Pats take Spikes....
Michael
40, he can play. FUCK
MZ
> Those bastards.... They took Spikes... I like this guy... Screw his
> 40, he can play. FUCK
Not a bad fit either, for the 3-4. The talking heads are saying he's
not fast enough for the nickel, but that's fine because that's what
Guyton does well. If he works out, he'll be in a rotation with Guyton.
Tyrone McKenzie, who they drafted in the 3rd round last year, will
also be in the mix at ILB. So it looks like their linebacking group is
starting to come together. I'm hoping for a second OLB now. Maybe Wootton?
Michael
Spikes is one of my fav lbs in a long time. You will love him. He
runs faster in full gear in a real game than he does at the bull shit
combine. He is less of a track and field athlete and much more of a
football player. Without knowing of the slow 40 time he'd be a first
rounder.
Wootton ??? Dont know much. The word is he is not a wold beating sack
master, but some skill at the task
MZ
I think the Pats still need to add another OLB. And now they'll
probably have to resign Burgess too. Strength in numbers. But they
took care of the other hole nicely, which was TE.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
They had a bigger need at the olb position, but the "ultimate" need
for a great player. Picking Spikes at this spot in the draft
demonstrates how smart the Pats are at building. I would not be
surprised if he gets himself a lot of attention his rookie season.
He's perfect for the Pats style of 43. I remember last season before
the draft I was wondering if he would come out early. The people who
passed over him because of his combine will be kicking themselves in
the ass.
Harlan Lachman
<9d0519ae-2487-4cb5...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
Michael <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote:
Michael, again we disagree.
I think the Pats strategy was moronic.
The Jets used their draft choices to get a starting nickle CB (a
position of need), a replacement guard for their OL (at a much lower
cost than the man he replaced), a much cheaper (and healthier) 3rd down
back, not to mention last year and this coming year of Braylon Edwards.
Four players I expect to see plenty of PT during the 2010 season.
The Pats, a loaded team, better than ours based on last year's record
(without an assist from teams not trying) had 12 picks, clearly did not
have 12 openings among their starters.
I think they would have been better off bundling picks and getting four
new starters for their system. A top team getting more developmental
picks is as logical as a..... well you get the idea....
h
MZ
I agree with you. I think the Pats made a mistake by not being more
aggressive early in the second round. The Gronkowski pick was a good
and necessary one, but I think they should have used their three other
picks yesterday to try to grab another front 7 guy earlier in the round
(eg. Misi, Kindle, or Joseph). Even if they did that, they still
probably could have come away with Spikes at the end of the round.
We'll see. Maybe they like Cunningham better than Misi and Kindle and
Joseph who were all higher rated.
I'm not thrilled with them picking another WR in the third. This means
they'll carry SEVEN wide receivers this year. I think that pick could
have been the one they used to facilitate a trade up.
The 6th and 7th round was painful to watch, because not a single one of
those guys has a shot at making the final roster. They drafted 5 guys
at the end to compete for the practice squad. And if they REALLY like
them, the best case scenario is that they end up redshirted.
Michael
> In article
> <9d0519ae-2487-4cb5-9497-2cf944d3d...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> - Show quoted text -
watch how spike and mayo work the middle and then come talk to me
about how the pats fucked up.