by Scott Benson
scott@bostonsportsmedia.com

Ron Borges continued his free-fall into abject dementia this morning by returning to a familiar theme for the lead item in his Sunday notes column.

Of all people Ron should bump into this week. it’s Old Friend Ty Law. Hey, did you know Ty almost returned to the Patriots this summer?

“I thought about it, but a lot of things were changing up there,” Law said. “It was intriguing to come back, but was it a step backward? I done it there. I wanted to move forward. I seen how my so-called replacements up there played when I went out and proved I could still play in New York.

“Up there, they like to talk about the system. The system is great, but I ain’t no system player. I didn’t want to retire as some guy people say could only do it because of Belichick’s system. It’s a great system, but it’s not the system that wins. It’s the players. I went to the Pro Bowl in Pete Carroll’s system. I went in Herman Edwards’s system. Different systems, same player.”

Oh, good. Just what I wanted to hear about on a day when the Patriots travel to New York for a crucial divisional game. A Kansas City Chief talking about the Patriots ’system’.

First, let’s see how ‘the player’ has done since he left the ’system’ - 4-12 last year and 0-1 this year. 4-13. Why isn’t ‘the player’ winning? I thought he was a Hall of Famer? Isn’t he concerned he’ll lose HOF support for being simply a product of the Herm Edwards ’system’? The evidence suggests he should be.

I hope to hell the Patriots aren’t stupid enough to ever save money against their cap for this guy again.

But I can’t blame Ty all that much - he’s never been a deep thinker as far as his public comments go. Great football player, but he’s no Dale Carnegie.

No, once again we really should be shooting the messenger, at least when the messenger is Ron Borges, who has punched his own one-way ticket to Nuttytown (via Liarville) simply because he can’t stand a couple of football executives. What does it say about a guy that pisses away his talent, and his oft-boasted (though not confirmed) honesty and integrity, so that he may pursue some batshit crazy crusade?

His ongoing emotional breakdown is his problem. I’ll stick with quibbling on a couple of points.

Ron, you really should be reminded that while your buddy was knocking around the AFC basement, helping his team to the fourth pick in the draft, his so-called replacements (Asante Samuel and Ellis Hobbs) at least went to the AFC divisionals, where they allowed just 190 passing yards in a loss. Take away five offensive and special teams turnovers, and the next week they’re following Pittsburgh’s receivers around Gillette Stadium in the AFC Championship Game.

If Ty’s replacements are such lousy players, wouldn’t the playoff appearance be due to the system? It’s not the system? Then maybe the so-called replacements aren’t as bad as you like to insist. Those contradictions are never addressed in your monthly Ty ‘The Player, Not the System’ Law updates.

And I’m guessing, Ron, if New England had offered the most money, we’d have found out just how strongly Ty felt about making the ’step backward’ into the Patriots system.

How many times are you going to write the same article, anyway? I’d say you can finally file this tired old beaten horse.

And I have an idea exactly where you can file it.

Now, on to the game.

by Scott Benson
scott@bostonsportsmedia.com

The Patriots will travel to the Meadowlands for the second time in three weeks Sunday when they face off in an early season AFC East matchup with the New York Jets.

The game - seen by many as a likely New England win, even as recently as last week - now seems to have taken on a surprising urgency in the past few days.

First, while they staged a veteran-style second-half rally to get past the Buffalo Bills, the Patriots simply did not play that well last Sunday. The offensive line had alarming breakdowns against blitzers and speed rushers, and while they ran like the 1978 Patriots, the passing game netted three first half yards.

THREE.

The defense saved the day with its second-half play, but even they struggled to get off the field in the first 30 minutes, allowing JP Losman to direct two scoring drives. Everybody - players, coaches, upstairs, and the fans - was relieved that the Patriots came away with the win, but no one was tearing down any goalposts either, if you follow me.

But it’s not just last week’s meager 19-17 win that has New England (us, not them) nervous. Of course, earlier this week the Patriots tore the scab off the Deion Branch situation, and now we’re pondering Life Without Weapons. We’re looking nervously for a quivering lip on the quarterback. We’re wondering about the strangers that are supposed to make us, and him, forget. We’re a bundle of nerves.

If the Pats throw up three passing yards in the first half this week, I’m leaving the country. Because I won’t be able to take the dull (literally) roar that will follow.

Naturally, we’ve also got the Lawyer Milloy Theory at work here. Popular player leaves clubhouse suddenly, money involved, players confused, hurt, even bitter; get their ass sewed to their face 31-0 the following weekend.

Oh, I imagine someone will mention it.

It’s not like it’s out of the realm. I was surprised to hear Tom Brady’s candid comments regarding his state of mind heading into last week’s game. I admire the guy’s honesty and integrity in owning up, but really, I’m truly surprised that Brady allowed that to happen. He’s not a young kid anymore, and he probably should have known better. But as usual, I like Brady’s resolve to learn from it.

Notice how I haven’t even mentioned the Jets themselves. We all had the Jets finishing dead last in the AFCE in the roundtable last week, and we were hardly alone on that sentiment. Now there’s a certain apprehension they’ll become the bullies standing on the neck of the suddenly vulnerable Pats this Sunday. Give us a few more days, Eric, and we’ll have your guys running away with the conference.

Lastly, we have the pending grievance by the Patriots regarding New York’s sign/trade offer during the Branch Open House. This has led to the reintroduction of the always tiresome “Border War” reference, made mostly by sportswriters that are just cracking themselves up. Yawn.

Let’s fire up the giant question machine:

Let’s spend a few more minutes on Branch. Why the hell don’t the Patriots try to avoid these fractures with players by heading a few off at the pass, negotiating new deals with certain key individuals instead of forcing them to play out their rookie contracts? You’d think Deion Branch would be one of those guys. What gives?

Greg: I’m sure they do try to avoid them. Perhaps they misunderstood Branch’s willingness to actually honor a contract he signed and misjudged his character. If Branch had left after his contract was up, I’m sure everyone would say that is his right and wished him the best and appreciate he bid his time and deserved his big payday, at least. But who knew he was so money motivated and wouldn’t live up to his own commitments? Given the fact he was apparently misjudged, they did what they had to do by trading him.

Bruce: Who’s to say they haven’t tried? I’m sure they have, but for whatever reason, more often than not it seems, they have been losing players recently. But of course, you can’t neglect to mention that their two biggest potential free agents were taken care of well in advance. Tom Brady and Richard Seymour are miles ahead of anyone that the Patriots have lost, and the most important thing to the future of the team is that both of those guys will be part of it. Perhaps they misjudged Branch’s fortitude in this matter, thinking he wasn’t going to cave. But I’m pretty sure this didn’t sneak up on them.

Scott: Let’s speak to Branch specifically. The claim is they took unnecessary advantage of Branch’s favorable rookie contract, and it came back to bite them, just as it allegedly had with David Givens. With the help of Miguel’s salary cap page, I looked at Deion’s production (over his career) as it related to his compensation at the time. The question was: at what point should the Patriots have locked up Branch to a new deal, signing bonus and all, as many suggest they should have done?

Obviously, 2002 is out. They’re not going to re-do the deal they just did ($430,000 in salary and signing bonus) for 43 catches. So that brings us to 2003, when he had 57 catches and a tremendous Super Bowl ($505,000). I suppose they could have done something here, but they have a good young player in his third year for modest money, which is a real advantage to the team if you buy the large middle class theory. Criticize the Pats for not acting here, but at the same time, do you want a management team that is this quick (2nd year of deal) to act on long-term commitments to young players that have had one outstanding season? That quick to give up an advantage? I don’t know if you do. Besides, Miguel estimates that the Pats were under the cap in 03 by only $8,300.

I think 2004 is another dicey question, because Branch had another tremendous Super Bowl, and was voted MVP of the team’s second straight championship win. But he missed seven games with a leg injury, and finished with only 35 catches ($590,600), rekindling previous durability concerns. What do you do? The guy was frigging fantastic in the playoffs (if he wasn’t a star who was?) so I guess I might say at this point, if they could have done something, it could have been in the spring and summer of 2005. And Miguel says that the Pats were about 1.3 million under their cap at the end of the 04 season. Sounds good to me. Except there was another priority named Seymour that required attention at that time, and when Miguel added up the numbers for 05, the Pats were but $44,000 under the cap. So when, exactly, should the Patriots have been addressing Branch prior to spring and summer of this year? And how? Write me if you know.

So what’s the next shoe to drop? Who’s the next young star to become disillusioned with his rookie contract and follow Branch’s blueprint out of Foxboro and into a fat new deal somewhere else? And what about Daniel Graham, Dan Koppen, and Asante Samuel, whose rookie contracts come due after this season? Are they on their last Patriot legs? Will this become a vicious circle?

Bruce: Wait a minute…what’s up with these real questions? We’re supposed to be a “ridiculous Patriots fanzine” here, aren’t we? You can’t be asking those questions. I refuse to respond to this line of questioning.

What…you’ll dock my check this week? All righty then. As the team drafted Thomas and Mills, it makes me think that they might be preparing for the departure of Graham. That would be too bad in my opinion, as I think the guy plays a much bigger role on the team than the casual observer might realize. I think the Patriots are always going to have a fluid roster, but as long as they can keep the core guys and continue restocking around them, they’re going to be a contender.

Scott: I’m told by some that Ben Watson’s already packed his bags, but I have to ask if he’s going to stay around and do something first. And which year does he plan to hold out? 07? 08? 09? As far as the rest of them, I’m sure that somebody’s going somewhere and soon. I have to accept this as a fact of life in Patriotville USA, which I’ll gladly do, as long as I can continue to see them play in February. So far, so good, overall. When there’s been a substantial change in this arrangement, let me know. Until then, I’ll resist jumping to any mortal conclusions.

Greg: I think we’ll be surprised. One or all of these guys could move on. But, as I said above, that’ll be their right. They’ve already demonstrated they’re different and have better character than Deion Branch by being at the same crossroads in their contract and not holding out, by continuing to work hard, by doing their job and living up to their obligations and then cashing in. Not the other way around. Daniel Graham was drafted higher than Deion Branch. He is fulfilling his deal. He isn’t whining and stomping his feet and refusing to honor his own signature. He is playing out his deal and knowing he’ll deserve what he gets next year whether it’s with the Patriots or elsewhere. And if he moves on, I can respect Daniel Graham and the honor he is displaying in his commitments. I predict at least two of these folks will stay in town as the Patriots will recognize that and go the extra mile for them. And they’ll deserve it.

Tom Brady spoke this week about the need for practice time with his receivers and the importance of an instinctive relationship between the quarterback and his targets to their ultimate efficiency on Sundays. Yet Doug Gabriel and Chad Jackson have been limited by injuries, particularly the rookie, who has barely practiced. How will Brady and the Pats passing game hold things together long enough to get everyone on the same page?

Scott: I suppose he’ll rely on the vets like Faulk and Brown, the tight ends, and even Caldwell, who he hit with a big throw last week. The newly robust running attack is certainly the biggest help. It seems probable that the new guys will need several weeks once they get active, though a big catch here and there might get the ball rolling faster. Right now, they just need to get on the freaking field as soon as possible. A longer delay and I fear the strain on the others is really going to start showing up.

Greg: They’ll improve this week. I would think at least one of Jackson and Gabriel will be back. They’ve had longer to practice together now. It’s not like Jackson didn’t participate in mini-camps and now two weeks of practice. He’s been immersed in the offense for some time. He’s worked with Brady, I’m sure, for months. It’s not the same as game time working together, but that process will start every week and you’ll see improvement. Jackson and Gabriel are both talented guys and by season-end, I think will contribute and the passing game will be fine.

Bruce: It’s not going to happen all at once, but I think as the season goes on, things are going to improve. There are going to be some tough moments along the way, there’s no doubt about that, but until these guys can build the chemistry and feeling with Brady, there is going to be a lot of trial and error. I think there is some talent here, it just needs some time to come together, and unfortunately, the learning process is going to have to take place during the fire of the regular season.

All right, it’s time for our picks in the games involving potential AFC playoff teams. It’s another six pack – Buffalo at Miami, Cleveland at Cincinnati, Houston at Indy, Kansas City at Denver, Tennessee at San Diego, and on Monday night, the world champs at Jacksonville.

Bruce (4-2, missing on Denver/St. Louis, and Dallas/Jacksonville): Miami should be able to handle Buffalo pretty easily, I see Cincinnati taking a tougher than expected intrastate battle with the Browns, the Colts in a cakewalk over the Texans, the hated Broncos dispatching Kansas City, the Chargers ALL over the Titans and the toughest game of the week, Jacksonville holding the fort at home against the Steelers on Monday night. That seemed way too easy though, there’s got to be an upset or two in there, but darned if I can see it.

Scott (4-2, missing the same): I’ll take Miami at home, though it sickens me. Buffalo was good at times last week, but I can’t see them catching the Dolphins the same way on the road. I’ll take the Bengals again, this time at home. Indy, too. The only way the Texans beat the Colts is in Houston, not Indy, and that’s only if a bunch of different planets line up. I’ll take Denver, beating Kansas City at home, because don’t they usually do that anyway? I’ll stick with the Chargers again, and I’ll take Jacksonville to beat Pittsburgh on Monday night.

Greg (last week, 0-5; Greg mitigated any further damage by refusing a guess on the Jets at Tennessee): I would have picked Tennessee, so feel free to make it 0-6 or 1-6 as at least I had the Pats winning. This week, I like Miami to win at home. Buffalo is improved, but last week’s disappointing loss and two straight road games is tough. They’ll let down this week and possibly get blown out. Cincinnati will manhandle Cleveland as I’m sure Carson Palmer will get untracked after a slow week 1, Houston at Indy….this isn’t fair. Who draws up these schedules every year for Indy, Bill Polian? Joking. Indy wins easily. KC at Denver? Herm Edwards strikes again. Denver wins. Tennessee at San Diego. Was San Diego as good as they looked Monday or is Oakland that bad? Probably a combination of both, but San Diego should get by a bad Tennessee team, though it may be closer than expected. I also like a Jacksonville team that looks to be more seasoned to take out Pittsburgh at home Monday.

The easy Pats win predicted by Greg and Scott last week never materialized. Bruce came the closest, predicting a relatively slim eight point winning margin. Let’s try this again – 1-0 Pats at 1-0 Jets, 4:15 Sunday, in the Meadowlands.

Greg: The Pats won last week playing not as well as they can against a team I feel is better than the Jets. The Jets won against a weak opponent. It’s a division game, so important. The Pats have a great shot to be off to a 2-0 division record. I don’t think they’ll blow it and are simply better than the Jets. I like the Pats 27-10 and I think they throw the ball a lot better as well.

Bruce: Another tough game for the Patriots within the division. The Jets are going to be fired up in their home opener, and with Mangini at the helm there’s going to be a wrinkle or two targeting something he’s seen on the Patriots, or even Brady. I think it might be a similar game to last week, but without the safety being the margin of victory. Patriots 20 -16.

Scott: I’m prepared for the worst 60 minutes of my life. Just kidding. I wouldn’t be surprised now if we had another game like last week; one of those grinders you sweat for the whole three hours, always one big play away from it going the other way. In my heart of hearts, I want the Patriots offense to come out like they did in pre-season and move the ball come hell or high water. I think the Patriots defense can manage Chad Pennington. The offense needs to get a lead and build on it so the boys can pin their ears back. That’s what I want. What will I get? Maybe 20-17, Patriots.

Who is this week’s Worst Mediot in the World? (Apologies to the cranky Keith Olbermann):

Scott: How about all the media, and all of us, the fans, for not realizing until Thursday that Junior Seau had a pretty good game Sunday. His coach went out of his way to praise little, game-winning things that we apparently overlooked. He got a game ball for eight tackles that we all mocked. Maybe we need to pay a little closer attention next time.

Greg: It’s kind of sad to see what’s happened to Michael Felger. He went from a pretty decent, down the middle, beat reporter to what he is today. And that’s not good. Since he got heavily involved in The Big Show crew, and now on his own show (which he dishonestly claimed wasn’t going to be about Manny peeing in the wall….a pledge he lived up to for maybe 2 or 3 months), he really has mailed it in more and more often in all aspects of his professional career. Last week’s column in the Herald’s special NFL preview pullout section I thought was a particular mail-in job.

Witness this atrocity from last week by Felger:

“Some of the departures have been shocking (Adam Vinatieri, Lawyer Milloy), others merely sad (Joe Andruzzi). The Pats have lost some good people (Damien Woody) to big-money, free agent offers, and also some bad ones (Ted Washington).”

So, let me get this straight….Ted Washington is a bad person????? Why? Because he wouldn’t speak to Felger and the rest of the media?

Obviously I don’t know Washington personally (and I’m sure Felger doesn’t really either). But I do know this; he is married with four children. Three girls and a boy. I am not aware of him ever being involved in an off the field incident, criminal or otherwise. He has been a nominee several times for the NFL Man of The Year award for community involvement. He was once a nominee for the NFL’s Byron “Whizzer” White Award which goes to the NFL player who does the most in his community. When he was with the Bills, he started a fund called “Ted Tackles MS” in which he would donate money for every tackle he had to curing MS. He started the “Ted Washington Foundation” to benefit local youth charities in Buffalo. For his entire career in Buffalo, he donated his allotment of 30 tickets to home games to youth groups for children to attend the Bills games. He was involved in the United Way and had his entire family appear in a commercial on their behalf in 1998.

Now, like I said, I don’t know the guy. But does Felger have the right to take a cheap shot at him in the paper when he likely doesn’t really know him either simply because he chooses not to talk to the press? And if Felger claims he was “disruptive” in the locker room and that is what he meant…..well how freakin’ disruptive could he have been? They went 14-2 and won the Super Bowl the one year he was here. Felger is just an ass in this particular case, there can be no disputing it.

Bruce: I think it’s time to show some love (disdain?) for the crew up in the Merrimack Valley led by the fearless (and clueless) Bill Burt. While their Red Sox coverage is very good, football isn’t that paper’s strong suit. Main NFL (and High School) writer Hector Longo this week somehow tried to make the argument that when the Patriots signed Tom Brady to the contract extension a couple years ago, that only “Patriots sycophants lauded the deal”. He weakly tried to connect that statement with the Patriots having cap room and not signing Branch. Meanwhile, his boss Burt was composing a column made up of answering imaginary questions that the voices in his head dictated to him.

Scott: Uh, Bruce, about that ‘imaginary questions’ line…….

Greg: Uh, Scott, someone posted in GDRV on Tuesday morning Junior Seau had a solid game last week. Ahem. Just sayin’…..

By Bill Barnwell, Football Outsiders - special to BSMW Patriots Game Day

Monday’s trade of Deion Branch to the Seahawks to a chapter of Patriots lore that will shine positive light on neither Branch nor Patriots management; while Branch got what he wanted, he was vilified in the process, while Bill Belichick and Scott Pioli’s initial requests of multiple high-level draft picks ended up becoming a #1 pick from a team sure to make one of the final selections of that round. While I’ve already presented a case for Branch becoming an elite receiver in a previous column, what this week’s column will analyze is the situation that the Patriots have gotten themselves into: what happens when a team loses two receivers the caliber of Deion Branch and David Givens?

Football Outsiders’ DVOA statistic is based on play-by-play data which, unfortunately, has only been processed at the time of writing up till 1996. As a result, this study will be looking at two other statistics: receptions and fantasy points. While the former is familiar, the latter may not be for some readers. Fantasy points (or FP) are, simply, a measure of a player’s performance in standard fantasy football leagues. It’s calculated, for wide receivers, by dividing receiving yards by ten and multiplying receiving touchdowns by six, and then adding the two figures. The reason I’m using it is just to have a simple metric that includes both receiving yards and touchdowns.

Again using the trusty data available at pro-football-reference.com, I compiled a database with the season statistics of every receiver since 1976 (the year of the first post-merger expansion). I tracked player movement at wide receivers across each of the seasons to determine which teams had lost receivers over time. I also calculated each players’ ranking in receptions and FP for each season and for each team season. While the ranking system is slightly biased towards older teams (in that the 40th best receiver in 1976 is actually slightly worse than the 40th best receiver in 2005, considering the extra teams that have come into existence since then), it didn’t present a problem in the data and I feel that the results represent what we were looking for: teams that lost two quality wide receivers at once.

Deion Branch and David Givens finished off their Patriot careers with very solid seasons in 2005. Branch finished 14th in receptions and 22nd in Fantasy Points, while Givens was 34th and 42nd, respectively. My first attempt was to find teams that had lost two players of comparable performance in one offseason. As you might imagine, such an incident was pretty rare — in fact, it happened all of two times in the 29 seasons that were tracked, with both receptions and FP. The two teams were:

* 1993/1994 Atlanta Falcons: The Falcons are a team who, while they lost two receivers that offseason, still had Andre Rison, their #1 receiver at the time. The Falcons’ Run & Shoot offense produced numbers that were simply so good that their #2 and #3 receivers put up numbers worthy of Branch and Givens. Mike Pritchard was 11th in catches and 12th in FP, while Michael Haynes was 12th and 31st, respectively. Pritchard and Haynes went to enjoy successful seasons elsewhere in 1994, while the Falcons acquired Terence Mathis from the Jets and Ricky Sanders from the Redskins to replace them. Sanders had 67 catches in his final NFL season, while Mathis went from a 24 catch season in 1993 to 111 catches (and 1,342 yards) in 1994, supplanting Bad Moon as the team’s #1 receiver. Ah, the Run & Shoot. This team’s move and link to the Patriots’ is tenuous at best, in that they seem to both share a mindset of wide receivers not being particularly important.

* 2001/2002 Green Bay Packers: Now, the 2001 Packers have slightly more in common with the Patriots’. Like the Patriots, they won a Wild Card game at home before losing a Divisional Playoff game on the road. The Packers had 32 passing touchdowns and 11 rushing touchdowns; the Patriots, 28 passing touchdowns and 16 rushing touchdowns. Both their quarterbacks completed over 60% of their passes and had one rushing touchdown. OK, maybe the last stat doesn’t mean much. The point is that, while they’re not the same team, they have much more in common than the Patriots and ‘93 Falcons do.

What the Packers did was jettison two wide receivers whose value to the Packers didn’t match what the players perceived to be their market value, in much the same vein that the Patriots rid themselves of Branch and Givens. Antonio Freeman, who had signed a deal with a $10 million signing bonus and who was earning in excess of, ironically enough, $6 million a season, was released for salary cap reasons. Bill Schroeder simply wasn’t resigned once his contract ran out (what a quaint concept!), and went off to an ill-fated run with the Lions. In fact, the Packers even lost Corey Bradford, their #3 wide receiver, to the Texans in the Expansion Draft. (Furthermore, Bradford’s Wikipedia page mentions that he “…also flipped off and beat up a ice cream man”, which I can neither confirm nor deny). The Packers’ leader in receptions for the season was Ahman Green, who had 62 in 2001, but without significant yardage or touchdown totals. While TE Bubba Franks chipped in with nine touchdowns, Freeman and Schroeder were the top options in an offense that spread the ball out to multiple receivers effectively. I’ve heard that one before.

In 2002, the Packers replaced their production with that of several players. Bubba Franks caught 54 passes, up from 36 a year earlier, while Ahman Green maintained his level of production from the previous season. Donald Driver took over the lead role in the offense from Freeman, catching 70 passes for 1064 yards and 9 touchdowns, a huge leap from his performance in the previous three seasons, but commensurate with an increase in playing time and balls thrown in his direction. Driver caught 68% of the passes that were thrown to him in 2001, and that number actually decreased to 59% in 2002. Meanwhile, Terry Glenn stepped in as the #2 receiver, catching 56 passes, an increase on Schroeder’s 53 and Freeman’s 52 the year before.

Now, at this point, you’re probably asking how the teams did after putting the wide receiver position through the wash cycle. Well, that’s where the fun begins. Note that the Y0 season listed below is that with the two receivers on their roster, while the Y+1 season is the first season the team was without them. The rank listed is their rank within the league for points scored, while PF is the abbreviation for “Points For”.

These two teams’ both scored more points after losing their wide receivers than they did with them! The offensive rank, a perhaps more accurate measure though, did decrease slightly. Maybe most importantly, though, Atlanta won one more game (they were sadly still stinky), while Green Bay maintained their win-loss record. While the sample of two teams is undoubtedly too small to draw any significant conclusion from, it’s interesting that both teams were able to replace the production from their two stud wide receivers without skipping a beat.

The next question that I wanted to look at was a question more concerned with teams who’d lost their wide receivers as opposed to the inherent quality of those receivers. The query was simple: teams who lost their top two wide receivers (measured by either receptions or FP, which almost always coincides on a team level) over the course of a single offseason.

This yielded 20 teams who had suffered such a fate, 18 losing their top two receivers by reception and/or FP, and two more who lost their top two solely based upon Fantasy Points. These teams had very little in common: some lost their only two wide receivers of any real merit, while others lost two in a deep WR corps. Some were among the better offenses in the league, while others weren’t brilliant. You get the idea. The numbers for those twenty teams are listed below. The “New Coach” column simply denotes teams who changed head coaches either during the first of or in-between the two seasons — naturally, new coaches who come in are more likely to shift the deck chairs around a little bit. Also, note that the averages of wins and losses may not add up to 16 games due to rounding.

I can’t remember why I bolded those two Cleveland lines for — oh — maybe it was the coach. Some Belichick guy. That’s right — something I’d forgotten about — Bill Belichick has done this before. In 1991, he let Webster Slaughter and Reggie Langhorne leave (it was also Bernie Kosar’s final season as a full-time starter) as part of his rebuilding project in Cleveland. Langhorne was 26, while Slaughter was 27. Branch left the team at 26, Givens 25. He replaced them by restoring Michael Jackson to a role of prominence within the offense — he led the Browns with 44 catches and 9 scores in 1992. He also restored an injured Eric Metcalf to the starting lineup, and the hybrid RB/WR responded with 47 catches. Lawyer Tillman, meanwhile, came back after three years of inactivity to catch 25 passes. No other WR caught more than five balls, including a green rookie by the name of Keenan McCardell. While the team’s offensive performance dropped from 16th to 20th in the league, they did win one more game than they had previously; their defense improved from 14th to 10th. The Browns’ offense under Belichick never reached higher than 11th — when it did in 1994, it was joined by a first-ranked defense and was Belicheck’s only playoff appearance as Browns coach. The second time around, Belicheck’s wide receivers were let go by Ted Marchibroda. McCardell and Andre Rison were replaced by a resurgent Jackson (who had a career year with 14 touchdowns) and backup Derrick Alexander on the way to a sixth-ranked offense…and a 4-12 record.

Belichick’s past aside, the study revealed some interesting results. The teams, as a whole, perform slightly worse - three-tenths of a win - than they did with their two old wide receivers. That being said, their offensive rank actually improves, on average, from 21st to 19th. This was very surprising to me.

Since a 2-14 Buffalo team getting rid of their wide receivers doesn’t really have much in common with the Patriots, I also computed the average performance of those teams who had winning records (none of the teams who changed coaches had a winning record and therefore, are irrelevant to the discussion). In this, the drop in record was twice as pronounced — teams lost eight-tenths of a win. However, some of this is due to what Bill James’ calls the Plexiglass Principle: the idea that the performance of all teams regresses to the mean over a large enough period of time. While I don’t have the data available at the time of writing, this intuitively makes sense: not many fourteen-win teams win that many games the next season, while not many two-win teams (the putrid ‘84-’85 Bills aside) remain so awful. An eleven-win team (by rounding) becoming a ten-win team the season after is, obviously, not out of the ordinary by any means. With only five teams of data to look at, the sample isn’t particularly large either. What’s more interesting, to me at least, is that these teams’ offenses improved by almost four spots the year after they got rid of their top two wide receivers, an even bigger improvement than when you include the teams that were mediocre at best all around.

What the past shows us here is that getting rid of your top two wide receivers, even if they’re as good as Deion Branch and David Givens, is no death wish. That’s not to say that the Patriots won’t suffer — judging from their Week 1 performance, the receiving corps still has a ways to go — but if the Patriots’ offense ends up coming close to or even exceeding its performance of a year ago, well, you can’t say I didn’t warn you.

by Scott Benson
scott@bostonsportsmedia.com

As Ron Borges continues to spin his way madly through another Patriots story, and the more misguided amongst us continue to accept his ‘reporting’ as fact, we offer this link from a particularly brilliant You Tube subscriber.

Click it, absorb it, and carry the righteous work of this industrious filmmaker forward to your friends and associates. There’s no reason on earth why any reasonably intelligent, sane person should be listening to Borges for any other reason than to mock the constant torrent of lies than flow like water from his corrupt, bought-and-paid-for sneer.

by Greg Doyle

A second look at the Patriots 19-17 opening day win over Buffalo reveals it was not nearly the near disaster portrayed by some. In fact, these eyes felt the Patriots played well for the most part. I heard one shrieking media person who longs to make himself more relevent than he is wondering aloud whether they were only 2 points better than Buffalo and thus a middle of the pack, mediocre team. Kind of a ridiculous question considering they were 6 points worse than a terrible Cincinnati team on opening day in 2001…..and then won the Super Bowl, that they were 31 points worse than a 6-10 Buffalo team on opening day in 2003….and then won the Super Bowl….and were 14 points worse than Pittsburgh early in the season in 2004…..and then won the Super Bowl knocking off the same Pittsburgh team by 14 along the way.

The point is, yes the Patriots only won by 2. But they beat a Buffalo team that played pretty well, that isn’t as bad as people think and which only scored 10 points on offense all day long. You can’t take out the first play, but it is not like that score resulted from a long stretch of being outplayed. It was simply one bad play. Disregard that one, albeit significant, screw up to open the game and the Patriots outplayed Buffalo by 9 the rest of the way and were driving for another potential score as time ran out. I don’t see the problem.

QUARTERBACKS: It was far from Tom Brady’s best performance. He wasn’t real sharp. But he made some good throws too. The first touchdown pass to Troy Brown was vintage Tom Brady. The throw for the touchdown to Kevin Faulk for the Patriots second touchdown was a thing of beauty. The throw to Reche Caldwell for a big 24 yard gain on the tying field goal drive was also very well placed. It wasn’t his best day, but it more resulted from circumstances than anything else and he seemed to get things cranked up a little better in the second half.

RUNNING BACKS: Obviously, Laurence Maroney’s debut was electrifying. Watching some of his runs over and over again today, I can’t think of another back in the entire NFL who hits the hole and gets upfield as quickly as he does. Give him a little room and boom, he is downfield 4-5 yards quicker than the defense knows what hit them. Its early, but he showed potential Sunday that he could quickly become one of the very best backs in the NFL. He did have one drop in the passing game, however, and it remains unproven how he’ll contribute in that area. Corey Dillon ran very hard and had an outstanding day as well. You have to like the physical pounding he laid on Buffalo. He has been doing that since his first carry in exhibition game one and seems determined to dish out as much punishment on defenses as possible this year and to run his absolute hardest every single carry he gets. He looks like a man on a mission. My only concern is, he clearly seems to have lost a little bit of speed and one wonders if he can continue to withstand the pounding will surely take given the way he is running or if he’ll wear down a bit. The fact he’ll be splitting time with Maroney will be a blessing for him, but perhaps at some point this year the staff should consider limiting Dillon’s carries for 3-4 games in a row so that he is fresh in the cold weather December and January games when his current style will be best utilized. Kevin Faulk had a good game in limited time. When the Pats have a game they need to open it up a bit more, Faulk should continue to be a great weapon for them and he did have that outstanding one touchdown catch.

WIDE RECEIVERS: Not a lot of production from the three that were active, but Troy Brown did have a nice touchdown catch. Reche Caldwell made two nice plays on both his catches. The first a nice run for a 9 yard gain on a quick receiver screen and the second a nice 24 yard catch in traffic with the safety bearing down on him to keep the game-tying drive going.

TIGHT END: Three catches by Ben Watson, including two big ones that kept drives moving. On a day when the Patriots have a different, more air-oriented game plan, Watson showed he will be a dangerous weapon. Daniel Graham had a nice catch to help a drive going and kill the clock. He also blocked well all day long in the running game. Watson did miss one block that helped cause a sack and he remains inconsistent at that area of his game.

OFFENSIVE LINE: A somewhat tough day for Matt Light. He was good in the running game, but struggled versus Bills speed rusher Aaron Schobel. Speed rushers typically give Light the most trouble and one wonders why the Patriots didn’t give Light more help as they have typically done with teams that have skilled speed rushers. But with only three receivers active, perhaps it was difficult to use backs and tight ends to help out as much when you needed them running routes. The good news for Light is next week’s opponent, the Jets, have traded away John Abraham, another speed rusher who typically gave Light trouble. Ryan O’Callaghan struggled as well in his NFL debut. He seemed to settle down in the second half and showed great potential in pre-season, so we’ll chalk it up to opening day nerves. Logan Mankins and Dan Koppen, on the other hand, were beasts on the line and had great days. Mankins has really improved in a year and dominated in run blocking. Koppen too really has shown how good he is since he returned in the pre-season from his major shoulder injury of last year. The holes he has been helping create in the middle of defenses really is apparent and its clear he is a difference maker on the line. Its no wonder the Patriots running game really kicked into gear with Koppen back in the lineup and doing great work in the middle.

DEFENSIVE LINE: A very solid performance with just one bad whiff by Vince Wilfork on Anthony Thomas’ 18 yard touchdown run for the Bills the one blemish. Besides that, Ty Warren continued his upgraded play from last year, a trend he started in the pre-season. Richard Seymour was his typical good self and Vince Wilfork played a lot better in the second half. There are few worries with this unit.

LINEBACKER: A good performance. Roosevelt Colvin made several good plays and was stout all day long in stringing plays out wide. Tully Banta-Cain, though he didn’t have a sack, caused some disruption and was also good in the running game. In the middle, Mike Vrabel was excellent and Junior Seau solid and seemed to follow the flow of the defense, particularly in the second half. He was the Patriots leading tackler.

SECONDARY: The cornerbacks had a good day, particularly Ellis Hobbs. At safety, Eugene Wilson had an outstanding day and was all over the field. He looked comfortable again back there after an inconsistent 2005. Rodney Harrison had a pretty uneventful return to the lineup and got off to a slow start. He even missed a tackle on Bills running back Willis McGahee, something you rarely see. Harrison is perhaps the best form tackler in the NFL. But he got a few licks in and there is nothing to indicate he won’t be back to his old, top form within a couple games.

KICKING GAME: Nothing to complain about here. Steven Gostkowski converted the critical tying kick and his kickoffs were deep. With one exception, the coverage was good against Buffalo’s top notch return team and Josh Miller had a solid day punting.

Overall, contrary to some, I was encouraged by this performance. You didn’t see the gross breakdowns on defense that were apparent right from the opening whistle last year. The running game was improved. The offense wasn’t explosive, but controlled the clock when needed with the run and put together several good drives. Give it time. I think fans who like running-oriented football on offense and good, smart, physical defense are going to like this team. And come the cold weather of December and January, it may very well serve this team perfectly. It also marks more of a return to the style that won this franchise three championships, as opposed to last year’s team which was somewhat out-of-character in style and performance in many ways both offensively and defensively. I liked what I saw. They’ll only get better and this style will feed off each other on both sides of the ball once they begin to gell. On to the Jets next week.

by Scott Benson
scott@bostonsportsmedia.com

Boston’s best football writer, Mike Reiss, is first with the stunning news that holdout WR Deion Branch has been traded to the Seattle Seahawks for a first round draft choice, just days before arbiters were to hear two grievances filed by the former Super Bowl MVP and his agent after earlier trade talks had failed.

Stay with Mike’s blog for the latest developments in this surprising story. We’ll no doubt be back with thoughts later on.

As a matter of fact, here we are now. Don’t you guys have to work?

Bruce’s thoughts:Definitely mixed emotions on this one. His holdout not withstanding, Branch was an extremely entertaining and likable Patriot. I’ll miss seeing #83 darting around the field. His 60 yard TD catch in the AFC championship game in Pittsburgh was one of the best moments in Patriots history. He came up big in both Super Bowl victories that he played in with the Patriots. He’ll be missed.

For the team, they probably needed to make a move here. Getting a first round pick, even from a good team like Seattle is more than many people thought that they could get. The longer that this holdout went on, the uglier and more distracting things were likely to be for the Patriots. The team can now move on, and hope that Doug Gabriel and Chad Jackson can get back on the field in the coming weeks and give the Patriots the receiving threat that they lacked this Sunday against the Bills.

Seattle gets a very good player, and could also use the spark on offense, as evidenced by their lackluster 9-6 win over Detroit yesterday. We’ll see if Matt Hasselbeck is as good to Branch as Tom Brady was.

Greg’s thoughts: Mixed feelings. I am disappointed in Deion. He has not covered himself in glory throughout this saga. But I suppose he has his money now, if that is how one measures success. It’ll be interesting to follow his career and the course of his new contract. I am also disappointed the Patriots let him “shoot his way out of town” and feel he should have been made an example of.

On the plus side, I feel the value of a first round pick, assuming that is what it is, is fine and fair. I also feel the Patriots can and will win without Branch. And I feel its a plus the whole issue is now over.

Scott’s thoughts: That’s what I get for getting wrapped up in the actual games. Never saw this one coming. Not today, anyway. Initial thoughts: I guess it wasn’t so unreasonable for the Patriots to ask for a first round pick after all. However, I suspect I’ll like that part of the deal a lot more next April than I do now. It’s just hard to look to the future when there’s already a season underway. I keep hitting Reiss’s Pieces hoping for the other shoe to drop, like it will all of a sudden be updated with the line “a first round pick in the 2007 draft AND receiver Nate Burleson” or anybody else that might be able to stick an oar in the water we’re currently paddling through. So far, no luck. In any event, the whole goddam thing is regrettable, in my mind. Its not too unreasonable to ask how in the world the Patriots managed to lose their two starting receivers in about six months time while being eleventy-billion dollars under the cap. I’ll need time to think on a good answer for that one. And even though I was urging the Patriots to grind him into dust in last week’s Roundtable, the fact is I like Deion Branch. Even with all the mess that he helped to create over the last several weeks, I’m going to miss the little bastard. He was ten feet tall when it mattered most.

Yet life goes on here in New England. Bring on the Jets. And Doug Gabriel and Chad Jackson, if it’s not too much trouble.

by Scott Benson
scott@bostonsportsmedia.com

A couple of lingering ‘I wish’ thoughts as week two begins…..

I wish I’d made a bigger deal of the game Rosevelt Colvin had. He was everywhere, but mostly in the Buffalo backfield. For a minute, I remembered how we wondered about Colvin as he worked his way back from a devastating hip injury in his second game as a Pat. Would he ever do anything to live up to his marquee free agent status? He was always - understandably - a step slow and a dollar short. Not anymore. You know, we question who will fill the hole left by Willie McGinest, but the fact is, that hole may be filled quite nicely by Colvin, who understudied for the Pats great as he worked his way back.

Speaking of linebackers, I wish I’d noticed on the first replay that it was Tully Banta-Cain that set up Ty Warren’s safety sack of JP Losman that provided the winning margin for the Pats. TBC came free from the blind side and forced JP to take a step up and to the left of the collapsing pocket, where Warren was waiting. Score one for the new guy.

I wish I hadn’t listened to Cris Collingsworth on NBC’s new Sunday night highlight show, as he acted the typical mediot fool by railing against the Patriots ‘arrogance’ in dealing with Deion Branch. According to Collingsworth, the Pats “thought they could beat Buffalo easily without Branch, and it almost cost them the game.” He said all this wearing his angriest NFLPA face. I guess I missed the part of Bill Belichick’s mid-week PC where he admitted that contract stalemate is based on the Patriots feeling they didn’t need Branch to beat the Bills. This must mean he’ll be signed by lunch today. I don’t even think Collingsworth watched the frigging game. I don’t expect he’ll be the last to opine that yesterday’s struggles were because Troy Brown started in place of Branch. I’m sure Michael Felger, for one, will tell us that the pressure on Brady was because he had no one to throw to. I’m sure some idiot on a fan board will tell us that the other teams don’t respect the Pats receivers and as a result, will continue to bring the house on Brady. I’m sure some smarmy morning radio host will leer that Branch gained ‘leverage’ yesterday. I’m sure NONE of them will remember all the failed blitz pick ups and simple physical matchups that were lost by the offensive line that some have called the best of Belichick’s tenure. They damn near lost the game in the first thirty minutes yesterday. No fair blaming the receivers (and ‘arrogance’) until those boys have had their due.

Lastly, I wish I’d mentioned again, as I did at the close of pre-season, how infrequently the other team seems to throw at Ellis Hobbs. He kept Buffalo’s best receiver, the entertaining Lee Evans, on the outside looking in yesterday. In other words, he shut Evans down, from the corner. Ahem.