Gaffney Signed!!

[Why?PJ]

Yes, they did. And, when the ***** hit the fan they were MIA.

The Pats knew what they had in A Smith and Dillon.

Dillon was money in the bank.
04 - 1635 yds - 12 tds 2004 New England Patriots Statistics & Players - Pro-Football-Reference.com

Smith was money in the bank.
01 - 1157 yds - 12 tds 2001 New England Patriots Statistics & Players - Pro-Football-Reference.com

In 03 NE had the best defense in the NFL.



When the Pats find out that Ridley and Vereen are not as good, then youve gambled away another season of having Tom Brady.

Or when we find out Ridley is the real deal we'll be just fine. We haven't had big number rb's because of the scheme, not the players. If BB gave the ball BJGE he could have hit 1000 yards every single year. With the Pats you need to look at the entire rb group, not just one player. BB makes sure none of his rb's will get any decent numbers. I think he does it so they'll stay cheap or something.

Absolutely. And this year with 90 man camp rosters and lots of teams cutting 45+ players including vets at the wire it's not going to be too hard to get a 7th rounder to the PS.

Except every single team will be staring at the Pats cuts. It only takes one team to pick up a player from the PS, and at some point one of them will guess BB knows more than they do.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yes, they did. And, when the ***** hit the fan they were MIA.

The Pats knew what they had in A Smith and Dillon.

Dillon was money in the bank.
04 - 1635 yds - 12 tds 2004 New England Patriots Statistics & Players - Pro-Football-Reference.com

Smith was money in the bank.
01 - 1157 yds - 12 tds 2001 New England Patriots Statistics & Players - Pro-Football-Reference.com

In 03 NE had the best defense in the NFL.



When the Pats find out that Ridley and Vereen are not as good, then youve gambled away another season of having Tom Brady.

What an amazingly silly notion.

 

[rookBoston]

I think Welker is gone. Asante blows the SB in 2007 and is sent on his way. Welker did the same in 2011.....

utter bull****, so many levels.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Pretty sure that this is the first time anyone's ever described Antowain Smith as "money in the bank". That's revisionist history if I've ever heard it.

 

[rookBoston]

Welker, Lloyd and Gaffney should be our first three. That leaves Branch, Ochocinco, Gonzalez, Stallworth, Edelman and Ebart fighting for two spots. What's more, the winners will probably never see the field.

I have to believe Edelman makes the roster on his strength in STs and as a utility player.

I think we can flip a coin to choose who gets to ride the pine in the last spot. Hard to imagine any of the remaining WRs going nothing. All four of them maybe should retire before they are unemployed.

Frankly, Ebert makes the most sense. He's the guy who has a future with the Pats. The rest of them will find jobs elsewhere or retire a Patriot.

 

[VrabelJr]

Edelman might become expendable with the drafting of a couple rookies who can contribute on ST in both phases.

 

[jsull87]

Hmmm i am not sure Ocho is going like many here say. I think this signing spells bad news for Gonzalez and Stallworth.

1. Lloyd
2. Welker
3. Gaffney
4. Branch
5. Ocho

ST
6. Edelman PR/CB/ST
7. Slater WR/ST

Only way i see Stallworth making this team is if Ocho absolutely cr@ps the bed on his last chance training camp.

 

[reflexblue]

The Patriots signed WR Jabar Gaffney.
In a text message to ESPN's Josina Anderson, Gaffney stated "I'm going to the Patriots". The deal is for two years, per NFL Network's Jason LaCanfora. After only spending a seventh-round pick at the receiver position, the Patriots seem content heading into offseason activities with the free agent additions of Brandon Lloyd, Anthony Gonzalez, Donte' Stallworth, and now Gaffney

per Rotoworld.

They should have never let him go in the first place, he was pretty good.

 

[patchick]

The Pats knew what they had in A Smith and Dillon.

Dillon was money in the bank.
04 - 1635 yds - 12 tds 2004 New England Patriots Statistics & Players - Pro-Football-Reference.com

Smith was money in the bank.
01 - 1157 yds - 12 tds 2001 New England Patriots Statistics & Players - Pro-Football-Reference.com

Whoa there. You can't show that the Pats "knew what they had" heading into 2001 & 2004 by showing the numbers those players put up that season! What they "had" in each case were brand new acquisitions who had put up utterly lousy numbers the year before for their previous teams, and in Dillon's case a malcontent who was a VERY controversial signing.

What they have now in Ridley, Woodhead and Vereen are three young guys with different body types and running styles who share uncommon versatility for running and passing games. And while Vereen is essentially an unproven rookie, Ridley and Woodhead have both shown plenty for this very team.

 

[JoeShmoe]

I wonder if Tom had a say in this? Getting guys on his wavelength that he trusts to run the same option routes he sees is the key and speed up top to create depredation underneath

Branch really hit the wall last year, we all love him but he has no speed or separation now. He got by on his smarts and connection with Brady but he was catching what, 1 or 2 passes a game? My bet is we go Lloyd and Gaffney outside, Wes in the slot, Stallworth as no 4 and Gonzo as no 5 if he stays healthy. Edelman, Branch and Ocho to be cut

 

[patchick]

Branch really hit the wall last year, we all love him but he has no speed or separation now.

I think a lot of the evaluations of Branch underestimate the effect of his injury. His "hitting the wall" happened when he got hurt, and came back dramatically slower. They just didn't have much behind him, so he had to soldier on. IF he's healthy again, IMO he should be in the mix for the 4th WR spot.

 

[fumbrunner]

Hmmm i am not sure Ocho is going like many here say. I think this signing spells bad news for Gonzalez and Stallworth.

1. Lloyd
2. Welker
3. Gaffney
4. Branch
5. Ocho

ST
6. Edelman PR/CB/ST
7. Slater WR/ST

Only way i see Stallworth making this team is if Ocho absolutely cr@ps the bed on his last chance training camp.

Gonzalez, when healthy (big if, I know) is twice the receiver that Edelman is. He's a former first round draft pick and is the kind of value pick up that BBis known for. I think he sticks.

 

[Triumph]

Whoa there. You can't show that the Pats "knew what they had" heading into 2001 & 2004 by showing the numbers those players put up that season! What they "had" in each case were brand new acquisitions who had put up utterly lousy numbers the year before for their previous teams, and in Dillon's case a malcontent who was a VERY controversial signing.

Oh, yes I can.

Dillon never had less than a 1100 yard season until he was injured in 2003. He always ran hard. Smith had 2 injury plagued seasons before joining the Pats. Only 3 starts in 2000. The former 1st round pick had only been in the NFL 4 seasons. There was past history of NFL success to look at in both instances.

What they have now in Ridley, Woodhead and Vereen are three young guys with different body types and running styles who share uncommon versatility for running and passing games. And while Vereen is essentially an unproven rookie, Ridley and Woodhead have both shown plenty for this very team.

In terms of the run only, the Pats have Woodhead who will wear down because he cannot take the pounding. When he gets beat up and tired, Woodhead has fumbled - see 2010 post season game. There was only 1. They have Ridley who has shown promise, but has also shown concern enough for Belichick to bench him.

The bottom line is that the Pats running game is a mystery heading into the 2012 season. And, weve seen what happens when the NE run game is mediocre and doesnt scare anyone.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I wonder if Tom had a say in this? Getting guys on his wavelength that he trusts to run the same option routes he sees is the key and speed up top to create depredation underneath

Branch really hit the wall last year, we all love him but he has no speed or separation now. He got by on his smarts and connection with Brady but he was catching what, 1 or 2 passes a game? My bet is we go Lloyd and Gaffney outside, Wes in the slot, Stallworth as no 4 and Gonzo as no 5 if he stays healthy. Edelman, Branch and Ocho to be cut

Actually it was 3.5 per game for a 14 YPC average... And he never got great seperation, he's one of those rare birds who succeeded here because they had a savvy knack for finding that small window the QB saw where they could make the catch despite coverage. He did seem to wear down down the stretch, but the second year TE's were also getting the majority of targets as they blossomed even as Branch remained on the field for close to 70% of snaps in part because there is more to the position here than simply getting open... In a lesser role he could still flourish. And capacity to do all those little things that matter here, including operating in an up tempo or no huddle offense, will be something Bill weights when he makes his final roster cuts.

 

[Triumph]

What an amazingly silly notion.

I shouldnt have to explain it to you.

Go ask your buddy Andy Johnson.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Gonzalez, when healthy (big if, I know) is twice the receiver that Edelman is. He's a former first round draft pick and is the kind of value pick up that BBis known for. I think he sticks.

1) Welker
2) Lloyd
3) Gaffney
4) Branch
5) Stallworth

ST Edelman
PS Ebert

I don't think Ocho or Gonzales make it. Hopefully Welker doesn't hold out in any games, much rather have Branch as a backup slot receiver than starter in the slot, but we'd still have enough good receivers even if Welker holds out.

 

[Deus Irae]

I shouldnt have to explain it to you.

Go ask your buddy Andy Johnson.

It's not that you shouldn't have to explain it to me, it's that your post made an obvious mistake. Go take a look at Smith's numbers from that 2003 Super Bowl. You'll find that he was barely above 3 ypc.

In other words, your argument was lousy and you, as someone who was mucking about with the statistics, should have known that before you posted.

 

[fester]

We haven't had big number rb's because of the scheme, not the players. If BB gave the ball BJGE he could have hit 1000 yards every single year. With the Pats you need to look at the entire rb group, not just one player. BB makes sure none of his rb's will get any decent numbers. I think he does it so they'll stay cheap or something.

WTF --- the Patriots have a demonstrated history of being willing to pay cash for bell-cow running backs (A. Smith, Corey Dillon) and draft them high (Maroney). I think if the Patriots had a running back that could reliably get 1,500 yards , 4.5 ypc, 12 TD, 30 catches and pick up the blitz, they would be willing to pay for that one individual. They get that capability but spread it out over the entire committee right now.

 

[Triumph]

It's not that you shouldn't have to explain it to me, it's that your post made an obvious mistake. Go take a look at Smith's numbers from that 2003 Super Bowl. You'll find that he was barely above 3 ypc.

In other words, your argument was lousy and you, as someone who was mucking about with the statistics, should have known that before you posted.

Your argumemt sucks.

Smith had 83 rushing yards and 1 TD. Who the hell cares besides you that he didnt average 4 yac? Tom Brady brought his A game passing for 3 TDs and 354 yards. Maroney could have danced all game and into the wee hours of the night with Brady playing like that.

You couldnt find anything wrong with Smiths 3.5 yac during the 2003 season so you brought this nonsense?

 

[Deus Irae]

Your argumemt sucks.

Smith had 83 rushing yards and 1 TD. Who the hell cares besides you that he didnt average 4 yac? Tom Brady brought his A game passing for 3 TDs and 354 yards. Maroney could have danced all game and into the wee hours of the night with Brady playing like that.

You couldnt find anything wrong with Smiths 3.5 yac during the 2003 season so you brought this nonsense?

Ok..... now take this argument you just made, that you somehow think supports your case, and apply it back to what you wrote earlier. When you figure out that you just shredded your own argument, get back to us.