Julio Jones.

[Interception]

To be more accurate, the Pats were the #1 scoring team in 2010 (32.4 ppg). They were also a top 10 offense of all time in terms of total points scored (518). All without the services of Julio Jones and Randy Moss for only 4 games out of the 16. The key to that was Tom Brady's terrific play yielding 36 tds vs only 4 ints.

I wouldn't put my nose up at drafting a WR in 2011 but it's clearly not a priority need that would warrant a 1st round pick. I'll take a Hankerson or Torrey Smith later in round 2. In round 1 I want to focus on defense which was clearly the Pats' achilles heel in 2010.

And on the games Brady couldn't play terrificly, our receivers couldn't do much to save him. I'm not saying Jones is going to take over games, but stretching the field with a receiver like that takes off pressure from Brady and the underneath WRs -- and Brady might not put up a season like this one again next year.
We have an extremely young defense, but an older group of WRs. I'm not sold on Tate at all either.
I do think we have needs on front seven, but we have plenty of picks to address the situation AND take Jones.

 

[BlueThunder]

To be more accurate, the Pats were the #1 scoring team in 2010 (32.4 ppg). They were also a top 10 offense of all time in terms of total points scored (518). All without the services of Julio Jones and Randy Moss for only 4 games out of the 16. The key to that was Tom Brady's terrific play yielding 36 tds vs only 4 ints.

I wouldn't put my nose up at drafting a WR in 2011 but it's clearly not a priority need that would warrant a 1st round pick. I'll take a Hankerson or Torrey Smith later in round 2. In round 1 I want to focus on defense which was clearly the Pats' achilles heel in 2010.

Totally AGREE on the above....This should be a DEFENSE orientated draft for BB.....Grab a RB when value is there...same with a WR....even an OL....
I'd like to see at least 4 defensive players drafted in first 6 picks Pats have...
Offense can be RB/OL...WR/RB or OL/WR .... for value, not necessarily need...
:bricks: