I think high turnover is healthy for us this year

[Snarf]

Personally, I'm hoping to see more cuts, and more new (good) faces.

I think the SB loss was likely very traumatic for a lot of the players. I think if we had the same team next year, there would be a feeling of dread or depression hanging over the team for much of the year.

We need new blood team-wide (including coaching) to help us avoid such psychological second-guessing and paranoia as the season progresses.

Just my thought... I know some of us fans won't get over this anytime soon, and it's got to be a lot worse for the players.

Perhaps that's part of the plan for this offseason... get some new blood.

 

[JR4]

Turn over means ... unknown condition exist.

If you're an optimist .... this is good.
otherwise .... fear :scared:

 

[Joker]

7 years...four bowl apperances...6 division titles...yeah, real scary

 

[Fanfrom1960]

Personally, I'm hoping to see more cuts, and more new (good) faces.

I think the SB loss was likely very traumatic for a lot of the players. I think if we had the same team next year, there would be a feeling of dread or depression hanging over the team for much of the year.

We need new blood team-wide (including coaching) to help us avoid such psychological second-guessing and paranoia as the season progresses.

Just my thought... I know some of us fans won't get over this anytime soon, and it's got to be a lot worse for the players.

Perhaps that's part of the plan for this offseason... get some new blood.

OK, interesting premise, but which players would have the dread and depression, and which ones wouldn't? You can't cut them all, or even half of them. Like saying I know some parts of my car are bad, so I'll randomly pick a few to replace.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Regardless of whether or not it's "healthy," turning over a quarter to a third of a team's NFL roster is, you know, normal for the salary cap era.

What makes this abnormal is the potential number of "blue-chip" players that are/may be leaving the team.

 

[Patdown93]

I agree. I think that some players that lose the Super Bowl lose their fire, at least for the next season. They might think that they worked so hard from training camp to get to the biggest game of their careers and fail. I think the only team in the past couple years to make the playoffs after losing the Super Bowl are the Seattle Seahawks.

The only team to lose the Super Bowl and win it the next year were the Cowboys. They lost in Super Bowl V to the Colts and won in Super Bowl VI against the Dolphins.

 

[Rob0729]

I'm definitely not thrilled about all the turnover. I do think that a lot of the turnover can end up being a significant positive for the Pats if they add the right personnel, but I am not going to hope for more cuts and look at it as the more cuts the better.

I really think the only guy we are definitely going to lose who we will have a lot of problems replacing is Samuel. Other than him and Moss, there is no other guy was was on our roster in 2007 and is a free agent that cannot be replaced with equal or greater talent through free agency and the draft. But that means the Pats will need to be fairly agressive in free agency. I'm not saying making an Adalius Thomas type of move, but they do need to add a few higher mid-level free agents.

 

[TomBradyWoot]

I agree. I think that some players that lose the Super Bowl lose their fire, at least for the next season. They might think that they worked so hard from training camp to get to the biggest game of their careers and fail. I think the only team in the past couple years to make the playoffs after losing the Super Bowl are the Seattle Seahawks.

The only team to lose the Super Bowl and win it the next year were the Cowboys. They lost in Super Bowl V to the Colts and won in Super Bowl VI against the Dolphins.

Didn't the 72 Dolphins win the Super Bowl after losing it in 71? I kept hearing Mercury Morris saying their objective wasn't to go un-defeated but to avenge their Super Bowl loss.

 

[BradyManny]

I really think the only guy we are definitely going to lose who we will have a lot of problems replacing is Samuel.

I think Samuel is easily replaced for many reasons. For starters, his insistence on not switching sides means teams could line up their best wideout against what they perceived to be the weaker matchup in Hobbs. Second, even with that fact, Hobbs and Samuel had pretty similar DB metrics - I heard Holley talking about it in a defense of Hobbs. Third, I think we stayed with the ultra soft zone in part b/c that's what Samuel thrives in, and Hobbs is perfectly good at challenging wideouts and better at man coverage. So, I don't think we're going to abandon the cover 3 and the principles that come with it, but if anything, Samuel's departure will give BB, Capers and Pees more flexibility in terms of varying their aggressiveness in playing wideouts.

What I'm getting at is that Samuel was great for the system, but in the grand scheme of things, he's mildly overrated and not too hard to replace. He'll go sign a huge contract somewhere and probably play out his career in a rather quiet, relatively unimpressive manner. A great pass rush will always make up for mediocre DBs anyway - sadly, we can point to three weeks ago to see that - and that's where our focus should lie.

 

[Patdown93]

Didn't the 72 Dolphins win the Super Bowl after losing it in 71? I kept hearing Mercury Morris saying their objective wasn't to go un-defeated but to avenge their Super Bowl loss.

Nope, they got killed 24 - 3. Staubach was MVP

And I also do think we shouldn't try to address too much via free agency. We need to get some more depth from the draft. We only have 2 players as holdovers from last years draft... Richardson and Meriweather. That's horrible.

 

[DefenseRules]

So um, when does the good news start?

 

[Pats726]

I think Samuel is easily replaced for many reasons. For starters, his insistence on not switching sides means teams could line up their best wideout against what they perceived to be the weaker matchup in Hobbs. Second, even with that fact, Hobbs and Samuel had pretty similar DB metrics - I heard Holley talking about it in a defense of Hobbs. Third, I think we stayed with the ultra soft zone in part b/c that's what Samuel thrives in, and Hobbs is perfectly good at challenging wideouts and better at man coverage. So, I don't think we're going to abandon the cover 3 and the principles that come with it, but if anything, Samuel's departure will give BB, Capers and Pees more flexibility in terms of varying their aggressiveness in playing wideouts.

What I'm getting at is that Samuel was great for the system, but in the grand scheme of things, he's mildly overrated and not too hard to replace. He'll go sign a huge contract somewhere and probably play out his career in a rather quiet, relatively unimpressive manner. A great pass rush will always make up for mediocre DBs anyway - sadly, we can point to three weeks ago to see that - and that's where our focus should lie.

Great points and I agree..he can and will be replaced..harder to replace ILBs...much harder...

 

[VJCPatriot]

I'm definitely not thrilled about all the turnover. I do think that a lot of the turnover can end up being a significant positive for the Pats if they add the right personnel, but I am not going to hope for more cuts and look at it as the more cuts the better.

I really think the only guy we are definitely going to lose who we will have a lot of problems replacing is Samuel. Other than him and Moss, there is no other guy was was on our roster in 2007 and is a free agent that cannot be replaced with equal or greater talent through free agency and the draft. But that means the Pats will need to be fairly agressive in free agency. I'm not saying making an Adalius Thomas type of move, but they do need to add a few higher mid-level free agents.

Yup those are the only real blue chippers I'm worried about replacing. Moss must be resigned. Samuel won't be imo.

Colvin... he was good when healthy, but isn't his replacement already on the roster in AD?

The Pats main holes are mobile/coverage ILB and #1 CB. Hobbs can be a servicable #2, but as we saw vs the Giants, there's no way he's a #1.

 

[Jimke]

Yup those are the only real blue chippers I'm worried about replacing. Moss must be resigned. Samuel won't be imo.

Colvin... he was good when healthy, but isn't his replacement already on the roster in AD?

The Pats main holes are mobile/coverage ILB and #1 CB. Hobbs can be a servicable #2, but as we saw vs the Giants, there's no way he's a #1.

Finding a #1 cornerback may be an insurmountable task. The other free

agent cornerbacks closest to Asante have been given the franchise tag.

The Pats may have to resort to a trade. I hope they have better luck than

the trade that netted them Duane Starks.

Also, we have to hold our breath on our wide receivers. If we lose Moss,

Stallworth, and Gaffney (unlikely I hope), we will be back to ground zero

on our receiving corps.