Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    "PLease pay attention, people." O.K. Dougie, but BB would never have allowed Nick Buonticonti, to depart.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from GO47. Show GO47's posts

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    In response to rameakap's comment:

    In response to MoreRings' comment:

    Woody



    Yup, I was going to say Woodhead.

    TE David Thomas, S Ihedigbo, Brian Waters, Meriweather isn't better than he was, but he isn't worse and the Pats have needed and enforcer safety ever since he was cut.

    But yeah, overall it has been the blown draft picks that have hurt Bill. Clearly he knows when to keep and cut the players he coaches.

    Sorry but every team in the NFL has their share of blown draft picks. We just happen to be familiar with the Patriot's because we follow them. But it's clear other teams like the Browns, Buccaneers, Jets, Cowboys, Raiders, and a lot more have their share of blown draft picks. Even the good teams that have excellent reputations have their share of "blown draft picks". This perception is over blown!


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

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    Craig James!!!!


    Kind of... One year wonder with the Pats then off to purse a GREAT career in broadcasting!!!


    Then this...


    James said in 1998 that the Wisconsin Badgers were "the worst team to ever play in the Rose Bowl." Wisconsin went on to defeat #6 UCLA 38–31 in the 1999 Rose Bowl. Afterward, Badger coach Barry Alvarez fired back, "Well, I know we're at least the second worst."


    and this...


    James is a voter in the AP college football poll, and has received some attention and criticism for his reported tendency to give low votes to teams from outside the Automatic Qualifying conferences, such as Boise State and TCU


    This too...


    On August 30, 2013, Fox Sports Southwest announced that it had hired James as a college football analyst and co-host of the network's college football studio show.[23] On September 2, after only one appearance, Fox Sports Southwest abruptly cut ties with James before he'd formally signed a contract. Reportedly, Fox Sports officials were displeased that James' hire had not been vetted.[24] Additionally, The Dallas Morning News reported that Fox Sports officials were upset at anti-same sex marriage statements James made during his Senate run.


    Finally this...


    On December 19, 2011, James announced he would run for the United States Senate as a Republican in 2012 for the seat being vacated by Kay Bailey Hutchison. Public Policy Polling found during the race that "as Craig James has become better known he's just gotten more and more unpopular." His campaign was notable for the Google bomb that afflicted it, in which it was falsely claimed that "Craig James Killed Five Hookers" during his time at SMU. During a 2012 debate, James upbraided former Dallas mayor Tom Leppert for attending a gay pride parade, and declared that gays would eventually "answer to the Lord for their actions." Those and other anti-gay statements subsequently cost him his job at Fox Sports Southwest.


    On May 29, 2012, he finished a distant fourth out of nine candidates in the Republican primary with about 4% of the vote.


    ......On second thought, I'll go with Doug Flutie!!


    "Don't touch my Leatherhelmet!!"

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

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    "Will people please read the thread title?"

    The thread title is not written in parchment paper. 

    The point of the OP was that Bill knows when to cut people. 

    Adam V is the obvious answer to the letter of the law of the thread. 

    I don't think the loss of Adam V hurt the Pats much and as you rightly point out, dome kicking has extended his career. 

    I do, however, agree with whoever put Deion Branch on here. Deion wasn't worth what Seattle paid him but I believe BB left a ring on the table by not bringing him back. 

    To my eyes that was BB's biggest error in judgement in terms of cutting players or not re-signing them too soon. 

    But yes, only Adam V fits the strict criteria of this thread. 

    Oh and Bledsoe with the Bills LOL - remember how excited Bills fans were about that "steal?"

    Overall, knowing when to cut is BB's greatest strength as a GM, exceptional - one area I tip my cap to him. A to A+ over the years here.

       
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    The only guy I could think of having a good career after leaving New England Curtis Martin.

    Sportsbozo1

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    I'm still sticking with Robbie Gould.  He's probably the best kicker in the league.  Signed as a free agent. got released by The pats in preseason in 2005. Went to the ravens and cut. Signed with the bears and was a pro bowl kicker in 2007 

     

     

     

    But, but I'm a good poster!

    Remember Tyler Sash!  Rinngggg ringgggg

    http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=10930324

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from user_4160947. Show user_4160947's posts

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.


    This off the top of my head, but the Pats had Irving Fryar for about 5 seasons.  He was a #1 pick but always in trouble, a little bit of a head case, and wasn't committed while here.  After getting cut and a short stay somewhere else, he got himself right and had a couple of Pro Bowl years in Miami.  Another guy I recall was a late cut from the O-line, Ted Larsen (?) a few years ago.  He's been an on and off starter in Tampa for a few years. 

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

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

     

    Okay, if we want to limit this to quality free agents in the prime of their career who leave because a contract can't be worked out, there aren't many to look at, because:

    (1) there are few of those in general

    (2) BB tends to re-sign the best of his free agents if they are still in their prime

     

    The guys BB doesn't re-sign mostly are either JAGs (Butler, Tate) or headed toward the downside of their careers (Welker, Mankins, Seymour at the time he was traded).  Samuel and Branch stand out as two who really were quality free agents (based on their performance up to the time they left) in their prime who Belichick didn't keep.  Samuel went on to play pretty much as well as he did in New England (while New England bumped along with guys like Ellis Hobbs).  Branch did not do as well, though you might argue that he was a good system player in New England more than a good player in general. Honestly I think both Branch and the Patriots would have done better if they had stayed together.  I think Branch would have continued to have been a success in New England and the Pats would have benefitted from having him on the field rather than guys like Reche Caldwell. 

     

    A quick skim of Pats' rosters suggests a few other candidates--though several of these are (like Jones and Wilson) are borderline quality players:

    Terry Glenn

    Damien Woody

    Tebucky Jones

    Daniel Graham

    Eugene Wilson

    Ben Watson

    Adam Vinatieri

    Brandon Merriweather

    Ben-Jarvus Green Ellis

    Danny Woodhead

     

    The way things work in the NFL, most quality rookies are signed to four-year contracts (it used to be five year contracts).  They tend to be in their prime when they negotiate their first non-rookie deal. Those deals typically are four or five years if the guy is good, too, so by the time a player reaches his third deal, he's been in the league 8 or more years and is in his 30s, so he's starting to get long in the tooth.  It's not rocket science to be cautious about re-signing to big money or long deals 30+-year old guys with 8 or nine years of wear on their treads. Belichick is smart in that he doesn't let emotion get in the way of reason, but there's no magic here. You can predict pretty accurately that most 32 year old players aren't going to have many more years of top-level performance left.  

     

    If you look at the Seymour trade, that's one where BB probably let him go a little earlier than ideal, but he did so because he knew he'd never re-sign him for the money he'd be looking for a year later (when he'd be turning 31 and already had 10 years in the league), so trading him allowed him to get value for a player he'd otherwise probably just lose for nothing.  The Mankins trade is a similar deal.  The Seymour trade, though, did hurt the D line in 2009--and maybe even for a year or two, because we didn't have a good replacement for him and Seymour had about two or three more quality years left.  Hopefully, the Mankins trade doesn't have a similar effect on the O line.  

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    There isn't enough data for the research.  Belichick fails so often at the draft, guys usually aren't good at NFL football in general, so the odds of them doing a better job at it at any point are very bad.

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

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:


     


    Okay, if we want to limit this to quality free agents in the prime of their career who leave because a contract can't be worked out, there aren't many to look at, because:


    (1) there are few of those in general


    (2) BB tends to re-sign the best of his free agents if they are still in their prime


     


    The guys BB doesn't re-sign mostly are either JAGs (Butler, Tate) or headed toward the downside of their careers (Welker, Mankins, Seymour at the time he was traded).  Samuel and Branch stand out as two who really were quality free agents (based on their performance up to the time they left) in their prime who Belichick didn't keep.  Samuel went on to play pretty much as well as he did in New England (while New England bumped along with guys like Ellis Hobbs).  Branch did not do as well, though you might argue that he was a good system player in New England more than a good player in general. Honestly I think both Branch and the Patriots would have done better if they had stayed together.  I think Branch would have continued to have been a success in New England and the Pats would have benefitted from having him on the field rather than guys like Reche Caldwell. 


     


    A quick skim of Pats' rosters suggests a few other candidates--though several of these are (like Jones and Wilson) are borderline quality players:


    Terry Glenn


    Damien Woody


    Tebucky Jones


    Daniel Graham


    Eugene Wilson


    Ben Watson


    Adam Vinatieri


    Brandon Merriweather


    Ben-Jarvus Green Ellis


    Danny Woodhead


     


    The way things work in the NFL, most quality rookies are signed to four-year contracts (it used to be five year contracts).  They tend to be in their prime when they negotiate their first non-rookie deal. Those deals typically are four or five years if the guy is good, too, so by the time a player reaches his third deal, he's been in the league 8 or more years and is in his 30s, so he's starting to get long in the tooth.  It's not rocket science to be cautious about re-signing to big money or long deals 30+-year old guys with 8 or nine years of wear on their treads. Belichick is smart in that he doesn't let emotion get in the way of reason, but there's no magic here. You can predict pretty accurately that most 32 year old players aren't going to have many more years of top-level performance left.  


     


    If you look at the Seymour trade, that's one where BB probably let him go a little earlier than ideal, but he did so because he knew he'd never re-sign him for the money he'd be looking for a year later (when he'd be turning 31 and already had 10 years in the league), so trading him allowed him to get value for a player he'd otherwise probably just lose for nothing.  The Mankins trade is a similar deal.  The Seymour trade, though, did hurt the D line in 2009--and maybe even for a year or two, because we didn't have a good replacement for him and Seymour had about two or three more quality years left.  Hopefully, the Mankins trade doesn't have a similar effect on the O line.  


     




    Bingo


    This is not the NBA where a team could have its draft pick ages 19/20-23/24 and then watch him walk or demand a trade and enjoy his 23-31 year old prime somewhere else. 


    An NBA player has an 8 year prime or so (IMO) of 23-31. That is usually preceded and followed by 2-3 years of being close to it and productive. An NFL player can't play until 3 years out of high school and rookie years are almost always spent really adjusting to playbooks and the toll the NFL season takes so primes of players also start around 23 but usually end by 27 or 28 followed by rapid decline. This is obvious in RB's but even a guy like Mankins started his decline in 2010 when he was 28. 


    For every Welker that puts in 3 decent years for Miami followed by 6 all-pro years for the Pats there is an Amendola. Moss has one of the greatest years of all-time here in 2007 but his next FIVE best seasons were with the Vikings who drafted him. Kinda like KG, who only had one elite season in a Celtic uniform that was on par with 10 of them in Minny.


    Getting a Ray Allen or Kevin Garnett at 31-32 in the NBA after a decade of good basketball somewhere else is like getting a Mario Williams or Revis age 27-28 in the NFL. You think you have a 3-5 year window but are crossing your fingers they don't break down in the next 2. That is the difference between an NFL prime/body and an NBA one. Bill knows when to let a guy walk. They can't all be Brady. 


     

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

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    In response to Fletcherbrook's comment:

    In response to DougIrwin's comment:

    Better? No.

    Decent or as good? No, not really, unless you want to count Vinatieri who is as consistent, but he kicks in a dome so it is hard to tell.

    BB doesn't miss here. As I said earlier this week, if he cuts you, everyone knows that is pretty much it because he gives you every chance to show something, anything, that he can use you for.



    I will give you that BB seldom, if ever,  misses on holding on too long.

    His other middling GM attributes sort of depend on this for success.




    Sounds great, Bustchise.

    You get some credit for the effort with using "Fletcherbrook" conceding some positive things about BB, in order to sell an angle on the back end that bashes BB.  Nice try. 

    It's not different the other day when you called me a cool "sheet" sometimes. It won't work, Bustchise. I've got you dead to rights on this board.  Dead to rights.

    But, your jealousy is delicious.

    Absolutely delicious.  BB doesn't miss when he sends you away from Foxborough. Plain and simple.



    Huh? Are you on Molly?

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

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    There isn't enough data for the research.  Belichick fails so often at the draft, guys usually aren't good at NFL football in general, so the odds of them doing a better job at it at any point are very bad.




    I don't really agree that Belichick fails in the draft.  The fact is there aren't a lot of players in the NFL who are way better than average . . . and a large percentage of those way better than average players are picked near the top of the draft where Belichick rarely has any picks (because he wins all the time--and also because he lost some high picks due to his own transition from the Jets and due to spy gate).

    I do, however, agree with your broader point. The sample size is very small because the vast majority of players on the Pats who become free agents are not all-pro players in their prime who would demand big contracts.   There just aren't that many of those players on the Pats . . . or on any team for that matter. 

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

    Re: Ex-Pats that go on to a better career.

    In response to sportsbozo1's comment:

    The only guy I could think of having a good career after leaving New England Curtis Martin.

    Sportsbozo1

    Martin did well when he left NE, you're right.  From what I remember though, he signed a poison pill offer sheet as an RFA more than the Pats really wanting to let him go.  I think he wanted to follow Parcells and both sides made it hard for him to stay in New England.    

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share