I mean, if you're looking for me to be 100% accurate..."Put in" no claims or "awarded" no claims?
I mean, if you're looking for me to be 100% accurate..."Put in" no claims or "awarded" no claims?
Great point about the Pats seeming to be quicker to flush guys who aren't working out.generally a little quicker to cut a not so great draft pick. You'd look like a slightly better drafter if you kept asiasi or McGrone and dropped a guy like tavai and it wouldn't matter very much at all (or dropped Cody Davis and kept Kevin Harris ).
As a note, it may have seemed this way, but.... it doesn't appear to actually be true. I looked back and from 2015-2020 it looks like we had 1 or 0 players claimed every year, and we claimed as many as we lost over that period.I look at this roster and it's as blah as blah can be. In years gone by, they'd have to cut talented players that got scooped up by other teams; this year, one player they cut got claimed, instead of "getting down to 53 players", it was more like "getting up to 53 players."
Where did you find those numbers? I just found this article after a basic google search for 2017...byline reads "On Sept. 3, New England saw an NFL-high four roster cuts claimed off waivers. Let’s revisit them."As a note, it may have seemed this way, but.... it doesn't appear to actually be true. I looked back and from 2015-2020 it looks like we had 1 or 0 players claimed every year, and we claimed as many as we lost over that period.
When the team is good everyone thinks the bench guys are secret hidden gems hidden behind the stars, when we're mediocre, they're garbage who can't beat out the starters. The truth is... pretty similar guys on the end of the roster every single year.
hmm interesting, I was going off sbnation lists mostly. Not sure how they missed that year, they only had McDermott.Where did you find those numbers? I just found this article after a basic google search for 2017...byline reads "On Sept. 3, New England saw an NFL-high four roster cuts claimed off waivers. Let’s revisit them."
https://www.patspulpit.com/2017/10/4/16413798/how-four-players-claimed-off-waivers-from-new-england-patriots-have-fared-since-nfl-roster-cutdowns
Good post, this is my take as well.I look at this roster and it's as blah as blah can be. In years gone by, they'd have to cut talented players that got scooped up by other teams; this year, one player they cut got claimed, instead of "getting down to 53 players", it was more like "getting up to 53 players."
They really have drafted poorly from about 2017 through 2020, I thought 2021 was a good draft, the jury is still out on 2022.
They don't have up and coming young players on rookie deals to fill holes, they have to overpay for veterans to fill those holes.
This team to the best of my knowledge has a habit of letting players walk/trading them away prior to or after their rookie deals; Jones, Collins, Flowers, Michel, Jackson, Ryan, Brown, Butler, then they played hardball with players like Gilmore and traded him and others away. It's one thing if you have someone on your roster who can step in and be as good or better, but they don't.
Have all those players gone on to have great careers elsewhere; some have done ok, others not so much, we drink the Kool Aid around here "BB knows what he's doing/next man up/he'll coach up guys and they'll be fine."..............the past couple of years; not so much, at least for me, you can't keep letting guys walk. I doubt if Wynn or Harris are on this team next year as their rookie deals are up at the end of the year, Wynn has been a bit of a disappointment, but now again they'll have a hole that needs to be filled with the draft. Harris may be up at the end of 2023, don't really know off the top of my head, maybe not, but again, I would not be shocked if they let him walk.
Been a fan since 1968, this is one of the most pessimistic outlooks I've had on a season in a long time, probably since 2000. On the one hand, it's comical to say that as they had an incredible 18 year run, but on the other hand, reality is what it is, long gone are the days of "Looking at their schedule, I've got them at 13-3, maybe 14-2, AFCCG at least, I'm only worried about this team or that team".........now they are looking up at about 10 teams in the AFC, two in their division alone.
I love this place as a lot of people here are being very realistic and calling it like they see it.
I really, really, hope I am proven wrong and they have a great year; it's no fun watching a team be noncompetitive.
Time will tell.
Maybe they were just looking at draft picks? Carr and Moore were UDFAs and O'Shaughnessey was a guy acquired via trade.hmm interesting, I was going off sbnation lists mostly. Not sure how they missed that year, they only had McDermott.
The concerns about losing guys are overblown year after year. Most teams are worried about their own 90-man guys and largely interested in keeping as many of them as they can on their 53 and practice squads. They'd rather work with guys they've been working with than someone new. Teams also generally have the pulse on which of their guys are desirable around the league and which they can sneak through waivers. Around the league there were only 33 waiver claims this year, so the Pats losing 1 player is almost exactly average.As a note, it may have seemed this way, but.... it doesn't appear to actually be true. I looked back and from 2015-2020 it looks like we had 1 or 0 players claimed every year, and we claimed as many as we lost over that period.
When the team is good everyone thinks the bench guys are secret hidden gems hidden behind the stars, when we're mediocre, they're garbage who can't beat out the starters. The truth is... pretty similar guys on the end of the roster every single year.
The media-driven narrative is that the team is moorless and that Belichick has lost his fastball. I'd prefer that the "woe is us" talk stay within the "Expectations" thread, but what can you do.Maybe they were just looking at draft picks? Carr and Moore were UDFAs and O'Shaughnessey was a guy acquired via trade.
The concerns about losing guys are overblown year after year. Most teams are worried about their own 90-man guys and largely interested in keeping as many of them as they can on their 53 and practice squads. They'd rather work with guys they've been working with than someone new. Teams also generally have the pulse on which of their guys are desirable around the league and which they can sneak through waivers. Around the league there were only 33 waiver claims this year, so the Pats losing 1 player is almost exactly average.
Maybe I’m overrating the current version of Mac Jones, but this sort of where I have him already.Not quite as bleak if Mac develops into a top 15-20 QB and OL figures it out. That hides a lot.
Why? On it's face the teams with the oldest rosters (Bucs, Saints, Bills, Cardinals) look better than the teams with the youngest (Browns, Lions).Patriots have the second-oldest opening day roster in the NFL.
https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/patriots/interesting-stat-about-patriots-53-man-roster-might-surprise-you
This...does not bode well for the season.
Skewed quite a bit by McCourty (who should still be good), Slater (ditto), Hoyer, and Nick Folk.Patriots have the second-oldest opening day roster in the NFL.
https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/patriots/interesting-stat-about-patriots-53-man-roster-might-surprise-you
This...does not bode well for the season.
Yeah--Pats cut Hoyer, Folk, Slater, and Cody Davis and replace with young kids (backup QB, a PK and 2 ST guys) and the age drops to basically league average.This stat is bullshit given how closely clustered the teams are.
It would be interesting to see what like the middle 47 is, after you drop the top and bottom 3. Probably isn't a hell of a lot of difference between teams.Yeah--Pats cut Hoyer, Folk, Slater, and Cody Davis and replace with young kids (backup QB, a PK and 2 ST guys) and the age drops to basically league average.
I mean, you can say the same for all teams, but Pats value some experience on STs.