Patriots to make Bennett their offseason priority

Share this page

Roberto71

Roberto71

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
18,521
Reaction score
12,728
Points
113
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Interesting story from NFL.com

Even though Hightower needs re-signing as well, insiders are reportedly saying Bennett is their priority. They want to lock him up. Good to hear, you just Bill loves his unselfish blocking abilities. They will need to cough up the cash though, 17 TEs are making more money than Marty this season.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...s-prioritizing-resigning-te-martellus-bennett
 
I mean, I'm glad because he's been reliable and overall awesome. Huge for long-term strength of the O.

But BB needs to figure out why his D continues to be meh after years of rebuilding.
 
Roberto71 said:
Interesting story from NFL.com

Even though Hightower needs re-signing as well, insiders are reportedly saying Bennett is their priority. They want to lock him up. Good to hear, you just Bill loves his unselfish blocking abilities. They will need to cough up the cash though, 17 TEs are making more money than Marty this season.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...s-prioritizing-resigning-te-martellus-bennett
Click to expand...

Well certainly now (especially if Sheard's going to not be re-signed), there's more than enough money to sign Hightower, Butler and Bennett.
 
Big/Sky/Fly said:
I think his scheme has something to do with it...seriously.
Click to expand...

What do you think the issue or issues are with scheme?

I ask not because I disagree, but because you may have a point, and I'm curious to know what your thoughts are.

It's tough to question and criticize a coach who has dominated the modern era, but I personally think that perhaps Belichick's offensive and defensive schemes are too complex. That affects us in two ways:

1. The more offensive and defensive plays you have, the less practice you get with each play. Consequently, player performance is less excellent than it could.

2. Because our schemes are so complex, they are often difficult for new players to learn. Some players eventually pick it up, but it takes them more time to than it would in a system like say, Tom Moore's system. Other players don't ever pick it up and are released or traded away. Consequently, the pool of potential players to sign or trade for is smaller than it is for teams with less complex schemes.

Maybe someone could argue Moore's system was too simple and that's why the Pats owned the Colts for the most part while Moore was the offensive coordinator for the Colts, but I tend to think it was because of other factors. I'm open to an alternate position, I just want to hear solid reasoning in support of that position.
 
BillForever said:
2. Because our schemes are so complex, they are often difficult for new players to learn. Some players eventually pick it up, but it takes them more time to than it would in a system like say, Tom Moore's system. Other players don't ever pick it up and are released or traded away. Consequently, the pool of potential players to sign or trade for is smaller than it is for teams with less complex schemes.
Click to expand...

I'd like to think that, I would. I'm just not sure how complicated 'Rush 2, Drop 9' really is.
 
BillForever said:
What do you think the issue or issues are with scheme?

I ask not because I disagree, but because you may have a point, and I'm curious to know what your thoughts are.

It's tough to question and criticize a coach who has dominated the modern era, but I personally think that perhaps Belichick's offensive and defensive schemes are too complex. That affects us in two ways:

1. The more offensive and defensive plays you have, the less practice you get with each play. Consequently, player performance is less excellent than it could.

2. Because our schemes are so complex, they are often difficult for new players to learn. Some players eventually pick it up, but it takes them more time to than it would in a system like say, Tom Moore's system. Other players don't ever pick it up and are released or traded away. Consequently, the pool of potential players to sign or trade for is smaller than it is for teams with less complex schemes.

Maybe someone could argue Moore's system was too simple and that's why the Pats owned the Colts for the most part while Moore was the offensive coordinator for the Colts, but I tend to think it was because of other factors. I'm open to an alternate position, I just want to hear solid reasoning in support of that position.
Click to expand...

Their domination on offense? That should be obvious enough...

The Pats defense has never ever excelled...they had a few decent years...but, dominating? Hardly...

Tell me when the Pats defense ever was the best in the NFL...

They are always bend but don't break. ALWAYS...

I'm not saying that they never had talent...they always have a few really good players.

Scheme wise, they always let the other team get huge yards. Is it part of their overrall plan? Perhaps...

Maybe it is to eat up the clock?... :shrug_n:
 
If their schemes are so hard to learn...maybe they should draft smarter players then? Talent alone won't get it done...when you don't know the plays. :coffee:
 
Big/Sky/Fly said:
Their domination on offense? That should be obvious enough...

The Pats defense has never ever excelled...they had a few decent years...but, dominating? Hardly...

Tell me when the Pats defense ever was the best in the NFL...

They are always bend but don't break. ALWAYS...

I'm not saying that they never had talent...they always have a few really good players.

Scheme wise, they always let the other team get huge yards. Is it part of their overrall plan? Perhaps...

Maybe it is to eat up the clock?... :shrug_n:
Click to expand...

"Coach [Bill] Belichick always used to say, 'I don't give a s--- about our defense giving up yards; all I care about is scoring defense, turnovers and the red zone,'" Woody said. "That's really the key to football. A lot of coaches pound their chest and say, 'I've got the No. 1 defense.' Those numbers don't mean anything."
-Damien Woody

I think the main problem on defense right now is that players are not playing well. Even if we are playing a bend but don't break defense, we are still playing poorly on an individual level.
 
BillForever said:
"Coach [Bill] Belichick always used to say, 'I don't give a s--- about our defense giving up yards; all I care about is scoring defense, turnovers and the red zone,'" Woody said. "That's really the key to football. A lot of coaches pound their chest and say, 'I've got the No. 1 defense.' Those numbers don't mean anything." -Damien Woody
Click to expand...

Didya see last week's game? :coffee:

---------- Post added at 02:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:17 PM ----------
BillForever said:
"Coach [Bill] Belichick always used to say, 'I don't give a s--- about our defense giving up yards; all I care about is scoring defense, turnovers and the red zone,'" Woody said. "That's really the key to football. A lot of coaches pound their chest and say, 'I've got the No. 1 defense.' Those numbers don't mean anything." -Damien Woody
Click to expand...

Their red zone defense needs to REALLY start tightening up...cuz, they sucked ass as of late.
 
BillForever said:
"Coach [Bill] Belichick always used to say, 'I don't give a s--- about our defense giving up yards; all I care about is scoring defense, turnovers and the red zone,'" Woody said. "That's really the key to football. A lot of coaches pound their chest and say, 'I've got the No. 1 defense.' Those numbers don't mean anything."
-Damien Woody

I think the main problem on defense right now is that players are not playing well. Even if we are playing a bend but don't break defense, we are still playing poorly on an individual level.
Click to expand...

This is what the players themselves are saying.
 
Big/Sky/Fly said:
If their schemes are so hard to learn...maybe they should draft smarter players then? Talent alone won't get it done...when you don't know the plays. :coffee:
Click to expand...

Haven't we done that though? How well has that worked out (Especially receiver and cornerback)?

I said earlier: "2. Because our schemes are so complex, they are often difficult for new players to learn. Some players eventually pick it up, but it takes them more time to than it would in a system like say, Tom Moore's system. Other players don't ever pick it up and are released or traded away. Consequently, the pool of potential players to sign or trade for is smaller than it is for teams with less complex schemes."

Even if they were and are drafting smart players, you can't build your entire team from the draft. Doesn't it make more sense to build offensive and defensive schemes that can be picked up by most players (draft, free agency, and trade) and yet still put them a position to be successful, and give the team a technical, tactical, and strategic advantage over opponents?
 
Big/Sky/Fly said:
Didya see last week's game? :coffee:

---------- Post added at 02:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:17 PM ----------



Their red zone defense needs to REALLY start tightening up...cuz, they sucked ass as of late.
Click to expand...

I wrote that in response to what B/S/F said
 
BillForever said:
Haven't we done that though? How well has that worked out (Especially receiver and cornerback)?

I said earlier: "2. Because our schemes are so complex, they are often difficult for new players to learn. Some players eventually pick it up, but it takes them more time to than it would in a system like say, Tom Moore's system. Other players don't ever pick it up and are released or traded away. Consequently, the pool of potential players to sign or trade for is smaller than it is for teams with less complex schemes."

Even if they were and are drafting smart players, you can't build your entire team from the draft. Doesn't it make more sense to build offensive and defensive schemes that can be picked up by most players (draft, free agency, and trade) and yet still put them a position to be successful, and give the team a technical, tactical, and strategic advantage over opponents?
Click to expand...

Collins is not smart...
 
More turnovers would be really nice come big boy time of the year. Let's see how things progress until then.

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk
 
Big/Sky/Fly said:
Collins is not smart...
Click to expand...

He wanted to improvise given his athleticism. A poor fit for us in that regard.

Remember Revis did not like the bend don't break and said as much during the season on his way to his only ring. :coffee:
 
BillForever said:
Haven't we done that though? How well has that worked out (Especially receiver and cornerback)?

I said earlier: "2. Because our schemes are so complex, they are often difficult for new players to learn. Some players eventually pick it up, but it takes them more time to than it would in a system like say, Tom Moore's system. Other players don't ever pick it up and are released or traded away. Consequently, the pool of potential players to sign or trade for is smaller than it is for teams with less complex schemes."

Even if they were and are drafting smart players, you can't build your entire team from the draft. Doesn't it make more sense to build offensive and defensive schemes that can be picked up by most players (draft, free agency, and trade) and yet still put them a position to be successful, and give the team a technical, tactical, and strategic advantage over opponents?
Click to expand...

Big/Sky/Fly said:
Collins is not smart...
Click to expand...

Collins is dump as a post. After hearing him speak in Cleveland I know why he never spoke to the Boston media.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top