1) Gaffney couldn't get a job for any team, ANY team, never mind a job as the #1 or #2 receiver. Do you really believe that Caldwell is better than the average starter in this league? If so, is he better than the average playoff team starter?
Yes, Caldwell is a better than average starter in this league. Not by much, but he is. As for being a better than average playoff team starter, that is a loaded question, in all honesty and really has no bearing on anything because there is NO WAY you can possibly know what would have happened last year if the Pats had still had Branch or Givens on the team.
As for Gaffney, just because he didn't have a job doesn't mean he's not an above average possession receiver. It took him about 8 games to be able to start to click with Brady, but he DID start to click with Brady. Gaffney performed very well on a bad Texans team that didn't have an O-line and where the QB was ending up sacked 60-70 times a year. Yet he still put up numbers equivalent to David Givens.
2) Bust my bubble if you wish. Many here were satisfied to go into the season with Caldwell, Gaffney, Jackson, Brown and Childress (and perhaps a Day Two draft pick). Some agreed that we might need a Day One draft pick, but really didn't want one, since we needed three between defensive backs and linebackers.
I believe it was very few who felt that the Pats needed a day 1 pick at WR, especially after the Pats got Welker. And yes, there were many here, myself included, who felt that Caldwell, Gaffney, Welker, Jackson and Brown would be sufficient going into the season.
bb and pioli STRONGLY disagreed in the biggest way possible. They brought in two potential pro-bowl quality starters and two #3 wide receivers. And we still have Jackson and Brown. Perhaps those with the vulnerable bubbles are those who think that last year's wide receivers were in any way acceptable. Personally, I believe that if we weren't going to make the deal for Moss, we would have drafted Gonzales at #28.
You seem have forgotten part of last year's receiving corps. Kelvin Kight, Jonathan Smith and Doug Gabriel. Kight is back on a 1 year deal and will probably end up back on the practice squad. Gabriel is long gone. And Smith is TC fodder.
Oh, no, the Pats DON'T still have Brown. He's a free agent that is recovering from an injury and there is no telling if he will be back and in what capacity he'll be back in.
No, I don't believe that BB and Pioli STRONGLY disagreed in the biggest way possible. They acquired value. If there had been more in the way of LBs available than Thomas who the Pats felt would have fit their system, don't you think they would have used that to bring them in? I do.
4) It will take one preseason game (maybe two) for real receivers to get used to Brady and to learn the defense well enough to be better than Caldwell and Gaffney.
Really? 1 - 2 pre-season games? That is utter BS and anyone whose been a WR will tell you that. It takes more than that for a QB and a WR to start to click.
5) I am lazy. I don't go back over old game films. So, I will make a somewaht weaker statement. I personally believe that there is no way we would have not scored another touchdown in the second half of the Indy game if we had Branch or Moss (or Stallworth or Washingon) on the field.
Well, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it. But, I believe its false. We had Branch in a situation like that and he choked when he was needed (Denver). Givens also. The is no telling what Stallworth or Moss would have done. Washington will be lucky to make this team, imho.
However, there is one problem with your thinking. If you add those guys to the team, there is no telling whether or not the Pats would have been in that situation. More than likely, the entire season is different.
6) Our defense was fine in the last half of the year. They were in the top five in many stats.
Our Defense was not fine in the last half of the season. They gave up 15.375 points per game compared to 14.25 points per game in the 1st half. They also allowed almost 1.25 yards per carry MORE in the 2nd half than in the 1st half. (I did not include the play-offs)
As you said, we replaced TBC with Thomas, and this means we have a WEAKNESS at linebacker? As I recall TBC played OLB. Perhaps you believe that Bruschi and Vrabel are a weakness at ILB. Are weaker "switching" Vrabel to where he plated all year? I don't. Am I satisfied with Alexander and Woods as our backups? No, and I don't think bb is either. I expect a couple of veterans to be signed as backups, as we do almost every year. THIS YEAR, however, we don't need a starter. We need to UPGRADE our backups, backups that have a year and three year on the team, and know the system.
MG, I have to say that I am amazed by your comments. Not only have you thoroughly misread what I said, you turned around and thoroughly misrepresented what I said.
I said that Thomas filled in a hole left by TBC. Yes, this is an UPGRADE. I never said otherwise. And if you read what I said, you'd have read that I was specifically talking about upgrading the back-ups.
Also, you didn't address what I said about Vrable and Bruschi. What should the Pats do? Move Vrable inside to WILB and move Bruschi over to SILB. Bruschi is not suited for the SILB position. As you say later, Vrable is better outside. And I believe that as well. I'd rather see Vrable come in as a sub off the bench for either the WILB position or the OLB position.
I suspect that bb and pioli are ready to rely on Alexander or Woods and pick up one linebacker. We'll see. Perhaps we are a better judge of what is needed than bb and pioli. I doubt it though. The linebacker situation is not a situation that has snuck up on the patriots. They have had a strategy of using older veteran linebackers in key roles for years. I'm of the opinion that this strategy has worked rather well, except for the year when they were unprepared for Johnson's retirement.
I have not said otherwise. Why is it that you (and others) insist on implying that I have.
While BB and Pioli have had a strategy of using older veteran linebackers, at some point, you have to develop them yourself. Otherwise, you will get burned. Like the Pats did in 2005. And, well, to some extent last year.
7) For the record, I was not a big fan of Branch. However, I stand by what said. Either Branch or Givens would have been enough to have us beat Indy.
Sorry. I have to disagree. You have no possible way of knowing that they would have been enough to have us beat Indy. Heck, we may not have even been in that situation with them on the team. The Pats could have been sitting at home.
8) Finally, I did disagree with choices made with regard to Givens or Branch. I suppose that Caldwell was indeed an adequate replacement for Givens, although nowhere as good in the red zone. I also do not think either bb or pioli is arrogant. I do think that they misjudged. BECAUSE they believed that Branch would play, they did not go very strongly after Stallworth, Moss or the others. No one can say that bb and pioli don't learn from their mistakes.
No one has claimed that BB or Pioli haven't learned from their mistakes. They usually do.
I don't disagree with the choices the Pats made regarding Givens or Branch. Givens was over-paid by the Texans. Branch was selfish and proved himself to be a liar. Lets remember that Branch was the one who chose not to negotiate even though the Pats made a good faith offer that was very similar to what the Seahawks ended up giving to him. Also, lets remember that no one knows just how high the Pats were willing to go with a contract offer. None of us, including Branch know this. The only point that the Patriots refused to budge on was ripping up the final year of Branch's rookie contract. The Pats didn't do it for Brady and they didn't do it for Seymour. They weren't going to treat him BETTER than the 2 building blocks of this team. And I support them WHOLE-HEARTEDLY.
