The Pats are going to add a reciever....

[Yankees/Colts]

Right on.

Add in backfield threats like Faulk, Pass, Maroney, Evans (if he makes it), and Dillon, and Brady will certainly have plenty of targets to throw to.

Are the Pats thin at wide receiver? Without a doubt, even with Branch/Jackson.

Are they thin at receiver? Nope.

Dink and dunk time!:singing: :rocker: :singing:

 

[PYPER]

I've been predicting 3 TE sets since they drafted Thomas but that doesn't make Watson a WR.

I feel I was as clear as I could be on this issue. Are you saying that if the coaching staff lines him up and utilizes him as a WR, he's still not a WR???

I really don't know what significance it matters what you call him. He's a football player. If it makes you sleep better at night to think of him as a TE, then you go do that. At the end of the day it doesn't really matter how you label his role. It will be whatever it will be regardless of what any of us like to call it.

 

[captain stone]

Man, now that's McGrew is out, how are the Pats EVER going to replace him? His absence makes them SUPER-THIN at WR.

Chad Jackson will NEVER be back. Article after article says Branch will be out until 2251.

WHAT are the Pats going to do?

Perhaps Archives should not have titled his thread: "The pats are going to..."; however, his point has merit. The pats are waffer thin at WR. After losing Givens, at a price for which I also would not have paid, the FO should have acquired a lower-cost replacement. You say that Chad Jackson is that guy? OK. Caldwell and Andre Davis are washes? Probably. Bam replaces Bethel? Maybe. I'll hold judgement on that one until the bye week. Tim Dwight replaced by...nobody. Why was he not re-signed? Baffling. By my 'cipherin', the pats are at least 1 WR, if not 2, short of a full boat, injuries notwithstanding. The other names in camp? Their surnames may as well be Flotsam and Jetsam, I'm afraid.

 

[pats1]

Perhaps Archives should not have titled his thread: "The pats are going to..."; however, his point has merit. The pats are waffer thin at WR. After losing Givens, at a price for which I also would not have paid, the FO should have acquired a lower-cost replacement. You say that Chad Jackson is that guy? OK. Caldwell and Andre Davis are washes? Probably. Bam replaces Bethel? Maybe. I'll hold judgement on that one until the bye week. Tim Dwight replaced by...nobody. Why was he not re-signed? Baffling. By my 'cipherin', the pats are at least 1 WR, if not 2, short of a full boat, injuries notwithstanding. The other names in camp? Their surnames may as well be Flotsam and Jetsam, I'm afraid.

Who says the Pats need 6 WRs?

Bethel was, in effect, replaced by Andrews or whoever else will be returning the kicks/punts.

Jackson and Caldwell replace Givens and Davis - a fairly even swap, really. Brown gets his role lessened.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

Kelvin Kight has been signed in place of McGrew

Oh thank God, the cavalry. (sarcasm)

 

[captain stone]

Who says the Pats need 6 WRs?

Bethel was, in effect, replaced by Andrews or whoever else will be returning the kicks/punts.

Jackson and Caldwell replace Givens and Davis - a fairly even swap, really. Brown gets his role lessened.

I smell what you're cookin'. Let's hope that Willie Andrews is, indeed, up to the KR/PR task. He is, after all, replacing both Bethel and Dwight in those duties.
Don't forget the attrition that usually befalls most position groups during TC. So even if your target count at WR is 5, it would seem that a "comfort" count of 7 at the start would be appropriate.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Kelvin Kight has been signed in place of McGrew

Wow, that's tight, I'd never have predicted that move.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I don't think they are thin at WR at all. The patriots have never had four potential #1 WRs on the same Team. Now they do. Lets watch the fun as tjhey compete.

On a talent basis, Givensn is a potential #5 amidst this crew.