Maye-day Every Day

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
12,771
around the way
Completely agree about sacks. I was trying to find pressure rate stats online to expand the scope of my post but couldn't dig any up. So I left that aspect out.

Agree that the OL stinks and Maye's facing an immediately collapsing pocket far too often. But it's part of the learning process. And so far I think he's done a pretty good job of escaping the worst hits. That's a skill, as we know.
Agreed that he does a good job using his athleticism to get out of trouble or at least to take big hits without getting killed. I'm a lot less worried having seen him back there in two real games.

Someone has access to the pass pro numbers. I don't remember how to find them, but they're out there. Last year we were 31-32 for most of the year. The only time I saw it posted here was a couple of weeks ago, and we were still bottom 5. It doesn't always match the eyeball test for me (sometimes a guy who looked not terrible is recorded with a bunch of complete whiffs).
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
23,149
Philadelphia
I completely agree he shouldn't have thrown it, but I think the first two points are kind of what Zolak is getting at. If Osborn runs the route correctly, it takes more time than what it did, so the progression speed is right, it's just that Osborn is now 5+ yards further through the route than he should be, because he never made a move upfield to put the defender off balance. That leads into Maye then rushing a throw. These routes are so connected, it's read one, read two, read three, etc. and if a receiver is covered, you just move on, but when a receiver isn't where they are supposed to be at the time they're supposed to be, everything goes to shit.

That said, if this is the kind of nit picking we're making for a rookie QB playing with the worst line and worst receivers in the NFL, coming off a game with a 109.7 QB rating, completing 70% of his passes, and zero turnovers, I think we're in far better shape than we probably deserve to be. I can't begin to say how impressed I've been with Maye to this point, and to me anything less than an A for yesterday's performance means expectations are simply way too high. There are going to be worse games going forward, a LOT worse, but every QB in every game makes a couple bad decisions, bad throws. Every single one. CJ Stroud was 10/21 for 86 yards yesterday, Jordan Love threw 2 picks, Purdy and Mahomes combined for 0td passes and 5 picks, Cousins threw 2 picks, lost a fumble and got blown out at home by the Seahawks, don't even get me started on Aaron Rodgers.

I'm waking up this morning and feeling better about yesterday than Atlanta, San Fran, Jets, Cowboys, etc. fans should probably be feeling, win totals be damned.
Great point about the timing of the route and I couldn't agree more with the second paragraph.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
60,970
San Andreas Fault
Agreed that he does a good job using his athleticism to get out of trouble or at least to take big hits without getting killed. I'm a lot less worried having seen him back there in two real games.

Someone has access to the pass pro numbers. I don't remember how to find them, but they're out there. Last year we were 31-32 for most of the year. The only time I saw it posted here was a couple of weeks ago, and we were still bottom 5. It doesn't always match the eyeball test for me (sometimes a guy who looked not terrible is recorded with a bunch of complete whiffs).
I looked up his height and weight on a couple of sites: 6’4” 220-225. In the games, he has looked quick and fast for a guy that size. Very good arm, tough. Limited data, but this guy is looking even better than I expected. Meanwhile, I’m seeing Brock Purdy, for example, getting too many passes blocked by linemen and having to scramble too much to find a lane to throw in because he’s shorter. When he slows down a step or two, he won’t be able to do that as much.
 

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
5,191
Worcester
That said, if this is the kind of nit picking we're making for a rookie QB playing with the worst line and worst receivers in the NFL, coming off a game with a 109.7 QB rating, completing 70% of his passes, and zero turnovers, I think we're in far better shape than we probably deserve to be. I can't begin to say how impressed I've been with Maye to this point, and to me anything less than an A for yesterday's performance means expectations are simply way too high. There are going to be worse games going forward, a LOT worse, but every QB in every game makes a couple bad decisions, bad throws. Every single one. CJ Stroud was 10/21 for 86 yards yesterday, Jordan Love threw 2 picks, Purdy and Mahomes combined for 0td passes and 5 picks, Cousins threw 2 picks, lost a fumble and got blown out at home by the Seahawks, don't even get me started on Aaron Rodgers.

I'm waking up this morning and feeling better about yesterday than Atlanta, San Fran, Jets, Cowboys, etc. fans should probably be feeling, win totals be damned.
None of those QBs faced the NE "defense".
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
12,771
around the way
I looked up his height and weight on a couple of sites: 6’4” 220-225. In the games, he has looked quick and fast for a guy that size. Very good arm, tough. Limited data, but this guy is looking even better than I expected. Meanwhile, I’m seeing Brock Purdy, for example, getting too many passes blocked by linemen and having to scramble too much to find a lane to throw in because he’s shorter. When he slows down a step or two, he won’t be able to do that as much.
Purdy is also an example of a guy struggling more now that the offense around him isn't as stable and explosive as prior years. Maye's tools are in his favor for sure.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
47,365
Melrose, MA
I know everyone is eagerly awaiting Bedard's grades for Maye's start vs. the Jaguars, so here goes:

https://www.bostonsportsjournal.com/2024/10/21/bedards-breakdown-offense-drake-maye-showed-substantial-improvement-in-second-start?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

After a solid debut in the Patriots' 20-point loss to the Texans, we were looking for a few things from Drake Maye in his second start against the Jaguars, who have one of the worst pass defenses in the league:

- Maintain or slightly increase his ability to make plays
- Cutdown on his minus decisions
- Cutdown on the turnovers
- Don't be so quick to leave the pocket
- Be a little more accurate
In the end, Maye largely checked off all of those as he produced my sixth-highest-graded game dating back to last season. Maye went from a -13.3% to a +6.4.

Maye's plus plays increased from 11 to 14. His minus plays went from 17 to 11. Maye was also much more consistent with a 7/5 split in the first half, and a 7/6 in the second half (and to be fair, two came in desperation time).

I thought Maye only departed the pocket early once, so it was good to see him take that coaching.
He also references some metrics:
Maye did technically not turn the ball over, but he had two near interceptions and PFF had his turnover-worthy play percentage tick up from 4.4 to 6.4. So that's not a clean checkmark.

His expected completion percentage difference increased from -1.8 to 2.9 in an illustration that his accuracy overall was a little better from Week 1, which was another good step.

In another sign of how much better Maye was in his second start, Maye's expected points added per dropback was 0.23, which ranked 6th in the league after Sunday. He was 25th against the Texans. Maye was also fourth in the league in passer rating against pressure (111.1) on Sunday. He was 13th (47.9) last week.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
55,281
I feel like i get nothing valuable from that quasi statistical analysis.
Here's Lazar's tale of the tape: After Further Review: Breaking Down Patriots QB Drake Maye's Second Start, the Pats Defense and More From Loss to Jags

Among 35 quarterbacks with at least 32 drop-backs in the last two weeks, Maye currently ranks 22nd in expected points added per drop-back (+0.05), 18th in drop-back success rate (45.6%), and 16th in completion percentage over expectation (+1.3). He's also tied for third with four deep completions and tied for fifth with three big-time throws.
From this perspective, the most compelling aspect of Maye's film in the early going is that he's mainly winning in structure. In the audio breakdown above, you'll see that nine of his 11 positively graded plays were within the framework of the offense, like finding his answers against pressure and going through progressions to find the open receiver. That's sustainable offense that they can replicate each week.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,708
None of those QBs faced the NE "defense".
In his first game a week ago, Maye faced arguably the best passing defense in the NFL vs. Houston, and he looked better in that game than those guys looked this week too (the same defense Jordan Love faced this week, and Maye doesn't have Josh Jacobs, Jayden Reed, Doubs, Wicks, that offensive line, etc).
 

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
5,191
Worcester
In his first game a week ago, Maye faced arguably the best passing defense in the NFL vs. Houston, and he looked better in that game than those guys looked this week too (the same defense Jordan Love faced this week, and Maye doesn't have Josh Jacobs, Jayden Reed, Doubs, Wicks, that offensive line, etc).
Yeah, I was just grumpy that the book is out on the Pats' D-- go up the middle, whether run or pass (or punt return)
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,415
Boston
In his first game a week ago, Maye faced arguably the best passing defense in the NFL vs. Houston, and he looked better in that game than those guys looked this week too (the same defense Jordan Love faced this week, and Maye doesn't have Josh Jacobs, Jayden Reed, Doubs, Wicks, that offensive line, etc).
It’s too bad the Patriots don’t draft high enough to get receivers like Reed, Doubs or Wicks. /end sarcasm. My larger point is these are 3 great examples of receivers that the Patriots could have drafted.

The Packers seem better than league average at either coaching or drafting receivers. But to be critical most teams have found contributors at WR in the middle rounds.

Additional examples of second round receivers in 2023:
-Rashee Rice
-Tank Dell
-Josh Downs
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
37,296
It’s too bad the Patriots don’t draft high enough to get receivers like Reed, Doubs or Wicks.

To be fair, the Packers seem much better than league average at either coaching or drafting receivers. But to be critical most teams have found contributors at WR in the middle rounds.
Packers also have a great offensive playcalling HC, that makes a huge difference, as does a good line. Wicks is a funny one because... his hands are horrendous, he has a higher drop rate than Ja'Lynn Polk this year and a lower catch%.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
55,281
It’s too bad the Patriots don’t draft high enough to get receivers like Reed, Doubs or Wicks. /end sarcasm. My larger point is that these are 3 great examples of receivers that the Patriots could have drafted.

To be fair, the Packers seem much better than league average at either coaching or drafting receivers. But to be critical most teams have found contributors at WR in the middle rounds.
Reed popped obviously. The other 2, if they were here, would like the dudes we have now. Doubs and Wicks look good because they have Reed and Watson.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
23,149
Philadelphia
It’s too bad the Patriots don’t draft high enough to get receivers like Reed, Doubs or Wicks. /end sarcasm. My larger point is that these are 3 great examples of receivers that the Patriots could have drafted.

To be fair, the Packers seem much better than league average at either coaching or drafting receivers. But to be critical most teams have found contributors at WR in the middle rounds.
In the 2021-2023 drafts the Packers drafted five WR and two TEs with picks in rounds 3,2,4,2,2,3,5, plus a couple very late fliers. They've largely been able to do this because they had a lot of extra picks over this window (one extra 1st, one extra 2nd, one extra 4th, two extra 5s).

They've done well overall, certainly with a hit rate higher than the Pats, but I don't think they've crushed this part of the draft. There are a couple total busts in there, a couple very promising maybe stars, and then a few that are probably just performing decently in a very functional offense with a top QB and elite play caller. Middle round WRs and TEs are largely crapshoots and you just need to take a lot of rolls.
 
Last edited:

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,708
It’s too bad the Patriots don’t draft high enough to get receivers like Reed, Doubs or Wicks. /end sarcasm. My larger point is that these are 3 great examples of receivers that the Patriots could have drafted.

To be fair, the Packers seem much better than league average at either coaching or drafting receivers. But to be critical most teams have found contributors at WR in the middle rounds.
Or DK Metcalf, Deebo, AJ Brown....

But I digress, because I will never, not ever, get over that draft.

I'm not so sure it's just that the Packers are better at identifying talent at WR, it's that they made sure to keep trying to...

Once it became clear that Aaron Rodgers (and Adams) was likely on his last deal with them, they started working towards the future. They drafted Jordan Love in 2020. He didn't start seeing snaps in real games until 2023. In 2021, they used a 3rd rounder on Amari Rodgers (bust). So they ran it right back and in 2022, they drafted Christian Watson in the 2nd, Romeo Dobbs in the 4th and Toure in the 6th. In 2023, they used another 2nd on Jayden Reed, they used a 2nd on TE Luke Musgrave, they used a 3rd on TE, Tylerr Kraft, they used a 5th on Wicks, and they used a 7th on another WR, Dubose. In a 3 year span, they took 7 wide receivers and 2 tight ends to start getting their young QB up to speed, knowing they won't hit on a all of them.

Conversely, what did Bill do here? They drafted Mac Jones in 2021. At that time, they had drafted EIGHT wide receivers going back to 2011 and 5 of those 8 were in the last two rounds with 4 of them in the 7th round (Jeremy Ebert in 2012 in the 7th, Josh Boyce in the 4th in 2013, Aaron Dobson in the 2nd in 2013, Gallon in the 7th in 2014, Devin Lucien in the 7th in 2016, Berrios in the 6th in 2018, Harry in the 1st in 2019, and they took Tre Nixon in the 7th in the Mac draft in 2021).

They completely fucking ignored the position in the draft because they had Tom Brady to clean up their mess. They did take 2 tight ends in the third round in 2020, who have a combined 7 career NFL catches, so I guess there was that.

But here we have a rookie QB coming in, and they haven't made it a real priority at all. So one would figure, like Green Bay, time to take a bunch of swings? Nope, they take Thornton in the 2nd in 2022, Boutte and Pop in the 6th in 2023 and then they come back in 2024 with Polk in the 2nd and Baker in the 4th.

If you're going to draft wide receivers, you need to either go up and get the elite talent, or you need to do what Green Bay does and swing and swing and swing in consecutive years. The Pats have done neither. The only receiver the Pats took in 2021, knowing they were going to send Mac Jones out there to start from day one was Tre Fucking Nixon in the 7th round and they didn't take a single receiver in 2020. That's fucking malpractice.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
23,149
Philadelphia
Its worth noting that a big big difference in terms of the ability to take middle round swings in these 2020-2023 drafts is that the Packers traded their aging offensive stars to reload (Davante Adams for a 1st and 2nd in 2022, Rodgers for what became two 2nds in 2023) whereas the Pats ran it back with Gronk and Brady in 2019 and then traded a 2nd for the corpse of Muhammed Sanu to try to keep it going. I wasn't complaining at the time. But that's basically a 1st and three 2nds for GB and negative one 2nd for the Pats (I guess they eventually got a 4th for Gronk but still).
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
37,296
Its worth noting that a big big difference is that the Packers traded their aging offensive stars to reload (Davante Adams for a 1st and 2nd in 2022, Rodgers for what became two 2nds in 2023) whereas the Pats ran it back with Gronk and Brady in 2019 and then traded a 2nd for the corpse of Muhammed Sanu to try to keep it going. I wasn't complaining at the time. But that's basically a 1st and three 2nds for GB and negative one 2nd for the Pats (I guess they eventually got a 4th for Gronk but still).
yep, this comes up a lot, but the Patriots were one of the hardest rebuilds ever because they had all the negatives of an aging team (dead cap hits for players not on the roster) and few of the upsides, because they couldn't get anything back for most of their stars who either retired or left for nothing.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
37,138
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I really wish people would understand that Sanu deal. He was great his first game here, then got a high ankle sprain in the next game the effectively ended his career.

He was a fine addition, they weren't trading for his corpse. His injury killed the team that year.
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,415
Boston
Middle round WRs and TEs are largely crapshoots and you just need to take a lot of shots.
I agree but for a team with major holes, this seems like a strategy that the Patriots haven’t tried enough.

I’ll give them credit for shots on Polk and Baker. But even there, between Polk and Wallace, it seems like they left another pick on the board where each went higher than projected. Easy to criticize Polk today but I would have gone tackle on the second or traded down for a WR.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
23,149
Philadelphia
I really wish people would understand that Sanu deal. He was great his first game here, then got a high ankle sprain in the next game the effectively ended his career.

He was a fine addition, they weren't trading for his corpse. His injury killed the team that year.
Corpse is probably uncharitable but the guy was 30 and not going to be part of the future. The point is that we sacrificed more of the future to keep the run going and therefore made the eventual rebuild harder, the opposite of what GB did.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
26,505
I really wish people would understand that Sanu deal. He was great his first game here, then got a high ankle sprain in the next game the effectively ended his career.

He was a fine addition, they weren't trading for his corpse. His injury killed the team that year.
100%. Sanu was a really good player for many years. It was a fine idea to trade for him.

And the Pats in the last few drafts have done what we've all kind of asked them to do - take multiple shots at WR.

2019 - 1st round - Harry
2022 - 2nd round - Thornton
2023 - 6th round - Boutte (considered a much higher round talent but with some issues), 6th round - Douglas (he's been terrific)
2024 - 2nd round - Polk, 4th round - Baker

Plus adding a bunch of other guys - JuJu, Osborn, Bourne, Parker, Agholor, Meyers

Obviously a bunch of these haven't worked out. That's kind of the nature of the beast and it's exactly why we have wanted them to keep taking shots, because most won't work out.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
37,138
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Corpse is probably uncharitable but the guy was 30 and not going to be part of the future. The point is that we sacrificed more of the future to keep the run going and therefore made the eventual rebuild harder, the opposite of what GB did.
And sacrificing the future for a last run with Brady was what fans at the time were screaming at them to do.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
37,791
306, row 14
And sacrificing the future for a last run with Brady was what fans at the time were screaming at them to do.
They were 7-0 at the time of the trade and Brady was a pending free agent and I'm sure all parties were well aware it was his last here in New England.

Harry was on IR from a camp injury, the Antonio Brown fiasco backfied, Josh Gordon had just left or got suspended again (can't remember) so their receiving options were 33 year old Edelman, Phillip Dorsett, undrafted rookie Jakobi Meyers and the literal coprse of Ben Watson. It was so bleak they were throwing passes to Elandon Roberts by the end of the year.

Perfectly reasonable trade, even in hindsight.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
55,281
If you're going to draft wide receivers, you need to either go up and get the elite talent, or you need to do what Green Bay does and swing and swing and swing in consecutive years. The Pats have done neither. The only receiver the Pats took in 2021, knowing they were going to send Mac Jones out there to start from day one was Tre Fucking Nixon in the 7th round and they didn't take a single receiver in 2020. That's fucking malpractice.
Assuming Polk fixes himself 3 of the top 4 guys are first or second year WR--Douglas, Boutte, Polk, with hopefully Baker getting closer to getting on the field. At the very least, Douglas and Boutte have shown up in games. It's a start. Baker was in London, and was a late scratch, but he might be getting close. If they can get a #1 this offseason then those guys slot into their roles a bit better.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,708
100%. Sanu was a really good player for many years. It was a fine idea to trade for him.

And the Pats in the last few drafts have done what we've all kind of asked them to do - take multiple shots at WR.

2019 - 1st round - Harry
2022 - 2nd round - Thornton
2023 - 6th round - Boutte (considered a much higher round talent but with some issues), 6th round - Douglas (he's been terrific)
2024 - 2nd round - Polk, 4th round - Baker

Plus adding a bunch of other guys - JuJu, Osborn, Bourne, Parker, Agholor, Meyers

Obviously a bunch of these haven't worked out. That's kind of the nature of the beast and it's exactly why we have wanted them to keep taking shots, because most won't work out.

No, drafting 2 second rounders, a 4th rounder and 2 6th rounders over the course of 3 drafts is NOT what we're asking them to do. Every one of those picks began a year AFTER they started a rookie QB in week one in 2021. Green Bay took 6 wide receivers and 2 tight ends in the 2 drafts before making Jordan Love the starter. There was no plan, Tom Brady was already gone, how the fuck do you take ZERO wide receivers in 2020 after Brady left knowing you have the corpse of Cam Newton under center? How do you take one wide receiver in the final round in 2021 knowing you're starting a rookie QB? How do you take 1 wide receiver in round 2 in 2022 knowing what happened with the receiving corpse in 2021?


They had to go looking for JuJu, Osborn, Agholor, Antonio Brown, Josh Gordon, Sanu, etc. because they ignored the fucking position year after year after year after year.

2003: Bethel Johnson (3rd round)
2004: P.K. Sam (5th)
2005: Zero receivers
2006: Chad Jackson (2nd)
2007: Zero receivers
2008: Matthew Slater (5th) (aka zero receivers)
2009: Brandon Tate (3rd) Edelman (6th)
2010: Taylor Price (3rd)
2011: Zero receivers
2012: Jeremy Ebert (7th)
2013: Dobson (2nd) Boyce (4th)
2014: Gallon (7th)
2015: Zero receivers
2016: Mitchell (4th) Lucien (7th)
2017: Zero receivers
2018: Berrios (6th)
2019: Harry (1st)
2020: Zero receivers
2021: Nixon (7th)

People can make whatever excuses they want, this guy didn't work out, they tried this in free agency. They tied their own fucking hands because they had Tom Brady and Gronk and slot guys, and when the shit hit the fan and guys aged out, the time to start striking was 2017 onward. Instead, they took zero wide receivers in 2 of the next 5 drafts, and took a 6th in one and a 7th in the other to go along with Harry.

And the next person that talks about them not having enough picks is going to bring out the fire. Bill had enough picks from 2019-2023 to take four fucking running backs, including 1 in the 3rd round and 2 in the fourth. He had enough picks to waste a 5th on a kicker that never played and a 6th on a punter, who in fairness, may be one of his better picks in the final years. This team wasn't committed to finding receivers for a long, long time through the draft, and even when the writing was on the wall and you had Cam Newton and then Mac Jones, they still didn't prioritize it. Bill could have traded down, as he did so many other times, built up his pick totals and took shots at WR, but nope, when you have a 3rd and a 4th in 2022 following the 2021 season, you take Thornton and then move on to defensive backs like Marcus and Jack Jones, and of course, when those don't work out right, you come right back and grab DB's in the 1st and 3rd the following year and wait until round 6 to grab a receiver.

Stop it. This is 2024 in the NFL. Anyone paying attention knows what receivers mean. If you can find and develop your own, they are almost as golden as finding and developing your own QB. Can't develop anybody if you don't fucking take any.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
37,296
No, drafting 2 second rounders, a 4th rounder and 2 6th rounders over the course of 3 drafts is NOT what we're asking them to do. Every one of those picks began a year AFTER they started a rookie QB in week one in 2021. Green Bay took 6 wide receivers and 2 tight ends in the 2 drafts before making Jordan Love the starter. There was no plan, Tom Brady was already gone, how the fuck do you take ZERO wide receivers in 2020 after Brady left knowing you have the corpse of Cam Newton under center? How do you take one wide receiver in the final round in 2021 knowing you're starting a rookie QB? How do you take 1 wide receiver in round 2 in 2022 knowing what happened with the receiving corpse in 2021?
The Packers are a bizarre comparison.... they used arguably even fewer draft picks on WR/TEs during the bulk of the Rodgers years than the Patriots did.

They added a 2nd rounder in Rodgers' last year, then two 2nds and a 3rd the year after he left.

The Patriots used a 1st in Brady's last year, and traded a 2nd for one, and then two 3rds the year after he left.

The timing of the WRs/TEs before the QB "Started" is because they drafted their QB multiple years before they got rid of their previous one. If the Patriots had drafted a QB in 2017 (they didn't have any picks) then you'd be looking at them drafting/trading for a similar number of passcatchers.


EDIT- to be clear, the difference between the Packers and the Patriots isn't how they used resources on passcatchers, it's that the Packers got good value and the Patriots completely whiffed in a shocking way.
 
Last edited:

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
23,149
Philadelphia
And sacrificing the future for a last run with Brady was what fans at the time were screaming at them to do.
As I said in the original post, I wasn't complaining about these decisions at the time. The point isn't to relitigate them but simply that they made they made the Patriots' rebuild harder than other teams like the Packers. Is that really in doubt?
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
26,505
No, drafting 2 second rounders, a 4th rounder and 2 6th rounders over the course of 3 drafts is NOT what we're asking them to do. Every one of those picks began a year AFTER they started a rookie QB in week one in 2021. Green Bay took 6 wide receivers and 2 tight ends in the 2 drafts before making Jordan Love the starter. There was no plan, Tom Brady was already gone, how the fuck do you take ZERO wide receivers in 2020 after Brady left knowing you have the corpse of Cam Newton under center? How do you take one wide receiver in the final round in 2021 knowing you're starting a rookie QB? How do you take 1 wide receiver in round 2 in 2022 knowing what happened with the receiving corpse in 2021?


They had to go looking for JuJu, Osborn, Agholor, Antonio Brown, Josh Gordon, Sanu, etc. because they ignored the fucking position year after year after year after year.

2003: Bethel Johnson (3rd round)
2004: P.K. Sam (5th)
2005: Zero receivers
2006: Chad Jackson (2nd)
2007: Zero receivers
2008: Matthew Slater (5th) (aka zero receivers)
2009: Brandon Tate (3rd) Edelman (6th)
2010: Taylor Price (3rd)
2011: Zero receivers
2012: Jeremy Ebert (7th)
2013: Dobson (2nd) Boyce (4th)
2014: Gallon (7th)
2015: Zero receivers
2016: Mitchell (4th) Lucien (7th)
2017: Zero receivers
2018: Berrios (6th)
2019: Harry (1st)
2020: Zero receivers
2021: Nixon (7th)

People can make whatever excuses they want, this guy didn't work out, they tried this in free agency. They tied their own fucking hands because they had Tom Brady and Gronk and slot guys, and when the shit hit the fan and guys aged out, the time to start striking was 2017 onward. Instead, they took zero wide receivers in 2 of the next 5 drafts, and took a 6th in one and a 7th in the other to go along with Harry.

And the next person that talks about them not having enough picks is going to bring out the fire. Bill had enough picks from 2019-2023 to take four fucking running backs, including 1 in the 3rd round and 2 in the fourth. He had enough picks to waste a 5th on a kicker that never played and a 6th on a punter, who in fairness, may be one of his better picks in the final years. This team wasn't committed to finding receivers for a long, long time through the draft, and even when the writing was on the wall and you had Cam Newton and then Mac Jones, they still didn't prioritize it. Bill could have traded down, as he did so many other times, built up his pick totals and took shots at WR, but nope, when you have a 3rd and a 4th in 2022 following the 2021 season, you take Thornton and then move on to defensive backs like Marcus and Jack Jones, and of course, when those don't work out right, you come right back and grab DB's in the 1st and 3rd the following year and wait until round 6 to grab a receiver.

Stop it. This is 2024 in the NFL. Anyone paying attention knows what receivers mean. If you can find and develop your own, they are almost as golden as finding and developing your own QB. Can't develop anybody if you don't fucking take any.
I said “in the last few drafts”. And in the last few (2022, 2023, 2024) drafts they’ve used five picks on WR.

2 second round picks
1 fourth round pick
2 sixth round picks
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,708
The Packers are a bizarre comparison.... they used arguably even fewer draft picks on WR/TEs during the bulk of the Rodgers years than the Patriots did.

They added a 2nd rounder in Rodgers' last year, then two 2nds and a 3rd the year after he left.

The Patriots used a 1st in Brady's last year, and traded a 2nd for one, and then two 3rds the year after he left.

The timing of the WRs/TEs before the QB "Started" is because they drafted their QB multiple years before they got rid of their previous one. If the Patriots had drafted a QB in 2017 (they didn't have any picks) then you'd be looking at them drafting/trading for a similar number of passcatchers.
Because unlike the Patriots, during the Aaron Rodgers years, the Packers were out there using high draft picks on receivers, and thus, hitting on them so they didn't need to keep swinging.

They took Greg Jennings in the 2nd in 2006, they took James Jones in the 3rd in 2007, they took Jordy Nelson in the 2nd (they didn't have a 1st) in 2008, they took Randall Cobb in the 2nd in 2010, they took Davante Adams in the 2nd in 2014, they took Montgomery in the 3rd in 2015, they also went and found Lazard on the waiver wire.


Then they turned into the Patriots and started ignoring the position, and lo and behold, their offense went to shit, Rodgers became a pouty tool, and the writing was on the wall. But unlike the Pats, they then went balls out in drafting guys that could develop chemistry with their heir apparent QB. The Packers used a 2nd and a 4th the year BEFORE Rodgers left, they used a 2nd, a 2nd, a 3rd and a 5th the year he left (if we're now including tight ends). Meanwhile, The Pats used 2 thirds on 2 tight ends after Brady left the building, while ignoring the WR position, which according to my notes, seems to be a far more important position in the NFL since 2020 than tight end. Then the Pats followed up with ZERO receivers, tight ends included, except a 7th rounder in Tre Nixon in 2021, knowing full well they just drafted their QB with the 15th pick.

The Patriots took ONE wide receiver before round 4 from 2014-2021, and that one guy was N'Keal Harry. Tom Brady's last season in New England was 2019. They did not plan for life after Brady, and like Green Bay, they did not plan for life with him either, or Tom Brady would have finished his career here, and Rodgers would likely have finished his in Green Bay.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,708
I said “in the last few drafts”. And in the last few (2022, 2023, 2024) drafts they’ve used five picks on WR.

2 second round picks
1 fourth round pick
2 sixth round picks
And that's not enough when you're cupboard is bare, and you have young QB's in today's NFL. If that is prioritizing the position after years of ignoring it, this rebuild will never, ever end.

But hey, we did go out and get playmakers like Hunter Henry and Austin Hooper and KJ Osborn and Jalen Reagor and Kendrick Bourne and JuJu, so I guess it's all good.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
37,296
Because unlike the Patriots, during the Aaron Rodgers years, the Packers were out there using high draft picks on receivers, and thus, hitting on them so they didn't need to keep swinging.

They took Greg Jennings in the 2nd in 2006, they took James Jones in the 3rd in 2007, they took Jordy Nelson in the 2nd (they didn't have a 1st) in 2008, they took Randall Cobb in the 2nd in 2010, they took Davante Adams in the 2nd in 2014, they took Montgomery in the 3rd in 2015, they also went and found Lazard on the waiver wire.


Then they turned into the Patriots and started ignoring the position, and lo and behold, their offense went to shit, Rodgers became a pouty tool, and the writing was on the wall. But unlike the Pats, they then went balls out in drafting guys that could develop chemistry with their heir apparent QB. The Packers used a 2nd and a 4th the year BEFORE Rodgers left, they used a 2nd, a 2nd, a 3rd and a 5th the year he left (if we're now including tight ends). Meanwhile, The Pats used 2 thirds on 2 tight ends after Brady left the building, while ignoring the WR position, which according to my notes, seems to be a far more important position in the NFL since 2020 than tight end. Then the Pats followed up with ZERO receivers, tight ends included, except a 7th rounder in Tre Nixon in 2021, knowing full well they just drafted their QB with the 15th pick.

The Patriots took ONE wide receiver before round 4 from 2014-2021, and that one guy was N'Keal Harry. Tom Brady's last season in New England was 2019. They did not plan for life after Brady, and like Green Bay, they did not plan for life with him either, or Tom Brady would have finished his career here, and Rodgers would likely have finished his in Green Bay.
Why are we comparing what the Patriots took from 2014-2021 with what the Packers did in 2006?

The Patriots took a WR in the 2nd in 2006, they traded a 2nd and a 4th in 2007 for Wes Welker and Randy Moss, they drafted a WR in the 3rd in 2009, Rob Gronkowski in the 2nd, and a WR in the 3rd, and Aaron Hernandez in the 4th in 2010, drafted a WR in the 2nd in 2013, a WR in the 4th in 2016, traded a 1st and 3rd in 2017 for Brandin Cooks.....

The Patriots invested far more in Passcatchers during that period than the Packers, they used more trades, and for various reasons missed or lost out (injuries, murder convictions) on some of those guys, but that's life in the NFL.

Edit- I'd also note.... the Patriots went to 4 Superbowls in 5 years in the period in question... I'd say they played the strategy just right. Could they have made other moves to try and extend the window at the expense of the present... sure, but assuming Brady would play far beyond when anyone expected him to isn't a great plan. (also Brady didn't leave because of his WRs after 4 superbowls in 6 years, he left for a number of complex reasons).
 
Last edited:

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,708
Why are we comparing what the Patriots took from 2014-2021 with what the Packers did in 2006?

The Patriots took a WR in the 2nd in 2006, they traded a 2nd and a 4th in 2007 for Wes Welker and Randy Moss, they drafted a WR in the 3rd in 2009, Rob Gronkowski in the 2nd, and a WR in the 3rd, and Aaron Hernandez in the 5th in 2010, drafted a WR in the 2nd in 2013, a WR in the 4th in 2016, traded a 1st and 3rd in 2017 for Brandin Cooks.....

The Patriots invested far more in Passcatchers during that period than the Packers.
You brought up the comparison when you talked about how Green Bay ignored the position in the draft moreso than the Patriots, which isn't true because unlike the Pats, they were using picks higher in the draft and hitting on them. I don't particularly care what the Pats did prior to 2017, it was just an illustration of just how much the Pats relied on Brady to dig them out of their unreliance on the draft at the WR position, and eventually, even Brady couldn't make up for it.


For the record, the Patriots won 3 Super Bowls to the Packers 1 over that span. Maybe, just maybe, if Green Bay didn't ignore the position from 2015 onward, they wouldn't have been relying on the corpse of Jimmy Graham in the playoffs behind Adams, after missing the playoffs outright for 2 years.

But what do I know. Maybe we should go DB, DB, P, K, OL, DB, LB in this years' draft, and we can ask Tampa Bay in week 4 next year if Chris Godwin is healthy and bring him in for a 2nd rounder. That would be in line with how the Pats viewed the position since roughly 2015.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
27,929
Unreal America
Seems as simple as Bill never believing that high-end WRs were necessary. I always assumed he figured that guys who were tough, precise, sure-handed route runners were all that was needed. But Bill miscalculated just how much Brady was holding together everything offensively.

I just didn't get Bill's post-Brady strategy.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
37,296
You brought up the comparison when you talked about how Green Bay ignored the position in the draft moreso than the Patriots, which isn't true because unlike the Pats, they were using picks higher in the draft and hitting on them. I don't particularly care what the Pats did prior to 2017, it was just an illustration of just how much the Pats relied on Brady to dig them out of their unreliance on the draft at the WR position, and eventually, even Brady couldn't make up for it.


For the record, the Patriots won 3 Super Bowls to the Packers 1 over that span. Maybe, just maybe, if Green Bay didn't ignore the position from 2015 onward, they wouldn't have been relying on the corpse of Jimmy Graham in the playoffs behind Adams, after missing the playoffs outright for 2 years.

But what do I know. Maybe we should go DB, DB, P, K, OL, DB, LB in this years' draft, and we can ask Tampa Bay in week 4 next year if Chris Godwin is healthy and bring him in for a 2nd rounder. That would be in line with how the Pats viewed the position since roughly 2015.
Uh.. I literally just posted a list of all the picks the Patriots used, it was a lot. The idea that drafting a guy is magically more valuable than trading a 4th for a HOF WR, is silly. As is not recognizing that draft strategy is dictated by roster composition and team goals. I love that you think the Patriots being one of the most dominant franchises in history over a period is not significantly different than a team that won 1 title and didn't even make a 2nd SB.

This year's draft strategy won't have anything to do with Brady era, because the team isn't trying to win a superbowl with a veteran heavy roster and an aging QB. They also have a new GM... one who just used 2 of his top 5 picks on WRs.

What are we doing here? Seriously. Your argument is that starting in 2017.... the Patriots, who went to back to back SBs, were making a mistake not taking WRs, because they should have been planning for a future QB not yet on the roster instead of trying to get to and win those SBs? In 2017 the year you picked.... they traded their 1st for a WR, in 2018 they did not take a WR, in 2019 they took a WR in the 1st... and traded a 2nd for another, so in the period you're talking about they used TWO OF THREE 1st round picks to help at WR, then in 2020 they had traded a 2nd for a WR, and proceeded to use two 3rds on TE.

Your argument is completely incoherent. The Patriots used more resources on QB both over the full dynasty and the end of dynasty years than the Packers... they just were not good picks. THAT should be your argument... that the Patriots were very bad at evaluating and drafting WRs in particular.

The argument you should make is..... the Patriots were BAD at drafting WRs and then in 2020 failed drafting TEs where they had been strong before.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
37,138
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Why are we holding up the Packers as some sort of paragon? They lost three playoff games in that time while allowing 44, 37, and 31 points. Their defenses and special teams sucked for years, and that's why they never made it to another Super Bowl. It has nothing to do with the receivers they drafted.

If Wolf wants to use his GB experience as a reason why he can rebuild the Pats, he'll have to answer the question of how he intends to build his Pats teams better than those Packers teams were built.

Two of the most memorable Packers moments in the last 25 years were Bostick screwing up the onside kick and the Packers allowing Dan Connolly to return a kickoff 70 yards. Oh, and losing playoff games at home. They have NEVER been good at the finer details of football.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
66,140
Rotten Apple
To be fair, the Packers have 150 wins since 2010. Only the Chiefs (153) and then the Pats (155) have more. That's a very good regular season track record. Add in, 8 division banners in that time frame- although they won one going 8-7-1.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
37,138
Deep inside Muppet Labs
To be fair, the Packers have 150 wins since 2010. Only the Chiefs (153) and then the Pats (155) have more. That's a very good regular season track record.
And yet people have slagged BB for winning only with Tom Brady. The Packers have had two HoF level talents at QB, back to back, and yet have won far fewer titles and even playoff games.

I've read over and over in this thread and on the board that the Pats rotted because they depended on Brady too much and that all the winning didn't mean BB was good at roster building. Now they have turned the team over to a guy who had the same situation in GB but won far less with it. And never ever addressed his team's weaknesses (defense, special teams, Rodgers' mouth and Favre's ego).
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
15,965
Gallows Hill
And yet people have slagged BB for winning only with Tom Brady. The Packers have had two HoF level talents at QB, back to back, and yet have won far fewer titles and even playoff games.

I've read over and over in this thread and on the board that the Pats rotted because they depended on Brady too much and that all the winning didn't mean BB was good at roster building. Now they have turned the team over to a guy who had the same situation in GB but won far less with it. And never ever addressed his team's weaknesses (defense, special teams, Rodgers' mouth and Favre's ego).
Some of us do believe that Belichick wasn’t the right guy to continue building the roster going forward, but also believe that the guy that ownership replaced him doesn’t look like the guy that should be building the roster going forward. That does mean that firing Belichick was the wrong call. The mistake IMO was not having a real GM/HC search and completely remaking the organization.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
66,140
Rotten Apple
And yet people have slagged BB for winning only with Tom Brady. The Packers have had two HoF level talents at QB, back to back, and yet have won far fewer titles and even playoff games.

I've read over and over in this thread and on the board that the Pats rotted because they depended on Brady too much and that all the winning didn't mean BB was good at roster building. Now they have turned the team over to a guy who had the same situation in GB but won far less with it. And never ever addressed his team's weaknesses (defense, special teams, Rodgers' mouth and Favre's ego).
Oh agreed, and those weaknesses were totally exposed in the playoffs. But if you're looking for a franchise with a sustained winning history over the last 15 years, Green Bay is right up there- even if it all the warts were covered by elite QB play.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
37,138
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Some of us do believe that Belichick wasn’t the right guy to continue building the roster going forward, but also believe that the guy that ownership replaced him doesn’t look like the guy that should be building the roster going forward. That does mean that firing Belichick was the wrong call. The mistake IMO was not having a real GM/HC search and completely remaking the organization.
On this we agree. Once the decision was made to move on from BB, a real GM/HC search should have been held. Instead they decided that BB was THE problem, got rid of him, handed the reigns to a couple of people already in the building, and called it a day.

I'd laugh if it wasn't so farcically incompetent.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,708
Uh.. I literally just posted a list of all the picks the Patriots used, it was a lot. The idea that drafting a guy is magically more valuable than trading a 4th for a HOF WR, is silly. As is not recognizing that draft strategy is dictated by roster composition and team goals. I love that you think the Patriots being one of the most dominant franchises in history over a period is not significantly different than a team that won 1 title and didn't even make a 2nd SB.
Because you've shifted the goalposts completely in the conversation. I will say this one more time. I posted the list of Pats draft picks of wide receivers going back to 2003 or whatever to illustrate that they didn't prioritize WR's in the draft then, and they have continued since 2017 knowing they had a 42 year old QB who was pissed, a corpse at QB, and a rookie at QB over the following 7 seasons.

Green Bay on the other hand knew they had a 40 year old QB, took a QB in the 1st round, and then started taking receivers and tight ends BEFORE their 40 year old QB left. The Pats not only didn't do that, they didn't even go get receivers in the draft AFTER Brady left. They literally did not draft a receiver in 2020 and took one 7th rounder in 2021.

But like I said in the other thread, they're plenty great at going and getting a bunch of guys who weren't good enough to be #2's and #3's as if that makes it better and a couple guys who spent time on the commissioner's exempt list.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
37,296
Because you've shifted the goalposts completely in the conversation. I will say this one more time. I posted the list of Pats draft picks of wide receivers going back to 2003 or whatever to illustrate that they didn't prioritize WR's in the draft then, and they have continued since 2017 knowing they had a 42 year old QB who was pissed, a corpse at QB, and a rookie at QB over the following 7 seasons.

Green Bay on the other hand knew they had a 40 year old QB, took a QB in the 1st round, and then started taking receivers and tight ends BEFORE their 40 year old QB left. The Pats not only didn't do that, they didn't even go get receivers in the draft AFTER Brady left. They literally did not draft a receiver in 2020 and took one 7th rounder in 2021.

But like I said in the other thread, they're plenty great at going and getting a bunch of guys who weren't good enough to be #2's and #3's as if that makes it better.
Okay... if that is your argument..... it isn't based in fact. As I noted, in 2017 they used a 1st round pick on a #1 WR, in 2019 they used a 1st and a 2nd on WRs. So actually they used far MORE draft capital on WR in the last 3 years of Brady's time than ever before (and more than the Packers have ever used).
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,708
Okay... if that is your argument..... it isn't based in fact. As I noted, in 2017 they used a 1st round pick on a #1 WR, in 2019 they used a 1st and a 2nd on WRs. So actually they used far MORE draft capital on WR in the last 3 years of Brady's time than ever before (and more than the Packers have ever used).
You're literally giving them credit for needing to go out and use upcoming draft capital to make up for the fact that they ignored the fucking position leading to them having to do it.

They had to trade their 1st in 2017 for Cooks because they had drafted zero receivers before round 4 going back to 2013. And they were so enamored with Cooks, they went and traded him after one year so they could take Isaiah Wynn. Dude is the definition of a very good #2, not a #1. Then because they traded him away in 2018, and only drafted Braxton Berrios in the 2018 draft, they had to take their 1st rounder in 2019, the only one of Bill's career IIRC. They had 9 other picks in that 2019 draft, including 3 thirds and 2 4th. Damn good thing they went after Jake Bailey in the 5th, because someone else might have gotten him first while Bill was taking Damien Harris in the 3rd and Stidham in the 4th.

But hey, if we're now doing the "draft capital given up through trade" in addition to draft picks used on wide receivers, would you like to discuss Cincy, KC, Miami, Philly, Buffalo instead of Green Bay?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
37,296
You're literally giving them credit for needing to go out and use upcoming draft capital to make up for the fact that they ignored the fucking position leading to them having to do it.

They had to trade their 1st in 2017 for Cooks because they had drafted zero receivers before round 4 going back to 2013. And they were so enamored with Cooks, they went and traded him after one year so they could take Isaiah Wynn. Dude is the definition of a very good #2, not a #1. Then because they traded him away in 2018, and only drafted Braxton Berrios in the 2018 draft, they had to take their 1st rounder in 2019, the only one of Bill's career IIRC. They had 9 other picks in that 2019 draft, including 3 thirds and 2 4th. Damn good thing they went after Jake Bailey in the 5th, because someone else might have gotten him first while Bill was taking Damien Harris in the 3rd and Stidham in the 4th.

But hey, if we're now doing the "draft capital given up through trade" in addition to draft picks used on wide receivers, would you like to discuss Cincy, KC, Miami, Philly, Buffalo instead of Green Bay?
I mean... you're the one who was saying the Packers were a great example. I'm pointing out that they aren't, they had a very similar strategy to the Patriots, they just happened to draft their QB before they dumped their old one, in part because they didn't have the handicap of the Patriots (that they couldn't trade Brady by agreement), then they followed a similar pattern.

If you want to argue that another team is the strategy the Patriots should follow, sure go ahead. Make that argument.

Overall though, your entire diatribe seems to boil down to "The Patriots should have drafted WRs because I want WRs now" which ignores two things:
1. The strategy they used lead to the best success in the history of the sport
2. They have since say 2019, pretty heavily invested in WRs, they just have failed (a 1st, two 2nds so far).

Edit- I will say, it seems that it is results of picks based far more than strategy. If the Patriots took AJ Brown and George Pickens instead of N'Keal Harry and Tyquan Thornton we wouldn't be having this discussion, just like if the Packers had whiffed on their WR picks they wouldn't be the example.
 
Last edited:

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,708
I mean... you're the one who was saying the Packers were a great example. I'm pointing out that they aren't, they had a very similar strategy to the Patriots, they just happened to draft their QB before they dumped their old one, in part because they didn't have the handicap of the Patriots (that they couldn't trade Brady by agreement), then they followed a similar pattern.

If you want to argue that another team is the strategy the Patriots should follow, sure go ahead. Make that argument.

Overall though, your entire diatribe seems to boil down to "The Patriots should have drafted WRs because I want WRs now" which ignores two things:
1. The strategy they used lead to the best success in the history of the sport
2. They have since say 2019, pretty heavily invested in WRs, they just have failed (a 1st, two 2nds so far).
I don't want the Patriots drafting WR's because I want WR's now.

I want the Patriots drafting wide receivers because anyone with a fucking pulse has recognized you can't win in today's NFL without them.

Let's be clear, our 1st round WR was the last pick in the round. Meanwhile, you have Philly using the 10th overall pick to draft a receiver and then spending massive capital to go get AJ Brown. You have Miami using a 6th overall to get Waddle and then spending even more draft capital to get Hill. You have Cincy using a 2nd on Boyd, a 1st on Ross, a 2nd on Higgins, and then the following year, the 4th overall on Chase. Those are heavy investments in wide receivers.

The Pats since 2017 have been reacting as opposed to going out and getting talent at WR (jury is still out on this year's draft, which IMO, represented the first real investment in a long, long time even if it doesn't work). It's a completely different model than what these other teams, notably other teams with young quarterbacks at the time, have done...One model seems to work, the other results in hoping our 3rd overall pick QB doesn't get killed waiting for a bunch of scrubs to get open.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
27,929
Unreal America
I've read over and over in this thread and on the board that the Pats rotted because they depended on Brady too much and that all the winning didn't mean BB was good at roster building.
Huh? This board deified Belichick for 2 decades. It's only been post-2020 where more than a few crackpots began to wonder about some of his roster decisions.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
27,929
Unreal America
I don't want the Patriots drafting WR's because I want WR's now.

I want the Patriots drafting wide receivers because anyone with a fucking pulse has recognized you can't win in today's NFL without them.

Let's be clear, our 1st round WR was the last pick in the round. Meanwhile, you have Philly using the 10th overall pick to draft a receiver and then spending massive capital to go get AJ Brown. You have Miami using a 6th overall to get Waddle and then spending even more draft capital to get Hill. You have Cincy using a 2nd on Boyd, a 1st on Ross, a 2nd on Higgins, and then the following year, the 4th overall on Chase. Those are heavy investments in wide receivers.

The Pats since 2017 have been reacting as opposed to going out and getting talent at WR (jury is still out on this year's draft, which IMO, represented the first real investment in a long, long time even if it doesn't work). It's a completely different model than what these other teams, notably other teams with young quarterbacks at the time, have done...One model seems to work, the other results in hoping our 3rd overall pick QB doesn't get killed waiting for a bunch of scrubs to get open.
For purposes of discussion (because I largely agree with you re: WRs), what positions are teams sacrificing in order to heavy up on WR picks? Have teams deemphasized Guards and Centers? Safeties? Since picks are a finite resource, particularly day 1 and day 2 picks, I'm wondering what's being neglected.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
37,296
I don't want the Patriots drafting WR's because I want WR's now.

I want the Patriots drafting wide receivers because anyone with a fucking pulse has recognized you can't win in today's NFL without them.

Let's be clear, our 1st round WR was the last pick in the round. Meanwhile, you have Philly using the 10th overall pick to draft a receiver and then spending massive capital to go get AJ Brown. You have Miami using a 6th overall to get Waddle and then spending even more draft capital to get Hill. You have Cincy using a 2nd on Boyd, a 1st on Ross, a 2nd on Higgins, and then the following year, the 4th overall on Chase. Those are heavy investments in wide receivers.

The Pats since 2017 have been reacting as opposed to going out and getting talent at WR (jury is still out on this year's draft, which IMO, represented the first real investment in a long, long time even if it doesn't work). It's a completely different model than what these other teams, notably other teams with young quarterbacks at the time, have done...One model seems to work, the other results in hoping our 3rd overall pick QB doesn't get killed waiting for a bunch of scrubs to get open.
Man can't believe the Patriots didnt take a WR in the top 10 with all the picks they had in that range over those years!

But beyond that.... the Patriots are far far more successful than the teams you mentioned. Only 1 of those teams has won a championship.

So maybe..... you can in fact win without spending high on WRs, in fact...
2024- #1 WR was a 2nd round rookie
2023- #1 WR was scrap heap Juju Smith Schuster
2022- #1 WR was a 3rd rounder
2021- #1 WR was a top 10 pick
2020- #1 WR was a 2nd rounder (picked shortly after Harry)
2019- #1 WR was a 7th rounder

If anything recent history says you DON"T need a top half of the 1st WR to win... what's most important is a QB, OL and that you get some kind of production out of your pass-catchers as a whole.