Re: Why The Continued Obsession About Offense?
posted at 3/28/2013 11:20 AM EDT
In response to alfred-e-bob-neumier's comment:
If you HAVE AN EXPECTATON THAT THE pATS ARE GOING TO DRAIN THEIR CAP AND THEN SOME TRYING TO SIGN AN ENTIRE NEW VETERAN RECEIVER CORP (opps, sorry caps), if any are really left, and end up cutting an additional palyer to create the cap space to do it, you are going to stay bitterly disappointed...they have NEVER done this, and they will not start now...why expect them to do things you know there is no chance of them doing...maybe they sign Emmanual, maybe they draft a WR in the first three rounds...that's about what you're looking at...even maybe a cheap Lloyd returning...but that's it.
My question would be, why wouldn't they spend at least as much as they did last year to bring in some durable replacements for those they had planned to lose? Jones they got for a song because of concerns over his durability. Amendola was the second choice and cost as much as Welker this year and more gauranteed money overall, but is not nearly as durable. I could understand taking a chance on an injury concern if you have some stability in the position in the first place but why are you messing around and rebuilding your entire WR core with huge question marks then not even invest in a durable option at this point? It's completely putting you eggs in a single basket while walking on ice and hoping you don't drop them. The ifs pile up quickly:
- If Amendola can stay healthy
- If Jones can stay healthy
- If Jones shows more then a solid #3 WR
- If they draft the right WR or sign Sanders
- If ALL of them can get on the same page as Brady (that's a big if given WRs in the past and you do need all to get it since at minimum you need to go 3 deep at WR)
That's a lot of ifs when history says that it's more then llikely Jones and/or Amendola will get hurt. Maybe 1 out of the 3 will really click with Brady, 2 at best but most likely not all. Given history BB is more likely to bring in 3-4 washed up vets at min price and patch work them in (Stallworth, Gaffney, Branch last year) which leaves Brady high and dry in case of injury. Don't forget Lloyd and Welker both played 16 games last year. Imagine if one of them was injured and you needed to start Branch. It's a lot easier to swallow the patch work vet #3 WR when you know your top 2 WRs will be there game in and game out.
There is no stability, durability, or a sense of chemistry currently in the WR core for one of the best QB's in the game on the back 9 of his career? Why rebuild now of all times? Brady has 2-3 good years left and you want to dump a bunch of unknown elements on his shoulders and say make it work, btw not sure if they are going to be able to play every game for you so we'll toss in random player X off the street if they get hurt.
This might be a bad analogy but that's like taking away your car that runs perfectly well and is reliable but could use some tweeks and handing you another car with less miles but more issues without telling you the history or it's random quirks and oh yeah it's broken down a couple of times in the past but they think the issues might have fixed themselves. Then telling you to drive across the country in it. Would you be comfortable in that situation?
I mean if they went out and signed Sanders right away instead of Jones (lets face it they are extremely similar players except Jones is injury prone) I think we'd all be more comfortable right now because at least Sanders is durable. You know you will get 16 games from him and the spector that Slater might be your #1 isn't hanging over your head.