|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 13:58:03 GMT -5
needing a 2-3 year rebuild is not making excuses it took 3-4 years for it all to fall aprt, will take the same to build it back They didn’t need a 2020 type season to clear the third most dead cap off the books. They also have a very talented roster with only a few holes to fill assuming they spend their free agent dollars to return their own guys. They have all the tools to fix it in year one of this new regime. It doesn’t mean “super bowl or bust,” but they have no excuses not to make a massive improvement. If they don’t, it will be because they blew it in free agency, the draft, mass injuries and/or the coaching and schemes are crap.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 13:53:20 GMT -5
"this defense is strong" yet Dugger Mills Guy Uche Jennings Wilson Phillips Bryant Bledsoe Austin may or may not be here in 2024 Gonzo coming off an ACL Dugger unquestionably Mills would be a nice returnee Uche and Jennings would also Guy and Phillips were slowly getting phased out last season due to age and ineffectiveness. Wilson is a reclamation project, not a contributor. Bryant, Bledsoe, Austin… tell us your joking with these three?
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 13:41:59 GMT -5
It’s not a big multiyear rebuild with the most cap space, the #3 overall pick in the draft with all their other draft picks… and only the offense to fix.
You’re building up a bunch of excuses for the new regime in advance without seeing what they do. I’d say it's odd, but you’re happy as a pig in sht the old guy is gone, so you’re giving them more leeway than needed.
I’m willing to give them this off-season to see what they do, if they make idiot moves I’ll say so, if they do the opposite I’ll say so and give them more time… that’s objective.
Also it’s Krafts former coaches and players calling him cheap, people with actual firsthand knowledge… not posters here.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 13:32:51 GMT -5
In 2007, Maroney's runs were as follows No doubt, more of those runs for 1 yard, negative yards, and no gain would have made them win the game! Maroney averaged 2.7 yards per carry. Definitely Belichick should have called even more of those runs. In 2011, BJGE average a respectable but hardly earth-shattering 4.4 yards per carry. But you take out his one 17 yard run, the rest of this runs averaged only 3 yards per carry. Woodhead averaged only 2.6 yards per carry. How many more 3 yard runs would have won the game for them? In the 2007 Super Bowl, the Patriots rushed 16 times and the Giants rushed 26 times. The Giants won the time of possession battle and finally the game by a slim margin. Neither team’s RB’s ran well, these were two tough defenses. In the 2010 Super Bowl, the Patriots rushed 19 times and the Giants rushed 28 times. The Giants won the time of possession battle by a large margin. Neither team’s RB’s ran well, these were two tough defenses. In both games the Giants were persistent and patient. They won because they held the ball longer, turned the ball over less and because by the end of the game their offense was still punching instead of receiving the blows. A pass that hits the ground stops the clock, a run that only goes for 4 yards keeps the clock running. That’s ^ what you never understood about this debate, the Patriots didn't lose because the Giants straight up beat them, they lost because they ran out of time. You don’t understand… so don’t bother responding when you clearly have no intention on trying to understand.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 13:20:59 GMT -5
macs weapons were crap as a unit last year... but mac would be crap with really good weapons too, so lack of quality weapons last year isnt an excuse...unless you are a mac apologist I hear the first part a lot and think, what would Mahomes, Burrow, Herbert or Stroud have done with Henry, Rhamondre, Douglas, Gesicki, Zeke, Juju, Bourne, Thornton? Outside of Kelce and Pacheco, none of Mahomes weapons this season were great and he won a ring. He won a ring the year prior with Juju leading his team in WR receptions and yards. So when the answer is “have been a top ten offense,” it doesn’t stand up under scrutiny. I liked all our weapons for what they were before they became Patriots and they haven’t forgotten how to play football. The 2023 Patriot’s offense had problems beyond Mac, the offensive line was wracked with injury. They had more lineup changes than any other starting unit in football. Big picture… the list of problems for the offense starts with QB, then OLine, possibly scheme/coaching next… weapons was way down the line if at all.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 9:44:05 GMT -5
For the record, below are the Pats rushing statistics from the nine post-seasons where they played in the Super Bowl. Regardless of Wozzy's woozy thinking, it's pretty clear that the Patriots appeared in nine Super Bowls and won six of them without, in most years, a heavy reliance on the run. NFL teams, on average, rush about 45% of the time (give or take a few percentage points each season). In all but two of the Pats' Super Bowl years, they rushed less than that in the post-season. In five Super Bowl post-seasons, they rushed 39% or less of the time. (Since Wozzy finds the concept of percentages dubious, I've also highlighted total rushes and rushes per game—all of which tell a similar story, even if percentage is the best way to normalize across games with different numbers of total plays.) The reality is that rushing more times or at a higher percentage doesn't strongly correlate with winning. And the Pats in most Super Bowl post-seasons ran less than NFL averages. The basic goal of football, as Bill Belichick said, is to "move the ball and score." To move the ball and score, a team needs to get first downs. Whether they get them by run or pass doesn't really matter, as long as they get them. But given that run plays typically produce shorter gains, most teams find they need to pass more than they run. The reality is that situation (score, time, field position, down, and distance to line of gain) is the primary determinant of whether a team runs or passes on any particular play. It is true that when a team has a very low number of rushing attempts it is likely they lost the game. But the very low number of rushing attempts is usually not the cause of the loss but a result of being behind and having to play catch up—in other words, the result of the situation in which the team finds itself. The corollary is that teams that are ahead late in the game tend to rush a bit more because they want to run clock—and, heck, taking three knees increases a team's rushing plays by three too. Again, situation determines the number of rushes. This is not to say that running is unimportant. And if a team can regularly gain 5 or more yards on running plays, it absolutely should run a lot. But very few teams can produce 5 or more yards on 40% or 50% of their running plays. Many can do that on 40% or 50% of their passing plays, however. They lost to the Giants twice because (like Truechamp said) they should have leaned on the run game more. The Giants used the EP offense better than the Pats did. Saying the Patriots didn't run is laughably misguided... the creator of their offensive system Ron Erhardt often said, "throw to score, run to win." The entire system was predicated on a strong run game. You're off the reservation.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 9:32:55 GMT -5
I’m definitely good with that. Not sure he would have been worth the big money. He wouldn't, big tall guy but with 4.5 speed... nothing special. Good possession receiver, but certainly not a superweapon.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 9:30:07 GMT -5
if JC Jackson is the ferrari and is cut, how much is the loss? Hahaha... the Patriots don't have to eat the loss because the Chargers already are. That's the only reason the Pats signed him besides injuries last season. The Chargers are paying 20.8 million in dead cap for Jackson this season and the entire regime was fired... smart money. BTW it just happened again, the Dolphins just cut stud CB Xavien Howard... why? Oh yeah, because the Dolphins are 24.6 million over the cap even after the massive cap raise they just received. This is exactly why the Chiefs traded Tyreek Hill and got better not worse, because team matters more than overpaying one superweapon. You don't understand the cap, stick to what you know...
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 9:21:50 GMT -5
non guaranteed contracts is the difference NFL guarantees contracts, just not the entire contract. That has nothing to do with anything. Baseball, soccer... these sports have no hard salary cap, that's why the Mets are still paying Bobby Bonilla even though he retired 23 years ago, it's why Shohei Ohtani just became one of the richest athletes on the planet at ten years 700 million dollars guaranteed. Learn the cap, learn team building.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 9:14:36 GMT -5
they kept their big men on the field forcing the Seahawks to pass the ball rather than run. forcing the pass, analytics favroed the slant pass. wake up Hey genius, goal line defense was sent on the field as soon as Jermaine Kearse caught that 33 yard wing and a prayer which set them on the five yard line. You saying "analytics" is what prompted them to send in the goal line formation, is like saying Neil Armstrong was going out for a space walk and analytics told him it would be smart to put a spacesuit on. They sent Malcolm Butler in on the play after the next when the coaches saw a third WR being sent on the field by Seattle, they weren't checking their cheatsheets to see what analytics told them either, it was exactly what they planned to do in that situation. Instincts, coaching... not analytics. BB already said he had no time for analytics, he was too busy coaching the football team. Now you think he was lying.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 24, 2024 9:07:36 GMT -5
the gambling money has not yet even scratched the surface of what will come same with the streaming deals the spigot is wide open CBS just reported you are wrong, and TV deals get negotiated every ten years or so... you don't know how this works. Best just to not comment on things you know nothing about.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 20:52:07 GMT -5
Why is JC Jackson still on this team? Besides being able to add another 14 million plus to their cap availability it is addition by subtraction in the locker room. I dislike that KC already found a cheaper punting option than their free agent punter and are getting ahead... like they didn't just win the Super Bowl. The Patriots had better step on the gas and not let up until the offseason is finished. Let's go Wolf, impress us...
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 20:26:21 GMT -5
I could swear they scored 25 points, 19 in regulation. Guess I'm wrong. They must have won the Super Bowl without scoring. Read what I wrote and have said this entire thread... stop being willfully ignorant.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 20:21:13 GMT -5
Or maybe they would have scored less. Magic thinking. They didn't score genius, their lone regulation TD was a result of their special teams forcing a turnover inside their red zone. Smooth brain thinking...
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 20:15:37 GMT -5
I'll wait for you to tell me where they should have run instead of passed. Like I said earlier, they ran more than any team in the postseason. Maybe they would have scored in the Super Bowl if they had run more. I don't have to prove anything else... history has proven a strong run game is important. Well it proves one thing Mr. Hooper, it proves you wealthy college boys don't have the education enough to admit when you're wrong. - Quint, Jaws
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 20:08:00 GMT -5
You clearly can't defend your hypothesis. I won this debate. You lead a rich fantasy life. History has proven this debate for the last hundred plus years, and you aren't on the winning side.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 19:59:40 GMT -5
No I didn't. What's clear, though, is you can't show where the Chiefs should have run more in the Super Bowl. So your claim that they should have run more is backed by no evidence at all. Their offense didn't sustain a drive to score a TD through 4 quarters of the Super Bowl... this is going way over your head. And my refusal to play your silly hypothetical mind games is evidence of nothing... except you grasping at straws.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 19:56:18 GMT -5
The NFL cites this is the result from the full repayment of all amounts advanced by the clubs and deferred by the players during the COVID pandemic and an extraordinary increase in media revenue for the 2024 season.
Once this blip on the salary cap big picture is settled, the cap will do what it does every decade in between new tv deals… increase at roughly 5-6% annually.
The cap goes up for all 32 teams, salaries will follow suit and increase as well across the board. Unless you’re in a small window where you can win multiple championships, it’s never a benefit to waste money or spend like a drunken sailor.
The cap ignorant here are using a TV/gambling deal that gets negotiated once a decade to pretend like this is a normal annual occurrence. When in reality... it’s the largest jump from one year to the next since the introduction of the salary cap in 1994.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 19:49:54 GMT -5
I didn't ask you to predict the result. I simply asked you to look at the play-by-play and tell me where they should have called runs instead of passes. Those runs may have succeeded or failed, and I'm not asking you to predict that. I'm just asking you to tell me where specifically they were passing too much. If you are going to make the claim that they were passing too much and not running enough, you need to back it up by showing where they should have run instead of passed or you're just blowing wind. I didn't suggest that running was a bad thing. I simply said the whole idea that there is some ideal run-pass balance is bunk—or that running more is what makes teams champions. Being big and tough and physical is an advantage. So is being fast. But winning football games requires keeping drives alive by getting first downs. And that requires a good passing game, as run plays average fewer yards than pass plays and teams need to be able to gain chunks of yards regularly to keep drives moving. You did... to both. And yes, be good at both running and passing. It starts with the offensive line. If you can run with power and opponents can't stop you, think those early Peyton Manning Colts teams, then passing doesn't matter much because you'll control the clock and ultimately an opponent's offenses ability to hurt you. Running also allows teams to reduce third downs to short manageable downs, we just watched the Chiefs do that, it's what the Patriots always did... which is why they needed WR's and TE's who could get open in short space and didn't need super weapons with speed. Agility and quickness was more important... think Troy Brown, Edelman, Amendola, Welker and Deion Branch. For a hundred years before the invention of the forward pass, all there was is running, don't forget your history. Running is good, stop denying what is good for you. It's silly.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 19:43:25 GMT -5
"no wonder Wozzy has been MIA. can someone get over to his house for a health check?" - Rkarp, 11 hours ago
"I just heard Wozzy's head explode" - Rkarp 24 hours agoI leave for a day in the offseason and you get the cold sweats... surely this means Mac is our starter, they don't want to trade him and the end is nigh? I wonder what you're going to say when he sucks again or is traded outright... it's Mayo or AVP's fault no doubt. Don't be an obsessive creeper... I'm into chicks.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 19:34:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 19:33:37 GMT -5
Yeah, my wife tells me my household budget is a farce too…because my business revenue increases each year. As my revenue increases my household budget increases. Seems pretty simple to me but she still thinks it's a farce. Oh, and she also insists that I pay for her birthday, Valentine, and Christmas presents in cash. If I put them on the credit card she thinks I'm cheap. I pretty much spend to my household budget each and every year but she somehow thinks I'm cheap if I'm not spending in cash. This place makes my brain hurt at times. Rkarp told me it would be cool to liquidate everything, buy a Ferrari, some blow and a yacht... he says it's sustainable because my revenue goes up slightly annually. Sounds legit...
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 19:31:01 GMT -5
the analytics guys however knew that if the PAts forced the Seahwks to throw by having their big men on the field, that Seatle would throw that slant. "Malcolm go" was directly tied to analytics They were on the goal line, of course they sent in the goal line package... it had everything to do with instincts and nothing to do with analytics. Don't be daft...
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 19:28:33 GMT -5
Wait a cotton picking second, are you saying having a great team around the player is not important…as you seemingly mock fans for wanting to surround a quarterback with great receivers?? My heavens! Read what I wrote, not what you want to hear. Deebo dropped a pass that hit him in the chest that potentially could have gone for a TD on that final drive, Ayuick drew a penalty for being offsides, his RT drew a holding call... His super weapons screwed him over, if they're the only reason Purdy is any good... they certainly weren't on that last drive.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Feb 23, 2024 19:25:16 GMT -5
I would pay Onwenu and Duggar top of market dollars. top 5 for sure. not that they are necessarily top 5 at their positions, but in 2-3 years, their deals will be more like top 10 than top 5, which imo is fair value. plus I like their age with regards to the Pats timeline for the rebuild. Henry I do not feel is top of market at TE and his age is not in line with the Pats rebuild. If he is willing to go 2/$20-$22 I would sign him I would follow the BB method and never pay top of the market, unless said player was the best player in the NFL at his respective position... and none of these guys are. They're close to the best though. I said Henry would get near the top of this year's free agent market, on a short year contract he's worth it. You just don't want to admit Mac had weapons to succeed and couldn't. I love Duggar's game, it would be nice to keep him for continuity's sake.
|
|