We Have A Top Offense

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by mgteich, Aug 14, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    We had a top 5 offense last year. We now have a healthy Brady, have added weapons to the passing game and blocking to the running game. The offense we saw Thursday looked great. And we still get to add Welker, Faulk, Holt and Taylor.

    Personally, I think that we still have a couple of roster spots to decide: 4th RB (Morris/Green_Ellis) and 9th OL (Wendell, Larsen, Chiaciuc). As of now, I think that we keep Holt AND Aiken. Obviously, Belichick has to be satisfied that Holt still has something left in the tank. The alternative for the 25th offensive roster spot (instead of Holt) would be to keep a 5th RB as we did last year.

    Obviously, it would be great if Mankins is signed. Otherwise, I don't see that we need addtions. We could add an OG, OT and/or a RB. There is certainly room for upgrades there.
  2. KontradictioN

    KontradictioN Do you even lift? PatsFans.com Supporter

    No Jersey Selected

    Faulk played Thursday night.
  3. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    I think there are a lot of decisions to make. I see a big group of guys in the mix for 7th-10th OL, and I dont think any have been decided. The WR issue, and its contribution to special teams will be a difficult decision, and whether or not to keep 5 RBs probably hinges on that.
    But I don't think those decisions have much of an impact on how good we will be on offense, they just fill in the depth.
  4. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    I agree with your analysis. We just differ on the characterization. I don't think that there are lots of decisions. As you said, we are primarily talking about depth. The decisions could easily be made today, and it wouldn't make much difference on way or the other.

    I agree that anything could still happen, but Ohrnberger and Bussey seem to have inside tracks to roster spots at this point. The last spot is still out there.

    7th WR or 5th RB
    I just don't understand the issue. Last year we carried 5 running backs and two tight ends, and didn't use the 5th RB. I see no reason to carry a 5th RB. Green-Ellis could beat out Morris, or not. I also don't see us dumping Holt, until at least the bye week.

  5. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    With the additional additions of Tate and Price at WR, and a full compliment of what looks like a very strong corps of TE's this O could be better than we have seen in a while.

    The ST's are in their second year of Scott O'Brien, very intriguing punt and kick returners and coupled with the Mesko addition will help with field position..
  6. convertedpatsfan

    convertedpatsfan PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    The OL could use Mankins, especially with Kaczur's injury. Starting the season with your third-string LG is a bit scary, though Connelly's played well so far. The second-string OL was awful, so we could use some more depth.

    The passing options are much-improved over last season, especially with Welker's miracle recovery. And I'm really glad BB taught O'Brien about these big guys called tight ends that are allowed to catch passes too. I'm hoping they'll bring another element to the offense and also open up some holes in the running game for Maroney.

    Brady should be better than last season, but a lot of our success on offense will be determined by O'Brien's maturity as a play-caller in his second season. Less spread, more running and play-action would be a good start. Less of that damn draw with Kevin Faulk on third and long would be nice too. I actually expect O'Brien to be the biggest variable on offense, and I expect he'll do much better.
  7. patsox23

    patsox23 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Obrien did fine last year. The ol and injuries to wr made his job difficult. As for BB "teaching" him to use the TE, if that position wasn't emphasized enough last year, it's Belichick's fault more than anyone. He's the boss.
  8. spacecrime

    spacecrime Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    That's because he is second string, not third. All the mediots are talking third string, but last year Connoly was the primary backup and G/C.

    Nothing changed. Kaczur was inserted at G not because he was the primary backup, but because BB needed to get Vollmer on the field, and Kaczur should have made a good OG. Just because he might have been a better OG than Connelly doesn't make Connelly third string. Matt Light and Koppen probably would make excellent guards. If BB put them there for a day, would Connelly suddenly become fifth string?

    Connelly is a good backup. He was last year and he will be this year.

    Besides, we are talking OG here, not LT or DE or any other position where a player can take over a game. When was the last time a guard was superbowl MVP?
  9. AzPatsFan

    AzPatsFan Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Now that that the pass rusuh situation is clarified wiht two starters and two expereinced reserves and a premium draft pick, Cassandra-like fans are turning to the Offensive line as a source of angst.

    Losing Kaczur transforms this to a potential opportunity, since it will force at least one newcomer to play. I find it unlikely that Mankins really accepts advice to sit for two years with out a dime, merely to make a point. I can't believe he thinks he could recoup the lost $14 -15 million dollars elsewhere, in any new contract scenario.

    It is obvious off the single preseason game, that this year's late offensive line picks need a few years of PS grooming, so the realistic possibilities are Connelly, Ohrnberger and perhaps the unsung Bussey, who is my wildcard. Every team in the AFCE has O line problems, with everyone having WORSE problems.

    But it also seems obvious that this upcoming draft will likely be a dull one from fans perspectives as it will be a meat-and-potatoes draft devoted to linemen on both sides of ther ball.
  10. WhiZa

    WhiZa Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    I'd rather keep Lawfirm over Holt. It does not look like Holt will be taking over the #3 WR like we all assumed. In that case, BJGE adds more value on STs then Holt does. Also looking into the future it will be easier to resign BJGE next year if we keep him this year. Holt also makes more money, if that means anything to the Pats in a uncapped year.
  11. convertedpatsfan

    convertedpatsfan PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    Fair enough. I shouldn't have said third-string, but rather third choice, as Connelly would probably be the top back-up at either OG spot.

    Connelly is a good back-up but Kaczur was projected to start ahead of him. And judging from the Saints game, Connelly is also the only back-up capable of playing important minutes for us, which makes our depth at the position very slim.
  12. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Disable Jersey

    1.) Mankins
    2.) Kaczur
    3.) Connolly

    Connolly is the #3 left guard, and that's 3rd string.

    I do think it's fair to say that we don't know if Connolly would have been backup or 3rd string at RG, since the Mankins situation meant that Kaczur was focusing only on LG and we can't say for certain that he'd have been looked at for both spots.
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2010
  13. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Kaczur was COMPETING WITH Connolly for the LG job. It had not been handed to him. The fact that he was with the first unit for 2 days isnt exactly proof he was going to be the starter.
    Theoretically, Kaczur having started for 5 years probably made him the favorite but there is no way he was being handed the job without competition.
  14. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Holt is not the #3 receiver because he didn't play in the first preseason game?

  15. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Well speculation ends, Holt to IR. So I do see 6 WR's: Moss, Welker, Tate, Edleman Price & Aiken.

    So 4 or 5 RB's and OL are the variables.
  16. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    If we consider that we have 25 offensive roster spots, 24 are already spoken for.
    QB 2
    WR 6
    RB 4
    TE 3
    OL 9
    As you said, two options are a 10th OL and a 5th RB. I agree. I might note that the 5th "running back" could very well be FB Thomas Williams.

  17. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Holt's spot is now available for a 5th RB (Thomas Williams anyone) or a 10th OL (we could protect a developmental player on the 53).

  18. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Given the talent among the DB's who can play ST I am leaning towards 26 D players and 24 O + the 3 ST specialist. OL who can be placed on the PS provides flexibility with the roster.
  19. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    I am fine with this idea as long as Thomas Williams is in the mix as a defensive player. Some would consider him a fullback, since that is where his value lies.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page