Pats are usually right when they let a player go

[reflexblue]

A good read on the Pats history of letting players go.

Jim Donaldson: Pats are usually right when they let a player go | New England Patriots | projo.com | The Providence Journal

The purge started before (Ellis) Hobbs arrived in 2005.”

That’s how highly respected NFL beat writer Rick Gosselin of sister paper The Dallas Morning News referred, in an article that appeared Sunday in both publications, to a series of personnel moves made by the Patriots in recent years.

The piece made the Patriots front office seem like bad guys for what, in fact, were a series of good personnel moves.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

They left out Brady's ex favorite target, Deion Branch. In fact, his numbers have declined each season since getting traded from the Pats in '06. However, it really bit the Pats in the a** that season as Brady had trouble developing a rapport with the revolving door of WR's. But in the end, the Pats struck gold at the Raiders garage sale of veterans and scored Randy Moss.


With that said, it wouldn't surprise me to see the Pats let Wilfork go, just like the Titans let Albert Haynesworth go. If the Pats can't get any type of a consistent pass rush, that money that Wilfork wants will probably go towards getting an elite pass rusher.

 

[farn]

They seem to be right about having let Redd walk... but maybe he'll be back after the 4 games...

 

[RobertWeathers]

IMO there are only 3 players who have left who could have made an impact the following season.

2005- Ty Law-Pats had major problems on D that year. Ty had 10 picks for the Jets. Would the Pats have beaten Denver w/ Law? Problem is Ty would haev cost an arm and a leg to keep.

2006- Branch-We all know if TB threw the 3rd& 4 pass to Deion, he would have caught it. True problem was the D in that game by allowing 38 points. Tough call.

2008- Samuel- Do they get to 12 wins with him in the secondary instead opposite of Hobbs?

The problem is all three of these players wanted buku bucks to stay. Who would they have to let go in order to stay under the cap?

 

[Synovia]

IMO there are only 3 players that have left who could have made an impact the following season.

2005- Ty Law-Pats had major problems on D that year. Ty had 10 picks for the Jets. Would the Pats have beaten Denver w/ Law? Problem is Ty would haev cost an arm and a leg to keep.

2006- Branch-We all know if TB threw the 3rd& 4 pass to Deion, he would have caught it. True problem was the D in that game by allowing 38 points. Tough call.

2008- Samuel- Do they get to 12 wins with him in the secondary instead opposite of Hobbs?

The problem is all three of these players wanted buku bucks to stay. Who would they have to let go in order to stay under the cap?

Ty Law had 10 Picks in '05, but he also got absolutely torched a ton that year. He had so many picks because he got targeted so often.

 

[robb01]

They seem to be right about having let Redd walk... but maybe he'll be back after the 4 games...

somewhat doubt he will be

 

[psychoPat]

....
The problem is all three of these players wanted buku bucks to stay. Who would they have to let go in order to stay under the cap?

Absolutely.

It is the salary cap that makes ... and keeps ...
the NFL so interestingly competitive
- while MLB degenerates into Yankees - RedSox.

Let's hope it remains in the new CBA !

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

They seem to be right about having let Redd walk... but maybe he'll be back after the 4 games...

I am astounded. A UFA gets cut EARLY in camp in his 2nd year. Then he gets cut again by another team. Then he's suspended for 4 games.

On what basis do you think a guy so lacking production he's cut early and often and with problematic behaviour as well might be back here

 

[jefmblrd]

Good article that provides some perspective for those who don't get that the perpetual contenders don't get married to their players and understand when it's time to let them go.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Ty Law had 10 Picks in '05, but he also got absolutely torched a ton that year. He had so many picks because he got targeted so often.

Yep no question. I'd take him over Hobbs or Gay though. Over Asante..not sure.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Yep no question. I'd take him over Hobbs or Gay though. Over Asante..not sure.

I'd take Ty over Samuel any day. When big playoff games against prolific QBs were on the line, Ty held onto the picks and he didn't blow coverage leaving the safety alone to make the play.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I'd take Ty over Samuel any day. When big playoff games against prolific QBs were on the line, Ty held onto the picks and he didn't blow coverage leaving the safety alone to make the play.

Agree 100%. I was just looking at the ages (31 vs 24) and the upside long-term. No question Ty was a better CB.

 

[patchick]

"Letting a player go" is a bit of a stretch when it comes to protracted megabucks disputes like Branch and Samuel. Branch was under contract, refused to come to work, and was traded for a #1 draft pick. They paid plenty for Samuel to play under a franchise contract, and he demanded they give up the right to a second franchise year so that he could hit unfettered free agency.

IMO those are very different different situations from "it's been great, but that time has passed" transactions like Willie & Vrabel, or "we like you, but not THAT much" calculations like Woody, Evans, Gaffney, etc. That's the kind of "letting go" that the Pats do particularly wisely, and that the article seemed to be about.

 

[hyperpat]

I'd take Ty over Samuel any day. When big playoff games against prolific QBs were on the line, Ty held onto the picks and he didn't blow coverage leaving the safety alone to make the play.

There ought to be a warning label on threads that mention "that game that must not be named." Then I could avoid any discussion of "that game that must not be named."

Maybe all of you think it's okay to discuss it, but I'm sure that if you keep bringing it up, Eli-mort, Pay-malfoy and the death eaters will descend on us all.

Thankfully, our powerful wizard protector has returned to ward off the evil ones. Have you ever noticed that Brady's ACL scar is in the shape of lightning bolt?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Thankfully, our powerful wizard protector has returned to ward off the evil ones. Have you ever noticed that Brady's ACL scar is in the shape of lightning bolt?

OK . . . someone with PhotoShop skillz needs to cast Tom Brady as Harry Potter. . . .

 

[JoeSixPat]

I don't feel a need to wish that players who are traded or cut do badly on their new teams... it's really just a matter of whether there's a better player here to take their place.

That's the only "right or wrong" that matters.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

IMO there are only 3 players who have left who could have made an impact the following season.

2005- Ty Law-Pats had major problems on D that year. Ty had 10 picks for the Jets. Would the Pats have beaten Denver w/ Law? Problem is Ty would haev cost an arm and a leg to keep.

2006- Branch-We all know if TB threw the 3rd& 4 pass to Deion, he would have caught it. True problem was the D in that game by allowing 38 points. Tough call.

2008- Samuel- Do they get to 12 wins with him in the secondary instead opposite of Hobbs?

The problem is all three of these players wanted buku bucks to stay. Who would they have to let go in order to stay under the cap?

I agree but those are all tough situations. I definitely thought Ty would have been 2000% better than the Duane Starks type players we tried to nuture into the system.

Branch was never worth the money objectively but it cut us deep to not have any recievers worth a crap. BB did bring in some receivers who looked like they had 'potential', including their draft pick Jackson. Branch was not exactly a world beater himself, just good in the system. None of the recievers like Stallworth seemed to catch on, so BB and Pioli just did not find any good fits for the system. Watching tape on Wes Welker sure puts Branch's 'talent' into question as a real football player.

Samuel was a good player but not worth breaking the bank for. You can't pay a B+ player like Champ Bailey.

The thing is that hindsight is 20/20. The Pats have let a boatload of players walk since 2001, and most have done literally nothing of note since.

Branch ruined his own career by walking. He had it made here.

Ty Law really pooched his situation by biting the hand that feeds his family.

Samuel got his money.

 

[mayoclinic]

Dallas just cut Justin Rogers, one-time Pats hopeful:

Dallas Cowboys Blog | Sports News | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News

I thought there were rules against cutting an injured player, but don't recall the specifics.

 

[Kontradiction]

If the Pats can't get any type of a consistent pass rush, that money that Wilfork wants will probably go towards getting an elite pass rusher.

We have a pretty good pass rusher in A.D. now that he's healthy. Plus Burgess, while still technically a question mark, was brought in because of his pass rush abilities. On top of that, we may be seeing Mayo rushing the passer a little more this year than he did last year.

 

[mayoclinic]

We have a pretty good pass rusher in A.D. now that he's healthy. Plus Burgess, while still technically a question mark, was brought in because of his pass rush abilities. On top of that, we may be seeing Mayo rushing the passer a little more this year than he did last year.

The Pats ranked 7th in the AFC with 31 sacks last year (only 3 behind the pass-rush happy Ravens), down considerably from 47 in 2007. The 2007 number was definitely influenced by other teams having to play catchup most of the time. In terms of player and unit contributions, the LBs contributed for only 9 of those 31 sacks (or roughly 29%) of those 31 sacks: Adalius Thomas contributed 5 sacks (down from 6.5 in 2007 and a career high of 11 for the 2006 Ravens), Mike Vrabel 4 (down from a career high 12.5 in 2007), and Jerod Mayo 1, Tedy Bruschi 0 (down from 2 in 2007), Pierre Woods 1, Junior Seau 0 (down from 3.5) and Gary Guyton 0. The LBs accounted for 28.5/47 sacks in 2007 (12.5 from Vrabel, 6.5 Thomas, 4 Colvin, 3.5 Seau and 2 Bruschi), or roughly 60%, over double what they accounted for in 2008. Or, to put it differently, the defensive sack production apart from the LBs increased from 18.5 sacks in 2007 to 22 in 2008, whereas the LB sack production fell to a third (9 vs. 28.5).

I would hope that we would see the LB corps this year account for upwards of 20 sacks. 8 each from Burgess and Thomas, 4 from Mayo, and 4 form the remaining LBs might seem reasonable. I also expect more S blitzes from Meriweather and Chung.

The bottom line is that I'm not sure we need one "elite" pass rusher putting up DeMarcus Ware or Merriman style numbers. I predict that this defense should produce well upwards of 40 sacks with the personnel they have and their expected offensive production.