Felger struggles to stay positive about the Pats...but fails in the end

[fnordcircle]

Felger starts off positive entitling this draft as huger than huge, but in the end he seems to forget our wheeling and dealing on the Moss trade...

Michael Felger | The Mailbag: This Draft Is Huger Than Huge For Patriots

He's right, grow some thicker skin. Our last few drafts have not measured up to the quality of the years prior.

The NE Patriots have become the 2003/2004 Colts. Most high-powered offense in the league and a defense that cannot get off of the field. We've stopped winning championships too. It might not be personnel, though, I think we really miss RAC.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Oh and nobody can hold a candle to Parcles in the draft. That guy gets it right more often then he gets it wrong. I'd also have to give what's his face in San Diego a bit of credit also.

The only high draft pick Parcells screwed up on was Bobby Carpenter. Other than that, nobody is close to Parcells in evaluating college talent.

Say what you want about this article but I agree 100%. They have bombed in the draft since 2005. I don't want to hear about Moss and Welker blah blah, i'm talking picking rookies and evaluating college talent.

I agree, the Pats have done well with their first round picks, but it's after that where they've screwed up. Also, there are a lot of teams that screwed up as well. However, I think Chad Jackson would have eventually become a good player had he not torn his ACL during the 2007 AFCCG. To this day I still think it's bizarre how the Pats coaches put this guy (who traded up for) on special teams (kick off team not kick return) when he just came back from injury.

 

[Double G]

If you want to hate on Felger, be my guest, but IMO, he's dead on with his comments.

If we had a championship calibre defense in 2006 and 2007, we'd have two more of those silver trophies with the football on it; the defense could not stop goober or goober junior in either last drive of both the AFCCG and the Super Bowl respectively (I'll take the loss in the latter to my grave too by the way) and that's all she wrote.

The truth hurts boys and girls.

 

[Jimke]

I see nothing wrong with that quote. In fact, Felger is 100% right. The pressure is on the Pats in this draft having 4 picks in the first two rounds. I said this a long time ago that this is a make or break draft for the Pats if they want to get back winning super bowls. I'm probably the minority when I say this, but the window is closing. I'm not really worried about Wheatley and Whilite because of the additions in free agency. Also, the Pats need to lay off any position that won't contribute any time soon in the first couple of rounds. I want to see draft picks that are going to compete for playing right away. So I don't want to see a TE or DL. If they have the nerve to draft a DL or TE in the first round, their setting themselves up for failure. I'm sorry, but you can't keep stockpiling one position and neglect others that are a glaring need. The outside LB is a glaring need and if they don't address it, you can forget a super bowl. Yes, the pressure is on the Pats.

There are a lot of players whose contracts expire in 2009. It would
be ideal to draft replacements this year so they will have a year's
experience under their belt.

 

[JoeSixPat]

There are a lot of players whose contracts expire in 2009. It would
be ideal to draft replacements this year so they will have a year's
experience under their belt.

Don't forget, the Patriots also have TWO franchise tags they can use to hold onto those players for an extra year.

Bottom line - it doesn't seem like Belichick agrees with Felger that there was pressure on him to use his first round pick, let alone all his second and third round picks to "stock up" on defense.

The only point I'd truly grant is that the DBs weren't good last year - but we've upgraded that in free agency and healthy 2008 rookies even before using a pick on a 2009 rookie.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Don't forget, the Patriots also have TWO franchise tags they can use to hold onto those players for an extra year.

Not quite. IF 2010 is uncapped, then every team will have one tag that can be franchise or transition, and one extra transition-only tag. So teams can designate one franchise and one transition player, or two transition players, but not two franchise players.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Not quite. IF 2010 is uncapped, then every team will have one tag that can be franchise or transition, and one extra transition-only tag. So teams can designate one franchise and one transition player, or two transition players, but not two franchise players.

Which means in a pinch you can also franchise tag the guy you don't believe you can sign and transition tag the guy you are willing to pay market to. I don't think the league will put up with much in the way of poison pill deals thereby making the transition tag a legitimate way to retain a guy you haven't been able to come to terms with.

And with all the potential uncapped RFA's out there we are now armed to shop in that 2nd round market too if that's the way the CBA goes.