Is it possible the team improves without Gronk?

[jimnance]

Th offense will improve just by hogan and bennett getting healthier and lewis gradually building back to the ball of dynamite he was(hes not far off now). Jules is close to 100%. And Mitchell looks great. The oline is light years better this year than last.

Gronk is the single most potent offensive weapon in the nfl(other than qb), so no, youre never going to be better w/o him than with him. But like others have said, this is the 1st year the Pats have enough offensive weapons to overcome losing gronk.

TB will get back to playing point guard, finding the open man, dropping dimes. One reason im really confident he'll do that-is look at how many different targets on offense have earned bradys trust this year, for him to have no qualms about passing to them in a crucial situation: jules, bennett, hogan, danny,lewis, mitchell and white. In the entire TB12 era-that is by far the most guys hes ever had that he knows he can rely on.

They also have the new and improved, slimmed down version of blount. And of all the teams that also have great offenses-cowboys, steelers, falcons, raiders-the Pats have a FAR superior Defense than all of them and yes, the Pats defense is better than last years. They cant afford to lose any more key players on either side of the ball. Homefield is crucial. That being said, i still think they have as good a shot as anyone to hoist the lombardi.

 

[PittPatriot]

Sooooo....we're going with Bill Simmons' "Ewing Theory"? Alrighty then.

We've already shown the offense, TB12, and even the team as a whole is not as good without Gronk in the games he has missed (so many of them).
There is no way we beat Seattle in Arizona without Gronk.

 

[mihap]

I dont know what is with that Gronk absence. Marty B with Jimmy G was awesome. It all depends on brady chemistry with Marty B and i hope that he some other guys get open and brady dont throw to Edelman every time.
Health is the main concern. If they are healthy they ll be good, and i am still hoping for oline to get even better.

 

[PScottman]

The biggest difference is the demonstration of a much better running game than last year. Since the two superstars have returned together that running game has shifted back (necessarily) to a much more complimentary role.

I'm not saying that the team will go to three hand-offs and a punt (Butts! We got Marion Butts over here!). However, it's a factor that is a big change from last year where the OL could neither pass or run block consistently.

All that said, "improves" is really not a word to use seriously, I don't think ANYONE will say the team will overall improve by any true definition of the word. Adjust? Absolutely. Change? Yes!

How about DIVERSIFY? I would absolutely buy 100% a more diverse offense with a higher number of "first look" plays going to other players that may have been second, third, fourth or fifth looks earlier.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

The biggest difference is the demonstration of a much better running game than last year. Since the two superstars have returned together that running game has shifted back (necessarily) to a much more complimentary role.

I'm not saying that the team will go to three hand-offs and a punt (Butts! We got Marion Butts over here!). However, it's a factor that is a big change from last year where the OL could neither pass or run block consistently.

All that said, "improves" is really not a word to use seriously, I don't think ANYONE will say the team will overall improve by any true definition of the word. Adjust? Absolutely. Change? Yes!

How about DIVERSIFY? I would absolutely buy 100% a more diverse offense with a higher number of "first look" plays going to other players that may have been second, third, fourth or fifth looks earlier.

We might see a bit of 2010 again. Brady seemed to be forcing the ball to Moss more than he should early on. Moss got traded, we brought back Branch and the offense seemed to go very steady after that.

Like you said, not better, just more diverse.

 

[LightSkinSmurf]

Nope

You scared me, I was afraid you just created the dumbest thread of all time.

 

[RayClay]

Add Dion Lewis and breakout Mitchell? Lots of weapons. Gronks gone why cry? Play the games.

 

[ashley]

A team with Gronk is much better than a team without Gronk. With that said, we are loaded on offense with weapons.

 

[Nikolai]

I don't disagree but if we had Gronk in there as well this would create even more space for other options or leave Marty/Gronk single covered. Now I am not saying we are dead in the water because we still have one of the better offenses in the league. Just don't see any angle where you could think we could be better without him if everything else is the same.

Didn't say we'd be better off without him. I'm just disagreeing with people who say that we have no way to command a double team out of the TE spot. Obviously, having both in the lineup is best, mostly because of the different types of plays we could run from THAT 2 TE setup. Instead of being superhuman on offense, we're merely extremely good (once Bennett is fully healthy).

 

[thecore762]

We will need all the other players to step it up like Mitchell, Amendola, Hogan, Lewis. I think we will be okay without Gronkowski when we have Bennett at blocking and catching. I say use Bennett sparingly since he is a huge key player for us. Other than that get Devlin in more in run situations since the guy is a stud at blocking.

 

[luuked]

Didn't say we'd be better off without him. I'm just disagreeing with people who say that we have no way to command a double team out of the TE spot. Obviously, having both in the lineup is best, mostly because of the different types of plays we could run from THAT 2 TE setup. Instead of being superhuman on offense, we're merely extremely good (once Bennett is fully healthy).

Gotcha.. totally agree.. was just semantics

 

[thecore762]

I kinda now wish that we would have kep AJ Darby on our roster since he looked promising as a third stringer.

 

[neuronet]

It's really not, IMO. If they win without Gronk, that means they were good enough to win without Gronk, which is a far cry from saying they're better off without him. They just aren't. When you subtract a GOAT candidate in the prime of his career from a team, that team gets worse. Maybe they were so good to begin with that they can still win without him, but that doesn't mean they improved in his absence.

Agree with all this except Gronk's prime was a while ago. He's still great though.

 

[Brewskies]

NO, this team can not be better without Gronk!

That said can this team win without Gronk, YES

 

[PittPatriot]

I would have felt better with AJ Derby on the roster. He is doing very well in Denver. I still can't figure out why we go rid of him when we are/were so thin at TE.

 

[Nikolai]

I remember thinking it was a season ender last year (in Denver) and my heart ****ing sank. This time around? It hurts but we can survive.

Yep, by that point last year, we had lost Dion Lewis, Edelman, and Amendola. When Gronk went down, I just laughed in disbelief.

 

[PatriotsPimp136]

I hope the chemistry that brady has with mitchell continues. Tommy just can't lock on edelman. Spread it around.

 

[stinkypete]

The offense is better equipped to handle an Gronk absence this year than it has been since he was drafted. An offense with Edelman, Hogan, Mitchell and Amandola at WR, Bennett at TE and Blount, White and Lewis at RB is still pretty damn potent.

 

[NewFeep]

"Twist & Blount" with a dash of White..........

 

[AtomicDawg]

"Twist & Blount" with a dash of White..........

And maybe a sprinkle of DJ Foster....