Pats Fans: What Will They Do (1 Viewer)

[David Yudkin]

Last I had read/seen/heard, the Patriots were still $15 million under the salary cap. They missed out on Ty Law (again offering a low ball offer) and are not making much progress in negotiations with Deion Branch.

With almost all the name free agents already signed, what on earth do the Pats plan to do with all that cap room? Historically, they spend right up to the salary cap, yet this year they haven't spent much.

Who's left on the open market for them to sign? What on earth is their plan for all those cap dollars?

 

[SSOG]

With almost all the name free agents already signed, what on earth do the Pats plan to do with all that cap room?

Purchase advertisements to try to convince their fans that they're still the best team in the league despite going 6-10.

 

[((Morpheus))]

Plan A signed with the Chiefs.

Plan B is delusional, and thinks he deserves a contract on par with the elite WRs.

As a diehard Pats fan, I am extremely disappointed in this offseason. I can't even think of any FA signing that would make me change my mind. At least we got Seymour signed...

 

[Gandalf]

I think we need to see what happens with Branch. And if we passed on free agents, I'm willing to trust Pats management that there were reasons why they didn't sign them. Reasons that may not be fully clear to the fan base.

 

[ImTheScientist]

With almost all the name free agents already signed, what on earth do the Pats plan to do with all that cap room?

Purchase advertisements to try to convince their fans that they're still the best team in the league despite going 6-10.

 

[Boston]

This is by far the biggest question I have with them. As you stated they have always spent to the cap. They are a very, very wealthy organization and money is not an issue with them. This is something that gets misunderstood sometimes because how they spend it can be misleading to those who only look at a team's stars. What confuses me is why they didn't add more veteran, low priced, depth guys like they have in the past. Guys like David Patten, Antowain Smith and Roman Phifer. They've had success with this formula in the past and it has zero long term effect on their future cap.

Right now, I can only see one way to spend it for the upcoming year. That's to extend players like Samuel, Branch, Koppen and Graham and have their contracts take a big hit this year. Other than that I just don't know how they'll be capable of spending all this dough.

So, playing the conspiracy role there's two other ways to look at this:

a) They were caught off guard by the jump in the cap space which escalated salaries. While this is a definite possibility my belief is they're too smart an organization to be totally caught off guard by this. Especially when Kraft is a major player in the NFL and knows what is going on. Even if they were caught off guard they still had the opportunity to make a few moves which they passed on so there has to be more than this although it definetly could be a contributing factor.

b) The goal of Kraft and Belichick has always been long term success. They are not interested in having a run and than bottoming out. They're very open about that. Using that formula the Pats are now in a position where they have turned their roster over from some older veterans to a ton of quality young talent (guys like Brady, Seymour, Wilfork, Warren, Hobbs, Watson and their entire O line are all very young and signed long term) and now have a silly amount of cap space to work work with. They could be putting themselves in a position to be major players next offseason where they may have some targets in mind and possibly feel that the crazy contracts of this year won't be duplicated. What doesn't make sense about that is they're close this year and to leave such a huge amount of cash on the table is a definite headscratcher.

The bottomline...it's a mystery. They're an incredibly tightlipped organization so we may never find out. Yet, I do know that while almost all Patriot fans have a blind trust in this organization (that has been earned) leaving a large amount of money on the table will not go over very well with the faithful even though past history leads you to believe they have a plan in place. That's one area that they will catch some heat, especially if a season like last year repeats itself.

 

[David Yudkin]

The potential backlash, of course, is that they had the money to hand out to the Givenses, Vinatieris, McGinnests, Laws, and Branches of the world and STILL could be under the cap (provided the first year salaries were low).

So not only did they let guys walk, they really didn't sign anyone noteworthy with the money they DIDN'T spend.

As Boston mentioned, yes they have a core of talented young players, but the seasoned guys packed up and left and no one else was really brought in of comparible talent.

For a fan base that saw an exodus but no infusion of players, with all that money left to spend and Branch not coming to camp, isn't there a disconnect there? The team has plenty of money to spend, and certainly if they met in the middle they could keep Branch likely with ease.

 

[Boston]

The potential backlash, of course, is that they had the money to hand out to the Givenses, Vinatieris, McGinnests, Laws, and Branches of the world and STILL could be under the cap (provided the first year salaries were low).

So not only did they let guys walk, they really didn't sign anyone noteworthy with the money they DIDN'T spend.

As Boston mentioned, yes they have a core of talented young players, but the seasoned guys packed up and left and no one else was really brought in of comparible talent.

For a fan base that saw an exodus but no infusion of players, with all that money left to spend and Branch not coming to camp, isn't there a disconnect there?  The team has plenty of money to spend, and certainly if they met in the middle they could keep Branch likely with ease.

In all honesty the disconnect is if they leave money on the table they will be going away from the business model they have used very successfully in the past. So, the quesion becomes why? Since BB/Kraft/Pioli don't take a piss wthout it being planned you have to assume there is a method to this madness. Yet, what it is is a complete mystery and right now doesn't seem to make sense.

 

[SSOG]

The potential backlash, of course, is that they had the money to hand out to the Givenses, Vinatieris, McGinnests, Laws, and Branches of the world and STILL could be under the cap (provided the first year salaries were low).

So not only did they let guys walk, they really didn't sign anyone noteworthy with the money they DIDN'T spend.

As Boston mentioned, yes they have a core of talented young players, but the seasoned guys packed up and left and no one else was really brought in of comparible talent.

For a fan base that saw an exodus but no infusion of players, with all that money left to spend and Branch not coming to camp, isn't there a disconnect there? The team has plenty of money to spend, and certainly if they met in the middle they could keep Branch likely with ease.

In all honesty the disconnect is if they leave money on the table they will be going away from the business model they have used very successfully in the past. So, the quesion becomes why? Since BB/Kraft/Pioli don't take a piss wthout it being planned you have to assume there is a method to this madness. Yet, what it is is a complete mystery and right now doesn't seem to make sense.

To be honest, there would be very smart ways to stick to their plan and still use the cap space.An example: let's say Brady only had 1 year left on his contract and he wanted 15 million in guaranteed money for a 6 year deal. Give him 15 million upfront against this season's cap, and sign him to a 6 year minimum-salary deal the rest of the way. You get the player that you want for the price that you want, but by using up some of this useless cap space this year, you realize HUGE cap savings in the future.

If I were running a team and was ever under the cap, I would turn that money into huge up-front non-amortized bonuses on big deals, so that I could get a big-ticket player without *any* cap ramifications whatsoever (except for during that season, but the cap money was just languishing there, anyway).

 

[bostonfred]

When Law signed elsewhere, Branch's leverage went way up. The most valuable thing left for them to spend on is signing him to a long term extension. They can also restructure contracts with front loaded money that is just as good as a signing bonus from the player's perspective, but gives them cap relief in subsequent years. This front office isn't stupid. They may have missed out on some value this year, but they have a solid core and should be in great shape capwise in subsequent years.

As for the players they lost, they were all good, but the losses of Givens, Vinatieri, McGinest, and Ashworth don't begin to compare to the relative additions of Harrison, Bruschi, Light and Maroney/Jackson. Vinatieri is impossible to replace in the postseason, and he has a very real chance of going to the Hall of Fame, but he wasn't THAT stellar in the regular season that he can't be replaced. I don't know if Gostkowski or Gramattica are the right guys to replace him, but I don't think it's impossible to replace his regular season performances, either. Similarly, McGinest wasn't that huge during the regular season. He just always seemed to come up big on the biggest stages. Ashworth is good, but he was never spectacular, and usually needed help double teaming. And Givens is a good receiver with good hands. But he was never unreplacable. Jackson probably won't be 1:1 as good in his first year, but I don't think there's a huge dropoff here.

Rumors of the Patriots' demise are greatly exaggerated. They're still a very good team all around. They still have a great defensive line, which will continue to have to cover for their age at linebacker and defensive back. They still have some talented young pass catchers, and added some talent on offense. They have a couple of top players returning from injury at key positions on both offense and defense. I actually think they may be better than last year, although as good as Brady is, I don't know if they can go deep in the playoffs with this team.

 

[PahtyTom]

With almost all the name free agents already signed, what on earth do the Pats plan to do with all that cap room?

Purchase advertisements to try to convince their fans that they're still the best team in the league despite going 6-10.

Ya. Too bad the Patriots are LOADED again this year. The defense will be scary with the depth and talent of that defensive line. On offense, you've got Brady throwing to his tight ends a little (Watson and Graham are mismatch nightmares in a two tight end set), his rbs, Branch, whoever. It doesn't matter, they're used perfectly and efficiently. Another dominant AFC East performance is highly likely.

 

[Chase Stuart]

The potential backlash, of course, is that they had the money to hand out to the Givenses, Vinatieris, McGinnests, Laws, and Branches of the world and STILL could be under the cap (provided the first year salaries were low).

So not only did they let guys walk, they really didn't sign anyone noteworthy with the money they DIDN'T spend.

As Boston mentioned, yes they have a core of talented young players, but the seasoned guys packed up and left and no one else was really brought in of comparible talent.

For a fan base that saw an exodus but no infusion of players, with all that money left to spend and Branch not coming to camp, isn't there a disconnect there? The team has plenty of money to spend, and certainly if they met in the middle they could keep Branch likely with ease.

In all honesty the disconnect is if they leave money on the table they will be going away from the business model they have used very successfully in the past. So, the quesion becomes why? Since BB/Kraft/Pioli don't take a piss wthout it being planned you have to assume there is a method to this madness. Yet, what it is is a complete mystery and right now doesn't seem to make sense.

To be honest, there would be very smart ways to stick to their plan and still use the cap space.An example: let's say Brady only had 1 year left on his contract and he wanted 15 million in guaranteed money for a 6 year deal. Give him 15 million upfront against this season's cap, and sign him to a 6 year minimum-salary deal the rest of the way. You get the player that you want for the price that you want, but by using up some of this useless cap space this year, you realize HUGE cap savings in the future.

If I were running a team and was ever under the cap, I would turn that money into huge up-front non-amortized bonuses on big deals, so that I could get a big-ticket player without *any* cap ramifications whatsoever (except for during that season, but the cap money was just languishing there, anyway).

Are you 100% sure this is allowed?

 

[SSOG]

With almost all the name free agents already signed, what on earth do the Pats plan to do with all that cap room?

Purchase advertisements to try to convince their fans that they're still the best team in the league despite going 6-10.

Ya. Too bad the Patriots are LOADED again this year. The defense will be scary with the depth and talent of that defensive line. On offense, you've got Brady throwing to his tight ends a little (Watson and Graham are mismatch nightmares in a two tight end set), his rbs, Branch, whoever. It doesn't matter, they're used perfectly and efficiently. Another dominant AFC East performance is highly likely.

The Patriots have been hemorrhaging talent for years- and what talent they haven't been leaking has been aging. Do you really think that Rodney Harrison will be the same player he was in the SB years? Do you think that their secondary will be SB-caliber without Ty Law? Do you think that their LBs won't suffer with McGinnest gone and Bruschi another year older? Do you think that their WRs won't suffer with Givens gone? Do you think they won't miss Vinateri? Who have they brought in to replace all the talent they've lost since their SB years, not even mentioning the talent they've lost due to natural aging? Yeah, they have a great D-Line, great QB, and great TEs. That doesn't make them a great team. They were also hardly "dominant" in the AFC East last year- it's just that the AFC East was brutally bad. If you swapped New England and Oakland, Oakland would have been competing for a division title and New England would have been in last place in the AFC West.

 

[SSOG]

The potential backlash, of course, is that they had the money to hand out to the Givenses, Vinatieris, McGinnests, Laws, and Branches of the world and STILL could be under the cap (provided the first year salaries were low).

So not only did they let guys walk, they really didn't sign anyone noteworthy with the money they DIDN'T spend.

As Boston mentioned, yes they have a core of talented young players, but the seasoned guys packed up and left and no one else was really brought in of comparible talent.

For a fan base that saw an exodus but no infusion of players, with all that money left to spend and Branch not coming to camp, isn't there a disconnect there? The team has plenty of money to spend, and certainly if they met in the middle they could keep Branch likely with ease.

In all honesty the disconnect is if they leave money on the table they will be going away from the business model they have used very successfully in the past. So, the quesion becomes why? Since BB/Kraft/Pioli don't take a piss wthout it being planned you have to assume there is a method to this madness. Yet, what it is is a complete mystery and right now doesn't seem to make sense.

To be honest, there would be very smart ways to stick to their plan and still use the cap space.An example: let's say Brady only had 1 year left on his contract and he wanted 15 million in guaranteed money for a 6 year deal. Give him 15 million upfront against this season's cap, and sign him to a 6 year minimum-salary deal the rest of the way. You get the player that you want for the price that you want, but by using up some of this useless cap space this year, you realize HUGE cap savings in the future.

If I were running a team and was ever under the cap, I would turn that money into huge up-front non-amortized bonuses on big deals, so that I could get a big-ticket player without *any* cap ramifications whatsoever (except for during that season, but the cap money was just languishing there, anyway).

Are you 100% sure this is allowed?

Not exactly like I described (there's a rule called the Deion Sanders Rule that prevents teams from giving a signing bonus that's astronomically higher than the salary values), but absolutely something similar can be accomplished. There's no rules telling a team how it has to structure its contracts- they're only backloaded because it's easier on this year's salary cap, and teams value the present more than the future. If you had a great young player, there's nothing to prevent you from giving him a 1-year extension that includes a $5 million dollar bonus this season (non-amortized, so it counts against this year's cap) and an extra year at the end of their current contract for the veteran minimum salary. The result is an extra year for an extra $5 million, but almost all of that $5 million counts against this year's cap, which leaves an extremely cap-friendly figure in that final season.

 

[David Yudkin]

The only problem with giving players a one year extension but paying them now is that the team assumes a lot more risk. The player gets paid essentially a bonus now (essentially a second signing bonus) on the promise of future returns. We also make the assumption that the player is a) worth the money, b) will still be a viable option down the road, and c) won't complain about playing for the minimum when he gets there.

 

[Franknbeans]

The potential backlash, of course, is that they had the money to hand out to the Givenses, Vinatieris, McGinnests, Laws, and Branches of the world and STILL could be under the cap (provided the first year salaries were low).

So not only did they let guys walk, they really didn't sign anyone noteworthy with the money they DIDN'T spend.

As Boston mentioned, yes they have a core of talented young players, but the seasoned guys packed up and left and no one else was really brought in of comparible talent.

For a fan base that saw an exodus but no infusion of players, with all that money left to spend and Branch not coming to camp, isn't there a disconnect there?  The team has plenty of money to spend, and certainly if they met in the middle they could keep Branch likely with ease.

In all honesty the disconnect is if they leave money on the table they will be going away from the business model they have used very successfully in the past. So, the quesion becomes why? Since BB/Kraft/Pioli don't take a piss wthout it being planned you have to assume there is a method to this madness. Yet, what it is is a complete mystery and right now doesn't seem to make sense.

How do you see their defense shaping up for this year?

 

[Davej626]

Its amazing to me that this team has won three SBs, has been the best team in NFL history (salary cap era), been competitive year in and year out, and yet there are still people that question them when it comes to salary cap management.

David, I realize that you have concerns. We all have concerns. But once they sign Branch, some of that cap room will be used. As for what's left? Who knows? But I can only go on what they have done in the past as a indicator of what they will do in the future. And for this management team, that past is pretty sweet. So, I guess what I am saying is, In Bill We Trust.

SSOG: 6-10.. Yea, they suck that bad.

 

[Boston]

With almost all the name free agents already signed, what on earth do the Pats plan to do with all that cap room?

Purchase advertisements to try to convince their fans that they're still the best team in the league despite going 6-10.

Ya. Too bad the Patriots are LOADED again this year. The defense will be scary with the depth and talent of that defensive line. On offense, you've got Brady throwing to his tight ends a little (Watson and Graham are mismatch nightmares in a two tight end set), his rbs, Branch, whoever. It doesn't matter, they're used perfectly and efficiently. Another dominant AFC East performance is highly likely.

The Patriots have been hemorrhaging talent for years- and what talent they haven't been leaking has been aging. Do you really think that Rodney Harrison will be the same player he was in the SB years? Do you think that their secondary will be SB-caliber without Ty Law? Do you think that their LBs won't suffer with McGinnest gone and Bruschi another year older? Do you think that their WRs won't suffer with Givens gone? Do you think they won't miss Vinateri? Who have they brought in to replace all the talent they've lost since their SB years, not even mentioning the talent they've lost due to natural aging? Yeah, they have a great D-Line, great QB, and great TEs. That doesn't make them a great team. They were also hardly "dominant" in the AFC East last year- it's just that the AFC East was brutally bad. If you swapped New England and Oakland, Oakland would have been competing for a division title and New England would have been in last place in the AFC West.

You're really off the mark here. First of all they went 10-6 and won a playoff game with an injury situation that I don't think anyone else could have withstood (as well as adjusting to the loss of their DC and OC). They lost three whole units (RB, OL and DB) to injuries and were starting street free agents at safety and RB it got so bad on the injury front. Besides the mess at OL, RB and DB Seymour, Bruschi, Givens, Troy and Graham lost considerable time to injuries. Brady played a good portion of the year injured. Is there another team in football that could still have put up double digit wins and a playoff win in this situation? I know Carolina couldn't in 04 and Philly couldn't last year.As for losing talent it's a neccessary evil in the NFL. If you want to remain a contender you have to let players walk. There's just no way around that since success means higher paychecks for your players. It's also a reason that the Pats won't bottom out like Baltimore or Tampa did after they won a single championship. The Pats are built for the long haul. Fortunately for every Ted Washington, Damien Woody, Ty Law or Joe Andruzzi they lose they are adding a Vince Wilfork, Stephen Neal, Ellis Hobbs and Logan Mankins. There will be growing pains as they transistion but you are vastly underestimating the makeup of this franchise. It's no fluke that Vegas still respects this team and has them as one of their favorites.

 

[Boston]

The potential backlash, of course, is that they had the money to hand out to the Givenses, Vinatieris, McGinnests, Laws, and Branches of the world and STILL could be under the cap (provided the first year salaries were low).

So not only did they let guys walk, they really didn't sign anyone noteworthy with the money they DIDN'T spend.

As Boston mentioned, yes they have a core of talented young players, but the seasoned guys packed up and left and no one else was really brought in of comparible talent.

For a fan base that saw an exodus but no infusion of players, with all that money left to spend and Branch not coming to camp, isn't there a disconnect there?  The team has plenty of money to spend, and certainly if they met in the middle they could keep Branch likely with ease.

In all honesty the disconnect is if they leave money on the table they will be going away from the business model they have used very successfully in the past. So, the quesion becomes why? Since BB/Kraft/Pioli don't take a piss wthout it being planned you have to assume there is a method to this madness. Yet, what it is is a complete mystery and right now doesn't seem to make sense.

How do you see their defense shaping up for this year?

Starterwise they'll be very solid. My issue with them is front seven depth. That's my biggest concern with this team. At DLine they have three young studs who should all be better this year in Seymour, Wilfork and Warren. They're as good as you get. Look for Wilfork to really become a force this year. After that you have Jarvis Green who is a jack of all trades super sub. He's just a very solid player. My worry is after that there's nothing but question marks. For some reason there's this myth that the Pats are deep at DLine. That's just not the case unless Sullivan grows up, Hill finally shows something, Wright gets better or the kid from Nebraska is a draft day steal. AT LB Colvin was back to form by the end of ast year and was a serious playmaker. We finally saw the guy the Pats signed pre-injury. Vrabel 's one of the most underrated players in the NFL. Bruschi's a rock in the middle and I have no short term concerns about him although he isn't getting any younger. After that it gets dicey. They seem convinced Beisel can get the job done but I can't say I'm overly comfortable with that. He was mediocre at best last year although he did seem more comfortable later in the year. After that it doesn't look like much on paper. You have guys like Eric Alexander, Ryan Claridge, Larry Izzo, Don Davis, Barry Gardner and a handful of rookies like Mincey. They must feel these guys can play because they had plenty of opportunities to add more depth but passed. IMO LB depth is by far their biggest exposure.

The secondary has a lot of depth. If Harrison comes back a lot will fall into place. He's a guy you can't understand how good he is until you watch him play every game. He's one of the best defensive players I've ever seen and his leadership skills are second to none. Outside of him they have some youngsters like Hobbs, Samuel, Gay, Sanders, Andrews and some veterans like Warfield, Scott, Hawkins and Jones. It won't be an elite unit but as long as the youngsters continue to grow (especially Hobbs who looks like he can be a real player) they'll get the job done. How much will depend on what Harrison gives you and keeping the front seven healthy with a nice pass rush. This is not a shutdown unit.

Overall this is a unit that probably needs to stay healthy. If that happens they'll be a top 10 unit. Probably not dominate like they have been but still a top shelf unit. Yet, if they get plagued by injuries than it could be in trouble. The Pats seem to be committing to some unknowns as far as depth goes. I guess BB and company are comfortable with these guys but right now it has me worried. After last year's debacle you can never have enough depth and I'm not sure the Pats have that in their front seven.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I actually do believe that the Pats were caught a little off guard by the change in rules regarding June 1st cuts. IMO, that made a huge difference in how FA played out this season. There were very few cuts this year on June 1st, a time where the Pats have thrived in the past. They've managed to add a lot of great depth in June the past several years and that just wasn't there this season.

(Disclosure, I'm a Bills fan). I actually think that Marv Levy may have been ahead of the curve a little bit this year. Everyone trashed the Bills for some of the FA moves, but they were basically doing what the Pats have done in the past, only they did it pre-June. They gave young guys with potential more than their market value up front, while getting them signed to longer contracts that will be very cap friendly over the longterm. It will be interesting to see how it plays out for both teams.

I will say that the Pats had a pretty nice draft though. Everyone seems to point to the loss of Givens, but IMO Givens is an average talent. Chad Jackson could be an impact player an easily make up for the loss of Givens. Laurence Maroney could be another guy to contribute this year and into the future at a skill position.

 

[msommer]

If Kraft can't find anyone to spend the money on he will put that money in his own pocket and smile all the way to the bank.

Don't forget this is a business as well - and this is cash as well as cap.

 

[Kyzersosik]

Yes Sir, the Pats will be lucky to go 8-8 in the AFC East. 3 out of 4 S Bowls and one hellacious playoff game(Denver) from maybe going to 4 out of 5. A system that the experts have annoited as "the way to deal with the Salary cap era" put in place from the owner on down. Players have walked, they walk everywhere. This team invests in talent that fits into there system, buys into the team concept. 15 million under, won`t end up unspent or in Kraft`s pocket. Branch is their #1 reciever true but the Pats system doesn`t need 1 player to catch 100 passes for 1500 yds. and 15 tds. Put him on another team maybe he gets close to these #`s and thus top Rec $$$$. Anyone who isn`t looking for another solid season from the Pats should just look at the 06-07 schdule. If Brady stays healthy, 12-4 and a strong run in the playoffs!

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

As a Steelers fan I was very concerned that the Pats would re-sign Law. He's not the player he was but with a Belichick reunion it would have been scary. The Pats still have three components of a Super Bowl team:

1) Tom Brady- The most clutch QB in the game, can win any style of game.

2) They usually control of the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball.

3) Belichick is still a master on D, he puts players in position to succeed.

 

[David Yudkin]

If Brady stays healthy, 12-4 and a strong run in the playoffs!

Looking at the Pats schedule, I can easily see them going 12-4. But I think that they are not really the caliber of a 12-4 team and will have some difficulty in the playoffs. Not saying they can't win, only that they on paper seem weaker than in prior seasons to start the season.Maybe they can get their mojo working by later in the year, but as I see it they are a weaker team than last year as of today. Even though some of the players they lost may not be deal breakers individually, collectively I am concerned that they haven't really restocked the talent pool. Yes, Jackson and Maroney should do well with some seasoning, but they probably won't step in and be gamebreakers from Day One.Defensively, the secondary has more bodies but how good they are (or healthY) remains a bit unknown. I saw on a sports talk show on tv that there was a chance that Harrison could start the season on the PUP list (like Bruschi last year) and then return later in the year. That was speculative BTW and not substantiated.Law would have helped, but apparently they felt he was not worth the investment. McGinnest certainly played very well the past few years, and I'm not sure if Banta-Cain is the answer.Onthe surface, losing Ashworth is not life threatening, but he played a role and played well when called upon. Losing Vinatieri may not seem like a big deal . . . until the team loses a game or two on missed kicks (should that ever even materialize).The point in all this was not to suggest that the sky is falling in New England, only to inquire about what the Pats options are for spending the bounty of cap money they have.If Branch really wants to stick it to the Pats and play hardball for top dollars, he could make life difficult for the team by holding out into the season. Who would the Patriots start at WR in that case? Troy Brown and Reche Caldwell?While it's nice to think that a system is plug and play and if the system is solid it will always be effective, but you still need players with skills, talent, and experience. Yes, they have a great nucleus, but int he past they had some solid players and a lot of key role players and contributions from 53 guys from week to week.If you look at their roster, the top tier of guys still is solid, but the other players IMO are not as strong. maybe that's just me being overly critical, but when guys that are #2 on the depth chart on defense are Jeremy Mincey, Eric Alexander, Jonathan Sullivan, and Gus Scott the team may not have a ton of depth.Just my opinion, others may vary (and could very well be right).