PatsFanTX Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Meant the multiple 1st, 2nd and 3rd rounders. They were specifically trading back to get multiple picks, I love that strategy, I just don't think they capitalized on it. These are serious question, not trying to be a douche, I don't pretend to be a Pats expert. To me, it looks like you only hit a few singles and doubles, but how many of these guys would describe as home runs? Specifically, I'm contrasting the Pats approach the past 5 years to the Jets (trading up and getting the guy you want). Obviously, Gholston was a bust, but aside from that, I really like what the Jets have done. OK, I misunderstood what you were saying. Anyway, your home run, elite type players are usually found in the top 20 picks. Multiple 2nd and 3rd round picks will generally get you a good, productive player. And that's what the Pats have done. These guys won't be Pro Bowl players, but they will contribute. If you are going to miss on a draft pick, better to be a 2nd or 3rd rounder versus a top 10 overall pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowmoe57 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Did anyone notice Randy Moss will not get a bye week this year - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE ILK Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Did anyone notice Randy Moss will not get a bye week this year - /slowmoe'd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowmoe57 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 /slowmoe'd I did not want to read 245 posts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Did anyone notice Randy Moss will not get a bye week this year - Don't worry. He'll take a game or 2 off at some point this season anyways. "I play when I want to play" - Randy Moss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Did anyone notice Randy Moss will not get a bye week this year - Really, are you sure? I thought he was on a bye with Vikings this past weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE ILK Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 I did not want to read 245 posts You did not have to, you nailed it. Good work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowmoe57 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Really, are you sure? I thought he was on a bye with Vikings this past weekend. No no no the Patriots said Bye to him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 74.43% of respondents on boston.com site hate this trade. Link: http://www.boston.com/sports/polls/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Don't worry. He'll take a game or 2 off at some point this season anyways. "I play when I want to play" - Randy Moss He's already had 4 off. The Pats barely looked at him early on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jussssstme Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Who's...taken less? What? And yes, it is a time of mediocrity. That tends to happen when you lose a few HOFers. HOFers? I thought the Rats won all those SB's with 1 HOFer and a bunch of no names. At least that's what the fan base says now that you are again loaded with no names. The Rats had a bunch of no names that had possible HOF careers before being traded to the dregs of the NFL. Brady took a home town discount and there were a few free agents that took less money, or wanted to play for the patriots over other teams. That scenario is not the case anymore. As for Brady, there is a reason his deal was only 4 years <I believe it was 4 anyhow>. No matter how well he does, he is not getting another deal from the patriots if BB and Kraft still in charge. He'll be what, 37 then? Brady will either be traded or he will play out final year and then not be signed again. It's the BB way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 As for Brady, there is a reason his deal was only 4 years <I believe it was 4 anyhow>. No matter how well he does, he is not getting another deal from the patriots if BB and Kraft still in charge. He'll be what, 37 then? Brady will either be traded or he will play out final year and then not be signed again. It's the BB way. Good call here on Brady. The Pats will definitely trade him in the final year of his contract. No way the just let him go (FA route) and not get anything for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 HOFers? I thought the Rats won all those SB's with 1 HOFer and a bunch of no names. At least that's what the fan base says now that you are again loaded with no names. The Rats had a bunch of no names that had possible HOF careers before being traded to the dregs of the NFL. Brady took a home town discount and there were a few free agents that took less money, or wanted to play for the patriots over other teams. That scenario is not the case anymore. As for Brady, there is a reason his deal was only 4 years <I believe it was 4 anyhow>. No matter how well he does, he is not getting another deal from the patriots if BB and Kraft still in charge. He'll be what, 37 then? Brady will either be traded or he will play out final year and then not be signed again. It's the BB way. Yea...well there's been a bunch of ignorant things like that in this thread. HOFers: McGinnest Seymour Possilby Vrabel but he's probably closer to the Hall of Very Good Brown Harrison And yes...Brady will probably go the route of many HOF type QBs and will be playing for someone else after this contract runs out. He won't be the first and it's not something the Patriots invented. As far as FAs and discounts...The Pats in the 2000's rarely went after big money FAs in the first place...Colvin's really the only one I can think of off the top of my head...I'm not sure they care as long as they get who they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 As far as FAs and discounts...The Pats in the 2000's rarely went after big money FAs in the first place...Colvin's really the only one I can think of off the top of my head...I'm not sure they care as long as they get who they want. Pats paid more for Adelius Thomas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 ding dong the witch is dead ! which old witch ? the cheating witch !!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Really, are you sure? I thought he was on a bye with Vikings this past weekend. LOL Well play sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Steve Young just had his take on ESPN...here were some things he said... Tom Brady's job just got significantly harder today. Moss takes the top off the defense. Now the D can play tight, it basically shrink wraps. Who scares you? Wes Welker doesnt catch as many passes and Tom no longer has a deep threat that can change the game with one throw. Basically everything I said all day long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garb Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Hey, what have I missed today? Freakin' work is getting out of control! Anyway, this sure will put my theory to the test. I'm confident though. I really do think the offense will be fine. The defense? Not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Steve Young just had his take on ESPN...here were some things he said... Tom Brady's job just got significantly harder today. Moss takes the top off the defense. Now the D can play tight, it basically shrink wraps. Who scares you? Wes Welker doesnt catch as many passes and Tom no longer has a deep threat that can change the game with one throw. Basically everything I said all day long. No kidding, but you act like the offense will be terrible whereas most are saying it will still be good. And it will, just not #1 in the league good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious89x Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 No kidding, but you act like the offense will be terrible whereas most are saying it will still be good. And it will, just not #1 in the league good Maybe TX can correct me here but during their dynasty years in always remembered their offense being a more "play to not lose the game" offense. Lots of short stuff, lots more running. Once they got a lead they were excellent at ball/clock control. Their D was great back then though. I see their O without Randy being more like it used to be. What's going to make the difference for them is for their D to not give up 20+ per game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmikeisback Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 No kidding, but you act like the offense will be terrible whereas most are saying it will still be good. And it will, just not #1 in the league good Without Moss thats a bottom half the NFL Offense. And you better have a great D to make up for that. They dont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Hey, what have I missed today? Freakin' work is getting out of control! Anyway, this sure will put my theory to the test. I'm confident though. I really do think the offense will be fine. The defense? Not so much. Definitely will. I think you should be careful what you wish for. No kidding, but you act like the offense will be terrible whereas most are saying it will still be good. And it will, just not #1 in the league good I honestly think they are going to struggle mightily for all those reasons. There is nobody that scares you and can open the field. All those players that have had the luxury of finding wide open space, are going to understand what its like to have 11 players on the field. Some of the guys have never had to feel what its like to have a safety roaming the middle of the field. Those little white boys are going to get lit up. Its still Tom Brady and they will still move the ball, but they are not going to be the same at all. And I think good defensive teams are going to be tough to beat for the Patsies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 HOFers: McGinnest Seymour Possilby Vrabel but he's probably closer to the Hall of Very Good Brown Harrison Huh? Seymour is about 50/50 (personally I'd give him the nod; he was really great once) and Harrison about a 20% chance or less There is zero chance for the other three. Zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmikeisback Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Huh? Seymour is about 50/50 (personally I'd give him the nod; he was really great once) and Harrison about a 20% chance or less There is zero chance for the other three. Zero. If a cheating, dirty, roided up THUG like Rodney Harrison makes the hall of fame, the hall of fame is pretty much declaring itself a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenorGato Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Huh? Seymour is about 50/50 (personally I'd give him the nod; he was really great once) and Harrison about a 20% chance or less There is zero chance for the other three. Zero. I thought I knew what I was talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Maybe TX can correct me here but during their dynasty years in always remembered their offense being a more "play to not lose the game" offense. Lots of short stuff, lots more running. Once they got a lead they were excellent at ball/clock control. Their D was great back then though. I see their O without Randy being more like it used to be. What's going to make the difference for them is for their D to not give up 20+ per game. Very good points. I would not say "play to not lose", but it did run the ball and was content on winning the field position battle in order to set-up the O for a short field or the D so the other team had to drive it. The Patriots skill positions minus runningback are all better now. Wes and company are better then Troy and company. The TEs are 1000x better. TOm is better with the deep ball. While Wes' job is harder, Hernandez and Tate can stretch the field. The Patriots are not as dynamic, but as the second half of the Jets game showed. When the O is forced to go through Randy it can die if he is shutdown. When it is spread-out, it is efficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Maybe TX can correct me here but during their dynasty years in always remembered their offense being a more "play to not lose the game" offense. Lots of short stuff, lots more running. Once they got a lead they were excellent at ball/clock control. Their D was great back then though. I see their O without Randy being more like it used to be. What's going to make the difference for them is for their D to not give up 20+ per game. You pretty much hit the nail on the head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Without Moss thats a bottom half the NFL Offense. So, the #1 offense in the NFL loses 1 WR and suddenly they go to the bottom half of the NFL? Seriously, how old are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmikeisback Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 So, the #1 offense in the NFL loses 1 WR and suddenly they go to the bottom half of the NFL? Seriously, how old are you? No 1 offense my a$$. They are 10th in total offense WITH moss. Only a complete and utter retard would look at scoring offense after 4 games when the team has had 4 TD's on returns.. right? Oh wait it's you again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Maybe TX can correct me here but during their dynasty years in always remembered their offense being a more "play to not lose the game" offense. Lots of short stuff, lots more running. Once they got a lead they were excellent at ball/clock control. Their D was great back then though. I see their O without Randy being more like it used to be. What's going to make the difference for them is for their D to not give up 20+ per game. I think they were very efficient, just not as explosive... ..see DVOA below which measures efficiency.. I honestly think they are going to struggle mightily for all those reasons. There is nobody that scares you and can open the field. All those players that have had the luxury of finding wide open space, are going to understand what its like to have 11 players on the field. Some of the guys have never had to feel what its like to have a safety roaming the middle of the field. Those little white boys are going to get lit up. Its still Tom Brady and they will still move the ball, but they are not going to be the same at all. And I think good defensive teams are going to be tough to beat for the Patsies. Deon branch, caldwell and those other losers weren't scarey either.. And remember Brady was still a neophyte till 2003 Pats rankings year/pts/yards -- DVOA 2001/#6/#19 -- 11 2002/#10/#21 -- 12 2003/#12/#17 -- 14 2004/#4/#7 -- 3 2005/#10/#7 -- 7 2006/#7/#11 -- 5 avg/#8/#13 -- #8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 I think they were very efficient, just not as explosive... ..see below.. Deon branch, caldwell and those other losers weren't scarey either.. And remember Brady was still a neophyte till 2003 Pats rankings year/pts/yards 2001/#6/#19 2002/#10/#21 2003/#12/#17 2004/#4/#7 2005/#10/#7 2006/#7/#11 avg/#8/#13 #8 in scoring and #13 in yards ain't gonna get it done when your defense sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 I thought I knew what I was talking about. They're all good players (or were, anyway). HOF'ers though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleedin Green Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 I agree with those that say the offense will be similar to what we saw out of the early/mid 2000s Patriots, which wasn't all bad. The difference is back then those Patriots teams were built on a great defense and a great QB with mediocre offensive skill players. These past few years, the Patriots teams were built on a great offense run by a great QB with great skill players and a mediocre defense. Now, you're looking at a good offense with a mediocre defense. They'll still be a winning team, but it's going to be tough on them. However, I'm not sure Moss is a major difference for them when it's all said and done, as the Patriots are a team that needed improvements on D this season if they wanted to make noise in the postseason regardless of Moss being on the team. The biggest difference is on Brady. In the old days his biggest strength was being nearly mistake-free and that's what helped the offense go even with the talent they had. These past few years, Brady's become more of a risk-taker because quite frankly, he could get away with it, having an offense that could potentially break a long one for a TD at any moment with a WR who could make big plays out of throws that may have been questionable going to any other receiver. It's very possible with this change, he might need to make a bit of a shift in his play to his older, more conservative style. Again, I'm not sure I see it being this major problem for them, because either way in the end the success or failures were going come down to the defense this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 #8 in scoring and #13 in yards ain't gonna get it done when your defense sucks. No, it won't.. but I think you'll see production closer to 04-06 which would put them roughly around 7th in points, enough to go 7-5ish down the stretch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmikeisback Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 No, it won't.. but I think you'll see production closer to 04-06 which would put them roughly around 7th in points, enough to go 7-5ish down the stretch Jeez. People need to stop being mesmerized by the cult of Belichick. The talent level on that offense isn't CLOSE to being top 10 in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.