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!
Honestly, I didn't see Law play much last year, so if someone wants to tell me why they think he's not as good anymore, feel free. But if Belichick is entertaining the idea, I'm sure he's not basing it on what Ty has done in the past, but what he thinks he can do this year.
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
Frankly, if the goal is to improve the talent level on the team, I'm perplexed why anyone wouldn't want to see Law back playing for the Pats
and my reply is that your premise is wrong. Sorry if I mis-stated. I was trying not to be blunt.
The goal is not to improve the talent level on the team. The goal is to build a better team.
My example was that Dan Snyder belives the two are the same. Snyder has shown that merely improving the talent level is pointless.
I also gave examples of players, like TO, whose acquisition would improve the talent level on the Patriots, but would not improve the Patriots as a team.
I did not and do not compare Snyder to BB/SP, or Law to TO.
Just giving examples of why improving the talent level on a team is the wrong goal.
Lets not forget that Law was barely able to jog this time last year.
He was not in shape and was recovering from a foot injury, that had to have left his wheels well less than 100%.
You just dont get that back during a season.
I dont think he played real well in 2005, but I'm pretty sure he will be better in 2006.
My biggest concerns in keeping him a year ago were that at his age and with the severity of the injury would he ever recover.
In my opinion his recovery was late and affected his 05 season, but he DID recover.
I'd love to have him here in 06. If he plays like he did last year, he is worth it. If he plays like last year PLUS being 100%, he is a steal.
Is it not worth noting that the coaching staff, while still led by Belichick, is now very different from when Ty had a place? Crennel and Mangini have moved on and Pees runs the show now. Is it possible that Pees' defense is going to be sufficiently unique to either require a Ty Law, or completely avoid having a #1 CB?
Perhaps Piolichick are simply driving Ty's price up for some other fool.
Either way-I'm all set without Ty Law--I like what we have for depth right now and am confident enough in their ability to be solid providing health works in their favor.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Put aside the price issue, because we all know he's not getting the guaranteed 14-16 mil. he's reportedly asking for.
Do you really want to judge Ty's likely performance in 2006 by what he did three seasons and a major injury ago?
This is a classic example of getting rid of a guy one year to early instead of one year too late. I'm not sold on Ellis Hobbs, but I'd like for him to get the chance. Have you ever been on an escalator going in one direction, and pass the people going the other way? That's Law going in one direction, and Samuel, Hobbs, and Gay going in the other. We have veteran insurance in Warfield that cost us a lot less than Law. I don't know why so many people here think that signing a guy with obviously declining skills is a great move for the franchise.
Does anybody agree with me? That even if his financial demands come down to a reasonable level, that a 33 year old Ty Law probably doesn't help this team?
I agree with you. I don't think we need Law back. I guess I would be OK with it if he came dirt cheap, but I'm not as down on our secondary as a lot of other people here seem to be.
I'd rather spend the money elsewhere.
Last edited by JackBauer; 05-15-2006 at 11:43 AM..
Is it not worth noting that the coaching staff, while still led by Belichick, is now very different from when Ty had a place? Crennel and Mangini have moved on and Pees runs the show now. Is it possible that Pees' defense is going to be sufficiently unique to either require a Ty Law, or completely avoid having a #1 CB?
Duly noted but was this not what we had last season and the season before when Law went out? A CB by committee approach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying Fungi
Perhaps Piolichick are simply driving Ty's price up for some other fool.
Or perhaps they are serious about adding a player that they feel can step right in at the CB spot, be highly effective while being a big play addition on a team sorely needing such a player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying Fungi
Either way-I'm all set without Ty Law--I like what we have for depth right now and am confident enough in their ability to be solid providing health works in their favor.
As long as we've got Troy around to play both ways we're all set in the depth department
Let me see, we're arguing over whether a big strong smart cornerback who is totally in synch with Rodney Harrison, who can read quarterbacks and disguise coverages, who can beat up receivers and throw them off their routes, who can wrap and tackle the big tight ends and running backs, who knows Belichick's defense, who busts a gut on the field and never takes a play off, who plays injured, and who has by now fully recovered from a serious injury ... we're arguing if he'd improve a group of corners who struggled all season both to cover and to catch errant passes.
I understand the question of money. But you're saying Ty Law can't make the team?
Resign Branch, maybe restructure some contracts if need be, maybe trade for someone or sign some depth at LB.
The Pats have tons of cap room to do all that as it is, Jack.
Adding Law wouldn't stop them from pursuing these options. Availability of competant players (to either trade for or to add as FA depth) would be the true problem as those players aren't likely available to be had.
Without a doubt Law is the most worthy player that is available at this time.
Linear Mode
