Branch for a 4th

[the_Bird]

 Branch is going to face some high expectations, given who he's replacing and that many people in New England will want to see the 2005 Deion Branch.

Couldn’t disagree more. Most Pat’s fans would agree that Tom and The Patriots were most successful when we were just passing to the open guy.

Deion isn’t replacing Moss as a #1 receiver, he’s being added to Welker, Tate, Hernandez, Edelman, and Gronkowski as a viable option.

People are saying that Welker and Tate won’t be as open without Moss, but if everyones getting single coverage that means any one player can get open at any time in the game.. OR if they double the slot VS Wes i’m sure Tate can handle deep, or Hernandez over the middle... etc...

I've seen this mentioned.  Technically, you'd say the Pats offense was at its best when Brady was throwing bombs to Moss in 2007, but that Moss isn't here any more (he had a helliva time just getting open last night). 

Still, you've seen Brady focus a lot of his attention on Moss many nights.  It's been playing away from Brady's strength, his ability to scan through his five progressions and get the ball to the right player - he's been too focused at times at just getting the ball to Randy. 

The other thing - they want/need to protect the D.  I think they'd like to return to a more methodical offense.  The balanced approach - short passes or runs on first and second down, makable third downs, five or six yards at a chunk, dinking and dunking instead of always going for the deep ball.  That should lead to more seven- or eight-minute drives. 

The easiest way to protect a young offense is to shorten the game and keep the other guys off the field.  Branch is another weapon in this regard.

[Rondo2287]

 Branch is going to face some high expectations, given who he's replacing and that many people in New England will want to see the 2005 Deion Branch.

Couldn’t disagree more. Most Pat’s fans would agree that Tom and The Patriots were most successful when we were just passing to the open guy.

Deion isn’t replacing Moss as a #1 receiver, he’s being added to Welker, Tate, Hernandez, Edelman, and Gronkowski as a viable option.

People are saying that Welker and Tate won’t be as open without Moss, but if everyones getting single coverage that means any one player can get open at any time in the game.. OR if they double the slot VS Wes i’m sure Tate can handle deep, or Hernandez over the middle... etc...

I've seen this mentioned.  Technically, you'd say the Pats offense was at its best when Brady was throwing bombs to Moss in 2007, but that Moss isn't here any more (he had a helliva time just getting open last night). 

Still, you've seen Brady focus a lot of his attention on Moss many nights.  It's been playing away from Brady's strength, his ability to scan through his five progressions and get the ball to the right player - he's been too focused at times at just getting the ball to Randy. 

The other thing - they want/need to protect the D.  I think they'd like to return to a more methodical offense.  The balanced approach - short passes or runs on first and second down, makable third downs, five or six yards at a chunk, dinking and dunking instead of always going for the deep ball.  That should lead to more seven- or eight-minute drives. 

The easiest way to protect a young offense is to shorten the game and keep the other guys off the field.  Branch is another weapon in this regard.

Statistically yes they were the best with moss, but his point was more successful.  They were more successful when they were winning superbowls throwing to the open guy.

[Fafnir]

Statistically yes they were the best with moss, but his point was more successful.  They were more successful when they were winning superbowls throwing to the open guy.

Don't let the result of a close SB sway you. The Pats were one sack/miracle catch away from that SB win, and one shanked FG away from two SB losses.

They idea that they're better off throwing to the "open guy" without Moss is silly. They're better when Moss is getting open deep and drawing safety help.

[Rondo2287]

Statistically yes they were the best with moss, but his point was more successful.  They were more successful when they were winning superbowls throwing to the open guy.

Don't let the result of a close SB sway you. The Pats were one sack/miracle catch away from that SB win, and one shanked FG away from two SB losses.

They idea that they're better off throwing to the "open guy" without Moss is silly. They're better when Moss is getting open deep and drawing safety help.

Please don't call my ideas silly... Im not really interested in playing make believe and what could have happened.  It is an absolute fact that the team was more successful with Deion Branch than with Randy Moss.  Does that mean they are better with him this year than they were with Moss?  that remains to be seen. 

These are some thoughts from Mike Reiss

Perfect fit -- Branch is one of the few players that uniquely fits the Patriots' needs at this time. He knows the team's system and can play all the receiver spots, so the learning curve won't be steep. That's a key consideration for the Patriots given their complex offensive system, especially when making a trade during the season. Branch is a high-character player who joins Brandon Tate, Wes Welker, Julian Edelman, Taylor Price and Matthew Slater on the receiver depth chart. He should be active on the 45-man game-day roster for Sunday's matchup with Baltimore and represents a receiver-specific attitude shift of sorts for the team.

Changing offense -- Without the vertical threat of Moss, the Patriots are likely to go back to the type of offense they ran when Branch was putting up solid numbers from 2002-05. That's an attack that spreads the ball around and features more short and intermediate routes in a West Coast-like style. Branch has more wear on his tires at this point of his career, but he should still be productive in that type of setup.

[Spilling Green Dye]

Rondo, I must say that I've agreed with you in this post, and you've made some valid points. 

I also don't get how Roy Hobbs is completely disregarding the apparent locker room/team issues & timing of the trades in his value equation.  I'd say the fact is the Patriots felt they HAD to trade Moss, and got the most they could for him. They are also trading away a lesser pick for a player who can make an impact in this offense.  In a sense, the Pats are cleaning things up while still trying to stay very competitive.  At no point do I think the argument of Moss vs Branch is valid b/c the patriots did not trade Moss so that they could get Branch.

[StartOrien]

Branch's numbers with Seattle:

14 games, 725 yards, 4 td's
11 games, 661 yards, 4 td's
8 games, 412 yards, 4 td's
14 games, 435 yards, 2 td's

Combined with what we have to pay him, seems like we overpaid for what I believe will end up being looked as a PR decision.

[Rondo2287]

Branch's numbers with Seattle:

14 games, 725 yards, 4 td's
11 games, 661 yards, 4 td's
8 games, 412 yards, 4 td's
14 games, 435 yards, 2 td's

Combined with what we have to pay him, seems like we overpaid for what I believe will end up being looked as a PR decision.

I agree his numbers arent stellar but keep in mind that number 1 he is a very very good route runner and is willing to go over the middle which is something the pats need going forward with their transition to the two tight end offense.  Also, some of those years he had Seneca Wallace throwing him the ball haha

[Cman]

Mike Reiss seemed to indicate that a renegotiated contract for Branch may be in order (can't see the Pats making this deal for the right to pay him what, $10M over the next two seasons?). 

My view on the trade will improve if indeed the contract is reworked.

[StartOrien]

He's not a bad reciever, but he's making elite reciever money. Combine that with his overall production, the 4th doesn't seem worth it to me.

Underwritten story in all of this:

This Moss divorce seems to really point at the mistake we made in passing on Anquan Boldin. Who was acquired for a 3rd and 4th round pick, and signed to a pretty decent contract (28 mil over 4 years).

And since we've acquired a 3rd and 4th in the Maroney & Moss trades it makes it pretty obvious: Would you rather have Deion Branch & a 3rd or Anquan Boldin for the next 4 years.

[Fafnir]

Statistically yes they were the best with moss, but his point was more successful.  They were more successful when they were winning superbowls throwing to the open guy.

Don't let the result of a close SB sway you. The Pats were one sack/miracle catch away from that SB win, and one shanked FG away from two SB losses.

They idea that they're better off throwing to the "open guy" without Moss is silly. They're better when Moss is getting open deep and drawing safety help.

Please don't call my ideas silly... Im not really interested in playing make believe and what could have happened.  It is an absolute fact that the team was more successful with Deion Branch than with Randy Moss.  Does that mean they are better with him this year than they were with Moss?  that remains to be seen. 

I'll call your ideas silly when they are, and this is clearly the Pats homer in you talking.

The Pats lost their last SB because of their offensive line's play, not their offensive system. The years the Pats won the SB after Brady's first year his YPA and YPC were pretty close. The bigger difference was that they didn't run the ball as much and threw it more. I don't think the Pats are going to run it more without Moss now! They still are setup to be a passing team.

The Pats were a better team with Moss, trading for Branch for a similar pick is a clear downgrade. Sometimes you have to make a trade for locker room reasons, but the idea that they need a "route runner" is spin.

[Fafnir]

Mike Reiss seemed to indicate that a renegotiated contract for Branch may be in order (can't see the Pats making this deal for the right to pay him what, $10M over the next two seasons?). 

My view on the trade will improve if indeed the contract is reworked.

There is no way they pay Branch his current contract unless his production goes way up.

[the_Bird]

 Branch is going to face some high expectations, given who he's replacing and that many people in New England will want to see the 2005 Deion Branch.

Couldn’t disagree more. Most Pat’s fans would agree that Tom and The Patriots were most successful when we were just passing to the open guy.

Deion isn’t replacing Moss as a #1 receiver, he’s being added to Welker, Tate, Hernandez, Edelman, and Gronkowski as a viable option.

People are saying that Welker and Tate won’t be as open without Moss, but if everyones getting single coverage that means any one player can get open at any time in the game.. OR if they double the slot VS Wes i’m sure Tate can handle deep, or Hernandez over the middle... etc...

I've seen this mentioned.  Technically, you'd say the Pats offense was at its best when Brady was throwing bombs to Moss in 2007, but that Moss isn't here any more (he had a helliva time just getting open last night). 

Still, you've seen Brady focus a lot of his attention on Moss many nights.  It's been playing away from Brady's strength, his ability to scan through his five progressions and get the ball to the right player - he's been too focused at times at just getting the ball to Randy. 

The other thing - they want/need to protect the D.  I think they'd like to return to a more methodical offense.  The balanced approach - short passes or runs on first and second down, makable third downs, five or six yards at a chunk, dinking and dunking instead of always going for the deep ball.  That should lead to more seven- or eight-minute drives. 

The easiest way to protect a young offense is to shorten the game and keep the other guys off the field.  Branch is another weapon in this regard.

Statistically yes they were the best with moss, but his point was more successful.  They were more successful when they were winning superbowls throwing to the open guy.

... and the reasons that the '07 team DIDN'T win the Super Bowl really had nothing to do with the offense or Randy Moss or Tom Brady at all, but rather we had an old D that ultimately got exposed.

Listen, I'm win with going back to a more-conservative game plan.  I think it's the best way to alleviate the pressure on a young, not-very-good-yet defense.

I also think it's pretty much the only option, as Moss simply is not getting separation the same way he used to.  Going back to the '07 approach only works if you've got a time machine to bring back the 2007 model of Randy Moss (or if you make a HUGE splash and trade for Vinnie Jackson).

[Fafnir]

 Branch is going to face some high expectations, given who he's replacing and that many people in New England will want to see the 2005 Deion Branch.

Couldn’t disagree more. Most Pat’s fans would agree that Tom and The Patriots were most successful when we were just passing to the open guy.

Deion isn’t replacing Moss as a #1 receiver, he’s being added to Welker, Tate, Hernandez, Edelman, and Gronkowski as a viable option.

People are saying that Welker and Tate won’t be as open without Moss, but if everyones getting single coverage that means any one player can get open at any time in the game.. OR if they double the slot VS Wes i’m sure Tate can handle deep, or Hernandez over the middle... etc...

I've seen this mentioned.  Technically, you'd say the Pats offense was at its best when Brady was throwing bombs to Moss in 2007, but that Moss isn't here any more (he had a helliva time just getting open last night). 

Still, you've seen Brady focus a lot of his attention on Moss many nights.  It's been playing away from Brady's strength, his ability to scan through his five progressions and get the ball to the right player - he's been too focused at times at just getting the ball to Randy. 

The other thing - they want/need to protect the D.  I think they'd like to return to a more methodical offense.  The balanced approach - short passes or runs on first and second down, makable third downs, five or six yards at a chunk, dinking and dunking instead of always going for the deep ball.  That should lead to more seven- or eight-minute drives. 

The easiest way to protect a young offense is to shorten the game and keep the other guys off the field.  Branch is another weapon in this regard.

Statistically yes they were the best with moss, but his point was more successful.  They were more successful when they were winning superbowls throwing to the open guy.

... and the reasons that the '07 team DIDN'T win the Super Bowl really had nothing to do with the offense or Randy Moss or Tom Brady at all, but rather we had an old D that ultimately got exposed.

Listen, I'm win with going back to a more-conservative game plan.  I think it's the best way to alleviate the pressure on a young, not-very-good-yet defense.

I also think it's pretty much the only option, as Moss simply is not getting separation the same way he used to.  Going back to the '07 approach only works if you've got a time machine to bring back the 2007 model of Randy Moss (or if you make a HUGE splash and trade for Vinnie Jackson).

The Pats defense did well enough in that game, their offensive line failed them more in my opinion. Brady was getting clobbered that game.

[Greenbean]

Statistically yes they were the best with moss, but his point was more successful.  They were more successful when they were winning superbowls throwing to the open guy.

Don't let the result of a close SB sway you. The Pats were one sack/miracle catch away from that SB win, and one shanked FG away from two SB losses.

They idea that they're better off throwing to the "open guy" without Moss is silly. They're better when Moss is getting open deep and drawing safety help.

Please don't call my ideas silly... Im not really interested in playing make believe and what could have happened.  It is an absolute fact that the team was more successful with Deion Branch than with Randy Moss.  Does that mean they are better with him this year than they were with Moss?  that remains to be seen. 

These are some thoughts from Mike Reiss

Perfect fit -- Branch is one of the few players that uniquely fits the Patriots' needs at this time. He knows the team's system and can play all the receiver spots, so the learning curve won't be steep. That's a key consideration for the Patriots given their complex offensive system, especially when making a trade during the season. Branch is a high-character player who joins Brandon Tate, Wes Welker, Julian Edelman, Taylor Price and Matthew Slater on the receiver depth chart. He should be active on the 45-man game-day roster for Sunday's matchup with Baltimore and represents a receiver-specific attitude shift of sorts for the team.

Changing offense -- Without the vertical threat of Moss, the Patriots are likely to go back to the type of offense they ran when Branch was putting up solid numbers from 2002-05. That's an attack that spreads the ball around and features more short and intermediate routes in a West Coast-like style. Branch has more wear on his tires at this point of his career, but he should still be productive in that type of setup.

In theory Roy is right. The problem I have is with Brady and how this offense has progressed with Moss over the years.

Brady fell in love with the deep ball. When the going has gotten tough, Brady just airs it out into coverage and the results are spotty.

He is the best deep threat on the planet but it is still a low percentage play.

It is kind of like living and dying by the three ball in basketball. Sure you can get hot and look amazing and unstoppable for stretches, but you can also get cold if a team decides to run you off the line.

Moss caught a rediculous amount of jump balls in 2007. Sometimes in double or triple coverage. As time went on, those plays resulted in picks more than they did scores.

I wonder what percentage of Bradys picks were throws to Moss. I know this year that number is 100%.

[the_Bird]

I don't think the Pats are going to run it more without Moss now! They still are setup to be a passing team.

This part I'm going to disagree with.  I think it's going to a more balanced attack, using the two-TE sets not just for passing but also for the run game.  I think they really like both Fred Taylor and BJGE, they both hit the hole hard and get decent yardage (even though neither's much of a threat to break a long one).  

There will still be a lot of short, quick passes - more of the West Coast-ey kind of offense - but sure looks to me like there's going to be more of a focus on ball control, including establishing somewhat of a running identity.

EDIT: Fan, I'd say that it was both the offensive and defensive lines that got exposed in that game as just not good enough.  Got beaten in the trenches on both sides of the ball, which is why I give full credit to the Giants for that win.  We didn't deserve to win if we can't control the line of scrimmage.