Tommy Kelly asked to be released

Deus Irae said:

Easley hadn't seen the field. There's no way the team would have known whether or not Easley was an upgrade to Kelly. Hell, looking at Sunday, he's clearly not one at this time.

Click to expand...

Whether or not it turns out to be so, IMHO Belichick drafted Easley as an upgrade to Kelly, with the starters from last year around until he steps ups (or as alternate starters).

It is NOT the style of Belichick's management to have the replacement in place performing better than the veteran before letting the veteran go. And yes, personally, I would have kept Kelly on the roster.
I suspect that the team had little interest in guaranteeing his salary.

I honestly feel that the Pats will look back some day and say I wish we would have gone all in to get Brady that 4th Super Bowl. Look how many Jags they have playing now. Time is passing BB by he is stuck in the past. Look at Denver and how they manage their Salary Cap. They and are going for it this year, and they aren't in Cap purgatory

Bombdog said:

I honestly feel that the Pats will look back some day and say I wish we would have gone all in to get Brady that 4th Super Bowl. Look how many Jags they have playing now. Time is passing BB by he is stuck in the past. Look at Denver and how they manage their Salary Cap. They and are going for it this year, and they aren't in Cap purgatory

Click to expand...

Fans may wish that the team had a boom or bust plan of action. That is not the way of Kraft.

That being said, we have $16M in cap room. IMHO, we should have used more THIS year. Perhaps, there is not one $8M a year rent a player in the entire league that could have helped us in 2014. Somehow, I think that were one or two available, perhaps including a GUARD. Surely the Mankins decision was not a recent decision based on the great person by Devey, and the faith of Cannon at LG.

mgteich said:

Whether or not it turns out to be so, IMHO Belichick drafted Easley as an upgrade to Kelly, with the starters from last year around until he steps ups (or as alternate starters).

It is NOT the style of Belichick's management to have the replacement in place performing better than the veteran before letting the veteran go. And yes, personally, I would have kept Kelly on the roster.
I suspect that the team had little interest in guaranteeing his salary.

Click to expand...

The salary guarantee is a non factor. You really shouldn't bring that up, as it is fuel for the BB and Kraft are cheap lemmings.
I'm not sure why we are debating that an aging DT coming off a major surgery was deemed not the best guy to keep on the roster. Its really nothing more nefarious or conspiratorial than that. BB chose his team and Kelly wasn't part of it. I'm not sure there is huge room to disagree with that talent assessment at this stage of Kellys career and health.

If we had a DL that could stand up to a run, I'd agree with you Andy. but we don't.

We should have kept Kelly (or brought in a second GOOD DT, or 3-4 DE) and brought in at least one (two if they knew they were dumping Mankins) veteran OL. We could have afforded it easily without being in "go for it now mode." And this isn't hindsight, since I and a lot of others were saying this back in February.

If the Pats don't fix their lines - either through scheme or personnel - I just can't see how they get near the Superbowl this year. I know it's early, but giving up 200 rushing yards to the Dolphins and giving a guy like Tannehill (behind a patchwork OL) all day to throw isn't promising, and certainly the OL wasn't promising, either.

50-yard-line said:

If we had a DL that could stand up to a run, I'd agree with you Andy. but we don't.

Click to expand...

Because we played one game in 90 degree heat and couldnt stop the run in the second half? Do you really think Tommy Kelly would have made a difference? I don't.

We should have kept Kelly (or brought in a second GOOD DT, or 3-4 DE) and brought in at least one (two if they knew they were dumping Mankins) veteran OL. We could have afforded it easily without being in "go for it now mode." And this isn't hindsight, since I and a lot of others were saying this back in February.

Click to expand...

We have Easley, Siliga and Jones who all were either out or playing in their first game after injury.

If the Pats don't fix their lines - either through scheme or personnel - I just can't see how they get near the Superbowl this year. I know it's early, but giving up 200 rushing yards to the Dolphins and giving a guy like Tannehill (behind a patchwork OL) all day to throw isn't promising, and certainly the OL wasn't promising, either.

Click to expand...

It was the first game. Surely you understand that BB teams play varied schemes each week based upon opponent, and that over the course of a season correct many of the issues that arise early on, right?
Tommy Kelly isn't the answer.

patsfan-1982 said:

I wish the guy the best of luck but he was getting blown off the ball in preseason vs back ups so I have no problem with him being gone even after sundays game

Click to expand...

I don't know who you are talking about, but Kelly was stout in pre-season. He failed to generate pass rush, but he looked looked like our 2nd best DT against the run after Wilfork.

PatriotReign said:

Kelly would have certainly been a better asset than Vellano, who needs to find his way off of the roster and out of the NFL.

Click to expand...

Undersized DLman, gritty as hell, willing to do whatever's asked, but doesn't look good doing it. Sounds like somebody the board would love as a backup FB.

50-yard-line said:

I missed the game yesterday - how'd he play?

Click to expand...

Better than Vellano, obviously; a department-store mannequin could've played better than Nice Guy Joey. He filled the gaps, sometimes required double-teaming, and stayed on his feet for the most part. The Doofins would not have been as successful running up the middle if Kelly were there; they would've still been productive overall, but not by quite as much.

mgteich said:

Whether or not it turns out to be so, IMHO Belichick drafted Easley as an upgrade to Kelly, with the starters from last year around until he steps ups (or as alternate starters).

It is NOT the style of Belichick's management to have the replacement in place performing better than the veteran before letting the veteran go. And yes, personally, I would have kept Kelly on the roster.
I suspect that the team had little interest in guaranteeing his salary.

Click to expand...

Why? Did something happen that gave the Pats zero cap room that I'm not aware of? Last I checked, they were relatively flush with cap space. They absolutely could have given Kelly the snaps that the defense as a whole needs while guaranteeing his salary.

AndyJohnson said:

Because we played one game in 90 degree heat and couldnt stop the run in the second half? Do you really think Tommy Kelly would have made a difference? I don't.

We have Easley, Siliga and Jones who all were either out or playing in their first game after injury.

It was the first game. Surely you understand that BB teams play varied schemes each week based upon opponent, and that over the course of a season correct many of the issues that arise early on, right?
Tommy Kelly isn't the answer.

Click to expand...

We'll just agree to disagree. I do think Kelly would have made a difference against the D's run game. Just like last year, even after we lost Wilfork, we were okay against the run...then Kelly went down and that was that.

Easley and Jones aren't great against the run - at least, that was the book on Easley coming out. Siliga is serviceable.

And yeah, they'll adjust. I'm not throwing in the towel or anything, but the move seems boneheaded to me, sorry. They'd have more options and a stouter line WITH Kelly than without.

50-yard-line said:

We'll just agree to disagree. I do think Kelly would have made a difference against the D's run game. Just like last year, even after we lost Wilfork, we were okay against the run...then Kelly went down and that was that.

Click to expand...

Kelly played one more game than Wilfork. We allowed 162 rushing yards in that one.
Again Tommy Kelly isnt the answer, but I understand you want to find someone to blame and make it seem like you are really smart, so you have to pretend the player who wasn't good enough to make the team was a beast and you are smarter than the coach because you knew it.

Easley and Jones aren't great against the run - at least, that was the book on Easley coming out. Siliga is serviceable.

Click to expand...

Siliga played better than Kelly last year, and Kelly wasn't recovering from an ACL tear.

And yeah, they'll adjust. I'm not throwing in the towel or anything, but the move seems boneheaded to me, sorry. They'd have more options and a stouter line WITH Kelly than without.

Click to expand...

Again, disagree. Kelly would have made no difference. He isn't the player you want to pretend he is.

The Patriots got manhandled last Sunday. The idea that Tommy Kelly would have changed that tangibly is dreaming. Would I have rather had Kelly in there instead of JV? Absolutely, however, it was not going to change this game's outcome. This issue Sunday was not just personnel it was also systemic.

Time to relax. This isn't the first egg the Patriots have laid and it won't be their last. Yet history more than indicates the Patriots will correct the issues and return to being highly competitive. Also consider that Siliga had almost no preseason. I'd like to think someone who showed promise last year, then with a full off season of training and maturity, will step in to be a positive next week/the coming weeks.

TheBostonStraggler said:

The Patriots got manhandled last Sunday. The idea that Tommy Kelly would NOT have changed that tangibly is the product of someone who didn't watch the game closely, at all.

Click to expand...

FYP

TheBostonStraggler said:

The Patriots got manhandled last Sunday. The idea that Tommy Kelly would have changed that tangibly is dreaming. Would I have rather had Kelly in there instead of JV? Absolutely, however, it was not going to change this game's outcome. This issue Sunday was not just personnel it was also systemic.

Time to relax. This isn't the first egg the Patriots have laid and it won't be their last. Yet history more than indicates the Patriots will correct the issues and return to being highly competitive. Also consider that Siliga had almost no preseason. I'd like to think someone who showed promise last year, then with a full off season of training and maturity, will step in to be a positive next week/the coming weeks.

Click to expand...

Better run defense would have been nice. Tommy Kelly wouldn't have made it any better. You are severely overrating what Kelly is at this point in his career and injury state.
Its fine though, calling Kelly the savior allows people to both dish out blame and take credit that they know the answer. Very popular around here.

AndyJohnson said:

Kelly played one more game than Wilfork. We allowed 162 rushing yards in that one.
Again Tommy Kelly isnt the answer, but I understand you want to find someone to blame and make it seem like you are really smart, so you have to pretend the player who wasn't good enough to make the team was a beast and you are smarter than the coach because you knew it.

Click to expand...

Well, that was beneath you. I suggest you go and look at my posting history. I almost always defend the coaches and the team, and always recognize that I don't know what I don't know.

In fact, this is the first time I've really been at odds with BB enough to even voice my opinion against his choices. I know what my eyes told me, last year and now after week 1, and IN MY OPINION, Kelly would be a big help to this team at this time, given their personnel at DT right now.

Siliga played better than Kelly last year, and Kelly wasn't recovering from an ACL tear.

Click to expand...

And I disagree strongly. Siliga was a nice surprise, but he wasn't nearly as dominant as Kelly last year. He also suffered a pretty serious injury in preseason and the DT depth behind him is nonexistent.

Again, disagree. Kelly would have made no difference. He isn't the player you want to pretend he is.

Click to expand...

I'm not pretending anything. I'm going by what I saw last year. Our defense was stout for the first few games - we lost Wilfork, Kelly and Mayo and our run-D became wet noodles, and stayed that way for most of the year. All three were part of that.

Kelly wasn't expensive. Kelly is BIG. Kelly can play DE in a 3-4.

If we're not allowed to express disagreement with the coaching staff, albeit with the appropriate caveats (don't have game film, don't know what happens in the locker room, etc.), then what's the point of a fan message board?

And no, I am NOT one of those nitpicking, hypercritical posters, and never have been on here.

Deus Irae said:

FYP

Click to expand...

Ha! You're funny Deus. Look, Tommy Kelly of 2012, his last full year to use as a measuring stick, had .09 sacks a game and 1.6 tackles/1.2 assists a game (statistics that have been largely tailing off).....and those stats are 2 years removed along with one serious injury, one largely missed season, at an old age for NFL standards.
Now apply that to the sound drubbing the Patriots received on the DL and one must stretch reality quite a bit to say Tommy Kelly would have made a tangible difference in Sunday's physical beatdown. Again I definitely would have preferred him over JV but the top of the pyramid and downward failure of last Sunday was way bigger than 'man if we just had Tommy Kelly!' (even without me watching, ahem, the game!).

TheBostonStraggler said:

Ha! You're funny Deus. Look, Tommy Kelly of 2012, his last full year to use as a measuring stick, had .09 sacks a game and 1.6 tackles/1.2 assists a game (statistics that have been largely tailing off).....and those stats are 2 years removed along with one serious injury, one largely missed season, at an old age for NFL standards.
Now apply that to the sound drubbing the Patriots received on the DL and one must stretch reality quite a bit to say Tommy Kelly would have made a tangible difference in Sunday's physical beatdown. Again I definitely would have preferred him over JV but the top of the pyramid and downward failure of last Sunday was way bigger than 'man if we just had Tommy Kelly!' (even without me watching, ahem, the game!).

Click to expand...

The Dolphins took advantage of the fact that the Patriots had no lead on the line beyond Wilfork. If you can't figure out why having a 2nd big body on the line to help Vince would have had a real impact, I don't know what to tell you.

AndyJohnson said:

Better run defense would have been nice. Tommy Kelly wouldn't have made it any better. You are severely overrating what Kelly is at this point in his career and injury state.
Its fine though, calling Kelly the savior allows people to both dish out blame and take credit that they know the answer. Very popular around here.

Click to expand...

I don't think I was overrating Kelly to say I wold have preferred him over JV. I think what it equals is giving JV low marks. I think Kelly is, likely, a decent rotation guy that could even take a greater than average share of snaps if pressed. Yet I do not think that description would have changed the beatdown the Phins laid on the DL and defense in general. The manhandling the Phins gave the DL was far beyond that IMHO. Still, JV looked so over matched that even an aged but likely (relatively) capable veteran would have been an improvement over JV.

It doesn't mean I think we should have kept Kelly, I am not saying that. I don't know enough of the situation to know why he was released......not to mention this is one game. One game does not define a team -- especially game 1 of the season. Further, again, I think Siliga has promise and look forward to seeing him, hopefully, gain some form (due to missing a lot of preseason)

No comment.....

Wait, I will say it again, you can not underestimate what kind of anchor you get from the interior of the defensive line. Last year when VW and TK were playing together healthy, they were game changers.

Now, keep in mind Kelly may not be the same player now, that he was then, nor may VW be for all we know, after his injury. And, with the Pats playing so overall pathetic I am not sure what would have made a difference on Sunday - Not sure if "todays" TK would have been better....With that, BB may have had a good reason to dump TK and I am sure it was not just $. I diddnt like the move, but its done.

Ok, so I had a comment.

Deus Irae said:

The Dolphins took advantage of the fact that the Patriots had no lead on the line beyond Wilfork. If you can't figure out why having a 2nd big body on the line to help Vince would have had a real impact, I don't know what to tell you.

Click to expand...

The Patriots did have a 2nd big body on the field. Siliga of last year proved himself a relatively adequate big body. If you can show me that meant our DL was much more competitive than JV in there, I'll buy into your premise. Yet for all the guesswork -- how about this guesswork: every team in the league may start 2014 Siliga over 2014 Kelly.
Again the Patriots issues were just as much systemic. This was a top down failure. The same personnel that played in Miami will likely play much better when BB and staff shake off the friggin egg they laid -- not to mention getting out of the Florida summer weather. I just relocated to Tampa a month ago from a dry, mild climate in San Jose. I can tell you going out into my yard to work during the day has been a brutally tiring acclimation process. I assume (guess) the same thing happened to the Patriots D.