Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from One-If-By-Sea. Show One-If-By-Sea's posts

    Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Let's admit the truth. Do you think our playoff hopes are increased if Asante was opposite Bodden and Seymour was opposite Warren? How would an extra 5 or so picks, and 8 extra sacks look right now? I know some people are all excited about trading for Suh or Peppers with our 2011 1st round pick, but I think we would have a shot at the SB with Asante and Seymour. Without them - I am not nearly as optimistic.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from can-pats-fan. Show can-pats-fan's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    I've seen enough Raider games this year to state Seymour is done, stick a fork in him.  He was once great and is now barely an upgrade over Green.  That said, Samuel "pay me money" Samuel would help, no doubt about that.  Too bad he is a me first player, otherwise he would still be a Pat today and yes we would be better, but not SB level with that change.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from AZPAT. Show AZPAT's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    GIVE IT UP!

    What's next? Whining about McGinnest, Law, and Vinateri? It's time for you to move on and get a life!

    I still wish the Pats had Sam Bam Cunningham and Larry Nance running for them, and Mike Haynes and Tim Fox in the defensive backfield. And, BTW, just WHO let Bruschi retire?

    Geesch!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Seymour has his best days behind him.  There would be no increase in sacks.  See last year.  Samuel probably would have a pick or two but without a pass rush your numbers are somewhat bloated.  Samuel is also known for being a poor tackler.  Weighing everything I wasn't really sorry to see him go and I think we plugged that hole up pretty good.  The defensive backfield is going to be fine.  You can't hold on to players forever.  Some you can but not all.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paulawht63. Show Paulawht63's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Pats no question Need Seymour Back In Oakland he doesn't fit in Like he did w/ the Pats the worst move Belichick ever made was Getting rid of Seymour GET HIM BACK
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dafoe. Show dafoe's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Asante Samuel has 8 INTs and Bodden has 5 That's a major upgrade? The big difference is Bodden got those picks while being a cover corner. He's where he is supposed to be most of the time. Samuel gives up big plays because he's not really interested in covering as much as he is trying to get a pick. He is not a shutdown corner. But a team was foolish enough to pay him like one. And I'd bet all the route jumping got under Belichick's skin. Who's to say the Pats wanted him back at any price? He had two good years in New England. Not to mention he cost us a Superbowl. It's time to move on.

    And Seymour? Some of you guys just need to give it up. If the Pats had kept him, he would have mailed it in for another year and then left via free agency. The only way the Pats were getting anything out of him was to trade him. The fact that they got a top 5 pick for him is nothing short of a miracle. How can anyone complain about that?

    The only move that was, and still is, a head scratcher was giving Vrabel away. And I would have liked to have seen them kick the tires on Tony Gonzalez. 

    The Pats are what they are. Complaining about ex Pats isn't going to help anything. I think the Patriots can get markedly better without adding anybody. If Brady can get back to being Brady, I mean mentally, they have a shot. He needs to lose the gunslinger mentality he's developed. What happened to the cerebral QB that just found the open guy? And the offense coordinator needs to get a little more creative. But this team CAN improve offensively.

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

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Asante was always frustrating BB because he never kept to plays and would always try to be the guy who makes the big play, which would end up letting some WR or TE wide open for a big gain. Asante is good but not for our defense. I agree with others, its over already get over it.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Asante blew our shot at SB a couple years back by ketting that pass thriough his hands-he chiked in the clutch, and is not a team player, he is me first and as for Seymour the guys washed up.

    I say trade wilfork for a good draft pick, then get the #1 pick in the draft and pick Suh
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Spetznaz24. Show Spetznaz24's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Samuel would've helped the Patriots. But didnt he cost us a Super Bowl 2 years ago? I am not only talking about the dropped interception that he should have had. Wasnt he also the guy who was supposed to cover Tyree on that miracle play? He didnt stay with Tyree and was wandering on the field. Harrison came too late and couldnt knock the ball out. Samuel was watching the whole play and didnt help Harrison.

    Seymour wouldnt have helped us. It was his last year in NE anyway, so whats the point? The money he wanted , NE wouldnt resign him. We got a top 5 pick for a guy who would've left anyway, so whats there to comlain about.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from One-If-By-Sea. Show One-If-By-Sea's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Asante Samuel has 8 INTs and Bodden has 5 That's a major upgrade?  My point is that it would be nice to have 13 INTs - would it not?

    It's time to move on. OK - time to move onto having Wilhite and Wheatley. I like our odds of winning a SB with Samuel over those guys, but you want to move on.

    Asante is good but not for our defense. I agree with others, its over already get over it. I am over it, but would like to win another SB. I would take Samuel over Springs, Wilhite and Wheatley - I would even like to take a chance on Law over Springs.

    and as for Seymour the guys washed up. And Shawn Springs is starting and is 24 years old? 25? 28? 38?

    And Seymour? Some of you guys just need to give it up. If the Pats had kept him, he would have mailed it in for another year and then left via free agency. The only way the Pats were getting anything out of him was to trade him. The fact that they got a top 5 pick for him is nothing short of a miracle. How can anyone complain about that? You draft guys kill me. So we traded Seymour for Eugene Chung - you draft guys don't get it. It is all about the future - the superstar that we will have - who cares - for me it is all about winning - wins and loses - I do not care about the draft. Half of our guys are third round and below.

    The Pats are what they are. Complaining about ex Pats isn't going to help anything. True, but you have to ask if we are destined to be a top 10 team for the next 20 years as we trade away our best players because it is good business, good for the franchise.

    Every week BB and the players say they have to go watch film and learn from their mistakes. It would be nice if this forum had the same courage.

    Marino and the Dolphins were a top 10 or a top 5 team for years and years. The Broncos and Elway finally changed at the end to win the SB. I think BB and the Kraft's business plan will keep us an elite team for years and years to come, but there is a difference between being an elite team and SB champs. Our business plan said that we could not pay Gaffney a bit more - Galloway was a better value. You can say "Move on" or "Get over it", but that just shows that you don't get it. Stop dinking the Koolaid for ONE minute. Close your eyes and think about learning from your mistakes. Why is it not a matter of "Moving on"? Because the organization has not moved on - their business plan has not changed. Next year we will let Gaffney go because 3rd receivers can only be paid X amount and Joey is just as good and a lot cheaper.

    Do you understand? The Pats have a business plan that keeps us a top 10 team - that is great for their revenue - it is a business. But as a fan I question their business plan. Are we better off without Samuel, Gaffney and Seymour and with Wilhite/Springs, Galloway and a 2011 1st round pick? You can say "Get over it" but in three years it will just be three different names and you will say "Get over it" again. Why will it be three different names? Because that is our business plan to stay in the top 10 teams and have steadily increasing revenue.

    We won 3 SBs because we had guys that made plays. Who has made a play this year on defense except for the Bills game? TBC has like 5 sakcs against the Bills. OH we made great plays against rookie Sanchez - more than half our picks. It will not be the Bills or Sanchez in the AFC Championship game. We have no playmakers on defense. No Smauel, no Seymour. But we have "VALUE" guys that fit our business plan. We did not have any 1st round picks, but 4 in the second round - great value for the business plan to stay in the Top 10, an elite team. We will keep doing the same business moves for "VALUE" guys, and you will keep making excuses and tell others to "Get over it" when the same "business decisions" (I say mistakes) are made over and over again.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Yapple. Show Yapple's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    "I still wish the Pats had Sam Bam Cunningham and Larry Nance running for them, and Mike Haynes and Tim Fox in the defensive backfield."

    I guess this makes me a History Nazi, but Larry Nance did his running for the Cleveland Cavaliers. I'm sure this is just a case of being in a hurry to post and there was confusion between Jim Nance and Larry Garron. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from bn34. Show bn34's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Why do NEP fans blame Asante Samuel alone for SB 42??  As if that was the only bad play/decision in the game.  What about the OL who couldn't block anyone and gave up 5 sacks (not to mention pressures)?  How about a great running game that averaged 2.8 yards per carry?  What about Pierre Woods somehow allowing Bradshaw to flip him over and rip a fumble out of his hands on the NYG 30 yard line?  What about Gostkowski kicking off out of bounds?  What about BB going for it on 4-13 in 3rd Q with a 4 point lead?  What about the DL getting blown off the line on the 1st series?  What about 3 false start penalties in 3Q? 2 offensive holding calls?  Lack of offensive adjustments at halftime?  What about having an injured 5'9" corner play man coverage against a 6'5" WR with less than a minute to play?  

    Did Asante Samuel play OL that day?  Did he call out blocking schemes?  Did none of this hurt NE's chances?  Pats thought they could just show up and win.  NYG punched them in mouth and NEP didn't know how to respond.  NYG was more physical and better coached that day.  Blaming one guy for one play may make you feel better but it's not accurate.  The NEP players and coaches lost that game.       

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ohyes. Show ohyes's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    I can see the let's look back and see what did'nt work thing. The Pat's had some big name cut's on some of the SB team's too.On the other hand how's the high draft pick's and big dollars working for green new york and there future? As for the let's look around and see what's happening. Who's the franchise that's using high pick's and signing big money player's that contend for a SB every year?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from falline. Show falline's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    What is it with people who post this lameass questions like this. If you gave those guys the money they wanted they would be the only two playing D.....
    stop acting like you have answers that aren't there to begin with...
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from slapointe1232. Show slapointe1232's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    If I recall no one was real fond of Samuel his first couple years. How do we know Wilhite won't improve. I know he's not looking great now, but Asante wasn't his first year either. I think more than anything the defense is missing the PASSION brought to it by Rodney Harrison, Tedy Bruschi, and Mike Vrabel.  It was time for them to retire... but they do need a player that will get them fired up like Harrison, Bruschi and Vrabel used to be able to.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from southnpatsfan. Show southnpatsfan's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    If your going to live in the past, God I wish we still had Jesse Richardson and Larry Eisenhouer (not sure on the spelling), along with Steve Nelson.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from 4Adam13. Show 4Adam13's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    For every great play Samuel made, he got torched for 2 plays. Great cover corner when he wanted to. But his attitude and being stuck on himself and caring more about me than team got too much for BB. I wasn't disapointed to see him go for the money he wanted. Another Ty Law in my opinion.

    As far as Seymour goes, his complacency cost him. His best days are behind him and while we probably would have been a slightly better defensive line with him, he's not a true pass rusher. We haven't suffered that much without him and we will be better off for it in 2011.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    You simply can't field a team of high priced veterans.  The only way to succeed in the NFL is to develop players through the draft that outperform thier contracts.  If a team is good at doing this than they end up having to let go of some of thier guys as they develop from low money to high money players. 
    Asante was great, but they either have to cut a high priced player like Moss, Welker, etc or cut 10 low money players to sign him again.  The Patriots can't field a team of 35 players, and they valued some other people over him.  The only other choice is to get another CB in the draft and make him as good.  It suc ks but it's just part of football in the salary cap/free agency era.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Macrawn. Show Macrawn's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Heck we'd probably benefit from having both of those players, but there are a lot of other considerations and moves that have to be made to keep a team competitive. 

    The Patriots are always trying to clear cap room and build future picks. The deal for Seymour was a good one for the future. Would you rather have Wilfork or Seymour? No way you can sign both to huge contracts. At least we got something for Seymour. 

    We are in a rebuilding year on defense no doubt about it. I think there is a lot of potential in what we have if BB can build the leadership up within the team. 

    We have had a very long run and the ONLY way we have been able to have such an extended run has been to not overpay for veterans who excelled within our system but were really just a product of our system. MANY guys who left NE for big time contracts have been complete busts. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from One-If-By-Sea. Show One-If-By-Sea's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    I am not sure I made myself clear - let me try again.

    We did not resign Gaffney because Denver offered him $2.5M per year. We signed Galloway at one year deal at $1.75M to save $750k and allow more flexibility. On this forum the missing 3rd reciever has been talked about over and over, and a lot of people talk about the importance of a wide reciever and quarterback being on the same page, working together, blah, blah, blah. Gaffney right now has 35 catches for 450 yards, Galloway/Aiken/etc. have what? If Brady and Gaffney were on the same page, if Gaffney was in rythem with the offense, did you ever ask why we let him go over $750k? The answer - it is the Pats business model.

    I am not talking about the past, I am not rehashing, I am not even complaining.

    I am asking the question, is the Pats business plan that keeps the Pats in the Top 10 or Top 5 going to allow the Pats to win another SB? Or are we always going to be letting our 3rd reciever go over $750k?
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ohyes. Show ohyes's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    The whole Gaffney situation is way different than Seymour and Sammuel. Even with Joey and Tate coming aboard. Those two don't bring what Gaff did. He played all the WR position's and worked well with Tom. I thought they learned this lesson when they lost Branch. This is the vanilla funk we see. TE's must block when the OL can't. With a deep ball offense. They have to keep throwing the deep ball so aleast a threat is there. All this with 2 RB's over 30 and 2 of the 3 could be labeled injury prone.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Macrawn. Show Macrawn's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    Gaffney should have been signed. He was not expensive and had Troy Brown type qualities. Signing him would have actually saved the team money. 
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from vegascolony. Show vegascolony's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    One-if-by-sea...aka know-it-all: You sound like a shrewd politician. Funny how you call the "draft guys" future only people. Let's not forget that Chung was a SECOND round pick. The Pats have a FIRST round pick from a TERRIBLE Raiders team which means at LEAST a top fiver, maybe even top 3....Normally, a first rounder contributes instantly (see Jerrod Mayo). Your basis for that argument is nothing more than you trying to search for reasons to outdo your fellow, knowledgable, Bostonian sportsfans. We want to win just as much as you, but you have to move the right pieces at the right time if you want CONTINUED success.......(see Bill Belichick and THE NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS BRAINTRUST"......smart guy.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from dafoe. Show dafoe's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    I really don't get the Seymour hangup. The Pats traded him for a player that they will have slotted under the new rookie payscale making the pick a great value. They have a chance at using that pick on locking up a game changer for 6 years.

    Versus keeping a guy that does almost nothing to help the team win football games and will be gone after the year is over. How is this not a no brainer? You act like they traded Mayo or a young Tom Brady.

    And Asante Samuel is a nice player. But he is not worth what he wanted. If you want  the Pats to turn into the Redskins, that's your business. But I think most of us fans are happy with a team that is consistently contending rather than spending most of it's payroll on 20% of the roster.

    Samuel and Seymour would do little to solve the major  defensive problems on this team: lack of a pass rush and overly passive defensive play calling. I hate to say this because it sounds like sour grapes. But Samuel wasn't that good. Darius Butler has a chance to be just as good, if not better, than Samuel  in the next couple of years.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from brisrog. Show brisrog's posts

    Re: Asante Samuel and Richard Seymour

    And Seymour? Some of you guys just need to give it up. If the Pats had kept him, he would have mailed it in for another year and then left via free agency. The only way the Pats were getting anything out of him was to trade him. The fact that they got a top 5 pick for him is nothing short of a miracle. How can anyone complain about that? You draft guys kill me. So we traded Seymour for Eugene Chung - you draft guys don't get it. It is all about the future - the superstar that we will have - who cares - for me it is all about winning - wins and loses - I do not care about the draft. Half of our guys are third round and below.

    Hey get the facts right Eugene Chung played OL, we drafted Patrick Chung who will be just fine, seein as he is a rookie. And BTW, teams need a mix of cagey veterans and hungry rookies to win the Super Bowl, or even make the playoffs where all bets are off, and if you get on a good run, you could be within a play or two of winning the whole thing. See Cardinals, Axizona 2008-2009 season....
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share