Belichick Shouldn't Play "Lady or the Tiger"...

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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    [/QUOTE]

    BB does not position himself for Gronk in the 2010 draft without trading out of the garbage 2009 1st rd.

    Clay Matthews is not a good run defenders.  BB knew that, hence why we has never on BB's 1st rd board to begin with.

    Mike Vrabel never had more than like 4 or 5 sacks in a year in BB's 3-4.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Hahahahahahahahaha

    Man you sure do live up to your reputation as obnoxious and confrontational at all times here bro. Your silly assaults on me, a monster Belichick supporter, are pretty pathetic. Just a lonley guy posting hundreds of times a day who has to find a fight for the sake of finding a fight I guess.

    Even though I am a giant fan of Bill, I have every right to question one particularly horrible draft. Especially when it easily cost us a super bowl or two.

    Here is where your attacks against my posts fall short and are baseless:

    1. Gronk

    I clearly stated this in my post:

    The only saving grace about not having Matthews was that in a round about way that trade got us Gronk. But the Pats had the ammunition a year later to move up and get him

    So you acting like you are 'educating' me as to how we got Gronk after that post of mine shows you are simply not concentrating.

    A. Belichick could have drafted Gronk in the 1st rd over McCourty. Bonus points if it came after an offseason where he doesn't repeat his Wheatley, Wilhite, Butler errors and actually spent some $ on a veteran strating CB. But CB was a priority in the draft. That being said, Gronk could have been the rd 1 choice, and a later pick used on a DB. With Matthews monster pass-rush here, the secondary would have been less exposed anyhow.

    B. In the adjusted Matthews being picked '09 hypothetical the other McCourty bro Devin was picked and Butler, the player we used the GB 2nd on, was not.

    C. The  best draft move would have been this one: The Pats held the 47th pick from a seperate trade in the draft that they picked Gronk at 42 (a pick obtained by trading down from 44, the pick we got by trading out of Matthews spot). Oakland traded down with us to 44 to let us get ahead of the Ravens and take Gronk. The cost, a 6th rd pick, if the cost of 3 extra spaces was a 6th AND 7th (the immortal Thomas Welch) or a future 5th or 6th (the Ocho/Haynsworth picks perhaps?) then it is no issue at all. Yes this all means no Spikes, but if we didn't end up with a MLB in rd 2 the way it worked, NaVorro Bowman is sitting there 1 pick after we took Taylor Price. Boom! A different style but equal (or more) talented LB'er is there to cover up for ANOTHER BB mistake, all simply b/c Matthews was picked in '09.

     

    2. You said: 'BB doesn't pay his 3-4 OLBs for sacks and big free agent money'. 

    when I proved you WRONG with an EXAMPLE (called facts) of Rosie Colvin, a guy who spent the entire middle SIX years of Bill's tenure as coach here and was a top 5 BIG MONEY free agent paid simply to add 10+ sacks a year when he hit the market, you moved the goalposts and tried to claim that because that was 2003 it doesn't matter anymore.

    Oh I'm sorry, but your statement didn't say '2009 Bill Belichick was no longer paying OLB's big money like he did in 2003 for Rosie Colvin' your nonspecific statement was wrong.

    3. You said:

    'Mike Vrabel never had more than like 4 or 5 sacks in a year in BB's 3-4.' 

    THE COMPUTER IS RIGHT AT YOUR FINGERTIPS!

    Are you really that ignorant?

    Vrabel had 9.5 sacks during a Super Bowl season and 12.5 sacks during a 16-0 regular season. He also had 'more than 4-5' (5.5) in another Super Bowl year. In short, the 3 best Patriots teams OF ALL TIME featured Vrabel averaging 9 sacks a season.

    Colvin had 7 sacks and 8.5 sacks in '05 and '06 after obliterating his hip in '03 and becoming a 2 down player.

    You don't think Bill wanted to get any of that rush back in '09? So he must have passed on Matthews to start Vrabel type players at OLB then right? WRONG! He paid for rush specialists Tully Banta-Cain (9.5 sacks in '09) and Derrick Burgess (almost a 10 sack avg the 4 years before we traded for him to come here) to man the corners. Not much run stopping there! But I'm sure the 2m and 3rd/4th rd picks in '11 were worth it for that 1 year of Burgess. Tully got himself a 13.5m 3 year deal he didn't live up to after one decent '09 season.

    Or, ya know, we coulda just had Clay Matthews...

    Also, Bill had no clue at the '09 draft what Ninkovich was to become here, since he was a Dolphin in '08 and a camp invite cut from a worse team. The Patriots were looking for a pass rush in less conventional ways in '09 rather than just drafting a future all-pro. It was a BAD decision, no way around it.

    Wiped the floor with you on this one bro

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to rameakap's comment:

     


    Everyone who responds this way to that 'hindsight is 20-20' stuff is just being obnoxious. Yes the draft is a gamble where 50% of the picks overall are busts.

    However, can we question what on earth Belichick was thinking back in 2009?

    You can question anything and I don't begrudge you or anyone for doing so. It's part of a fans joy. It is just nice when people have very solid grounds to do it on. I feel you have provided nothing other than trying to find the one or two players per round in a sea of guys you don't follow or know much about and try to say see look how the Patriots messed up. Seriously? That is what you bring to the table? That's it?

    Absolutely!

    I have no idea what was going on in his head of course, but it sure looked like he got so pick happy and so trade happy that he overthought EVERYTHING.

    1. Passing over Matthews for depth when an ELITE outside linebacker was one of the team #1 needs was incredibly dumb then and all the way until today, when the team was forced to switch to a 4-3 b/c of the lack of Matthews like talents available in the league overall, and had to make-up for the '09 werror with #1 and #2 picks in '12 and '13 when solving it in '09 (with a guy who played like recently departed players McGinest and Vrabel) probably would have won them a Super Bowl.

    Stop with the Mathews insanity.

    1) He is OK, a good player.

    2) He would not be used here in the same manner as in GB and not likely to necessarily have the same production here like he does in GB because of the system and what he would be asked to do here. The Pats do not take a guy and typically move him all over the defense to try and get him a free run at the QB. The Pats are far more disciplined in style.  

    3) His overall stats are not even that great or special.

    4) Why on earth would anyone jump all over picking Mathews in the 1st round exactly? Because he was a work out warrior at the combine and had an eye popping 10yd split? What college film would anyone be in awe of exactly? Do you realise he was a walk on at USC and barely played, other than special teams, until his senior season? Then we he got his chance he was part of a unit that included Brian Cushing , Rey Mualuga, Kaluka Maiava. WHen you have other linebackers in the group considered even better, how sure would you be at how good Mathews might be on his own without the other top players drawing attention away from him?

    5) The slotting system and CBA I do not believe was new yet so you had the money issue to compound that unknown and risk of bust failure without tons of film to pour over. I am pretty sure the brain trust down at gillete felt a lot more comfotable giving money to guys after looking at guys who were three or four year starters in college. A lot more material to make the best educated guess on.

    The 'fixes' they tried in '09-'10 playing Matthews role (Tully, Burgess, Cunningham) were simply not acceptable when a rare talent like that was at your fingertips. Imagine the Pats meeting GB in the '10 Super Bowl and instead of Tully/Burgess we had Matthews and spent the extra cash on those veteran FA's elsewhere? Meanwhile GB prob has the still good but less talented Connor Barwin at OLB instead of Matthews (he was selcted right after the 2nd rd pick we picked up from them) and some depth 3rd rounders.

    So the fix they tried in 09 did not work? IN 2009 Banta-cain cost next to nothing and matched or exceeded every Mathews stat for that season. The Patriots both got the same or better production without spending either the hard currency or draft currecy to make that happen. The whole team had issues, specifically chemistry issues but it would not have been any better with Mathews. Mathews would not have helped insubordination from disgruntled verteans with attitudes.

    The craziness of your continued pie in the sky predictions of who would have picked who even after you start changing picks in the 1st round is so over the top it is ridiculous. You have absolutely no idea and it is far more probable that as soon as you change a single pick in the 1st round, the majority of all subsequent picks will also change from that point onward. So you would have zero idea of who would be availbe to whom.

    2. Clearly they chose the wrong defensive lineman to 'leverage' in contract negotiations with a high pick. How could that not see that it would be Vince here long-term and not Seymour when EVERY fan saw it headed that way? Brace.... UGH! Such a waste of THREE draft picks.

    3. If you were looking at the tape and studying Chung vs. Byrd and went with Chung than your scouting and talent eval team were not doing their jobs.

    If your scouting team was looking for a safety to play safety why would they be comparing Chung to Byrd? Byrd was a cornerback not a safety. In fact he was not doing well as a CB for Buffalo and was a backup in his rookie year which is normal. He only got an opportunity to play free safety because both of Buffalos starters went down with injuries and they needed to insert Byrd. Buffalo had a stretch of seasons in a row that they got wiped out with injuries.  While so easy to say now, x number of years later, Byrd is a good free safety, what does that have to do with Chung? They did not even play the same position originally. They were not being evaluated to play the same positions. That is exaclty like me telling you to go to the grocery store and get an orange for me because i need one for my recipe i am making and you coming back with an apple and telling me the apple looked a lil better. Oh that's nice but i needed an orange for what I was making, not an apple. But the single most important thing is that, just like Mathews, just because Byrd is doing well in Buffalo in their system has no definitive proof on what he "might" do here in the Pats system.

    It is a simple as that.

    In the highly competitive business of the NFL you cannot blow 1st round picks/trade down from an opportunity for a star or misjudge talent as badly as Brace and Chung vs. Byrd. Even 2nd round picks if they are in the top 40-45 need to be starts 60% of the time and end up as solid rotation guys 90% of the time.



    I'm too tired to even bother addressing every point. You have your opinion and are passionate about it. I can appeciate that. I simply see nothing of substance to make me believe in your premise.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    When do we get beyond Clay Matthews envy? They didn't pick him, that was years ago. 80% of the league passed on Matthews. Aaron Rodgers too, by the way.

    Dowling and Brace were busts, you win. Byrd was better than Chung, you win again. You can literally micoranalyze the drafts of every team in the NFL and come up with a dozen cases of drafter's remorse for every last one of them. So what?

    What you can't do is say they would have won one more game than they did had they selected Matthews, or Byrd or anyone else. They won more games than Green Bay or Buffalo or just about any other team with the players they did pick. At the end of the day, the ONLY thing that matters is their W-L record. By that standard, they're top shelf.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I think it's another way they can deflect from Brady melting down in the 4th qtr of SB 46.

    BB drafting or not drafting Matthews in 2009 (which means no Gronk in 2010), has nothing to do with Brady's poor decision making in SB 46. Nothing at all.

    If Brady did not melt down at times in that SB and just made the right decisions on a few occasions, these threads do not exist.

    They just continue to scour for ways.

    [/QUOTE]

    Incorrect on several things again

    1. Brady was more to blame for the Super Bowl loss than the defense or Bill, I do not deny that. This 'draft revision' stuff had anything to do with trying to assign blame somewhere specifically away from Brady.

    2. I 100% proved to you that Matthews and Gronk could both have been Patriots

    3. Matthews is average at his position against the run, and an explosive rusher who has reshaped and ripped his body into a just solid rock muscle since being drafted. Clearly you have seen nothing on his crazy workout regiments that are everywhere in health magazines or watched ANY Green Bay games besides maybe 3-4 prime time and playoff games the past few years.

    4. The debate is not Matthews over Hightower or Collins (guys drafted AFTER the Super Bowl loss) nor is it Matthews over Nink (a camp invite who would have made the squad regardless of Matthews presence) It is Matthews over Burgess. A 34 year veteran waste of 2 million who we had to give up a draft pick for.

    By the time the Super Bowl season came around the Patriots were signing guys like Andre Carter and Mark Anderson as 1 year stop gaps to give them some, ANY sort of pass-rush.

    THOSE are the players you say we would have Matthews over. Sure, by now the Pats could have tagged and traded Matthews and felt he didn't fit their future. But the point is he'd have made a HUGE difference over 1 and done playoff teams in '09 and '10 over Burgess (TBC coulda still been here) then NOT cost us a chance to draft Gronk and been here instead of ONe of Carter and Anderson (probably Carter since we'd have stayed more 3-4).

    Talking about him has nothing to do with Hightower and Collins

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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In the highly competitive business of the NFL you cannot blow 1st round picks/trade down from an opportunity for a star or misjudge talent as badly as Brace and Chung vs. Byrd.

    [/QUOTE]

    And how have the Bills fared over the last decade compared to the Patriots?

    I guess you can blow picks, considering 100% of the teams in the NFL blow picks that's not surprising.  

    But I suppose you could do better, then again you said Shariff Floyd should have been taken with the 4th overall pick and he has 5 tackles for the entire season.  Your expertise is staggering...

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In the highly competitive business of the NFL you cannot blow 1st round picks/trade down from an opportunity for a star or misjudge talent as badly as Brace and Chung vs. Byrd.

    [/QUOTE]

    And how have the Bills fared over the last decade compared to the Patriots?

    I guess you can blow picks, considering 100% of the teams in the NFL blow picks that's not surprising.  

    But I suppose you could do better, then again you said Shariff Floyd should have been taken with the 4th overall pick and he has 5 tackles for the entire season.  Your expertise is staggering...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hahahahaha

    All I did was say Floyd was mocked in the top 10 in pretty much every draft so it was foolish of you to think he would slip to 29. Of course I know internet mocks are not NFL big boards by the teams themselves, just was trying to keep it realsistic. You were one of those guys thinking Watt was going to fall to us back in '11.

    I can safely say I've called it closer than you have over the years when it came to player analysis related to draft discussions.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    I wonder what the Giants could have done to be better this year, or the Steelers, or the Falcons, or the Packers, or the Texans, or the Ravens, or the Jets?

    Seems like all these playoff teams are not very good this year.

    Good thing they didn't hire Belichick, they would be much worse.

    Maybe it isn't so easy to be a playoff team....every year.

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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to carawaydj's comment:

    So much discussion about BB the drafter, BB the GM....

    BB has certainly had a few years of whiffing on high round picks.  I tend to think he's done better lately.  However, isn't the bottom line that he puts together winning teams year after year after year?

    RESPONSE: WRONGO!! This is the classic homer argument, which excuses BB for his lousy drafts and personnel decisions because, each year, because he "puts together winning teams". It is the job of BB "THE COACH" to take whatever group of players he has at his disposal, and get the most out of them. BB "THE COACH" is the very best in the game at doing this. But...it is the job of BB "THE GM" to provide the players and personnel that BB "THE COACH" has to work with. It is BB "THE GM" who is doing a consistently poor job of providing BB "THE COACH" with the best personnel possible to work with...forcing BB "THE COACH" to improvise with lesser talented players.  

    He might whiff on a 2nd rounder but find an UDFA that performs like a 2nd rounder.  He might find someone we think is just a training camp body (Nink) who ends up being a very good player.  All BB does is put together winning teams.  That to me is an A+.

    RESPONSE: No doubt, BB "THE COACH" gets an "A+" every season. He is the best coach in the game. BUT..."BB THE GM" has consistently failed to provide BB "THE COACH" with top quality talent...forcing BB "THE COACH to scrounge to develop less skilled role players...when BB "THE GM" continuously, not occasionally, whiffs on what has been a bevy of top 100 picks, since 2006.

    I really don't care how he does it.  I don't care if he seems to be better signing UDFA's than drafting 2nd rounders.  I don't care if he sometimes makes puzzling moves.  In a nutshell, we might not like the way he mixes some of the ingredients, and might not like some of his ingredients, but the cake that comes out of the oven is damned good each and every time.

    RESPONSE: Credit BB "THE COACH" for this...not BB "THE GM". Can you imagine how dominant the Patriots would have been since 2006 if only BB "THE GM" had drafted better, and not made those "puzzling moves"? If BB "THE COACH" had a better GM who made better personnel decisions, and provided BB "THE COACH" with more talented players, the Patriots wouln't have failed in their quest to win another championship, since the 2004 season. 

    I could care less if Buffalo picked a better player later than us.  When was the last time they were in the playoffs?  Clearly them picking a better player after us is the exception and not the norm.  If they were like this on all of their picks we'd be chasing them and they wouldn't have a losing record.  When judged against the bottom line, BB is the best....easily.

    RESPONSE: NO!! The difference between Buffalo and the Patriots over the years is that Buffalo didn't have Tom Brady, and BB "THE COACH". If Buffalo had them, they would have dominated the AFC East in the same manner as the Patriots have, over the past decade.




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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Hahahahaha

    All I did was say Floyd was mocked in the top 10 in pretty much every draft so it was foolish of you to think he would slip to 29. Of course I know internet mocks are not NFL big boards by the teams themselves, just was trying to keep it realsistic. You were one of those guys thinking Watt was going to fall to us back in '11.

    I can safely say I've called it closer than you have over the years when it came to player analysis related to draft discussions.

    [/QUOTE]

    All you did was attack me on my draft thread endlessly because I said Floyd was overrated and had a third round grade, you said he wouldn't fall out of the teens and I was a meatball for thinking he should, you also insisted that I was pretending to be some wannabe expert, attention hound when in my original post I always state that it's all in fun and I don't take myself too seriously... well I was right and you were wrong.

    I think the difference between us is I can readily admit that I'm wrong.  And no I never said JJ Watt would fall back to the Patriots but I was certainly wrong about how he would fare as a 3/4 defensive end, but you only know that because I constantly bring him up as an example of my humility regarding the draft process on my annual draft thread.

    You haven't called sht, you hang around the edges of draft threads without committing to any picks yourself and all of your picks are Kiper/McShay's top ten picks... great work. This year commit to ink 20 players that the Patriots should pick because they're the best of the best, also take players in every round, choose players that aren't ranked in the top 3 because after all you don't have six number one picks now do you, and maybe find us some undrafted free agent gems along the way... unlikely, instead you'll just criticize those of us that hang it all out there for everyone to see, the same way you attack the best GM in the game... as if you could do better.  

    Laughable

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Actually, Matthews has turned out to be a very good run defender.  If BB passed on Matthews because he thought he was a poor run defender, BB blew it.  He may have had other reasons for passing on Matthews, but I hope poor run defense wasn't one because if that was the reason Belichick did make a big mistake.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    What? Matthews sucks vs the run. Well known now for years. I am not talking about blasting in the backfield for a tackle. I am talking about setting the edge. He's way too small for that.

    Oh my god.  He's the same player he was after being drafted:  A feast or famine penetrator who is really good at what he does. 

    Learn the game, Prolate.  Any team that has a solid or good offense with a clue runs all over him to the strong side. It's been a big reason why their D has been weak in recent years.

    [/QUOTE]

    Rusty, you haven't been following closely enough.  

    http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/92568/matthews-absence-hurts-run-defense-too

    http://gnb.scout.com/2/1251623.html

     

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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Hahahahaha

    All I did was say Floyd was mocked in the top 10 in pretty much every draft so it was foolish of you to think he would slip to 29. Of course I know internet mocks are not NFL big boards by the teams themselves, just was trying to keep it realsistic. You were one of those guys thinking Watt was going to fall to us back in '11.

    I can safely say I've called it closer than you have over the years when it came to player analysis related to draft discussions.

    [/QUOTE]

    All you did was attack me on my draft thread endlessly because I said Floyd was overrated and had a third round grade, you said he wouldn't fall out of the teens and I was a meatball for thinking he should, you also insisted that I was pretending to be some wannabe expert, attention hound when in my original post I always state that it's all in fun and I don't take myself too seriously... well I was right and you were wrong.

    I think the difference between us is I can readily admit that I'm wrong.  And no I never said JJ Watt would fall back to the Patriots but I was certainly wrong about how he would fare as a 3/4 defensive end, but you only know that because I constantly bring him up as an example of my humility regarding the draft process on my annual draft thread.

    You haven't called sht, you hang around the edges of draft threads without committing to any picks yourself and all of your picks are Kiper/McShay's top ten picks... great work. This year commit to ink 20 players that the Patriots should pick because they're the best of the best, also take players in every round, choose players that aren't ranked in the top 3 because after all you don't have six number one picks now do you, and maybe find us some undrafted free agent gems along the way... unlikely, instead you'll just criticize those of us that hang it all out there for everyone to see, the same way you attack the best GM in the game... as if you could do better.  

    Laughable

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    True, laughable. Most everything you just said was garbage.

    Aww poor Wozzy being attacked, did I hurt your feelings? I barely did nothing close to 'endless' just maybe 2-3 responses after you got your panties in a bunch (like you are right now, such a little girl). Floyd was a 3rd rd talent in your eyes so I guess you have been proven 'right' because he fell 15 spots or so (pick 23 is in the 3rd round Wozzy?? hahaha) and because 6 games into a career he hasn't been dominant.

    Ok dude, haha, you 'win'. Hold onto this Floyd victory because there are a bunch of JJ Watt mistakes for every guy you think you called correctly.

    I barely post and hang around the edge of draft threads because I have a 70 hour a week job Bro. Must be nice to be retired, getting senile, having these small meaningless confrontations with younger men be the highlight of your life.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

     

    And for the record I don't follow Kiper at all.

    Go back and check my mock draft/final hopes for what the Pats did. I wanted 5 specific positions (DT, DE, ILB, OG, CB) and said I was looking for something like this:

    Rd 1 (29) - Werner to with Chandler or Sylvester Williams to put next to Vince. If both are gone and we cannot trade up a couple spots with future ('14) picks then trade down. I assumed Bill would trade the 1st rd pick for a 2nd/3rd combo and said i'd do the same thing unless a future all-pro Defensive lineman fell in our range.

    Rd 2 (59) - OG Larry Warford, CB's Jamar Taylor or Johnthan Banks, LB's Sio Moore or Kiko Alonso or a big DT like Hankins or Jenkins or a speedier one like Margus Hunt or Kawann Short. DE Tank Carrdine. Some of these guys were names I mostly thought we only couldf get in the 40-50 range after a trade down out of rd 1.

    Rd 3 (91) - CB's Tyrann Mathieu, Logan Ryan and Kayvon Webster, C/G's Travis Frederick or Barrett Jones, one of Moore/Alonzo if they dropped. DE Alex Okafor and DT Akeem Spence.

    Frederick, Alonso and the honey badger went much higher than I thought, but that is an example of how overall all the names of the guys I loved were also loved by the NFL draft teams. Ryan was the only Patriot player drafted that I was in on.

    After the very solid Minnesotra trade down that I loved, here is an example of how I would have done the draft based on all the players I REPEATEDLY said I wanted:

    2 (52) - OG Larry Warford

    2 (59) - LB Sio Moore

    3 (83) - CB Logan Ryan

    3 (91) - DT Akeem Spence

    4 (102) - DE - Alex Okafor

    Dobson has been about as expected and thankfully not a Chad Jackson type 2nd rd pick so far, but I kept saying that I would not draft a WR based on BB's track record and instead continue to try to go the Sanders route of trading a future pick for a veteran all offseason and also assumed Lloyd would restructure and be back. Did not know the depth of those issues.

    Moore has 1 sack to Collins 0 and has also had to deal with a minor injury from an auto accident. Considering Moore is more on ILB ale to have filled in for Mayo easier (in my opinion) jury is still out on those 2 guys.

    Warford has been a beast. I wanted him bad all last year and was bitterly dissapointed when we passed on him. Connolly is now hurt and in my opinion is/was a better Center than Wendall so the whole interior would have been more destructive.

    Ryan is a solid 4th CB.

    Spence would have been WAY better than Boyce, Spence sacked Brady in game 3 in with Vince now hurt would be huge here. Boyce was injured end of his college career and passed on the depth chart by an UDFA (T.J. Moe prob would contribute more)

    Okafor tore a bicep and is done for the season but I'd have loved a guy formely thought o go 40-60 at 102. Luckily we got Buchanan in rd 7 and that is an absolute steal.

    So Wozzy, when it comes down to it this 'hang around' guy knows his stuff, nails his mock year in and year out more than you and your 'endless' overthinking and listing of a dozen players per spot and finds your insecure issues with Floyd/Watt pretty pathetic.

     

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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Hahahahaha

    All I did was say Floyd was mocked in the top 10 in pretty much every draft so it was foolish of you to think he would slip to 29. Of course I know internet mocks are not NFL big boards by the teams themselves, just was trying to keep it realsistic. You were one of those guys thinking Watt was going to fall to us back in '11.

    I can safely say I've called it closer than you have over the years when it came to player analysis related to draft discussions.

    [/QUOTE]

    All you did was attack me on my draft thread endlessly because I said Floyd was overrated and had a third round grade, you said he wouldn't fall out of the teens and I was a meatball for thinking he should, you also insisted that I was pretending to be some wannabe expert, attention hound when in my original post I always state that it's all in fun and I don't take myself too seriously... well I was right and you were wrong.

    RESPONSE: Big deal. Why are you trumpeting this? Rusty is always wrong. That's what's so right about him...LOL!!!

    I think the difference between us is I can readily admit that I'm wrong.  And no I never said JJ Watt would fall back to the Patriots but I was certainly wrong about how he would fare as a 3/4 defensive end, but you only know that because I constantly bring him up as an example of my humility regarding the draft process on my annual draft thread.

    RESPONSE: You can readily admit to being wrong? Than why, like Rusty, do you continue to defend BB the GM?

    You haven't called sht, you hang around the edges of draft threads without committing to any picks yourself and all of your picks are Kiper/McShay's top ten picks... great work. This year commit to ink 20 players that the Patriots should pick because they're the best of the best, also take players in every round, choose players that aren't ranked in the top 3 because after all you don't have six number one picks now do you, and maybe find us some undrafted free agent gems along the way... unlikely, instead you'll just criticize those of us that hang it all out there for everyone to see, the same way you attack the best GM in the game... as if you could do better.  

    Laughable

    RESPONSE: BB is the best GM in the game?? Yes...that is laughable!  

    [/QUOTE]


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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    RESPONSE: You can readily admit to being wrong? Than why, like Rusty, do you continue to defend BB the GM?

    RESPONSE: BB is the best GM in the game?? Yes...that is laughable!  

    [/QUOTE]

    Find me a GM with a better winning % than Belichick over the last decade, otherwise blow it out your azz.  

    This ^ is your opinion which is worthless, almost the entire world of sports media, professional scouts, former players turned analysts agree with me and Bill Belichick is not an easy person to like... that's all the validation I need.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    Not that it really means anything much, but SI did a poll of a dozen GMs earlier this year and they voted Belichick the best coach and Ozzie Newsome the best GM.

     

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130904/nfl-gm-poll-belichick-newsome/

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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    True, laughable. Most everything you just said was garbage.

    I'll use the TexPat method of responding since your girlfriend has chosen to fight for you.  This ^ is a well thought out response, "garbage" is that a technical term?

    Aww poor Wozzy being attacked, did I hurt your feelings? I barely did nothing close to 'endless' just maybe 2-3 responses after you got your panties in a bunch (like you are right now, such a little girl). Floyd was a 3rd rd talent in your eyes so I guess you have been proven 'right' because he fell 15 spots or so (pick 23 is in the 3rd round Wozzy?? hahaha) and because 6 games into a career he hasn't been dominant.

    Floyd has barely played, aren't you the one above who said first rounders have to start and be productive or does that only count when measuring BB's whiffs and not your own?

    Ok dude, haha, you 'win'. Hold onto this Floyd victory because there are a bunch of JJ Watt mistakes for every guy you think you called correctly.

    I agree, but somehow you think general managers are supposed to be able to see into the future and predict the fates of men, do you see the rank stupidity of this yet... no, I doubt it.

    I barely post and hang around the edge of draft threads because I have a 70 hour a week job Bro. Must be nice to be retired, getting senile, having these small meaningless confrontations with younger men be the highlight of your life.

    I'm under 40, work and live a great life, I still find time to post here because unlike you it doesn't take me a half hour to formulate a paragraph and I don't spend my time attacking other posters for their opinions, I just put them on ignore which is what I suggest you do instead of insisting people are wrong without for a second considering that it might be you.

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Not that it really means anything much, but SI did a poll of a dozen GMs earlier this year and they voted Belichick the best coach and Ozzie Newsome the best GM.

     

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130904/nfl-gm-poll-belichick-newsome/

    [/QUOTE]

    As voted on by GM's... no GM will admit that the position is unnecessary with a great, single football mind who can do both, it would put those who can't coach out of a job.  

    I would stack Ozzie Newsome's picks next to Belichick any day, it would be very close judging the two, I would say they're very close and I have great respect for Newsome.  BB isn't very likeable, I would never expect him to win any popularity contests.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    I barely post and hang around the edge of draft threads because I have a 70 hour a week job Bro. 

    I never quite believe it when people tell me they work 70 or 80 hours a week, unless they really are working two full-time jobs where they have to punch a clock.  You do realize, that to work 70 hours in a week, you need to work 7 am to 7 pm five days a week and still put another 10 hours in over the weekend (i.e., work 7 to 5 on Saturday if you want Sunday off)?  To work 80 hours, you need to work 7 to 7 five days a week and 7 to 5 both Saturday and Sunday.  People say they work this much all the time.  I really don't believe them. Fifty or sixty hours, sure.  But 70 or 80?  Only if you have absolutely no life outside work at all. 

     

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Not that it really means anything much, but SI did a poll of a dozen GMs earlier this year and they voted Belichick the best coach and Ozzie Newsome the best GM.

     

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130904/nfl-gm-poll-belichick-newsome/

    [/QUOTE]

    As voted on by GM's... no GM will admit that the position is unnecessary with a great, single football mind who can do both, it would put those who can't coach out of a job.  

    I would stack Ozzie Newsome's picks next to Belichick any day, it would be very close judging the two, I would say they're very close and I have great respect for Newsome.  BB isn't very likeable, I would never expect him to win any popularity contests.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's fair.  I tend to feel like jri37 does.  That BB is definitely among the top five or so GMs in the league.  Picking one as "best" seems a bit artificial to me.  I think Newsome and Thompson both deserve consideration, since both have built very good teams that are in contention most years too. 

    BB is, in my mind, possibly the best coach the game has ever seen.  Certainly, I've seen no one even close to him as a strategist and talent manager. 

     

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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    That's fair.  I tend to feel like jri37 does.  That BB is definitely among the top five or so GMs in the league.  Picking one as "best" seems a bit artificial to me.  I think Newsome and Thompson both deserve consideration, since both have built very good teams that are in contention most years too. 

    BB is, in my mind, possibly the best coach the game has ever seen.  Certainly, I've seen no one even close to him as a strategist and talent manager. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Agreed, I don't know why there is a constant need to rank everything.  If having the 2nd best GM means I also have the best coach I'll take it.  There is no single person I would rather have running the Patriots, unlike some shortsighted posters here I remember the 80's.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    That's fair.  I tend to feel like jri37 does.  That BB is definitely among the top five or so GMs in the league.  Picking one as "best" seems a bit artificial to me.  I think Newsome and Thompson both deserve consideration, since both have built very good teams that are in contention most years too. 

    BB is, in my mind, possibly the best coach the game has ever seen.  Certainly, I've seen no one even close to him as a strategist and talent manager. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Agreed, I don't know why there is a constant need to rank everything.  If having the 2nd best GM means I also have the best coach I'll take it.  There is no single person I would rather have running the Patriots, unlike some shortsighted posters here I remember the 80's.

    [/QUOTE]

    It's kind of juvenile, isn't it, this need to rank everything. I agree with you.  I think we're the luckiest fans ever to get to watch Belichick at work.  It's like having a Lombardi or a Brown as your coach. He's in that class in my opinion. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Not that it really means anything much, but SI did a poll of a dozen GMs earlier this year and they voted Belichick the best coach and Ozzie Newsome the best GM.

     

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130904/nfl-gm-poll-belichick-newsome/

    [/QUOTE]

    As voted on by GM's... no GM will admit that the position is unnecessary with a great, single football mind who can do both, it would put those who can't coach out of a job.  

    I would stack Ozzie Newsome's picks next to Belichick any day, it would be very close judging the two, I would say they're very close and I have great respect for Newsome.  BB isn't very likeable, I would never expect him to win any popularity contests.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's fair.  I tend to feel like jri37 does.  That BB is definitely among the top five or so GMs in the league.  Picking one as "best" seems a bit artificial to me.  I think Newsome and Thompson both deserve consideration, since both have built very good teams that are in contention most years too. 

    BB is, in my mind, possibly the best coach the game has ever seen.  Certainly, I've seen no one even close to him as a strategist and talent manager. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree picking the "best GM" is such a difficult exercise. It is tough because of how fluid a situation 53 man rosters are and always seem to be always in flux. Sure you can judge the core of the roster and drafts but in my opinion one of the most difficult aspects of a GM's job is juggling the salry cap so a team can have adequate depth. As Wozzy stated and I have in the past BB record as GM speaks for itself and makes him a top 5 GM at a minimum.

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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

    In response to TexasPat's comment:

     

    RESPONSE: You can readily admit to being wrong? Than why, like Rusty, do you continue to defend BB the GM?

    RESPONSE: BB is the best GM in the game?? Yes...that is laughable!  

     

     

    Find me a GM with a better winning % than Belichick over the last decade, otherwise blow it out your azz.

    RESPONSE: Typical crude, low class Wozzy response...and so typical of a Homer. All emotion, no facts. The winning percentage of BB "THE COACH" underscores that he is one of, if not the greatest coach to ever prowl an NFL sideline. Especially when you consider that BB "THE COACH" has been saddled with BB "THE GM". Once again, to highlight the graveyard of wasted high draft picks by BB "THE GM" since 2006:

    1.) 2006: RB Laurence Maroney (21st overall pick), WR Chad Jackson (36th overall pick), TE David Thomas (86th overall pick), TE Garrett Mills (106th overall pick);

    2.) 2007: FS Brandon Meriweather (24th overall pick), DT Kareem Brown (127th overall pick);

    3.) 2008: CB Terrence Wheatley (62nd overall pick), LB Shawn Crable (78th overall pick), QB Kevin O"Connell (94th overall pick);

    4.) 2009: SS Patrick Chung (34th overall pick), DT Ron Brace (40th overall pick), CB Darius Butler (41st overall pick), WR Brandon Tate (83rd overall pick), LB Tyrone McKenzie (97th overall pick);

    5.) 2010: LB/DE Jermaine Cunningham (53rd overall pick), WR Taylor Price (90th overall pick);

    6.) 2011: CB Ras-I Dowling (33rd overall pick);

    7.) 2012: SS Tavon Wilson (48th overall pick), DE Jake Bequette (90th overall pick);

    8.) 2013: Based on what we've seen thus far, is anybody excited over what they've seen from Jamie Collins (52nd overall), CB Logan Ryan (83rd overall) SS Duron Harmon (91st overall), or WR Josh Boyce (102nd overall)?? Though WR Aaron Dobson (59th overall) has shown some potential, many here have taken to referring to him as Aaron Dropson, due to his unfortunate tendency to drop passes that hit him in the hands. NOT GOOD...as the BB "THE GM" beat goes on. 

         But Wooz...let's move on to discuss BB "THE GM's" off-season moves this year. How's that Danny Amendola signing working for you? How about the decision to pay Aaron Hernandez huge guaranteed money, despite having some knowledge that he was a troubled and troubling individual? How about the refusal to resign Wes Welker to a modest 2 year, $10mil. deal, despite knowing that Hernandez was lost to the team...thereby allowing him to join the Pats' top competitor in the AFC, the Denver Horsefaces?? How about his failure to add WR Emmanuel Sanders from the Steelers, when an extra million would have sealed the deal? How about the "great" job that BB "THE GM" did in adding quality depth at DT?      

    This ^ is your opinion which is worthless, almost the entire world of sports media, professional scouts, former players turned analysts agree with me and Bill Belichick is not an easy person to like... that's all the validation I need.

    RESPONSE: What does it matter whether BB is "not an easy person to like"? Personally, I'm a huge BB "THE COACH" advocate. I vigorously defended him, and continue to defend him, over the Spygate BS. In fact, I can honestly say that I do like BB! I love the way he sticks it to the media. In my humble opinion, he is the greatest NFL coach of all-time.

         BUT...the great decade of success for the Patriots was accomplished DESPITE BB "THE GM", not because of him! It was the uncanny ability of BB "THE COACH" to win by coaching up very average overall talent, and his great fortune in having the greatest QB of all-time playing playing for him.

         It's a shame that BB won't acknowledge his failings...and turn the personnel decisions over to a GM who is a better judge of talent...and someone who won't fall in love with a player, just because that player played at certain school. Pats' beat writer Mike Reiss has suggested this, too. Oh sorry...I forgot...everyone agrees with you...LOL!!!

         Sorry...but I can't turn a blind eye to  the failings of BB "THE GM". If BB "THE GM" was half as good as BB "THE COACH", the Patriots would have at least two more championships over their decade of dominance.

         I'm going to end it here, Wooz...without hurling any personal insults your way. I'm in far too good of a mood, after watching the Sox win the AL Championship last night. 

     




     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Tex for every list that you create regarding BB's failures, cherry picking instances where he faltered, I can create an opposing list of his victories. 

    If the end game is winning football games and fielding a competitive team EVERY year than the stance you're taking looks obtuse. 

    If you don't want to get blasted try not to interject yourself into an A/B conversation with smart azz comments followed by your traditionally smug and unwarranted "LOL."  We all know your take will be generally negative and anti-BB.

    This team is 5-1 with injuries to it's best, all pro players... saying our GM is bad is a joke.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TexasPat's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Tex for every list that you create regarding BB's failures, cherry picking instances where he faltered, I can create an opposing list of his victories. 

    RESPONSE: Cherry picking??? I've stated facts, while you rely on emotion. Again...I credit BB "THE COACH" for those successes, along with his great fortune in having Tom Brady as his QB. The poor personnel decisions of BB "THE GM" has made the job of Brady and his coach much harder.

    If the end game is winning football games and fielding a competitive team EVERY year than the stance you're taking looks obtuse. 

    RESPONSE: AGAIN...credit BB "THE COACH" for this, not BB "THE GM".

    If you don't want to get blasted try not to interject yourself into an A/B conversation with smart azz comments followed by your traditionally smug and unwarranted "LOL."  We all know your take will be generally negative and anti-BB.

    RESPONSE: Oh please Wooz...don't blast me??!!!!! I'll be good...LOL!!!

    This team is 5-1 with injuries to it's best, all pro players... saying our GM is bad is a joke.

    RESPONSE: Our team is 5-1 despite the failings of BB "THE GM" this offseason...one of his worst offseason performances ever. Credit a dogged Tom Brady and the great BB "THE COACH" for making lemonaid out of lemons.

    [/QUOTE]


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

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    The endless argument contines...BB is a great coach and a lousy GM and this guy is better and his draft picks suck and so on.

    I still don't understand how you can separate the GM from his record?

    Some examples.

    Theo Epstein made some good draft picks with the Red Sox, made some poor ones too. In the end, the teams he built won two championships so he's a top flight GM in almost everyone's judgment. Certainly the Cubs thought so.

    Floyd Reece won two championships with the Giants. His drafting record is not very good, to be charitable. But, based on the criteria most use to judge, he's a successful GM. 

    Ted Thompson has a spotty draft record, some really good picks and some really awful ones. But he won a championship in 2010 when the wild card Packers got hot and ran the table. When people talk about the best GMs in the NFL, he gets a lot of mentions. He has a nice team, but they haven't sniffed a Super Bowl other than that one fortunate season. 

    Ozzie Newsome is basically the same story, his team got hot and really lucky last year. Otherwise, he's a guy that has built a decent team (not great by the way) and has nothing to show for it after what, ten years on the job?

    But some on this board insist that Belichick should be held to a higher standard, that winning is somehow not enough and we need to microanalyze all of his draft choices and point out all the flaws. And based on that analysis, he falls way short of even being an average GM. In fact, he's a failure, the very reason why that other Belichick guy, the one with the hoody, hasn't delivered another championship.

    Why when we talk of other GMs, do some folks only look at the team's success but when we look at our own GM, you have to continually point out this or that mistake and ignore the body of work? 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share