Nick Mangold released

[RayClay]

Usually not for theses name acquisitions, but getting blown up in the middle has been an issue for years on the Pats. If healthy, Mangold could be a rock in the middle and I'm sure Brady would love him. BB must have a bionic ankle kicking around his laboratory.

 

[shmessy]

Tom Brady?

...........and the 2nd and 3rd string QBs are the best in the division.

It's called managing a T-E-A-M instead of collecting celebrities.

Amazing the rest of the league cannot figure it out.....but, hey, we'll take it!

.

 

[PatriotsPimp136]

Patriots
th

Usually not for theses name acquisitions, but getting blown up in the middle has been an issue for years on the Pats. If healthy, Mangold could be a rock in the middle and I'm sure Brady would love him. BB must have a bionic ankle kicking around his laboratory.

The line has to be strong. Tom will be 40. He can't take big hits. Our tackles did well but the interior was a problem.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

Patriots
th

The line has to be strong. Tom will be 40. He can't take big hits. Our tackles did well but the interior was a problem.

Solder was not great in the SB. Andrews struggled a lot - undersized. For the money Solder makes I wonder.

 

[PatsBoy12]

Just because you are "ok" at a position that doesn't mean you don't upgrade at the position when a top flight player becomes available. Mangold is the best center in football over the past decade and if they look at the tape and believe that he's still that kind of player then they will bring him in and make an offer. If however Belichick and Caserio believe he's no longer a first rate center then they will quietly pass on him. I love him as a player and want them to bring him in but I trust their evaluation process completely and trust that they will make the right decision on him.

Well that's the point. IF. We have no idea if he is the player he's been. We do, however, know what we have in Andrews. It's funny how a big name is out there and it's immediately "sign the beast" despite how many times we have heard and quoted that BB is building a team and not just signing talent. I'd say G and T are more important than C at this point. Oh and by "ok," I meant that we're fine at the C position. How much of all upgrade would Mangold be at this stage of his career anyway? We don't know.

 

[Ivan]

Well that's the point. IF. We have no idea if he is the player he's been. We do, however, know what we have in Andrews. It's funny how a big name is out there and it's immediately "sign the beast" despite how many times we have heard and quoted that BB is building a team and not just signing talent. I'd say G and T are more important than C at this point. Oh and by "ok," I meant that were fine at the C position. How much of all upgrade would Mangold be at this stage of his career anyway? We don't know.

You're right, they shouldn't look at him because you think they are OK at center.

My mistake.

It will never happen again.

 

[PatsBoy12]

You're right, they shouldn't look at him because you think they are OK at center.

My mistake.

It will never happen again.

Now you're being a bit childish, Ivan. Nowhere in either of my posts did I say the Pats shouldn't look at him. In fact, I believe they will because they're always thorough. My point, and I'll leave it alone after this, is why go for what would likely be just a marginal upgrade at this point in Mangold's career when there are bigger concerns on the line...and even on the rest of the roster? That's all I'm saying. Mangold has been the absolute best for some time now, but is that still the case? They'll look to see. I just don't think, AT THIS POINT, he represents that much of an upgrade over the guy we already have on the cheap. You're picking one part in the post and ignoring everything else. I'm not automatically dismissing Mangold. I'm just asking what I think are legit questions, especially in the long term.

 

[50-yard-line]

Well that's the point. IF. We have no idea if he is the player he's been. We do, however, know what we have in Andrews. It's funny how a big name is out there and it's immediately "sign the beast" despite how many times we have heard and quoted that BB is building a team and not just signing talent. I'd say G and T are more important than C at this point. Oh and by "ok," I meant that were fine at the C position. How much of all upgrade would Mangold be at this stage of his career anyway? We don't know.

When there's value to be had, sign the beast!

Nick Mangold? BEAST. Easiest upgrade on the offensive side of the ball: Interior OL.

And hey, I've been an Andrews fan from the get-go, and was pissed when they put him out and put Stork back in at center (should have moved him to guard). This is a clear physical/experience/skill upgrade.

If the price on Mangold is right, I can't think of many better ways to use some of that excess money. I'd throw 2/10, 2/12 at him in a heartbeat if he's healthy.

 

[PatsBoy12]

When there's value to be had, sign the beast!

Nick Mangold? BEAST. Easiest upgrade on the offensive side of the ball: Interior OL.

And hey, I've been an Andrews fan from the get-go, and was pissed when they put him out and put Stork back in at center (should have moved him to guard). This is a clear physical/experience/skill upgrade.

If the price on Mangold is right, I can't think of many better ways to use some of that excess money. I'd throw 2/10, 2/12 at him in a heartbeat if he's healthy.

Respect. I agree, IF he's the player he's been. That is all I'm saying. Are we getting the Manifold of dominant years past, or would we be signing a player who would only marginally upgrade a position that may not be the biggest need on the line? Why is that so out of bounds to ask at this point in Mangold's career, especially when he is coming off yet another injury? How many games has Andrews missed? Weekday happens to him if we sign Mangold, a 33 year old for even two years over a guy who is just getting started?

 

[Simpelton]

Bringing in one of the best veteran centers in the league will probably help the rest of the offensive line too. if he's healthy and still on his game of course. Even if not, I'd bring him in if the price was right, just because experience counts for something and unless I'm very wrong we have a pretty young offensive line.

 

[patfanken]

In the Houston playoff and the first half of the SB, If TFB wasn't on his alien diet and lifestyle, any other QB in the NFL would have been out for the rest of the playoffs.

That simply cannot happen long-term. We are depending too much on Alex Guerrero there- - TFB was taking HELLACIOUS punishment - - and both teams were keying up the middle directly over Andrews.

Ken you KNOW that.

I love Andrews and he is going to be very good - - but he is undersized and needs seasoning. The Pats have disguised things well with Scar this past year, but the NFL knows the Holy Grail and it is right over Andrews' three point stance. Give him the next two years learning from Mangold and he can become a Koppen (also undersized Center, but with superior technique and smarts who became better with experience).

.


.

Slow your roll there, big guy. Where in my posts do we disagree on the main premis, that Mangold would be a good additioin? We don't.

What I am disagreeing with you is in your portrayal that the Pats have a "serious" OL issue, and Brady was taking "hellacious" punishment this ENTIRE season. That is simply not the case. In fact the Pats allowed the 6th FEWEST sacks per game (1.7), which (if I'm reading this correctly) includes the playoffs.

I'm not saying Brady didn't get hit too much in the superbowl, but I would contend that was just ONE game and there was the fact they they attempted over 60 passes.

Where we DO agree is that we'd both like to see the OL improve, either by experience or player movement. We both think Mangold would be an upgrade over Andrews.

BTW- I don't think Andrews is the long term answer in any case. Like I said, I love his grit, and if they did nothing at the position it wouldn't crush me. But he is what he is. He's an overacheiver who will never be a liability, but will never be an "asset" or plus, either. Any improvement in his play through experience will be marginal IMO.

Bottom line, we aren't in any disagreement here, I just think you over stated the problem a bit.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Sounds like the YETS are in rebuild mode still......

Forty seven years on, and still just begining rebuilding ...

 

[RobertWeathers]

Classic case of do you want 1-2 years of elite or 7 years of guaranteed solid play

Elite when healthy but not sure his body can withstand the pounding for 1000 snaps anymore. If they think he can then he is worth a look-see.

I kinda like what Andrews did last year. He solid but obviously not at NMs level.

 

[ivanvamp]

Classic case of do you want 1-2 years of elite or 7 years of guaranteed solid play

Elite when healthy but not sure his body can withstand the pounding for 1000 snaps anymore. If they think he can then he is worth a look-see.

I kinda like what Andrews did last year. He solid but obviously not at NMs level.

They could sign Mangold and keep Andrews, and then limit Mangold's snaps by having Andrews sub in more often. Maybe playing all the snaps when the game is out of reach in the 4th quarter, something like that. Limit the wear and tear on Mangold.

 

[mosslost]

Probably injury-related.

Was my favorite Jet (short list, yeah) forever. What a great and tough player. And yeah, if he had anything left, I'd be all for having him on a #iwantaring-deal.

Wayne Chrebet was my favorite in my life time. I do barely rember Joe Namath on the Jets but I mostly remember he failing on other teams post injury and post his "pime". (Which was overrated anyway)

 

[mosslost]

I am expecting more releases from the jests.

Amazing the AFc East is becoming even ****tier than ever with Brady set to ride for 4 or 5 more years. The Dolphins will drop because that is the pattern. (Team other than Pats or Bills rise a little bit in the division for one or two years. Then they settle back down)

AFC itself is Dumpster Fire.
AFC East besides Pats is absolutely ****e in the heart of Fire.

 

[deroc5050]

Why spend big money on a position where the Pats are LOADED and with players that Brady has a great chemistry?

Even with Scar back, that line had serious protection issues last year

THINK. Throwing money at Decker is like invading your 401(k) to buy a 3rd nipple.

.

I never said for the Pats to sign Decker, I am just saying if they had him it would be an upgrade... people are so quick to disagree and dislike a comment and not really think it through

Decker or Mitchell?
Decker or Hogan?
Decker or Floyd?

At this point in his career he is 29 years old I would take him over any 1 of those guys. If Brady was throwing him the ball he would be a great Wide out. But its just a hypothetical the Pats are not going to get him. He isn't a need. But I would take him any day of the week.

 

[RobertWeathers]

They could sign Mangold and keep Andrews, and then limit Mangold's snaps by having Andrews sub in more often. Maybe playing all the snaps when the game is out of reach in the 4th quarter, something like that. Limit the wear and tear on Mangold.

We can always bring back Googs and rotate every player on the O-Line again..

 

[patfanken]

Would mangold take a two year deal making 2.7 million dollars?

Mangold was due to make $6MM this year. I think if you are going to get him you will need to give him at least the POSSIBILITY of making that much.

So it's a conditional deal with 3 levels of payment. Say $1MM at signing - $2MM for making the September 53 - which protects the team if he isn't better than Andrews any more - $2MM divided in 17 game day checks for every game he starts - Injury protection - and finally $1MM for a pro bowl season or a superbowl ring,

So basically if he actually IS an upgrade to Andrews, he'll wind up with around $5MM, and if he's still the guy he has been for the last decade, then he'll get the full $6MM.

That's a deal the Pats can afford and is fair to a great player on the decline

 

[meatface]

Bringing in one of the best veteran centers in the league will probably help the rest of the offensive line too. if he's healthy and still on his game of course. Even if not, I'd bring him in if the price was right, just because experience counts for something and unless I'm very wrong we have a pretty young offensive line.

He WAS one of the best centers, didn't play well the last two years and was injured last year. Honestly I think he would be a downgrade from Andrews