Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

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

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it? : brady's value would not have been as high last year. reconstructive knee surgery tends to do that to teams. u dont remember what happpend to miami with culpepper or even with brees with NO? love him but he was high risk and damaged goods. brady has proven he is healthy. frankly, i could have understood keeping cassel... i m a big fan of his. but i grasp the logic of keepg brady. perhaps if brady was a free agent or with one year left. thats y this offseason is key!
    Posted by choircontrarian[/QUOTE]

    When do teams get reconstructive knee surgery?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Evil2009. Show Evil2009's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it? : When do teams get reconstructive knee surgery?
    Posted by EnochRoot[/QUOTE]

    The same place this thread gets it's basis in reality.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it? : The same place this thread gets it's basis in reality.
    Posted by Evil2009[/QUOTE]

    I hope they get a group discount.

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

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it? : so? because 85% want more taxes, we should just do it? 85% want government health care, just do it? as part of the deal with a republican-based democracy, it is the great 15% my friend, that really move the society! yep, lets kick the bill gates of the world in the nuts... can anyone just create a microsoft? because the majority says it is so, doesnt necessarily make it so. we would still have the flat earth theory as the dominant view if not for the agitating contrarians like a galileo! lastly, by not specifically saying that brady was untradeable when he clearly had the opportunity to gratuitously say so  (but picked mayo instead when noone was going there) tells ME that is intentional and a message. brady is part of the TRADEABLES! he does not fit into the context of those NOT tradeable... could have said young studs AND loyal productive vets like Brady... but strategically chose not to. this is my opinion, just as you have yours. i am not a reporter or journalist, i am an opinionist! take it for what it is and stop badgering me over trivia! in my view, bel is OPEN to trading brady. i did not type "bel says brady will be traded". jeez!
    Posted by choircontrarian[/QUOTE]

        Again you ramble on, trying desperately to prove to us that you are intelligent in some manner, but actually you have no clue about what the fk you're saying.

        At the time of Galileo's birth in 1564,it was well known that the Earth was round. What was left of Ferdinand Magellan's crew managed to return to Spain after circumnavigating the Earth in 1522. 42 years BEFORE Galileo was born.
        The more you post the dumber you look. Your 15% of society needs a high school refresher course before trying to change the world. 
       BTW,according to the latest (Nov.9,2009) Ramussen Reports survey, only 45% of Americans favor the government health care plan that is currently being discussed in Congress. A huge difference from the 85% that you have posted.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from gmbill. Show gmbill's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    Choirboy, Child Please! DOn't waste time on this crap
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from choircontrarian. Show choircontrarian's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it? :   But thanks for FINALLY admitting you just made this stuff up. I think clarity is an elusive thing for some people. Sometimes it comes in the form of a hissy fit.   Why though do you consider the truth to be trivial?   And, no you did not say “bel says brady will be traded.” You wrote that Belichick is open to trading Brady when, in fact he never said anything of the kind.    Can I ask a favor? While I find it a near impossibility that you will ever get into a law school, I do realize that there are institutions in this country that will take anyone with a checkbook so I can’t entirely rule it out. So, first, can you please, please, please, please post your rejection letters here. I want to see how they word them in your specific case. Second, on the infinitesimal chance that you do get in, can you post your professors’ comments about your papers here? Life is after all to laugh.  
    Posted by EnochRoot[/QUOTE]I stand by my original points. Hey, i cant please everyone. it is what it is. its hard to play or explain chess with someone only schooled in checkers.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it? : I stand by my original points. Hey, i cant please everyone. it is what it is. its hard to play or explain chess with someone only schooled in checkers.
    Posted by choircontrarian[/QUOTE]

    Oh, no. That isn't why you can't explain chess. You can't explain chess because you haven't yet realized that chess isn't played with a deck of cards.

    Well, you at least finally admitted that you were a dishonest sob. Don't worry though. No one ever accused you of being anything but a dope. 

    And just by the by, what points do you think you have made? All I see is a guy who puts words in others mouths and says they said it.

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

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it? :     Again you ramble on, trying desperately to prove to us that you are intelligent in some manner, but actually you have no clue about what the fk you're saying.     At the time of Galileo's birth in 1564,it was well known that the Earth was round. What was left of Ferdinand Magellan's crew managed to return to Spain after circumnavigating the Earth in 1522. 42 years BEFORE Galileo was born.     The more you post the dumber you look. Your 15% of society needs a high school refresher course before trying to change the world.     BTW,according to the latest (Nov.9,2009) Ramussen Reports survey, only 45% of Americans favor the government health care plan that is currently being discussed in Congress. A huge difference from the 85% that you have posted.
    Posted by cowtherabbit-[/QUOTE]first of, if you really know your history, it would be clear to you that the Catholic Church was actively burning and persecuting the likes of Galileo as late as the 17th century over things like the flat-earth theory. it wasnt til the 19th century that they offically recognized that the non-flatearthers could have been right. also, when the government health care debate started it was much higher than 45%. thanks to the irritants like the Glenn Becks, that number has come down, i guess my point was more about health care in general. most still favor it as they do with most government or public based "welfare" programs that specifically benefits them be it on class, industry (your banking and wall street types), race, or gender reasons. the argument is always the same. most people.. according to this and that survey... my retort is a fairly consistent "so what?" because most people believe it or say so doesnt necessarily make it true. sometimes it is, sometimes it's not! 

    Do not confuse your adventurers or thinking elite as ever represent a majority. most people do not think or venture broadly from what they know or from where they came from and inherited. despite revision hisory, MOST people were perfectly content with slavery. had u taken a poll at anytime in the 18th century anywhere in this country, most would have voted in favor of slavery. just like with meat and animal cruelty today. in 50 years or so, you will find more people less inclined to treat other beings as we do. change happens due to a few radical and often contrarian thinking MINORITIES.  
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it? : first of, if you really know your history, it would be clear to you that the Catholic Church was actively burning and persecuting the likes of Galileo as late as the 17th century over things like the flat-earth theory. it wasnt til the 19th century that they offically recognized that the non-flatearthers could have been right. also, when the government health care debate started it was much higher than 45%. thanks to the irritants like the Glenn Becks, that number has come down, i guess my point was more about health care in general. most still favor it as they do with most government or public based "welfare" programs that specifically benefits them be it on class, industry (your banking and wall street types), race, or gender reasons. the argument is always the same. most people.. according to this and that survey... my retort is a fairly consistent "so what?" because most people believe it or say so doesnt necessarily make it true. sometimes it is, sometimes it's not!  Do not confuse your adventurers or thinking elite as ever represent a majority. most people do not think or venture broadly from what they know or from where they came from and inherited. despite revision hisory, MOST people were perfectly content with slavery. had u taken a poll at anytime in the 18th century anywhere in this country, most would have voted in favor of slavery. just like with meat and animal cruelty today. in 50 years or so, you will find more people less inclined to treat other beings as we do. change happens due to a few radical and often contrarian thinking MINORITIES.  
    Posted by choircontrarian[/QUOTE]

    What are you on. You are freaking word salad machine.

    The scariest part to me is that you are convinced that you are part of your so-called "adventurers and thinking elite". (Out of curiousity do you think that you are elite and can think or are you really trying to say that you are an elite thinker? The fact that you can't even express your own "ideas" correctly is just astonishing.)

    Anyway, just because your mother said you were smart doesn't make it so. In fact, she was likely just as big a dope as you.

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

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it? : first of, if you really know your history, it would be clear to you that the Catholic Church was actively burning and persecuting the likes of Galileo as late as the 17th century over things like the flat-earth theory. it wasnt til the 19th century that they offically recognized that the non-flatearthers could have been right. also, when the government health care debate started it was much higher than 45%. thanks to the irritants like the Glenn Becks, that number has come down, i guess my point was more about health care in general. most still favor it as they do with most government or public based "welfare" programs that specifically benefits them be it on class, industry (your banking and wall street types), race, or gender reasons. the argument is always the same. most people.. according to this and that survey... my retort is a fairly consistent "so what?" because most people believe it or say so doesnt necessarily make it true. sometimes it is, sometimes it's not!  Do not confuse your adventurers or thinking elite as ever represent a majority. most people do not think or venture broadly from what they know or from where they came from and inherited. despite revision hisory, MOST people were perfectly content with slavery. had u taken a poll at anytime in the 18th century anywhere in this country, most would have voted in favor of slavery. just like with meat and animal cruelty today. in 50 years or so, you will find more people less inclined to treat other beings as we do. change happens due to a few radical and often contrarian thinking MINORITIES.  
    Posted by choircontrarian[/QUOTE]

    I do know my history and science. The Catholic Church was concerned with the helio-centric model that was defined by Copernicus and proved by Kepler mathematically who utilized the vast collection of astronomical observations of Tycho Brahe. Galileo confirmed these theories through observations of the phases of Venus. The Catholic church in Galileo's day was quite informed about the roundness of the Earth through the many maritime trading ventures coming and going through the Mediterranean at the time. They were persecuting those scientists who tried to dismiss the geo-centric model of the known universe.They never promoted the notion that the world was flat you stupid fool. The only well known scientist burned at the stake by edict of the Catholic Church was Giodarno Bruno, in 1600, which was for his support of the Copernican helio-centric model.
         Now throw some more BS at us about how great you are because you can see an alternative side to things backed by factually incorrect information. You don't know what the fk you're talking about and you are completely wrong on your statements on history. You really look like a fool with your arrogant views that you are better than the rest of us because you get a hard on by posting every controversial angle you can dream up about a subject.
        Any clown can do what you're doing. It doesn't make you smart,it's only feeding your burning desire for any attention you can muster. It's really pathetic.
        If you are going to come at us like the modern messiah of alternative thinking and try to convince all of us that you are indeed the genius of the football board,then at least post at an intellectual level that transcends that of a high school Earth Science classroom.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from toocool9090. Show toocool9090's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    butt clown
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from timsandra. Show timsandra's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    In Response to Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?:
    [QUOTE]Just read a great exclusive interview with Belichick by yahoo sports, where among other things he shares this insight on his trade philosophy:  Each guy’s price is different. If a team asks, you see what the price is. Now, is  Jerod Mayo (notes)  available? No, not really. But there are certain players who are young that have a certain number of years left on their contract that you want on your team, so you’re really not going to trade them. Those guys are realistically not available, no. But is everybody else available for a certain price on every team? I would say, for the most part, they probably are. Who’s willing to give that? What you want and what someone else is willing to give, that’s usually very different. In this case (the Seymour trade – in return, the Patriots get Oakland’s first-round pick in the 2011 draft), it worked. Bel is too calculating to not know that by blatantly and unnecessarily including Mayo but not Brady that many fans and others out there would wisely pick up not-so-subtle omen! In MY interpretation, hoyer is in that mayo category due to his age and contract, and is a cinch-keeper as are guys like guyton, pryor, ingram and vellmor. however, due to his age, contract situation, and recent injury woes, i do believe belichick has already reviewed that brady trade scenario for this offseason and has already made his peace with it. If i am a san francisco, washington or oakland, i am coming with some serious offers, knowing that belichick will be listening as he is simultaneously negotiating and playing the PR asss-saving game with tom. I could easily see an unfortunate situation where bel has to seymour brady and not take the risks of franchising him or getting nothing in return, esp with the present CBA impasse and doom looming!   Full article:   http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AvNwZiW_yuJTb.j4VosJOLtDubYF?slug=jc-belichickqa110609&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
    Posted by choircontrarian[/QUOTE]

    CHOIRCONTRARIAN YOU ARE AN ABSOLOTE MORON. YOU SHOW YOUR INTELLIGENCE SAYING HOYER IS ONE OF YOUR UNTOUCHABLES! ARE YOU THIS DESPERATE FOR ATTENTION? WALK INTO THE KITCHEN AND TELL YOUR MOMMY TO GIVE YOU A HUG, YOU POOR, LONELY, MISGUIDED IDIOT.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from choircontrarian. Show choircontrarian's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he do it? : I do know my history and science. The Catholic Church was concerned with the helio-centric model that was defined by Copernicus and proved by Kepler mathematically who utilized the vast collection of astronomical observations of Tycho Brahe. Galileo confirmed these theories through observations of the phases of Venus. The Catholic church in Galileo's day was quite informed about the roundness of the Earth through the many maritime trading ventures coming and going through the Mediterranean at the time. They were persecuting those scientists who tried to dismiss the geo-centric model of the known universe.They never promoted the notion that the world was flat you stupid fool. The only well known scientist burned at the stake by edict of the Catholic Church was Giodarno Bruno, in 1600, which was for his support of the Copernican helio-centric model.      Now throw some more BS at us about how great you are because you can see an alternative side to things backed by factually incorrect information. You don't know what the fk you're talking about and you are completely wrong on your statements on history. You really look like a fool with your arrogant views that you are better than the rest of us because you get a hard on by posting every controversial angle you can dream up about a subject.     Any clown can do what you're doing. It doesn't make you smart,it's only feeding your burning desire for any attention you can muster. It's really pathetic.     If you are going to come at us like the modern messiah of alternative thinking and try to convince all of us that you are indeed the genius of the football board,then at least post at an intellectual level that transcends that of a high school Earth Science classroom.
    Posted by cowtherabbit-[/QUOTE]first of, i never said i was holier than thou or that i am better than anyone. i have said over and over, eventhough they often disagree with my positions, that other posters here like carraway and underdogg and even bubthegrub are far and away my superiors on a lot of basic football and philosophical issues. just for pure football knowledge, i will add mvpkilla and harley and even enoch to that list, just to name a few. i do not have to agree with everything a person says to agree with them on something. it doesnt make them a total idiot just because they dont make sense to me on one or 2 issues. called life, we must all compartmentalize. so do not throw your bull---- my way and try to paint me with some stinkbrush. almost every week as the pats are playing, i simultaneously check out the game thread to see what you and others are writing and thinking as the game is in progress. i believe i have commented once all freakin year. if there's nothing new to add or others more involved and detailed than me are already sharing something, why should i comment just for the heck of commenting or drisk rawing attention to myself? on gameday, i am a homer like most of the other true pats fans. its not the time or space to just casually drop contrarian principles or perspectives. its brady great, bel greater time.  

    as for scientific knowledge, i am not a trained scientist nor do i play one on TV. i was just making broad amateurish suppositions. u seem to be more knowlegeable in that area so i will call you my superior in the scientific world. this is not a science or history board. i dont care to win those debates or start long dissertations on them. i just care about focusing on certain contrarian points and hypotheses to promote independent but impassioned socratic discussions. sometimes i am proven wrong, and i will be the first one to admit it as such and sometimes i am not wrong and wont take the bait regardless of how much i am badgered. its not about attention that i take contrarian views. if you check my track record, i am not a frequent initiator of threads. if someone already has a thread going, i will roll with that flow like most folks here. 99 percent of the time i roll with the flow. the 1 percent of the time i make a lieberman/mccain type detour from the choir you want to badger me. again, its not for attention. i like readg others' opinions and rolling with it. but whats the point of all of us juat drinking the same kool aid all of the time, esp when there's another perspective being completely ignored? i believe in those few contra views so when i feel it is appropriate or in the news (like the peter king points), i throw it out there... DEAL WITH IT! 

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

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he? : CHOIRCONTRARIAN YOU ARE AN ABSOLOTE MORON. YOU SHOW YOUR INTELLIGENCE SAYING HOYER IS ONE OF YOUR UNTOUCHABLES! ARE YOU THIS DESPERATE FOR ATTENTION? WALK INTO THE KITCHEN AND TELL YOUR MOMMY TO GIVE YOU A HUG, YOU POOR, LONELY, MISGUIDED IDIOT.
    Posted by timsandra[/QUOTE]yes, hoyer is an UNTOUCHABLE in the same way brady was in 2000 and 2001. if not more so. he's so trusted and liked by bel that he has not bothered bringing in a vet or any other qb to even push or test the kid all freakin year. if brady goes down, hoyer is it... he WILL be given the keys. and u can bet your freakin life on it that if he duplicates what brady did in 01 and bring back a ring, that brady will absolutely be BLEDSOED during the offseason. 

    have you heard bel describe this kid? he sounds even more than a schoolgirl than he did gushing all over brady in 01 and 02. accordg to bel, this kid has made progressions that most guys dont start making til their third year or so. he is so far ahead of the curve esp in the judgment and accuracy areas bel prizes so highly, he made o'connell and others quickly expendable and to warrant NO further competition. plus he's super cheap and young. i believe he was totally nondrafted, so is lower than both brady and cassel. he's a gem. he's right up there with Mayo, Pryor, Vollmer and Guyton in being indispensable and untradeable my friend! 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from steve1581. Show steve1581's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    In Response to Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?:
    [QUOTE]Just read a great exclusive interview with Belichick by yahoo sports, where among other things he shares this insight on his trade philosophy:  Each guy’s price is different. If a team asks, you see what the price is. Now, is  Jerod Mayo (notes)  available? No, not really. But there are certain players who are young that have a certain number of years left on their contract that you want on your team, so you’re really not going to trade them. Those guys are realistically not available, no. But is everybody else available for a certain price on every team? I would say, for the most part, they probably are. Who’s willing to give that? What you want and what someone else is willing to give, that’s usually very different. In this case (the Seymour trade – in return, the Patriots get Oakland’s first-round pick in the 2011 draft), it worked. Bel is too calculating to not know that by blatantly and unnecessarily including Mayo but not Brady that many fans and others out there would wisely pick up not-so-subtle omen! In MY interpretation, hoyer is in that mayo category due to his age and contract, and is a cinch-keeper as are guys like guyton, pryor, ingram and vellmor. however, due to his age, contract situation, and recent injury woes, i do believe belichick has already reviewed that brady trade scenario for this offseason and has already made his peace with it. If i am a san francisco, washington or oakland, i am coming with some serious offers, knowing that belichick will be listening as he is simultaneously negotiating and playing the PR asss-saving game with tom. I could easily see an unfortunate situation where bel has to seymour brady and not take the risks of franchising him or getting nothing in return, esp with the present CBA impasse and doom looming!   Full article:   http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AvNwZiW_yuJTb.j4VosJOLtDubYF?slug=jc-belichickqa110609&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
    Posted by choircontrarian[/QUOTE]


    So ridiculous I dont even know what to say other than thank god you arent in the pats front office. Stick to retreading tires buddy
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaBlade. Show DaBlade's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    Here is the thing... Brady could be traded or let go in a few years but Brady will have one more contract with the Patriots... the question is would the Patriots ever let him go and the answer is yes if his ability begins to drop alla Montana and they let him know they are going to go with the "young" guy (who by the way will not be Hoyer unless he sits behind Brady like Young did Montana for years.  Brady wants to play till he is 40 and I think he could if he can keep injuries from slowing him.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    I'm more offended by you throwing Ayn Rand into this.  In democracy, 85 percent is more than a solid majority, its a landslide, no matter WHAT Bill Gates thinks.  P.S.  Bill G is actually a bit left leaning if you examine it seperate from the whole monopoly issue.  And no, he is NOT open to trading Brady.  For no other reason than ticket sales.  No matter who BB is, Robert Kraft will not allow that to happen unless Brady falls of significantly, or there is a situation like last year when they could plausibly make the switch.  And if Brady hurts his knee again, I doubt he will even keep playing, so still not an issue.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from PATSNYFAN. Show PATSNYFAN's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    In Response to Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?:
    [QUOTE]Just read a great exclusive interview with Belichick by yahoo sports, where among other things he shares this insight on his trade philosophy:  Each guy’s price is different. If a team asks, you see what the price is. Now, is  Jerod Mayo (notes)  available? No, not really. But there are certain players who are young that have a certain number of years left on their contract that you want on your team, so you’re really not going to trade them. Those guys are realistically not available, no. But is everybody else available for a certain price on every team? I would say, for the most part, they probably are. Who’s willing to give that? What you want and what someone else is willing to give, that’s usually very different. In this case (the Seymour trade – in return, the Patriots get Oakland’s first-round pick in the 2011 draft), it worked. Bel is too calculating to not know that by blatantly and unnecessarily including Mayo but not Brady that many fans and others out there would wisely pick up not-so-subtle omen! In MY interpretation, hoyer is in that mayo category due to his age and contract, and is a cinch-keeper as are guys like guyton, pryor, ingram and vellmor. however, due to his age, contract situation, and recent injury woes, i do believe belichick has already reviewed that brady trade scenario for this offseason and has already made his peace with it. If i am a san francisco, washington or oakland, i am coming with some serious offers, knowing that belichick will be listening as he is simultaneously negotiating and playing the PR asss-saving game with tom. I could easily see an unfortunate situation where bel has to seymour brady and not take the risks of franchising him or getting nothing in return, esp with the present CBA impasse and doom looming!   Full article:   http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AvNwZiW_yuJTb.j4VosJOLtDubYF?slug=jc-belichickqa110609&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
    Posted by choircontrarian[/QUOTE]
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from m1020us. Show m1020us's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    I believe that Bill would trade Brady if it made his team better.....having said that, I don't think that there is anything out there that would be able to make the Pats better than having one of the best QB's in the NFL in his prime.


    So the answer is not nessissarily no, just not bloody likely.....
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Physics. Show Physics's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    I think anyone can be traded if the right offer comes along. It is just seriously doubtful that offer would come along. I do wonder, are there rules with respect to how much a franchise can morgage its future on a trade/player? E.g., If the Detroit Lions were to say, 'We need Brady', could they (I'm not saying they would, just is it possible) offer their first round draft picks for the next 5 years? This also seems to depend on the salaries that would be demanded by those picks as well, e.g., if there was some cap on rookie salaries, I could see it more likely to have bigger trades involving draft picks and superstars simply because it wouldn't cripple your franchise to gamble on higher picks in exchanged for someone established.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from choircontrarian. Show choircontrarian's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?:
    [QUOTE]I'm more offended by you throwing Ayn Rand into this.  In democracy, 85 percent is more than a solid majority, its a landslide, no matter WHAT Bill Gates thinks.  P.S.  Bill G is actually a bit left leaning if you examine it seperate from the whole monopoly issue.  And no, he is NOT open to trading Brady.  For no other reason than ticket sales.  No matter who BB is, Robert Kraft will not allow that to happen unless Brady falls of significantly, or there is a situation like last year when they could plausibly make the switch.  And if Brady hurts his knee again, I doubt he will even keep playing, so still not an issue.
    Posted by Davedsone[/QUOTE]again, at one time you could get 85% to agree that the earth was flat or that slavery was fine (esp for nonwhites when only whites did the voting). so what? Many things that have been irrevocable, apparent "locks" in the past have changed in a heartbeat, and will continue to do so in the future. that's why we must keep pushing and testing the paradigms that we just take for granted. heck, had you taken a poll 2 years ago on who would be Democratic president today, we would have coronated queen Hillary rather than waited for the people to actually elect the underdog Obama!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from choircontrarian. Show choircontrarian's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    In Response to Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?:
    [QUOTE]Here is the thing... Brady could be traded or let go in a few years but Brady will have one more contract with the Patriots... the question is would the Patriots ever let him go and the answer is yes if his ability begins to drop alla Montana and they let him know they are going to go with the "young" guy (who by the way will not be Hoyer unless he sits behind Brady like Young did Montana for years.  Brady wants to play till he is 40 and I think he could if he can keep injuries from slowing him.
    Posted by DaBlade[/QUOTE]montana did not ever really slow down on ability or talent alone. if not mistaken, in his last year, he actually led KC to the AFC championship game. pretty great accomplishment. it becomes a physical issue more than an ability one as most of these guys age. they get hurt more, they dont heal or recover as quickly and what not. like pedro martinez. give him 12 days between starts and he can show glimpses of the old pedro. go on regular rest and we quickly see y he should be considering retirement. hoyer could be around for the next 6 years as the backup esp if brady stays healthy and no one else gets to see his cassel-like abilty to raise his stock too high. kind of like steve bono back in the day or jim sorgi now.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Belichick open to trading BRADY, will he?

    If I was deaf dumb and blind I would understand where your coming from.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share