ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Hoping to spark up some debate/insight into NE's WR situation. Seems the Pats currently have an embarrassment of riches at WR. Meantime my guys are still looking for a solid #2. We all know ya can't keep 'em all, so I'm hoping to elicit some feedback from fans who know the group better than I do.
Two questions (well, 2.5, second one is two pronged):
1. - How many WRs do you guys see the Pats keeping going in to week 1?
2. - Who do you see them cutting?
2a. - Of those cuts, is there anyone that, IYO, could effectively fill a #2 role on a team with less WR depth?
Thx in advance. Looking forward to your guys' opinons.
Also hoping that somehow WW, BL, JG, RG, and AH fail to make the team due to an unforseen hot air ballooning mishap that prevents them from landing safely until mid feb 2013!
What a set of options!
Last edited by LetsGoBuffalo; 05-05-2012 at 01:14 AM..
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
2a. - Of those cuts, is there anyone that, IYO, could effectively fill a #2 role on a team with less WR depth?
I could see Stallworth potentially being a #2.
In any case, I think Buffalo could have GRONK if they were willing to cough up, oh, about ten first-rounders.
__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
In any case, I think Buffalo could have GRONK if they were willing to cough up, oh, about ten first-rounders.
Oy don't remind me.
The family is from Williamsville, he grew up a Bills fan, and we go and take Terrell Freaking Troup right before him. Awesome. :/
Joking aside, do u guys see NE keeping a 3rd TE as well as a FB, one of the two, or niether? Depending on what they do there, will it affect how many WRs they keep?
I.E, if they keep a blocking TE will they keep 1 less WR given how talented AH and RG are?
Last edited by LetsGoBuffalo; 05-05-2012 at 01:34 AM..
Joking aside, do u guys see NE keeping a 3rd TE as well as a FB, one of the two, or niether? Depending on what they do there, will it affect how many WRs they keep?
They have three RBs that could be considered "locks" ATM (Ridley, Vereen, Woodhead). Even if they add a FB, that'd be fewer backs than they carried last year (5-6).
As far as TEs go, I think it's almost imperative that they carry three TEs capable of actually catching passes: the Patriots averaged nearly 2 TEs per play in 2011.
__________________
"Momentum was quickly snatched away by New England, who once again proved that any Patriot, at any moment, can make a play." —Inside the NFL, Packers v. Patriots
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
1. - How many WRs do you guys see the Pats keeping going in to week 1?
I'm pretty adamant about this. Excluding Edelman and Slater, a lot of people are going to say 5. I say no more than 4, plus those two. The Pats have no need for a #4 WR except in case of an injury. They have no need for a #5 WR except in case of TWO injuries. Edelman is good enough to function as the "in case of second injury" WR as well as his punt returning, kick coverage, possibly kick returning, and (unlikely) defense.
Quote:
2. - Who do you see them cutting?
Of note, I see them cutting Stallworth, Gonzalez, and Ochocinco, with a small chance that any one of them could beat out Branch for my last spot. I think Welker, Lloyd, Gaffney, Edelman, and Slater are locks.
Quote:
2a. - Of those cuts, is there anyone that, IYO, could effectively fill a #2 role on a team with less WR depth?
Branch was the #2 last year, but only averaged 37 yards per game in the 13 games following his 222-yard first two. I also don't know if he'd rather play for another team or retire. Your best bet is probably Ochocinco. He's still got it physically, just couldn't get the mental part of it figured out in time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGoBuffalo
Joking aside, do u guys see NE keeping a 3rd TE as well as a FB, one of the two, or niether? Depending on what they do there, will it affect how many WRs they keep?
I.E, if they keep a blocking TE will they keep 1 less WR given how talented AH and RG are?
They gave Fells a $1M signing bonus, so they obviously think he's sticking around. There are two FBs on the roster right now and McDaniels seems to like having a fullback or even two, so I'd definitely expect 3 TEs and 1 FB at the minimum.
I think the WR numbers are more of an effect of how good Gronk and Hernandez are as opposed to how many TEs and FBs they keep. Those two are good enough that they need to be on the field almost every snap. If they go empty, then that means 3 WRs. Any more than 3 WRs, and they're taking either Gronk or Hernandez off the field, and that's not good. And even that #3 WR shouldn't get much use because they'll use a RB so much.
I think Slater is on the bubble if Tavon Wilson pans out. Slater is of no use as a WR. So if Wilson beats him, I see Slater, Gonzalez, and any combination of the following 2 out of these three (Branch, Ocho, Stallworth) getting cut. I personally think that Branch will stay because of his rapport with Brady but I wouldn't be shocked to see him cut.
I could see Ocho, Branch, or Stallworth as a #2 in Buffalo but that isn't saying much imo.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
S.H.E.S.
Last edited by 37Harrison; 05-05-2012 at 07:33 AM..
I think Slater is on the bubble if Tavon Wilson pans out. Slater is of no use as a WR. So if Wilson beats him, I see Slater, Gonzalez, and any combination of the following 2 out of these three (Branch, Ocho, Stallworth) getting cut. I personally think that Branch will stay because of his rapport with Brady but I wouldn't be shocked to see him cut.
I could see Ocho, Branch, or Stallworth as a #2 in Buffalo but that isn't saying much imo.
Salter isn't on any bubble...unless you have bubbles in your brain... He's a pro bowl ST captain with a new extension... Wilson may play on some ST but he's a versitile db who can even play linebacker in some situations... He and Slater have no relation to each other aside from being teamates.
I'm pretty adamant about this. Excluding Edelman and Slater, a lot of people are going to say 5. I say no more than 4, plus those two. The Pats have no need for a #4 WR except in case of an injury. They have no need for a #5 WR except in case of TWO injuries. Edelman is good enough to function as the "in case of second injury" WR as well as his punt returning, kick coverage, possibly kick returning, and (unlikely) defense.
Of note, I see them cutting Stallworth, Gonzalez, and Ochocinco, with a small chance that any one of them could beat out Branch for my last spot. I think Welker, Lloyd, Gaffney, Edelman, and Slater are locks.
Branch was the #2 last year, but only averaged 37 yards per game in the 13 games following his 222-yard first two. I also don't know if he'd rather play for another team or retire. Your best bet is probably Ochocinco. He's still got it physically, just couldn't get the mental part of it figured out in time.
They gave Fells a $1M signing bonus, so they obviously think he's sticking around. There are two FBs on the roster right now and McDaniels seems to like having a fullback or even two, so I'd definitely expect 3 TEs and 1 FB at the minimum.
I think the WR numbers are more of an effect of how good Gronk and Hernandez are as opposed to how many TEs and FBs they keep. Those two are good enough that they need to be on the field almost every snap. If they go empty, then that means 3 WRs. Any more than 3 WRs, and they're taking either Gronk or Hernandez off the field, and that's not good. And even that #3 WR shouldn't get much use because they'll use a RB so much.
Sound predictions, but your confidence in them is a little overstated.
Every WR except Welker is a major question mark, due to age, newness with the the team, spotty recent production, or some combination. So keeping one more than you're saying, as a hedge against flame-outs, is not inconceivable.
Similarly, although I think Edelman will stick around, he's hardly a lock. (Slater, on the other hand, is indeed a near-lock.)
__________________
"To lose one parent may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness." -- Oscar Wilde
30Likes
WR Competition
Linear Mode
