FOURTEEN Million of free agency money

[patsinthesnow]

I disagree with the approach that we ignore positions where we are mediocre and focus on positions where we have no one signed.
I think we should focus on the positions that will have the most impact and if that means upgrading mediocrity to excellence and no one to mediocre, so be it.
I want to ramp up the pass rush. I want a better LDE than Ninkovich.
If it costs 6-7 mill, so be it. If there is a 1st rounder out there that can play the other side and complement Jones, that is fine too.
I want another inside pass rusher. Armstead may be the guy. The new LDE may be able to move inside in sub.
Armstead is the wild card, but if he can be an effective inside pass rusher then we really need one more, excellent player.
Base
New LDE-Wilfork-Armstead-Jones
Sub
New LDE-Cunningham-Armstead/cheaper FA-Jones

Plug a stud LDE in there, and we have a dominant front 7. Brady with reasonable weapons and a dominant front 7 = SB.

I would retain Welker.
I would add a top safety and move McCourty back to his natural LCB position.

We disagree about the Dline being mediocre. Putting McCourty at CB is a disaster waiting to happen. McCourty can't play man to man and Dennard cant play zone.

 

[Ring 6]

We disagree about the Dline being mediocre. Putting McCourty at CB is a disaster waiting to happen. McCourty can't play man to man and Dennard cant play zone.

The DL is better than mediocre because it has Wilfork vs the run. The pass rush is mediocre at best.
McCourty plays man just fine. He was a standout as a rookie. Struggled with the deep ball in year 2, and was very good again this year.
Not sure where you get that Dennard can't play zone.
The secondary is fine with those 2 at corner if the safety play is good, and we get a pass rush.

 

[mgteich]

Hmmm.

A) Drafting a top LDE is certainly right if the quality is there. We've brought in Armstead to help inside.

B) It cost money to move from nothing to mediocre. We need 3 corners. You do have a viable solution, moving McCourty back to corner. An adequate corner may be more valuable to us that a potential all-pro free safety. Re-sign or replace Arrington and we are good to go. One presumes a free agent safety and a draftee.
CB: McCourty, Dennard, Arrington, free agent
S: Gregory, Wilson, free agent, draftee, Ebner

I guess that this keeps us mediocre. This group seems a bit worse than last year, but you knew that.

C) It cost money to move from nothing to mediocre. We need 3 wide receivers. Re-signing Welker and Edelman works for me, along with keeping Lloyd.

D) I think that in this scenario, we could bring back Thomas or Vollmer.

BOTTOM LINE
OFFENSE - a bit worse because of the loss of Vollmer or Thomas.
DEFENSE - Stronger on the line, weaker in the secondary.

If the problem is truly with the DL, then the secondary will be OK. If the problem is truly with the secondary, then we'll be lucky to make the playoffs.

I disagree with the approach that we ignore positions where we are mediocre and focus on positions where we have no one signed.
I think we should focus on the positions that will have the most impact and if that means upgrading mediocrity to excellence and no one to mediocre, so be it.
I want to ramp up the pass rush. I want a better LDE than Ninkovich.
If it costs 6-7 mill, so be it. If there is a 1st rounder out there that can play the other side and complement Jones, that is fine too.
I want another inside pass rusher. Armstead may be the guy. The new LDE may be able to move inside in sub.
Armstead is the wild card, but if he can be an effective inside pass rusher then we really need one more, excellent player.
Base
New LDE-Wilfork-Armstead-Jones
Sub
New LDE-Cunningham-Armstead/cheaper FA-Jones

Plug a stud LDE in there, and we have a dominant front 7. Brady with reasonable weapons and a dominant front 7 = SB.

I would retain Welker.
I would add a top safety and move McCourty back to his natural LCB position.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

After allowing for bonuses earned, this year's rookie and workout bonuses, we have fourteen million available per Jason.

There will future costs that could be paid for by a late cut or two and/or a restructure or two: Player 52 and 53, the Practice Squad, IR players and their replacements (in camp or in season). We need not worry about this now since we have a method of paying for this in August.

There is precious little additional sources of revenue. For example, we could save a million by cutting Fells now, but it seems better to have the camp competition.

Since players replace a player already on the roster, we should consider only net costs, with a player considered to be replacing a $500K player on the roster. Minimum salary vets don't add much cost at all. We will likely add our usual dozen.

======
LASER FOCUS FOURTEEN MILLION FOR FREE AGENCY
As of now, we are losing players at every position (a normal situation). Who would you use precious free agency money to keep? How would you allocate our free agency money. Remember you have only fourteen million to spend on re-signings AND on free agencts from other teams.

As a final caution, I would note that the cap next year is very tight. Pushing a lot of money into next year is not a good idea. It is not at all clear when the nfl will see the next major raise in the cap.

I would also note that we are not choosing a final roster, just who to bring into camp.
=====================
OUR FREE AGENTS
RB Woodhead
WR Welker, Edelman, Branch, Stallworth
TE Hooman (RFA)
OL Vollmer, Thomas
DL Scott, Brace, Harrison
LB Koutouvides, White
CB Talib, Arrington, Cole, Martin
S Chung, Allen, Barrett
==================
Personally, I would allocate $2M to four low-level free agents (a million a year folks like Cole). That would leave twelve million a year for mid and top level free agents.

It's silly to approach FA as if this team will be limited to $12-14M... They will do restructures or extensions to free up whatever they need. As they all do. The key is not overdoing it, and they never do.

Brady's extension is begging to be done and not just to free up cap space this season. They knew they were going to have to do it once they opted to restructure last season. He's the safest one to. And they knew if he remained healthy and productive they were always going to extend him now. Because the alternative was 2 more seasons and then 2 or 3 tags which would be cap prohibitive even on his previous average ($22M, $26.5M, $31M+). His extension alone can free up $10M give or take on a deal that won't kill them going forward because the AAV will be below market due to the 2 remaining years.

Mankins restructure alone could free up $3.75M and with his $7M salary only final season and 4 years remaining to spread the $5M in salary restructured, that won't cause them any problems, either. Vince can't be restructured because he only has two years left and they'd have to asscan him in 2014 if they did a simple restructure. So maybe they do a 2 year extension if they want to seek relief there. But just Brady and Mankins alone can almost double their cap space overnight. And $28M signs a lot of mid level and quality FA as long as you don't do silly deals chasing elite FA or forget to check the mid levels medicals.

 

[Ring 6]

Hmmm.

A) Drafting a top LDE is certainly right if the quality is there. We've brought in Armstead to help inside.

I'm not 100% sold on Armstead, but kmy impression is he can be an effective inside rusher, which is huge.

B) It cost money to move from nothing to mediocre. We need 3 corners. You do have a viable solution, moving McCourty back to corner. An adequate corner may be more valuable to us that a potential all-pro free safety. Re-sign or replace Arrington and we are good to go. One presumes a free agent safety and a draftee.
CB: McCourty, Dennard, Arrington, free agent
S: Gregory, Wilson, free agent, draftee, Ebner

I guess that this keeps us mediocre. This group seems a bit worse than last year, but you knew that.

Well, I didn't say it would cost nothing. I also included a top safety.
I prefer McCourty and a top safety to McCourty and a decent corner, which would be similar in cost to a top level S.
I think it is much better than last year if you add a top S.

C) It cost money to move from nothing to mediocre. We need 3 wide receivers. Re-signing Welker and Edelman works for me, along with keeping Lloyd.

Again, I said spend on Welker. I'm OK with filling in behind Welker and Lloyd with whatever fits, preferably including a young player with upside.

D) I think that in this scenario, we could bring back Thomas or Vollmer.

Thomas will be back if he is cheap. If someone goes crazy we won't pay starter money for him. Volmer is interesting. I think all the reasons people are worried about resigning him are the reasons that will make him affordable.

BOTTOM LINE
OFFENSE - a bit worse because of the loss of Vollmer or Thomas.

Depends. Solder, Ridley and Vereen will be a year older, the TEs are likely to be healthy. Those are all plusses, that might well overcome the dropoff at RT(which is not huge from 2012 Volmer, even though it would be from 100% Volmer)

DEFENSE - Stronger on the line, weaker in the secondary.

I think stronger in both. For all the ballyho about Talib he only played in a handful of games. The 'getting in football shape' excuse was used at first, then he was injured again. He didn't really play much good corner on the field this year, even if the hope is high that he would have if all were right.
Of course, an actual pass rush makes the secondary better.

If the problem is truly with the DL, then the secondary will be OK. If the problem is truly with the secondary, then we'll be lucky to make the playoffs.

Don't know how we miss the playoffs by getting better than the 12-4 team was. I do know that if we didn't have Welker last year, we would have struggled to get 9 wins, and everyone seems in a hurry to see that happen.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I think the pass rush should be the #1 priority because it is as bad as any aspect of the team.

When Jones isn't healthy or available. And when Love gets knocked out early. I think Bill wants to improve the line, he attempted to last off season only he signed a guy with arthritis. There is more than one way to improve the pass rush. It's like a mosaic. Right now the secondary is McCourty, Dennard and Bill's collection of ST swiss army knives. A couple of whom may yet blossom into mid level guys... And our WR's are Brandon Lloyd and a ST gunner.

But again, we're not limited to $14M in cap space by a long shot. And we do have some draft picks left unless we squander more on rentals between now and April.

 

[Ring 6]

When Jones isn't healthy or available. And when Love gets knocked out early. I think Bill wants to improve the line, he attempted to last off season only he signed a guy with arthritis. There is more than one way to improve the pass rush. It's like a mosaic. Right now the secondary is McCourty, Dennard and Bill's collection of ST swiss army knives. A couple of whom may yet blossom into mid level guys... And our WR's are Brandon Lloyd and a ST gunner.

But again, we're not limited to $14M in cap space by a long shot. And we do have some draft picks left unless we squander more on rentals between now and April.

Love does about as much for the pass rush as I do. Thats part of the problem. We have one guy on the entire DL who is a consistent effective pass rusher.
#1 priority doesn't mean ignore everything else. Priority not exclusive issue.

 

[mgteich]

Yes, I understand that we can restructure Mankins. I expect us to do that for the next three years. I think that this is likely to happen late and the monies used for various needs after camp, including an injury reserve.

Yes, we could extent Wilfork and/or Brady. These are major efforts and may happen in the next couple of months or not.

You are free to believe that the above three will happen in the next month or so, when we will need major money for re-signing and free agency. As I said, I agree that Mankins can certainly be done.

Get back to us when Brady signs an extension. Until then, the money isn't available. BTW, the same argument was made last year with regard to Brady.
=======================
So, we have EIGHTEEN million if we use up Mankins restructure cap monies in March instead of August. The issue is priorities.
=======================
Of course, if you are right and the team is ready to announce the extension of Brady and Wilfork, then we would not be very constrained by the cap at all.

It's silly to approach FA as if this team will be limited to $12-14M... They will do restructures or extensions to free up whatever they need. As they all do. The key is not overdoing it, and they never do.

Brady's extension is begging to be done and not just to free up cap space this season. They knew they were going to have to do it once they opted to restructure last season. He's the safest one to. And they knew if he remained healthy and productive they were always going to extend him now. Because the alternative was 2 more seasons and then 2 or 3 tags which would be cap prohibitive even on his previous average ($22M, $26.5M, $31M+). His extension alone can free up $10M give or take on a deal that won't kill them going forward because the AAV will be below market due to the 2 remaining years.

Mankins restructure alone could free up $3.75M and with his $7M salary only final season and 4 years remaining to spread the $5M in salary restructured, that won't cause them any problems, either. Vince can't be restructured because he only has two years left and they'd have to asscan him in 2014 if they did a simple restructure. So maybe they do a 2 year extension if they want to seek relief there. But just Brady and Mankins alone can almost double their cap space overnight. And $28M signs a lot of mid level and quality FA as long as you don't do silly deals chasing elite FA or forget to check the mid levels medicals.

 

[mgteich]

Apparently, I misunderstood your position on safety. You expect to sign a top starting free agent safety? One that will add more value to the team than Talib?

Well, I didn't say it would cost nothing. I also included a top safety.

I prefer McCourty and a top safety to McCourty and a decent corner, which would be similar in cost to a top level S.

I think it is much better than last year if you add a top S.

 

[supafly]

Yes, I understand that we can restructure Mankins. I expect us to do that for the next three years. I think that this is likely to happen late and the monies used for various needs after camp, including an injury reserve.

Yes, we could extent Wilfork and/or Brady. These are major efforts and may happen in the next couple of months or not.

You are free to believe that the above three will happen in the next month or so, when we will need major money for re-signing and free agency. As I said, I agree that Mankins can certainly be done.

Get back to us when Brady signs an extension. Until then, the money isn't available. BTW, the same argument was made last year with regard to Brady.
=======================
So, we have EIGHTEEN million if we use up Mankins restructure cap monies in March instead of August. The issue is priorities.
=======================
Of course, if you are right and the team is ready to announce the extension of Brady and Wilfork, then we would not be very constrained by the cap at all.

Isn't it pretty much guaranteed though, that all of these deals and moves will certainly be done in a very gradual way throughout the next couple of months, so additional money can/will be freed up as needed just as it always is? I think that some are viewing it as an "all or nothing" kind of situation, when these deals are probably being considered and shuffled through on just about any given league day. How much do we really need to try and retain some of our own, while still being in play for a bigger type move or two for the first week or so of free agency?

I would assume that the current number would be fine at the moment, and could even be considered a prime target for just about every single year, who knows? Maybe I am just too optimistic since I know that this team looks towards the future in every way possible, while still preparing themselves for maximum competition in the current timeframe.

In other words, I am not seeing all that much difference than any other year for the NEP in free agency, besides the fact that maybe we have another couple/few players of our own to assess which is probably higher than the majority of years. The team rarely goes out and spends freely in any given year, and yet in comparison we often see a handful of teams who have excessive amounts in their pocket, so that isn't proving to be any different.

One may argue that the 3 key players (Welker, Talib, Vollmer) are incredibly key to our future success, but I would have to assume that Belichick would value them the exact same if he had 18 million or 38 million. For all we know, Belichick wasn't planning on offering that much to Talib anyway. I doubt he'd overpay for guys like Vollmer or Talib...even Welker. Hell, I'd doubt he would overpay in any situation. That doesn't seem to be the way that things work, so in that aspect I think the cap space may be a little overexaggerated by some.

I think that a handful of lesser cost players of our own can be retained as they are individually assessed, and I also think that will leave them with other decisions to make on the futures of Welker etc, but it can certainly be argued that they can free up money if/when they want, as the free agency levels move accordingly throughout, which obviously lessens the cost as they do.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Yes, I understand that we can restructure Mankins. I expect us to do that for the next three years. I think that this is likely to happen late and the monies used for various needs after camp, including an injury reserve.

Yes, we could extent Wilfork and/or Brady. These are major efforts and may happen in the next couple of months or not.

You are free to believe that the above three will happen in the next month or so, when we will need major money for re-signing and free agency. As I said, I agree that Mankins can certainly be done.

Get back to us when Brady signs an extension. Until then, the money isn't available. BTW, the same argument was made last year with regard to Brady.
=======================
So, we have EIGHTEEN million if we use up Mankins restructure cap monies in March instead of August. The issue is priorities.
=======================
Of course, if you are right and the team is ready to announce the extension of Brady and Wilfork, then we would not be very constrained by the cap at all.

Makes no difference when they do their cap space creating deals. They know in advance what they plan to do and why, and it isn't always space related. Brady's deal needs to be redone for other reasons. His leverage only grows with each upcoming deal (Flacco, Rodgers) as Jason pointed out. And if they lose the flexibility the remaining 2 years affords in structuring a cap friendly deal it will create big problems down the road. They can't simply restructure him because that would only gain them another $7M this year at the cost of a $26M+ cap hit in 2014 and limit any possibility of tagging him (at almost $32M) even for the trade which so many here long for... Last season they restructured Brady's deal on March 22nd because they wanted to have space to be players after tagging Welker. In the end they only used about $2M of that on the rainy day fund and some wasted signings and the rest ended up as carryover.

I never said Wilfork being extended was a given. It's simply a matter of they can't restructure him because with 2 years left it creates a situation where next season they'd have to part with him...because his cap hit would be $14.5M or a dead cap hit of $6.6M (to which you'd have to add the cost of a replacement). And if they plan to have him at all past 2014 it will have to be via extension because tagging him in 2015 would run them north of $13M.

 

[mgteich]

I don't understand this when we need the money stuff. We need money in the next month to sign players before they reach free agency. We will need money in late March to compete for top level free agents. I understand that in many years, we passed on the very beginning of free agency. I don't expect this to happen if we don't have Welker and Talib signed befor free agency begins.

I understand that we likely have a Mankins restructure available whenever we wish, and perhaps Belichick thinks that's all that will be needed early. After all, $20M of this year's cap is a lot of money.

Isn't it pretty much guaranteed though, that all of these deals and moves will certainly be done in a very gradual way throughout the next couple of months, so additional money can/will be freed up as needed just as it always is? I think that some are viewing it as an "all or nothing" kind of situation, when these deals are probably being considered and shuffled through on just about any given league day. How much do we really need to try and retain some of our own, while still being in play for a bigger type move or two for the first week or so of free agency?

I would assume that the current number would be fine at the moment, and could even be considered a prime target for just about every single year, who knows? Maybe I am just too optimistic since I know that this team looks towards the future in every way possible, while still preparing themselves for maximum competition in the current timeframe.

In other words, I am not seeing all that much difference than any other year for the NEP in free agency, besides the fact that maybe we have another couple/few players of our own to assess which is probably higher than the majority of years. The team rarely goes out and spends freely in any given year, and yet in comparison we often see a handful of teams who have excessive amounts in their pocket, so that isn't proving to be any different.

One may argue that the 3 key players (Welker, Talib, Vollmer) are incredibly key to our future success, but I would have to assume that Belichick would value them the exact same if he had 18 million or 38 million. For all we know, Belichick wasn't planning on offering that much to Talib anyway. I doubt he'd overpay for guys like Vollmer or Talib...even Welker. Hell, I'd doubt he would overpay in any situation. That doesn't seem to be the way that things work, so in that aspect I think the cap space may be a little overexaggerated by some.

I think that a handful of lesser cost players of our own can be retained as they are individually assessed, and I also think that will leave them with other decisions to make on the futures of Welker etc, but it can certainly be argued that they can free up money if/when they want, as the free agency levels move accordingly throughout, which obviously lessens the cost as they do.

 

[mgteich]

We agree that a Mankins restructure is available at any time it's needed.

We seem to agree that the only other serious sources are extensions of Brady and Wilfork.

To my mind, these extensions are NOT done and we don't know the schedule for execution of either deal. To my mind, it does matter when we have the money available. If the money were available now, then this would increase the available flexibility in dealing with franchise tags, re-signings, and early free agent signings.

Perhaps a Brady extension is so logical that there is no way a deal won't be made, if it isn't complete already. Obviously, we will all feel a lot better when the deal is signed and announced. As you have said, a Brady extension would likely make serious cap money available this year.

Makes no difference when they do their cap space creating deals. They know in advance what they plan to do and why, and it isn't always space related. Brady's deal needs to be redone for other reasons. His leverage only grows with each upcoming deal (Flacco, Rodgers) as Jason pointed out. And if they lose the flexibility the remaining 2 years affords in structuring a cap friendly deal it will create big problems down the road. They can't simply restructure him because that would only gain them another $7M this year at the cost of a $26M+ cap hit in 2014 and limit any possibility of tagging him (at almost $32M) even for the trade which so many here long for... Last season they restructured Brady's deal on March 22nd because they wanted to have space to be players after tagging Welker. In the end they only used about $2M of that on the rainy day fund and some wasted signings and the rest ended up as carryover.

I never said Wilfork being extended was a given. It's simply a matter of they can't restructure him because with 2 years left it creates a situation where next season they'd have to part with him...because his cap hit would be $14.5M or a dead cap hit of $6.6M (to which you'd have to add the cost of a replacement). And if they plan to have him at all past 2014 it will have to be via extension because tagging him in 2015 would run them north of $13M.

 

[supafly]

I don't understand this when we need the money stuff. We need money in the next month to sign players before they reach free agency. We will need money in late March to compete for top level free agents. I understand that in many years, we passed on the very beginning of free agency. I don't expect this to happen if we don't have Welker and Talib signed befor free agency begins.

I understand that we likely have a Mankins restructure available whenever we wish, and perhaps Belichick thinks that's all that will be needed early. After all, $20M of this year's cap is a lot of money.

I think that's pretty much the main point, besides the fact that they can always have options to free up money if they choose and that Belichick is going to assess the players headed towards free agency with his own personal price and value, not just due to the fact that we'd need to replace or sign them. For all we know, he may have good feelings already on the chances of each of the 3 big names and their potential to stay next year.

Obviously those options that can be made are on an individual basis where it makes more/less sense to do certain deals by certain deadlines, but in my opinion I'm not seeing the cap constraints that you are. Of course you could very well be right and I could be wrong, as I am certainly nothing close to anything of a cap expert by any stretch, nor am I claiming to be so.

I just am not seeing much of a difference between this year's free agency and any other year, and the fact that we have sufficient room as it is speaks volumes to the proper choices that they've made as a financial whole. After all, there are many other teams who have much worse problems than we do, and they'll still do their best to field a competitive team too.

I still think that Belichick always has some sort of a plan to think things through to the fullest extent, and if it is/were a problem, then he will likely address that issue with some of the options available.

Free agency is still a full month away, so that leaves ample time to assess everything. If it were that much of a problem right now, I'd have a hard time believing that Belichick is out golfing instead of addressing those issues. I'm guessing it's just normal protocol at this specific slower time of the year, with attention soon being paid to these issues on pretty much an everyday basis, along with of course--the combine at the end of the month.

At the current moment though, a reasonable argument can be made that they could potentially sign BOTH Welker and Talib, should they choose to do so, not to mention a role player or even two.

 

[nekromantique]

I like Datone Jones as the fit there. Can play Base 4/3 DE

Jones-Armstead-Wilfork-Jones

and move INSIDE for Sub

Nink-Armstead-Jones-Jones

I feel like Francis would end up being the guy that comes on in those sub/passing downs. I dont have the numbers, but in those last few games he seemed like was getting more pressure than Nink. Nink's sack totals for the year may be decent, but his pressures were pretty low. The fact that Jones had the most pressures on the team despite Not Playing/Being Limited for most of the second half of the season is SAD.

Datone Jones would be a good get, especially since i feel like Nink wont be back once his contract is up, unless he continues to be a very cheap option.

 

[patfanken]

Some comments on the comments

1. Andy, I think you are making too big a deal about the "lack of a pass rush". While everyone would like to see a dominating pass rush, and last year, the Pats were far from that, it should be noted that the of the 2 superbowl teams, the Ravens had exactly the same number or sacks as the Pats had, and the Niner had but ONE more. Clearly you DON'T need to be among the league's sack leaders to be a successful team.

2. I don't understand, Andy why you want to replace one of the more consistently productive players the Pats have on defense in Rob Ninkovich. Check the numbers, that over the last 2 years, he has been easily as productive as Mike Vrabel was for all but one year in his tenure as a Patriot.

Ninkovich has improved his sack total every year he's been a Patriot (from 1 to 4 to 6.5 to 8) Why wouldn't one think he can't improve again next year? Vrabel didn't have his career year in sacks (12.5) until his 11th year in the league. Next year will only be Ninko's 9th

3. As far as MG's OP goes: While the $14MM number is probably accurate on this date, to think the Pats won't make other moves to increase that number is highly unlikely. In another thread, Mo made a compelling case for adding ANOTHER $18MM by restructuring or extending just 3 contracts in a conservative realistic manner.

4. Lets be realistic here, Brady has 2 more years where we can reasonably expect him to play at the high level we've come to expect, at best 3. After that point he could probably be a solid NFL QB who could get a very good team to a superbowl, but no longer "carry" it there. That being the case, Pats fans have to get used to the fact that after all these years, the "window" is actually closing on the Brady era, and preparations have to start to being made.

5. So choices have to be made. Do the Pats do what's necessary to "load up" for a great 2 year run, which means signing high quality FA's to big money deals that minimize their cap consequences the first 2 years of their contracts.

OR, do we keep on building as we have been and hope over the next 2 years, the Pats will be the team that suddenly gets hot in the playoffs and wins a Lombardi, Meanwhile we keep building a team that will be strong enough to keep Brady and the Pats in superbowl. contention over his last few years.

6. As to what the Pats might finally decide to do with all their own FA's and the ones out there; there are so many possible configurations that it becomes almost impossible to even speculate what they might do. But I'll give it a shot anyway.

a. I think they will spend relatively big money on someone in the secondary. They might pay Talib or some other press coverage CB or They could pay a top safety FA like Jarius Byrd and move McCourty back to CB and have Dowling Dennard, and McCourty be their top 3 guys. They also could draft a safety high in the draft, since this is supposedly one of the strongest S crops in a long while. BUT regardless of the strategy, one way or another, the Pats are going to make a least one large investment on the defensive backfield

b. The next area weakness that has to be addressed is WR - Again the possible combinations of moves is almost impossible to guess. One group of scenarios involve signing Welker, and a whole lot of OTHER scenarios involve NOT signing him. But like the DB's its clear the Pats are going to make at least one large investment on a WR. It could be Welker, it could be a FA, or it could be in the draft.

While I didn't agree with him, I think Bedard got somewhat of a bad rap on his column the other day. When he was talking about getting rid of BOTH Lloyd and Welker, I think he was talking about the Pats making a fundamental change in the focus of their offense. Perhaps that might be toward the RBs. In other words using the RB's more in both rushing the football and in the short passing game. In replacing Welker and Lloyd with WRs who have "different" skill sets and will be more down the field targets, and leave the between the number targets to the TE's and RB's

c. As to the OL: Volmer may be more doable that I originally thought. PFT had a post that listed all the potential FA OT's and the list was looong. So given the vast number of potential pick ups and Volmer's shaky health history, the market for him might not be as hot as he might hope. IF the Pats are planning to run the ball more, it might be worth it to load up on the OL, rather than at WR, and my dream of a Connolly, Cannon, and Volmer right side MIGHT just become a reality

7. BOTTOM LINE: IMHO, if the Pats are thinking short term, they have the means to sign any one they want and still stay well under the cap for at least the next 2 years. However IF they choose to do so, there WILL be a day of reckoning down the road. However 2 years in the NFL is a lifetime and could well be worth the consequences.

8. Here's a last minute thought. The Pats load up for a 2 year run. Win 2 more Lombardi's then dump Brady's back loaded contract in big trade to the new LA franchise, where he can go home and put fannies in the seats of that new stadium. Meanwhile the Pats create a lot of cap room, and greatly minimizes the impact of the deals they made in 2013 and pick up a couple of picks besides. How's THAT for wishful thinking.

 

[ivanvamp]

8. Here's a last minute thought. The Pats load up for a 2 year run. Win 2 more Lombardi's then dump Brady's back loaded contract in big trade to the new LA franchise, where he can go home and put fannies in the seats of that new stadium. Meanwhile the Pats create a lot of cap room, and greatly minimizes the impact of the deals they made in 2013 and pick up a couple of picks besides. How's THAT for wishful thinking.

Ha! I love it. Well, so long as they get those Lombardis, that is.

 

[Ring 6]

Some comments on the comments

1. Andy, I think you are making too big a deal about the "lack of a pass rush". While everyone would like to see a dominating pass rush, and last year, the Pats were far from that, it should be noted that the of the 2 superbowl teams, the Ravens had exactly the same number or sacks as the Pats had, and the Niner had but ONE more. Clearly you DON'T need to be among the league's sack leaders to be a successful team.

If you think our pass rush was anything like the 49ers, you aren't watching the games. TEAMS are successful or unsuccessful for many different reasons, and one of the primary ones this team hasn't gotten further is a weak pass rush. Finding teams who were successful despite a weakness is not a reason to ignore a weakness. (And the ones you picked we much stronger at rushing the passer. Sack totals are a small part of the equation)

2. I don't understand, Andy why you want to replace one of the more consistently productive players the Pats have on defense in Rob Ninkovich. Check the numbers, that over the last 2 years, he has been easily as productive as Mike Vrabel was for all but one year in his tenure as a Patriot.

Because he is overmatched in his role. Making some plays now and then is nice, but the standard for not goosd enough is a bit higher than never making a play. Comparing Ninkovich to Vrabel is, simply, ignorant. And Vrabel never played LDE.

Ninkovich has improved his sack total every year he's been a Patriot (from 1 to 4 to 6.5 to 8) Why wouldn't one think he can't improve again next year? Vrabel didn't have his career year in sacks (12.5) until his 11th year in the league. Next year will only be Ninko's 9th

Sack totals are a small piece of the puzzle, and even then 19.5 in 4 years is not something to jump up an down about. Ninkovich generated next to no pressure beyond those 8 sacks, and that just isn't good enough.


I'm good with him as a reserve, both at LB and DE. But if we start Rob Ninkovich at LDE next year, with Kyle Love and VW at DTs, we will be near the bottom in pass defense again, no matter who the DBs are.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Some comments on the comments

7. BOTTOM LINE: IMHO, if the Pats are thinking short term, they have the means to sign any one they want and still stay well under the cap for at least the next 2 years. However IF they choose to do so, there WILL be a day of reckoning down the road. However 2 years in the NFL is a lifetime and could well be worth the consequences.

8. Here's a last minute thought. The Pats load up for a 2 year run. Win 2 more Lombardi's then dump Brady's back loaded contract in big trade to the new LA franchise, where he can go home and put fannies in the seats of that new stadium. Meanwhile the Pats create a lot of cap room, and greatly minimizes the impact of the deals they made in 2013 and pick up a couple of picks besides. How's THAT for wishful thinking.

Not a day of reckoning as in cap hell. Unless you do really foolish things or have incredibly bad luck you don't end up there nowadays.

Brady has yet to have a backloaded contract in need of dumping. I doubt his last one will be any different. His cap hit would be fine at the moment had they not chosen to restructure. The assumption there is they wouldn't have done that unless they knew they were going to do an extension to make it a moot point.

If you listen to Kraft's comments after the superbowl it's also pretty clear they've gone into negotiation mode. But the thing you should aparently note is Kraft's comments on the end game for Brady, where he basically says they want him to remain here as long as he remains productive and that it's his belief that Tom will know when it's time for him to depart the game and he will keep them in the loop in that regard. I been sayin' that for 5 years now... He's not going to start over somewhere else from scratch as Manning chose (after being forced) to. And that only happened because they sucked so bad for a season without him they ended up atop the Luck Sweepstakes. There is a reason GB offered Favre $20M to retire a Packer. These guys have value to the franchise that extends beyond their playing days. Rodgers got the Pack off the hook. Luck may do the same for Indy in time. Unless you believe you got that in the pipeline, not such a good idea to move on pre-emptively.

 

[Froob]

How can you hate on Ninko? Dude is mega ****** clutch. 8 sacks is pretty damn good. Not every team has two 10+ sacks DE. Pretty good run stuffer too.