Trying to be unbiased on Vinatieri, but..... - Page 3 - New England Patriots Forums

***MoLewisrocks*** · 08-09-2006, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphys95

In terms of caliber, both Vanderjagt and Vinatieri are pretty darn close. I'm not an ESPN Insider subscriber so I haven't been able to read the whole article. But the only upgrade in my opinion, if Clayton said that, is in terms of image. Vanderjagt is an eyesore and an earsore. Vinatieri is a beloved kicker (even outside of New England). I agree that both are equally good kickers. Adam wins the media battle over Vandy every day of the week.

I think Colts fans are relieved to rid themselves of an "idiot kicker" and replace him with a "clutch kicker". Image. That's the only answer I can come up with if Clayton said Adam was an upgrade.

You've got a good argument though. It seems Clayton might not have thought things through.

Well, except that Adam has dealt with kicking consistently well in lousy conditions his entire career while Vanderchoke has always been a dome kicker for 8-10 games a season, and that does make a difference - and one who could never handle KO well for some reason and whom Polian wouldn't allow to kick off the last few seasons. So for the Colts Adam is clutch, cost half as much on their cap this year and saves them a roster spot.

BTW Vanderchoke only had 2 50+ attempts since 2003 and missed them both. 50+ is over rated. Adam only had 4 attempts in the last 3 seasons, not because he couldn't make them but because his HC is a defensive minded field position guy who is not often going to have anyone kicking from outside the 32 because the risk/reward odds are just stacked against success.

Oh, and Adam has never missed in a dome other than Reliant Stadium. He's 37-41 indoors and 10-10 in the RCA Dome. KO's will likely average in the mid 60's too.

But aside from being clutch, the only way Adam can be a difference maker in Indy is if the QB lets him. Peyton suffers from I wanna do it-itis. Tom learned early on that he could count on Adam, and that allowed him to relax and get them just as far as he could without taking undue risk and making the mistakes that are born of desperation and an effort to do too much. QB's don't like to hand the ball over to someone else, even when that is all they really need to do. #1 drafted QB's with equally egotistical idiot kickers who have had the temerity to cricize them are far less likely to hand that ball over without a fight than is a #199 draft pick who knows it's a core team leader waiting along the sidelines for that handoff. It will be interesting to see if Peyton's ego still overrides Adam's quiet clutch.

***Yankees/Colts*** · 08-09-2006, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Peyton suffers from I wanna do it-itis. Tom learned early on that he could count on Adam,

And Peyton learned early on he could not count on Vanderjagt or his defense. If Peyton wasn't perfect, the Colts would lose. If he didn't score TDs, the Colts would lose. No, he could not dink and dunk, settle for FGs, score 20 points, yet win. Yes, Peyton learned this early on.

These are things Brady could not relate to.

dhamz · 08-09-2006, 09:08 PM

No one revises history better than Peyton's apologists.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yankees/Colts

Uh, no.

Once again, Vanderjagt also lost the Miami playoff game. Manning drove them down the field to win, just like Brady did vs. the Rams, but Vanderjagt missed it.

This is probably the closest you can get to saying it was all the kickers fault they lost. Of course, the kick he did miss from 49 yards and he hit 3 other FGs in the game including a 50 yarder as the Colts offense could only get in the end zone once.

And no, Manning's drive wasn't quite like Brady's drive. His drive got stopped, Brady's ran out of time. Manning failed to get closer than a 49 yard attempt. With 6 minutes left on the clock, time wasn't a factor. They just didn't execute throwing short of the first down and getting 11 on 3rd and 12.

Quote:

Vanderjagt also missed vs. the Pats which would have given the Colts home field advantage.

Game one of the season is now a huge game? Also, doesn't this go along with the theory that the Colts would be a Super Bowl lock if only they have home field? The one that ignores that in the last 3 years the Colts are 18-6 at home and 19-5 on the road? Or that when they did get home field they got bounced in round 1?

Quote:

Then in the Steeler game, Peyton drove the Colts down the field to win, just like Brady did vs. the Panthers, but Vanderjagt missed it. If he makes it, the Colts win the Superbowl.

Wrong in so many ways.

Peyton was attempting to drive them down the field to win the game - and he failed. They had to settle for a TYING field goal - which now was a Super Bowl winning kick? One can only assume it is based on the Colts tremendous track record going to deep in the playoffs that we should assume they not only win that game but also the next 2?

Again - unlike Brady, Manning didn't even get the kicker as close as he could before running out of time. With 2 timeouts and 30 seconds left with the ball on the 28 - he got stopped. What could have been a TD or at very least a chip shot FG wasn't. Instead they got a 45 yard field goal which was horribly shanked.

No one would make the argument Vanderjagt is anywhere near as clutch as Vinateri has been. The argument that the kicker is now what has held the Colts back is ridiculous.

They have built their franchise around Manning and his ability to out think and out perform defenses. In their playoff losses he has been out schemed and hasn't performed anywhere near the level he has normally. Adam Vinateri isn't fixing that.

miDeuce · 08-09-2006, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dhamz

They have built their franchise around Manning and his ability to out think and out perform defenses. In their playoff losses he has been out schemed and hasn't performed anywhere near the level he has normally. Adam Vinateri isn't fixing that.

Amen. And as for any comment on our running backs, I laugh at anyone who doubts Corey Dillon this season. Seems like there are no lingering effects of any calf injury. He running hard and he's pissed. And if that's not enough we've got a break away threat in Maroney who we know both Denver and Indy thought highly of. I'd take either one of our guys over any back on either of those teams, and they were the 1,2 seeds in the AFC last season.

Kdo5 · 08-09-2006, 09:54 PM

I agree, I have said it before it is not much of an upgrade as Vanderjerk was or still is in the top 3 best field goal kicking category. Adam has missed some more kicks, his leg isnt as great. And what if AV makes a lot of kicks indoors, are you counting on a three point deficit or tied game in the playoffs?

Manning had his second worst year in the NFL and it was a year in which Edge was injured for a lot of games.

Alk · 08-09-2006, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

Everyone's remembering the kick against the Steelers and forgetting that none of the Colts' other playoff losses have ever been due to the FG kicker. And if Bettis hadn't fumbled the Colts would have lost that one by more than a FG too.

That is true, Vinatieri wouldn't have saved them in the past but for that one particular game, he would have landed the Colts in the Super Bowl plain and simple. Fumbles due to a perfect hit happen, misses on a chipshot field goal by Vinatieri do not.

***shmessy*** · 08-09-2006, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yankees/Colts

And Peyton learned early on he could not count on Vanderjagt or his defense. If Peyton wasn't perfect, the Colts would lose. If he didn't score TDs, the Colts would lose. No, he could not dink and dunk, settle for FGs, score 20 points, yet win. Yes, Peyton learned this early on.

These are things Brady could not relate to.

I'm glad we had AV in his prime. You can have our sloppy seconds.

That's something YOU can relate to.

TracerTrav87 · 08-09-2006, 10:47 PM

The only reason that signing Vinatieri was notable, or signing *any* good kicker is notable... is the effect that it has on the QB. Not to say that it is some huge weight off of his shoulders, but at least the QB can say "well, my kicker can make a 45 yard FG 9 out of 10 times, so I know exactly where I need to push the offense for us to win this game". Other than that, the only additional is an exception kicker, and in Adams case.... one who can make clutch plays. I would rather have AV than Vanderjerk any day of the week.

I really dont know if you could call Adams signing the biggest event in the FA, though. That really is farfetched.

***shmessy*** · 08-09-2006, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TracerTrav87

The only reason that signing Vinatieri was notable, or signing *any* good kicker is notable... is the effect that it has on the QB. Not to say that it is some huge weight off of his shoulders, but at least the QB can say "well, my kicker can make a 45 yard FG 9 out of 10 times, so I know exactly where I need to push the offense for us to win this game". Other than that, the only additional is an exception kicker, and in Adams case.... one who can make clutch plays. I would rather have AV than Vanderjerk any day of the week.

I really dont know if you could call Adams signing the biggest event in the FA, though. That really is farfetched.

Too bad Adam was 80% last year. Your point ("well, my kicker can make a 45 yard FG 9 out of 10 times") loses even more steam because he was even worse than that (50%) beyond 40 yards.

Indy got itself a "name".

patsox23 · 08-09-2006, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shmessy

I'm glad we had AV in his prime. You can have our sloppy seconds.

LOL. We have a winner. 'Though shmessy also DESTROYED this guy a post or two before.