What is with this roster?

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

         The problem with this roster is an overall lack of talent at certain positions, primarily the secondary, and DT. Poor pass defense is what has prevented this team from winning championships over the past several years. All those BB draft misses with high round draft picks is the main culprit. Again:

    1.) 2007: FS Brandon Meriweather, 24th pick overall;

    2.) 2008: CB Terrence Wheatley, 62nd overall, and Jonathan Wilhite, 129th overall;

    3.) 2009: SS Patrick Chung, 34th overall, CB Darius Butler, 41st overall;

    4.) 2011: CB Ras-I Dowling, 33rd overall pick;

    5.) 2012: DB Tavon Wilson, 48th overall pick.

         Six of the above seven named DBs were high draft choices taken no later than the second round. As a direct result of these busts, BB has had to find players through free agency or in the later rounds to fill out the backline of his defense. BB's big free agency addition was 33 year old has been Adrian Wilson. 

         At DT, BB has not addressed the position since 2004. Other than bust Ron Brace, selected 40th overall in 2009, and DT Kareem Brown, selected with the 127th overall pick in 2007, I can't remember when BB has used a 4th round pick or better on this position. He's had to spend so many high draft resources in hopes of building up his weak secondary, that this position has suffered. Now, pro-bowl D Vince Wilfolk is 32 years old, and the remaining of the Pats' DTs were obtained off the free agency scrap heap. Poor-average DT play means no interior pass rush...which is the best way to disrupt a passing attack. 

         I hate to keep saying this, but BB's poor drafting has cost the Pats dearly. 

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    Apparently you guys missed it, this thread ended a few pages back. Whoever wants to revive it, answer Wozzy's post. If our roster is agreeably better then 2011(when we went to the super bowl and barely lost), then how in the FK is BB not a great GM?


    "Defense Wins Championships"
    M



    Apparently you missed it.  If the thread ended, there wouldn't be any subsequent pages.

    Going back to that thread ending quote, however, I am sure I disagree.  In order to win, the team needs to score.  It's #1 weapon is the QB and balls in the air.  Let's review who's catching them:

    "Amendola, Dobson, Boyce, Thompkins, Simms vs. Wes, Chad Johnson, Branch = Better

    Tight end... lets just say you don't have a serial killer on your team and we have Sudfeld = Better"

    1.  Suggesting that the injury guy, three rookies and a practice squader are better than Welker alone is nuts.

    2.  In 2011, Gronkowski had 17 TDs and 1,300+ yards.  He's out to start the season.  Hernandez had a good year.  Instead, this year we get to watch an undrafted rookie.  How on Earth is that "better"?

    The receiving corps may end up better, but right now, it's almost all question marks.  That's not doom and gloom.  That's reality. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from APpats22. Show APpats22's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to APpats22's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Lol Sudfeld is better than Hernandez huh? Just a few months ago all of the eternal optimists and super fans had Hernandez forgetting who Welker was. Now that he's gone a kid who has never played a real game is better than him.

    Lets try and wait a few games.

    2+2=5

     

     

     




    +1 people are settig this kid up for failure if he doesn't meet their unreasonable expectations. He's still a rookie.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Kid, that''s PHat Rex/Bustchise, etc.

     

    He's jealous. His teams WRs and TEs blow. Stephen Hill is a 2nd rd bust for them already and we have 3 WRs as rookies that look light years above Hill already.

    Sudfeld is just the cherry on top with Hernandez not here anymore.  No one is saying he will be as good as Hernandez at all. They're talking about that kind of a role being addressed so quickly in terms of Sudfeld being used similarly.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    It's not the same person...and if it was who cares? Bungalow-Bill talks actual football when he's not fighting with you. Bustchise doesn't really.

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to SilverSun's comment:

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Amendola (injury prone)
    Edelman (7th rounder that plays like a 7th rounder)
    Boyce (rookie)
    Tompkins (rookie)
    Dobson(rookie)
    Slater (hasn't done anything...ever)
    Sudfeld (rookie)
    Hoomanawanui (?)

    This is what the greatest GM of all time, with $10,000,000 in cap room, has given Brady.  If I were Tom Brady, I'd demand a trade.

     



    Bill the GM should be canned.  He doesn't help Bill the Coach at all.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    ^ Truth.

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    Talk to Brady. He's the one smiling after hearing Burress predict that we'll only score 14 points in SB 42.

     



    How do you know what the hell he was smiling about dumbkoff? Maybe he was just smiling because somebody was making trash talk predictions. (Of course how could he know his O-line would be wearing skirts that day?)

    You sound like a f'n jets troll. And you are so stupid you don't even realize it.

     

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to DoNotSleepOnThePats' comment:

    the defense got screwed on some lucky bounces for the G-Men



    Samuel dropping the Lombardi wasn't about luck, it was about choke.

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to TexasPat's comment:

         The problem with this roster is an overall lack of talent at certain positions, primarily the secondary, and DT. Poor pass defense is what has prevented this team from winning championships over the past several years. All those BB draft misses with high round draft picks is the main culprit. Again:

    1.) 2007: FS Brandon Meriweather, 24th pick overall;

    2.) 2008: CB Terrence Wheatley, 62nd overall, and Jonathan Wilhite, 129th overall;

    3.) 2009: SS Patrick Chung, 34th overall, CB Darius Butler, 41st overall;

    4.) 2011: CB Ras-I Dowling, 33rd overall pick;

    5.) 2012: DB Tavon Wilson, 48th overall pick.

         Six of the above seven named DBs were high draft choices taken no later than the second round. As a direct result of these busts, BB has had to find players through free agency or in the later rounds to fill out the backline of his defense. BB's big free agency addition was 33 year old has been Adrian Wilson. 

         At DT, BB has not addressed the position since 2004. Other than bust Ron Brace, selected 40th overall in 2009, and DT Kareem Brown, selected with the 127th overall pick in 2007, I can't remember when BB has used a 4th round pick or better on this position. He's had to spend so many high draft resources in hopes of building up his weak secondary, that this position has suffered. Now, pro-bowl D Vince Wilfolk is 32 years old, and the remaining of the Pats' DTs were obtained off the free agency scrap heap. Poor-average DT play means no interior pass rush...which is the best way to disrupt a passing attack. 

         I hate to keep saying this, but BB's poor drafting has cost the Pats dearly. 

     



    Do you think this roster is better then 2011's?

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    I'm on record as being excited about this roster, and have said in previous posts how I think it's better than last year's season opening roster.  That said, I don't understand the attacks on rkarp.  He raises some legitimate concerns.  No roster is perfect, and this roster has its potential problems too.  A lot depends on how the young players work out . . . with untested youth there's always both upside potential and downside risk.  If the young guys realize their potential, this will be the most talented team the Pats have had since about 2007, I think.  If the young guys end up as duds, the team is going to lack depth and be in trouble if injuries occur (as they almost always do in this sport). 

    As far as the team-building skills of Bill Belichick, which also get a lot of vitriolic debate on this board, I remain distinctly undecided about how good they really are.  My own opinion leans toward the middle: not as bleak as guys like TexPat but not so hyperbolic in praise as Rusty.  On the positive side, I think Belichick is clearly great at putting together competitive teams, with solid players, who complement each other well and together can execute effectively the schemes Belichick develops.  At the same time, I think in recent years (starting in 2008 or 2009) the team has had some persistent holes in talent that have hurt its chances in the playoffs, and some of that lack of talent does fall on Belichick's decision making in the draft and free agency. 

     

    In my opinion, the talent on the team reached its nadir (somewhat ironically, given it was a Super Bowl year) in 2011.  BB began the season by blowing up the D line shortly before the regular season started with the addition of Haynesworth and a change in scheme.  The secondary was a bunch of (ineffective) no-names.  There were no decent wideouts other than Welker.  The running backs (BJGE and Woodhead) were mediocre. There was no pass rush at all and the LBs were still an incomplete group.  The defense could not stop the pass, and the offense, while potent because of a brilliant hurry-up scheme and four great players (Brady, Gronk, Welker, and Hernandez), still relied far too heavily on just one tactic -- the short pass to the slot receiver or one of the two TEs.  Yet the team made the Super Bowl, thanks to great coaching!

     

    In my opinion, the roster we have today is far better than 2011's.  That's a good thing, but let's also not pretend that just because the 2011 team made the Super Bowl, the 2011 roster was a great one.  It wasn't.  Coaching and a bit of luck played into the team's success in 2011.  The 2011 team wasn't like the 2003 or 2004 teams, which had truly talented and dominant defenses and solid offenses as well.  It was a very incomplete collection of guys, whom Belichick coached brilliantly and who had the good fortune of playing a relatively weak regular season schedule, then getting Tim Tebow's Broncos at home in the playoffs, followed by a very lucky win in the AFC championship game on a missed field goal by the Ravens.  

     

    I continue to be very excited by this year's team.  I think it has improved from 2011 and 2012.  I think the potential is there for this to be a very good team . . . and maybe be strong enough to have a dominant showing in the playoffs again.  But there are also areas of concerns, and rkarp is hardly off base to point them out.  I'm sure Belichick has his concerns too. 

     

    But at this point, we are what we are, and it's time to see what we can do in the real games.  Sunday can't come fast enough!

     

     

     

     

     

     



    Do you prefer syrup or jelly with your waffle? In the words of Chris Rock, "I prefer syrup". There that is a definitive statement by me.

    You don't understand the attack on RKarp, but you do understand the attack on Belichick and his GM ability?

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    I'm on record as being excited about this roster, and have said in previous posts how I think it's better than last year's season opening roster.  That said, I don't understand the attacks on rkarp.  He raises some legitimate concerns.  No roster is perfect, and this roster has its potential problems too.  A lot depends on how the young players work out . . . with untested youth there's always both upside potential and downside risk.  If the young guys realize their potential, this will be the most talented team the Pats have had since about 2007, I think.  If the young guys end up as duds, the team is going to lack depth and be in trouble if injuries occur (as they almost always do in this sport). 

    As far as the team-building skills of Bill Belichick, which also get a lot of vitriolic debate on this board, I remain distinctly undecided about how good they really are.  My own opinion leans toward the middle: not as bleak as guys like TexPat but not so hyperbolic in praise as Rusty.  On the positive side, I think Belichick is clearly great at putting together competitive teams, with solid players, who complement each other well and together can execute effectively the schemes Belichick develops.  At the same time, I think in recent years (starting in 2008 or 2009) the team has had some persistent holes in talent that have hurt its chances in the playoffs, and some of that lack of talent does fall on Belichick's decision making in the draft and free agency. 

     

    In my opinion, the talent on the team reached its nadir (somewhat ironically, given it was a Super Bowl year) in 2011.  BB began the season by blowing up the D line shortly before the regular season started with the addition of Haynesworth and a change in scheme.  The secondary was a bunch of (ineffective) no-names.  There were no decent wideouts other than Welker.  The running backs (BJGE and Woodhead) were mediocre. There was no pass rush at all and the LBs were still an incomplete group.  The defense could not stop the pass, and the offense, while potent because of a brilliant hurry-up scheme and four great players (Brady, Gronk, Welker, and Hernandez), still relied far too heavily on just one tactic -- the short pass to the slot receiver or one of the two TEs.  Yet the team made the Super Bowl, thanks to great coaching!

     

    In my opinion, the roster we have today is far better than 2011's.  That's a good thing, but let's also not pretend that just because the 2011 team made the Super Bowl, the 2011 roster was a great one.  It wasn't.  Coaching and a bit of luck played into the team's success in 2011.  The 2011 team wasn't like the 2003 or 2004 teams, which had truly talented and dominant defenses and solid offenses as well.  It was a very incomplete collection of guys, whom Belichick coached brilliantly and who had the good fortune of playing a relatively weak regular season schedule, then getting Tim Tebow's Broncos at home in the playoffs, followed by a very lucky win in the AFC championship game on a missed field goal by the Ravens.  

     

    I continue to be very excited by this year's team.  I think it has improved from 2011 and 2012.  I think the potential is there for this to be a very good team . . . and maybe be strong enough to have a dominant showing in the playoffs again.  But there are also areas of concerns, and rkarp is hardly off base to point them out.  I'm sure Belichick has his concerns too. 

     

    But at this point, we are what we are, and it's time to see what we can do in the real games.  Sunday can't come fast enough!

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    Do you prefer syrup or jelly with your waffle? In the words of Chris Rock, "I prefer syrup". There that is a definitive statement by me.

     

    You don't understand the attack on RKarp, but you do understand the attack on Belichick and his GM ability?

    [/QUOTE]

    Say what you want, when lots of guys were gushing about Adrian Wilson being the next Rodney Harrison and Ballard being a lock for the roster, rkarp was absolutely right to advise caution.  

    If you think you know definitively one way or another how good or bad this roster is going to be when you haven't seen a single one of these rookie receivers in a real game, you're deceiving yourself.  

    It's like trying to predict the stock market.  

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    Say what you want, when lots of guys were gushing about Adrian Wilson being the next Rodney Harrison and Ballard being a lock for the roster, rkarp was absolutely right to advise caution.  

    If you think you know definitively one way or another how good or bad this roster is going to be when you haven't seen a single one of these rookie receivers in a real game, you're deceiving yourself.  

    It's like trying to predict the stock market.  



    Adrian Wilson is injured, there's a difference between not good enough and season ending IR, you're right when you say nobody can predict that, but it doesn't mean Wilson wouldn't have been a huge upgrade because he would have.

    Ballard and Fells were overpriced in the Patriot's estimation, who am I to argue, I don't sign their checks and I certainly don't know Gronk's status.  Ballard and Fells were both on the chopping block when Gronk returned.

    I've seen the WR's play in the preseason, that's good enough for me.

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    I'm on record as being excited about this roster, and have said in previous posts how I think it's better than last year's season opening roster.  That said, I don't understand the attacks on rkarp.  He raises some legitimate concerns.  No roster is perfect, and this roster has its potential problems too.  A lot depends on how the young players work out . . . with untested youth there's always both upside potential and downside risk.  If the young guys realize their potential, this will be the most talented team the Pats have had since about 2007, I think.  If the young guys end up as duds, the team is going to lack depth and be in trouble if injuries occur (as they almost always do in this sport). 

    As far as the team-building skills of Bill Belichick, which also get a lot of vitriolic debate on this board, I remain distinctly undecided about how good they really are.  My own opinion leans toward the middle: not as bleak as guys like TexPat but not so hyperbolic in praise as Rusty.  On the positive side, I think Belichick is clearly great at putting together competitive teams, with solid players, who complement each other well and together can execute effectively the schemes Belichick develops.  At the same time, I think in recent years (starting in 2008 or 2009) the team has had some persistent holes in talent that have hurt its chances in the playoffs, and some of that lack of talent does fall on Belichick's decision making in the draft and free agency. 

     

    In my opinion, the talent on the team reached its nadir (somewhat ironically, given it was a Super Bowl year) in 2011.  BB began the season by blowing up the D line shortly before the regular season started with the addition of Haynesworth and a change in scheme.  The secondary was a bunch of (ineffective) no-names.  There were no decent wideouts other than Welker.  The running backs (BJGE and Woodhead) were mediocre. There was no pass rush at all and the LBs were still an incomplete group.  The defense could not stop the pass, and the offense, while potent because of a brilliant hurry-up scheme and four great players (Brady, Gronk, Welker, and Hernandez), still relied far too heavily on just one tactic -- the short pass to the slot receiver or one of the two TEs.  Yet the team made the Super Bowl, thanks to great coaching!

     

    In my opinion, the roster we have today is far better than 2011's.  That's a good thing, but let's also not pretend that just because the 2011 team made the Super Bowl, the 2011 roster was a great one.  It wasn't.  Coaching and a bit of luck played into the team's success in 2011.  The 2011 team wasn't like the 2003 or 2004 teams, which had truly talented and dominant defenses and solid offenses as well.  It was a very incomplete collection of guys, whom Belichick coached brilliantly and who had the good fortune of playing a relatively weak regular season schedule, then getting Tim Tebow's Broncos at home in the playoffs, followed by a very lucky win in the AFC championship game on a missed field goal by the Ravens.  

     

    I continue to be very excited by this year's team.  I think it has improved from 2011 and 2012.  I think the potential is there for this to be a very good team . . . and maybe be strong enough to have a dominant showing in the playoffs again.  But there are also areas of concerns, and rkarp is hardly off base to point them out.  I'm sure Belichick has his concerns too. 

     

    But at this point, we are what we are, and it's time to see what we can do in the real games.  Sunday can't come fast enough!

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    Do you prefer syrup or jelly with your waffle? In the words of Chris Rock, "I prefer syrup". There that is a definitive statement by me.

     

     

    You don't understand the attack on RKarp, but you do understand the attack on Belichick and his GM ability?

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Say what you want, when lots of guys were gushing about Adrian Wilson being the next Rodney Harrison and Ballard being a lock for the roster, rkarp was absolutely right to advise caution.  

    If you think you know definitively one way or another how good or bad this roster is going to be when you haven't seen a single one of these rookie receivers in a real game, you're deceiving yourself.  

    It's like trying to predict the stock market.  

    [/QUOTE]


    Suggesting Adrian Wilson is a physical presence and we had been missing it since Rodney left is not saying he was the next rodney. We all knew he was 33 years old, but playing a sub role in an extra LB situation looked like a perfect fit. I applaud BB for bringing him in, disappointing it didn't work. Does our safety position and secondary look better then 2011's squad? Yes. Bringing guys into camp and not having it work is ok.

    Of course nobody knows what is going to happen, what fun would that be? This is about saying what you THINK will happen. I understand it is difficult for some people to commit to what they think.

    And the last time I checked, you have to actually buy stock in something in order for it to pay off, you can't just sit on the fence and waffle over it. I have stock in this team and this roster, not because I am a fan, but because I have eyes. We look to be better going in this year then we have in years. We have been to a super bowl, 2 afc championship games and a divisional playoff game in that time. Great team BB built.

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Say what you want, when lots of guys were gushing about Adrian Wilson being the next Rodney Harrison and Ballard being a lock for the roster, rkarp was absolutely right to advise caution.  

    If you think you know definitively one way or another how good or bad this roster is going to be when you haven't seen a single one of these rookie receivers in a real game, you're deceiving yourself.  

    It's like trying to predict the stock market.  

     



    Adrian Wilson is injured, there's a difference between not good enough and season ending IR, you're right when you say nobody can predict that, but it doesn't mean Wilson wouldn't have been a huge upgrade because he would have.

     

    Ballard and Fells were overpriced in the Patriot's estimation, who am I to argue, I don't sign their checks and I certainly don't know Gronk's status.  Ballard and Fells were both on the chopping block when Gronk returned.

    I've seen the WR's play in the preseason, that's good enough for me.

    [/QUOTE]

    So you're saying Wilson was a huge upgrade based off his performance in camp and the preseason games before mysteriously injuring his hamstring walking to the team bus? What does it say about our starting safeties that a 34 year old player (who couldn't run anymore) was a huge upgrade over them?

    And Ballard and Fells were being paid too much? The greatest GM of all time gave that contract to Fells, who proceeded to do nothing...absolutely nothing, after he got it, but hey at least he got paid less than that other hot garbage tight end we signed last year (Shiancoe). What did all these do nothing's (fells, Ballard, Schiancoe) cost us? Why don't we add it together with Fenene and Wilson? By the time we are through paying that trash we could of signed Goldson...with enough left over to get me that new Audi A8 I have my heart set on.

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    I'm on record as being excited about this roster, and have said in previous posts how I think it's better than last year's season opening roster.  That said, I don't understand the attacks on rkarp.  He raises some legitimate concerns.  No roster is perfect, and this roster has its potential problems too.  A lot depends on how the young players work out . . . with untested youth there's always both upside potential and downside risk.  If the young guys realize their potential, this will be the most talented team the Pats have had since about 2007, I think.  If the young guys end up as duds, the team is going to lack depth and be in trouble if injuries occur (as they almost always do in this sport). 

    As far as the team-building skills of Bill Belichick, which also get a lot of vitriolic debate on this board, I remain distinctly undecided about how good they really are.  My own opinion leans toward the middle: not as bleak as guys like TexPat but not so hyperbolic in praise as Rusty.  On the positive side, I think Belichick is clearly great at putting together competitive teams, with solid players, who complement each other well and together can execute effectively the schemes Belichick develops.  At the same time, I think in recent years (starting in 2008 or 2009) the team has had some persistent holes in talent that have hurt its chances in the playoffs, and some of that lack of talent does fall on Belichick's decision making in the draft and free agency. 

     

    In my opinion, the talent on the team reached its nadir (somewhat ironically, given it was a Super Bowl year) in 2011.  BB began the season by blowing up the D line shortly before the regular season started with the addition of Haynesworth and a change in scheme.  The secondary was a bunch of (ineffective) no-names.  There were no decent wideouts other than Welker.  The running backs (BJGE and Woodhead) were mediocre. There was no pass rush at all and the LBs were still an incomplete group.  The defense could not stop the pass, and the offense, while potent because of a brilliant hurry-up scheme and four great players (Brady, Gronk, Welker, and Hernandez), still relied far too heavily on just one tactic -- the short pass to the slot receiver or one of the two TEs.  Yet the team made the Super Bowl, thanks to great coaching!

     

    In my opinion, the roster we have today is far better than 2011's.  That's a good thing, but let's also not pretend that just because the 2011 team made the Super Bowl, the 2011 roster was a great one.  It wasn't.  Coaching and a bit of luck played into the team's success in 2011.  The 2011 team wasn't like the 2003 or 2004 teams, which had truly talented and dominant defenses and solid offenses as well.  It was a very incomplete collection of guys, whom Belichick coached brilliantly and who had the good fortune of playing a relatively weak regular season schedule, then getting Tim Tebow's Broncos at home in the playoffs, followed by a very lucky win in the AFC championship game on a missed field goal by the Ravens.  

     

    I continue to be very excited by this year's team.  I think it has improved from 2011 and 2012.  I think the potential is there for this to be a very good team . . . and maybe be strong enough to have a dominant showing in the playoffs again.  But there are also areas of concerns, and rkarp is hardly off base to point them out.  I'm sure Belichick has his concerns too. 

     

    But at this point, we are what we are, and it's time to see what we can do in the real games.  Sunday can't come fast enough!

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    Do you prefer syrup or jelly with your waffle? In the words of Chris Rock, "I prefer syrup". There that is a definitive statement by me.

     

     

     

    You don't understand the attack on RKarp, but you do understand the attack on Belichick and his GM ability?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

     

    Say what you want, when lots of guys were gushing about Adrian Wilson being the next Rodney Harrison and Ballard being a lock for the roster, rkarp was absolutely right to advise caution.  

    If you think you know definitively one way or another how good or bad this roster is going to be when you haven't seen a single one of these rookie receivers in a real game, you're deceiving yourself.  

    It's like trying to predict the stock market.  

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Suggesting Adrian Wilson is a physical presence and we had been missing it since Rodney left is not saying he was the next rodney. We all knew he was 33 years old, but playing a sub role in an extra LB situation looked like a perfect fit. I applaud BB for bringing him in, disappointing it didn't work. Does our safety position and secondary look better then 2011's squad? Yes. Bringing guys into camp and not having it work is ok.

     

    Of course nobody knows what is going to happen, what fun would that be? This is about saying what you THINK will happen. I understand it is difficult for some people to commit to what they think.

    And the last time I checked, you have to actually buy stock in something in order for it to pay off, you can't just sit on the fence and waffle over it. I have stock in this team and this roster, not because I am a fan, but because I have eyes. We look to be better going in this year then we have in years. We have been to a super bowl, 2 afc championship games and a divisional playoff game in that time. Great team BB built.

    [/QUOTE]

    I've written half a million times that I think this roster is improved from last year and potentially better than any since 2007.  That said, I don't see why it's necessary to put on blinders and pretend there are absolutely no concerns.  I guess ambiguity makes some people uncomfortable.  Personally, I find it intellectually stimulating.

     

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    So you're saying Wilson was a huge upgrade based off his performance in camp and the preseason games before mysteriously injuring his hamstring walking to the team bus?

    And Ballard and Fells were being paid too much? The greatest GM of all time gave that contract to Fells, who proceeded to do nothing...absolutely nothing, after he got it, but hey at least he got paid less than that other hot garbage tight end we signed last year (Shiancoe). What did all these do nothing's (fells, Ballard, Schiancoe) cost us? Why don't we add it together with Fenene and Wilson? By the time we are through paying that trash we could of signed Goldson...with enough left over to get me that new Audi A8 I have my heart set on.



    You don't know what injury Adrian Wilson has, you would be negative if we signed the messiah to play safety, we've all gotten used to it.

    Fells played well for us, played a lot of snaps last season.  Ballard and Fells are paid a lot in relation to Sudfeld and Huey, who are closer to the league minimum than the vet minimum.  By the way the 49ers didn't sign Goldson, what does that tell you?  Oh yeah, he is overpaid. 

    Let's see if the Buc's beat us and take it all the way to title town, you want to bet cash money them paying through the nose for Revis and Goldson doesn't win them anything?  Thought not...

    Injuries happen, the only time they don't in football is when you turn that option off on your Madden football game...

     

     

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

    I'm on record as being excited about this roster, and have said in previous posts how I think it's better than last year's season opening roster.  That said, I don't understand the attacks on rkarp.  He raises some legitimate concerns.  No roster is perfect, and this roster has its potential problems too.  A lot depends on how the young players work out . . . with untested youth there's always both upside potential and downside risk.  If the young guys realize their potential, this will be the most talented team the Pats have had since about 2007, I think.  If the young guys end up as duds, the team is going to lack depth and be in trouble if injuries occur (as they almost always do in this sport). 

    As far as the team-building skills of Bill Belichick, which also get a lot of vitriolic debate on this board, I remain distinctly undecided about how good they really are.  My own opinion leans toward the middle: not as bleak as guys like TexPat but not so hyperbolic in praise as Rusty.  On the positive side, I think Belichick is clearly great at putting together competitive teams, with solid players, who complement each other well and together can execute effectively the schemes Belichick develops.  At the same time, I think in recent years (starting in 2008 or 2009) the team has had some persistent holes in talent that have hurt its chances in the playoffs, and some of that lack of talent does fall on Belichick's decision making in the draft and free agency. 

     

    In my opinion, the talent on the team reached its nadir (somewhat ironically, given it was a Super Bowl year) in 2011.  BB began the season by blowing up the D line shortly before the regular season started with the addition of Haynesworth and a change in scheme.  The secondary was a bunch of (ineffective) no-names.  There were no decent wideouts other than Welker.  The running backs (BJGE and Woodhead) were mediocre. There was no pass rush at all and the LBs were still an incomplete group.  The defense could not stop the pass, and the offense, while potent because of a brilliant hurry-up scheme and four great players (Brady, Gronk, Welker, and Hernandez), still relied far too heavily on just one tactic -- the short pass to the slot receiver or one of the two TEs.  Yet the team made the Super Bowl, thanks to great coaching!

     

    In my opinion, the roster we have today is far better than 2011's.  That's a good thing, but let's also not pretend that just because the 2011 team made the Super Bowl, the 2011 roster was a great one.  It wasn't.  Coaching and a bit of luck played into the team's success in 2011.  The 2011 team wasn't like the 2003 or 2004 teams, which had truly talented and dominant defenses and solid offenses as well.  It was a very incomplete collection of guys, whom Belichick coached brilliantly and who had the good fortune of playing a relatively weak regular season schedule, then getting Tim Tebow's Broncos at home in the playoffs, followed by a very lucky win in the AFC championship game on a missed field goal by the Ravens.  

     

    I continue to be very excited by this year's team.  I think it has improved from 2011 and 2012.  I think the potential is there for this to be a very good team . . . and maybe be strong enough to have a dominant showing in the playoffs again.  But there are also areas of concerns, and rkarp is hardly off base to point them out.  I'm sure Belichick has his concerns too. 

     

    But at this point, we are what we are, and it's time to see what we can do in the real games.  Sunday can't come fast enough!

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    Do you prefer syrup or jelly with your waffle? In the words of Chris Rock, "I prefer syrup". There that is a definitive statement by me.

     

     

     

     

    You don't understand the attack on RKarp, but you do understand the attack on Belichick and his GM ability?

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

     

     

    Say what you want, when lots of guys were gushing about Adrian Wilson being the next Rodney Harrison and Ballard being a lock for the roster, rkarp was absolutely right to advise caution.  

    If you think you know definitively one way or another how good or bad this roster is going to be when you haven't seen a single one of these rookie receivers in a real game, you're deceiving yourself.  

    It's like trying to predict the stock market.  

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Suggesting Adrian Wilson is a physical presence and we had been missing it since Rodney left is not saying he was the next rodney. We all knew he was 33 years old, but playing a sub role in an extra LB situation looked like a perfect fit. I applaud BB for bringing him in, disappointing it didn't work. Does our safety position and secondary look better then 2011's squad? Yes. Bringing guys into camp and not having it work is ok.

     

     

    Of course nobody knows what is going to happen, what fun would that be? This is about saying what you THINK will happen. I understand it is difficult for some people to commit to what they think.

    And the last time I checked, you have to actually buy stock in something in order for it to pay off, you can't just sit on the fence and waffle over it. I have stock in this team and this roster, not because I am a fan, but because I have eyes. We look to be better going in this year then we have in years. We have been to a super bowl, 2 afc championship games and a divisional playoff game in that time. Great team BB built.

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    I've written half a million times that I think this roster is improved from last year and potentially better than any since 2007.  That said, I don't see why it's necessary to put on blinders and pretend there are absolutely no concerns.  I guess ambiguity makes some people uncomfortable.  Personally, I find it intellectually stimulating.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Voicing concerns with the team is normal, I do it all the time.

    Bashing BB's decisions, and laying blame on his drafting/FA acquisition as to why we don't get over the hump and win a super bowl(when we have won and been to more super bowls then any team during his time) is what I have a problem with.

    I am not directing that at you in particular, but to fans here who have  consistently spewed this propaganda over the last several years.

    There is a difference between being an objective fan, and a guy with an axe to grind. When I see agenda driven threads, and statements in general by certain people that aren't consistent with my strong opinions then I will challenge them. I think it serves great purpose, being as this is a discussion board and all.

     

Share