Patriots Dead Money

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:



    That DM is a result of last years cuts after June 1 that is counted against this years cap.

     

    They haven't even began to cut this years players.

    That # will increase significantly. Probably double.

    No, they're not in good shape at all.

    The Seahawks have less than 900k as of now and they won the SB.

     



    If they cut Wilfork, Kelly, Soap, Wilson, Connolly and Gregory outright the DM wouldn't double.  They aren't going to do that so you should chill.

     

    The Seahawks have no dead money because all of their best players are on rookie contracts so they didn't have to cut any of their dead weight.  Sidney Rice and Zach Miller had a combined cap hit this past season of almost 21 million.  Those are bad contracts.  Most teams would have cut them and incurred a significant amount of dead money.  The Seahawks have the luxury of being able to hang on to overpriced JAGs.




    Well I could see most of those guys and more cut and the 50-60 guys they bring into camp and sign in FA.

    And any guy with guarantee money that they cut and re-sign and cut and re-sign and cut and re-sign, as usual.

    Easily another 8M.

    And yes, the Seahawks have the luxury of not having to pay their QB for another two years, but by that time, those contracts might be able to be cut or restructured and a significant jump in cap, will help.  And, I wouldn't call ALL their best players rookies.

    But if they were, that's not a bad problem to have.  At least they don't have to replace the same guys over and over and over, because they suck, and account for a TON of DM.... and cap reduction. Like the Pats..



    I usually don't go this far, but I think you are either an idiot or a Patriot hater. I just wanted you to know.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:



    That DM is a result of last years cuts after June 1 that is counted against this years cap.

     

    They haven't even began to cut this years players.

    That # will increase significantly. Probably double.

    No, they're not in good shape at all.

    The Seahawks have less than 900k as of now and they won the SB.

     



    If they cut Wilfork, Kelly, Soap, Wilson, Connolly and Gregory outright the DM wouldn't double.  They aren't going to do that so you should chill.

     

    The Seahawks have no dead money because all of their best players are on rookie contracts so they didn't have to cut any of their dead weight.  Sidney Rice and Zach Miller had a combined cap hit this past season of almost 21 million.  Those are bad contracts.  Most teams would have cut them and incurred a significant amount of dead money.  The Seahawks have the luxury of being able to hang on to overpriced JAGs.




    Well I could see most of those guys and more cut and the 50-60 guys they bring into camp and sign in FA.

    And any guy with guarantee money that they cut and re-sign and cut and re-sign and cut and re-sign, as usual.

    Easily another 8M.

    And yes, the Seahawks have the luxury of not having to pay their QB for another two years, but by that time, those contracts might be able to be cut or restructured and a significant jump in cap, will help.  And, I wouldn't call ALL their best players rookies.

    But if they were, that's not a bad problem to have.  At least they don't have to replace the same guys over and over and over, because they suck, and account for a TON of DM.... and cap reduction. Like the Pats..



    I usually don't go this far, but I think you are either an idiot or a Patriot hater. I just wanted you to know.



    Luckily, ostriches opinions don't matter .

    And BTW Oscar, the ostrich, 16M in dead money in 2013 was due to cutting 64 players, EXACTLY as I described.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    So the way I see the debate (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that one side sees that there was no way BB should have signed or extended Hernandez, Fanene or Lloyd and the other sees these signings/extension and as appropriate given the information available.  Am I understanding the essence of the disagreement?

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    So the way I see the debate (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that one side sees that there was no way BB should have signed or extended Hernandez, Fanene or Lloyd and the other sees these signings/extension and as appropriate given the information available.  Am I understanding the essence of the disagreement?



    thats where i stand.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    Understood, Champ.  I'd like to wait for the other side of the discussion to respond then I'd like to offer my observations.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    When other teams take a guy like Hernandez off their draft board it's hard to argue that he was only a risk in "hindsight."  Lots of teams had the foresight not to even consider him because of character issues.  

    The warning signs with Lloyd were also abundant . . . despite some talent he was let go from multiple teams for locker room or attitude issues.  And Fanene was coming off an injury and had never been more than a spot starter.  Saying the risks were apparent only in hindsight is completely disengenuous because other teams made decisions based on their assessment of the risks ahead of time. 

     

     



    Let's not go all high and mighty here. I call a huge cup of BS here!!

     

    To my knowledge there were only three teams that attempted to say they had Hernandez off the board. The "Bengals" were one of them. Seriously? Do you really believe the Bengals had him off the board?

    Here is a quote I like that was written.

    "Of course, it’s easy for NFL executives to come forward now and say they wouldn’t have drafted Hernandez. A month ago, before all the revelations about Hernandez’s off-field activities began to surface, I don’t remember any NFL executives saying they wouldn’t have drafted Hernandez. That’s why the NFL’s security chief, who knows how teams investigate players’ backgrounds prior to the draft, is calling criticism of the Patriots 20/20 hindsight."

     



    Teams normally don't reveal anything about their draft boards so don't expect lots of evidence. He did, however, fall to the fourth round.  Actions speak louder than words.

     



    That is changing the point Pro. I am not questioning him having some question marks and him dropping in the draft.

    That happens every single year.

    I question the three, way after the fact, GM phonies who said oh he was removed from our board completely that year.

    Because when they say he was removed from their board they are saying not even as a UDFA signing. Those guys are on peoples boards.

    I don't believe them.

    Polian who is a shameless self promoter, look how great I am type and the Bengals who take every dirt bag going. Sorry I don't buy it is all.

    Bengals took Jermaine Gresham in the 1st round and did not draft another TE so very convenient for them to claim they took him off the board. They obviously were not looking for another TE to draft.

    Colts did draft a TE that year in the 5th round but Hernandez was off the board by then so again, also very convenient for them to claim Hernandez was off their board. It's not like they bypassed Hernandez at the point they went looking to draft a TE so we'll never know. But hey, maybe Hernandez was off the Colts board after all, they had their own suspected shooter on a team before in Marvin Harrison.

    Just don't buy it. I think they are both full of crap, as well as the argument that Pats should have known what happened was going to happen, to the degree it happened, in the offseason, prior to his "4th" year.

    According to some on here the Pats should have known Amendola would get hurt, that Welker NEVER gets hurt, and that Edelman will NEVER finish a season. Oops guess they had the last two of those things wrong. Gee go figure, how can that be, they always KNOW what is going to happen before it happens. Just ask them.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to rtuinila's comment:

     



    No, you said it wasn't hindsight if you railed about it before hand.

    "Btw I keep telling you this but you just don't seem to understand. It's only hindsight if you didn't point to it before it happened, otherwise it's known as foresight."

    If Kelly hadn't gotten hurt he would have had a vastly superior season compared to Bryant. If Kelly hadn't had the bad LUCK to have his knee taken out your above premise is wrong and BB would have gotten a better player for the same money.

    In this case your foresight was non-existent and your hindsight was 20-20!



    Please find one place I said Kelly would get hurt, or that there even was a chance he would get hurt. I'd be very interested in that post. What I have said time and time again is that they need to draft or sign a younger player in their prime instead of finding retreads. Retreads are inherently risky.



    You keep saying Kelly and Fanene cost the same as Bryant and you knew they would not produce as much as Bryant. I am pointing out that Kelly was vastly outperforming Bryant until he got hurt. Therefore you must have known Kelly would get hurt and said so somewhere. Otherwise the premise that Kelly and Fanene would not produce as well as Bryant for the same amount of money is a whole lotta HINDSIGHT!

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to rtuinila's comment:

     

    You keep saying Kelly and Fanene cost the same as Bryant and you knew they would not produce as much as Bryant. I am pointing out that Kelly was vastly outperforming Bryant until he got hurt. Therefore you must have known Kelly would get hurt and said so somewhere. Otherwise the premise that Kelly and Fanene would not produce as well as Bryant for the same amount of money is a whole lotta HINDSIGHT!



    I said HASN'T, I never said I knew they would. Please again point out that post. And again I have said over and over again that paying money upfront for higher talent players closer to their prime is better then retreads and low risk signings. Is it my fault that the vast majority of cases this has proven true? If you want to call that hindsight fine but I've said it for years and I guess two years down the road when it happens again it will be hindsight too!

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    So the way I see the debate (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that one side sees that there was no way BB should have signed or extended Hernandez, Fanene or Lloyd and the other sees these signings/extension and as appropriate given the information available.  Am I understanding the essence of the disagreement?



    I never said Belichick shouldn't have signed those guys.  My point, though, is that there were known risks with all those guys, and they came cheap precisely because of those known risks.  To say Belichick is just the victim of "bad luck" ignores the fact that Belichick intentionally selects risky players in the hopes of getting good talent at below-market rates.  To fairly judge whether that strategy works you have to weigh his failures when the risks have materialized against his successes when the risks have been avoided.  You can't praise his successes and then discount his failures as "just bad luck."  It's not bad luck.  It's one possible consequence of signing higher risk players in the hope of getting good talent cheap.

     

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    My thoughts on all of this:

    I'm in the people business; I employ 25, 3 of whom, apart from myself, are in a management/professional capacity.  Like most people with a workforce, I perform due diligence on their backgrounds, check references and assess my own sense of the individual as a consequence of personal interview.  I suspect that personnel evaluation in the NFL is all of that and significantly more.

    When I make the decision to hire, I do so recognizing all of the consequences, positive and negative, of engaging in the single riskiest act that any employer encounters.  I'd like to think my track record is pretty fair, although I must say that I've made some decisions that turned out poorly.  Does that mean that my hiring decision was incorrect?  It does not.  It means that knowing the possible consequences I hired the individual and it didn't work out.  Expensive?  In one case, quite so.  This particular individual while on the job 5 years ago slipped on a patch of ice, did not fall, or strike any body part on anything but simply wrenched his back.  He's been out on workers comp since then.  My w/c carrier has had him investigated including personal surveillance multiple times.  He has nothing more than a soft tissue injury but is 'unable to work'.  My rates are off the charts but that's the way it goes.  Will we eventually rid ourselves of this burden?  One certainly hopes so.

    Was hiring him a mistake?  In retrospect, with the full benefit of 20/20 hindsight, yes.  At the time I made the hiring decision, it was not.  Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    It is not a mistake when an experienced executive with a track record of success makes an informed decision of consequence after weighing all of the relevant factors.  And such is the case, in my opinion, when it comes to Hernandez and BB's decision to draft him and then extend him. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Lloyd produced but BB chose to go in a different direction.  Executives do that all the time and there are consequences for doing so. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Fanene is a case where I have nowhere near all of the facts necessary to offer an intelligent observation so I will not make one.

    Personnel management is NOT an exact science and the environment in which it is practiced is rarely black and white.  You do the best you can with what info you have and recognize that no matter which side of the equation your decision falls there will be consequences.

    That's the way I see it.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    My thoughts on all of this:

    I'm in the people business; I employ 25, 3 of whom, apart from myself, are in a management/professional capacity.  Like most people with a workforce, I perform due diligence on their backgrounds, check references and assess my own sense of the individual as a consequence of personal interview.  I suspect that personnel evaluation in the NFL is all of that and significantly more.

    When I make the decision to hire, I do so recognizing all of the consequences, positive and negative, of engaging in the single riskiest act that any employer encounters.  I'd like to think my track record is pretty fair, although I must say that I've made some decisions that turned out poorly.  Does that mean that my hiring decision was incorrect?  It does not.  It means that knowing the possible consequences I hired the individual and it didn't work out.  Expensive?  In one case, quite so.  This particular individual while on the job 5 years ago slipped on a patch of ice, did not fall, or strike any body part on anything but simply wrenched his back.  He's been out on workers comp since then.  My w/c carrier has had him investigated including personal surveillance multiple times.  He has nothing more than a soft tissue injury but is 'unable to work'.  My rates are off the charts but that's the way it goes.  Will we eventually rid ourselves of this burden?  One certainly hopes so.

    Was hiring him a mistake?  In retrospect, with the full benefit of 20/20 hindsight, yes.  At the time I made the hiring decision, it was not.  Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    It is not a mistake when an experienced executive with a track record of success makes an informed decision of consequence after weighing all of the relevant factors.  And such is the case, in my opinion, when it comes to Hernandez and BB's decision to draft him and then extend him. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Lloyd produced but BB chose to go in a different direction.  Executives do that all the time and there are consequences for doing so. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Fanene is a case where I have nowhere near all of the facts necessary to offer an intelligent observation so I will not make one.

    Personnel management is NOT an exact science and the environment in which it is practiced is rarely black and white.  You do the best you can with what info you have and recognize that no matter which side of the equation your decision falls there will be consequences.

    That's the way I see it.



    Logical post and I agree with all your points, except...

    unlike you and I who are managers of people, bb has had the benefit of getting inside info from coaches who have coached these kids, has a team of security personnel at his disposal, and gets to see a lot of them up and close before signings. Yes, there is still the element of the unknown here which is a roll of the dice. 

    PI don't have issue with most of what bb does. And, most that I disagree with is not about not knowing like in the case of Hernandez. What I take issue with is knowingly putting your trust in players who are known to have injury histories, known to have moved around the league, and known to be low talent/effort guys because they come on the cheap. I think these can be avoided or minimalized. Guys like Ocho, haynesworth, Fanaene, Lloyd, amendola, etc fall into this category. 

    I understand its not a perfect science, I just want the best GM of all time to be better than the rest. 

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    My thoughts on all of this:

    I'm in the people business; I employ 25, 3 of whom, apart from myself, are in a management/professional capacity.  Like most people with a workforce, I perform due diligence on their backgrounds, check references and assess my own sense of the individual as a consequence of personal interview.  I suspect that personnel evaluation in the NFL is all of that and significantly more.

    When I make the decision to hire, I do so recognizing all of the consequences, positive and negative, of engaging in the single riskiest act that any employer encounters.  I'd like to think my track record is pretty fair, although I must say that I've made some decisions that turned out poorly.  Does that mean that my hiring decision was incorrect?  It does not.  It means that knowing the possible consequences I hired the individual and it didn't work out.  Expensive?  In one case, quite so.  This particular individual while on the job 5 years ago slipped on a patch of ice, did not fall, or strike any body part on anything but simply wrenched his back.  He's been out on workers comp since then.  My w/c carrier has had him investigated including personal surveillance multiple times.  He has nothing more than a soft tissue injury but is 'unable to work'.  My rates are off the charts but that's the way it goes.  Will we eventually rid ourselves of this burden?  One certainly hopes so.

    Was hiring him a mistake?  In retrospect, with the full benefit of 20/20 hindsight, yes.  At the time I made the hiring decision, it was not.  Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    It is not a mistake when an experienced executive with a track record of success makes an informed decision of consequence after weighing all of the relevant factors.  And such is the case, in my opinion, when it comes to Hernandez and BB's decision to draft him and then extend him. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Lloyd produced but BB chose to go in a different direction.  Executives do that all the time and there are consequences for doing so. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Fanene is a case where I have nowhere near all of the facts necessary to offer an intelligent observation so I will not make one.

    Personnel management is NOT an exact science and the environment in which it is practiced is rarely black and white.  You do the best you can with what info you have and recognize that no matter which side of the equation your decision falls there will be consequences.

    That's the way I see it.



    The one difference ATJ, as Lifer pointed out, these guys have histories the team knows about. Take your workers comp situation. If you had known, example only, that he had been with 2 other companies and collected workers comp from them previously for "lower back issues" from injures sustained on the work floor, would you have called them up to check. And if they told you the same thing you are telling us would you then have hired the guy?

    It's one thing to have no prior history (like Vereen for instance who I'll never blame BB for picking, just not getting a proper backup at this point) and something happens. You can't blame the guy for that. But, when there is a history of known red flags and the guy ends up failing for those red flags would you say it's just bad luck?

    Another example as a hiring manager you have two guys for the same position. One guy has good work experience, is still young, and has a proven track record but wants a little more then you'd like to pay (say $25/hr vs $23/hr) and another guy is just coming out of rehab and was laid off from his last job for getting into numerous work place conflicts pushing and shoving coworkers around but is willing to take less then you had planned to spend (so $20/hr vs $23/hr), which one would you hire? And if you hired the latter and they start fights at work and slip back into drugs are you going to say, well just bad luck I guess.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    Lifer and Eng, points taken, and I alluded to them in this sentence from my last post:

    I suspect that personnel evaluation in the NFL is all of that and significantly more.


    In my opinion the decision to offer a contract to Amendola is a classic example of an executive having the information, weighing it and making a calculated decision with full knowledge of the potential consequences.  We really don't know what the consequences will be for the life of Amendola's contract; what we do know is that he missed time this year as a consquence of injury.  Time will tell on the rest.

    With respect to Hernandez, the same applies.  As so many have repeatedly pointed out on this board, there was no possible way of knowing that Hernandez would commit murder nor was it reasonable to project that he would do anything like that.

    I understand if you wish to take BB to task for his decisions; 'tis the birthright of every football fan.  My only point in all of this is simply to say as we used to in the old outfit:

    Ain't none of it easy.

     

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    Lifer and Eng, points taken, and I alluded to them in this sentence from my last post:

    I suspect that personnel evaluation in the NFL is all of that and significantly more.


    In my opinion the decision to offer a contract to Amendola is a classic example of an executive having the information, weighing it and making a calculated decision with full knowledge of the potential consequences.  We really don't know what the consequences will be for the life of Amendola's contract; what we do know is that he missed time this year as a consquence of injury.  Time will tell on the rest.

    With respect to Hernandez, the same applies.  As so many have repeatedly pointed out on this board, there was no possible way of knowing that Hernandez would commit murder nor was it reasonable to project that he would do anything like that.

    I understand if you wish to take BB to task for his decisions; 'tis the birthright of every football fan.  My only point in all of this is simply to say as we used to in the old outfit:

    Ain't none of it easy.

     



    ATJ, I usually agree with you, and find your posts fair, and coming from a Pats fan. But I have to disagree with your thought on Hern. I strongly feel that BB had much better intel than the Pats care to admit (obviously). From Urban Meyer, to the Fla police, to the Mass State Police/FBI, and from the other players telling BB the facts, I strongly feel that BB knew about gang affiliation, drug use and guns. I will stop short of murder, but to think the people hanging around Hern weren't capable of that is simply looking the other way.

    As I stated back at that time, either the Pats did not do their due dilligence, or they did, and decided to ignore the facts and "what could happen"...either version, a major, major error by the Pats, that has been simply swept under the rug, with the biggest "issue" being the dead money, not the dead people.

    As I have stated in the past, I understand completely the Pats are following legal guidance and not saying anything, but to say that the team has zero responsibility because they cut the guy simply does not cut it with me. The team 100% erred in judgement, and their system and support failed them. The least they can do is acknowledge this, and make a promnise to the community and fan base that they will dedicate themselves to improving, and will not allow these types of individuals on the team nor in the community. If this came from BB, it would be said half heartedly and with zero conviction, same as all of BB's public comments. The comments need to come from RK, and come with some back bone.

    We have heard more about Herns dead money hit and if the team can recoup the money, rather than how does the team stop this from happening again. RK should come out with a statement, if they recover any money, yes, the paper transaction will result in cap space, but if the team does realize any money, the team will match that amount and increase their vetting process to avoid further disaster 

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    rkarp, I have zero problem with your post and would characterize what happened as a 'consequence.'  Now, I do not know how much BB or the Pats knew about Hernandez.  Logic would seem to indicate that, given the level of due diligence and preparation that they typically apply to personnel decisions, that they knew more than the general public. 
    Did it rise to the level of that you ascribe to BB?  I think that will remain an open question.  Do the Pats bear responsibility for introducing Hernandez into the NFL?  Of course they do.  That responsibility is inescapable.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     


    Does that outweigh all the other measurables?



    When giving him a big contract that could hamstring the team if he gets in trouble off the field of course it does! True, you keep saying that you don't sign players to big contracts because you don't know what will happen and yet here's a player who by all reports has/had off the field social issues (1 out of 10 from your own report) in a league desperately trying to clean up it's image and you think it was worth giving him a big money deal? Then why let Lloyd go. You thought it was a good deal. The only issue was social interaction in the locker room yet they decided to let him go after a single season, so obviously the Pats think it's a pretty big deal too.

    Question True would you draft Colt Lyerla in the 4th? By all accounts he's as good a pass catching receiver as Hern was. He'll be lucky to get drafted this year because of off field issues, most of which are more minor than what Hern had coming out.



    Well Eng, I guess we all would have made the same mistake...

    Re: According to Adam Schefter: Aaron Hernandez gets a contract extension.

    posted at 8/27/2012 8:23 AM EDT

    • PatsEng
    • Posts: 11268
    • First: 2/11/2009
    • Last: 2/11/2014
    In Response to  Re: According to Adam Schefter: Aaron Hernandez gets a contract extension.:
    I'm surprised by this...how many years did Hernandez have left on his current contract? I imagine it's a team friendly deal, which is good for both sides because Hernadez was going to have to play on his rookie contract. I do worry about injuries with Hernandez - especially when it looked like Brady was targeting on virtually every throw this pre season, but I'm glad they locked him up. 
    Posted by mthurl


    mthurl, realize that in 14' (when Hern's contract runs up) the cap is going to jump up by $25mil. Also realize there is a good shot Hern is Welkers replacement as the #1/2 WR after this year. Given the explosions of contracts in 14' and the price a #1/2 WR will cost after this year signing Hern to a deal that most likely is lower then Gronks would be a bargain then trying to wait out his contract.

    I've been saying for years and have been killed by both people who won't be mentioned that it's better to pay todays prices then tomorrows and to re-up young core players before their contracts are up and not deal with the tag nonsense. I feel vindicated with BB's latest actions
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    My thoughts on all of this:

    I'm in the people business; I employ 25, 3 of whom, apart from myself, are in a management/professional capacity.  Like most people with a workforce, I perform due diligence on their backgrounds, check references and assess my own sense of the individual as a consequence of personal interview.  I suspect that personnel evaluation in the NFL is all of that and significantly more.

    When I make the decision to hire, I do so recognizing all of the consequences, positive and negative, of engaging in the single riskiest act that any employer encounters.  I'd like to think my track record is pretty fair, although I must say that I've made some decisions that turned out poorly.  Does that mean that my hiring decision was incorrect?  It does not.  It means that knowing the possible consequences I hired the individual and it didn't work out.  Expensive?  In one case, quite so.  This particular individual while on the job 5 years ago slipped on a patch of ice, did not fall, or strike any body part on anything but simply wrenched his back.  He's been out on workers comp since then.  My w/c carrier has had him investigated including personal surveillance multiple times.  He has nothing more than a soft tissue injury but is 'unable to work'.  My rates are off the charts but that's the way it goes.  Will we eventually rid ourselves of this burden?  One certainly hopes so.

    Was hiring him a mistake?  In retrospect, with the full benefit of 20/20 hindsight, yes.  At the time I made the hiring decision, it was not.  Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    It is not a mistake when an experienced executive with a track record of success makes an informed decision of consequence after weighing all of the relevant factors.  And such is the case, in my opinion, when it comes to Hernandez and BB's decision to draft him and then extend him. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Lloyd produced but BB chose to go in a different direction.  Executives do that all the time and there are consequences for doing so. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Fanene is a case where I have nowhere near all of the facts necessary to offer an intelligent observation so I will not make one.

    Personnel management is NOT an exact science and the environment in which it is practiced is rarely black and white.  You do the best you can with what info you have and recognize that no matter which side of the equation your decision falls there will be consequences.

    That's the way I see it.



    It is a great analogy ATJ. I know that rkarp thinks BB knew Hern was a gang banging thug who was just a hand gun away from murder but in reality BB has shown to go after "team first" players and Hernandez tested off the charts in his psyc eval in that area.

    Putting football first, gets along woth team mates, learns from mistakes, responsive to coaching all great scores. If we had a nickel for every football player with history of hanging with a rough crowd or growing up in a bad area we would be LOADED.

    Hernandez was a safe player to take a flier on in the 4rth round, he played exceptionally well and his 1st 2 years had the lowet drop rate for a TE in the NFL while catching over 70% of his targets which is top 10 in the league at all both TE and WR.

    He was a model citizen(unless like rkarp you believe that BB and Kraft knew he was shooting people here and there) and he was awarded with an extension that all of us thought was a great idea, including Patseng as shown above. So in Hind Sight and only hind sight can we condemn the extension, and now the drafting of this guy all together. Hind Sight is crystal clear and can never be wrong.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     


    Does that outweigh all the other measurables?

     



    When giving him a big contract that could hamstring the team if he gets in trouble off the field of course it does!True, you keep saying that you don't sign players to big contracts because you don't know what will happen and yet here's a player who by all reports has/had off the field social issues (1 out of 10 from your own report) in a league desperately trying to clean up it's image and you think it was worth giving him a big money deal? Then why let Lloyd go. You thought it was a good deal. The only issue was social interaction in the locker room yet they decided to let him go after a single season, so obviously the Pats think it's a pretty big deal too.

     

    Question True would you draft Colt Lyerla in the 4th? By all accounts he's as good a pass catching receiver as Hern was. He'll be lucky to get drafted this year because of off field issues, most of which are more minor than what Hern had coming out.



    Well Eng, I guess we all would have made the same mistake...

    Re: According to Adam Schefter: Aaron Hernandez gets a contract extension.

    posted at 8/27/2012 8:23 AM EDT

    • PatsEng
    • Posts: 11268
    • First: 2/11/2009
    • Last: 2/11/2014

    In Response to  Re: According to Adam Schefter: Aaron Hernandez gets a contract extension.:

    I'm surprised by this...how many years did Hernandez have left on his current contract? I imagine it's a team friendly deal, which is good for both sides because Hernadez was going to have to play on his rookie contract. I do worry about injuries with Hernandez - especially when it looked like Brady was targeting on virtually every throw this pre season, but I'm glad they locked him up. 
    Posted by mthurl


    mthurl, realize that in 14' (when Hern's contract runs up) the cap is going to jump up by $25mil. Also realize there is a good shot Hern is Welkers replacement as the #1/2 WR after this year. Given the explosions of contracts in 14' and the price a #1/2 WR will cost after this year signing Hern to a deal that most likely is lower then Gronks would be a bargain then trying to wait out his contract.

    I've been saying for years and have been killed by both people who won't be mentioned that it's better to pay todays prices then tomorrows and to re-up young core players before their contracts are up and not deal with the tag nonsense. I feel vindicated with BB's latest actions


    Yes this was prior to knowing the full extent of Hern's history. If I had knowledge that we did of his past after the event as we did when the statement was made I would have never thought resigning him at that point would have been smart to say the least. Too much risk for such a big contract. The media found out all the info pretty quickly so I would assume BB knew as much if not more since he was friends with Myer. This is a perfect case of hindsight due to lack of info, however, this is info BB should have known well before hand.

    I have said in recent posts that we didn't have the knowledge that we have know and with that new info (not including the murder) that I wouldn't have signed that type of deal. New knowledge doesn't change my orginal statements. Giant red flags when before it was just pot changes things True. Just pot is one thing to lock him up but gang affliations, gun related incidents and a record? That's changes things completely. As with ATJ, if he didn't know before hand can't blame the guy but there is no way BB didn't know about Herns history and had more info then fans had to go by.

    As for my statement it still holds true. I still wanted to extend Gronk (too much of a talent to pass up), I think extending Mayo was a good thing locking him up early, I hope they do it with McCourty but doesn't that fly in the face of your approach of why pay guys top dollar when you can just draft cheaper versions? 

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

     

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     


    Does that outweigh all the other measurables?

     



    When giving him a big contract that could hamstring the team if he gets in trouble off the field of course it does!True, you keep saying that you don't sign players to big contracts because you don't know what will happen and yet here's a player who by all reports has/had off the field social issues (1 out of 10 from your own report) in a league desperately trying to clean up it's image and you think it was worth giving him a big money deal? Then why let Lloyd go. You thought it was a good deal. The only issue was social interaction in the locker room yet they decided to let him go after a single season, so obviously the Pats think it's a pretty big deal too.

     

    Question True would you draft Colt Lyerla in the 4th? By all accounts he's as good a pass catching receiver as Hern was. He'll be lucky to get drafted this year because of off field issues, most of which are more minor than what Hern had coming out.

     



    Well Eng, I guess we all would have made the same mistake...

     

    Re: According to Adam Schefter: Aaron Hernandez gets a contract extension.

    posted at 8/27/2012 8:23 AM EDT

    • PatsEng
    • Posts: 11268
    • First: 2/11/2009
    • Last: 2/11/2014

    In Response to  Re: According to Adam Schefter: Aaron Hernandez gets a contract extension.:

    I'm surprised by this...how many years did Hernandez have left on his current contract? I imagine it's a team friendly deal, which is good for both sides because Hernadez was going to have to play on his rookie contract. I do worry about injuries with Hernandez - especially when it looked like Brady was targeting on virtually every throw this pre season, but I'm glad they locked him up. 
    Posted by mthurl


    mthurl, realize that in 14' (when Hern's contract runs up) the cap is going to jump up by $25mil. Also realize there is a good shot Hern is Welkers replacement as the #1/2 WR after this year. Given the explosions of contracts in 14' and the price a #1/2 WR will cost after this year signing Hern to a deal that most likely is lower then Gronks would be a bargain then trying to wait out his contract.

    I've been saying for years and have been killed by both people who won't be mentioned that it's better to pay todays prices then tomorrows and to re-up young core players before their contracts are up and not deal with the tag nonsense. I feel vindicated with BB's latest actions


    Yes this was prior to knowing the full extent of Hern's history. If I had knowledge that we did of his past after the event as we did when the statement was made I would have never thought resigning him at that point would have been smart to say the least. Too much risk for such a big contract. The media found out all the info pretty quickly so I would assume BB knew as much if not more since he was friends with Myer. This is a perfect case of hindsight due to lack of info, however, this is info BB should have known well before hand.

    I have said in recent posts that we didn't have the knowledge that we have know and with that new info (not including the murder) that I wouldn't have signed that type of deal. New knowledge doesn't change my orginal statements. Giant red flags when before it was just pot changes things True. Just pot is one thing to lock him up but gang affliations, gun related incidents and a record? That's changes things completely. As with ATJ, if he didn't know before hand can't blame the guy but there is no way BB didn't know about Herns history and had more info then fans had to go by.

    As for my statement it still holds true. I still wanted to extend Gronk (too much of a talent to pass up), I think extending Mayo was a good thing locking him up early, I hope they do it with McCourty but doesn't that fly in the face of your approach of why pay guys top dollar when you can just draft cheaper versions? 



    Of course not, you always have to build a core. You just take it to the extreme by saying we have to sign all of our draft pickls past their 4 year rookie deals. That ignores the personnel you have. For example we have drafted Hightower and then Collins in preperation for a Spikes departure. Spikes filled an important role here but his attitude didn't refelct what BB typically covets in a player. I would be interested to see his psyc eval and if he scored well in response to coaching etc...like Hernandez did. 

    Anyway, I find it hard to believe you really would have balked at extending Hernandez given any info other then that he had killed a guy. You make decisions in business based on the information at hand, and Hern was a model Patriot for 2 years and was an integral part of the post Moss offensive rebuild.

    You and I and all of us agreed that he was a great guy to lock up to a long term deal, like Gronk, but that is where "Real Financial Risk" comes into play...handing out 40 million dollar contracts, signing guys like Goldson to 42 million and Bryant to 35 million is a bigger risk then signing Tommy kelly and extending DMC 2 years later, also a bigger risk then investing 3.5 million bonus into Fanene. Even with what happened and we got money back, it was low risk/high reward, it just didn't work out....like Adalius, Colvin, Stalworth, and Hern were all high risk/high rewards who didn't work out.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     


    Of course not, you always have to build a core. You just take it to the extreme by saying we have to sign all of our draft pickls past their 4 year rookie deals. That ignores the personnel you have. For example we have drafted Hightower and then Collins in preperation for a Spikes departure. Spikes filled an important role here but his attitude didn't refelct what BB typically covets in a player. I would be interested to see his psyc eval and if he scored well in response to coaching etc...like Hernandez did. 

    Anyway, I find it hard to believe you really would have balked at extending Hernandez given any info other then that he had killed a guy. You make decisions in business based on the information at hand, and Hern was a model Patriot for 2 years and was an integral part of the post Moss offensive rebuild.

    You and I and all of us agreed that he was a great guy to lock up to a long term deal, like Gronk, but that is where "Real Financial Risk" comes into play...handing out 40 million dollar contracts, signing guys like Goldson to 42 million and Bryant to 35 million is a bigger risk then signing Tommy kelly and extending DMC 2 years later, also a bigger risk then investing 3.5 million bonus into Fanene. Even with what happened and we got money back, it was low risk/high reward, it just didn't work out....like Adalius, Colvin, Stalworth, and Hern were all high risk/high rewards who didn't work out.



    Actually you were the only one who said that True, thanks for pointing out that you take it to the extreme. What I have said is you have to sign more then 1 out of 12 and if a high end pick (whom you yourself said is one of the best in the league at what he does) doesn't get resigned then yes I would say that's not a wise investment and should be held on to or the pick shouldn't have been made if the reason you are letting them go was a red flag (such as a personality conflict) that existed prior to picking up that player.

    As for high contracts, I have never once said you need to sign a whole bunch of them year after year but why can't you add a couple in positions of need every couple of years? What prevents you from doing that and how is adding a couple more expensive contracts any more risky then adding 3 contracts of lesser value with red flags on those players? Other teams eat higher priced contracts or have to keep the player on the team, the Pats do the same thing to the tune of 10%+ of their cap space every year. It's just instead of a dozen or less players it's an entire roster of players released. It's the same thing True, however the one thing you can say is that the Pats lack the upfront talent in the post season so what I suggesting is every so often only in positions of need where a younger player closer to the prime is available it's worth investing into them and taking a couple less red flag contracts inorder to do so. Explain how that can backfire please. And note before you go on the extreme I said a couple of players, every couple of years, and only players in position of need in which the Pats clearly feel they are a fit for the team (as they did with a Goldson and a Bryant).

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    My thoughts on all of this:

    I'm in the people business; I employ 25, 3 of whom, apart from myself, are in a management/professional capacity.  Like most people with a workforce, I perform due diligence on their backgrounds, check references and assess my own sense of the individual as a consequence of personal interview.  I suspect that personnel evaluation in the NFL is all of that and significantly more.

    When I make the decision to hire, I do so recognizing all of the consequences, positive and negative, of engaging in the single riskiest act that any employer encounters.  I'd like to think my track record is pretty fair, although I must say that I've made some decisions that turned out poorly.  Does that mean that my hiring decision was incorrect?  It does not.  It means that knowing the possible consequences I hired the individual and it didn't work out.  Expensive?  In one case, quite so.  This particular individual while on the job 5 years ago slipped on a patch of ice, did not fall, or strike any body part on anything but simply wrenched his back.  He's been out on workers comp since then.  My w/c carrier has had him investigated including personal surveillance multiple times.  He has nothing more than a soft tissue injury but is 'unable to work'.  My rates are off the charts but that's the way it goes.  Will we eventually rid ourselves of this burden?  One certainly hopes so.

    Was hiring him a mistake?  In retrospect, with the full benefit of 20/20 hindsight, yes.  At the time I made the hiring decision, it was not.  Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    It is not a mistake when an experienced executive with a track record of success makes an informed decision of consequence after weighing all of the relevant factors.  And such is the case, in my opinion, when it comes to Hernandez and BB's decision to draft him and then extend him. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Lloyd produced but BB chose to go in a different direction.  Executives do that all the time and there are consequences for doing so. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Fanene is a case where I have nowhere near all of the facts necessary to offer an intelligent observation so I will not make one.

    Personnel management is NOT an exact science and the environment in which it is practiced is rarely black and white.  You do the best you can with what info you have and recognize that no matter which side of the equation your decision falls there will be consequences.

    That's the way I see it.



    Of course you never know what the future holds.  But you and other teams do have information about the candidates, and that information affects the market price of the player.  If two players have performed similarly on the field, but one has a history of problems (injury, character, attitude, etc.), the price (in dollars or draft picks)  for the player with the problems  will be lower than the price for the player with a clean history.  There is a market for players, and just as in the securities market, there's a trade off between cost and risk. You pay more for lower risk players and can get higher risk players at a discount.  The economic value of either choice may be the same, so it's not a mistake to choose either.  But if your strategy is to accept more risk in the hope of reducing cost, you have to be ready for the higher probability of a loss.    The loss isn't merely bad luck. It's something that had a higher probability of occuring precisely because of your stategic choice to save money by taking on more risk.  

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    My thoughts on all of this:

    I'm in the people business; I employ 25, 3 of whom, apart from myself, are in a management/professional capacity.  Like most people with a workforce, I perform due diligence on their backgrounds, check references and assess my own sense of the individual as a consequence of personal interview.  I suspect that personnel evaluation in the NFL is all of that and significantly more.

    When I make the decision to hire, I do so recognizing all of the consequences, positive and negative, of engaging in the single riskiest act that any employer encounters.  I'd like to think my track record is pretty fair, although I must say that I've made some decisions that turned out poorly.  Does that mean that my hiring decision was incorrect?  It does not.  It means that knowing the possible consequences I hired the individual and it didn't work out.  Expensive?  In one case, quite so.  This particular individual while on the job 5 years ago slipped on a patch of ice, did not fall, or strike any body part on anything but simply wrenched his back.  He's been out on workers comp since then.  My w/c carrier has had him investigated including personal surveillance multiple times.  He has nothing more than a soft tissue injury but is 'unable to work'.  My rates are off the charts but that's the way it goes.  Will we eventually rid ourselves of this burden?  One certainly hopes so.

    Was hiring him a mistake?  In retrospect, with the full benefit of 20/20 hindsight, yes.  At the time I made the hiring decision, it was not.  Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    It is not a mistake when an experienced executive with a track record of success makes an informed decision of consequence after weighing all of the relevant factors.  And such is the case, in my opinion, when it comes to Hernandez and BB's decision to draft him and then extend him. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Lloyd produced but BB chose to go in a different direction.  Executives do that all the time and there are consequences for doing so. Mistake? No. Consequences? Yes.

    Fanene is a case where I have nowhere near all of the facts necessary to offer an intelligent observation so I will not make one.

    Personnel management is NOT an exact science and the environment in which it is practiced is rarely black and white.  You do the best you can with what info you have and recognize that no matter which side of the equation your decision falls there will be consequences.

    That's the way I see it.



    Of course you never know what the future holds.  But you and other teams do have information about the candidates, and that information affects the market price of the player.  If two players have performed similarly on the field, but one has a history of problems (injury, character, attitude, etc.), the price (in dollars or draft picks)  for the player with the problems  will be lower than the price for the player with a clean history.  There is a market for players, and just as in the securities market, there's a trade off between cost and risk. You pay more for lower risk players and can get higher risk players at a discount.  The economic value of either choice may be the same, so it's not a mistake to choose either.  But if your strategy is to accept more risk in the hope of reducing cost, you have to be ready for the higher probability of a loss.    The loss isn't merely bad luck. It's something that had a higher probability of occuring precisely because of your stategic choice to save money by taking on more risk.  



    But what if the evidence suggests that your business actually suffers at a greater expense when you go after"top rated, safer, expensive" recruits who didn't fit your unique company motto of putting the team before the employee? 

    What if your company became the leader in the industry and hit a higher profit margin then all competitors by living the philosphy of building around a core of employess that was developed from the top and then adding "value" employees all around them? Can that company's business model possibly be condemned?

    And what is "high risk" exactly. I think each of our own opinion on high risk is causing this debate to carry on. The very point of signing "value players" is to minimize the risk/impact on the organization. You are committing a small portion of your budget to a few guys in order to find the best addition.

    Going all out on unproven "big shots/top rated FA's" is way more of a high risk. Consider that 19 muliti year deals were given out in 2011 and 10 of them were released before this off season, and a few more will come soon. We see that over half of these big deals don't work, and in our case the only "high priced contracts" given out is to the players developed in our own system....Brady, VW, Seymour, Light, Mankins, Mayo, Nink, Ty Warren, Bruschi, etc.... and as I showed earier when we give out the big contracts to players from other teams we have seen the most problems...Adalius the prized FA given 35 million and washed out.Dillion(3 year big extension after his epic 2004 season and he got fat off the cash, literaly) Moss? One great year and then another guy we didn't commit hurt us, Stalworth, the prized FA given a 6 year deal and cut, Colvin, the prized FA hurt his 2nd game and was never the same player.

    The risk is signing guys who were never coached by a very difficult man to be coached by, and risking that they will conform to the Patriot way. BB has shown low risk value players built around a high priced core he develops is the way to dominance yet still you guys attack?

    I guess this argument comes down to you guys thinking BB should pay guys who are a risk to perform in his unique and difficult coaching system, as opposed to BB paying only the guys he drafts and develops and is absolutely certain they are great long term players. Pretty clear who is right and who is wrong in my eyes.

     

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

     


    But what if the evidence suggests that your business actually suffers at a greater expense when you go after"top rated, safer, expensive" recruits who didn't fit your unique company motto of putting the team before the employee? 

    What if your company became the leader in the industry and hit a higher profit margin then all competitors by living the philosphy of building around a core of employess that was developed from the top and then adding "value" employees all around them? Can that company's business model possibly be condemned?

    And what is "high risk" exactly. I think each of our own opinion on high risk is causing this debate to carry on. The very point of signing "value players" is to minimize the risk/impact on the organization. You are committing a small portion of your budget to a few guys in order to find the best addition.

    Going all out on unproven "big shots/top rated FA's" is way more of a high risk. Consider that 19 muliti year deals were given out in 2011 and 10 of them were released before this off season, and a few more will come soon. We see that over half of these big deals don't work, and in our case the only "high priced contracts" given out is to the players developed in our own system....Brady, VW, Seymour, Light, Mankins, Mayo, Nink, Ty Warren, Bruschi, etc.... and as I showed earier when we give out the big contracts to players from other teams we have seen the most problems...Adalius the prized FA given 35 million and washed out.Dillion(3 year big extension after his epic 2004 season and he got fat off the cash, literaly) Moss? One great year and then another guy we didn't commit hurt us, Stalworth, the prized FA given a 6 year deal and cut, Colvin, the prized FA hurt his 2nd game and was never the same player.

    The risk is signing guys who were never coached by a very difficult man to be coached by, and risking that they will conform to the Patriot way. BB has shown low risk value players built around a high priced core he develops is the way to dominance yet still you guys attack?

    I guess this argument comes down to you guys thinking BB should pay guys who are a risk to perform in his unique and difficult coaching system, as opposed to BB paying only the guys he drafts and develops and is absolutely certain they are great long term players. Pretty clear who is right and who is wrong in my eyes.

     



    True you are missing the point completely. Those low cost risky ventures as you put it is fine it you aren't counting on them or if you only have a couple on the team at a time. However, we you fill the starting line up with them that's an issue. You can take a chance on a couple here or there but you can't completely rely on them or you are going to be in trouble when they fail.

    Of all the guys you mentioned lets break it down -

    Dillon - red flag - got lazy in Cinn and became a complainer in the locker room - Reason for release, got lazy and grumpy about number of reps run. In other words released for similar reasons we got ihm so "cheap"

    Moss - red flag - cancer in locker made issue out of contract - Reason for release cancer in locker room and complaining about contract

    Stallworth - no red flags but #2 WR talent at best - Reason for release paid him like a #1 and did perform up to that level, go figure (see Arrington)

    Thomas - no red flags but had a Ravens personality - Reason for release personality conflict not related to performance. You think BB should have known the personalities could conflict?

    With exception of Colvin everyone you listed failed because of red flags, overpaid for previous work, or personality conflict. All of those were known prior to signing. It's not like Stallworth didn't have an average season for himself or Lloyd for that matter. It's not like Thomas suddenly developed a new personality that conflicted with BB's. It's not like previous red flags didn't exist for both Moss and Dillon prior to signing. And if you want to talk about big signings how about Amendola who could get up to $31 mil for a guy who never stayed healthy and never performed higher than a #2 WR talent when healthy. That's called mismanagement.

    No one is saying you need to sign every big FA on the market but we are suggesting that you invest more into players with less risk than players who cost a little less with more risk. And those you sign to big contracts DO YOUR HOMEWORK. It's not difficult to find out if a players personality will conflict with your own, nor is it difficult to investigate red flags and decide if the risk is worth the extension.

    These are smart people. Some players just don't work but when a player fails for reasons you know prior to signing could be an issue maybe you shouldn't invest into them. All you have to do True is look at dead money. We are in the top half of the league every year in dead money, mostly from those risky players that didn't work out. You don't want to invest 2-3mil more for a less riskier player yet if you took one less risky player you could afford to give out that bigger contract. And if it didn't work out guess what you are no worse then you were before. Thomas, Colvin, Dillon, Moss, Bodden, Stallworth or any other "big" signings you want to toss out didn't prevent the team from signing other players and resigning their own to top of the league deals so why would a couple contracts like that suddenly sink them moving forward? What has changed that you can't absorb those types of deals other than you are already absorbing more dead money from released players with red flags.

    BTW, maybe it's about time BB looking to simplify the system slightly. I'm not talking a huge shift but if we are having such difficulty finding players well the players are going to change moving forward so why keep tossing money and picks into the pit. Why not adapt and simplify it a little so that it's easier to intergrate players instead of having to burn out the Jones and Ninks of the world playing 95%+ of the snaps making them almost useless and worn out by the playoffs.

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

    Re: Patriots Dead Money

    I think talking about red flags for Hernandez with regards to the murder is silly  At the end of the day an incredibly low percentage of the population actually murders someone.  I guarantee you there are thousands of people (many who probably currently play in the NFL) that have the exact same "profile" as Hernandez that have not and never will murder someone during their lifetime.  I don't think any NFL FO when making contract decisions worries about murder being the worst case scenario.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share