Welcome to PatsFans.com

I'm fine with our 2008 Receivers

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by mgteich, Jun 30, 2007.

  1. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,389
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +211 / 14 / -2

    I'm fine with
    Stallworth, Welker, Jackson and Washington
    These are the four signed to long-term contracts.

    Washington could take time to develop, but I expect him to be the #5 receiver, the developmental spot, the ST's spot. I expect Jackson to be the #6 receiver, or be on the PUP list.

    Of course, one of these four could be bumped in 2008 by the extension Moss or whichever of Gaffney and Caldwell we decide to keep, but I'd rather keep six than cut Washington this year.
  2. Remix 6

    Remix 6 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    7,780
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    Stallworth is a 1 year deal with an option for up to 4 or 6 i think.
  3. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,389
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +211 / 14 / -2

    I am presuming, as is the case on Miguel's charts, that the patriots will exercise all options on Stallworth. If he busts this year, the patriots can get out cheap.

  4. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,328
    Likes Received:
    121
    Ratings:
    +249 / 7 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    I think our 2008 WR will be Moss, Stallworth, Welker, Jackson and TBD. That could be Washington if we keep him this year.

    But I agree with the concept that if we only keep one of Moss & Stallworth, I am OK with that too.
  5. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,389
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +211 / 14 / -2

    I would be very happy if we add Moss for more years.
  6. Lurks_All_Day

    Lurks_All_Day Rookie

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Messages:
    562
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    No Jersey Selected

    I agree with the Jackson speculation from other threads and in the OP that he may well be PUP. I would be a bit surprised to see him on the field; likely late in the season if at all. Healthy first, a need for his participation might not materialize excepting injuries/ departures.

    I am curious about Washington, wondering if this environment will allow him to thrive, or whether the intense competition will squeeze him out of a choice spot on the depth chart.
  7. Krugman

    Krugman Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,042
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    A winning season may be a tonic to other players than Randy Moss,in other words they may sign for less to get a kick at a SB ring,time will tell.
  8. Box_O_Rocks

    Box_O_Rocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0

    I would prefer to see Jackson active for Training Camp, even if only in a red jersey. He needs as much drill/scrimmage time as he can get if he's ever going to develop.
  9. fgssand

    fgssand PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,771
    Likes Received:
    20
    Ratings:
    +24 / 0 / -1

    #17 Jersey

    Me too....for that would mean:

    A) He had a terrific season (I think he is going to have a monster season - (within the spirit and confines of what it means to excel with this team, contributing heavily, not necessarily seen inside the numbers alone).

    B) He will sign a cap friendly reasonable deal, one that provides decent money but is not ridiculous.

    C) He fits in and is accepted by fan, media and most important -his coaches and teammates.

    This is a dream team of WR's.......imagine if they actually all play to their potential!!
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2007
  10. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,389
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +211 / 14 / -2

    In the end, I think Josh will have Jackson or Brown or Mills. I would be fine with Jackson as the #6 receiver. It would indeed help him for the future.

  11. stcjones

    stcjones Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,647
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +4 / 7 / -1

    #12 Jersey


    This title is the understatement of the year so far....:))....I enjoy your posts Miguel.....
  12. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,389
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +211 / 14 / -2

    ???

    The statement is about 2008, and not too much of an understatement. And while Miguel and I often agree, I am not Miguel.

  13. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,008
    Likes Received:
    180
    Ratings:
    +285 / 5 / -8

    I wonder at the assumptions going into the Moss steamroller... it seemed to always be out there in the minds of fans and in the media, with BB saying nice things about Moss often. I usually filtered it out and considered it some kind of mind-**** on the Pats' part... but there never seemed to be actual negotiating happening.

    Then all of a sudden, on draft weekend, WHAM! Here he is!

    This makes me think it's possible that there never was a real expectation of getting Moss in the Pats' FO, until the dominos started falling.

    If this is the case, then we know:

    1) the Welker and Stallworth deals were already in place. In other words, we had already established that:
    1a. Welker gets a little over a long time, with much of it up-front: that is, a vote of confidence, a low-risk, medium reward pickup (and we paid big in draft choices for the priviledge.)
    1b. A deal with the assumed "#1/deep threat" this year, i.e., Stallworth, which included a "prove-it" year.

    2) The FO structured Moss to be a true 1-year deal. This leaves a lot of options open. But I don't think it's lost on anybody, that if Stallworth excels, Moss will be left with the option of signing a non-blockbuster deal, or looking elsewhere. If Moss excels, on the other hand, the Pats have their perfect wiggle room to get out of the Stallworth deal, which is going to cost upwards of 11M next year. I.e., what if Moss decides he's rich enough, and can stick around for 6M/year over 3 years (which may in fact be in line with his skills/abilities by then?)

    Of course, I am the kind of guy that doesn't like to deal w/bad surprises. If a good surprise happens -- for instance, being able to keep both these guys -- its got to mean the team has dealt with another hole (such as DB or LB) in an inexpensive way.

    At any rate... the rush of people signing w/the Pats and taking a hit vs. their market value, makes me think the Samuel negotiations are being handled just fine, as far as the team is concerned. Now Samuel has to make the case that he's as valuable as clement; more valuable than Vasher (by about 40%); and more valuable than the likes of Randy Moss and Adalius THomas. I know these are comparisons across positions -- but it makes you think for a minute. One would hope it makes Samuel do likewise.

    As I always say, I support the player's right to do what he has to do. But I don't think Samuel will win this one in the end.

    Similarly, Moss and Stallworth end up in a sort of unstated competition this year. And it's got to be a challenge, that part of the competition is "competing to display the best maturity and teamwork." Ouch.

    There is no way both can play through that successfully, without both being changed for the better.

    Whether that ends up meaning the Pats get to keep both, might be the difference between maturity and (financial) self-destructive tendencies. (I don't think 20% of the cap budget should be going into the receivers... which they'll end up eating of everybody gets what they *could* demand, if all goes well.)

    PFnV

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>