I don't consider it mean or confrontational, the whole point is to discuss things from all angles. The more opinions the better.
YES. Always interesting.
I hope you are right about TBC emerging and agree the Patriots system is the best.
I keep pinching myself to remind me to REALLY appreciate having a team like the Pats to make being a fan so wonderful.
It may be the best but is not infailable.
Oh,
completely agreed.
It's just so difficult to judge what changes or specific actions would improve the overall effectiveness (wins and SBs) of the team. The success of any such operation as the Patriots is a result of the sum total of the strategies of how they make tradeoffs and decisions PLUS what individual decisions they make on every resigning, FA signing, and draft pick. Any departure from the present approach and execution obviously changes the overall paradigm which can only be judged as 'better' if the results (wins and SBs) turn out to be better - and that takes years and even then, 'chance' and breaks may give you a wrong judgment as to whether it is really 'better'. It's going to be tough to ever have demonstated success better than the Patriots have had in this salary cap and intense draft era.
So I find it very difficult to believe that many of these spur of the moment reactions (in many cases you could say 'chicken little' or knee jerk type judgments) will truly make the Patriots 'better'. Folks tend to disregard the parameters of the Patriots success paradigm, some of which certainly are:
- The absolute constraint of a salary cap
- The case that it has been proven over and over and over that paying big bucks for a small number of 'stars' just isn't the formula for success - and certainly not just one additional big bucks player. Yet teams keep doing this, why I can't imagine (eg Washington)
- Even teams that are based on a formula of a well-put together sets of highly paid players seem to have a weakness when it comes to playoffs (eg Colts)
- The practical aspect of having enough
quality depth to be able to still win if key players go on IR -
also to have enough depth to rotate players during a game (something
very overlooked by the media and many fans). This is a huge tradeoff in how salary cap is allocated. Looking at salary cap structures of a lot of teams, there are an elite few who put more money into their middle class (Patriots, Steelers, Eagles, and maybe Broncos although I'm not sure my memory serves me there). The famous saying is - 'you can't have your cake and eat it too'. It's astonishing to see how many folks just don't get this and whose reaction is to throw a big chunk of money to some player for the current perceived 'hole'.
- And a BIG one. The Patriots success is without argument based on an overall system and scheme approach. Fans are many times enamored with the over-hyped flashy players or, especially,
very one-dimensional players who indeed cost big bucks (my favorite here is Dwight Freeney). But even with the prohibitive big bucks with respect to the Patriots approach of cap dollar allocation, many or probably almost ALL of these players would disrupt the Patriots system and wreck the overall effectiveness. What the media NEVER comments on and most fans aren't into evaluating in detail is that these flashy players look good on some plays but bomb on their responsibilities on others and allow the other team to drive to scores or cause their own team's drives to be stopped (Michael Vick comes to mind and any number of the flashy LBs and some of the flashy WRs).
- The injury bug is salary cap blind. It can bite a hugely expensive player just as easily as a modest cap player. So every high priced player is a big risk gamble in that you have put more of your resources in one place rather than spreading them out.
- First round draft picks - with careful observation, the Patriots seem to put a high weight on 'sure things' in their first round draft picks. Their 100% record of solid contributors from 1st round picks is so outstanding compared to the higer risk choices of highly hyped college stars that turn out to be busts for so many other teams.
Those are just a FEW of the many many aspects that make up the overall approach of the Patriots, but they are some of the most ignored by fans who clamor for 'fixes' to areas of the team or a 'better' way to fill a roster.
Your later post, which I won't quote here but hope folks were interested to read, was certainly good to provide some names that the Patriots may have considered. I want to poke a little and think about some of those. I think we can be assured that they were on Pioli's 'board'. Wouldn't it be great if we had some look into the internal valuations that the Patriots reportedly make on all players in the league. (small note: you can add to your roster names those of Gardner and possibly Jones who might have been a nickel type variation on the 4th LB.) Thanks for material to consider and ponder.