Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.
Are there any franchise LT's to be had?
That's as solid an explication of the situation as I've seen here, IMHO. I actually don't think there's a lot of mystery here. For understandable emotional reasons, we keep adverting to distracting side issues- the latest being all the silly brouhaha over what sort of haul we might get at the trade deadline: the answer is likely "none," rightly enough. There are maybe four players we need to keep as part of a rebuild, and the rest aren't worth a damn to anybody. The problem is that we have a lousy roster built by a lousy GM who must be fired as such. And we have a HC who bears watching, who is showing clear signs of being past it in that role as well.
Dude don't argue with BB and Mac apologists it's a waste of Time.
Ugh.
Still not able to tell the difference between realizing Mac isn't the main problem with thinking he's good I see.
It's not denial so much as seeing how lousy most of the league is. I do agree that transcendent WR talent can cover a lot offensively too. I'm no big fan of Tua, and he is absolutely propped up by the weapons he has. Even good quarterbacks need a go-to guy, which is why Gronk was so important to Brady (and Edelman). So Belichick has to be aware of that.
LOL. I'm thinking haberdashery may not be the team's big issue. But what the heck. Those deck chairs looked really fine as the Titanic slipped downward to oblivion.
I just think that's too simplistic and fails to face just how lousy the roster is. One my little regulatory self-admonitions is that if things seem simple, I've probably just lapsed into simplistic thinking. Ain't nuthin' simple is this world, as much as we wish there were.
We do indeed need to sign soon those few players, maybe three or four, who are not contractually secured and who can be expected to help us in years following. That will leave very little worth a damn in the trade market, so all this talk of the transformative powers of managing the trade deadline aright is silly.
And to your point defensively just shows how superior a talent gonzo is compared to the other CBs on the roster.
Absolutely agree! Another thing I'm wondering is.. why are they still running the Brady offense. The GOAT has long since retired. I know that Charlie Weiss said that Mac was drafted becuase he had the same traits and characteristics of Brady. Maybe he does Maybe he doesn't. It's just apparent that Mac needs a fresh start. Everything that's transpired particularly last season and this.. it just feels like it'll be best for Mac and the organization to part ways. But you know what. Ownership won't singularly becuase of his peanuts contract. Per the CBA a vested veteran would command at least 5 million for a contract. So they'd rather stick with Mac. I cannot come up with anything else as to what they would want to keep him at this point.
This team is not one or two players away.
They are dam near a whole roster away from becoming a contender.
I don't think either view is more or less simple than the other, apart from the idea that if you don't have the QB, you probably won't win. That part is pretty simple
That's a fair point. I only object where people (as they often or typically do) settle on one aspect of the problem, then decline to think any further to the other causes, affording them no legitimate basis whatever for presuming, as they typically do, that the aspect of the problem they happens to have settled on is the only or major problem. Ultimately, of course, any analysis must be made "simple" as a basis for action: implementing multiple solutions inevitably creates such confusion that progress is rarely made. The goal is to identify the discrete problems, identify solutions, prioritize. and act, beginning with whatever aspects are most urgent or concerning which there is opportunity to address it in the near term. In my mind that first step - absolutely without question, it seems to me - is to address the abysmally poor GM work. Without a functioning GM, most of the other problems are unadressable anyway. I have laid out elsewhere - too many times in all likelihodd - my take on the Mac issue. To put it simply, though the qb problem is legitimate, it is not at all the first problem crying out for resolution, nor in any case is there presently available a meaningful opportunity to do resolve it.
Thats not the point i am making. I am saying trading away dugger and uche and others isnt going to make us better next yr or two. Its better to sign some proven players then to get another 4th rounder for these just because we have to sell. Trading these players picks creates more holes which need to be filled. We dont have so much depth to trade these players.
