Patriots 2015 Off-Seaon Free Agency Rumors

Our front seven is a hell of a lot better than it was in 2011. I know that for sure. We can still be a top 10 defense (depending on which stats you use to determine that) even with our current CBs.

Rob0729 said:

Actually, the good news is the Pats don't face many good QBs this season. Only really face Luck, the Mannings (if one or both aren't toast), Roethlisberger, Romo, and Tannehill (depending on which Tannehill shows up).

Click to expand...

Yea. Not as deep as last year's but still strong.

VrabelJr said:

Our front seven is a hell of a lot better than it was in 2011. I know that for sure. We can still be a top 10 defense (depending on which stats you use to determine that) even with our current CBs.

Click to expand...

On the 2011 defense you can count two players that played at a ProBowl level.

On the 2015 D you can count 5-6

robertweathers said:

On the 2011 defense you can count two players that played at a ProBowl level.

On the 2015 D you can count 5-6

Click to expand...

Plus we get to see Easley, Chris Jones, Siliga, Harmon, Butler and Ryan continue to develop.

A lot of people around here are underrating continuity.

Branch,Siliga blow Kyle Love out of the water.

scott99 said:

This may be proof that measurables don't mean ****. His pro day, 4.44 forty, 40 inch verticle, 10'7" long jump, measured at 6'0" and 200 pounds. You would think he wouldn't be so horrible with those measurables.

Click to expand...

It took Bradley Fletchers workout numbers to tell you that measurable don't necessarily translate to on field success?








Just food for thought but they could also be the reason why Bill brought him in. Player with great measurable, and previous success who struggled when asked to do to much. Might be a player who could benefit from a reduced role and some New England coaching.

slash83 said:

Here's my response, go look it up. I didn't say anything about winning, winning is the end result but hey if your okay with getting carved up by mediocre qbs then to each his own.

Click to expand...

That is a misnomer. The Pats give up a lot of yards to mediocre QBs in the past, but not a lot of points.

I will go through the 2011 season which was arguably the worst secondary in the recent era and pick out the mediocre QBs:

Week 1 - Chad Henne, 416 yards, 2 TDs, 1 INT - one TD was from a drive that started on the New England 9 yard line and the other was in garbage time when the Pats were up 38-17 with less than 4 minutes left in the game. And the Dolphins punted 6 times (4 three and outs) and lost a drive on downs Pats won 38-24, but if you look at the statline, Henne ate the Pats alive.

Week 3 - Ryan Fitzpatrick had a good game 369 yards, 2 TDs, and 2 INTs, but the story of the game was Brady's 4 INTs. Bills win 34-31

Week 4 - Jason Campbell 344 yards, 1 TD, 2 INTs. Enough said. Pats 31-19

Week 5 - Mark Sanchez 166 yards, 2 TDs. One of the TDs started on the Pats' 20 yard line. Pats win 30-21

Week 10 - Mark Sanchez 306 yards, 1 TD, 2 INTs Sanchez completes about 50% of his passes. Pats win 37-16

Week 11 - Tyler Palko 230 yards, 0 TDs, 3 INTs Pats win 34-3

Week 12 - Vince Young 400 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT. The Eagles come out on fire and get a 10-0 lead. Score one more field goal in the first half and don't score again until garbage time when the Pats are up by 25 points. Pats win 38-16

Week 13 - Dan Orlosky - 353 yards, 2 TDs, 1 INT. Both TDs came in garbage time late in the fourth (both with less than 2:30 left in the game) when the Pats were up by 3 TDs. Pats win 31-24

Week 14 - Rex Grossman and Brandon Banks - 301 yards, 3 TDs, 1 INT (Banks got a 49 yard TD pass as a WR on a trick play. Doesn't really count for a QB, but I will count it here). Pats win 34-27

Week 15 - Tim Tebow - 194 yards, 0 TDs, 0 INTs. A typical Tebow game. Pats win 41-23

Week 16 - Matt Moore 281 yards, 3 TDs, 1 INT. Good game by him, but Pats win 27-24

Week 17 - Ryan Fitzpatrick 307 yards, 2 TDs, 4 INTs - And the Pats pulled a lot of their starters. Pats win 49-21

So yes, there were a few mediocre to bad QBs who got the best of the Pats' secondary, but most got yards but not points.

robertweathers said:

Yea. Not as deep as last year's but still strong.

Click to expand...

Eh! I don't think the QBs they are facing are all that good. I still think Peyton may be done. Tannehill is eratic. But for argument sake, say they all are good QBs. That is still 7 out of 16 games. Only Luck is elite (unless Peyton rebounds). And only Ben and Romo are other ones in the top 5-10 range.

I think the Pats as of right now look to have it pretty easy in terms of QB competition. Might be one of the easiest schedules based on what QBs they are facing in the league. Granted come during the season it could be far harder or easier than we expect right now. But the Pats have a very weak schedule on paper in terms of QBs they are facing.

slash83 said:

But I get you and your type I really do, your the type of fan that will walk head on into traffic if BB told you it was good for you.

Click to expand...

Assuming Bill knows more than I do about football means I would walk into traffic if he said so? You realize how stupid that sounds, right?

Rob0729 said:

That is a misnomer. The Pats give up a lot of yards to mediocre QBs in the past, but not a lot of points.

Click to expand...

Absolutely true. In 2011, NE was the only team in the entire league not to allow more than 27 offensive points in a game. Yes, that is 100% true. The only other team to accomplish that feat in the regular season was San Fran, but New Orleans broke into the 30s in their Divisional game.

There simply is no justification for the whole "Tom Brady has to go out and score 38 points to win!" narrative. Sure, you can find random examples like Buffalo in 2011 (when Brady threw four picks and the team stupidly kept throwing in running situations despite running out to a 21-0 lead) and the 2006 AFCCG. But you can find just as many from the great defensive seasons, including two (38-30 against TN and 32-29 in the SB) with the consensus best defense in team history. Even that 2006 loss happened with the defense that allowed a franchise low in points.

slash83 said:

Actually I did respond. Nobody is crying about passing yards, it's frustrating win or lose watching crap qbs look like hall of fame players. But I get you and your type I really do, your the type of fan that will walk head on into traffic if BB told you it was good for you.

Click to expand...

Clearly you know your argument is crap because you decide to criticize me for valuing winning.

What it comes down to is you criticize Belichicks scheme and philosophy.
The point is that you are ignorant to what matters because you care more about how many fantasy points are put up rather than whether your team wins.
I will take a 500 yard passing day from Mark Sanchez and a win over a 50 yard passing day from Aaron Rodgers and a loss.
I get you and your type too. Fantasy football fans.

Here is a hint for you. When you are on the side of criticizing the greatest coach of his generation and claiming those who disagree with you think he is flawless, you end up being wrong a lot more than you are right.

Rob0729 said:

You are talking 3-4 years ago to talk about today? Well, we can chock the Giants game as a loss even if they had Revis because the Giants alway beat the Pats no matter who is playing. Revis isn't going to change that. Should deactivate Brady and Gronk for those games. The past for predicting the future is always 100%.

And even if we do look at the past. Some of these scrub QBs got tons of yards in the past, but the Pats still were pretty good in points allowed those years. This past year the Pats were 13th in points allowed with Revis and Browner, they were 15th in 2011 with a horrible secondary, 9th in 2012 and didn't have Talib until midseason (and his play was overrated that year), 8th in points allowed in 2010, and 5th in points allowed in 2009. So even with crappy secondaries, the Pats historically haven't given up a lot of points.

Click to expand...

That doesn't matter. Team record is not a fantasy football category.

slash83 said:

Actually I did respond. Nobody is crying about passing yards, it's frustrating win or lose watching crap qbs look like hall of fame players. But I get you and your type I really do, your the type of fan that will walk head on into traffic if BB told you it was good for you.

Click to expand...

Dosent surprise me that you are not concerned about winning. Winners get addicted to winning. Losers...well......

Rob0729 said:

Eh! I don't think the QBs they are facing are all that good. I still think Peyton may be done. Tannehill is eratic. But for argument sake, say they all are good QBs. That is still 7 out of 16 games. Only Luck is elite (unless Peyton rebounds). And only Ben and Romo are other ones in the top 5-10 range.

I think the Pats as of right now look to have it pretty easy in terms of QB competition. Might be one of the easiest schedules based on what QBs they are facing in the league. Granted come during the season it could be far harder or easier than we expect right now. But the Pats have a very weak schedule on paper in terms of QBs they are facing.

Click to expand...

1/2 the games vs functional to good QBs is a lot.

Last year the Pats were great at making Dalton, Luck, Orton, Cutler, Stafford, Tannehill, P Manning and Rivers, Cassell look very average. Geno Smith- the most unlikely of the bunch performed pretty well. Only Rodgers and Alex Smith looked like worldbeaters and you can make the case that Rodgers was controlled in the 2nd 1/2.

As or right now, there is a greater chance Luck and other marginal Qbs throwing for 300 and doing well on 3rd down than not. The question is that do these QBs lead their team to a win.

robertweathers said:

1/2 the games vs functional to good QBs is a lot.

Last year the Pats were great at making Dalton, Luck, Orton, Cutler, Stafford, Tannehill, P Manning and Rivers, Cassell look very average. Geno Smith- the most unlikely of the bunch performed pretty well. Only Rodgers and Alex Smith looked like worldbeaters and you can make the case that Rodgers was controlled in the 2nd 1/2.

As or right now, there is a greater chance Luck and other marginal Qbs throwing for 300 and doing well on 3rd down than not. The question is that do these QBs lead their team to a win.

Click to expand...

Nah! Some teams have six games in their own division with functional to good QBs every year. If you are in Minnesota, you face Rodgers, Stafford, and Cutler six games a year. If you are Cleveland, you got Roethlisberger and Flacco and Dalton (who is middle of the pack). If you the Raiders, you have Manning, Rivers, and Smith for six games every year. And that is before you even go outside the division.

Most teams have at least two QBs in their division who are functional to great. The Pats have one and he is closer to functional than great. That means most teams automatically have four game against functional to great QBs and are likely to have at least 3-4 more in out of division games. Having seven games vs. functional to great QBs is pretty standard.

Rob0729 said:

Nah! Some teams have six games in their own division with functional to good QBs every year. If you are in Minnesota, you face Rodgers, Stafford, and Cutler six games a year. If you are Cleveland, you got Roethlisberger and Flacco and Dalton (who is middle of the pack). If you the Raiders, you have Manning, Rivers, and Smith for six games every year. And that is before you even go outside the division.

Most teams have at least two QBs in their division who are functional to great. The Pats have one and he is closer to functional than great. That means most teams automatically have four game against functional to great QBs and are likely to have at least 3-4 more in out of division games. Having seven games vs. functional to great QBs is pretty standard.

Click to expand...

let hope the bad to functional don't become good.

robertweathers said:

let hope the bad to functional don't become good.

Click to expand...

Everything right now is all guessing. Educated guessing, but still guessing. Luck could get injured and miss the game all together. Geno Smith could have a magical rebirth in a new system. We have no idea of what will actually happen this season.

For whatever freakish reason Geno Smith plays great against us.

VectorPrime said:

For whatever freakish reason Geno Smith plays great against us.

Click to expand...

He did ok vs NE. Last 4 game of the year he played well overall.

If he can continue to mature and evolve into a leader, with Marshall and more additions to the offense he might be ok next year.

AndyJohnson said:

Clearly you know your argument is crap because you decide to criticize me for valuing winning.

What it comes down to is you criticize Belichicks scheme and philosophy.
The point is that you are ignorant to what matters because you care more about how many fantasy points are put up rather than whether your team wins.
I will take a 500 yard passing day from Mark Sanchez and a win over a 50 yard passing day from Aaron Rodgers and a loss.
I get you and your type too. Fantasy football fans.

Here is a hint for you. When you are on the side of criticizing the greatest coach of his generation and claiming those who disagree with you think he is flawless, you end up being wrong a lot more than you are right.

Click to expand...

I've never played fantasy football but nice try.