someone like Brace does show significant improvement, Warren c/b on the fence.
    -Of course at the end of the day, it is a numbers game and I think that the Pats stay with the plan of keeping and developing the young OL and the DB's at the expense of that 5th RB or 6th WR. I also feel that it is "unusual" for the Pats in the "typical" spread offense that they have frequently used to carry a 3rd TE. It looks like this year they will carry that 3rd TE of course meaning one less player at LB/DL.      
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

    In Response to Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?:
    I don't think it is too much of a reach to assume that: -just because a player was resigned he is safely on the roster.  -Pats love the development shown by numerous young OL meaning Koppen and Neal are on the fence. Imo Light and Kaczur are held in higher esteem by the Pats brain trust than most of the posters on this website -BJGE's 53rd man title looks in jeopardy as the Pats try to juggle and addtl OL and DB on the roster. 5 RB's is one man too many in IMO  -I think Tate's roster spot depends on his return game. IF...repeat IF, Welker is on the active list opening day one has to assume Moss, Welker and Edelman are locks. That leaves Holt, Patten, Aiken, Price and Tate fighting for 3 spots. Assuming that Aiken is a lock due to ST play, as a reciever ready to play day 1, Holt, Patten and Price are all more ready than Tate. It would not surprise me to see Holt/Tate with Price on the practice squad, but to me Tate is 100% on the fence. -Would it be a surprise to say that Brace and Crable are on the fence? Clearly not. But I think if Crable and Ninko show some 3rd down burst, and can set the edge against the run, Burgess and Woods c/b in trouble, with Woods holding an edge on Burgess due to ST play. -I think that Warren is similiar to Burgess with regards to the DL. Warren is fairley solid. He won't embarass himself, but he won't make any plays either. If someone like Brace does show significant improvement, Warren c/b on the fence. -Of course at the end of the day, it is a numbers game and I think that the Pats stay with the plan of keeping and developing the young OL and the DB's at the expense of that 5th RB or 6th WR. I also feel that it is "unusual" for the Pats in the "typical" spread offense that they have frequently used to carry a 3rd TE. It looks like this year they will carry that 3rd TE of course meaning one less player at LB/DL.      
    Posted by ronk1
    This will be the hardest final roster to predict because of the quality at many positions,look even Thomas Williams the LB is working out at FB too give himself another option as well as playing ST,roster spots on this team could darn depend on how many emergancy positions you can play and play well.. I think Aikens,Woods,Alexander,several rookies and additional Vets realize they have to catch the HC's eyes if they plan on working in Foxboro as football players,however you can also believ that the same players won't be unemployed for long just take a look at how long Stansback and Bruce Davis were unemployed.
    Patriots players that are cut will immediately find work,just because of their knowledge of the Pats system and also because there are now 4 other teams with ties to BB in one form or another. The Browns,Broncos,Chiefs and Falcons all use variations of the BB school of thought,even the Packers have an ex assistant on their staff even though he was with the Patriots for one year. The Chiefs and Broncos will be just waiting for the players to drift their way as will the Seahawks to some extent.The way of the world when you are one of top banana's..
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from artielang. Show artielang's posts

    Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

    as per previous post, tate is a lock. patten and crable are most likely on the outside looking in (for all the crable lovers out there it was reported that he was practicing with the scout team players yesterday). i think the other veterans that are not assured anything are the guys that were at last week's OTA's. it seemed like they told the roster lock guys to stay away from those sessions so they could get a better look at the young players and the bubble guys. there may only be one spot between woods and alexander, and one between aiken and slater. hard to imagine thomas williams making the team as a LB or FB. i think they keep all the running backs because they are all so injury prone other than faulk and BJGE. you have to assume taylor and morris will both miss major time as usual. i actually think taylor could be a surprise cut if BJGE shows development or if paschall shows anything. i also think g. warren and d. lewis are not locks, i think it could be one or the other. should be an interesting camp...
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tagandtrade. Show tagandtrade's posts

    Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

    Surprise of the year

    Laurance Maroney

    Expected
    -Gerard Warren
    -Damion Lewis

    They do not need both

    Potential
    - Pierre Woods (they tried to give him away he he is still here)
    - Sean Crable (If they sign a vet that can play the 3-4 why keep him)
    - Eric Alexander (Mackenzie takes on his role on special teams)
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from artielang. Show artielang's posts

    Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

    i think the actual surprise is how many players names were misspelled in this post. this must be a record!

    In Response to Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?:
    Surprise of the year Laurance Maroney Expected -Gerard Warren -Damion Lewis They do not need both Potential - Pierre Woods (they tried to give him away he he is still here) - Sean Crable (If they sign a vet that can play the 3-4 why keep him) - Eric Alexander (Mackenzie takes on his role on special teams)
    Posted by tagandtrade

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

    Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

    I'm sure it won't be pretty for some, when they are cut loose
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Supernova13. Show Supernova13's posts

    Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

    I think Alexander is gone, along with Patten and perhaps Woods. 
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from datdude401. Show datdude401's posts

    Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?

    In Response to Re: Which veteran player(s) will have to go?:
    It's way to early to tell because we haven't seen the defensive and offensive packages they will play this year....some of the vets may be kept for scheme specific purposes. One player I think is already bound for the waiver wire walk is Crable....already he's been assigned to practice with the scrub team....not a good sign for a guy who is a vet even though he hasn't played at all since being drafted.....his time is UP,,,,,,,,one of either Lewis or warren on the dl.....LB Alexander...ol orenburger.....wr/db/ret/sp Slater........
    Posted by jfaust1954


    I disagree. If Crable can stay off the IR he'll make the squad. He plays a position of GREAT need. You dont let that walk away, as he has no trade value, with the money & time they've invested in this kid. Its not much $ in football terms but Im sure they like a return at some point. Hey, they gave Chad Jackson 3 yrs.
     

Share