Why all the worry about the offense?

[Kontradiction]

Umm, those are defensive stats you linked.

How does a team not deserve their ranking?
Also, I could argue the ranking should be higher because points allowed is much more important than yards, but in any event, you are on the wrong side of the ball, I said we have a top 5 offense.

Yeah my bad. I read it again today and saw "offense". Regardless though, I would recommend that anybody who thinks we had one of the better defenses in the league last year go see an optometrist and rewatch the 2009 season.

 

[Ring 6]

Yeah my bad. I read it again today and saw "offense". Regardless though, I would recommend that anybody who thinks we had one of the better defenses in the league last year go see an optometrist and rewatch the 2009 season.

Well, they really were top 10, (11th in yards and something like 6th in points). I understand watching them in a vaccuum makes that seem incorrect, but the defenses that were ranked lower had even more problems.

 

[Ring 6]

Sure, I'd rather win 17-13 than 28-27 too, but it's my simple opinion that the defense is still in a rebuilding phase--hopefully, I am wrong and they are a shutdown unit that gives up 10 pts a game this year. Until the defense gets back to domination, we have to have a dominant part of the team. You say you want to run more, throw to the TE etc--that's fine, I agree I'd like more of a balanced offense too. Except our RB (today) are not going to carry this offense, they have only been complimenting it. Otherwise, we'd be running more. The same goes for the TE position. It has been mainly a blocking position as a 6th O-lineman, and we rarely throw the ball there lately. Maybe that changes a bit this year, but if we didn't with a speedy Watson who Brady had developed much trust with, I don't know why you'd assume that we will without him. You are making some assumptions that we haven't shown any trend towards. What we have shown trends towards is using our HOF qb in Brady, as he threw for the 2nd most yardage ever. I don't know why anyone would assume that would change dramatically--although I'd agree with you that I'd like some better balance too.

As far as your point goes about being 3rd in passing yards, that point is valid, no doubt. But this year we lack our #1 weapon in Welker, and Moss needs a complimentary downfield threat to take some coverage from him too. Without Welker and even Watson who Brady trusted and looked to at times, I can't really see why this is such a debate?

I think discussing it too much further is futile, as we differ in opinions in some areas--but if you're actually trying to tell me that you didn't see a problem at times last year with Brady and his viable targets, I'd have a hard time believing you. That problem is not as severe as a front 7 on defense, for example, but it is a problem regardless.

When you have Tom Brady and Randy Moss, my guess is that just about every team in the NFL would build around those attributes. That is our strong point, and needs to remain that way until the defense (hopefully) finds their legs and becomes a dominant force once again. We either need another downfield threat split end/flanker to compliment Moss, or use Tate in that position and get a better #4, I don't care which one. One way or another, we are still at least 1 WR away from remaining a force.

You may feel differently, and I respect that, but just about everyone is going to agree that we need at least 1 more WR as a viable option. If you're that confident, I suggest you start a poll and see how many are in agreement.

The examples of other teams were to state the change of passing attack in today's NFL. How you can claim that "I want to emulate teams who didn't do as well" is beyond me, as I included New Orleans and Indy right off the bat. 3 of the first 4 teams were in conference championships or better, while PIT and ARZ were in the Super Bowl last year. DAL, SD, and PHI (as I stated to a lesser degree) were all in the playoffs too. Just about all of the examples I gave were teams that way more success than us recently, if not at least the same in a worse case scenario.

Once again, I respect your opinion, but count me in the group who feels we certainly need at least 1 more viable WR as WR2 or WR3 (depending on how you look at it). Bottom line we need a split end/flanker. (unless we plan to use Tate there, whereas we still need a #4 such as Reed, Branch, etc)

I would agree that until Welker is back we are 1 WR short, assuming Tate cannot be that guy. I disagree that it needs to be a superstar (not that you said it did) or that with a healthy Welker we would even be looking at WRs

 

[signbabybrady]

I would agree that until Welker is back we are 1 WR short, assuming Tate cannot be that guy. I disagree that it needs to be a superstar (not that you said it did) or that with a healthy Welker we would even be looking at WRs

This is why Andy is one of the better posters. Simple to the point and says what I have been trying to say on this board for weeks.


If you assume Welker is will not be ready to start the season what is the problem with using Tate as that guy. If he proves he is not ready to handle that than you are waiting for Welkers return. Moss and Edelman will be your top two targets until Welker returns that doesn't seem as terrible as people would like to think. Hopefully Tate fills in admirably in Welkers abscence making the team that much better in his return.

Which than leads me to the true WR need which is someone to compete with Patten as the backend of the WR group (Back up) this IMO can be one of two things a WR like Patten who has proven himself in the NFL but is not the same guy he once was or a rookie and this could be anywhere from rd1 to a rd 7 developemental guy as with Moss' pending FA we could use a high pick but with the guys on the roster it doesn't have to be.

 

[iapatsfan]

This is why Andy is one of the better posters. Simple to the point and says what I have been trying to say on this board for weeks.


If you assume Welker is will not be ready to start the season what is the problem with using Tate as that guy. If he proves he is not ready to handle that than you are waiting for Welkers return. Moss and Edelman will be your top two targets until Welker returns that doesn't seem as terrible as people would like to think. Hopefully Tate fills in admirably in Welkers abscence making the team that much better in his return.

Which than leads me to the true WR need which is someone to compete with Patten as the backend of the WR group (Back up) this IMO can be one of two things a WR like Patten who has proven himself in the NFL but is not the same guy he once was or a rookie and this could be anywhere from rd1 to a rd 7 developemental guy as with Moss' pending FA we could use a high pick but with the guys on the roster it doesn't have to be.

You would really be OK with Moss and Edelman as our top two receiving options next year until Welker comes back? Am I the only one that saw Moss seriously slowing down last year? He seemed to have a difficult time getting separation compared to previous years, and considering he's another year into his 30's, I don't expect that trend to have a drastic turnaround. Edelman showed some good things last year, but he is not close to Welker's level as a slot receiver, and he does not have the abilities to play on the outside on a regular basis. He is not a quality #2 receiving option. Tate was an excellent return man in college, but he was an avg WR. Why would anyone think he will be anything more than that in the Pros, especially when he is coming off another knee operation? Patten is just flat out old, and he would probably not be on a roster right now if it wasn't for the Pats. Combine the lack of talent at the WR position with the lack of talent at RB and TE, and we are in serious trouble next season.

 

[supafly]

This is why Andy is one of the better posters. Simple to the point and says what I have been trying to say on this board for weeks.


If you assume Welker is will not be ready to start the season what is the problem with using Tate as that guy. If he proves he is not ready to handle that than you are waiting for Welkers return. Moss and Edelman will be your top two targets until Welker returns that doesn't seem as terrible as people would like to think. Hopefully Tate fills in admirably in Welkers abscence making the team that much better in his return.

Which than leads me to the true WR need which is someone to compete with Patten as the backend of the WR group (Back up) this IMO can be one of two things a WR like Patten who has proven himself in the NFL but is not the same guy he once was or a rookie and this could be anywhere from rd1 to a rd 7 developemental guy as with Moss' pending FA we could use a high pick but with the guys on the roster it doesn't have to be.

Good post. As I stated, Tate could very well be the split end opposite Moss, and if that's the case, a 3rd-4th tier WR4 such as Reed or Branch would still be nice for depth, competition, and a veteran presence. Some feel that the WR situation is in real trouble, I don't agree--I simply think we're 1 player away for various reasons.

The main problem I have with the bolded statement is that we may be in for a bit of a wait if it doesn't work out. "Hoping" that a guy like Tate works out is fine, but it shouldn't be the answer IMO, it should be a bonus. To me, I don't see it any different from "hoping" Crable works out as an OLB.

 

[iapatsfan]

Good post. As I stated, Tate could very well be the split end opposite Moss, and if that's the case, a 3rd-4th tier WR4 such as Reed or Branch would still be nice for depth, competition, and a veteran presence. Some feel that the WR situation is in real trouble, I don't agree--I simply think we're 1 player away for various reasons.

The main problem I have with the bolded statement is that we may be in for a bit of a wait if it doesn't work out. "Hoping" that a guy like Tate works out is fine, but it shouldn't be the answer IMO, it should be a bonus. To me, I don't see it any different from "hoping" Crable works out as an OLB.

I see it as much different than "hoping" Crable works out. Crable was a playmaker on defense for Michigan. He got after the QB and, if I remember right, I think he set some type of record for tackles for loss. I've asked this many times on this board, but I still have not got an answer; Why would anyone think Tate is going to be a quality NFL WR? He was nothing more than an avg WR in college. Now he is facing much better competition, and he's coming off a 2nd knee operation. If he was an avg WR in college before a knee injury, why is he going to be a quality WR in the NFL after a knee injury?

 

[Fencer]

I would agree that until Welker is back we are 1 WR short, assuming Tate cannot be that guy. I disagree that it needs to be a superstar (not that you said it did) or that with a healthy Welker we would even be looking at WRs

I think we're one WR short with or without Welker, namely the guy who is #2 speed receiver and (with Welker healthy) #3/#4 receiver over all.

If he's so-so at speed receiving and is a big end zone target, that's OK too.

It so happens that our best WR other than the two Pro Bowlers is Edelman, who is kind of like Welker, and that our best non-WR receiver is Faulk, who's also kind of like Welker.

We don't have much in the big and/or superfast guys after Moss.

 

[supafly]

I see it as much different than "hoping" Crable works out. Crable was a playmaker on defense for Michigan. He got after the QB and, if I remember right, I think he set some type of record for tackles for loss. I've asked this many times on this board, but I still have not got an answer; Why would anyone think Tate is going to be a quality NFL WR? He was nothing more than an avg WR in college. Now he is facing much better competition, and he's coming off a 2nd knee operation. If he was an avg WR in college before a knee injury, why is he going to be a quality WR in the NFL after a knee injury?

Crable was indeed a playmaker at Michigan, and to a lesser extent, as was Brandon Tate. Tate was projected as a 2nd rd talent or better, until he received his injury--which in turn opened the door for Hakeem Nicks a little wider.

They both have some, albeit minor experience in NFL film study, weekly meetings, and specific team schemes. Both are coming off 2 seasons of injury for the most part. It may actually be easier (although likely slightly) for Tate to catch passes from Tom Brady, than for Crable to pick up and execute Belichick's complicated NFL defense--these are variables that we're unsure of.

Both are comparisons to good NCAA caliber players who are coming off 2 yrs of injury, and trying to learn how to be successful in a much harder NFL. Both are comparisons to players looking to step up in a major team area of need, LB, and to a lesser degree WR. These are the areas where they do mirror each other, anyone could agrue just the same that Brandon Tate may end up being much better than Crable--the same way you are arguing the opposite.

It's just a matter of opinions. Bottom line is that we're still hoping that at least 1 of them can make a pretty major contribution, without being properly prepared if they don't (at least as of today).

 

[Ring 6]

I think we're one WR short with or without Welker, namely the guy who is #2 speed receiver and (with Welker healthy) #3/#4 receiver over all.

If he's so-so at speed receiving and is a big end zone target, that's OK too.

It so happens that our best WR other than the two Pro Bowlers is Edelman, who is kind of like Welker, and that our best non-WR receiver is Faulk, who's also kind of like Welker.

We don't have much in the big and/or superfast guys after Moss.

And we never have. That isnt our system.
I would be fine if our 5 WRs were Moss, Welker, Andre Johnson, Reggie Wayne and Hines Ward. But we have other priorities.
Its just odd to me that after we made this team revolve around the WR position and the results were a great passing offense and no championships, that we want to keep focussing more and more and more on WR.
We have Brady, Brady will find the open receiver, lets worry about areas where we have greater need, or greater dropoff in the performance of the team with adequate players. Adequate WRs has proven to be enough for us to win. Great WRs have proven to be enough for us to break records. Lets fix the other stuff and win before we worry about breaking records.

 

[supafly]

And we never have. That isnt our system.
I would be fine if our 5 WRs were Moss, Welker, Andre Johnson, Reggie Wayne and Hines Ward. But we have other priorities.
Its just odd to me that after we made this team revolve around the WR position and the results were a great passing offense and no championships, that we want to keep focussing more and more and more on WR.
We have Brady, Brady will find the open receiver, lets worry about areas where we have greater need, or greater dropoff in the performance of the team with adequate players. Adequate WRs has proven to be enough for us to win. Great WRs have proven to be enough for us to break records. Lets fix the other stuff and win before we worry about breaking records.

I'm with you on that, but that is likely going to take another yr or 2 at best if you're talking about the other side of the ball (which you are). We all know that building through the draft isn't an overnight process, and we are lacking poorly at the LB position, a very important position in a Belichick inspired 3-4. Besides that, we are average at the front 3 without Seymour--maybe above average, but certainly not dominant anymore. And the secondary is still suspect even with the good yr from Bodden, and the upside of Butler (who is still very raw.)

The thing with the 'record breaking' is that we all saw how we were 60 seconds away from immortality and whipping the entire NFL. You're comparing that with 'barely' winning SB's, all by 3 points, and all by major key plays at very critical times--some of them certainly lucky. To put it in basketball terms, Why take your chances at hitting a key 3 pointer late in the game, when you can absolutely dominate by using your best players?

With one of the alltime greats at QB, why wouldn't you take advantage of your biggest attribute? That's like owning a Porsche but deciding to drive 2 or 3 different Hondas because they're better on gas. Until we finish the rebuilding of the defense (which is a highly bigger priority than WR) we need to mask the fact that they may give up too many points, too many 3rd down conversions, and too many key plays. That is what we saw last year, along with the inability of the offense to close games out.

You're acting like people are talking about rebuilding the entire offense, when we're all agreeing we only need 1 or 2 players. We're a hell of a lot farther on defense (as you agree with), so it's going to take some time, specifically when you're against big name FA's/trades, and are building strictly through the draft. What is mediocrity on both sides of the ball going to get you, besides a 9-7/10-6 record? Why not be very good at least in 1 area, while you continue to build?

 

[Ring 6]

I'm with you on that, but that is likely going to take another yr or 2 at best if you're talking about the other side of the ball (which you are). We all know that building through the draft isn't an overnight process, and we are lacking poorly at the LB position, a very important position in a Belichick inspired 3-4. Besides that, we are average at the front 3 without Seymour--maybe above average, but certainly not dominant anymore. And the secondary is still suspect even with the good yr from Bodden, and the upside of Butler (who is still very raw.)

The thing with the 'record breaking' is that we all saw how we were 60 seconds away from immortality and whipping the entire NFL. You're comparing that with 'barely' winning SB's, all by 3 points, and all by major key plays at very critical times--some of them certainly lucky. To put it in basketball terms, Why take your chances at hitting a key 3 pointer late in the game, when you can absolutely dominate by using your best players?

With one of the alltime greats at QB, why wouldn't you take advantage of your biggest attribute? That's like owning a Porsche but deciding to drive 2 or 3 different Hondas because they're better on gas. Until we finish the rebuilding of the defense (which is a highly bigger priority than WR) we need to mask the fact that they may give up too many points, too many 3rd down conversions, and too many key plays. That is what we saw last year, along with the inability of the offense to close games out.

You're acting like people are talking about rebuilding the entire offense, when we're all agreeing we only need 1 or 2 players. We're a hell of a lot farther on defense (as you agree with), so it's going to take some time, specifically when you're against big name FA's/trades, and are building strictly through the draft. What is mediocrity on both sides of the ball going to get you, besides a 9-7/10-6 record? Why not be very good at least in 1 area, while you continue to build?

We just disagree here.
I think that the success of the Patriots over the years has been based upon lacking liabilities rather than having overwhelming strengths.
I am comparing more than the final minute of SBs. The 06 team collapsed in the AFCC, 08 couldnt beat a winning team, yes I realize that was without Brady, but the problem didnt get fixed when Brady came back. Last year we were an excellent team that outplayed most of its opponenets until crunchtime and folded often.
That just isnt the mold I want this team built in.
We have consistently become more reliant on the WR position and the franchise has been going in the wrong direction.
As I have said, get all the WRs you want, but don't tell me its a priority because I believe that if we had signed Boldin AND Holmes AND Marshall we aren't winning a SB unless we fix other problems, although the fan base would expect 19-0.
You see WR as the problem that needs to be fixed, I see overreliance on the WR position as the bad thinking that needs to be corrected.

 

[signbabybrady]

I'm with you on that, but that is likely going to take another yr or 2 at best if you're talking about the other side of the ball (which you are). We all know that building through the draft isn't an overnight process, and we are lacking poorly at the LB position, a very important position in a Belichick inspired 3-4. Besides that, we are average at the front 3 without Seymour--maybe above average, but certainly not dominant anymore. And the secondary is still suspect even with the good yr from Bodden, and the upside of Butler (who is still very raw.)

The thing with the 'record breaking' is that we all saw how we were 60 seconds away from immortality and whipping the entire NFL. You're comparing that with 'barely' winning SB's, all by 3 points, and all by major key plays at very critical times--some of them certainly lucky. To put it in basketball terms, Why take your chances at hitting a key 3 pointer late in the game, when you can absolutely dominate by using your best players?

With one of the alltime greats at QB, why wouldn't you take advantage of your biggest attribute? That's like owning a Porsche but deciding to drive 2 or 3 different Hondas because they're better on gas. Until we finish the rebuilding of the defense (which is a highly bigger priority than WR) we need to mask the fact that they may give up too many points, too many 3rd down conversions, and too many key plays. That is what we saw last year, along with the inability of the offense to close games out.

You're acting like people are talking about rebuilding the entire offense, when we're all agreeing we only need 1 or 2 players. We're a hell of a lot farther on defense (as you agree with), so it's going to take some time, specifically when you're against big name FA's/trades, and are building strictly through the draft. What is mediocrity on both sides of the ball going to get you, besides a 9-7/10-6 record? Why not be very good at least in 1 area, while you continue to build?

Supa,

Because this is an offense thread I have ignored some of your comments on the defense but I cant anymore.

Why do you think the D is so far away? I think the D is 2-3 players away from being as talented or close to as talented as any D we have fielded. You give me a RDE and OLB and we are pretty much there and maybe one more CB (but hopefully Butler can do this and Springs can be the 3rd CB)

 

[supafly]

We just disagree here.
I think that the success of the Patriots over the years has been based upon lacking liabilities rather than having overwhelming strengths.
I am comparing more than the final minute of SBs. The 06 team collapsed in the AFCC, 08 couldnt beat a winning team, yes I realize that was without Brady, but the problem didnt get fixed when Brady came back. Last year we were an excellent team that outplayed most of its opponenets until crunchtime and folded often.
That just isnt the mold I want this team built in.
We have consistently become more reliant on the WR position and the franchise has been going in the wrong direction.
As I have said, get all the WRs you want, but don't tell me its a priority because I believe that if we had signed Boldin AND Holmes AND Marshall we aren't winning a SB unless we fix other problems, although the fan base would expect 19-0.
You see WR as the problem that needs to be fixed, I see overreliance on the WR position as the bad thinking that needs to be corrected.

Fair enough, Andy. I actually think we're a little closer to agreeing on some aspects than you realize, it's possible I am wording them incorrectly or using wrong examples. I feel that I am in between where you're at--and where some very pessimistic posters are at, in regards to the WR position. In other words, I don't feel that it's "the" problem that needs fixed, but I do think it's "a" problem for sure. Too many examples last year + some losses at the position (counting Welker + Watson as a minor receiving TE) lead me to believe that we need 1 more viable option.

 

[supafly]

Supa,

Because this is an offense thread I have ignored some of your comments on the defense but I cant anymore.

Why do you think the D is so far away? I think the D is 2-3 players away from being as talented or close to as talented as any D we have fielded. You give me a RDE and OLB and we are pretty much there and maybe one more CB (but hopefully Butler can do this and Springs can be the 3rd CB)

I am actually optimistic with getting younger, faster, etc, but I think we're in a rebuilding phase--nothing more. I think the ever important 3-4 LB'ers are the weakest point, as many would agree. I feel the loss of Seymour on the line is more important than some do (right or wrong), and I still think the secondary needs another year or 2. Yes, Bodden looked good, yes Butler got some good reps. Wilhite is still somewhat of an unknown, but what he's shown hasn't exactly given me much optimism. Springs can certainly be a solid vet at times when he's not injured, but the position does lack overall depth still.

The safeties are a good group, IMO.

While I agree with you there's a lot of hope, I cannot agree that we're 2/3 players away from being one of the best groups yet. I hope that changes in the next yr or two, and am excited about the possibilities. I think the 11th ranked overall ranking is a bit high, and that we were more in the middle, mainly due to playing lower scoring teams like BUF,MIA and the NYJ almost 50% of the schedule. When we struggle against average teams like BAL, HOU, and get downright whipped against better scoring teams like NO it gives me cause for concern. I still think we're hoping for the emergence of a high draft pick, and are not sufficiently prepared if it doesn't happen. I think they can be a better defense, but not for another yr or two.

 

[Ring 6]

Fair enough, Andy. I actually think we're a little closer to agreeing on some aspects than you realize, it's possible I am wording them incorrectly or using wrong examples. I feel that I am in between where you're at--and where some very pessimistic posters are at, in regards to the WR position. In other words, I don't feel that it's "the" problem that needs fixed, but I do think it's "a" problem for sure. Too many examples last year + some losses at the position (counting Welker + Watson as a minor receiving TE) lead me to believe that we need 1 more viable option.

And I'm probably misinterpreting your comments and perceiving them (and repsonding as if) as copnsistent with the general mindset of pessimism.

 

[signbabybrady]

I am actually optimistic with getting younger, faster, etc, but I think we're in a rebuilding phase--nothing more. I think the ever important 3-4 LB'ers are the weakest point, as many would agree. I feel the loss of Seymour on the line is more important than some do (right or wrong), and I still think the secondary needs another year or 2. Yes, Bodden looked good, yes Butler got some good reps. Wilhite is still somewhat of an unknown, but what he's shown has exactly given me much optimism. Springs can certainly be a solid vet at times when he's not injured, but the position does lack overall depth still.

The safeties are a good group, IMO.

While I agree with you there's a lot of hope, I cannot agree that we're 2/3 players away from being one of the best groups yet. I hope that changes in the next yr or two, and am excited about the possibilities. I think the 11th ranked overall ranking is a bit high, and that we were more in the middle, mainly due to playing lower scoring teams like BUF,MIA and the NYJ almost 50% of the schedule. When we struggle against average teams like BAL, HOU, and get downright whipped against better scoring teams like NO it gives me cause for concern. I still think we're hoping for the emergence of a high draft pick, and are not sufficiently prepared if it doesn't happen. I think they can be a better defense, but not for another yr or two.

IMO if the youth on D improves (as it should) and you find an Good starting OLB and a good starting RDE and this D is top five in the league.