Pats as Roman Empire

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Plluto29. Show Plluto29's posts

    Re: Pats as Roman Empire

    [QUOTE]Poor analogy for your argument...the Byzantine and Holy Roman Empires followed..just as the Pats show the league you can rebuild, transition and continue to win.
    Posted by krismk[/QUOTE]

    Actually, my analogy is extremely apt.  Your exactly right.  New entities, separate and distinct from the source empire were created after bloody wars and in-fighting along with a general loss of purpose from the leadership.  And what was the result of this.  A general decline in the robustness of the original Empire.  Can the Pats re-invent themselves.  Sure. But at what cost?  One year, two years, three or more years of being poor to mediocre before a new incarnation appears? The Pats were bad in the early 70's then became an up and coming team in the mid-70's then fell apart by the early 80's.  They got good again in the mid-80s but then fell apart until the Big Tuna came on the scene in the early 90's. The Pats thrived until Pete Carroll showed up and the eventual decline came and they were terrible again.  Then Belicheck shows up and we are good, then great. We are on the inevitable down-side of the Belicheck era (an admittedly longer successful era than the Pats organization has ever known before) unless the Belicheck braintrust can consistently infuse new, cheaper talent along with some playmaking ability from free-agents and higher round picks. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Pats as Roman Empire

    [QUOTE]Dude:  You are the short-sighted moron who needs to be schooled in the NFL.  You haven't been paying attention to the general deterioration going on in Foxboro. Letting players go in Free-agency, making bad draft pick after bad draft pick, and constantly stockpiling picks for next year when they need players now.  Yeah they can still be competive in the league for the moment.  In bigger scheme of things, the Pats, like the Celtics in the late 80's, lare letting themselves get old, have made and continue to make bad drafting decisions, and are in the process of dropping from an elite team to a joke within 2-3 years.  The Pats are headed in the same direction. The Pats aren't doing the things that they need to do in order to be competitive moving forward. 
    Posted by Plluto29[/QUOTE]
    going 11-5 with a back-up,and all the holes on the team,and now everyone is healthy,and have added great players.oh yea we are in a decline.get real!come up with something better.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Pats as Roman Empire

    Your argument is based on an suppositions of an idea and not on reality.  The appearance of this and that has happened so this has to happen kind of nonsense.  Saying we don't have play makers is not true.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from krismk. Show krismk's posts

    Re: Pats as Roman Empire

    [QUOTE]Actually, my analogy is extremely apt.  Your exactly right.  New entities, separate and distinct from the source empire were created after bloody wars and in-fighting along with a general loss of purpose from the leadership.  And what was the result of this.  A general decline in the robustness of the original Empire.  Can the Pats re-invent themselves.  Sure. But at what cost?  One year, two years, three or more years of being poor to mediocre before a new incarnation appears? The Pats were bad in the early 70's then became an up and coming team in the mid-70's then fell apart by the early 80's.  They got good again in the mid-80s but then fell apart until the Big Tuna came on the scene in the early 90's. The Pats thrived until Pete Carroll showed up and the eventual decline came and they were terrible again.  Then Belicheck shows up and we are good, then great. We are on the inevitable down-side of the Belicheck era (an admittedly longer successful era than the Pats organization has ever known before) unless the Belicheck braintrust can consistently infuse new, cheaper talent along with some playmaking ability from free-agents and higher round picks. 
    Posted by Plluto29[/QUOTE]

    Extremely apt?  Is that like the famous draft buzz-word 'leadership ability"...in both cases you are, or are not ...you have it, or you don't..like being a little bit pregnant.

    If 11-5 is mediocre and declning, what is suckitude?  New and cheaper talent has been infused...through free-agency as well as the draft.  Do you really think that the Pats would not have contended if not for the catatrophic loss of Brady in the FIRST QUARTER OF THE FIRST GAME last year?  Please do not go so low as to listen to the dopes on ESPN who constantly parrot that the Pats need to get younger on Defense.  Anyone who follows the team realizes they have SEVERAL young LBs, Linemen and DBs in the pipeline, as well as key free-agents...every single year.

    What they have and what they do works...why else would the rest of the league recruit their coaching staff, and more recently their front office personnel?  Why else would the rest of the Boston Pro-Sports franchises try to emulate their methods?

    If it aint broke, don't fix it.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tojo. Show tojo's posts

    Re: Pats as Roman Empire

      I hate to say it, but the currrent regime running the Pats has run its course and we need new leadership. 
    Posted by Plluto29[/QUOTE]

    You have to explain that one to me.  Undefeated 2 years ago and lost the SB because the clock was not operated correctly in the 4th quarter, 11-5 last year without the starting QB.

    Pats continue to play the long term success game better than anyone else.  The best thing about this years draft?  Another load of 2nd round pick next year!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Pats as Roman Empire

    The roman empire lasted from 31 B.C. to 1450 A.D.

    I see that two third round draft choices were traded out to second rounders in 2010.  Two drafted players were drafted specifically for future years, a wide receiver with knee damage and an underbulked, raw tackle.  Second rounders are specifically better than first rounders because they can be signed to an extra year of contract, and BB had three low second rounders, one high second rounder and three more second rounders next year. (Second rounders also aren't all fou-fou about holding out from training camp for more money.) 

    All this implies that Bill Belichick is deliberately laying in a great amount of firepower for well down the road.  Call it a Roman Empire if you like, the term dynasty is passe, but New England hasn't seen worse than a 10-6 season (and plenty better) since 2001.

    The Roman Empire was famous for throwing vast manpower at its enemies.  Notice anything about the sheer size of the Patriots' draft plus the 9 free agents signed earlier?
     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sveltics. Show Sveltics's posts

    Re: Pats as Roman Empire

    plluto....if you jump off the Harvard Bridge about 25 paces from Mass Ave, you will hit a rock that will put you out of your misery...
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BradyHasMoreRings. Show BradyHasMoreRings's posts

    Re: Pats as Roman Empire

    [QUOTE]plluto....if you jump off the Harvard Bridge about 25 paces from Mass Ave, you will hit a rock that will put you out of your misery...
    Posted by Sveltics[/QUOTE]


    Please see my first few posts to this discussion.....it explains pluto very well
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from stringer1776. Show stringer1776's posts

    Re: Pats as Roman Empire

    "Playmakers are for Highlight Reels (and FFL).Hard-working football-loving committed team members is what make Champion TEAMS."

    [QUOTE]  Playmakers like Terrell and OchoCinco, yeah that is how to build a team.  For the knucklehead that sees Roman decline, 29-6 over the last two years is proof to the contrary. We came into this offseason with needs in the secondary, DL and OL.  Secondary:  We got a consensus first round corner at 41, we got the top ranked strong safety, and we signed two veterans CBs on top of the two picks from last year.  This has to be an upgrade over Hobbs and O'Neal. LB - we picked up an ILB, but we picked up three last year remember.  With Thomas, Mayo, Bruschi, Crable, Guyton, returning we certainly have invested in this position.  If we pick up Taylor for a year or two, even better. The DL - by picking Brace we may have an option for next year if Wilfork pulls an Asante.  Its called being prepared. Receivers - we replace our departed 3rd receiver with Galloway.  Unless he is injured, that will be an upgrade.  We have a highly touted prospect to groom -or dump if he doesn't toe the line. RB - we return with Faulk, Maroney, the Law firm and now add Fred Taylor.  OL - we have three picks to begin grooming QB - we replace a nice kid that had a better than hoped for year, with the best to ever play. Oh yeah, we trade 2 third round picks this year for 2 second round picks next year. I sure can't the decline you are talking about 
    Posted by Encinitas[/QUOTE]

    .... my sentiments as well.
    Trading down, not upfor over-hyped, over-pricedprima-donnas...  and strategically signing "your king of guys" is the way to build the champions we've seen.
     

Share