Can Browner start at SS?

[Professor of Rondology]

I know next to nothing about this guy but it seems like he has the body (6' 4" 221 lbs) and the physical style of play. Any thoughts?

Personally, I thought our CB group was already more than adequate. Revis-Ryan-Dennard-Arrington is a good, if not great, unit. Add Browner and Arrington becomes a highly overpaid special teams player.

On the other hand, Browner is more physical than any of the other CBs on this roster, so maybe we need him to match up out wide against bigger, more physical WRs. I'm just a little anxious about using so much of our cap space on a piece that we didn't absolutely need when there are still glaring holes on this roster (SS, IOL, WR, DT).

[Smokeeye123]

I know next to nothing about this guy but it seems like he has the body (6' 4" 221 lbs) and the physical style of play. Any thoughts?

Personally, I thought our CB group was already more than adequate. Revis-Ryan-Dennard-Arrington is a good, if not great, unit. Add Browner and Arrington becomes a highly overpaid special teams player.

On the other hand, Browner is more physical than any of the other CBs on this roster, so maybe we need him to match up out wide against bigger, more physical WRs. I'm just a little anxious about using so much of our cap space on a piece that we didn't absolutely need when there are still glaring holes on this roster (SS, IOL, WR, DT).

I think its going to be browner opposite revis. They still have money and the draft to address those positions. $7.5mil more when they release wilfork.

[PhoSita]

I think Browner will have the flexibility to play at either safety or corner, much like McCourty, only he's bigger and more physical.  Really like what his addition will allow the Patriots to do in the backfield.

[Cman]

I think they'll probably keep him at CB. This is the position he's best suited to play. Whether he starts opposite Revis or not will depend on the situation. It will be an added wrinkle for opposing coaches to consider (ie: not knowing quite what to expect when facing the Pats).

There is a lot of depth for the Pats at CB, but I don't think it is a problem. Keep in mind that Browner won't play the first 4 games, and that Revis might not be back after this year.

[jambr380]

I think they'll probably keep him at CB. This is the position he's best suited to play. Whether he starts opposite Revis or not will depend on the situation. It will be an added wrinkle for opposing coaches to consider (ie: not knowing quite what to expect when facing the Pats).

There is a lot of depth for the Pats at CB, but I don't think it is a problem. Keep in mind that Browner won't play the first 4 games, and that Revis might not be back after this year.

Your last statement is very key. Without the ability to franchise Revis, he is going to cost quite a bit of money, especially if the Pats continue their trend of going deep into the playoffs. I am ecstatic about acquiring Revis and it totally trumped Den signing Talib from us, but Browner is more likely the long term solution here.

[Evantime34]

I think mostly he will be used to cover tight ends in man coverage. What used to make the Pats defense so difficult to play against was the flexibility of all their players. I think they attempt to get back to this. Browner and McCourty can play both safety and corner, our two outside linebackers can play the run, play the pass or rush the passer out of a 3 point stance, and our two DE can rush the passer, play the run or cover from either a two or a three point stance.

They are trying to create a versatile defense that consistently confuses as well as beats up opposing offenses. I still worry about our DT position if we are forced to grant Wilfork his release.

[Cman]

I think mostly he will be used to cover tight ends in man coverage. What used to make the Pats defense so difficult to play against was the flexibility of all their players. I think they attempt to get back to this. Browner and McCourty can play both safety and corner, our two outside linebackers can play the run, play the pass or rush the passer out of a 3 point stance, and our two DE can rush the passer, play the run or cover from either a two or a three point stance.

They are trying to create a versatile defense that consistently confuses as well as beats up opposing offenses. I still worry about our DT position if we are forced to grant Wilfork his release.

Pats can always keep Wilfork for the year. The question is whether he shows up, and if he does whether he will be a distraction. I don't think that will happen -- Wilfork's issue is with Pats management, not players, and he won't take his grudge out by not showing up to play.

So, I think Pats keep him on the roster this year, then lose him to FA next year (note as a silver lining this outcome potentially nets Pats a "good" compensatory pick the following year). I imagine Pats will target a big DT/NT in the draft, and groom him to replace Wilfork the following year.

[Professor of Rondology]

Apparently BB didn't mention the possibility of playing safety to Browner at all in their meetings, which leads me to believe that they have no plans to try him out at SS. I think that BB must be confident in Harmon's ability to start at SS (or believe he can grab a starter on draft night) because it does not seem like he is eager to find a starter in free agency.

As for Wilfork, I hope we hold on to him. His cap hit will be larger than his contribution, but there is no chance we replace his production (assuming he stays healthy) if he is cut. There are no free agents left who could step in and fill his shoes, regardless of how much money we have. We could use our first rd pick on a DT, but I'd prefer it to be used on a IOL, SS, or TE.