- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 7,611
Yeah, we should keep Mankins because in six years when his career is done, the Pats will never reach the playoffs again.
Come on. No player is irreplaceable. If you think the Pats cannot ever reach the playoffs ever again once he is gone, fine. But if you think they can recover when he retires in 5-6 years, why can't they recover now?
Besides, you can't look at is the team better off with Mankins or without him. You have to say, Is the team better off with Mankins at OG or Kaczur at OG and $8 mil a year spent on someone else. Like a RDE or OLB.
The difference between a serviceable OG and a stud OG just isn't that great. Like it or not, Justin Tuck killed us in SB42. We had problems other than Mankns, and in another thread we can talk all about them. But here we are talking about Mankins, and anyone who says no one can ever play better than him needs to rewatch that game.
Mankins is good. If he were Evans or Hutchinson, we'd have a 19-0 banner.
I'm fine with $6 mil a year for an OG, nervous about $7 mil a year, and no way do I want the Pats to spend $8 mil a year.
Anyone who thinks that $8 mil a year cannot be put to better use on this team, fine. It's a free country
But you're wrong
This is a good discussion and people are actually putting out reasonable positions on both sides of a tough issue.
Here's where I come down, as I've said.
I look at this through the lens of the window slowly closing on TB's best years and see everything from the perspective of making another run at a ring while he's still on the right side of 35 (i.e., the next three seasons). Of course, he could defy the odds and be another Elway or Favre, but John is the only QB to win an SB after the age of 35.
So, I just think the Pats should avoid the risk of changing an important part of any future success and one that seems to be working. Last year, the OL was told to protect the Franchise and give him every chance to get back to his old form after a career-threatening injury and surgery. They more than excelled at that, allowing only 16 sacks and giving Tommy time to get his feet back under him without ducking "incoming" every other play.
I'm willing to man-up, as I've said elsewhere here, and come out here on the morning of January 3rd. If Brady has put another low 90's pass rating and not missed a play due to injury again and taken around 16 sacks with a Mankins-less line, I'll be the first to say I was wrong. Can I plan to meet you here then?
And, it's you who are are wrong.