2017 NFL thread v. Patriots Dynasty

[King Postwhore]

You counting on Gronk to play 16? Amendola also has played less to get 16 games since he was injury prone.  Sure they have a lot but I've seen wide receivers play defensive back before here (Brown, Edelman) so to me this is before the season and he will miss the whole year.  That is big.

[KevShmev]

Tom Brady once led the league in touchdown passes with his three top pass catchers being Troy Brown, David Patten and Deoin Branch.  And that was when Brady was only a 2nd year starter and not nearly the QB then that he is now.  This is not big.

[King Postwhore]

Big, no.  But I'm looking at the big picture.  When Denver brat the Pats in the AFC Championship game the injuries hurt against the best defense in the league. 

That's what matters.

[KevShmev]

Ah, there's that injury excuse.

"Denver only beat us cause we had injuries!!"

No, what hurt was Von Miller and the boys knocking the crap out of Tom Brady all day.

[King Postwhore]

Let me add this to what I'm saying.

[King Postwhore]

Ah, there's that injury excuse.

"Denver only beat us cause we had injuries!!"

No, what hurt was Von Miller and the boys knocking the crap out of Tom Brady all day.

No.  Not what I'm saying.  A limping into a playoff team has a lesser chance of winning against great teams.  Cone in man.  You know that.

[KevShmev]

Every team is beat up quite a bit by the time January rolls around.

And I forgot to address the chatter from yesterday...

All of that bluster aside, my point still stands: Jim Kelly was a kicker's made field goal away from being a winner.  Poor guy.

No, he was a missed field goal away from winning a Super Bowl, which is an element of being a winner.   He wins that, and he's Trent Dilfer and/or Phil Simms.   Are they "winners"?  "Elite"?

Did you not watch football in the 80s/90s? Even mentioning Dilfer in the same breath as Kelly is absurd. Simms is way below Kelly's level too but at least had stretches of consistent play. Kelly was regarded as a top tier QB not far behind Montana, Marino, and Elway for at least half of his career. I think you're scoffing at the dude's accomplishments because you're trying to support your argument.

Well said.  Jim Kelly was a Hall of Fame QB, and we all know how hard it is for QBs who not win titles to get tons of credit and/or make the Hall.  'Nuff said.

Jim Kelly is a loser for giving up 37, 52, and 30 points to his opponents and leading his team into game-winning field goal position in the other.

Exactly.  Dogging him for not taking advantage of his other three opportunities makes no sense when you consider that two of those three losses were to the Dallas juggernaut that was loaded beyond belief and the other was to one of the best single season teams we've ever seen ('91 Redskins).

[Destiny Of Chaos]

Jim Kelly was one of the greats. His having 0,1,2,3 or 4 rings wouldn't change that.

lol at the Lions all you want, but they really weren't the same team once Stafford got dinged up. No telling how far they would have gotten if he didn't get hurt.

Losing Edelman would suck for New England. But in the long run they'll be fine, so long as more and more guys don't get injured. But you can say that about every team.

[King Postwhore]

No doubt Kev.  The healthier teams have a better chance because of the quality of teams they play against.

As a Pats fan, I always admired Kelly.  To this day, just to get to 4 SB in a row is just unthinkable.

[El Barto]

If Edleman's done, and I figure he is from the way he went down, I'm not at all worried about it as a Patriots fan. As I said, no team in the league could weather it better right now. I'm really saddened by it as a football fan, though. Just like I was when Watt or Bridgewater went down. We're going to miss the opportunity to see something special. Their offense will roll right along, but with all of the pieces in place this was looking to be an offense on par with the Greatest Show on Turf, and unless you're a Jets fan that's something everybody can appreciate seeing.

[Destiny Of Chaos]

If Edleman's done, and I figure he is from the way he went down, I'm not at all worried about it as a Patriots fan. As I said, no team in the league could weather it better right now. I'm really saddened by it as a football fan, though. Just like I was when Watt or Bridgewater went down. We're going to miss the opportunity to see something special. Their offense will roll right along, but with all of the pieces in place this was looking to be an offense on par with the Greatest Show on Turf, and unless you're a Jets fan that's something everybody can appreciate seeing.

On behalf of the Ravens fans, we would most certainly not appreciate seeing the Patriots offense being special again. We humbly suggest that the Bronco fans on board be the ones to appreciate this potential feat. 

[KevShmev]

Pass.

The Patriots might have the 5-1 lead on the Broncos in Super Bowls won this century, but we've got the 3-1 lead in head to head playoff games (with their only win being against Tebow ). 

[PowerSlave]

Last year when they made the playoffs?

I probably should have used green text. I do tend to pick on them a little bit, though. Just like the NFC every December and January 

[Stadler]

Jim Kelly was one of the greats. His having 0,1,2,3 or 4 rings wouldn't change that.

lol at the Lions all you want, but they really weren't the same team once Stafford got dinged up. No telling how far they would have gotten if he didn't get hurt.

Losing Edelman would suck for New England. But in the long run they'll be fine, so long as more and more guys don't get injured. But you can say that about every team.

This isn't just for you, but for all the Kelly fans (of which I am one; I liked the guy.  Class, style, humility...), you're starting a team.  You have the choice between Jim Kelly, Dan Marino on one side, or John Elway, Roger Staubach, Peyton Manning, Bob Griese, Ben Roethlisberger, Bart Starr, Jim Plunkett and Eli Manning, I'm taking one of the latter group every single time.  I might even take Warner, Favre and Theisman, too. 

The object of a football game (or a football season) is not to make the Hall of Fame.  It's to win the Super Bowl.   

[black_biff_stadler]

Again, blaming one guy for the efforts of 22.

[King Postwhore]

Pass.

The Patriots might have the 5-1 lead on the Broncos in Super Bowls won this century, but we've got the 3-1 lead in head to head playoff games (with their only win being against Tebow ). 

I'll gladly let you win that one over the last 17 years.

Jim Kelly was one of the greats. His having 0,1,2,3 or 4 rings wouldn't change that.

lol at the Lions all you want, but they really weren't the same team once Stafford got dinged up. No telling how far they would have gotten if he didn't get hurt.

Losing Edelman would suck for New England. But in the long run they'll be fine, so long as more and more guys don't get injured. But you can say that about every team.

This isn't just for you, but for all the Kelly fans (of which I am one; I liked the guy.  Class, style, humility...), you're starting a team.  You have the choice between Jim Kelly, Dan Marino on one side, or John Elway, Roger Staubach, Peyton Manning, Bob Griese, Ben Roethlisberger, Bart Starr, Jim Plunkett and Eli Manning, I'm taking one of the latter group every single time.  I might even take Warner, Favre and Theisman, too. 

The object of a football game (or a football season) is not to make the Hall of Fame.  It's to win the Super Bowl.   

Eli?  Eli?  No way Jose!

[Stadler]

Again, blaming one guy for the efforts of 22.

Like I'm the first guy in the history of sports commentary to do that... having said that, how many times have we seen guys - Tom Brady; Kurt Warner was GREAT for this - make the guys around him better.  Some guys do that, others yell and bark at their receivers for whatever reason. 

[TAC]

When I think of Kelly, all I can think of is Fred Smerlas completely railing against him. He kept calling him a "womanizer". Smerlas hated the guy.

[black_biff_stadler]

This isn't just for you, but for all the Kelly fans (of which I am one; I liked the guy.  Class, style, humility...), you're starting a team.  You have the choice between Jim Kelly, Dan Marino on one side, or John Elway, Roger Staubach, Peyton Manning, Bob Griese, Ben Roethlisberger, Bart Starr, Jim Plunkett and Eli Manning, I'm taking one of the latter group every single time.  I might even take Warner, Favre and Theisman, too. 

The object of a football game (or a football season) is not to make the Hall of Fame.  It's to win the Super Bowl.

All of these guys over Kelly lol?

Elway: Probably doesn't even get the chance to make a fourth and fifth SB without Terrell Davis and TD was way more the reason they won XXXII than him and despite how iconic his helicopter dive was, he went 12/22 123 yds. 0 TD/1 INT in that game. He turns in that performance with an average RB, he probably loses the game and who knows if he ever makes it to another one with an 0-4 resume being in his head. Also, his average margin of defeat was 32.0 ppg in his losses. Even if you take Kelly's three worst SB losses it's only 21.7 ppg.

Staubach: Maybe. But his defense made SB VI a cakewalk for him by only allowing 3 points and getting 3 takeaways while the ground game averaged 5.25 yards a carry gaining 252 yards compared to his 119.

Here's a breakdown of the Cowboys' scoring drives in that game with the first group of letters being how the Cowboys gained possession of the football, the next part being their starting field position for the drive, and the last part being what type of score followed by how much yardage he accounted for.

FUM-DAL 48-FG[9 yd] (two completions for 29 yards)
Punt-DAL 24-TD (three completions for 34 yards including TD)
KOff-DAL 29-TD (one non-scoring completion for 12 yards)
INT-MIA 9-TD (one completion, a 7 yard TD)

SB XII could've been as bad a bloodbath as SB XXIV considering that the Cowboys D had 8 takeaways but Dallas had to settle for five FG attempts and missed three of them. The summary below shows that three of their five scoring drives were for 35 yards or less due to a combo of their defense being the real MVP and Denver being flat out horrible.

INT-DEN 25-TD (one non-scoring completion for 13 yards)
INT-DEN 35-FG (one incomplete pass)
Punt-DAL 43-FG [43 yd] (two completions for 30 yards)
Punt-DAL 42-TD (two completions for 58 yards and a TD)
FMB-DEN 29-TD (a one-play drive ended by a HB pass for TD)

In SB X, he lost 21-17 while throwing 3 picks and fumbling 3 times which were all recovered by Dallas and being sacked 7 times.

Oddly enough, SB XIII seems to be either his best SB stat line or close to it with him going 17/30 228 3 TD 1 INT but he was still sacked 5 times (no way of knowing which were his fault or the O-line's without going back and watching it though.)

My point through all of this Staubach research is that he was a good QB but far from noteworthy in his SB victories (considering the ridiculous amount of help he got from his running game and D) and due to the way Landry used him he was basically a game manager if you check the box scores from Dallas' scoring drives in their two SB wins with him.

Peyton Manning: I agree with you on that one.

Bob Griese: He missed 9 games during the perfect '72 season and literally only threw five passes in the AFC CG that year. How much credit are you really trying to give him for having one of the deadliest backfields in NFL history combined with a beyond-stout D?

Ben Roethlisberger: Literally a game manager during the SB XL and XLIII runs and then lost the only SB where he could even be argued as being anything more than a game manager. He was below 3500 yards five times in his first seven seasons and below 20 TDs five times as well. With passing stats as highly inflated as they are since 2000, that's a pretty clear indication of a game manager especially when you consider how many high quality RBs he's played with. He's better than that these days but can't seem to make a SB. The fact that he injured himself on a motorcycle clearly violating the terms of his contract and might've raped a girl are just more reasons why it'd be foolish to go with him over Kelly.

Bart Starr: Lombardi's power sweep is what made that offense run. This dude is good but tends to get overrated because of all the titles they won as a team, not a platoon led by a standout QB. He averaged about 16 attempts per game for his entire career. Not a very daunting task when your job is just to hand off for 70% of the game and make about 9 good passes a game.

Plunkett and Manning: You're nearly trolling at this point.

Warner and Favre: I have no problem with them

Theisman: I doubt it but I'll research it later if you want.

Again, blaming one guy for the efforts of 22.

Like I'm the first guy in the history of sports commentary to do that... having said that, how many times have we seen guys - Tom Brady; Kurt Warner was GREAT for this - make the guys around him better.  Some guys do that, others yell and bark at their receivers for whatever reason. 

There are a lot of misguided ways to assemble criteria for drawing a conclusion. I'm not sure what the frequency with which they occur has to do with making them any less fallible.

[PowerSlave]

BF, I realize that I'm a steeler's homer when I say this, but I'd give Ben a little more credit for his play in the SB against Arizona. I think that it takes something more than a game manager to lead that game winning 4th quarter drive. And as I mention that drive, the stats on it alone are a little misleading as well. There were a couple of terrible drops by receivers during that drive when he made very good passes.

As far as Elway goes, he was lights out if my memory is correct in the SB against Atlanta. I haven't checked his stats for that game, but I do remember him torching Atlanta's secondary more than once in that game. I remember Denver being considered the best team in the league for about 3 years straight when he retired, and I imagine that much of that was due to his leadership. In fact, had they not had that puzzling playoff loss against Jacksonville the one season, he could have easily went out winning it 3 times instead of just twice. Yes, I realize that it's a "what-if", but he had "it" all the way to the end.

I think the "game manager" moniker gets thrown around a little too often. It usually gets used when a great running game, or a great defense is a big part of the equation, but people often forget that strategic and effective passing, or even the threat of it is a huge factor in a game. If you have average QB play (or no threat of an effective passing game) a defense will stack up against the run, or you'll put your own defense on the field too much and wear them down allowing the opposition to run up points. Yes, I'm stating the obvious, but stats don't always tell the complete story in this case. I'm usually a numbers guy, but there's still more to it than that.

Having said all of that, I think that Jim Kelly deserves to be mentioned along side many of the game's greats. You don't take a team to your league's championship four consecutive seasons without being an awesome QB.

[KevShmev]

Pass.

The Patriots might have the 5-1 lead on the Broncos in Super Bowls won this century, but we've got the 3-1 lead in head to head playoff games (with their only win being against Tebow ). 

I'll gladly let you win that one over the last 17 years.

 

Last year when they made the playoffs?

I probably should have used green text. I do tend to pick on them a little bit, though. Just like the NFC every December and January 

Well, the Lions haven't won a playoff game since 1991, so they deserve a little derision, but they are certainly not the laughingstock they used to be.

Again, blaming one guy for the efforts of 22.

Wait, you mean that other players besides the QB have something to do with winning and losing in a TEAM sport?? 

The object of a football game (or a football season) is not to make the Hall of Fame.  It's to win the Super Bowl.

Winners: Antowain Smith, CJ Anderson, Brandon Jacobs, Hakeem Nicks, Marques Colston, Deion Branch.
Losers: Barry Sanders, LaDainian Tomlinson, Adrian Peterson, Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Calvin Johnson.

Thank you for clearing that up.

As far as Elway goes, he was lights out if my memory is correct in the SB against Atlanta. I haven't checked his stats for that game, but I do remember him torching Atlanta's secondary more than once in that game. I remember Denver being considered the best team in the league for about 3 years straight when he retired, and I imagine that much of that was due to his leadership. In fact, had they not had that puzzling playoff loss against Jacksonville the one season, he could have easily went out winning it 3 times instead of just twice. Yes, I realize that it's a "what-if", but he had "it" all the way to the end.

Actually, even though I am a HUGE Broncos fan, I am not sure they win three straight if they do not lose to Jacksonville, for the following reasons:

-There is no way to know who wins the SB in '96 if they had made it (GB was better in '96 than they were in '97).  I like to think the Broncos would have won it, but the Packers were pretty awesome that year, having the number 1 overall offense AND defense.
-Shannon Sharpe said on Cowherd's show a while back that the loss to Jacksonville was major motivation for them the two years after that. It was talked about every single day.
-The psychology of SB32 completely changes if the Broncos had beaten Jax and went on to beat GB in SB31.  In the two weeks leading up to SB32, the Broncos relished in the fact that they were the major underdog who was given little chance to win, while the defending champs, the Packers, were being stroked by everyone and all but considered a sure thing to win and repeat as champs.  If the Broncos comes in as the champs and the Packers still that upstart "on the verge" team still in search of their first title, the dynamic completely changes.

That all aside, as much as I loved Elway as a player, I am sure he goes to sleep every night thanking God for Terrell Davis. Before 1997, Elway was largely considered a great QB who couldn't win the big game.  Had his career ended with no Super Bowl title, he would have been Dan Marino without the gaudy passing numbers.

[PowerSlave]

I've no doubt that he's thankful for TD, and I don't mean to diminish the importance of the running game in those later years of his career. However, I can only think of a few instances where great QB play wasn't instrumental in the success of team and the other phases of play. John QB'd 5 super bowl teams, and it's definitely no fluke that he was at the helm of those teams.

The Ravens in the early 2000's, and the mid 80's Bears are the big examples that come to my mind where the QB play was "game manageresque", and didn't need to be any more than that. And maybe the mid 90's Steelers as well, but I'd say that Neil O'donnell was probably a better QB than Trent Dilfer and Jim Mcmahon.

There's also the argument that great players make others around them great, as well. The 70's Steelers, the 80's 49'ers and the 90's Cowboys etc. etc...

[Stadler]

Black_Floyd and KevSchmev: I think, respectfully, you are missing a key point in all of what I'm saying.  I'm not saying "ONE GUY" wins champeenships.  I'm not saying any of these guys blow or are elite.  What I'm saying is this:   The objective in the NFL is to win.   Some guys have an intangible and they WIN, regardless of whether they throw for 450 yards and 5 TDs or they don't.   I can't and won't tell you that all of them are equivalent in that manner, but there are guys that make everyone around them better.   I think Ben is like that.  They are NOT the same team without Ben Roethlisberger in there, and that's not at all because he's throwing like Warren Moon on crack binge.   That's also why Mike lets him play when he's got bone fragments in his stools.    Kelly HAD weapons, and he couldn't pull off even one out of four.   You can parse the blame around - maybe Marv Levy was the guy that was holding them back, but Kelly didn't have enough to push them over the top.   

I don't at all have a problem with "game managers".  Ask Andy Reid, "game management" is not easy, and not everyone can do it.  It takes poise, it takes not making mistakes, and it takes not trying to play outside your game.  Tony Romo is an extremely talented ATHLETE, he's a horrid game manager.   Horrid. 

I'm taking "one game" out of this and looking at the big picture.  Yeah, maybe Kelly DOES do enough to win that game but or Norwood.   There are a lot of variables, and even Brady doesn't win all of them.  But there are patterns and there are broad strokes.  I think some QBs make their linebackers better. Their safeties.  Their special teams.  They have a way of getting their players to give another 10% when they've already given 105%.

Kenny Stabler and Jim McMahon are examples here.  McMahon is getting a pretty bad rap in recent years, and I'm not sure why.  His body let him down, badly, but that guy won at EVERY level.  He made his guys play harder, and play more fierce.  You can argue that that was a self-limiting proposition (healthwise) but it worked.   Stabler; lefty with an arm like a wet rag, but he made it work somehow and that team - Stabler/Madden - is one of the best coach/QB pairings in NFL history, in my opinion.  They had no business winning as much as they did, and yet...

[Stadler]

Winners: Antowain Smith, CJ Anderson, Brandon Jacobs, Hakeem Nicks, Marques Colston, Deion Branch.
Losers: Barry Sanders, LaDainian Tomlinson, Adrian Peterson, Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Calvin Johnson.

Thank you for clearing that up.

I'm not sure why you keep making this more than it is.   In terms of winning the big game, yeah, that's what I'm saying.  But don't take it farther than it goes.   Terrell Owens and Randy Moss are two of the best pure athletes to ever play the game. 
They were toxic in the clubhouse, though.   Would you really rather have Terrell Owens on your team than Julian Edelman?  Would you really rather have Terrell Owens indoctrinating your rookies than Edelman?  I'm also not putting WR/RBs at the same level as QBs, since some of them are not four down players.

While Owens is doing pushups in his front yard for the press, badmouthing the front office of his last team, Julian Edelman is trying to find places to put his rings and trophies.   But in terms of pure athleticism?  That's not even close.  In a footrace?  Owens is enjoying his post race beer before Edelman breaks the tape.   

[black_biff_stadler]

Vontaze Burfict is a certifiable piece of shit but he just pulled off the ultimate troll. 62-yard pick 6 capped off by shrugging off Kirk Cousins at the goal line, knocking him to the ground, then leaping into the empty Redskin seats in the endzone and waving back to his teammates looking like some enthusiastic fan greeting his Bengal teammates.

[KevShmev]

Winners: Antowain Smith, CJ Anderson, Brandon Jacobs, Hakeem Nicks, Marques Colston, Deion Branch.
Losers: Barry Sanders, LaDainian Tomlinson, Adrian Peterson, Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Calvin Johnson.

Thank you for clearing that up.

I'm not sure why you keep making this more than it is.   In terms of winning the big game, yeah, that's what I'm saying.  But don't take it farther than it goes.   Terrell Owens and Randy Moss are two of the best pure athletes to ever play the game. 
They were toxic in the clubhouse, though.   Would you really rather have Terrell Owens on your team than Julian Edelman?  Would you really rather have Terrell Owens indoctrinating your rookies than Edelman?  I'm also not putting WR/RBs at the same level as QBs, since some of them are not four down players.

While Owens is doing pushups in his front yard for the press, badmouthing the front office of his last team, Julian Edelman is trying to find places to put his rings and trophies.   But in terms of pure athleticism?  That's not even close.  In a footrace?  Owens is enjoying his post race beer before Edelman breaks the tape.

What trophies does Julian Edelman have?  Seriously. 

Did they give him one the whopping TWO times he managed to break 1,000 yards in a single season? Did he get one for being the 19th best player on a Super Bowl-winning team? 

I am merely curious.

[King Postwhore]

Yeah, I'm staying out of this conversation.

[TAC]

   Stabler; lefty with an arm like a wet rag, but he made it work somehow and that team - Stabler/Madden - is one of the best coach/QB pairings in NFL history, in my opinion.  They had no business winning as much as they did, and yet...

They had plenty of business. Except they kept coming up against the Steelers.

They were my childhood's favorite team. Dave Casper remains my favorite all time player.

[Stadler]

Winners: Antowain Smith, CJ Anderson, Brandon Jacobs, Hakeem Nicks, Marques Colston, Deion Branch.
Losers: Barry Sanders, LaDainian Tomlinson, Adrian Peterson, Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, Calvin Johnson.

Thank you for clearing that up.

I'm not sure why you keep making this more than it is.   In terms of winning the big game, yeah, that's what I'm saying.  But don't take it farther than it goes.   Terrell Owens and Randy Moss are two of the best pure athletes to ever play the game. 
They were toxic in the clubhouse, though.   Would you really rather have Terrell Owens on your team than Julian Edelman?  Would you really rather have Terrell Owens indoctrinating your rookies than Edelman?  I'm also not putting WR/RBs at the same level as QBs, since some of them are not four down players.

While Owens is doing pushups in his front yard for the press, badmouthing the front office of his last team, Julian Edelman is trying to find places to put his rings and trophies.   But in terms of pure athleticism?  That's not even close.  In a footrace?  Owens is enjoying his post race beer before Edelman breaks the tape.

What trophies does Julian Edelman have?  Seriously. 

Did they give him one the whopping TWO times he managed to break 1,000 yards in a single season? Did he get one for being the 19th best player on a Super Bowl-winning team? 

I am merely curious.

I forget now, and I'm too lazy to look it up, but when the Pats scored 31 unanswered points to beat the Falcons, how many of those were awarded for his 1,000 yard seasons?   But I'll bet Brady is thankful for ""the catch".  He dug down and just flat out worked harder. 

[black_biff_stadler]

I hate the 49ers more than any other team in any other sport in existence but I care about historical accuracy enough to say that we really don't need to start calling that "The catch". That was obviously Joe and Dwight's moment. Just like how Ladainian Tomlinson will never be LT.

Sorry if that came off as petty. I guess I get easily triggered by the redundant use of things tied to more historically important things. Edelman's catch was actually every bit as impressive as Clark's imo but one was the signature moment in the start of one of the NFL's greatest dynasties and the other was the signature moment in an incredible game.

Both were excellent but the Pats are still doing just fine with their 4-3 SB record under Bill and Tom if they lose that game. If Dwight doesn't make that catch, who knows if the 9ers ever end up that close to another SB appearance?

[Stadler]

I won't argue that, and I'm not trying to start something up; it was just a short-hand way to say that individual performances are fantastic for the individual, they are probably great to talk abuot once retirement sets in, but I have a sneaking suspicion that if Edelman had a choice:   five years in a row with 750 yards and a Super Bowl ring, or 1,500 yards and home in December, he'd take the former every time.   Other players?  Not so much, and that's the main point of my position. 

[KevShmev]

Edelman might feel differently if was good enough and had enough talent to actually be a top NFL player.  If I were a marginal, run of the mill possession WR, I'd be thrilled to get a ring, too.

[King Postwhore]

Dude.  He's not top 5 but damn he came from a college as a QB to being very important to 2 Super bowls.  90 Receptions annually is not run of a mill.

[TAC]

Edelman might feel differently if was good enough and had enough talent to actually be a top NFL player.  If I were a marginal, run of the mill possession WR, I'd be thrilled to get a ring, too.

Not trying to sound like a homer, but Kev, you're way off on Edelman.

[Cable]

As a more than half my life NE fan, I don't see the mammoth loss here. So I'm with Kev. For one, Welker was better than JE as a WR. I'm not talking just raw numbers, but something a little deeper like catch %. Now things such as JE on punts, connection with Brady and buying NE Koolaid vs Welker- different story. The receiving corps, taking in every position, is better than it was last year. It took a hit, but I think "next man up" will cover the loss well enough.

 Their D-line, *especially* after this weekend, should be getting the talk here. No one bit my carrot from when I mentioned it previously.