Rumor: Patriots in the mix for Vincent Jackson

[Bonzo]

First off, considering the two are perennial playoff teams, I sincerely doubt that SD would deal Jackson to the Pats, unless we make a dramatically better offer than the next guy or they know something we don't . . .

That said, most posters disparaging the idea are basing their criticism off of yesterday's performance, which I think is rather shortsighted. The point is that VJ offers a long-term solution for either a successor or at least complement to the deep-ball threat represented by Randy Moss (who I think we agree is likely gone after the season). VJack is 27, Moss 33. Simple as that.

Also, it's been said on here that the Patriots brain trust regard Jackson as the best WR in the NFL. If there is any validity to this report (and I realize there probably isn't), I would think that would weigh very heavily.

 

[blackglass3]

Can he rush the passer?

(I'm in a class and don't have time to see if it's been said yet)

 

[moosekill]

Brad Childress was tooting his own horn when he picked Harvin because he believed the Pats were trying to get him.

BTW, trading for Jackson would be stupid for several reasons.

1. WR's aren't the problem, Brady is uncharacteristically locking on certain WR's.
2. Brady is over throwing WR's.
3. Brady is under throwing WR's.
4. Brady is becoming careless with the football.
5. RB is a dire need
6. CB is a dire need

- The Pats should be calling up Carolina and see if they can work out a deal for Williams or Stewart.
- The Pats need to sign Mankins now or trade him. If they don't, Mankins walks and the best the Pats get is a 3rd round comp pick.

If Mankins doesn't play this year he is still the Patriots property next year.

 

[Deus Irae]

If Mankins doesn't play this year he is still the Patriots property next year.

This is incorrect.

 

[moosekill]

Every thing I have read has said that is correct, based on the current assumptions for the collective bargaining agreement. Could you explain how that isn't correct?

 

[boston22407]

We need a 3 way deal, Jackson to NE, Moss to Minn and picks (or Mankins) to SD.

Minnesota only needs a 1 year WR with Rice out. They have Rice, Berrian, Harvin going forward. We need a long term stud with Moss seemingly on his way out. San Diego would get more from a team getting Jackson signed long term.

that would be crazy if moss went back to min

 

[boston22407]

Can he rush the passer?

(I'm in a class and don't have time to see if it's been said yet)

we got put on 160 lbs jackson

 

[moosekill]

Or are you guessing?

 

[BelichickFan]

that would be crazy if moss went back to min

Forgot about that connection but Favre wanted him in 2007; I posted that knowing there's no chance but based on the needs of the teams it actually makes a lot of sense. Given their ages I'd absolutely throw something in with Moss to get Jackson if we could get him signed long term.

 

[Teenuh]

i would like to add Jackson...then flip Moss to the Vikings. I love Randy and what he has done for us, but i really think he might need a change that enables him to get that last contract. Look, Moss had that unthinkable catch yesterday, but i did not like his intensity and think a change woulod be best for both team and player.

You heard it here first: If we lose Moss, our offense becomes average at best. Welker won't be getting the number of catches he usually gets, our running game will become ever worse, etc.... Jackson can't stretch a defense the way Moss does.

 

[moosekill]

You heard it here first: If we loss Moss, our offense becomes average at best. Welker won't be getting the number of catches he usually gets, our running game will become ever worse, etc.... Jackson can't stretch a defense the way Moss does.

And if we lose Moss and don't get a #1 receiver what happens to our offense?

 

[boston22407]

And if we lose Moss and don't get a #1 receiver what happens to our offense?

I dont want to even think about that

 

[Teenuh]

And if we lose Moss and don't get a #1 receiver what happens to our offense?

We need to keep Moss and forget Jackson. Anyone who thinks Moss will decline significantly in the next few years apparently isn't watching the same player I am. Moss as an athlete is a total freak. His physical skills won't decline anytime soon. Pay moss, get another RB in the next draft and we're set.

 

[boston22407]

We need to keep Moss and forget Jackson. Anyone who thinks Moss will decline significantly in the next few years apparently isn't watching the same player I am. Moss as an athlete is a total freak. His physical skills won't decline anytime soon. Pay moss, get another RB in the next draft and we're set.

i think we keep moss and draft a young stud wr

 

[Rob0729]

And if we lose Moss and don't get a #1 receiver what happens to our offense?

Losing Moss may not be the end of the world. It may get Brady back to spreading the wealth. Hernandez looks to be a stud receiving TE after two weeks (granted two weeks is not a career). Tate looks good. Gronk should get some looks.

Brady led this team with Reche Caldwell as his primary WR and not much else. I am not that worried about losing Moss although he makes the offense much more explosive. It could make the offense better in that Brady wouldn't overrely on him.

 

[Deus Irae]

Every thing I have read has said that is correct, based on the current assumptions for the collective bargaining agreement. Could you explain how that isn't correct?

The 5 year requirement for UFA was a change due to the uncapped season. Prior to this year, Mankins would already have been a UFA. I can't speak to what "current assumptions" your claiming, so I really can't explain in comparison.

 

[WhiteWesWelker88]

Didn't we win 3 SBs with far less receiving talent than we have now? Guess the defense and run game mattered that much.

Defense was hugely important....

A Stud WR makes a difference..

Moss is not a stud anymore.:bricks::bricks::bricks:

 

[Bonzo]

You heard it here first: If we lose Moss, our offense becomes average at best. Welker won't be getting the number of catches he usually gets, our running game will become ever worse, etc.... Jackson can't stretch a defense the way Moss does.

Certainly, Moss is one of the all-time great wide receivers in NFL history. But I don't think the current gap (if there is one) is as pronounced as you make it. Every year that Moss has been a Patriot, Jackon has boasted higher yards per catch. And of course, San Diego has boasted some great rushing totals in the years with Jackson as their top deep threat. Moss can burn like nobody's business, but I don't think he's that much better at stretching a defense than Jackson.

 

[moosekill]

So when you said I was incorrect, what you should have said was, that may or may not be correct Moose, although most of the experts think you will be correct.

 

[Boston Boxer]

You heard it here first: If we lose Moss, our offense becomes average at best. Welker won't be getting the number of catches he usually gets, our running game will become ever worse, etc.... Jackson can't stretch a defense the way Moss does.

i think Moss has checked out. In the long run, getting VJ and lossing Moss would be an upgrade over time