Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    The rookies are clearly better than they were at the beginning of the season.  Vereen being healthy is huge, but I wouldn't downplay this loss too much.  Gronk is a one of a kind player.  The margin of error on offense just got a lot smaller.

    I guess it all depends by what you mean by devastating.  If that means the Patriots have no chance at the Lombardi then I disagree.  If that means there chances just took a pretty big hit?  Well then I think it's hard ot argue this injury wasn't devastating.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I actually agree with you Megatool. Because Gronk has been mostly absent when we've needed him most anyway.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why the namecalling?  

    [/QUOTE]

    I gave you your chance to accept the "No Name-Calling Challenge" dork. Take it. But, you will lose that to me, like you always lose to me. It's as sure as the sun rising.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The rookies are clearly better than they were at the beginning of the season.  Vereen being healthy is huge, but I wouldn't downplay this loss too much.  Gronk is a one of a kind player.  The margin of error on offense just got a lot smaller.

    I guess it all depends by what you mean by devastating.  If that means the Patriots have no chance at the Lombardi then I disagree.  If that means there chances just took a pretty big hit?  Well then I think it's hard ot argue this injury wasn't devastating.

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree with this. SB chances are not dead, especially if the Pats lock up the 2 seed, where they would just have to win one home game and then potentially beat Denver. However, it is hard to argue that it doe not hurt our chances in both the passing and running game, given Gronk's blocking ability.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I actually agree with you Megatool. Because Gronk has been mostly absent when we've needed him most anyway.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why the namecalling?  See, this is where your allies are hypocrites. They claim only I namecall, but you initiate it every time.

    Always go to the source, folks, and you'll not only look more intelligent but you won't be a hypocrite.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Megatool is a term of endearment from Babe.

    [/QUOTE]

    haha

    Between that and his bigoted homophobic self, Frankie Fitts, is really on a roll lately showing his true colors.

    [/QUOTE]


    Can a single day go by without you talking about "gay" dumbkoff?

    You're obsessed with it.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    Isn't this the same as we'll be fine without Vince?

    How can you lose the best TE in the game and not have it become a major issue?

     

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Isn't this the same as we'll be fine without Vince?

    How can you lose the best TE in the game and not have it become a major issue?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    He's gone a lot anyway.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I actually agree with you Megatool. Because Gronk has been mostly absent when we've needed him most anyway.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why the namecalling?  

    [/QUOTE]

    I gave you your chance to accept the "No Name-Calling Challenge" dork. Take it. But, you will lose that to me, like you always lose to me. It's as sure as the sun rising.

    [/QUOTE]

    Did you just call me another name again and then go all Hitler on me forcing me to accept some Mark Summersque "challenge"?

    I think the challenge is for you.

    [/QUOTE]


    You hadn't accepted the challenge yet.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    I can think of several reasons:

    1.  Bill Belichick

    2.  Tom Brady

    3.  The New England Patriots

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to themightypatriots' comment:

    I can think of several reasons:

    1.  Bill Belichick

    2.  Tom Brady

    3.  The New England Patriots




    LOL!  +1

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to HeygangLH's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    deadahead- you are almost,yes almost as bad as babe-You say that BB's legend will be cemented.What legend???-keep in min mind that without Tom Brady there is no BB.

    Brady's days and hopefully BB's days are numbered up there. Brady is getting old and BB's so called legend is too tarnished.

    Babe- Watch your language because I'm watching you!! LOL

    [/QUOTE]


    (Yawn.....)

    OK, and you'll absolutely guarantee that BB wouldn't have done the same thing over the years with a different low round QB selection, or someone's roster reject/cut.  Your drivel is like saying The Niners were nothing without Montana, or the Steelers were bad without their defense. Neither coaches or team players would or could of EVER achieved anything but losing without them.

    Put the bottle down, son. Put the bottle down! 

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I actually agree with you Megatool. Because Gronk has been mostly absent when we've needed him most anyway.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why the namecalling?  See, this is where your allies are hypocrites. They claim only I namecall, but you initiate it every time.

    Always go to the source, folks, and you'll not only look more intelligent but you won't be a hypocrite.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Megatool is a term of endearment from Babe.

    [/QUOTE]

    Particularly since he used upper case.  He calls me geezer (note lower case) and it hurts my feelings.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    Well i was devastated - lol

    Red Zone efficience went up to 77% with Gronk

    i think it is certainly tougher

    There will be no one to blame if they dont win the SB. However I think there is still alot of skill left. and teams may not be ready for them

    Speed all over the field may keep us in the hunt. I would also add we need getting something from Boyce  along with better Oline play, and Ridley cannot fumble- I think McD has his work cut out for him. They have to be really really smart. I was always afraid that the play calling would be Gronk, Gronk and more Gronk. Now it has to be TB's favorite receiver - the open man - and he does have confidence to throw to all of them. And did yoou alos see TB roll out for the last td???/

    On  D, we need something from Silga?? (sorry the name went blank) I will believe in our LBs and we have 3 good corners. I have no problem with our safties or Arrington in the slot.

    I do not care about yards given up, I only care about points- however Bb decides is ok with me. I think our run D is better now? really only nver was horrible - but BB gave up it up with his schemes. And I am not worried about pass D. Everythingis the red zone - OK  I am concerned about too much time off the clock to keep the ball from TB

    Who can have any problem with our ST's - especially now that Boyce is the KO returner

    So its not impossible -

    I did hear greenberg say that if the Pats won the SB he would say that TB would be the greatest ever. I think he is anyway but it would be icing on the cake to have a big time jet fan eat something. But we would all know that every player/coach on that team would deserve the credit. A win this year would mostly erase 42.

    Good thread rusty

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In answer to the basic question, I do not view Gronk's loss as devastating.  Hurt the team's chances?  Absolutely, but the Pats are not without weapons on the offensive side of the ball.  On the D side, if Siliga really can be effective against the run and we get a little healthier in the secondary, I see no reason why the Pats can't contend.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    1. Vereen is here

    2. Amendola is healthier and further along

    3. The rookies are progressing in their own ways/further along

    Gronk's biggest absence will be in the red zone and with how you can dictate plays with his presence, but that does not mean our offense will falter either. Sunday's first half was proof of that.

    Discuss:

    [/QUOTE]


    The biggest Void that was left when Gronk went down is the lack of a target over 6 ft. I get that Vareen and Danny can cover for Gronk over the middle, but you noticed at the end of the browns game, our only option was to hope that Boyce can outrun a guy. We currently have NOONE to go up for the jump ball. Thats how you attack smallish safeties like Gregory and McCourty by throwing high to your tight end.

    Now we have to really beat the other guy every time which is hard to do. IN the redzone, Mulligan and Develin are barely over 6 ft and wont outjump anyone.

    We need Dobson to return QUICK to give some height and big play ability back to this offense. I am also concerned with the amount of hits Vareen is taking. He still has a bad wrist and they need to limit him and get more from Danny/Edleman over the middle and utilize playactions to the FB instead of looking long all the time. The Fb is ALWAY open for a 1st down.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to TripleOG's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    1. Vereen is here

    2. Amendola is healthier and further along

    3. The rookies are progressing in their own ways/further along

    Gronk's biggest absence will be in the red zone and with how you can dictate plays with his presence, but that does not mean our offense will falter either. Sunday's first half was proof of that.

    Discuss:

    [/QUOTE]


    The biggest Void that was left when Gronk went down is the lack of a target over 6 ft. I get that Vareen and Danny can cover for Gronk over the middle, but you noticed at the end of the browns game, our only option was to hope that Boyce can outrun a guy. We currently have NOONE to go up for the jump ball. Thats how you attack smallish safeties like Gregory and McCourty by throwing high to your tight end.

    Now we have to really beat the other guy every time which is hard to do. IN the redzone, Mulligan and Develin are barely over 6 ft and wont outjump anyone.

    We need Dobson to return QUICK to give some height and big play ability back to this offense. I am also concerned with the amount of hits Vareen is taking. He still has a bad wrist and they need to limit him and get more from Danny/Edleman over the middle and utilize playactions to the FB instead of looking long all the time. The Fb is ALWAY open for a 1st down.

    [/QUOTE]


    good point on size and dobby

     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Gronk's Absence Is Not Devastating

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, things have changed since earlier in the season as you note. 

    However, gronk's value is much bigger,than a great red zone threat. With him in the lineup, you have a dual threat weapon...great blocker, great pass catcher. You can run or pass in different formations with him. You can only say something similar with Vereen, with his ability to run or lineup wide or in the slot. Our remaining TEs don't off that flexibility to the offense. 

    devastating? We will see this week when we face a good Miami defense. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Agree, but Mulligan can block well. That's why I was saying in another thread about how McDaniels can improve first half gamecalling is by using Mulligan and Develin as both blockers AND receivers.

    Seriously. I am not asking for heavy targeting, but strategic targeting to show they can do and will do both.

    No binkies from Brady.  Spread it out and diversify.  I think Brady/McDaniels were too Gronk happy vs the Browns.

    Brady was staring him down a lot and they were trying to get him the ball, which obviously you would want to, but Cleveland knows that too.

    [/QUOTE]

    Did Mulligan just learn to block this year becasue last year you said he was the worst at everything.  Maybe something has changed?  What could it be?

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share