HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

If your saying he's overrated, I agree. However, I want the Pats to re-sign him because there isn't anybody else to replace him. Also, if he leaves, it will then create another need that Pats can't afford.

tanked_as_usual

if they can pry a 2010 first rounder from the chiefs or broncos in a tag and trade, I say go for it and then sign ryan pickett and draft rolando mcclain

AndyJohnson

I'm also saying he isnt as hard to replace as many think. Wilfork played 510 snaps on defense, which is just over half of the 941 plays. Out of those 265 were passes, so Vince Wilfork was on the field for 245 running plays, about 15 a game. That is about 1/4 of the total plays where Wilfork is on the field doing what he is good at, playing run D. He spends more than half the time he is on the field rushing the passer, which is basically futile. Yeah he is overrated.
He actually was 12th on the team in # of plays played. That means a reserve plays more than him.
He covers 2 gaps of run D on half the plays. All that is needed to replace him would be a one dimensional 2 gap technique player. Even of that player does nothing other than play good 2gap discipline we lose very little.

HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

I also agree. There are plenty of teams that don't have a "big name" NT and are stopping the run better than the Pats. As long as you have talent around the NT, your team will be fine at stopping the run.

AndyJohnson

I think that the decline of the talent of the franchise (which has been steady, 2007 was an anomoly where they were so good at one thing it overwhelmed everything else) was inevitable, because there was no possible way in a capped system to maintain the overall talent level of 2003-2004.
I think actually BB and the front office did a tremendous job staying competitve by becoming strong enough in some areas to overcome the weaknesses that were developing and widening every year.
I think ultimately, though the strengths led to the weaknesses. I think spending 2 #1s (plus the #2 on Hill) on the DL after already having Seymour in fold was a mistake, because it cost us building up other areas that became weaknesses.
The 01-04 Patriots were much more about a lack of weaknesses than they were about a wealth of overwhelming strengths. The 05-09 Patriots were more about excessive strengths trying to hide and overcome significant weaknesses.
Result 01-04 we win every big game.
05-09 we beat all the bad teams, and more and more as time goes on, lose to good teams that take advantage of the weaknesses.
Again if you consider 2007 an anomoly because the passing offense was so good, the best ever, that it overcame the weaknesses, and was so good it won all on its own, the decline is steady.
I also think it was well hidden. 2005 was the Bruschi issue. 2006 was a bad 2nd half in the AFCCG (which should have been the bell ringing because it was so uncharacteristic) 2007 masked it completely. 2008 didnt count because Brady was hurt. 2009 was the first time that it stood out, and apparently hit home.
We don't need to rebuild, because we arent many pieces away from contending for a title, but I think you are going to see an off-season that resembles the ones from 01-04, designed to shore up weaknesses, than one from 06-09, designed to become dominant in strength areas and not terrible in weak areas.

HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

I somewhat agree. Are you saying the two #1's were (Warren and Wilfork)? I wasn't really feeling the Warren pick (I really wanted Willis McGahee or Larry Johnson) as he might have been taken too high. However, the Wilfork pick was a great value and provided nice depth behind Keith Traylor. Also, we didn't know how Traylor would hold up playing NT in a 3-4.

Regarding Marquise Hill (God bless him), but I didn't like the pick at all because they already were good at DL and had Green as a capable back up.

In addition, the Watson pick in 2004 was ridiculous because they just drafted Graham and was doing just fine. A lot of people wanted Dansby, but I was really high on Stephen Jackson even though they already had Dillon. I think they should've traded up for him.
Agree
Agree. I have been getting ripped for saying their 2007 defense was able to stop the run because they didn't have to stop the run. Also, their defense was able to tee off on QB's because the Pats put opposing teams in passing situations by the end of the 1st quarter.
The Pats need to go back to basics and think what won them super bowls (I think we already know the answer). The flashy offense was really fun to watch, actually I think we can all agree it was the most fun season to watch as a fan until that nightmare of a super bowl. I've been a broken record for the last 5 years but the Pats need to shore up the defense, hire an actual defensive coordinator (they could've had Dom Capers), hire an actual offensive coordinator and have a better commitment to the ground game.

ALP

LOL, all u guys hold eli to a higher regard than I

i would take 3 QB's b4 wilfork, but it would be schuab instead of eli
also fitz, jackson and dansby along w/ allen

wouldnt put vilma up there, and would put the safeties behind vince, along w/ turner

__________________
Last time I lived in New England the Pats became a Dynasty

Then I moved away and they haven't won since

...now I'm moving back, and a Lombardi I predict

AndyJohnson

I think it was a necessary evil. In hindsight it seems obvious to me. Faced with a roster than had a cumulative value far in excess of the cap, the talent on the roster was certain to deteriorate. What BB did (by design or happnestance) was to greatly increase the talent at the high end of the roster, and in specific areas, in order to cover the impending degradation of other areas.
In the end, it got us about 2 plays away from winning 2 more SBs, and controlled our division for 5 years but for losing tiebreaker in the season our best player missed entirely.

If you really understand the issues that were in front of the franchise in March of 2005, the results have been pretty remarkable.

patsfan-1982

yes wilfork is a good player and means a lot to the pats but you can't rank him in the top 10 of a draft that may have 5 or 6 hall of fame players in it


as far as Eli Manning, being #3 i know eveyone hates him cause he stoped the pats perfact season. but he is a good maybe even great QB 4021 yerds passing 27 TD's 14 INT's 93.1 QB Rating. bradys numbers where not much better. this year. if the jets had Eli Manning, as there QB they would have won the SB and when the G man had a D like the jets have they did win a SB

Deus Irae

If you've got Wilfork much lower than 6th, you're doing nothing but establishing that your player analysis skills should be completely ignored in the future.

__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius