100% agree (with u2 emoney). Reasonable and well thought out. My biggest issue with people wanting to bring in Boldin AND a top 50 pick is that they don't consider what the team would be like if Tate is a keeper, if Edelman continues to develop rapidly, if Welker has a positive recovery. You obviously can't guarantee any of these things happening, but why invest scarce and valuable resources in case they ALL DON'T happen. It is like a healthy, single 25 yo buying $2M in life insurance. Can't guarantee it won't be needed, but chances are it is not the best use of money.
Say the Pats signed Boldin and drafted Benn (or whoever) in the 2nd round. Round about week 10, the depth chart could be:
Moss
Boldin
Welker
Edelman
Tate
Aiken (he is either #5 or #6 because of ST)
Benn
That is at best impractical and at worst impossible. Impractical because Tate would get no work with Brady in practice and Benn would never be active. It might be impossible based on the roster spots needed for the other positions.
If these people want to dump Moss in a contract year, go for it. Or get rid of Edelman. Or Tate. I wouldn't do these things but at least the roster composition would make more sense. But the Pats just can't collect WR like an old lady collects cats.
I agree that too many WR's could be impractical. I am simply stating that at worst they need a solid #2 to stretch the field on the outside, opposite Moss. This would allow a combination of a strong first 3, allowing Edelman/Welker to do what they do best, play the slot and run underneath routes. This would allow Moss to utilize his strengths (more circa 07), taking a bit of the coverage and gameplanning focus solely off of him, give Brady a reliable target with the #2, and allow Edelman/Welker to play the slot and continue to have open underneath routes.
The rest of the 4-5, or 4 thru 6 actually could be just fine the way it is now. So, to use your example, I would try and choose one of the following but not both: FA/trade for #2, or draft pick (not both). The problem with the draft pick is that it likely will take some time for him to learn, get on the same page, and execute--so I wouldn't 'count' on major production from a draft pick or Tate, (or Welker for that matter). Any significant contributions from any of them would be considered pure bonuses. A draft pick along with even Tate are basically still in learning phase, while Welker likely will miss half the season and should be counted on for nothing, IMO.
To bottom line it--I really don't see a huge glaring need for anything else but a good, reliable, solid #2. That would at least give us a strong first 3, and at worst a couple solid targets should injury occur. The rest of the 4-6 can be a combo of Tate, minor acquisition such as Reed/if not Aiken, and/or a draft pick or Stanback depending on the draft choice. I'm not one who is calling for anything but another solid option opposite Moss, for more viable options for Brady--or should injury occur.
Offensive attacking is supposed to be our best attribute, and strongest point of the team. You could see obvious problems and even questionable body language (did I say body language?
) from Brady at times. It certainly seemed as though he wanted another option or 2, and that was before the loss of Welker and Watson. If you look at some of the more offensive minded teams in today's NFL, you'll certainly see a trend involving their WR's/down the field TE's. You could start with Indy or New Orleans in the SB, go to Minnesota, Arizona, Philly, Pittsburgh, SD, Dallas, hell--even Baltimore got on board with many receiving options too.
Apparently the thought of the idea passed through the FO too, as we had recent rumors of talks with Boldin and a want in Bryant. I'm not suggesting an upper-tier WR of those calibers, but I bet a certain #12 wouldn't mind either.
