Peter King: "Patriots have concerns"

[JackBauer]

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?

If you really think Moss, Welker, Edelman, and two third round picks are not sufficient talent and depth at the WR position, then there's really no point in arguing this any further.

 

[mgcolby]

It's easy. Don't evaluate based on consistent evaluation criteria.

What exactly did Pittsburgh do to upgrade their WR's? lose Holmes?

King can have concerns because he can simply ignore that his "great" teams had bigger OL issues and did less to address.

Exactly. I think most national writers jump on the "trendy" comments of the local media and regurgitate them. Although I don't necessarily lump King in with them, he is one of the few that hits every camp and at least tries to be knowledgeable about the teams he has to cover. With that said I believe the local media and the majority of the “sky is falling crowd” that lurks around here, look at this team in a vacuum. They tend to compare this team to previous dominate Pats teams, when they really should be comparing this team to its competition. I think if more people took that approach it would change their perspective immensely.

 

[Synovia]

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?

WR was a point of weakness? According to who? Or what?

Moss, Welker, Edelman, Tate, Price could arguably be the best 1-5 in the NFL

There isn't a team in the NFL that isn't counting on a Rookie or 2nd year player to become a legitimate XX.

 

[51Hits]

As long as Moss/Welker aren't the ONLY options they'll be fine as they literally were last year. This year you have potential for help from Tate, Hernandez, Gronk and Edelman. That's a good amount of possibilities there. I agree WR is unproven, but I'm a lot more worried about the defense than the offense.

The main question on the offense is where is the running game?

 

[Zeus]

The main question on the offense is where is the running game?

My main question about the offense is whether the defense can get off the field so that the offense actually gets a chance to play.

 

[Deus Irae]

If you really think Moss, Welker, Edelman, and two third round picks are not sufficient talent and depth at the WR position, then there's really no point in arguing this any further.

Given that what you're posting here is not what was at issue, I agree that there's no point discussing this further.

 

[Deus Irae]

Why is the o-line a concern for you? We upgraded RT, and lost Mankins. Connolly has looked solid. If depth is a concern than I can see that given Neil's history. But the starting five are as solid as they come in the NFL.

Have you seen the Jets, Steelers, Colts play this preseason? What have their lines done that have impressed you?

1.) The offensive line is clearly an issue. The team's on it's #3 left guard before the season even starts, just to point out on obvious concern.

2.) The problems of other teams have nothing to do with the problems of the Patriots. If the entire Jets team were to be suspended tomorrow, the Patriots wouldn't be better or worse.

 

[sbpatfan]

If you really think Moss, Welker, Edelman, and two third round picks are not sufficient talent and depth at the WR position, then there's really no point in arguing this any further.

Not to mention Crumpler, Gronkowski, and Hernandez...

 

[Deus Irae]

Not to mention Crumpler, Gronkowski, and Hernandez...

Crumpler, Gronkowski and Hernandez are tight ends, not wide receivers.

 

[Synovia]

Crumpler, Gronkowski and Hernandez are tight ends, not wide receivers.

Okay, so who exactly needed to be upgraded at WR?

 

[JackBauer]

Given that what you're posting here is not what was at issue, I agree that there's no point discussing this further.

No, but it is directly related to the point. If WR was not an area of weakness moving into the offseason (at least not post-draft), and is clearly not an area of weakness after the preseason, complaining that the Patriots have questions because of their failure to address a non-issue is stupid. Sorry.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

The offensive line is not the biggest concern on the team...while depth certainly is,it is not comparable to the OLB corps...for god sakes we have Marcus freaking Murrell who should be the guy starting opposite Banta Cain on sunday

.....nothing against Tully but Tully would not start on 28 teams in this league and Murrell would be on most teams practice squad at best and who is behind Marcus on the depth chart?,..its a rookie who has missed preseason and is a HUGE question mark.

Our group of OLBs are very poor at best in comparison to the majority of teams in the league,so yes,OLB is THE biggest problem for the Pats,in fact OLB is not even second biggest worry..its CB

 

[JackBauer]

Tully would not start on 28 teams in this league

That's absurd.

 

[PatsChamp88]

Patriots: "Peter King has concerns"

 

[Synovia]

.....nothing against Tully but Tully would not start on 28 teams in this league and Murrell would be on most teams practice squad at best.

I strongly disagree that Tully wouldn't start on 28 teams in the league.


He's not a perfect player, but hes a pretty good pass rusher, and there's a lot of guys out there (DEs and OLBs) who can't even claim that.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

That's absurd.

The 49ers dropped Tully and last time I looked they were not exactly a powerhouse...Tully has played decent in NE but I doubt he would start for more than a handful of teams...he is a fine player in terms of depth but he is starting because he is the best of poor or inexperienced depth

Like I said he is the best we got NOW

 

[BradyFTW!]

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.

Same here. I agree with Peter that there's reason to be concerned about the Pats, although I definitely disagree that WR is one of them. I'd also point out that every team in the league has similar reasons to be concerned, but what can you do... the Pats have major question marks on both sides of the ball, but rather than pencil them in for 8-9 wins I'd rather just see how the talent on hand performs. Could be an 8 win team, could be a 13 win team, and we just don't know yet.

 

[BradyFTW!]

The 49ers dropped Tully and last time I looked they were not exactly a powerhouse...Tully has played decent in NE but I doubt he would start for more than a handful of teams...he is a fine player in terms of depth but he is starting because he is the best of poor or inexperienced depth

Like I said he is the best we got NOW

Care to point out which 3-4 teams TBC wouldn't start for? Because when you look at the number of sacks that he had versus his frequency of rushing the passer, and add in that he's actually pretty competent against the run, it's clear that he'd start for most 3-4 teams in the NFL.

Just looking over the AFC, he would probably start for the Pats, Bills, Dolphins, Jets, Chiefs, and Broncos. He probably wouldn't start for the Steelers, Chargers, or Ravens.

 

[Deus Irae]

No, but it is directly related to the point. If WR was not an area of weakness moving into the offseason (at least not post-draft), and is clearly not an area of weakness after the preseason, complaining that the Patriots have questions because of their failure to address a non-issue is stupid. Sorry.

1.) WR was clearly an area of concern moving into the offseason.

2.) WR was clearly an area of concern post-draft.

3.) Until Tate can prove he's a viable WR3, Welker can prove he's healthy enough for the regular season, Edelman can show that he can play without getting hurt and Price can show that he's able to play in the NFL, WR will still be an area of concern.

Calling that a non-issue is stupid. Sorry.

 

[Deus Irae]

You seem to subscribe to the "everyone is entitled to their opinion" mantra, which is fine.

But once you accept a position that NE's WRs are a weak spot, then that makes all but 1-2 positions on every team a weakness. That certainly makes Indy's WRs a weakness, since you also feel it makes sense to exclude the TE from the discussion. Without Clark, Indy has one very good receiver and a bunch of ordinary guys.

But would anyone really say Indy's WRs are a weakness?

There is such a thing as an incorrect opinion, and this appears to be one.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with King's opinion. What King said:

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.

What people are apparently seeing:

OMG!!!! Epic disaster!!! BB Sucks!!!! Patriots 0-16!!!!