Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

OTAs: Spikes no show, Cannon plays RG, Dobson made a catch!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25241
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2013 6:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
You're right, Brown's loss would have derailed the entire offense.

Wow, Troy Brown was my favorite player when he was active, but I would not have made that claim.


Brown accounted for 101 catches and 1199 yards in 2001. That's almost twice as much as the #2 option Patten (51 for 749) and the #3 and #4 options were terrible (Charles Johnson and Fred Coleman - a combined 16 catches).

You think the Pats win the Super Bowl with Patten and Johnson as the top receivers in the playoffs? No, I don't think so.

I think Troy Brown is overrated a little in terms of his on-field contributions by Pats fans, but in 2001 he WAS the offense. He was the extension of the mediocre running game and the only guy who could be reliably counted on to make catches and run crisp routes. Furthermore, he's the only guy that Brady has an excellent chemistry with for the beginning of his career.

You're worried about the team losing Dobson's development (a "disaster" waiting to happen) when they have about 5-6 other weapons but think losing Brown would have been anything than catastrophic for the 2001 team? That I don't understand at all. Patten was a passable receiver. The rest of those offensive weapons (including Rutledge, Wiggins and company) were awful. Worse than Fells and Jenkins.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12619
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2013 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
You're right, Brown's loss would have derailed the entire offense.

Wow, Troy Brown was my favorite player when he was active, but I would not have made that claim.


Brown accounted for 101 catches and 1199 yards in 2001. That's almost twice as much as the #2 option Patten (51 for 749) and the #3 and #4 options were terrible (Charles Johnson and Fred Coleman - a combined 16 catches).

You think the Pats win the Super Bowl with Patten and Johnson as the top receivers in the playoffs? No, I don't think so.

I think Troy Brown is overrated a little in terms of his on-field contributions by Pats fans, but in 2001 he WAS the offense. He was the extension of the mediocre running game and the only guy who could be reliably counted on to make catches and run crisp routes. Furthermore, he's the only guy that Brady has an excellent chemistry with for the beginning of his career.

You're worried about the team losing Dobson's development (a "disaster" waiting to happen) when they have about 5-6 other weapons but think losing Brown would have been anything than catastrophic for the 2001 team? That I don't understand at all. Patten was a passable receiver. The rest of those offensive weapons (including Rutledge, Wiggins and company) were awful. Worse than Fells and Jenkins.

Derailing the offense and winning the Super Bowl are two different things. If we take Brown off offense but leave him on special teams for the playoffs, there's a decent chance they still get to the Super Bowl. It's not like the offense did much in the first two games. And they still had a productive ground game, Faulk and Patten to catch passes and a defense playing well above its head to get them the ball back. It would have been a big blow, but derail the entire offense? I don't see it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25241
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2013 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
You're right, Brown's loss would have derailed the entire offense.

Wow, Troy Brown was my favorite player when he was active, but I would not have made that claim.


Brown accounted for 101 catches and 1199 yards in 2001. That's almost twice as much as the #2 option Patten (51 for 749) and the #3 and #4 options were terrible (Charles Johnson and Fred Coleman - a combined 16 catches).

You think the Pats win the Super Bowl with Patten and Johnson as the top receivers in the playoffs? No, I don't think so.

I think Troy Brown is overrated a little in terms of his on-field contributions by Pats fans, but in 2001 he WAS the offense. He was the extension of the mediocre running game and the only guy who could be reliably counted on to make catches and run crisp routes. Furthermore, he's the only guy that Brady has an excellent chemistry with for the beginning of his career.

You're worried about the team losing Dobson's development (a "disaster" waiting to happen) when they have about 5-6 other weapons but think losing Brown would have been anything than catastrophic for the 2001 team? That I don't understand at all. Patten was a passable receiver. The rest of those offensive weapons (including Rutledge, Wiggins and company) were awful. Worse than Fells and Jenkins.

Derailing the offense and winning the Super Bowl are two different things. If we take Brown off offense but leave him on special teams for the playoffs, there's a decent chance they still get to the Super Bowl. It's not like the offense did much in the first two games. And they still had a productive ground game, Faulk and Patten to catch passes and a defense playing well above its head to get them the ball back. It would have been a big blow, but derail the entire offense? I don't see it.


A few things on this:

1. Faulk was an afterthought on the 2001 team. 30 catches and 41 rushes. After week 11, he was almost totally benched - 9 rushes and 5 receptions in the final 5 regular season games. 2003 Faulk could have helped make up for the loss of Troy Brown, but 2001 Faulk was not that player by any stretch.

2. The offense might not have "done much" in the first two games of the playoffs, but Brown accounted for 12 catches and 164 yards (including an 8 for 121 performance in the AFCCG). Implying that Fred Coleman or Charles Johnson could have picked up that slack is crazy. If Patten was the only NFL caliber WR (and let's not act like Johnson or Coleman were good in 2001, they were both quite bad), defenses would have been able to take him out of the game easily. That leaves the "superb" combo of Johnson, Coleman and garbage TE's (Rutledge, Wiggins). As it is, the offense put up 365 yards vs. the Raiders, I wouldn't say that classifies as "not doing much" although the OT obviously inflates it a bit.

3. Brown was significant in helping move the chains on screens. Patten was OK on them but Coleman and Johnson were useless. I'm sure you watched all of those games and remember the struggles they had running the ball at times in 2001. Brown's ability to be an extension of the running game was crucial to that team's offensive success.

4. Your initial point is that the Pats passing game is in trouble ("disaster") if Dobson doesn't develop and the key to him developing is his ability to master the "chemistry" aspect (hand signals, timing what have you). Your example of him needing those intangibles in December and January is totally contradictory to the idea that the Pats could have done without Troy Brown in 2001. As covered, Charles Johnson never looked in sync with Brady and was never known as an "intangibles" guy and Fred Coleman wasn't an NFL caliber player by any measurement. Brown was easily the most gifted (not saying much) and most "intangible" guy on that offense.

5. The 2013 Patriots offense without Aaron Dobson at WR are a much better team than the 2001 Patriots team without Troy Brown at WR. Suggesting that losing Brown wouldn't have totally deflated that offense and significantly impacted their chances at getting to the playoffs (let alone Super Bowl) is totally crazy IMO. He was the only above average talent in the WR/TE/RB grouping in talent and "intangibles". Losing him IMO would have been a much much bigger blow than last year's team losing Gronkowski or the 2009 team losing Welker. Brown is overrated in general by Pats fans (in terms of talent) but in 2001 he was the offense. More than just the yards and first downs, he was the vehicle through which Brady acclimated to the NFL and developed (and stayed in) rhythm. Brady's breakout game (the San Diego OT game) just happened to coincide with Brown putting up 11-117 and establishing himself as Brady's binky.

You can have the last word if you want it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12619
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2013 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Richter wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
You're right, Brown's loss would have derailed the entire offense.

Wow, Troy Brown was my favorite player when he was active, but I would not have made that claim.


Brown accounted for 101 catches and 1199 yards in 2001. That's almost twice as much as the #2 option Patten (51 for 749) and the #3 and #4 options were terrible (Charles Johnson and Fred Coleman - a combined 16 catches).

You think the Pats win the Super Bowl with Patten and Johnson as the top receivers in the playoffs? No, I don't think so.

I think Troy Brown is overrated a little in terms of his on-field contributions by Pats fans, but in 2001 he WAS the offense. He was the extension of the mediocre running game and the only guy who could be reliably counted on to make catches and run crisp routes. Furthermore, he's the only guy that Brady has an excellent chemistry with for the beginning of his career.

You're worried about the team losing Dobson's development (a "disaster" waiting to happen) when they have about 5-6 other weapons but think losing Brown would have been anything than catastrophic for the 2001 team? That I don't understand at all. Patten was a passable receiver. The rest of those offensive weapons (including Rutledge, Wiggins and company) were awful. Worse than Fells and Jenkins.

Derailing the offense and winning the Super Bowl are two different things. If we take Brown off offense but leave him on special teams for the playoffs, there's a decent chance they still get to the Super Bowl. It's not like the offense did much in the first two games. And they still had a productive ground game, Faulk and Patten to catch passes and a defense playing well above its head to get them the ball back. It would have been a big blow, but derail the entire offense? I don't see it.


A few things on this:

1. Faulk was an afterthought on the 2001 team. 30 catches and 41 rushes. After week 11, he was almost totally benched - 9 rushes and 5 receptions in the final 5 regular season games. 2003 Faulk could have helped make up for the loss of Troy Brown, but 2001 Faulk was not that player by any stretch.

2. The offense might not have "done much" in the first two games of the playoffs, but Brown accounted for 12 catches and 164 yards (including an 8 for 121 performance in the AFCCG). Implying that Fred Coleman or Charles Johnson could have picked up that slack is crazy. If Patten was the only NFL caliber WR (and let's not act like Johnson or Coleman were good in 2001, they were both quite bad), defenses would have been able to take him out of the game easily. That leaves the "superb" combo of Johnson, Coleman and garbage TE's (Rutledge, Wiggins). As it is, the offense put up 365 yards vs. the Raiders, I wouldn't say that classifies as "not doing much" although the OT obviously inflates it a bit.

3. Brown was significant in helping move the chains on screens. Patten was OK on them but Coleman and Johnson were useless. I'm sure you watched all of those games and remember the struggles they had running the ball at times in 2001. Brown's ability to be an extension of the running game was crucial to that team's offensive success.

4. Your initial point is that the Pats passing game is in trouble ("disaster") if Dobson doesn't develop and the key to him developing is his ability to master the "chemistry" aspect (hand signals, timing what have you). Your example of him needing those intangibles in December and January is totally contradictory to the idea that the Pats could have done without Troy Brown in 2001. As covered, Charles Johnson never looked in sync with Brady and was never known as an "intangibles" guy and Fred Coleman wasn't an NFL caliber player by any measurement. Brown was easily the most gifted (not saying much) and most "intangible" guy on that offense.

5. The 2013 Patriots offense without Aaron Dobson at WR are a much better team than the 2001 Patriots team without Troy Brown at WR. Suggesting that losing Brown wouldn't have totally deflated that offense and significantly impacted their chances at getting to the playoffs (let alone Super Bowl) is totally crazy IMO. He was the only above average talent in the WR/TE/RB grouping in talent and "intangibles". Losing him IMO would have been a much much bigger blow than last year's team losing Gronkowski or the 2009 team losing Welker. Brown is overrated in general by Pats fans (in terms of talent) but in 2001 he was the offense. More than just the yards and first downs, he was the vehicle through which Brady acclimated to the NFL and developed (and stayed in) rhythm. Brady's breakout game (the San Diego OT game) just happened to coincide with Brown putting up 11-117 and establishing himself as Brady's binky.

You can have the last word if you want it.

I really, really don't want to address this point by point, because I think you're missing the bigger picture, which is basically that the 2001 Patriots were not as offense dependent as recent squads (Brown's catch and yardage totals are nice, but they beat the Steelers on a great David Patten catch and a bunch of special teams plays sprinkled between great defense), and made the Super Bowl largely on the strength of a decent bit of good fortune and timely defensive play more than anything else. The offense wasn't carrying its share of the load entirely at that point. This team is vastly, vastly different, and the offense is still what will win them games at this point. They'll also likely face much tougher competition in the AFC this year than the somewhat mediocre collection of opponents available in 2001. I think you and I have different meanings as far as the word derailed goes, though. I take it as meaning "ceases to function", whereas you seem to take it as "far less productive". I don't think the 2001 Patriots offense turns into the Arizona Cardinals offense of recent vintage if Brown goes down, which was the basic point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FakingInjuries


Joined: 05 Feb 2012
Posts: 547
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 10:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Spikes and his agent should realize he's almost certainly out of New England next year. He should be doing as much as possible to present himself as the consummate teammate and leader. Those intangibles will get him a bit more than his fairly limited skill set would normally fetch on the open market.

A guy who has already been suspended, had (minor) character issues coming out of school and now is holding out? Can't say that's going to help next winter. 2-down players don't fetch a ton these days, especially when they have questions about their personality.


...and he's already been replaced. Hightower can move to MLB, and Collins can play OLB.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 25241
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2013 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Kyle Arrington manned the first team with Talib to open OTAs while Alfonzo Dennard and Dowling manned the second unit — take that as you will. They all looked terrific — add as much salt as necessary, given the lack of pads and contact — in their first run-through of the offseason, and it wouldn’t be a surprise if Dowling and Dennard get some first-team reps of their own in the weeks to come.

From a pure spectator standpoint, Dowling looked like the best of the bunch. He appeared crisp in his backpedal, changed direction with supreme fluidity and even broke up a few of Tom Brady‘s passes along the sideline. Talib was working hard out on the corner, and both Dennard and Arrington looked solid in their reps, but, for my money at least, Dowling appeared to be the best player out on the corner.


I really hope Dowling can stay healthy this year and be the medium-long term solution opposite Dennard[/quote]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Donut


Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 12539
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2013 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Quote:
Kyle Arrington manned the first team with Talib to open OTAs while Alfonzo Dennard and Dowling manned the second unit — take that as you will. They all looked terrific — add as much salt as necessary, given the lack of pads and contact — in their first run-through of the offseason, and it wouldn’t be a surprise if Dowling and Dennard get some first-team reps of their own in the weeks to come.

From a pure spectator standpoint, Dowling looked like the best of the bunch. He appeared crisp in his backpedal, changed direction with supreme fluidity and even broke up a few of Tom Brady‘s passes along the sideline. Talib was working hard out on the corner, and both Dennard and Arrington looked solid in their reps, but, for my money at least, Dowling appeared to be the best player out on the corner.


I really hope Dowling can stay healthy this year and be the medium-long term solution opposite Dennard

As do I. i'm glad he's finally going into a TC healthy. He's one of my favorite prospects that we drafted and I still think he could be a good CB and wouldn't be surprised if he is a starting option.
_________________
dhunt2402 wrote:
You're like the patron saint of roster bubble players Laughing
Adopt a Patriot: Tim Wright
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address MSN Messenger
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12619
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2013 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Quote:
Kyle Arrington manned the first team with Talib to open OTAs while Alfonzo Dennard and Dowling manned the second unit — take that as you will. They all looked terrific — add as much salt as necessary, given the lack of pads and contact — in their first run-through of the offseason, and it wouldn’t be a surprise if Dowling and Dennard get some first-team reps of their own in the weeks to come.

From a pure spectator standpoint, Dowling looked like the best of the bunch. He appeared crisp in his backpedal, changed direction with supreme fluidity and even broke up a few of Tom Brady‘s passes along the sideline. Talib was working hard out on the corner, and both Dennard and Arrington looked solid in their reps, but, for my money at least, Dowling appeared to be the best player out on the corner.


I really hope Dowling can stay healthy this year and be the medium-long term solution opposite Dennard

If Talib and Dowling won the starting spots, stayed healthy and played to their potential, it'd make for the best duo at the position since Ty Law and Tyrone Poole back in '03. It'd also make the Patriots defense actually formidable for the first time in a long time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group