Just a couple of brief thoughts that might encourage some discussion. 1. Perhaps the most DISAPPOINTING aspect of the Pats game this season has been the play of the OL. Its not that they have sucked this year, but the OL has FINALLY gotten some real talent, yet for the first time in this run the OL ISN'T better than the sum of its parts. Its OK, but I felt that it would be a LOT better than just OK. 2. Is there a team with more than 14 guys on the IR? I guess there might be but not many, nor not much more. Come on guys, this is like the 4th season in a row where the Pats are among the biggest losers to injuries. At this point I have to think its systemic. Any thoughts or suggestions?? 3. I'm really torn this week by 2 entirely different looks at this game against the Jags. One (spouted by most of the media) states that the Jags 2 very good corners will take away our WRs, crowd the LOS to stop the run, which will be very difficult anyway because of the great DT's the Jags have, and keep us out of the endzone. Sounds very reasonable. On the other hand, courtesy of Michael Holly, he opines that the Jags of 2006 ARE NOT as good as the team that came here last December and lost in a 28-3 game (the Jags have lost some very good players to injury as well like Peterson and Taylor) and the Pats, despite their injuries are in better shape than they were back then (although we are worse at WR, we are much better off on the OL, RB, and DB that we were last Jan). Another thing Holley mentioned was fairly simple but right on point. Even if the Jags DO stop our running game, what has been our strength this entire year. We have been very successfull at stopping the run as well. So if winning the game is dependant at how successful your QB is in throwing the ball, who would you rather have, David Garrard, or Tom Brady??? Holley made me feel a lot better about this game.