ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Re: Dan Snapp - Media Fixation on "Loyalty" by Belichick and the Patriots
Quote:
Originally Posted by Section103
I love arguments and points backed up with facts. Dan nailed it!
I was listening to arguments on the radio the other day that as fans we should root for success right now and not worry about the team's finances later on. The team will always make money and they will always gouge it from the fans.
My counter to that is that I AM concerned about the team's finances long term. I don't ONLY want to win this year, I want to win every year. A single player is not a guarantee of a Super Bowl this year, nor are future draft picks a guarantee of a win in future years. However, if the team is financially responsible enough to put themselves in a position to afford good players every year, then that gives them the best chance to keep on winning.
The win now at all costs strategy does NOT work... just ask Dan Snyder.
Good points all.
I think it's interesting how the Krafts word their objective for the team as they go into each season; the objective is to be "competitive for a championship" each year. That's different than saying they have to "win a chamipionship" each year to be successful.
The Krafts understand that there are far too many variables that can work for and against winning an SB (things like Tuck Calls that go your way and Roughing the Passer Calls that go against you; like season ending injuries to your QB in the First Quarter of the First Game and magic helmet catches) to write a year off as a failure if that doesn't occur.
Going into a year with the goal of being competitive throughout the regular season for the Playoffs and then making the Playoffs is a lot different than saying we have to win the SB to be successful. It takes a long term view and, IMHO, will continue to bring more than their share of Lombardi's to the Krafts' trophy case in Foxboro.
Remember this; in the 43 year history of the Super Bowl, of 32 Franchises, only two (the Cowboys and Steelers) have gone to the big game more often than the Patriots and only three (Steelers, Cowboys and Niners) have more trophies. The Krafts' strategy has put the Pats among the elite of the NFL and I think it will keep them there for a long, long time, whether or not they win an SB every year.
And, your Snyder point is right on; he's too busy trying to "win Super Bowls" when he'd be better off focusing on building a consistent team and not on paying for the biggest stars. Jerry Jones has begun to fall into the same trap.
__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.
Last edited by PatsFanSince74; 09-10-2009 at 10:48 AM..
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Re: Dan Snapp - Media Fixation on "Loyalty" by Belichick and the Patriots
Quote:
Originally Posted by condon84
Does anyone still really reads those guys? I'd rather go to this forum or some other forum and read stuff from other posters because they're usually more amusing and entertaining.
(By "those guys" I meant Shaughnessy, Borges, etc.)
that's a very good point. i learn a lot more out here than i do at the Globe or Horrald (which latter i now boycott on line and at the newsstand). In fact, i have tended to go to the Globe primarily to see what Reiss has to say; now, i might not be going there so often, especially if they start to charge for their "wisdom."
__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.
Re: Dan Snapp - Media Fixation on "Loyalty" by Belichick and the Patriots
Excellent article. Thanks for posting it.
Obviously written with a viewpoint that's Pats positive but it's not homeristic since the writer uses facts to support his view. CHB is such a Patriots downer. Far better that a wise Celtics GM had traded the Bid Three than the years in the wilderness that followed.
__________________
Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck." RAH
Re: Dan Snapp - Media Fixation on "Loyalty" by Belichick and the Patriots
Quote:
Originally Posted by makoute
The only problem is when some of you guys rip players like Deion Branch and Samuels for holding out for more money.
What's the problem there?
I have no problem with Samuel, who chose to become a FA and then refused to sign the franchise tender until negotiating an agreement with the Pats not to tag him again so that he could go out and get a big long-term contract. That's within his rights, and he always honored his contract.
Branch is a different matter. He refused to report when under contract in order to force a new deal. I have no sympathy for players who sign lucrative deals (even a 2nd round draft pick's rookie deal is lucrative by general standards) and then try to hold out for more.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid
"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi
Re: Dan Snapp - Media Fixation on "Loyalty" by Belichick and the Patriots
Quote:
Originally Posted by makoute
The only problem is when some of you guys rip players like Deion Branch and Samuels for holding out for more money.
Why not? My loyalty is the laundry. That said, Seymour and Samuel worked out something so they never missed a game - I can live with that level of holdout when they use that option to address their financial grievance. Branch is another story. When a player holds out into the season he's stepping on "my" laundry, up until that point he's taking care of business - he just better come ready to play.
__________________
"Avert thine eyes! You're not hot enough to be looking at me." To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Re: Dan Snapp - Media Fixation on "Loyalty" by Belichick and the Patriots
Quote:
Originally Posted by makoute
The only problem is when some of you guys rip players like Deion Branch and Samuels for holding out for more money.
No, the problem is when people think we're 'ragging on someone' when we think the team shouldn't give them huge money.
Deion Branch was good receiver, but not worth $8M/yr. Asante is a good corner, but he freelances too much, and gives up on coverages occasionally. Again, very good, but not something the Patriots felt was worth giving $70M to.
Re: Dan Snapp - Media Fixation on "Loyalty" by Belichick and the Patriots
Unfortunately, one of the tools that players have at their disposal is holding out their services for a few weeks. There does reach a point where they need to show up or be put on reserve. The players don't have many tools. That is one.
As far as being under contract, the team has a right to cut a player at any time. A player has a right to hold out at any time. A player's right is limited to a few games unless he wants to retire. A team's right is unlimited.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mayoclinic
What's the problem there?
I have no problem with Samuel, who chose to become a FA and then refused to sign the franchise tender until negotiating an agreement with the Pats not to tag him again so that he could go out and get a big long-term contract. That's within his rights, and he always honored his contract.
Branch is a different matter. He refused to report when under contract in order to force a new deal. I have no sympathy for players who sign lucrative deals (even a 2nd round draft pick's rookie deal is lucrative by general standards) and then try to hold out for more.
Re: Dan Snapp - Media Fixation on "Loyalty" by Belichick and the Patriots
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgteich
As far as being under contract, the team has a right to cut a player at any time. A player has a right to hold out at any time. A player's right is limited to a few games unless he wants to retire. A team's right is unlimited.
And all of that is clearly stated in their contracts. They sign the contract knowing that.
Re: Dan Snapp - Media Fixation on "Loyalty" by Belichick and the Patriots
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgteich
Unfortunately, one of the tools that players have at their disposal is holding out their services for a few weeks. There does reach a point where they need to show up or be put on reserve. The players don't have many tools. That is one.
As far as being under contract, the team has a right to cut a player at any time. A player has a right to hold out at any time. A player's right is limited to a few games unless he wants to retire. A team's right is unlimited.
Understood. I don't dispute Branch's right to hold out, but I have no sympathy for him. That's my right. I don't despise Samuel or Branch for wanting more than the Pats were willing to pay. To their credit, they found a patsy willing to shell out. I just don't respect holding out when you're under a relatively lucrative contract. But I recognize it as a right under the CBA.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "OVER Loading at ANY position can create a Fatal Advantage. THAT is what interests ME. Attacking With Concentrated Force. THAT is what WINS. In the words ~ more or less ~ of General Patton: 'I'm fighting a WAR, here. Let the B*****ES worry about their FLANKS.' " - Off the Grid
"The key to any successful organization is to anticipate things, not react to them." - Michael Lombardi