Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    the sacks and pressure on the TB were not a factor? The WR's reading the defense incorrectly and subsequently running the incorrect route were no factor? The drops? No Gronk? Amendola hurt?

    My god, with out TB last year this is an 8-8 team

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    the sacks and pressure on the TB were not a factor? The WR's reading the defense incorrectly and subsequently running the incorrect route were no factor? The drops? No Gronk? Amendola hurt?

    My god, with out TB last year this is an 8-8 team

    [/QUOTE]

    +100 million

    Rusty doesn't even pretend to be a serious commentator anymore . . . it's a circus act. 

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    the sacks and pressure on the TB were not a factor? The WR's reading the defense incorrectly and subsequently running the incorrect route were no factor? The drops? No Gronk? Amendola hurt?

    My god, with out TB last year this is an 8-8 team

    [/QUOTE]

    +100 million

    Rusty doesn't even pretend to be a serious commentator anymore . . . it's a circus act. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I took him off ignore today because OTA's are coming up and I want to hear what his uncle has to say

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    the sacks and pressure on the TB were not a factor? The WR's reading the defense incorrectly and subsequently running the incorrect route were no factor? The drops? No Gronk? Amendola hurt?

    My god, with out TB last year this is an 8-8 team

    [/QUOTE]

    +100 million

    Rusty doesn't even pretend to be a serious commentator anymore . . . it's a circus act. 

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    I think this is one thing we can all agree on. Rusty's act is soooooooo old.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I'll just add that I was not reassured by Amendola's inconsistent level of performance.  There were a few games where he looked very good, but too many where his impact was minimal.  Maybe that was because of injury, but I think the book is still out on him. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Brady sucked early last year and then the media tried to scapegoat the rookies and amendola.

    No more excuses for brady. I am tired of it.  Been going on in various forms for many years.

    [/QUOTE]


    That's because the rookies did suck and Amerndola was not anywhere as expected, matter of fact he was hardly on the field at the end of the season.  No scapegoat needed.  It was what it was... BB blew it with the WR position last season.

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:


    Rusty doesn't even pretend to be a serious commentator anymore . . . it's a circus act. 





     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Sorry but I will disagree with you. And for the following reasons:

    1. they made it to TWO SBs in the last 7 seasons

    2. In BOTH SBs they had leads late in the game

    When you are that close it is the hieght of abusrdity to say the team was not good enough. 

    1. A magic helmet(!) means we didnt have enough talent?! Remember who was covering the magic helmet? RODNEY. And there is NO question that he was an exceptional player.

    2. A dropped pass by a hugely dependable receiver off a less than stellar throw by the most accurate QB over 20 yards...

    No. We are disappointed but you cant blame it on BB (sorry Babe) or lack of talent. They fell short but they had a team in both those years that could have won it.

    You can make the case that if they had been healthy last year they might have beaten Denver. Look what they did in their record come back against them in Foxboro.

    Disagreeing is one thing but ranting and raving how bad they are... its ridiculous.

     

    [/QUOTE]



    I can't disagree with your points about the two losses to the Giants in SB's.  The 2007 Pats team was more talented then the Giants. That loss in big part was attributed to a worn out team at the end of a long season going undefeated and trying to do what no other team has done since the 1972 Dolphins.  Matter of fact, it was reported that the Pats were practicing hard and in pads right up to the SB when they should have been resting.  They were tired and worn out.  As for the 2011 SB, The Giants had a better D at that point, the RB position was a push, I would have to give the WR advantage to the Giants due to Gronk being hurt.  2 teams evenly matched.  However, 2012 season and 2013 season the Pats lost to teams who had more talent on the field.  Plain and simple.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    the sacks and pressure on the TB were not a factor? The WR's reading the defense incorrectly and subsequently running the incorrect route were no factor? The drops? No Gronk? Amendola hurt?

    My god, with out TB last year this is an 8-8 team

    [/QUOTE]


    Without TFB last season they would have been worse then 8-8 with Mallet as QB.  The guy can't even do well in the preseason games against 2's and 3's.  They might have needed to bring Tebow back to get to that 8-8 record.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:


    In response to rkarp's comment:


    the sacks and pressure on the TB were not a factor? The WR's reading the defense incorrectly and subsequently running the incorrect route were no factor? The drops? No Gronk? Amendola hurt?


    My god, with out TB last year this is an 8-8 team


     


    +100 million


    Rusty doesn't even pretend to be a serious commentator anymore . . . it's a circus act. 







    The guy is a joke.  His agenda is old, clearly he doesn't know what he is talking about. 

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to TFB12's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Sorry but I will disagree with you. And for the following reasons:

    1. they made it to TWO SBs in the last 7 seasons

    2. In BOTH SBs they had leads late in the game

    When you are that close it is the hieght of abusrdity to say the team was not good enough. 

    1. A magic helmet(!) means we didnt have enough talent?! Remember who was covering the magic helmet? RODNEY. And there is NO question that he was an exceptional player.

    2. A dropped pass by a hugely dependable receiver off a less than stellar throw by the most accurate QB over 20 yards...

    No. We are disappointed but you cant blame it on BB (sorry Babe) or lack of talent. They fell short but they had a team in both those years that could have won it.

    You can make the case that if they had been healthy last year they might have beaten Denver. Look what they did in their record come back against them in Foxboro.

    Disagreeing is one thing but ranting and raving how bad they are... its ridiculous.

     

    [/QUOTE]



    I can't disagree with your points about the two losses to the Giants in SB's.  The 2007 Pats team was more talented then the Giants. That loss in big part was attributed to a worn out team at the end of a long season going undefeated and trying to do what no other team has done since the 1972 Dolphins.  Matter of fact, it was reported that the Pats were practicing hard and in pads right up to the SB when they should have been resting.  They were tired and worn out.  As for the 2011 SB, The Giants had a better D at that point, the RB position was a push, I would have to give the WR advantage to the Giants due to Gronk being hurt.  2 teams evenly matched.  However, 2012 season and 2013 season the Pats lost to teams who had more talent on the field.  Plain and simple.

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    What if we had Wilfork, Mayo, Spikes, Talib, Gronk, Hernandez, and Volmer the best RT in the league? 

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What if we had Wilfork, Mayo, Spikes, Talib, Gronk, Hernandez, and Volmer the best RT in the league? 

    [/QUOTE]

    Take away the most talented players on our team (some of the best players at their respective positions in the NFL) and we're not talented enough.

    Tom Brady was right when he said NE fans were spoiled...

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What if we had Wilfork, Mayo, Spikes, Talib, Gronk, Hernandez, and Volmer the best RT in the league? 

    [/QUOTE]

    Most teams in the NFL could make that argument.  Depth certainly hurt and it will be a weakness in some areas again this season if certain players go down. 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What if we had Wilfork, Mayo, Spikes, Talib, Gronk, Hernandez, and Volmer the best RT in the league? 

    [/QUOTE]

    Take away the most talented players on our team (some of the best players at their respective positions in the NFL) and we're not talented enough.

    Tom Brady was right when he said NE fans were spoiled...

    [/QUOTE]


    Did we not just recently hear BB talking about being prepared, being ready in case something happens when he was discussing the signing of Garoppolo?  So why not have the same stance at other positions?  WR, TE, D line, these positions were not ready last season when the crap hit the fan.  That is on the GM.  Spoiled?  Isn't our expectations the same as the team and Organizations expectations?  How is that spoiled?  We are fans, this is what fans do.  NO?

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    The trick is knowing who is aging or consistently gets injured and backing them up with better backups to reduce the impact of them not being there. Of the guys mentioned who got injury (and I don't count Spikes who was effectively benched not so much injured at the end of last season) Gronk, Talib, and Vollmer are known to have injury issues and only Vollmer had a proper backup. Wilfork was aging and being backed up by UDFA's? Hern, Mayo you can't really account for and those happen to every team but some of the others who were either not effective due to injury (Amendola, Vereen) or weren't present on the field at all you have to plan better for them not being there since the chances of them not being there are much greater than say a younger player who didn't show signs on injury issues prior to this year.

    For instance does anyone feel confident that Amendola, Gronk, Vereen, or Vollmer will be 100% in the playoffs this upcoming season? Those are players I'd be more concerned about making sure I got proper backups. Players like McCourty, Revis, Nink, Jones don't have that history so I'd feel much more comfortable believing they will be there when the snow starts to fly.

    As BB said there are some things you can plan for and some things you can't, you just have to do your best with the things you can.


    I swear by lil 10 pound bearded baby Jesus

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    We need pro bowlers backing up pro bowlers. It's so simple.

    [object HTMLDivElement]

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We need pro bowlers backing up pro bowlers. It's so simple.

    [object HTMLDivElement]

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Or just not JAGs..... I know scary to think about planning ahead, must seem like voodoo how eerily people can predict if a player might get injury during the season or not,  but I assure you it's nothing more than something called learning by studying patterns in history. If I have two players, 1 who can't complete a full season once in their career or 1 that has finished 15+ games for the vast majority of their careers I would spend a little more on the former's backup and even if that means to spend a little less for the latter's backup. It's called planning ahead and it's a wise thing to do not only in the Pats case but in regular life too. Ie, If you have something you rely on that consistently gives you problems you should keep a good spare backup.... Kind of like if you live on pothole invested streets which caused multi flat tires in the past that maybe you should invest in a full sized spare instead of just getting the doughtnut. 

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:


    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    We need pro bowlers backing up pro bowlers. It's so simple.

    [object HTMLDivElement]





    [object HTMLDivElement]


    Or just not JAGs..... I know scary to think about planning ahead, must seem like voodoo how eerily people can predict if a player might get injury during the season or not,  but I assure you it's nothing more than something called learning by studying patterns in history. If I have two players, 1 who can't complete a full season once in their career or 1 that has finished 15+ games for the vast majority of their careers I would spend a little more on the former's backup and even if that means to spend a little less for the latter's backup. It's called planning ahead and it's a wise thing to do not only in the Pats case but in regular life too. Ie, If you have something you rely on that consistently gives you problems you should keep a good spare backup.... Kind of like if you live on pothole invested streets which caused multi flat tires in the past that maybe you should invest in a full sized spare instead of just getting the doughtnut. 


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]


    You should write BB a letter explaining which guys will get hurt. It would save him a lot of aggravation. 

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    You should write BB a letter explaining which guys will get hurt. It would save him a lot of aggravation. 

    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    I keep on offering you the bet True out of Amendola, Vereen, Vollmer, Gronk, and Edelman I predict more than half will miss time this year. I'm willing to bet and entire years salary on it. If you think you can't predict who might get injury then the odds are in your favor. Why won't you take it if you don't believe in injury prone? Tell you wat lets forget the money if you aren't confident. How about if it happens you actually except reality that some players are just more injury prone than others? For some reason I doubt you'd even accept that since deep down you know I'm right and there are just some players who for whatever reason just can't stay healthy.

    But then again I predicted Amendola, Gronk, Vollmer, and Vereen to get injured last offseason so I must be a wizard or something.

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You should write BB a letter explaining which guys will get hurt. It would save him a lot of aggravation. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Lol!

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


     


    We need pro bowlers backing up pro bowlers. It's so simple.

    [object HTMLDivElement]


     


    Did we acquire a Pro Bowl WR? 


    I guess you mean Slater backing up Slater . . .    

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We need pro bowlers backing up pro bowlers. It's so simple.

    [/QUOTE]

    I see what you did there.... but I will play along!

    Not prow bowlers but certainly better then what they had, imo.

    Certainly need better then Hooman backing up Gronk.

    Dobson and Thompkins never should have been starters last year, they should have been backing up a Pro Bowler or two. 

    Arrington shouldn't be a starter, he should be a back up. 

    Wilfork and Kelly, you would have thought they would have had better backups considering their age.

    As we all witnessed, no legit backup to Talib last season.

    I'm sure there are more but it's Friday evening, I'm out!

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    I keep on offering you the bet True out of Amendola, Vereen, Vollmer, Gronk, and Edelman I predict more than half will miss time this year. I'm willing to bet and entire years salary on it. If you think you can't predict who might get injury then the odds are in your favor. Why won't you take it if you don't believe in injury prone? Tell you wat lets forget the money if you aren't confident. How about if it happens you actually except reality that some players are just more injury prone than others? For some reason I doubt you'd even accept that since deep down you know I'm right and there are just some players who for whatever reason just can't stay healthy.


    But then again I predicted Amendola, Gronk, Vollmer, and Vereen to get injured last offseason so I must be a wizard or something.


    You could pick any five names out of a hat and the odds are pretty good that more than half will miss time.


    Rob Gronkowski, Shane Vereen, Matthew Slater, Vince Wilfork, Steven Ridley, Tavon Wilson, Tommy Kelly, Jerod Mayo, Aqib Talib, Danny Amendola, Sebastian Vollmer, Steve Gregory, Alfonzo Dennard, Michael Hoomanawanui, Aaron Dobson, Marcus Cannon, Kenbrell Thompkins, Devin McCourty, Brandon Spikes all missed games last year.


    The list is shorter for players who played in all 16 games last year, Danny Aiken, Ryan Allen, Kyle Arrington, LeGarrette Blount, Tom Brady, Jamie Collins, Daniel Connolly, James Develin, Stephen Gostkowski, Dont'a Hightower, Chandler Jones, Logan Mankins, Rob Ninkovich, Logan Ryan, Brandon Spikes, Joe Vellano, Ryan Wendell, Chris White.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    The Patriots are not the dynasty they once were. Shocking but true.

    Wilfork and Kelly backups? Two pro-bowl receivers? We sure can dream!

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    The O is fine, it's the D that needs to play better. Hopefully getting the MASH unit back on the field will help!

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

    Re: Am I the only one who thinks we still need OFFENSE?

    In response to mellymel3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The O is fine, it's the D that needs to play better. Hopefully getting the MASH unit back on the field will help!

    [/QUOTE]


    Generally, I agree that focusing on D is the ticket to success.  That said, there is still room to improve the offense, especially if Gronk is missing lots of time.  The hard thing about judging this offense is that so much depends on whether Gronk is in or out.  If he's on the field, I would agree with Mel's statement that the "O is fine."  But when Gronk is off the field, I'm not quite so comfortable with what they've got.  

     

     

Share