truth on hold Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 - They have a great WR (Moss) and a very good situational WR and return man (Welker) - I don't like their RBs - They have a good TE (Watson) - Their QB is unproven and his only memorable appearance was getting a quick hook after nearly blowing a big lead against Miami last year when spelling Brady - They have an Oline that seems to be getting weaker (wasted in Super Bowl, allowed season ending hit on Brady) - They have an aging defense that let them down big time in the Super Bowl and AFC Championship 2 years ago - Their kicking games are adequate, but nothing special Without Brady this is a team I respect but do not fear.
KD in CA Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 And if Bowe catches the friggin ball in the endzone, they are in OT yesterday against the worst team in football. Too early to write them off entirely, but they take a big step back w/o Brady.
4BillsintheBurgh Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 - They have a great WR (Moss) and a very good situational WR and return man (Welker)- I don't like their RBs - They have a good TE (Watson) - Their QB is unproven and his only memorable appearance was getting a quick hook after nearly blowing a big lead against Miami last year when spelling Brady - They have an Oline that seems to be getting weaker (wasted in Super Bowl, allowed season ending hit on Brady) - They have an aging defense that let them down big time in the Super Bowl and AFC Championship 2 years ago - Their kicking games are adequate, but nothing special Without Brady this is a team I respect but do not fear. Plus teams are/were going to be bringing the pressure on Brady after that Super Bowl loss. I'm sure the tape of that was a hot commodity this summer.
RayFinkle Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 They will be respectable without Brady. They still have a solid coaching staff and talented players on both sides of the ball.
nucci Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 Plus teams are/were going to be bringing the pressure on Brady after that Super Bowl loss. I'm sure the tape of that was a hot commodity this summer. The idea of putting pressure on a QB is not new. It's just that the Giants were the only team able to do it. EVERY team wants to pressure a QB!!
4BillsintheBurgh Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 The idea of putting pressure on a QB is not new. It's just that the Giants were the only team able to do it. EVERY team wants to pressure a QB!! And everyone else is going to follow their blueprint, that's all I'm saying.
drg2021 Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 - They have a great WR (Moss) and a very good situational WR and return man (Welker)- I don't like their RBs - They have a good TE (Watson) - Their QB is unproven and his only memorable appearance was getting a quick hook after nearly blowing a big lead against Miami last year when spelling Brady - They have an Oline that seems to be getting weaker (wasted in Super Bowl, allowed season ending hit on Brady) - They have an aging defense that let them down big time in the Super Bowl and AFC Championship 2 years ago - Their kicking games are adequate, but nothing special Without Brady this is a team I respect but do not fear.They are below average on defense with a very average LB corp and dismal secondary.They are going down and going down hard.
BuffaloWings Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 And if Bowe catches the friggin ball in the endzone, they are in OT yesterday against the worst team in football. Or if Devard Darling was able to get away from the defense... Too early to write them off entirely, but they take a big step back w/o Brady. Agreed. Remember Bledsoe became the next Wally Pipp when Brady took over. Not saying Cassel is capable of being Lou Gehrig, but we really don't know what he's capable of. We only have the Miami game last year and this year's preseason to go on, and that's not much. That said, E$PN was saying this morning that the Patriots* were going to bring in Chris Simms and Tim Rattay for a look-see.
bourbonboy Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 I seriously doubt that they stick with Cassells as a starter for the year. My guess is that Simms will be signed, and Bellichek will lean on the D more than he had to last year. Predictions aside - the hit on Brady did not look dirty, but I did a flashback to the hit on JP last year, which was definitely a cheap shot and looked worse on film...I'd never root for anyone to get injured, but it does have a poetic justice-type element to it.
Zulu Cthulhu Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 I seriously doubt that they stick with Cassells as a starter for the year. My guess is that Simms will be signed, and Bellichek will lean on the D more than he had to last year. Predictions aside - the hit on Brady did not look dirty, but I did a flashback to the hit on JP last year, which was definitely a cheap shot and looked worse on film...I'd never root for anyone to get injured, but it does have a poetic justice-type element to it. Haha now they're DOOOOOOOOOOOMED!
nucci Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 And everyone else is going to follow their blueprint, that's all I'm saying. Ok, cool. Was not trying to be a smartass.
colin Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 all strong points. imo with brady there were gonna be off this year, 10 or 11 wins. without him and with the target sign on their backs they are looking at 6 or 7. remember the vikings after they didn't make the superbowl due to losing in OT to the falcons? i think that team was like a 7 win team, and frankly was better than the pats are this year.
murra Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 For the record, KC is not the worst team in the AFC. Not even close.
colin Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 For the record, KC is not the worst team in the AFC. Not even close. who's worse? miami?
VOR Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 It's not looking good for the Patriots. Their defense looks weak and old, their ST's are nothing special, and without Brady, their offense is a lot weaker.
murra Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 who's worse? miami? They're a leap above the Texans, the Dolphins, and the Bengals for sure. Beyond that, we'll see. I'm sure they'll finish with 6 or 10 wins. Def, not the worst team in the AFC.
Andrew in CA Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 For the record, KC is not the worst team in the AFC. Not even close. It's debatable, but it's certainly close. Who's that much worse? Oakland, Miami, and KC bringing up the rear in the AFC, and I think KC is the worst of all of them.
dollars 2 donuts Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 They're a leap above the Texans, the Dolphins, and the Bengals for sure. Beyond that, we'll see. I'm sure they'll finish with 6 or 10 wins. Def, not the worst team in the AFC. Yeah, I'm a little surprised b/c i really thought the Ravens were one of the worst teams (which sort of...they still are) and people were overrating Cincy, but I still thought Cincy was going to handle them easily. Marvin Lewis is a man in trouble.
Hazed and Amuzed Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 What are the odds now that Moss loses interest. I don't think he'll play as hard for Casell. The Randy Moss I've seen won't.
KD in CA Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 What are the odds now that Moss loses interest. I don't think he'll play as hard for Casell. The Randy Moss I've seen won't. Depends on how things go the next few weeks. If they start losing games and he is getting fewer looks, that is certainly a possibility.
Recommended Posts