Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    Sure, the offense isn't perfect and could use some depth at certain positions, but it still seems to me that the defense has bigger weaknesses and the road to another SB ring is more dependent on improvements w/ our pass rush and defensive backs.  When trying to improve this team for another SB run - it's about building a team that can beat the likes of the 49ers, Ravens, or Giants, aka, the Patriots' kryptonite.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Quagmire3. Show Quagmire3's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    In response to anonymis' comment:

    Sure, the offense isn't perfect and could use some depth at certain positions, but it still seems to me that the defense has bigger weaknesses and the road to another SB ring is more dependent on improvements w/ our pass rush and defensive backs.  When trying to improve this team for another SB run - it's about building a team that can beat the likes of the 49ers, Ravens, or Giants, aka, the Patriots' kryptonite.



    I agree. It is the Defense that needs to improve dramatically if we are to get that elusive 4th ring. The old adage appears to be true "Offense wins games, Defense wins championships."

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    The "obsession" is mostly around the WR position, which is probably the weakest on the team right now.  Addressing that is important, because part of our problem in the playoffs is that we have a good offense, but one that lacks the depth and diversity to overcome injuries or challenge certain parts of the field effectively.

    At the same time, I think most of us agree that the defense is the deeper and broader problem. Still, the recent signings at DB do mean we are maybe now one or at most two players away from a pretty good secondary. Talib, Dennard, Arrington, Gregory, McCourty, and the two Wilsons give us a reasonable rotation.  Add another good corner and/or a good safety and that unit becomes an strength rather than a weakness. 

    As far as the front seven goes, we really need two, maybe three, players: a tackle who can have an impact next to Vince on the interior and one or two edge players who can provide pass rush and coverage support.  There are an awful lot of bodies in the mix there already, though, so we may find that even just one good addition could be enough to elevate the play of this unit.  An interior tackle who can penetrate or collapse the pocket on passing plays might be enough.  Add a speedy and versatile outside linebacker who is good in coverage, but can also rush from the edge and you'd have a really nice unit.  

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from NEGAME2. Show NEGAME2's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    Because- two new receivers, maybe a new draft receiver, and maybe another new fa, plus Gronk?? and Hernandez, who knows.  and Ballard another new player. and Amendola and the other four all hurt last year  There's no stability there. I'm sure his shoulder will be on the injury list all year. Yes I'm concerned.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Quagmire3. Show Quagmire3's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    In response to NEGAME2's comment:

     

    Because- two new receivers, maybe a new draft receiver, and maybe another new fa, plus Gronk?? and Hernandez, who knows.  and Ballard another new player. and Amendola and the other four all hurt last year  There's no stability there. I'm sure his shoulder will be on the injury list all year. Yes I'm concerned.

     



    with all the holes in our offense right now TB12 could still roll out of bed with the weapons hes got and put up 21 pts. Nothing to get excited over, just improve the D.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    In response to anonymis' comment:

    Sure, the offense isn't perfect and could use some depth at certain positions, but it still seems to me that the defense has bigger weaknesses and the road to another SB ring is more dependent on improvements w/ our pass rush and defensive backs.  When trying to improve this team for another SB run - it's about building a team that can beat the likes of the 49ers, Ravens, or Giants, aka, the Patriots' kryptonite.

     



    Because as of right now this WR core is similar to the 06' core, except if Cadwell only played in a 3rd of the games (Slater is currently our #3 WR, really?). That didn't turn out to well last time. I don't think they need to go overboard and get an 07' O but how about an 03' one? I think all I want is 1 durable WR who can give consistent production. After that I'm perfectly happy with the TEs, OL, Brady, and RBs but the WR core is really concerning to me. Of  course if the choice came down to adding a pass rusher, an interior DT to play next to Wilfork, and a legit outside CB backup I'd take D anyday, but lets not neglect the WR core either. Imo you can fill all those needs between what's left in FA (Abraham, Nelson/Lloyd) and draft (DT, WR, CB)

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonSportsFan111. Show BostonSportsFan111's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    Wide reciever? They got wide recievers. What they need is a cornerback. Cornerback? they got Tabib and Dennard, what they need is a tackle. Tackle? They just signed Vollmer, its the linebackers to worry about... But I love their chances...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGaLbln9eOU

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MordecaiBloodmoon. Show MordecaiBloodmoon's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    I think WR is still a big need.  Particularly one that isnt a shrimp that can improve against those kryptonite Ds/in the redzone.  We can move the ball against them, but fall flat in the redzone. 

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    Sure, the offense isn't perfect and could use some depth at certain positions, but it still seems to me that the defense has bigger weaknesses and the road to another SB ring is more dependent on improvements w/ our pass rush and defensive backs.  When trying to improve this team for another SB run - it's about building a team that can beat the likes of the 49ers, Ravens, or Giants, aka, the Patriots' kryptonite.

     

     



    Because as of right now this WR core is similar to the 06' core, except if Cadwell only played in a 3rd of the games (Slater is currently our #3 WR, really?). That didn't turn out to well last time. I don't think they need to go overboard and get an 07' O but how about an 03' one? I think all I want is 1 durable WR who can give consistent production. After that I'm perfectly happy with the TEs, OL, Brady, and RBs but the WR core is really concerning to me. Of  course if the choice came down to adding a pass rusher, an interior DT to play next to Wilfork, and a legit outside CB backup I'd take D anyday, but lets not neglect the WR core either. Imo you can fill all those needs between what's left in FA (Abraham, Nelson/Lloyd) and draft (DT, WR, CB)

     

     



    Oh Please. 2006! Really? 2006? Amendola caught 85 passes from a mediocre QB one year and last year had 66 on pace for another 85+ season. We had NO ONE in his class in 2006. Plus we did not have any TEs in the class of Gronk or Hern and they are a critical part of the passing game. We also did not have a guy like Vereen (speed, route running ability, hands, etc). We have Faulk who was great but limited in any downfield use.

    The problem you have here is not in looking at the total receiving picture and overlooking DA. No small thing.

    No folks. What we have right now is already way better than anything we had in 2006.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    In response to alfred-e-bob-neumier's comment:

    A deep threat wide receiver WHO CAN AND WILL CATCH THE BALL is a real need, granted....this really cannot be argued...

    However this man-love for the bald midget Welker has reach fetish proportions...enough already...those pounding the Pats over this transaction need to relax and wait to see how the rest of the FA and draft process continues....

    And yes, if they wish to return to a SB winning team they need to build up that defense, particularly in the back end and pass rush....Nink is a good, not great LB, ,but what they need is a REAL consistant pass rushing threat to match with Jones, and Nink ain't it. A  coverage LB wouldn't hurt either.

     



    Yes but looking at their WR core right now, you have two WRs with medical issues. Amendola who's finished 1/4 of his total games in the last 2 years and Jones who the Bills basically dumped over medical concerns and the Pats are appearently concerned too since no money was gauranteed. The biggest thing about Welker was he was durable. Yes we have to wait and see what else might happen but as of today there's an extremely likely possibility that Slater will be your #1 WR at some point this season and that should concern you. Otherwise what's the point of this board in the offseason if not to talk about the current roster and what needs/should be added?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    Sure, the offense isn't perfect and could use some depth at certain positions, but it still seems to me that the defense has bigger weaknesses and the road to another SB ring is more dependent on improvements w/ our pass rush and defensive backs.  When trying to improve this team for another SB run - it's about building a team that can beat the likes of the 49ers, Ravens, or Giants, aka, the Patriots' kryptonite.

     

     



    Because as of right now this WR core is similar to the 06' core, except if Cadwell only played in a 3rd of the games (Slater is currently our #3 WR, really?). That didn't turn out to well last time. I don't think they need to go overboard and get an 07' O but how about an 03' one? I think all I want is 1 durable WR who can give consistent production. After that I'm perfectly happy with the TEs, OL, Brady, and RBs but the WR core is really concerning to me. Of  course if the choice came down to adding a pass rusher, an interior DT to play next to Wilfork, and a legit outside CB backup I'd take D anyday, but lets not neglect the WR core either. Imo you can fill all those needs between what's left in FA (Abraham, Nelson/Lloyd) and draft (DT, WR, CB)

     

     

     



    Oh Please. 2006! Really? 2006? Amendola caught 85 passes from a mediocre QB one year and last year had 66 on pace for another 85+ season. We had NO ONE in his class in 2006. Plus we did not have any TEs in the class of Gronk or Hern and they are a critical part of the passing game. We also did not have a guy like Vereen (speed, route running ability, hands, etc). We have Faulk who was great but limited in any downfield use.

     

    The problem you have here is not in looking at the total receiving picture and overlooking DA. No small thing.

    No folks. What we have right now is already way better than anything we had in 2006.

     



    I think the offensive hand wringing has been simple durability concerns with Gronk, Hern, DA and Jones. 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    Good point PE about the current corps of WRs and potential medical issues.  Me?  I just wonder about chemistry, learning a new system and rapport with Brady.  I could understand if the guys they brought in at WR were a clear upgrade to the guys they had (Welker and Lloyd) but it's just not the case.  Let's see what unfolds in the weeks ahead, I refuse to believe that BB will leave the cupboards bare for Brady.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    Sure, the offense isn't perfect and could use some depth at certain positions, but it still seems to me that the defense has bigger weaknesses and the road to another SB ring is more dependent on improvements w/ our pass rush and defensive backs.  When trying to improve this team for another SB run - it's about building a team that can beat the likes of the 49ers, Ravens, or Giants, aka, the Patriots' kryptonite.

     

     



    Because as of right now this WR core is similar to the 06' core, except if Cadwell only played in a 3rd of the games (Slater is currently our #3 WR, really?). That didn't turn out to well last time. I don't think they need to go overboard and get an 07' O but how about an 03' one? I think all I want is 1 durable WR who can give consistent production. After that I'm perfectly happy with the TEs, OL, Brady, and RBs but the WR core is really concerning to me. Of  course if the choice came down to adding a pass rusher, an interior DT to play next to Wilfork, and a legit outside CB backup I'd take D anyday, but lets not neglect the WR core either. Imo you can fill all those needs between what's left in FA (Abraham, Nelson/Lloyd) and draft (DT, WR, CB)

     

     

     



    Oh Please. 2006! Really? 2006? Amendola caught 85 passes from a mediocre QB one year and last year had 66 on pace for another 85+ season. We had NO ONE in his class in 2006. Plus we did not have any TEs in the class of Gronk or Hern and they are a critical part of the passing game. We also did not have a guy like Vereen (speed, route running ability, hands, etc). We have Faulk who was great but limited in any downfield use.

     

    The problem you have here is not in looking at the total receiving picture and overlooking DA. No small thing.

    No folks. What we have right now is already way better than anything we had in 2006.

     

     



    I think the offensive hand wringing has been simple durability concerns with Gronk, Hern, DA and Jones. 

     



    bingo. If Amendola was durable then I'd love the move and have no issue no resigning Welker. Or if Jones didn't have injury concern I think he could be a good Lloyd replacement. But, it does the team no good to have a guy who once caught 85 balls if he can't stay on the field. Honestly if both get injured Slater is basically your last WR. Not going to be very good if Hern and Gronk are the only guys Brady has to throw to, and given the odds we'll lose at least one of them for a couple games next year too. They need to add some durability to the receiving core. Doesn't need to be a 100+ catch guy but someone who can give you at least 50-75 catches and be on the field game in and game out, then I'd feel much better about this receiving core

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    Not fair to the player to speculate because I am not 100% sure, but hey this is only an opinion forum, not a news forum. I believe Jones issue is kidney related

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    We carried 4 wide receivers on this team last year and had the #1 ranked offense in the land, statistically one of the best offense's the NFL has seen since 2007.  The only thing this team needs on both sides of the ball is grit and mental toughness... a few receivers and a defensive tackle can be found in the draft and after teams shed more payroll to sign their rookies.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    We carried 4 wide receivers on this team last year and had the #1 ranked offense in the land, statistically one of the best offense's the NFL has seen since 2007.  The only thing this team needs on both sides of the ball is grit and mental toughness... a few receivers and a defensive tackle can be found in the draft and after teams shed more payroll to sign their rookies.



    But 3 of those 4 WR's are no longer on the team and there is question if 2 of the replacements can stay on the field. Ditto Gronk and Hern

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    Sure, the offense isn't perfect and could use some depth at certain positions, but it still seems to me that the defense has bigger weaknesses and the road to another SB ring is more dependent on improvements w/ our pass rush and defensive backs.  When trying to improve this team for another SB run - it's about building a team that can beat the likes of the 49ers, Ravens, or Giants, aka, the Patriots' kryptonite.

     




    Well, because the shotgun spread base preference via Brady has failed to the tune of 2 SBS and a myriad of playoff games where they stall and do nothing for huge chunks, so they need to clearly diversify the offense.

     

    The D has been very young and coming along nicely, but it can't be asked to bail out an offense that disappears every postseason. The offense has got to be more diverse, while the D is clearly ready to go with a couple of small adds left.

    Health/added depth would ideal for the D, IMO. 

    Offenses win championships in this era.  It's a war of attrition and our offenses runs away from the battle every January and February.

    Gotta have a QB and an offense in the postseason or you're not going anywhere.

    You just answered it: The reason why we can't beat the Ravens, 49ers or Giants is because our offense is too one dimensional.

    Their offenses are more balanced than ours.  Moving on from Welker is a good start to commit to change.

     

     



    I guess I am also missing the correlation between Wes and Woody no longer on the team to the cut back in shot gun/spread/hurry up?

    I understand you thought this DECREASED TB's effectiveness, but I see nothing that tyhe Pats have done so far that says they are cutting back these formations.

    Maybe they spread the ball around more with Wes gone, but that doesnt mean shot gun or hurry up is going away, or even reduced, does it?

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    I know that they ran the ball more often last year than year before, but I see the shot gun INCREASING with Vereen getting Woody snaps.

    I like Fiametta, but I think it comes down to he or Hooma, and assuming both healthy Pats will go Hooma..

    I asked before, and never saw an answer. How many snaps did Bolden get after his PED usage?

    Again, I think shot gun/spread/hurry up is here to stay until other teams stop them...or the PAts stop themselves...

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    In response to alfred-e-bob-neumier's comment:

    If you HAVE AN EXPECTATON THAT THE pATS ARE GOING TO DRAIN THEIR CAP AND THEN SOME TRYING TO SIGN AN ENTIRE NEW VETERAN RECEIVER CORP (opps, sorry caps), if any are really left, and end up cutting an additional palyer to create the cap space to do it, you are going to stay bitterly disappointed...they have NEVER done this, and they will not start now...why expect them to do things you know there is no chance of them doing...maybe they sign Emmanual, maybe they draft a WR in the first three rounds...that's about what you're looking at...even maybe a cheap Lloyd returning...but that's it.



    My question would be, why wouldn't they spend at least as much as they did last year to bring in some durable replacements for those they had planned to lose? Jones they got for a song because of concerns over his durability. Amendola was the second choice and cost as much as Welker this year and more gauranteed money overall, but is not nearly as durable. I could understand taking a chance on an injury concern if you have some stability in the position in the first place but why are you messing around and rebuilding your entire WR core with huge question marks then not even invest in a durable option at this point? It's completely putting you eggs in a single basket while walking on ice and hoping you don't drop them. The ifs pile up quickly:

    • If Amendola can stay healthy
    • If Jones can stay healthy
    • If Jones shows more then a solid #3 WR
    • If they draft the right WR or sign Sanders 
    • If ALL of them can get on the same page as Brady (that's a big if given WRs in the past and you do need all to get it since at minimum you need to go 3 deep at WR)

    That's a lot of ifs when history says that it's more then llikely Jones and/or Amendola will get hurt. Maybe 1 out of the 3 will really click with Brady, 2 at best but most likely not all. Given history BB is more likely to bring in 3-4 washed up vets at min price and patch work them in (Stallworth, Gaffney, Branch last year) which leaves Brady high and dry in case of injury. Don't forget Lloyd and Welker both played 16 games last year. Imagine if one of them was injured and you needed to start Branch. It's a lot easier to swallow the patch work vet #3 WR when you know your top 2 WRs will be there game in and game out.

    There is no stability, durability, or a sense of chemistry currently in the WR core for one of the best QB's in the game on the back 9 of his career? Why rebuild now of all times? Brady has 2-3 good years left and you want to dump a bunch of unknown elements on his shoulders and say make it work, btw not sure if they are going to be able to play every game for you so we'll toss in random player X off the street if they get hurt. 

    This might be a bad analogy but that's like taking away your car that runs perfectly well and is reliable but could use some tweeks and handing you another car with less miles but more issues without telling you the history or it's random quirks and oh yeah it's broken down a couple of times in the past but they think the issues might have fixed themselves. Then telling you to drive across the country in it. Would you be comfortable in that situation?

    I mean if they went out and signed Sanders right away instead of Jones (lets face it they are extremely similar players except Jones is injury prone) I think we'd all be more comfortable right now because at least Sanders is durable. You know you will get 16 games from him and the spector that Slater might be your #1 isn't hanging over your head.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Salcon. Show Salcon's posts

    Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?

    So, from what I'm getting out of this is the Pats need to sign receivers who never get hurt and are guaranteed not to ever get hurt while playing football in the NFL.  

    Injuries are part of the game. 

    Was it a mistake that the Pats drafted both Gronk and Hern because they seem to get hurt quite a bit for as young as they are?

    So, now they have to stay away from anyone who's been hurt in their careers?

    Not realistic.  

    Don't want to hear about "injury prone" either.  

    Every player is prone to injury in this game.

     

Share