Hollywood Donahoe

No, I'm not. That's not a very nice way to speak to another.

Guess I'm not up on the lingo. I thought he meant the CNN/SI front page. My apologies.

I guess posting a link was too tough. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/foot...ahee/index.html

Depth != Winning

The only thing that's obvious is that I'm not a member of the Patriots' front office staff, and that I don't have full knowledge of their motivations. I'm just speculating like you all.

Doesn't mean they want to try and do it every week.

Seymour's a great player, and all team's want great players participating in camp.

The same reason people talk about Roman Phifer, who is 37 and loast his job last year to a one-dimensional run stuffer, as if he's a big loss - some people will do almost anything to convince themselves that the Pats were ravaged this offseason, even though that's not the case at all.

How? DL is the team's deepest unit by far, and they didn't miss a beat in the playoffs when he was out.

I kind of agree. Green's deal definitely seems like full time starter money.

At it again, Nostradamus?

I was addressing only the players mentioned in LabattBlue's post.

0%

You have a point with Law, who was still an eilte player when the Pats had to replace him, but with the Bledsoe and Milloy, the team got rid of declining players with big cap hits and upgraded the positions. The team has yet to prove that they win withour Bruschi and Seymour over a full season, but I'm confident that they can.

Certainly. Against probably the 2nd and 3rd best teams in the league last year, there was no drop-off whatsoever from Seymour to Green, at least from what I could see. Seymour's a great player, no doubt, and I wish he was out there. But Green's played extremely well in his place, and has proved he's a good starter.

I'm starting to think the writing's on the wall for Seymour. The Pats today signed his backup, Jarvis Green, to a five-year extension. Green was excellent filling in for Seymour in two playoff games last year, for what it's worth.

That sucks. Hope he recovers.

With a first year starter at QB who's going to be doing his fair share of improvising, I would say that you NEED as many quick, talented WRs as you can get your hands on.

Bears DE from a few years back, I believe.

Isn't that Travis Daniels? I was hoping the Pats would grab him.

He was always a really good run stuffer. His contributions will be missed.

But, with no Brady at Notre Dame, who's going to bail Weis out when he slips into one of his seemingly endless spells of asinine playcalling?

Optimistic? I'm picking them to lose 3 games when they've lost 4 over the past 2 years. Bledsoe is worthless, and I think Losman will be a better overall pro, but there's no denying that most QBs have a learning curve. I also think your OL is a pretty significant question mark, and could hurt McGahee, who was middle-of-the-road last year (despite the hype). Also, no proven backup RB behind a guy who's got a reconstructed knee is a tad shaky. And keep in mind that last year's 9-7 was built upon an intensely easy stretch of schedule.

Citing Bailey's return as a bright spot is at least more credible than predicting that the loss of Roman Phifer, of all people, is going to be the Pats' downfall.

Actually, by year's end, none of them were even full-time starters at all, let alone "key". Dana Stubblefield is not a member of the Patriots. Harrison is still a top safety, and hardly past his prime. Poole is coming off an injury, but had great numbers in '03. To top it off, they added Duane Starks, who's a very good corner when healthy. Seems like your knowledge of the Pats' players is sub-par at best. Might want to study up on them before you spout off again.