Patriots interested in Vincent Jackson

[obgod3]

So you opposed the Ayers trade, then, right? You oppose all midseason trades, right?

Come on,thats not even a decent comparison to vjax. and yes thats a smart move because thats a place on your team where your left with a gap. You dont have a gap in the receiving corps in NE. Maybe in the O Line you still do, everyone will find out next Sunday because it wont be as pretty as it was yesterday. That O line is still a weakness and Denver will probably show everyone that, brady probably wont even have time to get the deep ball to vjax. Maybe, we will see. Teams need three really good receivers, check, a really good TE, check, and a decent RB, check.

Teams that are desperate forfeit futures for an immediate return, or chance at a return. NE isnt desperate and not once during a SB was a deep threat a factor one way or another for NE, you could just as easily say it was lack of a great TE in the last one or a wide open guy not catching a ball.

 

[Deus Irae]

Come on,thats not even a decent comparison to vjax. and yes thats a smart move because thats a place on your team where your left with a gap. You dont have a gap in the receiving corps in NE.

1.) It's a perfectly apt comparison. You're giving up a draft pick for a player.


2.) They do have a gap in the receiving corps. That's patently obvious, since they've only got 2 WRs doing anything with consistency. Why people are trying to re-fight 2009-2013 all over again, after they'd finally conceded the receiving issues for those years, is a question begging for an answer.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Just wondering that if Vjax is like Moss how many SB's did they win with Moss? How did that work out loosening up the middle in that SB? Yeh that deep threat worked out great .

...and they haven't won any without him since 2004 either. Offensive line needs to block too.

But three SB's without a big time deep threat. I dont buy into having to go get vjax. What will folks say when we cant resign Revis because of this deal, if it happens. If you get him cheap, get him to restructure then maybe. Sounds like shoring up the o line is important, maybe a good run defender?

I would agree that a 3 down linebacker, or 3/4 DE or 4/3 DE/DT that can rush the passer and play the run would be a higher priority.

 

[obgod3]

1.) It's a perfectly apt comparison. You're giving up a draft pick for a player.


2.) They do have a gap in the receiving corps. That's patently obvious, since they've only got 2 WRs doing anything with consistency. Why people are trying to re-fight 2009-2013 all over again, after they'd finally conceded the receiving issues for those years, is a question begging for an answer.

Your reaching.

I honestly would still worry much more about the O lIne. If they want to make a trade there Im all for it or someone that can tackle a RB before he gets 7 yards. Wait till sunday you'll see, or Ill come back and admit I was wrong.

Anyway we wont agree so Im done arguing, I wont convince you and you wont convince me. I do appreciate the friendly banter. Cool?

 

[Ring 6]

I agree.
=====
Folks out there just think but hell lets do what other dumb teams do, forfeit the future for a few games that want really wont change a dam thing right LOL

Just wondering that if Vjax is like Moss how many SB's did they win with Moss? Yeh that deep threat worked out great . But three SB's without a big time deep threat. I dont buy into having to go get vjax. What will folks say when we cant resign Revis because of this deal, if it happens.

I'm not quite sure we agree.
I was just pointing out that there is a cost, and that has to be factored into the decision.

Of course adding a good WR will help the team, and make it more likely to win a SB.
Adding this player improves our chances of winning the SB.
The argument that a deep threat is useless because we had one once and only went 18-1 is silly.

The bottom line is the team is better with him, but how much better and whether its worth the cost is part of the equation.

Get him no matter what, and we don't need him are equally naive.

 

[Deus Irae]

Your reaching.

I honestly would still worry much more about the O lIne. If they want to make a trade there Im all for it or someone that can tackle a RB before he gets 7 yards. Wait till sunday you'll see, or Ill come back and admit I was wrong.

Anyway we wont agree so Im done arguing, I wont convince you and you wont convince me. I do appreciate the friendly banter. Cool?

I'm not reaching at all. Again, we went through this from 2009-2013. And I think you'll find, if you look through the thread, that most people who would bring in Jackson would look to other positions, either as well or instead.

As for the rest, have yourself a great day. Enjoy tonight's game, if you're watching it. Washington v. Dallas

 

[JayNM]

Is VJax a guy that would re-do his deal? He's way too expensive(11M/Y or so) in the long run, specially at 31 YO.

I would take him for 9M, already incluiding some nice incentives. Next year, however, i'd say goodbye to Amendola.

 

[obgod3]

...and they haven't won any without him since 2004 either. Offensive line needs to block too.

Basically my point. the issue isnt the WR, it that Brady doest get enough time to get a guy downfield to throw the ball to, at least against really good defenses. I just see the O line and some defenses positions being more important right now. I could be wrong but the folks on this forum are going to see an very good defensive line next sunday and be sad we dont have one.

 

[JMC00]

Teams need three really good receivers, check

LaFell and Edelman. Who is the third? Amendola? Tyms?

Maybe in the O Line you still do, everyone will find out next Sunday because it wont be as pretty as it was yesterday. That O line is still a weakness and Denver will probably show everyone that, brady probably wont even have time to get the deep ball to vjax

Have you even watched the last 4 weeks? You think Brady is playing like he is if the OL wasn't playing better?

 

[obgod3]

I'm not quite sure we agree.
I was just pointing out that there is a cost, and that has to be factored into the decision.

Of course adding a good WR will help the team, and make it more likely to win a SB.
Adding this player improves our chances of winning the SB.
The argument that a deep threat is useless because we had one once and only went 18-1 is silly.

The bottom line is the team is better with him, but how much better and whether its worth the cost is part of the equation.

Get him no matter what, and we don't need him are equally naive.

Well ok then, I ask...how did having Moss help win that SB? we will probably disagree but if you say O line was the problem then shouldn't we have put more emphasis there? Anyway folks on the board here want to think some Moss like trade thing will change everything and there are bigger gaps than WR, to not see that is looking through colored glasses. I would mind seeing him on the team if the price is right, but it wont be, has to be a bargin. I just dont think it is a place they should focus right now. God I hope Im wrong but that Chicago defense is nothing compared to Denver.

 

[JMC00]

Well ok then, I ask...how did having Moss help win that SB?

If Asante Samuel makes the pick, if Mike Carey blows his whistle, if whoever was suppose to cover Tyree does their job, or if Tyree's helmet didnt turn into a cowhide magnet Randy Moss is the guy that caught the game winning TD to finish the perfect season.

 

[RobertWeathers]

If Asante Samuel makes the pick, if Mike Carey blows his whistle, if whoever was suppose to cover Tyree does their job, or if Tyree's helmet didnt turn into a cowhide magnet Randy Moss is the guy that caught the game winning TD to finish the perfect season.

...and Brady doesnt have a high-ankle sprain and Stephen Neal and Kevin Faulk don't get hurt.

At the end of the day, it just wasn't meant to be.

 

[obgod3]

LaFell and Edelman. Who is the third? Amendola? Tyms?



Have you even watched the last 4 weeks? You think Brady is playing like he is if the OL wasn't playing better?

so we are still at it, LOL

First let me say I do thinkt eh O line is playing better, but against what? Ok so really your going to compare any of those teams to Denver? Serious. Cincy looks like a pretender, Bears...come on...Jets..dont tell me you were not worried there...Ill give you buffalo.

Im a lifetime Pats fan, grew up back there but I live in Denver, been to most of the games this year here in Denver, they are really frigin good, they got basically 7 new/or guys returned from injuries etc. last year on their defense. Wait till you see how fast Marshall and the entire defense is, Talib is playing lights out, Miller and Ware, leading the NFL in sacks.

Look I hope I eat crow on this next week.

But there are still way more important issues to address than WR. Obviously we dont agree.

 

[obgod3]

If worms had machine guns birds wouldn't screw with them...what if's

 

[obgod3]

Done im out, not talking Vjax anymore.

been fun, have a good day guys.

 

[West Philly Patriot]

I'm convinced the memory of patriots fans who talk like this is limited to 1 week at a time.

Now, we have 3 "really good" WR's. Lol.

When the offense reverts back to the mean, which it likely will at some point, the same questions will be there. Having outside WR(s)that can beat their guy 1-1 to give Brady an option when there seemingly are none. This is usually a requirement against tougher defenses like the ones we will see in the playoffs. We saw this every year for the last 3 seasons or so.

1) Lafell has been pretty damn good, I'm fine with him as a WR2.

2) I'm not convinced Edelman's best spot is outside the hashes.

3)Tyms is a Kenny Stills type, still learning to be a complete receiver.

4) Dobson is a complete non factor

5) Amendola is a KR/PR specialist

6) Slater is a ST'er

 

[Deus Irae]

...and Brady doesnt have a high-ankle sprain and Stephen Neal and Kevin Faulk don't get hurt.

At the end of the day, it just wasn't meant to be.

Yep. The "Moss didn't help win a SB" argument is specious. By that logic:

Brady didn't win in 2007
A good running game didn't win in 2007
A quality OL didn't win in 2007
Great overall receiving didn't win in 2007
A great DL didn't win in 2007
Quality LBs didn't win in 2007
A quality secondary didn't win it in 2007

So, again, by the "2007" logic, it's time for the Patriot to cut everyone who's not a tight end, because the Patriots didn't win the SB in 2007, and they had everything but TEs.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Forgetting one ...

If Belichick/Weiss and Brady had listened to John Madden .............

 

[JMC00]

I just am completely baffled that there are people adamantly against bringing in Jackson if there isn't a worthwhile DL or LB out there.

So because BB can't find a DL or LB he isn't allowed to improve another area? An area that helps Brady, which helps the offense, which helps the defense a little bit.

 

[Ivan]

I just am completely baffled that there are people adamantly against bringing in Jackson if there isn't a worthwhile DL or LB out there.

So because BB can't find a DL or LB he isn't allowed to improve another area? An area that helps Brady, which helps the offense, which helps the defense a little bit.

I would take him, I would just prefer a front 7 defender, but ultimately all that matters is how much any addition helps them win, as well as the price. I certainly won't be upset if he ends up in Foxboro though.