Patriots Offensive Line

Share this page

Status
Not open for further replies.
Big/Sky/Fly said:
He's not a pinky. He's a Pats fan that wants the best for his team.
Click to expand...
He is a typical Boston fan that lives to hate his own team. Did he take a few years off during the 6 SB wins? Sure. But he is back in form and when people show you who they are, believe them.
 
DropKickFlutie said:
Here’s the thing though. People like me want BB to win another ring. It makes for great drama if BB can do it after TB12 just got his 7th ring. And I want BB to pass Shula. But at the same time there are glaring things worth pointing out like unproven OC, shaky OLine, multiple overpaid bad players wrecking the cap, it’s ridiculous if valid criticism isn’t allowed. Reminds me of last year starting 2-4 and certain blind homers were in total denial and not objective.
Click to expand...

Key word: Valid. You are an arm chair QB that loves to hate looking backwards. You are what you are. Flag described the psychosis well in his post.
 
DropKickFlutie said:
Here’s the thing though. People like me want BB to win another ring. It makes for great drama if BB can do it after TB12 just got his 7th ring. And I want BB to pass Shula.
DropKickFlutie said:
Here’s the thing though. People like me want BB to win another ring. It makes for great drama if BB can do it after TB12 just got his 7th ring. And I want BB to pass Shula. But at the same time there are glaring things worth pointing out like unproven OC, shaky OLine, multiple overpaid bad players wrecking the cap, it’s ridiculous if valid criticism isn’t allowed. Reminds me of last year starting 2-4 and certain blind homers were in total denial and not objective.
Click to expand...
Guess what, most of us want what you want. And, we know the other things that you point out and to some degree have talked about it. But most of us don't harp on it all the time. That doesn't make us "blind homers".
I hate the term "homer". We are fans, which comes from the word, fanatic. We are supposed to be "homers" if that term has to be used.
The only person who can decide if valid criticism is allowed here or not is UT. The rest of us can only post if we agree or disagree or say give it a break.
Click to expand...
 
I like to read opponents boards pre and post games. I thought this post as the game was being closed out by the Patriots was interesting....

1663542159009.png
 
round of applause to the OLine today. Aside from a Wynn penalty they played well. Power run gap is above average. Scrap zone stretch, we dont have the tackles for it
 
aloyouis said:
Key word: Valid. You are an arm chair QB that loves to hate looking backwards. You are what you are. Flag described the psychosis well in his post.
Click to expand...
Also they ripped off 7 straight wins after that.
 
DropKickFlutie said:
Here’s the thing though. People like me want BB to win another ring. It makes for great drama if BB can do it after TB12 just got his 7th ring. And I want BB to pass Shula. But at the same time there are glaring things worth pointing out like unproven OC, shaky OLine, multiple overpaid bad players wrecking the cap, it’s ridiculous if valid criticism isn’t allowed. Reminds me of last year starting 2-4 and certain blind homers were in total denial and not objective.
Click to expand...
I get it. The problem as a fan, though, is that it becomes a total trap. We naturally want to be proven right, and it creates a conflict in fandom. When something we were concerned about plays out, it's natural to take a certain pleasure in being right.

The mistake that many of the group in conflict make is thinking that "homers" don't see the same problems y'all do, or can't see it objectively. Most see it just fine. But, not being able to impact it in any way, it makes being a fan more fun if there's nothing conflicting with rooting interests. If you see the problems and talk on the boards about what needs to develop to lead to a championship, or for the team to reach it's potential, it's just stating the same negatives in a way that doesn't set you up in a position to be taking joy in failures. This is doubly the case when you set yourself against a specific coach or player.

I get it. I do. As a manager, I rarely give positive feedback and I tend to focus almost exclusively on the things that need fixing. But that's something I'm responsible for, and have significant control over.
 
Flagg the Wanderer said:
I get it. The problem as a fan, though, is that it becomes a total trap. We naturally want to be proven right, and it creates a conflict in fandom. When something we were concerned about plays out, it's natural to take a certain pleasure in being right.

The mistake that many of the group in conflict make is thinking that "homers" don't see the same problems y'all do, or can't see it objectively. Most see it just fine. But, not being able to impact it in any way, it makes being a fan more fun if there's nothing conflicting with rooting interests. If you see the problems and talk on the boards about what needs to develop to lead to a championship, or for the team to reach it's potential, it's just stating the same negatives in a way that doesn't set you up in a position to be taking joy in failures. This is doubly the case when you set yourself against a specific coach or player.

I get it. I do. As a manager, I rarely give positive feedback and I tend to focus almost exclusively on the things that need fixing. But that's something I'm responsible for, and have significant control over.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm......
 
aloyouis said:
Hmmmm......
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know. To the extent that anyone cares:

I worked at Bridgewater for awhile, and that amazing and intense corporate culture changed my whole outlook on management. My teams always know from jump that if they're doing great work I'll stay the hell out of their way except to see what I can learn from what they're doing. If they're experienced I try to only interfere beyond guidance and workshopping when requested or when I need to take blame directed at them for something going wrong. I still nominate them for bonuses, company awards, and stuff like that, but I don't sandwich negative feedback with positive feedback around it in reviews. In fact, ai tell them that if they are hearing any feedback for the first time at a review, that means I haven't been doing my job.

Basically, I treat them like accountable grownups from whom the expectation is excellent work, so the only surprise (and some change is needed) when I don't get that. Some hate it, some think it's fantastic. I am finding that Gen Zers and a decent % of younger millennials tend not to be big fans. But I'm now up to 5 people who have reached out me after leaving my team to come work with me again, even at different companies. It becomes pretty self-selecting.
 
Flagg the Wanderer said:
Yeah, I know. To the extent that anyone cares:

I worked at Bridgewater for awhile, and that amazing and intense corporate culture changed my whole outlook on management. My teams always know from jump that if they're doing great work I'll stay the hell out of their way except to see what I can learn from what they're doing. If they're experienced I try to only interfere beyond guidance and workshopping when requested or when I need to take blame directed at them for something going wrong. I still nominate them for bonuses, company awards, and stuff like that, but I don't sandwich negative feedback with positive feedback around it in reviews. In fact, ai tell them that if they are hearing any feedback for the first time at a review, that means I haven't been doing my job.

Basically, I treat them like accountable grownups from whom the expectation is excellent work, so the only surprise (and some change is needed) when I don't get that. Some hate it, some think it's fantastic. I am finding that Gen Zers and a decent % of younger millennials tend not to be big fans. But I'm now up to 5 people who have reached out me after leaving my team to come work with me again, even at different companies. It becomes pretty self-selecting.
Click to expand...
All good.

I was similar but I would add deserved and appropriate positives.

We are all human.

We are also all different. Whatever works for them.
 
Last edited:
"Cole Strange may be playing like he could become one of the best guards in the NFL, but that doesn't mean the Patriots didn't blow the pick. " Ben Volin (dweeb troll)
 
chevss454 said:
"Cole Strange may be playing like he could become one of the best guards in the NFL, but that doesn't mean the Patriots didn't blow the pick. " Ben Volin (dweeb troll)
Click to expand...

Strange could be like the Mankins pick but I still don’t like going that high for a guard. Pats went a decade without a ring until they reloaded with an elite man cover CB1.

But kudos to Strange yesterday, he showed up in a big way. Almost as much as his counterpart 6th round pick teammate Onwenu
 
DropKickFlutie said:
Strange could be like the Mankins pick but I still don’t like going that high for a guard. Pats went a decade without a ring until they reloaded with an elite man cover CB1.

But kudos to Strange yesterday, he showed up in a big way. Almost as much as his counterpart 6th round pick teammate Onwenu
Click to expand...
I'll dump it here as well...
Flagg the Wanderer said:
🙄
Guards are underrated. Or rather, the value of a dominant and flexible guard is underrated - I do think it's a position where you don't suffer as much from a JAG as you do in others.

But if you think Quentin Nelson, Will Shields, or John Hannah is there in the first round, you spend the friggin' pick.

And in this case, remember that the Patriots traded back to get him, then traded back again with the pick they acquired. So for pick 1.21 they got:
  • Cole Strange,
  • Jack Jones,
  • Bailey Zappe, and
  • a 2023 3rd.

Disaster! They blew the pick!
Click to expand...
 
Speaking of guards, seems strange that they pick a player in the first round whose strength is his mobility , aka "great for the wide zone plan". But in later rounds of the draft select Olinemen that weigh 330 lbs and up.

Why not pick more mobile types that could improve under the NFL weight/ training program??
 
sg14 said:
Speaking of guards, seems strange that they pick a player in the first round whose strength is his mobility , aka "great for the wide zone plan". But in later rounds of the draft select Olinemen that weigh 330 lbs and up.

Why not pick more mobile types that could improve under the NFL weight/ training program??
Click to expand...
Because if you get those 330lbs types down to 305, you might have something. Also, as you saw plenty of yesterday, 'the great wide zone plan' is only a small percentage of what they do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top