Something to consider when thinking about trading away draft picks . . . look at the Patriots

[Oldfan]

I don't think their plan is working at all.

The Patriots plan HAS worked. It's not the plan you should be questioning' date=' but the execution of the plan which has been failing in recent years.

I thought the plan that Snyder, Cerrato and Zorn had was basically sound. The question I had from the beginning was -- could they execute the plan competently? The answer is [i']obviously not.[/i]

Now, I'm questioning the plan. We don't seem to have a good win-now plan or a good rebuilding plan going on. I'm not among those fans who think you can go in both directions at the same time.

[elkabong82]

I think if the Saints had taken Brady rather then Marc Bulger in the sixth round, and the Patriots had selected Bulger, instead. You'd be calling Bulger "all world" now.

We're not calling Bledsoe "all world," and Cassel had his faults in the Pats system. Their OL and WR corp helped Cassel out. Brady isn't "all world" but he is elite because he makes accurate throws and plays smart because he knows the system well. There certainly are a few QBs who would thrive in the Pats system, but only a handfull (Peyton, Brees, Rivers) I could see accomplishing what Brady has in the system. And keep in mind I LOATHE the Pats and their cheating head coach, but this is my honest interpretation.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I still think the Patriots are a Super Bowl caliber team, and they proved they can do that without highlight type of talent in certain areas like WR (e.g., they had David Patten and some other so-so guy when they won their first). On the flip side to the postulate that you bring in young cheap talent is the corollary principle that you rid yourself of players headed on the decline and get what you can for them. One classic example of this is the Pats' trade of Richard Seymour for the Raiders first round pick in 2011 (which is why the Pats have two first rounders next year). Seymour definitely can still contribute but he's headed to the downside of his career. And they got what appears to be a high first round pick in the 2011 draft.

Has no one watched their defense the last two years outside for Monday Night? It's not good. At all.

I don't think they can win the division with that defense, let alone compete with the Ravens, Jets, and Steelers for a Super Bowl berth. The AFC has some loaded teams. The Pats have Brady and a lot of white hustle.

[The Tris]

I guess they are looking ahead to 2012 - when Brady might be crippled' date=' I might add. But that would not fill me with joy as Pats' fan.[/quote']

I wouldn't worry about that. The system is such that any QB can take the reigns and have success. Only 7.2% of the Pats success is due to Tom Brady.

/Oldfan'ed

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Their plan HAS worked. It's not the plan you should be questioning, but the execution of the plan which has been failing in recent years.

I thought the plan that Snyder, Cerrato and Zorn had was basically sound. The question I had from the beginning was -- could they execute the plan competently? The answer is obviously not.

Now, I'm questioning the plan. We don't seem to have a good win-now plan or a good rebuilding plan going on. I'm not among those fans who think you can go in both directions at the same time.

I think the Skins are screwed until the CBA issues are worked out. They don't have enough young talent. They don't have any draft picks. They don't really know who they are on either side of the ball. It will take two years to figure out at least.

Having said that, what has been the Pat's plan since 2008? It seems to be get rid of anyone with trade value in the hopes that at some point you hit on a Steelers '74 or Redskins '81 draft. They once knew what they were doing. Right now, it seems like they are doing what the Skins do in free agency...except for a cheaper price. Just grab as many people as you can and hope that magic happens.

[elkabong82]

The Pats have gotten into the habit of acquiring picks simply for the purpose of acquiring them. They are like someone who dies with millions of frequent flyer miles.

I don't get how throwing one more draft pick onto their huge pile of draft picks does anything to really help them. They are basically punting away a season in Week 5 unless they know something about the Jets that I don't. The Jets have a better record than the Pats and are getting back a game-changing receiver. The Pats are giving one away.

I guess they are looking ahead to 2012 - when Brady might be crippled' date=' I might add. But that would not fill me with joy as Pats' fan.[/quote']

I don't get it either, and I agree with your take on their draft pick situation. But to their credit they've won w/o Moss, and they won on Monday night when Moss was a non-factor. I guess they figure with his age and attitude that bthey might as well get something for him while they can. Personally I wouldn't have traded him, especially not if you're thinking Superbowl and sending him to the Vikes makes them a threat to get there themselves.

[Skadden]

Has no one watched their defense the last two years outside for Monday Night? It's not good. At all.

I don't think they can win the division with that defense' date=' let alone compete with the Ravens, Jets, and Steelers for a Super Bowl berth. The AFC has some loaded teams. The Pats have Brady and a lot of white hustle.[/quote']

I'm talking about their strategy over the years. For instance, they drafted Richard Seymour and Vince Wilfork. When both were playing together, they formed the one of the best DT tandems in recent memory.

[Devastate]

We're not calling Bledsoe "all world," and Cassel had his faults in the Pats system. Their OL and WR corp helped Cassel out. Brady isn't "all world" but he is elite because he makes accurate throws and plays smart because he knows the system well. There certainly are a few QBs who would thrive in the Pats system, but only a handfull (Peyton, Brees, Rivers) I could see accomplishing what Brady has in the system. And keep in mind I LOATHE the Pats and their cheating head coach, but this is my honest interpretation.

Agreed QB's more than anyone are either or skilled or they're not.. You can't take Danny Wuhrefel(whatever) put him as the starter of the pats and win superbowls.. Sorry just won't happen. System doesn't change decision making ability might slow it down a hair if the system is radically different, doesn't change arm strength, doesn't change accuracy.. It wasn't Billbell out there throwing all those TD's.. Marc Bulger while I think is an ok QB shouldn't even be talked about in the same breath as Tom Brady.

[The Tris]

I'm talking about their strategy over the years. For instance, they drafted Richard Seymour and Vince Wilfork. When both were playing together, they formed the one of the best DT tandems in recent memory.

They had a 3 or 4 year run where they couldn't miss on draft picks. Then they have gone on about a 6 year run where they have about a 10% success rate. Law of averages caught up with them. Some of the genius luster has worn off.

[Frostx08]

I understand your point but I think you have to consider something else. A team philosophy also plays into this entire thing. Belicheck prefers Great, Underrated players compared to star players...as big names take away from his philosophy. Notice Randy Moss was quiet the past few years and has actually been quiet compared to big perceived stars like Terrell Owens, Steve Smith, etc. Now he's been speaking out more

A lot of people would say for example that Brady had no receivers when he won the Super Bowl. That was very untrue.....if you watched Patriots games back then people would see that from defense, to special teams, to offense their players were VERY underrated...their receivers included. The Patriots were the 1st team to make an entrance in the Super Bowl as a Team instead of individual announcements. Every team has a different philosophy and it's kind of a stretch to imitate it...it starts from the ground up

[MassSkinsFan]

I think the Skins are screwed until the CBA issues are worked out. They don't have enough young talent. They don't have any draft picks. They don't really know who they are on either side of the ball. It will take two years to figure out at least.

Having said that' date=' what has been the Pat's plan since 2008? It seems to be get rid of anyone with trade value in the hopes that at some point you hit on a Steelers '74 or Redskins '81 draft. They once knew what they were doing. Right now, it seems like they are doing what the Skins do in free agency...except for a cheaper price. Just grab as many people as you can and hope that magic happens.[/quote']

And when did Scott Pioli leave? And when did KC begin their turnaround?

[Oldfan]

...At least this time around we brought in another WCO guy...

The Shanahan-McNabb downfiled attack is more like the vertical attack of Coryell than the ball control scheme of Bill Walsh, so the disruption is even greater than you've portrayed it.

I didn't see anything wrong with the Snyder-Cerrato-Zorn plan. The execution of the plan was incompetent but the plan was okay as a starting point.

[Conn]

Agreed QB's more than anyone are either or skilled or they're not.. You can't take Danny Wuhrefel(whatever) put him as the starter of the pats and win superbowls.. Sorry just won't happen. System doesn't change decision making ability might slow it down a hair if the system is radically different, doesn't change arm strength, doesn't change accuracy.. It wasn't Billbell out there throwing all those TD's.. Marc Bulger while I think is an ok QB shouldn't even be talked about in the same breath as Tom Brady.

You only need to look as far as Cutler's change in production going from Denver to Chicago that first year to see how much of an effect offensive system's have on the players that play in them.

People readily believe/preach that offensive systems in college have a HUGE effect on the stats/play of the QB's in them. Other positions as well.

Why is it so different in the NFL? The Patriots have an offensive scheme that is VERY friendly to a QB with Brady's physical skill set. Which isn't that rare.

I don't think Bulger would have done AS well as Brady...but I don't think there'd be as much difference as you'd think.

And since the Patriots haven't won **** since Brady started breaking passing records, maybe the Pats would have been better all along not believing they could become an air-it-out team with Brady...their defenses won them championships, and now its garbage.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I'm talking about their strategy over the years. For instance, they drafted Richard Seymour and Vince Wilfork. When both were playing together, they formed the one of the best DT tandems in recent memory.

In the first part of the decade, they were awesome.

The Patriots have not been awesome for quite a while. Right now, they are a middle of the pack team. Yes, they have a smart coach and a great QB. So, they will occasionally go on tv and embarrass someone in their home stadium and everyone will think that it is 2004 again. But it's not.

They are a borderline wild card team right now unless the Jets just implode (which is completely possible).

[Oldfan]

And when did Scott Pioli leave? And when did KC begin their turnaround?

Seems to me that the Patriots drafts were headed South before Pioli left and there hasn't been much for Pioli to brag about until this season which has a long way to go.

[Son of Gadsden]

If you think the bolts would trade VJ to New England you have lost your ****in mind. Why trade your top wide receiver to a already super bowl contending team in your conference? so you can get your ass kicked in the playoffs? They have already made it known they will only trade to a limited amount of teams, and i guarantee you neither of them are the Colts or Pats.

As far as draft picks, they are not the savior of everyone. a good point about draft ratios was made above. They traded Moss for a 3rd. Lets just say they get next years JaMarcus Russell off that pick...they lost a great player for nothing. Yet the Vikes traded a 3rd for Moss.....they miss the risk and may have made something out of nothing. Also, how many teams actually keep a talented guy for their entire career? It happens, but not often. Moss went to several teams. Our best wide receiever (fair weathers, say what you want) is Santana Moss, he has contributed more to our wins in the last 5 years than anyone else has...did we draft him? NO. Where would we be without him? Way worse than we are right now. What about Portis...great idea to draft him huh? Another trade. Maybe he is washed up now, he was a dominant force at one time. Now lets try drafts....Devin Thomas? Great idea. Malcolm Kelly? He's paying off too, someone has to keep the bench warm. Colt Brenan? Ask the cult about him. Jason Campbell? FAILURE. you can sit here and argue all day but the simple fact is its two different techniques for getting players and neither is better than the other. they both have pros and cons. One is the risk that may get a greater reward, but its a gamble. The other almost always guarantees talent....but its more expensive and possibly giving up more for less.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

And since the Patriots haven't won **** since Brady started breaking passing records, maybe the Pats would have been better all along not believing they could become an air-it-out team with Brady...their defenses won them championships, and now its garbage.

I looked at a Pats message board this morning. Some of their fans are excited that getting rid of Moss will make them a more ball-controlled team - which is kind of like ripping out the engine of your car to save gas money, but whatever.

When the Patriots were winning titles, everything was built around their defense. The 16-0 team was a once in a lifetime combination of offensive talent that ultimately didn't win anything.

[MassSkinsFan]

Seems to me that the Patriots drafts were headed South before Pioli left and there hasn't been much for Pioli to brag about until this season which has a long way to go.

I think they were solid until at least 2005, though the last two were not as good as usual (though you could discount that as aberrant due to the inherent hit/miss of the draft). As far as his time in KC, this is probably about when we'd expect to see dividends from the 2008/2009/2010 drafts right?

OTOH Pioli is to blame for bringing Moss there in the first place.

[Oldfan]

...Right now' date=' it seems like they are doing what the Skins do in free agency...except for a cheaper price. Just grab as many people as you can and hope that magic happens.[/quote']Belichick used 16 cheap free agents as gap fillers when they won a Super Bowl in 2001. He was as surprised as anybody.

We could see that they weren't drafting well and were in need of more cheap FA gap fillers even before Pioli left. Maybe their early drafting success was just luck, but they aren't drafting well now.

[Oldfan]

When the Patriots were winning titles' date=' everything was built around their defense.[/quote']I can't agree with that. Offense and defense are equally important and Belichick knows it. You can't build the best team in the NFL by putting the emphasis on one side of the ball.

[Peeping Wizard]

That's true, but you also have to think about the flexability having those draft picks gives you.. Everyone is think that giving Minny Moss puts us in the front running of the Vjac sweepstakes and we really can't afford it with the picks we have.. But the patriots can.. They could sweep in right now get Vjax and still have more picks than almost every other team in the league..They can afford to spend a 2nd to get the deal done and still have a 2nd round pick, yet we don't even have a 2nd to work with..Hell if they wanted they can give a 2nd and 3rd if they covet Vjax that much without even batting an eye.

I actually find this argument more compelling than the stance that you should simply stockpile more draft picks because your odds of hitting on a draft pick are low.

The fact of the matter is that draft picks, veteran players and sometimes cash are the only currencies that carry any weight in NFL transactions. The Pats put themselves in a nice position to make a move for an available veteran with all of those picks no matter how well they draft. It also puts them into a postion to trade up in the draft if they see somebody who is likely to be a sure-fire stud going forward. The bottom line is it is much easier to wheel and deal when you have lots of picks to do it with.

[TheLongshot]

The Shanahan-McNabb downfiled attack is more like the vertical attack of Coryell than the ball control scheme of Bill Walsh, so the disruption is even greater than you've portrayed it.

Mostly because they got a QB who probably never was a particularly strong short passing game guy and seems to have regressed further. It seems one of the few things that seems to be working for him right now.

I didn't see anything wrong with the Snyder-Cerrato-Zorn plan. The execution of the plan was incompetent but the plan was okay as a starting point.

Unfortunately, after Vinny instigated the circus that was last season, I don't think there was much choice but to move on. Zorn was not in a good position. If you were going to go with a guy like him, you needed the patience to see through all the rough spots and that patience isn't here right now. Don't get me wrong, Zorn also made some bad choices (like trying to have his cake and eat it too with the HC-OC dichotomy.), but it was a tough situation for a guy with his first HC job to succeed in.

It makes me really wonder if we are going to go through endless repetitions of retread coaches because they are the only ones that can hold up under the pressure here. I've asked the question before whether a young coach could ever succeed here and that is still an open question.

[Oldfan]

... As far as his time in KC, this is probably about when we'd expect to see dividends from the 2008/2009/2010 drafts right?

Maybe. I haven't noticed a big talent upgrade on that team, but I haven't followed them either.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I can't agree with that. Offense and defense are equally important and Belichick knows it. You can't build the best team in the NFL by putting the emphasis on one side of the ball.

I sometimes don't know where theory begins and ends with you.

Yes, offense and defense are both important. But the Pats D was better than its O during the title years. They didn't beat the Rams by out-scoring them.

They had a Great D and a Good O - which gave them a huge advantage in an AFC filled with teams with bad Os like Pittsburgh and Baltimore.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

It also puts them into a postion to trade up in the draft if they see somebody who is likely to be a sure-fire stud going forward.

Which they never do.

The biggest change in NE is that Belichik does not seem to look at players as players. He looks at them as pieces. At some point, you need to draft a stud just because he is a stud. He does not do that.

Ozzie Newsome stockpiles picks and just drafts talent. He doesn't care if he already has a bunch of OLBs. If the biggest impact player is an OLB, he takes him and worries about the details later. Granted, he has skewed his selections towards offense lately. But he won't pass up Michael Oher because he needs a safety or because he not might fit into the "Ravens Way" or whatever.