Ronin

Yeah, I have mystical powers that forecasted to me, and only me, that JW was going to have a DWI yesterday. Thanks for sticking to the actual topic and not making the thread about me. LOL The way these threads devolve is comical, it's almost every single one. Attention deficit disorder strikes en masse often. LOL Great substance added to the topic. Once again, I speak to how these threads devolve.

Will Gilmore be satisfied with that? It doesn't sound as if he will if the media reports are true, about wanting to be paid like the best.

How so? Two players from our current draft class now have issues. Lawson and his injury and JW and his DWI, which will likely result in a suspension if it doesn't prevent him from making the team. It should be a foregone conclusion that Cardale Jones will be lucky to contribute in any capacity much less at QB. This leaves Ragland, Washington, Seymour, and Listenbee as the only other draftees from this year, and three of those will be depth players at best. So in essence we're down to Ragland that can possibly make a starting caliber impact. I think that the thread title/subtitle is perfectly accurate.

Interesting question. As always, what he's worth to one team or us may vary depending upon circumstances, cap-room being among them. Building and keeping an NFL roster is an ongoing battle in today's NFL, eh. It's also a huge shell game with and regarding opportunity costs. Mario was good, but not so good that he was worth tying up such an enormous piece of the cap and of real dollars. As always, the question becomes one of what else one can get for the same money, not even necessarily in terms of the same position, but in any way. One thing's for sure tho, you can only have so many highly paid players. As for me, I'll be content with whatever happens on this one. Glenn we needed, Dareus we needed, Taylor, we'll see after/during the season. Gilmore? For the money I'm not sure it's worth shedding tears if they don't keep him. Same with Watkins, I got into this topic the other day, but IMO unless Watkins turns things around immediately, meaning staying healthy and putting up top-10 WR numbers, he won't be worth 5th year option money. Once you start getting into double-digit millions you'd better have players that can stay healthy to start.

Those are pretty key players to be missing time. Many Buffalo-oriented thinking that JW had possibilities. I don't to be honest, hardly a game-breaker and he missed last season and won't have played for two seasons, but given Shady's hammy, Karlos and JW were the odds-on faves to back him up. Not sure whether JW will be suspended or not, but it sure also doesn't help his chances of making the team, especially if he's not that good to begin with during preseason as I suspect. The players from previous drafts or traded for are the reasons why the other players mentioned are relevant. Except for Lawson of course who's supposed to replace Mario. Read a piece yesterday, probably linked on the front page, about how the Bills' D has more talent this year than last and a prediction of 9 wins. Not seeing that. I see less talent, particularly with Lawson out. Ragland has issues in coverage and Washington is overrated IMO but either way will be a depth player, not a starter anyway as he has far more talent ahead of him on the depth chart, so his contributions even if he's good will be limited. Anyway, I see a less talented D this year so far and injuries haven't even accumulated.

Nothing from college tho, correct? I couldn't find anything. That's all I meant. Granted, he sat out a year, still.

Lawson out and unlikely to contribute much if at all this season, Karlos showing up to camp as if he just came from a two-month all-u-can-eat buffet, Shady with an injury of the type that lingers throughout the season, Watkins' status completely indeterminable, and now Jonathon Williams facing a suspension for DWI. Even if Tyrod does step it up, huge questions exist as to the weapons he'll actually have at his disposal this season. Poor guy, this appears to be one of the weakest supporting casts in franchise history. Besides being largely unproven (Karlos, Williams, Lawson), there's zero quality depth. The "victory in the offseason" is actually manifesting itself more towards netting us a top-5/10 draft pick than it is a .500 record much less anything better. Doesn't seem as if JW had character issues coming in tho.

So, apart from DeBerg, are you comparing the '78 - '80 Niners to the Pats teams apart from Brady? Yes or no? I realize that they were loaded with Allstar talent and their top-10 defensive rankings as well. /extreme sarcasm Really? Thank you!!!!!!!!! And this folks, is exactly the difference between intellectual content and the typical drivel that flows out of the mouths of TV types who have jobs day after day regardless of the mindless and unsubstantiated irrelevancies that they utter. Gugny and Mr. WEO take particular note. I think you've missed the context of this part of the conversation here. I don't think that anyone is saying that they're not going to win the division. We're essentially talking about their first four games. There isn't a team in the AFCE that's poised to take it from them. Even if they lose their first four and go 10-2 the rest of the way 10-6 will probably win it in this division. Again, they can thank the football gods that they're in the division with the worst string of management, coaching, and QB of any during the career of Brady. In just about any other division except perhaps the NFCE, and maybe even there, they'd have a seriously challenge for the D title, but not here. I agree with you as I sense that most do, they'll be fine on the season, unless Brady gets hurt or something. I doubt they'll have homefield as a result of the suspension tho. LOL Of course you do, that much has been clear from the onset, ... except, that you ignore a whole bunch of things like a the Pats being in teh weakest division in football (verifiably) during Brady's tenure, BB's cheating which you haven't acknowledged either, the fact that in 7 other seasons BB hasn't even been average much less good, that fact that luck, not performance got them to their first SB to even be able to win it, and other things like this "defensive genius" having his D's sorely underperform over the last bunch of seasons and when he also hasn't had top allstar talent. All around the country there are people in NFL circles that agree with the notion that Brady is far more responsible for the Pats' success than BB is, but you dismiss it out of hand. Feel free, but if you want to judge a career without all of the data factored in then that really isn't judging his entire career, is it. Whoever mentioned Walsh mentioned Levy, but IMO Levy wasn't a great coach either. He had arguably the best collection of talent in the NFL. Kelly was better than Aikman or Hostetler. Our WRs were as good if not better, Thurman was comparable to the best, our D was too. Yet, he couldn't beat inferior Giants or Dallas teams (2nd SB). Polian was the reason why Levy has a legacy. For those that failed to notice, the only successful era of the Bills fell apart after Polian, not Levy, left. If Parcells, JJ, or Gibbs had been the coach of the Bills we'd be at least 2-2 in SBs right now with maybe another appearance or two even. That's MO. Yes, I know, but you'll feel free to comment on what it says. So typical in forums. Again, refer to my response to vincec please. It's posters such as him that make good intellectual conversation and discussion possible. In the meantime, and please, take this any way you want to, if you never respond to one of my posts again I'll consider it to be a positive development.

Know, actually what I find funny, really, is your inability to read and comprehend what I actually write and state plainly in simple English. See, in your world, and posters such as yourself, everything's boolean in nature. Good [grunt] ... Bad! [groan] I view things on a sliding scale, a continuous one. And simply because I've stated that Brady's the reason for the Pats success, uhhhh, essentially when he's been on the field and not otherwise much less under any other team that BB has fielded, in your and other posters minds for some bizarre reason that seems to translate to some absurd notion that what I actually wrote, which appears nowhere anywhere, least of all not in this thread, is that BB sucks or something akin to that, that he's a "bad" coach, etc. Clearly I've not said that but your approach has me shagging polemical balls that I never asked to have to field. Other posters have clearly gotten it based on what I actually wrote, but not you, you're [apparently] a little to quick for that. Then others float things about Walsh as if Walsh has a similar history despite the fact that he doesn't. Again, is this good intellectual content? I don't think so. To me it's a waste of time like so much here. Anyway, I've not omitted anything in this discussion although I have mentioned possible cheating on the part of BB to assist him through the playoffs and to his first few SBs, which we don't know, but this also shouldn't be news to you and I'd love to see you start a thread here saying that you don't think that cheating assisted his Pats in anyway and let's see what the response is. OTOH, you continue to ignore facts and refuse to consider any other possible angle, which is all I've done here, pose a possibility, that's all. Meanwhile, your mundane repetitive limited opinions apart from any real facts or substance to substantiate them keep reappearing as if you're operating under the notion that if something is repeated often enough it finally becomes the truth. If when Brady retires BB continues to make the playoffs and win games therein then you'll end up being more correct than not. Until then ... But the fact of the matter is that BB's teams apart from Brady have been no better than Jauron's, whose playoff team frankly was better than BB's. There are other data points as well suggesting that BB is overrated, such as Coughlin entirely owning him in the most important games of their careers, and that includes Coughlin on two different teams as well. Harbaugh with a much lesser talented Ravens team also has outperformed BB's Pats on average as well. This has contributed to BB's winning only one SB after he was discovered cheating, despite having been the perennial preseason favorite to win the SB every single season since then. I realize that you choose to ignore all that, which is what you are doing and which is fine, but it's wrong to throw up things that I didn't say as if I did.

LOL Right, your opinionated way or the highway. Yeah, I got that much from you a while back. You're right, on paper anyway. The problem is that your way of thinking, if BB tanks after Brady is gone, as I suspect he will, if IMO he's dumb enough to keep coaching in order to preserve his legacy as-is, then you and everyone else will be singing a different tune. And yeah, only you and that hamster on that wheel inside your head would seriously talk about the "greatness" of a coach that in 6 seasons posted a 52-62 record with one lackluster trip to the playoffs with an entirely unceremonious loss to oust them and their 1st-ranked D. To add some perspective to that, that's approximately a carbon copy of how Dick Jauron fared as a head coach. So just keep talkin' partner. Time will tell, or it won't if BB resigns after Brady does.

LMAO Walsh has no such track record. He was viewed as having revolutionized the game in his era. Talk about cherry-picking statements. We'll see depending upon how the Pats play under JP. My guess is that you'll be eating those words.

They have some above average players no doubt, but few ringers besides Gronk. Also, IMO you underestimate the impact that Brady has apart from merely throwing the ball and calling the plays. Edelman is good but hardly great. Watkins is better and look at us. Taylor will play better than JP in every likelihood too. Tannehill will likely even play better. Did you mean Dion Lewis? I don't see why he'll be a huge factor. Hasn't been so far. If you take their roster and match it up to other teams, I think you'll find that it's a pretty average roster. We're so used to Brady overachieving that it seems to be better than it is. I mean put Tannehill on the Pats instead of Brady and what do you see? Many teams have talented players. We have them. In fact Dareus, Glenn, Wood, Incognito, Darby and Gilmore are all better than their counterparts in NE IMO. Yet ... McCoy's better than any of their RBs too. Anyway, here's their depth chart, check it out, do you really see a serious contender w/o Brady? I see a .500 team +/- a game or two depending upon a variety of circumstances. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/teams/depth-chart/NE/new-england-patriots They'll win the division because Brady's only out for four games and otherwise because it's unlikely that any of the other three teams steps it up enough to win it. What, Geno Smith and Tannehill? Not seeing it. We have Taylor but too many other shortcomings despite what talented players we have. So once again the Pats are fortunate to be in the AFCE and not pretty much any other division.

Agreed The first four games, assuming that JP starts, will tell much. If the Pats go 1-3 and struggle offensively, that talk I'm guessing will start around the league. Maybe not in NE, but elsewhere. Also, we have to remember, we have no idea to what extent he cheated to win those SBs, and we all know that the Pats were lucky to advance out of the divisional round in 2001 in that game against the Raiders, the "tuck rule" game. The Pats should never have even been in that SB. After that, 11 seasons in the weakest division in football, as the preseason SB favorites every single season, with arguably the best QB in NFL history, they have one SB win. All because when Brady gets shut down in the playoffs BB has no answers. To me it's pretty clear.

First of all, get the context of the argument/discussion before diving in with both feet. You're off here. I'll engage anyway. Well, that's the question, did Belichick develop Brady or was Brady going to be good regardless. Since Belichick had no track record whatsoever of developing QBs, and since everyone that knows anything about football agrees that his prowess isn't offensive, rather defensive, I'll side with the notion that Brady was more responsible for developing himself along with perhaps an OC/QB Coach or two in a more limited manner. Otherwise, fine, if you and Gugny think that a head coach with a 52-62 record with one miserable playoff appearance featuring the 1st-ranked D, apart from having Brady is even average, great. To me that's not good and on par with what has gotten numerous of our coaches fired over the last 15 years or so. Not sure what to say. I can imagine your takes on how good our team is tho, you're probably one of those thinking that we're on the cusp.

LOL Even better. Let's not laugh too hard tho, I can see BB signing Fitzpatrick in the ultimate slap-in-the-face to the Jets. The Pats might be able to go 3-1/4-0 w/ Fitz. All they need is slightly above average QB play in three games along with a solid all-around effort otherwise. Not sure that they have the roster for that solid all-around effort, but if so, Fitz would be a great fit. Testeverde wasn't great, so how did Billick get a 33/16 season from him the very next season? I noticed that you leap-frogged Belicheat's 5-13 record w/ Bledsoe too. Seriously, you're defending BB's record apart from Brady. I think I've seen everything here now.

Sorry, should have qualified that better, I meant as a HEAD coach. Argue that one. I don't care if they ran a pro-style offense or a run-n-shoot, the speed of the game at that level is vastly different than it is at the FBS level. You've sat through an FBS game somewhere no doubt, you can see it. They're just not as fast. Given the difference between the FBS game and the NFL as the players state it, that's a huge wall for him to climb. Again, if he does it in these first four games it'll literally be a miracle. Also, he's 6'2", 225 or so, he's hardly a physical specimen. I don't see it. I see Jay Cutler-esque play coming from JP at best. If that happens they'll be lucky to win 1 game those first four. Maybe that'll shut up obnoxious Pats fans for a while then. I have no trouble envisioning that JP may be among the bottom five QBs after four games. BTW, I don't think Petty's going to do anything in the NFL as a starter ever either.

Agree, right now they are. Their roster simply isn't very good, on either side.

Bill B hasn't done squat in the NFL w/o Brady. He SUCKED with Bledsoe. 5-13 with essentially the same team that Brady took to the playoffs. I don't even credit Belicheat with knowing that Brady was better. If he had known he would have tossed that bum and put in Brady w/o having had his hand forced. He's just lucky that Bledsoe had that injury or Brady probably would have been playing for some other team long ago like most of their backups that come in for one contract and never get resigned. BTW, I already cited this, but the Pats went 2-2 last season with Brady's late-season diminished play. They needed 3 TD games from him to beat both the Texans and Broncos, neither of which had great offenses last season and with Osweiler playing for Denver. If Belicheat is smart he'll retire when Brady finishes to keep any tarnish off of his legacy. Between the cheating and a post-Brady demise, plenty of questions would arise.

All I know is that he last played for an FCS school, Eastern Illinois. Heaving 7 TDs against teams like Illinois St. doesn't matter. He played against third-rate opponents there, the kinds of teams that are in week one for good FBS schools as warmup games. His best four games there were against Illinois St., Northern Illinois, Tennessee-Martin, and Appalachian St. Big deal. That was about half of his 53 TD total that season. He's completely unproven in the NFL, has an average D to help him, no significant support in the running game, receivers that are probably only as good as they are because they play with Brady, Amendola being a prime example. Even then, their receivers are average at best besides Gronk. Gronk isn't enough to carry a team that won five games by 7 points last season to victory w/ Garoppolo under center behind a dicey OL. Point taken, but my angle is that they had the easiest, truly, the 32nd ranked, schedule in the league that year. If Belichick were all that he should have been able to do a little bit more than the Fins with Pennington, the Jets with a washed up Favre, or us with Edwards than he did. I mean do you really think that any of those teams were better than the Pats with Cassel? Remember, Cassel's put together one other much better season with the Chiefs too. The Pats had the best scoring D in the AFCE, the most points scored too, against lesser teams in the AFCE, with the easiest schedule in the league, and still couldn't prevent the Fins from winning the division. The Fins who were 1-15 the season prior and 7-9 the season following. Still think that's impressive? I don't. What it says to me is that if the Pats had had a middle-of-the-road schedule they may have been 6-10 or 7-9 and any talk of who is more important, Brady or Belicheat, would have been ended after that season. Anyway, I think we're going to see that in September this season. I think that discussion is going to rear its head in NFL circles.

What was a fluke was their schedule. Look at it sometime that season. I've said this, they beat no one, unless you happen to think that the Pennington-led Fins or geriatric Favre-led Jets were forces to be reckoned with, which is a laugh. Neither had a great D. Without an easy schedule that season the Pats would have been .500 easily. Why are you defending NE? Agreed. Divisional games are different. I remember during the Cowboys' 1-15 season, their sole win was against the 10-6 Skins. Happens all the time. Rex has played the Pats well with a dearth of talent in comparison. He can't seem to piece together a consistent season though. BTW, having said that, this also highlights how much of an advantage the Pats have had during the Brady era having been fortunate enough to have been nestled in the AFCE with three other poorly run teams that haven't had decent QBs since the '90s.

People don't realize that w/ Cassel, other than divisional opponents, the best team that they beat was the 9-7, besides the Jets and who were also overrated that season because the Pats weren't very good, they beat only teams that finished .500 or worse. Their schedule is tougher this year like ours. Two divisional teams, Houston who has a great D unlike any of the teams mentioned above, and Arizona who has a great D, are their first four opponents. People don't realize that it's Brady, not Belichick who was 5-13 with the Pats using Bledsoe, that has been the reason for their winning. Same thing last season, when Brady averaged only 1.25 TDs/game over his last four, they went 2-2 beating the Titans and Texans only, losing to the Jets and Fins. Garoppolo had one prolific season in a non-FBS school playing against small time schools. Throwing 7 TDs against a school like Illinois St. or 5 TDs against Appalachian State, schools that are warm-up fodder for FBS schools, hardly qualifies him to play in the NFL. He's a craps shoot at best. Who knows, maybe he'll shine, but my money says he's going to struggle. Everyone thinks that the Pats are automatically a 11-5 team with Brady and 13-3/14-2 otherwise. IMO they're a ballpark .500 team w/o Brady, plus/minus. Belichick has almost no history of success apart from Brady. He made the playoffs only once w/o him on the merits of having had a #1 ranked D, had the fortune of playing Bledsoe, Santa Claus, in the playoffs, before having the Steelers mop the floor with him. In 7 seasons of coaching, w/o Brady, Belichick has made the playoffs once, is 1-1 in the playoffs, and is 52-62 otherwise, and as I mentioned earlier, his season with Cassel was not impressive. He didn't beat any good teams unless you happen to think that the Pennington-led Fins or Favre-led Jets were good. This is going to be interesting and it wouldn't surpise me that if after that stretch the Pats are 1-3 and everyone's talking about this very topic. In other news, everyone still considers Belichick to be some sort of defensive genius, but in his last eight seasons his defenses simply haven't been great. When he had top talent he had a top D, shouldn't surprise anyone. Typical for a lot of coaches, better talent, better play. Since 2008 he's had the following ranked yardage Ds: 10th, 11th, 25th, 31st, 25th, 26th, 13th, 9th Since 1008 he's had the following ranked scoring Ds: 8th, 5th, 8th, 15th, 9th, 10th, 8th, 10th. That might look good initially, but when we consider that he's played in a division that has had QBs like Pennington, Penne, Moore, Tannehill, Sanchez, Smith, Fitzpatrick, Edwards, Manuel, Orton, and Taylor, most playing a one or two and done season, it's hardly impressive when that's 40% of your schedule. All I know is that the Pats' D is massively overrated. They can't rely on their D like other teams with no QB. So figure that they're like any other team with an above average but not great D, a highly questionable QB, a suspect rushing game, a suspect OL, and WRs that typically have only been good while playing for Brady. ... besides Gronk that is who's exceptional, but also injury prone. Besides, teams will double him now. Amendola sucked before he went to NE. Edelman's a starter there and his numbers as a starter have hardly been impressive. He's also questionable to start the season. Brady's skill is spreading the ball around. If JP can do that I'll eat my shorts during halftime. That would be a miracle. The more I think about it, middle of the road D, marginal OL, quite frankly and apart from Gronk mediocre receiving corps, no RB capable of dominating, non-stellar secondary, ... wouldn't stun me to see them go 0-4.

For once we get to see how good the Pats are w/o Brady. The last time they didn't have Brady they missed the playoffs. I'm one of those that claims that 80% of the reason for their success is because of Brady and only 20% because of Belichick. Belichick was 5-13 on the Pats prior to Brady. Some will cite the 2008 season but that year they split with the Jets and Fins and didn't beat one other team that had 10+ wins. Their D isn't that good and neither is their O w/o Brady. I can easily see them going 2-2 or maybe even 1-3. Let's not forget that they finished last season 2-4 as Brady's passing games diminished. Arizona on the road, the Texans, and two division games, one that Ryan may be up for more than any other, 2-2 isn't out of the question and neither is 1-3.

LOL Yeah, not as if there's anything negative to back up their basis, eh. I mean it's not as if we're the current as well as the now historical record holders for playoff futility and haven't made the playoffs since the '90s or anything. It's not as if our 1st-round draft picks under Whaley aren't all contributing. I mean who can possibly argue that Whaley hasn't done all that he could do as Asst. GM/Director of Personnel & GM with the performances that five 1st-rounders for Spiller, Lawson, Watkins, & EJ "the It Factor" Manuel have provided and the combined numbers of starts that they all will have following this season. And by all means, who could possibly argue that our selection of coaches isn't beyond reproach. Clearly the Buffalo News and anyone being negative about this team simply don't know what they're talking about. If Watkins isn't 100% for most of this season I suspect we'll be hard-pressed to win more than 4 or 5 games. I'm curious what the opinions will be if that happens. In the meantime I guess we're supposed to revel in the notion that our starting WRs could very well be Woods & Hankerson and our starting RB a rookie that hasn't even played in two seasons. Meanwhile, defensively, our 1st-round pick won't even be a significant factor this season if at all and our D otherwise has bled talent. Who could possibly complain. They can prove everyone that is critical wrong in the first four weeks. On the contrary, if they do not, then any negative press will have been and continue to be earned. Pegula can look at himself in the mirror if the team doesn't turn things around this season. And if he doesn't fire both Whaley & Ryan if not he'll merely have proven that he really doesn't care about winning but cares more about building a little empire in downtown Buffalo instead.

He may have also logged 1,200 yards, we don't know, do we. That's like saying that DeMarco Murray would have played just as poorly on Dallas again as he did last season when it's a leap in logic to say something as such. Johnson did better under Manuel than any other WR we've had, including Sammy. Most teams just don't trade away a reasonably priced player like Stevie that set a franchise record for a 4th rounder that nets a backup RB in another trade that eventually gets cut. We should have drafted a WR in this draft and to think that instead of letting Ryan's son do our scouting we could have had Treadwell had Whaley had any balls to do his job correctly, instead of Lawson who's injured and unlikely to do anything this season, maybe we wouldn't have our entire offensive season rely on the health of a single player that hasn't even remotely proven the ability to stay healthy for even half a season. Poor planning, poor management, idiotic vision. What you call "volume" is actually substance, which includes data, facts, and substantiation for the opinions and positions that I render. Beats most of what gets posted here for content. I'd take a whole lot more "volume" from most posters in a NY second rather than merely unsubstantiated opinions as if opinions lacking any substantiation, much less actually contrary to facts that are out there yet not presented, as if those same opinions are facts merely because the poster says so.

What?! Taylor's at least competent. Name one other WR on this team besides Sammy that has proven the ability to start? By that I mean that has put up numbers that if repeated from their past would make you content that we do not need another starter at the position? Just one. Woods and Hank are the best and most proven ones we have. If their best seasons repeat themselves they'll hit 1,100 and some yards and post 8 TDs between them. If they both end up starting even by default with garbage-time production they should log 1,500/10 easily. Still, that flies in the face of your comment.