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

How Will We Replace Hernandez?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
HOVA333


Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 4762
Location: Brockton MA Richard Sherman is a Pansy
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 4:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Donut wrote:
Billy Spikes wrote:
Not saying they were gonna sign him but this off-the-field issues might hurt his chances:

http://www.tmz.com/2013/07/01/jeremy-shockey-divorce-wife-daniela-shockey-alimony-jail/

We brought Gaffney back during his divorce and he flipped out about her on twitter when he found out. But 8 months and a prenup and she wants alimony...


Why do professional athletes get married? Seriously? Party like a Rock star until the end!! ( But not like Gronk more discreet)
_________________

Adopt A Patriot
Logan Ryan : CB
Tkls: Int: FF:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23458
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HOVA333 wrote:
Donut wrote:
Billy Spikes wrote:
Not saying they were gonna sign him but this off-the-field issues might hurt his chances:

http://www.tmz.com/2013/07/01/jeremy-shockey-divorce-wife-daniela-shockey-alimony-jail/

We brought Gaffney back during his divorce and he flipped out about her on twitter when he found out. But 8 months and a prenup and she wants alimony...


Why do professional athletes get married? Seriously? Party like a Rock star until the end!! ( But not like Gronk more discreet)


Most adults, including football players (I'm guessing?), don't have the maturity level of a 21 year old frat boy (like Gronkowski).

I would assume that like most working adults who need a paycheck, these guys bust their butts to maintain their place in the company (team) and to reach their goal (usually a championship but also maybe glory/fame/a fat contract). If anything, athletes should party less than most working stiffs because there is so much at stake and they need to keep their bodies in near perfect condition and there is more "off duty" work they need to do (learn plays, study film, work out etc).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Donut


Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 12457
PostPosted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HOVA333 wrote:
Donut wrote:
Billy Spikes wrote:
Not saying they were gonna sign him but this off-the-field issues might hurt his chances:

http://www.tmz.com/2013/07/01/jeremy-shockey-divorce-wife-daniela-shockey-alimony-jail/

We brought Gaffney back during his divorce and he flipped out about her on twitter when he found out. But 8 months and a prenup and she wants alimony...


Why do professional athletes get married? Seriously? Party like a Rock star until the end!! ( But not like Gronk more discreet)
Because people believe in love? I mean if you don't whats the point.
_________________
dhunt2402 wrote:
You're like the patron saint of roster bubble players Laughing
Adopt a Patriot:
2011: Matt Slater
2012: Ras I Dowling
2013: Chandler Jones
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address MSN Messenger
Grachuus


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 25272
Location: Thanks for the Sig Deadpulse!
PostPosted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I hope it doesn't take too long to find a pro-bowl alleged murderer. Seems like a very under utilized roster slot.
_________________

Mark Twain wrote:
Sanity and happiness are an impossible combination.

QBvsDefensiveQuality
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mongo


Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 770
Location: Englewood CO
PostPosted: Fri Jul 05, 2013 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Billy Spikes wrote:
Mongo wrote:
Richter wrote:
Mongo wrote:
As a Chiefs fan, Iím interested in this situation. Tony Moeaki probably no longer fits in KCís plans. Heís athletic, but often injured. Letís face it, there are few TE as athletic as Hernandez. Moeakiís rookie year was full of promise.

The Chiefs are going to lose an R2 or 3 for Alex Smith. I believe a deal can be struck, if NE needs to.

A conditional R4 based on Moeakiís performance might be do-able. If I were KC GM John Dorsey thatís what Iíd want, otherwise no deal.

I doubt the Patriots would have any interest in that deal.

Why not? It's safe to presume a NE R4 would be a late one. The condition could be based on 40-50 catches, otherwise it falls to an R5. If Moeaki catches that many passes, the trade is well worth it for NE.


Moeaki wasn't overly fast even before he tore his ACL, he seemed even slower in 2012. Also he's only been in the league a couple of seasons and he's already 26 and i don't think he's a 5th round pick especially since he won't play the Hernandez role, we have a bunch of slower/good hands guys on the team already and adding another for 4th-5th is pointless.

He only caught 33 passes last season and one touchdown, he's not very productive.

Moeaki did run 4.69 at the combine. I'll grant you that he did not seem fully recovered last year. However, some of his "lack of productivity" can be attributed to the awful QB play in KC last year. No one produced in the passing game.
_________________
IMO - In My Opinion
opinion: a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23458
PostPosted: Sat Jul 06, 2013 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd give up a 5th rounder for Moeaki without thinking twice. Any player who has shown to be moderately useful and has upside is worth a 5th rounder IMO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deadpulse


Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 8587
Location: Boston MA
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
I'd give up a 5th rounder for Moeaki without thinking twice. Any player who has shown to be moderately useful and has upside is worth a 5th rounder IMO.


Im a big Moeaki fan, loved him before his injury, Id go as high as a 4th for him. I wouldnt mind Celek either though.

So many media outlets are like, OMG WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO WITH ONLY GRONK AT TE?!

How about what everyone else does? Having two was amazing and created mismatches like crazy, but its not like Josh McD doesnt know how to run a more spread look offense and its not like Ridley and Shane arent used to running behind a spread look either.
_________________

Sigs
Patriots Red Sox Celtics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23458
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deadpulse wrote:

So many media outlets are like, OMG WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO WITH ONLY GRONK AT TE?!


Well, I think the "panic" about the TE situation is largely a function of both of the top 2 guys having serious injury questions (Will Gronkowski be ready by October, let alone September? Is Ballard going to be healthy/productive?) and the backups are nobodies.

Quote:
How about what everyone else does? Having two was amazing and created mismatches like crazy, but its not like Josh McD doesnt know how to run a more spread look offense and its not like Ridley and Shane arent used to running behind a spread look either.


This is the other part of the "panic" which is related to the Pats WR corps. They have Amendola and a bunch of unknowns (and known mediocrities like Jenkins, Jones and Hawkins). I can see why some, especially casual fans and those in the media, think the Pats need to add another TE to improve the offense. Right now, the team's most talented receivers (except Amendola) are question marks and the rest of the corps is underwhelming at best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deadpulse


Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 8587
Location: Boston MA
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Deadpulse wrote:

So many media outlets are like, OMG WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO WITH ONLY GRONK AT TE?!


Well, I think the "panic" about the TE situation is largely a function of both of the top 2 guys having serious injury questions (Will Gronkowski be ready by October, let alone September? Is Ballard going to be healthy/productive?) and the backups are nobodies.

Quote:
How about what everyone else does? Having two was amazing and created mismatches like crazy, but its not like Josh McD doesnt know how to run a more spread look offense and its not like Ridley and Shane arent used to running behind a spread look either.


This is the other part of the "panic" which is related to the Pats WR corps. They have Amendola and a bunch of unknowns (and known mediocrities like Jenkins, Jones and Hawkins). I can see why some, especially casual fans and those in the media, think the Pats need to add another TE to improve the offense. Right now, the team's most talented receivers (except Amendola) are question marks and the rest of the corps is underwhelming at best.


I have faith Gronk will be back well before October. If he misses time, he misses week 1 only I think.

I may be the only one, but I actually like the receiving corps. Are all of them question marks? Absolutely. Some more than others probably, but I like the chances of at least a few panning out, which is all we really need with Brady behind a very good line. Amendola could fill and exceed the Welker role as long as he stays healthy. Julian knows the system and has shown flashes that are extremely similar to Danny, but again, stay healthy. Dobson and Boyce are the rookies that need to learn fast, even if just one produces in year one that'd be amazing. Mark Harrison and Kenbrell Thompkins are nice guys to fight it out as UDFAs against the veterans of Jenkins, Hawkins, Jones, of which only one really needs to show up.

Are they all questions? Again, yes. However there is a great deal of them, so the odds of 3/9 panning out are pretty good. Its very uncertain, because any of them could boom or bust and anywhere inbetween, but thats what makes it excited and one of the reason why I am so excited to go to TC this year.

And finally, I think people are underrated the stable of running backs we have. Ridley and Vereen can be leaned on IMO, especially with bruisers behind them to take the big hits (whether it be Blount or Bolden).
_________________

Sigs
Patriots Red Sox Celtics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23458
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deadpulse wrote:

I may be the only one, but I actually like the receiving corps.


I'll like it if one of the rookies can be an impact player. They have enough depth options to fill out the #3-5 spots.

But if Dobson and Boyce struggle to step into a #2 role by mid-season, the team's passing game could look out of sync and sloppy for the entire season. That doesn't mean they will have a terrible offense or that they will struggle to score points, but stalled drives, INT's due to bad communication, off target throws by Brady etc will probably be more prevalent than in recent years.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deadpulse


Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 8587
Location: Boston MA
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Deadpulse wrote:

I may be the only one, but I actually like the receiving corps.


I'll like it if one of the rookies can be an impact player. They have enough depth options to fill out the #3-5 spots.

But if Dobson and Boyce struggle to step into a #2 role by mid-season, the team's passing game could look out of sync and sloppy for the entire season. That doesn't mean they will have a terrible offense or that they will struggle to score points, but stalled drives, INT's due to bad communication, off target throws by Brady etc will probably be more prevalent than in recent years.


I just keep looking back to 2006 and it comforts me, because it wont be THAT bad offensively. Granted that defense was more reliable on the other side of the ball.
_________________

Sigs
Patriots Red Sox Celtics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23458
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deadpulse wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Deadpulse wrote:

I may be the only one, but I actually like the receiving corps.


I'll like it if one of the rookies can be an impact player. They have enough depth options to fill out the #3-5 spots.

But if Dobson and Boyce struggle to step into a #2 role by mid-season, the team's passing game could look out of sync and sloppy for the entire season. That doesn't mean they will have a terrible offense or that they will struggle to score points, but stalled drives, INT's due to bad communication, off target throws by Brady etc will probably be more prevalent than in recent years.


I just keep looking back to 2006 and it comforts me, because it wont be THAT bad offensively. Granted that defense was more reliable on the other side of the ball.


And in 2006, Brady had his worst season in the 2005-2012 stretch (by quite a bit). 87.9 rating and 220 YPG. That's essentially Andy Dalton level (or regular season Flacco). I don't think the Pats can win 12+ games with that type of performance.

I know most of us are quite high on Ridley (and Vereen), but I don't know that those guys can make up that type of drop from what Brady has been providing and what a 2006 type performance. The 2006 team had more success in obvious run situations (except in the 2006 AFCCG unfortunately) than the 2012 team. Ridley (et al) put up good stats last year largely due to them catching the opponent in extra DB sets and in the hurry-up.

I don't think the 2013 team - as it stands now - is built to exploit personnel mismatches as well as last season and I don't think the run game will enjoy the same element of surprise type success. The 2012 team's success, outside of some very predictable series from McDaniels, was largely because of their ability to run and pass successfully from any personnel group on any part of the field. I don't know that their personnel is built that way right now. They will need a number of guys to step up to give them the same match-up advantage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deadpulse


Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 8587
Location: Boston MA
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Deadpulse wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
Deadpulse wrote:

I may be the only one, but I actually like the receiving corps.


I'll like it if one of the rookies can be an impact player. They have enough depth options to fill out the #3-5 spots.

But if Dobson and Boyce struggle to step into a #2 role by mid-season, the team's passing game could look out of sync and sloppy for the entire season. That doesn't mean they will have a terrible offense or that they will struggle to score points, but stalled drives, INT's due to bad communication, off target throws by Brady etc will probably be more prevalent than in recent years.


I just keep looking back to 2006 and it comforts me, because it wont be THAT bad offensively. Granted that defense was more reliable on the other side of the ball.


And in 2006, Brady had his worst season in the 2005-2012 stretch (by quite a bit). 87.9 rating and 220 YPG. That's essentially Andy Dalton level (or regular season Flacco). I don't think the Pats can win 12+ games with that type of performance.

I know most of us are quite high on Ridley (and Vereen), but I don't know that those guys can make up that type of drop from what Brady has been providing and what a 2006 type performance. The 2006 team had more success in obvious run situations (except in the 2006 AFCCG unfortunately) than the 2012 team. Ridley (et al) put up good stats last year largely due to them catching the opponent in extra DB sets and in the hurry-up.

I don't think the 2013 team - as it stands now - is built to exploit personnel mismatches as well as last season and I don't think the run game will enjoy the same element of surprise type success. The 2012 team's success, outside of some very predictable series from McDaniels, was largely because of their ability to run and pass successfully from any personnel group on any part of the field. I don't know that their personnel is built that way right now. They will need a number of guys to step up to give them the same match-up advantage.


I dont expect Brady to sink that low. I think this WR core is exceptionally better than in 2006. What I am saying is if Brady can be good with the talent from 2006 he can definitely still be great with his 2013 cast, especially with Gronk back
_________________

Sigs
Patriots Red Sox Celtics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 23458
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deadpulse wrote:
think this WR core is exceptionally better than in 2006.


Well Amendola is far better than anything the 2006 team offered. The rest though? Dobson has more talent, but who knows how he will pan out. Jones/Hawkins/Edelman/Jenkins are pretty close to washed up Troy Brown, Caldwell, Gabriel, Gaffney.

For as much as people are going to focus on Gronkowksi's health and Hernandez being gone, the development of Aaron Dobson is really the key to the offense's success. He's the only guy other than Gronkowski/Amendola that opposing defenses will (potentially) have to worry about/specifically game plan for. If he has a big season, the Pats will be an elite offense once again. If he is injured/doesn't pan out/develops slowly, they will probably be in the 7th-12th overall range.

Although honestly, do the aggregate numbers matter? What matters is being able to win games, and the offense needs to do three things in January:

1. Work efficiently - don't leave points on the board
2. Don't turn the ball over
3. Control the clock

The vaunted Pats offense of 2007 and 2010-2012 really struggled with #1 and #3 in the biggest games. So to that end, this year's offense has a lower bar to clear than some might think in order to be more "championship worthy".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deadpulse


Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 8587
Location: Boston MA
PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
Deadpulse wrote:
think this WR core is exceptionally better than in 2006.


Well Amendola is far better than anything the 2006 team offered. The rest though? Dobson has more talent, but who knows how he will pan out. Jones/Hawkins/Edelman/Jenkins are pretty close to washed up Troy Brown, Caldwell, Gabriel, Gaffney.

For as much as people are going to focus on Gronkowksi's health and Hernandez being gone, the development of Aaron Dobson is really the key to the offense's success. He's the only guy other than Gronkowski/Amendola that opposing defenses will (potentially) have to worry about/specifically game plan for. If he has a big season, the Pats will be an elite offense once again. If he is injured/doesn't pan out/develops slowly, they will probably be in the 7th-12th overall range.

Although honestly, do the aggregate numbers matter? What matters is being able to win games, and the offense needs to do three things in January:

1. Work efficiently - don't leave points on the board
2. Don't turn the ball over
3. Control the clock

The vaunted Pats offense of 2007 and 2010-2012 really struggled with #1 and #3 in the biggest games. So to that end, this year's offense has a lower bar to clear than some might think in order to be more "championship worthy".


I'd love for a return to the ideal of defenses and the running game win championships. Having Brady is definitely huge and I would never intentionally belittle his massive importance, but a good running game is the best way to be efficient, to not put the ball in the air and therefore reduce a chance of a turnover, and control the clock. Then the good defense inhibits 1-3 for the other team, disrupting their efficiency with sacks, swats, and TFL, forcing turnovers, and taking the other team off the field so that your team can control the clock.
_________________

Sigs
Patriots Red Sox Celtics
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 - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 5 of 7

 
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