b72s

If the pats signed Julius Peppers back in 2010 would we won 1 SUperbowl.

My assumption is he would have made defense better.

1. More QB pressure takes pressure off Secondary
2. We would get off field on 3rd downs

We know have the financially savvy version of Peppers in C. Jones

Clearly Peppers was a lot of money to bite on and pre strike but given how many people we ran through here. Clearly Pats would not want to tip the lockerroom salary issue.

But money aside I say we would have won one with him.

I just hope C. Jones can do teh same some day!!!

My problem is my in laws are giants fans

Big-T

Signing Peppers = no money for Vince, Brady & Welker.

Who would you rather have? Peppers, who doesn't look as good as he has in the past or those 3 players?

BigMike

Peppers wanted huge money - again bye bye Vince, etc aas previous poster has stated....

__________________
It is what it is......

KontradictioN

We could have also hamstringed the salary cap. But yeah, that's the ticket.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


CREDIT - Sicilian

Sciz

And talent aside, Tully Banta-Cain was just fine

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

PatsBoy12

I have two words - CHANDLER JONES!

Ice_Ice_Brady

Patriots offered him a lot of money. At some point you have to just draw the line and realize you are no longer making a good decision. Peppers has been good as a Bear, maybe even worth the money, but look at guys like Albert Haynesworth and (soon to be) Mario Williams. Pats have built through the draft, which is the only way to get an edge in the salary cap era.

signbabybrady

OK I will bite and I will say yes we would have won one if not more.

But I think you can say the same about a lot of free agents over the years. Or if we had just drafted Matthews.

But I think you need to flip the script to had we spent that money what would have been the trickledown? Does that mean no long term for Vince? Maybe we dont let Vince go but tagged him 2 years in a row and instead let Wes walk? Maybe we still re-up Vince and tag Wes but would Gronk and Nandez maybe want more in their deals after seeing what we gave a top player at their position? Or even a little less complex than all that maybe we dont draft Jones because we have Pepp and instead we have a player on the second half instead of one with his all career ahead of him.

Bottom line is we didnt sign him and we still got to the superbowl (mere seconds away from victory) and everything that could have been diferent in the above alternate universe has happened and it looks like we will be competing for 3-5 more years at least.

__________________

Bravo777

The offense was the thing that stunk in the Super Bowl, not the defense.

DaBruinz

Sorry, but this is just false.

As others have mentioned, with Peppers, we'd be without Wilfork, at the very least. Who'd you have anchoring the D-Line??? Peppers? That's a joke..

Who'd be the QB? Mallett?? Hoyer??

Sorry, but the Pats wouldn't have won one with Peppers because it wasn't the defense that cost the Pats the SB. Or did you miss the offense not being able to run out the clock when we needed it the most?