Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

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

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    [QUOTE]We're set up for another decade of dominance. We've always had a good mixture of young and old on BB's best teams. As far as I remember we have two #1 picks along with a slew of mids in the next few drafts, I don't look at that as mortgaging the future away...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]


    I agree.

    Quick question: if brady goes down tomorrown and never returns - how important is it that we can either draft or trade for someone who can fill  Brady's shoes? How easy is it to actually accomplish that task.  High quality QBs are not a dime a dozen.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats? : I agree. Quick question: if brady goes down tomorrown and never returns - how important is it that we can either draft or trade for someone who can fill  Brady's shoes? How easy is it to actually accomplish that task.  High quality QBs are not a dime a dozen.
    Posted by anonymis[/QUOTE]

    Mallet was the best QB in the draft...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    Read the article and wonder if he knows what going for broke really means.  A poor choice of words. 

    I would have to agree that the Pats are running out of time with Brady and the window of opportunity is closing.  I don't think that this could be argued.  Maybe this is what Gasper is trying to say instead of "going for broke". 

    The change up of the roster is a stretch as well.  You take the window is closing idea and you look at what your weaknesses are.  The main one is getting to the QB.  More and more teams are moving to the 3-4.  That means 3-4 players are drying up and 4-3 are more available.  BB made the change.  You bring in a bunch of guys to compete and keep the best.  Now the chances of getting at the QB should be better.

    Changes made to the team I find misdirected.  This is the age of FA afterall.  Every team keeps a core, tries to build threw the draft and rotates everyone else.  Things will change by the nature of today's NFL.  So I don't know where he's going here. 

    It's not so much a negative article as it is a poor choice of words, window of opportunity closing with Brady vs. "going for broke".  Then doing something really silly and trying to support "going for broke". 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    We had a "decade of dominance"? We certainly had half a decade of dominance.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    [QUOTE]Why is someone so out of touch allowed to be employed?  The guy is right there following the team day to day, for crying out loud, and it's his job to at least be somewhere in the ballpark of having a clue. CHB and Mazz are the same way, except Gasper is more of an on the scene beatwriter/columist for the Pats.   CHB and Mazz are more just columnists who think they know everything. NE has two 1st rd picks next year (AGAIN), had a good 2009 draft, a GREAT 2010 draft and what appears to be a good 2011 draft. This means BB will have strung together 4 good drafts in a row when 2012 rolls around.  Go look at any unnamed NFL executive's quotes the last year or two and their opinions on NE.  They all say the same thing. Even national media haters can't ignore the genius of Belichick's incredibly thorough rebuilding process here. Meanwhile, Gapser feels these new FA moves are some sign of selling out for oen season?  What planet am I on here? This doesn't count players being developed in the pipeline who haven't even really hit the scene yet as mid, late or UDFA picks, either.  These always seem to be strong players for BB teams. Gasper is the type that thinks it's a good idea to look stupid by putting an agenda above his craft, and the fact is, no one will respect you as a professional when you do that. Even an educated Pats hater wouldn't claim NE is gambling to win in 2011 exclusively. When Ellis, Carter and Haynesworth or even Ocho Cinco, move on in the next 2-3 years, Belichick will have developed players or fresh, high draft picks AND veteran FAs, coming in here. Again, and again, and again. Gasper is either dumb, lazy or letting the agenda do the talking.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]

    Well said. The guy covers the team daily and this is what he comes up with? How about instead of tying to intergect your opinion, why don't you just break a story once in a while? Because your view on things sucks.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from mannyortez3424. Show mannyortez3424's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    I would call it more signing a lot of guys and seeing who sticks moreso than going for broke...

    The day Tom Brady retires is the day Bill and the Pats get desperate...
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    [QUOTE]I do not like Gasper's articles very much.  He's usually over the top and he's been a scribe in this town for much too short a time to have the negative schtick working for him.  In a recent article, he writes that the recent moves the Pats have made as "going for it" this year, and I actually agree with him.  The Pats have managed to accumulate some young talent and have used free agency to round out the roster nicely.  Many here have been saying for years that this team is rebuilding, and I believe they have been, even last year at 14-2 this team was not a finished product.  Gasper's article says that it's go for broke now, that this is the year since the Pats have invested in guys like Haynesworth, Ellis, Carter and CJ, and have brought Light back for another year and franchised Mankins.  He thinks that the core is going break apart next year and this could be the Pats' best chance to get back to a superbowl in the Brady era. I would argue that this team is set up nicely for the next 3-4 years and isn't a 1-trick pony loading up on vets like some of our division rivals.  This team will have some choices to make soon deciding which guys to re-sign, but there is enough young talent to keep this team competitive throughout the rest of Brady's time here.  I think the past few years of drafting have brought us another 3-4 year superbowl window.  Anyone else agree that this team is set up nicely for the next 3-4 years?     
    Posted by CablesWyndBairn[/QUOTE]

    we were close last year.  i think bb is doing the best he can for the team with these signings to give us the best chance to win now. does that mean we wont be able to win next year or the year after, of course not. i do hope we get a little better in the draft dept (not that we did poorly, but i think we could do better at selection players who can excel here (ie from ok or decent to excellent).
    whether that means adding someone to the scouting or draft decision making, whatever it takes.

    i like our chances this year.
    still ddont like meri as a starter and stil think we need to do better at olb (this year and in future).

    looking forward to see if price can be THAT GUY. and ditto with ras - I. loved what i saw from him in college.

    cant wait till regualr season,  lets get after em!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats? : More of it has to do with being realistic rather than being negative, though Shaugnessy can be a bit gloomy, lol. I mean, if you ask most fans on a fan forum, they will tell you NE will win the Superbowl before every single season. I think Gasper's bigger point is that NE looks loaded up this season, but next season is a little more hazy considering that Mankins, Ellis, Carter, and Ocho will be out of the picture or in FA on the market. I think that is pretty fair. I also think it is absolutely fair to bring light to any moves that add in the next four seasons. Tom is the best. And Tom is in his prime. But he also only has four seasons left on his deal, and at the end of it, might not be the same guy as he was at the start. There should be a slight sense of urgency on the part of New England brass to bring players in when you can to maximize the time you have while Brady is still 'the man.' It has a bit of that Randy Moss feeling from 2007, when BB had a very good team with some holes (WR) and added a few guys before he had the monster 2008-9 stretch where he would have to unload what was essentially the core of the defensive team. Let's hope he is right, because I would love this team to get a crack at a Superbowl. They are a lot younger, and are built a little bit better to 'survive' than the amazing offense they put together in 2007. This is not as big a drop off, NE won't be rebuilding over night. But he senses they are close and wanted the players to get them there. I would disagree that adding Haynesworth is that kind of deal -- you don't sign 'win now' guys to 3 year deals. The added an extra year in his contract. Haynesworth is meant to play here, play here at a high level, and play here through the next three seasons. He is not   a 2011 or bust player, but a guy to sit next to Fork and across from Tom and the core of TE's for the next few seasons while they try to make a few more runs.
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]


    which is exactly what i and a few others were saying last year.
    just a year later than some of us felt the need for. in the next 3 years or so let's go for 2. isolate who our competition will be, get the players, coach them up, unity/the patriot way. all out super bowl or bust. we've got what we need, let's do it. do what it takes, improvise, but no compromise.
    2011 here we come.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Patriots1970. Show Patriots1970's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    the Globe is now the worst paper in New England for the Patriots. I only check here now once a week - but before it was mutliple times per day. if it wasnt for the forum I would not use the globe at all.

    there is better information on twittah (not via the globe) then this site/paper
     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from memery26. Show memery26's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    I don't know how you can look at the team's consistency over the past decade and come away with any other conclusion than the Pats being the best at managing personnel. 

    Everyone else seems to cobble together teams every season; BB and Kraft have implemented a system that transcends individual seasons. It just so happens to spit out quality teams every year, leaving FA and trades to complete the package. 

    It's amazing how everyone seems to see it happening, but nobody else can do it like NE, and, maybe, Green Bay.


     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    If BB has had a decade of 'mixed' results I'll take mixed results every decade please. LOL.

    Mixed as in ... a mix of 30% Patriots superbowl wins, 40% patriots superbowl appearances, 50% Patriots AFC appearances, and 90% playoff appearances. That is one excellent mix.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from goredsox100. Show goredsox100's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    I do not think BB has tendered any future, whatsoever. This is not a NY Yankees situation here where we've brought in ridiculously expensive contracts on aging veterans and locked them into long-term deals, while giving away our youth. BB has had four straight very good drafts for young talent. Last year, the argument can be made, was a unique year in which he leaned heavily on giving young talent on-field experience (and somehow went 14-2). Now he goes and drafts RB's, safeties, OL, and a QB in this year's draft. We've got young developing WR's, TE's, DB's, Safeties, ILBs, OL's and a slew or RB's. The smartest thing BB could do is surround all of this young raw talent with seasoned, experienced, veterans with role-specific jobs to get us through this year, maybe next year too, and, for little money and short-term deals. We haven't gambled one iota of our future. 

    With respect to Brady, Welker and Branch, it can be argued that there is somewhat of a window if you are looking at these three as a tandem unit, I guess. But, they are still here now. Next year, we have plenty of draft picks to go for WR's and Offensive Linemen (possibly) to help Brady remain durable. But I'm putting my money on Solder, Mankins, Connolly, Cannon, Light. I just do no see where the holes in our future are. HOpefully, we will find our next QB to take his reigns in Mallet in a few years from now. I'll willing to cross that bridge when we get to it.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BTownExpress. Show BTownExpress's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    I've been saying for the past 2-3 years that the Pats need to pay attention to parameters in regards to the timing of having core players around. The fact that so many short-term contracts were introduced this year is not necessarily a situation where the team is going for broke.  I might simply be that it makes more sense to audition a few more than "go for broke" in the draft, especially since so many good players are available.

    Personally, I believe that the Pats should have a legitimate contender for the next couople of years.  It might appear that they are going for broke every year that Brady & Co. are around.  However, don't be surprised if most of the same cast are back next year along with a few of the guys who played well through their short-term contract.
     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    I would agree that at least some of this is specifically designed to stir up debate. We're in here talking about it, so from Gasper's perspective, that's a good thing whether he's right or wrong . . .  or whether he even believes what he writes. Personally, I have trouble believing that someone who makes their living covering the team really maintains this perspective. I won't bother rehashing everything that's already been said in the thread, but fleshing out the roster with key veteran needs -- some of them at arguably exorbitant costs -- is a thing every "re-loading" team wishes it could do.

    As an exampe, I live in the Vikings market. That team should have been in the Super Bowl two years ago and is now looking up at the Detroit Lions . . .  relying on has-beens and never-weres to remain relevant (they won't) as the league passes them by. That is a team that wen't "all in" the way Gasper is describing it. Not only did their gamble not pay off, but there is little reason to believe they'll be back anytime soon.

    Conversely, the Pats have remained at the top of the league despite the youth movement and, yes, I know there were a few of the diehards in here predicting the typical undefeated season for the Pats last year (I'm looking at you, mighty), but realistically, few of us envisioned anything remotely like how the Pats progressed last season. It's true enough that Brady is the key and that the time is now, but as has been pointed out, "now" isn't this year . . .  it's the next five years.

    Sure, there are some short-term fixes in place, but fans (or writers) should have no reason to believe that those parts aren't replaceable. The reason people hate Bill Belichick isn't because he "cheated" (although that's what they will tell you). They hate him because he runs circles around them -- most of them, at any rate -- and accomplishes what the league is supposed to be designed to prevent.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from passfirst. Show passfirst's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?


      those two writers are complete hacks.  I never read there articles.  In no way shape or form is the future mortgaged for the present.  They've got a great balance right now and the growing core of young talent coupled with the culture of Patriot football gives them a chance to repeat the moves made through free agency this year and for the foreseeable future.

    Maybe it gains them attention to doubt BB as a coach.  What a joke.  What a lack of respect.  That 2008 season was incredible.  They were arguably the best team in football by the last week in the season.  It's a shame that two worse teams in their own division got into the playoffs instead that year.  There is so much more that is actually real, that's interesting and that they could report on. I thought the job of reporting was to be insightful not to incite people.  Hacks!  
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from lippa. Show lippa's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?

    LMAO just wow o wow some people are getting alittle upset over a article  its one guys oppion no need to go nuts over it.
     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from passfirst. Show passfirst's posts

    Re: Anyone agree with Gasper's take on the Pats?


      It's not his opinion is the point.  And if he's trying to serve up a debate then he needs to come up with something better than "the pats are going for broke and there's no future after this".  He's actually getting paid for it.
     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share