When will the Patriots realize that they need to draft a WR?

[FirstTimer]

Regardless, the fact remains that they won 3 with very pedestrian WR, and didn't win when they had Moss

Overly simplistic viewpoint.

[Tailback U]

Tailback just talking out of his ass at this point.

Like KG said, the 8-3, #1 Seed, Patriots are doing just fine and are very capable and should be favorites for the Super Bowl.

Sleep on them cause they don't have a receiver that's fine.

Last time Pats played Jets:
Welker - 5 rec, 124 yards
Branch - 7 rec, 74 yards TD

Game before that:
Gronk - 8 rec 113 yards, 2 TDs
Branch - 5 rec, 58 yards
Ochocino - 2 rec, 65 yards
Welker - 6 rec, 46

If you had some evidence to back your claims relative to THIS SEASON, I'd agree but really you're just bullshitting

LOL @ you being so sensitive.

Not the same Jets D this year as last, at all. Even comparing them to last year is stupid.

Victor Cruz is another #3 WR. The Patriots are fat with those. I also don't see Victor Cruz as a field stretcher. Smith, maybe, but he's not the same player he was in 2005.


The guys going up and attacking the football for the Pats are Gronk and Hernandez. I really don't see Smith or Cruz as difference makers beating a team like the Jets..who I don't think are really that good anyways.

The Pats have bigger issues at OL, RB and on defense IMO. I'd put WR's down the list a a bit of what they "need"

I gotcha. I understand that thought process as well. They have several issues, I just think WR is a glaring one but only when they face those defensive minded teams.

And Cruz is averaging over 17 yards a catch. He has 17 catches over 20 yards (6 more than Mike Wallace) and 6 catches over 40 yards - tied with Mike Wallace and Calvin Johnson for tops in the league.

[nflman2033]

I don't understand how these two points relate. Are people suggesting that because they won with average guys and didn't with a stud WR then that means they don't need a stud WR? I don't agree with that form of logic. I have to believe that a stud WR would make things easier for everyone....including Brady. I just don't think that sort of logic can carry over forever, as each season has a host of variables that go into who wins a SB and why.

Because winning 3 without means you don't have to have one. If they had never won one, and the I said they didn't win when they had moss, I would agree with you. You are missing the more import part of argument, which is they won three without a top WR.

[killgod]

Just to be clear - I think the Patriots consistently overachieve.

I really don't think they are that talented offensively. They obviously execute better than anyone, outside of the Packers (arguably).

Top draft WR's are superior athletes that just make plays, much like we saw with Moss during his time in NE.

However that got NE away from being a team who executed at a level higher than anyone else on the offence. A big part of the offence was then more...wide open, more about athletic ability than elite execution.

When they got to the Super Bowl and the throw it up to the athelete tactic failed, you saw that NE wasn't as sharp in execution to overcome what the Giants were doing in the trenches.

I believe that Moss being in the offence was a strong part in why the Patriot offence failed that game to do what they did all decade.

I don't understand how these two points relate. Are people suggesting that because they won with average guys and didn't with a stud WR then that means they don't need a stud WR? I don't agree with that form of logic. I have to believe that a stud WR would make things easier for everyone....including Brady.

I disagree for the reason suggested above.

[nflman2033]

Overly simplistic viewpoint.

What need is there to be complicated, they didn't need a top WR to win three and couldn't win when they did, it doesn't matter what the reasons where for winning 3 times and not winning the other. It's just a fact that they didn't need a top WR to win when they proved it 3 times they didn't need one

[FirstTimer]

Because winning 3 without means you don't have to have one. If they had never won one, and the I said they didn't win when they had moss, I would agree with you. You are missing the more import part of argument, which is they won three without a top WR.

And they also had a top tier defense, a better OL. Which they don't have now. There's WAY more variables involved than just the WR position. Boiling it down to Moss and only Moss is dumb.

[FirstTimer]

What need is there to be complicated, they didn't need a top WR to win three and couldn't win when they did, it doesn't matter what the reasons where for winning 3 times and not winning the other. It's just a fact that they didn't need a top WR to win when they proved it 3 times they didn't need one

:obama:

[ralaw]

Because winning 3 without means you don't have to have one. If they had never won one, and the I said they didn't win when they had moss, I would agree with you. You are missing the more import part of argument, which is they won three without a top WR.

They were stopping a pass rush away from being considered the Geatest Team of All Time with Moss......that has to mean something, No? I understand they didn't win a championship, but 18-1 and Brady having his greatest season ever has to mean something.

[JOHNNYTHECLOWN]

And they also had a top tier defense, a better OL. Which they don't have now. There's WAY more variables involved than just the WR position. Boiling it down to Moss and only Moss is dumb.

Corey Dillon.

I'll make a thread 'When will the Patriots realize that they need to draft a RB?'

Obviously, if you take a football team and add a studly WR they would become better. At this point do they NEED a WR to put them over the top? No. They're already there.

[FirstTimer]

They were a pass rush away from being considered the Geatest Team of All Time with Moss......that has to mean something, No? I understand they didn't win a championship, but 18-1 and Brady having his greatest seaon ever has to mean something.

Exactly.

These recent Patriots teams aren't built like the early 2000 versions at some pretty key areas that helped them win. It's easier to have a difference maker at the WR and RB position with one guy than it is to cobble and rebuild an OL and defense. Do the Patriot's "need" a better WR? Maybe. Maybe not. It sure as hell would be a luxury with the middling defense they have, the OL I'm not overly impressed with and a stable of running backs that can be lulz worthy at times.

I sure as hell know they'd rather have a player X with the skill set of Randy Moss from years ago than not have him.....and especially given the way the team is constructed right now. I can see it both ways...but simply saying they don't need one because when they had Moss they didn't win is ridiculously simple minded.

[Bear Pand]

Corey Dillon.

I'll make a thread 'When will the Patriots realize that they need to draft a RB?'

Obviously, if you take a football team and add a studly WR they would become better. At this point do they NEED a WR to put them over the top? No. They're already there.

Pats haven't been on top since like 2004. And I'm pretty sure they've had a .500 or worse playoff record since then.

[FirstTimer]

Corey Dillon.

I'll make a thread 'When will the Patriots realize that they need to draft a RB?'

Obviously, if you take a football team and add a studly WR they would become better. At this point do they NEED a WR to put them over the top? No. They're already there.

Like I said. I see it both ways. I don't think you can ignore a guy like Moss the same way I don't think you can ignore these Patriots teams aren't nearly as good at some key spots as they were in the early 2000's when they were able to get by with marginal WR's.

[ThunderHorse]

If you had some evidence to back your claims relative to THIS SEASON, I'd agree but really you're just bullshitting

The Steelers didn't show everyone how to give the Pat QB and WR's a hard time this year?

I think that's what TB is saying in the end. you guys are going to have to see at least 1 or 2 teams like that, who are going to use similar gameplans.

[killgod]

Exactly.

These recent Patriots teams aren't built like the early 2000 versions at some pretty key areas that helped them win. It's easier to have a difference maker at the WR and RB position with one guy than it is to cobble and rebuild an OL and defense. Do the Patriot's "need" a better WR? Maybe. Maybe not. It sure as hell would be a luxury with the middling defense they have, the OL I'm not overly impressed with and a stable of running backs that can be lulz worthy at times.

I sure as hell know they'd rather have a player X with the skill set of Randy Moss from years ago than not have him.....and especially given the way the team is constructed right now. I can see it both ways...but simply saying they don't need one because when they had Moss they didn't win is ridiculously simple minded.

The OL definitely needs some work but what can you do right now. Koppen out for the season doesn't help and Vollmer's been hurt as well so he's not able to get his career started. Solder is learning on the job, Waters is new to the team...it's a patchwork OL with some problems, but not entirely in trouble. Mankins is a stud guard and these young pair of tackles could become pretty good and make for a decent OL for the next few years.

The RB's can be lulz worthy I guess, but getting over 100 a game and having a guy like BJGE with a career of ZERO fumbles, let alone lost fumbles, what's lulz worthy about it? He just executes and doesn't lose the football. 8TD's, probably another 4 to go this season, what's wrong with that? The NFL doesn't even have a 100 per game back right now, so I'll take 50, 1 TD and zero fumbles per game from BJGE anyday.


I still say they don't need that athlete because they are more successful by proper execution. They stay sharper when they don't turn to raw athleticism.

[JOHNNYTHECLOWN]

Every team NEEDs playmakers.

This team could use a big play CB, DE, RB before they need a WR.