2015 Patriots 53-man Roster & Practice Squad Watch

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,499
deep inside Guido territory
White will be in his 3rd down role. Jackson will be seen on 1st/2nd down but different role than LG because he's a legit threat to catch passes. Iosefa will be James Develin redux. Bolden will be on ST and get some carries but not nearly as many offensive snaps as last week.
 
Apr 7, 2006
2,562
It's not unusual for the Pats to have four RB active. They did it in Weeks 2, 3, 5, 6, and 8 this year - basically, almost every week until Lewis went on IR (the only exceptions were Week 1 when Blount was suspended and Week 7 when Lewis was hurt). I think they probably will have four RB active in Weeks 16 and 17 because Jackson won't be ready for a big load and they have enough other guys to make inactive. The playoffs are anyone's guess - a lot depends on how much gas Jackson has left in the tank, how Iosefa and White develop, and whether anyone gets hurt between now and then.
But those four active RBs included Dion Lewis, LGBT and uber-STer Brandon Bolden...and maybe James White as a just-in-case, right? I don't see BB and a Friends feeling the same jones for keeping Iosefa available on game day, do you?
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Then why is he here?
Because he has the potential to help them. They will presumably assess him in practices this week and determine if he's one of the 45 they need for this game. Just like every other player.

My guess is that they expect that he will be active and have some cautious optimism about him.

But even the most optimistic of coaches knows what we all know: he's been out of the game all season and was not particularly good last season, despite his impressive career resume.

For some reason, I can see big things out of this guy and am thinking he'll play and make some good runs. But him either being inactive this week or getting just a few plays would not surprise me.

The X factor in all of this is that Iosefa showed something last week. I assume they will measure what they expect to get out him versus Bolden or Iosefa and if they are not confident it will be more, the right move is to put him on the inactive list, no? Said differently, do they really need to carry 4 RBs?

Last, Jackson could be inactive this week while they hopefully take care of business and give him a long look during the extended garbage time against the Fins. It's possible he needs a little more time to get in football shape and learn the offense, and the combination of that and the prospect of a regular season exhibition game in Week 17 might keep him out this week.
 
Apr 7, 2006
2,562
I wouldn't go so far as "they need him," but given the banged up-ness - likely no Amendola, almost certainly no Edelman - I can see an "as many hands on deck as possible" situation. In the spirit of striking a balance between R & R and sewing up HFA throughout, adding to the mix even the CHANCE of Jackson contributing a bit is a sound plan.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,024
Mansfield MA
But those four active RBs included Dion Lewis, LGBT and uber-STer Brandon Bolden...and maybe James White as a just-in-case, right? I don't see BB and a Friends feeling the same jones for keeping Iosefa available on game day, do you?
I don't know why you're so dismissive of the idea - Iosefa led the team in carries on Sunday. And no question there is less talent at the position now, but isn't that all the more reason to carry more options and depth?

The other issue is that, with Bolden playing a bigger role on offense Sunday, the team dialed down his special teams contributions to nothing. So you might not really get value out of carrying just 3 RBs, because the extra player you add elsewhere now has to fill Bolden's ST role (directly or indirectly). Blount could carry the ball 20+ times (he didn't often, but he could), so they didn't need Bolden to play much role on offense, but they don't really have anybody like that now.
 
Apr 7, 2006
2,562
I don't know why you're so dismissive of the idea - Iosefa led the team in carries on Sunday. And no question there is less talent at the position now, but isn't that all the more reason to carry more options and depth?

The other issue is that, with Bolden playing a bigger role on offense Sunday, the team dialed down his special teams contributions to nothing. So you might not really get value out of carrying just 3 RBs, because the extra player you add elsewhere now has to fill Bolden's ST role (directly or indirectly). Blount could carry the ball 20+ times (he didn't often, but he could), so they didn't need Bolden to play much role on offense, but they don't really have anybody like that now.
Fair points all and you may well be right. I don't think Iosefa covered himself in glory last week, but yes, he did get the most carries. I can definitely see your point, especially in the near term. He might be part of the all hands on deck. And I would definitely like to get Bolden back focused on the STs.

Edit dumb shit poorly phrased
 

bradmahn

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
591
In a game that would seem to call for passing, it wouldn't surprise me if they carry just Bolden, Jackson, and White on the active roster but I think it's most likely all play Sunday.
 

Granite Sox

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2003
5,065
The Granite State
Iosefa was "featured" against the Titans, who suck. Despite Gasper's poor attempt at irony, the Pats probably saw Tennessee as the ideal opponent against which to break in Iosefa.

I'd be shocked if he got more touches this week against the Jets. And given the struggles of STs the past month or so, Bolden's relative value is needed more there. Against a team battling for a playoff spot, I'd be surprised if Jackson wasn't active to take some of Bolden's carries and catches.
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
I'm perfectly fine with this...as long as he's never on the field for the rest of the year.
You mean after Week 17?

If not, get ready to be disappointed. With LaFell and Martin the only other WR (and LaFell is questionable) and Chandler clearly playing hurt, someone else is going to need to take snaps there. White and Bolden will run some WR routes, but Harper will need to do so as well.
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
I'm surprised you're still killing him for this after Martin and Amendola both fumbled and lost punts in similar situations against Houston and Tennessee.
Indeed, you could argue that Harper's kick was the most difficult of all to return, given the snowy conditions and the team's decision to not even attempt to field the subsequent punt (and didn't the Broncos also fumble but recover a punt?).

I'd like to see Martin get more shots at returning punts despite the fumble.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,390
Indeed, you could argue that Harper's kick was the most difficult of all to return, given the snowy conditions and the team's decision to not even attempt to field the subsequent punt (and didn't the Broncos also fumble but recover a punt?).

I'd like to see Martin get more shots at returning punts despite the fumble.
Agreed. The guy made a mistake. Granted it was a big one but he did well in preseason and was fine during the game until that point. Not saying Harper is any good but mistakes are made constantly. By this reasoning Lafell should have been cut last year, Dion Lewis cut this year etc.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,263
I'm surprised you're still killing him for this after Martin and Amendola both fumbled and lost punts in similar situations against Houston and Tennessee.
I can hold irrational sports grudges with the best of them. And punt fumbles really grind my gears.
 

JohnnyK

Member
SoSH Member
May 8, 2007
1,941
Wolfern, Austria
I think the issue with the fumble was that lots of people assumed the coaches must've told Harper to either fair catch it or just let it bounce and he basically defied them. Of course this was never confirmed by anyone, so it's patently silly, but it still seems to linger in some people's minds.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,024
Mansfield MA
I think the issue with the fumble was that lots of people assumed the coaches must've told Harper to either fair catch it or just let it bounce and he basically defied them. Of course this was never confirmed by anyone, so it's patently silly, but it still seems to linger in some people's minds.
I think the issue with the fumble was what happened after. The D caved after Harper's fumble; it held tough after Martin's and Amendola's. None of that had anything to do with the returner, but Harper got blamed for the subsequent defensive breakdowns while Martin's and Amendola's blunders were forgotten because the D picked them up.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,529
“@tomecurran: Leonard Hankerson has been claimed off waivers by Buffalo. Asante Cleveland was claimed by San Diego. Pats released both late last week.”
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,137
Given how banged up the OL is, I'm sure it's going to be a 50 pass attempt game for Brady against the Fish. Iosefa probably wouldn't have gotten any touches so cutting him and picking up another OL makes sense. Steven Jackson was a big fat 0 against the Jets but Bill must see something.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
I thought he showed good burst and when not hit in the backfield by unblocked linebackers performed like a Blount.

Not blocking makes any RB look horrific.
Bracketing the line play... Jackson looked like a guy who hadn't played football in nearly a year, for good reason. He didn't show "burst". He looked like he had concrete in his shoes. Jackson hasn't had "burst" in this decade. He does have a solid understanding of pass protection and isn't going to fumble. Slow(er) backs can be useful in certain situations.