Siliga

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

    Re: Siliga

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     

    I disagree. 1st off you say how many of those guys become pro bowlers? It doesn't matter as we regularly field 4 to 6 pro bowlers a year. How many do we need? I completely disagree with the notion that signing 1 or 2 big money guys would have been the difference in the super bowl. I could easily make the opposite case and say if we had done that we would be just like the Giants, steelers, ravens, and others who's seasons are over right now, and in years past.

    BB built super bowl teams, some key injuries and plain bad luck like the Tyree catch are the reasons you and I are even having this discussion.



    If we could have a team of 53 probowlers I'd take that. I'm pretty sure anyone who works in the NFL would love a team of all probowlers. The difference in the SB's was a couple of plays. A couple more talented players over some of the JAGs they had on the field could have meant those plays so yes they could have made a difference. If you need proof look at the 06' season in which we were a couple plays away what did BB do that offseason, went out and spent on Thomas and Moss and traded a high pick for Welker. Obviously he saw that they needed to add more talent because they guys they had weren't enough to make those couple of extra plays. I'm not saying spend all your money on 1 or 2 big names what I am saying though is sometimes you have to spend a little extra to get a starting caliber player closer to their prime without as many issues instead of some of the retreads they constantly bring in like Ocho, or A. Wilson, or Gallery. How much money and resources were spent on guys like that when for a couple extra mil they could have had a Goldson (who they had worked out and offer a contract to) or a Sanders (who they liked and offered a contract to)

    BTW - I don't think BB agrees with you seeing as he still takes picks in the 1st-3rd rounds and even traded up for Chandler Jones. If he didn't think higher end talent could make a difference then why move up to get them to begin with? Why not just trade down and get 20 day 3 picks instead of taking day 1 and 2 picks instead?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ...[/QUOTE]


    I'm just going to go over a few names to add up a little of that cash, ready? 

    Ocho Cinco. Traded a 5th and a 6th. Then gave him an average of 6.5 million. 

    Jonathan Fanene. 3 years 15 million. Don't know if they got their money back, don't care, it was a waste and went against our cap. Period

    Leigh Bodden. 25 million dollar deal...didn't play a second of his contract.

    Shaun Ellis. 2 years 8 million. Guy literally walked out on the field and crapped his pants weekly in front of 60k thousand people and you called him "a steal from the jets". Lol!

    Schiancoe. We gave him over two million. He never ran more than three feet.

    Fells. See Schiancoe.

    Gregory. 3 years up to 8 million. Guy should be starting on a division 3 team.

    Hernandez. 45 million dollar contract

    Fred Taylor. 3 years 12 million. Played four games

    Albert Haynesworth. 2 years five million. We had to drive him to his court dates before he tried to punch Pepper Johnson on the sideline. Money well spent.

    Adrian Wilson.If we paid him anything more than ten bucks we got screwed...and we did. Gave the guy a nice 1.5 million retirement gift.

    Arrington. Four million per season to be a liability in coverage

    Stallworth, Holt, Galloway, Banta can't, Adalius Thomas 30 million, Gaffney, Mike Wright, Trevor Scott...I could go on, but there's already over 150 million in total contract money in these names. Not a single player out of those names...out of all that money, helped this team win. Yes I'd take Julius Peppers instead of all this hot garbage. Yes I would. And I can list more if you want. This is better than Ozzie Newsome? I'll tell you what, you bring Ozzie here and let him have Tom and Belichick and there wouldn't be a list like the one above. 

    Go get your calculator you dope.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Some of the names you mention were decent players who contributed to winning teams, guys like Wright, Scott, Banta Cain, even Gregory. And some of them were low cost gambles that teams take. Some pan out, some don't. Adrian Wilson cost Bob Kraft $1 million, big deal. That's like a tank of gas for you and me. He'll manage.

    And a few of them were legitimate mistakes like Ocho and Haynesworth, mostly because they gave up draft picks. But we're dealing with human beings, sometimes they suck. 

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Siliga


    Siliga is a stud who is just one peice of this crazy puzzle. He is a great story. Keep working hard and let the chips fall where they may. He now has a chance to help us in a big way. The way he got low and collapsed the line on that QB sneak was a thing of beauty and he is holding his own in there allowing our backers to roam more.

    We still are luck to have had Vellano and Jones who despite being overmatched most times did the best job you could ask while filling in.

    The aquisiton of Blount may go a long way. Siliga is equally important for helping to shore up our run D.

    2 things you need to win in postseason. Run Game and a Run D! We are still in the hunt and have a chance and when you have Brady playing possum handing off most of the time and then you can just spead em out and pick them apart...thats how this offense should be ran. Kudos to BB for finding this guys in season. Id like to see him stay

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

    Re: Siliga

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    You want to talk about value? Here lets talk about value...Ocho Cinco, Albert Haynesworth, Robert Gallery, Jonathan Fanene, Shaun Ellis, Fred Taylor, Leigh Bodden, Adrian Wilson, Schiancoe, Fells, Trevor Scott, Joseph Addai, Stallworth, Gregory, Gaffney, Hernandez.

    There's over a 100 million in value right there^^^. I could add another 100 million in names if you want. All those guys I just listed was our value...the guys that were supposed to help...how we were smarter than everyone else. If you want to ignore that go ahead, but it's not going anywhere. We had our chance to sign quality players...we blew it in a biblical fashion. We are now in salary cap hell because of it, you'd think at least one of those "values" would of worked out. I'd take one Peppers over all that JUNK! 

    [/QUOTE]

    First off take Hernandez's millions out of the pot, if he didn't turn into a serial killer he was easily the best HBack/Fullback in the game.

    Now that we've done that, stop for a moment and take a look at the big picture.  The end game here is to win football games, they posted a graphic the other day in the Bills game that has been floating around the board, the Patriots have had a decade worth of winning seasons with the next best team being the Packers with 4 seasons.  

    Year after year the Patriots the Patriots are one of the most frugal teams and never go over the cap, they are the poster team for cap management, but you're painting them as spending like drunken sailors.  They sign players with little money down and little money lost if they get cut, moreover the sign other players as contingency plans in case these free agents don't pan out, they are almost always prepared for injury or for a player to quit.

    How can you argue against success?  

    And please don't pull out the Super Bowl as a reason, the majority of the teams in the NFL haven't won a championship in decades, there is a high degree of luck involved, mainly regarding health, if life were like Madden football and we could turn off the "injuries" button, the Patriots would have the best team annually and would never lose.

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Siliga

    Sports is about winning the big trophy.....nothing else.  There's 1 winner and everyone else is a LOSER.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sports is about winning the big trophy.....nothing else.  There's 1 winner and everyone else is a LOSER.

    [/QUOTE]

    Better to have a shot EVERY year than have decades of futility and misery... I remember the 80's.  Reagrding BB, in the words of Carly Simon, nobody does it better.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Siliga

    Who's success whould you rather have since 2004.....Red Sox or Patriots?

    I'll take the Sox.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from CatfishHunter. Show CatfishHunter's posts

    Re: Siliga

    He's been great.

    My draft philosophy has always been after filling glaring holes in your team draft the Best Available Samoan.

    This guy has been through personal tragedy as well ... the tsunami of a few years ago

    "Defensive tackle Sealver Siliga lost eight family members, and offensive lineman Neli A'asa had three die in the disasters. According to various Utah media outlets, all were believed to be aunts, uncles or cousins."

    http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/8840/utah-players-lose-family-in-tsunami-smu-coach-awaits-word

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Who's success whould you rather have since 2004.....Red Sox or Patriots?

    I'll take the Sox.

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't have to choose, I am blessed to be a New England sports fan, I choose the Pats, Celtics, Sox and Bruins every time.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Who's success whould you rather have since 2004.....Red Sox or Patriots?

    I'll take the Sox.

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't have to choose, I am blessed to be a New England sports fan, I choose the Pats, Celtics, Sox and Bruins every time.

    [/QUOTE]

    lol, well just to indulge myself from 2005 - 2013 in those 9 years the Sox have made the playoffs just over 50% of the time (5x) coming in last place in 2012.  

    Just seems being the annual Champ is much better then the Perennial loser.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    lol, well just to indulge myself from 2005 - 2013 in those 9 years the Sox have made the playoffs just over 50% of the time (5x) coming in last place in 2012.  

    Just seems being the annual Champ is much better then the Perennial loser.

    [/QUOTE]

    Winning in the NFL isn't easy, they may have made it look easy 2001-2004 but it wasn't, its even harder now because we can't sneak up on anyone, we're at the top of the mountain looking down.  

    Beating us in the regular season is the super bowl for many teams, most teams are reluctant to trade players to us, our coaches get poached every offseason and if we're interested in free agents those teams usually come back with larger counter offers to beat us.  

    Enjoy it while it lasts, just imagine a decade of sub 500 teams, or worse pretend you're a jests fan, everyone hates you and you sux... at least people hate us because we're the best.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sports is about winning the big trophy.....nothing else.  There's 1 winner and everyone else is a LOSER.

    [/QUOTE]

    Better to have a shot EVERY year than have decades of futility and misery... I remember the 80's.  Reagrding BB, in the words of Carly Simon, nobody does it better.

    [/QUOTE]

    They have a punchers chance every year for one reason and one reason only...Tom Brady. You take him off the team this year and they go 5-11 with outstanding coaching. I'm glad you get excited over getting punched in the face by playoff teams (been watching that for nearly a decade now), but the fact remains we need more than just him to win it all. That's the GM's job.

    Every year you get all excited over undrafted free agents that don't go out on the field and pee themselves. Earlier this year it was some big defensive tackle that wasn't even on our roster anymore...remember that one? What was his name? And last year it was Justin Francis, remember him? You were putting him into the hall of fame - the guy is out of football a year later. All these "finds" are here because the guys we draft and sign as free agents go BUST! Then Bill coaches the hell out of them...gets them to run in the right direction for a few games...and you get all excited until they get smacked in the face by NFL playoff teams. 

    If this is not the case then it's all Brady's fault, and I don't believe that to be true. I think it's the collection of players on the team and I think here have been too many mistakes building that team over the last five years. You want to take Hernandez off that free agent contract lists? Why? We signed him, we knew what he was to a point, we took that gamble from day one...that was mistake. In fact every other GM in football would be fired for resigning a guy like that.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Sports is about winning the big trophy.....nothing else.  There's 1 winner and everyone else is a LOSER.

    [/QUOTE]

    Better to have a shot EVERY year than have decades of futility and misery... I remember the 80's.  Reagrding BB, in the words of Carly Simon, nobody does it better.

    [/QUOTE]

    They have a punchers chance every year for one reason and one reason only...Tom Brady. You take him off the team this year and they go 5-11 with outstanding coaching. I'm glad you get excited over getting punched in the face by playoff teams (been watching that for nearly a decade now), but the fact remains we need more than just him to win it all. That's the GM's job.

    Every year you get all excited over undrafted free agents that don't go out on the field and pee themselves. Earlier this year it was some big defensive tackle that wasn't even on our roster anymore...remember that one? What was his name? And last year it was Justin Francis, remember him? You were putting him into the hall of fame - the guy is out of football a year later. All these "finds" are here because the guys we draft and sign as free agents go BUST! Then Bill coaches the hell out of them...gets them to run in the right direction for a few games...and you get all excited until they get smacked in the face by NFL playoff teams. 

    If this is not the case then it's all Brady's fault, and I don't believe that to be true. I think it's the collection of players on the team and I think here have been too many mistakes building that team over the last five years. You want to take Hernandez off that free agent contract lists? Why? We signed him, we knew what he was to a point, we took that gamble from day one...that was mistake. In fact every other GM in football would be fired for resigning a guy like that.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep, the one season we have to go by the pats went 11-5 with matt cassel, for those that care to remember it would have been 12-4 if not for David Thomas personal foul which gave the colts the game. 

    Now lets look at other teams who still have HOF QBs in the steelers, amd giants. They have a chance to win a super bowl this year? How about the ravens? Super bowl winning coach, GM, and QB still their. 

    How about Brady just turned in one of his worst statistical seasons, but we are still 12-4. 10th in ppg allowed, 5th in sacks, 12th in picks, 1st in rushing touch downs. 

    Again, a fools errand to try and say 1 player is responsible for a team sport that at 1 point has 90 players on the roster.  

    But what does it matter....you have your mind made up. Keep on trying to sell us that BB suddenly forgot how to build winning football teams. The rest of us will enjoy our 4rth playoff bye week in as many years.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    They have a punchers chance every year for one reason and one reason only...Tom Brady.

    [/QUOTE]

    This has already been proven false, they went 11-5 without Brady in 2008, they had the #1 offense in the NFL in creating 1st downs that year and were ranked #1 in scoring percentage.

    Football is a team sport, a team sport with 60 man rosters including the practice squad.  Coaching is everything.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

     

    Every time Mt Hurl and his brainwashed morons make a statement like that, I will  be here reminding the board of how crappy he's been, which means it's not just about Brady.  Imagine if he wasn't so crappy?



    You're just as wrong or more so than they are, this goes both ways, it's a team sport.  

    The offense plays bad or well, not just Tom.  A lot has to happen, many people have to do their job for a pass and catch to connect.  

    Tom Brady is the best in the game, but QB's get too much credit when they win and too much blame when they lose.  The only constant is coaching, great coaches find good players and make them great, not the opposite.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    I disagree. 1st off you say how many of those guys become pro bowlers? It doesn't matter as we regularly field 4 to 6 pro bowlers a year. How many do we need? I completely disagree with the notion that signing 1 or 2 big money guys would have been the difference in the super bowl. I could easily make the opposite case and say if we had done that we would be just like the Giants, steelers, ravens, and others who's seasons are over right now, and in years past.

    BB built super bowl teams, some key injuries and plain bad luck like the Tyree catch are the reasons you and I are even having this discussion.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If we could have a team of 53 probowlers I'd take that. I'm pretty sure anyone who works in the NFL would love a team of all probowlers. well, i guess we are living in the real world, and while you complain about how many undrafted players become pro bowlers, we keep producing 4-6 pro bowlers a year, which with perspective(compared to the rest of the league)we know is a phenomenal job by our GM. 

    The difference in the SB's was a couple of plays. A couple more talented players over some of the JAGs they had on the field could have meant those play and or might have meant one of those talented players ended up being just ok like juluis peppers the last 2 years, and we would have paid premium money for production we could have got from 2nd year players like Jones and coachable over acheivers like Nink. The building model cannot be down played, it is proven.

    so yes they could have made a difference. If you need proof look at the 06' season in which we were a couple plays away what did BB do that offseason, went out and spent on Thomas and Moss and traded a high pick for Welker. BB traded a 2nd round and 4rth round pick for those players. You guys have condemned that draft even though it produced 2 of the best players we ever had. 2006 was also the worst collection of offensive talent we ever had. Are you trying to say we havent had offensive talent every year since then?

     Obviously he saw that they needed to add more talent because they guys they had weren't enough to make those couple of extra plays. I'm not saying spend all your money on 1 or 2 big names what I am saying though is sometimes you have to spend a little extra to get a starting caliber player closer to their prime without as many issues instead of some of the retreads they constantly bring in like Ocho, or A. Wilson, or Gallery. How much money and resources were spent on guys like that when for a couple extra mil they could have had a Goldson (who they had worked out and offer a contract to) or a Sanders (who they liked and offered a contract to)

     

    BTW - I don't think BB agrees with you seeing as he still takes picks in the 1st-3rd rounds and even traded up for Chandler Jones. If he didn't think higher end talent could make a difference then why move up to get them to begin with? Why not just trade down and get 20 day 3 picks instead of taking day 1 and 2 picks instead?

    wait, so your argument is that because BB drafts players in the 1st -3rd rounds he doesn't actually believe in his own value system? Of course higher end talent makes a difference, at the right price and for the right player. We knew with the rookie wage scale in effect he would start taking players higher. The system works. We have the best record in football for a 13 year period, Brady is having one of his worst seasons and here we are 12-4 with the most injury riddled team in the league.  

    Belichick builds for depth, he goes for coachable high effort team 1st guys. That is who he thinks gives his team the best chance to win. That is the type of players that the coach likes to coach! You think he's wrong?


     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Do you think Brady, our best player, our most expensive player in the cap era, our leader in an easy, offensive era where records are broken annually, is in any way partly responsible at all?

    Why through all of this, with Brady getting more tools to work with than any time prior in his career (pre 2007), in an easier Goodell era for QBs, is he not held accountable for poor play?

    Why is it on someone else when he rears back and launches a reckless INT on 1st downs for no reason other than being reckless in the decision?

    That's not on anyone else but Brady.  You can't change that fat, Wozzy. It cannot be changed.

    No one on the offense, no one on the sidelines, stands or at home forced him to make those decisions to hurt our team.

    [/QUOTE]

    The team wasn't good enough when it needed to be.

    The biggest deficiency this team has had post 2001-2004 has been the loss of great coaches, assistants, strength coaches, personnel men and coordinators.  

    A good carpenter doesn't blame his tools.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Siliga

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    I disagree. 1st off you say how many of those guys become pro bowlers? It doesn't matter as we regularly field 4 to 6 pro bowlers a year. How many do we need? I completely disagree with the notion that signing 1 or 2 big money guys would have been the difference in the super bowl. I could easily make the opposite case and say if we had done that we would be just like the Giants, steelers, ravens, and others who's seasons are over right now, and in years past.

    BB built super bowl teams, some key injuries and plain bad luck like the Tyree catch are the reasons you and I are even having this discussion.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If we could have a team of 53 probowlers I'd take that. I'm pretty sure anyone who works in the NFL would love a team of all probowlers. well, i guess we are living in the real world, and while you complain about how many undrafted players become pro bowlers, we keep producing 4-6 pro bowlers a year, which with perspective(compared to the rest of the league)we know is a phenomenal job by our GM. 

    I'm sure if you ask BB how many probowlers he'd like on his team his response wouldn't be 4-6 is good enough we don't need more. Lets keep things in perspective that the more probowlers you have the more liekly you are to win a SB. BTW those probowlers you don't really care for with exception of Brady where do they usually come from? Mayo - 1st, Gronk 2nd, Wilfork 1st, Ghost high pick for a kicker, McCourty - 1st seems to be a correlation of spending a little more or taking higher draft picks and them turning into top level performers huh? And don't the more higher level performers you have mean the better chance you have to win?

    The difference in the SB's was a couple of plays. A couple more talented players over some of the JAGs they had on the field could have meant those play and or might have meant one of those talented players ended up being just ok like juluis peppers the last 2 years, and we would have paid premium money for production we could have got from 2nd year players like Jones and coachable over acheivers like Nink. The building model cannot be down played, it is proven.

    This is true not every FA works out. However, it's proven that since 04' we haven't won a SB. Now I love Nink but he's giving his all right now and can't pump it up any higher than he currently is. It's proven in the playoffs you need to take it to the next level in order to compete. Every player and coach will tell you that, so if you are already playing at your max it's hard to give that much more. Dillon could, Brady does, Rodney did, Seymour did but players like Arrington, Nink, Earthwind can't and typically don't.

    so yes they could have made a difference. If you need proof look at the 06' season in which we were a couple plays away what did BB do that offseason, went out and spent on Thomas and Moss and traded a high pick for Welker. BB traded a 2nd round and 4rth round pick for those players. You guys have condemned that draft even though it produced 2 of the best players we ever had. 2006 was also the worst collection of offensive talent we ever had. Are you trying to say we havent had offensive talent every year since then?

    That's my point he identified players with high end talent and went out and spent to get them! That's what I've been saying. He saw 06' value O wasn't enough and spent resources to fix the problem. That's what I've been talking about. Did it go over your head?

     Obviously he saw that they needed to add more talent because they guys they had weren't enough to make those couple of extra plays. I'm not saying spend all your money on 1 or 2 big names what I am saying though is sometimes you have to spend a little extra to get a starting caliber player closer to their prime without as many issues instead of some of the retreads they constantly bring in like Ocho, or A. Wilson, or Gallery. How much money and resources were spent on guys like that when for a couple extra mil they could have had a Goldson (who they had worked out and offer a contract to) or a Sanders (who they liked and offered a contract to)

     

    BTW - I don't think BB agrees with you seeing as he still takes picks in the 1st-3rd rounds and even traded up for Chandler Jones. If he didn't think higher end talent could make a difference then why move up to get them to begin with? Why not just trade down and get 20 day 3 picks instead of taking day 1 and 2 picks instead?

    wait, so your argument is that because BB drafts players in the 1st -3rd rounds he doesn't actually believe in his own value system? Of course higher end talent makes a difference, at the right price and for the right player. We knew with the rookie wage scale in effect he would start taking players higher. The system works. We have the best record in football for a 13 year period, Brady is having one of his worst seasons and here we are 12-4 with the most injury riddled team in the league.

    My argument is your logic is off since BB himself has at times switched gears and dropped the value concept when there was a critical hole that needed to be filled. He didn't get value for Dillon for a 2nd, didn't get it for Welker at the time at another 2nd, didn't get it for Thomas as it was one of the bigger contracts he'd ever given out, and he moved up to get Jones which isn't value either. So at times he has spent. Spending a little more doesn't mean you go out like a mad man and spend wild but it also doesn't mean you should take 20 players to find 1 either and that's what you are arguing. 

    Belichick builds for depth, he goes for coachable high effort team 1st guys. That is who he thinks gives his team the best chance to win. That is the type of players that the coach likes to coach! You think he's wrong?

    At times I think he himself thinks it's wrong. Do you think he's happy with the way the D has played? Do you think he maybe second thought about not getting a DT in a DT heavy draft given they are ranked 31st against the run? Or drafting T. Wilson well before anyone thought he should go? He himself has second guessed his only style, like resigning players before their rook contracts were up (after the fights with Wilfork and Mankins), or going out and getting Brady receivers after that 06' season, or moving up to get Jones after passing on chances at edge rushers in the draft for years. If it's alright for BB to question himself and change styles why can't we? Obviously he doesn't think he's right all the time as he's admitted he's been wrong before unless you believe everything he does is perfect. 

    [/QUOTE]


     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from soups. Show soups's posts

    Re: Siliga


    Getting back to Siliga...maybe Fouts will pronounce his name correctly from here on out.

     

     

Share