Defense Discussion [2017]

[cannondale]

Patriots will sign Brooks and get another 3 years out of him at a high level. Its' what they do

[PackyAttacky]

5 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Let me play devil's advocate, when is too early to cut loose on a player?

Thornton was cut in his second year right? How long did Worthy last? I don't think you cut if there is nothing behind him, let him try and develop. Both Clay and Winston make it sound like he has to get nasty, and stop being so nice. Perry said he has to just do his thing and stop thinking so much.

[HyponGrey]

18 minutes ago, cannondale said:

Patriots will sign Brooks and get another 3 years out of him at a high level. Its' what they do

At some point you have to look at that system and say, "If he's doing it, I can too. What is he doing that I'm not? It's the same player with the same skills." FTR, "Bellyczech" is not an answer. There ain't something in the water

[SpeightTheVillain]

Long time lurker, but had to create an account based on the new forum (awesome) and this debate about Ryan vs. Ragland.

You people are sleeping on Jake Ryan.

Too many people on here are caught up in the college tape. Ragland was certainly a better prospect and "might" be a good NFL player. But Jake Ryan already is. I would even debate the point that Ragland is a better run defender then Ryan. So much about run defense is (1) instincts and (2) getting around guards. The misconception on here is that run defenders need to be "thumpers". It doesn't matter how one gets around guards as long as they do. So many successful ILBs are slip blockers. Think, Derrick Johnson (Chiefs), and even Clay. I'm not saying that Ryan can only do that, as his striking abilities on the line are apparent, but he has the ability to both slip block and face up on guards. He's not Ray Lewis or anything, but Ragland can only do it one way.....at least Ryan has options.

[cannondale]

22 minutes ago, HyponGrey said:

At some point you have to look at that system and say, "If he's doing it, I can too. What is he doing that I'm not? It's the same player with the same skills." FTR, "Bellyczech" is not an answer. There ain't something in the water

I've been a fan of that part of their system for years. Signing veterans on the decline for cheap and squeezing every last ounce of football out of them. Low risk, and yet adding guys with a high level of experience. Sometimes you can compile a unit where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts when placing high experience guys in certain spots even if their best days are behind them.  How many times have we heard the word miscommunication regarding our defense over the years ? How many picks have we burned on DL over the years ? How many years have we been mediocre at the ILB position ? I get the whole draft and develop thing, but there are holes in that thinking. The Patriots have found the way to fill holes cheaply and immediately and without the need to develop them. 

[MacReady]

The problem with the "Patriot" way is that they had no business beating the Falcons.  That game should have been OVER.  They were outmatched physically on offense AND defense, and it took a meltdown for the ages for the Falcons to lose.  Three gigantic mistakes on offense, a missed interception that turned into one of the best Super Bowl catches ever (Edleman)...

Their entire team was veterans last year it seemed. 

But when you are weak at one position and a veteran becomes available at that one position when you're in position to compete for a Super Bowl... Yeah, sign them.  Not in every case, but in the case of Brooks... just sign him. 

[packfanfb]

Not that this would happen, but interested in the response. With Edelman down, Patriots call us today and offer Malcolm Butler for Randall Cobb, straight up, or even Cobb and a lower round pick. Yay or nay? Which player would make us a stronger overall team?

[AlexGreen#20]

26 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Not that this would happen, but interested in the response. With Edelman down, Patriots call us today and offer Malcolm Butler for Randall Cobb, straight up, or even Cobb and a lower round pick. Yay or nay? Which player would make us a stronger overall team?

If the Patriots offered us Malcolm Butler for Cobb, Cobb would be on a plane to New England before the call was over. 

[MacReady]

10 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

If the Patriots offered us Malcolm Butler for Cobb, Cobb would be on a plane to New England before the call was over. 

New England wouldn't make that offer though.  After Gilmore, Butler and Rowe they really don't have any good corners at all.  I said in a different thread that I would be livid if we traded Cobb to our biggest Super Bowl competitor for anything less than an equal value player swap or a first round pick.  You don't make your team weaker and your opponent stronger this year unless it's way above market value. 

But, since the Patriots don't win Super Bowls without top 10 defenses, and since we don't either, I'd trade Cobb for Hightower, Flowers or Butler.  Less likely to be happy with Butler though since we have House/Randall/King/Rollins going forward.

[packfanfb]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

If the Patriots offered us Malcolm Butler for Cobb, Cobb would be on a plane to New England before the call was over. 

Your response implies that there is a pretty wide disparity between Butler's value and Cobb's. Frankly I would agree so let me rephrase...Butler for Cobb and a 3rd? What about Cobb and a 4th? 

[MacReady]

Just now, packfanfb said:

Your response implies that there is a pretty wide disparity between Butler's value and Cobb's. Frankly I would agree so let me rephrase...Butler for Cobb and a 3rd? What about Cobb and a 4th? 

There is no damn way in hell the Patriots should get equal value.  THEY are the ones who just lost somebody, and they have fleeced team after team with their trades.  If we trade Cobb AND picks for Butler, who has one year left on his deal, I'm rioting. 

[PackyAttacky]

10 hours ago, SpeightTheVillain said:

Long time lurker, but had to create an account based on the new forum (awesome) and this debate about Ryan vs. Ragland.

You people are sleeping on Jake Ryan.

Too many people on here are caught up in the college tape. Ragland was certainly a better prospect and "might" be a good NFL player. But Jake Ryan already is. I would even debate the point that Ragland is a better run defender then Ryan. So much about run defense is (1) instincts and (2) getting around guards. The misconception on here is that run defenders need to be "thumpers". It doesn't matter how one gets around guards as long as they do. So many successful ILBs are slip blockers. Think, Derrick Johnson (Chiefs), and even Clay. I'm not saying that Ryan can only do that, as his striking abilities on the line are apparent, but he has the ability to both slip block and face up on guards. He's not Ray Lewis or anything, but Ragland can only do it one way.....at least Ryan has options.

Thought Jake Ryan played great, think he plays for us for ten plus years. Doesn't offer much on third downs, but is a really good old school ILB.

[PackyAttacky]

9 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said:

The problem with the "Patriot" way is that they had no business beating the Falcons.  That game should have been OVER.  They were outmatched physically on offense AND defense, and it took a meltdown for the ages for the Falcons to lose.  Three gigantic mistakes on offense, a missed interception that turned into one of the best Super Bowl catches ever (Edleman)...

Their entire team was veterans last year it seemed. 

But when you are weak at one position and a veteran becomes available at that one position when you're in position to compete for a Super Bowl... Yeah, sign them.  Not in every case, but in the case of Brooks... just sign him. 

All the talking heads and Pats fans forget this, worse choke job of all time for them to even win. It was a 101 on how to lose a football game. The Falcons were hiking the ball up a ton with 17-20 seconds left on the clock while it was ticking down. They were not in clock control mode at all.

[incognito_man]

3 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

If the Patriots offered us Malcolm Butler for Cobb, Cobb would be on a plane to New England before the call was over. 

i couldn't reply fast enough in agreement.

[spilltray]

4 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said:

But, since the Patriots don't win Super Bowls without top 10 defenses, and since we don't either, I'd trade Cobb for Hightower, Flowers or Butler.  Less likely to be happy with Butler though since we have House/Randall/King/Rollins going forward.

House isn't signed past this year, in the VERY unlikely event that Butler was acquired, I'd assume House is let find a deal in FA again.