|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 27, 2014 17:42:29 GMT -5
Dennard to IR, Boyce is back. Looks like Edelman will get some more time to clear the cobwebs.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 28, 2014 11:56:35 GMT -5
Volmer, gronk, Edelman, gray, browner, Connelly and Hightower are inactive.... Guessing we don't see too much of Brady behind that oline....
Looking forward to seeing Garapolo and I'm a big Boyce fan. I think he's going to have s nice career eventually hope he does well today.
|
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 28, 2014 13:04:08 GMT -5
Eh... Vollmer could have earned quite some money in playing time incentives... wonder how hurt he is.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 28, 2014 13:39:23 GMT -5
Eh... Vollmer could have earned quite some money in playing time incentives... wonder how hurt he is. They already lowered volmers numbers - he's fine. They didn't hold him out to save money. |
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 28, 2014 14:53:49 GMT -5
Brandon Bolden Wildcat, Jimmy G zone read, it's like they pre-scripted all these 2nd half plays on the assumption they would be ahead.
Also, was Nate Ebner playing Linebacker?
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Dec 28, 2014 15:52:09 GMT -5
How bad was solder's injury?
|
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Dec 29, 2014 0:19:57 GMT -5
This might sound completely irrational, but the only team in the AFC right now I don't see the Pats beating (in normal conditions) is the Ravens. So go Steelers next week!
|
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 29, 2014 9:06:48 GMT -5
Idzik and Ryan are gone. If you ask me, the Falcons would be very smart to swoop down on Rex and get him in their clutches.
Will be fascinating to see whom the J-E-S-T bring in and what those guys will think about Geno "Flashes" Smith.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 29, 2014 11:19:51 GMT -5
Hey wanted Casserio which is probably part of the reason the Pats extended him with such a long term deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Dec 29, 2014 13:46:54 GMT -5
This might sound completely irrational, but the only team in the AFC right now I don't see the Pats beating (in normal conditions) is the Ravens. So go Steelers next week! I think we could beat anyone at home. But I agree they'd be the toughest matchup. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 29, 2014 14:02:29 GMT -5
I disagree, Pittsburg is a tougher matchup than Baltimore.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 29, 2014 14:04:56 GMT -5
LeVeon Bell's injury might change that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Dec 29, 2014 17:50:09 GMT -5
I disagree, Pittsburg is a tougher matchup than Baltimore. Nope, the Ravens were a better team in 2014 and always seem to play us tough. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 29, 2014 18:34:39 GMT -5
They do play us tough but this is a different team and Pitt has been the strongest team outside of New England and Seattle the last 10 weeks or so. Bell could change things but I'm thinking he's fine 2 weeks from now. The Pittsburg offense is a lot better and neither D is that great.
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Dec 29, 2014 18:39:47 GMT -5
Pittsburgh hasn't beat us in a long time. They're probably the team im least worried about. Especially with Revis on Antonio Brown.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 29, 2014 19:02:01 GMT -5
I forgot every team was the same from one year to the next...
|
|
|
|
Post by xxdamgoodxx on Dec 29, 2014 19:08:30 GMT -5
Let us not forget that we smoked the Ravens 41-7, at their house, last year. Their edge rushers scare me a little, but I don't think that they have the secondary to stop us if we go 5 wide+no-huddle. In the AFCCG that Baltimire came to NE and won, Talib was out by the second half and we didn't have the secondary to deal with their 5-wide sets. We are much better equipped to handle their receivers this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Dec 29, 2014 21:54:22 GMT -5
Well we would play The Bungles or Colts if the Steelers win so that might be a moot point. It would be tough for the Steelers secondary to outlast The Broncos if they beat Baltimore.
|
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 30, 2014 13:13:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 30, 2014 13:19:58 GMT -5
Brady made an extra 3m by doing what he did with his contract. There is no risk of being cut. If he were cut, he'd make more the first year than the final 2 years of his current deal. Remember they are not cutting him this year so he will earn that money and he is protected for injury.
What this proves is that he will play for these low numbers whereas before it was speculated they were fake years he'd never play for.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 30, 2014 14:30:35 GMT -5
Agree with the first part but I believe they can (and still might) redo his deal. Kraft was going to have to put $24M in escrow now if this hadn't been done. That's no longer the case.
|
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 30, 2014 15:32:51 GMT -5
Agree with the first part but I believe they can (and still might) redo his deal. Kraft was going to have to put $24M in escrow now if this hadn't been done. That's no longer the case. Big ****ing deal ... there's no way Kraft has cash flow problems of the sort that would make putting $24m in escrow something to worry about. This is a total red herring. And rjp, the Patriots are only going to cut Brady if he's not worth the money, it's not like Garoppolo is a big star just waiting to finally become a starter. He might become a good starter but he's not there yet. Of course the Patriots aren't going to cut Brady this offseason. But if they cut him in 2 years, he'll be short $7m compared to the original contract, and he might be such a wreck by then that he won't get that much back on the market. Unless Reggie McKenzie inexplicably still has a GM job then, that is. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 30, 2014 15:36:24 GMT -5
 ? I didn't say it was cash flow PROBLEMS. I don't get why people don't believe that even the richest have budgets that they work with. No matter how big an enterprise you are, you work within the constraints of a budget. It may be higher than most, but it exists. They are going to have to pay bonuses to folks and this gives them more wiggle room to do that. They had an opportunity to gain flexibility to do that and they took it. |
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 30, 2014 15:43:55 GMT -5
? I didn't say it was cash flow PROBLEMS. I don't get why people don't believe that even the richest have budgets that they work with. No matter how big an enterprise you are, you work within the constraints of a budget. It may be higher than most, but it exists. They are going to have to pay bonuses to folks and this gives them more wiggle room to do that. They had an opportunity to gain flexibility to do that and they took it. They were completely capable of paying those bonuses without this contract restructure, anyone who claims otherwise is lying. Meanwhile, they LOSE cap space due to giving Brady more money. It's amazing how Adam Schefter is able to brainwash so many of you. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Dec 30, 2014 17:48:53 GMT -5
Well I can't argue with someone who has access to their books so I'll stop.
|
|
? I didn't say it was cash flow PROBLEMS.