| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sciz
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 12833
Location: Iowa
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:01 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
I'm not worried about the Pats defense. They basically only gave up 10 to the Cards. But how did the offense only score 18?! 
_________________
Shut up, NBT |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NinjaZX6R
Joined: 05 Jun 2011
Posts: 6763
Location: Columbus, Ohio
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Sciz wrote: | | I'm not worried about the Pats defense. They basically only gave up 10 to the Cards. But how did the offense only score 18?! |
Offense was derp that day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tzimisce
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Posts: 40589
Location: Slowly coming to terms with the inevitable
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sciz
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 12833
Location: Iowa
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Bedard just made an off-hand comment that actually makes a lot of sense. If the Pats are willing to let Welker go this offseason, I could see him having a lot of interest in Danny Amendola.
_________________
Shut up, NBT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tzimisce
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Posts: 40589
Location: Slowly coming to terms with the inevitable
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Sciz wrote: | | Bedard just made an off-hand comment that actually makes a lot of sense. If the Pats are willing to let Welker go this offseason, I could see him having a lot of interest in Danny Amendola. |
I think that goes without saying. Especially if what we all think we know about Edelman turns out to be accurate.
_________________
https://twitter.com/Zealotry_Metal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NinjaZX6R
Joined: 05 Jun 2011
Posts: 6763
Location: Columbus, Ohio
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Leave it to the Cards to break their own record of allowing 8 plus sacks back to back weeks. Previous record was back in 2003 held by the Cards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcmurtry86
Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 16176
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Sciz wrote: | | Bedard just made an off-hand comment that actually makes a lot of sense. If the Pats are willing to let Welker go this offseason, I could see him having a lot of interest in Danny Amendola. |
There's been speculation about that for awhile.
That said, why would the Pats want to spend fairly big bucks on a similar player with a growing injury history? Amendola isn't going to be cheap (and if he is, I'd assume there will be a huge effort by the Rams to retain him and other teams will get involved). Given the way that Welker's role could be (allegedly) reduced, I don't see why the team would spend money on a #3 WR.
They'd be better off spending Welker's money on the D, OL or #2 WR and drafting a slot WR or finding someone on the scrap heap. As great as Welker has been, I don't see a reason to invest a lot of money in that position unless it is Welker himself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sciz
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 12833
Location: Iowa
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Tzimisce wrote: | | I think that goes without saying. Especially if what we all think we know about Edelman turns out to be accurate. |
Well he's a free agent too. I really have no idea what's going to happen to Edelman in free agency. If they get Amendola, then I'd expect them to not bring back Edelman, but you never know.
_________________
Shut up, NBT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NinjaZX6R
Joined: 05 Jun 2011
Posts: 6763
Location: Columbus, Ohio
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Cards O line.
Officially on 59 dropbacks. 9 sacks.
He was hurried/knock down/hit/sacked a total of 53 times.
They gave him 6 clean dropbacks.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richter
Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 9278
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| NinjaZX6R wrote: | Cards O line.
Officially on 59 dropbacks. 9 sacks.
He was hurried/knock down/hit/sacked a total of 53 times.
They gave him 6 clean dropbacks.
:lol: |
And (not that I think Kolb is a particularly good QB, but) tomorrow, the narrative from at least one sports talk blowhard will be about how Kevin Kolb can't get it done in Arizona, and how great QBs work around problems with the offensive line. That was a pitiful, pitiful showing by Arizona's blockers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Troy Brown
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 19488
Location: Newport, Rhode Island
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| samgurl775 wrote: | | NinjaZX6R wrote: | | Holy crap, Kevin Kolb has been sacked 7 times in this game. He has sacked 8 times last week. |
The Cardinals OL is starting to look like it did in the preseason, just a hot mess. |
Yeah, I thought Kolb looked ok when given time but that was truly one of the worst OL performances I've ever seen. Kolb was running when no one was there by the end of the game.
_________________
Yo, is that time machine done yet? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonyto3690
Joined: 29 Jan 2010
Posts: 5506
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| mcmurtry86 wrote: | | Sciz wrote: | | Bedard just made an off-hand comment that actually makes a lot of sense. If the Pats are willing to let Welker go this offseason, I could see him having a lot of interest in Danny Amendola. |
There's been speculation about that for awhile.
That said, why would the Pats want to spend fairly big bucks on a similar player with a growing injury history? Amendola isn't going to be cheap (and if he is, I'd assume there will be a huge effort by the Rams to retain him and other teams will get involved). Given the way that Welker's role could be (allegedly) reduced, I don't see why the team would spend money on a #3 WR.
They'd be better off spending Welker's money on the D, OL or #2 WR and drafting a slot WR or finding someone on the scrap heap. As great as Welker has been, I don't see a reason to invest a lot of money in that position unless it is Welker himself. |
Yeah, there really is no point in a trade off between Amendola and Welker. All we know is Welker has a special connection with Brady and flourishes under our system and Amendola is just a comparable talent who will want likely almost comparable money and is an unproven.
That being said, I think a WR is more of a need than people give credit. Lloyd really hasn't even proven he can consistently win the 1 on 1 matchups he gets because Welker/Gronk/Hernandez were the dominant focus of defensive game plans, let alone be the de facto go to WR that defenses try to stop.
If we drop Welker we need to draft/sign a guy who can immediately start at WR and be groomed to become a #1 we can count on when Lloyds contract is up.
_________________
| C0LTSFAN4L1F3 wrote: |
Drew Brees IS the most accurate qb ever |
Brees that night:
28/50, 341 yards, 0 TD, 5 INT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richter
Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 9278
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| tonyto3690 wrote: | | mcmurtry86 wrote: | | Sciz wrote: | | Bedard just made an off-hand comment that actually makes a lot of sense. If the Pats are willing to let Welker go this offseason, I could see him having a lot of interest in Danny Amendola. |
There's been speculation about that for awhile.
That said, why would the Pats want to spend fairly big bucks on a similar player with a growing injury history? Amendola isn't going to be cheap (and if he is, I'd assume there will be a huge effort by the Rams to retain him and other teams will get involved). Given the way that Welker's role could be (allegedly) reduced, I don't see why the team would spend money on a #3 WR.
They'd be better off spending Welker's money on the D, OL or #2 WR and drafting a slot WR or finding someone on the scrap heap. As great as Welker has been, I don't see a reason to invest a lot of money in that position unless it is Welker himself. |
Yeah, there really is no point in a trade off between Amendola and Welker. All we know is Welker has a special connection with Brady and flourishes under our system and Amendola is just a comparable talent who will want likely almost comparable money and is an unproven.
That being said, I think a WR is more of a need than people give credit. Lloyd really hasn't even proven he can consistently win the 1 on 1 matchups he gets because Welker/Gronk/Hernandez were the dominant focus of defensive game plans, let alone be the de facto go to WR that defenses try to stop.
If we drop Welker we need to draft/sign a guy who can immediately start at WR and be groomed to become a #1 we can count on when Lloyds contract is up. |
There's really only four positions I'm even interested in drafting next year: OL, DL, DB and WR. That's it. I don't want to see picks go to any other position unless it's in the late rounds, because there is talent likely to be available at those positions, and the Patriots could put together a truly dominant squad for the long term if they hit on a few picks at those positions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sciz
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 12833
Location: Iowa
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| mcmurtry86 wrote: | That said, why would the Pats want to spend fairly big bucks on a similar player with a growing injury history? Amendola isn't going to be cheap (and if he is, I'd assume there will be a huge effort by the Rams to retain him and other teams will get involved). Given the way that Welker's role could be (allegedly) reduced, I don't see why the team would spend money on a #3 WR.
They'd be better off spending Welker's money on the D, OL or #2 WR and drafting a slot WR or finding someone on the scrap heap. As great as Welker has been, I don't see a reason to invest a lot of money in that position unless it is Welker himself. |
True. First the Pats need to find a #2 outside receiver that's good enough to keep the slot receiver off the field in 2-receiver formations. If they succeed at that, then the slot receiver isn't going to have a major role anyway, especially if one of the RBs steps up as a pass protector and receiver.
_________________
Shut up, NBT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NinjaZX6R
Joined: 05 Jun 2011
Posts: 6763
Location: Columbus, Ohio
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Sciz wrote: | | mcmurtry86 wrote: | That said, why would the Pats want to spend fairly big bucks on a similar player with a growing injury history? Amendola isn't going to be cheap (and if he is, I'd assume there will be a huge effort by the Rams to retain him and other teams will get involved). Given the way that Welker's role could be (allegedly) reduced, I don't see why the team would spend money on a #3 WR.
They'd be better off spending Welker's money on the D, OL or #2 WR and drafting a slot WR or finding someone on the scrap heap. As great as Welker has been, I don't see a reason to invest a lot of money in that position unless it is Welker himself. |
True. First the Pats need to find a #2 outside receiver that's good enough to keep the slot receiver off the field in 2-receiver formations. If they succeed at that, then the slot receiver isn't going to have a major role anyway, especially if one of the RBs steps up as a pass protector and receiver. |
Aaron is essentially the Slot WR in a 2wr 2 te set. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
