Some comments on the comments
1. Andy, I think you are making too big a deal about the "lack of a pass rush". While everyone would like to see a dominating pass rush, and last year, the Pats were far from that, it should be noted that the of the 2 superbowl teams, the Ravens had exactly the same number or sacks as the Pats had, and the Niner had but ONE more. Clearly you DON'T need to be among the league's sack leaders to be a successful team.
2. I don't understand, Andy why you want to replace one of the more consistently productive players the Pats have on defense in Rob Ninkovich. Check the numbers, that over the last 2 years, he has been easily as productive as Mike Vrabel was for all but one year in his tenure as a Patriot.
Ninkovich has improved his sack total every year he's been a Patriot (from 1 to 4 to 6.5 to 8) Why wouldn't one think he can't improve again next year? Vrabel didn't have his career year in sacks (12.5) until his 11th year in the league. Next year will only be Ninko's 9th
3. As far as MG's OP goes: While the $14MM number is probably accurate on this date, to think the Pats won't make other moves to increase that number is highly unlikely. In another thread, Mo made a compelling case for adding ANOTHER $18MM by restructuring or extending just 3 contracts in a conservative realistic manner.
4. Lets be realistic here, Brady has 2 more years where we can reasonably expect him to play at the high level we've come to expect, at best 3. After that point he could probably be a solid NFL QB who could get a very good team to a superbowl, but no longer "carry" it there. That being the case, Pats fans have to get used to the fact that after all these years, the "window" is actually closing on the Brady era, and preparations have to start to being made.
5. So choices have to be made. Do the Pats do what's necessary to "load up" for a great 2 year run, which means signing high quality FA's to big money deals that minimize their cap consequences the first 2 years of their contracts.
OR, do we keep on building as we have been and hope over the next 2 years, the Pats will be the team that suddenly gets hot in the playoffs and wins a Lombardi, Meanwhile we keep building a team that will be strong enough to keep Brady and the Pats in superbowl. contention over his last few years.
6. As to what the Pats might finally decide to do with all their own FA's and the ones out there; there are so many possible configurations that it becomes almost impossible to even speculate what they might do. But I'll give it a shot anyway.
a. I think they will spend relatively big money on someone in the secondary. They might pay Talib or some other press coverage CB or They could pay a top safety FA like Jarius Byrd and move McCourty back to CB and have Dowling Dennard, and McCourty be their top 3 guys. They also could draft a safety high in the draft, since this is supposedly one of the strongest S crops in a long while. BUT regardless of the strategy, one way or another, the Pats are going to make a least one large investment on the defensive backfield
b. The next area weakness that has to be addressed is WR - Again the possible combinations of moves is almost impossible to guess. One group of scenarios involve signing Welker, and a whole lot of OTHER scenarios involve NOT signing him. But like the DB's its clear the Pats are going to make at least one large investment on a WR. It could be Welker, it could be a FA, or it could be in the draft.
While I didn't agree with him, I think Bedard got somewhat of a bad rap on his column the other day. When he was talking about getting rid of BOTH Lloyd and Welker, I think he was talking about the Pats making a fundamental change in the focus of their offense. Perhaps that might be toward the RBs. In other words using the RB's more in both rushing the football and in the short passing game. In replacing Welker and Lloyd with WRs who have "different" skill sets and will be more down the field targets, and leave the between the number targets to the TE's and RB's
c. As to the OL: Volmer may be more doable that I originally thought. PFT had a post that listed all the potential FA OT's and the list was looong. So given the vast number of potential pick ups and Volmer's shaky health history, the market for him might not be as hot as he might hope. IF the Pats are planning to run the ball more, it might be worth it to load up on the OL, rather than at WR, and my dream of a Connolly, Cannon, and Volmer right side MIGHT just become a reality
7. BOTTOM LINE: IMHO, if the Pats are thinking short term, they have the means to sign any one they want and still stay well under the cap for at least the next 2 years. However IF they choose to do so, there WILL be a day of reckoning down the road. However 2 years in the NFL is a lifetime and could well be worth the consequences.
8. Here's a last minute thought. The Pats load up for a 2 year run. Win 2 more Lombardi's then dump Brady's back loaded contract in big trade to the new LA franchise, where he can go home and put fannies in the seats of that new stadium. Meanwhile the Pats create a lot of cap room, and greatly minimizes the impact of the deals they made in 2013 and pick up a couple of picks besides. How's THAT for wishful thinking.