This Week's Trade and Eliminating a Fatal Flaw

pencilneckgeek said:

Brady locks onto one receiver when he doesn't trust his protection. Edelman and Gronk win most of their one-on-ones, so they are rightly the first reads, but they regularly get balls that are tough to catch when someone else is wide open. Tom will certainly be more inclined to go through his reads this year with 4-5 guys who can get open on any play, but if the offensive line doesn't hold-up, he'll won't be able to get through those reads.

Jays set aside the OL issue early on, but I think that remains the weakest link. Did Cannon ever step inside to G last night? Kline literally fell on his face in pass protection last night, and while he may do as well as Mankins in pass protection, he's not going to run block as well, so 3rd and 3 just became 3rd and 5. Stork might replace Wendell, but the weak point of the offense didn't really get stronger. Thankfully, just about everything else on offense (except the GOAT) did, and our defense is even more improved.

PS Agree on Browner. He might have been the next surprise cut, if he didn't have 4 weeks during which one of the younger CBs can learn to be our 2nd or 3rd best safety.

Click to expand...

Not so much with the Browner part, but I am in 100% agreement with everything above it.

Zeus said:

The Browner situation is interesting. Are others playing ahead of him based on performance or based on his unavailability for weeks 1-4? There's not much guaranteed money in his contract.

Click to expand...

I had this same thought. His salary is guaranteed for this year regardless of whether he is on the roster or not, so there's no harm in keeping him around until Week 4 and deciding then.

VrabelJr said:

I realize my initial post was a bit harsh so I wanted to thank you for taking the time to write all of this and hope you write more thoughts like this again.

My snark was trying to emphasize how tired I am of hearing people say "Cannon will be a guard!" for the last 3-4 years. It hasn't happened and it isn't happening, just like that 1st or 2nd round pick some people thought we were getting for Mallett.

Click to expand...

Kudos on taking your beating like a gentleman.

Deus Irae said:

Every offense can be shut down. Every defense can be lit up. Because the Patriots have been one-sided and/or injured, we've been forced to see what happens when teams limit that offense. I think that's led a lot of people here to forget what happened a couple of times to the 'great' Patriots defenses during the SB years, and to the off games that even teams like the 2000 Ravens (36 points to the Jaguars) and 1985 Bears (38 points to the Dolphins) had.

Click to expand...

Quoted for truth. The 1999 Rams were held to 11 points in the NFCCG. The 2003 Patriots allowed 29 points in the Super Bowl. Does anyone think either of those units weren't among the best in the league in their respective seasons?

There is a unit to stop any other unit every year. Sometimes you get lucky and avoid that bad match up, sometimes another unit steps up and sometimes you're just SOL.

Not that I disagree with Jays assertion in any way. The rhetoric around needing another Randy Moss to elevate NE's offense to championship level has driven me crazy for years. Not only is there the obvious point that Moss at his peak didn't lead NE to a SB victory, but what team needed a historically great WR to win the championship lately? A collection of 5 good receivers can be just as effective.

Oswlek said:

The rhetoric around needing another Randy Moss to elevate NE's offense to championship level has driven me crazy for years. Not only is there the obvious point that Moss at his peak didn't lead NE to a SB victory, but what team needed a historically great WR to win the championship in recent years? A collection of 5 good receivers can be just as effective.

Click to expand...

Word.
Unsaid but I think you implied it is that you need a smart QB who can read the D and using that read, go through the correct sequence of progressions before throwing to the open man. We have that QB.

Some thoughts in response:

1. Mankins leaving won't do much to the pass blocking, but it's apt to diminish run blocking substantially.

2. Replacing Wendell with somebody who can pass block is also apt to diminish the run blocking.

3. A fullback may be good compensation for diminished OL run blocking.

4. It's not obvious to me why you said, in effect, "If a team has a lot of big DBs, let's throw a lot of big receivers at them." Is this in hope that our big guys outnumber their big guys, and we get a size mismatch SOMEWHERE?

My first thought would be more in terms of throwing the wiggle guys at the teams with big DBs, and the big guys at the teams emphasizing quick pygmies. But in the red zone I guess I can see size trumping everything else.

But yes, being able to throw a LOT of big guys onto the field at once can stress a defense.

5. I agree completely about the importance of redundancy ... and also about the irreplaceability of Gronk.

6. All depth notwithstanding, we can only play six eligible receivers at once. If four of them are Brady, Gronk, an RB and Develin, then we can only add two of Edelman & Amendola, Dobson & Thompkins, LaFell & Wright. Leave Develin out and we can play three of those guys, but then how threatening is our run game?

Fencer said:

Some thoughts in response:

1. Mankins leaving won't do much to the pass blocking, but it's apt to diminish run blocking substantially.

6. All depth notwithstanding, we can only play six eligible receivers at once. If four of them are Brady, Gronk, an RB and Develin, then we can only add two of Edelman & Amendola, Dobson & Thompkins, LaFell & Wright. Leave Develin out and we can play three of those guys, but then how threatening is our run game?

Click to expand...

1) Thanks for mentioning this. While all the talking heads were blabbing on about Brady, they seemed to forget that Mankins hasn't been a plus pass protector for years. It's run blocking that will take a hit.

6) I'm not sure why you find the removal of Develin to be a big problem for the rushing attack. NE has had a great deal of success running out of a 2WR/2TE/1RB set for some time now. Are you implying that the team will need to rely on a FB to make up for Mankins' absence?

Oswlek said:

Are you implying that the team will need to rely on a FB to make up for Mankins' absence?

Click to expand...

And Wendell's, if he's absent too.