Re: Anybody else think this may be the most talented team the Pats have had since 2007?
posted at 8/19/2013 8:22 PM EDT
In response to russgriswold's comment:
I feel bad for Don'tSleepOnThe Pats, but he can point to Prolate mentioning Burgess in 2009 where this thread went off the rails. Prolate has no one to blame but himself for that one. He had a good thread to start it, but he sent it off into neverland which is what happens here.
Huh? Burgess was just an example of a number of "patches" BB has tried to fill holes in the talent. That's what is different this year. The guys aren't "patches." Some are young and unproven, but they're guys with lots of upside and potential. Burgess was on the downside of his career. He was brought in to provide some pass rush and couldn't deliver because he was washed up. He's a perfect example of the difference between the teams of the bast five years or so and today's team. I never said bringing in Burgess was a bad decision. We needed patches. What's different today is we don't need patches because BB has had success bringing in enough youth with potential.
I made no cheapshot . . . you just wanted to start a fight. Typical.
That's really why Don'tSleep has stopped coming here and that's too bad because he's a good poster.
Anyone not knowing BB wasn't all in for 2009 isn't very bright, or trolling by saying BB thought Burgess would be some savior and long term rebuilding block at DE here.
It's a cheap shot by Prolate. He's too intelligent and I wasn't letting that one go. Sorry. It was a trollish addition to his follow up commentary. There is a salary cap and there was a lockout in 2011. He's too smart to not acknowledge those elements in his analysis.
BB dealt Seymour, Vrable and Bruschi retired and we're all in for a SB in 2009? Really? What FAs on the market were available to replace those kinds of players? Answer? No one.
Unknown economic environment, lockout in 2011, needing to pay Mankins, Wilfork and Brady in 2010 and we can be aggressive in FA in 2010 or 2011?
I think it's disingenuous to come in here and tell BB that he doesn't have the right as a GM to rebuild the right way, because it doesn't appease a fan's childish demands of an immediate, overnight SB team. We would rather he did what the Jets did with huge holes all over their roster which makes them masquerade as an above .500 team, when they really aren't? Mt Hurl fell for it. He said he wanted BB to do it and destroy our team for the future. Why any Pats fan would want that, I have no idea.
It just doesn't happen. I think it's amazing BB did what he did as coach and in the draft/trades in 2010, winning coach of the year, having the balls to deal Moss with better results, and to have us in the SB with such a young team off a lockout with no camp???? That was incredible.
Meanwhile, that group of Prolate's gush over Brady all year long, only to go quiet when he sucks or is mediocre for us in Brady's preferred shotgun spread base in the postseason. Or, Brady's preference for the hurry up as a gimmick.
Neither are base offenses. They're wrinkles. And this goes back YEARS.
We should be celebrating the tweaks from BB as a GM this offseason, not arguing back and forth, because it appears to me he's made the final tweaks to address both sides of the ball where we had some flaws in recent years. I think that is fair, but it also needs to be acknowledged he wasn't trying to go for it all in a small window in 2009 and 2010. Just get over it.
1. He could not do that.
2. If he had done it, some key players we count on right now, wouldn't be here.
But, mentioning Burgess from 2009? That was a cheapshot by Prolate.