PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    Blount is a Patriot now.  The world has forgotten that he was a Buccaneer.  Now he's a hot commodity because he ran behind a good run-blocking line with Tom Brady pitching the football behind him, also because he was taught to run low, and finally because he was healthy at the end of the season when everyone watches these things. 

    This means that his value on the free agent market is three times what the Patriots will pay for him.  Not that Blount isn't pretty good and unique on a cold, wet, windy day against a soft defensive front seven, but he's pretty old and injury-prone also.  BB doesn't invest in age unless it comes on the cheap.

    A month of Blount was well worth parting with Jeff Demps.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    I would hope not.  Hey, I like Blount and had fun watching him break off the big runs but really, how many good games did he have?  a couple ok games and 2 great games.  He had better seasons before coming to the Pats.  I don't think teams will be going after him with their safe open.

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    I don't think BB relies much on the one back system and he has 3 other really good backs to choose from, plus two more prospects sitting on the PS and IR. So I doubt that they will offer more than the 2 mil reported to LeGarrette Blount... With 5 backs under contract there's not much wiggle room vs. the cap.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    For the last time Commie isn't Bustchise.

    Agreed - Blount was fine but running back is not where we should be investing our precious cap money.

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    Agreed - Blount was fine but running back is not where we should be investing our precious cap money.



    Absolutely agree.

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    For the last time Commie isn't Bustchise.

    Agreed - Blount was fine but running back is not where we should be investing our precious cap money.



    +1

    I like Blount, but this isn't were money should be spent. 
    In FA money should go to Talib, in the draft go for Oline, Dline, TE and maybe SS. 

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?


    Blount would only be worth signing if we were to shift our offensive focus to heavier use of the run and keeping Brady upright. We have really started to do that the last 2 seasons, but ultimately Brady is still throwing 600 times a year at 36 years old, and our post season discrepancy is disturbing. 285 passes to 66 power runs in 6 playoff losses in a row. I guess we must have played all the  teams that focused on taking the run away!!! Strange given our propensity to pass that teams would play the run so aggressively.....isn't it? 

    I don't think paying a running back is worth it in our system.I think BB is the best but he has been doing the offense a disservice by putting too much on Brady's right arm. Only pay Blount if you are going to pound the rock, keep Tommy under center more often, utilize the skills of the best play action QB in NFL history and balance out the offense. If not, what's the point.

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    Sounds fine to me.  RB is the most fungible position in the NFL.  Unless you have a truly elite guy there is no point paying them.  Heck even the elite guys aren't worth the money they are getting paid.  Better to devote those resources to other positions imo.

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    Looks like lots of RB available in free agency and the draft. Blount did not show enough to warrant much, he comes back on a 1 year show me contract

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?


    BB dont pay RBs. If we had no money for Woodhead I would hate to see Blount get paid. BB doesnt value RBs, WRs, or CBs, unless you are a shutdown guy.

    So that means Talib gets paid. Blount will get a cheap offer that he will move on from.

    You can find plenty of Blounts in college. Only thing is BB has already coached up Blount to be a good back.(no more hurdling, or running too high) so he DOES have value to a team looking for a power back but with all our needs I dont think we can pay him. We have 3 good guys under contract and get an UDFA back this year to compete.

    Bu Bye Blount. Not your fault you couldnt run in postseason. Thats why we need to draft a C and G that can pave the way on the ground(over 300 lbs). If the NFL is made up of 350 plus lb DTs why do we try to block them with 300 lb guys? Same reason they ask the 255 lb Nink to play all game vs mammoth right tackles and same reason they ask little McCourty to cover tight ends?  Arrogance and being cheap and drafting bad and picking up washed up guys in f/a like A.Wilson.

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    He doesnt pay shut down CB (see Samuel) 

    he will pay a CB that can jam a wr at the los, tackle out on the edge and cover. Not many around, Talib is one of them. Pats pay or he walks. Talib played cheap last year and did what he had to do to get paid. BB, time to pay the man

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    He doesnt pay shut down CB (see Samuel) 

    he will pay a CB that can jam a wr at the los, tackle out on the edge and cover. Not many around, Talib is one of them. Pats pay or he walks. Talib played cheap last year and did what he had to do to get paid. BB, time to pay the man




    well in BB's defense, Samuel refused, I mean refused to play man/press. He thought he was effective playing off man and never played press. NOw if he aint good at it, he aint good but he was too small to move to Safety. Thats what happened to Dmac who WOULD get up and press but couldnt get his hands on anyone and got burnt at the line.

    He DID play press when playing zone and was very good(see pick 6 in AFCCG vs manning) but Im thinking the fact he disobeyed orders was his downfall. My opinion...Why make a guy play press if he is much better playing off?  He DID give up lots of 1st downs underneath but as you can see, thats still the plan so why didnt he sign Samuel?? Ego imo. Samuel wanted to do it his way. It was the best way but it made BB look bad.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    He's not a elite player by any stretch, but I'd take him back at what the rumored offer was. It would be nice to have a back that we didn't need to bring off the field..someone who could catch 30-40 passes a year and yet run between the tackles. I think someone like that would do wonders for the offense....no more subbing this one in, or that one...the whole thing would be much less predictable.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from joepatsfan111111. Show joepatsfan111111's posts

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?


    if the deal is 2 for 2 or even 2 for 2.5 I would do it. anything higher than that is a waste. RBs are dime a dozen, just go draft a big man (andre williams)

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    He's not a elite player by any stretch, but I'd take him back at what the rumored offer was. It would be nice to have a back that we didn't need to bring off the field..someone who could catch 30-40 passes a year and yet run between the tackles. I think someone like that would do wonders for the offense....no more subbing this one in, or that one...the whole thing would be much less predictable.



    Isnt that what your arch enemy rusty has been saying for years? 

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    He's not a elite player by any stretch, but I'd take him back at what the rumored offer was. It would be nice to have a back that we didn't need to bring off the field..someone who could catch 30-40 passes a year and yet run between the tackles. I think someone like that would do wonders for the offense....no more subbing this one in, or that one...the whole thing would be much less predictable.



    Isnt that what your arch enemy rusty has been saying for years? 




    Don't tell me a thought in my head matched his, please don't do that to me. I know we don't see eye to eye truechamp, but show me some humility:)

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

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    He's not a elite player by any stretch, but I'd take him back at what the rumored offer was. It would be nice to have a back that we didn't need to bring off the field..someone who could catch 30-40 passes a year and yet run between the tackles. I think someone like that would do wonders for the offense....no more subbing this one in, or that one...the whole thing would be much less predictable.



    Isnt that what your arch enemy rusty has been saying for years? 




    Don't tell me a thought in my head matched his, please don't do that to me. I know we don't see eye to eye truechamp, but show me some humility:)



    Sorry bud, your effed on this one. You and rusty are just plain old simpatico. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: PATS won't go beyond $2m for 2 years with BLOUNT?

    In response to Paul_K's comment:

    Blount is a Patriot now.  The world has forgotten that he was a Buccaneer.  Now he's a hot commodity because he ran behind a good run-blocking line with Tom Brady pitching the football behind him, also because he was taught to run low, and finally because he was healthy at the end of the season when everyone watches these things. 

    This means that his value on the free agent market is three times what the Patriots will pay for him.  Not that Blount isn't pretty good and unique on a cold, wet, windy day against a soft defensive front seven, but he's pretty old and injury-prone also.  BB doesn't invest in age unless it comes on the cheap.

    A month of Blount was well worth parting with Jeff Demps.

     



    Isn't he 27?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share