Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections


    In Response to Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections : Try not to confuse the impact of the HOF QB with what BB is as a GM. BB is an NFL failure if his record without Brady is considered. That is the fact. The SB wins he did have were with a number of key players he did not acquire. That is the fact. All you have is spin.
    Posted by BabeParilli

    He acquired Vrabel, Phifer, Terell Buckkely, re-acuired Otis Smith, etc, etc.


    I have said he is a good trader. That is the one aspect of being a GM that he does pretty well.

    Just because you type "that is a fact", it doesn;t mean it is.

    Point out anything I have called a fact that was not a fact.

    Just who is this guy getting coach of the year on an annual basis and maneuvering in the draft and FA so well?

    You do realize that "coach of the year" and GM are not the same thing, right?

    Yeah, that 2007 fleece job for Moss and Welker was terrible too!  Awful value there!

    lol

    I have reapeatedly said he is a pretty good trader. If that was all a GM did I would have no complaints about him.

    Babe = Troll

    A really good troll.  Best technique I've seen yet. Concede a bunch of things and then hammer away at one irrationally, exposing yourself as a troll.  That was your one main flaw, Babe.  

    Worked for a while and you have some fooled. 

    The only one who is fooled is you. Because I am a Pat's fan since 1966 but you just cannot comprehend that I don't drink the Hoodie kool-aide.
     
  3. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    This is getting long TP...


    BUT NOW...HIS BEST:  1.) Selecting DE Richard Seymour over WR David Terrell, and others, as the media and fans wanted; Fans and media always like the flashy WR or RB. You win with great QB and defense in this league these days. Seymour played great through his rookie contract, but became a fraction of his former self once he got his money through the holdout. It was a great pick in the sense that it supercharged the D-line in the dynasty years. Overall it was merely a good pick, not great. RESPONSE: Please stop. Seymour is at least a border line Hall of Famer. C'mon TP, try to be objective. Really. The guy didn't make all-pro ever again once he got his fat contract. He finally made the pro-bowl again last year with the Raiders, in of course, the contract year after his score off the Pats with the holdout. He didn't make the pro-bowl for the better part of that fat contract. He was taken 6th overall. I said it was a good pick, I'm not going to call it great based on his mercenary ways and tendency to kick back when he gets the money.   RESPONSE: Oh please! Seymour was the centerpiece around which the Pats' defense, which won 3 SB in 4 years, was built. But for some shady officiating In Indy, and a miraculous catch by David Tyree, it would have been a defense that won five championships in 7 years. Is he a Hall of Famer? Moat likely: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/11/raiders-dt-richard-seymour-future-hall-of-famer/1   I haven't said he wasn't great during his rookie contract. And I haven't said he wasn't good beyond that. I just said for being taken #6 he was a good pick not a great pick. You're supposed to get good guys in the top 10. I don't really get what your beef is with calling this a good pick.
     
    RESPONSE: Richard Seymour, the 6th overall player selected in the 2001 draft, was the best player to come out of his draft class. Take a look for yourself at the players selected that year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NFL_Draft
    The only other player that was arguably better was 4th overall pick, LaDainian Tomlinson. When you select the best player available in the entire draft, that's a great job...not a good one. Seymour is a six (six) time pro-bowler, in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2010 (his first season with Uncle Al), and was selected to the NFL's All Decade team: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Seymour


    I will stick to him being a good pick, not great. In 2001 Vick, Smith, Tomlinson and Seymour were good picks in the top 6. To say who the best was is a matter of opinion. If his play remained as high as during his rookie contract I would agree it was a great pick. He is probably capable of having sustained that level of play, but he is obviously a money driven guy.


    2.) His decision to play Tom Brady over Drew Bledsoe; No brainer. Brady was winning, Bledsoe was 5-11 the year before. Brady earned his spot on the team, earned the start when Bledsoe was hurt and earned keeping the job by winning.   RESPONSE: As I recall it, many people thought that Bledsoe should get his job back when he regained his health. Many more thought that the Pats had a better chance of beating the Rams in the SB with Bledsoe starting, rather than Brady...who was playing on a somewhat gimpy ankle. Lots of people thought Drew was good. Lots of people thought Grogan was good. They weren't.   RESPONSE: Absurd! Both Grogan and Bledsoe were good NFL Qs...though neither of them were  as good as Tom Brady. When BB went with Brady over Bledsoe, Brady as an unknown quantity. Bledsoe was a three time pro-bowl QB, with playoff and SB experience...when BB made his choice. Bledsoe made his 4th pro-bowl with Buffalo in 2002. grogan had some great years with the Pats in 1973-1976. But for the not so divine intervention of Ben Dreith, he would have led the Patriots to their first world championship. Be sober about this. We all know both Drew and Grogan were classic throw a pick at the worst time kind of guys. Brady was winning. Bledsoe is a 98-95 lifetime QB. No brainer; stick with the guy who is winning if you want to keep your job. If you were going to win a SB it was despite them, not because of them. I certainly wan't wanting Drew back. BB knew what he was going to do with Bledsoe. He saw it the year before. No brainer for BB despite what other clueless persons thought. RESPONSE: More absurdities! If Bledsoe was so bad, why did the Buffalo Bills trade a first round pick for him? Why did he make the pro-bowl in Buffalo? The Pats were one of the best teams in the AFC in the mid 70s with Grogan at the helm.   Why? Because Buffalo is stupid. Bledsoe made the pro-bowl in '94 with 27 INTs. Pffft. Over 3 years with the Bills he had a 55/43 TD/INT ratio. Has it occurred to you that Brady was showing in practice that he was just the better player?
     
    RESPONSE: It didn't "occur to me"...that's what BB said...and that's the main reason for his decision. But...how is that a "no-brainer"?? Just because BB saw Brady's talents, doesn't mean that every other NFL coach would have. How many coaches would have had the grape-fruits to keep seated their highly paid, pro-bowl QB, in favor of an unknown quantity? Certainly, BB put his neck on the line when he made this decision...just as he did in Cleveland, when he chose to release favorite son, Bernie Kosar. The decision to go with Brady, at the time it was made, was far from a "no-brainer". Few coaches have courageouly made such decisions.

    After taking a team that had not had a losing season in 3 years under Carrol, and making the playoffs 2 out of those 3, BB was not looking like such a genius going 5-11 in 2000. Starting off 0-2 with Blesdoe was certainly making BB wonder if he would have a job in the relatively near future. Once Brady started playing he won 3 of his first 4 starts. It would have been easy enough to go back to Bledsoe if the new kid started to falter. No brainer. Stick with the guy who might save your job. Bledsoe was a .500 QB before Brady and after Brady. BB knew this.

    I will grant you Grogan was a good QB when he could run. But that wasn't for long. I guess your idea of a good QB and mine are different.
     
    RESPONSE: Grogan was reaching elite status as a QB, until he was slowed by injuries. Certainly, Grogan was better than Tony Eason...or any other QB to wear a Pats uniform, prior to the coming of Drew Bledsoe.

    Grogan was never approaching elite status as a passer. He wasn't even better than Eason. BTW, Esson has a 115 passer rating in the playoffs.

    3.) The decision to trade his 19th overall pick in the 2003 draft...and then using the picks obtained to select DB Eugene Wilson, and NT Vince Wilfolk; Wilfork was a good pick, and overall BB has been a good trader.   RESPONSE: Agreed.   4.) His decision to release Lawyer Milloy in 2003 was correct...and established himself as the undisputed leader of the franchise; Milloy was a money issue whose play was deteriorating.   RESPONSE: True...but don't you remember all the heat BB took from his players and the media for this move...especially after Milloy went to Buffalo, and the Bills crushed the Pats, 31-0, in game one? Don't you agree that his decision to cut Milloy, and how BB handled it, entrenched his position as the man in charge of the Patriots? I remember well the rantings of fools who don't know their azz from their elbow. The same ones who demanded we draft Dez Bryant, that cried when Vinatieri went to the Colts, who wanted us to pay Asante top money. BB doesn't listen to them; neither do I.   RESPONSE: And BB gets no credit from you for that? I consistently give him credit for good decisions. I'm just saying it was an obvious decision to make. It doesn't make him a genius.
     
    RESPONSE: There you go again! In hindsight, the decision to sit Bledsoe for Brady was a no-brainer...just as his decision to release The Lawyer, in hindsight, was a no brainer. BUT...at the time these decisions were made, they were far from "no-brainers". No one knew what Tom Brady would become...and, especially in the aftermath of that 31-0 pasting in Buffalo, BB was on the hot-seat over Milloy. The great majority of the "experts" were wailing about how BB lost his team by letting The Lawyer go...and about how cheap the Pats were...remember?

    It wasn't hindsight for me. 


        5.) Grand larceny committed against the Pittsburgh Steelers with the signing of UFA, Mike Vrabel; Good signing obviously. I will give you Beisel and Brown in answer to that. RESPONSE: If you read my previous post above, you would see that I included the Beisel signing as one of BB's boners. But, the discussion here centers only on his good moves. The signing of Vrabel was a great one. You really don't want to match good move against bad. I've left out so many good ones, such as the acquisition of RBs Corey Dillon, Danny Woodhead, and Antwain Smith...DTsTed Washington, Keith Traylor, and Mike Wright, WRs Jabar Gaffney, and David Patten, not to mention getting WR David Givens with a 7th round pick...and the salvaging of Rodney Harrison from the free ageny scrap-heap.     The problem for you is Pat, that you can't discern the good from the filler. Dillon, Washington, Wright and Harrison were pretty good. The rest are filler or unproven. GMs all over the league find guys of this caliber. It's not a mark of genius as a GM.   RESPONSE: Isn't it BB's job to build a team every year? Doesn't that require good "fillers", as you put it? I prefer to call iit good role players. Isn't that how championships are won? Championships are won by a great QB and a strong D for the most part. All teams have filler.
     
    RESPONSE: Nonsense! Do you dispute that the Patriots "filler", whom I more accurately refer to a role players, were better than that of other contenders, especially during the championship years? Isn't true that the Patriots placed a higher value on special teams than most other teams? Isn't the reason why the Pats have been able to absorb injuries better than most teams is because of their philosophy...few stars, and a strong middle class of players? I suggest you read "Patriot Reign". 


    This is mostly spin. The Pat's "filler" was no better than the other contenders "filler". It was Brady and some big play defenders that set them apart.


       6.) The trade made with the 49ers in 2007, which ended up netting the Patriots Randy Moss, and Jarod Mayo; Yup, good trader. Let's not forget the #1 we lost because of BB's boneheaded spygate scandal.   RESPONSE: Desperation. You're starting to sound like UD6. Spygate was a NY media driven, manufactured scandal...where that tool of a Commissioner, Roger "Jets" Goodell...caved to media pressure, and punished the Patriots in an unprecedented manner. No one could have forseen such a harsh punishment, for such a relatively minor infraction. TP, just stop with the homer BS. People outside of Pat's Nation don't see it that way. And they are right to an extent. Taping after the memo was just plain idiotic, if not cheating. The problem isn't me sounding like UD6, the problem is your denial.The FACT is with the judgement of an idiot, BB brought the worst cheating scandal in league history down on the good name of our beloved team. Spin it all you like, but that is the bottom line. To this day it sickens me he brought this stench on us we have to scramble to somehow justify. IDIOTIC! RESPONSE: Me, a homer? I criticize BB and the Patriots as much as anybody. For the great majority of the past decade, BB has put his team in a position to contend for a championship.Only the Steelers and Colts can make the same claim. While a memo on the subject should have been heeded, no one could have forseen the dearth consequences of disregarding it.  If you hate BB so much, please name for me someone else who is available, that can do a better job? For that matter, please name someone who has done a better job, over the past decade?    I don't see much scrutiny from you regarding BB. Brady has put this team in a position to contend, not BB. I have never said I hate BB. I rather like him. Anybody who would be a better than average GM would be better than BB. Why the past decade? Why not who has been better over the last 6 years? In that case 4-5 names can be brought to bear.
     
    RESPONSE: Obviously, you haven't been reading my posts, and "Report Cards", over the years...or you would know better. Like you, I too have been accused of being a troll...LOL!! Why the past decade? Because you were claiming that BB has been "an average GM". You didn't say that he's been an average GM over the past 6 years...which is an entirely different discussion. Incidently, who are the four or five names that can be "brought to bear"?

    The names would be of those who have done better than; "the greatest AFC Championship choke in history, the greatest SB choke in history, a no show and two one and outs in the last 6 years." And those who did not inherit a half dozen key players from previous regimes before that. In total, he has been average. He has had a bit better result in the first 5 years, when Pioli was a big factor.



     7.) The selection of OG Logan Mankins with the 32nd overall pick in 2005; Good pick, but where was he in the '07 SB? And he has turned out to be a jerk .   RESPONSE: Using this twisted logic, than Tom Brady sucks too...because he had a bad playoff game against the Jets. I don't think Mankins is a jerk. I do think that he followed some bad advise from his agent...and that Bob Kraft was unreasonable with him in demanding that Mankins apologize several different times, and in several different ways. I see Mankins and the Pats getting a long term deal done, fairly soon.  Sorry TP, Mankins is overrated and a jerk. Brady is neither of those.   RESPONSE: Apparently, the NFL players disagree with you...as Mankins was ranked by them as the league's 39th best player. Only Jabari Evans was rated higher as a OG, at #36? When did you become such a hater, Babe? I never said Mankins wasn't a great player.
     
    RESPONSE: You "never said Mankins wasn't a great player"? Oh...perhaps I misunderstood when you said that "...Mankins is overrated and a jerk".

    Saying he is a great player and saying he is overrated are not incompatible statements. And he is clearly a jerk.

    I just said he's not as great as people claim. Apparently your hero BB agrees, as he has not opened up the treasure chest for him and was willing to play without him completely rather than give him the top money he wants.

    RESPONSE: That is incorrect, sir...and you know it: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/09/espn-patriots-had-deal-with-pro-bowler-logan-mankins-that-fell-apart-over-an-apology/1

    Interesting "report", but certainly not to be taken as gospel.

    Do you call everybody who disagrees with you a hater? That is a rather cheap shot tactic TP. Rise above it.
     
    RESPONSE: No...but I call those who call a legendary coach and GM, who took a team that was the Cincinnati Bengals of the Northeast, and transformed them into champions, and perennial contenders...a hater.  

    By what possible criteria other than your own and other fan's bloated opinion do you call BB a legendary GM? 


    8.) The selection of CB Devin McCourty with 27th pick in 2010; Yup, good pick so far.   RESPONSE: But for Suh, McCourty was the defensive rookie of the year. One year isn't a guarantee, but the prospects look great.   10.) Trading Drew Bledsoe in 2002 for Buffalo's #1 draft choice in 2003...which was used to select DE Ty Warren. Again, good trader, but I'm not going to agree Warren was a great pick at #13 overall based on his results.   RESPONSE: Warren has been a very solid player, until injuries caught up with him. Warren was a blah pick for going that high.   RESPONSE: Being a top 3-4 DE is a "blah" pick? Look at the problems the Pats have had at DE without the "blah" Ty Warren, in 2010. Waren was a  pro-bowler in 2007. According to PFR Warren has never made a pro-bowl. What, did 4 guys bow out for injuries? I find it hard to believe a "top" DE has NEVER made a pro-bowl. Warren remains a blah pick for going #13 overall.
     
    RESPONSE: So, are you denying that Warren has been a very good player for the Patriots, when healthy? In 2007, Warren was named All-Pro, even though he was not selected to the pro-bowl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ty_Warren
          But, let's go back and take a look at Warren's class, and see who among the #1 picks were a better selection...shall we?:

    1.) Of the twelve players taken before Warren, only these were better, or arguably better players: QB Carson Palmer (#1) WR Andre Johnson (#3) , OT Jordan Gross (#8), DT Kevin Williams (#9), DE Terrell Suggs (#10), CB Marcus Trufant (#11);

    2.) After Warren, the list is much shorter: SS Troy Polamalu (#16), TE Dallas Clark (#24), RB Larry Johnson (#27), CB Nnamdi Asomugha (#31).:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_nfl_draft

    I haven't said Warren was a disaterous pick. It just wasn't that good. I think that statement is compatible with your notation here.

         If Drew Bledsoe was as bad as you claim, at the time the Pats traded him...it seems that BB got more than full value for a washed-up Bledsoe. Wouldn't you agree?  

    I have repetedly stated he is a pretty good trader.
    He preys well upon the stupid.

    11.) Selection of USC backup QB Matt Cassel with a 7th round pick in 2007. Cassel would win 11 games for BB in 2008...and be traded for the 34th overall selection of the 2009 draft (Patrick Chung). Cassel benifited from a weak schedule and the jury is still way out on Chung.   RESPONSE: Oh...so Cassel suks? Didn't he just lead the Chiefs to the AFC West title? Sure, he has played well against weak schedules. Against a real schedule he has wilted. This year he won't be playing the NFC West. He will be coming our way. If he puts up numbers against this schedule I will agree he is good. But he won't. He will be right back to looking at a boot in his azz out of town like he was until last year's cushy schedule came along. RESPONSE: The guy led his team to a divisional title, despite a weak OL, and a mediocre defense. Look at all the teams who drafted a QB in the first round last April. That's how valuable QBs are in the NFL. He has beaten very few teams with a winning record in his career. Give up with the spin and stick to the facts. Sorry, Babe...but it seems that BB's successes far outweigh his failures. Not really. Average GM. Average drafting. Below average FA signer. Good trader.   RESPONSE: You're being ridiculous. As I've easily demonstrated above, BB has had more than his fair share of success with the draft, and through free agency. If you wish to call the signings of Mike Vrabel, Rodney Harrison, Jabar Gaffney, Danny Woodhead, BJGE, Antwain Smith, David Patten, Christian Fauria, Junior Seau, Anthony Pleasant, Bobby Hamilton, Larry Izzo, Bryan Cox, Joe Andruzzi, Steven Neal, Tully Banta Cain, Gary Guyton, Gerard Warren, Kyle Arrington, Rob Ninkovich, Mike Wright, and Eric Moore "below average"...so be it What is with you reeling off names of mostly filler players? All GMs find guys like this to fill a roster. Yeah, most of these guys are average or below. If you stop overrating people "because if BB picked them they must be good" you will have a much clearer picture of where we actually are. RESPONSE: Overrating people? LOL!!! Last time I checked, the Pats won 14 games last season. So, BB must be doing something right. Don't you agree? Posted by BabeParilli Yeah, you constantly overrate people probably because of your Hoodie worship. Oh yes. He is doing something right. But he isn't doing enough right or he would have more to show for it than a playoff miss and two one and outs for the last 3 years.

    RESPONSE: So...everything is BB's fault...yet anything good that becomes of the team, Brady gets the credit? Sorry Babe, but you're all wet. "Worshipping" any coach who fields a strong, contending Patriots' team, year after year, is a "no-brainer". Wouldn't you agree? 

    No. and no.

    The primary source of the lack of full success has been the GM decisions of BB. There have been some other issues not the least of which has been some bad luck.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    In Response to Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections:
    [QUOTE]This is getting long TP... BUT NOW...HIS BEST:  1.) Selecting DE Richard Seymour over WR David Terrell, and others, as the media and fans wanted; Fans and media always like the flashy WR or RB. You win with great QB and defense in this league these days. Seymour played great through his rookie contract, but became a fraction of his former self once he got his money through the holdout. It was a great pick in the sense that it supercharged the D-line in the dynasty years. Overall it was merely a good pick, not great. RESPONSE: Please stop. Seymour is at least a border line Hall of Famer. C'mon TP, try to be objective. Really. The guy didn't make all-pro ever again once he got his fat contract. He finally made the pro-bowl again last year with the Raiders, in of course, the contract year after his score off the Pats with the holdout. He didn't make the pro-bowl for the better part of that fat contract. He was taken 6th overall. I said it was a good pick, I'm not going to call it great based on his mercenary ways and tendency to kick back when he gets the money. RESPONSE: Oh please! Seymour was the centerpiece around which the Pats' defense, which won 3 SB in 4 years, was built. But for some shady officiating In Indy, and a miraculous catch by David Tyree, it would have been a defense that won five championships in 7 years. Is he a Hall of Famer? Moat likely: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/11/raiders-dt-richard-seymour-future-hall-of-famer/1   I haven't said he wasn't great during his rookie contract. And I haven't said he wasn't good beyond that. I just said for being taken #6 he was a good pick not a great pick. You're supposed to get good guys in the top 10. I don't really get what your beef is with calling this a good pick.   RESPONSE: Richard Seymour, the 6th overall player selected in the 2001 draft,  was the best player to come out of his draft class. Take a look for yourself at the players selected that year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NFL_Draft .  The only other player that was arguably better was 4th overall pick, LaDainian Tomlinson. When you select the best player available in the entire draft, that's a great job...not a good one. Seymour is a six (six) time pro-bowler, in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2010 (his first season with Uncle Al), and was selected to the NFL's All Decade team: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Seymour .  I will stick to him being a good pick, not great. In 2001 Vick, Smith, Tomlinson and Seymour were good picks in the top 6. To say who the best was is a matter of opinion. If his play remained as high as during his rookie contract I would agree it was a great pick. He is probably capable of having sustained that level of play, but he is obviously a money driven guy.

    RESPONSE: I maintain that Seymour was the best player to come out of his draft class. Vick and Tomlinson were chosen ahead of Seymour. Please name any player who inyour opinion, would have been a better choice?    

    2.) His decision to play Tom Brady over Drew Bledsoe; No brainer. Brady was winning, Bledsoe was 5-11 the year before. Brady earned his spot on the team, earned the start when Bledsoe was hurt and earned keeping the job by winning.   RESPONSE: As I recall it, many people thought that Bledsoe should get his job back when he regained his health. Many more thought that the Pats had a better chance of beating the Rams in the SB with Bledsoe starting, rather than Brady...who was playing on a somewhat gimpy ankle. Lots of people thought Drew was good. Lots of people thought Grogan was good. They weren't.   RESPONSE: Absurd! Both Grogan and Bledsoe were good NFL Qs...though neither of them were  as good as Tom Brady. When BB went with Brady over Bledsoe, Brady as an unknown quantity. Bledsoe was a three time pro-bowl QB, with playoff and SB experience...when BB made his choice. Bledsoe made his 4th pro-bowl with Buffalo in 2002. grogan had some great years with the Pats in 1973-1976. But for the not so divine intervention of Ben Dreith, he would have led the Patriots to their first world championship. Be sober about this. We all know both Drew and Grogan were classic throw a pick at the worst time kind of guys. Brady was winning. Bledsoe is a 98-95 lifetime QB. No brainer; stick with the guy who is winning if you want to keep your job. If you were going to win a SB it was despite them, not because of them. I certainly wan't wanting Drew back. BB knew what he was going to do with Bledsoe. He saw it the year before. No brainer for BB despite what other clueless persons thought. RESPONSE: More absurdities! If Bledsoe was so bad, why did the Buffalo Bills trade a first round pick for him? Why did he make the pro-bowl in Buffalo? The Pats were one of the best teams in the AFC in the mid 70s with Grogan at the helm.   Why? Because Buffalo is stupid. Bledsoe made the pro-bowl in '94 with 27 INTs. Pffft. Over 3 years with the Bills he had a 55/43 TD/INT ratio. Has it occurred to you that Brady was showing in practice that he was just the better player?   RESPONSE: It didn't "occur to me"...that's what BB said ...and that's the main reason for his decision. But...how is that a "no-brainer"?? Just because BB saw Brady's talents, doesn't mean that every other NFL coach would have. How many coaches would have had the grape-fruits to keep seated their highly paid, pro-bowl QB, in favor of an unknown quantity? Certainly, BB put his neck on the line when he made this decision...just as he did in Cleveland, when he chose to release favorite son, Bernie Kosar. The decision to go with Brady, at the time it was made, was far from a "no-brainer". Few coaches have courageouly made such decisions. After taking a team that had not had a losing season in 3 years under Carrol, and making the playoffs 2 out of those 3, BB was not looking like such a genius going 5-11 in 2000. Starting off 0-2 with Blesdoe was certainly making BB wonder if he would have a job in the relatively near future. Once Brady started playing he won 3 of his first 4 starts. It would have been easy enough to go back to Bledsoe if the new kid started to falter. No brainer. Stick with the guy who might save your job. Bledsoe was a .500 QB before Brady and after Brady. BB knew this. I will grant you Grogan was a good QB when he could run. But that wasn't for long. I guess your idea of a good QB and mine are different.   RESPONSE: Grogan was reaching elite status as a QB, until he was slowed by injuries. Certainly, Grogan was better than Tony Eason...or any other QB to wear a Pats uniform, prior to the coming of Drew Bledsoe. Grogan was never approaching elite status as a passer. He wasn't even better than Eason. BTW, Esson has a 115 passer rating in the playoffs.
     
    RESPONSE: LOL!!! Did you ever see "Mr. Happy Feet" Eason play? Grogan was a leader, and a winner. He threw a great deep ball, to the likes of Harold Jackson and Stanley Morgan, to injuries limited his effectiveness.  But, getting back to BB's decision to keep Brady at the helm after Bledsoe was ready to return...BB went with a guy with no experience, and left himself open to be second-guessed by fair weather fans, such as yourself.  

    3.) The decision to trade his 19th overall pick in the 2003 draft...and then using the picks obtained to select DB Eugene Wilson, and NT Vince Wilfolk; Wilfork was a good pick, and overall BB has been a good trader.   RESPONSE: Agreed.   4.) His decision to release Lawyer Milloy in 2003 was correct...and established himself as the undisputed leader of the franchise; Milloy was a money issue whose play was deteriorating.   RESPONSE: True...but don't you remember all the heat BB took from his players and the media for this move...especially after Milloy went to Buffalo, and the Bills crushed the Pats, 31-0, in game one? Don't you agree that his decision to cut Milloy, and how BB handled it, entrenched his position as the man in charge of the Patriots? I remember well the rantings of fools who don't know their azz from their elbow. The same ones who demanded we draft Dez Bryant, that cried when Vinatieri went to the Colts, who wanted us to pay Asante top money. BB doesn't listen to them; neither do I.   RESPONSE: And BB gets no credit from you for that? I consistently give him credit for good decisions. I'm just saying it was an obvious decision to make. It doesn't make him a genius.   RESPONSE: There you go again!  In hindsight,  the decision to sit Bledsoe for Brady was a no-brainer...just as his decision to release The Lawyer, in hindsight, was a no brainer. BUT...at the time these decisions were made, they were far from "no-brainers". No one knew what Tom Brady would become...and, especially in the aftermath of that 31-0 pasting in Buffalo, BB was on the hot-seat over Milloy. The great majority of the "experts" were wailing about how BB lost his team by letting The Lawyer go...and about how cheap the Pats were...remember? It wasn't hindsight for me.

    RESPONSE: LOL!!! Whatever!!

          5.) Grand larceny committed against the Pittsburgh Steelers with the signing of UFA, Mike Vrabel; Good signing obviously. I will give you Beisel and Brown in answer to that. RESPONSE: If you read my previous post above, you would see that I included the Beisel signing as one of BB's boners. But, the discussion here centers only on his good moves. The signing of Vrabel was a great one. You really don't want to match good move against bad. I've left out so many good ones, such as the acquisition of RBs Corey Dillon, Danny Woodhead, and Antwain Smith...DTsTed Washington, Keith Traylor, and Mike Wright, WRs Jabar Gaffney, and David Patten, not to mention getting WR David Givens with a 7th round pick...and the salvaging of Rodney Harrison from the free ageny scrap-heap.     The problem for you is Pat, that you can't discern the good from the filler. Dillon, Washington, Wright and Harrison were pretty good. The rest are filler or unproven. GMs all over the league find guys of this caliber. It's not a mark of genius as a GM.   RESPONSE: Isn't it BB's job to build a team every year? Doesn't that require good "fillers", as you put it? I prefer to call iit good role players. Isn't that how championships are won? Championships are won by a great QB and a strong D for the most part. All teams have filler.   RESPONSE: Nonsense! Do you dispute that the Patriots "filler", whom I more accurately refer to a role players, were better than that of other contenders, especially during the championship years? Isn't true that the Patriots placed a higher value on special teams than most other teams? Isn't the reason why the Pats have been able to absorb injuries better than most teams is because of their philosophy...few stars, and a strong middle class of players? I suggest you read "Patriot Reign".  This is mostly spin. The Pat's "filler" was no better than the other contenders "filler". It was Brady and some big play defenders that set them apart.    6.) The trade made with the 49ers in 2007, which ended up netting the Patriots Randy Moss, and Jarod Mayo; Yup, good trader. Let's not forget the #1 we lost because of BB's boneheaded spygate scandal.   RESPONSE: Desperation. You're starting to sound like UD6. Spygate was a NY media driven, manufactured scandal...where that tool of a Commissioner, Roger "Jets" Goodell...caved to media pressure, and punished the Patriots in an unprecedented manner. No one could have forseen such a harsh punishment, for such a relatively minor infraction. TP, just stop with the homer BS. People outside of Pat's Nation don't see it that way. And they are right to an extent. Taping after the memo was just plain idiotic, if not cheating. The problem isn't me sounding like UD6, the problem is your denial.The FACT is with the judgement of an idiot, BB brought the worst cheating scandal in league history down on the good name of our beloved team. Spin it all you like, but that is the bottom line. To this day it sickens me he brought this stench on us we have to scramble to somehow justify. IDIOTIC! RESPONSE: Me, a homer? I criticize BB and the Patriots as much as anybody. For the great majority of the past decade, BB has put his team in a position to contend for a championship.Only the Steelers and Colts can make the same claim. While a memo on the subject should have been heeded, no one could have forseen the dearth consequences of disregarding it.  If you hate BB so much, please name for me someone else who is available, that can do a better job? For that matter, please name someone who has done a better job, over the past decade?    I don't see much scrutiny from you regarding BB. Brady has put this team in a position to contend, not BB. I have never said I hate BB. I rather like him. Anybody who would be a better than average GM would be better than BB. Why the past decade? Why not who has been better over the last 6 years? In that case 4-5 names can be brought to bear.   RESPONSE: Obviously, you haven't been reading my posts, and "Report Cards", over the years...or you would know better. Like you, I too have been accused of being a troll...LOL!! Why the past decade? Because you were claiming that BB has been "an average GM". You didn't say that he's been an average GM over the past 6 years ...which is an entirely different discussion. Incidently, who are the four or five names that can be "brought to bear"? The names would be of those who have done better than; "the greatest AFC Championship choke in history, the greatest SB choke in history, a no show and two one and outs in the last 6 years. " And those who did not inherit a half dozen key players from previous regimes before that. In total, he has been average. He has had a bit better result in the first 5 years, when Pioli was a big factor.
     
    RESPONSE: Don't try to misdirect the conversation. You said, "Four or five names could be brought to bear"...all of whom are allegedly better than than that "average" GM, Belichick. Please name them. Furthermore, I would think that there would be at least 10-15 people you could name...since BB is so "average".  

     7.) The selection of OG Logan Mankins with the 32nd overall pick in 2005; Good pick, but where was he in the '07 SB? And he has turned out to be a jerk .   RESPONSE: Using this twisted logic, than Tom Brady sucks too...because he had a bad playoff game against the Jets. I don't think Mankins is a jerk. I do think that he followed some bad advise from his agent...and that Bob Kraft was unreasonable with him in demanding that Mankins apologize several different times, and in several different ways. I see Mankins and the Pats getting a long term deal done, fairly soon.  Sorry TP, Mankins is overrated and a jerk. Brady is neither of those.   RESPONSE: Apparently, the NFL players disagree with you...as Mankins was ranked by them as the league's 39th best player. Only Jabari Evans was rated higher as a OG, at #36? When did you become such a hater, Babe? I never said Mankins wasn't a great player.   RESPONSE: You "never said Mankins wasn't a great player"? Oh...perhaps I misunderstood when you said that "...Mankins is overrated and a jerk". Saying he is a great player and saying he is overrated are not incompatible statements. And he is clearly a jerk. I just said he's not as great as people claim. Apparently your hero BB agrees, as he has not opened up the treasure chest for him and was willing to play without him completely rather than give him the top money he wants. RESPONSE: That is incorrect, sir...and you know it: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/09/espn-patriots-had-deal-with-pro-bowler-logan-mankins-that-fell-apart-over-an-apology/1 Interesting "report", but certainly not to be taken as gospel.
     
    RESPONSE: ..."Certainly not to be taken as gospel"? Why not? This story was widely reported, both locally and nationally. Do you have any proof to show why it should certainly not be taken as gospel? 

    Do you call everybody who disagrees with you a hater? That is a rather cheap shot tactic TP. Rise above it.   RESPONSE: No...but I call those who call a legendary coach and GM, who took a team that was the Cincinnati Bengals of the Northeast, and transformed them into champions, and perennial contenders...a hater.   By what possible criteria other than your own and other fan's bloated opinion do you call BB a legendary GM?

    RESPONSE: The Patriots have been at or near the top of the mountain in the NFL for the past decade. Over his years with the Patriots, here's a list of some of BB's fine draft choices over the years:

    1.)   2000: QB Tom Brady...6th round, 199th overall;

    2.)   2001: DE Richard Seymour...1st round, 6th overall;

    3.)   2001: LT Matt Light...2nd round, 48th overall; 

    4.)   2002: WR Deion Branch...2nd round, 65th overall; 

    5.)   2002: WR David Givens...7th round, 253rd overall;

    6.)   2003: DE Ty Warren...1st round, 13th overall;

    7.)   2003: CB Asante Samuel, 4th round, 120th overall;

    8.)   2003: C Dan Koppen, 5th round, 164th overall;

    9.)   2003: DE/OLB Tully Banta-Cain, 7th round, 239th overall;

    10.) 2004: NT Vince Wilfolk, 1st round, 21st overall selection;

    11.) 2005: LG Logan Mankins, 1st round, 32nd overall;

    12.) 2005: QB Matt Cassel, 7th round, 230th overall;

    13.) 2006: PK Stephen Gostowski, 4th round, 118th overall;

    14.) 2008: ILB Jarod Mayo, 1st round, 10th onerall;

    15.) 2009: SS Patrick Chung, 2nd round, 34th overall;

    16.) 2009: RT Sebastien Vollmer, 2nd round, 58th overall;

    17.) 2010: CB Devin McCourty, 1st round, 27th overall;

    18.) 2010: TE Rob Gronkowski, 2nd round, 42nd overall;

    19.) 2010: TE Aaron Hernandez, 4th round, 113th overall;

    20.) 2010:  P  Zolton Mesko, 5th round, 150th overall.        


      8.) The selection of CB Devin McCourty with 27th pick in 2010; Yup, good pick so far.   RESPONSE: But for Suh, McCourty was the defensive rookie of the year. One year isn't a guarantee, but the prospects look great.   10.) Trading Drew Bledsoe in 2002 for Buffalo's #1 draft choice in 2003...which was used to select DE Ty Warren. Again, good trader, but I'm not going to agree Warren was a great pick at #13 overall based on his results.   RESPONSE: Warren has been a very solid player, until injuries caught up with him. Warren was a blah pick for going that high.   RESPONSE: Being a top 3-4 DE is a "blah" pick? Look at the problems the Pats have had at DE without the "blah" Ty Warren, in 2010. Waren was a  pro-bowler in 2007. According to PFR Warren has never made a pro-bowl. What, did 4 guys bow out for injuries? I find it hard to believe a "top" DE has NEVER made a pro-bowl. Warren remains a blah pick for going #13 overall.   RESPONSE: So, are you denying that Warren has been a very good player for the Patriots, when healthy? In 2007, Warren was named All-Pro, even though he was not selected to the pro-bowl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ty_Warren       But, let's go back and take a look at Warren's class, and see who among the #1 picks were a better selection...shall we?: 1.) Of the twelve players taken before Warren, only these were better, or arguably better players: QB Carson Palmer (#1) WR Andre Johnson (#3) , OT Jordan Gross (#8), DT Kevin Williams (#9), DE Terrell Suggs (#10), CB Marcus Trufant (#11); 2.) After Warren, the list is much shorter: SS Troy Polamalu (#16), TE Dallas Clark (#24), RB Larry Johnson (#27), CB Nnamdi Asomugha (#31).:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_nfl_draft I haven't said Warren was a disaterous pick. It just wasn't that good. I think that statement is compatible with your notation here.      If Drew Bledsoe was as bad as you claim, at the time the Pats traded him...it seems that BB got more than full value for a washed-up Bledsoe. Wouldn't you agree?   I have repetedly stated he is a pretty good trader. He preys well upon the stupid. 11.) Selection of USC backup QB Matt Cassel with a 7th round pick in 2007. Cassel would win 11 games for BB in 2008...and be traded for the 34th overall selection of the 2009 draft (Patrick Chung). Cassel benifited from a weak schedule and the jury is still way out on Chung.   RESPONSE: Oh...so Cassel suks? Didn't he just lead the Chiefs to the AFC West title? Sure, he has played well against weak schedules. Against a real schedule he has wilted. This year he won't be playing the NFC West. He will be coming our way. If he puts up numbers against this schedule I will agree he is good. But he won't. He will be right back to looking at a boot in his azz out of town like he was until last year's cushy schedule came along. RESPONSE: The guy led his team to a divisional title, despite a weak OL, and a mediocre defense. Look at all the teams who drafted a QB in the first round last April. That's how valuable QBs are in the NFL. He has beaten very few teams with a winning record in his career. Give up with the spin and stick to the facts.
     
    RESPONSE: So, you are saying that Cassel sucks...LOL!!! How many QB starved teams would gladly take Cassel as their starting QB? Besides, the point is that Cassel was a great draft pick, especially when considered that he was a late 7th rounder. The Pats got a good year out of him as a starter, and shipped him off to K.C. for the 34th overall pick (Patrick Chung) in the 2009 draft. Are the Chiefs, controlled and managed by Scott Pioli, a stupid team, too?   

    Sorry, Babe...but it seems that BB's successes far outweigh his failures. Not really. Average GM. Average drafting. Below average FA signer. Good trader.   RESPONSE: You're being ridiculous. As I've easily demonstrated above, BB has had more than his fair share of success with the draft, and through free agency. If you wish to call the signings of Mike Vrabel, Rodney Harrison, Jabar Gaffney, Danny Woodhead, BJGE, Antwain Smith, David Patten, Christian Fauria, Junior Seau, Anthony Pleasant, Bobby Hamilton, Larry Izzo, Bryan Cox, Joe Andruzzi, Steven Neal, Tully Banta Cain, Gary Guyton, Gerard Warren, Kyle Arrington, Rob Ninkovich, Mike Wright, and Eric Moore "below average"...so be it What is with you reeling off names of mostly filler players? All GMs find guys like this to fill a roster. Yeah, most of these guys are average or below. If you stop overrating people "because if BB picked them they must be good" you will have a much clearer picture of where we actually are. RESPONSE: Overrating people? LOL!!! Last time I checked, the Pats won 14 games last season. So, BB must be doing something right. Don't you agree? Posted by BabeParilli Yeah, you constantly overrate people probably because of your Hoodie worship. Oh yes. He is doing something right. But he isn't doing enough right or he would have more to show for it than a playoff miss and two one and outs for the last 3 years. RESPONSE: So...everything is BB's fault...yet anything good that becomes of the team, Brady gets the credit? Sorry Babe, but you're all wet. "Worshipping" any coach who fields a strong, contending Patriots' team, year after year, is a "no-brainer". Wouldn't you agree?  No. and no. The primary source of the lack of full success has been the GM decisions of BB. There have been some other issues not the least of which has been some bad luck.

    RESPONSE: By lack of "full success", I assume you're talking about not winning a championship? So, according to you, if BB doesn't win a championship, it proves that he's average?? 
         You're right about the "bad luck" thing, to an extent. The Pats were robbed of a championship by referees in Indianapolis, in 2006...and in 2007 against the Giants, the football Gods were on the Giants' sideline on that final drive. In 2008, there was the Brady knee injury...though the Pats, led by that "average GM", still managed to win 11 games without him.
      


    Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]

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

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections


    This is getting long TP... BUT NOW...HIS BEST:  1.) Selecting DE Richard Seymour over WR David Terrell, and others, as the media and fans wanted; Fans and media always like the flashy WR or RB. You win with great QB and defense in this league these days. Seymour played great through his rookie contract, but became a fraction of his former self once he got his money through the holdout. It was a great pick in the sense that it supercharged the D-line in the dynasty years. Overall it was merely a good pick, not great. RESPONSE: Please stop. Seymour is at least a border line Hall of Famer. C'mon TP, try to be objective. Really. The guy didn't make all-pro ever again once he got his fat contract. He finally made the pro-bowl again last year with the Raiders, in of course, the contract year after his score off the Pats with the holdout. He didn't make the pro-bowl for the better part of that fat contract. He was taken 6th overall. I said it was a good pick, I'm not going to call it great based on his mercenary ways and tendency to kick back when he gets the money. RESPONSE: Oh please! Seymour was the centerpiece around which the Pats' defense, which won 3 SB in 4 years, was built. But for some shady officiating In Indy, and a miraculous catch by David Tyree, it would have been a defense that won five championships in 7 years. Is he a Hall of Famer? Moat likely: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/11/raiders-dt-richard-seymour-future-hall-of-famer/1   I haven't said he wasn't great during his rookie contract. And I haven't said he wasn't good beyond that. I just said for being taken #6 he was a good pick not a great pick. You're supposed to get good guys in the top 10. I don't really get what your beef is with calling this a good pick.   RESPONSE: Richard Seymour, the 6th overall player selected in the 2001 draft,  was the best player to come out of his draft class. Take a look for yourself at the players selected that year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NFL_Draft .  The only other player that was arguably better was 4th overall pick, LaDainian Tomlinson. When you select the best player available in the entire draft, that's a great job...not a good one. Seymour is a six (six) time pro-bowler, in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2010 (his first season with Uncle Al), and was selected to the NFL's All Decade team: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Seymour .  I will stick to him being a good pick, not great. In 2001 Vick, Smith, Tomlinson and Seymour were good picks in the top 6. To say who the best was is a matter of opinion. If his play remained as high as during his rookie contract I would agree it was a great pick. He is probably capable of having sustained that level of play, but he is obviously a money driven guy.

    RESPONSE: I maintain that Seymour was the best player to come out of his draft class. Vick and Tomlinson were chosen ahead of Seymour. Please name any player who inyour opinion, would have been a better choice?

    How about
    Drew Brees? Or Michael Vick? Or Reggie Wayne? All chosen over 30 places higher than Big Sey in the recent nfl players top 100 vote.  

    2.) His decision to play Tom Brady over Drew Bledsoe; No brainer. Brady was winning, Bledsoe was 5-11 the year before. Brady earned his spot on the team, earned the start when Bledsoe was hurt and earned keeping the job by winning.   RESPONSE: As I recall it, many people thought that Bledsoe should get his job back when he regained his health. Many more thought that the Pats had a better chance of beating the Rams in the SB with Bledsoe starting, rather than Brady...who was playing on a somewhat gimpy ankle. Lots of people thought Drew was good. Lots of people thought Grogan was good. They weren't.   RESPONSE: Absurd! Both Grogan and Bledsoe were good NFL Qs...though neither of them were  as good as Tom Brady. When BB went with Brady over Bledsoe, Brady as an unknown quantity. Bledsoe was a three time pro-bowl QB, with playoff and SB experience...when BB made his choice. Bledsoe made his 4th pro-bowl with Buffalo in 2002. grogan had some great years with the Pats in 1973-1976. But for the not so divine intervention of Ben Dreith, he would have led the Patriots to their first world championship. Be sober about this. We all know both Drew and Grogan were classic throw a pick at the worst time kind of guys. Brady was winning. Bledsoe is a 98-95 lifetime QB. No brainer; stick with the guy who is winning if you want to keep your job. If you were going to win a SB it was despite them, not because of them. I certainly wan't wanting Drew back. BB knew what he was going to do with Bledsoe. He saw it the year before. No brainer for BB despite what other clueless persons thought. RESPONSE: More absurdities! If Bledsoe was so bad, why did the Buffalo Bills trade a first round pick for him? Why did he make the pro-bowl in Buffalo? The Pats were one of the best teams in the AFC in the mid 70s with Grogan at the helm.   Why? Because Buffalo is stupid. Bledsoe made the pro-bowl in '94 with 27 INTs. Pffft. Over 3 years with the Bills he had a 55/43 TD/INT ratio. Has it occurred to you that Brady was showing in practice that he was just the better player?   RESPONSE: It didn't "occur to me"...that's what BB said ...and that's the main reason for his decision. But...how is that a "no-brainer"?? Just because BB saw Brady's talents, doesn't mean that every other NFL coach would have. How many coaches would have had the grape-fruits to keep seated their highly paid, pro-bowl QB, in favor of an unknown quantity? Certainly, BB put his neck on the line when he made this decision...just as he did in Cleveland, when he chose to release favorite son, Bernie Kosar. The decision to go with Brady, at the time it was made, was far from a "no-brainer". Few coaches have courageouly made such decisions. After taking a team that had not had a losing season in 3 years under Carrol, and making the playoffs 2 out of those 3, BB was not looking like such a genius going 5-11 in 2000. Starting off 0-2 with Blesdoe was certainly making BB wonder if he would have a job in the relatively near future. Once Brady started playing he won 3 of his first 4 starts. It would have been easy enough to go back to Bledsoe if the new kid started to falter. No brainer. Stick with the guy who might save your job. Bledsoe was a .500 QB before Brady and after Brady. BB knew this. I will grant you Grogan was a good QB when he could run. But that wasn't for long. I guess your idea of a good QB and mine are different.   RESPONSE: Grogan was reaching elite status as a QB, until he was slowed by injuries. Certainly, Grogan was better than Tony Eason...or any other QB to wear a Pats uniform, prior to the coming of Drew Bledsoe. Grogan was never approaching elite status as a passer. He wasn't even better than Eason. BTW, Esson has a 115 passer rating in the playoffs.
     
    RESPONSE: LOL!!! Did you ever see "Mr. Happy Feet" Eason play? Grogan was a leader, and a winner. He threw a great deep ball, to the likes of Harold Jackson and Stanley Morgan, to injuries limited his effectiveness.  But, getting back to BB's decision to keep Brady at the helm after Bledsoe was ready to return...BB went with a guy with no experience, and left himself open to be second-guessed by fair weather fans, such as yourself.  

    Funny you mention "happy feet". That term was coined for the guy you are defending, Bledsoe - funny.

    Eason played well enough to get us to our first Super Bowl. Something Grogan never did. Grogan never even won a playoff game. Grogan was 0-4 in the playoffs with a 49 PR, with 3-td 7int. Eason was 3-2 with a 115 PR, 7-td 0-int. (Better than Brady's PR I might add.) Same old idiotic hero worship by too many Pat's fans for Grogan that we see for BB. Same disease. Ignore the facts, embrace the spin.

    BB went with a guy that was winning instead of a guy who was a .500 QB that had managed 5 wins the previous year for BB and was already 0-2 that season. Like I said, no brainer, if you want to keep your job. If Brady was looking bad he could have always put "happy feet" back in.

    Please do not call me a fair weather fan again, or our discussions will end. I treat you with respect regarding your being a fan, extend the same courtesy.


     
    3.) The decision to trade his 19th overall pick in the 2003 draft...and th

    en using the picks obtained to select DB Eugene Wilson, and NT Vince Wilfolk; Wilfork was a good pick, and overall BB has been a good trader.   RESPONSE: Agreed.   4.) His decision to release Lawyer Milloy in 2003 was correct...and established himself as the undisputed leader of the franchise; Milloy was a money issue whose play was deteriorating.   RESPONSE: True...but don't you remember all the heat BB took from his players and the media for this move...especially after Milloy went to Buffalo, and the Bills crushed the Pats, 31-0, in game one? Don't you agree that his decision to cut Milloy, and how BB handled it, entrenched his position as the man in charge of the Patriots? I remember well the rantings of fools who don't know their azz from their elbow. The same ones who demanded we draft Dez Bryant, that cried when Vinatieri went to the Colts, who wanted us to pay Asante top money. BB doesn't listen to them; neither do I.   RESPONSE: And BB gets no credit from you for that? I consistently give him credit for good decisions. I'm just saying it was an obvious decision to make. It doesn't make him a genius.   RESPONSE: There you go again!  In hindsight,  the decision to sit Bledsoe for Brady was a no-brainer...just as his decision to release The Lawyer, in hindsight, was a no brainer. BUT...at the time these decisions were made, they were far from "no-brainers". No one knew what Tom Brady would become...and, especially in the aftermath of that 31-0 pasting in Buffalo, BB was on the hot-seat over Milloy. The great majority of the "experts" were wailing about how BB lost his team by letting The Lawyer go...and about how cheap the Pats were...remember? It wasn't hindsight for me.

    RESPONSE: LOL!!! Whatever!!

          5.) Grand larceny committed against the Pittsburgh Steelers with the signing of UFA, Mike Vrabel; Good signing obviously. I will give you Beisel and Brown in answer to that. RESPONSE: If you read my previous post above, you would see that I included the Beisel signing as one of BB's boners. But, the discussion here centers only on his good moves. The signing of Vrabel was a great one. You really don't want to match good move against bad. I've left out so many good ones, such as the acquisition of RBs Corey Dillon, Danny Woodhead, and Antwain Smith...DTsTed Washington, Keith Traylor, and Mike Wright, WRs Jabar Gaffney, and David Patten, not to mention getting WR David Givens with a 7th round pick...and the salvaging of Rodney Harrison from the free ageny scrap-heap.     The problem for you is Pat, that you can't discern the good from the filler. Dillon, Washington, Wright and Harrison were pretty good. The rest are filler or unproven. GMs all over the league find guys of this caliber. It's not a mark of genius as a GM.   RESPONSE: Isn't it BB's job to build a team every year? Doesn't that require good "fillers", as you put it? I prefer to call iit good role players. Isn't that how championships are won? Championships are won by a great QB and a strong D for the most part. All teams have filler.   RESPONSE: Nonsense! Do you dispute that the Patriots "filler", whom I more accurately refer to a role players, were better than that of other contenders, especially during the championship years? Isn't true that the Patriots placed a higher value on special teams than most other teams? Isn't the reason why the Pats have been able to absorb injuries better than most teams is because of their philosophy...few stars, and a strong middle class of players? I suggest you read "Patriot Reign".  This is mostly spin. The Pat's "filler" was no better than the other contenders "filler". It was Brady and some big play defenders that set them apart.    6.) The trade made with the 49ers in 2007, which ended up netting the Patriots Randy Moss, and Jarod Mayo; Yup, good trader. Let's not forget the #1 we lost because of BB's boneheaded spygate scandal.   RESPONSE: Desperation. You're starting to sound like UD6. Spygate was a NY media driven, manufactured scandal...where that tool of a Commissioner, Roger "Jets" Goodell...caved to media pressure, and punished the Patriots in an unprecedented manner. No one could have forseen such a harsh punishment, for such a relatively minor infraction. TP, just stop with the homer BS. People outside of Pat's Nation don't see it that way. And they are right to an extent. Taping after the memo was just plain idiotic, if not cheating. The problem isn't me sounding like UD6, the problem is your denial.The FACT is with the judgement of an idiot, BB brought the worst cheating scandal in league history down on the good name of our beloved team. Spin it all you like, but that is the bottom line. To this day it sickens me he brought this stench on us we have to scramble to somehow justify. IDIOTIC! RESPONSE: Me, a homer? I criticize BB and the Patriots as much as anybody. For the great majority of the past decade, BB has put his team in a position to contend for a championship.Only the Steelers and Colts can make the same claim. While a memo on the subject should have been heeded, no one could have forseen the dearth consequences of disregarding it.  If you hate BB so much, please name for me someone else who is available, that can do a better job? For that matter, please name someone who has done a better job, over the past decade?    I don't see much scrutiny from you regarding BB. Brady has put this team in a position to contend, not BB. I have never said I hate BB. I rather like him. Anybody who would be a better than average GM would be better than BB. Why the past decade? Why not who has been better over the last 6 years? In that case 4-5 names can be brought to bear.   RESPONSE: Obviously, you haven't been reading my posts, and "Report Cards", over the years...or you would know better. Like you, I too have been accused of being a troll...LOL!! Why the past decade? Because you were claiming that BB has been "an average GM". You didn't say that he's been an average GM over the past 6 years ...which is an entirely different discussion. Incidently, who are the four or five names that can be "brought to bear"? The names would be of those who have done better than; "the greatest AFC Championship choke in history, the greatest SB choke in history, a no show and two one and outs in the last 6 years. " And those who did not inherit a half dozen key players from previous regimes before that. In total, he has been average. He has had a bit better result in the first 5 years, when Pioli was a big factor.
     
    RESPONSE: Don't try to misdirect the conversation. You said, "Four or five names could be brought to bear"...all of whom are allegedly better than than that "average" GM, Belichick. Please name them. Furthermore, I would think that there would be at least 10-15 people you could name...since BB is so "average".  

    Okay, the persons making the decisions for the Steelers, Colts, Saints, Giants, Packers, Ravens, Chargers, Eagles, Cowboys and Bears.


     7.) The selection of OG Logan Mankins with the 32nd overall pick in 2005; Good pick, but where was he in the '07 SB? And he has turned out to be a jerk .   RESPONSE: Using this twisted logic, than Tom Brady sucks too...because he had a bad playoff game against the Jets. I don't think Mankins is a jerk. I do think that he followed some bad advise from his agent...and that Bob Kraft was unreasonable with him in demanding that Mankins apologize several different times, and in several different ways. I see Mankins and the Pats getting a long term deal done, fairly soon.  Sorry TP, Mankins is overrated and a jerk. Brady is neither of those.   RESPONSE: Apparently, the NFL players disagree with you...as Mankins was ranked by them as the league's 39th best player. Only Jabari Evans was rated higher as a OG, at #36? When did you become such a hater, Babe? I never said Mankins wasn't a great player.   RESPONSE: You "never said Mankins wasn't a great player"? Oh...perhaps I misunderstood when you said that "...Mankins is overrated and a jerk". Saying he is a great player and saying he is overrated are not incompatible statements. And he is clearly a jerk. I just said he's not as great as people claim. Apparently your hero BB agrees, as he has not opened up the treasure chest for him and was willing to play without him completely rather than give him the top money he wants. RESPONSE: That is incorrect, sir...and you know it: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/09/espn-patriots-had-deal-with-pro-bowler-logan-mankins-that-fell-apart-over-an-apology/1 Interesting "report", but certainly not to be taken as gospel.
     
    RESPONSE: ..."Certainly not to be taken as gospel"? Why not? This story was widely reported, both locally and nationally. Do you have any proof to show why it should certainly not be taken as gospel? 

    Yes, I have proof. Neither the Pats or Mankins confirmed it. You have got to be kidding. It's a RUMOR.
    If the Pats were demanding an apology I doubt the report that they were really willing to give him the big bucks is true.


    Do you call everybody who disagrees with you a hater? That is a rather cheap shot tactic TP. Rise above it.   RESPONSE: No...but I call those who call a legendary coach and GM, who took a team that was the Cincinnati Bengals of the Northeast, and transformed them into champions, and perennial contenders...a hater.   By what possible criteria other than your own and other fan's bloated opinion do you call BB a legendary GM?

    RESPONSE: The Patriots have been at or near the top of the mountain in the NFL for the past decade. Over his years with the Patriots, here's a list of some of BB's fine draft choices over the years:

    1.)   2000: QB Tom Brady...6th round, 199th overall;

    2.)   2001: DE Richard Seymour...1st round, 6th overall;

    3.)   2001: LT Matt Light...2nd round, 48th overall; 

    4.)   2002: WR Deion Branch...2nd round, 65th overall; 

    5.)   2002: WR David Givens...7th round, 253rd overall;

    6.)   2003: DE Ty Warren...1st round, 13th overall;

    7.)   2003: CB Asante Samuel, 4th round, 120th overall;

    8.)   2003: C Dan Koppen, 5th round, 164th overall;

    9.)   2003: DE/OLB Tully Banta-Cain, 7th round, 239th overall;

    10.) 2004: NT Vince Wilfolk, 1st round, 21st overall selection;

    11.) 2005: LG Logan Mankins, 1st round, 32nd overall;

    12.) 2005: QB Matt Cassel, 7th round, 230th overall;

    13.) 2006: PK Stephen Gostowski, 4th round, 118th overall;

    14.) 2008: ILB Jarod Mayo, 1st round, 10th onerall;

    15.) 2009: SS Patrick Chung, 2nd round, 34th overall;

    16.) 2009: RT Sebastien Vollmer, 2nd round, 58th overall;

    17.) 2010: CB Devin McCourty, 1st round, 27th overall;

    18.) 2010: TE Rob Gronkowski, 2nd round, 42nd overall;

    19.) 2010: TE Aaron Hernandez, 4th round, 113th overall;

    20.) 2010:  P  Zolton Mesko, 5th round, 150th overall.    

    Naming Brady illustrates your lack of insight and deep worship of Hoodie. It was a lucky pick. PERIOD.  There are so many here you call "good" picks it's laughable. You confuse "good" and "decent" obviously.


      8.) The selection of CB Devin McCourty with 27th pick in 2010; Yup, good pick so far.   RESPONSE: But for Suh, McCourty was the defensive rookie of the year. One year isn't a guarantee, but the prospects look great.   10.) Trading Drew Bledsoe in 2002 for Buffalo's #1 draft choice in 2003...which was used to select DE Ty Warren. Again, good trader, but I'm not going to agree Warren was a great pick at #13 overall based on his results.   RESPONSE: Warren has been a very solid player, until injuries caught up with him. Warren was a blah pick for going that high.   RESPONSE: Being a top 3-4 DE is a "blah" pick? Look at the problems the Pats have had at DE without the "blah" Ty Warren, in 2010. Waren was a  pro-bowler in 2007. According to PFR Warren has never made a pro-bowl. What, did 4 guys bow out for injuries? I find it hard to believe a "top" DE has NEVER made a pro-bowl. Warren remains a blah pick for going #13 overall.   RESPONSE: So, are you denying that Warren has been a very good player for the Patriots, when healthy? In 2007, Warren was named All-Pro, even though he was not selected to the pro-bowl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ty_Warren       But, let's go back and take a look at Warren's class, and see who among the #1 picks were a better selection...shall we?: 1.) Of the twelve players taken before Warren, only these were better, or arguably better players: QB Carson Palmer (#1) WR Andre Johnson (#3) , OT Jordan Gross (#8), DT Kevin Williams (#9), DE Terrell Suggs (#10), CB Marcus Trufant (#11); 2.) After Warren, the list is much shorter: SS Troy Polamalu (#16), TE Dallas Clark (#24), RB Larry Johnson (#27), CB Nnamdi Asomugha (#31).:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_nfl_draft I haven't said Warren was a disaterous pick. It just wasn't that good. I think that statement is compatible with your notation here.      If Drew Bledsoe was as bad as you claim, at the time the Pats traded him...it seems that BB got more than full value for a washed-up Bledsoe. Wouldn't you agree?   I have repetedly stated he is a pretty good trader. He preys well upon the stupid. 11.) Selection of USC backup QB Matt Cassel with a 7th round pick in 2007. Cassel would win 11 games for BB in 2008...and be traded for the 34th overall selection of the 2009 draft (Patrick Chung). Cassel benifited from a weak schedule and the jury is still way out on Chung.   RESPONSE: Oh...so Cassel suks? Didn't he just lead the Chiefs to the AFC West title? Sure, he has played well against weak schedules. Against a real schedule he has wilted. This year he won't be playing the NFC West. He will be coming our way. If he puts up numbers against this schedule I will agree he is good. But he won't. He will be right back to looking at a boot in his azz out of town like he was until last year's cushy schedule came along. RESPONSE: The guy led his team to a divisional title, despite a weak OL, and a mediocre defense. Look at all the teams who drafted a QB in the first round last April. That's how valuable QBs are in the NFL. He has beaten very few teams with a winning record in his career. Give up with the spin and stick to the facts.
     
    RESPONSE: So, you are saying that Cassel sucks...LOL!!! How many QB starved teams would gladly take Cassel as their starting QB? Besides, the point is that Cassel was a great draft pick, especially when considered that he was a late 7th rounder. The Pats got a good year out of him as a starter, and shipped him off to K.C. for the 34th overall pick (Patrick Chung) in the 2009 draft. Are the Chiefs, controlled and managed by Scott Pioli, a stupid team, too? 

    I never said BB was stupid (other than about spygate). I notice you like to falsely portray what people have said. Maybe some people don't notice that and it's working out for you.

    Cassel was a good pick, though he isn't that good. But I don't credit for picks after say the 4th round and I don't find fault either. It's way too much about luck at that point.


     


    Sorry, Babe...but it seems that BB's successes far outweigh his failures. Not really. Average GM. Average drafting. Below average FA signer. Good trader.   RESPONSE: You're being ridiculous. As I've easily demonstrated above, BB has had more than his fair share of success with the draft, and through free agency. If you wish to call the signings of Mike Vrabel, Rodney Harrison, Jabar Gaffney, Danny Woodhead, BJGE, Antwain Smith, David Patten, Christian Fauria, Junior Seau, Anthony Pleasant, Bobby Hamilton, Larry Izzo, Bryan Cox, Joe Andruzzi, Steven Neal, Tully Banta Cain, Gary Guyton, Gerard Warren, Kyle Arrington, Rob Ninkovich, Mike Wright, and Eric Moore "below average"...so be it What is with you reeling off names of mostly filler players? All GMs find guys like this to fill a roster. Yeah, most of these guys are average or below. If you stop overrating people "because if BB picked them they must be good" you will have a much clearer picture of where we actually are. RESPONSE: Overrating people? LOL!!! Last time I checked, the Pats won 14 games last season. So, BB must be doing something right. Don't you agree? Posted by BabeParilli Yeah, you constantly overrate people probably because of your Hoodie worship. Oh yes. He is doing something right. But he isn't doing enough right or he would have more to show for it than a playoff miss and two one and outs for the last 3 years. RESPONSE: So...everything is BB's fault...yet anything good that becomes of the team, Brady gets the credit? Sorry Babe, but you're all wet. "Worshipping" any coach who fields a strong, contending Patriots' team, year after year, is a "no-brainer". Wouldn't you agree?  No. and no. The primary source of the lack of full success has been the GM decisions of BB. There have been some other issues not the least of which has been some bad luck.

    RESPONSE: By lack of "full success", I assume you're talking about not winning a championship? So, according to you, if BB doesn't win a championship, it proves that he's average?? 
         You're right about the "bad luck" thing, to an extent. The Pats were robbed of a championship by referees in Indianapolis, in 2006...and in 2007 against the Giants, the football Gods were on the Giants' sideline on that final drive. In 2008, there was the Brady knee injury...though the Pats, led by that "average GM", still managed to win 11 games without him.

    Considering he has Brady, the best QB ever, he should have won a couple the last 6 years if he was doing his job as GM.
      
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    I don't get you Babe.  You say Championships are all that matters but you give BB no credit for 3, and your list of better GM's is Steelers, Colts, Saints, Giants, Packers, Ravens, Chargers, Eagles, Cowboys and Bears has five teams that haven't won anything in a longtime, some ever.  You say Brady is the only reason they ever won, but the same case could be made for the Colts/Manning, Saints/Brees, Packers/Rodgers, Steelers/Roethlisburger. 

    "Considering he has Brady, the best QB ever, he should have won a couple the last 6 years if he was doing his job as GM."
    this quote sets a pretty crazy high standard.  If they don't win more Championships in 10 years than anyone has ever won in the NFL than BB is "average".

    If BB gets a great player in the late rounds he's lucky, if he gets agreat player in the early rounds he's supposed to be good so it means nothing. 

    I don't see what point you're trying to make here. 
    Are you hoping they fire BB?  Do you think the Pats are better without him?


     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    In Response to Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections:
    [QUOTE]This is getting long TP... BUT NOW...HIS BEST:  1.) Selecting DE Richard Seymour over WR David Terrell, and others, as the media and fans wanted; Fans and media always like the flashy WR or RB. You win with great QB and defense in this league these days. Seymour played great through his rookie contract, but became a fraction of his former self once he got his money through the holdout. It was a great pick in the sense that it supercharged the D-line in the dynasty years. Overall it was merely a good pick, not great. RESPONSE: Please stop. Seymour is at least a border line Hall of Famer. C'mon TP, try to be objective. Really. The guy didn't make all-pro ever again once he got his fat contract. He finally made the pro-bowl again last year with the Raiders, in of course, the contract year after his score off the Pats with the holdout. He didn't make the pro-bowl for the better part of that fat contract. He was taken 6th overall. I said it was a good pick, I'm not going to call it great based on his mercenary ways and tendency to kick back when he gets the money. RESPONSE: Oh please! Seymour was the centerpiece around which the Pats' defense, which won 3 SB in 4 years, was built. But for some shady officiating In Indy, and a miraculous catch by David Tyree, it would have been a defense that won five championships in 7 years. Is he a Hall of Famer? Moat likely: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/11/raiders-dt-richard-seymour-future-hall-of-famer/1   I haven't said he wasn't great during his rookie contract. And I haven't said he wasn't good beyond that. I just said for being taken #6 he was a good pick not a great pick. You're supposed to get good guys in the top 10. I don't really get what your beef is with calling this a good pick.   RESPONSE: Richard Seymour, the 6th overall player selected in the 2001 draft,  was the best player to come out of his draft class. Take a look for yourself at the players selected that year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NFL_Draft .  The only other player that was arguably better was 4th overall pick, LaDainian Tomlinson. When you select the best player available in the entire draft, that's a great job...not a good one. Seymour is a six (six) time pro-bowler, in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2010 (his first season with Uncle Al), and was selected to the NFL's All Decade team: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Seymour .  I will stick to him being a good pick, not great. In 2001 Vick, Smith, Tomlinson and Seymour were good picks in the top 6. To say who the best was is a matter of opinion. If his play remained as high as during his rookie contract I would agree it was a great pick. He is probably capable of having sustained that level of play, but he is obviously a money driven guy. RESPONSE: I maintain that Seymour was the best player to come out of his draft class. Vick and Tomlinson were chosen ahead of Seymour. Please name any player who inyour opinion, would have been a better choice? How about Drew Brees ? Or Michael Vick? Or Reggie Wayne? All chosen over 30 places higher than Big Sey in the recent nfl players top 100 vote.
     
    RESPONSE: Michael Vick? Please. Reggie Wayne...LOL!! If building a team in 2001, and knowing what the future held for each player, a dominant defensive lineman like Seymour would be the choice. Part of Wayne's success must be attributed to having Peyton Manning as his QB. As to Brees, you have an argument. Initially, Seymour was the better player. But...Brees has certainly come on. 

      2.) His decision to play Tom Brady over Drew Bledsoe; No brainer. Brady was winning, Bledsoe was 5-11 the year before. Brady earned his spot on the team, earned the start when Bledsoe was hurt and earned keeping the job by winning.   RESPONSE: As I recall it, many people thought that Bledsoe should get his job back when he regained his health. Many more thought that the Pats had a better chance of beating the Rams in the SB with Bledsoe starting, rather than Brady...who was playing on a somewhat gimpy ankle. Lots of people thought Drew was good. Lots of people thought Grogan was good. They weren't.   RESPONSE: Absurd! Both Grogan and Bledsoe were good NFL Qs...though neither of them were  as good as Tom Brady. When BB went with Brady over Bledsoe, Brady as an unknown quantity. Bledsoe was a three time pro-bowl QB, with playoff and SB experience...when BB made his choice. Bledsoe made his 4th pro-bowl with Buffalo in 2002. grogan had some great years with the Pats in 1973-1976. But for the not so divine intervention of Ben Dreith, he would have led the Patriots to their first world championship. Be sober about this. We all know both Drew and Grogan were classic throw a pick at the worst time kind of guys. Brady was winning. Bledsoe is a 98-95 lifetime QB. No brainer; stick with the guy who is winning if you want to keep your job. If you were going to win a SB it was despite them, not because of them. I certainly wan't wanting Drew back. BB knew what he was going to do with Bledsoe. He saw it the year before. No brainer for BB despite what other clueless persons thought. RESPONSE: More absurdities! If Bledsoe was so bad, why did the Buffalo Bills trade a first round pick for him? Why did he make the pro-bowl in Buffalo? The Pats were one of the best teams in the AFC in the mid 70s with Grogan at the helm.   Why? Because Buffalo is stupid. Bledsoe made the pro-bowl in '94 with 27 INTs. Pffft. Over 3 years with the Bills he had a 55/43 TD/INT ratio. Has it occurred to you that Brady was showing in practice that he was just the better player?   RESPONSE: It didn't "occur to me"...that's what BB said ...and that's the main reason for his decision. But...how is that a "no-brainer"?? Just because BB saw Brady's talents, doesn't mean that every other NFL coach would have. How many coaches would have had the grape-fruits to keep seated their highly paid, pro-bowl QB, in favor of an unknown quantity? Certainly, BB put his neck on the line when he made this decision...just as he did in Cleveland, when he chose to release favorite son, Bernie Kosar. The decision to go with Brady, at the time it was made, was far from a "no-brainer". Few coaches have courageouly made such decisions. After taking a team that had not had a losing season in 3 years under Carrol, and making the playoffs 2 out of those 3, BB was not looking like such a genius going 5-11 in 2000. Starting off 0-2 with Blesdoe was certainly making BB wonder if he would have a job in the relatively near future. Once Brady started playing he won 3 of his first 4 starts. It would have been easy enough to go back to Bledsoe if the new kid started to falter. No brainer. Stick with the guy who might save your job. Bledsoe was a .500 QB before Brady and after Brady. BB knew this. I will grant you Grogan was a good QB when he could run. But that wasn't for long. I guess your idea of a good QB and mine are different.   RESPONSE: Grogan was reaching elite status as a QB, until he was slowed by injuries. Certainly, Grogan was better than Tony Eason...or any other QB to wear a Pats uniform, prior to the coming of Drew Bledsoe. Grogan was never approaching elite status as a passer. He wasn't even better than Eason. BTW, Esson has a 115 passer rating in the playoffs.   RESPONSE: LOL!!! Did you ever see "Mr. Happy Feet" Eason play? Grogan was a leader, and a winner. He threw a great deep ball, to the likes of Harold Jackson and Stanley Morgan, to injuries limited his effectiveness.  But, getting back to BB's decision to keep Brady at the helm after Bledsoe was ready to return...BB went with a guy with no experience, and left himself open to be second-guessed by fair weather fans, such as yourself.   Funny you mention "happy feet". That term was coined for the guy you are defending, Bledsoe - funny. Eason played well enough to get us to our first Super Bowl. Something Grogan never did. Grogan never even won a playoff game. Grogan was 0-4 in the playoffs with a 49 PR, with 3-td 7int. Eason was 3-2 with a 115 PR, 7-td 0-int. (Better than Brady's PR I might add.) Same old idiotic hero worship by too many Pat's fans for Grogan that we see for BB. Same disease. Ignore the facts, embrace the spin. BB went with a guy that was winning instead of a guy who was a .500 QB that had managed 5 wins the previous year for BB and was already 0-2 that season. Like I said, no brainer, if you want to keep your job. If Brady was looking bad he could have always put "happy feet" back in. Please do not call me a fair weather fan again, or our discussions will end. I treat you with respect regarding your being a fan, extend the same courtesy.
     
    RESPONSE: Excuse me...but you've constantly referred to me as a "homer", who worships the ground that BB walks on. Those who seek respect, must first give respect. With regards to Grogan, but for that BS Ben Dreith roughing the passer call, that cost the Pats the AFC championship in Oakland, Grogan would have led the Pats to their first world title in 1976. 

      3.) The decision to trade his 19th overall pick in the 2003 draft...and th en using the picks obtained to select DB Eugene Wilson, and NT Vince Wilfolk; Wilfork was a good pick, and overall BB has been a good trader.   RESPONSE: Agreed.   4.) His decision to release Lawyer Milloy in 2003 was correct...and established himself as the undisputed leader of the franchise; Milloy was a money issue whose play was deteriorating.   RESPONSE: True...but don't you remember all the heat BB took from his players and the media for this move...especially after Milloy went to Buffalo, and the Bills crushed the Pats, 31-0, in game one? Don't you agree that his decision to cut Milloy, and how BB handled it, entrenched his position as the man in charge of the Patriots? I remember well the rantings of fools who don't know their azz from their elbow. The same ones who demanded we draft Dez Bryant, that cried when Vinatieri went to the Colts, who wanted us to pay Asante top money. BB doesn't listen to them; neither do I.   RESPONSE: And BB gets no credit from you for that? I consistently give him credit for good decisions. I'm just saying it was an obvious decision to make. It doesn't make him a genius.   RESPONSE: There you go again!  In hindsight,  the decision to sit Bledsoe for Brady was a no-brainer...just as his decision to release The Lawyer, in hindsight, was a no brainer. BUT...at the time these decisions were made, they were far from "no-brainers". No one knew what Tom Brady would become...and, especially in the aftermath of that 31-0 pasting in Buffalo, BB was on the hot-seat over Milloy. The great majority of the "experts" were wailing about how BB lost his team by letting The Lawyer go...and about how cheap the Pats were...remember? It wasn't hindsight for me. RESPONSE: LOL!!! Whatever!!       5.) Grand larceny committed against the Pittsburgh Steelers with the signing of UFA, Mike Vrabel; Good signing obviously. I will give you Beisel and Brown in answer to that. RESPONSE: If you read my previous post above, you would see that I included the Beisel signing as one of BB's boners. But, the discussion here centers only on his good moves. The signing of Vrabel was a great one. You really don't want to match good move against bad. I've left out so many good ones, such as the acquisition of RBs Corey Dillon, Danny Woodhead, and Antwain Smith...DTsTed Washington, Keith Traylor, and Mike Wright, WRs Jabar Gaffney, and David Patten, not to mention getting WR David Givens with a 7th round pick...and the salvaging of Rodney Harrison from the free ageny scrap-heap.     The problem for you is Pat, that you can't discern the good from the filler. Dillon, Washington, Wright and Harrison were pretty good. The rest are filler or unproven. GMs all over the league find guys of this caliber. It's not a mark of genius as a GM.   RESPONSE: Isn't it BB's job to build a team every year? Doesn't that require good "fillers", as you put it? I prefer to call iit good role players. Isn't that how championships are won? Championships are won by a great QB and a strong D for the most part. All teams have filler.   RESPONSE: Nonsense! Do you dispute that the Patriots "filler", whom I more accurately refer to a role players, were better than that of other contenders, especially during the championship years? Isn't true that the Patriots placed a higher value on special teams than most other teams? Isn't the reason why the Pats have been able to absorb injuries better than most teams is because of their philosophy...few stars, and a strong middle class of players? I suggest you read "Patriot Reign".  This is mostly spin. The Pat's "filler" was no better than the other contenders "filler". It was Brady and some big play defenders that set them apart.
     
    RESPONSE: You criticize me for "worshipping Belichick". Well...it's obvious that you worship at the alter of Tom Brady. According to you, all of BB's success is attributed to having Brady. What nonsense!  

       6.) The trade made with the 49ers in 2007, which ended up netting the Patriots Randy Moss, and Jarod Mayo; Yup, good trader. Let's not forget the #1 we lost because of BB's boneheaded spygate scandal.   RESPONSE: Desperation. You're starting to sound like UD6. Spygate was a NY media driven, manufactured scandal...where that tool of a Commissioner, Roger "Jets" Goodell...caved to media pressure, and punished the Patriots in an unprecedented manner. No one could have forseen such a harsh punishment, for such a relatively minor infraction. TP, just stop with the homer BS. People outside of Pat's Nation don't see it that way. And they are right to an extent. Taping after the memo was just plain idiotic, if not cheating. The problem isn't me sounding like UD6, the problem is your denial.The FACT is with the judgement of an idiot, BB brought the worst cheating scandal in league history down on the good name of our beloved team. Spin it all you like, but that is the bottom line. To this day it sickens me he brought this stench on us we have to scramble to somehow justify. IDIOTIC! RESPONSE: Me, a homer? I criticize BB and the Patriots as much as anybody. For the great majority of the past decade, BB has put his team in a position to contend for a championship.Only the Steelers and Colts can make the same claim. While a memo on the subject should have been heeded, no one could have forseen the dearth consequences of disregarding it.  If you hate BB so much, please name for me someone else who is available, that can do a better job? For that matter, please name someone who has done a better job, over the past decade?    I don't see much scrutiny from you regarding BB. Brady has put this team in a position to contend, not BB. I have never said I hate BB. I rather like him. Anybody who would be a better than average GM would be better than BB. Why the past decade? Why not who has been better over the last 6 years? In that case 4-5 names can be brought to bear.   RESPONSE: Obviously, you haven't been reading my posts, and "Report Cards", over the years...or you would know better. Like you, I too have been accused of being a troll...LOL!! Why the past decade? Because you were claiming that BB has been "an average GM". You didn't say that he's been an average GM over the past 6 years ...which is an entirely different discussion. Incidently, who are the four or five names that can be "brought to bear"? The names would be of those who have done better than; "the greatest AFC Championship choke in history, the greatest SB choke in history, a no show and two one and outs in the last 6 years. " And those who did not inherit a half dozen key players from previous regimes before that. In total, he has been average. He has had a bit better result in the first 5 years, when Pioli was a big factor.   RESPONSE: Don't try to misdirect the conversation. You said, "Four or five names could be brought to bear"...all of whom are allegedly better than than that "average" GM, Belichick. Please name them. Furthermore, I would think that there would be at least 10-15 people you could name...since BB is so "average".   Okay, the persons making the decisions for the Steelers, Colts, Saints, Giants, Packers, Ravens, Chargers, Eagles, Cowboys and Bears.
     
    RESPONSE: What a croc!! The Patriots have owned the Steelers over this past decade. But for that gift-wrapped AFC title game in Indy, the Pats have gotten much the better of the Colts. Other than their one recent championship each, what have the Saints, Giants, and Packers done? The Ravens last won their title over 10 years ago...while the Eagles, Bears and Chargers have won none in recent times.
         With the exception of the Packers, which of the teams you've mentioned is currently better than the Pats? 
       

    7.) The selection of OG Logan Mankins with the 32nd overall pick in 2005; Good pick, but where was he in the '07 SB? And he has turned out to be a jerk .   RESPONSE: Using this twisted logic, than Tom Brady sucks too...because he had a bad playoff game against the Jets. I don't think Mankins is a jerk. I do think that he followed some bad advise from his agent...and that Bob Kraft was unreasonable with him in demanding that Mankins apologize several different times, and in several different ways. I see Mankins and the Pats getting a long term deal done, fairly soon.  Sorry TP, Mankins is overrated and a jerk. Brady is neither of those.   RESPONSE: Apparently, the NFL players disagree with you...as Mankins was ranked by them as the league's 39th best player. Only Jabari Evans was rated higher as a OG, at #36? When did you become such a hater, Babe? I never said Mankins wasn't a great player.   RESPONSE: You "never said Mankins wasn't a great player"? Oh...perhaps I misunderstood when you said that "...Mankins is overrated and a jerk". Saying he is a great player and saying he is overrated are not incompatible statements. And he is clearly a jerk. I just said he's not as great as people claim. Apparently your hero BB agrees, as he has not opened up the treasure chest for him and was willing to play without him completely rather than give him the top money he wants. RESPONSE: That is incorrect, sir...and you know it: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/09/espn-patriots-had-deal-with-pro-bowler-logan-mankins-that-fell-apart-over-an-apology/1 Interesting "report", but certainly not to be taken as gospel.   RESPONSE: ..."Certainly not to be taken as gospel"? Why not? This story was widely reported, both locally and nationally. Do you have any proof to show why it should certainly not be taken as gospel?  Yes, I have proof. Neither the Pats or Mankins confirmed it. You have got to be kidding. It's a RUMOR. If the Pats were demanding an apology I doubt the report that they were really willing to give him the big bucks is true. Do you call everybody who disagrees with you a hater? That is a rather cheap shot tactic TP. Rise above it.   RESPONSE: No...but I call those who call a legendary coach and GM, who took a team that was the Cincinnati Bengals of the Northeast, and transformed them into champions, and perennial contenders...a hater.   By what possible criteria other than your own and other fan's bloated opinion do you call BB a legendary GM? RESPONSE: The Patriots have been at or near the top of the mountain in the NFL for the past decade. Over his years with the Patriots, here's a list of some of BB's fine draft choices over the years: 1.)   2000: QB Tom Brady...6th round, 199th overall; 2.)   2001: DE Richard Seymour...1st round, 6th overall; 3.)   2001: LT Matt Light...2nd round, 48th overall;  4.)   2002: WR Deion Branch...2nd round, 65th overall;  5.)   2002: WR David Givens...7th round, 253rd overall; 6.)   2003: DE Ty Warren...1st round, 13th overall; 7.)   2003: CB Asante Samuel, 4th round, 120th overall; 8.)   2003: C Dan Koppen, 5th round, 164th overall; 9.)   2003: DE/OLB Tully Banta-Cain, 7th round, 239th overall; 10.) 2004: NT Vince Wilfolk, 1st round, 21st overall selection; 11.) 2005: LG Logan Mankins, 1st round, 32nd overall; 12.) 2005: QB Matt Cassel, 7th round, 230th overall; 13.) 2006: PK Stephen Gostowski, 4th round, 118th overall; 14.) 2008: ILB Jarod Mayo, 1st round, 10th onerall; 15.) 2009: SS Patrick Chung, 2nd round, 34th overall; 16.) 2009: RT Sebastien Vollmer, 2nd round, 58th overall; 17.) 2010: CB Devin McCourty, 1st round, 27th overall; 18.) 2010: TE Rob Gronkowski, 2nd round, 42nd overall; 19.) 2010: TE Aaron Hernandez, 4th round, 113th overall; 20.) 2010:  P  Zolton Mesko, 5th round, 150th overall.     Naming Brady illustrates your lack of insight and deep worship of Hoodie. It was a lucky pick. PERIOD.

    RESPONSE: Lucky? LOL!!! Well...every other team had the opportunity to be lucky 198 times, before the Patriots made their pick. This is why I'm referring to you as a hater. Why can't you give BB credit where credit is due? The bottom line is, BB selected Brady. He obviously saw something in him that others did not. Or...are you trying to argue that BB just threw a dart at a list of names??

      There are so many here you call "good" picks it's laughable. You confuse "good" and "decent" obviously.
     
    RESPONSE: Some of the picks weren't "good" or "decent", but great! Please tell me which of the 20 picks below were "decent", rather than good...especially when you take into consideration where certain guys were taken.

      8.) The selection of CB Devin McCourty with 27th pick in 2010; Yup, good pick so far.   RESPONSE: But for Suh, McCourty was the defensive rookie of the year. One year isn't a guarantee, but the prospects look great.   10.) Trading Drew Bledsoe in 2002 for Buffalo's #1 draft choice in 2003...which was used to select DE Ty Warren. Again, good trader, but I'm not going to agree Warren was a great pick at #13 overall based on his results.   RESPONSE: Warren has been a very solid player, until injuries caught up with him. Warren was a blah pick for going that high.   RESPONSE: Being a top 3-4 DE is a "blah" pick? Look at the problems the Pats have had at DE without the "blah" Ty Warren, in 2010. Waren was a  pro-bowler in 2007. According to PFR Warren has never made a pro-bowl. What, did 4 guys bow out for injuries? I find it hard to believe a "top" DE has NEVER made a pro-bowl. Warren remains a blah pick for going #13 overall.   RESPONSE: So, are you denying that Warren has been a very good player for the Patriots, when healthy? In 2007, Warren was named All-Pro, even though he was not selected to the pro-bowl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ty_Warren       But, let's go back and take a look at Warren's class, and see who among the #1 picks were a better selection...shall we?: 1.) Of the twelve players taken before Warren, only these were better, or arguably better players: QB Carson Palmer (#1) WR Andre Johnson (#3) , OT Jordan Gross (#8), DT Kevin Williams (#9), DE Terrell Suggs (#10), CB Marcus Trufant (#11); 2.) After Warren, the list is much shorter: SS Troy Polamalu (#16), TE Dallas Clark (#24), RB Larry Johnson (#27), CB Nnamdi Asomugha (#31).:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_nfl_draft I haven't said Warren was a disaterous pick. It just wasn't that good. I think that statement is compatible with your notation here.      If Drew Bledsoe was as bad as you claim, at the time the Pats traded him...it seems that BB got more than full value for a washed-up Bledsoe. Wouldn't you agree?   I have repetedly stated he is a pretty good trader. He preys well upon the stupid. 11.) Selection of USC backup QB Matt Cassel with a 7th round pick in 2007. Cassel would win 11 games for BB in 2008...and be traded for the 34th overall selection of the 2009 draft (Patrick Chung). Cassel benifited from a weak schedule and the jury is still way out on Chung.   RESPONSE: Oh...so Cassel suks? Didn't he just lead the Chiefs to the AFC West title? Sure, he has played well against weak schedules. Against a real schedule he has wilted. This year he won't be playing the NFC West. He will be coming our way. If he puts up numbers against this schedule I will agree he is good. But he won't. He will be right back to looking at a boot in his azz out of town like he was until last year's cushy schedule came along. RESPONSE: The guy led his team to a divisional title, despite a weak OL, and a mediocre defense. Look at all the teams who drafted a QB in the first round last April. That's how valuable QBs are in the NFL. He has beaten very few teams with a winning record in his career. Give up with the spin and stick to the facts.   RESPONSE: So, you are saying that Cassel sucks...LOL!!! How many QB starved teams would gladly take Cassel as their starting QB? Besides, the point is that Cassel was a great draft pick, especially when considered that he was a late 7th rounder. The Pats got a good year out of him as a starter, and shipped him off to K.C. for the 34th overall pick (Patrick Chung) in the 2009 draft. Are the Chiefs, controlled and managed by Scott Pioli, a stupid team, too?  I never said BB was stupid (other than about spygate). I notice you like to falsely portray what people have said.

    RESPONSE: Oh really? Please give me an example of where I have "falsely portrayed" what you have said? The question I asked above had nothing to do with BB being stupid. I asked if you thought Pioli was stupid for trading his 34th overall pick in 2009 for Cassel...since you say that BB preys well on the stupid. 

    Maybe some people don't notice that and it's working out for you. Cassel was a good pick, though he isn't that good. But I don't credit for picks after say the 4th round and I don't find fault either. It's way too much about luck at that point.
     
    RESPONSE: That's absurd. The true mark of a great talent evaluator is his ability to find good players in the later rounds. Why is it that when BB finds a good player in the later rounds it's luck, but when the Colts or Steelers do it, it's skill?    

      Sorry, Babe...but it seems that BB's successes far outweigh his failures. Not really. Average GM. Average drafting. Below average FA signer. Good trader.   RESPONSE: You're being ridiculous. As I've easily demonstrated above, BB has had more than his fair share of success with the draft, and through free agency. If you wish to call the signings of Mike Vrabel, Rodney Harrison, Jabar Gaffney, Danny Woodhead, BJGE, Antwain Smith, David Patten, Christian Fauria, Junior Seau, Anthony Pleasant, Bobby Hamilton, Larry Izzo, Bryan Cox, Joe Andruzzi, Steven Neal, Tully Banta Cain, Gary Guyton, Gerard Warren, Kyle Arrington, Rob Ninkovich, Mike Wright, and Eric Moore "below average"...so be it What is with you reeling off names of mostly filler players? All GMs find guys like this to fill a roster. Yeah, most of these guys are average or below. If you stop overrating people "because if BB picked them they must be good" you will have a much clearer picture of where we actually are. RESPONSE: Overrating people? LOL!!! Last time I checked, the Pats won 14 games last season. So, BB must be doing something right. Don't you agree? Posted by BabeParilli Yeah, you constantly overrate people probably because of your Hoodie worship. Oh yes. He is doing something right. But he isn't doing enough right or he would have more to show for it than a playoff miss and two one and outs for the last 3 years. RESPONSE: So...everything is BB's fault...yet anything good that becomes of the team, Brady gets the credit? Sorry Babe, but you're all wet. "Worshipping" any coach who fields a strong, contending Patriots' team, year after year, is a "no-brainer". Wouldn't you agree?  No. and no. The primary source of the lack of full success has been the GM decisions of BB. There have been some other issues not the least of which has been some bad luck. RESPONSE: By lack of "full success", I assume you're talking about not winning a championship? So, according to you, if BB doesn't win a championship, it proves that he's average??       You're right about the "bad luck" thing, to an extent. The Pats were robbed of a championship by referees in Indianapolis, in 2006...and in 2007 against the Giants, the football Gods were on the Giants' sideline on that final drive. In 2008, there was the Brady knee injury...though the Pats, led by that "average GM", still managed to win 11 games without him. Considering he has Brady, the best QB ever, he should have won a couple the last 6 years if he was doing his job as GM.

    RESPONSE: That's absurd. You're absolving the players of any responsibility for their performance, and placing the full blame for poor performances on what BB has done in the draft. 
    Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]
     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    In Response to Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections:
    [QUOTE]I don't get you Babe.  You say Championships are all that matters but you give BB no credit for 3, and your list of better GM's is Steelers, Colts, Saints, Giants, Packers, Ravens, Chargers, Eagles, Cowboys and Bears has five teams that haven't won anything in a longtime, some ever.  You say Brady is the only reason they ever won, but the same case could be made for the Colts/Manning, Saints/Brees, Packers/Rodgers, Steelers/Roethlisburger.  "Considering he has Brady, the best QB ever, he should have won a couple the last 6 years if he was doing his job as GM. " this quote sets a pretty crazy high standard.  If they don't win more Championships in 10 years than anyone has ever won in the NFL than BB is "average". If BB gets a great player in the late rounds he's lucky, if he gets agreat player in the early rounds he's supposed to be good so it means nothing.  I don't see what point you're trying to make here.  Are you hoping they fire BB?   Do you think the Pats are better without him?
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]


    Consider that the 3 SBs BB did win were with a good number of players he did not acquire.

    No, I think BB is a great coach (despite the ghastly specter of spygate) so he should remain in that capacity. I would like to see him replaced as GM.
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    Babe - I think you are right on here.  From the outset Belichick had a nice core (mcginest, johnson, bruschi, law, milloy, hamilton)  drafted a couple of good/great defenders (seymour, wilfork, samuel, warren, wilson - only 2 were primary starters in more than 1 sb year) to go with the other players he brought in on defense (Vrabel, Phifer, Harrison). 

    Don't forget the value of Vinatieri. 

    Belichick hasn't had such great fortune with defensive FA's over the last few years, but back then he was spot on. 

    And you are also right that coaches aren't great on their own.  They need the players.  

    And there is not really a difference between being astute enough to pick a guy in the 6th rd vs. being lucky.  If anyone (including the team who picked said player) thought the player was going to be significantly better (let alone one of the best in history) than the place he was picked, he never would have been left on the board that long.  
     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    I am more than certain you are correct rusty.  I am willing to bet that belichick's mentality went something like this:

    "I think this Brady kid may be the next great QB in the NFL, and I am the only one who knows it.  Based on my diligent research, he's not even on anyone's radar.  I'll bet I can wait until the 6th round to get the next great QB in the NFL."

    The statement "he wouldn't have lasted so long" is reality.  IF anyone projected Brady to be as great as he has become, no one can honestly say he wouldn't have been taken earlier than 198.  Suggesting such smacks of dishonesty. 

    How in the world is the drafting of Matt Ryan and/or Aaron Rogers at all similar to the drafting of Brady or the "patriot way" (whatever that is).  Ryan was picked 3rd (1st QB).  Rogers was #24 (2nd QB).  And your comment about all teams drafting "Jeff George" is incorrect, too.  Why?  Because the first QB taken in 00 was Chad Pennington - smart, marginal arm.  Jeff George would never be tagged with those characteristics. 

    Rusty - you are a trip.  You write so much sh*t it is amazing - just hoping for something to stick, I guess. 

    I honestly don't believe that you believe everything you write. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rocky. Show Rocky's posts

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    ">Nate Solder Among Patriots Rookies With Unpredictable Roles in 2011

    Nate SolderThe Patriots' success in 2010 was surprising for a whole host of reasons, one of them being the number of rookies who played significant roles throughout the course of the 14-2 campaign.

    Seven draft picks and three undrafted players made an impact for New England, which improved throughout the regular season and entered the playoffs with the best record in the NFL. Because of the youth movement, 2010 rookies such as Devin McCourtyRob GronkowskiAaron HernandezBrandon Spikes and Jermaine Cunningham helped provide optimism that the Patriots can continue contending with a new generation of players.

    Now, on the eve of a new collective bargaining agreement, how many Patriots rookies should be expected to contribute in the 2011 season?

    On the surface, the Patriots' most recent draft class looks to be full of promise, even if it will take years to sort out its body of success. For example, after the 2000 season, there was little reason for New England to be excited about its most recent rookie class. And then Tom Brady happened. After the 2006 season, running back Laurence Maroney and wide receiver Chad Jackson still looked like they could highlight an explosive class. Eventually, Maroney's rookie year turned into an aberration and Jackson's hype was an abomination.

    At any rate, New England's 2011 rookie class had a different feel from the group in 2010. While tackle Nate Solder, cornerback Ras-I Dowling, running backs Shane Vereen and Stevan Ridley, quarterback Ryan Mallett and offensive lineman Marcus Cannon are all heralded prospects, it might take them longer to develop into their true potential.

    Solder's immediate fate hinges on the unknown status of free agent Matt Light. Dowling likely won't start over Devin McCourty or Leigh Bodden, and it's even more unclear where he'll fit on the depth chart among cornerbacks Kyle ArringtonDarius Butler and Jonathan Wilhite

    Vereen and Ridley will get their touches, but they'll still split carries with BenJarvus Green-EllisDanny Woodhead and maybe even Kevin Faulk. Cannon is recovering from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, so it's uncertain if he'll be ready for 2011. If he is able to play, he'll still be fighting for playing time behind Logan Mankins (possibly), Dan Connolly and Ryan Wendell. And then there's Mallett, who will be a third-stringer if he makes the roster.

    Outside linebacker Markell Carter is an unknown who could add a boost to the pass rush, while tight endLee Smith and special teamer Malcolm Williams will hope to make the practice squad. Then, at the outset of free agency, expect the Patriots to sign as many as two dozen undrafted rookies.

    Obviously, injuries will play a major role in playing time, but let's remove that variable from the equation for now. If everything stays true, it's really difficult to forecast each player's time on the field due to the unique circumstances at each position throughout the depth chart.

    Solder could have the greatest impact among New England's rookies, or he might not play a single snap. Dowling could be an integral cornerback in sub packages, or he might be relegated to special teams. Vereen and Ridley could have some big moments, but they might also go weeks at a time with very limited touches.

    There are reasons to like a chunk of the Patriots' rookie class, but they might not contribute too heavily in 2011 -- definitely not in the way that the 2010 rookies produced, anyway.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    I would never argue about helping the Offensive Line OR Defensive Line out despite what your teams 'needs' are.  So by them taking Solder OT with #1 pick, we really shouldn't complain.  I'm sure in a couple years from now, we may all look back at this pick and 'hopefully' say - great pick. 

    I believe folks are angry/frustrated with the 0-2 record (AT HOME!) in the last two playoff games.  We know our offense is putting up the numbers to win, but OUR Defense is YOUNG and in transition.  Until they 'sign' FAgents to help out that FRONT 7,  they'll continue to struggle in the playoffs.  They need to become a 'stout' defense and get off the field on 3RD Down!  (I think they were at the bottom last yr on 3rd down defense!)  They really need to IDENTIFY FA's on DEFENSE (Front 7) to put this team over the top!    Offensive wins games.  Defense wins championships!  PERIOD!
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    In Response to Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections : NE takes NY's cuts and make them work well . Yeah, that's what Chris Baker, Victor Hobson, &  Kyle Brady said too. 
    Posted by McCheaters[/QUOTE]

    Oh yeah!  Kyle Brady the Jets first round pick, Chris Baker the 3rd round pick, and Victor Hobson the second round pick!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rocky. Show Rocky's posts

    Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections

    In Response to Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Why Many Patriots' Fans Were Upset over 2011 Draft Selections : Yeah, that's them.  Your ball handler, Queenie, claims that they played at a brobowl level under Bellichick.  Do you agree?
    Posted by McCheaters[/QUOTE]

    brobowl? New York slang?
     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share