Wide Receivers - As Good As It Can Be

[VrabelJr]

Can they quadruple dip at DT in next years draft with no worthy depth and ageing Wilfork/Kelly

Can see DT being an emphasis for the next couple of drafts.

I think we had an eye on DT this year until all the good ones were off the board before it got to us, hence the trade back immediately after the last DT good was taken. Last years draft was deep but the drop off from 1st round DTs to 2nd round DTs was pretty siginificant imo.

 

[Deus Irae]

Perhaps you are a little rusty at this admitting error thing.

I'm fine, thanks. For example, one of your posts contained the following:

after spending the last few months decrying the group as the worst in the league makes you look pretty silly

What I'd actually written was this:

History tells us what rookies tend to do, which is "not much". Go list all the teams with a worse WR corps than the Patriots, discounting any and all rookies due to their "unknown" status. That's your starting point, and it should explain why people are saying what they are saying.

When it comes to the WR corps, the Patriots are relying on a lot of players to defy the odds/history this season.

You're tossing TEs in with the WRs, though. Right now, the Patriots "known" WR corps essentially consists of Amendola, Edelman and Jenkins, with only Amendola a 'lock'. Everyone complaining that people are down on the WRs should really take a look at that, factoring in both injury and talent.

Patriots current "known" WR corps:
Amendola
Edelman (?)
Jenkins (?)

That's got to be among the worst in the league.

Your posts in this thread have been horrible and off the mark, and, if there's someone here who needs to admit error, it's you.

 

[Deus Irae]

For how bad the situation was, and could have worked out to be, I do think that it is as good as we could have expected. We have 4 players that have met our expectations, and 1 that has greatly exceeded them. And yes, much depends on Thompkins.

Pretty much dead on, IMO. Thompkins, if he's the real deal, gives Dobson and Boyce time to develop while the team starts with

Amendola
Thompkins
Edelman

as the top 3 WRs (I'm hoping the team doesn't try forcing Dobson in too soon, and lets him work as the WR4 while he adjusts). If Suds is for real, Gronk can come back and be close to where he was pre-injuries, and Vereen can handle the Kevin Faulk role, the offense should be fine, because Brady should be able to cover up a lot of the little problems. It's a lot of ifs, and some are more likely than others, but none of them are impossible, and how many work out will impact how well the offense runs. Before this thread, I didn't think any of this would be controversial.

Now, I'm really starting to wonder just what the hell's been put into the Koolaid around here.

 

[fnordcircle]

LMAO @ begrudgingly saying Amendola is 'as expected' after a summer of weeping over the loss of Welker.

Danny has looked every bit as good as Wes but is younger, faster and has a better catch radius.

He's an upgrade. And I had Wes's number on my ******* wedding cake. Not making it up - the cake maker put it in there as an easter egg knowing my wife and I were huge Wes fans.

 

[MassPats38]

LMAO @ begrudgingly saying Amendola is 'as expected' after a summer of weeping over the loss of Welker.

Danny has looked every bit as good as Wes but is younger, faster and has a better catch radius.

He's an upgrade. And I had Wes's number on my ******* wedding cake. Not making it up - the cake maker put it in there as an easter egg knowing my wife and I were huge Wes fans.

I hear you, but if only it were true. Given the Amendola injury watch lately in the media, I cringe at the thought of him missing a regular season game. You will hear the "I knew the Pats should have kept Welker" repeated so often here that you will probably be inspired to put that phrase to music.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Re-watched segments of the 1st half focusing on Edes. When he runs deep, it looks as if he's covered, but on the quick routes through the middle, he looks quite open. This should not be news here.

 

[mgteich]

DI and I have said that it is good that Dobson and Boyce will (hopefully) get time to develop. I don't think either of us said that they were not solid 2nd and 4th round choices.

Yep, I think Thompkins' preseason impersonation of a 5-year vet may be skewing our expectations of Dobson and Boyce. IMO they look like solid 2nd and 4th round rookies so far.

 

[Rob0729]

We don't want to repeat the poor production of Branch last year.

I think that, as of now, Edelman is a much better #3 than Dobson. I think that Brady can count on Edelman to be where is supposed to be, and to execute. Edelman has a relatively low ceiling, but he (like Branch) is dependable. Of course, his issue is health.

I see your point, but I think they will bring out Dobson first because his skills are more diverse than the other guys on the field. You put Edelman out there and it allows defenses to flood the middle of the field and instead of Gronk Welker, and Hernandez in the middle of the field, it is Amendola, Edelman, and Sudfeld.

I think the #3 WR is a bit of a misnomer anyway. The Pats are usually fluid with their receivers and many times starters are only starters because they are on the field on the first play of the game and the #4 guy could get more reps than the #3 (at least when the Pats had some depth at WR).

 

[Rob0729]

Re-watched segments of the 1st half focusing on Edes. When he runs deep, it looks as if he's covered, but on the quick routes through the middle, he looks quite open. This should not be news here.

That is why I think Dobson will be the first guy off the bench. At least a lot of the time. I think when they put that third guy in, they are going to want him to work the outside and going down field. Dobson seems to have that part of his game going a bit. He is struggling with shorter routes in getting off the block and running crisper routes.

 

[mgteich]

I'm not sure I follow. Didn't we count on 3 WR's for much of last year? The #4 got very few reps. We had Salas for awhile. How often were both Edelman and Branch available and how many receptions (or even reps) did the #4 get in those games.

I'm fine with diversifying more, and using the 4th WR more. However, it is hardly a given. We will still run lots of 2 WR sets. Barring injury, I don't see anyone but Amendola and Thompkins being in in that sets. I am fine with Dobson or Boyce pushing by Edelman and getting lots of reps. But, for me, barring injury, the #4 and #5 WR's in a game are likely get almost no reps.

The best case scenario for me would be for Dobson or Boyce to pass Edelman on the depth chart and be the #3 WR, with Edelman being the #4 in any game (used almost not at all).

I see your point, but I think they will bring out Dobson first because his skills are more diverse than the other guys on the field. You put Edelman out there and it allows defenses to flood the middle of the field and instead of Gronk Welker, and Hernandez in the middle of the field, it is Amendola, Edelman, and Sudfeld.

I think the #3 WR is a bit of a misnomer anyway. The Pats are usually fluid with their receivers and many times starters are only starters because they are on the field on the first play of the game and the #4 guy could get more reps than the #3 (at least when the Pats had some depth at WR).

 

[ivanvamp]

Danny has looked every bit as good as Wes but is younger, faster and has a better catch radius.

He's an upgrade.

All that may be true, but he's only an upgrade if he can stay on the field. Given that he's already banged up, that may be seriously wishful thinking.

 

[Rob0729]

I'm not sure I follow. Didn't we count on 3 WR's for much of last year? The #4 got very few reps. We had Salas for awhile. How often were both Edelman and Branch available and how many receptions (or even reps) did the #4 get in those games.

I'm fine with diversifying more, and using the 4th WR more. However, it is hardly a given. We will still run lots of 2 WR sets. Barring injury, I don't see anyone but Amendola and Thompkins being in in that sets. I am fine with Dobson or Boyce pushing by Edelman and getting lots of reps. But, for me, barring injury, the #4 and #5 WR's in a game are likely get almost no reps.

The best case scenario for me would be for Dobson or Boyce to pass Edelman on the depth chart and be the #3 WR, with Edelman being the #4 in any game (used almost not at all).

Actually, early they only relied on two - Edelman and Lloyd.

But I am saying that they will probably want their #3 WR to bring a different skill set than what they have on the field. Edelman is very similar to Amendola. They will probably want an outside/stretch the field type for #3. I could be wrong.

I just think the Pats are looking to diversify their offense (hence why they drafted Dobson and acquired both Ocho and Lloyd in past years). I don't know if they want an Edelman type being the #3 WR. He started on Friday because he is the primary back up to Amendola.

It could be a case that there will not be a true #3 WR with Edleman and Dobson sharing that role depending on the package and the competition. I think we get too hung up on the rankings of certain positions. They Pats don't always look at their depth that way, I am just as guilty of this as anyone else since I am the one who first mentioned #3 WR.

 

[Rob0729]

All that may be true, but he's only an upgrade if he can stay on the field. Given that he's already banged up, that may be seriously wishful thinking.

Come on. Word is this was a minor injury and he would have played if this was a real game.

I wonder if the Pats are overstating this injury (if he really is injured at all) because they have seen enough of Amendola to know what they have and they wanted to see the rest of the receivers and give them more reps with Brady. The Pats did the same thing with Moss in 2007. Moss didn't even see a preseason game in 2007 due to injury and had a monster game his first game out.

People are making far too much of this "injury" to Amendola. The guy was seen after he was done for the night two weeks ago sitting on the bench chatting it up with Brady. If he had a real or significant injury, he wouldn't have been on the field.

 

[mgteich]

I agree with your analysis. The question is whether either Dobson or Boyce is ready enough to gain Brady's confidence (and when). In any case, one of them will be active in each game.

Actually, early they only relied on two - Edelman and Lloyd.

But I am saying that they will probably want their #3 WR to bring a different skill set than what they have on the field. Edelman is very similar to Amendola. They will probably want an outside/stretch the field type for #3. I could be wrong.

I just think the Pats are looking to diversify their offense (hence why they drafted Dobson and acquired both Ocho and Lloyd in past years). I don't know if they want an Edelman type being the #3 WR. He started on Friday because he is the primary back up to Amendola.

It could be a case that there will not be a true #3 WR with Edleman and Dobson sharing that role depending on the package and the competition. I think we get too hung up on the rankings of certain positions. They Pats don't always look at their depth that way, I am just as guilty of this as anyone else since I am the one who first mentioned #3 WR.

 

[JMC00]

Question for the people that are not too optimistic about this group and wanted no part of Emmanuel Sanders.

Do you wish the Pats offered him more now and gave up the 91st pick in the draft?

 

[mgteich]

Yes, but that conclusion is colored by the fact that we drafted Harmon with the 91st pick.

BTW, I think it would have taken significantly more.

Question for the people that are not too optimistic about this group and wanted no part of Emmanuel Sanders.

Do you wish the Pats offered him more now and gave up the 91st pick in the draft?

 

[ATippett56]

The pass catching corps looks far better this year. Caveat is rooks under real game planning conditions.
And note that Moss only played 4 games here in 2010 and was de-emphasized in those 4.

Hence the Moss/Branch line item, since in essence Branch replaced Moss. As for Moss de-emphasized, it was more Moss decided to "mentally check out".

 

[Oswlek]

Question for the people that are not too optimistic about this group and wanted no part of Emmanuel Sanders.

Do you wish the Pats offered him more now and gave up the 91st pick in the draft?

For one year at 2.5mm? No thanks, I'm happy with who they have.

 

[Oswlek]

LMAO @ begrudgingly saying Amendola is 'as expected' after a summer of weeping over the loss of Welker.

Yeah, it is pretty silly. Calling Edelman a ST-only player and then saying him performing as a #3 is "meeting expectations" is another gem.

EDIT: I'm not even sure I would call Julian a #3, my hope is to have him be the #4 and catchall backup, which of course means that one of Dobson and Boyce needs to up their game in the next month or so. I only used the #3 description because it was brought up elsewhere.

Frankly, if all it took was one guy proving to be a capable pairing with Amendola - something that was not only reasonable, but probable considering the multitude of options they gave themselves - to turn the "expected" WR corps into a good group, why was there so much gnashing of teeth the past few months?

 

[ATippett56]

Frankly, if all it took was one guy proving to be a capable pairing with Amendola - something that was not only reasonable, but probable considering the multitude of options they gave themselves - to turn the "expected" WR corps into a good group, why was there so much gnashing of teeth the past few months?

Some people could not comprehend the loss of Wes Welker.

Personally, I have moved on since the start of training camp.