Jarvis Landry??

[Ivan]

You know that's not what I'm saying. Or at least , you should know.

It really wasn't so much a comment on you as it was the tenor of this message board when it comes to replacing proven players with binkies, which imo is rampant around here. But that's my personal b.tch, overall I like most of the discussion here, I just think people are way to quick to want to dump good proven players for their binkies.

 

[Oswlek]

I am not particularly worried about Lucien. He spend an entire year on the PS and had another offseason to make a jump but really didn't. Not sure there is much more to him than what we have seen.

Yup. Every team has a Devin Lucien, it's PS or bust for him.

 

[Oswlek]

Trade your best RB for a first-round bust. Genius.

Yeah, his obsession with another WR is downright silly. It's even more bizarre when you realize that Edelman's absence makes versatile RBs that much more important. On top of that, given the fact that only White has a clean injury record, sacrificing depth at that position seems decidedly foolish.

 

[PatriotsNumero1Fan]

Yeah, his obsession with another WR is downright silly. It's even more bizarre when you realize that Edelman's absence makes versatile RBs that much more important. On top of that, given the fact that only White has a clean injury record, sacrificing depth at that position seems decidedly foolish.

How it's silly? You would look like a fool if god forbid cooks missed some time with a hammy or hogan. It's about having some good depth behind. A lot of people are riding on Mitchell to take it up a notch this season and the guy hasn't even played a lot in the preseason. Amendola shows up in the playoffs.

 

[maineman209]

It really wasn't so much a comment on you as it was the tenor of this message board when it comes to replacing proven players with binkies, which imo is rampant around here. But that's my personal b.tch, overall I like most of the discussion here, I just think people are way to quick to want to dump good proven players for their binkies.

I hear ya.

I really try my best to avoid making definitive pronouncements ... "This WILL happen" or "That SHOULD happen". I also try to avoid putting players in boxes based on their positional designations. I just try to explore possibilities and to avoid excluding any possibilities arbitrarily, while acknowledging that what I think and what the Pats coaches think may well be dramatically different.

So, I think there's a possibility that Foster could be retained through cutdowns primarily to play some slot receiver for maybe the first week or two. After that?

I also think that there's a possibility that the Pats could trade Lewis at some point, but not necessarily during cutdowns.

I also think there's a possibility that Bolden could be released during cutdowns, and then re-signed on Monday after the Pats have moved a couple of players off the "final" 53 and onto IR.

In my mind though, these three possibilities don't necessarily have a lot to do with one another.

 

[50-yard-line]

FTR, I'm fine with them keeping Foster and using him any way they see fit, but the idea of getting rid of Lewis is idiotic. The redundancy they have on this roster is one of their greatest strengths, and Lewis and White give them great redundancy and strength in the receiving back role. Brady exploits that role to the max, and with Edelman out for the season it becomes even more important. I'd like to see them bolster depth at DE and Ol, but they really don't need to do more than that at this point.

You're on a roll, Ivan.

I agree with this - and let's put the best players on the field (since when has BB been hemmed in by "position"?).

Burkhead can play the slot. So can White. The Pats have four backs who all need touches. Just like High going to DE situationally, there's your Edelman replacement right there. Keep Hogan, Mitchell, Cooks and DA, obviously, and run Burkhead (that'd be my choice, from what I've seen) out of the slot.

 

[luuked]

How it's silly? You would look like a fool if god forbid cooks missed some time with a hammy or hogan. It's about having some good depth behind. A lot of people are riding on Mitchell to take it up a notch this season and the guy hasn't even played a lot in the preseason. Amendola shows up in the playoffs.

This team went to the AFCCG game with Brandon Bolden, the rookie version of James White, the corpse of Steven Jackson, bone-bruised Rob Gronkowski, broken-foot Julian Edelman, knee-injured Danny Amendola and whatever the **** Keyshawn Martin was.

Nobody expects Mitchell to do anything special, Dola shows up whenever he gets a chance and we will be fine even if Cooks is suffers a season ender because we are ****ing stacked on offense. And if our team gets so injured that it can't function anymore then Philipp ****ing Dorsett won't make a difference anyway.

 

[PP2]

Problem is the Patriots WR tree usually doesn't completely lay out the route presnap. Most (especially the slot) have more than one route dependent on the defense. If this was one of those routes, he went the wrong way. The defender had inside leverage and the outside defender jumped the underneath. He should have broke out. He's got the physical ability but it's that "being on the same page as Brady" that's most important. Edelman and Welker both had that in spades.

I don't quite understand what you mean- if you mean the inside defender, a.k.a., Howard (CB) having inside leverage, he was actually anticipating the break out so Carr was right to fake the breakout and break in, forcing Howard to flip his hips and lose a step.

 

[PP2]

And as to the question posted in this thread, I'd say no to Landry. Both Cooks and Landry are, IRRC, one year rentals and both will command big bucks on their next contracts.

 

[Ivan]

You're on a roll, Ivan.

I agree with this - and let's put the best players on the field (since when has BB been hemmed in by "position"?).

Burkhead can play the slot. So can White. The Pats have four backs who all need touches. Just like High going to DE situationally, there's your Edelman replacement right there. Keep Hogan, Mitchell, Cooks and DA, obviously, and run Burkhead (that'd be my choice, from what I've seen) out of the slot.

Yep, this team is talented, versatile, and deep, and they have the experience to run all sorts of formations in both sides of the ball. Belichick said on Monday that they were in sub packages 85% of the time last season, and I'd expect much the same this season. Don't sleep on Gillislee either, he could end up getting a lot of carries in the red zone.

 

[Oswlek]

How it's silly? You would look like a fool if god forbid cooks missed some time with a hammwww.y or hogan. It's about having some good depth behind. A lot of people are riding on Mitchell to take it up a notch this season and the guy hasn't even played a lot in the preseason. Amendola shows up in the playoffs.

It's perfectly natural to want quality depth and to be disappointed by Edelman's injury. It is going too far when you talk about trading away the very people the team will rely on to overcome Julian's absence for a wildcard who may or may not work simply because of a nominal position similarity.

 

[TommyD4207]

On top of that, given the fact that only White has a clean injury record, sacrificing depth at that position seems decidedly foolish.

Well. Cleanish.

 

[TommyD4207]

And as to the question posted in this thread, I'd say no to Landry. Both Cooks and Landry are, IRRC, one year rentals and both will command big bucks on their next contracts.

Cooks is a two-year rental.

And Landry just might want to stick around once he experiences life in the AFC East Penthouse, instead of the outhouse.

 

[TommyD4207]

How it's silly? You would look like a fool if god forbid cooks missed some time with a hammy or hogan. It's about having some good depth behind. A lot of people are riding on Mitchell to take it up a notch this season and the guy hasn't even played a lot in the preseason. Amendola shows up in the playoffs.

I can think of a dozen WRs that you could get for a 6th or 7th rounder right now, that are better than Dorsett could ever hope to be. Jarvis Landry might cost you a 3rd or 4th.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Cooks is a two-year rental.

And Landry just might want to stick around once he experiences life in the AFC East Penthouse, instead of the outhouse.

Why do you think Cooks is a rental?

 

[TommyD4207]

Why do you think Cooks is a rental?

I don't. I was commenting on the poster's assertion that he was a rental. You know, since he's signed this year and next year.

I think if he likes winning, and produces, he'll stay.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I don't. I was commenting on the poster's assertion that he was a rental. You know, since he's signed this year and next year.

I think if he likes winning, and produces, he'll stay.

Ah. I think the $ needs to be in the ballpark as well.

 

[Ivan]

Why do you think Cooks is a rental?

Because he is very likely going to want a 100 million deal in two years, and Belichick won't give that to a player that touches the ball 8-10 times a game. I love Cooks and loved the deal but I think it's two and gone. I really hope I'm wrong but that's my feeling.

 

[IllegalContact]

Because he is very likely going to want a 100 million deal in two years, and Belichick won't give that to a player that touches the ball 8-10 times a game. I love Cooks and loved the deal but I think it's two and gone. I really hope I'm wrong but that's my feeling.

you're probably right......but in that case, it will have meant that cooks had 2 outstanding years here and I'm ok with that

 

[RobertWeathers]

Because he is very likely going to want a 100 million deal in two years, and Belichick won't give that to a player that touches the ball 8-10 times a game. I love Cooks and loved the deal but I think it's two and gone. I really hope I'm wrong but that's my feeling.

Brown just landed 4/$68m so I highly doubt it'll be $100m