Clayton: Even with Peppers, Pats not Super Bowl team

[Joker]

Ray Boursin couldn't score more than 2 goals on the Bruins first line...whaddya talkin' about.....oh....wait.....

 

[Tucker]

was that Boursin Supremacy movie trilogy any good? My girlfriend keeps telling me to watch it

 

[PatsBoy12]

In an attempt to be objective, I'm going to say that I agree with Clayton thus far. Really, there are too many variables to think about when trying to decide if this Patriot team is a SB team:

1. The health of Brady. Obviously, we don't know what we're getting back after what was a major injury. This has been discussed in other threads and there are a lot of people who feel we will be getting the same ole Brady, but how can anyone be sure until we see him in action? Injuries, especially one like Brady's, tend to be just as much psychological as they are physical. The doctors may have repaired the knee, but that only solves the physical aspect. None of us have any idea how Brady will react to being in the pocket with bodies flying around after a year off and a presumably tough rehab (not even Brady himself).

2. The new guys. The additions seem to fill the needs on paper, but let's remember who we got. Springs, Taylor, and Galloway are all guys who have been injured quite often in their careers and they're all almost eligible for Social Security. We don't really know if we'll have them all season and, even if they both manage to play the full 16-game regular season, who knows what kind of play we'll get from them? Again, they're not exactly in the prime of their respective careers.

Leigh Bodden has shown flashes of something special, but frankly, the jury is still out on him.

3. Injuries. This is the thing that worries every coach, player, and fan. The injury bug hit us hard last year, and it's certainly conceivable that the same could occur in the upcoming season (though we all hope not). The year that shall forever remain nameless saw a team that dealt with few injuries. In fact, we lost more people (temporarily or permanently) in the final game that shall remain nameless than we did all year long.

I could go on, but I think anyone reading gets the point. There are too many variables to consider when talking about which teams will win and which teams will not. I like our chances, but I'm supposed to because the Pats are my team. We have a progressive and forward-thinking staff in NE, so I'm sure they have backup plan for the backup plan for the original plan. We'll just have to see how things iron out once the season is underway.

 

[BradyFTW!]

In an attempt to be objective, I'm going to say that I agree with Clayton thus far. Really, there are too many variables to think about when trying to decide if this Patriot team is a SB team:

1. The health of Brady. Obviously, we don't know what we're getting back after what was a major injury. This has been discussed in other threads and there are a lot of people who feel we will be getting the same ole Brady, but how can anyone be sure until we see him in action? Injuries, especially one like Brady's, tend to be just as much psychological as they are physical. The doctors may have repaired the knee, but that only solves the physical aspect. None of us have any idea how Brady will react to being in the pocket with bodies flying around after a year off and a presumably tough rehab (not even Brady himself).

2. The new guys. The additions seem to fill the needs on paper, but let's remember who we got. Springs, Taylor, and Galloway are all guys who have been injured quite often in their careers and they're all almost eligible for Social Security. We don't really know if we'll have them all season and, even if they both manage to play the full 16-game regular season, who knows what kind of play we'll get from them? Again, they're not exactly in the prime of their respective careers.

Leigh Bodden has shown flashes of something special, but frankly, the jury is still out on him.

3. Injuries. This is the thing that worries every coach, player, and fan. The injury bug hit us hard last year, and it's certainly conceivable that the same could occur in the upcoming season (though we all hope not). The year that shall forever remain nameless saw a team that dealt with few injuries. In fact, we lost more people (temporarily or permanently) in the final game that shall remain nameless than we did all year long.

I could go on, but I think anyone reading gets the point. There are too many variables to consider when talking about which teams will win and which teams will not. I like our chances, but I'm supposed to because the Pats are my team. We have a progressive and forward-thinking staff in NE, so I'm sure they have backup plan for the backup plan for the original plan. We'll just have to see how things iron out once the season is underway.

Yeah, because it's unheard of for there to be variables and unanswered questions during the offseason (let alone before the draft)

Every team's got questions. Can you find one with fewer than the Patriots? I can't, other than maybe the Steelers (Pats have a *much* higher ceiling, but they don't have anyone recovering from a major injury).

 

[mmasterkillah]

If the Patriots aren't the favorites, than that will make me some more money when I bet on them. LOL

 

[PatsBoy12]

Yeah, because it's unheard of for there to be variables and unanswered questions during the offseason (let alone before the draft)

Every team's got questions. Can you find one with fewer than the Patriots? I can't, other than maybe the Steelers (Pats have a *much* higher ceiling, but they don't have anyone recovering from a major injury).

Well, I'm not going to engage in some smart-@ss war of words with you. I'm new here and don't want any trouble with anyone. I was simply trying to be objective about it. The fact is that the Patriots roster was ravaged more than just about any other team's roster last season. Our QB, not some other random player, suffered a pretty significant injury last season, and we may not know the full extent of it until the season starts. Remember, this is the first major injury of his career. That's all. Your point about variables at this point is duly noted, but we seem to have more than any other true contender in number and significance, IMO. So, I stand by my original post. Again, I respect everyone's opinion(s). These are just mine. I'd rather underestimate our chances and be pleasantly surprised than to overdo it and be disappointed.

To answer your question about the teams with the least amount of question marks, let's see:

1. Pittsburgh for obvious reasons.

2. Titans. All they really need to solve is their WR question. Haynesworth will not be sorely missed in that defense, IMHO.

3. Giants. They may need some help in the OL and WR, assuming Plax is done. Everything else is solid. (It burns me up to even have to admit that)

 

[Rob0729]

In an attempt to be objective, I'm going to say that I agree with Clayton thus far. Really, there are too many variables to think about when trying to decide if this Patriot team is a SB team:

1. The health of Brady. Obviously, we don't know what we're getting back after what was a major injury. This has been discussed in other threads and there are a lot of people who feel we will be getting the same ole Brady, but how can anyone be sure until we see him in action? Injuries, especially one like Brady's, tend to be just as much psychological as they are physical. The doctors may have repaired the knee, but that only solves the physical aspect. None of us have any idea how Brady will react to being in the pocket with bodies flying around after a year off and a presumably tough rehab (not even Brady himself).

2. The new guys. The additions seem to fill the needs on paper, but let's remember who we got. Springs, Taylor, and Galloway are all guys who have been injured quite often in their careers and they're all almost eligible for Social Security. We don't really know if we'll have them all season and, even if they both manage to play the full 16-game regular season, who knows what kind of play we'll get from them? Again, they're not exactly in the prime of their respective careers.

Leigh Bodden has shown flashes of something special, but frankly, the jury is still out on him.

3. Injuries. This is the thing that worries every coach, player, and fan. The injury bug hit us hard last year, and it's certainly conceivable that the same could occur in the upcoming season (though we all hope not). The year that shall forever remain nameless saw a team that dealt with few injuries. In fact, we lost more people (temporarily or permanently) in the final game that shall remain nameless than we did all year long.

I could go on, but I think anyone reading gets the point. There are too many variables to consider when talking about which teams will win and which teams will not. I like our chances, but I'm supposed to because the Pats are my team. We have a progressive and forward-thinking staff in NE, so I'm sure they have backup plan for the backup plan for the original plan. We'll just have to see how things iron out once the season is underway.

Except you can play this game with every single Super Bowl contender. There isn't a team in the league without question marks. But let me address each issue:

1. All we can go on is other players with similiar injuries. Looking at Philip Rivers and Carson Palmer, the odds are that Brady will be back as good as ever.

2. Other than Mike Vrabel and Lamont Jordan; the Pats haven't really lost anyone (assuming Harrison will be back). All these new players are additions to what the Pats have. So it is safe to assume they made the team better even if the new players disapoint.

3. Injuries are a part of the game and no team is immuned. You can't use this argument against the Pats being a Super Bowl contender because this argument applies to every team in the league.

 

[Rob0729]

Well, I'm not going to engage in some smart-@ss war of words with you. I'm new here and don't want any trouble with anyone. I was simply trying to be objective about it. The fact is that the Patriots roster was ravaged more than just about any other team's roster last season. Our QB, not some other random player, suffered a pretty significant injury last season, and we may not know the full extent of it until the season starts. Remember, this is the first major injury of his career. That's all. Your point about variables at this point is duly noted, but we seem to have more than any other true contender in number and significance, IMO. So, I stand by my original post. Again, I respect everyone's opinion(s). These are just mine. I'd rather underestimate our chances and be pleasantly surprised than to overdo it and be disappointed.

To answer your question about the teams with the least amount of question marks, let's see:

1. Pittsburgh for obvious reasons.

2. Titans. All they really need to solve is their WR question. Haynesworth will not be sorely missed in that defense, IMHO.

3. Giants. They may need some help in the OL and WR, assuming Plax is done. Everything else is solid. (It burns me up to even have to admit that)

1. The Steelers won the Super Bowl, but let's not make it like they don't have question marks. They won the Super Bowl in a down year where the Pats, Chargers, and Colts were all not at their top form (some or all may never return, but the AFC wasn't as strong last year). They have questions on offense, durability issues. Their defense is one of the oldest in the league with players in key positions like Aaron Smith (32), Casey Hampton (31), James Farrior (34), James Harrison (31 at the start of the season), Deshea Townsend (34 at the start of the season), Brad Keisel (31 at the start of the season). If the Pats were questioned last year about the age of their defense, why would the Steelers' defense not have the same questions with more starters over 30? How will the Steelers' secondary fair with the loss of Bryant McFadden?

2. The Titans have an old QB who has an up and down career. The Titan's defense has historically suffered when Haynesworth was out. They have a much tougher schedule than last year. I think the Titans have a lot of question marks must importantly was last year a fluke.

3. The Giants came apart the end of last season. They lost four of their last five games if you count the playoffs. The loss of Plaxico was huge. He will most likely miss at least part of the season if not all. I have serious questions about that team and their make up.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Well, I'm not going to engage in some smart-@ss war of words with you. I'm new here and don't want any trouble with anyone. I was simply trying to be objective about it. The fact is that the Patriots roster was ravaged more than just about any other team's roster last season. Our QB, not some other random player, suffered a pretty significant injury last season, and we may not know the full extent of it until the season starts. Remember, this is the first major injury of his career. That's all. Your point about variables at this point is duly noted, but we seem to have more than any other true contender in number and significance, IMO. So, I stand by my original post. Again, I respect everyone's opinion(s). These are just mine. I'd rather underestimate our chances and be pleasantly surprised than to overdo it and be disappointed.

To answer your question about the teams with the least amount of question marks, let's see:

1. Pittsburgh for obvious reasons.

2. Titans. All they really need to solve is their WR question. Haynesworth will not be sorely missed in that defense, IMHO.

3. Giants. They may need some help in the OL and WR, assuming Plax is done. Everything else is solid. (It burns me up to even have to admit that)

1. I agree re: Pittsburgh, although the elephant in the room is that, assuming Brady is back and healthy (and, based on comparable injuries and his notorious work ethic, there's no reason to think he won't be), the fact remains that Pittsburgh has a pretty bad record against Brady-led teams. Especially in the playoffs.

2. You don't think Haynesworth will be sorely missed? I'm going to disagree to the extreme and say that he was the one player on that team that they could not afford to lose. Haynesworth, when healthy, might be the most game-changing defensive player in the league; I think that you're underrating him to an extreme degree. If you want evidence of that, look at how the Titans did last year when he was hurt. I'm also far from sold on Kerry Collins as the starting QB solution. There's a reason why he's lost his job on multiple teams.

3. Exactly: they need help in OL and WR. Do the Pats? Even if Brady did somehow come back as 60% of the player that he used to be, the Pats would still be better at QB than the Giants, so it's not like the Brady variable puts the Giants over the Pats.


The point that I'm trying to make is that, when you basically have two major question marks on your entire team (how well can Brady come back?, how can the pass rush get better?), and one of those questions is empirically answerable because Carson Palmer, Philip Rivers, and Donovan McNabb have all remained highly effective after the same injury with less recovery time... I think it's pretty safe to say that Brady will be good this year. Maybe not as good as he was before the injury, but he'll be an effective QB, to say the least. That leaves one major question mark, maybe 2 if you're worried about safety depth, and the Pats have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds to solve that and then shore up some other positions.

They don't have to replace their best player, they don't need to revamp their entire WR corps, and and they could go into the season and be fine with the OL that they have right now. Like I said in the first place: you'll be hardpressed to find a team with *fewer* question marks than the Pats have at this stage, which is why your statement that Clayton was right, and they're not SB contenders, is pretty ridiculous. You can't say that a team isn't a SB contender because it has variables at a time of year when every team in the league has as-or-more significant variables as well.

 

[PatsBoy12]

1. I agree re: Pittsburgh, although the elephant in the room is that, assuming Brady is back and healthy (and, based on comparable injuries and his notorious work ethic, there's no reason to think he won't be), the fact remains that Pittsburgh has a pretty bad record against Brady-led teams. Especially in the playoffs.

2. You don't think Haynesworth will be sorely missed? I'm going to disagree to the extreme and say that he was the one player on that team that they could not afford to lose. Haynesworth, when healthy, might be the most game-changing defensive player in the league; I think that you're underrating him to an extreme degree. If you want evidence of that, look at how the Titans did last year when he was hurt. I'm also far from sold on Kerry Collins as the starting QB solution. There's a reason why he's lost his job on multiple teams.

3. Exactly: they need help in OL and WR. Do the Pats? Even if Brady did somehow come back as 60% of the player that he used to be, the Pats would still be better at QB than the Giants, so it's not like the Brady variable puts the Giants over the Pats.


The point that I'm trying to make is that, when you basically have two major question marks on your entire team (how well can Brady come back?, how can the pass rush get better?), and one of those questions is empirically answerable because Carson Palmer, Philip Rivers, and Donovan McNabb have all remained highly effective after the same injury with less recovery time... I think it's pretty safe to say that Brady will be good this year. Maybe not as good as he was before the injury, but he'll be an effective QB, to say the least. That leaves one major question mark, maybe 2 if you're worried about safety depth, and the Pats have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds to solve that and then shore up some other positions.

They don't have to replace their best player, they don't need to revamp their entire WR corps, and and they could go into the season and be fine with the OL that they have right now. Like I said in the first place: you'll be hardpressed to find a team with *fewer* question marks than the Pats have at this stage, which is why your statement that Clayton was right, and they're not SB contenders, is pretty ridiculous. You can't say that a team isn't a SB contender because it has variables at a time of year when every team in the league has as-or-more significant variables as well.

Okay, I'll concede my friend. There is no reason to continue this, honestly, because it's opinion versus opinion. I think the Pats losing to the Giants a few years ago clearly shows that games are won and lost on the field and not on paper (or message boards in this case). Again, I respect you opinions, though I don't agree with all of them.

We all love the team and want good things to happen. I'm on a Patriots board, so I know my opinion may be tipping the scales too far in the other direction, and thus is not going to be a popular one. However, it ultimately does not matter in the grand scheme of things. The players still have to play the games, so we'll see how things play out. Hopefully, you all will be right. As I stated earlier, I'd rather underestimate and be surprised than to overdo it and be disappointed. Fair enough?

 

[ALP]

Better for us, the least attention we get, the more people write us off, the better it will be, I hope we go into the playoffs with a 10-6 record and just cream everyone thereafter.
Low key style!

u should know after last season, that u should want the pats to win their division every year....

11-5 didnt get us to playoffs last yr, 10-6 is even worse, wint he division or bust for the frist 14 weeks, win the sb or bust for the last 6