2007 Pats Offense vs, 2012 Pats Offense (1 Viewer)

[ldizzle]

Everyone remembers the great season the Pats had in 2012. Tom Brady and Randy Moss bot went off. But when comparing the 2 teams on paper, I can see the 2012 offense being much better. Lets compare the fantasy players from then and now.

2007

QB: Tom Brady

WR: Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, Jabar Gaffney

Rb: Laurence Maroney, Kevin Faulk, Heath Evans

Te: Ben Watson, Kyle Brady

2012

Qb: Tom Brady

Wr: Wes Welker, Brandon Lloyd, Donte Stallworth, Jabar Gaffney, Julian Edelman

Rb: Steven Ridley, Shane Vereen, Danny Woodhead, Joseph Addai

Te: Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez

I think the O-line may have been better in 2007. But, seeing as how more teams are passing to win more, is Tom Brady poised to have a season like 2007, which in terms of fantasy was amazing. The only thing that I can see is that the running game is better this year, but we know how the Patriots don't care about being balanced on offense and like to score and score a lot.

What say you Shark Pool?

 

[stbugs]

Not sure if they will be as prolific as you never know, but I do agree with you. There are some great QBs out there, but I would think that Brady is as solid as anyone to have a great season. Welker, Gronkowski, Lloyd and Hernandez, if all are healthy is a nightmare for defenses. If Hernandez is healthy and Lloyd plays like the Lloyd of the last two years, that is 4 really solid WRs/TEs. You have to feel like someone is going to get open on every play. In 2007, Welker and Moss were great and while Lloyd isn't 2007 Moss, Gronk and Hernandez are light years better than Watson/Brady. 2012 WR/TEs >>>> 2007 WR/TEs even with Moss.

So in short, I agree with you that 2012 could be a banner year for the NE offense, especially Brady. I would have no problem owning any of the WR/TEs, but I think you can get a piece of all of them cheaper with Brady this year. Assuming no injuries, Brady will absolutely contend for QB1 with this stable of receivers. Of the top 5 QBs (huge dropoff from #5 to #6 bigger than drop from #1 to #5), no doubt in my mind that Brady and Rodgers are the safest bets and I am pretty sure Brady will be drafted after Rodgers.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Funny how Stallworth and Gaffney found their way back.

 

[Borat]

Outside of tight end, I don't see a single position where this team is clearly better off offensively than they were in '07. There is potential at RB, but even if Ridley and Vereen shine, I will be amazed if they're anywhere near what Kevin Faulk was in pass protection.

 

[David Yudkin]

Outside of tight end, I don't see a single position where this team is clearly better off offensively than they were in '07. There is potential at RB, but even if Ridley and Vereen shine, I will be amazed if they're anywhere near what Kevin Faulk was in pass protection.

LOL at the bolded. If we count Mike Vrabel as a tight end, he, Ben Watson, and Kyle Brady together posted 47-462-10 in 2007.Gronk and Hernandez combined for 169-2237-24 last year. So sure, your statement is accurate . . . but the difference in TE production of 122-1775-14 mostly gets swept under the rug in your assessment.

I am not sure that the current receiving corps of Welker / Lloyd / Gaffney / Branch / Stallworth taken as a whole is dramatically worse than Moss / Welker / Stallworth / Gaffney was in 2007, especially when you factor in that defenses are going to have to struggle immensely to deal with the two tight ends.

I concur that at the moment we have no idea how Ridley or Vereen will do in pass protection and blitz pick up. It also would not shock me if they lined up two TEs plus Welker, Lloyd, and Gaffney (or one one of the other WRs). If Brady got any time to pass, that group of 5 guys could be impossible to cover. I am not sure Branch and Stallworth will make the final cut, but that group of receiving threats could be unstoppable if Brady has time to sit in the pocket.

 

[Borat]

Outside of tight end, I don't see a single position where this team is clearly better off offensively than they were in '07. There is potential at RB, but even if Ridley and Vereen shine, I will be amazed if they're anywhere near what Kevin Faulk was in pass protection.

LOL at the bolded. If we count Mike Vrabel as a tight end, he, Ben Watson, and Kyle Brady together posted 47-462-10 in 2007.Gronk and Hernandez combined for 169-2237-24 last year. So sure, your statement is accurate . . . but the difference in TE production of 122-1775-14 mostly gets swept under the rug in your assessment.

I am not sure that the current receiving corps of Welker / Lloyd / Gaffney / Branch / Stallworth taken as a whole is dramatically worse than Moss / Welker / Stallworth / Gaffney was in 2007, especially when you factor in that defenses are going to have to struggle immensely to deal with the two tight ends.

I concur that at the moment we have no idea how Ridley or Vereen will do in pass protection and blitz pick up. It also would not shock me if they lined up two TEs plus Welker, Lloyd, and Gaffney (or one one of the other WRs). If Brady got any time to pass, that group of 5 guys could be impossible to cover. I am not sure Branch and Stallworth will make the final cut, but that group of receiving threats could be unstoppable if Brady has time to sit in the pocket.

That's a whole lot of words to basically just agree with me.

 

[David Yudkin]

Outside of tight end, I don't see a single position where this team is clearly better off offensively than they were in '07. There is potential at RB, but even if Ridley and Vereen shine, I will be amazed if they're anywhere near what Kevin Faulk was in pass protection.

LOL at the bolded. If we count Mike Vrabel as a tight end, he, Ben Watson, and Kyle Brady together posted 47-462-10 in 2007.Gronk and Hernandez combined for 169-2237-24 last year. So sure, your statement is accurate . . . but the difference in TE production of 122-1775-14 mostly gets swept under the rug in your assessment.

I am not sure that the current receiving corps of Welker / Lloyd / Gaffney / Branch / Stallworth taken as a whole is dramatically worse than Moss / Welker / Stallworth / Gaffney was in 2007, especially when you factor in that defenses are going to have to struggle immensely to deal with the two tight ends.

I concur that at the moment we have no idea how Ridley or Vereen will do in pass protection and blitz pick up. It also would not shock me if they lined up two TEs plus Welker, Lloyd, and Gaffney (or one one of the other WRs). If Brady got any time to pass, that group of 5 guys could be impossible to cover. I am not sure Branch and Stallworth will make the final cut, but that group of receiving threats could be unstoppable if Brady has time to sit in the pocket.

That's a whole lot of words to basically just agree with me.

Tying everything back to the question posed in the thread, the TE production alone almost makes up for not having Randy Moss.2007: Moss + TEs = 145-1955-33

2011: Gronk + Hernandez = 169-2237-24

The only thing to make up is the 9 TD.

2007 Receiving totals from anyone else: 258-2904-17 (or thereabouts, my math might be off slightly).

If Gronk and Hernandez have a repeat of last year (which I don't think will happen, but for argument's sake let's say they do), there's not THAT much ground to cover to surpass the 2007 numbers. With no proven goal line back, a still well below average defense, and (on paper) a relatively easy schedule, I put the probability of Brady throwing for more yardage than 2007 at 80% and Brady making a run at 50 TD again at about 50% (assuming of course he plays all 16 games).

 

[jurb26]

Tying everything back to the question posed in the thread, the TE production alone almost makes up for not having Randy Moss.2007: Moss + TEs = 145-1955-332011: Gronk + Hernandez = 169-2237-24The only thing to make up is the 9 TD.2007 Receiving totals from anyone else: 258-2904-17 (or thereabouts, my math might be off slightly).If Gronk and Hernandez have a repeat of last year (which I don't think will happen, but for argument's sake let's say they do), there's not THAT much ground to cover to surpass the 2007 numbers. With no proven goal line back, a still well below average defense, and (on paper) a relatively easy schedule, I put the probability of Brady throwing for more yardage than 2007 at 80% and Brady making a run at 50 TD again at about 50% (assuming of course he plays all 16 games).

Wait, so with basically the same weapons as last year when Brady only threw for 39 TDs his probability of throwing for 50 this year is 50%? On top of that, the total from last year included perhaps the best season in NFL history for a TE. This also doesn't touch on the simply rarity of 50 TDs seasons as a whole.Call me a skeptic, but I don't think the odds of Brady tossing 50 TDs are anywhere near 50%. I place it more around 10% or less.

 

[Borat]

Outside of tight end, I don't see a single position where this team is clearly better off offensively than they were in '07. There is potential at RB, but even if Ridley and Vereen shine, I will be amazed if they're anywhere near what Kevin Faulk was in pass protection.

LOL at the bolded. If we count Mike Vrabel as a tight end, he, Ben Watson, and Kyle Brady together posted 47-462-10 in 2007.Gronk and Hernandez combined for 169-2237-24 last year. So sure, your statement is accurate . . . but the difference in TE production of 122-1775-14 mostly gets swept under the rug in your assessment.

I am not sure that the current receiving corps of Welker / Lloyd / Gaffney / Branch / Stallworth taken as a whole is dramatically worse than Moss / Welker / Stallworth / Gaffney was in 2007, especially when you factor in that defenses are going to have to struggle immensely to deal with the two tight ends.

I concur that at the moment we have no idea how Ridley or Vereen will do in pass protection and blitz pick up. It also would not shock me if they lined up two TEs plus Welker, Lloyd, and Gaffney (or one one of the other WRs). If Brady got any time to pass, that group of 5 guys could be impossible to cover. I am not sure Branch and Stallworth will make the final cut, but that group of receiving threats could be unstoppable if Brady has time to sit in the pocket.

That's a whole lot of words to basically just agree with me.

Tying everything back to the question posed in the thread, the TE production alone almost makes up for not having Randy Moss.2007: Moss + TEs = 145-1955-33

2011: Gronk + Hernandez = 169-2237-24

The only thing to make up is the 9 TD.

2007 Receiving totals from anyone else: 258-2904-17 (or thereabouts, my math might be off slightly).

If Gronk and Hernandez have a repeat of last year (which I don't think will happen, but for argument's sake let's say they do), there's not THAT much ground to cover to surpass the 2007 numbers. With no proven goal line back, a still well below average defense, and (on paper) a relatively easy schedule, I put the probability of Brady throwing for more yardage than 2007 at 80% and Brady making a run at 50 TD again at about 50% (assuming of course he plays all 16 games).

What? You don't think that the TE's will replicate last year's numbers, but "if" they do, then the "only" thing they have to make up for is 9 TD's? ...but Brady's nevertheless got a 50% shot at putting up 50 TD's again?

 

[The Gunslinger]

I think the schedule is too easy for those type of gaudy numbers. Unless the return of McDaniels also returns the "no mercy" philosophy they had in 2007, I think to many games will be over by halftime.

I think the Patriots may also have the luxury to win many games with conservative game plans in order to put less on tape for opposing D's to try to figure out. They are in a must win window for the superbowl with a relatively old roster and I personally believe 2012 is more about the Super Bowl and less about gaudy stats.

 

[ldizzle]

Tying everything back to the question posed in the thread, the TE production alone almost makes up for not having Randy Moss.2007: Moss + TEs = 145-1955-332011: Gronk + Hernandez = 169-2237-24The only thing to make up is the 9 TD.2007 Receiving totals from anyone else: 258-2904-17 (or thereabouts, my math might be off slightly).If Gronk and Hernandez have a repeat of last year (which I don't think will happen, but for argument's sake let's say they do), there's not THAT much ground to cover to surpass the 2007 numbers. With no proven goal line back, a still well below average defense, and (on paper) a relatively easy schedule, I put the probability of Brady throwing for more yardage than 2007 at 80% and Brady making a run at 50 TD again at about 50% (assuming of course he plays all 16 games).

Wait, so with basically the same weapons as last year when Brady only threw for 39 TDs his probability of throwing for 50 this year is 50%? On top of that, the total from last year included perhaps the best season in NFL history for a TE. This also doesn't touch on the simply rarity of 50 TDs seasons as a whole.Call me a skeptic, but I don't think the odds of Brady tossing 50 TDs are anywhere near 50%. I place it more around 10% or less.

Just curious as to why you guys dont think Lloyd could help boost Brady's numbers? The Pats havent had Mcdaniels since he left and that was when 50 tds happened. I do think the TE's wont have a year like last, but it is not impossible. They were only in their 2nd years and are playing like monsters already, cant they get better?IMO Brady had only 2 legit passing threats in 07, now he potentially has 4.

 

[Borat]

I think the schedule is too easy for those type of gaudy numbers. Unless the return of McDaniels also returns the "no mercy" philosophy they had in 2007, I think to many games will be over by halftime.

I think the Patriots may also have the luxury to win many games with conservative game plans in order to put less on tape for opposing D's to try to figure out. They are in a must win window for the superbowl with a relatively old roster and I personally believe 2012 is more about the Super Bowl and less about gaudy stats.

FWIW, people have been saying this about the Patriots since at least 2007.

 

[David Yudkin]

Outside of tight end, I don't see a single position where this team is clearly better off offensively than they were in '07. There is potential at RB, but even if Ridley and Vereen shine, I will be amazed if they're anywhere near what Kevin Faulk was in pass protection.

LOL at the bolded. If we count Mike Vrabel as a tight end, he, Ben Watson, and Kyle Brady together posted 47-462-10 in 2007.Gronk and Hernandez combined for 169-2237-24 last year. So sure, your statement is accurate . . . but the difference in TE production of 122-1775-14 mostly gets swept under the rug in your assessment.

I am not sure that the current receiving corps of Welker / Lloyd / Gaffney / Branch / Stallworth taken as a whole is dramatically worse than Moss / Welker / Stallworth / Gaffney was in 2007, especially when you factor in that defenses are going to have to struggle immensely to deal with the two tight ends.

I concur that at the moment we have no idea how Ridley or Vereen will do in pass protection and blitz pick up. It also would not shock me if they lined up two TEs plus Welker, Lloyd, and Gaffney (or one one of the other WRs). If Brady got any time to pass, that group of 5 guys could be impossible to cover. I am not sure Branch and Stallworth will make the final cut, but that group of receiving threats could be unstoppable if Brady has time to sit in the pocket.

That's a whole lot of words to basically just agree with me.

Tying everything back to the question posed in the thread, the TE production alone almost makes up for not having Randy Moss.2007: Moss + TEs = 145-1955-33

2011: Gronk + Hernandez = 169-2237-24

The only thing to make up is the 9 TD.

2007 Receiving totals from anyone else: 258-2904-17 (or thereabouts, my math might be off slightly).

If Gronk and Hernandez have a repeat of last year (which I don't think will happen, but for argument's sake let's say they do), there's not THAT much ground to cover to surpass the 2007 numbers. With no proven goal line back, a still well below average defense, and (on paper) a relatively easy schedule, I put the probability of Brady throwing for more yardage than 2007 at 80% and Brady making a run at 50 TD again at about 50% (assuming of course he plays all 16 games).

What? You don't think that the TE's will replicate last year's numbers, but "if" they do, then the "only" thing they have to make up for is 9 TD's? ...but Brady's nevertheless got a 50% shot at putting up 50 TD's again?

"Making a run at" and "exceeding" are not the same. I can easily see Brady throwing 40-45 TD. Brees and Rodgers had 46 and 45 TD last year. I would consider that "making a run."Fantasy wise, Brady had 462 fantasy points last year and 496 in 2007. I don't think it is that big a stretch to think he could score 35 more points than last year.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

I don't "easily see" a 40-45 TD season for any QB, especially one that's 35. That's a short list.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I think the schedule is too easy for those type of gaudy numbers. Unless the return of McDaniels also returns the "no mercy" philosophy they had in 2007, I think to many games will be over by halftime.

I think the Patriots may also have the luxury to win many games with conservative game plans in order to put less on tape for opposing D's to try to figure out. They are in a must win window for the superbowl with a relatively old roster and I personally believe 2012 is more about the Super Bowl and less about gaudy stats.

relative to what?

 

[David Yudkin]

I don't "easily see" a 40-45 TD season for any QB, especially one that's 35. That's a short list.

How many offenses have had the potential of the Pats offense led by the caliber of QB like Brady?I agree that a few years ago even thinking QBs would hit 40 TDs would be a crazy thought, but 3 QBs did it last year and Brady was only 1 behind.The Patriots defense is still one of the worst in the league, their running game is very unproven, and the RB that scored 21 rushing TD over the past two seasons is now gone.Maybe the Pats offense will disappoint, but on paper this looks like an offense with huge potential.That being said, I think the Pats need to be more balanced and establish a running game whgile being less dependent on the pass. That would help take time off the clock and would keep the defense off the field. But I have been saying that for years and that really hasn't happened.

 

[griff321]

Outside of tight end, I don't see a single position where this team is clearly better off offensively than they were in '07. There is potential at RB, but even if Ridley and Vereen shine, I will be amazed if they're anywhere near what Kevin Faulk was in pass protection.

LOL at the bolded. If we count Mike Vrabel as a tight end, he, Ben Watson, and Kyle Brady together posted 47-462-10 in 2007.Gronk and Hernandez combined for 169-2237-24 last year. So sure, your statement is accurate . . . but the difference in TE production of 122-1775-14 mostly gets swept under the rug in your assessment.

I am not sure that the current receiving corps of Welker / Lloyd / Gaffney / Branch / Stallworth taken as a whole is dramatically worse than Moss / Welker / Stallworth / Gaffney was in 2007, especially when you factor in that defenses are going to have to struggle immensely to deal with the two tight ends.

I concur that at the moment we have no idea how Ridley or Vereen will do in pass protection and blitz pick up. It also would not shock me if they lined up two TEs plus Welker, Lloyd, and Gaffney (or one one of the other WRs). If Brady got any time to pass, that group of 5 guys could be impossible to cover. I am not sure Branch and Stallworth will make the final cut, but that group of receiving threats could be unstoppable if Brady has time to sit in the pocket.

That's a whole lot of words to basically just agree with me.

Tying everything back to the question posed in the thread, the TE production alone almost makes up for not having Randy Moss.2007: Moss + TEs = 145-1955-33

2011: Gronk + Hernandez = 169-2237-24

The only thing to make up is the 9 TD.

2007 Receiving totals from anyone else: 258-2904-17 (or thereabouts, my math might be off slightly).

If Gronk and Hernandez have a repeat of last year (which I don't think will happen, but for argument's sake let's say they do), there's not THAT much ground to cover to surpass the 2007 numbers. With no proven goal line back, a still well below average defense, and (on paper) a relatively easy schedule, I put the probability of Brady throwing for more yardage than 2007 at 80% and Brady making a run at 50 TD again at about 50% (assuming of course he plays all 16 games).

Why not? I've been ranting and raving about the brilliance of the two TE set since I had an inkling of what was to come when Gronk and Hernandez were rookies. I just don't get why it's so hard for people to wrap their minds around the offensive juggernaut the pats have crated around Gronk and Hernandez. Who cares if it's new and has never happened before. Just look at what the TEs were able to accomplish in only their first two seasons in the league. Stop living in the past people. The evidence is there, so get behind it.

 

[Borat]

Outside of tight end, I don't see a single position where this team is clearly better off offensively than they were in '07. There is potential at RB, but even if Ridley and Vereen shine, I will be amazed if they're anywhere near what Kevin Faulk was in pass protection.

LOL at the bolded. If we count Mike Vrabel as a tight end, he, Ben Watson, and Kyle Brady together posted 47-462-10 in 2007.Gronk and Hernandez combined for 169-2237-24 last year. So sure, your statement is accurate . . . but the difference in TE production of 122-1775-14 mostly gets swept under the rug in your assessment.

I am not sure that the current receiving corps of Welker / Lloyd / Gaffney / Branch / Stallworth taken as a whole is dramatically worse than Moss / Welker / Stallworth / Gaffney was in 2007, especially when you factor in that defenses are going to have to struggle immensely to deal with the two tight ends.

I concur that at the moment we have no idea how Ridley or Vereen will do in pass protection and blitz pick up. It also would not shock me if they lined up two TEs plus Welker, Lloyd, and Gaffney (or one one of the other WRs). If Brady got any time to pass, that group of 5 guys could be impossible to cover. I am not sure Branch and Stallworth will make the final cut, but that group of receiving threats could be unstoppable if Brady has time to sit in the pocket.

That's a whole lot of words to basically just agree with me.

Tying everything back to the question posed in the thread, the TE production alone almost makes up for not having Randy Moss.2007: Moss + TEs = 145-1955-33

2011: Gronk + Hernandez = 169-2237-24

The only thing to make up is the 9 TD.

2007 Receiving totals from anyone else: 258-2904-17 (or thereabouts, my math might be off slightly).

If Gronk and Hernandez have a repeat of last year (which I don't think will happen, but for argument's sake let's say they do), there's not THAT much ground to cover to surpass the 2007 numbers. With no proven goal line back, a still well below average defense, and (on paper) a relatively easy schedule, I put the probability of Brady throwing for more yardage than 2007 at 80% and Brady making a run at 50 TD again at about 50% (assuming of course he plays all 16 games).

What? You don't think that the TE's will replicate last year's numbers, but "if" they do, then the "only" thing they have to make up for is 9 TD's? ...but Brady's nevertheless got a 50% shot at putting up 50 TD's again?

"Making a run at" and "exceeding" are not the same. I can easily see Brady throwing 40-45 TD. Brees and Rodgers had 46 and 45 TD last year. I would consider that "making a run."Fantasy wise, Brady had 462 fantasy points last year and 496 in 2007. I don't think it is that big a stretch to think he could score 35 more points than last year.

You're not even making sense at this point. A 50% chance of possibly making a run at 50 TDs? That's probably the most noncommittal prediction I've ever read anywhere.

 

[The Gunslinger]

I think the schedule is too easy for those type of gaudy numbers. Unless the return of McDaniels also returns the "no mercy" philosophy they had in 2007, I think to many games will be over by halftime.

I think the Patriots may also have the luxury to win many games with conservative game plans in order to put less on tape for opposing D's to try to figure out. They are in a must win window for the superbowl with a relatively old roster and I personally believe 2012 is more about the Super Bowl and less about gaudy stats.

relative to what?

I'm specifically referring to Brady, Welker, and Lloyd but mostly to Brady. I don't think the Pats are eagerly awaiting the Ryan Mallet era of league dominance. Yes they have been saying this team is old since 2007 and they have been correct since 2007. The defense has had to be completely (and unsuccessfully) revamped due to aging vets and the offense isn't far behind.

 

[bostonfred]

I think you have to look at personnel groupings. Like last year, the patriots will see a lot of 2te sets, obviously. They will go single back a lot, especially with guys who can split wide if they need to so they can option from single back to "five wide" (counting the two tight ends). Those were their bread and butter packages last year and it created lots of mismatches. And like last year, they will occasionally work from other starting sets, like starting in five wide, then using hernandez as a running back.

The thing im struggling with is that they are now talking about using their fullback more. How does that work? 2rb, 2te, welker inside the 5? It seems like lloyds td potential is capped in a big way if that's the case. Is that a formation we should expect to see outside of short yardage situations?

I do think that the offense will continue to be heavily pass oriented, because that's where their biggest mismatches are created. I think they want a running back who can pass block and brings the threat of splitting out wide, even if he's not as good a pure runner, and I think they'd like that guy to be better than woodhead, which kind of leans me towards addai, or maybe vereen.

I can see gronk coming down to earth somewhat, because I do think they forcefed him (and the saints forcefed graham) trying to set the record. But it doesn't seem like you can double him all the time without getting burnt elsewhere, because every position on that offense is a potential mismatch. Right now, im thinking something like

Welker 100 1200 7

lloyd 55 800 4

gronk 90 1050 14

hernandex 60 800 8

branch 25 400 1

Other receivers and tes 20 200 2

backs 40 350 6

brady total 390 completions, 4750 yards, 42 tds, 10 ints.

And those numbers actually feel pretty conservative to me, meaning there's some room for upside. If brady has a record in reach at the end of the season - maybe another run at the yardage record - then all bets are off.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

I don't "easily see" a 40-45 TD season for any QB, especially one that's 35. That's a short list.

How many offenses have had the potential of the Pats offense led by the caliber of QB like Brady?I agree that a few years ago even thinking QBs would hit 40 TDs would be a crazy thought, but 3 QBs did it last year and Brady was only 1 behind.The Patriots defense is still one of the worst in the league, their running game is very unproven, and the RB that scored 21 rushing TD over the past two seasons is now gone.Maybe the Pats offense will disappoint, but on paper this looks like an offense with huge potential.That being said, I think the Pats need to be more balanced and establish a running game whgile being less dependent on the pass. That would help take time off the clock and would keep the defense off the field. But I have been saying that for years and that really hasn't happened.

Brady has thrown for 40+ TD exactly once in his career. The odds are against him doing it again at 35.

 

[David Yudkin]

I don't "easily see" a 40-45 TD season for any QB, especially one that's 35. That's a short list.

How many offenses have had the potential of the Pats offense led by the caliber of QB like Brady?I agree that a few years ago even thinking QBs would hit 40 TDs would be a crazy thought, but 3 QBs did it last year and Brady was only 1 behind.The Patriots defense is still one of the worst in the league, their running game is very unproven, and the RB that scored 21 rushing TD over the past two seasons is now gone.Maybe the Pats offense will disappoint, but on paper this looks like an offense with huge potential.That being said, I think the Pats need to be more balanced and establish a running game whgile being less dependent on the pass. That would help take time off the clock and would keep the defense off the field. But I have been saying that for years and that really hasn't happened.

Brady has thrown for 40+ TD exactly once in his career. The odds are against him doing it again at 35.

Yes, Brady has thrown 40+ TD one time. But his average passing TD for his last 4 full seasons is 38 TD (which includes a post-injury year where he was clearly not 100%). Add in his rushing TD and Brady has averged exactly 40 total TD a year across 2007, 2009, 2010, and 2011. I don't think suggesting that he will up that by 5 TD is all that bold an outcome.I can't prove it, but I believe this will be the first time ever that a QB will have SIX receivers that had at least 700 receiving yards the prior seasons:Welker 1569Gronkowski 1327Lloyd 966Gaffney 947Hernandez 910Branch 702Obviously they won't collectively add up to 6421 yards like they did last year, but the point remains that the Pats are full of proven and capable receiving threats and a combination unlike we have ever seen before.As for Brady, does he magically turn into a relic at 35? He seemed to fare pretty well at 34 when he accounted for a combined 5344/42 (passing and rushing yardage and TD combined).I realize last year is last year and things will be different, but here were the defensive passing rankings for the Pats opponents this upcoming season . . .Tennessee Titans - Allowed 337/2 to Brees last yearArizona Cardinals - Allowed 422/2 to Newton last yearBaltimore Ravens - Brady has averaged 230/1.5 over his career against BALBuffalo Bills x 2 - Brady already has had 8 games with 3+ TD against BUFDenver Broncos - Brady games of 320/2 and 360/6 against DEN last year Seattle Seahawks - Allowed 420/3 to Eli last yearNew York Jets x 2 - Brady averaged 305/2.4 in 5 games with the Jets in 10 + 11St. Louis Rams - Allowed 269/1 to Brees last yearIndianapolis Colts - Brady 289/2 against Colts last seasonMiami Dolphins x 2 - Brady 517/4 against the Fins Week 1 last seasonHouston Texans - Allowed 370/3 to Brees last yearSan Francisco 49ers - DAL 432/3, Vick 416/2, Brees 462/4 against Niners last year Jacksonville Jaguars - Brady 267/4 last outing against JagsThe more that I look into things, the more I see Brady doing better than he did last year . . . even as an old man with a cane at 35.

 

[griff321]

I think that you're on the right track with at least six receivers over 700yds, but I'd supplant a WR with whatever RB breaks out this season.

 

[bostonfred]

Brady has thrown for 40+ TD exactly once in his career. The odds are against him doing it again at 35.

Prior to 2007, bradys high water mark for tds was 28. Then josh mcd took over as coordinator, they improved the receiving talent around him, and the pats played a seemingly easy schedule. Last year, brady threw 39 tds. This year, josh mcd took over as coordinator, they improved the receiving talent around him, and the pats play a seemingly easy schedule.

 

[Chazzhawk]

Brady has thrown for 40+ TD exactly once in his career. The odds are against him doing it again at 35.

Prior to 2007, bradys high water mark for tds was 28. Then josh mcd took over as coordinator, they improved the receiving talent around him, and the pats played a seemingly easy schedule. Last year, brady threw 39 tds. This year, josh mcd took over as coordinator, they improved the receiving talent around him, and the pats play a seemingly easy schedule.

I see Josh Mcdaniel taking over as O.C. more a coincidence then the actual reason Brady's career took off. The rules have really changed in the last 5 years, and the changes have led to an offensive explosion. Brady's high mark of 28 td's before 07 has more to do with the rules, the receiving core and the running backs around him than Josh Mcdaniels. I expect Brady to put up another 4500 + season with 35 + total tds at worst and barring injury.

 

[FF Ninja]

Outside of tight end, I don't see a single position where this team is clearly better off offensively than they were in '07. There is potential at RB, but even if Ridley and Vereen shine, I will be amazed if they're anywhere near what Kevin Faulk was in pass protection.

LOL at the bolded. If we count Mike Vrabel as a tight end, he, Ben Watson, and Kyle Brady together posted 47-462-10 in 2007.Gronk and Hernandez combined for 169-2237-24 last year. So sure, your statement is accurate . . . but the difference in TE production of 122-1775-14 mostly gets swept under the rug in your assessment.

I am not sure that the current receiving corps of Welker / Lloyd / Gaffney / Branch / Stallworth taken as a whole is dramatically worse than Moss / Welker / Stallworth / Gaffney was in 2007, especially when you factor in that defenses are going to have to struggle immensely to deal with the two tight ends.

I concur that at the moment we have no idea how Ridley or Vereen will do in pass protection and blitz pick up. It also would not shock me if they lined up two TEs plus Welker, Lloyd, and Gaffney (or one one of the other WRs). If Brady got any time to pass, that group of 5 guys could be impossible to cover. I am not sure Branch and Stallworth will make the final cut, but that group of receiving threats could be unstoppable if Brady has time to sit in the pocket.

That's a whole lot of words to basically just agree with me.

Tying everything back to the question posed in the thread, the TE production alone almost makes up for not having Randy Moss.2007: Moss + TEs = 145-1955-33

2011: Gronk + Hernandez = 169-2237-24

The only thing to make up is the 9 TD.

2007 Receiving totals from anyone else: 258-2904-17 (or thereabouts, my math might be off slightly).

If Gronk and Hernandez have a repeat of last year (which I don't think will happen, but for argument's sake let's say they do), there's not THAT much ground to cover to surpass the 2007 numbers. With no proven goal line back, a still well below average defense, and (on paper) a relatively easy schedule, I put the probability of Brady throwing for more yardage than 2007 at 80% and Brady making a run at 50 TD again at about 50% (assuming of course he plays all 16 games).

What? You don't think that the TE's will replicate last year's numbers, but "if" they do, then the "only" thing they have to make up for is 9 TD's? ...but Brady's nevertheless got a 50% shot at putting up 50 TD's again?

They won't replicate last year because Lloyd will be stealing the show.

 

[bostonfred]

If lloyd were going to steal the show, it would be in yards, not touchdowns. Let's say it's first and goal from the 1. Do you think lloyd is on the field? What about on the five yard line? Ten? For the most part, its going to be hernandez, gronk and welker, five o linemen, brady, and at least one running back. Theres only room for one more guy. Considering that they've stated that they plan to use the fullback more this year, and the pats like to go extra big to create mismatches and force the defense to commit presnap to run or pass, so there will be a lot of snaps where they only go one wideout. If he does make it on the field, the pats love their big red zone targets and they love welkers ability to catch safe, low passes outside the goal line and try to back in, so that means lloyd is the odd man out most of the time in the red zone.

To be fair, lloyd is really good at catching the sideline pass, so if he can become "corner of the endzone guy", he might get some looks, but most of his damage will be done between the twenties. Which could still lead to a good year. It just probably wont mean a lot of tds.