PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

12/20: Patterson not at practice either; Slater practicing with WRs


Status
Not open for further replies.
This is the last year of Patriots Dynasty 2.0. It's 2009 again, not in the sense of the teams results but in terms of an aging roster and a series of disappointing drafts. In 2010, it was said they made some big reevaluation of their scouting department and the types of players they were drafting. I think another reevaluation would make sense here.

I don't know about any "big re-evaluation" of the scouting department, but the trade of Seymour to the Raiders at the start of 2009 was probably the first step in transitioning from a classic, 2-gapping, 3-4 "Elephant" base defense to the hybrid 4-3/3-4 style front they've been using since. That transition accelerated in 2010, causing further roster turnover.

That turnover on the DL wasn't exclusively age-related.
 
If he is on the field .. it's massive OC fail. Last time was Denver I believe. They try him cuz he gives a good presser, Apparently.

Slater lines up at WR probably more often than most people realize - 14 times so far this season, 13 times last season, 52 times (!) in 2016 ....
 
So many things wrong with this post. (1) Anyone panicking doesn't know much about this team. (2) Patterson has proven himself a valuable asset to the offense. (3) He reportedly was missing from practice due to illness, not injury, and likely will be available Sunday. (4) Even without him, the team has three capable WRs to fill the breach.
I count Edelman (and he has a foot injury). Who have the other two been?
 
That's cute. :rolleyes:
52452066-studio-shot-of-an-old-punk-rocker-holding-a-bass-guitar-and-making-a-rock-gesture-isolated-on-white-.jpg
 
True, but separate dynasties and retooling within a dynasty aren't really the same thing. And generally speaking I only really bring it up since Curran's article about it led people to start referring to post-2009 as "Patriots 2.0". At that point, if we're going to talk in terms of iterations then I don't think that's really correct. The 2001 Patriots and 2007 Patriots had little enough in common, both philosophically and in terms of coaching and personnel, that I can't make sense of them being considered the same iteration. I think it creates an interesting discussion re: exactly how many times the Patriots have retooled in terms of both personnel and philosophy to keep this run going for as long as it has.

When we get to the historic legal of these Patriots, I hope people do have the presence of mind to break it down like this, because it really highlights how impressive this run has been IMO, and how far ahead of all of its peers this team has been. It's hard enough to build one great core, and the Patriots have built at least 3-4 over the course of this run.

IMHO the Pats have had two different eras of success. The first was defensive (first half of Brady's career) and the second was offensive (Brady's second half). Once Brady's done the Pats will be too, at least as far as dynastic play is concerned.
 
True, but separate dynasties and retooling within a dynasty aren't really the same thing. And generally speaking I only really bring it up since Curran's article about it led people to start referring to post-2009 as "Patriots 2.0". At that point, if we're going to talk in terms of iterations then I don't think that's really correct. The 2001 Patriots and 2007 Patriots had little enough in common, both philosophically and in terms of coaching and personnel, that I can't make sense of them being considered the same iteration. I think it creates an interesting discussion re: exactly how many times the Patriots have retooled in terms of both personnel and philosophy to keep this run going for as long as it has.

When we get to the historic legal of these Patriots, I hope people do have the presence of mind to break it down like this, because it really highlights how impressive this run has been IMO, and how far ahead of all of its peers this team has been. It's hard enough to build one great core, and the Patriots have built at least 3-4 over the course of this run.

It's helped to have the greatest quarterback of all-time. Not needing to ever replace your quarterback is the biggest deal in football. Only the Steelers have really had a comparable run where they had two distinct teams win Super Bowls with the quarterback remaining the same. Maybe the Ravens, who had similar reloads, though there it was Ray Lewis as the continuous piece. Neither the Steelers nor the Ravens have seen the breadth nor depth of success that the Patriots have, however, and this 'third' Steelers era of the 2000s has been noticeably less successful than the two previous.

I might date those as follows, with the defining players of each range of years...

First period, 2001-2005: This period is defined by players like Adam Vinatieri, Deion Branch, Troy Brown, David Patten, Richard Seymour, Antowain Smith, Corey Dillon, Mike Vrabel, Kevin Faulk, Ty Law, Rodney Harrison, and Tedy Bruschi. It's marked by a dominant defense, with Tom Brady growing into his role as a franchise QB. The first period ends with the playoff loss to Denver and the departure of Deion Branch and Adam Vinatieri following the 2005 season.

Second period, 2006-2010: This period is defined by the acquisitions of Randy Moss and Wes Welker prior to the 2007 season, and those players are its most iconic. Faulk and Seymour remained as holdovers from the previous era, while new players and stars like Laurence Maroney, Asante Samuel, Jerod Mayo, Logan Mankins, Ty Warren, Stephen Gostkowski, and Vince Wilfork emerged. Beginning in 2006, Brady emerged as a true superstar, a quarterback who would set records and who put any question that he was a system QB with a good defense to bed. This period ends with the departure of Randy Moss.

Third period, 2010-2017: This period is defined most notably by the emergence of Rob Gronkowski as the greatest tight end of all-time following the departure of Moss and eventually Welker. Other defining players include Aaron Hernandez (for good or ill), Dion Lewis, Danny Woodhead, Rob Ninkovich, Julian Edelman, Danny Amendola, Nate Solder, Donta Hightower, Malcolm Butler, Matt Slater, and Devin McCourty, as well as Gostkowski. This period cements Brady as the greatest quarterback of all-time. This era ends with the Super Bowl loss to the Eagles, the departure of Lewis, Butler, Amendola, and Solder, and the diminishing effectiveness of Gronk.

Fourth period, 2018-present: The history of this period has yet to be written, but it's likely to be the last era of the Brady and Belichick dynasty. The best players of the previous era are gone or aging. In these early days, the defining players look to include James White, Stephon Gilmore, Shaq Mason, Sony Michel, and Trey Flowers (though it's unclear if the latter will last). There's still time and a lot left to be written, but unfortunately the drafts of the last few years may catch up to them.
 
IMHO the Pats have had two different eras of success. The first was defensive (first half of Brady's career) and the second was offensive (Brady's second half). Once Brady's done the Pats will be too, at least as far as dynastic play is concerned.

Brady took over for Bledsoe 8 years ago, which means the first half of his career was 2001-2009, and the second half (to date) is 2010-2018. That's the main reason why I can't agree that the Patriots were a defensive team for the first half of his career. Partly because the 2004 title-winning team's best unit was its offense, partly because Brady led the league in passing yards in 2005, and partly because 2007 is now firmly in the first half of Brady's career, and by the time he's done 2010 likely may well be too.

I agree the 2001-2003 Patriots were defense-dominant, but I think the transition to being offense-first happened a lot earlier than most place it, to the point that by the end of the three-peat I think they were already an offense-first team. Football Outsiders had them as the third-ranked offense by DVOA in 2004, which is definitely in-line with the season as I remember it. I think Brady had grown into a superstar QB by that point, the line was great, and Dillon was a monster. Recipe for a damn near unstoppable pre-2005 offense, right there.
 
Last edited:
It's helped to have the greatest quarterback of all-time. Not needing to ever replace your quarterback is the biggest deal in football. Only the Steelers have really had a comparable run where they had two distinct teams win Super Bowls with the quarterback remaining the same. Maybe the Ravens, who had similar reloads, though there it was Ray Lewis as the continuous piece. Neither the Steelers nor the Ravens have seen the breadth nor depth of success that the Patriots have, however, and this 'third' Steelers era of the 2000s has been noticeably less successful than the two previous.

I might date those as follows, with the defining players of each range of years...

First period, 2001-2005: This period is defined by players like Adam Vinatieri, Deion Branch, Troy Brown, David Patten, Richard Seymour, Antowain Smith, Corey Dillon, Mike Vrabel, Kevin Faulk, Ty Law, Rodney Harrison, and Tedy Bruschi. It's marked by a dominant defense, with Tom Brady growing into his role as a franchise QB. The first period ends with the playoff loss to Denver and the departure of Deion Branch and Adam Vinatieri following the 2005 season.

Second period, 2006-2010: This period is defined by the acquisitions of Randy Moss and Wes Welker prior to the 2007 season, and those players are its most iconic. Faulk and Seymour remained as holdovers from the previous era, while new players and stars like Laurence Maroney, Asante Samuel, Jerod Mayo, Logan Mankins, Ty Warren, Stephen Gostkowski, and Vince Wilfork emerged. Beginning in 2006, Brady emerged as a true superstar, a quarterback who would set records and who put any question that he was a system QB with a good defense to bed. This period ends with the departure of Randy Moss.

Third period, 2010-2017: This period is defined most notably by the emergence of Rob Gronkowski as the greatest tight end of all-time following the departure of Moss and eventually Welker. Other defining players include Aaron Hernandez (for good or ill), Dion Lewis, Danny Woodhead, Rob Ninkovich, Julian Edelman, Danny Amendola, Nate Solder, Donta Hightower, Malcolm Butler, Matt Slater, and Devin McCourty, as well as Gostkowski. This period cements Brady as the greatest quarterback of all-time. This era ends with the Super Bowl loss to the Eagles, the departure of Lewis, Butler, Amendola, and Solder, and the diminishing effectiveness of Gronk.

Fourth period, 2018-present: The history of this period has yet to be written, but it's likely to be the last era of the Brady and Belichick dynasty. The best players of the previous era are gone or aging. In these early days, the defining players look to include James White, Stephon Gilmore, Shaq Mason, Sony Michel, and Trey Flowers (though it's unclear if the latter will last). There's still time and a lot left to be written, but unfortunately the drafts of the last few years may catch up to them.

>>Beginning in 2006, Brady emerged as a true superstar

2006 one of Brady's least prolific years of his career. I think only 2001 was less prolific. 2013 in same realm too.
 
Brady took over for Bledsoe 8 years ago, which means the first half of his career was 2001-2009, and the second half (to date) is 2010-2018. That's the main reason why I can't agree that the Patriots were a defensive team for the first half of his career. Partly because the 2004 title-winning team's best unit was its offense, partly because Brady led the league in passing yards in 2005, and partly because 2007 is now firmly in the first half of Brady's career, and by the time he's done 2010 likely may well be too.

I agree the 2001-2003 Patriots were defense-dominant, but I think the transition to being offense-first happened a lot earlier than most place it, to the point that by the end of the three-peat I think they were already an offense-first team. Football Outsiders had them as the third-ranked offense by DVOA in 2004, which is definitely in-line with the season as I remember it. I think Brady had grown into a superstar QB by that point, the line was great, and Dillon was a monster. Recipe for a damn near unstoppable pre-2005 offense, right there.
>>by the end of the three-peat

Three-peat?
 
...I often hear how they came into 2018 with no good receivers...Jordan Matthews, Kenny Britt and Malcolm Mitchell were anticipated to make an impact, but injuries made things much different..
Matthews is still making an (admittedly small but 287 yards would be 6th on the team) impact, but Bill decided that he'd rather have Eric Decker.
 
Picture’s not accurate. To be an accurate representation of me, one of those guys needs to be built like a brick ****house with a chiseled jawline and a schlong the size of a Python.

Same here. Fools never know lol
 
>>Beginning in 2006, Brady emerged as a true superstar

2006 one of Brady's least prolific years of his career. I think only 2001 was less prolific. 2013 in same realm too.

2006 was Brady willing the team to the precipice of the Super Bowl with Reche Caldwell as his WR1.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


MORSE: Patriots Draft Needs and Draft Related Info
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/19: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/18/24
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/18: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/17: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/16: News and Notes
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Back
Top