Time for Pats to move on from Brady, Gronk?

[Donoghus]

Injuries destroyed the team defensively.  Pats lost the two biggest anchors of their defense in Wilfork & Mayo not to mention a valuable player in Kelly.  Talib was never 100% and I'm not sure McCourty was totally right down the stretch.

I wouldn't go as far to label Hightower a bust.  He had an excellent start to the season but struggled mightily in Oct-Nov when Mayo went out.  He was playing out of position much of the 2nd half of the season which didn't help matters. I also think he rebounded a bit and played must better the last month or so (including playoffs).

The Hernandez thing killed them (sorry, pun not intended) before the season started.  Totally threw the offensive strategy through a loop and they never fully recovered.  The team only had a glimpse of Gronk too which didn't help matters.

Brady's accuracy was off a lot of the season.  I think the early part was due to unfamiliarity with receivers while I think he was playing with hand/ligament damage at the end of the season.  I'm sure some of it might even be chalked up to age too.

I certainly wouldn't blow things up after this season.  They were still the second best team in the AFC while playing with a decimated team which is darn impressive.  I think you'd be nuts to move away from Brady or Gronk right now.  Those guys don't grow on trees and this team is still in the upper echelon of the NFL, especially when healthy.

Too many excuses here. Sure, each is a setback, but when you look at the larger pattern for the Pats in the playoffs over the past 10 years, it's the like Groundhog Day.

I'm not trying to make excuses at all.  I think its remarkable that they made it to the AFC title game with that group.  Injuries to Mayo/Wilfork types would do that same thing to any of the other 31 teams in the NFL.


Just illustrating what a tumultuous 2013 season it was for the Pats.

[tstorey_97]

Brady II is not out there. Brady is what we have and he is still top ten if not top 5 anymore. He is not much of as long baller. Watching Luck go deep reminded me of Brady when he was younger.

The receivers are not to blame. They are on the roster and working with the QB and the system in early August. Tommy's stats aren't what they used to be and blaming other people is just an attempt to avoid the inevitable.

Look at the 2001 group of receivers that combined to beat the "greatest show on turf" and Brady as a rookie:

Troy Brown (really good receiver...not a NFL HOF guy)
Wiggins
David Patten
Fred Coleman
Rod Rutledge

RB's Faulk/Pass/Redmond could catch balls too.

Good group. No $12M guys though. Any $9M guys? Nah.

It is a team sport, the media would prefer it is an individual sport as they sell their advertizing with individuals....like Sherman from Seattle. ESPN needs idiots not well oiled machines that win with converted Kent State QB's.
 
Denver beat the Pats fair an square, every NFL team has a bunch of guys hurt by January. Win the freaking game or go home.

[Jon]

We should not move on from Brady in the least.  Franchise quarterbacks are not easy to come by and there's a very strong case to be made that had Gronk, Wilfork, and Mayo been healthy (and let's not even get into Solder and Kelly, or Aaron Herandez for that matter), the Pats would have cruised to a 14-2 or 15-1 record and hosted the Broncos at home and pummeled them.  Sure, injuries are a reality of football, but a) the Pats got hit harder than most and b) it's just another reminder how circumstantial something like this is.  The OP wouldn't have dreamt of making this post if Brady had better weapons and had won.  And before the 2001 comparisons get out of control, let's take a second and remember that 2001 Brady was not all the masterful.  In fact, in 2001, Tom Brady through for exactly ONE TD pass in the playoffs.  So it just goes to show even further how mediocre to bad receivers do affect a QB. 

As for Gronk, maybe he does prove to be too injury prone to ever live up to expectations.  However, there's no real advantage to moving on.  When he's healthy, he's arguably the best offensive weapon in football.  The best we're going to get is pennies on the dollar for him.  Might as well hold on and see if we can him back in shape. 

[Cman]

As for Gronk, maybe he does prove to be too injury prone to ever live up to expectations.  However, there's no real advantage to moving on.  When he's healthy, he's arguably the best offensive weapon in football.  The best we're going to get is pennies on the dollar for him.  Might as well hold on and see if we can him back in shape.

Gronk isn't going anywhere.

Another thing to consider: the Pats currently have ~$6M available to spend in the offseason. They'll free up $2M when they cut Sopoaga (almost a given). They could free up another $700k by cutting Adrian Wilson (probably will happen). They could free up another $7.5M by cutting Wilfork, so you better believe his injury situation is being monitored closely.

Let's assume they don't cut Wilfork, but do cut the other two.

How do you spend the $8.7M?
Here's what I do:
(1) Signing draft picks (~$2M)
(2) Re-sign Talib (~$5M)
(3) Sign a Center (or resign Wendell) (~$1.7M)

That's about all you can do. Maybe bring aboard a vet here or there.

In short, its likely that Edelman is gone. Its not likely that there will be a top FA landing here.

[Jon]

As for Gronk, maybe he does prove to be too injury prone to ever live up to expectations.  However, there's no real advantage to moving on.  When he's healthy, he's arguably the best offensive weapon in football.  The best we're going to get is pennies on the dollar for him.  Might as well hold on and see if we can him back in shape.

Gronk isn't going anywhere.

Another thing to consider: the Pats currently have ~$6M available to spend in the offseason. They'll free up $2M when they cut Sopoaga (almost a given). They could free up another $700k by cutting Adrian Wilson (probably will happen). They could free up another $7.5M by cutting Wilfork, so you better believe his injury situation is being monitored closely.

Let's assume they don't cut Wilfork, but do cut the other two.

How do you spend the $8.7M?
Here's what I do:
(1) Signing draft picks (~$2M)
(2) Re-sign Talib (~$5M)
(3) Sign a Center (or resign Wendell) (~$1.7M)

That's about all you can do. Maybe bring aboard a vet here or there.

In short, its likely that Edelman is gone. Its not likely that there will be a top FA landing here.

Well, maybe this is the year they make a big move package some picks to move up to a high pick and draft a dynamic offensive weapon (whether it be a TE or WR).  I mean if Wilfork is coming back, the DT position is pretty set.  The only other help they need (besides receiving help) is perhaps more depth at the inner part of the offensive line, but they can still get that even if they give up a few picks to move up.  I'm pretty happy with the RB situation (even without Blount), the OTs, the DTs, the LB core (Collins, Mayo, and Hightower could be awesome next year), and the secondary is good if Talib is back (Logan Ryan should make even further strides next year). 

And if Wilfork hangs them up, then they can use that money to sign someone to help Brady out.   

[Cman]

As for Gronk, maybe he does prove to be too injury prone to ever live up to expectations.  However, there's no real advantage to moving on.  When he's healthy, he's arguably the best offensive weapon in football.  The best we're going to get is pennies on the dollar for him.  Might as well hold on and see if we can him back in shape.

Gronk isn't going anywhere.

Another thing to consider: the Pats currently have ~$6M available to spend in the offseason. They'll free up $2M when they cut Sopoaga (almost a given). They could free up another $700k by cutting Adrian Wilson (probably will happen). They could free up another $7.5M by cutting Wilfork, so you better believe his injury situation is being monitored closely.

Let's assume they don't cut Wilfork, but do cut the other two.

How do you spend the $8.7M?
Here's what I do:
(1) Signing draft picks (~$2M)
(2) Re-sign Talib (~$5M)
(3) Sign a Center (or resign Wendell) (~$1.7M)

That's about all you can do. Maybe bring aboard a vet here or there.

In short, its likely that Edelman is gone. Its not likely that there will be a top FA landing here.

Well, maybe this is the year they make a big move package some picks to move up to a high pick and draft a dynamic offensive weapon (whether it be a TE or WR).  I mean if Wilfork is coming back, the DT position is pretty set.  The only other help they need (besides receiving help) is perhaps more depth at the inner part of the offensive line, but they can still get that even if they give up a few picks to move up.  I'm pretty happy with the RB situation (even without Blount), the OTs, the DTs, the LB core (Collins, Mayo, and Hightower could be awesome next year), and the secondary is good if Talib is back (Logan Ryan should make even further strides next year). 

And if Wilfork hangs them up, then they can use that money to sign someone to help Brady out.

I wonder a lot about Wilfork. He's owed a lot of money, and its not clear how good he'll be when back, given the nature of his injury and age. With Pepper Johnson retiring, does Vince move in as a coach?

I think the immediate questions are:

(1) Is Talib back? If not, there's a huge hole to fill in the secondary. This will be priority number 1.

(2) Will Wilfork be healthy? If not, the Pats need to move on and fill the hole via the draft, and use the money he frees up elsewhere.

[Jayman]

I would love to keep Edelman and re-signing Talib is a must.

Gronk and Brady should be Pats for life... We dont need to change much, if we were fully healthy we would be in the Superbowl. No reason why I cant happen next season!

[Bahku]

Get rid of one of the best QB's to ever play the game, (the best, IMO), and one of the best TE's in the league because he's had two substantial injuries?

Ummmmm ... no.

Don't quite see how Brady is "slipping", unless you mean his numbers, which clearly just reflect the lack of a dependable, consistent big-time receiver, and some major holes in the offensive line resulting in not enough protection/time to throw the ball.

If we're comparing to Manning, there is certainly a clear difference, and that's the fact that Peyton was not hurried or pressured at ALL in this conference matchup, and Marino at his current age could've completed those passes.

Manning is a fantastic QB, one of the best, but his job was an EASY one on Sunday, and in fact should've been much more of a blowout than it was with the amazing amount of time he had to throw.

The Pats have also established a significant RUN game again, which is absolutely wonderful and probably the best thing about this entire season. However, that is obviously going to reflect directly on Brady's passing yards, so maybe that's what you mean by "slipping"?

Some of Tom's comebacks this year were nothing less than miraculous and incredible, (one was one of the biggest of ALL TIME), and there is NO ONE who has mastered the late-game turnaround or two-mninute drill better than he.

He's been criticized for not scrambling enough, and I agree that I wish he were more of an option in that regard, but he scored a touchdown on Sunday doing just that, so he's certainly capable of it.

Gronk's injuries have hurt us big-time, and could have actually made all the difference, but so were the injuries of Mayo, Wilfork, etc., and that's just a part of the game, unfortunately.

But to say Gronk is "injury-prone" because of those two injuries is over-reacting a bit ... two injuries does NOT make a player injury-prone, IMHO, and certainly does NOT warrant trading away one of the best TE's to come along in a very long time.

So I guess I'm saying in summation that I completely disagree with Brady as "slipping" or Gronk as being "injury prone", and would absolutely NOT get rid of two of the best players in the entire league because we lost the conference finals.

Vince has been injured more than Gronk, (as has Mayo), so should we consider trading him, too? I'd have to vehemently disagree with that, too. Very few pundits gave us a chance at getting as far as we did this year, and I think this team over-achieved, if anything.

Let's try and keep the proper perspective on this team, and not give up two of the biggest assets in the game because they didn't get to the Super Bowl. We've been spolied by Brady's amazing and miraculous heroics at times, but let's not forget that the guy is human.

So, my answer to moving on from Brady and Gronk?

No. Absolutely not.

[BUTerrier]

What if Cleveland offered their 2 firsts (#4 and #26), their second rounder (#35), and Hoyer for Brady?  Do the Patriots do that?

Even if they were willing to do that -- and I don't think they would be -- the only way I'd even think about doing that is if I could be absolutely certain Teddy Bridgewater was still on the board at the #4 pick (which I'll virtually guarantee he won't be, smoke signals about trade-ups to get Manziel aside). Even then, I'd hesitate. Brady may not be the Brady of old, but he's still arguably a Top 5 QB in this league; I'd rank Brees, P Manning, Rodgers, and MAYBE one of Kapernick/Wilson above him. Bridgewater may turn into the next Kapernick or Wilson, but he may also turn into the next Blaine Gabbert; it's just such a crap shoot. I mean, of those 4 QBs above him, only Manning was a no-brainer first round pick; even Rodgers almost slipped out of the first round. And Hoyer's a good guy, and a solid backup, and he'd likely know the offense better than any other guy in the league, but his hot streak was on the Browns, and I think those numbers were inflated both by the number of times they fell behind and because Josh Gordon is super-human.

I'm not one of those "overvalue the hometown players" guy; I had no issue trading Bledsoe, much as I loved him. But I don't think you're going to get the kind of deal we would need to move Brady. I mean, the kind of deal the Redskins made to get RG3 would at least give me pause and consider it, but it might need to be even better than that.