Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

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

    Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    With the latest news about Gronk do the Pats look for a dependable starter in case he is never dependable? The offense has been changing since the two TEs got here and I expect more changes in this direction - 2 and 3 TEs helping both the running and passing games. But Gronk is really a critical piece. Without a superior blocker who is also a superior receiver it is not as formidable. I think his loss in big playoff games the last two years is one key reason for the O flops. It shows how much the O relies on him being healthy. So while we can hope he becomes reliable do we look for a second choice while we hope he gets it together? If so do we look to the draft?

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    I am not saying he WONT be there. But if you follow BB you know he hates to go into a season with the basics not truly covered. This O is now built around 2 TEs one being Gronk. He is not so easily replaced. But BB will try to be ready in case. Maybe he thinks Ballard is good enough. Maybe not.

     

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    With the latest news about Gronk do the Pats look for a dependable starter in case he is never dependable? The offense has been changing since the two TEs got here and I expect more changes in this direction - 2 and 3 TEs helping both the running and passing games. But Gronk is really a critical piece. Without a superior blocker who is also a superior receiver it is not as formidable. I think his loss in big playoff games the last two years is one key reason for the O flops. It shows how much the O relies on him being healthy. So while we can hope he becomes reliable do we look for a second choice while we hope he gets it together? If so do we look to the draft?



    I have speculated this is why Fells has not been released. Gronk insurance. Might see free agency activity pick up after this week as well....Dennerd decision this week.....Gronk will be operated again.....Edelman decision comes to a head (so I hear). Once these issues are resolved Pats hopefully move on some DL help

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

     

    With the latest news about Gronk do the Pats look for a dependable starter in case he is never dependable? The offense has been changing since the two TEs got here and I expect more changes in this direction - 2 and 3 TEs helping both the running and passing games. But Gronk is really a critical piece. Without a superior blocker who is also a superior receiver it is not as formidable. I think his loss in big playoff games the last two years is one key reason for the O flops. It shows how much the O relies on him being healthy. So while we can hope he becomes reliable do we look for a second choice while we hope he gets it together? If so do we look to the draft?

     



    I have speculated this is why Fells has not been released. Gronk insurance. Might see free agency activity pick up after this week as well....Dennerd decision this week.....Gronk will be operated again.....Edelman decision comes to a head (so I hear). Once these issues are resolved Pats hopefully move on some DL help

     



    While you may be right about Fells my question is a bigger one... do you look for a potential starting TE? Fells is just depth and makes sense only as a part time player, not an important piece to the O.

     

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    I would think Ballard and Hern start with Fells and Hooma depth 

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

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

    With only 5 picks there is little chance they will use one on a TE....maybe sign an undrafted FA TE ortwo, yes, but certainly not one of their top 3 picks, unless the medical reports are much worse than they are letting on....but I doubt it...

     

    Besides....who could they draft to give the team what a healthy Gronk gives them? Anyone in the NFL do what he does? ...Not really...if he doesn't play they loose a whole bunch in terms of Off. schemes and philiosophy....Hernandez doesn't give you what Gronk does, their skills are vastly different.




    A quick look at the TEs this year in the draft and I have to agree.

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    I would think Ballard and Hern start with Fells and Hooma depth 



    That makes sense. However, what would the offense look like with Hern as your slot, Danny the flanker, Ballard and Gronk as you inline te's, and possibly sanders, hopkins, Rogers playing outside? That sounds nice to me, but if Gronk isn't in that mix, it really weakens the lineup . Now, what happens if we drafted eiffert to spell Gronk if out. He is an excellent receiving TE and a decent blocker. when Gronk returns, and even assumes he misses no time, eiffertb could line up outwide, in the slot or flanker and now you have 3, 6'6" guys on the field who can catch And block. 

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    I would think Ballard and Hern start with Fells and Hooma depth 

     



    That makes sense. However, what would the offense look like with Hern as your slot, Danny the flanker, Ballard and Gronk as you inline te's, and possibly sanders, hopkins, Rogers playing outside? That sounds nice to me, but if Gronk isn't in that mix, it really weakens the lineup . Now, what happens if we drafted eiffert to spell Gronk if out. He is an excellent receiving TE and a decent blocker. when Gronk returns, and even assumes he misses no time, eiffertb could line up outwide, in the slot or flanker and now you have 3, 6'6" guys on the field who can catch And block. 

     



    Eifert is NOT a decent blocker as an inline TE. He cant do that. He is a different type of player. Wont work. Do not try this at home. It will blow up. But if you want him to play the Hern role that is different.

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    Do we know if Herman can/can't play?

     
  12. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    I would think Ballard and Hern start with Fells and Hooma depth 

     



    That makes sense. However, what would the offense look like with Hern as your slot, Danny the flanker, Ballard and Gronk as you inline te's, and possibly sanders, hopkins, Rogers playing outside? That sounds nice to me, but if Gronk isn't in that mix, it really weakens the lineup . Now, what happens if we drafted eiffert to spell Gronk if out. He is an excellent receiving TE and a decent blocker. when Gronk returns, and even assumes he misses no time, eiffertb could line up outwide, in the slot or flanker and now you have 3, 6'6" guys on the field who can catch And block. 

     

     



    Eifert is NOT a decent blocker as an inline TE. He cant do that. He is a different type of player. Wont work. Do not try this at home. It will blow up. But if you want him to play the Hern role that is different.

     



    A snippet from a scouting report on eifert below. Although not the blocker Gronk or Ballard are, he is decent and improving. 

    "Eifert is an NFL-ready pass catcher. He has good speed running down the middle seam with excellent hands. Eifert is fearless leaping in the middle of the field to make tough catches despite knowing that massive hits are coming his direction. He showed real toughness for the Fighting Irish. Eifert is very good on third down to help move the chains. He gains separation on linebackers and is too big for defensive backs. Eifert should be a real contributor in the passing game early in his NFL career. 

    Eifert made a lot of improvements in his run blocking for 2012, including added strength and improved technique. He made real strides in his final season. Eifert needs to continue that in the NFL, especially if he's drafted into a power-man scheme."

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    Ballard is enough but that makes the wide receiver need much greater.

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    I think part of the worry with Gronk is that he won't be participating in any off season type of traing with his arm in a sling. Then he will be coming back (if all goes well...and that's a big if) until right at the start of the season - that would mean he wouldn't of played football since the last time he hurt his arm. That will have to be weighing heavily on his mind.

    It's a concern...not a panic, yet.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    Kevin Boss is availible! Herman was a decent TE at Iowa but not Gronk level. Just say no to Shockey!

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    we still have Hern, Ballard, Fells and Hooman. do u think we need more?

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    Ballard Career numbers...

    38 Receptions, 604 yards, 4 touchdowns.

     

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    Bring back WELKER!  

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from tenace4life. Show tenace4life's posts

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to NOISE's comment:

    Bring back WELKER!  




    Gone!  Get over it!

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    I would think Ballard and Hern start with Fells and Hooma depth 

     



    That makes sense. However, what would the offense look like with Hern as your slot, Danny the flanker, Ballard and Gronk as you inline te's, and possibly sanders, hopkins, Rogers playing outside? That sounds nice to me, but if Gronk isn't in that mix, it really weakens the lineup . Now, what happens if we drafted eiffert to spell Gronk if out. He is an excellent receiving TE and a decent blocker. when Gronk returns, and even assumes he misses no time, eiffertb could line up outwide, in the slot or flanker and now you have 3, 6'6" guys on the field who can catch And block. 

     

     

     

    hey lifer,

    it would be a wealth of talent if we got eifert too.

    i must say your post brought a smile to my face posing hopkins and rogers in the lineup; the 2 wrs ive been posting this whole offseason for the pats :)

    re the te thogh, if bb had shored up positions (instead of drafting the same one over and over and missing) we might could adfford a luxury like eifert. now, i think it would be a mistake. though with bb' spropensity of grabbing tes you never know. further note, in this crazed scenario of the killer tes., we need wrs on the field (ideally big ones like rogers)who can separate wide. wihtout that good des play the middle of the field and jam the short  routes. 

    note, i dont know how youd have sanders AND hopkins and rogers unless you spent all 3 picks on wr. i dont think that'd be wise

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    Do we know if Herman can/can't play?



    hes very marginal as a receiver.

    ive seen some nfl evaluators also say he was nto good blocking. with no way to follow him on plays watchign network, i thought he was decent at blocking.

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to bredbru's comment:

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

     

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    I would think Ballard and Hern start with Fells and Hooma depth 

     



    That makes sense. However, what would the offense look like with Hern as your slot, Danny the flanker, Ballard and Gronk as you inline te's, and possibly sanders, hopkins, Rogers playing outside? That sounds nice to me, but if Gronk isn't in that mix, it really weakens the lineup . Now, what happens if we drafted eiffert to spell Gronk if out. He is an excellent receiving TE and a decent blocker. when Gronk returns, and even assumes he misses no time, eiffertb could line up outwide, in the slot or flanker and now you have 3, 6'6" guys on the field who can catch And block. 

     

     

     

    hey lifer,

    it would be a wealth of talent if we got eifert too.

    i must say your post brought a smile to my face posing hopkins and rogers in the lineup; the 2 wrs ive been posting this whole offseason for the pats :)

    re the te thogh, if bb had shored up positions (instead of drafting the same one over and over and missing) we might could adfford a luxury like eifert. now, i think it would be a mistake. though with bb' spropensity of grabbing tes you never know. further note, in this crazed scenario of the killer tes., we need wrs on the field (ideally big ones aka rogers)who can separate wide. wihtout tht good des play the niddle of th field and jam teh short wr routes. 

    note, i dont know how youd have sanders AND hopkins and rogers unless yo spent all 3 picks on wr. idotn think thatd be wise



    Yes, meant to put an "or" between sanders, Rogers and Hopkins..

     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Is Ballard enough for life without gronk?

    In response to RidingWithTheKingII's comment:

    In response to tenace4life's comment:

     

    In response to NOISE's comment:

     

    Bring back WELKER!  

     




    Gone!  Get over it!

     

     




    It's become embarrassing.

     



    incorrect grammar

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share