When is a good time to be critical?

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    Wow, emotions are running high for you guys? 

    Eng, I'm sorry pal but your list of "faults" or whatever is extensive and would typically be made for teams who have numerous problems and don't win. I'm all for a fans right to be critical of a team, believe me I do it all the time, but to suggest BB is making multiple mistakes that could have simply been prevented by doing the many things you mentioned is a tad ridiculous Imo.

    And Karp we appreciate any analysis coming from a guy with your first hand insight, and nobody wants to put you on ignore just because you have been critical of a this team for the last however many years. This happens to all teams who portray dominance for such a long period of time. Fans expectations grow to unrealistic heights and we start admonishing the team for not turning out great back up QBs who win super bowls on other teams and other weird scenarios. 
    [object HTMLDivElement]




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    True you didn't answer the question, were they not faults and did they not hurt us? What's ridiculous is to close you eyes to something that obvious and write it off. I thought the point of every offseason was to get better? Wouldn't finding those faults and correcting them the point of the offseason?

    BB seemed to agree considering most of those faults I listed last offseason that can back to haunt the team BB seems to have adjusted this offseason and addressed. But, you must think BB is ridiculous since he did exactly what I suggested he do to prevent the same mistakes from last year. If you didn't know what those were here you go:

    • Spent money on a more durable consistent CB (Revis over Talib)
    • Got Vereen a proper backup (drafted White)
    • Added a vet pass rusher to a thin DE group (signed Smith)
    • Spent a high draft pick on a young high talented player to take over the starting DT position (Easley)

    These were things I suggested in the 13' offseason and he adjusted and did them this offseason so BB recognized those mistakes and corrected them. Next year when they sign a TE or draft one if it turns out to be a weakness this year, will you say that's ridiculous too?




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    So, BB did what you suggested?

    He tried to sign that injury prone player you "knew" wouldn't be available for us in the afc game but another great team paid him more money. I guess Elway and BB are idiots and should have consulted the pats engs how to build an NFL franchise hand book.

    I don't understand the running back point?

    You think Will Smith(an aging former pro bowler with recent injury red flags) is BB doing what you said he should? You blast almost every aging vet we sign? Which is it? 

    Wait! You like the Easley pick? Very un patseng like. The guy has red flags dude....2 of them.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    [object HTMLDivElement]

    So, BB did what you suggested?

    He tried to sign that injury prone player you "knew" wouldn't be available for us in the afc game but another great team paid him more money. I guess Elway and BB are idiots and should have consulted the pats engs how to build an NFL franchise hand book.

    I don't understand the running back point?

    You think Will Smith(an aging former pro bowler with recent injury red flags) is BB doing what you said he should? You blast almost every aging vet we sign? Which is it? 

    Wait! You like the Easley pick? Very un patseng like. The guy has red flags dude....2 of them.




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Yes True, if you read my comments during that offseason BB did exactly what I suggested in the 13' offseason this year. A year later than I wanted but yes he did.

    Considering I said I didn't expect him to be available in the playoffs yes you can say I "knew" it. I know you think learning from history and making a reasonable prediction based on that history is some form of voodoo or magic but people can and actually do that. Why do you think BB passed on Talib even before knowing Revis would be available? I know shocker, BB might have let Talib go (our best CB at the time) to our biggest competition because even he knew that Talib is often injured. If I go back to the threads when Talib left would I find posts by you talking about how Talib was injured too often and Elway spent too much?

    You don't get Vereen gets injured every year and they needed a proper 3rd down back as an option last year? I don't know how much simpler I can make it for you since it actually happened in real life!

    I don't want aging players coming off of injures as starters but as rotational role players that's a great role for them! Smith isn't going to be a starter he will be situational, that's the difference. Have you glanced over the numerous times I've stated that you can have some red flag players and take some risks just as long as you don't put them into a situation that you need to count on them and don't fill up the team with them? I've had to say it a hundred times in our conversations but you never seem to pick up on it. You just read what you want without actually reading the statement. Given the complete lack of depth last year and this year at the DE position a situational vet is a perfect role to use.

    I like that he drafted high for a DT. I've been saying they've needed to for years. I posted when they drafted him I like they got one but was extremely cautious of his injury history and would give him time. But, I didn't like the injury history. Just because I liked they drafted a certain position doesn't mean I auto like the pick and given the injury history I said way back then I'm reserving my judgement for a couple years down the road but I'd gladly be on record I didn't like going with such a long injury history so early. I really and I mean really hope I eat crow on that and if I do then I'm gladly let you get on me for with glee but try not to twist clear statements I have made about it.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    When you grow some thicker skin? *sarcasm

    I think this forum is out of whack. There are two extremes, BB the GM is to blame and playoff Brady is to blame. Posters respond to every criticism as if they are one of those extremes.

    Ignore the extremists.

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    When we lose a real game?

    IDK....The game was pretty bad but it didnt count in the standings. I have had most of the same concerns but they cant be substantiated or ignored based on the very 1st game. Guys have literally not played a real game since January. Our Backups looked like backups. BB has a little time to bring guys in that are needed. I will wait to watch the 3rd game when they actually look at results and see how they look. Benefit of the doubt if you will. Only because playing Cincy in preseason back in 04' we got mashed pretty good but went on to win it all with that same team. So I do share concerns but will wait to say if they are gonna be real issues down the road. Some surprise players could step up.

    Maybe they released Jones, Watson due to DJ looking good? or they have decided that 2 TE and Devlin as emergency TE is enough. Keller still coming after season starts??

    They know more about Easley than we do.

    They played 3-4 on D which I dont think they will  do much in reg season if guys dont pick it up.

    Revis didnt play....  He is the key to everything defensively.

    Brady didnt play.... He is the key to everything offensively.

     

    "A lot of bookies are probably mad at us right now, but we don't give a damn, ... We're the champs!!"

    Ty Law after his team defeated the Rams in SB 36.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    Show me the perfect team?

    Nothing is immutable, not even the Buddhas.  The faces on a team are ever changing, like pebbles in a river.

    "Critical" implies the situation is dire, since 2001 have things ever been so nadir one could deem there was a "critical" problem outside of injuries?



    Actually, in this context that is not at all what critical means. Here are a few various definitions that came straight from the dictionary:

    1. characterized by careful, exact evaluation

    2. containing careful or analytical evaluations

    3. involving or requiring skillful judgement as to truth, merit, etc

    There are a few posters who don't tolerate any criticism without getting bent out of shape and they have certainly shown themselves on this thread. Most however, don't have an issue with it, it's just that the ones who do are the most outspoken and often times insulting.

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Without many here jumping down my throat?

     

    Many of us have posted here for a few months now about some perceived holes on this team.

     

    TE. Now that Williams is injured, Jones and Watson cut, here we are, with Gronk and Hooman. Many of us were concerned about this months ago. Count me as still concerned. 

     

    DT. Many of us were nervous about the depth due to Vince and Kelley coming off injury and age. Now Sil and Jones are missing all of preseason, maybe more, and Easley has not seen the field yet. And Vince and Kelley are still old. Anyone watching the waiver wires? 

     

    RB. Ridley first carry, spins, gets hit and bobbles the ball. Can Vareen stay healthy? 2 RB's already cut, with rumbles that Bolden is next. Team looks to be breaking camp with 3 RB's. 

     

    LB. I really thought Anderson was going to help. I have now watched 7 practices and 1 preseason game. I am not sure Anderson makes this team. I was surprised Beauharnis was not cut last year. ILB that weighs 230lbs. Really looked out of place Thursday and was continuously out of position. Yet, Fletch, Eddes, Tarp all gone. 



    It us good to be critical only when you want to shorten your lifespan or alienate people

     

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    People should welcome any and all criticism that is rational.  There is such a thing as honest debate, and many of us choose that approach.  Where it gets contentious is when people make head-scratching statements seemingly devoid of any reason.

    In a nutshell, expect criticism no matter what you post.  There will always be differing opinions on just about everything.  I appreciate an argument from someone who at least uses sound reasoning.  What ruins an argument is when you know the person on the other side is being irrational and/or devoid of logic.


    This is what being level-headed sounds like.

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to carawaydj's comment:

    People should welcome any and all criticism that is rational.  There is such a thing as honest debate, and many of us choose that approach.  Where it gets contentious is when people make head-scratching statements seemingly devoid of any reason.

    In a nutshell, expect criticism no matter what you post.  There will always be differing opinions on just about everything.  I appreciate an argument from someone who at least uses sound reasoning.  What ruins an argument is when you know the person on the other side is being irrational and/or devoid of logic.


    This is what being level-headed sounds like.




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    I agree, I'll have a healthy discussion with anyone and if someone wants to take an opposite position with me I enjoy the debate. What I don't enjoy is when they make extremist points (like saying you want 53 all-pro's), stick to one lines that clearly state you don't have your own opinion (in BB I trust so no need to discuss a move or lack there of), decide to attack the poster (calling them troll, hater, basher and the like), or over the top sarcasm because you can't add anything to the discussion and have no real argument (Why don't you write BB because you know more than he does). These types of things add nothing to the debate and only are used as tools to discredit the OP. Classic mud slinging of a weak argument.

    I know you and I haven't always seen eye to eye on issues but at least when we debate we explain our stances and our opinions. I do the same with Triple on most things (on occasion some things get off track) but there are some that instead of having the debate see any criticism as a personal attack and go into this mudslinging over the top defense. There is no point in those discussions as it turns into a glue and rubber argument. Unfortunately I can't seem to stay out of them at times as the extreme logic, false statements, and complete misinterpretation of previous comments drags my better nature back in in a futile attempt to correct the mistake. 

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to rkarp's comment:



    Without many here jumping down my throat?


    Many of us have posted here for a few months now about some perceived holes on this team.


    TE. Now that Williams is injured, Jones and Watson cut, here we are, with Gronk and Hooman. Many of us were concerned about this months ago. Count me as still concerned. 


    DT. Many of us were nervous about the depth due to Vince and Kelley coming off injury and age. Now Sil and Jones are missing all of preseason, maybe more, and Easley has not seen the field yet. And Vince and Kelley are still old. Anyone watching the waiver wires? 


    RB. Ridley first carry, spins, gets hit and bobbles the ball. Can Vareen stay healthy? 2 RB's already cut, with rumbles that Bolden is next. Team looks to be breaking camp with 3 RB's. 


    LB. I really thought Anderson was going to help. I have now watched 7 practices and 1 preseason game. I am not sure Anderson makes this team. I was surprised Beauharnis was not cut last year. ILB that weighs 230lbs. Really looked out of place Thursday and was continuously out of position. Yet, Fletch, Eddes, Tarp all gone.



    It will never happen so get used to it.  The nature of the topic is such that there is no way you or anyone else can comment on anything without getting debated.  There is nothing wrong with honest debate.  I'm of the position that the smartest football fan on this board is dumber than the worst coach in the NFL.  The smartest personnel/GM guy on this board is dumber than the worst GM in the NFL.  If anyone thinks differently then they need to get a job in the NFL.


    That does not mean we can't speculate and argue, only that we need to keep it real.  We need to keep things in perspective.  There are some people here who might actually believe they would make a better GM than BB.  I don't think you are one of them but you seem to be trending in that direction.  The notion of anyone being smarter than BB is a mental illusion created by:


    1. No coach or GM will be mistake free.  Fans easily remember when they were right and BB was wrong but have amnesia when BB is right and they are wrong.


    2. Fans don't worry about the "whole team".  Fans don't even know which direction BB is taking the team.  We focus on a few positions and scratch our heads about some decisions.  BB has to account for the entire team, player contracts down the road, salary cap, who contributes best in each phase of the game, who has best value, who best fits the scheme today and next year, etc.


    That said, it's fun to speculate and debate here.  We need to keep it real though.  All of us have nothing more than opinions based on "from the outside looking in".  Even those in the media around the team have nothing but opinions.  Nobody outside of the core coaching staff knows why BB left the TE and other positions seemingly unaddressed.  If you could sit down at a bar with BB and have an honest conversation with him, what do you think he would say?  Do you think he would be dumbfounded about the apparent need at TE?  Would it come as a shock to him?  What he would probably explain to you instead is a very detailed decision making process about why they picked this guy over that guy and why they accepted risk at TE instead of at position X.  He might explain how the strengths of his team have prompted him to move away from the reliance of the TE.  He may explain that he'll accept the risk of being light at TE because he knows he can sign player X and Y in season if needed.  We went into last year light at DT.  The worst case scenario unfolded when we lost both Wilfork and Kelly.  Guess what?  We survived and advanced to the AFCCG.  After a night at the bar with BB you might still disagree with him. You might even end up being right on that one issue.  Just keep it real and don't start thinking you'd actually make a better GM.


     


    This is what being level-headed sounds like.

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    (Points entered here removed for space saving purposes)

    Belichick is (wisely) not going to let need trump value in the draft.  Note, though, I agree that the Pats have a weaknesses in TE depth.  I hope this demonstrates how one can have legitimate concerns about talent at a position without necessarily thinking BB made a mistake.  I'm sure BB has concerns too.  He didn't get this good without being honest about the talent he has and doesn't have.



    In my opinion, this is a very well and clearly stated observation.  It also happens to be an opinion with which I am in complete agreement. 

    To make my own view crystal clear, I am also not happy with the Pats TE position but do not believe that it would have been a better choice to select one in this year's draft.




    Thanks ATJ.

    After reading some of the posts made since I made my earlier comment, I'd just add that I think it's rather obvious that BB does an excellent job of building a competitive team that he can coach effectively.   That said, there are many challenges to building a good team:  the main one is the simple fact that elite talent is rare, hard to identify before it's proven its ability on the field, and expensive once it has proven its ability.  Add to the mix the fact that winning teams get low draft picks and, with the salary cap, are limited in their ability to re-sign their best players while also bringing in new, high-quality veterans in their prime.  All these things make it hard for winning teams to keep their talent levels up year after year.

    Recognizing all of the above, it shouldn't surprise anybody that any GM--and especially the GM of a perennial winner--is going to have a tough time building a team that has high quality in both starters and back-ups in all positions.  The Pats are no exception--and while BB does an excellent job assembling a team every year, he can't completely beat the odds and therefore it should be expected that every year there will be weak positons on the Patriots.  To recognize these weaknesses isn't necessarily a criticism of anything BB does. It's simply acknowledgement of reality.

    I will say that the one thing BB does that is interesting to question is his tendency to try to find good value for low cost.  BB knows he's disadvantged in team building by low draft picks, so he often appears to try to beat the odds by taking players (in the draft or in free agency) with known risks (injury, character, lack of large school experience, age, etc.).   Because those risks exist, the market adjusts the cost of the player downward.  If the risks don't materialize, BB gets excellent value for a low cost and this helps make up for the disadvantge of getting lower draft picks.  However, there is the possiblity that the risks will materialize, and when this happens, one can legitimatelywonder whether it would not have been better to simply to take players wth lower risk but higher cost. I don't really know the answer to this.  It's reasonable to give BB the benefit of the doubt on this strategy.  Still, I think it's also possible to fairly question the strategy.  I myself know that I don't really know enough to have a definitive answer one way or the other--but I am interested in all the evidence both positive and negative.  It's a very interesting strategic question--and it gets right at the heart at what makes BB so interesting to follow.  

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    Has it not been stated that Keller is a done deal to the Pats at some point this summer??

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:

    Has it not been stated that Keller is a done deal to the Pats at some point this summer??




    I believe Finley is still out there as well.

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    In response to Section136's comment:



    Actually I think you're being a bit over sensitive and melodramatic but that's OK, some people don't handle being disagreed with very well.

    Do you have any solutions to offer regarding these flaws in the team? I'd love to hear them. Thanks.




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    And that was the problem. Have you not been around the last couple of offseasons? People like Rkarp, Pro, TFB, and myself have had our fanship questioned, been called negative Nancy's, BB bashers, trolls, and a lot of other things for expressing our opinions about the issues listed above that now everyone agrees exists. And it wasn't all by Rusty either.

    If you want suggestions on how to fix it, just go back 4-6 months on the forums and you'll see the suggestions and the reactions to those suggestions that have lead to this thread.  



    Don't count me in as someone that agrees that all of the problems cited exist. The team as it exists today is not what it will be when they play the real games. There is one more cycle of free agents left that can potentially plug perceived holes in the Pats.

    Personally, I think the Pats are going back to the style of play and the kind of players they won superbowls with. That means no stars, just above average lunchpail guys that play smart and want it more than the other guy across from them. That is what "Patriots football" used to be and I hope it really does come back.

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to PatsEng's comment:

    Come on Rkarp, you know it's never a good time to be critical. People will always find fault in something you say and rush to defend something. I've learned over the past couple of years that regardless if you're right or how legitimate your concern is in the end it's why are you questioning, do you think you know better? I mean honestly, not many will admit they did but here's some things I got seriously jumped on from over the last couple years:

    • Signing Amendola over Welker
    • Cautioning over getting too excited about Armstead
    • Thinking A. Wilson wasn't starter quality anymore
    • Wanting BB to spend on quality starters instead of trying to sign 5 nickles and calling it a quarter
    • Thinking the DT position was really thin last year
    • Not getting Vereen a proper 3rd down backup last year
    • Not having a vet pass rusher to spell Nink and Jones last year
    • The TE position looked awfully thin this year going into offseason
    • Not getting a better vet WR this offseason
    • Saying the OL we drafted might take a few years and not liking their injury issues in college
    • Thinking the LB position was thin going into the offseason and not thinking a 2nd FA period one would do the trick
    • Saying 2nd FA period and cut vets aren't as good as people think they are

    No I'm not always right but I never understood why I got so much dumped on me for the above statements being called a BB basher, hater, troll, and what not (and no I'm not just talking about Rusty) when all the above were obvious and legitimate concerns. There's being negative and there's be realistic and people have trouble seeing the difference when they have their blinders on.

     

    Trust me, I'm an engineer!



    Probably because you have never said you liked anything about the Pats except as a one line intro to a 40 line dissertation on every little thing you think is bad.

     

    BTW I'm an engineer too and I wouldn't trust any of them!

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to rtuinila's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Personally, I think the Pats are going back to the style of play and the kind of players they won superbowls with. That means no stars, just above average lunchpail guys that play smart and want it more than the other guy across from them. That is what "Patriots football" used to be and I hope it really does come back.

     

    I'm not sure (1) that "no stars" ever was a strategy or (2) that the Pats have somehow gotten away from the strategy they had when they won the Super Bowl and are now going back to it.  I think BB always tries to put together a team that is as complete and talented as possible.  It's just that he faces constraints and has to make compromises. 

     

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to rtuinila's comment:


    Personally, I think the Pats are going back to the style of play and the kind of players they won superbowls with. That means no stars, just above average lunchpail guys that play smart and want it more than the other guy across from them. That is what "Patriots football" used to be and I hope it really does come back.





    Saying the SB era teams had no stars is a disservice to a number of guys on those teams.

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    I think Eng's posts are realistic assessments.  I don't know why some attack him for expressing opinions about the team's talent that I bet even Bill Belichick might agree with.  

    I think it's pretty obvious that BB isn't quite happy with the TEs he has, no?  I mean he just cut two and brought in three more.  That's not what you do if you like what you have.

     

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to rtuinila's comment:

     


    Personally, I think the Pats are going back to the style of play and the kind of players they won superbowls with. That means no stars, just above average lunchpail guys that play smart and want it more than the other guy across from them. That is what "Patriots football" used to be and I hope it really does come back.


     




    Saying the SB era teams had no stars is a disservice to a number of guys on those teams.

     




    +1

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to rtuinila's comment:

    Probably because you have never said you liked anything about the Pats except as a one line intro to a 40 line dissertation on every little thing you think is bad.

     

    BTW I'm an engineer too and I wouldn't trust any of them!




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Then you only read what you want because I've complimented the team plenty of times. But, it seems all you see it negativity, which is human nature when you are completely defensive about any criticism. 

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to rtuinila's comment:

    Don't count me in as someone that agrees that all of the problems cited exist. The team as it exists today is not what it will be when they play the real games. There is one more cycle of free agents left that can potentially plug perceived holes in the Pats.

    Personally, I think the Pats are going back to the style of play and the kind of players they won superbowls with. That means no stars, just above average lunchpail guys that play smart and want it more than the other guy across from them. That is what "Patriots football" used to be and I hope it really does come back.




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    Actually I didn't, you are closer to the Rusty side (but I wouldn't lump you in with him. You don't insult, just have the kool-aid glasses on).

    Just out of curiosity who do you honestly think will become available in the 3rd FA period? Of all the 3rd FA period's BB has been in who are his claims to fame in that time period. All I can think of is Woodhead. Teams are basically set at that point of the year and you are getting other peoples trash. They aren't cutting them for cap considerations they are cutting them because they have better options. Sure you can get some back of the roster players then but chances are you aren't finding anyone who's going to make a difference at that point, same as the 2nd FA period myth.

    Btw, Brady, Bruschi, Johnson, Seymour, Law, Rodney, Branch, Wilfork, Cox, Washington, Dillion, Vinateri might all disagree with no stars bit when they won their superbowls to name a few.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    (Points entered here removed for space saving purposes)

    Belichick is (wisely) not going to let need trump value in the draft.  Note, though, I agree that the Pats have a weaknesses in TE depth.  I hope this demonstrates how one can have legitimate concerns about talent at a position without necessarily thinking BB made a mistake.  I'm sure BB has concerns too.  He didn't get this good without being honest about the talent he has and doesn't have.



    In my opinion, this is a very well and clearly stated observation.  It also happens to be an opinion with which I am in complete agreement. 

    To make my own view crystal clear, I am also not happy with the Pats TE position but do not believe that it would have been a better choice to select one in this year's draft.




    Thanks ATJ.

    After reading some of the posts made since I made my earlier comment, I'd just add that I think it's rather obvious that BB does an excellent job of building a competitive team that he can coach effectively.   That said, there are many challenges to building a good team:  the main one is the simple fact that elite talent is rare, hard to identify before it's proven its ability on the field, and expensive once it has proven its ability.  Add to the mix the fact that winning teams get low draft picks and, with the salary cap, are limited in their ability to re-sign their best players while also bringing in new, high-quality veterans in their prime.  All these things make it hard for winning teams to keep their talent levels up year after year.

    Recognizing all of the above, it shouldn't surprise anybody that any GM--and especially the GM of a perennial winner--is going to have a tough time building a team that has high quality in both starters and back-ups in all positions.  The Pats are no exception--and while BB does an excellent job assembling a team every year, he can't completely beat the odds and therefore it should be expected that every year there will be weak positons on the Patriots.  To recognize these weaknesses isn't necessarily a criticism of anything BB does. It's simply acknowledgement of reality.

    I will say that the one thing BB does that is interesting to question is his tendency to try to find good value for low cost.  BB knows he's disadvantged in team building by low draft picks, so he often appears to try to beat the odds by taking players (in the draft or in free agency) with known risks (injury, character, lack of large school experience, age, etc.).   Because those risks exist, the market adjusts the cost of the player downward.  If the risks don't materialize, BB gets excellent value for a low cost and this helps make up for the disadvantge of getting lower draft picks.  However, there is the possiblity that the risks will materialize, and when this happens, one can legitimatelywonder whether it would not have been better to simply to take players wth lower risk but higher cost. I don't really know the answer to this.  It's reasonable to give BB the benefit of the doubt on this strategy.  Still, I think it's also possible to fairly question the strategy.  I myself know that I don't really know enough to have a definitive answer one way or the other--but I am interested in all the evidence both positive and negative.  It's a very interesting strategic question--and it gets right at the heart at what makes BB so interesting to follow.  




    I think that's a pretty fair summary of the approach BB takes, at least as best we can conclude based on what we know.  He does march to the beat of his own drummer, of that there can be no disagreement (well, of course there can based on some of the spats I've seen in here).

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: When is a good time to be critical?

    Am I concerned about the TE position? Yeppers to that, Gronk still not cleared, Hooman not playing, D.J. Williams, ordinarily just camp fodder, will probably make the team. Anyone we'd pick up from the last cuts from camps, given the relative weakness at the position league wide, probably won't be any good at all but will still beat out who we just brought in. The recent additions are most likely glorified camp bodies themselves. Yep, trouble ahead here if Gronk falters at all.


    LB? We can't go the entire season with what we have at LB in the 4 through 6 slots and we certainly will not miss injury this season with our starters...no one does! We need some waiver wire help here and there's not much in camp right now.


    DT...again, we're very thin. Glad Easley is finally playing but he has to be gradually brought along to test those knees and to learn the D. Age and health issues make for a fairly weak outlook ...if these guys are healthy for the balance of the season we're in good shape.


    WE need Dobson to get healthy and play to potential. I doubt Boyce makes this team - he's shown nothing in camp so far for someone with such great physical talents. What a waste!

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share