Sticky Caulk

The Patriots offense didn't finish well against Baltimore, but acting as if yardage was the reason is incorrect. Like I said, they didn't finish. They got themselves into scoring position over and over. They couldn't cap drives off with scores.

Let's have a playoffs with Gronk healthy and see what happens.

I think that Getting to the AFC Championship game multiple times shouldn't be looked down on. Of course your offense is going to get stalled consistently when you do that. Harder competition. You have to keep the players that get you there.

AndyJohnson

1) Isolating the points score in the playoff losses without recognizing the playoff wins, and that the most prolific offense in the NFL is the only reason they are there to begin with it dubious.
2) Eliminating the one thing the team does best is an idiotic method to improve the team.
3) Which teams are scoring a lot of points in their playoff losses?


This is simply not true. The defenses we have faced in playoff losses are very different with different schemes (even the 09 and 12 Ravens were very different defenses)
We also moved the ball up and down the field on Bmore and stalled inside the 25 which is totally inconsistent with anything in the history of this offense.
The only similarity is you pretending there is a similarity.



The silliness of judging an offensive scheme on one game is beyond explanation. But you top yourself by comparing it to a totally different team with entirely different type of players, indoors vs outside in heavy wind and 30 degrees.

AndyJohnson

And not finishing is not an inherent problem that this offense has consistently struggled with.
But, hey, lets take away the #1 strength the team has. I guess 8-8 won't give us any playoff disappoinments

Rob0729

Again, the Pats had 5 trips into the red zone against the Ravens with one TD to show for it. So are you arguing the Pats need a deep threat that can stretch the field 10-20 yards? Again, the Pats missed a big target in the red zone (Gronk anyone?). Not that their "small ball" offense was missing a deep threat. A guy who can stretch the field 30 yards isn't needed on a first and goal on the 10.

Sticky Caulk

Exactly how I feel. Everyone acts as if this record setting offense is made up of a bunch of easy to replace, interchangeable parts. If the NEP let Welker go, the offense is not going to be better for it.

Do people realize the only reason The Patriots lose big playoff games is because this incredible offense gets them to those games? Is it better to come close, but a bit short or not be there at all?

MTaylorJ1

I could see letting Welker go if you thought he's starting to show the wear of being a high volume slot guy for all these years. I don't get letting Welker and Lloyd go at the same time (esp. over a paltry $3m) for all the disappointment in Lloyd, he had 900+ yards and produced against good defenses. Just what we needed him for really. I also think the idea of drafting a WR high is a sketchy one to replace Welker. Aside from Branch, who is decidedly NOT the type of WR people are looking to bring in, has our high round drafting of WRs to stretch the field been very productive at all? (Bethel, Chad Jackson, Tate). Still too many holes on the defense to whiff on a pick like that (and I'm pretty confident they'll whiff again there, seems like a scouting hole to me or poor skillset fit with the QB, who isn't changing).

You could potentially make an argument for Bowe, because of the size fit and familiarity with Daboll. But in the draft? I think that's a mistake. Press corner, and interior line help for me please. The one glaring need this team has in my mind is the inability to rush the passer up the middle.

Rob0729

Bedard really lost me when he suggested replacing Welker and Lloyd with possibly Danny Amedola and Josh Cribbs.

He means the Josh Cribs who had 7 catches for 63 yards in 16 games last year? He means the guy who's career year was 41 catches for 518 yards and 4 TDs. The guy is a great special teams player, but he is a back up at best as a WR. If the Pats resigned Welker and Edelman and keep Lloyd, he would be the #4 WR at best.

Amedola could be great in McDaniels' system, but the guy has played 12 games in the last two years. He missed five games last season and 15 games the year before. You cannot go into the season as him as your anointed #1 WR. You can't count on him lasting 16 games.

Although I am not on board with letting Welker and Lloyd go, I think the Pats will have to consider giving up the first rounder and going after Victor Cruz if they let both go. They will have to make a splash at WR in free agency if they let both go and he is the only guy that really fits in the system with big production potential in free agency is Cruz (IMHO). The Giants will likely tender him the highest tender and it will take a first to get him. Not advocating this move, but it may be the only logical way to replacing both Welker and Lloyd assuming they don't hit big in the draft (as others pointed out, the Pats haven't done so with WR in a long time).

AndyJohnson

How is the offense that was #1 in yards, points and first downs, and was 7th in 20+ plays, 9th in yards per attempt, and 9th in yards per completion a 'small ball' team.
The Ravens and Patriots had the same yards per completion.
Green Bay, Denver, Houston, Detroit, Atlanta, were among the teams that played 'smaller ball' than the Patriots average less per completion.

AndyJohnson

I would prefer to leave the strengths alone, and fix the weaknesses. I think it is silly to take a season long strength and blame one loss on it, and even sillier to misjudge what the issue was in that game.

AndyJohnson

Well, we haven't drafted any high. 2nd round WRs are shaky or they wouldn't be in the second round. The worst argument you can make is 2 times out of 3 we picked the wrong guy out of a group of flawed choices in round 2. Tate at 82 doesn't doesn't belong in the discussion.
We have no clue how this organization would do at evaluating top level WRs in the draft, good or bad.


Again they have never 'whiffed' on a 1st round WR.

Famiarity with Daboll is meaningless, character issues are not.

There are many positions we could use a stud player drafted in the 1st round. During the length of that players contract those needs will also change.
Unless its QB, TE or maybe RB, we should draft the best guy on the board.