Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

PoWww's NE Patriots Mock Draft V1
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
PoWww


Joined: 28 Feb 2013
Posts: 1333
PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Based on this, I'm assuming Talib, Edelman(?), Wendell and Blount are retained or replaced with similar players? And Jones is signing as well? Where's all that money coming from?

Jones and Talib seem like an either/or for me. I don't see how the team signs both without letting Edelman go (and not replacing him externally) and IMO that's a big mistake.

I'm with Richter on this one. I'd be pretty unsatisfied with this. The first pick IMO has to be a lineman on either side of the ball or a CB if Talib goes. Those are positions where young, cost controlled players are extremely valuable.

I don't care for Gregory but moving from him to Pryor IMO would have a fairly low impact on the team's performance and you're not saving much money (which is a huge consideration when drafting)


I tried not to go too in depth into free agency, because I'm by no means an expert when it comes to the salary cap(why I am the capolgist for our FFMD, I have no idea). But I know there's some ways that the Patriots can free up some cap space. Cutting Kelly, Gregory, Soapoaga, etc. Restructuring Wilfork and hopefully Mankins. Extending McCourty. I'm confident they can free up some space.

I just don't see Talib returning. Given Kraft's recent comments about how he isn't on the field that much, and how I'm thinking he's going to be out of our price range. Would I like to see him replaced with a cheap veteran? No. Ideally I'd like to see him come back for a cheaper deal, but I'm almost positive that isn't going to happen. It'd be nice to retain Talib and have Dennard stay as our #2 corner, where he excels. But I just don't see it happening.

As far as Jones being pricey, I stated that I see him coming here for a below market deal to play with his brother. I think you're really underselling him as a player. He'd be an an improvement and would help our interior pass rush. I don't like the idea on relying on both Kelly and Wilfork to return to form from injury.

I think Pryor is the best safety in this class and that he would definitely help improve our defense. I wouldn't be shocked if he ends up going in the 15-20 range in May. He's a physical safety who also has range. I think he would be an excellent complement to McCourty.

Didn't expect everyone to love this mock. I appreciate all the constructive criticism and feedback.
_________________

^Deadpulse
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23703
PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PoWww wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Based on this, I'm assuming Talib, Edelman(?), Wendell and Blount are retained or replaced with similar players? And Jones is signing as well? Where's all that money coming from?

Jones and Talib seem like an either/or for me. I don't see how the team signs both without letting Edelman go (and not replacing him externally) and IMO that's a big mistake.

I'm with Richter on this one. I'd be pretty unsatisfied with this. The first pick IMO has to be a lineman on either side of the ball or a CB if Talib goes. Those are positions where young, cost controlled players are extremely valuable.

I don't care for Gregory but moving from him to Pryor IMO would have a fairly low impact on the team's performance and you're not saving much money (which is a huge consideration when drafting)


I tried not to go too in depth into free agency, because I'm by no means an expert when it comes to the salary cap(why I am the capolgist for our FFMD, I have no idea). But I know there's some ways that the Patriots can free up some cap space. Cutting Kelly, Gregory, Soapoaga, etc. Restructuring Wilfork and hopefully Mankins. Extending McCourty. I'm confident they can free up some space.


Right now, the Pats have $9M in cap space (using the top 51), assuming a $127M cap (which was the rumored amount). Throw in $4M rollover and you're at $13M.

Now, let's take a quick look at the needs this offseason:

Roster filler - Fletcher, backup TE, another LB, another OT, long snapper, other cheap miscellaneous players - $4-5M

Blount - $3M (?)

Edelman - $5M (let's assume a discount here)

Rookie class - $4M (last year was at $3.7 but without a 1st rounder so this year figures to be at least $4M)

Wendell or veteran interior lineman - $3M (Wendell might be a little more but a veteran might be less, so this is IMO a fair average)

So right there you're at a minimum of $15M, and that's assuming Blount is gone.

Again using the top 51 rule, the cap savings for the guys you want to cut are:

Sopoaga - $2M
Kelly - $1.7M
Adrian Wilson (you didn't mention, but it seems like a likely move) - $750K
Gregory - $2.3M

restructure Wilfork - $5M in savings (?)

So that's $15M spent, and $12M saved + $13M in cap room. So before the CB or DT position get addressed, you're at roughly $10M. Except, the team always keeps a cushion of $4-5M. So we're down to $5M or so to sign Arthur Jones and a veteran CB. It's going to be almost impossible barring unexpected moves (which I would consider the Mankins restructure you mention) or without opening up holes elsewhere.

Quote:

As far as Jones being pricey, I stated that I see him coming here for a below market deal to play with his brother. I think you're really underselling him as a player. He'd be an an improvement and would help our interior pass rush. I don't like the idea on relying on both Kelly and Wilfork to return to form from injury.


I don't like relying on both veterans returning from injury either. But the big holes the Pats have along that line IMO are pass rushing/disruptive 3-technique and a backup NT who isn't dreadful. Maybe Siliga can be the latter but Arthur Jones is definitely not the former. Signing Jones to play 3-technique is a curious allocation of resources because he's not a pocket pusher, he's not especially disruptive and he's not a plus in sub packages (which they played 67% of the time last year). It's a big chunk of the team's very limited cap room to spend on a guy who basically just improves the team's interior run D. An important thing to do, absolutely. But that's something they can fill on the cheap most likely. If they're spending $4-6M on a DT, I'd much prefer someone who can actually provide a disruptive presence.

I like Jones as a player, but he's not the interior rusher people seem to think he is.


Quote:
I think Pryor is the best safety in this class and that he would definitely help improve our defense. I wouldn't be shocked if he ends up going in the 15-20 range in May. He's a physical safety who also has range. I think he would be an excellent complement to McCourty.

Didn't expect everyone to love this mock. I appreciate all the constructive criticism and feedback.


I don't have any issues with Pryor as a prospect and I agree he's probably the best prospect at the position. But I think a safety in round 1 would be an awful move barring an unexpected turn in free agency.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
I_GET_SAX


Joined: 17 Nov 2012
Posts: 5958
Location: The Granite State
PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

Quote:
I think Pryor is the best safety in this class and that he would definitely help improve our defense. I wouldn't be shocked if he ends up going in the 15-20 range in May. He's a physical safety who also has range. I think he would be an excellent complement to McCourty.

Didn't expect everyone to love this mock. I appreciate all the constructive criticism and feedback.


I don't have any issues with Pryor as a prospect and I agree he's probably the best prospect at the position. But I think a safety in round 1 would be an awful move barring an unexpected turn in free agency.


I would take HaHa if he magically fell to us. Homer Bammer tho
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
24isthelaw


Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 7614
Location: Where the Patriots are
PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like Aaron Lynch in the 4th a lot. Not a fan of the 1-2-3 but if Lynch turns into a star it would make up for a lot...
_________________

Adopt-a-Patriot: Marcus Forston - Practice squad (0 tackles, 0 sacks)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Patsfan01


Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 9127
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The only thing I really hate about this mock is not locking up more OL and DL help. I'm actually a fan of the Pryor pick in round 1. I believe DL/OL help is a bigger need, but man after watching what Seattle's safeties did to Denver, I absolutely wouldn't be opposed to adding an impact safety in round one. And Pryor is exactly that. Hard-hitting, good in coverage, and physical! I liked what I saw from Harmon this past season, but I'm sorry, the guy is not a franchise safety. And Gregory sucked. It's crazy to see what an impact safety can do to a defense. But unfortunately, until we move on from a 2004 mindset defensively, I don't think we will see that.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23703
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 11:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Patsfan01 wrote:
The only thing I really hate about this mock is not locking up more OL and DL help. I'm actually a fan of the Pryor pick in round 1. I believe DL/OL help is a bigger need, but man after watching what Seattle's safeties did to Denver, I absolutely wouldn't be opposed to adding an impact safety in round one. And Pryor is exactly that. Hard-hitting, good in coverage, and physical! I liked what I saw from Harmon this past season, but I'm sorry, the guy is not a franchise safety. And Gregory sucked. It's crazy to see what an impact safety can do to a defense. But unfortunately, until we move on from a 2004 mindset defensively, I don't think we will see that.


Yeah we'd never see it with this 2004 mindset. Which was the year when they spent the most on the secondary and had Rodney Harrison. I guess he wasn't a 'franchise' safety.

We'll also ignore their drafting of Brandon Meriweather in 2007 who was every bit the impact prospect that the guy you're advocating for (Pryor) is.

Bill Belichich has always valued the safety spot and has put a lot of resources into the position over the years. But some years it just isn't possible to add impact players at every spot on the field.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Patsfan01


Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 9127
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yeah we'd never see it with this 2004 mindset. Which was the year when they spent the most on the secondary and had Rodney Harrison. I guess he wasn't a 'franchise' safety.


I never once said Rodney Harrison wasn't a franchise safety. I was intending to say since his days, we haven't had a franchise safety at SS. We have put a lot of attention over the years to the safety position and nobody has worked out. And yes the game has changed and until the Patriots realize that we can't win with the "lets let teams drive down the field and try holding them to 3 points" mentality and with the players we have on our defense, we won't win another Super Bowl.

Quote:
We'll also ignore their drafting of Brandon Meriweather in 2007 who was every bit the impact prospect that the guy you're advocating for (Pryor) is.


Advocating? I simply said I wouldn't be opposed to taking a safety in round one. I wouldn't be mad if Pryor was the pick. I am not advocating for us to draft Pryor.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12114
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
We'll also ignore their drafting of Brandon Meriweather in 2007 who was every bit the impact prospect that the guy you're advocating for (Pryor) is.

If you know nothing about talent evaluation, maybe. Bad safety prospect in a class full of them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23703
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Patsfan01 wrote:
Quote:
Yeah we'd never see it with this 2004 mindset. Which was the year when they spent the most on the secondary and had Rodney Harrison. I guess he wasn't a 'franchise' safety.


I never once said Rodney Harrison wasn't a franchise safety. I was intending to say since his days, we haven't had a franchise safety at SS. We have put a lot of attention over the years to the safety position and nobody has worked out. And yes the game has changed and until the Patriots realize that we can't win with the "lets let teams drive down the field and try holding them to 3 points" mentality and with the players we have on our defense, we won't win another Super Bowl.

Quote:
We'll also ignore their drafting of Brandon Meriweather in 2007 who was every bit the impact prospect that the guy you're advocating for (Pryor) is.


Advocating? I simply said I wouldn't be opposed to taking a safety in round one. I wouldn't be mad if Pryor was the pick. I am not advocating for us to draft Pryor.


So what does a '2004 mindset' have to do with anything? You claimed we would not see an impact safety can do for a defense. Last I checked, the Pats have invested a lot in trying to upgrade the position and have - when the talent has been there - fully utilized their quality safeties.

As for the endlessly repeated knocks against the Pats D scheme - it obviously works because the team is consistently in the top 10 for points allowed and often in the top 10 in takeaways. So implying that their scheme is outdated makes no sense. Given that the D performed pretty darn well in preventing points last year despite crippling injuries is all you need to know about the '2004 mindset'. It works.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23703
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
We'll also ignore their drafting of Brandon Meriweather in 2007 who was every bit the impact prospect that the guy you're advocating for (Pryor) is.

If you know nothing about talent evaluation, maybe. Bad safety prospect in a class full of them.


So the Pats front office knows nothing about talent evaluation? Or are you suggesting they'd draft a guy that high without thinking he was an impact prospect?

Obviously scouts, GM's, 'experts' etc flub evaluations but simply because he flopped doesn't make him - as a prospect - a guy who was projected to be an impact player.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12114
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 3:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
We'll also ignore their drafting of Brandon Meriweather in 2007 who was every bit the impact prospect that the guy you're advocating for (Pryor) is.

If you know nothing about talent evaluation, maybe. Bad safety prospect in a class full of them.


So the Pats front office knows nothing about talent evaluation? Or are you suggesting they'd draft a guy that high without thinking he was an impact prospect?

Obviously scouts, GM's, 'experts' etc flub evaluations but simply because he flopped doesn't make him - as a prospect - a guy who was projected to be an impact player.

Every team has blind spots when it comes to talent evaluation and makes mistakes. And in this case, I think they didn't like the draft, didn't have the desire to move out of the spot they were in based on the offers available to them, and wanted a safety. They took the best of a bad lot, and hoped he'd develop. I don't believe they thought he'd be an impact player, but I suppose that depends on the definition of the term. That was a bad draft that they didn't seem to like much, as evidenced by the deal they made with their own pick at the end of the round to move forward a year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23703
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
We'll also ignore their drafting of Brandon Meriweather in 2007 who was every bit the impact prospect that the guy you're advocating for (Pryor) is.

If you know nothing about talent evaluation, maybe. Bad safety prospect in a class full of them.


So the Pats front office knows nothing about talent evaluation? Or are you suggesting they'd draft a guy that high without thinking he was an impact prospect?

Obviously scouts, GM's, 'experts' etc flub evaluations but simply because he flopped doesn't make him - as a prospect - a guy who was projected to be an impact player.

Every team has blind spots when it comes to talent evaluation and makes mistakes. And in this case, I think they didn't like the draft, didn't have the desire to move out of the spot they were in based on the offers available to them, and wanted a safety. They took the best of a bad lot, and hoped he'd develop. I don't believe they thought he'd be an impact player, but I suppose that depends on the definition of the term. That was a bad draft that they didn't seem to like much, as evidenced by the deal they made with their own pick at the end of the round to move forward a year.


It was a pretty common assessment of him as a prospect. It's not a Tavon Wilson scenario.

Acting as if Meriweather could have only been viewed as an impact prospect by those who have blind spots or know nothing of talent evaluation is just revisionist history. There was a lot to like about him as a prospect other than his big failing - the coachability he lacked.

Lots of 1st rounders flop, most of them were rightly viewed as potential impact prospects. Some are obviously questionable picks on a talent evaluation basis. I don't think that's the case with Meriweather.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12114
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
We'll also ignore their drafting of Brandon Meriweather in 2007 who was every bit the impact prospect that the guy you're advocating for (Pryor) is.

If you know nothing about talent evaluation, maybe. Bad safety prospect in a class full of them.


So the Pats front office knows nothing about talent evaluation? Or are you suggesting they'd draft a guy that high without thinking he was an impact prospect?

Obviously scouts, GM's, 'experts' etc flub evaluations but simply because he flopped doesn't make him - as a prospect - a guy who was projected to be an impact player.

Every team has blind spots when it comes to talent evaluation and makes mistakes. And in this case, I think they didn't like the draft, didn't have the desire to move out of the spot they were in based on the offers available to them, and wanted a safety. They took the best of a bad lot, and hoped he'd develop. I don't believe they thought he'd be an impact player, but I suppose that depends on the definition of the term. That was a bad draft that they didn't seem to like much, as evidenced by the deal they made with their own pick at the end of the round to move forward a year.


It was a pretty common assessment of him as a prospect. It's not a Tavon Wilson scenario.

Acting as if Meriweather could have only been viewed as an impact prospect by those who have blind spots or know nothing of talent evaluation is just revisionist history. There was a lot to like about him as a prospect other than his big failing - the coachability he lacked.

Lots of 1st rounders flop, most of them were rightly viewed as potential impact prospects. Some are obviously questionable picks on a talent evaluation basis. I don't think that's the case with Meriweather.

That's a massive false dichotomy you've created. It's not Impact Prospect or Tavon Wilson as the two choices. There's a range in between. Call it revisionist history if you want, but I don't believe Meriweather was viewed as an impact prospect in the draft. He was viewed as a late first, early second round prospect that didn't receive nearly the hype of having a potential impact as LaRon Landry did, who went 6th overall. That's an impact prospect.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23703
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
We'll also ignore their drafting of Brandon Meriweather in 2007 who was every bit the impact prospect that the guy you're advocating for (Pryor) is.

If you know nothing about talent evaluation, maybe. Bad safety prospect in a class full of them.


So the Pats front office knows nothing about talent evaluation? Or are you suggesting they'd draft a guy that high without thinking he was an impact prospect?

Obviously scouts, GM's, 'experts' etc flub evaluations but simply because he flopped doesn't make him - as a prospect - a guy who was projected to be an impact player.

Every team has blind spots when it comes to talent evaluation and makes mistakes. And in this case, I think they didn't like the draft, didn't have the desire to move out of the spot they were in based on the offers available to them, and wanted a safety. They took the best of a bad lot, and hoped he'd develop. I don't believe they thought he'd be an impact player, but I suppose that depends on the definition of the term. That was a bad draft that they didn't seem to like much, as evidenced by the deal they made with their own pick at the end of the round to move forward a year.


It was a pretty common assessment of him as a prospect. It's not a Tavon Wilson scenario.

Acting as if Meriweather could have only been viewed as an impact prospect by those who have blind spots or know nothing of talent evaluation is just revisionist history. There was a lot to like about him as a prospect other than his big failing - the coachability he lacked.

Lots of 1st rounders flop, most of them were rightly viewed as potential impact prospects. Some are obviously questionable picks on a talent evaluation basis. I don't think that's the case with Meriweather.

That's a massive false dichotomy you've created. It's not Impact Prospect or Tavon Wilson as the two choices. There's a range in between. Call it revisionist history if you want, but I don't believe Meriweather was viewed as an impact prospect in the draft. He was viewed as a late first, early second round prospect that didn't receive nearly the hype of having a potential impact as LaRon Landry did, who went 6th overall. That's an impact prospect.


You called him a 'bad safety prospect'. Which is certainly not a reasonable assessment of the consensus view of him in April 2007. We can quibble about the term 'impact' if you'd like but my mention of Wilson was merely an example if a pick which was very questionable in regard to talent vs consensus.

Your suggestion that one would have no ability to evaluate talent to think Meriweather had starting potential, playmaking ability and high end overall upside is off base regardless of how you want to argue semantics regarding the use of the word 'impact'.

As for Landry - simply because Meriweather didn't have that hype and top 5 consideration doesn't mean there wasn't a good case to be made that he could be a top safety in the league. Lots of guys are drafted in the mid-late first who are considered potential impact players.

It's your opinion that Meriweather was a 'bad prospect'. I'd evaluate his pro upside (in 2007) roughly the same as Pryor this year. Maybe I'm missing the boat on Pryor being a Landry-esque prospect because I see him much as the way I saw Meriweather: a potential high end safety. That was my only point here. As prospects, I don't see much difference in their ceilings. Clearly we disagree about both so we can just leave it at that.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12114
PostPosted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
We'll also ignore their drafting of Brandon Meriweather in 2007 who was every bit the impact prospect that the guy you're advocating for (Pryor) is.

If you know nothing about talent evaluation, maybe. Bad safety prospect in a class full of them.


So the Pats front office knows nothing about talent evaluation? Or are you suggesting they'd draft a guy that high without thinking he was an impact prospect?

Obviously scouts, GM's, 'experts' etc flub evaluations but simply because he flopped doesn't make him - as a prospect - a guy who was projected to be an impact player.

Every team has blind spots when it comes to talent evaluation and makes mistakes. And in this case, I think they didn't like the draft, didn't have the desire to move out of the spot they were in based on the offers available to them, and wanted a safety. They took the best of a bad lot, and hoped he'd develop. I don't believe they thought he'd be an impact player, but I suppose that depends on the definition of the term. That was a bad draft that they didn't seem to like much, as evidenced by the deal they made with their own pick at the end of the round to move forward a year.


It was a pretty common assessment of him as a prospect. It's not a Tavon Wilson scenario.

Acting as if Meriweather could have only been viewed as an impact prospect by those who have blind spots or know nothing of talent evaluation is just revisionist history. There was a lot to like about him as a prospect other than his big failing - the coachability he lacked.

Lots of 1st rounders flop, most of them were rightly viewed as potential impact prospects. Some are obviously questionable picks on a talent evaluation basis. I don't think that's the case with Meriweather.

That's a massive false dichotomy you've created. It's not Impact Prospect or Tavon Wilson as the two choices. There's a range in between. Call it revisionist history if you want, but I don't believe Meriweather was viewed as an impact prospect in the draft. He was viewed as a late first, early second round prospect that didn't receive nearly the hype of having a potential impact as LaRon Landry did, who went 6th overall. That's an impact prospect.


You called him a 'bad safety prospect'. Which is certainly not a reasonable assessment of the consensus view of him in April 2007. We can quibble about the term 'impact' if you'd like but my mention of Wilson was merely an example if a pick which was very questionable in regard to talent vs consensus.

Your suggestion that one would have no ability to evaluate talent to think Meriweather had starting potential, playmaking ability and high end overall upside is off base regardless of how you want to argue semantics regarding the use of the word 'impact'.

As for Landry - simply because Meriweather didn't have that hype and top 5 consideration doesn't mean there wasn't a good case to be made that he could be a top safety in the league. Lots of guys are drafted in the mid-late first who are considered potential impact players.

It's your opinion that Meriweather was a 'bad prospect'. I'd evaluate his pro upside (in 2007) roughly the same as Pryor this year. Maybe I'm missing the boat on Pryor being a Landry-esque prospect because I see him much as the way I saw Meriweather: a potential high end safety. That was my only point here. As prospects, I don't see much difference in their ceilings. Clearly we disagree about both so we can just leave it at that.

It's my opinion that Meriweather was a bad prospect, yes, and I think history bears that out as the correct one. That's not the discussion, which is that Meriweather was an impact prospect. If he was, he'd have gone a lot higher in a very mediocre draft.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group