I think a lot of people are of the frame of mind that the Patriots are one big playmaker away from winning the Superbowl.
There does seem to be some difference of opinion as to whether that playmaker needs to be on offense (i.e., Mike Wallace) or defense (i.e., Mario Williams).
Either way, I think it is a legitimate viewpoint. Yes the Pats need to be mindful of the cap and they have their own guys to take care of this year and down the road. But if adding just one more high impact guy could get you over the hump to being a Superbowl champion again, you do that, right?
So I think the Chicken Littles are overreacting a little by saying that the sky is falling just because the Pats didn't hand out wads of money on the first day of free agency. But I also think the opposite end of the spectrum--the people who are saying that the Pats don't need to do anything substantial in free agency--may also be wrong. There's a time to be bold and perhaps this is that time.
I disagree with this thinking (the one player away).
Teams change every year. Strengths and weaknesses can change even with very little turnover.
Gettng the best 53 players on the roster is still a better approach that getting one guy to handle one job that you were weak at last year, and hoping you don't digress elsewhere.
Thinking that adding one pass rushers to the defense means everything is the same and the QB has less time to throw, so the team is better, ignores that our of 25 or so players on the defensive roster as many as half of them will be turned over.
At one point early in the BB years, and I think it was 2000, there was a line of questioning from reporters about replacing the pieces that were here in 1996. And BBs response basically was that you never chase and old roster when building a new roster, because the pieces will never fit together the same way.
I have no problem that Bills fans come here on March 14th pounding their chest about how they think they are going to have 2 good new players and pretending that 2 players translate to wins and losses. Apparently they aren't even getting them, but if they had those 2 result in a weakening of the other 51.
Too many fans (and media) are only interested in a cursory analysis of a team, and end up basing their opinion of the quality of a team on the 5 most well known players on the roster. That is why EVERY season the media annoints a new king of the hill based on FA signings, and every single year they turn out wrong.
