What I saw last night

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

    What I saw last night

    I am not going to make roster assumptions on one preseason game, but I did come away with some thoughts on some players and situations.

    -the WR results were irrelevant. I liked that the WRs looked like they belonged on the field and where in the right place at the right time. TB's completion % said as much. Malletts timing on the Boyce play as well, but Mallett must make that throw. 

    -Vince and McCourty are irreplaceable to this defense. Kelly has looked very good since June, but BB still needs to manage his snaps wisely and get some depth on the DL

    -Jones has taken the next step

    -the S play IMO will still be a concern over the top. I am not yet sold on Gregory, Wilson, Wilson or Harmon bringing top side help. 

    -I saw too many good things from Boldenlast year and too hand the job to Blount after 1 preseason game. Lets see how things unfold

    -I am wondering if Ballard will be in that Crumpler role? Expect 5-10 catches but superb blocking? Can the team carry a guy like that and carry Hooman, who also blocked very well last night and plays special teams? Fells also was very good last night. 

    - I am still not concerned about Ghost. No kicker is going to be perfect. ghost still has tremendous  leg strength, is great on kick offs, doesn't get shaken in big situations, and will still hit 35 of 40 fg's this season

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from tenace4life. Show tenace4life's posts

    Re: What I saw last night

    Have to agree with what you said here . . . think the Pats may just keep five running back this year:  Ridley, Washington, Bolden, Blount and Vereen  . . . with Vereen's hands he maybe lined up anyplace and give the defenses fits in pre-game planning against the Pats.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Towelie-Toke. Show Towelie-Toke's posts

    Re: What I saw last night

    Just a pre-season game.  Offense looked good on first two possessions. Defense gave up two TDs on Iggies first 2 possessions.

    Running game overall looked good.  Blount surprised many on this board.

    Tebow got slammed by many, but, I think he should be given some leeway here. His throwing is off - altho he barely missed Sudfeld on a seam route. He ran well.  If he quicken his release, increase his accuracy for short throws, and get his timing down with receivers - he might be okay. Backup QB is still Mallett's to lose.

    One thing Tebow does better than Brady or Mallett is run.

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

    Re: What I saw last night


    Agree with everthing you said.

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

    Re: What I saw last night

    In response to tenace4life's comment:

    Have to agree with what you said here . . . think the Pats may just keep five running back this year:  Ridley, Washington, Bolden, Blount and Vereen  . . . with Vereen's hands he maybe lined up anyplace and give the defenses fits in pre-game planning against the Pats.



    I am with you T - I like all these guys and believe its time to run more this year.  Can see us carring 3 TE's or 5 receivers to accommodate.

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

    Re: What I saw last night

    Not sure why the WR results were "irrelevant"? Maybe inconclusive is what you mean? I thought Thompkins was the best WR on the field. Dobson was decent, had a bad drop though. Otherwise, there wasn't much to see.

    I wonder every year why they don't keep an actual WR instead of Slater. You might as well call him a TE or an OL for as much as he contributes as a receiver. Too bad someone who can actually catch the ball can't replace him. Maybe Aiken? Is Slater that much better of a tackler? If so, let's see if he can play safety.

    All the TEs looked solid. Gonna be a tough cut there if Gronk isn't on PUP. Hooman and Fells are kind of interchangeable. I think it was Reiss who said he could see them cutting both and then resigning whichever one doesn't get picked up at a lower number. If Gronk is available I can see that. Both are decent, but not indispensable. Still amazed Sudfeld went undrafted...

    Not sure how much you can take away from the play of the RBs or the running game overall. Philly's defense is weak. It looked at times like the varsity against the JVs when their D was on the field. Maybe Tampa will be a better test.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from gr82bme. Show gr82bme's posts

    Re: What I saw last night

    Didn't get a chance to see the game last night, so I much appreciate rkarp's recap and everyone elses thoughts.  Thanks folks!

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

    Re: What I saw last night

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    Not sure why the WR results were "irrelevant"? Maybe inconclusive is what you mean? I thought Thompkins was the best WR on the field. Dobson was decent, had a bad drop though. Otherwise, there wasn't much to see.

    I wonder every year why they don't keep an actual WR instead of Slater. You might as well call him a TE or an OL for as much as he contributes as a receiver. Too bad someone who can actually catch the ball can't replace him. Maybe Aiken? Is Slater that much better of a tackler? If so, let's see if he can play safety.

    All the TEs looked solid. Gonna be a tough cut there if Gronk isn't on PUP. Hooman and Fells are kind of interchangeable. I think it was Reiss who said he could see them cutting both and then resigning whichever one doesn't get picked up at a lower number. If Gronk is available I can see that. Both are decent, but not indispensable. Still amazed Sudfeld went undrafted...

    Not sure how much you can take away from the play of the RBs or the running game overall. Philly's defense is weak. It looked at times like the varsity against the JVs when their D was on the field. Maybe Tampa will be a better test.



    About Sudfeld...I know it was only one game, but let's pretend he was drafted in the first round...based off the way he has looked all preseason and during that game last night, I would of said we picked the right guy in the first and love his potential.

    I want to see more of this guy. I initially thought he was too thin, too narrow to play tight end, but he has looked good. I also looked at his 40 time and thought..well that's nothing special..decent, but added with his thinness...nothing great. Got to hand it to him, the kid looks like an athlete who can catch and apparently block. Maybe we found something? Lord knows we deserve it after what happened to our tight end position this off season.

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

    Re: What I saw last night

    Sudfeld looked at least as good as Ertz (sp?), the second rounder for Philly. At least in this game.

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

    Re: What I saw last night

    Disagree with your assessment of ghost. He's expensive, inconsistent, has and will cost us at least 1 game this year. Sorry, it's just how I feel.

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

    Re: What I saw last night

    I agree with the general assessment. I think Adrian Wilson will thrive in his role as the enforcer in the short middle of the field, but don't expect a guy who is 6'3 230 to be 50 yards up field playing deep safety. Gregory has short comings in speed/talent. Tavon or Harmon need to win that job or we might have the same issues. Then again Devin McCourty being on the field helps tremendously....

        







    "Defense Wins Championships"
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from NYC. Show NYC's posts

    Re: What I saw last night

    Lose 4 WR's, get 4 new ones, no problem for TB.

    Lose a RB, get a new one, no problem. 

    The beat goes on in Pats-Town! 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from GO47. Show GO47's posts

    Re: What I saw last night

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    Not sure why the WR results were "irrelevant"? Maybe inconclusive is what you mean? I thought Thompkins was the best WR on the field. Dobson was decent, had a bad drop though. Otherwise, there wasn't much to see.

    I wonder every year why they don't keep an actual WR instead of Slater. You might as well call him a TE or an OL for as much as he contributes as a receiver. Too bad someone who can actually catch the ball can't replace him. Maybe Aiken? Is Slater that much better of a tackler? If so, let's see if he can play safety.

    All the TEs looked solid. Gonna be a tough cut there if Gronk isn't on PUP. Hooman and Fells are kind of interchangeable. I think it was Reiss who said he could see them cutting both and then resigning whichever one doesn't get picked up at a lower number. If Gronk is available I can see that. Both are decent, but not indispensable. Still amazed Sudfeld went undrafted...

    Not sure how much you can take away from the play of the RBs or the running game overall. Philly's defense is weak. It looked at times like the varsity against the JVs when their D was on the field. Maybe Tampa will be a better test.




    Sorry but I disagree about Fells. He's had an excellent off season and training camp. He has mentioned that he feels much more comfortable with the system and plays which he has shown during training camp. He blocks much better than Hooman and has better hands. I think Hooman might be the odd man out. They kept 4 TEs last year and I don't see that changing with them having multiple 3 tight end formations.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from fatsam72. Show fatsam72's posts

    Re: What I saw last night

    "I wonder every year why they don't keep an actual WR instead of Slater. You might as well call him a TE or an OL for as much as he contributes as a receiver. Too bad someone who can actually catch the ball can't replace him. Maybe Aiken? Is Slater that much better of a tackler? If so, let's see if he can play safety."

    Did you not see the heat-seeking missile that was Slater completely destroy two blockers at the point of attack and blow up an entire kickoff return?

    Just like Izzo and Whigham - marginal elsewhere, but gamechangers in ST.  BB always has one.  

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

    Re: What I saw last night

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    Not sure why the WR results were "irrelevant"? Maybe inconclusive is what you mean? I thought Thompkins was the best WR on the field. Dobson was decent, had a bad drop though. Otherwise, there wasn't much to see.

    I wonder every year why they don't keep an actual WR instead of Slater. You might as well call him a TE or an OL for as much as he contributes as a receiver. Too bad someone who can actually catch the ball can't replace him. Maybe Aiken? Is Slater that much better of a tackler? If so, let's see if he can play safety.

    All the TEs looked solid. Gonna be a tough cut there if Gronk isn't on PUP. Hooman and Fells are kind of interchangeable. I think it was Reiss who said he could see them cutting both and then resigning whichever one doesn't get picked up at a lower number. If Gronk is available I can see that. Both are decent, but not indispensable. Still amazed Sudfeld went undrafted...

    Not sure how much you can take away from the play of the RBs or the running game overall. Philly's defense is weak. It looked at times like the varsity against the JVs when their D was on the field. Maybe Tampa will be a better test.



    No, I meant irrelevant. It did not matter to me how many catches/yards the WRs had. What mattered was getting off the LOS cleanly, getting separation, and being whe Brady or Mallett expected them to be. All 3 rookies looked the part, in spite of the zero catches by Boyce and the drop by Dobson. To me that was very conclusive, not inconclusive. 

    Pit is always fun to compare players and speculate who they remind you of. After watching Dobson  and Boyce and Thompkins, I sense that we are watching Nicks, Cruz and Ocho. The end results most likely will not be the same, but they look like similar player types to me. It should only happen. 

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

    Re: What I saw last night

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    I am not going to make roster assumptions on one preseason game, but I did come away with some thoughts on some players and situations.

    -the WR results were irrelevant. I liked that the WRs looked like they belonged on the field and where in the right place at the right time. TB's completion % said as much. Malletts timing on the Boyce play as well, but Mallett must make that throw. 

    -Vince and McCourty are irreplaceable to this defense. Kelly has looked very good since June, but BB still needs to manage his snaps wisely and get some depth on the DL

    -Jones has taken the next step

    -the S play IMO will still be a concern over the top. I am not yet sold on Gregory, Wilson, Wilson or Harmon bringing top side help. 

    -I saw too many good things from Boldenlast year and too hand the job to Blount after 1 preseason game. Lets see how things unfold

    -I am wondering if Ballard will be in that Crumpler role? Expect 5-10 catches but superb blocking? Can the team carry a guy like that and carry Hooman, who also blocked very well last night and plays special teams? Fells also was very good last night. 

    - I am still not concerned about Ghost. No kicker is going to be perfect. ghost still has tremendous  leg strength, is great on kick offs, doesn't get shaken in big situations, and will still hit 35 of 40 fg's this season




    Good post and I agree with everything except about Gostkowski.  I gave him a pass last year.  I won't be so kind to the guy this year.  He better start making those FG's come regular season.  No more Cardinals type game losses.

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

    Re: What I saw last night

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    I am not going to make roster assumptions on one preseason game, but I did come away with some thoughts on some players and situations.

    -the WR results were irrelevant. I liked that the WRs looked like they belonged on the field and where in the right place at the right time. TB's completion % said as much. Malletts timing on the Boyce play as well, but Mallett must make that throw. 

    -Vince and McCourty are irreplaceable to this defense. Kelly has looked very good since June, but BB still needs to manage his snaps wisely and get some depth on the DL

    -Jones has taken the next step

    -the S play IMO will still be a concern over the top. I am not yet sold on Gregory, Wilson, Wilson or Harmon bringing top side help. 

    -I saw too many good things from Boldenlast year and too hand the job to Blount after 1 preseason game. Lets see how things unfold

    -I am wondering if Ballard will be in that Crumpler role? Expect 5-10 catches but superb blocking? Can the team carry a guy like that and carry Hooman, who also blocked very well last night and plays special teams? Fells also was very good last night. 

    - I am still not concerned about Ghost. No kicker is going to be perfect. ghost still has tremendous  leg strength, is great on kick offs, doesn't get shaken in big situations, and will still hit 35 of 40 fg's this season



    If Sudfeld is the real deal sure they can. Once Gronk gets back you have your 2 main blocking/catching TE's and your 3rd TE in 3 TE sets are essentially extra OL anyways so why not especially if he proves to be the best blocking TE we have

     

Share