Patriots riddled with question marks for 2008

With the number of questions that the Patriots face in the wake of their Super Bowl loss to the Giants, I'm amazed people are still even bothering with...what should we call it? Belichick Left the Field a Second Too Early-Gate?

Here are a few that have occurred to me when football finally wormed its way back into my brain after a good week or so of trying to block it out.

Please note: none of these questions will address all the Congress / NFL investigation stuff, which I'm not going to get into any more until more information comes out.

1.�What's the game plan for next season, Coach? After the Patriots lost to the Colts in the 2007 AFC Championship Game, Belichick went on the warpath with his players about conditioning, endurance, and staying mentally committed through 60 minutes of football. These improvements created a perfect regular season, but the Patriots looked flat and the offensive line completely physically overmatched in the Super Bowl. Was the idea sound, and the execution not up to par in the end? Or did the perfect regular season take a toll? How do the Patriots regroup strategically and what can they learn from this experience, similar to the way they learned from the loss to the Colts?

2. How do we fill the holes? As Jamie already wrote, the Patriots have a slew of players eligible for free agency now that the season's over. Some of them are also eligible for retirement, and it's hard to ignore how the median age of the defense has crept up. The Patriots have traditionally shunned building through the draft for the short-term; will that philosophy be modified this year to get a youth movement going? At this juncture the Patriots would do well to follow the example of the Red Sox, and focus on developing more young talent for the next generation of Patriots football. In the meantime, the most crucial free agent question: does Asante stay or go?

3. What's the future for Tom Brady? It's clear opponents have determined that eliminating Brady is the key to defeating the Patriots. It's also clear that given the unanimous enmity the league seems to feel toward the Patriots, most teams will have no problem at least attempting to re-enact the Giants' blitzing performance when next they line up against the Pats.

Meanwhile, Brady has already racked up nagging injuries including shoulder separation, knee sprains, ankle sprains and a sports hernia. He's mobile in the pocket but not a scrambling quarterback; it's easy to say the Patriots should just get some better offensive linemen, but that unit already has veterans, Pro Bowlers and Super Bowlers alike--it's tough to figure how it�could be built better. Rather, rebalancing the offensive strategy to focus a little less on the pass might take some of the heat off Brady and improve his longevity in the league, but it's easy to see why the Patriots had no time for that idea this year with the way Brady was playing earlier in the season. So do they clip Brady's wings a bit or do they risk losing him too early, and for good?

Brady's also up for a contract extension and bump in pay, though he is signed through 2010, and the Globe points out his contract situation, regardless of which way the Patriots decide to go,�"would affect�all other offseason planning."

4. Where can we find the next Adam Vinatieri? There were, in retrospect, a number of questionable coaching decisions that affected the outcome of the Super Bowl, but none stands out more than the decision to go for the end zone rather than a field goal kick on 4th and 13. Mike Reiss points out that this decision in turn may have been influenced by�a lack of confidence in Stephen Gostkowski:

Belichick explained that there was thought given to the field goal, but he ultimately felt the kick was too long. In making that decision, he likely was factoring in Gostkowski's body of work this season, that his season-long field goal was 45 yards. Gostkowski had just one attempt from 48 yards or longer this season, a miss against the Steelers.

At the time Vinatieri was let go, the thought was that the Patriots shouldn't have so much of a dependency on the kicker; that they wouldn't get too far�relying on clutch three-pointers and instead should push for a�more solid lead.

But�with the exception of the first part of this past regular season, the Patriots have succeeded by focusing on each opponent�without looking ahead, and by doing just enough to win; this was also true of the Patriots throughout the latter half of this season. When you're playing a finesse game, three-pointers add up: the Patriots had won each of their Super Bowls by three points and lost this one by three.��

5. What's the post-mortem on the Randy Moss experiment? He behaved like a model prisoner this year...except for that little restraining-order debacle leading up to the AFC Championship Game. He broke records as a wide receiver during the regular season...and was a moping non-factor in the Super Bowl. Versatile targets like Donte' Stallworth and Wes Welker proved just as valuable for Brady this year, and they're going to want vastly less money. Which way do the Patriots go?

We're in uncharted territory as Patriots fans; it feels like the upward trajectory of the last five or so years is tapering off, and now the age of the team's best players, what proved to be a fallible game-planning / coaching strategy somewhere along the line, SpyGate and Handshake-Gate and Ankle-Gate (Pats Edition), leave the Patriots at possibly the most crucial impasse of the decade. How the team regroups from this loss, what kind of 'humble pie' the coaching and personnel staffs will be feeding themselves this spring, and how the team is built this year will play a big part in the future of the franchise for years to come.

Comments

[Dan]

Hate to bring it up again, but with the impending congressional hearings and the Matt Walsh/ Super Bowl XXXVI allegations coming in, the biggest question mark could and maybe should be what will be the fallout. Not in terms of people's opinions of the team, but the commissioner's and the league. Different media sources already have pointed out that Goodell may be pressured into suspending Belichick if any of the new Walsh stuff is true. Not to mention the pandora's box that is the Super Bowl XXXVI allegations. Now that the Pats lost the super bowl, I could care less about spygate, but sadly the league and Specter don't share my opinion. This could get really ugly for the Pats.

[happiest fan alive]

Here's one more question for you.

Why didn't the 18-1 patriots bother to show up on Sunday?

You might want to start thinking about that probowl offensive line while your at it.

They definitely need a major overhaul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX2uxsE_otk

Good luck next year suckass losers!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dan]

By the way, I'm sorry for looking over your disclaimer about the senate stuff, so to make it up, I've come up with some other questions.

1.) What happens with the old defensive guys? Vrabel, Bruschi, Seau and Harrison are all over 30, and Colvin and Thomas are soon joining them. That was the glaring weakness in the loss to the Colts 2 years ago, and was exposed at times in 07, and in the Bowl.

2.) How do you shore up the secondary?

Back when the Pats were a dynasty, their secondary always played great, even if it was Randall Gay and Tyrone Poole. Ellis Hobbs, James Sanders, Brandon Meriwether, an aged Rodney Harrison, and whoever will replace Samuel don't cut it. You think the '04 Pats would have let Tyree catch that ball??

3.) The Running Game?

After supposedly finding the running game, it was terrible against the Giants. After putting up numbers against porous run defenses, and a good game against Jacksonville, Maroney was thought to be back. He was terrible in the super bowl.

[Dan]

One more thing......

1.) Are the Pats chokers???

Before you Pats fans brush it off. Think about it. They let clearly inferior teams in the Panthers and Eagles stick around in super bowls. They were driving for a go-ahead touchdown and Brady throws essentially a pick-six to Champ Bailey in the end zone, and the Pats self-destruct against Denver. The Pats the blow an 18 point lead in the AFC title game. Then, the crowning acheivement, the Pats break every offensive record imaginable, go 18-0, and lose to a 6 loss team, and get much more outplayed than the 3 point differential would indicate. Are Brady and Belichick's playoff genius overrated?

[Jamie]

Dan, I'll try and answer some of those questions (just my guess)

1. If some do not retire, they'll come back in a reduced role. Youth is needed and could learn much from a player like Tedy Bruschi. Player/coach?

2. I'm actually pleased with the progress of James Sanders and Brandon Meriweather. I feel that the safety position is in good hands, especially with Meriwweather. If Asante leaves, then corner is a major concern. There are some solid FA's and the draft has a couple of good corners coming out.

3. Maroney wasn't given enough chances in the SB. I don't believe any draws or delays were attempted to help back off the pressure. When they did run, it was obvious it was coming (even I knew where and when they were running). With Sammy Morris coming back and some decent FA's available taht could help shoulder the load, I like our running game.

4. I don't know if it's choking or the team doesn't have the drive it once did. I liken it to Rocky in Rocky 3 when Clubber Lang knocked him out. The Pats, I think, need to recapture the "eye of the tiger" and also get back to Patriots football. Sometimes I think BB is unwilling lately to part from a gameplan no matter how much it isn't working. There were no adjustments made in the SB, which was the Pats' calling card during the championship years.

[beth]

hfa, you must've still been passed out drunk when all your buddies commented about a week ago.

dan, re the chokers thing, let's look at the patriots' super bowl history--

1986 - crushed by Bears

1997 - beaten soundly by Packers

2001 - edged Rams

2003 - won shootout vs. Carolina

2004 - won vs. Philadelphia

2007 - edged by Giants

this makes their super bowl record 3-3. if you call losing the super bowl, i.e., failing on the biggest stage after getting all the way there choking, well...i guess the results are inconclusive. the patriots have had about as many losing years as winning years, and their gaudy numbers over the last 8 years have brought lots of their historical totals even, just like that. for much of their history, the patriots have just stunk.

thing is, in my book, you can't equate simply losing with choking. choking to me requires another element, of mental or character failure on the verge of almost-assured victory. this year, because the patriots' failure may have been a failure of mental discipline, or a failure of character through arrogance, when they had a perfect season down to the last seconds of the last game, yes, i'd say it was a choke. the other two times the pats lost the super bowl, and when they lost to the broncs and colts, it was because they weren't the better team. that's different from choking, in my opinion. that's just regular old losing.

i also don't factor in "letting the panthers and eagles hang around". the fact that those teams got close doesn't mean anything. close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.

as to your final question about brady / belichick being overrated, the patriots as a franchise are different from belichick and brady as individuals. pats all time are at .500 in the SB, but those two still have a winning career SB record at 3-1. belichick shares the record books with lombardi, brady shares the record brooks with peyton manning, dan marino, and joe montana. they haven't been overrated by being called a great coach and quarterback, no. have belichick and brady's patriots been a great team? they've won three super bowls and four AFC championships in eight years. they've set a new record for regular-season wins, new QB and WR TD records...i mean, what do you think i'm going to say?

i think what you're really getting at is that the patriots have been over-hyped in the last few years. a lot of hyperbole has been thrown their way. people have really short memories for some reason, and so they judge the historically-mediocre patriots as a franchise on the basis of the relative success of the last decade and start doing things like comparing them to the yankees, who are one of the winningest franchises in the history of any sport and who play in a league without a salary cap. there are lots of other non sequiturs like that have been made over the last few years on the national broadcasts that are clearly untrue. but that, and one super bowl loss, doesn't change what brady and belichick have accomplished.

[happiest fan alive]

Edged by Giants?

Dominated by Giants defense.

watch the game again

[beth]

the giants kept the game close with dominating defense, but this is not the same as dominating. in terms of the actual numbers on the scoreboard, the game was won in the final minute. it was a great, thrilling finish, without a doubt among the greatest games in super bowl history. but was it domination? don't think so. being dominated is losing 46-10, like the pats did in the '85 SB.

[love the gmen]

As a giants fan im confused with how some of you are questioning to keep brady around for a while, if he does infact ask for more $$...He is the only thing that keeps this team going? I mean, do I think hes the best ever, not in a million yrs, but hes been the best qb in the league, with peyton, for the last 5 yrs? Hes great...Without him, you have a decent team...with him, great.

[Andrew Farrar]

Well, if Tom Brady's looking for a pay rise, I'd be telling him to look elsewhere for it.

As for the superbowl, it was dominated by the defences of both teams - both teams restricted the other to two Touch Downs and one Field Goal attempt (unfortunately, Bill Belichick, for whatever reason, didn't have the stomach for attempting a Field Goal when the opportunity arose).

I think that, to a certain degree, New England's luck ran out at the wrong time. In the first fixture against the Giants, it was New England that made the "big plays" at the right time, in Arizona they didn't - the interception and sack that never were.

[Jamie]

HFA,

Are you kidding me? While the Giants defense played an excellent game, the Giants, as Beth said, squeaked out a win in the final minute. If the offense did not score on that final drive, they would've lost. That certainly does not constitute domination.

[Andrew Farrar]

To be honest, the scoreline didn't adequately reflect the game as it was played, as far as I'm concerned. Yes, but for the Lesser Manning slipping out of the grasp of the defenders, New England might've won. But it would've been a largely undeserved triumph, although, naturally enough, one I'd have welcomed.

[beth]

i think that game was a dogfight from beginning to end. i think if they'd kept playing for 80 minutes, the lead would've changed a couple more times. yes, it was clear by halftime that the giants defense was more than we'd bargained for, but let's also not forget that new england led on the scoreboard for most of the contest.

[Andrew Farrar]

Yes, they led from an opening drive Touch Down that was facilitated by a defensive penalty, needlessly given away, as by play from New England's offence.

But from then on both defences were dominant, until the fourth quarter and had New England's defence managed to come up with a key play - as they had done on several occasions previously - they might've sneaked a win.

But, as it turned out, it was the New York offence that made the key plays.

[beth]

ltgm, you'll have to direct that line of questioning to andrew. he and i don't agree on that at all.

if you're referring to the brady part of my post, i wasn't meaning to advocate getting rid of him altogether, but maybe trying to shift the strategy a bit so he's not the clear key to the patriots and therefore a 6'5" 220 pound target for other teams to whale on and neutralize the way the giants did. now that the giants did it and it worked, every other team's going to line up against them the same way, at least to begin with.

[Andrew Farrar]

As I understand it, Brady has three years left on his contract, so I'd just let that run down. If he asks for more money in the mean time, then let him go elsewhere. No one - except perhaps Belichick and Vrabel - is irreplaceable.

[Tom]

2001* superbowl championship

[Dan]

Andrew,

Brady is ireeplaceable. He may not be all that the media makes him out to be, and his abilities in the clutch may be overrated, but he is easily one of the top two quarterbacks in the NFL. If you lose him, unless you get a top 5 QB back, you can kiss away any chance of a Super Bowl in the next 5 years in the AFC. Without Brady, you would maybe have won four games this year. Had any average QB been in the game the Pats may have been shut out in the super bowl against that pass rush. Brady should be able to demand any type of money he wants and get it.

[Andrew Farrar]

He may well be ireeplaceable, but he's not irreplaceable, especially when he's in fannying about mode.

[Andrew Farrar]

Anyway, I think the Patriots might want to take a look at Calvin Pace down in Arizona - he's likely to fall victim of "cap issues" and would be a good addition to the Line Backing squad.

[Jamie]

Andrew,

I agree 100% about Calvin Pace. He's a DE/OLB hybrid that has size to move inside if need be and is extremely flexible, a la Adailus Thomas.

I disagree 100% with you about Tom Brady. Quality QB's are extremely hard to find, and he has been #1 to go along with Peyton at #1a, and I wouldn't trade him for any QB in the NFL right now. You lose Brady, and this team takes a serious nosedive. Do you honestly think Matt Cassel or Matt Guittierez can do better?

[Dan]

Thankyou Jamie.

Some of you Pats fans like Andrew here, can't sit and truly appreciate a great player like Brady. I would pay him as much as possible if I was Kraft. Just appreciate his greatness when you can. The Pats wouldn't of sniffed playoffs, let alone undefeated without Brady. Some players, like Brady, Manning, and for other sports Duncan and Marty Broduer, are truly irreplaceable. Stop complaining about him asking for a pay raise, and sit and soak in all you can of the Brady era, becuase it won't last forever.

[Perfection]

going back to happiest fan alive's comment.... dude grow up.. haah we kicked every team's ass in our path... 18-1 dont mean shit.... whoever ur team is probably lost to patriots.... and you can bring your team anytime and patriots will run the football up and down their asses all day long so dont talk shit.... dominated by giants???!?! LOL!!! please little boy you go watch the game again you stupid no0b.... the giants didnt do shit for 3 and a half quarters.... quit talking out of your ass you stupid tart...Giants will go back to sucking nuts again and Eli will go back to 18 for 52 games throwing 5 interceptions in the process... thats all there is to it... so plz stfu and look at the statistics... the Patriots are the best team in the NFL and will remain that way GG No0b..

[Andrew Farrar]

I don't mind being in a minute minority, especially when I'm right and everyone else is wrong.

But beth here shows exactly what the problem is. It's said that Caesar employed a man to walk behind him reminding him he wasn't immortal, but Tom Brady has countless thousands of people worshipping (don't let Mike Huckabee catch you admitting to worshipping a false god) him.

He's a good Quarterback, seems like a decent enough fellow, but if he came knocking on my door asking for a raise after that hapless showing in Arizona, he'd be sent packing.

[beth]

dan and ltgm, please, PLEASE don't hold andrew up as an example representing even a minority--even a minute minority--of pats fan opinion. i can say without a shadow of a doubt that he's the only pats fan i've ever even heard of who doesn't absolutely worship tom brady. he's got a right to his opinions, of course, but he is completely on his own with them.

[Daniel]

Wow Perfection......

This is why the rest of the league's fans hate Pats fans in general. Most Pats fans are good, knowledgeable football fans, but there are too many of people like you. You idiots who clueslessly flaunt their team, after they just lost the super bowl as a 12 point favorite no less. Plus try not to say noob twice in a sports blog comment.

Anyway, Andrew. I really think your underestimating Brady's performance in the Super Bowl. Facing a dominant pass rush, and a sieve for an offensive line, and with a coaching staff that did not make any o-lind adjustments, it is amazing that he played average football. ALL NFL Quarterbacks would have put up crappy numbers in that game. Brady drove it 80 yards and gave your team a lead with 2:50 left. If Vrabel and Belichick are so irreplaceable, their defense would not have given it up.

[beth]

wow pickett, you sure do know a lot about me and how my mind works from a few comments on a blog.

your comment pretty much sums up the point i was trying to make. fans like you and dan (PLEASE NOTE: referring SPECIFICALLY to THIS conversation, not all, most or any percentage of giants fans in general), concluding from the opinons of one commenter that pats fans in general aren't properly appreciating our team's quarterback and then sermonizing to us about how to go about doing that; complaining about how i paint giants fans with the same brush when i'm actually talking about specific conversations that can be read right here in black and white rather than making sweeping generalizations (like, say, "you are all full of yourselves") based on, well, nothing; telling me how to deal with "anger issues" you've so expertly diagnosed...you're proving my point (again, about THIS conversation) with your condescending response.

speaking of painting with a broad brush, before we start generalizing about the "misguided sense of entitlement" among pats fans, how many patriots fans are on the giants website right now offering unsolicited advice and psychoanalysis?

[beth]

//This is why the rest of the league�s fans hate Pats fans in general.//

because they make generalizations based on a minority. p.s., it's not like idiot loudmouth fans are a uniquely new england phenomenon. they exist in every fan base. and don't even say there are more of them among patriots fans, unless you've conducted some form of scientifically valid study.

[Pickett]

Interesting discussion. I'm a Giants fan and here's my 2 cents from a non-Patriots fan perspective. Football is a game that is all about adjustments; either season to season, game to game, or quarter to quarter. The Pats lost the Super Bowl because they were unable to adjust within the game to the Giants pass rush and the pressure they put on Tom Brady. That's it in a nutshell. Tom Brady is the best QB in football but what the Patriots need to do is what the Giants as an organization have always believed. You win with the running game, ball control, and defense. The Patriots will need to focus on the running game a bit more and now that the Giants have shown the rest of the league how to attack the Patriots offense, Belichik (sic) will make the proper adjustments. But, don't throw Brady under the bus. A quarterback is only as good as the players around him. I admired Joe Montana but do you think he would have been as good as he was without Rice, Taylor, his O line, that runing game, and Bill Walsh? Of course not. Same with Brady. Sure, some of the gloss and luster is gone now that the Pats have been shown to be human beings but don't lose faith. We Giants fans know a lot about this since we've walking in the wilderness since the Parcells days.

[beth]

btw i also have to say i'm highly amused by the turn these comments threads have taken. we started with giants fans telling us we're suckass losers, and have come back around to giants fans telling us not to lose faith. apparently we patriots fans really need a lot of help figuring out how to root for a football team.

[Pickett]

Beth:

You are a strange person. No one is telling you how to root for a team and only a few idiots said you were "suckass losers" as you say. Most people are reasonable but you chose to paint all Giants fans with the same brush as LT#56 who is a racist and who I believe has been blocked from all MVN sites. I think part of the problem here is that now that your franchise has had this recent success you are totally full of yourselves. You lack magnanimity and generosity but have some misguided sense of entitlement. The fall from the pinnacle of success is very far. You'll have to learn how to deal with it without the anger and sarcasm.

[Pickett]

Dearest Beth:

You are too uptight to continue our relationship. Goodbye forever. I will now migrate to the Kansas City Chiefs thread. Vaya con Dios.

Your paramour,

Pickett

[beth]

*chokes back tears*

[Andrew Farrar]

That's a shame - the Giant mob have brought a little life to The Patriot Act.

Are they funhogs over at the Kansas City Chiefs' section?

[Pickett]

Andrew:

No - it's just that I like ragging Herman Edwards. All good natured of course. Please tell Beth that she's broken my heart. I will never be the same. Some wounds never heal.

[Perfection]

lol Daniel dont speak really... i defend my team the way i want too... if you dont like it then leave the thread..i defend my team in the way i know how because i was raised like that... dont discriminate because you think my "manners" are off or whatever... you act like your team is full of perfect fans haha.. just stop right now before you embarass yourself.. nuff said...

[jodybanks]

Pickett you are wrong about montana he was a winner in college a top qb at notre dame and heismann trophy winner. A top All American player and a scholar too. Brady aint no Montana joe M played with that kind of pass rush in a lot in his career he always found ways to elude it or withstand it to produce victories.