Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

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

    Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

         According to a wishful Colts' fan, they are. Here's an article from Brad Wells of Stampede Blue. My comments have been inclued therein, in bold black:  

    The New England Patriots Are In Deep Trouble In 2013

    By Brad Wells

        

    The New England Patriots have lost over 90% of their receiving production from last season.     

    For the first time since 2002, the New England Patriots are not listed as a regular season opponent for the Indianapolis Colts. However, just because the Pats aren't on the docket doesn't mean the gutting of their roster this offseason won't affect the Colts and the rest of the AFC.

    To put it bluntly, the Patriots are toast.

    RESPONSE: We shall see.

    Yes, yes, yes. I know Tom Brady is still the quarterback and I know Bill Belichick is still skulking the sidelines. As long as those two are there, the Patriots are playoff contenders.

    RESPONSE: Okay...then why are you saying that the Patriots are toast??

    By "toast" I mean their chances of seriously contending in the AFC. You have to be a homer of the highest degree of blissful ignorance if you truly think that the loses this team has suffered this offseason, particularly on offense, won't affect their win-loss column.   

    RESPONSE: To quote "The Miz"...Really? Really? Really? Really???

    Let's do a recap of the damage, shall we?

    • Owner Bob Kraft got cheap and decided to play hardball with the greatest receiver in franchise history, Wes Welker. Welker bolted and signed with AFC rival Denver (and Peyton Manning).

    RESPONSE: Obviously, this guy is ignorant of the way the Patriots rate veterans, manage the salary cap, and their personnel philosophy. BB has always held that it's better to release a good veteran player a year early, than to keep him a year too long. In Danny Armendola, the Pats saw a guy who is five (5) years younger than Wes, with similar physical capabilities. The decision to let Wes go had little to do with money, and more to do with his age, and the chance for the team to gain a younger, suitable replacement. That said, had BB known that Aaron Hernandez would morph into two-gun Crowley, he might have stuck with Welker. But...no one saw that one coming...except those wise men in the media.  

     

    RESPONSE: A healthy Gronk appears to be a must, if the Pats are to make a SB run. There's no telling at this time when he'll be ready...or if he'll ever again regain his form. 

     

    RESPONSE: Sure...the loss of AH hurts. But, this can be overcome. Furthermore, the media negativity over the AH mess could become another "us against the world" rallying point, much like the bogus spygate "scandal" was. 

    Danny Woodhead bolted during free agency and signed with the Chargers.

    RESPONSE: Danny played well while in NE. But, Shane Vereen should be more than ready to take up the slack. 

     The team didn't re-sign Brandon Lloyd.

    RESPONSE: Evidently, Lloyd is a head-case. Still, his production must be replaced.

    Deion Branch was also let go.

    RESPONSE: Deion had a great career with the Pats. But, he's done.

    These loses account for 354 completions, 29 touchdowns, and 4,129 yards of offense for the Patriots last season. Tom Brady's ENTIRE RECEIVING CORPS is gone from his 4,827-yard season last year!  

    RESPONSE: I refer you to the 2006 season, in which your lovables were handed the AFC Title game against the Patriots that year by the zebras...and the Pats' injury riddled defense let the team down. Brady had little WR fire-power to work with that year, as well.

    Now, there are some out there that still think this Patriots offense will be a-okay, okely-dokely with Brady throwing to Michael Jenkins, Lavelle Hawkins, and Danny Amendola.

    RESPONSE: in 2006, Brady had an ancient Troy Brown, Reche Caldwell, and Jabbar Gaffney to work with. This year, he has the players you mentioned above, plus rookie Aaron Dobson. 

    Sure. Sure they will.

    RESPONSE Guys like you were saying the same thing in 2006.

    If players like Hernandez are so expendable, why did New England give him a 5-year, $40 million extension? Why did they even try to re-sign Welker this offseason? Why did they franchise him in 2012, paying him nearly $10 million?

    RESPONSE: No one is saying that AH and Wes won't be missed. But, you're neglecting the fact that the Pats have a deeper, stronger stable of RBs than they had in 2006, have an all-world TE (assuming he's healthy), and have what appears to be a younger, deeper, improved defense in 2013.  

    Logic: The bane of all New England apologists.

    RESPONSE: Patriot fans "aplogize" for NOTHING. Our team has the best record in the NFL over the past decade. Really...such a silly comment from a fan of a team that leads the NFL in most playoff chokes over the same past decade. 

    There's also the school of thought that says that no matter who Tom Brady has to throw to, the Patriots will still be fine

    RESPONSE: True...because Tom Brady is of of the greatest QBs to ever play the game...and BB is the greatest coach to ever prowl the sidelines. 

    RT @PantherPride86 Who exactly is Tom Brady going to throw to? ... Went to AFCCG with Reche Caldwell as leading WR. That won't be a problem.

    — Evan Silva (@evansilva) June 27, 2013

     

    I like and respect Evan Silva, but come on.

    The season he is referring to is the 2006 campaign, the one that saw the Patriots epically choke in the AFCCG that year to the Colts. That season, Brady still had Corey Dillon, Kevin Faulk, Ben Watson, and a rookie Laurence Maroney on the team. That's a helluva lot better looking than what they have now.

    RESPONSE: Your ignorance of the Patriots is showing again. Corey Dillon was all but washed up in 2006. Faulk was a great 3rd down RB. Maroney was inconsistent at best...and was more of a kick returner than a big time contributor in the backfield in his rookie year. Compare and contrast that with the solid Stevan Ridley, the up and coming Shane Vereen, veteran scat-back Leon Washington, and bruisers in Brandon Bolden, and veteran LeGarrette Blount. 

    But hey, whatever. I'm content to see this whole thing play out, and when the outcome ends up being what I think it will, I'm going to enjoy every darling moment of it.

    RESPONSE: Hatred and obsession with the Pats is all you Manningless Dolt fans have left. Why don't you concentrate on that great young QB you now have, rather then rehash sad red, white, and blue memories? Don't watch the Pats this season...you may not like what you see.

         What say you, my Patriot bretheran? Will the Pats struggle, or thrive?      

     

     

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    In response to TexasPat's comment:

         According to a wishful Colts' fan, they are. Here's an article from Brad Wells of Stampede Blue. My comments have been inclued therein, in bold black:  

    The New England Patriots Are In Deep Trouble In 2013

    By Brad Wells

        

    The New England Patriots have lost over 90% of their receiving production from last season.     

    For the first time since 2002, the New England Patriots are not listed as a regular season opponent for the Indianapolis Colts. However, just because the Pats aren't on the docket doesn't mean the gutting of their roster this offseason won't affect the Colts and the rest of the AFC.

    To put it bluntly, the Patriots are toast.

    RESPONSE: We shall see.

    Yes, yes, yes. I know Tom Brady is still the quarterback and I know Bill Belichick is still skulking the sidelines. As long as those two are there, the Patriots are playoff contenders.

    RESPONSE: Okay...then why are you saying that the Patriots are toast??

    By "toast" I mean their chances of seriously contending in the AFC. You have to be a homer of the highest degree of blissful ignorance if you truly think that the loses this team has suffered this offseason, particularly on offense, won't affect their win-loss column.   

    RESPONSE: To quote "The Miz"...Really? Really? Really? Really???

    Let's do a recap of the damage, shall we?

    • Owner Bob Kraft got cheap and decided to play hardball with the greatest receiver in franchise history, Wes Welker. Welker bolted and signed with AFC rival Denver (and Peyton Manning).

    RESPONSE: Obviously, this guy is ignorant of the way the Patriots rate veterans, manage the salary cap, and their personnel philosophy. BB has always held that it's better to release a good veteran player a year early, than to keep him a year too long. In Danny Armendola, the Pats saw a guy who is five (5) years younger than Wes, with similar physical capabilities. The decision to let Wes go have little to do with money, and more to do with his age, and the chance for the team to gain a younger, suitable replacement. That said, had BB known that Aaron Hernandez would morph into two-gun Crowley, he might have stuck with Welker. But...no one saw that one coming...except those wise men in the media.  

     

    RESPONSE: A healthy Gronk appears to be a must, if the Pats are to make a SB run. There's no telling at this time when he'll be ready...or if he'll ever again regain his form. 

     

    RESPONSE: Sure...the loss of AH hurts. But, this can be overcome. Furthermore, the media negativity over the AH mess could become another "us against the world" rallying point, much like the bogus spygate "scandal" was. 

    Danny Woodhead bolted during free agency and signed with the Chargers.

    RESPONSE: Danny played well while in NE. But, Shane Vereen should be more than ready to take up the slack. 

     The team didn't re-sign Brandon Lloyd.

    RESPONSE: Evidently, Lloyd is a head-case. Still, his production must be replaced.

    Deion Branch was also let go.

    RESPONSE: Deion had a great career with the Pats. But, he's done.

    These loses account for 354 completions, 29 touchdowns, and 4,129 yards of offense for the Patriots last season. Tom Brady's ENTIRE RECEIVING CORPS is gone from his 4,827-yard season last year!  

    RESPONSE: I refer you to the 2006 season, in which your lovables were handed the AFC Title game against the Patriots that year by the zebras...and the Pats' injury riddled defense let the team down. Brady had little WR fire-power to work with that year, as well.

    Now, there are some out there that still think this Patriots offense will be a-okay, okely-dokely with Brady throwing to Michael Jenkins, Lavelle Hawkins, and Danny Amendola.

    RESPONSE: in 2006, Brady had an ancient Troy Brown, Reche Caldwell, and Jabbar Gaffney to work with. This year, he has the players you mentioned above, plus rookie Aaron Dobson. 

    Sure. Sure they will.

    RESPONSE Guys like you were saying the same thing in 2006.

    If players like Hernandez are so expendable, why did New England give him a 5-year, $40 million extension? Why did they even try to re-sign Welker this offseason? Why did they franchise him in 2012, paying him nearly $10 million?

    RESPONSE: No one is saying that AH and Wes won't be missed. But, you're neglecting the fact that the Pats have a deeper, stronger stable of RBs than they had in 2006, have an all-world TE (assuming he's healthy), and have what appears to be a younger, deeper, improved defense in 2013.  

    Logic: The bane of all New England apologists.

    RESPONSE: Patriot fans "aplogize" for NOTHING. Our team has the best record in the NFL over the past decade. Really...such a silly comment from a fan of a team that leads the NFL in most playoff chokes over the same past decade. 

    There's also the school of thought that says that no matter who Tom Brady has to throw to, the Patriots will still be fine

    RESPONSE: True...because Tom Brady is of of the greatest QBs to ever play the game...and BB is the greatest coach to ever prowl the sidelines. 

    RT @PantherPride86 Who exactly is Tom Brady going to throw to? ... Went to AFCCG with Reche Caldwell as leading WR. That won't be a problem.

    — Evan Silva (@evansilva) June 27, 2013

     

    I like and respect Evan Silva, but come on.

    The season he is referring to is the 2006 campaign, the one that saw the Patriots epically choke in the AFCCG that year to the Colts. That season, Brady still had Corey Dillon, Kevin Faulk, Ben Watson, and a rookie Laurence Maroney on the team. That's a helluva lot better looking than what they have now.

    RESPONSE: Your ignorance of the Patriots is showing again. Corey Dillon was all but washed up in 2006. Faulk was a great 3rd down RB. Maroney was inconsistent at best...and was more of a kick returner than a big time contributor in the backfield in his rookie year. Compare and contrast that with the solid Stevan Ridley, the up and coming Shane Vereen, veteran scat-back Leon Washington, and bruisers in Brandon Bolden, and veteran LeGarrette Blount. 

    But hey, whatever. I'm content to see this whole thing play out, and when the outcome ends up being what I think it will, I'm going to enjoy every darling moment of it.

    RESPONSE: Hatred and obsession with the Pats is all you Manningless Dolt fans have left. Why don't you concentrate on that great young QB you now have, rather then rehash sad red, white, and blue memories? Don't watch the Pats this season...you may not like what you see.

         What say you, my Patriot bretheran? Will the Pats struggle, or thrive?      

     

     




    always great to read your comments. WHO  is Brad Wells of Stampede Blue? Obviously he couldn't pick his nose!!!

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    I agree with your comments. Really, this is nothing like 2006 except, maybe that the WRs are different than they were the year before. Really though, Caldwell was the only WR that year that was a big factor and was new to the team. Troy Brown was still there. Gaffney wasn't a major factor, he only caught 11 passes. Ditto Chad Jackson.

    The offense is a lot more diverse now. They're at least four deep at RB, not really counting guys like Winn who we haven't seen yet. And they're far more athletic than the guys they had then. The WRs are also more athletic now as well, with much higher ceilings.

    I expect them to have some issues on offense early in the season and then gradually figure it out and be a major factor in the AFC by the time the playoffs roll around. Gronk is absolutely a key, but I really would prefer he sits until he's 100%, even if it's half the season or more. I want him at full tilt in the playoffs, I couldn't care less if he doesn't catch a pass in the regular season.

    How about for once, they lay in the weeds, go 9-7 or 10-6, get a wild card berth and peak in the postseason instead of in week 12 or 14? That's what SB champions do, more often than not. The regular season is only there to qualify for the tournament. The bye week is way overrated.

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    Stampede Blue are a collection of insufferable twits who have no insight whatsoever into this game. It's like a board full of Rustys.

     

     

     http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff6/babeparilli/gif_193x113_39ce6f_zps83b8ca29.gif?t=1373985234

     

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    10-6 with 10th ranked offense/12th ranked defense

    9-7 with 9th ranked offense/25th ranked defense

    10-6 wild card with 9th ranked offense/5th ranked defense

    Last three SB champs. Regular season is basically irrelevant, just get to the dance and play well. No trophies for style.

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    Stampede Blue are a collection of insufferable twits who have no insight whatsoever into this game. It's like a board full of Rustys.

     

     

     http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff6/babeparilli/gif_193x113_39ce6f_zps83b8ca29.gif?t=1373985234

     

     



    Sure. Sure. Yes, I have no insight into the game of football. Sure, Diapers. 

    Muzwell just agreed with my analysis and insight, so does that mean he has no insight either? lmao

    Keep putting your foot in your mouth, PatsFan1966.

     




    He agrees with you that the Stampede Blue fools are dead wrong. That's not showing insight dumbkoff.

     

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    Stampede Blue are a collection of insufferable twits who have no insight whatsoever into this game. It's like a board full of Rustys.

     

     

     http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff6/babeparilli/gif_193x113_39ce6f_zps83b8ca29.gif?t=1373985234

     

     



         LOL!!! Perhaps our good buddy UD6, a/k/a, The Dog(ggggg), was the ghostwriter of this article?? LOL!!!

     

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    I wouldn't say "deep" trouble. The offense will have some early season woes due to receivers having little experience with Brady.  Poorly run routes, wrong routes, and bad timing will be the biggest reason early on.

    The defense won't be any worse than last year, but isn't good enough to win games for the team on a regular basis or to put fear in opponents until they prove otherwise.  Enough players were added on defense to possibly be a difference maker.

    There are probably still at least 16 teams in much worse shape than the Patriots.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    What does this all mean?

     

     

    1. It means TB is already the frontrunner for MVP.

    2. They will fight and claw there way to win the AFC East which means they will be playoff hardened before they even play one post season game.

    3. Gronk regaining his form? Who is kidding here? He is 24 years old..he is 3 years away from his prime..get real.

     

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    The 2012 Ravens were in deep trouble after finishing the season losing 4 of their last 5 games.

    The 2011 Giants were in deep trouble after losing 5 of 6 games during the second half of the season.

    It sounds to me that being in deep trouble is a positive.

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    Answer to question- hell to the bells- No!  This "off" season is getting awfully long.  Sure there's plenty to talk about but as always the Pats will do their talking with their play on the field. 

    I can't wait to see how they respond. And what no mention of Tebow? He's a very intersting wild card.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

     

    I agree with your comments. Really, this is nothing like 2006 except, maybe that the WRs are different than they were the year before. Really though, Caldwell was the only WR that year that was a big factor and was new to the team. Troy Brown was still there. Gaffney wasn't a major factor, he only caught 11 passes. Ditto Chad Jackson.

    The offense is a lot more diverse now. They're at least four deep at RB, not really counting guys like Winn who we haven't seen yet. And they're far more athletic than the guys they had then. The WRs are also more athletic now as well, with much higher ceilings.

    I expect them to have some issues on offense early in the season and then gradually figure it out and be a major factor in the AFC by the time the playoffs roll around. Gronk is absolutely a key, but I really would prefer he sits until he's 100%, even if it's half the season or more. I want him at full tilt in the playoffs, I couldn't care less if he doesn't catch a pass in the regular season.

    How about for once, they lay in the weeds, go 9-7 or 10-6, get a wild card berth and peak in the postseason instead of in week 12 or 14? That's what SB champions do, more often than not. The regular season is only there to qualify for the tournament. The bye week is way overrated.

     



    I can see them starting out 2-2, maybe a 4-2 situation with a blown game in there. That's pretty much what they do every year. There's always a game in Sept where they blow a lead and lose. Everyone flips out, ask for BB to be fired and then they go on a roll, gradually building in October and into November, with BB being the wizard he is, battening down the hatches and they play their best ball as he tries to get them healthy.

    Would love nothing more than a NE vs Den AFC title game. Say, we geta 2 seed, bye week Wildcard weekend, go 12-4, but have to go into Denver for the title game. The media will all pick Gomer and Denver, Brady and BB will be chomping at the bit and this little tool from Indy up above will wonder how in the hell BB did it again. Would love nothing more to make Gomer go 3-10 career outdoors in the postseason in some kind of a blizzard, us run amuck all over their questionable D, with Brady catching fire with his great play in weather like that, and just take it going away. 

    Don't know if I can stomach another poor Brady outing at home in the postseason. Maybe a road game to get back to the SB is what Brady needs?

    And yes, we are so deep at RB compared to 2006 (old and injured Dillon, rookie Maroney), TE (Watson was a solid player, but Gronk, Ballard and maybe a Sudfeld provide much more), our OL is easily as good as 2006s, but I'd argue deeper on the bench.

    That 2006 D was not very fast. It had experience and valuable continuity, but this D now has all of that and more. I'll take our LBs now in terms of speed and athleticism of those then. Bruschi was not the same after the stroke. He got by on expereince in 2006 and 2007.

    Our CBs are comparable with Samuel and Gay and now Talib, Dennard, Arrington, etc.  Very comparable.

    Safeties are also comparable when you throw in a 2006 Rodney and a 2013 Adrian Wilson now.

    Might even be better if McCourty proves stronger than what Artrell Hawkins was giving us then.

    Clearly, the Hernandez incident  has provided anti-NE fodder, as does the media painting BB as the bad guy with Welker, but as you know from me, BB putting far less money into the middle of the field is not an accident.

    1, hopefully 2, of these WRs will emerge from the dust and make the club as guys they'll ween in behind solid/good flankers (Amendola and Edelman).  They can mask a lot of the flaws they feel they have early in the season with the running backs in here, the OL, Brady himself, and what should be an improved D.

    These kids today who are so enamored with fantasy football and video games tied to stats, just don't get the game of football and clearly don't get what BB looks for as best he can with the players and skills he has. Its not a rule that we must use most of our gameplans, targeting our 8 million dollar slot WR as the main piece of the gameplan.

     




    pipe down OLD MAN

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    Stampede Blue are a collection of insufferable twits who have no insight whatsoever into this game. It's like a board full of Rustys.

     

     

     http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff6/babeparilli/gif_193x113_39ce6f_zps83b8ca29.gif?t=1373985234

     




    Laughing  Laughing

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:

    What does this all mean?

     

     

    1. It means TB is already the frontrunner for MVP.

    2. They will fight and claw there way to win the AFC East which means they will be playoff hardened before they even play one post season game.

    3. Gronk regaining his form? Who is kidding here? He is 24 years old..he is 3 years away from his prime..get real.

    RESPONSE: He's also had 5 surgeries in the past 3 years...pull your homer head out of your backside!!

     




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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    As long as TB is under center the Pats will be fine. I believe the Dolphins are the only team that can compete with the Pats for the division-but they brought in a lot of guys who have to mesh-which will take half the season, if at all. I dont know their early schedule but if its hard in the first half of the season they will be too far behind to catch the Pats for the Division-JMO.

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    In response to TexasPat's comment:

         According to a wishful Colts' fan, they are. Here's an article from Brad Wells of Stampede Blue. My comments have been inclued therein, in bold black:  

    The New England Patriots Are In Deep Trouble In 2013

    By Brad Wells

        

    The New England Patriots have lost over 90% of their receiving production from last season.     

    For the first time since 2002, the New England Patriots are not listed as a regular season opponent for the Indianapolis Colts. However, just because the Pats aren't on the docket doesn't mean the gutting of their roster this offseason won't affect the Colts and the rest of the AFC.

    To put it bluntly, the Patriots are toast.

    RESPONSE: We shall see.

    Yes, yes, yes. I know Tom Brady is still the quarterback and I know Bill Belichick is still skulking the sidelines. As long as those two are there, the Patriots are playoff contenders.

    RESPONSE: Okay...then why are you saying that the Patriots are toast??

    By "toast" I mean their chances of seriously contending in the AFC. You have to be a homer of the highest degree of blissful ignorance if you truly think that the loses this team has suffered this offseason, particularly on offense, won't affect their win-loss column.   

    RESPONSE: To quote "The Miz"...Really? Really? Really? Really???

    Let's do a recap of the damage, shall we?

    • Owner Bob Kraft got cheap and decided to play hardball with the greatest receiver in franchise history, Wes Welker. Welker bolted and signed with AFC rival Denver (and Peyton Manning).

    RESPONSE: Obviously, this guy is ignorant of the way the Patriots rate veterans, manage the salary cap, and their personnel philosophy. BB has always held that it's better to release a good veteran player a year early, than to keep him a year too long. In Danny Armendola, the Pats saw a guy who is five (5) years younger than Wes, with similar physical capabilities. The decision to let Wes go had little to do with money, and more to do with his age, and the chance for the team to gain a younger, suitable replacement. That said, had BB known that Aaron Hernandez would morph into two-gun Crowley, he might have stuck with Welker. But...no one saw that one coming...except those wise men in the media.  

     

    RESPONSE: A healthy Gronk appears to be a must, if the Pats are to make a SB run. There's no telling at this time when he'll be ready...or if he'll ever again regain his form. 

     

    RESPONSE: Sure...the loss of AH hurts. But, this can be overcome. Furthermore, the media negativity over the AH mess could become another "us against the world" rallying point, much like the bogus spygate "scandal" was. 

    Danny Woodhead bolted during free agency and signed with the Chargers.

    RESPONSE: Danny played well while in NE. But, Shane Vereen should be more than ready to take up the slack. 

     The team didn't re-sign Brandon Lloyd.

    RESPONSE: Evidently, Lloyd is a head-case. Still, his production must be replaced.

    Deion Branch was also let go.

    RESPONSE: Deion had a great career with the Pats. But, he's done.

    These loses account for 354 completions, 29 touchdowns, and 4,129 yards of offense for the Patriots last season. Tom Brady's ENTIRE RECEIVING CORPS is gone from his 4,827-yard season last year!  

    RESPONSE: I refer you to the 2006 season, in which your lovables were handed the AFC Title game against the Patriots that year by the zebras...and the Pats' injury riddled defense let the team down. Brady had little WR fire-power to work with that year, as well.

    Now, there are some out there that still think this Patriots offense will be a-okay, okely-dokely with Brady throwing to Michael Jenkins, Lavelle Hawkins, and Danny Amendola.

    RESPONSE: in 2006, Brady had an ancient Troy Brown, Reche Caldwell, and Jabbar Gaffney to work with. This year, he has the players you mentioned above, plus rookie Aaron Dobson. 

    Sure. Sure they will.

    RESPONSE Guys like you were saying the same thing in 2006.

    If players like Hernandez are so expendable, why did New England give him a 5-year, $40 million extension? Why did they even try to re-sign Welker this offseason? Why did they franchise him in 2012, paying him nearly $10 million?

    RESPONSE: No one is saying that AH and Wes won't be missed. But, you're neglecting the fact that the Pats have a deeper, stronger stable of RBs than they had in 2006, have an all-world TE (assuming he's healthy), and have what appears to be a younger, deeper, improved defense in 2013.  

    Logic: The bane of all New England apologists.

    RESPONSE: Patriot fans "aplogize" for NOTHING. Our team has the best record in the NFL over the past decade. Really...such a silly comment from a fan of a team that leads the NFL in most playoff chokes over the same past decade. 

    There's also the school of thought that says that no matter who Tom Brady has to throw to, the Patriots will still be fine

    RESPONSE: True...because Tom Brady is of of the greatest QBs to ever play the game...and BB is the greatest coach to ever prowl the sidelines. 

    RT @PantherPride86 Who exactly is Tom Brady going to throw to? ... Went to AFCCG with Reche Caldwell as leading WR. That won't be a problem.

    — Evan Silva (@evansilva) June 27, 2013

     

    I like and respect Evan Silva, but come on.

    The season he is referring to is the 2006 campaign, the one that saw the Patriots epically choke in the AFCCG that year to the Colts. That season, Brady still had Corey Dillon, Kevin Faulk, Ben Watson, and a rookie Laurence Maroney on the team. That's a helluva lot better looking than what they have now.

    RESPONSE: Your ignorance of the Patriots is showing again. Corey Dillon was all but washed up in 2006. Faulk was a great 3rd down RB. Maroney was inconsistent at best...and was more of a kick returner than a big time contributor in the backfield in his rookie year. Compare and contrast that with the solid Stevan Ridley, the up and coming Shane Vereen, veteran scat-back Leon Washington, and bruisers in Brandon Bolden, and veteran LeGarrette Blount. 

    But hey, whatever. I'm content to see this whole thing play out, and when the outcome ends up being what I think it will, I'm going to enjoy every darling moment of it.

    RESPONSE: Hatred and obsession with the Pats is all you Manningless Dolt fans have left. Why don't you concentrate on that great young QB you now have, rather then rehash sad red, white, and blue memories? Don't watch the Pats this season...you may not like what you see.

         What say you, my Patriot bretheran? Will the Pats struggle, or thrive?      

     

     




    Well done sir, well done. 

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

         The "flavor" of the past few months, and every expert's favorite to represent the AFC in the 2013 season SB, are the Denver Horsefaces. Peyton Manning this, and Wes Welker that...YUCK!! But, the truth of the matter is that no one truly knows what will happen, in a National Football League season.There are so many variables. One key injury could be the difference between a team going 11-5, or 5-11. For example, what would the Broncos be without a healthy Manning...or a sober, drug free Von Miller?: http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_23707287/broncos-von-miller-faces-four-game-suspension

         In the NFL....one nver knows.

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

         And the NFL continues to bend over backwards to prop up Peyton:

         "In late 2011, there was some suspicion that the league tapped the brakes on a couple of potential suspensions in order to avoid derailing Tebowmania.  In 2012, the Broncos were among the league’s darlings, given the arrival of Peyton Manning.  There’s no evidence that the process as to Miller has been delayed in any way to help the Broncos, however." Yeah...right! LOL!!!  http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/22/report-von-miller-tested-positive-for-amphetamines-marijuana-in-2011/

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    If I want one QB to bring new WRs along as rookies or backups to start the season, it's Brady. He's had a lot of experience with it.

    NE has continuity like never before all over the field.  OL, LB, RB, TE, CB, S, etc.  A long, long way from where they were in 2010 and off the lockout in 2011.

    It's fascinating watching how clueless some really are in this world, when they think they are being accurate with the analysis (on any topic).



    What rookie WRs has Brady helped to develop? Since Branch in 2002, no rookie WR has been a major contributor the offense. In fact, with the exception of Givens (also drafted in 2002), every high drafted WR (4th round or better) by the Patriots has been a disappointment. 

    I agree that OL, LB do have great continuity. CB only does if Dennard is around. Safety has McCourty who has only been a safety for half an NFL season either Adrian Wilson coming in from the outside or Tavon Wilson/Steve Gregory who were both so bad last year that McCourty became a safety. TE we lost the number two option and could have two rookies in that group as well. At RB, I love Ridley, but Vereen needs to prove he can be the third down back (he only had 8 receptions last year). Woodhead was a bigger loss than people realize he had more receptions last season than all the other backs combine (40 to 16). He actually had more receptions than Edelman and Branch combined. He was also third on the team in total TDs with 7.

    I don't think any of these things are insurmountable, but I think you are fooling yourself if you think there is some sort of unprecedented continuity on this team. I would say that it is similar to the years from 2003-2006 in terms of roster stability.

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    GOD I HOPE SO! Please, say the PATRIOTS ARE IN TROUBLE!!!

    You mean like in 2001 when Drew Bledsoe went down for the year and in came some lanky nobody to take them to and win the Superbowl?

    You mean like in 2007 when "Spygate" rocked their world so bad that they went 16-0 and made it to yet another Superbowl?

    You mean like in 2008 when Tom was lost in the first game of the season and some guy who was so bad that he hadn't started a single football game since HIGH SCHOOL lead them to a 11-4 record the rest of the way?

    Yeah, I really hope they think they are in trouble this year, because if you haven't noticed, the New England Patriots take tragedies and use them to galvanize the team, to display laser-like focus, and to feed off of the adversity like no other professional sports organization. Afterall, what else could motivate the most successful franchise in the NFL over the last 13-years more than being told that "THEY ARE TOAST!"? Keep the nay-sayers comin' and we'll C-U in New Jersey on 2/2/2014! CAN'T WAIT!

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    Love this kind of talk! Gets the PATS all fired up and ready to go!

    I WOULD LOVE ANOTHER "THEY HATE THEIR COACH" SEASON!!

    The Offense will hold their own and the D is poised to be much better than last year. I love being the under dog and the rest of the league is in trouble if you ask me.

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    What I see for this team is:

    *early regular season challenges in the passing game, probably in the form of inconsistency, gradually improving as the year progresses

    *strong play in the backfield, both in the ground and passing games (hardly insightful I know)

    *strengthened defensive play across the board even if Dennard isn't available.  

    *11-5 (give or take a game) overall, 5-1 in the division - AFC East title

     

     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Are the 2013 Patriots in Deep Trouble??

    Three things. 1. It's not even training camp and already the doomsayers are out in full force.2. Brady, BB and the team will be fine 3. If Brady is not fine (injury) I don't expect Belichick to go into "Suck For Bridgewater or Manziel" mode ; we will just see more great coaching (Cassel season) because s--king for a high draft pick defeats the whole purpose of competing.

     

    Oh and I hope Chandler breaks Luck in half.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share