Anyone nervous about Moss' effectiveness...

[JoeSixPat]

I think when we're talking about Moss' effectiveness in the context of the original question in the thread its not a question of wondering whether he'll have another big season, with plenty of receptions, yards, and TDs....

It's a question of, when the game is on the line, and Brady absolutely must complete a deep pass, will he have a viable option OTHER than a triple teamed Moss?

Last season the answer was a resounding "No"

If there IS another credible deep threat and the answer is "Yes" - then Defenses aren't able to devote their dime coverage near exclusively on Moss they way they did, especially towards the end of the season and in the playoffs.

And by doing so Moss need not contend with a triple team in that situation quite so often - and therefore has the opportunity to be MORE EFFECTIVE in critical situations.

I don't know why any Patriots fan WOULDN'T want to see that happen but indeed this topic is apparently one of the most controversial on the board.

All that being said, can the Patriots, with Moss as the only credible consistent deep threat who will certainly face more than his share of double and triple teams, contend for the Super Bowl? Absolutely. Defenses caught on towards the end of last season and they still almost brought home the Lombardi.

But would any fan prefer to see Moss's overall numbers go down next year if that meant that he had a credible deep WR on the other side of him that drew at least some coverage away from him to make him that much more effective in critical situations? I'd think the overwhelming response from PatsFans should be "yes".

 

[Deus Irae]

I think when we're talking about Moss' effectiveness in the context of the original question in the thread its not a question of wondering whether he'll have another big season, with plenty of receptions, yards, and TDs....

It's a question of, when the game is on the line, and Brady absolutely must complete a deep pass, will he have a viable option OTHER than a triple teamed Moss?

Last season the answer was a resounding "No"

If there IS another credible deep threat and the answer is "Yes" - then Defenses aren't able to devote their dime coverage near exclusively on Moss they way they did, especially towards the end of the season and in the playoffs.

And by doing so Moss need not contend with a triple team in that situation quite so often - and therefore has the opportunity to be MORE EFFECTIVE in critical situations.

I don't know why any Patriots fan WOULDN'T want to see that happen but indeed this topic is apparently one of the most controversial on the board.

All that being said, can the Patriots, with Moss as the only credible consistent deep threat who will certainly face more than his share of double and triple teams, contend for the Super Bowl? Absolutely. Defenses caught on towards the end of last season and they still almost brought home the Lombardi.

But would any fan prefer to see Moss's overall numbers go down next year if that meant that he had a credible deep WR on the other side of him that drew at least some coverage away from him to make him that much more effective in critical situations? I'd think the overwhelming response from PatsFans should be "yes".

Here we go again with the same disproved song and dance....

 

[fair catch fryar]

To answer you initial question..umm...no. What does make me nervous and always has me the most concerned is the ability to keep Brady upright. I know our O-line is considered one of the best in the business right now, but I can't help but have horrific flashbacks to the Superbowl. That sh!t can't be allowed to happen again. As tough as Brady has shown he can be, that kind of pounding would eventually catch up to anyone.

 

[NJPatsfan26]

To answer you initial question..umm...no. What does make me nervous and always has me the most concerned is the ability to keep Brady upright. I know our O-line is considered one of the best in the business right now, but I can't help but have horrific flashbacks to the Superbowl. That sh!t can't be allowed to happen again. As tough as Brady has shown he can be, that kind of pounding would eventually catch up to anyone.

Yeah thats true. I am really worried about him going down again. The SB proved that any team can bring down Brady when they have the chance. As long as our O-line comes out strong, we will be fine.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Here we go again with the same disproved song and dance....

I think I'll leave it to others to convince you that neither Gaffney, nor Faulk, nor Welker, nor Maroney is considered a credible and consistent deep threat opposite Moss this time.

I strongly disagree with your statement that ANY of our players - TEs or WRs or RBs - are considered a viable deep threats by opposing Ds.

Nor does the statistic that you cite of our offense being ranked #1 help Moss see fewer triple team coverages in critical situations.

Belichick understands the falacy of statistics - that's why he cut the #1 WR from the #6 ranked offense in 2006 and dramatically improved the team.

 

[SeanBruschi54]

I think I'll leave it to others to convince you that neither Gaffney, nor Faulk, nor Welker, nor Maroney is considered a credible and consistent deep threat opposite Moss this time.

I strongly disagree with your statement that ANY of our players - TEs or WRs or RBs - are considered a viable deep threats by opposing Ds.

Nor does the statistic that you cite of our offense being ranked #1 help Moss see fewer triple team coverages in critical situations.

Belichick understands the falacy of statistics - that's why he cut the #1 WR from the #6 ranked offense in 2006 and dramatically improved the team.

Chad Jackson has deep threat written all over him if his head is screwed on straight.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Okay a couple of things:

- Early on, Moss was an "eh maybe he's special maybe he's back" story. People were hoping against hope that he "really" was the guy who could be covered like any other wideout that they all prophesized about going into the year. You know - he's soft, he lost a step, etc.

- yes weather caught up to him late in the season.

- Whoever used the phrase "played a factor" FUGGIN STOP IT! MAKE IT STOP! nothing "plays a factor." THings "play a role" or "play a part" in something, or things "are a factor" in something. There is no theatrical role called a "factor." There is no position on a team called a "factor." There is no musical instrument called a "factor." YOU CAN NOT "PLAY" A FACTOR! (by the way though nobody did it, there is no such thing as a "receiving core"... I have seen "corps" here more than once, which is CORRECT, and beamed with pride at my fellow Pats fans.)

- I know I was being a prick (above.) No need to tell me.

- How about this: We determine the percentage of time we get the ball to Moss, and disregard everything else in a game, and publicize it. We could call it the "Randy Ratio". Since Randy is so key to our success, it logically follows that getting him the ball a certain proportion of plays will guarantee victory.

- Nobody repeats a 23-TD hookup. It does not happen. Moss drops down to the teens or even (though unlikely) the single digits. Horrors. Last year was a one-off performance, people.

- Drop him down to 13 TDs, and that still puts him at the top of the receiving ranks, and hold all else constant, and Tom's got 40 TDs through the air... in a more balanced attack.

I have zero worry about Moss' almost guaranteed declining effectiveness. I do not have much concern that we don't clinch our division early. I'm not terribly worried about the 16-game season part... this sort of sucks in a way, but it's a nice problem to have. Certainly better than the alternative.

I do worry that it's hard to stay healthy, it's hard to make it back, and it's hard to win game after game after game against the elite teams in the National Football League -- so I am VERY worried that we will not win Super Bowl XLIII. I think the odds in Vegas are running 2-1 against us as of now.

But that's a whole-team worry, not a Moss worry. Plus, he's given us all a new rooting interest in NASCAR, if we want it.

PFnV

 

[Deus Irae]

I think I'll leave it to others to convince you that neither Gaffney, nor Faulk, nor Welker, nor Maroney is considered a credible and consistent deep threat opposite Moss this time.

I strongly disagree with your statement that ANY of our players - TEs or WRs or RBs - are considered a viable deep threats by opposing Ds.

Nor does the statistic that you cite of our offense being ranked #1 help Moss see fewer triple team coverages in critical situations.

Belichick understands the falacy of statistics - that's why he cut the #1 WR from the #6 ranked offense in 2006 and dramatically improved the team.

1.) The statistics weren't fallacious.

2.) Belichick understands talent and how to use it. That's why players whom you insist aren't "deep threats" are able to become deep threats.

3.) No matter how many times you try to make this argument, you won't be correct.

 

[JoeSixPat]

1.) The statistics weren't fallacious.

2.) Belichick understands talent and how to use it. That's why players whom you insist aren't "deep threats" are able to become deep threats.

3.) No matter how many times you try to make this argument, you won't be correct.

I'm not even sure what "argument" you're talking about anymore.

I've simply said that we didn't have a credible deep threat alternative to Moss last season and I hope we have one this season. Apparently that's controversial in your eyes?

Most folks around here accept that as fact and don't really buy your contention that DC's are keeping safeties held back, and away from Moss because they're worried about Faulk, Maroney or Gaffney burning them deep.

 

[Deus Irae]

I'm not even sure what "argument" you're talking about anymore.

I've simply said that we didn't have a credible deep threat alternative to Moss last season and I hope we have one this season. Apparently that's controversial in your eyes?

Most folks around here accept that as fact and don't really buy your contention that DC's are keeping safeties held back, and away from Moss because they're worried about Faulk, Maroney or Gaffney burning them deep.

You do love to move the goalposts of your argument, don't you?

 

[JoeSixPat]

You do love to move the goalposts of your argument, don't you?

Neither I, nor anyone else here knows or cares what you're talking about anymore... though it is interesting you don't even attempt to address the issue that's being discussed.

I'm saying neither Faulk, Maroney, Welker or Gaffeny is a deep threat WR.

You clearly disagree. If you'd care to elaborate please do so.

 

[Deus Irae]

Neither I, nor anyone else here knows or cares what you're talking about anymore... though it is interesting you don't even attempt to address the issue that's being discussed.

I'm saying neither Faulk, Maroney, Welker or Gaffeny is a deep threat WR.

You clearly disagree. If you'd care to elaborate please do so.

We've been through this before. Any receiver in the NFL is capable of getting deep. Your very argument disproves itself. You insist that the Patriots had only Moss as a deep threat last season and, in doing so, simply dismiss the number of deep receptions made by other players on the team. You insist Gaffney, for example, isn't a deep threat, yet he scored on that long bomb in the Pittsburgh game.

Now, tell me all about the 'deep threat' that Michael Irvin posed for the Cowboys' dynasty.

 

[JoeSixPat]

We've been through this before. Any receiver in the NFL is capable of getting deep. Your very argument disproves itself. You insist that the Patriots had only Moss as a deep threat last season and, in doing so, simply dismiss the number of deep receptions made by other players on the team. You insist Gaffney, for example, isn't a deep threat, yet he scored on that long bomb in the Pittsburgh game.

Now, tell me all about the 'deep threat' that Michael Irvin posed for the Cowboys' dynasty.

Thank you.

As they say on the big show - you're making my point.

We just need to get your theories about any player being a deep threat accepted by defensive coordinators so they'll accept the "proven" fact that Kevin Faulk and Lawrence Maroney are just as much of a deep threat as Randy Moss!

 

[dhamz]

No player on the roster is going to draw deep coverage from Moss. No one on last year's roster was going to either. Chad Johnson might (he probably wouldn't but DC's would at least think about it) but he isn't walking through that door. Moss is the greatest deep threat in the history of football. He is going to get a safety over the top week in, week out no matter if it was Stallworth, Gaffney, Washington, or Jackson across from him.

What is needed opposite Moss is guys to take adavantage of the coverage he is going to draw. Last year, that spot opposite Moss contributed 82 catches, 1146 yards, and 8 TDs. Those are big numbers for the player or players manning that spot in 08 to match.

 

[JoeSixPat]

No player on the roster is going to draw deep coverage from Moss. No one on last year's roster was going to either. Chad Johnson might (he probably wouldn't but DC's would at least think about it) but he isn't walking through that door. Moss is the greatest deep threat in the history of football. He is going to get a safety over the top week in, week out no matter if it was Stallworth, Gaffney, Washington, or Jackson across from him.

What is needed opposite Moss is guys to take adavantage of the coverage he is going to draw. Last year, that spot opposite Moss contributed 82 catches, 1146 yards, and 8 TDs. Those are big numbers for the player or players manning that spot in 08 to match.

That's pretty defeatist. You mean there's nothing that can be done, no play nor scheme that can be run, in any conceivable situation that under any circumstnaces that would cause a team to drop a triple coverage on Moss to a double coverage?

 

[dhamz]

That's pretty defeatist. You mean there's nothing that can be done, no play nor scheme that can be run, in any conceivable situation that under any circumstnaces that would cause a team to drop a triple coverage on Moss to a double coverage?

No, there is nothing that can be done to make anyone else the deep focus of the opposing defense. There never has been in his entire career. He never has and never will play with a guy who will concern the other team more deep.

And yet he is still the most effective and productive deep WR of all time because he is just that damn good. He beats the coverage repeatedly and when the opposing defense does switch up and he has the opporunity against "regular" coverage, he takes advantage.

 

[JoeSixPat]

No, there is nothing that can be done to make anyone else the deep focus of the opposing defense. There never has been in his entire career. He never has and never will play with a guy who will concern the other team more deep.

And yet he is still the most effective and productive deep WR of all time because he is just that damn good. He beats the coverage repeatedly and when the opposing defense does switch up and he has the opporunity against "regular" coverage, he takes advantage.

Amazing. I'm going to have to go back and watch game tape to see if he was triple covered on every play.

You're joking right?

Seriously - how did you go from a discussion of having one other legitimate deep recevier who might pull one of three guys off of Moss in a passing situation to needing someone who will be better than Moss and become the focus of the opposing defense?

 

[Xzibit23]

That's pretty defeatist. You mean there's nothing that can be done, no play nor scheme that can be run, in any conceivable situation that under any circumstnaces that would cause a team to drop a triple coverage on Moss to a double coverage?

The way you fight against Moss double teams is by beating the defense underneath where there isnt safety help because of Moss, which Welker routinely did last year. Thats why, at times, teams decided to pick and choose when to double Moss and didnt do it all the time, they realized they were being burnt with short passes and, towards the end, Maroney as well. The poster who said you can't negate the doubles on Moss by adding another deep threat is correct. Moss is BY FAR the best deep threat in the NFL, he stands alone and will almost always carry the safety with him on deep routes.

 

[JoeSixPat]

The way you fight against Moss double teams is by beating the defense underneath where there isnt safety help because of Moss, which Welker routinely did last year. Thats why, at times, teams decided to pick and choose when to double Moss and didnt do it all the time, they realized they were being burnt with short passes and, towards the end, Maroney as well. The poster who said you can't negate the doubles on Moss by adding another deep threat is correct. Moss is BY FAR the best deep threat in the NFL, he stands alone and will almost always carry the safety with him on deep routes.

You want to end double teams against Moss? Good luck.

When talking about Moss's effectiveness I'm more interested in just limiting the situation where he's triple teamed in deep passing situations (i.e. where a defense would gladly give up a defense would GLADLY give up a short pass and then converge.)

I'm sure towards the end of the Super Bowl the Giants defense would have happilly allowed themselves to be "beat" with a short pass. They certainly had Moss well covered though.

Having a credible deep threat on the opposite side would be a big help in that sitution both in terms of providing an alternative deep option or keeping defenses honest in covering the additional deep threat - but again I know that's a pretty "out there" theory.

Can Chad Jackson provide that deep threat? I'm hoping he can.

 

[Deus Irae]

Thank you.

As they say on the big show - you're making my point.

We just need to get your theories about any player being a deep threat accepted by defensive coordinators so they'll accept the "proven" fact that Kevin Faulk and Lawrence Maroney are just as much of a deep threat as Randy Moss!

I'm not making your point. It's not my fault that you can't can't grasp the obvious. Here, maybe this will help.....

A comparison between the 2007 Patriots and the 1998 Vikings:

Brady played one regular season game more than Cunningham, but the one game difference at QB doesn't ruin the comparison since the numbers are for the receivers:

20+ yard pass plays:

Vikings - 55, Moss had 20, Carter had 13, Reed 6

Patriots - 56, Moss had 18, Gaffney/Stallworth had 16, Welker 10