2025 New England Patriots Training Camp General Discussion

[Clonamery]

Not sure I agree that there is a ton wrong with this team. Imo, the biggest problems last year were the coaching staff (schemes and teaching) and OL. This year we have a coaching staff that has done it before and are good teachers. We will actually have proven schemes on both sides of the ball, so just that change alone will make this team significantly better. several changes were made to the OL, we will see if it improves much but I would wager that it will be a lot better than last year.

I think the WR is "fixed" by that I mean there will much more production than last year. I think the OL is still a big question despite several moves being made. Rookie OTs sometimes take awhile to perform up to expectations, so I would not be surprised to see Big Will struggle. Below is a list of the top 5 OTs drafted last year and Lowe for reference. Honestly I am hoping for Fuaga type production at worst. We upgraded at RT, but Mo is an older guy who is probably going to miss a handful of games. at Center Bradbury is solid-ish against the run but trash in pass blocking(at least he has been in his career), better than Brown though. Hopefully Wilson can become the guy sooner than later because he seems equally good vs pass/run blocking.

Pick	Name	Snaps	Penalties	Pressures
5	Alt	1010	8	20
7	Latham	1087	10	47
11	Fashanu	534	7	23
14	Fuaga	1070	10	39
18	Mims	835	4	33
	Lowe	803	13	33

I think your AI is broken.

 

[Real fan 02]

Not sure I agree that there is a ton wrong with this team. Imo, the biggest problems last year were the coaching staff (schemes and teaching) and OL. This year we have a coaching staff that has done it before and are good teachers. We will actually have proven schemes on both sides of the ball, so just that change alone will make this team significantly better. several changes were made to the OL, we will see if it improves much but I would wager that it will be a lot better than last year.

I think the WR is "fixed" by that I mean there will much more production than last year. I think the OL is still a big question despite several moves being made. Rookie OTs sometimes take awhile to perform up to expectations, so I would not be surprised to see Big Will struggle. Below is a list of the top 5 OTs drafted last year and Lowe for reference. Honestly I am hoping for Fuaga type production at worst. We upgraded at RT, but Mo is an older guy who is probably going to miss a handful of games. at Center Bradbury is solid-ish against the run but trash in pass blocking(at least he has been in his career), better than Brown though. Hopefully Wilson can become the guy sooner than later because he seems equally good vs pass/run blocking.

Pick	Name	Snaps	Penalties	Pressures
5	Alt	1010	8	20
7	Latham	1087	10	47
11	Fashanu	534	7	23
14	Fuaga	1070	10	39
18	Mims	835	4	33
	Lowe	803	13	33

Great post. I agree. It's also encouraging that Drake had a great start to camp.. now i know it's just day 1 and no ones in pads yet, but when he spoke he you can hear the confidence in himself as a leader. I'd like Wilson to ultimately take the starting C role. Interestingly enough Phil Perry mentioned the only reason Kevin O'Connell moved of Bradbury is because they were going bigger on the OL

 

[Real fan 02]

I think your AI is broken.

Don't break my heart..

 

[captain stone]

It's involved in every championship team.. luck.. believe it or not.. not the only thing but a small element. C'mon cap.. after a few drinks luck helped you take her home..

The Queefs didn't have "luck": They had the league Actively pushing - via its corrupt zebras - for their success.

 

[Real fan 02]

The Queefs didn't have "luck": They had the league Actively pushing - via its corrupt zebras - for their success.

Well.. it's still luck.. Calls could either way.. randy moss was fnnn face guarded and hacked 20 yards down feild.. all game in the superbowl the refs didn't want to call PI.. the David tyree helmet catch... all luck. Today that is probably ruled incomplete... all im saying brother

 

[Pape]

Well.. it's still luck.. Calls could either way.. randy moss was fnnn face guarded and hacked 20 yards down feild.. all game in the superbowl the refs didn't want to call PI.. the David tyree helmet catch... all luck. Today that is probably ruled incomplete... all im saying brother

its not luck... its having a QB that is the aww shucks golly gee, pale imitation of Tom Brady they can market the **** out of...

 

[Steve102]

its not luck... its having a QB that is the aww shucks golly gee, pale imitation of Tom Brady they can market the **** out of...

IF a couple of these young guys can develop, they good manufacture a Brady v Manning type of thing pretty easily.

 

[Real fan 02]

its not luck... its having a QB that is the aww shucks golly gee, pale imitation of Tom Brady they can market the **** out of...

Some form of luck id always involved.

 

[Pape]

Some form of luck id always involved.

they traded up to get him... Reid knew what he was doing...

 

[Real fan 02]

they traded up to get him... Reid knew what he was doing...

What i think i may have gotten myself twisted here.. I was referring to play off runs, championship runs. Your right on your assessment

 

[Wozzy]

Talk about cherry picking stats. Points per drive doesn't refute what I said they were a ball control don't turn the ball over offense. They were only 16/31 in scoring not top ten in 2001. That's average not elite as your stat would suggest. Also not featured in your stat? The #1 ppg defense in 2003 and a top 5 one in 2004. 2004 with Corey Dillon was easily the best of those offenses, but before that they were just ok, not good.

If I went by just points they were ranked higher all three seasons. “Points” is not cherry picking… it’s the single most important stat in football.

 

[pazrul72]

If I went by just points they were ranked higher all three seasons. “Points” is not cherry picking… it’s the single most important stat in football.

No they were not. You specifically said points per drive they were #7 in 2001 which surprised me so I went and looked. By strait points they were ranked 16th. That's cherry picking a stat to back your argument. Which backs my memory they were a very average at best offense that didn't have to do as much because of an awesome defense. Part of the reason they were so average is until 2004 when Dillon got 1600 yards on the ground the WRs were just ok as well. Branch Brown Givens and Patten are all #2 WRs on their best days. Can you even name another early dynasty WR without looking them up?

Again I agree with your overall point you don't need a top 10 #1 WR to be successful, hell my personal favorite model is when the Saints had (4) #2 receivers and one week a guy would have one catch for 7 yards and the next week 8 for 120 because the matchup dictated who got the ball. Regardless of how you run it though you do need talented WRs and right now the pats have either young or injured question marks.

 

[signbabybrady]

Branch Brown Givens and Patten are all #2 WRs on their best days. Can you even name another early dynasty WR without looking them up?

In 01 there was also aged vets Torrance Small and Charles Johnson.

After that you listed 4 of the 5 for the next few seasons so not exactly fair. Bethel Johnson being the 5th for a season or 2.

You had a failed season out of Donald Hayes.

We also used a lot of TEs between Watson, Graham, and Fauria.

Who else did I miss?

And PS at their best I think Branch and Troy were #1s. Troy took awhile to develop so that peak was quick and Branch wasted a few of his in Seattle. They weren't top ten guys like Holt or something but definitely #1 quality for a few years.

 

[Wozzy]

No they were not. You specifically said points per drive they were #7 in 2001 which surprised me so I went and looked. By strait points they were ranked 16th. That's cherry picking a stat to back your argument. Which backs my memory they were a very average at best offense that didn't have to do as much because of an awesome defense. Part of the reason they were so average is until 2004 when Dillon got 1600 yards on the ground the WRs were just ok as well. Branch Brown Givens and Patten are all #2 WRs on their best days. Can you even name another early dynasty WR without looking them up?

Again I agree with your overall point you don't need a top 10 #1 WR to be successful, hell my personal favorite model is when the Saints had (4) #2 receivers and one week a guy would have one catch for 7 yards and the next week 8 for 120 because the matchup dictated who got the ball. Regardless of how you run it though you do need talented WRs and right now the pats have either young or injured question marks.

2001 - 6th is total points scored, 7th in points per drive

2001 New England Patriots Rosters, Stats, Schedule, Team Draftees | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Check out the 2001 New England Patriots Roster, Stats, Schedule, Team Draftees, Injury Reports and more on Pro-Football-Reference.com.

www.pro-football-reference.com

 

[pazrul72]

2001 - 6th is total points scored, 7th in points per drive

2001 New England Patriots Rosters, Stats, Schedule, Team Draftees | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Check out the 2001 New England Patriots Roster, Stats, Schedule, Team Draftees, Injury Reports and more on Pro-Football-Reference.com.

www.pro-football-reference.com

I stand corrected, I don’t know what I was looking at but it had them ranked 16th. Though looking at the scores it really was feast or famine dropping 44 on the colts 38 on the panthers 34 on the saints and chargers.

 

[sb1]

If I went by just points they were ranked higher all three seasons. “Points” is not cherry picking… it’s the single most important stat in football.

Points in a single game is the most important stat. Points per game or points for a whole season - not so much.

And the 2001 Pats had a last place schedule.

 

[Pape]

Points in a single game is the most important stat. Points per game or points for a whole season - not so much.

And the 2001 Pats had a last place schedule.

last place? maybe ... but .492 strength of schedule, ranked 20th... had both wild cards come out of the AFCE that year... took out both the raidahs & the number 1 seed steelers (on the road that one) on their way to dismantling the Greatest Show on Turf...

 

[sb1]

last place? maybe ... but .492 strength of schedule, ranked 20th... had both wild cards come out of the AFCE that year... took out both the raidahs & the number 1 seed steelers (on the road that one) on their way to dismantling the Greatest Show on Turf...

All true but I was just saying "points per game" or ranking doesn't matter that much because they're heavily dependent on schedule. An offense with fewer points per game against a brutal defensive schedule isn't necessarily worse than an offense with more points per game against a soft defensive schedule.

 

[Pape]

All true but I was just saying "points per game" or ranking doesn't matter that much because they're heavily dependent on schedule. An offense with fewer points per game against a brutal defensive schedule isn't necessarily worse than an offense with more points per game against a soft defensive schedule.

i get it, and i'm not really being a ball buster...

its my frustration with the existing and available stats... at a certain point, points scored, points allowed, points per game etc become the true metric of a team... because there really is nothing else to use... It becomes a question of how far you want to push the stats? I suppose the best way would be to do a game by game break down of points scored vs the opponents defensive ranking on a game by game basis... akin to the dvoa stats i suppose... but the NFL did such a poor job with defensive stats for a long time its hard to do with games that were played 25 years ago...

 

[Pape]

Given the early showing some guys in the WR room have had, Mack Hollins is losing ground... could he be a potential camp cut due to injury?