Are we not as far as we originally thought?

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

which happened to be 4-4 over the 2nd half of the season......4-5 if you include the playoff game.

the pats are far right now.......you can conjure up memories of 2002, but the big difference is that the pats don't have an LB unit like they had, and there aren't good LB's hanging around on street corners looking for work......which is what any team wishing to play the 3-4 needs most importantly

Gut feeling is that you will see some major names show up on the street looking for a home. Question is do the Pats want to sign them.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

Which is one of the main reasons why I originally thought (as I stated in the first post of the thread) we were 2 years away. However, we may only need two more solid front seven guys added to this defense to truly compete. Of course that's figuring Wilfork sticks around. Which is a huge question mark (no pun intended).

right now, 2 of the front 7 spots are 'set' (mayo and warren), and for argument sake 3 if you include wilfork. you have no strating RDE, no starting OLB and one ILB. to truly compete, you need 7 solid front 7 guys, so the pats need 4 or 5 more

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

Gut feeling is that you will see some major names show up on the street looking for a home. Question is do the Pats want to sign them.

do they have a choice if they want to compete?

I still think the most effiecient route is to get a deal for wilfork (such as a KC or Denver 1st round pick), dump thomas and springs, and then back up the truck for someone like peppers, follow that up with a replacement for wilfork such as pickett. then do the rest of it through the draft (mcclain, odrick, hughes/graham, norwood, asamoah in day 1)

that'll give you warren,pickett,odrick across the line and hughes/graham, mayo, mcclain, pepper across the LB's although I would consider putting peppers on the left side so QB's would have to look around that size....you would have wright,pryor,brace for depth as well as guyton, norwood and say TBC at LB

in order for it to be a one year fix, it would have to be like that....unfortunaltely, I believe that wilforks presence would keep the pats from turning around so quickly

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

do they have a choice if they want to compete?

I still think the most effiecient route is to get a deal for wilfork (such as a KC or Denver 1st round pick), dump thomas and springs, and then back up the truck for someone like peppers, follow that up with a replacement for wilfork such as pickett. then do the rest of it through the draft (mcclain, odrick, hughes/graham, norwood, asamoah in day 1)

that'll give you warren,pickett,odrick across the line and hughes/graham, mayo, mcclain, pepper across the LB's although I would consider putting peppers on the left side so QB's would have to look around that size....you would have wright,pryor,brace for depth as well as guyton, norwood and say TBC at LB

in order for it to be a one year fix, it would have to be like that....unfortunaltely, I believe that wilforks presence would keep the pats from turning around so quickly

I'm a fan of hitting on draft picks. I know thats a pretty generic statement but IMO guys that you draft are your core group. They are the ones that bleed your colors, are completely immersed and have bought into the entire system. The problem is that they are unproven and need time to develop.

Nothing against FAs as you can pick up some good ones who are selfless (see Harrison, Colvin, Vrabel, etc.).

It's a shame that VW and the Pats haven't worked something out, but at this point you may be right.

 

[patsfan55]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

right now, 2 of the front 7 spots are 'set' (mayo and warren), and for argument sake 3 if you include wilfork. you have no strating RDE, no starting OLB and one ILB. to truly compete, you need 7 solid front 7 guys, so the pats need 4 or 5 more

To have a DOMINANT front seven we are 4 or 5 pieces away. And to have a dominant defense you need a dominant front seven. Previously I felt as though we needed a dominant defense to win a title again. But after taking a step back and re-assessing the state of the top teams in the NFL I have come to the realization that we probably don't need a dominant defense, just one that can come up with the stops when a big one is necessary (which our d has failed to do in each of the past few seasons in key situations: see giants sb, loss vs the jets last year, loss to the colts in the afc champ...). So, if we can get two or three of those four or five spots filled we should be in a pretty good position to contend again.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

To have a DOMINANT front seven we are 4 or 5 pieces away. And to have a dominant defense you need a dominant front seven. Previously I felt as though we needed a dominant defense to win a title again. But after taking a step back and re-assessing the state of the top teams in the NFL I have come to the realization that we probably don't need a dominant defense, just one that can come up with the stops when a big one is necessary (which our d has failed to do in each of the past few seasons in key situations: see giants sb, loss vs the jets last year, loss to the colts in the afc champ...). So, if we can get two or three of those four or five spots filled we should be in a pretty good position to contend again.

offenses have won the SB before, but in the long run, defense always comes to the top. once in a while, you have teams with top offenses where the cards fall right and their defense is good enought for them to win the superbowl or get to the superbowl....the colts did not have to face the chargers and the saints did not have to face the cowboys......

I'll still go with defense as the long term solution

 

[patsfan55]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

offenses have won the SB before, but in the long run, defense always comes to the top. once in a while, you have teams with top offenses where the cards fall right and their defense is good enought for them to win the superbowl or get to the superbowl....the colts did not have to face the chargers and the saints did not have to face the cowboys......

I'll still go with defense as the long term solution

It is true that in the three super bowl years there were many more playmakers on defense than offense. However, it's a different league now.

 

[Sean Pa Patriot]

The buisness of the Pats will take over the football side of the pats... Which Im not expecting big things in FA....

 

[emoney_33]

The buisness of the Pats will take over the football side of the pats... Which Im not expecting big things in FA....

What do you mean by this?

 

[JackBauer]

What do you mean by this?

He means the Patriots, and specifically Kraft, are cheap!

LOLz!

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

Gut feeling is that you will see some major names show up on the street looking for a home. Question is do the Pats want to sign them.

One thing that is going to happen this year which hasn't happened in about 5 years is that you are going to see a bunch of big names cut or traded for salary reasons this offseason. You are hearing some big names potentially on the cutting block like Adrian Wilson who just signed a big contract just last offseason. This will definitely help the Pats fix their problems if they are active in free agency. I could see a 2007 type of rebuild and that was done with a mediocre LB corp for most part.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

One thing that is going to happen this year which hasn't happened in about 5 years is that you are going to see a bunch of big names cut or traded for salary reasons this offseason. You are hearing some big names potentially on the cutting block like Adrian Wilson who just signed a big contract just last offseason. This will definitely help the Pats fix their problems if they are active in free agency. I could see a 2007 type of rebuild and that was done with a mediocre LB corp for most part.

Would love to see Wilson in this secondary. Love it.

Thats why I may be more optimistic than most with regard to the Pats being able to acquire play-making talent that will fortify both sides of the ball. 2007 was a complete reload. Made for a great offseason and an exciting prelude to the reg season.

As I said, its up to BB to decide what he needs and what the bean-counters say that they team can afford.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

As I said, its up to BB to decide what he needs and what the bean-counters say that they team can afford.

AFAIK there has never been a limitation or restriction on what BB can spend aside from the salary cap. It's always been about strategic long-term team building principles where you stick to your value system. Sometimes there will be free agents worth the $$, other years it's wiser to use the money elsewhere and/or push it to the future.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

AFAIK there has never been a limitation or restriction on what BB can spend aside from the salary cap. It's always been about strategic long-term team building principles where you stick to your value system. Sometimes there will be free agents worth the $$, other years it's wiser to use the money elsewhere and/or push it to the future.

Historically speaking, we all know the Pats spend to the brim. No gripes there.

As I've said in other posts, I wonder with a capless year, the CBA, pot'l lockout, etc. how receptive will players on the market be to those types of contracts ($$, length, if/then bonus structures, payment schedules pushed out, etc.) that have safeguards if a lockout does take place. Its a unique time.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

AFAIK there has never been a limitation or restriction on what BB can spend aside from the salary cap. It's always been about strategic long-term team building principles where you stick to your value system. Sometimes there will be free agents worth the $$, other years it's wiser to use the money elsewhere and/or push it to the future.

I have never heard Kraft refusing to pay for anyone or any need. The Pats make business decisions based on a player's worth and how they fit in the cap, but I have never heard them make business decisions to affect Bob Kraft's profit and loss statement.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

Historically speaking, we all know the Pats spend to the brim. No gripes there.

As I've said in other posts, I wonder with a capless year, the CBA, pot'l lockout, etc. how receptive will players on the market be to those types of contracts ($$, length, if/then bonus structures, payment schedules pushed out, etc.) that have safeguards if a lockout does take place. Its a unique time.

The Patriots don't "spend to the brim". They were #10 in actual dollars over a 4 year stretch (2004-2008), and were $150 million under what #1 spent. They spend money, but they aren't maxing out payroll.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

The Patriots don't "spend to the brim". They were #10 in actual dollars over a 4 year stretch (2004-2008), and were $150 million under what #1 spent. They spend money, but they aren't maxing out payroll.

Point taken. They spend to the cap + or - a couple of mil every year.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

Point taken. They spend to the cap + or - a couple of mil every year.

He has no point. They spend maximum allowed to spend over the long-term.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

He has no point. They spend maximum allowed to spend over the long-term.

I was being polite. I've seen the same financials as Deus.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: Are we not as far as we originallly thought?

He has no point. They spend maximum allowed to spend over the long-term.

BTW for that 04-08 Window if you believe the numbers, they spent over the salary cap. That money was either borrowed from future years or pushed over from previous years. You can't spend more than the cap, and people like Deus refuse to put any effort into researching (or even pay attention to) things that go against what they want to believe.