Uncategorized

It’s going to be a big camp for him, I’m sure the Patriots would love him to make a big jump and contribute at least as a designated pass rusher in sub-packages. It’s probably asking too much for him to compete with Ninkovich at LDE. But he’s certainly a player a lot of eyes will be on this summer.

Give me A, but history tells us that it would be a really stretch for the Pats offense to end up in the teens. The lowest they’ve been with Brady is 12th in 2003, and that was the only time they were out of the top 10. That includes the dreaded 2006 season (7th) everyone like to point to as when Brady had no weapons, and the Matt Cassel 2008 season (8th). 

The fact is that Brady and the coaches are too good for this to suddenly dip to an average offense regardless of who’s catching passes. And the Pats never had anyone like Gronkowski or Hernandez in 2006 either.

Ultimately I do believe that defenses win championships, and the Patriots have put enough pieces in place for them to finally ascend to a level of a defense that can win games, and not just hold on or require a turnover to preserve a victory. 

If the defense can continue to build on the success they had in the second half of last season, and add some final talent tweaks in a couple spots over the next month in free agency and the draft, they should definitely be headed toward a season in the top half of the league rankings.

That’s a good question, because a lot of Ridley’s yards were the byproduct of the no huddle attack. You look at his 151 yards against the Broncos and most of them were a direct result of the Broncos being totally unable to stop the Pats blitzkreig. So, can he still put up big yards when it seems like the no-huddle will be slightly less efficient as Brady breaks in new receivers? That’s the big question.

I lean that he can, and with a full healthy Logan Mankins that should help too. But it’s a huge question, because last year the Patriots could run when teams were on their heels, but they couldn’t necessarily run when teams were prepared for it. That will be the biggest challenge of 2013.

Great question, I’d throw Branch and Lloyd in there too. This will be one of the greatest schematic questions facing the 2013 Patriots. 2012 they took the league by storm with how fast they could run their offense, but that was largely attributed to having receivers who were comfortable in the system and with Brady. 

Now they’ll still have Gronk and Hernandez back, and Shane Vereen does have some experience in the system and will likely replace Woodhead, but the huge question is can Amendola and whomever else pick up the offense and execute it at breakneck speed.

If not it’s highly possible the Pats will go back to a more conventional attack that relies less on the no-huddle, at least at the start of the season. The important thing to remember, especially this year on offense, is that they’re building something for the playoffs, so what we see in September and Octobers is not the finished product. 

But it should be fascinating to see how the offense evolves this year and who Brady develops (or doesn’t develop) confidence in at wide receiver.

Right now I still lean toward a DT in the first round unless they trade back, which everyone knows there’s a good chance of. There’s still some names out there like Israel Idonije and Alan Branch, but right now they still need some DT depth. 

Wouldn’t rule out WR either, or to a lesser extent DB. Either way it will just come down to value. But I think the first two rounds will see some combination of DT, WR, and CB, depending on who falls. The good news is that there’s really good depth in to the second round for all those positions.

Vollmer is the wild card, if he doesn’t return RT could be a priority too.

I think so, it seems like the Pats have an offer to him and he’s seeing if anyone will top it but it doesn’t seem like anyone has. Or maybe the teams that have aren’t the best situations. Getting Vollmer back would be a nice boost and allow the Pats to focus on DL, DB and WR at the top of the draft.