Bedard Listening Thread

[Rob0729]

So does that mean the Pats would be unable to trade Brady if they decided to go in another direction?

They would just release him?

He didn't say it outright, but there might be a handshake deal to let him walk rather than trade him. I don't see Belichick letting Brady going for nothing (my opinion, not what Bedard said). But Kraft may step in on that to take care of Brady and let him go where he wants (again, my opinion and not what Bedard said).

 

[letekro]

He says Ravens were playing coverage against Ben. Played way off the receivers.

My commentary: That makes sense against burners like Brown and Bryant, but I assume they will play tighter against us since they wouldn't be worried about Edelman or LaFell getting behind them.

 

[Rob0729]

Should respect the Ravens offense. But the defense is at a place they should not have much problem with the Ravens' offense. Know Kubiak's offense well.

 

[letekro]

You should respect Flaco, Steve Smith, Torrey and Daniels, but Pats can handle these guys.

 

[neuronet]

Sorry...but huh? Who is Bedard? What is being listened to?

 

[Rob0729]

Key match up: Solder vs. Suggs. Expects them to take care of Suggs with help for Solder.

Said look at the game last year and the Pats' o-line was in complete disarray with Mankins at LT and Kline at LG.

 

[Rob0729]

Said you should respect the Ravens' offense. The Pats' defense is equiped to handle the Ravens' offense. Know Kubiak's offense well.

 

[letekro]

Bedard not worried about this game. of course worse than Bengals or Colts, but Pats are well equipped to beat them. Will be close. Broncos have it a little eaisier

 

[Rob0729]

Is confident the Pats will win. He think he is more confident this week than games in the past.

Although he said that he feels that the Pats are the second most likely to be upset this weekend, he is confident the Pats will win. Just that he doesn't see how the Colts can win in Denver. Otherwise, the Pats would be the second least likely to lose.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Tony Mazz: "Brady biggest prima donna left in playoffs"

..and Mazz is the biggest idiot on Boston radio.

 

[patfanken]

He says Ravens were playing coverage against Ben. Played way off the receivers.

My commentary: That makes sense against burners like Brown and Bryant, but I assume they will play tighter against us since they wouldn't be worried about Edelman or LaFell getting behind them.

But Edelman, Lafell, and Tyms have ALL gotten deep on guys this year. Its not like they are plodders. Brady just has to hit some of them.

Its time to bring back one my favorite routes. One that even got Welker deep from time to time.l Its the one that Troy Polamalu sees in his sleep. . That the one you use after the Pats have bombarded the Ravens with short crossers and medium in cuts. The route I'm talking about is the one where WR starts his 10 yd in cut from outside the hash and then cuts up the seem deep when the DB commits to what he's seen so often on the in cut. I swear it never fails to be open.

 

[letekro]

But Edelman, Lafell, and Tyms have ALL gotten deep on guys this year. Its not like they are plodders. Brady just has to hit some of them.

Its time to bring back one my favorite routes. One that even got Welker deep from time to time.l Its the one that Troy Polamalu sees in his sleep. . That the one you use after the Pats have bombarded the Ravens with short crossers and medium in cuts. The route I'm talking about is the one where WR starts his 10 yd in cut from outside the hash and then cuts up the seem deep when the DB commits to what he's seen so often on the in cut. I swear it never fails to be open.

I'm all for it, but, if I'm the Ravens I'm going to assume that the Pats cannot hurt me deep until they prove to me they can.

 

[Rob0729]

He says Ravens were playing coverage against Ben. Played way off the receivers.

My commentary: That makes sense against burners like Brown and Bryant, but I assume they will play tighter against us since they wouldn't be worried about Edelman or LaFell getting behind them.

I think part of the reason they did it wasn't because of who they were facing, but to protect the liabilities in their secondary. The Pats have done the same thing when they had weak secondaries. Play everyone off the ball and keep everything in front of you. Give up the short passing plays, but try to eliminate the big plays. I have a feeling you will still see a lot of safety high coverage on Saturday to prevent Gronk from breaking a big one up the middle.

Gronk, Edelman, and LaFell all have YAC ability and they may determine it is better to give up the 5-8 yard play than the 20 plus one.

 

[BHSL2]

I think part of the reason they did it wasn't because of who they were facing, but to protect the liabilities in their secondary. The Pats have done the same thing when they had weak secondaries.

A very Dean Pees thing to do.

 

[Sicilian]

Gronk, Edelman, and LaFell all have YAC ability and they may determine it is better to give up the 5-8 yard play than the 20 plus one.

Or they may take the opposite thought process and say, "If we let them catch the ball they're probably going to break it for 5-10 additional after the catch. Our best chance is to play tight and hope the rush gets there."

It will be interesting to see which approach they take.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I think part of the reason they did it wasn't because of who they were facing, but to protect the liabilities in their secondary. The Pats have done the same thing when they had weak secondaries. Play everyone off the ball and keep everything in front of you. Give up the short passing plays, but try to eliminate the big plays. I have a feeling you will still see a lot of safety high coverage on Saturday to prevent Gronk from breaking a big one up the middle.

Gronk, Edelman, and LaFell all have YAC ability and they may determine it is better to give up the 5-8 yard play than the 20 plus one.

That could actually help us in the TOP battle.

 

[Rob0729]

Or they may take the opposite thought process and say, "If we let them catch the ball they're probably going to break it for 5-10 additional after the catch. Our best chance is to play tight and hope the rush gets there."

It will be interesting to see which approach they take.

The problem is with a weak secondary and you play tight with receivers capable of getting massive YAC is that if you let them catch the ball and you don't get to them, you give up a massive play. It is a dangerous game to play tight with bad secondary players. If they do, I can see Gronk and/or Edelman break it for 40-50 yards at least once or twice.

I hope they play it close to the line. If they had a better secondary, I might feel different. Gronk will eat apart their defense if they don't provide over the top help for him.

 

[reflexblue]

..and Mazz is the biggest idiot on Boston radio.

Mazz proves any idiot can get a radio gig

 

[Oswlek]

It would be nice if this thread could be confined to conveying GB's opinions and not turning it into a shouting match about them.

First time here?

Now that the new Bedard smell has diminished, I'll dig through...

On the restructure, it was a move to put money in the Kraft's pocket. Brady did the Pats' a solid.

Feels the two sides (Brady and the team) made this restructure with an exit strategy in mind.

He didn't say it outright, but there might be a handshake deal to let him walk rather than trade him.

I'm still befuddled by this thinking. What team that would be willing to sign Brady in FA wouldn't also be willing to trade for him? And what team willing to trade for this contract wouldn't have been willing to trade for the prior one?

Until those propagating the "exit strategy" rhetoric can answer these questions, there is only one viable explanation: Kraft didn't want to put $24mm on ice, so they gave Tom $3mm as a thank-you for redoing his deal.

Thinks the o-line is healthy for the first time in a long time.

Sounds good. Hopefully this isn't just speculation.

While we are talking about the OL, have people forgotten that both Stork and Connolly missed games during the "good" portion of the OL season? Somehow NE was able to make due without two starters, yet they are meaningless because the team struggled against the Jets down just Connolly?

Is it just me, or is there more to story here?

Thinks if the Pats lose in the playoffs, it doesn't change his opinion the Mankins' trade being right.

Nor should it. As I said before, the nonsense about NE's 6th OL is just that, nonsense. Or, perhaps that is a little too strong. Obviously NE could use better OL depth, but the panic over the 6th OL is overblown considering they won games with the 6th and 7th guys in there (against the Jets, no less).

And even if it is granted that Mankins would have improved the depth, since when is a depth guy worth $10mm in cap space? Plus, aren't we already talking about all the guys who need to be retained this offseason? Surely that cap space is going to prove invaluable, no?

Mazz says...

I don't give a ****.

 

[ausbacker]

The Patriots are better on D and they are better on O. Forget yesteryear, if the Patriots play to their capabilities, they should clobber the Ravens.

I have supreme confidence in the Patriots D this season. They are primed.