Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/23/2009 2:22 PM EDT
I know this is old news but after reading Bruschi’s Breakdown on ESPNBoston.com, specifically concerning Adalius Thomas, I’m led to a specific possibility regarding his deactivation.
We’re all aware that he received a huge contract, by Patriots standards, on the Free Agent market a few years ago. The expectation was that he would be the single most important player on the Defense. Now, I’m a personal believer that he hasn’t been used in a way that highlights his strengths nor put in a spot to put up great stats. Regardless, his impact has been underwhelming.
Where the Pats are only about $1m under the cap and the deactivation happened the Sunday prior to the trading deadline I’m inclined to believe they were aggressively trying to renegotiate his deal (he has the third highest cap number on the team) in an effort to add another player and he wouldn’t budge. I guess the message to him was “we can win without you so you may want to reconsider your position”. I suppose you could theorize his lone assisted tackle in the Denver game may have contributed to this especially if he were making a statement of his own. Granted, that is very speculative and, if true, there is no question that a message was necessary. This will most likely just blow over but I strongly feel this is the most logical explanation to an otherwise surprising move.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/23/2009 2:25 PM EDT
A.D. will probably lose a game check, seems like another way for Kraft to save a few bucks, since he knew they wouldn't need him against the Titans.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/23/2009 2:29 PM EDT
In Response to
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation:
A.D. will probably lose a game check, seems like another way for Kraft to save a few bucks, since he knew they wouldn't need him against the Titans.
Posted by payingfan
doubtful
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/23/2009 4:42 PM EDT
- ewhite1065
- Posts: 3016
- First: 4/26/2007
- Last: 10/27/2010
In Response to
Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation:
I know this is old news but after reading Bruschi’s Breakdown on ESPNBoston.com, specifically concerning Adalius Thomas, I’m led to a specific possibility regarding his deactivation. We’re all aware that he received a huge contract, by Patriots standards, on the Free Agent market a few years ago. The expectation was that he would be the single most important player on the Defense. Now, I’m a personal believer that he hasn’t been used in a way that highlights his strengths nor put in a spot to put up great stats. Regardless, his impact has been underwhelming. Where the Pats are only about $1m under the cap and the deactivation happened the Sunday prior to the trading deadline I’m inclined to believe they were aggressively trying to renegotiate his deal (he has the third highest cap number on the team) in an effort to add another player and he wouldn’t budge. I guess the message to him was “we can win without you so you may want to reconsider your position”. I suppose you could theorize his lone assisted tackle in the Denver game may have contributed to this especially if he were making a statement of his own. Granted, that is very speculative and, if true, there is no question that a message was necessary. This will most likely just blow over but I strongly feel this is the most logical explanation to an otherwise surprising move.
Posted by SonnyCorlione
Interesting thought but I'd have to disagree judging from the way the Pats have handled business issues in the past. BB would never sit anyone out for spite, he just doesn't operate that way. Even when Ty Law called him a liar in the off season Belichick didn't let that phase him at all. A contract renegotiation is business and of all people Sonny Corleone should know the difference between personal and business.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/23/2009 6:19 PM EDT
- NEGAME
- Posts: 913
- First: 4/26/2007
- Last: 10/27/2010
He missed a practice and Belichick does not tolerate that! Remember with Seymore got back late from his Grandmother's furneral and Belichick put him on the bench. Seymore never got over it. I would say the Patriots would be treading on thin ice if they sat a player for not renegotiating a contract. Where do you come up with these ideas!!
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/23/2009 7:52 PM EDT
In Response to
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation:
He missed a practice and Belichick does not tolerate that! Remember with Seymore got back late from his Grandmother's furneral and Belichick put him on the bench. Seymore never got over it. I would say the Patriots would be treading on thin ice if they sat a player for not renegotiating a contract. Where do you come up with these ideas!!
Posted by NEGAME
I agree 100%.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/23/2009 8:36 PM EDT
Its simple he was not playing at a level they expected expecially after the Denver game performance and Bill sent a message. We can win without you but it would be nice if you picked it up a bit and earned what we pay you.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/23/2009 9:19 PM EDT
- bchan89
- Posts: 559
- First: 9/28/2007
- Last: 9/7/2011
payingfan,
it wasn't about a "game check" because he gets paid only during the 16 game schedule weather he plays or not, as long he is on the roster he gets paid. if your are upset about the Patriots money management you should email Kraft and not whine about it on a message board. If you don't like the way Mr. Kraft handles the Patriots you should save your money and buy the team and run it your way. And oh yeah know a little bit about the topic before you post you totally awsome paying customer.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/24/2009 12:23 AM EDT
I watched the game again and Merriweather whiffed on even more tackles than I originally thought, and where he made tackles he was dragged for yards. His inability to tackle is what cost us the overtime loss to the Jets (and a 12-4 record) last year. And it cost us Cotchery's big gain that set up Sanchez's TD in the opening of the second half in game 2. I honestly don't know why they don't play him more in deep coverage as the free safety rather than in the Rodney Harrison wannabe role he's currently in. But I'm sure BB is making the most out of what he has.
(And his inability to shed (pick) blocks cost us a 3rd and 11 conversion after the miracle in the super bowl.)
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/24/2009 12:31 AM EDT
BB needs to reel in ed reed
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/24/2009 6:41 AM EDT
In Response to
Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation:
I know this is old news but after reading Bruschi’s Breakdown on ESPNBoston.com, specifically concerning Adalius Thomas, I’m led to a specific possibility regarding his deactivation. We’re all aware that he received a huge contract, by Patriots standards, on the Free Agent market a few years ago. The expectation was that he would be the single most important player on the Defense. Now, I’m a personal believer that he hasn’t been used in a way that highlights his strengths nor put in a spot to put up great stats. Regardless, his impact has been underwhelming. Where the Pats are only about $1m under the cap and the deactivation happened the Sunday prior to the trading deadline I’m inclined to believe they were aggressively trying to renegotiate his deal (he has the third highest cap number on the team) in an effort to add another player and he wouldn’t budge. I guess the message to him was “we can win without you so you may want to reconsider your position”. I suppose you could theorize his lone assisted tackle in the Denver game may have contributed to this especially if he were making a statement of his own. Granted, that is very speculative and, if true, there is no question that a message was necessary. This will most likely just blow over but I strongly feel this is the most logical explanation to an otherwise surprising move.
Posted by SonnyCorlione
Interesting perspective of the Thomas deactivation. With almost ALL the moves happening in the last week being money related I wouldn't be surprised if that conversation actually did occur.
Trying to force a square peg into a Patriots' system hasn't made AT well-rounded it has proven that the Pats system is more important to Bill than molding the system to the talent available. AT is an OLB not an ILB but for some reason Pats LBs need to play ALL LB positions and D end too.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/24/2009 1:18 PM EDT
- TrueChamp
- Posts: 4989
- First: 8/15/2009
- Last: 5/22/2013
In Response to
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation:
I watched the game again and Merriweather whiffed on even more tackles than I originally thought, and where he made tackles he was dragged for yards. His inability to tackle is what cost us the overtime loss to the Jets (and a 12-4 record) last year. And it cost us Cotchery's big gain that set up Sanchez's TD in the opening of the second half in game 2. I honestly don't know why they don't play him more in deep coverage as the free safety rather than in the Rodney Harrison wannabe role he's currently in. But I'm sure BB is making the most out of what he has. (And his inability to shed (pick) blocks cost us a 3rd and 11 conversion after the miracle in the super bowl.)
Posted by themightypatriotz
Mighty Im 99% sure it was J Wilhite who tried to bump Cotchery out of bounds instead of wrapping him up. Did Merriweather get beat after that or are u confusing the dreads?
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/24/2009 2:15 PM EDT
- Macrawn
- Posts: 668
- First: 9/12/2008
- Last: 5/23/2013
I wouldn't be surprised if they were shopping him around. That would explain the deactivation. You don't want him hurt if you are aggressively shopping him especially if you want to deal him badly enough. I would have thought something would have surfaced by now on that if it was truly the case.
Could be BB is also sending a message to him like he did Maroney last year. Suit up and bust some people up or sit on the bench.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/24/2009 2:36 PM EDT
In Response to
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation:
In Response to Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation : Mighty Im 99% sure it was J Wilhite who tried to bump Cotchery out of bounds instead of wrapping him up. Did Merriweather get beat after that or are u confusing the dreads?
Posted by TrueChamp
Champ I'm referring to the first play of the second half. Wilhite had primary coverage but Merriweather had deep/inside support. If you go to 14:48 in the 3rd Q, after the catch is made, Merriweather is in perfect position to tackle Cotchery at about the Pats 40. Instead he whiffes and Cotchery gets down to the 10.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/24/2009 6:25 PM EDT
AD has been playing terrible this year. His last good game was the super bowl and that was over 20 games ago. He has played poorly so he was sat. Simple as that. Bill plays the guys he thinks can help him win, period. He would bench his son if he carried the clip board too low.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/24/2009 6:54 PM EDT
- Stanwell
- Posts: 18
- First: 4/28/2009
- Last: 1/8/2012
Like Macrawn my first thought was that they were shopping him around & wanted him healthy. Then BB said something that made me think he just wanted to take it like a preseason game and get another look at the third string. But then, I have not been deep in the tape studying AD's hits and misses so I don't know whether 'sending a message' to AD re performance would make any difference. Nor re contracts, though that would be of a piece with the rest.... Interesting thought.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/24/2009 7:41 PM EDT
Seems to me that if AD has been used primarily in coverage, and we haven't heard his name come up, it means he's covering so well that opponents aren't throwing at him. Guess that isn't enough for people who demand sacks and "big plays."
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/24/2009 9:55 PM EDT
"
Trying to force a square peg into a Patriots' system hasn't made AT well-rounded it has proven that the Pats system is more important to Bill than molding the system to the talent available. AT is an OLB not an ILB but for some reason Pats LBs need to play ALL LB positions and D end too."
Another possibility is that AT is just not very good anymore, had that occurred to you also? I certainly haven't seen much since I got here to make we wish he had a bigger role.
Re: Easy to Explain the AD Deactivation
posted at 10/25/2009 6:02 AM EDT
- +Mrboston
- Posts: 45
- First: 9/20/2009
- Last: 6/2/2011
To the man that Stated that AD is a outside linebacker, remember this.He would perfer to stay on the outside, but he was given the big bucks to play inside or outside.He played inside in 2007 and was very good.Bill wants to move him as nessary. AD perfers to stay outside, so he played like sh!t and got benched. I think he will be fine movig forward.
