mgteich

What is most likely to keep us from the AFC Championsip Game?

NOT DRAFTING A TOP LINEBACKER? NAAAH!
We have Vrabel, Thomas and Woods outside. Woods is as good as Banta-Cain was.
We have Bruschi, Thomas and Alexander and will re-sign Seau or another vet.
We'll get more help, but not getting it isn't critical. Besides, rookie linebackers take time to develop.

NOT DRAFTING A TOP CORNER? NAAAH?
We can draft corners in second, third or even the fourth round.
We have Hobbs, Bryant, and Richardson with Webster and Sanders fighting for time. We'll get help in the draft, but it doesn't need to be early. I would secure another VETERAN like Shepherd or Law, but a top draftee isn't critical.

NOT PROTECTING BRADY BETTER? YUPPP!!!!
We didn't think a guard was a top need when we drafted Mankins. We were wrong!!! Having a stud left guard, who hasn't played one snap at tackle in the regular season, was well worth a first rounder.

Is gettin Brady better protection on the right side worth a first rounder, a #7? Would that be reaching? The real question is whether we have the need and who the best players are to meet the need. The players must come from the draft. The need, if any, is on the right side.

Personally, I am NOT a fan of Neal. I think that Albert would be a major upgrade and would make Kaycur or O'Callahan better. However, if the problem is really at RT, I wouldn't draft Albert unless he is ready to start and be a probowl potential RT (I think not). If the problem is at RT, then draft Otah or another RT. The pros is not where we train guards to play tackle. The reverse happens all the time. College tackles can indeed become pro guards rather easily.

Clady at #7 or #8 may be too much too pass up.

IcyPatriot

I agree .. but when I posted about this several months ago I got slammed and ridiculed for saying it.

Changes To Offense To Keep Brady Healthy?

PATSNUTme

You are right. But I'm not convinced that Clady or Otah or Williams are the guys. But if the Patriots draft anyone at #7 then I will have to give them the benefit of the doubt and hope my doubts are doubtful.

SamBamsFan

I actually agree with the thought ( though didn't you start this thread last week? a LB and two CB's by Pick 69). I think if you look at value in relations to the Pats needs- then you have to look at the talent available on the OL in the draft this year. If not at 7, certainly by 62/ 69. Of course, I was the one last year that recommended Grubbs/ Staley(many rotten veggies were tossed my way) .

__________________
""Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel"
Samuel Johnson

VJCPatriot

Unfortunately Mankins got manhandled in the Superbowl. I really have no idea why, he was solid during the regular season. I'm thinking the Pats need a T more than a guard. Kaczur is meh. Pretty much, I agree. I wouldn't cry if the Pats went with a top OT at #7. Although I think they can trade down to the early teens and still get a guy like Otah. If Clady is head and shoulders above Otah and is comparable to a guy like Joe Thomas of the Browns, I think he'd be worth it at #7.

__________________

BelichickFan

I would never be upset with an OT. However I kind of like Ellis too. He could help give guys a breather, be a real backup for Wilfork (Vince getting jurt scares the crap out of me) and Ellis could play a lot on 2nd/3rd and short/long downs.

Deus Irae

I'm all for drafting a tackle with the pick. It's a rarity for this team to be drafting this high, and it's a year with a couple of potential top notch pass protecting left tackles, an increasingly rare type of player. That being said, let's not go drafting for the O-line under false pretenses:


1.) Light is one of the best in the game at LT right now. He's not an elite type of LT, but there aren't many of them around right now. He's the kind of guy you always see at the top of the "The best of the rest" lists.

2.) Mankins is probably the best LG in the game, despite that ridiculous gas piping of the Super Bowl.

3.) Koppen is more than up to the task at center.

4.) Neal is arguably this team's best run blocker and, I think inarguably, its best pulling lineman.

5.) Kaczur has done a solid, though not spectacular, job at RT.

The line was awful during the Super Bowl. Significantly, given the OP's discussion about Neal, the line didn't collapse until Neal went down with an injury. However, until then, it had helped get the team to 18-0 and move the ball in the Super Bowl. People really need to stop letting 3/4 of one game dictate their way of thinking.

__________________
"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

ALP

where to begin???

lets see, first a question...choose one game last year in which ur view that we need to protect brady better is clearly shown...

u chose the superbowl as ur example, so not lets move on

in the superbowl, neal was hurt, there was a backup at RG for much of the game....

our other guard had his worst game all season (all his career as well)

which is why our LT suffered

our RT did usual

add it all up, and u get a bad DAY from the O line which lasted a WHOLE SEASON

the circumstances just all went in favor of the giants, it was one of those murphys laws things

i would take a whole season to evaluate the Offensive line rather then just one game, and our O line is fine, just fine

they had a bad day

they dont call it the fluke bowl for nothing

but in that amazing completion where manning was almost sacked and tyree caught it with his head

say we had a young, fast LB going after manning.....and getting the sack

or say we had a young, fast, CB who intercepted the ball instead of drop it

then we win

case closed

__________________
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

ALP

nobody is joe thomas....they say jake long isnt even close to joe thomas...

__________________
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

Zeke_Mowatt

I'm with you - I think a gassed D has helped us lose the past 2 years - sure you can say the D performed to expectations and held teams to low points, but when it mattered, they didn't do what they used to which was make the big play, get the big t/o etc. I'm not disappointed with them, as ALP said, it was pretty darn flukey on both sides of the ball, but to me, our offense is spectacular and only getting better this year, but our D needs an infusion of some kind...younger vets (we didn't get many yet) or draft picks, and since we've done pretty well with late 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rounders under Dante's tutelage, I think we ought to (if the value is there) upgrade the D as much as possible with our earlier picks. But I'm still of the opinion that if we can trade down for more picks, we should because I think our prototypical "value" guys who produce and don't break the salary cap are going to be more readily available in rnds 2 and 3.