Peter King: "Patriots have concerns"

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

It Is What It Is Peter King on D&H: Patriots have concerns

Did I read that right that he puts the Steelers as his pick for one of the best teams this season?

I can't see the Steelers doing better than 9-7,they could go 1-3 to start without Ben

 

[Calciumee]

It Is What It Is Peter King on D&H: Patriots have concerns

Did I read that right that he puts the Steelers as his pick for one of the best teams this season?

I can't see the Steelers doing better than 9-7

He does realize that Big Ben can't play for the first 4 games?

And usually, he ends up missing a game or two with an injury, so say he only plays 10 games, they will be lucky to be 9-7!

 

[JackBauer]

King said his clear top three teams in the NFL are the Steelers, Saints and Packers, with the Panthers and Colts a notch below. He has a number of concerns about the Patriots. “I don’t know about their running game,” King said. “Can Fred Taylor stay healthy? Because I think he’s the best running back they have. Is Brady going to have enough time behind some different guys on the offensive line? Is he going to have the weapons? They just, in my opinion, have not focused enough right now on the receiver position in the offseason, but obviously they did focus on the tight end. I would be very, very excited if I were them about the tight end position.

Yeah. Okay, Peter.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yeah. Okay, Peter.

Where's the problem with his opinion there? Moss, Welker, Tate and Edelman were already on the team. The 'major' additions were Holt, Price and D.P.. That's two 'venerable' receivers and a rookie 3rd round pick from a college program that isn't exactly known for churning out ready made NFL receivers. He notes that it's just his opinion, after all.

 

[JackBauer]

Where's the problem with his opinion there? Moss, Welker, Tate and Edelman were already on the team. The 'major' additions were Holt, Price and D.P.. That's two 'venerable' receivers and a rookie 3rd round pick from a college program that isn't exactly known for churning out ready made NFL receivers. He notes that it's just his opinion, after all.

The point is that it's a stupid point, regardless of whether or not he's technically correct.

 

[patman12]

Of the issues to focus on with the Patriots (young, inexperienced D, thin at CB, questions at OLB, lack of rush from the front 7), it seems weird for King's opinion to focus on the receivers.

 

[Deus Irae]

The point is that it's a stupid point, regardless of whether or not he's technically correct.

It's not a stupid point at all. Wide receiver was a clear area of weakness for the Patriots last season, and not much was done to address it in King's eyes. The reality is that the Patriots are counting on a player who showed almost nothing last year to become a legitimate WR3. Whether you and/or I think Tate can get it done is irrelevant to King's opinion on the matter.

Are we supposed to pretend the Aiken as a WR3 era wasn't just last year?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The problem, and it's not unique to Peter, is if he has a problem with a team that had one of the best WR duos in the league last year only adding a couple of youngsters (not to mention seriously upgrading the TE talent), then it's incomprehensible he can't have concerns with teams who had QB (among other) concerns last season who are starting the season without a functional one... Steelers is bad enough...PANTHERS???

It would seem at times we are the only perrenial contender who has problems... Every team has problems whether the mediots grasp that or are remotely equipped to assess them or simply choose not to because they're too busy twitting and competing for breaking news scoops...

 

[BSR]

I actually am one of the rare people that likes Peter King, but I don't read him for his insight or analysis. His picks and predictions are basically no better then the average persons. His access though is outstanding.

When I first read the headline I read it as the Patriots themselves had concerns about something. Now that I read it, it is clear that he has concerns about the Patriots. That I don't worry about.

 

[patsox23]

It's not a stupid point at all. Wide receiver was a clear area of weakness for the Patriots last season, and not much was done to address it in King's eyes. The reality is that the Patriots are counting on a player who showed almost nothing last year to become a legitimate WR3. Whether you and/or I think Tate can get it done is irrelevant to King's opinion on the matter.

It is empirically ridiculous and criminally negligent for a guy in Peter King's position to list RECEIVER as a concern for the Patriots. I can list at least three or four bigger concerns on the team. In fact, outside of kicker and QB, I'm not sure if anything is LESS of a concern than the WR depth chart. That's seriously asinine.

 

[Deus Irae]

It is empirically ridiculous and criminally negligent for a guy in Peter King's position to list RECEIVER as a concern for the Patriots. I can list at least three or four bigger concerns on the team. In fact, outside of kicker and QB, I'm not sure if anything is LESS of a concern than the WR depth chart. That's seriously asinine.

You didn't bother reading or listening to the interview, did you?

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

The point is that it's a stupid point, regardless of whether or not he's technically correct.

As are King's other points. That's why King makes perfect, rational sense to your "debate" opponent.

Interesting take on how great the Packers are. I guess they have zero offensive line, running back, defensive issues.

I guess those issues will be overcome by their young athletic secondary.

And especially that max protect, young offensive line

 

[Sicilian]

Of the issues to focus on with the Patriots (young, inexperienced D, thin at CB, questions at OLB, lack of rush from the front 7), it seems weird for King's opinion to focus on the receivers.

It's odd, because King is usually a QB centric evaluator (from what I've seen). So on one hand, it makes sense that he would focus on the weapons that Brady has to determine his prediction. But on that front, he chooses Carolina as one of his top teams, who has a subpar QB, only one good WR, and lost their best defensive player.

It's not a stupid point at all. Wide receiver was a clear area of weakness for the Patriots last season, and not much was done to address it in King's eyes. The reality is that the Patriots are counting on a player who showed almost nothing last year to become a legitimate WR3. Whether you and/or I think Tate can get it done is irrelevant to King's opinion on the matter.

Are we supposed to pretend the Aiken as a WR3 era wasn't just last year?

I think it's unfair to say they didn't do more than hope Tate works out. They brought in two vets and a rookie. The vets didn't work out, the rookie is still here, and it sounds like Tate is doing well (based on Brady's words about him). With Welker and Edelman healthy (assuming), we're guaranteed to upgrade over Aiken at WR3. By how much remains to be seen.

 

[Sicilian]

It is empirically ridiculous and criminally negligent for a guy in Peter King's position to list RECEIVER as a concern for the Patriots. I can list at least three or four bigger concerns on the team. In fact, outside of kicker and QB, I'm not sure if anything is LESS of a concern than the WR depth chart. That's seriously asinine.

Going a little overboard with the bolded statement there, aren't you?

 

[patsox23]

It's odd, because King is usually a QB centric evaluator (from what I've seen). So on one hand, it makes sense that he would focus on the weapons that Brady has to determine his prediction. But on that front, he chooses Carolina as one of his top teams, who has a subpar QB, only one good WR, and lost their best defensive player.



I think it's unfair to say they didn't do more than hope Tate works out. They brought in two vets and a rookie. The vets didn't work out, the rookie is still here, and it sounds like Tate is doing well (based on Brady's words about him). With Welker and Edelman healthy (assuming), we're guaranteed to upgrade over Aiken at WR3. By how much remains to be seen.

A big part of the reason the vets "didn't work out" is that Tate and, to a lesser degree, Price -- not to mention all three TEs -- made them expendable.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think it's unfair to say they didn't do more than hope Tate works out. They brought in two vets and a rookie. The vets didn't work out, the rookie is still here, and it sounds like Tate is doing well (based on Brady's words about him). With Welker and Edelman healthy (assuming), we're guaranteed to upgrade over Aiken at WR3. By how much remains to be seen.

How is it unfair? That's where they are at NOW, with the offseason now over. What King wrote was:

They just, in my opinion, have not focused enough right now on the receiver position in the offseason

If you want to think that bringing in Patten and Holt during the offseason (along with the lesser lights) was enough, you're entitled to that opinion. That doesn't make King's opinion stupid, though.

 

[patsox23]

Going a little overboard with the bolded statement there, aren't you?

Yes. It's called hyperbole. (It's also called indulging my 13-year old temper.)

 

[Deus Irae]

King's concerns in the Q&A...

o-line
running game
not addressing WR enough in the offseason
Youthful secondary

He didn't mention the linebackers or the DEs. The harshest criticism that can reasonably be aimed at King is that he didn't voice enough concerns.

 

[Rob0729]

Peter King is just one opinion out of millions. His preseason predictions have been notoriously bad and even he makes fun of some of his predictions. Who really cares what he thinks? Doesn't mean that he is right or that anyone with any football knowledge will agree with him.

 

[signbabybrady]

How is it unfair? That's where they are at NOW, with the offseason now over. What King wrote was:



If you want to think that bringing in Patten and Holt during the offseason (along with the lesser lights) was enough, you're entitled to that opinion. That doesn't make King's opinion stupid, though.

Seems to me like like 3 draft picks in 2 years is doing a lot at the position especially considering 2 of the best in the game are on the roster already. Ignoring what is there and stating the Pats didn't do enough is stupid IMO it would be equal to saying that the Patriots didn't do enough at QB during the offseason that Brady returned and Cassell left.

I am not sure how you can defend King on this as he just wrong to say WR as a concern other than Welkers return to form.