Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

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

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    I think also because BB is a media man's nightmare every move he makes has to be scrutinised to this degree. I think honestly baring injury everyone who's come in could he here for a number of years if they work out and as many of you have said I never get this "They're built to win it all this year, the window is closing" it's always the aim to win it all it's not like you go into a season saying winning 6 games is going to be a great achievement. They're talking balls it's not like we brought in Favre!
     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    I agree, i spose he writes for the Globe somethin mainly Boston fans will only read so I suppose there's little need to write nonsense when we know the truth ourselves from A) living in the area and having other sources and B) being intelligent enough to realise that it's a team built for the net 4 years. If Gasper's a puppet i think Shaughnessy is much worse I think he's clearly told to be the bad cop of the group he's rarely ever positive. I mean things have to be awesome for him to truely admit it.
    Posted by danemcmenamin


    More of it has to do with being realistic rather than being negative, though Shaugnessy can be a bit gloomy, lol. I mean, if you ask most fans on a fan forum, they will tell you NE will win the Superbowl before every single season.

    I think Gasper's bigger point is that NE looks loaded up this season, but next season is a little more hazy considering that Mankins, Ellis, Carter, and Ocho will be out of the picture or in FA on the market. I think that is pretty fair.

    I also think it is absolutely fair to bring light to any moves that add in the next four seasons. Tom is the best. And Tom is in his prime. But he also only has four seasons left on his deal, and at the end of it, might not be the same guy as he was at the start. There should be a slight sense of urgency on the part of New England brass to bring players in when you can to maximize the time you have while Brady is still 'the man.'

    It has a bit of that Randy Moss feeling from 2007, when BB had a very good team with some holes (WR) and added a few guys before he had the monster 2008-9 stretch where he would have to unload what was essentially the core of the defensive team. Let's hope he is right, because I would love this team to get a crack at a Superbowl. They are a lot younger, and are built a little bit better to 'survive' than the amazing offense they put together in 2007.

    This is not as big a drop off, NE won't be rebuilding over night. But he senses they are close and wanted the players to get them there.

    I would disagree that adding Haynesworth is that kind of deal -- you don't sign 'win now' guys to 3 year deals. The added an extra year in his contract. Haynesworth is meant to play here, play here at a high level, and play here through the next three seasons. He is not  a 2011 or bust player, but a guy to sit next to Fork and across from Tom and the core of TE's for the next few seasons while they try to make a few more runs.
     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    Good points all.  These are the comments from Gasper that I don't necessarily agree with. 

    This could be the Patriots' last shot to win with this current core group, and Belichick knows it. It’s a smart play.

    If his point is that the elder statesmen (Faulk, etc.) are ready to give it their last shot for a superbowl, then fine.  But the cupboard is hardly bare and the Pats have a good mix of young vets and high draft picks to keep things going for a while, which he doesn't say. 

    Chalk it all up and you have a recipe for urgency in 2011 because you have roster uncertainty in 2012.


    Disagree.  BB's two biggest additions were guys who were acquired for low draft picks.  They were available and fit a need, and they have a lot of upside for little risk.  They are likely here for longer than one year, which hardly points to "win now at all costs".  There may be uncertainty at a few positions (Light, Mankins, Faulk) but he doesn't follow up with any comment about how Woodhead, Vereen, Solder and a slew of high draft picks could offset those losses.  He portrays it as "win now because all bets are off after this year".  Those who follow the personnel moves this team makes know that this is portraying half of the argument to make your point or support your agenda. 

    Again, I never read Gasper, and don't mean to give him any credibility with this thread, but I knew that some of the better posters here would be ready to point out the flaws in Gasper's analysis of the 2011 roster and his assessment of the Pats' future.   
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Pats-bilbo. Show Pats-bilbo's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    I have not seen anyone mentioning this so thought I would. BB had a good 4 months or more to do nothing but watch video and scheme. He is making moves that we can only guess at. He may be inventing a totally new defense that moves in and out of 4-3 or 5-2 or 2-3-4-2 or any other combination you can think of. He can open the game in one way and when the other team makes half time adjustments he just switches what he is doing.

    To have this type of flexability you need veterns that undertsand the changes they need to make when they make these types of switches. It is hard enough for a young guy to understand his responsibilities without these switches.

    Remember he had 4 months or more to learn and adjust and scheme some new ideas. He and all his coaches, they had nothing else to do, no OTA's or player moves or worrying about players. They could only sit back and scheme. We know he is a student of the game and maybe he used this "down"time to go back to school and see what works and what doesn't work.

    I am excited to see what he does, because it will set new standards in the game. If he is sucessful, others will be scrambling to understand and copy it and this will only distract them. It will be an interesting ride.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from patthepatriot666. Show patthepatriot666's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    They are not going for broke, but if they don't think they are close i don't think they make a lot of these moves
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    I don't agree at all but I suppose the point is to get attention and by this thread it is working.  The premise that the Pats are going for broke this year is almost laughable considering the news the last 2 years has been the huge youth movement and high number of draft picks playing and starting on the roster.  

    The Pats in the last 3 years have overhauled the LB'ers, receivers, O-line, safety, CB, and TE's, PR, KR, LS, and Punter.  Lots of youth there.  

    Pretty much the only position not addressed in the early part of a draft was the D-line partly because Wilfork is still young.  So they grab Haynesworth(who is not old) on a 3 year contract, and some lesser known older vets and they are suddenly old?.  I would say outside of the Haynesworth addition the other guys added are very replaceable.  Maybe Ellis, but it's not like they haven't survived without him.  Even if the Pats let Branch, Ocho, and Welker go I have confidence that Price and Edelman are very good receivers.  And there is no way they let all three go anyway.

    It's hard for me to imagine this team not getting better and better the next few years.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from carawaydj. Show carawaydj's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    If Gasper wrote that the sun emits light I would still go outside to check for myself.  Some writers perceive being controversial as a ticket to success and stardom; I guess.  Kinda like how a troll who writes some wacky post gets a lot of attention.  As soon as Reiss left Gasper did a 180 and drank nothing but Krap-Aid.

    So no, I don't agree with him.  Not when he's wrong, and not when he gets lucky and guesses right.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hoier. Show Hoier's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?


    The patriots brought in a number of older gulys in on one year contracts.  In that sense it could be interpeted as going for broke this year or buying time to get better through next year draft and other places. 

    The truth also is the core playoff/super bowl players (Brady et al) are getting older, and the clock waits for no one.  Maybe BB feels he needs to make a stong effort to win one or two more when he still has his core players
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Macrawn. Show Macrawn's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    Gasper isn't great but he's a heck of a lot better than the rest of the Boston yoyo reporters. He's no Reise. 

    The Pats filled all of the major holes they had and they have the potential for a dominating defense. What OchoCinco they filled a huge need. The offense was never a worry and it should do well. The D could be something special this year if they stay healthy which has been a problem. The team made significant improvements and they have a legit shot at it. There isn't any dominating AFC team that can't be beaten. They have yet to prove they can win in the playoffs with this young team but that may change this year. 

    I can't credit Gasper too much on this unless you get points for being Captain Obvious. 
     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats? : I think he's been trained by CHB and Mazz, actually. He's the butt kisser in the classroom no one liked.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing


    Accurate assessment I'd say. The bar is set so low by the likes of Borges (spelling?) that a butt kisser is an improvement. 

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

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    At least Breer is gone.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from NY-PATS-FAN4. Show NY-PATS-FAN4's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    The guy has to say something. Why, I don't know.
    Posted by themightypatriotz


    LOL, Mighty! Exactly what I was thinking...
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from NY-PATS-FAN4. Show NY-PATS-FAN4's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    At least Breer is gone.
    Posted by DynastyXXXVI


    Amen to that! Borges, too!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from auchhhhhhhhhhh. Show auchhhhhhhhhhh's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    Core breaking ???

    Mankins, light, Vince, Mayo, Chung, Bodden, DMC, Brady, Gronk, Vollmer, hernandez. Are here for years to come !!!

    We have some more young and productive players like Woody, tate, cunningham, arrington.

    PLUS promising rookies like SOLDER, Vareen, Ras-i, Cannon PLUS a ton of picks next year.

    Gasper sucks !

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

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    There have been numerous realists on this board who have been saying that the time window for winning another SB with Brady has been closing for some time now.  The reasons are obvious at this point.  I think BB has been trying to rebuild for some time now - and now has a solid nucleus to work with.

    I think back in 2007, he tried to do it with offense - and it almost worked. Problem is that we had become the Colts of olde - and it didn't work for them either.

    It's going to be a fun year to see if this particular team can develop the right chemistry and attitude to go deep into the playoffs.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    He has a little bit of a point, in that there are some expiring contracts. But it isn't so dire, so perhaps he overstates that. This team isn't like the 2004 Redsox, where a lot of the great players were leaving the next season and they went over a barrel to acquire Curt Schilling. His strongest point is with the Light deal, not so much the Haynesworth addition. Brining Light back for one more shows that BB thinks this team could go pretty far and he doesn't want to leave Brady in the hands of a rookie. The one year for Ellis is convincing too, but again, I imagine that a draft selection down the road fills that roster spot out or perhaps one other young en. I think this is more like BB wants to compete now and in the future. He saw obvious holes in the pass rush, on the line, in the WR corps, and most newly developed at RB, and decided to plug them agressively understanding that even with those holes the team was 14-2 last season, and a couple minor mistakes away from progressing in the playoffs. That is distinct from last season where he let some rookies and young guys play out, without expectations. So while there are expiring deals, NE has a load of selections in 2012, and a handful of young guys ready to step in and take room up.
    Posted by zbellino


    Mebbe BB brought back Light because he knew there was zero chance that Solder would be ready to start at LT.  If it was a full pre-season and Solder signed early, I think Light may have been let go.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    I don't really agree with his assessment. I think it is what it has been right along. There is no master plan. The only plan is to grope for solutions and hope to get lucky on a few choices. The results so far to that approach have been mixed.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from mikec645. Show mikec645's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    Not even going to read all the comments here so I'm sure this was mentioned already but not even close.  I knew there was a reason I stopped reading the Pats coverage on this site after Reiss left.


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

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    I don't really agree with his assessment. I think it is what it has been right along. There is no master plan. The only plan is to grope for solutions and hope to get lucky on a few choices. The results so far to that approach have been mixed.
    Posted by BabeParilli


    lol.....chaos theory
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    We're set up for another decade of dominance. We've always had a good mixture of young and old on BB's best teams.

    As far as I remember we have two #1 picks along with a slew of mids in the next few drafts, I don't look at that as mortgaging the future away...
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share