Reiss: Growing pains for Pats' WR redo?

[MoneyFX]

I hope we don't have hopes that are too lofty for Dobson. Personally, I think just the fact alone that he has the potential to upgrade the position with speed and downfield ability will be enough to be optimistic about. I hope that we all don't just measure his season on statistics alone.

I've said it before, but I honestly would be very happy with 40 catches from Dobson, especially if some of those catches are in the downfield variety; much like we saw from Brandon Tate's first real (redshirted) yr when he was basically a rookie.

Unfortunately, Tate did not have what Belichick wanted for reasons that were likely more than just talent alone--possibly his lack of picking up the playbook or even his attitude or work ethic, but in his rookie year we saw him put up an 18 ypc average and make some nice downfield grabs with only catching 24 balls all season.

More importantly he was able to draw some attention away from the safety and actually run his man downfield at times, which was beneficial to our offense in other ways. I'm not saying that Tate's rookie year should be the bar for which we measure Dobson, because we all want something more of course, but if Dobson only catches 35-40 balls, he can still be considered an upgrade based on "other" measurables aside from just statistical ananlysis.

I agree. I don't think Dobson will have 900+ yards like Lloyd did in 2012, but assuming that he stays healthy and can get accustomed to the playbook, he will have a bigger impact on the offense than Lloyd, even with less catches/yards than Lloyd. He can definitely stretch the field unlike Lloyd.

As you said, it's not about his stats and he doesn't need to be Randy Moss, as in putting up all-pro numbers. It's all about him and filling his role of being the outside receiver to complement the inside receivers in Amendola, Edelman and the TEs.

Dobson has the physical attributes to be the premier perimeter receiver, but it's all up to him if he wants to be great.

I'm also interested to see how Josh Boyce can make an impact. He's got speed and he can play physical on the outside.

 

[supafly]

I agree. I don't think Dobson will have 900+ yards like Lloyd did in 2012, but assuming that he stays healthy and can get accustomed to the playbook, he will have a bigger impact on the offense than Lloyd, even with less catches/yards than Lloyd. He can definitely stretch the field unlike Lloyd.

As you said, it's not about his stats and he doesn't need to be Randy Moss, as in putting up all-pro numbers. It's all about him and filling his role of being the outside receiver to complement the inside receivers in Amendola, Edelman and the TEs.

Dobson has the physical attributes to be the premier perimeter receiver, but it's all up to him if he wants to be great.

I'm also interested to see how Josh Boyce can make an impact. He's got speed and he can play physical on the outside.

All great thoughts. Couldn't agree more.

 

[supafly]

Hopefully with Brady losing his binkys he is forced to spread the ball more and not become unpredictable - this will be key against great defenses that we face in the off season

I assume you meant "not become predictable."

I'm not as worried as predictability myself, especially if the running game can step up a bit and take advantage of any defense that chooses to stay in nickel formation all game (cough..Baltimore..cough). We showed a dedication to the running game, but they also have to be able to run effectively in the games of January and hopefully, February.

I think some of your predictability concerns stem from a lack of talent in certain areas from the actual receivers, combined with a lack of adequate replacement for injured players like Gronkowski; otherwise I didn't see as problem with predictability as you seem to have. Let's remember that it was still a 14-13 game early in the last quarter during the AFCCG, and that we racked up almost 450 yds on them. On top of that they were inside what normally is considered FG range a whopping EIGHT times, only to come away with a measly 13 pts.

In other words, there were many factors that led to the AFCCG loss, much like any of our other losses. It's just my opinion but I didn't see as much predictibility as you may have.

 

[supafly]

Just to take it one step further I see several major TEAM concerns that would be higher on the priority list than offensive "predictability" issues. All of these led to losses recently :


--depth and talent in the secondary, along with the ability to play better man coverage (I think this has been addressed very nicely)

--cohension and development in the defense itself, along with the ability to play the same grouping of guys in multiple alignments and formations (I think this has also been improved upon with the ability to play both 30 and 40 fronts, and I think that all of Hightower, Jones, Collins, and even Fletcher will help in this regard)

--improvement on talent/depth at the TE position (Again, I think the addition of both Ballard and possibly even Sudfeld can help to offset the loss of either one of Hernandez/Gronkowski for a handful of games, as hard and impossible as it would be to "replace" a guy like Gronkowski. Another aspect to consider is the injury situation last season to Daniel Fells, who may very well be able to contribute a lot more should he make the team)

--the ability to successfully run the ball on a consistent basis in big game settings vs top notch defenses (we've seen 3 decent defensive teams beat us in playoff games recently, and all had a tendency to line up in nickle formations. The key and main question would be whether or not we can end up running successfully and effectively should someone else try to get cute and copy this idea)

--the lack of talent for our WR group, aside from Wes Welker (We're discussing a group which included Edelman's 21 catches, Branch's 16 catches, and Llyod's inability to beat man coverage and gain any YACs. The group is a big question mark at the moment, but we at least need Amendola to be able to take 75% or so of Welker's production)

--the ability of the offensive line to remain as injury free as possible, and to show up nicely in playoff game settings (This has been somewhat of a question mark vs the better defensive teams in the league, especially the inability to hold up vs interior pressure)

--the inability to create turnovers in playoff game settings, while giving up the ball ourselves in certain situations (Always the great equalizer, especially come playoff time. Some of this is bad luck like the 3 lost chances at fumble recoveries in the SB, some is just poor execution)

 

[Se7eN]

I assume you meant "not become predictable."

I'm not as worried as predictability myself, especially if the running game can step up a bit and take advantage of any defense that chooses to stay in nickel formation all game (cough..Baltimore..cough). We showed a dedication to the running game, but they also have to be able to run effectively in the games of January and hopefully, February.

I think some of your predictability concerns stem from a lack of talent in certain areas from the actual receivers, combined with a lack of adequate replacement for injured players like Gronkowski; otherwise I didn't see as problem with predictability as you seem to have. Let's remember that it was still a 14-13 game early in the last quarter during the AFCCG, and that we racked up almost 450 yds on them. On top of that they were inside what normally is considered FG range a whopping EIGHT times, only to come away with a measly 13 pts.

In other words, there were many factors that led to the AFCCG loss, much like any of our other losses. It's just my opinion but I didn't see as much predictibility as you may have.

Lol yeah, my bad.

Anywho, imagine last year, if welker were injured. Our whole passing offense would have gotten derailed.

 

[NEPettyOfficer72]

I can understand growing pains if you had rookie wide receivers who've never played in the no huddle, never played in complex offensive systems, didn't have the physical, intellectual, and athletic tools, didn't have perhaps the greatest quarterback of all time and the best in the game today to learn and catch passes from, didn't have the best coach in the league and perhaps greatest of all time to receive knowledge and teaching from, didn't have Josh McDaniels to learn from, or Brian Daboll to learn from, didn't have versatility and on and on and on and on.....

Reiss, I like the guy but he has to realize that all position redo's go through some growing pains but not all under certain circumstances. I would call Gronkowski's absence a blessing because Tom now has the entire off season to develop top notch chemistry with all of his receivers. I would call Wes Welker's trade a blessing because we can now spread the ball around. I would call this draft a blessing because through all the PK Sams, Chad Jacksons, and other receivers of the draft, none had the attributes and tools both physically, and mentally that these two young men this year have. So I think our receivers will thrive this season, plus they also have vets to learn from such as Danny Amendola and Michael Jenkins.. Jenkins a guy who has been around and seen it all. These kids have too much around them and in them, I think this season will be fun.

The lack of optimism around this organization outside of the team and coaching staff is so stupid and I'm sick of it. Multiple championship runs, and appearances, and the QB and coach that we have, I think we as fans have become SPOILED. We have so much talent and depth this season that other teams would kill for... and don't even realize it with our "stats" and our "expertise".

 

[mgteich]

Yes, fans are spoiled. We are not "optimistic" in the sense that this team seems to be at the same level as those from 2005-2012. Every year, as with all teams, we hope for improvement. We understand that the Brady dynasty is a magic time. We'd like to see him with a better team so that he has a chance for more Super Bowls.

So, yes, we "should" celebrate that we are almost a lock for the playoffs every year. After all, we have won or tied for the division for 12 years in a row. There have been just a few dynasties in the history of the NFL; this is one of them. Some would call it the Kraft dynasty and start it when Kraft bought the team. The turnaround was amazing and the consistency since then has been incredible.

The lack of optimism around this organization outside of the team and coaching staff is so stupid and I'm sick of it. Multiple championship runs, and appearances, and the QB and coach that we have, I think we as fans have become SPOILED. We have so much talent and depth this season that other teams would kill for... and don't even realize it with our "stats" and our "expertise".

 

[mgteich]

This is a fine analysis. My list of concerns is similar to yours. My primary worries include

A) red zone production,

B) the effectiveness of the wide receivers,

C) the inability to create turnovers,

D) the vulnerability of the offense to inside pressure, and

E) the health of the secondary.

All this has been addressed. Our question marks are less severe than those for almost any other team.

Just to take it one step further I see several major TEAM concerns that would be higher on the priority list than offensive "predictability" issues. All of these led to losses recently :


--depth and talent in the secondary, along with the ability to play better man coverage (I think this has been addressed very nicely)

--cohension and development in the defense itself, along with the ability to play the same grouping of guys in multiple alignments and formations (I think this has also been improved upon with the ability to play both 30 and 40 fronts, and I think that all of Hightower, Jones, Collins, and even Fletcher will help in this regard)

--improvement on talent/depth at the TE position (Again, I think the addition of both Ballard and possibly even Sudfeld can help to offset the loss of either one of Hernandez/Gronkowski for a handful of games, as hard and impossible as it would be to "replace" a guy like Gronkowski. Another aspect to consider is the injury situation last season to Daniel Fells, who may very well be able to contribute a lot more should he make the team)

--the ability to successfully run the ball on a consistent basis in big game settings vs top notch defenses (we've seen 3 decent defensive teams beat us in playoff games recently, and all had a tendency to line up in nickle formations. The key and main question would be whether or not we can end up running successfully and effectively should someone else try to get cute and copy this idea)

--the lack of talent for our WR group, aside from Wes Welker (We're discussing a group which included Edelman's 21 catches, Branch's 16 catches, and Llyod's inability to beat man coverage and gain any YACs. The group is a big question mark at the moment, but we at least need Amendola to be able to take 75% or so of Welker's production)

--the ability of the offensive line to remain as injury free as possible, and to show up nicely in playoff game settings (This has been somewhat of a question mark vs the better defensive teams in the league, especially the inability to hold up vs interior pressure)

--the inability to create turnovers in playoff game settings, while giving up the ball ourselves in certain situations (Always the great equalizer, especially come playoff time. Some of this is bad luck like the 3 lost chances at fumble recoveries in the SB, some is just poor execution)

 

[Deus Irae]

The lack of optimism around this organization outside of the team and coaching staff is so stupid and I'm sick of it. Multiple championship runs, and appearances, and the QB and coach that we have, I think we as fans have become SPOILED. We have so much talent and depth this season that other teams would kill for... and don't even realize it with our "stats" and our "expertise".

Multiple championship runs means nothing without championship victories. Ask Bills fans. In the end, nobody gives a damn who comes in second. The Patriots have squandered the last 8 years (including the injury season) of Brady's career. It should come as no surprise to anyone that people view the season as SB or bust, and take a cautious approach to what they see and hear in the offseason.

 

[Bruins29]

The Patriots have squandered the last 8 years (including the injury season) of Brady's career. .

No question, it will be a real shame if we cant get TB at least one more ring and 5 would be ideal to put all the silly GOAT discussions to bed.

But, do you really feel these seasons were squandered? I think of the word squander and I feel it would have meant the pats really diddnt try during those 8 seasons. They diddnt spend to the cap or diddnt try to improve the team. Obviously several moves backfired but they do for every team and we can use hindsight as such a weapon against them every time.

Maybe a couple of years you could legitimately say that (or certainly argue it) but I dont think its the right word for that 8 year period. Bad luck and just a couple of bad games had way more to do with it.

And, for as much as we love to blame the FO for not giving TB a team around him (as you indicated in that statement) TB diddnt exactly light the world on fire in all of his playoff games during that time period.

 

[mgteich]

You state you position clearly.

The Bills team that won four AFC championships in a row was a great team, and has been many times recognized as such. Perhaps the 2000-2003 Ravens are better because they won one SB and then collapsed. Such a philosophy is certainly "reasonable". I just don't share it.

In the end, nobody gives a damn who comes in second. The Patriots have squandered the last 8 years (including the injury season) of Brady's career. It should come as no surprise to anyone that people view the season as SB or bust, and take a cautious approach to what they see and hear in the offseason.

 

[Deus Irae]

You state you position clearly.

The Bills team that won four AFC championships in a row was a great team, and has been many times recognized as such. Perhaps the 2000-2003 Ravens are better because they won one SB and then collapsed. Such a philosophy is certainly "reasonable". I just don't share it.

No question, it will be a real shame if we cant get TB at least one more ring and 5 would be ideal to put all the silly GOAT discussions to bed.

But, do you really feel these seasons were squandered? I think of the word squander and I feel it would have meant the pats really diddnt try during those 8 seasons. They diddnt spend to the cap or diddnt try to improve the team. Obviously several moves backfired but they do for every team and we can use hindsight as such a weapon against them every time.

Maybe a couple of years you could legitimately say that (or certainly argue it) but I dont think its the right word for that 8 year period. Bad luck and just a couple of bad games had way more to do with it.

And, for as much as we love to blame the FO for not giving TB a team around him (as you indicated in that statement) TB diddnt exactly light the world on fire in all of his playoff games during that time period.

Awful teams look to wins to define their seasons.
Middling teams look to reaching the playoffs to define their seasons.
Good teams look to playoff wins to define their seasons.
Elite teams look to championships to define their seasons.

One need only look at the 2007 season for verification.

 

[Deus Irae]

You state you position clearly.

The Bills team that won four AFC championships in a row was a great team, and has been many times recognized as such. Perhaps the 2000-2003 Ravens are better because they won one SB and then collapsed. Such a philosophy is certainly "reasonable". I just don't share it.

The Bills were playing in a woeful AFC when they went on their run. When it came to the big game against the NFC opponent, they got thumped in 3 out of 4 games.

30-13
52-17
37-24
20-19

They weren't a great team. They were a very good team in a down conference that was in the midst of a 13 year losing streak. As Patriots fans, we don't have their experience to fall back on, because TFB & Co. won 3 of 4, so we're looking at the last 8 years from a different perspective.

 

[mgteich]

IMHO, a team who wins the AFC championship 4 years in a row is an elite team.

You are free to believe that the 2007 patriots were not an elite team. I disagree.

Our difference is that you don't consider winning divisions or conference CHAMPIONSHIPS to mean anything.
==========

So, I guess that you consider the 2000 Ravens and the 2001 Patriots to be elite teams. If so, the word "elite" add no meaning. You might as well simply say that they are SB winners.

Awful teams look to wins to define their seasons.
Middling teams look to reaching the playoffs to define their seasons.
Good teams look to playoff wins to define their seasons.
Elite teams look to championships to define their seasons.

One need only look at the 2007 season for verification.

 

[Rob0729]

Awful teams look to wins to define their seasons.
Middling teams look to reaching the playoffs to define their seasons.
Good teams look to playoff wins to define their seasons.
Elite teams look to championships to define their seasons.

One need only look at the 2007 season for verification.

Yeah, but the argument about blaming personnel moves is a tired one.

If Bill Belichick made better personnel decisions, David Tyree wouldn't have made an impossible catch that happens once a... well once ever.

If Bill Belichick made better personnel decisions, Bernard Pollard wouldn't have taken out Gronk's ankle in the AFCCG.

Fact of the matter is the Pats have been to five Super Bowls and everyone one were basically decided in the last minute or two of the game. The wins had breaks go the Pats' way and the losses didn't. Without the Panthers kicking the ball out of bounds prior to the game winning drive for the Pats, they might have lost that Super Bowl. If Tyree drops the pass like he should have, the Pats win that one. Then the argument is completely different.

Belichick since 2004 has given the Pats enough talent to make it to five conference championship games and two Super Bowls. Not many teams can say that. And the Pats could easily have two to four more Super Bowl wins with a few breaks (Tyree dropping the pass, Gronk being healthy, etc.).

 

[Deus Irae]

IMHO, a team who wins the AFC championship 4 years in a row is an elite team.

It depends on how good the conference was. In the case of the Bills, the conference was way down.

You are free to believe that the 2007 patriots were not an elite team. I disagree.

They were elite. They lost the SB. That's the point.

Our difference is that you don't consider winning divisions or conference CHAMPIONSHIPS to mean anything.
==========

I never made that claim. I don't take that position.

So, I guess that you consider the 2000 Ravens and the 2001 Patriots to be elite teams. If so, the word "elite" add no meaning. You might as well simply say that they are SB winners.

The 2000 Ravens were clearly an elite defense. They allowed the fewest points in NFL history. They had an offense that was charged with just not screwing things up. It worked enough to get them a championship. Why do you keep bringing them up? Are you just trying to be contrary, or do you fail to understand the difference between potential and reality?

 

[Deus Irae]

Yeah, but the argument about blaming personnel moves is a tired one.

If Bill Belichick made better personnel decisions, David Tyree wouldn't have made an impossible catch that happens once a... well once ever.

If Bill Belichick made better personnel decisions, Bernard Pollard wouldn't have taken out Gronk's ankle in the AFCCG.

Fact of the matter is the Pats have been to five Super Bowls and everyone one were basically decided in the last minute or two of the game. The wins had breaks go the Pats' way and the losses didn't. Without the Panthers kicking the ball out of bounds prior to the game winning drive for the Pats, they might have lost that Super Bowl. If Tyree drops the pass like he should have, the Pats win that one. Then the argument is completely different.

Belichick since 2004 has given the Pats enough talent to make it to five conference championship games and two Super Bowls. Not many teams can say that. And the Pats could easily have two to four more Super Bowl wins with a few breaks (Tyree dropping the pass, Gronk being healthy, etc.).

Rob, you and I have been on this site for a lot of years. You know that I look to some seasons as being personnel/GM type failures, some as being injury failures and some as being player failures, and I expect that you would agree with my position in general, given your posting history.

In the end, though, for a team who's goal is to win the SB as opposed to just winning more than 2 games, or making the playoffs, or winning a playoff game, it's been a long string of ultimately failing. I have to admit, I'm surprised that this is an even mildly controversial position to take, because it's sort of paint-by-numbers obvious.

 

[mgteich]

Clearly, having a SB contender every year is not enough for many posters. They would rather have an additional SB in the last seven years and also have bunch of 8-8 seasons (or 7-9 or 9-7).

In many ways, this is a matter of team perspective. For example, the patriots could have signed a couple more top free agent this year and ignored future cap implications, and had a higher likelihood of winning the SB this year and a lower probability in 2014 and 2015. Many posters agree with the team's philosophy; many do not.

Yeah, but the argument about blaming personnel moves is a tired one.

If Bill Belichick made better personnel decisions, David Tyree wouldn't have made an impossible catch that happens once a... well once ever.

If Bill Belichick made better personnel decisions, Bernard Pollard wouldn't have taken out Gronk's ankle in the AFCCG.

Fact of the matter is the Pats have been to five Super Bowls and everyone one were basically decided in the last minute or two of the game. The wins had breaks go the Pats' way and the losses didn't. Without the Panthers kicking the ball out of bounds prior to the game winning drive for the Pats, they might have lost that Super Bowl. If Tyree drops the pass like he should have, the Pats win that one. Then the argument is completely different.

Belichick since 2004 has given the Pats enough talent to make it to five conference championship games and two Super Bowls. Not many teams can say that. And the Pats could easily have two to four more Super Bowl wins with a few breaks (Tyree dropping the pass, Gronk being healthy, etc.).

 

[Deus Irae]

Clearly, having a SB contender every year is not enough for many posters. They would rather have an additional SB in the last seven years and also have bunch of 8-8 seasons (or 7-9 or 9-7).

In many ways, this is a matter of team perspective. For example, the patriots could have signed a couple more top free agent this year and ignored future cap implications, and had a higher likelihood of winning the SB this year and a lower probability in 2014 and 2015. Many posters agree with the team's philosophy; many do not.

Why do you keep relying on false claims and straw men? Your comments about this year are a perfect example. The team had plenty of cap room, so your point has no validity, yet you claim it as if it were fact.

And where is anyone hoping for 8-8 seasons?

To put it another way, the Pittsburgh Penguins reached the conference finals this season, yet the talk is that their coach could get fired because that wasn't good enough.

 

[mgteich]

Are you suggesting that this attitude should be carried over to the NFL?

To put it another way, the Pittsburgh Penguins reached the conference finals this season, yet the talk is that their coach could get fired because that wasn't good enough.