I just read that the 2010 draft will begin on Thursday night and then proceed Friday night finishing up Saturday morning. This is devastating news. Draft Saturday had been an integral piece of my football calendar for years. It is the first true football day after an extended drought of meaningful football news. This new plan will almost guarantee my having to take Friday off of work. I've never watched the draft without excessive libations and gluttonous food intake and waking up the next morning and having to go to work is simply unimaginable. Waking up to anything other than the later rounds of the draft where the next steal of the century may be taking place is just not the way the draft should be viewed. I can't be alone on this. I can see no advantage to this, is there something we can do? A petition of sorts? Call a congressman? Is Obama a football fan, could he help?
I have to agree with you James. In terms of work, this setup is much better for us. We usually lose an entire weekend during the short offseason and this at least gives us Sunday off and a shorter-than-normal Saturday. But in terms of fan appeal, I don't understand how this adds to draft enjoyment in any way. I know the NFL studies the numbers on these things and I'm sure their information indicates the TV ratings will increase. I'm skeptical, and I don't always believe the data they give us. I'm with you on this one, James. I'll take draft weekend over this any day.
I recently read a few articles regarding the Broncos Champ Bailey. He seemed unhappy with the way things are unfolding in Denver and expressed that he really wants to win a Super Bowl. Anyway you see a trade happening between the Broncos and Patriots?
I'm not going to pretend to know the extent of Bailey's situation in Denver but I honestly can't see a scenario in which he's traded to the Patriots. The last thing Josh McDaniels wants to do is help the Patriots win another Super Bowl, and getting Bailey would certainly enhance the team's chances to do just that. I don't see it.
I'd like to address this post to Andy Hart specifically because there is no possible way he could find my last name funny. It's not funny. Not even close. It's Ehrenzweig. He can look it up. I'm certain it must be on file somewhere. Have him check with my mom or somebody. That being clear, I do now have the following recommendation for your debate Friday serial. If the best team in the land achieves the ultimate goal of a perfect regular and postseason, do you think BB will consider retiring as coach? The retirements of other successful coaches such as Bill Cowher, Tony Dungy and Mike Holmgren must have some relevance, but how much? Or consider this: in the past the team has inhibited other teams' considerations with Scott Pioli, but this year they let him depart, with some nice parting gifts. Could this be a preparation for a Parcells style position for our favorite game planner? How does the situation in Miami compare with possible scenarios between Belichick and a loyal coach such a Romeo Crennel? I can see it happening. Can you?
First, I'm sure everybody's favorite fourth grader Andy Hart could come up with a way to poke fun at your name. Just try to remember the best insults you threw around in grammar school and that's the direction Andy's likely to head. Second, I don't see Belichick hanging them up anytime soon. I didn't always think like that, but lately I've become more convinced that he's not interested in much else besides coaching. I can't see him filling a role in the NFL that doesn't involve coaching, so I don't believe a Parcells-type situation would appeal to him. He rarely talks openly about his future plans so knowing what he's thinking is next to impossible for anyone outside of his circle. But if you ask me I don't see him leaving within say the next five years.
Thanks for keeping us in the loop on Canada's favorite NFL team (contrary to popular belief, no more than 10 or 12 people here are Bills fans). There hasn't been much chatter about Brandon Tate this offseason, mostly due to his knee injury, I would assume. I'm not sure what his recovery timetable is, but how excited should we be about this guy moving forward? Injury aside, I'm hearing that drafting him at 83rd overall in the third round will go down as an absolute steal a few years down the road. Thoughts?Chris Lang
Tate was place on the non-football injury list and will open camp on the sideline. If he's unable to return before the end of camp, he likely would open the season there and have to miss at least six weeks before he could return to practice. The rules for NFI are the same as PUP, so he could start practicing anytime between Weeks 6-9 and from there would have three weeks to work before the team has to decide whether to activate him. Unless the Patriots suffer a rash of injuries at wide receiver, or if the return game is struggling badly, my guess is Tate will miss the entire year while he works to get back to 100 percent. I'm not sure how much of a steal Tate will be, but it is clear that he would have gone much higher in the draft had he not been injured, perhaps as high as late in the first round. I think Tate will be an excellent return man right away but will need some time to develop as a receiver.
Why do people put Joey Galloway as a No. 3 WR instead as a No. 2? I don't get it. Wes Welker is really good, but I don't see him as the second WR. Galloway and Randy Moss on opposite sides are the most logical choice because of speed, route running, catching and height. Welker is a lot better in the slot. So why?
Technically, you are correct. Traditionally the slot receiver is considered the third receiver in the offense while the two outside guys are considered Nos. 1 and 2. But those numbers are more for the media than for coaches. We consider Randy Moss a No. 1 receiver but the coaches just look at him as a receiver. It doesn't matter to the coaches or the quarterback who makes all the catches. Most people consider Welker to be the No. 2 receiver because he's the second-best wideout on the team after Moss. His reception totals would certainly back that up. So while it's true that Galloway will most often line up opposite Moss, and Welker will be in the slot, it really doesn't matter if one is considered No. 2 or 3 or 23 as long as they run their routes and catch the ball.
Interesting Debate Friday question about how much preseason work Brady should get, with a pretty obvious answer in my mind. Look one year ago to the season start that Peyton Manning had. After sitting out the preseason after recovering from surgery, he struggled with his timing with his receivers. Suddenly, everyone was squawking "the Colts will go 8-8, won't make the playoffs." After Week 6, I believe, Manning found his timing, got into a groove, and the Colts pretty much won out to get the wild card. Brady needs the preseason to get the timing and rhythm of the offense down, especially after coming off a much more severe injury than Manning did. And don't talk to me about practices being enough. You can't simulate game speed in practice, and that's what Brady needs.
Assuming Brady is healthy enough to play, and that's a logical assumption at this point since he's been on the field since May, then I believe he should play what he normally would in the preseason. Usually that's been a cameo in the first game (roughly 10-15 snaps), a little more in the second game, into the third quarter in the third game and then sit out the final week. I don't think there's any added need for timing or any other factor I'd weigh into it. He didn't play at all in the preseason last year for health reasons, not because of any grandiose plan. Manning was injured and coming off the injury last year and that, in my opinion, was the reason for his early struggles. I agree that Manning's injury was not as severe as Brady's (not even close), but Manning's surgery took place in August while Brady's was last October. Manning was in the early stages of rehab while he was playing in live games. Brady will be playing all summer long, again, assuming he's healthy. To me, there's really no comparing the two cases. If it were my decision, Brady would play about a quarter of each of the first two games, the first half plus a series in the third quarter of the third game and then sit and watch the finale.
If New England has already so much depth at CB, what with Leigh Bodden, Shawn Springs, Terrence Wheatley and Jonathan Wilhite, couldn't they have used that pick for a good LB instead? Or is having five CBs on a roster common in the NFL?
Most teams have at least five, and with the way the modern game continues to evolve into a passing league teams are looking for more. Butler may turn out to be better than some of the guys already on the roster, but even if he's the fifth corner he'll get an opportunity to contribute. I thought there were a couple of options at linebacker late in the first round (Everette Brown) but clearly Belichick didn't share those thoughts. I like the Butler pick and the need for depth in the secondary is huge in today's game.
There're many big name free agents still out there such as Plaxico Burress and Marvin Harrison. The addition of these players can be a huge boost to this already amazing New England offense. I believe if you still have some salary cap room, why not use it wisely?Joel Collins
I can see a lot better ways to use money than signing one of two receivers with sketchy pasts. Burress isn't going to be playing for anyone for the next two years, both of which it looks like he'll be spending in prison. Harrison has been ineffective for the last couple of years since his knee injury and has a gun charge of his own hanging over his head. I wouldn't touch either one of these guys, especially considering the offense is already high powered enough to win games by itself. No thanks.
Ray Ventrone does he make the team?Guy Giguere