good time to appreciate draft brilliance

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: good time to appreciate draft brilliance

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    I'll say it again and it's undeniably true...  the Pat's don't win 3 rings without the drafting of Richard Seymour.  It just doesn't happen.  So in that regards, the drafting of Seymour is of equal importance as the drafting of Brady.  

    So for those saying the only reason we win, which is stupefying in a sport with 53 man gameday rosters, is only because of Tom Brady realize that he is just a part, albeit a big part of what we do but he is still just a cog in a wheel.  

    There are no rings without Seymour, Viniteri and countless others... football isn't basketball where one player changes the outcome of your team and if Brady was the QB of the Jaguars they would still stink... period.  If Brady is drafted by a dog of a team he becomes Ryan Leaf, Jeff George or Jamarcus Russell.  

    It starts first with owner having the foresight to hire the right guy, then it's a coaches league, the coach creates a culture of winning, creates a positive atmosphere for learning and achieving, not the reverse.

    Please feel free to remove heads from a$$es...




    I agree with your point but I would not single out Seymour. I would rather say that it requried and will require a key group on D at each of the three levels. THat past key core (the "Brady" of the D) was Seymour, McGinest, Bruschi, Vrabel, and Law. IN any one year a name might change here or there (like Rodney Harrison for example). But I think the core "Brady" group on D is at least 4 or maybe 5 players withg at least one at each level and solid players filling out the rest... including depth!

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: good time to appreciate draft brilliance

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    It's not a question of whether Brady would have become Ryan Leaf, it's whether Ryan Leaf would have become a somebody playing for a Belichick or Bill Cowher and I'm saying it's highly likely he would have, had they seen traits that made him draftable.

    The successful teams around the NFL revolve around coaches, the best players want to play for the best coaches.  The only painful hits we've taken as a team over the years has been to our coaching ranks along with a few bedrock type players.

    Some people only point to coaching when something goes wrong and never accept that without coach there is no winning ways.  I'll admit that my saying Brady would become Leaf was hyperbole but only for the sake of my making a point.  

    People who think Belichick lucked his way into success are haters deluding themselves.



    Woz, I agree with much of what you ahve been saying. But let's put the Ryan Leaf thing (and arguements along those lines) in perspective. There were some who questioned Leaf coming out of college because of the intangibles - mostly lacking leadership skills (a personality issue which coaching can only overcome with a fair amount of time and difficulty if at all) and perhaps worse he had little field recognition.

    Bottom line is that some guys just are not going to be good anough anywhere (at the level of the NFL). We see guys not making it under BB EVERY YEAR. Some even surprise us (higher round draft choices or name free agents that just don't make it).

    Leaf is not a good example. Brady would not have been a Leaf anywhere. I do grant you that he may not have been all that he is today if he had come up under a different system and coaches. We will never know. But I think he would have eventually been exceptional in his career regardless.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: good time to appreciate draft brilliance

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    You guys think I'm saying Brady doesn't possess what's necessary to be the best and that is not what I'm saying.  What I'm saying is it's a two way street, he gets drafted by a cruddy team with little to no weight program or focus and none of the great things happen to him, instead he gets sacked to death.  

    Theres always been great QB's on the worst teams, it doesn't necessarily make them lesser QB's.  Marino in the 90's, Archie Manning on the Saints, Steve Grogan was a great QB on some crappe' teams.  Who knows what Testeverde, Chad Pennington and others would have accomplished on better teams?

    Matt Ryan this year isn't any better than last year; coaching, system, play calling, players around him and execution are better.  

    In short coaching matters, coaching comes before team excellence, not the latter. Sorry if you disagree but without H2O there's no life either.

     




    You lost me at using Grogan and great QB in the same sentence.



    Babe, I agree with you about Grogan. He was FAR from being a very good QB. TOugh yes. Stong arm yes. Could run yes. But not a good passer at all.

    Still Babe, the arguement Woz makes has SOME merit. I think Archie Manning - and Sonny Jurgensen - are good examples of great QBs on weak teams. I expect Brady would be exceptional anywhere though I do not expect he would have had the same level of success elsewhere that he had here. Of course we will never know.

    Perhaps a fair analogy would be Bart Starr, Vince Lombardi and the Green Bay Packers. I do not think Starr would have had the same success elsewhere - though I epxect he would have made a name for himself as an expectional QB with his accuracy and ability to avoid interceptions. And I expect Lombardi and the Packers would also not have had the same success they had if they had gone without him.

    None of this is a reach. Take a great player away from the successful team they played on and the team is diminished. Put that player on a lesser team and it is very likely their play is diminished. As Brady's wife said... he can't throw it AND catch it. Nor can he block for himself or play D or special teams or coach... or pick the talent each year.

     

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

    Re: good time to appreciate draft brilliance

    Last three drafts have been great. There is still some work to do, but you won`t here a peep from me. Look at how the Steelers have been unable to draft decent O Linemen (Pouncey and 4 nobodies....an injured Decastro) and their QBs(and evidently RBs) keep getting killed. BB has nearly rebuilt his entire defense form 2007 SB team. Jones, Wilson, Hightower, and Dennard already look good or very good. I commented that the 2012 draft could do for the D what the 2010 draft did for the Offense (serious jolt in the arm). I haven`t altered that statement. Jones and Wilson look legit...Hightower will come into his own and Dennard is looking more and more like a steal every day. Add Talib and this D is better than it has been in years. This is still a relatively young defense, but they will learn.

     

    As for FA signings some might have been bad (Ocho, Haynesworth), but some of the pick-ups have been great (Waters).

    IMO I`d rather draft well than go all in on free agents; a strategy that has not worked for Eagles or Jets.

     

    The best you can really do in any draft is too yeild 3 or 4 starters per draft. Some will find roles on ST (Edelman, Slater) others be put in D or O sub-packages and contribute there. Is it perfect? Hell no. The Pats have done a very good job the last 12 years without having a losing season. Tough to do.  And yes Reese, Caesario and others have contributed.

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

    Re: good time to appreciate draft brilliance

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    You guys think I'm saying Brady doesn't possess what's necessary to be the best and that is not what I'm saying.  What I'm saying is it's a two way street, he gets drafted by a cruddy team with little to no weight program or focus and none of the great things happen to him, instead he gets sacked to death.  

    Theres always been great QB's on the worst teams, it doesn't necessarily make them lesser QB's.  Marino in the 90's, Archie Manning on the Saints, Steve Grogan was a great QB on some crappe' teams.  Who knows what Testeverde, Chad Pennington and others would have accomplished on better teams?

    Matt Ryan this year isn't any better than last year; coaching, system, play calling, players around him and execution are better.  

    In short coaching matters, coaching comes before team excellence, not the latter. Sorry if you disagree but without H2O there's no life either.

     




    You lost me at using Grogan and great QB in the same sentence.



    Babe, I agree with you about Grogan. He was FAR from being a very good QB. TOugh yes. Stong arm yes. Could run yes. But not a good passer at all.

    Still Babe, the arguement Woz makes has SOME merit. I think Archie Manning - and Sonny Jurgensen - are good examples of great QBs on weak teams. I expect Brady would be exceptional anywhere though I do not expect he would have had the same level of success elsewhere that he had here. Of course we will never know.

    Perhaps a fair analogy would be Bart Starr, Vince Lombardi and the Green Bay Packers. I do not think Starr would have had the same success elsewhere - though I epxect he would have made a name for himself as an expectional QB with his accuracy and ability to avoid interceptions. And I expect Lombardi and the Packers would also not have had the same success they had if they had gone without him.

    None of this is a reach. Take a great player away from the successful team they played on and the team is diminished. Put that player on a lesser team and it is very likely their play is diminished. As Brady's wife said... he can't throw it AND catch it. Nor can he block for himself or play D or special teams or coach... or pick the talent each year.

     




    I ask, what is exceptional about our team other than Brady and a couple of receicvers (who debatably wouldn't be as good without Brady)?

    Yes, put Brady on a terrible team and you won't see the same kind of success. But put him on just an avergae team with a halfway decent coaching staff and you would see a viable SB threat every year.

    We are talking about arguably the greatest QB of all-time here. To say minus that we would be just fine is ludicrous.

    People ARE going to find out all about this soon enough. Then they will learn.

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

    Re: good time to appreciate draft brilliance

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    I'll say it again and it's undeniably true...  the Pat's don't win 3 rings without the drafting of Richard Seymour.  It just doesn't happen.  So in that regards, the drafting of Seymour is of equal importance as the drafting of Brady.  

    So for those saying the only reason we win, which is stupefying in a sport with 53 man gameday rosters, is only because of Tom Brady realize that he is just a part, albeit a big part of what we do but he is still just a cog in a wheel.  

    There are no rings without Seymour, Viniteri and countless others... football isn't basketball where one player changes the outcome of your team and if Brady was the QB of the Jaguars they would still stink... period.  If Brady is drafted by a dog of a team he becomes Ryan Leaf, Jeff George or Jamarcus Russell.  

    It starts first with owner having the foresight to hire the right guy, then it's a coaches league, the coach creates a culture of winning, creates a positive atmosphere for learning and achieving, not the reverse.

    Please feel free to remove heads from a$$es...




    I agree with your point but I would not single out Seymour. I would rather say that it requried and will require a key group on D at each of the three levels. THat past key core (the "Brady" of the D) was Seymour, McGinest, Bruschi, Vrabel, and Law. IN any one year a name might change here or there (like Rodney Harrison for example). But I think the core "Brady" group on D is at least 4 or maybe 5 players withg at least one at each level and solid players filling out the rest... including depth!



    I would, Seymour was the equivalent for the defense to what Brady what was to the offense.  

    Without Seymour playing like King Kong as a rookie we don't win.  We had little to no depth on the interior D line and he instantly came in and played at an all pro level.  He has not fallen off at all despite what some here say, in fact his best season may have been his first as a Raider.  He has been a top 5 defensive tackle in the NFL, at one point the best player at his position in the NFL, for his entire career... that's what I'd call a solid draft pick. 

     

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

    Re: good time to appreciate draft brilliance

    There's plenty of dim among the brilliance.

    2004 - Wilfork and a whole lot of nothing.

    2005 - Mankins (1st), Cassel in the 7th, and nothing in between.

    2006 - Gostowski (the jury is still out), who cost the Pats the Arizona game

    2007 - Good thing they traded picks for Welker and Moss. They sure couldn't pick 'em that year.

    2008 - Horrible draft. Mayo is solid, but not good enough to justify being a top 10 pick. He and Slater (5th) couldn't save this draft. 3 busts in rounds 2 and 3 say it all.

    2009 - BB avoids drafting Clay Matthews by dealing out of the 1st round. he then snookers his former personnel guy by getting a high 2 for Cassel, only to waste it on Patrick Chung. Chung's teammate, Jarius Byrd was taken a few picks later in the round. Byrd is looking at a big 2nd contract in 2013, while Chung will likely hook up for short money at the NFL minimum, since he's not expected to return. Overall, the Pats had 13 picks, including 4 in the 2nd and 2 in the 3rd. My favorite was passing up Mike Wallace for Brandon Tate in the 3rd. Wallace was taken next. If not for Sebastian Vollmer (2nd) and Julian Edelman (7th) this draft would have gone down as the worst in team history.

    2010 - Best draft since 2003. Outside of Jermaine Cunningham (2nd) over Carlos Dunlap, there's not much to complain about.

    2011 - Ras-I Dowling notwithstanding, this draft looked completely wasted until Nate Solder (1st), Shane Vereen (2nd), and Stevan Ridley (3rd) all have had great seasons following underwhelming rookie years. Though Vereen hasn't played much, he's deserving of more touches going forward.

    2012 - Too soon to call, but Chandler Jones (1st) lookes like a stud. To get a DE as good as him has to be a major heist. I'm on the fence with Don'ta Hightower. He looks lost at times. I expect better from him next year. Tavon Wilson (2nd) has impressed me. He's always around the ball. Can't wait to see him next year. Nate Ebner (6th) looks like a solid gunner on Teams. Alfonzo Denanrd (7th) looks like a steal. Sure he's been up and down, but he's been a contributor on the regular defense. Considering where he was picked, that's a steal in my book.

    Overall, some brilliance and some dimness.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: good time to appreciate draft brilliance

    If this goes one 1 or 2 more drafts this team will have another 10 years of great football.

    Yes, tom brady will retire someday, but maybe we can biuld a good defense, and running game to help mallet or a newcomer

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

    Re: good time to appreciate draft brilliance

    Perspective...the word of the day. When evaluating any particular seasons drafts successes and failures. One needs to look at the entire draft class and also factor in where each team drafted that season...too include the undrafted rookie free agents of which there's always two or more that find their way onto NFL rosters and outperform those that were drafted.

    It's hard to argue with the longterm sustained success of the Patriots and not conclude that they've done well drafting players to maintian the teams depth. It's an inexact science at best how else does a player like Tom Brady last until the 6th round?

    End of the day

    >1st rounders are supposed to be players that are projectable everydown starters "Impact players". Over the years Belicheck has done pretty well in this regard...

    >2nd rounders are players that are also seen as projectable starters every down types with upside potential...In most drafts this round is the one that has the greatest impact on the percieved quality of that years success. It's also where many times Belicheck reaches or gambles...The list of players that have fallen short of expectations taken in this round is perhaps the one area where one could quibble with Belicheck...

    >3rd and 4th rounders; Typically are expected to make the team. Most are "projects". Players that should make an impact on the depth chart as quality backups with many of them seen as playing a significant role on special teams. Herein lyes an area where the teams depth chart plays a significant role in the selection of players...

    >5th, 6th & 7th rounders; almost always are two to three projects with upside. The best that can be expected is that they make the team and play a role on special teams (Edelman)...The better the teams depth, the tougher it is for players drafted in the later round to make the team...

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share