Around the NFL 2013 Offseason (Version 5150)

[Lotus]

Brady has won Super Bowls with rather crappy receivers before. This does not mean that he will again - but it also means we should be cautious in declaring the demise of the Pats for receiver reasons alone.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Lotus

.... but it also means we should be cautious in declaring the demise of the Pats for receiver reasons alone.

Nah, **** it! Grab the pitchforks and burning brands! Burn the Franchise!

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Nah, **** it! Grab the pitchforks and burning brands! Burn the Franchise!

No, please don't do that! Then the Patriot's bandwagon fans would have to find another team, and some of them just might chose the Redskins.

I know the Patriots have some loyal fans, but for some reason, it seems like they have more bandwagon fans than any other team. Maybe it's just me.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Brady has won Super Bowls with rather crappy receivers before. This does not mean that he will again - but it also means we should be cautious in declaring the demise of the Pats for receiver reasons alone.

Agreed. For years Brady threw to a bunch of joe schmoes and had success. I won't believe they are heading downhill until it happens.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Brady has won Super Bowls with rather crappy receivers before. This does not mean that he will again - but it also means we should be cautious in declaring the demise of the Pats for receiver reasons alone.

He was younger and had a far better defense than what they have now. Brady was 27 years old when his best receiver was Reche Caldwell.

While I don't think it is all gloom and doom for N.E., I don't think they will be the juggernaut they once were. But I am sure they'll find a way to win. I do find it puzzling that with all of the resources they've had (especially their draft picks), they've not given Brady any weapons (other than Gronk).

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

He was younger and had a far better defense than what they have now. Brady was 27 years old when his best receiver was Reche Caldwell.

While I don't think it is all gloom and doom for N.E., I don't think they will be the juggernaut they once were. But I am sure they'll find a way to win. I do find it puzzling that with all of the resources they've had (especially their draft picks), they've not given Brady any weapons (other than Gronk).

It seems they gave Hernandez a weapon.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by SirLK26

Poor Brady. He doesn't have his elite receiving squad anymore. In hindsight, I'm sure the Pats are kicking themselves for letting Welker go.

Someone on this board(CRedskinsRule?)asked if this was the year NE faltered. It's starting to look that way. No good receivers are a lock to play this season except for Amendola, and Danny Woodhead's gone. If their defense isn't better than last season, I can't see them finishing above 9-7.

The Pats Super Bowl wins weren't about WRs.

Great CHFF article:

The reality is this folks: New England’s fortunes have NOTHING to do with who plays slot receiver in 2013 or beyond. New England’s fortunes have EVERYTHING to do with finding a shutdown corner and pass rusher – two championship building blocks that the team has miserably failed to find for nearly a decade now.

[skinsfaninok]

Pats have had 12 straight winning seasons, can't really bet against that

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Pats have had 12 straight winning seasons, can't really bet against that

True, true. But Brady's getting older; Welker, who's been a big part of their success, is gone; Woodhead's gone; Ridley hasn't proven he can be a reliable runner; and the defense has never been among the best.

I don't know, perhaps not this year, but every dog has his day, and I think the Patriot's day is coming to a close.

[skinsfaninok]

Eventually the pats will fall but that division is still pretty bad, miami,buff and ny are all bad teams.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Eventually the pats will fall but that division is still pretty bad, miami,buff and ny are all bad teams.

The Dolphins are better than you think. If they find a running game they can win 9-10 games.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Eventually the pats will fall but that division is still pretty bad, miami,buff and ny are all bad teams.

Anyone recall why the Niners were dominant in the late 80's through the 90's? Same reason. Weak division.

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Anyone recall why the Niners were dominant in the late 80's through the 90's? Same reason. Weak division.

Exactly!! Oh no wait, it was "the genius" who was ranked as the second greatest NFL coach by ESPN, despite getting abused by Parcells in that era.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Anyone recall why the Niners were dominant in the late 80's through the 90's? Same reason. Weak division.

Walsh
Montana
Rice
Young
Seifert
Lott
......................there's a few reasons , look up the rest.

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Anyone recall why the Niners were dominant in the late 80's through the 90's? Same reason. Weak division.

A weak division gets you to the playoffs. It does not get you the amount of SB wins that San Fran won during the late 80's and early 90's. To get that many SB wins with a weak team would involve a weak NFL, not a weak division.

I used to live in Cali back in the early 80's (summer of 80' through summer of 86'). I had the opportunity in the summer of 85' to go see the 49ers at one of their training camp practices. Trust me, Montana didnt miss a pass. He hit his receivers in perfect stride almost every time. He didnt have the strongest arm, but his accuracy was a thing of beauty.

Side note - Little did any of us know that the skinny WR that they picked in the first round that year would break almost every record before he was done.