Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from pats-fan-2007. Show pats-fan-2007's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    The Patriots will earn the SB victory this coming season.

    This looks like the best Pats team to date:

    DB's: young, but most talented group they have had since the days of Clayborn and Haynes. Unlike last season, when we had ZERO starting quality CB's, we now have 3-5 starters in Wheatley, Springs, Butler, Bodden and Whilhite.

    DL: with the addition of Brace, deepest DL we've had. Let's hope Seymour and Warren stay healthy.

    LB's: question mark, unless you think that Crable and Guyton will step up and become solid starters. Personally, I think that between Crable and Redd and Thomas, the OLB's will be better this year than last. We need another starting caliber ILB, though.

    WR's: if Galloway is healthy, you won't be able to double Moss anymore. Now imagine Tate becoming available after he comes off PUP?

    TE's: deepest bunch since I've been a Pats fan (a long time).

    RB's: health is a concern, but it's the deppest backfield we've had. Look for them to hold on to BJGE. I actually think we'll become more of a running team this year, take the pressure off Brady.

    OL: no veteran infusion, so no immediate improvement. My feeling is that all 3 OL rookies will make the team: Vollmer, Oldengberger, and Bussey. We cut some of the high priced mediocre veterans. By the end of the season, I see Vollmer starting and Oldenberger getting PT.



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

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE]     Peter King has written an article for SI, picking the top NFL teams, from 1-32. He has placed the New England Patriots at #1, followed by the Steelers, Giants, Bears (yes...da Bears), Colts, Eagles, Chargers, Ravens, Cowboys, and Titans.      If I were a Steelers fan, I would take this as a great insult. After all, didn't the Black & Gold crush the Cassel led Patriots in Foxboro, on their way to winning the 2008 season championship? Yet, despite have their SB winning team  returning almost completely intact, their getting dissed;      Giants fans will point back to the 2007 season SB...and the fact that their 2009 defense, and running game, may, in fact, be deeper and better, than the 2007 version.      As for the Bears...its' a joke that they have been included by King as one of the NFL's top teams.      The Colts are always in the hunt. Last year, cracks were beginning to show, as injuries infiltrated both their offensive and defensive lines. Marvin Harrison is gone, and Joe Addai has showed signs of wear and tear. The selection of RB Donald Brown should improve the Colts running game and screen pass attack. Nonetheless, the lack of a deep threat, that was Harrison, will make it less formidable. Furthermore, how much will they miss Tony Dungy?      The Eagles, based on their great off-season, should be a threat. Their defense is solid. The addition of LT Jason Peters will fortify their OL. Young WRs Deshawn Jackson are Jeremy Maclin are game breakers...and rookie RB LeSean McCoy should allow them to take some of the load off the fabulous Brian Westbrook.      The Chargers have a first rate QB in Philip Rivers. But, their OL is not nearly what it was in 2006...and neither is LaDainian Tomlinson. As we saw last year, Shawne Merriman is the key to their defense. It remains to be seen if Merriman can fully recover from his serious knee injury. The fact that the Bolts used their top draft choice on hybrid OLB Larry English suggests some concern.      The Ravens will fall back to Earth in 2009. An older, free agency ravaged defense, and a darth of WRs, will speed their downfall.      The Cowboys have no business being listed in the top 10. Their OL is old, injury prone, and overrated. Those who followed the 2009 draft saw how their silly trade for WR Roy Williams damaged the team. Wade Phillips is a figurehead of coach, taking his marching orders from you know who...and everybody knows it.                  The Titans have fallen, largely due to the loss of DT Albert Hayneswoth. QB Kerry Collins is a year older...and neither he, or his team, will be sneaking up on anybody this season. Nonetheless, their defense and running game still make them formidable.            WHICH BRINGS US TO THE PATRIOTS. Theres' no way that the 2009 offense will rival the 2007 edition. Their WR corp isn't as good, or deep. Their OL remains the same, but two years older. Tom Brady, like Shawne Merriman, is coming off a severe knee injury. Will he ever return to being the Tom Terrific of old? Will missing the the entire 2008 season cause him to be rusty...at least initially?       As for the defense, is it any better than the 2007 unit? That year, the Patriots finished 2nd in the NFL with 47 sacks. That total dropped off dramatically last year. Mike Vrabel, Rodney Harrison, and Asante Samuel are gone, Tedy Bruschi is 36, and Richard Seymour has yet to play to the level of his contract.       But, ILB Jarod Mayo has been added to the mix, as have several young DBs...and a couple of solid veterans. Assuming, as everyone does, that Jason Taylor signs on...that should benefit the pass rush. But, what if Taylor doesn't sign...or signs, but is only a shadow of the player that he once was? Who will rush the passer? Does anybody think that the 2009 Patriots defense is potentially a championship caliber unit??      The Pats, for all their accomplishments, haven't won a championship since 2004.        Thoughts? Heres' the King article: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/index.html?eref=T1            
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    Tex I have to disagree to a small degree on some points...

    As good as the offense was in 2007 one could argue that the "ball control" style of offense that the PAT's used to win at least the first couple of Super Bowls was more efficient or at least more successful.  Pounding the rock with the running game will make us harder to beat in the playoffs, unlike 2007 where we got softer and softer as the season progressed until we fianlly lost it in the big game. 

    Also our offensive line is more improved and Ryan OCallaghan and eventually Seb Vollmer are the reason why.  Of course Light and Kaczur will start the season at tackle but when these two mammoth tackles finally get on the field we will see a much more dominant offensive line.  Bill B sticks by his Vets both because of loyalty and also so he doesn't diminish the vets value as commodities to be traded.  Our two best tackles are sitting on the bench waiting to play mark my words...

    That being said talent wise on offense there isn't much if any drop off and we have a better stable of running backs and tight ends.

    I agree that the D may not match it's sack total from the best years, but then again Pierre Woods, Crable and A Thomas (possibly Taylor?) may be close to as good or better and the D backfield is deeper than years past so I suspect the interception totals will rise. 

    Richard Seymour was as dominant last year as he's ever been, he was a terror at the line of scrimmage and looked like his old self.

    Preseason ranking are garbage because injury is the great equalizer in the league.  If you were to play Maddden Football on your playstation and you would turn off the "injuries" option, the PAT's would consistantly be the overall best rated team over that past ten years so I don't see how this year is any different.  Judging from BB's ability to draft I'd say we just reloaded...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE] As good as the offense was in 2007 one could argue that the "ball control" style of offense that the PAT's used to win at least the first couple of Super Bowls was more efficient or at least more successful.  Pounding the rock with the running game will make us harder to beat in the playoffs, unlike 2007 where we got softer and softer as the season progressed until we fianlly lost it in the big game.

    RESPONSE: A combination of things killed the Pats in that game. They obviously were distracted by the "specter" of spygate...as they played by far their worst game of the season. Their defense couldn't stop a mediocre Giants offense from storming 83 yards for the game winning TD in the final two minutes. But, the main reason for the loss was horrible OL play (for which one must in a large degree credit the Giants defense and coaching staff). The Pats had no problems "pounding the rock" against San Diego in the 2007 AFC title game...in which they ate up the entire 4th quarter via ball-controll, smash-mouth football.    

    Also our offensive line is more improved and Ryan OCallaghan and eventually Seb Vollmer are the reason why.  Of course Light and Kaczur will start the season at tackle but when these two mammoth tackles finally get on the field we will see a much more dominant offensive line.  Bill B sticks by his Vets both because of loyalty and also so he doesn't diminish the vets value as commodities to be traded.  Our two best tackles are sitting on the bench waiting to play mark my words...

    RESPONSE: I hope you're right about Vollmer and O'Callaghan. But, Vollmer is extremely raw. O'Callaghan has not been able to stay on the field, and has had extreme problems with speed rushers.

    That being said talent wise on offense there isn't much if any drop off and we have a better stable of running backs and tight ends.

    RESPONSE: Agreed.

    I agree that the D may not match it's sack total from the best years, but then again Pierre Woods, Crable and A Thomas (possibly Taylor?) may be close to as good or better and the D backfield is deeper than years past so I suspect the interception totals will rise.  Richard Seymour was as dominant last year as he's ever been, he was a terror at the line of scrimmage and looked like his old self.
     
    RESPONSE: The Pats have never been able to replace Willie McGinest. They need to find somebody who can rush the passer.
         True...the retooled secondary should be better.
         Richard Seymour dominant last year? I wish.

    Preseason ranking are garbage because injury is the great equalizer in the league.  If you were to play Maddden Football on your playstation and you would turn off the "injuries" option, the PAT's would consistantly be the overall best rated team over that past ten years so I don't see how this year is any different.

    RESPONSE: What else is there for a football fan to talk about in May...LOL!!

      Judging from BB's ability to draft I'd say we just reloaded...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

         Wozz...I hope you're right. The Pats have had too many "all-mosts" over the past several years. Its' time to get it done.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Pats7393. Show Pats7393's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE]I personally hate it when we are picked to win, i like being the underdog. Not that we can ever be an underdog again lol but still i liked it when everyone would pick against us. You know back when Peyton was the golden boy and the Pats D didnt have what it took to stop him right? And then Ty Law would come out and pick him off 3 times and our D would hold him to 3 points and we would win a championship with all the "experts" left scratching their heads....ah those were the days. Hey Pats so I assume that you were giving the Giants their due respect in the power rankings the year they beat us right?
    Posted by MVPkilla[/QUOTE]

    Yes but I wasn't as comfortable saying it as I am now about the Steelers, as I said it depends how depleted a team gets during the offseason or if their roster is pretty much intact.  The giants lost a few key guys non bigger than MS.  I might have been a bit gun shy then about calling them favorites over the Pats going into the 2008 season.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsChowder. Show PatsChowder's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    Jumping in on this topic late-

    Do they deserve to be number 1?  I'm sorry, but no.  Yes, they have made some fantastic additions and the Super Bowl champs have probably lost more than they have gained (though overall they look fairly similar), but the Patriots are old. The defense is old, the offensive line is starting to age, and Tom Brady is coming off of a significant knee injury that could be the end of the Brady we all know and love.

    They will absolutely be in the mix, but to be ranked number one out of the gate seems a little presumptuous.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

      --  "The defense is old, the offensive line is starting to age, and Tom Brady is comimg off of a significant knee injury that could be the end of the Brady we all know and love." --

    If this is the kind of "buzz" available at PatsChowder.com, thanx -- I'll pass.

    You probably missed it, being so busy with the "buzz" and the tweeting and everything, but the Pats are in the process of getting younger, and not a little bit.

    But seriously, congratulations on that outside-the-box prediction that the Pats will be "in the mix." Be careful out there on that limb all by yourself.



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

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    How about an outsider's perspective. 

    #1 is bs at this time - name the playoff teams that has value. 

    the pats will clearly be in the playoff mix.  I can't see how they don't win their division, but if something happens, I expect them to be no less than a wild card. 

    Brady will be ready to play, but I don't expect you will see Brady in 07 form for at least 4 weeks.  But if they could have him play like they did cassell (and you'd have to believe he'd be more effective at it) they will still win games but maybe by a closer margin.  All of the RB's are there to take the load off Brady for the short term. 

    LB's - I honestly see this as a weakness for the pats.  Thomas and Mayo will be fine, but then who.  Certainly not the 3 to 4 that became so well known during the pats dominating days. 

    CB's - this is most confusing to me.  Lots of you here are looking so forward to the pats being significantly better here, but better than 07.  What are you missing 3 of 4 starters.  Remember - Merriweather did not start until Harrison went down.  Samuel was perfect for Belichick's system.  Hobbs, like him or not, he started every game the last 2 years.  I just don't know if this young unit can be as good as the 07 unit. 

    That said, this is nitpicking.  But better on paper than 07 - please.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from bubthegrub2. Show bubthegrub2's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    RESPONSE: The Pats have never been able to replace Willie McGinest. They need to find somebody who can rush the passer.


    I've been saying this for the last couple years. And it's not simply rushing the opposing QB. Willie used to consistently make the huge defensive plays in the 4th quarter to crush the hopes of an opponents comeback. Especially in January, when the games are generally closer than in the regular season. Tedy Bruschi used to do this also, but age has seemingly caught up with him.


    The defense is old, the offensive line is starting to age, and Tom Brady is coming off of a significant knee injury that could be the end of the Brady we all know and love.


    The defense is not as old as you seem to think. They have promising rookies in Butler and Chung, Merriweather and Mayo look like stars in the making, and young guys like Crable, Wilhite, Guyton, and Bodden who are up and coming. As far as Brady's knee, we'll soon find out. But Tom was never much of a scrambler, he relies on quick decisions and subtle moves to avoid the rush. He should be back as a top 5 QB this season. Look at how Rivers did in 08, and he had four and a half months less to rehab than Brady did.


    CB's - this is most confusing to me.  Lots of you here are looking so forward to the pats being significantly better here, but better than 07.  What are you missing 3 of 4 starters.  Remember - Merriweather did not start until Harrison went down.  Samuel was perfect for Belichick's system.


    Springs and Bodden are both vets who should contribute right away. Both are bigger than Samuel and Hobbs. Plus they have one of the top rated CBs from the draft in Butler. I don't know why you put Merriweather in this discussion, as he's a safety. But Chung added to the mix gives them the versatility they've needed. I'm looking for the pass rush to improve with more safety blitzes, which they are now better staffed to do. And Samuel was a great player, but he was not perfect for this system. If he were he would have stayed instead of going for the huge payday. Not knocking him for that, but part of the "system" is having guys who are hungrier for championships than they are for a few extra bucks.

    All in all, being ranked #1 before training camp starts is not worth much. That and two bucks can get you a gallon of gas! I'm with Taz, I also hate it when they rank NE as the favorite. I usually reserve my judgement until November, when we see how additions pan out and what injuries occur. It seems as though we've finally got the "respect" we've all been complaing about not getting for years. But I agree it's better being the underdog (one "G", not two)! And speaking of underdogg, how can he possibly call his Colts that? They have been considered favorites by at least half the media ever since Manning's third season!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1020us. Show m1020us's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE]How about an outsider's perspective.  #1 is bs at this time - name the playoff teams that has value.  the pats will clearly be in the playoff mix.  I can't see how they don't win their division, but if something happens, I expect them to be no less than a wild card.  Brady will be ready to play, but I don't expect you will see Brady in 07 form for at least 4 weeks.  But if they could have him play like they did cassell (and you'd have to believe he'd be more effective at it) they will still win games but maybe by a closer margin.  All of the RB's are there to take the load off Brady for the short term.  LB's - I honestly see this as a weakness for the pats.  Thomas and Mayo will be fine, but then who.  Certainly not the 3 to 4 that became so well known during the pats dominating days.  CB's - this is most confusing to me.  Lots of you here are looking so forward to the pats being significantly better here, but better than 07.  What are you missing 3 of 4 starters.  Remember - Merriweather did not start until Harrison went down.  Samuel was perfect for Belichick's system.  Hobbs, like him or not, he started every game the last 2 years.  I just don't know if this young unit can be as good as the 07 unit.  That said, this is nitpicking.  But better on paper than 07 - please.
    Posted by underdogg[/QUOTE]

    Actually there is an argument that we did get better now than the 17 team.

    I think, for the most part, that we can all agree that the Pats Offense as good if not possibly better than the 07 team.  Right?

    The Defense, I have been told, was bad in 07....even though they finished in the top 10.....people kept saying that the CB's were not that good and we had no pass rush (just look at the very last game we had in 07 the SB).  Since then, we have gotten rid of our aging and often injured SS (harrison), and our injury prone CB (hobbs), Chadd Scott CB, the oft injured Eugene Wilson FS and the oft injured Randall Gay....replacing them with younger players and some decent veterans....
     
    I understand that the LB position doesn't look much better....but the addition of Mayo replaces Seau, and Vrable and Colvin are gone from this group...we have added some youth in the past drafts that will hopefully fix that problem....

    The DL is virtually the same except it is now healthy and has better depth.

    So to say that this team is better than the 2007 team is not a total stretch....it is an observation.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE]Actually there is an argument that we did get better now than the 2007 team. I think, for the most part, that we can all agree that the Pats Offense as good if not possibly better than the 07 team.  Right?

    RESPONSE: Wrong. The 2007 offense was the highest scoring group of all-time. Tom Brady was 100% healthy. Tom Brady threw 50 TD passes, and Randy Moss hauled in 23 of them...both NFL records. The 2009 OL is 2 years older, Brady has a gimpy knee, and Randy Moss and evin Faulk are two years older.

    The Defense, I have been told, was bad in 07....even though they finished in the top 10.....people kept saying that the CB's were not that good and we had no pass rush (just look at the very last game we had in 07 the SB).  Since then, we have gotten rid of our aging and often injured SS (harrison), and our injury prone CB (hobbs), Chadd Scott CB, the oft injured Eugene Wilson FS and the oft injured Randall Gay....replacing them with younger players and some decent veterans....
     
    RESPONSE: The defense cost the Pats championships in 2006 & 2007 because they couldn't prevent the Colts and Giants from going 80 plus yards on them in the final 2 minutes. That said, I agree with your assertion that the Pats secondary this season will be better. But, that optimism is tempered because there is nobody currently on the roster who can consistently rush the opposing passer. Unless the Pats improve in this area, I don't see them getting to the SB.  

      I understand that the LB position doesn't look much better....but the addition of Mayo replaces Seau, and Vrable and Colvin are gone from this group...we have added some youth in the past drafts that will hopefully fix that problem....
     
    RESPONSE: "...we have added some youth...that will hopefully fix the problem. Doesn't exactly inspire confidence...does it?  

    The DL is virtually the same except it is now healthy and has better depth. So to say that this team is better than the 2007 team is not a total stretch....it is an observation.

    RESPONSE: No, my friend. Its' huge stretch to expect the 2009 offense to be nearly as good as that record setting 2007 wrecking crew. Its' also a stretch because in 2007, the Pats finished second to the Giants in sacks with 47. Their top sackers from 2007 are no longer with the team. Although Vince Redd and Shawn Crable are decent prospects, they don't appear to  be anywhere near ready to match the production of Mike Vrabel and Rosevelt Colvin, in 2007.  

    Posted by m1020us[/QUOTE]

         My friend, I hope you're right on with your optimistic prognostication. But, questions regarding the ability of the 2009 defense to put any type of consistent pressure on opposing QBs greatly concerns me.    
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    Given the plethora (Si', El Guapo, you have a plethora) of safeties on the roster, one can't help but wonder if Belichick is hatching a plot to bring pressure on the qb from non-traditional sources.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    Mike - interesting point.  Otherwise all of them cannot be kept, can they?

    Speaking of top tier teams, I will say this.  While I believe all top tiers will remain top tier, other than Brady coming back - which I believe will include 4 sub (brady) par games due to reacclimation - there really is not positive excitement from any of the teams. 

    Its the mid level teams who are getting better. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE] Speaking of top tier teams, I will say this.  While I believe all top tiers will remain top tier, other than Brady coming back - which I believe will include 4 sub (brady) par games due to reacclimation - there really is not positive excitement from any of the teams.  Its the mid level teams who are getting better. 
    Posted by underdogg[/QUOTE]

         I disagree. The Philadelphia Eagles had a fabulous off-season. LT Jason Peters stabilizes their OL, and WR Jeremy Maclin is an exciting player with game breaking capabilities.


         I also think that the NY Giants really bolstered their defensive front 7 in the off-season. Both they and Philly should be tough.


         RB Donald Brown is going to be an exciting addition to your Colts...and watching how Percy Harvin progresses in Minnesota should be interesting.     

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

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    TP - I agree with you regarding the Eagles.  The others, yes good additions but not noise making additions. 

    the Vikes - yes. but they were (are) a second tier team.

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

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE]IMO, last year if Brady didn't get hurt the Pats would have been in the Super Bowl hunt and they might have won their 4th trophy. I think Brady will be a lot healthier than some pundits on this board since the injury happened in week one. It's not like Carson Palmer where it happened at the end of the season. Receiving worse maybe, maybe not you could make a good argument that Galloway even at his age is better than a Stallworth and Gaffney. Then you throw in some wildcards in Tate and Lewis.  TE will be better than 2007 with Baker and maybe Alex Smith. The running game could be better than the 2007 committee with the additon of Taylor. Offensive line about the same. I don't think they will duplicate the 2007 offensive numbers but next year this will be the best offense that takes the field. Defense, Warren stays heathly this season and they have their front 3 all year that will be an improvement. Linebacking was a mess last year with injuries, so a healthier unit there could mean an improvement. Plus Mayo if he improves his game even more and a player like Crable, Woods, or Guyton step up more could make a very formidable front 7. Defensive backfield I'll say right now will be far better than last year. I think it might even be good enough with the FA and draft additions that we could see a lot more safety blitzing to get added pressure on the QB's. In 2009 I see the Steelers running with the Pats for the top spot in the AFC. NFC right now I like Philadelphia, but I don't think they are as good as the Pats or Steelers at this point in time.
    Posted by Wizardsjag[/QUOTE]
     Not with a Db core that had Ellis 'toast' Hobbs & Delta O'neal on it, sorry.

    BTW- didnt you get a DB from DETROIT of all places?

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

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    1-Healthy Chargers - Rivers is now a force. The wait is over.
    2-Steelers tough d
    3-Pats, no credence on Brady's knee possibly makin' him less mobile?
    I think yes & questionable Dbs, bigtime IMO
    4-Atlanta if defense improves these guys are sleepers
    5-Baltimore, if Flacco is not flagellant ( 2 playoff wins turn into 4?)
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from pats-fan-2007. Show pats-fan-2007's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    I hate to say it, but our defense has been poor ever since Dan Pees took over.

    For 3 years in a row, our D-Fence could not make a stop to win a big game:

    Denver, Indy (man that game hurt), and of course the Giants.

    The fact that Hobbs and O'Neal are gone and Sanders will be replaced by Chung....automatically upgrades our D-backs.

    I believe that Wheatly would have eventually started, barring the injury. He should finght for a starting spot, and is a definite upgrade.

    Merriweather started to break out last season, with (I believe) 4 interceptions and a few more he should have had (especially the one in the SB).

    Brace upgrades our D-Line and Crable will be better than Vrabel was last year.

    I think that's fair analysis.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE]1-Healthy Chargers - Rivers is now a force. The wait is over. 2-Steelers tough d 3-Pats, no credence on Brady's knee possibly makin' him less mobile? I think yes & questionable Dbs, bigtime IMO 4-Atlanta if defense improves these guys are sleepers 5-Baltimore, if Flacco is not flagellant ( 2 playoff wins turn into 4?)
    Posted by jbolted[/QUOTE]

         1.) Chargers: Sorry, my friend. Norv simply isn't the guy to take the Bolts to the promised land. But, to his credit, he has done wonders with Rivers. The Chargers should have parted ways with LT in the offseason. His best days are clearly behind him...and that makes his incessive whining that much harder to take. Dumb draft trade last year with the Pats to acquire Jacob Hester really hurt them. That 47th overall pick could have been used on some badly needed OL help;

         2.) Steelers: Everything seemed to break right for the Steelers last year. They should go undefeated this year in the fairly weak AFC North...and should have a great shot at repeating as AFC champs;

         3.) Pats
    : Brady's knee, lack of anyone who can rush the passer, and a sometimes shaky OL are causes for deep concern. I don't see the Patriots, as currently constituted, winning another SB in 2009.

         4.) Atlanta
    : Lacks the defense necessary to be a serious threat to either the Giants or the Eagles;

         5.) Baltimore
    : They're due for a fall...which will make the Steelers' road to the playoffs that much easier. Their aging, free agency ravaged defense won't be nearly as effective it was last year. Joe Flacco has no WRs to throw to.   

         So...who wins it all in 2009? I like the survivor of the NFC East. The AFC is wide open, with the usual suspects...Pittsburgh, San Diego, Indy, and the Pats, vying for the AFC title. Whichever of these teams stays the healthiest should play in the SB.  

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

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE]     1.) Chargers: Sorry, my friend. Norv simply isn't the guy to take the Bolts to the promised land. But, to his credit, he has done wonders with Rivers. The Chargers should have parted ways with LT in the offseason. His best days are clearly behind him...and that makes his incessive whining that much harder to take. Dumb draft trade last year with the Pats to acquire Jacob Hester really hurt them. That 47th overall pick could have been used on some badly needed OL help;      2.) Steelers: Everything seemed to break right for the Steelers last year. They should go undefeated this year in the fairly weak AFC North...and should have a great shot at repeating as AFC champs ;      3.) Pats : Brady's knee, lack of anyone who can rush the passer, and a sometimes shaky OL are causes for deep concern. I don't see the Patriots, as currently constituted, winning another SB in 2009 .      4.) Atlanta : Lacks the defense necessary to be a serious threat to either the Giants or the Eagles;      5.) Baltimore : They're due for a fall...which will make the Steelers' road to the playoffs that much easier. Their aging, free agency ravaged defense won't be nearly as effective it was last year. Joe Flacco has no WRs to throw to.         So...who wins it all in 2009? I like the survivor of the NFC East. The AFC is wide open, with the usual suspects...Pittsburgh, San Diego, Indy, and the Pats, vying for the AFC title. Whichever of these teams stays the healthiest should play in the SB.       
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]
     
    Norv has the same amount of playoff wins as BB the last two years.

    LT, while injured, gained 1100 yards, 400 more than any Patriot.
     
    Hester only played in the last six games other then special teams. He too is getting better with more snaps. He is very good at catches passes out of the backfield.

    The Chargers will lead the NFL in points scored this year or be at least top 3.
    Rivera in his 1st full year spells trouble for all others in the Afc. HEALTHY SD WINS IT ALL   
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from bobomul. Show bobomul's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    From Tex Pat:

    I understand that the LB position doesn't look much better....but the addition of Mayo replaces Seau, and Vrable and Colvin are gone from this group...we have added some youth in the past drafts that will hopefully fix that problem....
     
    RESPONSE: "...we have added some youth...that will hopefully fix the problem. Doesn't exactly inspire confidence...does it?  

    The DL is virtually the same except it is now healthy and has better depth. So to say that this team is better than the 2007 team is not a total stretch....it is an observation.

    RESPONSE: No, my friend. Its' huge stretch to expect the 2009 offense to be nearly as good as that record setting 2007 wrecking crew. Its' also a stretch because in 2007, the Pats finished second to the Giants in sacks with 47. Their top sackers from 2007 are no longer with the team. Although Vince Redd and Shawn Crable are decent prospects, they don't appear to  be anywhere near ready to match the production of Mike Vrabel and Rosevelt Colvin, in 2007.

    Obviously repeating the offensive production of 2007 is a very difficult tastk.  But they don't need to be the same offensive juggernot. I'd settle for merely being the #1 offensive team in the NFL (points/balance) in 2009. 

    On defense, the tallent and depth of the secondary is clearly improved over past seasons.   Improvement in 3 of the 4 spots (Asante the lone exception).

    On the front 7 I think an inffusion of youth is welcome.  You may not have a lot of confidence in Crabble/Guyton/Redd/Woods/etc but good teams need to replenish their veterans with draft choices.  All of the previous Pats championchip teams had significant contributions from young players and unheralded free agents. 

    Can they find a pass rush?  Last year's sack deficit was not only due to the OLB's poor production but also that of the DEs not named Seymour. 

    In the 2 previous seasons (2006-2007) Warren and Green combined for 25.5 sacks. Last year they combined for just 4.  Neither are old and both are healthy coming into the season.  No reason they both shouldn't be at 4-5 sacks each.


    The OLBs combined for 18.5 sacks in 2006 and 16.5 in 2007 but just 10 in 2008.  Well, AD had 5 in a shortened season and looks to be able to get 8-10 in a full season (if healthy).  TBC got 5.5 of the 2006 total as a part time player and could fulfil that role again.   Is it reasonable to expect that Crable/Redd/Woods could get 6-7 combined from from the 3 of them?  As rushing the passer is what Crable brought here to do, I think it is.  And if they struggle in preseason, maybe BB will bring back Rosevelt Colvin (still only 31 years old) to add more compitiion.

    In all, I do think the 09 Pat's D will be better than the 07 Pats D and the 09 Pat's O will be better than the 09 compition's O.

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

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    If the refs are dirty again this year, euthanize them on the spot.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE]  RESPONSE: A combination of things killed the Pats in that game. They obviously were distracted by the "specter" of spygate...as they played by far their worst game of the season. Their defense couldn't stop a mediocre Giants offense from storming 83 yards for the game winning TD in the final two minutes. But, the main reason for the loss was horrible OL play (for which one must in a large degree credit the Giants defense and coaching staff). The Pats had no problems "pounding the rock" against San Diego in the 2007 AFC title game...in which they ate up the entire 4th quarter via ball-controll, smash-mouth football. 
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    Responses to the response -

    I'm not sure I buy the Spygate excuse...  Superbowls are about avoiding distraction and BB does it as well as anyone.  I agree the defense was very thin due to injury and age but they gave as good as they got and it was the offense that was pathetic.

    If they beat San Diego by pounding the rock then why not the Giants?  I also don't subscribe to the offensive line being the biggest problem even though they were made the scapegoats for the national media to pick on and parrot the same drivel over and over; they were hung out to dry by Josh McDaniel’s who's play calling was horrid, every play had Brady dropping back into a 5 step drop leaving him susceptible to hits... again, a little dinking and dunking as well as a heavy dose of running the ball would have kept our weakened D off the field and controlled the time of possession, instead we tried to pass our way to victory against a team that thrives on rushing the passer.  Bill B was too busy trying to keep a patchwork D together to even watch what was happening on offense...


     
    RESPONSE: I hope you're right about Vollmer and O'Callaghan. But, Vollmer is extremely raw. O'Callaghan has not been able to stay on the field, and has had extreme problems with speed rushers.

    Vollmer is raw but the talent is obviously there, he is the more likely of the two to be a bust but I think he came to the right team.  Everybody expects the PAT's to draft an offensive lineman with a high pick but BB has built his line with late rounders and been successful at it.  The picks on Vollmer and O’Callaghan were as high as any he has used on the line, the lone exception being Mankins.

    I said O’Callaghan had been injury prone in college not the Pros; he has been healthy and solid as a pro.  He played in 11 games as a rookie and started 6 games at right tackle for a PAT's offensive line that nearly reached 2000 yards rushing and only allowed one sack in the time he was starting.

    Here is part of the game logs from that season with him starting at right tackle, I don't know where you get your information that he struggles with rushers, if anyone struggles with speed rushers its Matt Light:



    Denver (9/24):
    Started at right tackle and was a member of an offensive line that did not allow a sack despite 55 pass attempts.  Buffalo (10/22): Started at right tackle ... Pounced on a Tom Brady fumble midway through the third quarter. Minnesota (10/30): Started at right tackle ... Was a member of an offensive front that gave Tom Brady enough time to throw for 372 yards and tie his career high with four touchdown tosses.
     

    In 2007's record setting offense he played in 15 regular season games with one start at right tackle, he didn't start or even play at tackle during the playoffs and Super Bowl except for special teams and the O Line struggled... coincidence..?


    RESPONSE: The Pats have never been able to replace Willie McGinest. They need to find somebody who can rush the passer.

    I agree nobody has been as good as Willie but we have put up some good team sack totals since he left, we were deeper and had more people who could pressure the QB than when he played here.  Willie was also the third overall pick in his draft class and a very special player, many PAT's fans will never know how good they had it with Willie Mac. 

        
    Richard Seymour dominant last year? I wish.


    Last season Seymour had 8 sacks playing at end in a 3/4 alignment, that total tied his single season high sack record he set in 2003 to go with 52 tackles, a total he has only eclipsed twice in his career.  He constantly demanded double teams and was week in week out our best defender; for you to say that makes me wonder what games you were watching?  That he didn't make the Pro Bowl was a disgrace and just show what a popularity contest it is.  Tex this season I want you to focus more on the trenches... lol

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

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    Yes..... Yes they do moving on now.......
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE]Responses to the response - I'm not sure I buy the Spygate excuse... 

    RESPONSE: Excuse? Who said I'm making excuses for the Pats? Regardless of the distraction, they still should have beaten the Giants. But, theres' no denying that the Specter/Tomase BS on the eve of the SB was a major distraction. Both players and coaches admitted to that...saying that their preparation was thrown off due to having to deal with that trumped up lie. 

    I agree the defense was very thin due to injury and age but they gave as good as they got and it was the offense that was pathetic.

    RESPONSE: The OL was pathetic. Furthermore, have you ever seen a Pats game in which the coaching staff was so ill prepared and flat? Clearly, the spygate BS was a distraction for them. 

    If they beat San Diego by pounding the rock then why not the Giants? 

    RESPONSE: Because they Giants had a better team than the Chargers. They had the best defense in the game that season. Not enough credit is given to  the Giants for playing their best, and winning that game. Had it not been for a season ending injuries to Osi Umenyiora (knee), and the self destruction of Plaxico Burress, the Giants would have repeated as SB champs in 2009.

    I don 't subscribe to the offensive line being the biggest problem even though they were made the scapegoats for the national media to pick on and parrot the same drivel over and over; they were hung out to dry by Josh McDaniel’s who's play calling was horrid, every play had Brady dropping back into a 5 step drop leaving him susceptible to hits... again, a little dinking and dunking as well as a heavy dose of running the ball would have kept our weakened D off the field and controlled the time of possession, instead we tried to pass our way to victory against a team that thrives on rushing the passer.  Bill B was too busy trying to keep a patchwork D together to even watch what was happening on offense...
     
    RESPONSE: Again, there is no question that the coaching staff was distracted by the spygate BS. But, are you seriously giving the OL a pass? It was terrible!! Their play was reminiscent of that December of 2006 pounding they took in Miami, in a 21-0 loss. Do  you remember that game...when Jason Taylor and company pushed the Pats OL all over the field?
         Josh McDaniels did try to incorporate some screens into the offense. But, so dominant was the Giants' pass-rush, that Brady didn't even have enough time to execute a screen. I recall one play in particular, in which the Pats ran a middle screen for Maroney. Brady had no time to get him the ball. If he had, Maroney had two blockers ahead of him and nothing but green. 

    Vollmer is raw but the talent is obviously there, he is the more likely of the two to be a bust but I think he came to the right team.  Everybody expects the PAT's to draft an offensive lineman with a high pick but BB has built his line with late rounders and been successful at it. The picks on Vollmer and O'Callaghan were as high as any he has used on the OL, the lone exception being Mankins. 

    RESPONSE: Lets hope that Donte Scanecchia can work his magic on him. Incidently, if O'Callaghan and Kaczur are so good, why did the Pats reach for Vollmer at #58? 
         Mankins was a low first round pick, and Matt Light was a high second round pick.  


    I said O’Callaghan had been injury prone in college not the Pros; he has been healthy and solid as a pro.  He played in 11 games as a rookie and started 6 games at right tackle for a PAT's offensive line that nearly reached 2000 yards rushing and only allowed one sack in the time he was starting. Here is part of the game logs from that season with him starting at right tackle, I don't know where you get your information that he struggles with rushers, if anyone struggles with speed rushers its Matt Light: Denver (9/24): Started at right tackle and was a member of an offensive line that did not allow a sack despite 55 pass attempts.  Buffalo (10/22): Started at right tackle ... Pounced on a Tom Brady fumble midway through the third quarter. Minnesota (10/30): Started at right tackle ... Was a member of an offensive front that gave Tom Brady enough time to throw for 372 yards and tie his career high with four touchdown tosses.   In 2007's record setting offense he played in 15 regular season games with one start at right tackle, he didn't start or even play at tackle during the playoffs and Super Bowl except for special teams and the O Line struggled... coincidence..?

    RESPONSE: Surely you jest. O'Callaghan has been hurt quite often. He's a slow footed, non-athletic, drive blocker. If hes' as good as you claim, why hasn't he been unable to beat out the very average Nick Kaczur? 

    I agree nobody has been as good as Willie but we have put up some good team sack totals since he left, we were deeper and had more people who could pressure the QB than when he played here.  Willie was also the third overall pick in his draft class and a very special player, many PAT's fans will never know how good they had it with Willie Mac. 

    RESPONSE: "We are deeper and have more people that can pressure the QB then when Willie McGinest was here." Really? Who are these "people"? The Pats do seem to have lots of quantity, but not too much quality. 
         A bit nit-picky, but McGinest was the 4th player selected overall in the 1994 draft (yes, its' that long ago), not the 3rd...and it took several years for Big Willie to develop as a player. The three players taken ahead of him were Dan "Big Daddy" Wilkerson (a bust), Hall of Fame RB Marshall Faulk, and freshman Congressman Heath Shuler (a Matthew Stafford QB clone-who was one of the worst draft busts in NFL history).  


           Last season Seymour had 8 sacks playing at end in a 3/4 alignment, that total tied his single season high sack record he set in 2003 to go with 52 tackles, a total he has only eclipsed twice in his career.  He constantly demanded double teams and was week in week out our best defender; for you to say that makes me wonder what games you were watching?  That he didn't make the Pro Bowl was a disgrace and just show what a popularity contest it is.  Tex this season I want you to focus more on the trenches... lol

    RESPONSE: Here, you may have a point. A 3-4 DE has a rather thankless, unglamorous job. Perhaps his efforts didn't shine through because the Pats had no one to take advantage of the constant double-teaming against him.   

    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

          As I stated previously, I hope that your rosy outlook for the 2009 Pats is right on the money. Its' been 5 years since their last championship. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonBobBlowhard. Show BostonBobBlowhard's posts

    Re: Do Patriots Deserve to Be Favored to Win SB?

    [QUOTE]     Peter King has written an article for SI, picking the top NFL teams, from 1-32. He has placed the New England Patriots at #1, followed by the Steelers, Giants, Bears (yes...da Bears), Colts, Eagles, Chargers, Ravens, Cowboys, and Titans.      If I were a Steelers fan, I would take this as a great insult. After all, didn't the Black & Gold crush the Cassel led Patriots in Foxboro, on their way to winning the 2008 season championship? Yet, despite have their SB winning team  returning almost completely intact, their getting dissed;      Giants fans will point back to the 2007 season SB...and the fact that their 2009 defense, and running game, may, in fact, be deeper and better, than the 2007 version.      As for the Bears...its' a joke that they have been included by King as one of the NFL's top teams.      The Colts are always in the hunt. Last year, cracks were beginning to show, as injuries infiltrated both their offensive and defensive lines. Marvin Harrison is gone, and Joe Addai has showed signs of wear and tear. The selection of RB Donald Brown should improve the Colts running game and screen pass attack. Nonetheless, the lack of a deep threat, that was Harrison, will make it less formidable. Furthermore, how much will they miss Tony Dungy?      The Eagles, based on their great off-season, should be a threat. Their defense is solid. The addition of LT Jason Peters will fortify their OL. Young WRs Deshawn Jackson are Jeremy Maclin are game breakers...and rookie RB LeSean McCoy should allow them to take some of the load off the fabulous Brian Westbrook.      The Chargers have a first rate QB in Philip Rivers. But, their OL is not nearly what it was in 2006...and neither is LaDainian Tomlinson. As we saw last year, Shawne Merriman is the key to their defense. It remains to be seen if Merriman can fully recover from his serious knee injury. The fact that the Bolts used their top draft choice on hybrid OLB Larry English suggests some concern.      The Ravens will fall back to Earth in 2009. An older, free agency ravaged defense, and a darth of WRs, will speed their downfall.      The Cowboys have no business being listed in the top 10. Their OL is old, injury prone, and overrated. Those who followed the 2009 draft saw how their silly trade for WR Roy Williams damaged the team. Wade Phillips is a figurehead of coach, taking his marching orders from you know who...and everybody knows it.                  The Titans have fallen, largely due to the loss of DT Albert Hayneswoth. QB Kerry Collins is a year older...and neither he, or his team, will be sneaking up on anybody this season. Nonetheless, their defense and running game still make them formidable.            WHICH BRINGS US TO THE PATRIOTS. Theres' no way that the 2009 offense will rival the 2007 edition. Their WR corp isn't as good, or deep. Their OL remains the same, but two years older. Tom Brady, like Shawne Merriman, is coming off a severe knee injury. Will he ever return to being the Tom Terrific of old? Will missing the the entire 2008 season cause him to be rusty...at least initially?       As for the defense, is it any better than the 2007 unit? That year, the Patriots finished 2nd in the NFL with 47 sacks. That total dropped off dramatically last year. Mike Vrabel, Rodney Harrison, and Asante Samuel are gone, Tedy Bruschi is 36, and Richard Seymour has yet to play to the level of his contract.       But, ILB Jarod Mayo has been added to the mix, as have several young DBs...and a couple of solid veterans. Assuming, as everyone does, that Jason Taylor signs on...that should benefit the pass rush. But, what if Taylor doesn't sign...or signs, but is only a shadow of the player that he once was? Who will rush the passer? Does anybody think that the 2009 Patriots defense is potentially a championship caliber unit??      The Pats, for all their accomplishments, haven't won a championship since 2004.        Thoughts? Heres' the King article: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/index.html?eref=T1            
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    Peter King is often wrong and never in doubt. The other media types kiss the ring and call him an "expert", yet I bet the predictions of the people on this board every year are more accurate than his. Another version of "Dr. Z". How do these charlatans get these jobs and be treated as "experts", paid millions to tell me nothing of value?
     

Share