JackBauer
Hall of Fame Poster
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2005
- Messages
- 25,365
- Reaction score
- 7,823
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Darius Butler
This team cannot win a Super Bowl without a front 7 that can stop the run and pressure the passer.
Larry Fitz is a GREAT player, but I'd rather see the top-end talent come on defense.
My .02$
I can almost guarantee you this. If the Pats acquire Fitzgerald and it stops them from getting one or two impact players in the front seven, the Pats are not going to win a Super Bowl even if this is the best offense ever.
People are in love with the Ferarris. But name the last team that has won a Super Bowl with a flashy elite WR, but has significant deficiencies on defense. This team has won three Super Bowls with very good to great defenses while two of those Super Bowls teams had average at best offenses. This team has had the highest scoring offense in the league two of the last four years and have zero Super Bowl wins to show for it.
If the Pats could get Fitzgerald for nothing, then I would be all for it. Unfortunately it will take a lot in terms of picks and salary. That will hurt the improvement of the defense which is clearly the biggest problem of this team. Just because the Jets did a good job in one game of shutting down the offense, it doesn't mean it is the blueprint to stop it every game. Belichick may already have a game plan to successfully counter what the Jets did in that game.
I nominate this as post of the thread. You've hit all the main issues, leaving out nothing important. A great D with an efficient-but-not-flashy O wins Superbowls. Big Games are won or lost at the line of scrimmage.
//
I agree, but I will say this: Let's say the Pats can get Fitz for a 1st, 3rd, and a 6th. That still leaves them with a 1st, two 2nds, and a 3rd. They then sign Woodley for the defense, re-sign Mankins, move Vollmer to LT, and then add Watt, an OL, and another DL/LB with their first three picks. With the 3rd round pick they can grab another OL, and then add a free agent RB like Pierre Thomas.
So:
QB - Brady, Hoyer
RB - Thomas, Green-Ellis, Woodhead, Morris
WR - Fitzgerald, Branch, Welker, Edelman, Price, Tate
TE - Gronk, Hernandez, Crumpler
OL - Vollmer, Mankins, Koppen, Connolly, rookie RT (or Ohrnberger)
DL - Warren, Wilfork, Wright, Watt (a lot of W's there), Pryor, Brace, Moore
LB - Woodley, Mayo, Spikes, Cunningham, Guyton, Ninkovich, Fletcher
DB - Bodden, McCourty, Meriweather, Chung, Sanders, Butler, Page
I know there's a few more guys to add...but look at that starting offense: Brady, Thomas, Fitzgerald, Welker, Gronk, Hernandez....yikes. And the defense would be significantly improved with the additions of Woodley and Watt.
Just a thought.
Great post. If anything, the Pats need to improve their offense by installing an explosive running game. Adding more passing offense is about the last thing this team needs to do.I can almost guarantee you this. If the Pats acquire Fitzgerald and it stops them from getting one or two impact players in the front seven, the Pats are not going to win a Super Bowl even if this is the best offense ever.
People are in love with the Ferarris. But name the last team that has won a Super Bowl with a flashy elite WR, but has significant deficiencies on defense. This team has won three Super Bowls with very good to great defenses while two of those Super Bowls teams had average at best offenses. This team has had the highest scoring offense in the league two of the last four years and have zero Super Bowl wins to show for it.
If the Pats could get Fitzgerald for nothing, then I would be all for it. Unfortunately it will take a lot in terms of picks and salary. That will hurt the improvement of the defense which is clearly the biggest problem of this team. Just because the Jets did a good job in one game of shutting down the offense, it doesn't mean it is the blueprint to stop it every game. Belichick may already have a game plan to successfully counter what the Jets did in that game.
Darius Butler
I agree with your point completely that improving in the trenches is WAY more important than going out and getting Fitz, but it's also time to realize that this isn't the same NFL as when New England won 3 championships. Look at the championships won in 2000 and 2002 by Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson. You're never again going to see a 3 year period where two different quarterbacks that mediocre win superbowls. You can't win with an average offense that has as little at receiver as New England does now-a-days.I can almost guarantee you this. If the Pats acquire Fitzgerald and it stops them from getting one or two impact players in the front seven, the Pats are not going to win a Super Bowl even if this is the best offense ever.
People are in love with the Ferarris. But name the last team that has won a Super Bowl with a flashy elite WR, but has significant deficiencies on defense. This team has won three Super Bowls with very good to great defenses while two of those Super Bowls teams had average at best offenses. This team has had the highest scoring offense in the league two of the last four years and have zero Super Bowl wins to show for it.
If the Pats could get Fitzgerald for nothing, then I would be all for it. Unfortunately it will take a lot in terms of picks and salary. That will hurt the improvement of the defense which is clearly the biggest problem of this team. Just because the Jets did a good job in one game of shutting down the offense, it doesn't mean it is the blueprint to stop it every game. Belichick may already have a game plan to successfully counter what the Jets did in that game.
Here we go with this. 2 seasons and he's already a bust.
Did you notice when he was the nickel corner he actually looked like he knew what he was doing?
People are in love with the Ferarris. But name the last team that has won a Super Bowl with a flashy elite WR, but has significant deficiencies on defense.
Woodley 6+ million
Fitzgerald 10+ million
Brady 19+ million
Wilfork 8 million
Mankins 7 million
$51 million in five players? Not good. This is not just a 'draft pick' thing. It's also a salary thing, and it also a depth thing.
Lets get one thing right...NO ONE and I mean NO ONE can ever get what Belichick is thinking right ...when we go right,he goes left.
Its fun to dream but inevitably thats what it is.
Very fair point. You could save some money by dumping Gostowski and keeping a cheaper kicker.
New Orleans Saints 2009, Indianapolis Colts 2006.
And who says getting Fitzgerald forecloses the improvement of the defense. The Pats have a ton of draft picks in the 2011 draft which would afford them the luxury to still do this AND get a proven stud WR who can actually get open inside as well as outside (deep).