September 27, 2016

Freak In

by Scott Benson
[email protected]

Well….heh, heh……um….this is kind of awkward, isn’t it?

So despite my last minute appeals, the Patriots have chosen to hitch their wagon to the supernatural force that is Randy Moss, agreeing to a three-year deal that is said to be worth $27 million.

The Pats guaranteed more than half that amount ($15 million) to lock up Moss, despite reported efforts by the Philadelphia Eagles to steal the veteran in the final hours of negotiations. Moss’s agent Tim DiPiero told the Boston Globe that his client turned down a more lucrative offer to remain with New England.

When Moss was acquired from the Raiders in a draft day trade last April, it was commonly believed that the all-pro receiver’s stay in Foxborough would be brief. The conventional wisdom was that Moss would rehabilitate his reputation with the Pats and use that to cash in on a long-term deal with another team when the 08 free agency season commenced.

A funny thing happened on the way to that forum – Moss broke the single-season touchdown record for a receiver and became such a pivotal piece of the Patriots’ offense that many fans came to believe that losing him would be nearly as devastating as the Giants’Super Bowl upset of New England a little more than a month ago.

The Pats evidently agreed, and now one of the most prolific receivers in pro football history has turned a one-year lease on life into a long-term stay. The Patriots, who lost the noteable Asante Samuel and role players like Randall Gay and Donte Stallworth in the early hours of free agency, have stemmed any real or perceived roster bleeding with a band-aid as big as all outdoors.

For the life of me, I don’t know how anybody could see that as a bad thing. Right? Heh, heh….um…..so anyway, how ’bout those Bruins?

Comments

  1. Can he play cawnaback????

  2. Naw… they’re gonna drag Troy out of the retirement home and make him fill in for Asante all year. He’ll end up with 6 interceptions and have no idea what to do when he catches any of them.

    Which brings up the question- do we think Troy is going to try and make the roster this year? As much as I love him- he’ll always be my favorite Patriot- I hope he decides to hang ‘em up gracefully rather than not get onto the roster.

  3. chrisa798 says:

    I wouldn’t be surprised if Troy Brown hangs around sort of on the Q.T. football-wise and begins his coaching career. Then if he’s needed he could pull a Nate Scarboro.

    I have no way of knowing whether 9M per was a good investment / allocation, but given that the Pats are the Pats and I’m just some schlub, I’m confident that this was a solid move.

  4. Billy B says:

    I find it laugable that some people are even considering the fact that signing a guy who caught 98 balls 23 touchdowns and had 1,493 yards is somehow a BAD THING…..OH THAT’S RIGHT!…The Patriots have been to 4 Super Bowls this decade but lost the one with Moss on the team!…and Brady is too focused on Moss, I guess those 112 balls Welker caught were a figment of my imagination….jeeze

  5. the concern is an over-emphasis on the passing game, not that they throw to Moss and no one else. The concern is that by over-emphasizing the pass, it comes at the expense of other elements of a balanced team’s offense, which doesn’t seem like such an outlandish statement given the events of the Super Bowl, particularly along the line of scrimmage. What’s laughable is that the best you can muster in response is 98-1493-23. Way to get beneath the surface. You want to start talking about all the teams that rolled up eye popping numbers but yet never were able to close the deal? How is it that Pats fans have spent all this time making fun of Dan Marino’s one Super Bowl appearance but yet find it ‘laughable’ that an over-emphasis on the pass might not be a good thing? Give me a break.

  6. Box_O_Rocks says:

    Scott, which leg you want broken? Seriously, I’m with you, I was pounding the arm of my chair on the last scoring drive of the SB with Giants DL dropping like flies muttering “too fast, too fast, you’ve got to eat up the clock more!”

  7. How is Bernard Berrian getting more money guaranteed than Randy Moss? It doesn’t even appear that anyone was really even bidding for him as Clayton reported Philly just offered him an extra year which is worthless in the NFL system.

  8. jamesgarnerisgod says:

    That’s right, the Pates lost the Super Bowl because of Randy Moss. It couldn’t be that they were outplayed and outcoached by an NFC team that actually deserved to be in the Super Bowl, rather than being a team that was the least weak of a weak-sister league.

    To review, the “all-pro” front line was tormented all night by a fast and physical Football Giants D-line. Brady was pummeled like Floyd Mayweather’s speed bag. And the Pates D was just worn down by a never-say-die New York offense.

    As much as it pains me to write this, the Patriots were beaten in the Super Bowl. No excuses.

    Oh wait, here’s one: It’s all Randy Moss’ fault.

  9. If that’s what you took away from what was written in this entry and those over last weekend then sorry for my part in the confusion. I don’t know what to tell you other than that.

    As far as excuse-making – you’ve got the wrong guy. You can’t tell past Super Bowl whiners to STFU and then start bleeding excuses the first time (literally) the things didn’t go the Pats way. If you can find anywhere on past posts where I made an excuse for that loss, I owe you $5.

    Niether is anybody blaming Moss for anything. I’ve said from the beginning of this discussion that he is a unique talent, and that if they lost him, it would leave a big hole in their offense as we know it today. You’d have to first be concerned about the impact on Welker, for example.

    The point all along has been about offensive philosophy, and that such a unique resource like Moss almost compels you to lean heavily towards the pass as an orientation. That leads to things like lining up with four wide receivers on 3rd and short or 1st and goal inside the 5, which is kind of a tone setting thing in my opinion, for better or worse. I draw a line from that to things like being unable to cope with the physical pounding they took along the front line in early February, or in the Ravens game, or the Eagles game. That’s the point. If you want to read that as me blaming Randy Moss, go ahead, but I’d say philosophical decisions are made by Moss, they’re made by the coaching staff and the personnel department. If I’m blaming anyone, its them. Except I’m not blaming them either. Just maybe disagreeing with them.

  10. philosophical decisions aren’t made by Moss, I meant to say.

  11. Billy B says:

    To tell you the truth I think we are TOO focused on the offence…I think the Pats need to change their DEFENSIVE PHILOSOPHY…This bend but don’t break stuff is starting to wear on me. There were too many times this year where the Pats couldn’t get off the field on 3rd down….even though they held the Giants to 17 points, that opening drive where the Giants held the ball for 10 MINUTES was huge for them confidence wise.

    There were also too many times where I found myself yelling, “WHERE’S THE PASS RUSH?!!…say what you want about the offence but if the defense did it’s job the last 2 years it could have been 5 in 7

  12. I have to agree with you on the defense thing (although they’re not entirely to blame for the Super Bowl loss – the offense only scored 14 points). I’m interested in seeing how Dom Capers helps with our secondary, as I strongly feel that the unit as a whole was very inconsistent last season. I grew increasingly annoyed at the amount of times our defense gave up third and long, and I know I’m not the only one.

  13. jamesgarnerisgod says:

    You criticized the Patriots, and now you must pay.

    OK, I admit I might have jumped a little unnecessarily ugly on my post and, FWIW, I wasn’t accusing you of making excuses, though I can certainly see how my post could be read that way.

    My point is simply that emphasizing the O isn’t what did the Pates in — besides, they REALLY needed to emphasize the offense, despite their past Super Bowl success (which was two years removed as of this year’s game and now, I guess, three years removed). The defensive shortcomings, though, are independent of the offensive re-tooling. The D had to do largely with an aging (though still elite) corps handling more of the workload than anticipated, once Colvin and some of the younger guys, like Oscar Lua, either got injured or just didn’t pan out for one reason or another.

Leave a Reply