Buzzing about the draft
Questions galore about players the Pats might pick
If you're an NFL fan, it's all about the draft at this time of year.
I sense a distinctive energy and enthusiasm from Patriots officials about this year's crop of players, which is better and deeper than last year's.
I also think the positioning of the team's draft picks has generated some internal excitement. Having four picks in the first three rounds -- including top-of-the-round selections in the first and third rounds -- the Patriots know they are going to add some players who will make them better.
Since last week's mailbag, the Patriots have made one free-agent move (signing LB Victor Hobson) and the team was also front and center at the NFL's annual meeting in Palm Beach, Fla.
But make no mistake, the majority of questions that came into this week's mailbag were draft-related, so here goes ...
When do the pre-draft visits actually happen? The week before the draft? I ask because lately Bill Belichick has been everywhere but Foxborough. I would expect when a player comes in for a pre-draft visit, the head coach is present.
Nick, Montreal
A: Nick, the visits usually take place over the next three weeks. Most teams like to have the visits as close to the draft as possible, so the information is as fresh as possible. I always like to provide the reminder that the pre-draft visits can mean a lot of different things, and it's often risky to assume genuine interest. In some cases, the visits might actually confirm non-interest. Nonetheless, here is the list of players that have been confirmed, either through sources or other media reports, visiting the Patriots:
DE/LB Cliff Avril (Purdue)
CB Antoine Cason (Arizona)
DT Glenn Dorsey (LSU)
DE/OLB Vernon Gholston (Ohio State)
DE/LB Quentin Groves (Auburn)
DE/LB Jason Jones (Eastern Michigan)
CB Patrick Lee (Auburn)
LB Curtis Lofton (Oklahoma)
LB Jerod Mayo (Tennessee)
RB Darren McFadden (Arkansas)
CB Leodis McKelvin (Troy)
LB Keith Rivers (USC)
DE/LB Darrell Robertson (Georgia Tech)
CB Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie (Tennessee State)
CB Aqib Talib (Kansas)
CB Terrell Thomas (USC)
Any thoughts on the draft beyond the first round pick (after day one), where the Pats have unearthed some nuggets in the past?
Shriram, Chennai, India
A: I'm glad you brought this up, Shriram, because most of what you see from us reporters leading up to the draft is a mock first round. But as Asante Samuel (fourth round, 2003) reminds us, there are star players to be found in the mid to later rounds as well. Here are a few names that stand out to me at each position as second-round to free-agent possibilities for the Patriots (those who are making known visits to Gillette Stadium are not included):
Quarterback: Chad Henne (Michigan), Josh Johnson (San Diego), Kevin O'Connell (San Diego State).
Running back: Justin Forsett (California), Dantrell Savage (Oklahoma State).
Wide receiver: Danny Amendola (Texas Tech), Earl Bennett (Vanderbilt), Dexter Jackson (Appalachian State), Kenneth Moore (Wake Forest).
Tight ends: John Carlson (Notre Dame), Tom Santi (Virginia), Craig Stevens (California).
Offensive line: C/G Andrew Crummey (Maryland), OT/G Mike McGlynn (Pittsburgh), C/G Jamey Richard (Buffalo), C John Sullivan (Notre Dame), OT/G Jeremy Zuttah (Rutgers).
Defensive line: DT Red Bryant (Texas A&M), DT Keilen Dykes (West Virginia), DE/DT Nick Hayden (Wisconsin), DT Frank Okam (Texas).
Linebacker: OLB Shawn Crable (Michigan), OLB Lawrence Jackson (USC), ILB J Leman (Illinois), ILB Curtis Lofton (Oklahoma), ILB Darren Mustin (Alabama).
Defensive back: CB Tyvon Branch (Connecticut), CB Kennard Cox (Pittsburgh), CB Brandon Flowers (Virginia Tech), CB Justin King (Penn State), S Nate Lyles (Virginia), S Tom Zbikowski (Notre Dame).
Mike, do you see the Pats being so infatuated with anyone (Vernon Gholston) that they would trade up!?
Pete
A: While nothing would surprise me, Pete, I would rate this as unlikely. I just don't see the Patriots giving up one of their other draft picks to move up, and then pay such a heavy financial price to sign the player. Bill Belichick said at the NFL's owners meeting that he didn't feel there was a clear-cut No. 1, so I think there is a cluster of players there under consideration. I think that the team will be more content to see what falls to them and then consider trading down to accumulate additional picks, more so than working to move up.
Assuming the Patriots want to trade down from the seventh pick, who would they like to see still available at seven, that would make the best trade bait?
Don, Brockton
A: Don, I would say Matt Ryan and Darren McFadden would be the two names that would give the pick most value if they were available -- Ryan because he's a potential franchise quarterback, and McFadden because of the potential dynamic approach and immediate sizzle he could bring an offense at running back.
Mike, I know Bill loves the 3-4 and he is a defensive genius but the Giants killed us with a 4-3. A good coach is supposed to choose the system that suits his personnel and it appears that finding great linebackers is very hard to do. Should he consider more 4-3 since he doesn't appear to have the troops for a 3-4 anymore? Thanks.
Edward, Lancaster
A: Hi Edward. Belichick does prefer a base 3-4, although the system is designed to be multiple, and thus allow for flexibility to switch to the 4-3 at a moment's notice. I don't envision the Patriots changing from their base 3-4, although as Bill Belichick has said, every year brings modifications. In theory, I could see the Patriots' defense employing more of an up-field, slanting, vertical approach at times in 2008, more so than they have in recent years. This is something I have kept in mind while analyzing the draft prospects because it wouldn't surprise me to see the team go slightly off course to pick a player with a bit of a different skill-set than we've seen in the past.
I've been following the draft closely for the last six years. Something about this year's class just doesn't sit well with me, specifically the cornerbacks. There's a handful of the top cornerback prospects and none of them seem to stand out. Usually there's one guy who sets himself apart from the rest, but not this year. You get a different answer from everyone you talk to. Some have Leodis McKelvin as the top, others have Aqib Talib and others have Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie. Can you try and clear this up a little bit? Who is the No. 1 guy in this draft?
Jarrod
A: You nailed it, Jarrod. There is no clear-cut top corner, as many feel the true value of this crop is in the mid-to-late first round into the second and third rounds. The people I've spoken with, who have studied the prospects a lot closer than I have, tell me it's Talib and McKelvin at the top. But both have areas that hold them back from being a clear-cut No. 1 -- Talib has off-field questions that teams must become comfortable with, while some wonder how McKelvin stacks up against top competition and why his interception totals are low. So to answer the question -- who is the No. 1 guy? -- I think it will truly vary on a lot of teams' draft boards. Some will have McKelvin. Some will have Talib. Others might have Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, or Antoine Cason, or Mike Jenkins.
Do you believe that the Patriots, either through free agency or the upcoming draft, need to add much to their secondary? They have essentially replaced Asante Samuel, Randall Gay, and Eugene Wilson with Fernando Bryant, Jason Webster, Lewis Sanders, and Tank Williams, with Bryant, Webster, and Williams having extensive starting experience. They seem to have greater team needs with the most glaring being linebacker. What are you thoughts?
Kent, Hudson
A: I do think the Patriots still need to replenish parts of the secondary, mainly with a long-term focus in mind. The team has brought in some veterans who could vie for starting roles, but those players are on short-term deals and the idea of drafting a quality corner and having him under contract for four years should be on the team's radar. Players like Arizona's Antoine Cason, USC's Terrell Thomas and Iowa's Charles Godfrey would seemingly fit nicely.
Since the Patriots did not spend the money on Samuel, it appears to me that they would not select (and spend that type of money) on a CB with the seventh pick. My thought is that it's an OLB or a trade out (Dallas looking for McFadden). As far as first day picks -- LB/DE tweener, several DBs and a TE. What do you think?
Bo, Brooklyn, Conn.
A: That sounds like the key needs would be filled, Bo, but I also wouldn't rule out a defensive lineman like USC's Sedrick Ellis if he's available. On the cornerbacks, I think another key point is that there isn't a clear-cut No. 1 guy that a team could feel good about paying that money to, but if a Champ Bailey-like corner was there, I wouldn't have a problem with letting Samuel go and paying the next Champ Bailey.
In view of the fact that the Patriots have now lost two title games in spite of the fact that they had the lead four times in the AFC title loss and the other team had to score a touchdown in 2:29 to win the Super Bowl and the defense was not able to come up with the big stop, do you think that Belichick's reputation as a defensive guru has been put to rest?
Fred, Washingtonville, NY
A: I don't, Fred, and mainly that's because I wouldn't judge someone's reputation solely based on Super Bowl championships -- or how those Super Bowls are won/lost. I think the fact the Patriots have played in four Super Bowls over the last seven years is remarkable in and of itself.
Mike, I enjoy your articles every day. Are the Patriots interested in resigning Mel Mitchell, Chad Scott, and Rosevelt Colvin? Also, are the Ty Law talks dead?
Gary, Cleveland
A: I see the situations with Mitchell, Scott and Colvin as all health-based, Gary. I don't think any of the three players can pass a physical right now. When those players can pass a physical, I think the Patriots would have interest. There have been several questions about Colvin in recent weeks, and I'd probably put him in the least likely to return of the three in this group. As for Ty Law, I think he knows there is a standing offer from the Patriots. But I think he's looking for that offer to come up a bit.
Mike, does the Hobson signing end any interest in Adam Seward? Perhaps the Pats see Hobson for one year as a better deal than Seward long-term and compensation.
Rob
A: I don't think the Hobson signing means the Patriots are no longer interested in Seward, Rob. Teams have until April 18 to sign restricted free agents to offer sheets and even if the Patriots don't sign Seward to an offer sheet, there is always the possibility of a trade. Based on Bill Belichick's answer at the NFL's annual meeting, I do think the Patriots have interest in Seward, but it seems to me the team is trying to determine the best way to acquire him -- at a price they are comfortable with.
Hey, Mike. I think the safest pick for the Patriots to make in the first round where they are is either Sedrick Ellis or Keith Rivers. I think they may like Rivers enough but might want to move down to get him. Do you see the Patriots working out a trade to bring Seward from Carolina in an exchange of first-round picks? Is the 13th pick too low to take Rivers? Could they manage to acquire a third-rounder and Seward from Carolina?
Russ
A: The idea of acquiring Seward in a trade with Carolina -- in an exchange of first-round picks, 7 for 13 -- is something I had suggested in recent weeks. The problem with that scenario, however, is that you can't trade a player who is not under contract and Seward has yet to sign his tender from the Panthers. I suppose an agreement could be worked out for Seward to sign the tender to facilitate a trade, but it seems complicated to have all that happen while the teams are on the clock during draft day. As for acquiring an extra third-rounder as part of that trade, my feeling is that Carolina would find that a bit too rich, unless they were really targeting a player they felt was worth it. As for Rivers at 13, my hunch is that he won't be there at that point.
Mike, I'm a bit worried about us signing free agents this year to one-year contracts. Your thoughts on this?
Edvin, Trondheim, Norway
A: Given the players that have signed those one-year deals, Edvin, I don't think it's a major concern. In most cases from the team perspective, they are low-risk, high-reward signings. From the players' perspective, the one-year deal gives them a chance to restore their value and hit the market again next year (e.g. Victor Hobson). A lot of times those are win-win situations for both the team and player, and if it works out for both sides, an extension is often reached during the season. The key, as I see it, is striking a balance between some one-year deals (e.g. Lewis Sanders, Fernando Bryant, Jason Webster) and some longer-term deals (e.g. Randy Moss, Kelley Washington).
Will the curse of the Super Bowl loser strike Pats? (Touch wood it doesn't).
Mark, Delhi, India
A: It's interesting to note that six of the last seven Super Bowl losers have not qualified for the playoffs the following season. I remember talking with Seahawks quarterback Matt Hasselbeck about this following Seattle's Super Bowl loss to the Steelers a few years ago. He said it was something that had become a topic of discussion among the Seahawks, who ended up bucking the trend.
I do think it will be interesting to see how the Patriots will respond. In the end, I think they'll overcome this "curse" based on a talented roster and what looks to be, on paper, a pretty good schedule (yes, that's always dangerous to project).
Matt Walsh is like rabbit on a dog track and Mr. Goodell is spinning his wheels and should move on, or if their is a legal way to take Walsh to court, you should and end the lingering bad press for the good of the league and its fans. Your thoughts?
A.G.
A: A.G., when the possibility of a lawsuit was presented to Goodell last week, he said all options were on the table. But later, when NFL chief attorney Jeff Pash spoke with the press, the option of legal action was ruled out at this time. I think the biggest reason is that if Walsh is somehow put on trial, you are subjecting others to being put on trial as well -- from Goodell, to Bill Belichick, to Matt Estrella etc. I think the league would like to avoid that type of situation and reach a resolution without going that route.
Mike, what was the impetus behind changing the 'force out' rule? I foresee defenders being extra physical with receivers to ensure that second foot does not touch the field of play, possibly holding them up and throwing them out of bounds. On the coin toss rule change, I thought if a team won the opening coin toss they could defer to the second half if they desired. What changed?
Andrew
A: I think the impetus behind changing the force-out rule, Andrew, was to eliminate a judgment call. The NFL's competition committee noted that there were only 16 such calls last season, and by eliminating the call, it cleans things up. In rewriting the rule, the league made it illegal to hold up and carry a player out of bounds, but a physical defender can simply push a player out of bounds and it would be legal. As for the coin toss, there was not a deferral option for teams prior to this rule change.
With regards to the new defensive headset rule, will it be legal to have neither player on the field with a headset? Or will one of the headsetted players be required to play at all times? It seems likely there may be times when a team doesn't want either of the two players on the field for a certain play.
Bruce, Minneapolis, Minn.
A: I read the exact rule, Bruce, and there was nothing that stated a defender with a communication device had to be on the field.
When does the NFL release the regular season schedule?
Mike
A: The NFL is not specifying a date at this time, Mike, but it should be at some point this month. Last year, for example, it was released April 11.
