- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Messages
- 11,528
- Reaction score
- 10,024
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.The real issue is who makes the roster.
Welker, Lloyd, Gaffney and Slater as a STer seem to be locks. Stallworth hasn't produced in awhile.
Who are the other two?
Branch
Stallworth
Edelman
Other
This is behind my asking this question.
It seems most think what PATs offense didn't have last year was the
outside deep threat.
If you say Lloyd and Stallworth are the best outside threats then I would
think they both make the roster.
If say Lloyd gets hurt then there should be someone on the roster that
can step up to take over his job. Maybe not as good but a least still
threat.
But maybe patfanken is right, Pats do not have a real deep threat yet.
If he is talking speed alone maybe not but I've read except for top
corner backs covering, Lloyd can't be covered without help ... he always
finds the rock.
Colston isn't an outside receiver, despite his size and ypc. He's actually much more of a threat in the middle of the field. Gaffney is a versatile midrange receiver. I never thought of him as a deep threat. He can play outside, and the Pats need that.I'd say Gaffney, Lloyd, Stallworth, Branch. Gaffney is the true downfield threat on this team ala Lance Moore. Lloyd is playing the Colston role where he can threaten every level of the field. Stallworth next based on pure speed. Reminds me of a Devery Henderson type. With Branch being able to go deep here and there.
This is behind my asking this question.
It seems most think what PATs offense didn't have last year was the
outside deep threat.
If you say Lloyd and Stallworth are the best outside threats then I would
think they both make the roster.
If say Lloyd gets hurt then there should be someone on the roster that
can step up to take over his job. Maybe not as good but a least still
threat.
But maybe patfanken is right, Pats do not have a real deep threat yet.
If he is talking speed alone maybe not but I've read except for top
corner backs covering, Lloyd can't be covered without help ... he always
finds the rock.
1) Clearly yards per catch is not a relevant stat. All the receivers we are considering are in the 13.5-14.5 range: Lloyd, Gaffney, Stallworth and Branch.
Not your finest effort Ice. Gaffney's skills are much different from Lloyd's and like it has been said you have less than a 1% chance of that being true, unless there's an injury to Lloyd.
And IF Branch makes the team, he's not going to take Brown's 2007 role. Don't forget, Branch is a one trick pony trying to make a team that prides itself on versatile players. He ONLY plays the Z. He only makes this team as a potential back up to Lloyd and he offers ZERO down field skill.
People better get used to the fact the Lloyd is a different kind of "downfield" threat. He isn't going to blow by ANY NFL CB. Lloyd's greatest skill, ISN'T in getting "separation" and being "open". He's a downfield threat because his great body control allows him to get into a favorable position to catch the ball even when he is covered. He isn't the kind of WR who teams will feel the need to rotate Safeties over the top to protect the CBs. I'm thrilled to have him, but he is what he is, and people expecting more will be disappointed.
We still don't have a "downfield burner". But with this offense, maybe we won't need one.
I don't think Lloyd's 18.8 in 2010 should be ignored, especially considering that last year's 13.8 was when he was catching passes from AJ Feeley and Kellen Clemens.
I think that Gronk and Hernandez from time to time are going to require some double team looks as well2) The first issue is who would command a double team. There are two: Lloyd and Welker.
The Stallworth signing has never excited me. He is what he is. He's experienced depth, with a chance to be a field stretcher (if he still has 4.3 speed) when we go to 3 wide outs. If he has 30 catches for the season it will be a huge win.3) Does it matter that Stallworth has averaged less than 2 catches a game since 2007? I think that it does.
I don't see it as being "significantly better" if only because its going to be hard to improve on the Historic effort of last season. It was the 2nd best passing yardage EVER. "Just" as good would be a great accomplishment. What it WILL be is a significantly deeper set of receivers with a more diverse set of skills than last year. THAT will give Josh more flexibility in his schemes and make it harder for defenses to hone in on our game plans and protect against injuries4) Brady had one of the very best passing offenses in the league in 2011 with receivers Welker, Gronk, Hernandez and Branch. Adding Lloyd, Gaffney and a backup TE is sufficient to make the passing game significantly better and more dependable. We'll also have more screens and dump-offs (RB receptions) now that Josh is back and our youngsters have a year of experience (Woodhead will get the RB share of receptions if they don't).
I'm probably wrong, I don't think it speaks well of our receiving corps if Branch makes the team. His skill has always been his ability to create separation against zone based teams. He has NEVER been effective against strong physical man coverage, even in his prime. Now as his physical skills are deteriorating, combined with the fact that more and more teams have gone to playing the Pats with a physical play, especially in the short zones, his effectiveness has dropped even more. About the only thing he has going for him at this point is his familiarity with Brady.A) Our #2 and #3 WR are Lloyd and Gaffney instead of Branch and Ochocinco.
B) We are arguing who should replace Underwood. I vote for Branch.
Your pretty much right on the money. I find it funny that our 4 main receivers are Gronk, Hernandez, Welker, and Lloyd. All are proven and effective. Most teams would die to have 4 dependable options, and we spend all this time and anguish speculating on who their backups will be.BOTTOM LINE
I don't see Stallworth making the roster unless there is an injury before Game 1 or if Branch isn't the 1-2 catch per game threat that Stallworth is if he is healthy.
This team isn't built around chucking the ball 30-40 yards down the field very often. We are much better than that using the short and intermediate routes, and counting on more completions and YAC's.
The top 6 receiving targets are Welker, Gronk, Lloyd, Hernandez, Gaffney and whichever running back is in the game.
We can fuss about whether we keep Branch or Stallworth. It seems unlikely that either will be active barring injuries. In any case, I'm fine with Gaffney replacing Lloyd as a starter if Lloyd is injured.
Even if Lloyd is injured and Branch is active, we are still ahead of last year. We have Gaffney instead of Ochocinco.
I don't think I'm being harsh, just practical. Roster spots are going to be at a premium this season. I just don't think we should use one on a player that DOESN'T play ST's, has NO position flexibility, and is unlikely to get on the field unless someone is injuredPatfanken, I don't really see why you are being so harsh on Branch. I realize he had plenty of troubles last year, but at times he had some decent production. There is no chance he is going to be playing the high percentage of snaps he did last year, which would likely make him more effective when he was on the field.
It doesn't make sense to throw away a proven asset, especially in a league where you never know who's going to go down when. Branch as a backup isn't the ideal, but backups are never the ideal. Despite everything else he still has that special connection with Brady, which inherently makes him one of the more dangerous backups in the league. He's the ideal safety net at one the more vital positions on the team.