Gaffney Released

[IllegalContact]

Gaffney's not another Branch. They are different players. Gaffney's a versatile receiver, who can line up anywhere and can run any pattern at any depth, although he's best under 20 yards. Branch is a short-middle specialist who's more of a zone buster than a manbeater at this point in his career.

There's still time to make adjustments at WR, and there's still time for Ebert to shine. As of right now, though, the Gaffney release is a head scratcher unless he's coming back post-injury.

gaffney simply doesn't run routes as well as branch, and is by no means a man-beater

 

[Deus Irae]

I probably wasn't specific enough. How they get there is different, but both players attack the same area of the field (10-20 yards), which means Gaffney is not BradyFTW's answer to the true deep threat.

We went over this time and again during the season, and BB clearly saw what so many of us saw and brought in all the WR help, so we're all just spinning our wheels here. Gaffney is a theoretical threat to every part of the field, and the Patriots WR problems were about threatening outside the numbers just as much as they were about threatening deep.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

With our outside the box coach, i am surprised that he doesn't sift threw the thousands of scrub corners and see if one of them could pick up our offense. Most teams want big wideouts but we prefer midgets and i am convinced that the guys bb is looking for are playing cornerback. You don't often see receivers that can match welker's quickness but there are many cbs that can. I feel someone like darius butler could have been our desean jackson. I really do.

The usual reason CBs are CBs and not WRs are lack of reliable WR hands and get the ball skills. And lack of height.

 

[ivanvamp]

If the Patriots had a single WR who could regularly threaten opposing defenses downfield, they probably would have had the top offense in NFL history, and Brady would probably have a fourth ring right now.

You may be right...though they had exactly that kind of weapon in 2007 and they couldn't win it all.

 

[Rob0729]

WR and TE are two different positions. I don't know why you and Ivanamp seem intent on merging the two.

LOL! The same guy who argued with me that the Saints have a better receiving corp than the Patriots because of the Saints RBs is now separating the TEs and WRs.

No matter how you want to parse it:

2012 WRs >>> 2011 WRs in terms of starters and depth.

2012 Welker = 2011 Welker
2012 Lloyd > 2011 Branch
2012 Branch > 2011 Ochocinco

The rest is still the same, but that is a significant upgrade at the starting position and the topline depth.

 

[Deus Irae]

gaffney simply doesn't run routes as well as branch, and is by no means a man-beater

Gaffney does still beat man coverage or, rather, he did still beat man coverage as recently as last year. As for the routes, nobody is as precise in their routes as Branch, and that includes Welker, so that's a non-issue.

 

[Rob0729]

Guys was Anthony Gonzalez cut?

About two months ago.

 

[Snake Eyes]

You may be right...though they had exactly that kind of weapon in 2007 and they couldn't win it all.

I think the assumption is that we'd have a capable O-line as well, in SB42 they were not capable.

 

[Deus Irae]

LOL! The same guy who argued with me that the Saints have a better receiving corp than the Patriots because of the Saints RBs is now separating the TEs and WRs.

Are you seriously going to pretend that you can't tell the difference between a discussion about a team's wide receivers and a discussion about a team's entire receiving corps?

No matter how you want to parse it:

2012 WRs >>> 2011 WRs in terms of starters and depth.

2012 Welker = 2011 Welker
2012 Lloyd > 2011 Branch
2012 Branch > 2011 Ochocinco

The rest is still the same, but that is a significant upgrade at the starting position and the topline depth.

This is not this issue. What's more, you know that it's not the issue, which is likely the reason you decided only to go 3 deep on your list.

 

[ivanvamp]

WR and TE are two different positions. I don't know why you and Ivanamp seem intent on merging the two.

What are you talking about? I replied to the comment about the Packers' insanely good WR corps by agreeing with that, and by stating that that's probably one huge reason why they had a great offense.

But then I said that in terms of total *targets*, the Pats have a group that is as good. I'm not conflating WR and TE. I'm agreeing that the Packers' WR group is unreal, and better than the Patriots', but I'm also suggesting that the passing game is about more than just the WR, so when you take into account all the targets Brady has, the Pats are loaded.

I think I was pretty clear about that, but maybe not. If I wasn't before, then now you know what I'm trying to say.

 

[PatsFan2]

About two months ago.

Thank's Rob i gotta keep up.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I probably wasn't specific enough. How they get there is different, but both players attack the same area of the field (10-20 yards), which means Gaffney is not BradyFTW's answer to the true deep threat.

No, Lloyd is the answer to that, but even as a guy who can routinely be a threat 15+ yards downfield on the outside against man coverage, Gaffney is significantly better than anyone else on the roster, including Branch.

 

[BradyFTW!]

You may be right...though they had exactly that kind of weapon in 2007 and they couldn't win it all.

Due to Brady being injured/immobilized and having a passing game that consisted of two real threats and one credible receiver. 2011 Gronk was borderline Moss-like in his game-changing ability, but again, the Giants beat us because they could generate interior pressure and, as long as they could cover two guys, we had nowhere else to go. If you're going to lean on the passing game as heavily as the Pats do, then there's no such thing as too many weapons. I'll be curious to see who sticks ahead of "a WR who we know can actually play WR in this system" (Gaffney), because at some point in the season I'd be willing to bet quite a bit that we'll miss Gaffney more than we needed someone else who made the 53.

 

[Deus Irae]

What are you talking about? I replied to the comment about the Packers' insanely good WR corps by agreeing with that, and by stating that that's probably one huge reason why they had a great offense.

But then I said that in terms of total *targets*, the Pats have a group that is as good. I'm not conflating WR and TE. I'm agreeing that the Packers' WR group is unreal, and better than the Patriots', but I'm also suggesting that the passing game is about more than just the WR, so when you take into account all the targets Brady has, the Pats are loaded.

I think I was pretty clear about that, but maybe not. If I wasn't before, then now you know what I'm trying to say.

This is a discussion about Gaffney and the WRs. It's not a discussion about TEs or RBs, and any attempt to bring them into the conversation is just an attempt to avoid the actual topic at hand by conflating positions and roles.

This battle was fought all season long. It's disappointing to see posters have already begun to willfully ignore the results.

 

[Rob0729]

Are you seriously going to pretend that you can't tell the difference between a discussion about a team's wide receivers and a discussion about a team's entire receiving corps?




This is not this issue. What's more, you know that it's not the issue, which is likely the reason you decided only to go 3 deep on your list.

I didn't list a #4 WR because on most teams the #4 WR is a special teamer who can be on the field 5-15 snaps a game which Edelman can handle.

Seriously, why is all the sudden the #4 WR becomes such a big concern. We went into the season last year with no back up for Gronk or Hernandez and no legitimate starting safety opposite Chung. At WR, they only had one legitimate full time starter at WR and no legitimate guy off the bench as a #3 WR. Those were real concerns and the Pats overcame them. Worrying about the #4 WR is nothing compared to that or the fact that if Vollmer or Solder goes down that Cannon becomes the teams' starting RT.

As for the TE/WR thing, it is no different than what described. The Pats use Hernandez as WR a lot just like San Deigo used to consider Gates as a WR in a TE's body (still do, but he isn't as effective) or KC did with Gonzo (and then Atlanta). Yes, Gronk is used as a pure TE, but Hernandez is a hybrid and likely to be used more this year as a WR.

 

[Kontradiction]

If the Patriots had a single WR who could regularly threaten opposing defenses downfield, they probably would have had the top offense in NFL history, and Brady would probably have a fourth ring right now.

They had two as of yesterday. Now they have one. If that one gets hurt, they have none (assuming Gaffney isn't coming back).

 

[ATippett56]

Yep. And it's one reason the Packers' offense is so good. The Patriots can match them in terms of total targets though:

Jennings-Driver-Nelson-Jones-Cobb-Finley

vs

Welker-Lloyd-Branch-Gronkowski-Hernandez-Woodhead

I dunno...pretty close. Either way, both teams are elite with a capital "E" when it comes to offense.

The comparison of the receiving corps fails when Woodhead is added to the equation. Needle across the record.

 

[Sicilian]

No, Lloyd is the answer to that, but even as a guy who can routinely be a threat 15+ yards downfield on the outside against man coverage, Gaffney is significantly better than anyone else on the roster, including Branch.

Then why wasn't Branch cut instead? He's far more likely to be a shadow roster type of guy (or come back in week 2 for the non guaranteed money), the only reason they would cut Gaffney over Branch is because Branch is a better fit and is showing more in preseason. So no, I don't agree that Gaffney is significantly better than Branch right now for THIS team.

 

[PatsFan2]

It seems like we are one WR short: if Lloyd gets hurt we are right back to last year. Teams are going to load up on the inside against us if we cannot keep em honest on the outsides. Patriots WR scouts should be fired, those guys are stealing money. We don't have one good capable young WR on this roster it embaracing.:snob:

 

[Rob0729]

They had two as of yesterday. Now they have one. If that one gets hurt, they have none (assuming Gaffney isn't coming back).

Gaffney was never a down the field threat. He is more like Branch doing the short and intermediate routes.

BTW, last year, the Pats had no deep threat and if that one got hurt, they still had none.