The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

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

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    I agree with you on this.  Why always try to get something for nothing? The fact is when it fails you are left with...nothing. 

    If the pats don't show some signs of life this year (and they have a tough sched), it will be 3 years since their last superbowl and not much to show for it.  Granted you cannot leave out the Brady injury, but you still have to play football. 

    Draft picks are not players.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from apdynasty23. Show apdynasty23's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    I think just the opposite: it's extending his prime. Had the Patriots been all-in the past few years, we'd be sacrificing depth in the future even with Brady still playing. The Patriots aren't cheap by any means, check the numbers. On the other hand, if the Jets give max money to their Core Four, and Sanchez pans out, they'll be handicapped during Sanchez' prime years because there's no depth and this is a league that's often predicated on which teams handle injuries the depth (the answer there is quality depth)
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Evil2010. Show Evil2010's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime:
    [QUOTE]I agree with you on this.  Why always try to get something for nothing? The fact is when it fails you are left with...nothing.  If the pats don't show some signs of life this year (and they have a tough sched), it will be 3 years since their last superbowl and not much to show for it.  Granted you cannot leave out the Brady injury, but you still have to play football.  Draft picks are not players.
    Posted by underdoggggg[/QUOTE]

    Funny from someone who's an Indy fan. How's that worked out for your boy Peyton's carrer? A couple of big salary 'star' players have added up to lots of personal records and one title.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    The only detrimental factor in the Pats not being 12 win teams(or more) the last 2 years was the tearing of 3 ligaments in the knee of the best QB in the game. Underdogged and StanleyMorgan(you don't deserve this title) how many wins do you see the Pats getting in 08 and 09 with Brady never having missed a game? Your answer will dictate  whether or not you are worth having a conversation with.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MordecaiBloodmoon. Show MordecaiBloodmoon's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    It is not about the value picks.  It is about the missed picks, the busts.  We are always close to cap.  So there has to be room to add someone.  Trades almost never happen in the NFL.  Moving up does not assure a great pick, look at the Sanchise as a great example. 
    Yes I want us to win it all every year and with Brady we have a shot.  I still think our next SB win will be 2012 and 2013.
    Wasted years, ask Barry Sanders about that one.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from smorgan86. Show smorgan86's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime:
    [QUOTE]The only detrimental factor in the Pats not being 12 win teams(or more) the last 2 years was the tearing of 3 ligaments in the knee of the best QB in the game. Underdogged and StanleyMorgan(you don't deserve this title) how many wins do you see the Pats getting in 08 and 09 with Brady never having missed a game? Your answer will dictate  whether or not you are worth having a conversation with.
    Posted by TrueChamp[/QUOTE]

    Stop already! Question for you. How many DB's have we drafted the past 4 years? How many BUST FA's because we wanted them cheap?? How's that worked out so far?? Gimme a break with using injuries as an exuse. Right now we have 2nd tier talent at alot of key positions as well as crappy street value FA's
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from deluxbury. Show deluxbury's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

     I agree with your thoughts here to a degree.  There's been quite a few drafts in the past when a solid player of need was available and they passed. 

    I think what BB has done is good sound strategy if you are looking out for the long-term best of interest of the team.  However, I think there could have been a little more balance to what he was doing.

    My frustrations are around OLB's and most specifcally the lack of a pass rusher.  I think this team would have two more SB's under its belt if he played his cards a little better on building the defense.  Perhaps we would have been able to stop the Colts with the huge lead we had in 06.  Perhaps Eli never would have had the chance to beat us in 07.

    If someone asked me in the year 2000 if I would be content with 4 superbowl appearences with three wins in the next 10 years, I would have said HELL YEAH! 

    It's just we were so close to two more which will likely never happen again in the NFL period!

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

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    In Response to The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime:
    [QUOTE]Not that I'm against the BB "value" approach as a basic strategy. I'm not. You can't overspend for everybody. BUT, I think they have taken it too far too often. This team in my opinion didin't and hasn't for a number of years, needed a ground up rebuild. Stockpiling picks and bring in value FA's is great when you need many pieces to the puzzle to even compete at a high level. I think this team has been 2 or three players away from again being a 12 plus win team. The Pats and BB has had PLENTY of draft picks in the deck to either move up in the draft or trade for a few of these players to plug the few holes we have. Instead they have continued to take the approach of moving out of every draft slot and grabbing as many bodies as they can, throw them against the wall to see what "sticks". Meanwhile, every year Brady is a year older. Worry about the full blown rebuild when Brady is done and gone. How is it that we can't manage to pull in ONE shutdown corner or ONE edge pass rusher with all the cards we've had to play? They've had money, picks and players to leverage and they choose to take the "value" approach that MAY get us 9 wins this season. That in my opinion is a WASTE for a team with TB
    Posted by smorgan86[/QUOTE]

    I agree alot if not ALL of what you said her Stanley Steamer.  Throw out 2007 when they signed MOSS / WELKER - and they 'went for it' from how I felt - but the other years to me they didn't 'go for it' as they should since the 04 SB.  I'm not saying signing everything under the sun, but a key signing here and there could have made a huge difference, OR as you said Smorgan, stay in the First Rd and take a 1st rd talent instead of looking for value.  I do agree that it does seem we are wasting some Golden years here to grab another title.  tom Brady's don't come around too often, we may never see this again in our lifetime...

    Let's see what happens by next week as there are going to be cuts on Saturday and as we ALL know - they have Plenty of Draft Picks in Next yr's draft to possibly TRADE a pick for a talented Player who can HELP THIS YEAR! (esp. on the Defensive side of the ball)....
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime : Stop already! Question for you. How many DB's have we drafted the past 4 years? How many BUST FA's because we wanted them cheap?? How's that worked out so far?? Gimme a break with using injuries as an exuse. Right now we have 2nd tier talent at alot of key positions as well as crappy street value FA's
    Posted by smorgan86[/QUOTE]

    Where are they?

    Merriweather 1st
    Chung 2nd
    McCourty 1st
    Butler 2nd
    Mayo 1st
    Spikes 2nd
    Burgess 52 sacks 3rd
    TBC 10 sacks last year 7th
    Wilfork 1st(best NT in game)
    Gerrard Warren 1st
    Damien Lewis 1st
    Cunningham 2nd
    Mckenzie 3rd
    Sanders 3rd
    Brace 2nd
    Wright ?

    When the injured player is your 3 time SB Champion QB I would say it has bearing on the conversation bud.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from 123meg. Show 123meg's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    These trolls have way too much free time
     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The




    LOL, I shall call him minime
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 123meg. Show 123meg's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    They spend to the cap every year.  What imaginary numbers were you checking?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from bradleyBliss. Show bradleyBliss's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime:
    [QUOTE]I agree with you on this.  Why always try to get something for nothing? The fact is when it fails you are left with...nothing.  If the pats don't show some signs of life this year (and they have a tough sched), it will be 3 years since their last superbowl and not much to show for it.  Granted you cannot leave out the Brady injury, but you still have to play football.  Draft picks are not players.
    Posted by underdoggggg[/QUOTE]


    Hey doggiedodo! WHAT in the name of football would you know about a tough schedule?????????????????????

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

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime : Oh, I have checked the numbers.  In 2009 Kraft pocketed about 30 million of the money under the cap.In 2008, it was 24 million in 2007, they were close to the cap in 2006, by coincidence, they reached the superbowl - hmmm. 
    Posted by PhatRex[/QUOTE]

    The pats were $4mil under the cap last year, not 30 million.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from apdynasty23. Show apdynasty23's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    I wouldn't necessarily say there's a direct correlation between how much you spend and how often you win; if that were the case, the Redskins would be the greatest team in the history of the game.

    As a Patriots fan, I'll admit sometimes it gets annoying to always be dealing for "value." I mean, good luck watching a draft around here. But still, overall the system pays off because Kraft/Pioli/Belichick emphasized the economics of the game a bit more than just the talent aspect of it. That in a nutshell, is the story behind the dynasty.

    Part of him curtailing his spending also has to do with Patriot Place, I bet. I walked through there last year when I flew up for a game and it didn't seem like a fiscally viable operation.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from marvcook. Show marvcook's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    Believe it or not, the Patriots will not close up operations once Tom Brady retires. You don't need a HOF QB to win a Super Bowl. Just ask the 2000 Ravens, 2002 Bucs, 2005 Steelers, and 2007 Giants. The Patriots went 16-0 in '07 and probably would have gone 13-3 in '08 with a healthy Brady. It's amazing how one 10-6 season has put so many "fans" on suicide watch. Act like you've followed this team for more than 8 years. I have no problem with the RECENT draft strategy of stockpiling 2nd rounders. The failed drafts of 2006 & 2008 are what's handicapping this team right now, and in those years the Patriots didn't do much trading down.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from smorgan86. Show smorgan86's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime:
    [QUOTE]These trolls have way too much free time
    Posted by 123meg[/QUOTE]

    Don't read the thread them. Just because your part of the "In Bill we Trust" crowd doen't mean that others can't look at the FACTS and formulate an opinion. Everytime someone here goes against the Grand Wizard BB then they are a troll. Take a hike
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggggg. Show underdoggggg's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime : Hey doggiedodo! WHAT in the name of football would you know about a tough schedule?????????????????????
    Posted by bradleyBliss[/QUOTE]
    I know yours was meant to be a snide remark, but I don't get it.  Are suggesting the pats schedule will not be tough?
     
  20. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime : I know yours was meant to be a snide remark, but I don't get it.  Are suggesting the pats schedule will not be tough?
    Posted by underdoggggg[/QUOTE]

    Seems clear to me. We almost always seem to have a tougher schedule than the Dolts. Yours looks pretty soft again this season...no cold weather ....late season games, etc.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Grogan77. Show Grogan77's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    In Response to Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime:
    [QUOTE]Yea I dont agree, his prime might have been only a few years if it was not for the way the Pats do things, the team contends year in and year out and has double digit wins every year in his prime because of the way they handle themselves. When there is a player they feel is worth the money they spend. The issue is not the Pats but the fans. The Fans want them to spend on every big free agent out there so the fans think they are cheap but in the real the Pats most likely were never going to sign this guy or that guy cause they dont fit the team.
    Posted by MVPkilla4life[/QUOTE]

    I agree killa, it's the fans fault the Pats got knock out of the playoffs last season in foxboro.  Not the drafts or FA pickups.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggggg. Show underdoggggg's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    Brad,

    Last year we played each others division - I guess the AFC South is tougher than the East and we played the NFC West while you played the South.  Yeah you had it tougher last year

    This year we play the west and you play the North - Will Pitt be any good?  Is Cincy legit?  The browns??  We are probably even here - you may have it a little tougher. 

    We play the NFC East and you play the North (??) - we have tougher sched here. 

    Sounds like the scheds are pretty even.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: The "value" approach is squandering years of Brady's prime

    So, smorgan, you are operating under the assumption that the Pats are supposed to win 12 games every year, year after year.

    Good luck with that.
     

Share