Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by DropKickFlutie, Jan 23, 2013.
Let's not get carried away here.
reed isn't coming anywhere close to gillette..lets all just get over this
"Stud WR Won't Fix Anything" - wonder how many Ravens fans inaccurately were saying that same thing before they drafted Torrey Smith?
Maybe you noticed while the Ravens were beating the Pats - Smith fixed almost everything for that offense.
They had the opposite problem - strong defense and a weak offense. That's why it made sense.
It already is damn near unstoppable, except without Gronk on Sunday, it decided to stop itself.
Torrey Smith had a mediocre year for a deep threat WR (49 catches for 855 yards and 8 TDs). He went 10 games without a TD and 7 games where he had two or less catches during the regular season.
Against the Pats, he had 4 catches for 69 yards and no TDs. Smith wasn't anything special on Sunday. Boldin was the guy who killed the Pats (5 catches for 60 yards and 2 TDs) and Pitta was also about as important as Smith (5 catches for 55 yards and 1 TDs).
Flacco's longest passing play was to Boldin for 26 yards. It wasn't the deep threat that beat the Pats.
Smith was awesome on a few plays vs. the Broncos (3 catches for 98 yards and 2 TDs), but he wasn't anything special vs. the Colts (2 catches for 31 yards and 0 TDs) or the Pats.
The Ravens completed 1 pass to a WR in the first half. We need a deep threat to get to the SB.
There's a big difference between a Randy Moss type who thrives off deep balls and outside patterns and a do it all receiver like Larry Fitzgerald. I think I'd rather have a Fitzgerald type for our offense. Moss was special though, you've got to admit that 2007 was special and we likely would have won the Superbowl if our OL hadn't crapped the bed, partly due to a serious injury at starting guard that weakened the whole line and then having to face off against one of the best and most talented DLs of the entire decade.
Even then, Smith is the perfect argument against a big "stud" WR as your starter. Smith is the model of inconsistency. He can be a stud for one game and disappear for the next three. As a deep threat "stud" WR, he had two games in the regular season where he had over 100 yards and two games where he had two or more TDs.
I mean Gronk played 11 games this season and had three games where he had over 100 yards and three games where he had 2 or more TDs. In those 11 games, he had 6 more catches, 3 more TDs, and 65 less yards than Smith had in 16 games.
Again, Smith is the perfect example of why a deep threat is overrated. Way too inconsistent unless you are a true stud.
Smith is a deep threat but not physical. Dennard was bullying him all game.
Press coverage will completely neutralize him.
Yeah, I swear people see what they want to see. I don't think many people came away from that game saying "Boy, the Pats had no answer for Torrey Smith". In fact, I was saying that Dennard did a good job neutralizing Smith.
Yeah, I thought Dennard did a great job on Smith. Beat him up. Too bad the Pats didn't have Talib to do the same with Boldin.
TBH, I was surprised Dennard didn't get called for a lot of illegal contact and holding. But, they really weren't calling it either way.
Disappointed Wilson wasn't on him. Boldin is really a TE playing as a WR.
So what if Smith didn't go nuts on the Pats? He did on the Broncos and that was enough to make the Pats game plan against him.
The legitimate threat of a deep pass being completed. Smith may be inconsistent - he's also capable of being deadly, just ask the Broncos - but he's enough of a factor to change a defense. The Ravens played up and crowded the short to medium routes all game making life difficult for Brady.
To say getting a guy like Smith - big and very fast - who can get open more often than Smith and can catch the ball more consistently wouldn't help the Pats makes zero sense. Every player who can get free makes trouble for the opposition. Getting open down field generates more opportunity.
One of the main reasons Gronk is so effective is because he's open further down field than most TE's all the time. He changes the O for the better, as would a legit deep threat.
The Pats had a deep decoy like that in 2010, and they thought so highly of him that they traded him and replaced him with Deion Branch
The Patriots had the #1 offense in the league this year in points scored, even with Gronk out 8 games. Obviously Gronk is a lethal weapon when he is healthy. This Pats offense is already LOADED, some of the posts here sound like old Colts fans claiming Peyton wasn't surrounded with great weapons to explain why he repeatedly choked.
The Patriots had a 1300 yard running back. 2 different great 3rd-down RB's. Two great tight ends with different strengths, and maybe the best slot receiver in history. Sure having a deep threat would be nice, but that is NOT the reason the Pats offense has choked with low point totals in big playoff games. One could always nitpick one relative area of weakness and say "if only we had X" that would solve everything.
The Patriots going 1 for 5 in the red zone against Baltimore had NOTHING to do with the lack of a stud WR. And while Gronk is amazing, his absence shouldn't be the easy excuse for why the team was so bad in the red zone.
We need to stop looking at Moss and insisting that he is all we need to know about what a deep threat can do here. Moss had started down the same path here that he always seems to end up going down....taking plays off etc etc. So getting rid of Moss was not just a Pats decision about deep threats in this offense...but was much more a decision about Randy Moss himself.
What do you think the difference is if we line up Deion Branch (or whoever) and send him deep vs Torry Smith. What do you think a defense does?
This Post is almost like saying Welker like Receivers and Hern type TE won't fix anything if we lose them next season because we didnt win the SB this year. Losing Neal during the game was a big reason we lost. Moss would have really helped.
Separate names with a comma.