Welcome to PatsFans.com

165 receptions from 2005 ... GONE

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Sean Pa Patriot, Sep 2, 2006.

  1. Sean Pa Patriot

    Sean Pa Patriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    8,226
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    Deion- 78
    Givens- 59
    Dwight-19
    Davis- 9


    Anyone think we could replace all those..??? Looks like a heavy dose of Dillion Maroney ,and Watson...
  2. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    22,585
    Likes Received:
    135
    Ratings:
    +470 / 18 / -14

    well, first Branch is not exactly gone yet. Secondly the guy who threw all of those passes is still here, and thats a hell of a lot more important than who caught them.

    Brady is going to complete 60+% of his passes no matter who is catching them. We will run the same plays, with the same routes, there will just be someone else catching the ball when Brady delivers it on time and accurately.
    We will be just fine, and no we won't abandon the passing game for 3 yards and a cloud of dust, just because the guys who are going to catch those 165 passes are different than the ones who did last year.
  3. Sean Pa Patriot

    Sean Pa Patriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    8,226
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    I realise that Brady is still here, but where is the deep threat??? I dont think we will see it till the Denver game.. The underneath route will be covered heavily and Brady will not be able to go deep...Brady is great, but he will be hamstrung... And Deion is all but gone...
  4. smg93

    smg93 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,809
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Please, no more talk about "hamstrungs" :D Our deep threat will be availabe soon in Chad Jackson. (I'm hoping sooner rather than later)
  5. Sean Pa Patriot

    Sean Pa Patriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    8,226
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    Does he know what 'deep is" , since he does not know the playbook, according to Tommose.. I know its a long season, but its time to start to be concerned..
  6. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    22,585
    Likes Received:
    135
    Ratings:
    +470 / 18 / -14

    Who was the deep threat last year?
    Why cant Brady go deep? There is no special talent required to run a deep route. You design a play, see coverage that leaves the deep route open, and the WR runs a deep route.
    You sound as if we are replacing Ben Johnson with Raymond Burr.
    Anyone we put on the field at WR is capable of running deep routes. If defenses leave that open Brady will burn them. Whether that is Branch, Childress, Caldwell, Jackson, Brown, Watson, or whoever, there is very little change in our ability to get the ball down the field, and according to Brady he is better at the deep ball after correcting mechanics.

    By the way, do you know how many 'deep balls' we completed last year, or that any team typically completes? One every other game is a lot.

    And by the way, teams cannot just cover underneath and leave the deep pass wide open, because any NFL caliber WR will destroy that coverage.
    Hint: Defenses defend QBs not WRs.
  7. SamBam39

    SamBam39 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    830
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    andy - to be fair you are over simplifying things abit. saying it doesn't matter at all who our receivers are is a little delusional. losing branch and givens without finding at least a similiar level of ability will hurt. right now, it's not clear how we could possible do that. brady or no brady, this is important how this gets resolved.
  8. Sean Pa Patriot

    Sean Pa Patriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    8,226
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey




    Ok see the San Diego game , when Deion Branch was double teamed.. Now you will say we have a better running game, here will be the 8 box defense, and let Brady find the open guy...
  9. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,307
    Likes Received:
    130
    Ratings:
    +241 / 8 / -26

    I agree the sky is not falling, I think this years offense will look a lot different than last years, with the addition of Maroney our running game will be different. With the development of Watson, a true freak, our TE game will be different. Our O-line will be more mature, and probably stronger. Overall, I like Branch and what he brings to the table, however this team is known for developing strategies and adjustments from loss... the most important thing is to resolve it quickly it is becoming a distraction.
  10. zoostation

    zoostation Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    2,032
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    The Patriots (and Brady) understand what D Branch brings to the table. Both sides will come together before the Buffalo game.
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2006
  11. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,555
    Likes Received:
    153
    Ratings:
    +322 / 5 / -5

    Well, if you'll remember, Brady led the NFL in yards last year . . . largely because, for a good portion of the season, there was no running game to speak of. Having a healthy running game should remove a LOT of the burden on Brady, no matter what happens with Deion.
  12. Jimke

    Jimke Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,704
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    If we lose Branch along with all the others, it will definitely

    affect our passing game. Anyone who thinks otherwise is having

    pipe dreams. This is the worst screw up ever during the BB/Pioli

    era. The Pats lose David Givens because they don't want to pay

    him too much and set the bar too high for future negotiations with

    Deon Branch. Now the Branch situation has become an impossible one

    because they let him test the market. To hell with the good value theory.
  13. holyredeemer

    holyredeemer Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    Look, to me, its as simple as this. Branch just doesnt want to be in NE. Thats fine with me, I mean honestly, lets not make him into a receiver that he's not. No need to sacrifice our cap space for a guy that can never play a full season anyway. Branch is an above avg. receiver/good receiver. If he gets jammed at the line, he's screwed. He cant compete for the jump ball, and only avgs. about 12 yds a catch. Remember from 2000-2002 when T. Brown was catching over 80 balls a year? He even actually cracked over a 1,000 yds rec. around that time. Far better production than what Branch has given us, but everybody seems to be in a panic. BB will find someone to throw in there, and someone else will step it up big time. Thats the way it has always worked. Let Branch go, if he doesnt want to be here, than **** em. I am not saying our offense will be better without him, but merely saying that someone else will fill the void as much as it needs to be, and the offense will still get it done, it'll just be different.
    Also, anyone who says that by not having branch we lose our deep threat is REALLY drinking the kool-aid. When was the last time this team actually had a deep threat??? Branch isnt one of them.
  14. Patjew

    Patjew PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,596
    Likes Received:
    40
    Ratings:
    +88 / 2 / -1

    No Jersey Selected

    A truer optimist there has never been. Hope you're right, but I just don't see what we can base this on.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>