New England Patriots thread (MOD WARNING - #4503)

eagle eye

Ha, that is not a message for the fans, that is a Valentine's card to Tom Brady's greatest love the Vince Lombardi trophy.

Son Of A Vidic

Delighted to see Scar will be attending the Combine and no doubt he will be tagging good prospects for us. I think the O line will be a priority in this years draft and if Scar has been spending his time checking out the talent, then that can only be a very good thing.

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4778272/dante-scarnecchia-heads-to-combine

JaMarcusHustle

Looks like he's working for us throughout the draft and not just for the combine. Very happy to hear that.

BizzyC

In fairness, Stork turned out to be a great selection.
A few more picks like that and we'll be in very good shape.

BKWDR

I sat down and watched the 4th quarter again on Tuesday night. Have to say, having been distracted with the last couple minutes and the game winning INT. You forget how good and how well the 2 TD drives Brady & Co put together. I think at one point they were penalised and 2nd and 18 on one of those drives and they pull it off. Just gets better every time you watch it, you see different things.

Son Of A Vidic

BKWDR wrote: »

I sat down and watched the 4th quarter again on Tuesday night. Have to say, having been distracted with the last couple minutes and the game winning INT. You forget how good and how well the 2 TD drives Brady & Co put together. I think at one point they were penalised and 2nd and 18 on one of those drives and they pull it off. Just gets better every time you watch it, you see different things.

They also had a 3rd & 16 (or 14) on the last drive I think. But those drives were well beyond 'good', it was phenomenal what Brady and the team did and it ended the GOAT QB debate for a lot of non-Patriots out there. One of the best defenses of all time, was carved up at will by Brady on those two drives. And this coming after we had 3-4 consecutive drives that got nowhere. And everybody in the huddle did their job, when I saw Vereens great one-handed catch, for some reason I immediately thought of Welkers key drops and was glad he wasn't out there.

Ten points down, late in the 4th quarters, nobody gives you a chance against that Seahawks defense. Then again, they hadn't faced Brady before in a game that really mattered.

“Tom comes into the huddle and he goes, ‘OK fellas, we need a championship drive.’ And I remember it so clearly, so vividly, and then we went ahead and put that drive together.”

Brady proceeded to connect on all nine of his pass attempts on the Patriots’ go-ahead drive, including four to Vereen, before hitting Julian Edelman for a 3-yard touchdown.

Vereen said Brady was “loose” in the huddle, making eye contact with the other 10 players in the huddle before breaking.

“In that moment he was very relaxed, very calm, very collected, focused,” Vereen said. “There was an intense amount of focus I would say in his eyes

Within days, the pundits & sport commentators had gone from putting the game down as one of the top three Super Bowl of all time, to it being possibly the best Super Bowls of all time. And that's because the game exceeded all the pregame hype. It was a titanic battle between the two best teams in the NLF. It had everything and the entire team delivered. Hightower's unsung tackle prior to the Bultler Int, the great one handed catch by Vereen, to Edelmans unbelievable toughness and YAC on those final two drive. The game was just littered with great plays by both team. Unless we have a rematch next year, I think it will be a very long time before we see a Super Bowl like that again, if ever.

JaMarcusHustle

Reports that Vereen wants 5 mill a year. If so, pretty sure we'll be saying goodbye and resigning Ridley for cheaper instead.

Son Of A Vidic

Not a chance he'll be getting $5 million. This is probably all part of the prenegotiation semantics though. But I can't see us offering anything beyond $3.75 - 4 million per year.

eagle eye

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

Reports that Vereen wants 5 mill a year. If so, pretty sure we'll be saying goodbye and resigning Ridley for cheaper instead.

Ridley isn't going to replace Vereen. They are two totally independent decisions.

I don't see Ridley coming back either. There is a deep RB class here and we have Blount, Bolden and Gray, I'd be happy to take my chances in the draft although I'd love to have Vereen back.

JCTO

eagle eye wrote: »

Ridley isn't going to replace Vereen. They are two totally independent decisions.

I don't see Ridley coming back either. There is a deep RB class here and we have Blount, Bolden and Gray, I'd be happy to take my chances in the draft although I'd love to have Vereen back.

Don't forget James White who is similar to the style of play of Vereen.

Son Of A Vidic

eagle eye wrote: »

Ridley isn't going to replace Vereen. They are two totally independent decisions.

He certainly hasn't got the kind of hands & ability Vereen offers us in the passing game. Vereens clutch one-handed catch at big moment in the SB, told me we have to try and keep him.

Anyone have any thoughts on James White? He basically had a redshirt year in 2014 and in the very limited clips I've seen, I haven't seen much since preseason. Then again, a year to digest the playbook and acclimatise might be good for him.

Edit: just saw JCTO's comments RE:White.

kryogen

I would love Vereen back, he really stood up when it counted but I can see him getting paid more elsewhere and the rb class coming through is good. There are other backs on the roster who could fill the role too, White would be one though obviously is untested. I would like Ridley back and think its a possibility, he could be very cheap considering the upside but I wouldn't be too concerned if he does not return. Blount is a great asset to have there too

JCTO

I agree with EE Ridley is not a replacement for Vereen and with Blount and Gray if we keep him I cant see room for Ridley. Having said that Gray could see the axe and Ridley brought back. I love Vereen though but if that rumour is true I cant see us paying him and it could be a green light for White to do something. I honestly think White will come good for us if given the chance.

JaMarcusHustle

eagle eye wrote: »

Ridley isn't going to replace Vereen. They are two totally independent decisions.

I don't see Ridley coming back either. There is a deep RB class here and we have Blount, Bolden and Gray, I'd be happy to take my chances in the draft although I'd love to have Vereen back.

I'm not saying Ridley will replace Vereen, I'm just saying we're unlikely to keep both - I can see us keeping one and replacing one of them in FA or the draft. We don't want to have to replace both. If Vereen is asking for too much, then it means Ridley is the more likely of the 2 to stay. The fact that Bill gave Ridley a lot of chances even after fumbles shows he likes him and I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that Ridley will walk this summer. White is more likely to replace Vereen as a 3rd down back, but if we let Vereen walk I think it increases our chances of keeping Ridley.

helimachoptor

Will Ayers get a deal?

eagle eye

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

I'm not saying Ridley will replace Vereen, I'm just saying we're unlikely to keep both - I can see us keeping one and replacing one of them in FA or the draft. We don't want to have to replace both. If Vereen is asking for too much, then it means Ridley is the more likely of the 2 to stay. The fact that Bill gave Ridley a lot of chances even after fumbles shows he likes him and I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that Ridley will walk this summer. White is more likely to replace Vereen as a 3rd down back, but if we let Vereen walk I think it increases our chances of keeping Ridley.

As I said they are two totally independent decisions. The chances of one staying because another leaves is not affected by the other leaving.

Anyways I don't want us to keep Ridley. Our lead back has always been 6'0" tall or bigger when we have won a Superbowl. So I don't want a guy shorter than that even if he is 5'11"!:D

kryogen

helimachoptor wrote: »

Will Ayers get a deal?

I think he will be offered one, but I think he will get better somewhere else, he has done well but with Mayo coming back and that I doubt he is a priority

JaMarcusHustle

eagle eye wrote: »

As I said they are two totally independent decisions. The chances of one staying because another leaves is not affected by the other leaving.

That's awfully naive of you - oh how I wish it was that simple! In terms of on-field decisions and from a personnel standpoint, sure it's an independent decision as they are very different running backs, but it's not as simple as "we value this guy at X, if accepts it he stays, if not he goes". That X value is derived from what cap room we have available to us and in case you haven't realised, we have some mighty big contractual decisions to make this offseason!

What we would have offered Ridley to stay might have been dependent on assumptions we'd made over the likes of McCourty, Revis, Wilfork, Vereen etc. We'll have a figure in mind for all those guys and will be budgeting based on those figures. If all of a sudden Vereen is gone because he's asking for a couple of million more than we had in mind, then suddenly what we had budgeted as committed to Vereen now becomes available to allocate elsewhere whether that be to a direct replacement or to other contract negotiations. So maybe we can afford to give Ridley that extra half a mill he wanted and allocate the rest elsewhere - maybe we put it all towards another RB to replace Vereen, or some of it towards a young RB to replace White if he's the one that will be replacing Vereen. Maybe we move it to other negotiations like Gost or McCourty. There's far too many variables for anyone to be in a position to say "As I said, they are independent decisions". But I would happily place a bet that we keep Ridley if Vereen leaves.

JCTO

The questions will be asked about Ridley though:

Do we need to pay him with a stacked house back there

Is Jonas Gray a good enough replacement for him

Do we really need 4 downhill RBs

The decision on Vereen willl affect the decision on Ridley in some degree but not for the most part considering if Vereen leaves we will need someone to replace him given the type of back he is. Now if we decide White or someone else we have or tried out last year then you could argue that makes room for Ridley both cash wise and space. I would like to see Ridley stay but something inside me tells me it wont happen.

eagle eye

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

That's awfully naive of you - oh how I wish it was that simple! In terms of on-field decisions and from a personnel standpoint, sure it's an independent decision as they are very different running backs, but it's not as simple as "we value this guy at X, if accepts it he stays, if not he goes". That X value is derived from what cap room we have available to us and in case you haven't realised, we have some mighty big contractual decisions to make this offseason!

What we would have offered Ridley to stay might have been dependent on assumptions we'd made over the likes of McCourty, Revis, Wilfork, Vereen etc. We'll have a figure in mind for all those guys and will be budgeting based on those figures. If all of a sudden Vereen is gone because he's asking for a couple of million more than we had in mind, then suddenly what we had budgeted as committed to Vereen now becomes available to allocate elsewhere whether that be to a direct replacement or to other contract negotiations. So maybe we can afford to give Ridley that extra half a mill he wanted and allocate the rest elsewhere - maybe we put it all towards another RB to replace Vereen, or some of it towards a young RB to replace White if he's the one that will be replacing Vereen. Maybe we move it to other negotiations like Gost or McCourty. There's far too many variables for anyone to be in a position to say "As I said, they are independent decisions". But I would happily place a bet that we keep Ridley if Vereen leaves.

It's not naive in any way. Just like TO points out there, we are in pretty good shape at RB without Ridley. He is coming off a serious injury and I don't think he is going to get serious bucks anywhere this year. He really has to go out and prove himself all over again coming off tearing his MCL and ACL. I don't think it makes any difference whether or ot Vereen stays. We will get Ridley cheap on a one year deal if we want I think.

Utopia Parkway

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

Reports that Vereen wants 5 mill a year. If so, pretty sure we'll be saying goodbye and resigning Ridley for cheaper instead.

I'd really like to keep Vereen. Granted some games he's not used all that much but when it comes to the games against really stout defences he always seems to be a much bigger part of the gameplan. Ridley I think could be replaced pretty easily.

That said the Pats are usually great at replacing guys that seem almost irreplaceable at the time so if Vereen walks I have no doubt that they would come up with a decent alternative to him.

eagle eye

I think what will happen with Vereen is that he will test FA and the Patriots will then sit down with him and likely pay him. We had Kevin Faulk for a long, long time and he was a great one. Belichick looked after Faulk here and I think we might see the same happen with Vereen. To be fair to Vereen he added clutch to his repertoire this past season in the Superbowl. The guy deserved to get paid.

Son Of A Vidic

I agree with eagle, Vereen is like Faulk and there's no reason why he can't have a similar career. We drafted him into our system, he loves it in NE and he delivered when it really mattered on the biggest stage. If he wants $5 million a year and we don't want to pay more than $3.5 million a year, I think $4.25 might be a nice piece of middle ground for both parties to agree to.

kryogen

I would really like him to stay and would agree with the scenario that EE laid out, I think he will test it, like Edelman and hopefully re sign.

paulie21

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25080052/-patriots-could-chase-percy-harvin-if-cut-by-jets

Can't see it myself but Belichick has been known to make something out of troublemakers

BizzyC

He's not a tall guy, but definitely capable of getting behind defences ans stretching the field, as well as his usefulness in the screens and quick routes that we love to throw...

I can see him making a good impact, but only worth the risk for a bargain price.
Not everyone will turn it around the way Dillon, Moss & Blount did, for each of them there's an Ocho, Thomas & Haynesworth....

kryogen

paulie21 wrote: »

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25080052/-patriots-could-chase-percy-harvin-if-cut-by-jets

Can't see it myself but Belichick has been known to make something out of troublemakers

Financially alone I see this as a bit of a dead duck tbh

paulie21

kryogen wrote: »

Financially alone I see this as a bit of a dead duck tbh

Yep we need the money to pay bigger priorities

Son Of A Vidic

I wouldn't have any interest in Harvin. I think he'd could possibly end like Ocho, by not being able to digest our complex offense. I'd also put WR needs well down the list of our priorities right now.

bruschi

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

I wouldn't have any interest in Harvin. I think he'd could possibly end like Ocho, by not being able to digest our complex offense. I'd also put WR needs well down the list of our priorities right now.

not sure I'd write him off as quick, as I dont really see him as a typical WR anymore. More of a specialist, in that he can take a handoff in the backfield and run wide, is good on deep routes, and is an excellent kick returner. I dont see WR as a big need anymore, as its pretty clear Brady is comfortable in keeping the game short if needs be, and we have an abundance of talent to suit him there. but if he could be got for cheap, I'd see Harvin as a nice low risk gamble.