Pats backroom let down Brady AGAIN

[Brady6]

DI,

I can stomach only so much bellyaching from you.

Fact: the Pats were 1-1 versus Denver last year.

Fact: the team was virtually terminally injured by the AFCCG. They actually had a trick play for Slater, they were so desperate.

Fact: BB has been re-building the team since 2009 and the Defense was coming around in the first four games, before all the injuries hit. The DL now has six people on it that would possible Pro Bowlers. The Line Backers can offer three more. The secondary has improved and has at least least 3 more possible representatives as well. Its deeper than the Law's Six that shut down the Greatest Show on Turf.

Fact: they have added a lot of new talent, Revis, Browner, AA and found developed others Siliga, C Jones, Collins, and on Offense Dobson, Blount, and Edelman.

You ***** that they couldn't run the ball, when Denver was overloading to prevent it. Then you ***** when the added big OL talent. You criticize the draft of a big Center in Stork who won the Rimington trophy last year, while playing injured. He outweighs game but undersized Wendell by at least 25 pounds. You criticize drafting Halapio who is a road grader at G, even though he played with a torn pec. I know I would have rather have had Martin, Sua Filo and Bitonio. Make up your damn mind. Did they need more talent on the O line or not? Did they need a bigger tougher interior O line or not?

I'm sorry BB didn't have 10 First Round picks to satisfy your desires, I'd like that too. But as they say, That is the way the World is, Deal with it. Five Super Bowl appearances in slightly more than a decade plus knocking on the door several other times is a fine record.

There are teams that have never even made an single appearance and I recall following one for 25 years before it got there, only to have it smashed and humiliated by the trick overload defense of Da Beahs, followed by the cloacal cavities in the Boston 'sports media'.

Realistically what percent of the draft picks made end up lasting long term? 35-40% (all teams not just the Patriots), so when a poster says they do not like every pick is that really a negative or just there prediction on who the player that does not work out is going to be?

When I look at this draft, I rank the picks as follow (best to worst) –

Easley
Moore
Fleming
Thomas
White
Garoppolo
Stork
Gallon
Halapio

The bottom three players I do not think will work out. That is not putting Belichick down, that is acknowledging that every draft has players that do not work out, and those are the players whom I view as most likely to fail.

As far as Garoppolo goes I think he will be a solid NFL player, I just am not sure he will be a starter ever, and I do not think that he is the heir apparent to Tom Brady.

 

[Brady6]

I think the mistake some passionate fans make is they sometimes forget it's a business. I think anyone who has run a business looks at this a bit differently ... not better ... just differently. Sorry to say it's not win at all costs ... just as any other business. It's win at this cost ... win with this much leverage to getting greater gain out of our invested assets. Kraft has alluded to this on several occasions. It's not like Basketball - Baseball and Hockey ... it's more about depth than it is about super stars except for QB to a degree. I think take the business aspect out of it and every team's draft will change.

Then injury gets in the way ... the unforseen. We should have five Lombardi's right now in the Brady era ... at least 5. A healthy Gronk first and foremost perhaps changes all perceptions, a helmet, a missed interception, a healthy Welker ... but ... it happens. I'll take Belichick's drafting percentages ... he's done above average.

Look at Icy interjecting with the rational. Well done my man! Great post!

As I said in my last post, it is delusional to expect every pick to work out, I am looking at the draft and I am willing to say we are going to have one dominating all pro player in Easley. If we walk away from this draft with just that then I will be happy, I think we also have a solid pass rusher in Moore in the future, and three good depth players in Fleming, Thomas, and White who offer starter upside. The rest of the picks I have my reservations about, but I every years picks offer reservations.

 

[yukon cornelius]

I think the mistake some passionate fans make is they sometimes forget it's a business. I think anyone who has run a business looks at this a bit differently ... not better ... just differently. Sorry to say it's not win at all costs ... just as any other business. It's win at this cost ... win with this much leverage to getting greater gain out of our invested assets. Kraft has alluded to this on several occasions. It's not like Basketball - Baseball and Hockey ... it's more about depth than it is about super stars except for QB to a degree. I think take the business aspect out of it and every team's draft will change.

Then injury gets in the way ... the unforseen. We should have five Lombardi's right now in the Brady era ... at least 5. A healthy Gronk first and foremost perhaps changes all perceptions, a helmet, a missed interception, a healthy Welker ... but ... it happens. I'll take Belichick's drafting percentages ... he's done above average.

that's the point so many don't get


getting to the final 4 is a science......rare seasons leave you short (2008 case in point).....this team has shown a propensity for being in that final 4 mix year after year


once you get there, anything can happen.....all of those teams tend to be damned good......it often comes down to who gets the break, one bounce or call or play here and there, and the tide turns

not winning the SB sounds like a failure.....but in reality, it has more to do with the butterfly effect and less to do with the construct of the team

this team puts itself in position year after year.....as a fan, that's all i can ask for

do i want lombardis? yes.....but i know enough about the game to realize that although lombardis are the ultimate goal, winning them isn't always about what you do, and not winning them isn't always about what you don't do.......

 

[goheels22002]

You are new here. Some here have a very special way of understanding football. For them, signing lineman is just not good enough. For them, we need to sign four top receivers (2 WR's and 2 TE's).

The Patriots did sign two top WRs and 4 TEs (Edelman, LaFell and Hooman plus three undrafted TEs including Asa Watson.)

 

[JMC00]

About 95% of you guys are homers who cry and whine very time someone criticizes what BB does and then when it doesn't work out you guys still won't admit your wrong. But then you continue to shoot the messenger who saw it coming. I mean hell, just pull those Chad Johnson threads from a few years ago and you will see a ton of really dumb fans who still haven't learned since that situation and stuck up for BB even then and still are as a GM. Most of the time you guys dont even make arguments to defend your position. You just troll the post and then call the other person a troll because you guys couldn't create an argument to refute the initial point. Its hilarious how predictable it is.

Why do you even come on this board?

 

[Brady6]

Which is kind of my point. Belichick went with these guys because they fit the scheme he is hoping to successfully implement.

Brady6 just hates the picks because the guys weren't on his binkie big board.

ftfy

I really actually only hate 2 picks – Halapio and Stork, I am not all about White, Gallon, or JG, I think Thomas, Fleming, and Moore were good selections, and I absolutely love the Easley pick.

Was I supposed to love all 9 of the picks, is that what the real fans do, they have absolutely NO ability to think for themselves and just agree with what Belichick does? Sorry if I did not follow protocol well enough.

 

[Deus Irae]

DI,

I can stomach only so much bellyaching from you.

Then put me on ignore.

Fact: the Pats were 1-1 versus Denver last year.

The game NE won was a turnover fest (7 combined turnovers) on a windy night where Manning's weakened arm came back to haunt the Broncos, as the Patriots squeaked one out in overtime. The game DEN won was a game where both teams were missing a lot of key players, and the Broncos kicked the tar out of the Patriots. It's true that we can't really say which team was actually the better team, and I'll defend the Patriots against any Broncos/Jets troll who comes in on the subject, but let's not pretend the games were equal.

Fact: the team was virtually terminally injured by the AFCCG. They actually had a trick play for Slater, they were so desperate.

Fact: People around here pimp "depth" almost non-stop. So why are you now using injuries as an excuse?

Fact: BB has been re-building the team since 2009 and the Defense was coming around in the first four games, before all the injuries hit. The DL now has six people on it that would possible Pro Bowlers. The Line Backers can offer three more. The secondary has improved and has at least least 3 more possible representatives as well. Its deeper than the Law's Six that shut down the Greatest Show on Turf.

Fact: This team's problems had largely gone unsolved since 2008. When I, and a few others who had previously been on the homer side (just like I had), began to point this out and question some of BB's moves, we were suddenly the object of idiotic attacks by the shills.

Fact: they have added a lot of new talent, Revis, Browner, AA and found developed others Siliga, C Jones, Collins, and on Offense Dobson, Blount, and Edelman.

Fact: Every team does that.

You ***** that they couldn't run the ball, when Denver was overloading to prevent it. Then you ***** when the added big OL talent. You criticize the draft of a big Center in Stork who won the Rimington trophy last year, while playing injured. He outweighs game but undersized Wendell by at least 25 pounds. You criticize drafting Halapio who is a road grader at G, even though he played with a torn pec. I know I would have rather have had Martin, Sua Filo and Bitonio. Make up your damn mind. Did they need more talent on the O line or not? Did they need a bigger tougher interior O line or not?

OK, do us both a favor here. Before you start posting your *****es about me, READ MY POSTS.

1. I did not ***** that they couldn't run the ball. I defended the team's relatively few runs in the AFCCG
2. I did not ***** that they added OL talent. I've been calling for IOL upgrades for years.
3. I did not criticize the drafting of Stork, at least not that I recall. I wanted a center to be taken. He wouldn't have been my first pick, but he's a center, and I'm happy one got drafted
   
4. I did not criticize the drafting of Halapio

I'm sorry BB didn't have 10 First Round picks to satisfy your desires, I'd like that too. But as they say, That is the way the World is, Deal with it. Five Super Bowl appearances in slightly more than a decade plus knocking on the door several other times is a fine record.

Quit building straw men.

There are teams that have never even made an single appearance and I recall following one for 25 years before it got there, only to have it smashed and humiliated by the trick overload defense of Da Beahs, followed by the cloacal cavities in the Boston 'sports media'.

This couldn't be more irrelevant if it tried to be.

 

[yukon cornelius]

Then put me on ignore.



The game NE won was a turnover fest (7 combined turnovers) on a windy night where Manning's weakened arm came back to haunt the Broncos. The game DEN won was a game where both teams were missing a lot of key players, and the Broncos kicked the tar out of the Patriots. It's true that we can't really say which team was actually the better team, and I'll defend the Patriots against any Broncos/Jets troll who comes in on the subject, but let's not pretend the games were equal.

games between two top flight NFL teams tend to be equal, more or less, and often come down to a few key turning points


neither of these games was any different

 

[Deus Irae]

games between two top flight NFL teams tend to be equal, more or less, and often come down to a few key turning points


neither of these games was any different

You didn't watch the AFCCG, then.

 

[james87654]

This sounds like Felger babble, is Gronk a difference maker? was Ahern a difference maker? Can Easley be a difference maker? I think BB goes for good players that fit into his system, he's always building a team not collecting all pros.

I actually like felger in a lot of ways....hes not a complete patriots sycophant, which is more than some people....but he also understands how great BB is for the most part

 

[MassPats38]

About 95% of you guys are homers who cry and whine very time someone criticizes what BB does and then when it doesn't work out you guys still won't admit your wrong.

You have to admire the poster who repeatedly lauds the objectivity and intelligence of his own subjective opinions. When people disagree with those opinions, the only response is they lack the objectivity and vision to see the truth and are 'homers'.

Are you a fan of the Pats? If not, then why do you subject yourself to this perceived lack of objectivity? If you are a fan, let me know when you actually compliment something this failing organization does. Everything I have read seems to be negative and critical of an organization that pretty much spanks the rest of the NFL with sustained excellence in the salary cap era.

 

[yukon cornelius]

You didn't watch the AFCCG, then.

watched it more than twice

i could cite 3-4 key plays that turned that game.....3-4 plays that go the other way, and the game turns....

but you wouldn't listen....your game is pretty tired, actually

 

[goheels22002]

this thread makes me giggle

This is like a mid-season thread after a loss. Ian, I'd say people have adapted splendidly to the new format.

 

[Rob0729]

Then put me on ignore.



The game NE won was a turnover fest (7 combined turnovers) on a windy night where Manning's weakened arm came back to haunt the Broncos, as the Patriots squeaked one out in overtime. The game DEN won was a game where both teams were missing a lot of key players, and the Broncos kicked the tar out of the Patriots. It's true that we can't really say which team was actually the better team, and I'll defend the Patriots against any Broncos/Jets troll who comes in on the subject, but let's not pretend the games were equal.

So a turnover fest somehow makes the game irrelevant? I will argue the Broncos benefitted more from the turnovers in that game with a fumble returned for TD and another one that put them in position to score at least three points.

And for the AFC Championship game, the Pats had more key people missing and Talib going down weakened both CB positions. And perfect January day in Denver is almost as much of a weather/altitude advantage to the Broncos as a windy day in Foxboro was the Pats.

I will agree that the AFC Championship game means more because of the fact that it was a winner takes all event where the loser's season was over, but to dismiss the first meeting to make a point is a weak argument.

 

[Danger Zone]

About 95% of you guys are homers who cry and whine very time someone criticizes what BB does and then when it doesn't work out you guys still won't admit your wrong. But then you continue to shoot the messenger who saw it coming. I mean hell, just pull those Chad Johnson threads from a few years ago and you will see a ton of really dumb fans who still haven't learned since that situation and stuck up for BB even then and still are as a GM. Most of the time you guys dont even make arguments to defend your position. You just troll the post and then call the other person a troll because you guys couldn't create an argument to refute the initial point. Its hilarious how predictable it is.

I know that Belichick as a coach, is a genius.

But I sometimes feel the Patriots might have been better off with Belichick simply having to coach the players a good (and sympathetic) GM chose to give him.

I worry that some of the time Belichick does in fact try too hard to prove how smart he is to the rest of the football world by making very unusual picks and being unconventional.

I think his attitude towards the press is ultimately detrimental to the team.

I don't see the purpose of tweaking the NFL's nose in the meta things like refusing to take a group photo with the rest of the coaches.

I think he was a smuck for allowing Spygate to happen.

I see much sense in the theory that Brady needs at least one tall, semi-elite talented WR like what he had in Moss.

I think Belichick is making a big mistake by not addressing this issue even if its costly.

I believe Belichick let his pride get in the way of retaining Welker.

I know this was a HUGE mistake (figuratively) in at least the short term (also figuratively).

I believe that when Belichick has a bowel movement, it stinks just as badly as any other big man his age.

And finally, I believe that if Deus expressed his criticism of the team a little more like Supafly does, 90% of his problems with the Homers would cease to exist.

 

[Deus Irae]

watched it more than twice

i could cite 3-4 key plays that turned that game.....3-4 plays that go the other way, and the game turns....

but you wouldn't listen....your game is pretty tired, actually

Yeah, a game that was 23-3, and finished at 26-16, was a real nail biter.

My game, as you pit it, is fine. Your argument isn't.

 

[Rob0729]

About 95% of you guys are homers who cry and whine very time someone criticizes what BB does and then when it doesn't work out you guys still won't admit your wrong. But then you continue to shoot the messenger who saw it coming. I mean hell, just pull those Chad Johnson threads from a few years ago and you will see a ton of really dumb fans who still haven't learned since that situation and stuck up for BB even then and still are as a GM. Most of the time you guys dont even make arguments to defend your position. You just troll the post and then call the other person a troll because you guys couldn't create an argument to refute the initial point. Its hilarious how predictable it is.

Belichick is a pretty good GM, but he isn't perfect. He makes mistakes, but so does Ozzie Newsome who is arguably the best GM in the league.

Belichick was wrong to bring in Chad Johnson, but 95% of the people who cover the league nationally thought it was a brilliant move and not just Pats fans. So let's not act like it was only Patriots "homers" who praised and defended the move.

Belichick has made other significant blunders as a GM. What GM hasn't?

I have no problem with people criticizing his moves as long as they are civil and backed with at least some decent reasoning behind it. I will respond to such posts with civility and hopefully at least somewhat decent reasoning behind it. In fact, that is exactly how I responded to the original poster. Hell, your post is quite frankly rather condescending and instead of firing back with insults, I gave you a civil and ration response.

I think a large majority of the "homers" on this board are willing to debate civilly with people who disagree with their opinions as long as the courtesy is returned.

 

[shmessy]

Wait.. someone disagreed with that post? How the hell do you disagree with something that's so blatantly obvious? There is not one THE WAY. There are many avenues to the top. If Belichick's was the only way, this team would currently be at a minimum of 13 consecutive Lombardis and counting. Pointing to 0-2 when your team is 0-9 is folly.

This is an example of what we were discussing earlier. This negative system is going to be a real problem if people can't start using their heads.

For someone who proclaims he doesn't care about his image, you sure do care a lot about your image.

 

[shmessy]

So not only are you suggesting that he can play the tight end position but you are putting him at the Y-TE which is the in line position, not even the flex tight end position? No way that is going to happen, and you know I am very fond of you Shmessy but you are straight up trolling me right now and putting words in my mouth. I never said I knew more than Rivera, and I never said that scouts knew everything. I have never seen a player that weighs 210lbs lineup as a Y-TE and I do not expect LaFell to be that player. LaFell is a great signing and I was advocating signing him even before he came in for a visit but he is not here to replace Hernandez, he is an upgrade to the position we expect Donald Jones to play for us last season before he was forced to retire.

Either way as I said I am very fond of you Shmessy and I do not want to go back and forth and interject some level of animosity into our relationship over this.

First off, there is no animosity whatsoever, 6. You're good people and we're just debating a football point. No worries.

Second, your post above is responding to (but evidently did not read the part of) a post where I wrote in the 2nd paragraph (caps now for emphasis):

"Is Lafell an EVERY DOWN TE posibility? HELL NO,he's not big enough. Can he fill the "Y" role for 5-10 PLAYS PER GAME? The professional highly paid NFL coach who worked with Lafell day in and day out (not you) says yes. Throw a possibility of Mark Harrison at 6'3" 230lbs in there along with Dustin Keller (if he's healthy) and you have 3.5 pretty good TE's and can lose Hoomanawanui and DJ Williams.

It is not just Belichick that is responsible for this but realistically we have had the best QB in the league for the past ten years, and while the other top QBs have all won a title in that time Brady has not, that to me indicates that we are not building around Brady well enough.

If we did not, have the GOAT and we were in the AFCCG or SB every year I would be sitting here defending everything Belichick does too, but when you have the best QB in a league that the most important player is the QB you should be in contention.

Wait a second.

HOW have the Patriots NOT been in contention EVERY single year in the 10 years since they last won a SB????

In the past 10 years, please list ONE other NFL team that can say the same.

 

[RayClay]

I know that Belichick as a coach, is a genius.

But I sometimes feel the Patriots might have been better off with Belichick simply having to coach the players a good (and sympathetic) GM chose to give him.

I worry that some of the time Belichick does in fact try too hard to prove how smart he is to the rest of the football world by making very unusual picks and being unconventional.

I think his attitude towards the press is ultimately detrimental to the team.

I don't see the purpose of tweaking the NFL's nose in the meta things like refusing to take a group photo with the rest of the coaches.

I think he was a smuck for allowing Spygate to happen.

I see much sense in the theory that Brady needs at least one tall, semi-elite talented WR like what he had in Moss.

I think Belichick is making a big mistake by not addressing this issue even if its costly.

I believe Belichick let his pride get in the way of retaining Welker.

I know this was a HUGE mistake (figuratively) in at least the short term (also figuratively).

I believe that when Belichick has a bowel movement, it stinks just as badly as any other big man his age.

And finally, I believe that if Deus expressed his criticism of the team a little more like Supafly does, 90% of his problems with the Homers would cease to exist.

You'll get to see how someone else runs a team soon enough.